Set limits, even for 'I love you'

McClatchy NewspapersMay 26, 2009 

My recent series, "I'm ready for the 1960s to be over and done with," set off nervequakes in some readers. (The entire series is still available at

My theme: American parenting began its continuing downhill slide in that dumbest and most deconstructive of decades. One fellow speculates that I either have yet to emerge from the Stone Age or just crawled out of the bomb shelter my parents stuffed me into in 1959. He refers specifically to my contention that children should not be allowed to express feelings freely. He writes, sarcastically, "Like love, maybe?"

Well, since he mentioned it, yes, children should not even be allowed to express feelings of love freely. If it is inappropriate for an adult to blurt out "I love you!" whenever the feeling strikes, I submit it is inappropriate for a child of certain age and in certain situations to do so as well. In both cases, the spontaneous expression of feeling may cause the individual who is the object of said emotion to feel very uncomfortable.

Let's use some common sense. It is cute for a 3-year-old boy to blurt this out to a female playmate. It is not necessarily cute when an 8-year-old boy does the same thing. Somewhere between the two ages, children need to be told that expressing spontaneous love to someone outside of one's immediate family is to be done only after great forethought and always with prudence .

Lack of emotional self-control is uncivilized. The exercise of same is civilized. Therefore, I am arguing for nothing more radical than the restoration of civility to child rearing.

As I write this, in an airport waiting area, a mother is following her toddler as he runs up and down the rows of occupied seats, yelling incoherently, causing a disturbance. Mom is smiling, as if she thinks this is cute. No doubt she would agree with my critic. Her child wants to run and yell in a public area; therefore, he should be allowed to run and yell (and she should run grinning after him, doubling the disturbance).

I'm certain that the Stone Age mother would have removed her child from the area, insisted that he calm down, and taught him to sit quietly with her.

And everyone, including her child, would have benefited from her repressive, draconian attitude.

Family psychologist John Rosemond answers parents' questions at

News & Observer is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service