I think it's quite disgusting the way some people here are throwing around accusations of poor parenting. Sure the older article about the 19 year old kid at the maturity level of a 5 year old was pretty disgusting, and probably warranted most of the criticism. But this article and parent don't deserve this level of criticism!

Every kid has quirks. I would be the last to claim to be an expert (my only child is only 13 months), but he is part of a large playgroup, and I see a wide range of behavior in what is a pretty typical group of infants/toddlers. Just because one is shyer/ more prone to crying/ more aggressive, doesn't mean that the parent is doing anything wrong. It's very likely that the child just has a different temperament.

I think it's fine that several folks have pointed out that such a panic attack could be a sign of a larger problem, but keep in mind that one incident or situational problem shouldn't lead to a diagnosis. It's probably best to limit the comment to mentioning that if the child exhibits *other* signs in addition then it might be time to check it out more closely. There's no way anyone should think they can conclude that this child has any larger issues from the single anecdote expressed in the story (if you think you can, you've been reading too many tabloids!).

I think it's admirable that she's trying to help him figure out how to solve the problem himself. I think that the special knapsack pocket suggestion (with the optional laminated tag) is a fantastic idea, and I'd bet that the author finds it really useful!

No one is saying Bazelon is a shitty parent because her kid cries, you retard, they're suggesting that she's a shitty parent because she's reinforcing her brat's bad behavior and making excuses for him.

I know what people are saying, and I never implied that it was because the kid was crying. I said that calling someone a shitty parent based on one situation that they have no personal experience with is asinine.

t's amazing how free people feel to criticize other peoples' parenting skills when they haven't tried it. Calling someone a "shitty parent" from an indeterminate distance away is easy and cowardly. Raising a child amongst all of the competing pressures of the real world is *hard*. People need to face that there are many times that there are NO RIGHT ANSWERS to a problem, and the simple easy solution you think of while sitting back in your easy chair isn't likely to work as well in the real world as it does in your head.

It's been suggested that the child's episode should be solved by not sending him to the event until he stops it. But then how will he learn to stop it, and now he wouldn't be developing social and independence skills he was developing before, which could make the whole thing worse, couldn't it?

This parent has done nothing to warrant the label "shitty" or "helicopter" parent. In fact I find the latter accusation ironic, she gets accused of helicoptering for sending a 5 year old to an event without her, and trying to figure out a solution that *doesn't* involve her directly. These to me are the *opposite* approach a helicopter parent would take (though she does acknowledge the "draw" that that type of solution presents).

Don't you think it is a little dense of Emily to

1. Reinforce bad behavior by not even acknowledging that it is bad behavior.

2. Not even consider the possibility that her kid just isn't able to handle a challenging after school activity on a Friday. I'm 35 years old and there are a lot of Fridays where I am one step away from a meltdown. That's why they invented happy hour.

I think those are reasonable questions which I couldn't pretend to really be able to answer without knowing far more about the particular child, but from what has been presented:

1. First, I'm not sure she *hasn't* told him that it's not acceptable behavior. From the context of the story, I presume that the behavior is not typical for this child, and that because it is unusual she suspects its something other then a simple tantrum. I agree with others that jumping to the "panic attack" conclusion is extreme, but it could be something as simple as a bad memory or association (as another poster mentioned). Telling them that it's "bad" wouldn't help much in that situation. The problem that I have with many of the other posts is that they assume that this is typical behavior for this child, and we haven't been shown any evidence that it is.

2. It's possible, but I think she's weighing the pros/cons of the episode/event and choosing the event, even in the presence of the event. The soccer game is getting him exercise, teaching him social skills, getting him outside, teaching him to be more independent, etc. This would seem to outweigh the other if the episode isn't that traumatic. I agree with the poster who said to ask the child about it. He may not even remember his panic later that day, and will probably work through it in time. She's just trying to find the best and quickest way. Personally I applaud her for trying to help him solve it by himself, then showing him that all problems must be solved by Mommy.

Sorry, that last sentence should be:

Personally I applaud her for trying to help him solve it by himself, rather than showing him that all problems must be solved by Mommy.

It makes far more sense that way! ;-)

I'm 35 years old and there are a lot of Fridays where I am one step away from a meltdown. That's why they invented happy hour.

I think we've hit upon the solution: A big red S on the back of Simon's hand. S Simon; S for See what you can do for yourself?; S for Scotch and Soda, which will be put in his thermos in lieu of a snack.

Simon doesn't have a quirk. He doesn't have a problem or a panic disorder or anything else. He's just a normal child. Kids will act out and scream when they're hungry, if left to their own devices. But that's what we have parents for: to keep them from their own devices, to mold them into something healthy, happy and productive.

This kid is totally indulged by his neurotic mother. THAT's what's going to screw him up.

If you put a kid in the wilderness and do nothing to socialize him, just let him express himself in any manner he wishes, indulge in every want he has, he will not grow up to be a well adjusted, self-realized Noble Savage. He'll just be a savage.

Instead of scurrying around for snacks, letting this little kid basically manipulate everyone with his totally inappropriate, anti-social and yes, perfectly natural behavior, how about she grabs him by the shoulders, shakes him a bit, swats his behind if necessary and demand he snap out of it or suffer consequences? Teach him that he's not the center of the universe, that he can survive a few hunger pangs, that he needs to consider others around him also?

THAT's parenting. Her style is something bizzarre and harmful to the child.

I totally agree with EarlyBird. And racerx, your comments are quite amusing to those of us who have raised children to adulthood. Having a 13 month old doesn't make you an expert, I'm afraid.