I love the Carolyn Hax column in The Washington Post and recently she posted a discussion about does how you care for your dog translate into how you will care for your kids?
A person wrote in that they spoiled their dogs terribly and assumed that meant they would equally spoil their kids.
“… The dogs have too many toys, I plan most vacations so I can bring them along, and I have a habit of praising them for existing. If one of them comes over all waggy, I’ll put down my book in a heartbeat to lavish unearned adoration on them.
“This means my kids are going to be entitled, self-centered, unsympathetic, instant-gratification-focused nightmares, right? And they probably won’t run the vacuum, either. “
Carolyn replied in part:
“Treating your dogs in a way that’s right for dogs, though, usually means you’ll treat kids in a way that’s right for kids, so it’s a fine indicator.”
“Although I suspect the dog owner was being facetious, I do think it is worth noting that in my experience, not disciplining/training your dog can translate to not setting boundaries for your kids. Personally, I don’t think there is anything more annoying than a dog/child that does whatever it wants — be it jumping on people and eating off people’s plates or interrupting every conversation to say “look at me” and eating while jumping on the couch.”
There were other replies as well but I cant pull any more. Check them out on the site.
So the question is: Do you think pet care is an accurate reflection of childcare? Do you think it will indicate if you will NOT be disciplined or caring for your child or like Carolyn Hax said it would she that you would be “appropriate” to the needs to the child or animal you were caring for?