"Get your hands off that child!" when the parent is right there

[TootsNYC]

Somewhere in my career I chanced upon a surprisingly effective line to stop objectionable activity quickly: assume that you're in charge and say "we're not going to do that." Maybe it works, at least for me, because it doesn't challenge the wrongdoer to prove you wrong.

And if that feels too bossy, try:

"Let's not do that."

[cwm]

I was tickled mercilessly growing up until I was about 8 or 9 years old. My dad had built us a bunk bed and I was sitting on the top bunk when he came in to tickle me. I ended up spontaneously kicking him in the face (I honestly didn't mean it, but he went after my feet). I can tell you, I was never tickled by him again after that. It took some of my friends in high school learning the same lesson the same way, despite having been told that I flail and thrash.

Depending on the age of the child, if someone is in actual danger of them thrashing to get away and getting hurt, step in on those grounds. If someone calls you on it, again, white lie. "One of my friends actually hurt someone pretty badly trying to get away from being tickled. I'd hate to see you kicked in the face over this, and it doesn't look like kid is enjoying it too much any more."

[gemma156]

On a scout activity of abseiling down a small cliff front, one family brought along their younger son who thought pushing small stones off the edge was no big deal (the side the scouts and people were working from).  The parents were standing by and also thought this was no big deal, so my DH stepped in as one of the leaders of the day and told him to stop. 

The boy continued knocking the stones off the edge, and my dh went off on him - his parents then chimed in to say he was alright let him be and my dh informed them it was not ok.  Not for the kids going down the cliff and certainly not for the people who were holding onto the kids guide ropes at the bottom, and if they couldn't understand that they could leave the activity.  The parents were a little shocked to be presented with the option of comply or leave the activity, but they complied and led their youngest away from the cliff face to do something else.

[Zilla]

On a scout activity of abseiling down a small cliff front, one family brought along their younger son who thought pushing small stones off the edge was no big deal (the side the scouts and people were working from).  The parents were standing by and also thought this was no big deal, so my DH stepped in as one of the leaders of the day and told him to stop. 

The boy continued knocking the stones off the edge, and my dh went off on him - his parents then chimed in to say he was alright let him be and my dh informed them it was not ok.  Not for the kids going down the cliff and certainly not for the people who were holding onto the kids guide ropes at the bottom, and if they couldn't understand that they could leave the activity.  The parents were a little shocked to be presented with the option of comply or leave the activity, but they complied and led their youngest away from the cliff face to do something else.

See I think that's completely wrong.  What should have happened was your dh ask the little boy to go to his parents and explain to them why it isn't okay for the boy to do that.  They might have been completely clueless about where the rocks were going.  For your dh to go off on him is not right. 

[JoyinVirginia]

On a scout activity of abseiling down a small cliff front, one family brought along their younger son who thought pushing small stones off the edge was no big deal (the side the scouts and people were working from).  The parents were standing by and also thought this was no big deal, so my DH stepped in as one of the leaders of the day and told him to stop. 

The boy continued knocking the stones off the edge, and my dh went off on him - his parents then chimed in to say he was alright let him be and my dh informed them it was not ok.  Not for the kids going down the cliff and I certainly not for the people who were holding onto the kids guide ropes at the bottom, and if they couldn't understand that they could leave the activity.  The parents were a little shocked to be presented with the option of comply or leave the activity, but they complied and led their youngest away from the cliff face to do something else.

See I think that's completely wrong.  What should have happened was your dh ask the little boy to go to his parents and explain to them why it isn't okay for the boy to do that.  They might have been completely clueless about where the rocks were going.  For your dh to go off on him is not right.

Dangerous activity. Safety is imperative. The scout leader was absolutely correct in his role to make the offending behavior stop right then.

[sammycat]

Dangerous activity. Safety is imperative. The scout leader was absolutely correct in his role to make the offending behavior stop right then.

I agree.

[lowspark]

Dangerous activity. Safety is imperative. The scout leader was absolutely correct in his role to make the offending behavior stop right then.

I agree.

I agree too.

[PastryGoddess]

On a scout activity of abseiling down a small cliff front, one family brought along their younger son who thought pushing small stones off the edge was no big deal (the side the scouts and people were working from).  The parents were standing by and also thought this was no big deal, so my DH stepped in as one of the leaders of the day and told him to stop. 

The boy continued knocking the stones off the edge, and my dh went off on him - his parents then chimed in to say he was alright let him be and my dh informed them it was not ok.  Not for the kids going down the cliff and I certainly not for the people who were holding onto the kids guide ropes at the bottom, and if they couldn't understand that they could leave the activity.  The parents were a little shocked to be presented with the option of comply or leave the activity, but they complied and led their youngest away from the cliff face to do something else.

See I think that's completely wrong.  What should have happened was your dh ask the little boy to go to his parents and explain to them why it isn't okay for the boy to do that.  They might have been completely clueless about where the rocks were going.  For your dh to go off on him is not right.

Dangerous activity. Safety is imperative. The scout leader was absolutely correct in his role to make the offending behavior stop right then.

Adding my POD.  That was not the time for a measured and sensitive discussion on the how's and why's of their son's behavior

[gramma dishes]

Dangerous activity. Safety is imperative. The scout leader was absolutely correct in his role to make the offending behavior stop right then.

I agree.

I agree too.

Oh my!  Me too!! 

[Zilla]

Dangerous activity. Safety is imperative. The scout leader was absolutely correct in his role to make the offending behavior stop right then.

I agree.

As I posted, I don't think he was wrong in stopping the dangerous activity but he should have done so the first time by walking the boy over to his parents and explaining why.  Just because he said stop to the boy who disobeyed by continuing to do it does not give him the right to go off on him.  If he did explain why and the boy still went back to do it, then he can be more firm.  But not in the way it the OP of this event described.

[gramma dishes]

Dangerous activity. Safety is imperative. The scout leader was absolutely correct in his role to make the offending behavior stop right then.

I agree.

As I posted, I don't think he was wrong in stopping the dangerous activity but he should have done so the first time by walking the boy over to his parents and explaining why.  Just because he said stop to the boy who disobeyed by continuing to do it does not give him the right to go off on him.  If he did explain why and the boy still went back to do it, then he can be more firm.  But not in the way it the OP of this event described.

The parents were aware of what the child was doing and thought it was no big deal.  But it WAS a big deal.  Someone could have been seriously injured.  They (parents) knew.  They just chose not to stop and consider what what obvious to everyone else. 

No, the OP's (of this story) husband absolutely did what he needed to do to stop the dangerous activity.  I'm sure every single other parent there and the participants involved applauded what the husband did.  I certainly would have!

[Amava]

Dangerous activity. Safety is imperative. The scout leader was absolutely correct in his role to make the offending behavior stop right then.

I agree.

As I posted, I don't think he was wrong in stopping the dangerous activity but he should have done so the first time by walking the boy over to his parents and explaining why.  Just because he said stop to the boy who disobeyed by continuing to do it does not give him the right to go off on him.  If he did explain why and the boy still went back to do it, then he can be more firm.  But not in the way it the OP of this event described.

No. If a leader tells you to stop, you stop.
If you disobey and the leader gets upset with you, that's on you. Whether you are 5 or 50 years old.

[lowspark]

According to gemma's story, The parents were standing by which I take to mean they were right there and could see what their son was doing. So I'm not sure how her DH was supposed to walk them over. With the parents standing right there, grabbing the hand of the offending kid to walk him a few feet might not be that wise a thing to do.

It sounds to me like the parents saw nothing dangerous in what their son was doing so they certainly had no intention of stopping him. When gemma's DH told the boy to stop and he didn't, that indicated a clear lack of respect on the boy's part for the adults in charge (gemma's DH being one of the leaders). The parents then also showed this lack of respect for the leaders by saying it was ok, thus encouraging the boy to continue.

At that point, with the safety of the people below at risk, I'd say that the leader (gemma's DH) has no choice but to do whatever it took to make the boy stop. Verbally going off on the boy would be the first step. Physical involvement (walking the boy to the parents) would be something I'd do only if the verbal reprimand didn't work.

[Zilla]

On a scout activity of abseiling down a small cliff front, one family brought along their younger son who thought pushing small stones off the edge was no big deal (the side the scouts and people were working from).  The parents were standing by and also thought this was no big deal, so my DH stepped in as one of the leaders of the day and told him to stop. 

The boy continued knocking the stones off the edge, and my dh went off on him - his parents then chimed in to say he was alright let him be and my dh informed them it was not ok.  Not for the kids going down the cliff and certainly not for the people who were holding onto the kids guide ropes at the bottom, and if they couldn't understand that they could leave the activity.  The parents were a little shocked to be presented with the option of comply or leave the activity, but they complied and led their youngest away from the cliff face to do something else.

Again I don't think he was wrong in stopping the activity, just in the way he did.  I am sure the parents are not trying to allow their younger son to hurt someone on purpose.  We have many times met clueless parents on these boards.  The younger kid wasn't a boy scout therefore not realizing the importance of that dh was a leader.  And furthermore if the activity was so apparently dangerous, why didn't anyone else including the parents of those kids dangling from the rope stepped forward instantly. I think the people other than your dh didn't realize at that instant just how dangerous it was. (not saying it wasn't)  I still maintain that the dh should have turned/walked to the parents and explain why the boy needs to stop and stay with the parents.  If after that the boy continued, then the dh can be firmer. 

[RegionMom]

Do a search on death/injury by falling rock, and you will say why immediate action was taken. 

"Went off" does not mean cussing.  With the DH as a scout leader, I would doubt really harsh words were used. 

Slightly off topic, but similar- there was an article about a husband and wife's goofing off in a pool and the wife play screamed and the lifeguard came towards them.  Both the wife and husband waved him away, "we are just playing, wife is not really drowning!"  but the lifeguard went a few feet past them to rescue their silently drowning daughter.

How did the parents not notice their own daughter a few feet away, while the lifeguard was 50 feet away?
Because the lifeguard KNEW the dangers and the warning signs. 

The parents of the cliff ignored a warning and waved off a leader. 
What if a rock had hit older brother below?