laitimes

Bear children "" in the cinema hall, resulting in a large number of refunds, is it reasonable for parents to refuse compensation?

Bear children "" in the cinema hall, resulting in a large number of refunds, is it reasonable for parents to refuse compensation?

Bear children "" in the cinema hall, resulting in a large number of refunds, is it reasonable for parents to refuse compensation?

In the past few days, a "tasteful" news has been on the hot search, and the thing is like this:

A parent in Jiangxi took his son to watch a movie, but he didn't know whether the air conditioning in the cinema was too turned on or he ate his stomach, and the little boy directly "poured a thousand miles" in the theater.

According to the staff of the cinema, when the child was convenient in the theater, excrement was everywhere, flowing from where he was sitting to the bathroom.

Good guys, other spectators have experienced this kind of scene, so they have asked for a refund, or asked for a new show.

But this film was a big hit, and the performances were basically full at that time, and the theater had to cancel the next few performances and compensate according to the ticket price.

In response to this matter, the cinema staff said:

"In fact, it was not someone else who caused the loss in this matter, it was this little boy, everyone understands, since the little boy caused the loss, he should compensate."

But when the staff approached the parent to make a claim, the parent refused, saying that "it was just a child."

The implication is naturally that "my children are still young and cannot be controlled, so compensation should not be given." ”

Bear children "" in the cinema hall, resulting in a large number of refunds, is it reasonable for parents to refuse compensation?

But the cinema staff also felt helpless:

First, the little boy is 8 or 9 years old, which is not "small" at all;

Second, the cinema did not consider the actual situation, so there was no "lion opening", but only required parents to compensate for certain losses according to the reserve price.

As a result, the two could not reach a consensus on the issue of compensation, and finally the matter was made into a video and posted online, causing a uproar.

Shouldn't "children are young" be compensated?

The mistake made by the child, although it may indeed be unintentional, but the damage to the theater is real, so in any case, "the child is still young" cannot be a reason for parents to refuse compensation.

On the contrary, because the child is small and lacks the ability to act, and cannot pay for the mistakes he has made, parents need to stand up and sincerely compensate and apologize, rather than lightly saying "still a child" to shirk their own responsibility.

What's more, children are 8 or 9 years old, not those real "children" who do not understand anything and cannot control their own behavior.

Therefore, the parent's handling is really inappropriate, and the subsequent phrase "still a child" does not solve any practical problems.

This reminds me of another "bear child" some time ago, who also made a mistake.

He splashed ink downstairs, and the clothes and exterior walls of the building were all spared.

So what did the parents of this "bear child" do?

The child's mother immediately went door-to-door to apologize to the neighbors, took the neighbor's ink-stained clothes home and washed them by hand, and compensated them according to the price if they were not clean, or simply bought new ones to compensate others.

The child's father "worked at height" and cleaned up all the soiled facades of the building himself.

The child's father said:

"It's not that the child is not allowed to wipe, it's that the child really can't do this job."

The same bear children make mistakes, but the parents' handling methods are very different, as for who is better or worse of the two, I believe that everyone has a scale in their hearts.

Bear children "" in the cinema hall, resulting in a large number of refunds, is it reasonable for parents to refuse compensation?

Parents set false examples for their children

As the guardians of their children, in addition to raising their children to grow up, it is more important for parents to undertake the heavy responsibility of education.

When a child makes a mistake, the parent not only does not take the slightest responsibility, but even steps back vigorously, using "the child is still young" as a shield, which is also a demonstration of mistakes for the child.

Professor Li Meijin mentioned in the book "Psychological Parenting":

"Parents are a mirror of their children, and many of their children's problems can be found in their parents."

The reason why many children become "bear children" is that their parents themselves are "giant babies", do not have the basic moral concepts of adults, and lack responsibility.

Everyone understands the principle of "leading by example and teaching by example", but not every parent can do it.

What kind of demonstration will children give their children if they make mistakes in the cinema and parents are busy shirking responsibility and refusing to compensate?

When the child encounters similar problems again in the future and makes mistakes, the probability is that the first thing he thinks of is not to take responsibility, but to retreat and retreat, and he will lack the responsibility of a man.

Parents' refusal to compensate seems to avoid a loss and gain a small profit, but in fact, what is lost is the child's future, and the gain is not worth the loss.

Bear children "" in the cinema hall, resulting in a large number of refunds, is it reasonable for parents to refuse compensation?

Do a good job of educating your child afterwards

Since the bear child is still young and cannot take responsibility, does the parents have no other way than to "carry the pot" to take responsibility?

The answer is of course not, bear children make big mistakes, parents should take responsibility instead, but in addition to teaching children to take responsibility, we must also do a good job in post-event education and leave certain lessons for children.

For example, some bear children go out and destroy public facilities, and parents have to compensate according to the price, although the children do not have the ability to make money, but this does not prevent us from conducting after-the-fact education.

We can let the children do housework to "settle debts", brush the bowl once, drag the land once is equivalent to how much money, when to save enough, can be regarded as a complete solution.

Because this matter is caused by the child, the child has to bear this responsibility.

As the saying on the Internet says:

"If you don't educate your child well now, then when he goes into society, there will always be someone to help you educate."

Only when we do a good job of educating children afterwards and not letting children fall twice in the same place can we truly avoid raising babies as "bear children" and make them learn responsibility and responsibility.

Bear children "" in the cinema hall, resulting in a large number of refunds, is it reasonable for parents to refuse compensation?

Epilogue:

Educating children is a science, and a seemingly ordinary action by parents can have a profound impact on children.

When children make mistakes, the most important thing parents should do is to have the courage to take responsibility and carry out post-event education for their children, rather than retreating again and again, using "children are still young" as a shield.

Today's topic: What do you think of the parent's treatment?

Read on