To be honest, you just don’t push your kids out The difference between parenting and children’s health is

Children's health is a "rigid baseline" that all children must meet. Don't strain your body over psychological issues and parenting for grades. On the premise of adhering to this line, it is your and your child's freedom to adapt to each family and how you want to teach.

I have been doing follow-up work in the child health department for 7 years, and I have encountered too many people who confuse the two. There was a very popular topic before, asking "Will advanced education ruin parents?" Last week, there were two mothers and two children." The two groups were quarreling. Those who opposed said that early learning would make children tired of learning. The first one showed the growth curve and frowned, saying, "My 3-year-old only weighs 27 pounds. I didn't teach him well." Those who supported said that early learning can build self-confidence. The next person asked, "My child is 5 years old and dare not say hello to others. Do you want to eat something to boost his courage?" You see, I think there is no standard answer to this question. The former classifies health problems into parenting methods, while the latter classifies parenting problems into health. I have seen children who were 4 years old and finished the second grade of elementary school, but still failed to understand the boundary between the two and still be happy every day.

I have seen children who are forced to attend 8 interest classes and end up with anorexia and hair loss even if they don’t miss out on sports and social activities. The question is not “whether it is advanced education”, but whether you have maintained the baseline of children’s health. As long as the child is physically and mentally healthy, you can choose whatever path you choose. If there is a health problem, no matter how "correct" the standard of children's health is, there is a consensus among the global medical community, and there is almost no dispute. WHO's 0-18-year-old growth percentile, ranging from 3% to 97%, is within the normal range. As long as the developmental milestones of gross motor, fine motor, language, and social interaction are not more than 6 months behind, no excessive intervention is required. There are also core indicators such as blood routine hemoglobin, visual refraction, parenting methods, and bone age. As long as they are within the standard range, whether they are "thinner", "talked two months late, or 1cm shorter than their classmates", they are all in vain.

category. Even if I followed a 6-year-old boy before, his mother had a full schedule of training classes every day in order for him to enter a private elementary school. He didn't go to bed until 11 o'clock at the latest. He only grew 0.8cm in height in half a year. He also caught a cold once a month. His personality also changed from lively to timid. I told his mother at that time to cut all extracurricular classes in half first, and he had to go to bed at 9 o'clock, and nothing else mattered. I came back for a follow-up checkup six months later and found that the child had grown 4.2cm and was no longer sick. His previous problem of being unable to sit still had improved and he was now learning things much faster than before.

You see, many parents always think that "if I invest more in my child, he will be better", but they often forget that all "excellence" must be based on the 1 of "health". No matter how many 0's are added at the end, it is meaningless without the previous 1.

But when it comes to parenting, there is no unified answer at all. The same 5-year-old child is a healthy child with traditional Chinese medicine and western medicine. Whether you want him to run around outside every day or not, your child care philosophy is different. He has a natural contact with health, or you are willing to spend time with him to learn English and practice piano. Even if you want him to play more video games to exercise his reflexes, the core judgment is the same: he can eat and sleep, he will not get sick often, his mood is stable, and as long as he does not touch healthy development and conforms to universal laws, there will be no problem. This is the bottom line. There is no choice between "My family likes to let the baby stay up late" or "My red line - for example, I love to feed the baby 10 hours of junk food every day after getting enough sleep". If you encounter it, you must correct it. Otherwise, it will affect the child's lifetime shortsightedness and long-term anxiety to the physiological basis just because he is forced to learn.

Decreased immunity - all reasonable. Nowadays, everyone is arguing about various parenting schools, whether it is Montessori, positive discipline, or even the older generation's "strictness leads to filial son". In fact, many people nowadays confuse "raising well" and "teaching well". They think that raising a child to be fat and white means successful parenting. This obviously blurs the boundary between the two. I have seen many children who have been raised to be tough but will roll around on the floor when something goes wrong, and I have also seen children who are thin but have strong empathy and hands-on skills. Can you say that the former is "better-raised" than the latter? Obviously not. The former is healthy but still has room for adjustment in parenting, while the latter is fully qualified healthy + adaptive parenting, but it just doesn't fit in with some stereotypes that "fat is good" is essentially a different family.

To put it bluntly, there is no absolute choice of priorities for children's health. This is a "must answer" question for all parents, wrong. And parenting is an "open question." You have to get full marks for the required questions first, and you can answer the open questions however you want. As long as you and your child feel comfortable, there's nothing wrong with it.