Teaching Kids Dollars & Sense» Blog Archive » Should children be paid to do chores

Doing more than just “winging” it

SIDEBAR

»
S
I
D
E
B
A
R
«

February 11th, 2008 by Harvey

Ahhhh….the never-ending debate about whether allowance should be linked to chores. Here’s a thoughtful blog entry by Dave Taylor, who publishes Attachment Parenting Blog: Raising Children with Love.

Dave raises some great points to consider for parents who feel their kids should contribute to the running of the home just because they “should” (the “I don’t get paid for doing dishes” crowd).

What do YOU think?

4 Responses

HC writes:
February 12th, 20083:04 pmat

Well … like most “never-ending debates” they never end because both sides make such good points. We like to read these debates, not to find the definitive answer, but because it may stimulate some new perspective on the age old questions.

Two thoughts to add to the mix:
First, isn’t much of this context specific? Some kids you have to pay to get them in the groove of making their beds … others would pay you to make the bed. (Serious, I have a little girl who likes nothing better!)

Secondly, maybe we can pay kids for chores that are a little beyond their ken right now … but not make it a condition for doing anything or everything. What these are, again, is specific to the child and your household.

I vividly remember being paid for polishing my mothers copper ware, and siliver photo frames … while she often forgot to give me my allowance. Why? In hindsight, I believe she so much hated doing the polishing herself, that she would do almost anything to have someone else do it for her. I felt good about receiving her payments, because there was clear value to her to a job well done. And it never felt that great to hold out my hand for a weekly donation when she was paying for my upkeep anyways.
It may not be logical or consistent, but it worked for us … isn’t that the point?
Rubyn Marcusohn writes:
February 20th, 20082:52 pmat

I would think that one of the basic drivers here is to ensure that our children are well equipped to live happy and fulfilling lives. One philosophical point of debate might be whether that means that we provide them with the tools to become mature responsible adults (our clones?) or we figure out what basic tools they would require to be able to go out and evolve on their own (this would likely be the more challenging and riskier option). But, since this is my input to the blog, and I choose not to endorse anarchy (at least not total…), I will get back to the point at hand…no, children should not be paid for chores. At least, not in the traditional sense. This is an opportunity to develop their relationships and responsibilities within a community. If the reward is monetary-based, it would lessen if not totally eradicate the feeling of responsibility. Perhaps some lessons in performing human kindness acts might be appropriate?
derrick writes:
January 22nd, 20093:03 pmat

should kids be required to do chores
Bud Hennessy writes:
April 10th, 20115:05 pmat

This subject of to pay kids for ‘chores’ or not to is clearly a divided one. However, with the concept in mind that we are supposed to be ‘raising adults’ that will be independent and productive members of society who will enter the world understanding that in order to be paid, one must work. I think it better to get them started on that path sooner rather than later. I do not see the value of ‘giving’ children an allowance with no expectation of something in return. To me this sets up an unrealistic expectation that in their adult lives that perhaps someone will ‘give’ them money just for existing… In other words they receive the message that that are entitled to be given money for nothing. In the U.S. this system is called ‘welfare’. I’m sure the same system exists in other countries under different names. Why would you want to teach children that money is given with no expectation of work? I suppose that I agree with the concept that perhaps some ‘chores’ should not be ‘paid’ for and should be expected to be done as a responsibility of being a member of a household. The trick to me seems to be in somehow separating these household member responsibility ‘chores’ from “work” for which they receive payment. Perhaps the word “allowance” in and of itself is part of the problem… Call it semantics, but to me the word “allowance” brings to mind an entitelement of getting something for nothing. I tend to believe more in Suzy Orman’s concept of “work pay”. This sends the message that in order to receive money one must be prepared to work for it.