Kids wearing for longer

Status
Not open for further replies.

jamie72

Est. Contributor
Messages
96
Role
  1. Adult Baby
  2. Diaper Lover
  3. Little
  4. Incontinent
Diaper sizes are getting bigger, and it seems normal for kids to wear much longer than before.
Here in the U.K. there have been surveys that show more and more kids are starting school wearing pull ups, and today I read that nearly half of kids still wet the bed when they start school, not every night, but do sometimes.
Is it the avaibilty if larger diapers and pull ups that lead to kids wearing for longer , or is it a response to a greater need that the manufacturers are responding to.
Looks like loads of kids still wear diapers or pull ups for bed, perhaps it is more acceptable today
 
Diaper companies are making larger diapers more commonly avalible, but you have to look at it from a more wider perspective then just potty training and bedwetting there is also the disabled kids to consider as well. Conditions like severe autism and other developmental conditions are starting to become much more flushed out and widely acceptable within the cultures which also has the effect of bringing it more into the media's light which is provoking a demand and a need for larger diapers from the companies so they take their existing products upsize them but then they take the designs and match them to the actual age group so they can sell it on more than one front, marketed as "pajama pants", "nighttime underwear", or "bedwetting protection" for the children who have minor bed wetting but they are just as functional as a regular diaper for those who need them for 24/7 use
 
But as a side effect because they're more readily available for larger sizes parents or more likely to buy them for their bedwetting children which makes it a common occurrence and thus raises the acceptance of school aged kids wearing some form of diaper or pullup.
 
I think lots wear 'just in case' because they can still fit into them - and perhaps some just use them because they can
 
jamie72 said:
I think lots wear 'just in case' because they can still fit into them - and perhaps some just use them because they can
Um kids don't normally have disposable income nor are capable of purchasing them on their own. And about 80% of parents won't continue spending that much money if it's not a necessity. I understand it's easy for you to think that way but the cost of keeping a child in a diaper is very very expensive there's been times when I've had to choose between buying pull ups for my kid and getting enough food to last a month. To put it in perspective about the cost for the short time that both my son and my little brother were both in Pull-Ups was running close to $130 a month in just diapers and pullups
 
I believe it's half and half. Kids have likely been dealing with bedwetting since beds were invented. In decades past this was dealt with more harshly, and secretly in house. Larger diapers were just not allowed by the parents in spite of any true need for them.

Fast forward to more recent times and those same kids have grown up in a slightly more accepting society.They (we) now realize the problem isn't a lack of laziness and should be dealt with by treatment not punishment. Hence the need for more larger sized diapers.

On the flip side though, we as a society are becoming less "concerned" with potty training kids by age two, three, or even later. The availability of those larger diapers has lessened the need to get them out of diapers all together. While at the same time the ease of disposables, and a kid being more comfortable in them, makes the task of potty training that much more difficult in comparison.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if in another 25-50 years we might see some teens or young adults who have just never been potty trained at all. Not because they couldn't be, but because they just didn't want to. Of course this would be a bit shocking by today's standards, but so was a diapered 5 year old 25-50 years ago.
 
Slomo said:
I believe it's half and half. Kids have likely been dealing with bedwetting since beds were invented. In decades past this was dealt with more harshly, and secretly in house. Larger diapers were just not allowed by the parents in spite of any true need for them.

Fast forward to more recent times and those same kids have grown up in a slightly more accepting society.They (we) now realize the problem isn't a lack of laziness and should be dealt with by treatment not punishment. Hence the need for more larger sized diapers.

On the flip side though, we as a society are becoming less "concerned" with potty training kids by age two, three, or even later. The availability of those larger diapers has lessened the need to get them out of diapers all together. While at the same time the ease of disposables, and a kid being more comfortable in them, makes the task of potty training that much more difficult in comparison.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if in another 25-50 years we might see some teens or young adults who have just never been potty trained at all. Not because they couldn't be, but because they just didn't want to. Of course this would be a bit shocking by today's standards, but so was a diapered 5 year old 25-50 years ago.
I don't think it'll ever go as far as your proposing but Kindergarten or first-grade wouldn't be surprising the problem is most schools do not have the funding to take care of kids that old in diapers
 
It honestly wouldn't surprise me if at some point in the future, potty training becomes optional in society. I don't mean that in terms of being ABDL and hoping for it, but more just based on the trends in society.

I will personally admit, as I have many times before, that I was potty trained late. My folks wanted to have me trained around the age of 3, however between myself being a stubborn child and my Aspberger's, I wasn't fully day-trained until roughly the age of 4 1/2. I did wet the bed for a while after, but I can't remember how long for.

The way I see things, diaper manufacturers want to get as much money as they can for their products, which means doing anything they can to squeeze every last cent out of a consumer. Increasing the size and size range of diapers and their related products is a way they're going to make more money as society shifts moving forward.

As a good example, even though it's before my time, Huggies and Pampers (namely) only had sizes that ran up through size 5 in their products. It was either the late 80's or early 90's that the idea of a size 6 came to market. The reasoning behind it: some children potty train later than others, and need a larger size until they are ready to do so, or there are some children that are larger than average for their age and need a larger diaper. This came about more as a need the consumers had more than the company did.

Fast forward several years to when Pampers launched a size 7 diaper. From my understanding, the reasoning behind it was not for later potty trainers, but because they rationalized that children are different sizes, and need different sized diapers when they are nearing the potty training age. I think some consumers bought into the fact that it says it's a size up from size 6, when in reality it's meant to be another option if it works better on a child than a size 6 diaper. (I could be entirely wrong here, and apologize if I am.)

I believe that it's that sort of consumer rationale that leads to a shift in society where children are being potty trained later, if at all in some cases due to disability or other conditions. It's almost like a cycle: company releases new size, consumer misinterprets the reasoning behind it, potty training gets delayed, and then the company releases another new size or product (but this time to cash in on the demand). I can't even begin to tell you how many reviews I've read online of parents asking for bigger sizes or increased absorbency on products that they use with their older children (those older than the typical potty training age, if that's even a thing anymore), or their disabled children.

The way I look at it, I don't necessarily know if the continued prolonging of potty training would be a good or bad thing. I would say that potentially, if it gets to a point where potty training becomes optional, it could mean an increase in quality of store-bought adult or adolescent products, as well as an increased availability of them. With things the way they are these days, who knows what will happen.
 
Slomo said:
I believe it's half and half. Kids have likely been dealing with bedwetting since beds were invented. In decades past this was dealt with more harshly, and secretly in house. Larger diapers were just not allowed by the parents in spite of any true need for them.

Fast forward to more recent times and those same kids have grown up in a slightly more accepting society.They (we) now realize the problem isn't a lack of laziness and should be dealt with by treatment not punishment. Hence the need for more larger sized diapers.

On the flip side though, we as a society are becoming less "concerned" with potty training kids by age two, three, or even later. The availability of those larger diapers has lessened the need to get them out of diapers all together. While at the same time the ease of disposables, and a kid being more comfortable in them, makes the task of potty training that much more difficult in comparison.

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if in another 25-50 years we might see some teens or young adults who have just never been potty trained at all. Not because they couldn't be, but because they just didn't want to. Of course this would be a bit shocking by today's standards, but so was a diapered 5 year old 25-50 years ago.

I think this is probably the most reasonable answer.

Maybe it's just the DL in me talking, but I think it's good that diapers, when needed, such as for bedwetting, have become less stigmatized. I mean, I don't understand why, if your child is a bedwetter, you'd rather have them lie in urine and go through the work of washing sheets (not to mention potentially ruining mattresses) when a diaper can solve some of the headache.

On the other hand, I do view it as a bit of a problem when normal, non-disabled kids are left in diapers longer than they need to be when parents are too lazy to toilet train.

PaddedBrony said:
It honestly wouldn't surprise me if at some point in the future, potty training becomes optional in society. I don't mean that in terms of being ABDL and hoping for it, but more just based on the trends in society.

I will personally admit, as I have many times before, that I was potty trained late. My folks wanted to have me trained around the age of 3, however between myself being a stubborn child and my Aspberger's, I wasn't fully day-trained until roughly the age of 4 1/2. I did wet the bed for a while after, but I can't remember how long for.

The way I see things, diaper manufacturers want to get as much money as they can for their products, which means doing anything they can to squeeze every last cent out of a consumer. Increasing the size and size range of diapers and their related products is a way they're going to make more money as society shifts moving forward.

As a good example, even though it's before my time, Huggies and Pampers (namely) only had sizes that ran up through size 5 in their products. It was either the late 80's or early 90's that the idea of a size 6 came to market. The reasoning behind it: some children potty train later than others, and need a larger size until they are ready to do so, or there are some children that are larger than average for their age and need a larger diaper. This came about more as a need the consumers had more than the company did.

Fast forward several years to when Pampers launched a size 7 diaper. From my understanding, the reasoning behind it was not for later potty trainers, but because they rationalized that children are different sizes, and need different sized diapers when they are nearing the potty training age. I think some consumers bought into the fact that it says it's a size up from size 6, when in reality it's meant to be another option if it works better on a child than a size 6 diaper. (I could be entirely wrong here, and apologize if I am.)

I believe that it's that sort of consumer rationale that leads to a shift in society where children are being potty trained later, if at all in some cases due to disability or other conditions. It's almost like a cycle: company releases new size, consumer misinterprets the reasoning behind it, potty training gets delayed, and then the company releases another new size or product (but this time to cash in on the demand). I can't even begin to tell you how many reviews I've read online of parents asking for bigger sizes or increased absorbency on products that they use with their older children (those older than the typical potty training age, if that's even a thing anymore), or their disabled children.

The way I look at it, I don't necessarily know if the continued prolonging of potty training would be a good or bad thing. I would say that potentially, if it gets to a point where potty training becomes optional, it could mean an increase in quality of store-bought adult or adolescent products, as well as an increased availability of them. With things the way they are these days, who knows what will happen.

I've noticed that it seems pretty common for autistic children to have trouble with potty training. I guess it just goes to show what a spectrum it can be, seeing I had no problems with it, according to my mother. I mean, I may be freshly diagnosed, but that doesn't change the fact that I must have still had it at the age of two if I have it now. Honestly it seems like my symptoms just got worse the older I got... but that's going off-topic.
 
KimbaStarshine said:
I think this is probably the most reasonable answer.

Maybe it's just the DL in me talking, but I think it's good that diapers, when needed, such as for bedwetting, have become less stigmatized. I mean, I don't understand why, if your child is a bedwetter, you'd rather have them lie in urine and go through the work of washing sheets (not to mention potentially ruining mattresses) when a diaper can solve some of the headache.

On the other hand, I do view it as a bit of a problem when normal, non-disabled kids are left in diapers longer than they need to be when parents are too lazy to toilet train

Thanks, and I have to agree with you on this too.

One one hand there's going to be less childhood trauma from bedwetting. And on the other hand it IS a problem if the parents are just being lazy.

This said, as a life long DL myself, I'd be a complete hypocrite if I forced (or even tricked) my own kid into potty training. At the very least I'd double make sure it's what they really want, and would still encourage the training anyways. But I believe that ultimately if the child really does not ever want to potty train, then I wouldn't force it- ever. That isn't just lazy though.
 
Slomo said:
Thanks, and I have to agree with you on this too.

One one hand there's going to be less childhood trauma from bedwetting. And on the other hand it IS a problem if the parents are just being lazy.

This said, as a life long DL myself, I'd be a complete hypocrite if I forced (or even tricked) my own kid into potty training. At the very least I'd double make sure it's what they really want, and would still encourage the training anyways. But I believe that ultimately if the child really does not ever want to potty train, then I wouldn't force it- ever. That isn't just lazy though.
If You Don't Force It by a certain age your child will suffer for it there's no Stigma really to wearing diapers at night among kids anymore however day time is a diffrent beast altogether, if my son wants a pullup to wear and use around the house I really can't argue too much but definitely not in public.
 
By the looks of it, I think they have to wear diapers/pull-ups so that they won't have to miss a single thing in their class schedules.
 
AnimeDude892 said:
By the looks of it, I think they have to wear diapers/pull-ups so that they won't have to miss a single thing in their class schedules.
That's another beast on its own. My niece is 10 years old in between school and all her extracurricular activities she barely has 10 minutes to herself everyday
 
Hate to say it but... the actual size of diapers have remained the same since the 90's the diaper companies have just chopped them up into different sections rebranded, offered less per count on there "larger sizes" to make more money.
Baby diapers were at there largest from the 80's into the early 90's then they started to get trimmed down to specific ranges, think of the walker series in pampers then the next series was size 1 -5.
 
But, more people are using them, and their use is becoming more normal
 
We have to look back 30 40 years ago. One parent work while the other parent cook and clean. But now we have to look at Both parents who work and have a hard time paying bills. They really don't cook like our Parents or Grand Parents did. They are dealing with kids and working so dinner and lunch is not what it use to be.

We also have to factor Kids are sitting on their diaper butt with a tablet (Cheap Baby sitter) while the kids in the 1970 1990's was playing outside or with the parents and burning off energy.
 
KimbaStarshine said:
On the other hand, I do view it as a bit of a problem when normal, non-disabled kids are left in diapers longer than they need to be when parents are too lazy to toilet train.

Most parents are of the "I can't WAIT for timmy to get potty trained" attitude. I can't imagine a parent considering diapers easier than potty training. I've also heard many parents lamenting over having more than one kid in diapers at a time, for the increased workload. One (with one older and two twins) was commenting that "it's like all I do all day long is change diapers!"
 
KimbaStarshine said:
I think this is probably the most reasonable answer.

Maybe it's just the DL in me talking, but I think it's good that diapers, when needed, such as for bedwetting, have become less stigmatized. I mean, I don't understand why, if your child is a bedwetter, you'd rather have them lie in urine and go through the work of washing sheets (not to mention potentially ruining mattresses) when a diaper can solve some of the headache.

On the other hand, I do view it as a bit of a problem when normal, non-disabled kids are left in diapers longer than they need to be when parents are too lazy to toilet train.



I've noticed that it seems pretty common for autistic children to have trouble with potty training. I guess it just goes to show what a spectrum it can be, seeing I had no problems with it, according to my mother. I mean, I may be freshly diagnosed, but that doesn't change the fact that I must have still had it at the age of two if I have it now. Honestly it seems like my symptoms just got worse the older I got... but that's going off-topic.
Quick off-topic thing, but that was the only thing I ever had an issue with growing up. I hit all the other milestones early, just I was a bit of a pain to potty train. By no means is what I have severe, if anything it looks more like a case of ADHD more than anything else.

Getting back on-topic, there are probably hundreds of reasons that could be cited for this phenomenon, and each one could have a certain validity over another. It's a culmination of those things that's causing this trend to occur. One thing's for sure though: no matter which direction it goes in next, it's going to take a lot of effort to get to the next step.
 
bambinod said:
Most parents are of the "I can't WAIT for timmy to get potty trained" attitude. I can't imagine a parent considering diapers easier than potty training. I've also heard many parents lamenting over having more than one kid in diapers at a time, for the increased workload. One (with one older and two twins) was commenting that "it's like all I do all day long is change diapers!"

I just don't know. I think that attitude has been changing over the years. I mean, if your healthy, normally-development three-year-old is still in diapers, you don't seem to be in much of a hurry to get the job done, and this seems to be getting more common. Of course, this is just my observation. I don't know if every older kid I see in diapers is delayed or not.
 
KimbaStarshine said:
I just don't know. I think that attitude has been changing over the years. I mean, if your healthy, normally-development three-year-old is still in diapers, you don't seem to be in much of a hurry to get the job done, and this seems to be getting more common. Of course, this is just my observation. I don't know if every older kid I see in diapers is delayed or not.

I agree. I see it a lot. I have a 20 month old. My son's cousin is 8 MONTHS older than him and she still has a binky and pullups. Wife and I think it's ridiculous but obviously don't say anything to her parents. Frankly I find it repulsive to see kids that old in diapers unless they' have a developmental disability. My cousin has a 4 year old who only got out of pullups at about 3.5 years old. Kid would go squat in the corner to shit himself. To me, that's a pretty clear sign he's ready to start using the toilet. In that case though, my cousin is a cop who works 90 hours a week and his wife is one of those super mommies who's batshit crazy obsessed with everything mommy. they have 4 kids and I honestly think she can't let go of having a baby around so she's dragging it out. She's super nice and a good mom, but her mommy obsession is a bit wacky (also increasingly common if you look at facebook and websites like baby center etc).


We're just kind of starting to get serious about potty training but haven't put a real effort in yet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top