# Beliefs about children (people)



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

I hope it is ok to start this thread - I thought this idea was really neat and worthy of discussion - it's a new topic anyway:

The4ofUs wrote:
"Some of us believe that our children, when treated respectfully and presented information about situations and alternative ideas, will almost always make rational decisions that will be agreeable to all...and when they don't make rational decisions, there is a good underlying reason for it that can usually be accommodated with a little problem solving.

AND

Some of us believe that our children, when treated respectfully, given information, alternatives, and time, will still sometimes make irrational decisions. And, sometimes there is not a deep underlying reason; sometimes, it's just because."

I guess I would fall more toward #2, because I believe children think differently than adults. I think they lack the experience and information that comes with being an adult. And I do not believe it is always productive to give children choices. (I also don't think it is natural.) I think many MANY conflicts are avoided when children have boundaries and understand what they are. And when given boundaries I think many children are happy to live within their boundaries the majority of the time. But not only that, I don't think adults most often make rational choices that are "agreeable to all", so I find that expectation unreasonable for children.


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
Some of us believe that *PEOPLE*, when treated respectfully, given information, alternatives, and time, will still sometimes make irrational decisions. And, sometimes there is not a deep underlying reason; sometimes, it's just because."
.

That's what I think.


----------



## Spanish Rose (Jan 29, 2007)

Number two. I don't find anything wrong with being irrational.

Children aren't so much illogical as that they have a different type of logic. It's developmental and perfectly alright.

Humans are designed to need boundaries.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I hope it is ok to start this thread - I thought this idea was really neat and worthy of discussion - it's a new topic anyway:

The4ofUs wrote:
"Some of us believe that our children, when treated respectfully and presented information about situations and alternative ideas, will almost always make rational decisions that will be agreeable to all...and when they don't make rational decisions, there is a good underlying reason for it that can usually be accommodated with a little problem solving.

AND

Some of us believe that our children, when treated respectfully, given information, alternatives, and time, will still sometimes make irrational decisions. And, sometimes there is not a deep underlying reason; sometimes, it's just because."

I guess I would fall more toward #2, because I believe children think differently than adults. I think they lack the experience and information that comes with being an adult. And I do not believe it is always productive to give children choices. (I also don't think it is natural.) I think many MANY conflicts are avoided when children have boundaries and understand what they are. And when given boundaries I think many children are happy to live within their boundaries the majority of the time. But not only that, I don't think adults most often make rational choices that are "agreeable to all", so I find that expectation unreasonable for children.

I agree 100% with you on #2.


----------



## ShaggyDaddy (Jul 5, 2006)

Children are better at learning then adults, they lack the prejudice and closed-mindedness that comes with a lot of life experience and can therefore creatively attack problems without having to first break out of their engrained way of thinking.

I have found that children are often better at finding a mutually agreeable solution because they are not so caught up in what is "supposed" to happen or how things "always were"

For instance I have pretty much written off trying to come to a mutually agreeable solution for any problem with my parents, because their habit and their prejudice is to always over-ride their children's ideas and desires in favor of familiar or traditional ones because of habit and "experience"

Sometimes a "deeply irrational" choice is actually just a more open-minded one, from someone who is not clouded with "wisdom"


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ShaggyDaddy* 
Children are better at learning then adults, they lack the prejudice and closed-mindedness that comes with a lot of life experience and can therefore creatively attack problems without having to first break out of their engrained way of thinking.

I agree with this too! And the dichotomy breaks down; they always do anyway...


----------



## frenchie (Mar 21, 2006)

I agree with #2 as well. 2bluefish...I agree with every word you posted! My son doesn't always like choices. There are days he just wants to be directed...he doesn't want to have to make a decision, and he makes that very clear!


----------



## 425lisamarie (Mar 4, 2005)

Everyone is irrational at times. I am for sure. I think it's ok to have irrational feelings.

I'm not sure the exact point of the question, but if you're asking what do I do as a result of my thinking....

I include DS in anything that I would describe as a boundary. I really dont' have many examples because he really doesn't push me about things, or want to do things I find completely unacceptable. I guess I just AM the kind to want to figure out something that is agreeable. Obviously if he were in the car and tried to jump out the window I wouldn't ask for his opinion. But I would truly struggle with any scenario that I would be unable to find a solution.

Same with DH, and DD(though she's sort of along for the ride at 9.5 months right now).


----------



## 4evermom (Feb 3, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *frenchie* 
I agree with #2 as well. 2bluefish...I agree with every word you posted! My son doesn't always like choices. There are days he just wants to be directed...he doesn't want to have to make a decision, and he makes that very clear!

There are days I want someone else to make the decisions, too







.


----------



## frenchie (Mar 21, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *4evermom* 
There are days I want someone else to make the decisions, too







.

AND HOW!!!! I hear ya!


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

Me, too! Sometimes trying to come to a mutually agreeable solution with Dh and/or the kids about what to eat or watch makes me nuts. _Someone else just choose for me!_


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

I am quoting the forum guidelines for the second time today







_"Effective discipline is based on loving guidance. It is based on the belief that children are born innately good and that our role as parents is to nurture their spirits as they learn about limits and boundaries, rather than to curb their tendencies toward wrongdoing. *Effective discipline presumes that children have reasons for their behavior* and that cooperation can be engaged to solve shared problems."_

I think it is important to presume your child has reasons for their behavior, even if you don't always understand those reasons.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

I think "having a reason" and being "reasonable" are not quite the same - defining what is reasonable is a value judgement. I guess being a #2 parent - I often acknowledge the reason but feel as and adult I am responsible for making value judgements about what is reasonable when need be. I don't always like doing that, but I think that is my job.


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
Some of us believe that our children, when treated respectfully, given information, alternatives, and time, will still sometimes make irrational decisions.....I believe children think differently than adults. I think they lack the experience and information that comes with being an adult.

I believe this and I would add that I think that much of the time (though again, not always) when treated this way children will "make rational decisions that will be agreeable to all" but

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
And, sometimes there is not a deep underlying reason; sometimes, it's just because."

I do not believe this. I think there is always a reason for a person's behavior. It need not be a "deep" one and it might not be a "rational" (in the adult's mind) one but there is always a reason and that reason is never "just because." I think "just because" is what we say a child's reason is when we can't figure it out or when the reason is that "they want to assert autonomy/decide for themselves" or "they're extremely tired/overwhelmed/sick/anxious/etc. and irrational" or "to see what happens/out of curiosity/to learn." I think of my own behavior and I have never, ever done something "just because." It might look like "just because", I suppose, to someone else who doesn't think like I do and who can't read my mind and to whom I haven't explained my reason- but it is never the case that I do it "just because." I can't even imagine what it would be to do something "just because." I think my children deserve the respect of having others recognize that they do things for reasons, not "just because." Just a friendly offering of my own opinion.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Good point sledg!


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

I fall more in the first catagory. It has been my experience with dd and the other small children I know that they are just as capable of being reasonable (lump in rational and cooperative too) as adults. Sometimes moreso. I believe that it is when adults assume children are not reasonable that children start to become unreasonable in an effort to have some control over thier lives. And just like adults, the ability to be reasonable decreases when basic needs (sleep, food, coffee, etc....) are not being met.


----------



## gaialice (Jan 4, 2005)

I agree with Sledg, yes, there is a reason for all behaviours. The real problem - for me - is that some kids will come back from schol and say "I am upset today because.... " Other kids will instead act unreasonable and annoying. It is the same with adults, of course. Some of us get home from the office and say "I had such a bad day today..." and just get it out and over with --for other people it ain't so easy. Like my dd1 today. When I came home, I started to play with her and her sister, and she was acting really agressive towards her sister and me. Now, we had this problem frequently until not long ago, but recently she's doing a ton better. I went on and on playing and playing and took a lot of occasions to playfully hug and kiss and caress her. And then finally, she said that she was very upset because she had inadvertently broken a cup that belongs to her favorite teacher at her school (the teacher was not there but will be there tomorrow) We brainstormed a solution and from then on, she was another kid altogether...
The point I'm trying to make is of course I did enforce limits to protect everyone's safety tonight. I did not let her punch her sis and me... however no problem would have been solved purely by enforcing these limits...
I am not always successful with dd1, there are many nights that are not so great and I go to sleep thinking I really did not get whatever it was that was troubling her. But for every night like tonight I am thankful, and I hope it builds in her that she can trust me...


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

I agree with #2.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I think "having a reason" and being "reasonable" are not quite the same - defining what is reasonable is a value judgement. I guess being a #2 parent - I often acknowledge the reason but feel as and adult I am responsible for making value judgements about what is reasonable when need be. I don't always like doing that, but I think that is my job.

Sure, we do make value judgements about what is reasonable and acceptable. When I say it is important to presume your child has reasons for their behavior, that doesn't mean they're always right, or that they don't need direction and guidence. But, in my family with four children and many personalities to take into account, I've found it makes things easier if we use cooperation to solve problems. Drawing lines in the sand about "what need be" is bound to get some hackles up.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sledg*
I think my children deserve the respect of having others recognize that they do things for reasons, not "just because."


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *gaialice* 
The real problem - for me - is that some kids will come back from schol and say "I am upset today because.... " Other kids will instead act unreasonable and annoying. It is the same with adults, of course. Some of us get home from the office and say "I had such a bad day today..." and just get it out and over with --for other people it ain't so easy. Like my dd1 today. When I came home, I started to play with her and her sister, and she was acting really agressive towards her sister and me. Now, we had this problem frequently until not long ago, but recently she's doing a ton better. I went on and on playing and playing and took a lot of occasions to playfully hug and kiss and caress her. And then finally, she said that she was very upset because she had inadvertently broken a cup that belongs to her favorite teacher at her school (the teacher was not there but will be there tomorrow) We brainstormed a solution and from then on, she was another kid altogether...
The point I'm trying to make is of course I did enforce limits to protect everyone's safety tonight. I did not let her punch her sis and me... however *no problem would have been solved purely by enforcing these limits*...









Some people have the skills to handle a problem effectively, some don't yet have the skills to handle a problem adaptively and instead will attempt to communicate or solve the problem in a less adaptable and less effective manner. So it might look really random to, say, come home from school and just be irritable and start hitting people (btdt) but most likely it's not-there are reasons to be addressed, addressing the behavior alone is not enough IME.

If my child acts out to get attention (say, by hitting) then to solve the problem in a durable manner I have to help her learn to ask for attention a different way. I can't just tell her to stop hitting. At least, this has been my experience. How I understand the problem leads directly to my response-so it's important to really think about my understanding of my children. I need to understand their reasons, their concerns. Sometimes I don't, not right away, but the point is to make the effort, and through that effort we build trust and we learn to cooperate together. This is hard-won understanding for me, we've been through the wringer here to figure this out, and I am so grateful to understand this now.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
And I do not believe it is always productive to give children choices. (I also don't think it is natural.) I think many MANY conflicts are avoided when children have boundaries and understand what they are. And when given boundaries I think many children are happy to live within their boundaries the majority of the time.

I agree with that.
I am in category 1.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sledg*
If my child acts out to get attention (say, by hitting) then to solve the problem in a durable manner I have to help her learn to ask for attention a different way. I can't just tell her to stop hitting.









:


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

I love what's being said - I just want to point out, I don't think #2 people don't care or don't respond to the reasons behind their children's behavior. I just think they don't feel it is neccessary to look for the reason behind every action or conflict. A one time event might not warrent a "discussion" - while a pattern of behavior does.

Or I don't know, maybe the dichtomy doesn't really pan out that well after all. I do think kids have reasons for what they do; I just don't think it is essential to look at the reason behind every action -

Today dd went by the dog when I had told her not to. She got knocked down and cried. I pointed out that I had told her not to because she would get knocked down. She acknowledged that she had heard me tell her that. I didn't ask her why she did it. I didn't dry her tears or make a big deal about it. I just let her deal with the natural consequence on her own. I have no idea what her reason was, and it really doesn't matter. She needs to stay away from the dog when he is on his chain. If she can't be trusted with that boundary, then she will have the "aversive" of being left inside while I feed the animals.


----------



## frenchie (Mar 21, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I love what's being said - I just want to point out, I don't think #2 people don't care or don't respond to the reasons behind their children's behavior. I just think they don't feel it is neccessary to look for the reason behind every action or conflict. A one time event might not warrent a "discussion" - while a pattern of behavior does.

Or I don't know, maybe the dichtomy doesn't really pan out that well after all. *I do think kids have reasons for what they do; I just don't think it is essential to look at the reason behind every action* -

This is how I feel.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

I found something else that might be helpful for those of us trying to understanding our beliefs concerning parenting styles. This quote is from "You are your child's first teacher" by Rahima Baldwin Dancy (Waldorf philosophy):

"Many parents don't want to be authoritarian, and they question whether they should insist that their child obey. Studies have shown that among authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive parents, the children whose parents are authoritative do best. That means effectively and consistantly setting limits for the child. Parents have a natural authority with their children because the parents are adults, so children naturally look to them as knowing more about the world than they do. Children 'come to earth' only gradually, so the adult must provide the ego force for the child that will direct his emotions; they must make decisions based on a mature viewpoint, rather than on the child's own likes and dislikes."

This is me - authoritative - not authoritarian


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I found something else that might be helpful for those of us trying to understanding our beliefs concerning parenting styles. This quote is from "You are your child's first teacher" by Rahima Baldwin Dancy (Waldorf philosophy):

"Many parents don't want to be authoritarian, and they question whether they should insist that their child obey. Studies have shown that among authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive parents, the children whose parents are authoritative do best. That means effectively and consistantly setting limits for the child. Parents have a natural authority with their children because the parents are adults, so children naturally look to them as knowing more about the world than they do. Children 'come to earth' only gradually, so the adult must provide the ego force for the child that will direct his emotions; they must make decisions based on a mature viewpoint, rather than on the child's own likes and dislikes."

This is me - authoritative - not authoritarian









ITA.

I also think developmental stages have a lot to do with whether camp #2 or camp #2 apply (the two cateogories defined by the OP). I really believe that very young children discharge emotion in a very healthy way if allowed to. We all have swings of feelings and children let those emotions flow right out of them. As adults, we are trained to hold onto them and ignore them and therefore there are underlying reasons for our behaviors at times. I really don't think this is often the case for young children (under the age of 5 or so). Of course, there are times when the emotions/behavior represent something else going on but I think if we're paying attention, it's pretty clear what that something might be (hungry, tired, frustrated or hurt by a social interaction, etc.).

Now, with older children they are beginning to get socialized out of having this natural flow of emotional discharge. I think it becomes more important to pay close attention and look for the underlying causes of behavior and emotional outbursts at this point. It's so sad, but very true.

So I don't think one can apply the concepts broadly to parenting...it must change as the needs of the child change.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

I sort of got tangential on the emotional side of this. But for the most part, I fall into the 2nd category. But I always am reflecting on the interactions during the day to try to understand how I can better engage with my child so that he is able to be as free as possible to do whatever learning and emotional growth that he is processing.

I love these discussions...I hope this thread doesn't get closed down!


----------



## Daffodil (Aug 30, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
Some of us believe that our children, when treated respectfully and presented information about situations and alternative ideas, will almost always make rational decisions that will be agreeable to all...and when they don't make rational decisions, there is a good underlying reason for it that can usually be accommodated with a little problem solving.

I'm mostly in this camp. My DD is still only 4, but I don't see her making a lot of irrational decisions. She sometimes wants things that I don't want her to want, but it's usually not because she's being irrational, it's just because she values different things. Heck, even my 1 year old doesn't tend to act irrationally. It's not irrational to climb up on the table and throw stuff on the floor if you value the fun of throwing more than you value the stuff.


----------



## Thao (Nov 26, 2001)

Interesting thread! I'm in camp #2 I guess, although I fervently believe in trying to get at root causes and being an emotion coach and all that. But in my worldview, children, being human, are made up of the same complicated squishy mishmash of noble yearnings and selfish desires that we all are. They are no more inherently "good" or "bad" than I am, they are 100% human and that encompasses both.

So I do believe that while sometimes a child has hurtful behavior because they are tired or hungry or processing something they can't articulate, other times the reason may be simple selfishness -- which is okay, it's human, we grownups struggle with that too. So I do try to figure out reasons and causes but I don't always think I'll be able to resolve the cause because let's face it humans have had a selfish streak pretty much through our entire history.

One downside that *may* occur when one focuses too much on causes rather than boundaries is that the child may come to the conclusion that they aren't really responsible for their behavior, that their hurtful behavior is always the product of something else, like being too tired or whatnot. This happened to me and dd. I think I overdid it when she was younger, or maybe I didn't adjust my parenting appropriately as she got older. Anyway there was an "aha" moment when I realized that my search for her reasons had started to metamorphose into her making excuses instead of taking responsibility. I've adjusted now and say, "I understand you are feeling xyz right now but regardless it is not okay for you to abc." I feel strongly that this was the right shift for us.

I think I agree with bluefish though, that this isn't really a dichotomy. More like different shades of grey, and which shade of grey is the right one will change depending on each parent and child.


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

Wow, I've never been spun off before!







:









I had posted originally in the context of how you view child development and how that affects the way you parent. I used rational/irrational, though now I see that can be problematic, too...

I like this:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Thao*
Interesting thread! I'm in camp #2 I guess, although I fervently believe in trying to get at root causes and being an emotion coach and all that. But in my worldview, children, being human, are made up of the same complicated squishy mishmash of noble yearnings and selfish desires that we all are. They are no more inherently "good" or "bad" than I am, they are 100% human and that encompasses both.

So I do believe that while sometimes a child has hurtful behavior because they are tired or hungry or processing something they can't articulate, other times the reason may be simple selfishness -- which is okay, it's human, we grownups struggle with that too. So I do try to figure out reasons and causes but I don't always think I'll be able to resolve the cause because let's face it humans have had a selfish streak pretty much through our entire history.

One downside that *may* occur when one focuses too much on causes rather than boundaries is that the child may come to the conclusion that they aren't really responsible for their behavior, that their hurtful behavior is always the product of something else, like being too tired or whatnot. This happened to me and dd. I think I overdid it when she was younger, or maybe I didn't adjust my parenting appropriately as she got older. Anyway there was an "aha" moment when I realized that my search for her reasons had started to metamorphose into her making excuses instead of taking responsibility. I've adjusted now and say, "I understand you are feeling xyz right now but regardless it is not okay for you to abc." I feel strongly that this was the right shift for us.

I think I agree with bluefish though, that this isn't really a dichotomy. More like different shades of grey, and which shade of grey is the right one will change depending on each parent and child.

and this:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish*
Or I don't know, maybe the dichtomy doesn't really pan out that well after all. I do think kids have reasons for what they do; I just don't think it is essential to look at the reason behind every action -


I will also point out that in the past few months, leading up to and after my son's 3rd birthday, he has become much more capable of having *discussions* about situations with me, and coming up with alternative solutions, so we have by default become more consensual with each other, which I'm really loving, because while it's not a deal breaker for me to 'make' him do things sometimes, I strive to be as consensual as *I* am capable of being in any given situation - and because I believe that he is developing his reasoning abilities as he gets older, I don't have a problem with still pulling rank sometimes - and that is where the different lies, I suppose - because I believe what I do developmentally, I am gradually handing over the reins to him, as opposed to him having them all to himself from the get go. Based on my experience with him, up until a couple months ago, he sometimes wasn't willing or able to participate in a discussions about mutual solutions, so I woud default to the path of least resistance much of the time when we were at an impasse, simply because he wasn't getting concepts I was trying to get across for whatever reason. I think *this* ability (or inability, as it were) to "get it" or "not get it" will vary from child to child, and may be another determining factor in how you parent, as well...it was really frustrating to be trying to work something out with him so we'd both be happy, and he would just stare at me blankly. But clearly, the groundwork was being layed, as we now have discussions about situations and *most* of the time come up with a solution that will make us both happy.

Anyway. Thao's right - it's been an interesting discussion!


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Thao* 
So I do believe that while sometimes a child has hurtful behavior because they are tired or hungry or processing something they can't articulate, other times the reason may be simple selfishness -- which is okay, it's human, we grownups struggle with that too.

I think "selfishness" is nothing more than attempting to meet one's own needs, when one's own needs are pressing enough that it's difficult to consider the needs of someone else. I can't imagine what "simple selfishness" is if it is not an attempt to meet one's own needs. So, I don't think selfishness is simple-there's still a reason. I think we use the descriptor "selfish" when a person's persistent attempt to meet their need, or actual meeting of their need, conflicts with our own needs or values. I think "selfish" is a term we use to subtly invalidate a person's preferences/feelings/needs. We can dismiss their reasons or needs, because they're "just being selfish." I have found that it is so important for me to become aware of the language I use to describe my children and their behavior, be honest about it, examine it. My beliefs about my children, my attitude toward them, the words I use to describe them directly affect how I treat them and what I teach them. (disclaimer: this is not an attack on anyone, simply how I think as I strive to grow and do better as a parent, this is my process.)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Thao* 
One downside that *may* occur when one focuses too much on causes rather than boundaries is that the child may come to the conclusion that they aren't really responsible for their behavior, that their hurtful behavior is always the product of something else, like being too tired or whatnot.

I think it's entirely possible to focus both on the cause and on being responsible for one's own behavior. I don't think looking into reasons (like being tired) precludes teaching children that we are all responsible for our own behavior and that our behavior affects those around us. In fact, I think it's very important that my children become aware of the factors that go into their behavior, it helps them communicate and address their needs more effectively. I can help my child become aware, while also encouraging her to take responsibility: "I hear that you are frustrated because....I don't like that you hit her, hitting isn't safe, it hurts. Let's think of a safer way you could say you're frustrated, let's find another way to solve this problem." I have actually found boundaries to be much easier to maintain when reasons are taken into account and addressed.

Do I always remember to think about what my child's reasons might be? No, sometimes I'm too selfish.







Sometimes I forget, for lots of reasons (like, I'm preoccupied, or exhausted, or frazzled-and knowing this helps me take the action I need to take in order to be better able to cultivate awareness of my child's reasons, like resting or relaxing or meditating-taking responsibility for my own actions). But making the effort to hold an awareness of my child's possible reasons has helped us develop a more compassionate and cooperative relationship. It has helped me become a more effective parent. Though I sometimes forget to consider my child's reasons, or sometimes even do choose to ignore my child's reasons "for the greater good" (ahem..._my_ idea of what the greater good is at the moment), I don't think it's helpful or compassionate or respectful to do so. I don't think being aware of and considering my child's reasons means I always have to have some big, tedious problem-solving session. Sometimes it simply a matter of empathizing, and that does matter an awful lot, empathy can make a huge difference. And as far as taking reasons into consideration, and even discussing reasons with my child, does it take more time? Well, yes it takes time. But the more I do it, the less time it takes us to resolve problems. So really, it's not a matter of not having time to do it but of not having the time *not* to do it.

This is a very interesting discussion, and discussions like these always help me find greater clarity and help me learn.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

sledg, your post *really* resonated with me! You said it much better than I could have!


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

yes, great post sledg!
I agree with not excusing behavior because there's a reason, but that reasons do matter in solving the problem, and finding acceptable alternatives.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sledg*
I think it's entirely possible to focus both on the cause and on being responsible for one's own behavior. I don't think looking into reasons (like being tired) precludes teaching children that we are all responsible for our own behavior and that our behavior affects those around us. In fact, I think it's very important that my children become aware of the factors that go into their behavior, it helps them communicate and address their needs more effectively. I can help my child become aware, while also encouraging her to take responsibility: "I hear that you are frustrated because....I don't like that you hit her, hitting isn't safe, it hurts. Let's think of a safer way you could say you're frustrated, let's find another way to solve this problem."

My ds knows that hitting the dogs isn't ok, even when he has a reason. But if he does hit them, I figure out the reason, and find a better way for him to express himself.


----------



## Thao (Nov 26, 2001)

Quote:

I think "selfishness" is nothing more than attempting to meet one's own needs, when one's own needs are pressing enough that it's difficult to consider the needs of someone else. I can't imagine what "simple selfishness" is if it is not an attempt to meet one's own needs. So, I don't think selfishness is simple-there's still a reason.
This is a good point, but I think I define what I call "selfishness" a little differently. I'm not talking about an infant crying to be fed, for example. I would define it as attempting to meet one's needs (or wants, because there are a lot of things we want but don't need) while not taking into consideration the needs or wants of others, when one has the cognitive ablity to take others into consideration. Teasing an animal in a physically painful way when one has the cognitive ability to understand that the animal feels pain is an example of what I would consider a "selfish" act.

Sure it's a reason, and I agree with you that it's definitely not simple. But I don't always think that it can be resolved, I believe it is a part of human nature. You can tell a child who is hurting a cat how the cat feels, or show better ways to express their needs, and many if not most will stop. But some won't. They are not "bad" children, they are human children with their own particular makeup. In which case boundaries are necessary and the child's reasons take a back seat to the animal's well-being.

Quote:

I think "selfish" is a term we use to subtly invalidate a person's preferences/feelings/needs. We can dismiss their reasons or needs, because they're "just being selfish."
I'm sure you are right in many cases. I am equally sure that selfishness does exist, objectively, in human nature, so it is possible to use the term descriptively rather than judgementally.

I should add, though, that when it comes to parenting I am think it is really harmful to use labels like "selfish" directly to a kid.

Quote:

I think it's entirely possible to focus both on the cause and on being responsible for one's own behavior. I don't think looking into reasons (like being tired) precludes teaching children that we are all responsible for our own behavior and that our behavior affects those around us. In fact, I think it's very important that my children become aware of the factors that go into their behavior, it helps them communicate and address their needs more effectively.
I completely agree with you here, which is why I tried to emphasize the word "may" happen - not "will" happen. It was my experience. Maybe I didn't parent right. But it's a fine line to walk for me and my dd.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

What a discussion! I just agree with just about every point made - only thing I had to add was I don't feel that selfish is always about "needs", I do believe that there are "wants", and sometimes what we want is not what we need.

DD wanted to play with the dogs water bucket yesterday, but what she needed was to stay away from the dog. Her want really has no bearing on the lesson she needed to learn - there are plenty of other buckets she can play with and not get knocked down by a dog. YWIM?


----------



## BamBam'sMom (Jun 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
"Many parents don't want to be authoritarian, and they question whether they should insist that their child obey. Studies have shown that among authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive parents, the children whose parents are authoritative do best. That means effectively and consistantly setting limits for the child. Parents have a natural authority with their children because the parents are adults, so children naturally look to them as knowing more about the world than they do. Children 'come to earth' only gradually, so the adult must provide the ego force for the child that will direct his emotions; they must make decisions based on a mature viewpoint, rather than on the child's own likes and dislikes."


Well, I agree with this. I also don't think it's incompatible with #1 in your OP. I do set firm boundaries, just not as many as some people. My son is not allowed to hit people, to run out in the street, etc. I do think that "children need firm boundaries" has been overused and people don't always stop to think what it really means anymore. It certainly doesn't mean one needs to set up silly rules and enforcing them so children will know who's boss.

I'm not saying you do this, but many do.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

yeah, I think alot of this is how we perceive ourselves. I see myself as authoritative, yet another mom might think I'm too authoritarian, while another sees me as permissive. I think we just have to look deep inside and ask ourselves if we are maintaining balance in our homes.

I also saw this referred to another book as "brickwall, backbone, and jellyfish". I do not like those words, because I think very few people are going to be able to look at their actions and say "I am a jellyfish". While someone may look at themselves as permissive, and examine how that is working for them.

But the 1 and 2 thing - I don't know. I don't think I have lot's of boundaries. I think I have enough. But what makes me compelled to classify myself as #2 is I don't feel that I always need to discuss the boundaries - sometimes the boundaries just are. Boundaries can be reevaluated occasionally so they stay appropriate.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

[plas forgiv th typos, th lttr that coms aftr "d" is brokn on my kyboard!]

ITA with sldg. vry wll said!!

And I think I fall into #1 *and* #2 abov, lol!

b/c I think thr is always a rason (not a raisin, lol!) and yt I also think childrn truly nd boundaris too. i hav ruls and boundaris in our houshold, but i think i "nforc" thm gntly and without punishing.

i, too, think blufish is right that it isn't a dichotomy. i'm not vn sur that thy ar 2 diffrnt things.

oh and i think this talk cannot ignor how many yrs old child is. as a baby thy cannot "problm solv" so I modl it for thm and act for thm whn thy cannot. as thy gt oldr thy do mor problm solving on thr own, until i won't b 'nforcing" any boundaris b/c th kids will b part of stablishing thos ruls. so it's a sliding procss whr at 1 nd you hav "i do it for you" and at th othr nd you hav a child who fully participats in solving th problm at hand.

ugh. sorry this is so hard to mak out!


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
Studies have shown that among authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive parents, the children whose parents are authoritative do best.


This study hd som flaws (as many do of cours). Alfi Kohn dissctd it in his book. for xmapl, Kohn notd that th middl group "authoritative" consistd of thos who usd mild punishmnts and thos that usd non at all. it is so hard to catgoriz a parnting styl, which maks such studis difficult to do and to intrprt.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Piglet68* 
[plas forgiv th typos, th lttr that coms aftr "d" is brokn on my kyboard!]

omg, that is hilarious! hehehe
"nforce" hehehe ds thinks I'm crazy. lol


----------



## melissel (Jun 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Piglet68* 
[plas forgiv th typos, th lttr that coms aftr "d" is brokn on my kyboard!]

I'm







at this too. For some reason I'm imagining you with a numb jaw after a trip to the dentist









And this is all OT, but I'm constantly amazed at how insightful and wise many mamas here are, whether I agree with them or not. I often feel about two inches tall among you all, but I keep reading and learning anyway


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Thao* 
I would define it as attempting to meet one's needs (or wants, because there are a lot of things we want but don't need) while not taking into consideration the needs or wants of others, when one has the cognitive ablity to take others into consideration.

Well, I certainly have the cognitive ability to take into consideration the needs and wants of others. However, there are times when I do not and cannot take the needs of others into consideration because of my emotional state-I can't access that cognitive ability. Or maybe more likely, my needs are so pressing that I am not willing to take the needs of others into consideration. I just think that the term "selfishness" is a loaded one, one we have a negative association with. I know that it's been my experience, living in my culture, that it is often considered selfish when one persists in attempting to meet one's needs even though one may have taken the needs of others under consideration and decided to continue to attempt to meet one's own need. However, I don't think that this is always a bad thing. And I think it's easier for an adult with a pressing need to defer meeting that need while taking others into consideration than it is for a child. Certainly if it causes harm, we would consider that "bad" however it may very well be that the intent was "good" (to protect oneself, to meet one's own need-and perhaps one couldn't think of another way to protect oneself or meet one's own needs). Another thought I have is that sometimes it's not the fact of meeting one's own need that is that is harmful/"selfish", but the _particular way in which one is attempting to meet one's need_ that hurts others and is not in harmony with the needs of others.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Thao* 
Teasing an animal in a physically painful way when one has the cognitive ability to understand that the animal feels pain is an example of what I would consider a "selfish" act.

Sure it's a reason, and I agree with you that it's definitely not simple. But I don't always think that it can be resolved, I believe it is a part of human nature. You can tell a child who is hurting a cat how the cat feels, or show better ways to express their needs, and many if not most will stop. But some won't. They are not "bad" children, they are human children with their own particular makeup. In which case boundaries are necessary and the child's reasons take a back seat to the animal's well-being.

And I agree that this child isn't "bad," and that boundaries to protect the animal have to be in place. However, I would not assume that this is just the child's makeup, that the child just enjoys hurting the cat, or that this child just has more of some kind of essential human selfishness. I would wonder what else could be preventing the child from being gentle with the cat. Does the child really understand? Does the child really have adequate impulse control? Is the child really aware of the force she is using with the cat? Does the child have the ability to take the cat's perspective (and really, that's part of one's decision not to hurt-taking the other's perspective)? Does the child have another motivation for hurting the cat, is there something else the child is expressing that I don't yet understand? I'd probably wonder a lot of things. And yes, there is probably some child somewhere who simply delights in the pain of the animal. But still, I'd wonder why.

There are times, to be sure, when for safety's sake boundaries come first and the addressing of needs come second. I don't argue that at all. And certainly there are times when a parent has to prioritize. For example, my child doesn't want to stop watching tv, and we have 5 minutes to leave the house in order to pick up my other children. Well, I might not find a great solution that addresses my tv-watching child's need in that moment. I might just pick her up and carry her out. But it's important to understand and acknowledge her needs because that allows me to empathize with her (let her know I care about her desires/needs) and because it gives me more information so that I can address the problem better the next time.

And regarding wants vs. needs, I don't think it's all that clear cut. If my child wants to watch tv, she doesn't have a need to watch tv but her desire to watch it likely comes from a need for relaxation or for fun (we all need some relaxation and fun). If it's time to go and she refuses to stop watching, it may be that she is still feeling a need to relax and doesn't want to leave and do something that isn't relaxing, or it may be that she is feeling a need for choice/autonomy (she wants to choose when to stop watching). Knowing what need she's trying to meet either by watching tv or by refusing to leave very often helps me address the problem in a better way-if not this time, the next time.

And regarding the dog bowl example, the child likely doesn't have a need to play in the dog bowl, but a need for exploration of water and for learning (which is a need that can be met a variety of ways). And maybe when I say my child has a need to not be knocked over by the dog, I'm expressing my own need to ensure the safety of my child. My child also has a need to stay safe, sure, but her more urgent need (in her mind) is to explore/learn.

The point isn't that "my child has a need, therefore I should just sit back and let her do what she wants" but that understanding the reasons is just so important along with setting boundaries and providing guidance. And for me, understanding needs/reasons opens up lots of new solutions and has brought lots of opportunity for greater harmony and deeper connection. For me this isn't about giving up on boundaries, but about thinking about my children in a different way which allows me to more effectively and compassionately (and with greater harmony) guide my children.

And count me in amongst those who think that we aren't all talking about very different things. I think we're all touching on the same thing, like the story about the group of blindfolded people touching different parts of the elephant, so that when they describe it it seems like they're all talking about something different, but still they're all talking about the elephant.

I feel like I'm starting to talk in circles now, so I think I'll bow out. I thank everyone for such a great discussion.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sledg* 
The point isn't that "my child has a need, therefore I should just sit back and let her do what she wants" but that understanding the reasons is just so important along with setting boundaries and providing guidance.

I think what some of us are objecting to a perception that some moms are saying "every reason is worthy of exploring". Of course, a 2 year old needs lot's of opportunity to explore, play in water etc. Aware of that, I provide that. However, when dd walked past 3 or 4 bucks of water that were "safe" in order to get to the one bucket that was off limits, at that point her need of safety takes precedence over any other thought she had in her head. As the adult and as the mother, it is my job to make the judgement of when I need to looking to the reasons for the behavior and when I just need to respond to the behavior for the sake of expediency, well being of the group, etc.

Also, I think it is extremely important when parents are looking for the "reasons" that they don't project their own ideas onto the child. I was certainly a victim of that as a child - my dad for some reason got the idea in his head that I was "jealous" of my sister, and used that preconceived notion to filter alot of my behavior for years. That led to some unjust treatment at times, since I have actually never been jealous of my sister. We have talked that out since I have been an adult, and he has apologized.


----------



## captain optimism (Jan 2, 2003)

I don't see why assuming that children have reasons for their behavior means that children don't need limits, or guidance, or whatever you call it. They lack experience and therefore information about the world.

If there isn't time to present a full-blown disquisition on why not to do something dangerous, a simple "Hey, that's hot, be careful!" still presents the same idea, eh? Or the very cliched by this point, "In our house we do not hit, please use your words"--same idea as the 20 minute discussion presenting alternatives, and based on the same assumption of reason.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Piglet68* 
This study hd som flaws (as many do of cours). Alfi Kohn dissctd it in his book. for xmapl, Kohn notd that th middl group "authoritative" consistd of thos who usd mild punishmnts and thos that usd non at all. it is so hard to catgoriz a parnting styl, which maks such studis difficult to do and to intrprt.

Yeah, Alfi is a little out there for me, but I did have the same thought. That this idea is a little broad. It signals the extremes that should be avoided but does not explore the subtle differences of those in the middle. I think there is a huge difference between punishment done correctly and punishment done incorrectly for one thing. I'm not a fan of shuning all reinforcement the way Alfi is. I feel praise is a wonderful part of life when it is genuinely given. My mother was one of those who was short with the praise - thinking I had enough self esteem and not wanting me to get the big head - it was a source of many secret tears and frustrations. I do things because I am internally motivated and always have - but I still wanted to hear that my mom was proud. It's about fairness and justice in my mind.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
Also, I think it is extremely important when parents are looking for the "reasons" that they don't project their own ideas onto the child. I was certainly a victim of that as a child - my dad for some reason got the idea in his head that I was "jealous" of my sister, and used that preconceived notion to filter alot of my behavior for years. That led to some unjust treatment at times, since I have actually never been jealous of my sister. We have talked that out since I have been an adult, and he has apologized.

I think this is huge. And it isn't always done in a direct way like this. I find that I often will work so hard as a parent to avoid the painful experiences I had a child under my mother's parenting. But my son is a different person than I was as a child while we have very similar temperments. I try to be really aware of when I am projecting my own childhood stuff rather than really paying attention to him and how he is reacting to his environment.

Sometimes, I see him as the child I might have been had I been parented in a healthier way and allowed to be myself.


----------



## Thao (Nov 26, 2001)

Quote:

I just think that the term "selfishness" is a loaded one, one we have a negative association with. I know that it's been my experience, living in my culture, that it is often considered selfish when one persists in attempting to meet one's needs even though one may have taken the needs of others under consideration and decided to continue to attempt to meet one's own need.
Well again, you are right, but beyond how the word has been misused (in particular to keep women "in their place"














I believe there really is an objective reality out there that sometimes people, adults and children alike, do things that violate other living creatures simply because it was the most direct route to what they wanted at the time. I do understand your problem with the term "selfishness", though, so maybe we should call it something else?









The official MDC guideline says "children are born innately good". I'm not sure exactly what is meant by "good", but if what is meant is that children aren't going to do anything "bad" unless some external influence teaches them to do so, then I don't agree. I believe that human nature is very complicated and the "good" and the "bad" is all in there from birth. Our job as parents is to teach our children how to express that nature in compassionate and socially acceptable ways. But even a child with the very best parents in the world will occasionally be "bad" i.e. act in ways that are deliberately harmful to others because that is a part of who are are too.

However, that said, sledg, in practice I agree wholeheartedly with your entire post, especially the importance of trying to understand a child's reasons for their behavior in order to help them learn. I guess the only place we differ is that I think that in some limited (NOTE I SAID LIMITED!) cases the reason will be this "bad" side of human nature in which case there really is no resolution possible, just boundaries.

Personal anecdote: I remember when I was in middle school once standing at the top of a stairwell and spitting on the heads of kids that were walking up. To this day I can't tell you why I did that. I was always a straight A student and a really "good" kid. If the principal or my mom had tried to find out my reasons for why I did it, I honestly couldn't have told them. And really it didn't matter, it wasn't a pattern or symptom of a deeper problem, it was just an isolated incident where I think I was exploring my "dark side".


----------



## CalebsMama05 (Nov 26, 2005)

I think children always have a reason for what they do. Just because I can't figure it out doesn't mean it doesn't exsist.

one time caleb was driving me crazy trying to scale teh bookcase and I did everything in my power to keep him off of it until finally I burst out with "WHY are you so insistent on scaling the bookcase?!?" and I took a look and his paci was up there. I handed him his paci and he went and sat on the couch. apparently he wanted it. who knew?


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

I agree that there are reasons for behavior. I also agree that there are times we are just seeing what something feels like or "exploring our dark side"







...I guess these are all reasons behind behavior as well. I think at these times it isn't always as important as to the motivation but dealing with the behavior itself. I.e, the dog is being tortured therefore dog's safety is priority #1 at that time.

I think it was sledg who brought up the incident with her dd about having to leave while she was watching TV. I have to say this is an area I struggle with a bit. Yes, TV is relaxing and we all have that need. However TV is also very addicting and I really don't believe children can regulate their viewing...geez, I can hardly do that!

This one issue just struck me as one where the parent really needs to set a clear limit and not worry too much about what the child wants/needs...they are going to want/need to watch more and more. That is most children, anyway.

My ds has had times when he stopped watching TV when he'd had enough but this is not usually the case. We have pretty clear guidelines about TV viewing and that has made it no big deal for him. For him, I think if we didn't have these guidelines for TV viewing, we would often battle over when and how much he'd watch.


----------



## gaialice (Jan 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I found something else that might be helpful for those of us trying to understanding our beliefs concerning parenting styles. This quote is from "You are your child's first teacher" by Rahima Baldwin Dancy (Waldorf philosophy):

"Many parents don't want to be authoritarian, and they question whether they should insist that their child obey. Studies have shown that among authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive parents, the children whose parents are authoritative do best."

I really, really, cannot stand books that divide us parents into three categories. Two are "bad" (authoritarian and permissive) and one is "good" (authoritative). I see that in my parenting I tried things that worked in the short term and not in the long term. I can see that I did things that actually did not work period, short and long term. I am always willing to learn how to do better tomorrow than I did yesterday on any given situation. From books, from friends, from all the great mommies who post here. However learning how to approach different situations is one thing and putting a straightjacket on -- become the successful "authoritative" parent is quite another.
Besides, what does it mean that "a child will do best"? I do not feel that that is my objective, to have a child who does "best". Not even to have the child who is "happiest". I think it is important to try and create harmony in the house, and certainly the initial conditions in which a child is born make a ton of difference. Some of us work, some of us don't, some of us have their dh always close by, others do not, some have a great network of family and friends, others do not... some kids are born more mellow than others, some couples are more harmonious than others, some live in the countryside and others in the city centers, some are under financial stress and others have plenty and I could continue... How can you compare and is there any sense in comparing?


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

I think the comparing and defining becomes helpful when you are on a list like this trying to weed through the advice given. Sometimes it helps to have some concept of how you like to parent and what your goals are, so when you get advice that doesn't resonate, you understand why. Of course, the divisions are mostly artificial, but that doesn't mean they aren't sometimes helpful.

For example, through this process I've learned that I view "expectations" and "conditions" differently. As a Jewish mother, I have expectations for my children and believe God has expectations for them and me as well. That has nothing to do with my love for my children or God's love for us - we love and are loved unconditionally. Alot of the CL stuff does not work for me, because I do not believe my children and I write the rules.

I agree with yor position of evaluating your parenting as you go. I do that too. I just find things like the permissive to authoritarian meter a useful tool for evaluating my goals and how I am doing. I think these things are useful for self reflecting, not for judging other people.


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

I said I wasn't going to come back to this.







I don't like my last post. It's not accurate, I got carried away with...something.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Thao* 
Well again, you are right, but beyond how the word has been misused (in particular to keep women "in their place"














I believe there really is an objective reality out there that sometimes people, adults and children alike, do things that violate other living creatures simply because it was the most direct route to what they wanted at the time. I do understand your problem with the term "selfishness", though, so maybe we should call it something else?

















I don't think there is a single word that would capture that for me. I was trying, yesterday when I posted, to capture what I think it is that causes people to violate other living creatures: b/c that is the most direct route to what they want, the only route they can think of at the time-that it's not an essential human "badness" but a lack of...something (skill? ideas? knowledge? resources?), or a limitation that is part of human nature. Or maybe not. I don't know. I guess I think that if they are able (not just in general, but in that specific moment in time when the choice is made), people will tend to choose not to violate other living things-but "able" is what I cannot put into words. I have a very optimistic view of people. I'm not sure there are good words for this. I wonder if we're thinking the same thing and saying it different ways. I posted and then disliked a lot of what I said, because I think what I'm thinking of (not just with regard to the idea of selfishness) is something words can't adequately convey. I think human nature is like that, life is like that, the minute you try to capture it in words it's incomplete and inaccurate. And while I say "I believe this" and "I do that" and "I think this is important," not only is that incomplete but the fact is I'm always growing and always open and always changing. So it's outdated when I say it, kind of like computers are outdated as soon as you pay for them.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Thao* 
The official MDC guideline says "children are born innately good". I'm not sure exactly what is meant by "good", but if what is meant is that children aren't going to do anything "bad" unless some external influence teaches them to do so, then I don't agree. I believe that human nature is very complicated and the "good" and the "bad" is all in there from birth. Our job as parents is to teach our children how to express that nature in compassionate and socially acceptable ways. But even a child with the very best parents in the world will occasionally be "bad" i.e. act in ways that are deliberately harmful to others because that is a part of who are are too.









I think for me "innately good" means that a child's (and, I believe, an adult's too) essential nature is...well, not automatically evil. I mean, we can't separate "good" and "bad". We carry within us the capacity and seeds for both, and which seeds we water are the seeds that will grow. But I think the term "innately good" is one I choose to combat the idea that is pervasive in my culture that says that people are innately bad and automatically choose "evil" when not intimidated, forced, punished or rewarded into choosing "good." I think we are born with the capacity to choose, that we will not automatically choose "evil" or "bad". I think we are born with a need for and orientation to interconnection and interdependence, and we are born with a significant capacity for compassion. And I think, again (and again, it's difficult to put into words), that people will tend toward "good" when they are able to do so-and what makes one able to do so is not a simple formula. Some people think that makes me naive. I think it's as realistic as any other belief about people.

Thank you, Thao!







I have really enjoyed this.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sledg* 







I think for me "innately good" means that a child's (and, I believe, an adult's too) essential nature is...well, not automatically evil. <snip> I think we are born with the capacity to choose, that we will not automatically choose "evil" or "bad".

This is what I think as well.


----------



## gaialice (Jan 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I just find things like the permissive to authoritarian meter a useful tool for evaluating my goals and how I am doing. I think these things are useful for self reflecting, not for judging other people.

The hardest thing really, for me, is trying not to judge myself. No good comes from evaluating own's behaviour and judging it good or bad (and permissive or authoritarian are very charged of meaning). Of course I do that too, at times, it is so engrained in our culture. But it is so much more empowering to say, hey, I did this, it resulted in that, it is not what I want, tomorrow I'll try a different thing.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
I think the comparing and defining becomes helpful when you are on a list like this trying to weed through the advice given. Sometimes it helps to have some concept of how you like to parent and what your goals are, so when you get advice that doesn't resonate, you understand why. Of course, the divisions are mostly artificial, but that doesn't mean they aren't sometimes helpful.

Honestly, I think you get the best advice from people who have BTDT, those who have encountered a situation that is similar to what you're going through, and similar in a very deep way, not just superficially so. I deeply believe we encounter challenges because we need to grow out of the limitations that we feel we have, to grow to understand our power to change ourselves and the world outside us in the process. Very often I find that some moms on this forum are going through (or went through) a challenge very similar to one I am myself dealing with. Not just that our children challenge us in similar ways but that our perception of their behaviour is similar, because we both need to experience this and grow out of it -- stronger. It is not that we give advice to one another, it is deeper than that even, we share a moment in our growth. So yes, back to the original point, there is a reason your child behaves a certain way and there is a reason that you perceive it so. And it is important to reflect on it, although it is not always possible to do it in the there and now.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sledg* 
what I think it is that causes people to violate other living creatures: b/c that is the most direct route to what they want, the only route they can think of at the time-that it's not an essential human "badness" but a lack of...something (skill? ideas? knowledge? resources?), or a limitation that is part of human nature. Or maybe not. I don't know. I guess I think that if they are able (not just in general, but in that specific moment in time when the choice is made), people will tend to choose not to violate other living things .

It is great to think about it as a lack of skills and resources. To think about our own behaviour and that of our kids in these terms changes the perspective from judgemental to compassionate. What is it that I need, so that I can do better tomorrow as a mom? What is it that dd needs so that she learn to communicate in words rather than through hitting dd2? It is true we may never find out what caused a certain behaviour. But we can see what challenge we're trying to overcome, and what skills we need to learn, what resources we need to acquire... very empowering thoughts, thanks everyone for this thread, I am really enjoying...


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

I'm not going to articulate this well, I'm sure. But I've been thinking about the developmental process of children and I think that is what is at the root of a lot of the specific behaviors we are talking about (hitting, hurting animals, etc.). Children are very egocentric when they are little. It's natural and healthy. It is a HUGE step to begin to consider others and experience empathy. Along with that is impulse control which is a tricky thing to master...or simply grow into.

When we're talking about "root causes" I don't think they always run that deep for children. Sometimes it just that they have been used to grabbing this or that and aren't used to having anyone else's wants factor into the equation. That is a huge thing.

I guess I got to thinking about this when issues like hitting the dog or a sibling have come up...at least when the child is very young. When the child is older, I think rooting out the cause makes a lot of sense...we want to connect and understand where they are coming from and what their behavior is telling us. But when they are little (2ish to 5ish), I think they are just learning these social interactions and it takes time and guidance.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *swampangel* 
I guess I got to thinking about this when issues like hitting the dog or a sibling have come up...at least when the child is very young.

My ds is 2.5, and the EASIEST way I have found to stop him from hitting the dogs, is to find the reason and give him acceptable alternative ways of expressing it. This has been the case since 18 mos or so.
It's not so much that he thoroughly understands how his actions affect others, but he does realize that they DO affect others, and that it is not acceptable. As long as he has another way to express that particular impulse, he generally uses that better alternative.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Deva33mommy* 
My ds is 2.5, and the EASIEST way I have found to stop him from hitting the dogs, is to find the reason and give him acceptable alternative ways of expressing it. This has been the case since 18 mos or so.
It's not so much that he thoroughly understands how his actions affect others, but he does realize that they DO affect others, and that it is not acceptable. As long as he has another way to express that particular impulse, he generally uses that better alternative.

I guess this is where this conversation is losing me. Perhaps we're all really saying the same thing. You are describing what to me sounds like realizing that there is an impulse control issue and providing an alternative action for the child - i.e., hit the pillow not the dog. Or go run around outside and get some of that energy out. Or have time in a room without dogs if the dogs are bothering the child. Whatever it may be.

I think it's how we define the process for ourselves. I see it as being aware of where my child is developmentally in those early years. And who they are becoming as their personalities begin to really emerge and blossom. I learn about what triggers certain behaviors/responses and help my child maneuver in the world given these things.

I'm not sure that we're really saying anything so differently.


----------



## pookel (May 6, 2006)

I don't always have a reason for what *I* do. I don't expect kids to, either.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *swampangel* 
I guess this is where this conversation is losing me. Perhaps we're all really saying the same thing. You are describing what to me sounds like realizing that there is an impulse control issue and providing an alternative action for the child - i.e., hit the pillow not the dog. Or go run around outside and get some of that energy out. Or have time in a room without dogs if the dogs are bothering the child. Whatever it may be.

kind of. If ds hits the dog because he wants her to move, my alternative is to tell her to "back off!" If he hit the dog because he wanted her to move, I wouldn't tell him to hit the couch instead. That doesn't help him express his impulse.
So there's a reason. It's a legitimate reason, and he deserves to be able to express it. But we have to find a socially acceptable way to do that.
It seems that in a lot of these conversations, both sides DO basically the same things, and it's just that everyone is using different words to talk about it. lol


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Deva33mommy* 
kind of. If ds hits the dog because he wants her to move, my alternative is to tell her to "back off!" If he hit the dog because he wanted her to move, I wouldn't tell him to hit the couch instead. That doesn't help him express his impulse.
So there's a reason. It's a legitimate reason, and he deserves to be able to express it. But we have to find a socially acceptable way to do that.
It seems that in a lot of these conversations, both sides DO basically the same things, and it's just that everyone is using different words to talk about it. lol

My example of "hit the pillow" was, I thought, in response to something I read. I agree that usually a child will hit the dog because the dog is in the way. But, of course, there are kiddos who just hit the dog because they hit the dog. Being the attentive mamas that we all are, I'm sure we figure out the issue fairly quickly.

I agree, we're all kind of talking about the same thing.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pookel* 
I don't always have a reason for what *I* do. I don't expect kids to, either.

Yup. Usually I'm just having an off moment (or day) but it isn't always something I can figure out easily or express. I think being a kid is hard in a lot of ways. Of course, they're gonna have off moments and days as well.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *gaialice* 
The hardest thing really, for me, is trying not to judge myself. No good comes from evaluating own's behaviour and judging it good or bad (and permissive or authoritarian are very charged of meaning).

I don't call it self-judgement; I call it discernment. I feel that practicing discernment is important. Being able to think critically and evaluate what I hear and what I do. To some extent I agree with what you are saying - when I hear a parent say "on a bad day I just take the toy away to end the argument rather than discuss it with the children", my discerning mind sends up red flags. I don't agree that philosophy of being - it is far to self censoring for my taste. Instead I tend to look for trends in my behavior - if I am always taking toys away, and never problem solving with my kids, then I might discern that I am becoming too authoritarian in my parenting, and it is time to reevaluate. But ultimately, as a Jew, I do believe in right and wrong as defined by the Torah - and I judge myself against my understanding of the Torah. That's me


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
when I hear a parent say "on a bad day I just take the toy away to end the argument rather than discuss it with the children", my discerning mind sends up red flags.

I agree that we shouldn't view a failure to live up to one's standards as a reason to beat ourselves up. In fact, while I think I set very high standards for my parenting, I also know that nobody is perfect, and that frankly a perfect parent would be a bit scary, kwim?









When I "screw up" and don't parent a situation the way I want to, I do exactly as you said, 2bluefish, I look for an overall pattern. Was this screwup truly an unusual event or part of a pattern that needs further evaluation.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Cool - I guess the words "screw up" are getting me hung up, because it sounds like you are critical of the choice. While I would say it is fine to make that choice and not a screw up at all, as long as it is not part of a pattern of behavior you are trying to correct. (Like having a beer is fine, unless you are recovering from alcoholism - then having a beer is a "screw up".)


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

I think that there are some things- like taking away a toy and putting it up in a punitive way- that I would say I screwed up, and I would think I made the wrong decision. I wouldn't be angry at myself for it, and I wouldn't think that it was necessarily harmful to ds, and I wouldn't feel like it was going to damage our relationship or anything like that. And there's a good chance that I felt like it was the best I could do in the moment.
But I still wouldn't think it was the ideal way to deal with the situation. I'd try to think of a better way to deal with the situation the next time.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Deva33mommy* 
I think that there are some things- like taking away a toy and putting it up in a punitive way- that I would say I screwed up, and I would think I made the wrong decision.

And that right there is the difference between some of others and others of us. I believe the parent is the authority in the home, and if they decide to take a toy away for any reason (other than to just be a jerk) then they have that right. I absolutely would not think that taking a toy away to end a fight is a "screw up" or the "wrong decision" unless it was part of a pattern of behavior of not problem solving with the kids.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
And that right there is the difference between some of others and others of us.

Yeah, I think that tends to be one divide here. It seems like what we do in practice is very very similar, but how we feel and think about our kids and our relationship with them is a bit different.
I do think parents are the authority figures in the house, but I don't necessarily believe that using my size and strength to my advantage comes with the position. (not that I never do, I just don't feel that it's ideal for me).
And I wasn't saying that I think it's *wrong* to do that. I was trying to convey that it is not in line with how *I* want to discipline my ds.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I reserve that judgement for myself, and I wouldn't use it for others. kwim?

I must say that these current discussions really have me thinking a lot about a lot of different gd methods, and the possible advantages of each.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Deva33mommy* 
And I wasn't saying that I think it's *wrong* to do that. I was trying to convey that it is not in line with how *I* want to discipline my ds.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I reserve that judgement for myself, and I wouldn't use it for others. kwim?









Yeah, I think when people feel strongly about what they do and why, it can sometimes come across to other people as judgemental whether or not we mean to be. That's why it's been helpful for me to put words to my philosophical base. I've really enjoyed the discussion.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

I am loving this discussion...it's really got me thinking a lot about my parenting style and philosophies and what changes I'd like to make for now. Very cool.

I had a thought about the "screw up" thing. I think that what we're modeling for our children in those moments is that we are human and have emotional reactions. And when Piglet said it would be kind of scary if we were ideal parents, I would go a step further and say that it would actually be harmful to our children if we were. We learn from our mistakes and we learn about ourselves by our emotional responses to situations and experiences. This is all very good and healthy. Also, our children need to see that they have the power to evoke reactions in others. As their social worlds expand, this is only going to be helpful to them.

So taking the time to discern and reflect on our parenting is so important, it's also important to let our children see that we are human and make mistakes. When I do something with my ds that I don't feel particularly good about, we talk about it. It lets him see that I, too, have outbursts and big emotions that I need to continually learn how to manage. I think viewing it as a failure isn't good for anyone.


----------



## gaialice (Jan 4, 2005)

The point I was trying to make earlier on in this thread is that, whatever your goal in parenting may be, if you see something you recently did does not help you achieve your goal, then, rather than putting a label on your behaviour (i'm being too authoritarian, or too permissive) it it is more helpful to look for what caused that behaviour. I'm building this on what sledg was saying earlier on. I do not need to violate other people (my children) to achieve whatever my objective is. However, at times, it feels that is the only way. Why is that so? What resources do I need? What skills can I build?
And the same is for kids. How can I help dd1 to express in words what happened in school about the teacher's cup, rather than by hurting her little sis? How can help her build these new skills? And really, teaching and learning these skills, are one and the same thing.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *gaialice* 
, if you see something you recently did does not help you achieve your goal, then, rather than putting a label on your behaviour (i'm being too authoritarian, or too permissive) it it is more helpful to look for what caused that behaviour.

That might be an individual brain thing. I am a big picture thinker - that's why labels work for me. I can quickly determine when something doesn't fit within my label, and weed it out. I keep a big picture in my head of what I want my parenting relationship to be, and I compare what I'm doing at any moment to that picture with the label, and if it doesn't fit, then I fix it. For example, yesterday after milking the goat, dd did not want to come in the house, she wanted to stay outside, but I had to put the milk away. My impulse was to demand she enter the house. Instead I reminded myself of my goals - homesteading family, homeschooling family - and in a really animated voice told her I would show her how we put the milk away. The labels let me make the right choice quickly.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

I see what you're saying, 2bluefish. I'm not sure I remind myself of labels or styles, per se, but I do stop and think how do I want my child to experience this situation? What kind of message do I want to send to him? My knee jerk responses might be to yell or demand (there are so many reasons for this - exhaustion, isolation, old patterns, etc.), but I don't want that to be my response so I try to enlist my cognitive self rather than my emotional self to make a different decision. I'm not always successful and it usually depends on how my inner resources are holding up at that particular time.

I also try not to see it as success or failure but just what is. I can reflect on it and move on from there but judging myself just doesn't help. I'm human and raising children is hard.


----------



## ^guest^ (Jul 2, 2005)

Interesting. How old are we talking about? I know I can talk about something to my 2 year old until I'm blue in the face, give her space and time to come to her own decision, treat her with respect, love, and understanding...

And she'll still whack me when I tell her it's not a good idea to touch the hot stove.

One's reaction needs to be tailored to their child. My daughter is extremely spirited. She tests limits constantly. I've been telling her not to eat dog food for 18 months now. Guess what? She still tries. I've even let her eat some so she can see for herself it doesn't taste good. Her need to explore every little thing, dangerous or not, whether or not it upsets her mother, overrides any past lessons learned, it seems. I can't let her have the absolute free reign with extremely limited boundaries that some parents can give - for her safety, and my sanity.

I can remember being a kid, about 4 years old, and I remember doing wierd stuff for no reason other than I had the capacity to do it. Cutting things because I figured out how to use scissors, drawing on walls with mascara just because I could, taking a walk next to the highway (I was..what..3?). My mother could have explained to me why I shouldn't do such things, and I still would have, simply because I could not see why it was so important NOT to.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

DD is 28 months. I think she acts more like a 3 year old than a 2 year old though. She can be willful, but usually if you can get her excited about what you want her to do, she will comply. But there are plenty of times I take her by the hand and ignore the whining that follows (she's never *knock on wood* thrown a full blown tantrum or hit). I keep close tabs on her. She will get into things she wants to get into - even if she *knows* not too. Somethings she will heed my directions. Other times I determine she just can't handle that temptation and move it - I had to move the cat food away from the water bowl months ago, because she likes to put all the food in the water making a very big mess and a very unhappy mommy. Today for the first time we are letting her play in the yard by herself with us watching from the window.... I totally think parenting is kid sensitive.


----------



## Benji'sMom (Sep 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Neoma* 
Interesting. How old are we talking about? I know I can talk about something to my 2 year old until I'm blue in the face, give her space and time to come to her own decision, treat her with respect, love, and understanding...

And she'll still whack me when I tell her it's not a good idea to touch the hot stove.

One's reaction needs to be tailored to their child. My daughter is extremely spirited. She tests limits constantly. I've been telling her not to eat dog food for 18 months now. Guess what? She still tries. I've even let her eat some so she can see for herself it doesn't taste good. Her need to explore every little thing, dangerous or not, whether or not it upsets her mother, overrides any past lessons learned, it seems. I can't let her have the absolute free reign with extremely limited boundaries that some parents can give - for her safety, and my sanity.

I can remember being a kid, about 4 years old, and I remember doing wierd stuff for no reason other than I had the capacity to do it. Cutting things because I figured out how to use scissors, drawing on walls with mascara just because I could, taking a walk next to the highway (I was..what..3?). My mother could have explained to me why I shouldn't do such things, and I still would have, simply because I could not see why it was so important NOT to.

Yeah my 3 year old will still freak out when he wants juice. Even given the information that we have no juice in the house and even given the alternative that he can drink water, his solution is not rational or mutually agreeable. ("MY JUICE, MY JUICE!!!!")


----------



## savithny (Oct 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
Some of us believe that our children, when treated respectfully, given information, alternatives, and time, will still sometimes make irrational decisions. And, sometimes there is not a deep underlying reason; sometimes, it's just because."

I guess I would fall more toward #2, because I believe children think differently than adults. I think they lack the experience and information that comes with being an adult. .


I also am definitely a #2 in this.

I also think that the very definition of "rationality" is important here, because what an adult thinks of as a rational decision and what a child does can be very different things, because children live in an intellectual world where some things just operate differently.

As an example? My child can make what *to him* is a perfectly rational decision. But it is based on his firm belief that Thomas the Tank Engine is a real "person" and the Island of Sodor is a real place. To me, the resulting decision is completely irrational - but it has an internal logic.

I think there are developmental stages in brain development and thought development that will lead children to make "irrational" decisions. Just as a very basic example - - Conservation of Volume doenst' kick in with many kids until school age. Until then, you can *show* them that two containers have the same amount of liquid in them by pouring back and forth, but they will almost always believe that the taller container has more. This beleif could lead to a child pitching a huge fit if they beleive their sibling has more milk. Rational? Well, the adult *has* presented all the information, all the facts, *Demonstrated* That both glasses have the same amount, but the child is _developmentally unable_ to process all the information s/he has been given. The child's response is rational *based on the child's perception of the world.* The problem is, that perception is not shared by the percentage of people in this world who are older than the child!


----------



## gaialice (Jan 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
That might be an individual brain thing. I am a big picture thinker - that's why labels work for me. I can quickly determine when something doesn't fit within my label, and weed it out. I keep a big picture in my head of what I want my parenting relationship to be, and I compare what I'm doing at any moment to that picture with the label, and if it doesn't fit, then I fix it.

Interesting! Labels do not work for me because they put me down, make me feel lower than low kind of thing when I think of what I did or didn't do. But in the example you're using -- making decisions, looking forward -- I totally agree that keeping an objective in mind is useful, I do that too. It helps to build a positive image of the family you want to shape. When I look back, instead, it helps me to think in terms of skills, needs, resources.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Neoma* 
I can't let her have the absolute free reign with extremely limited boundaries that some parents can give - for her safety, and my sanity.

I can remember being a kid, about 4 years old, and I remember doing wierd stuff for no reason other than I had the capacity to do it. Cutting things because I figured out how to use scissors, drawing on walls with mascara just because I could, taking a walk next to the highway (I was..what..3?). My mother could have explained to me why I shouldn't do such things, and I still would have, simply because I could not see why it was so important NOT to.

ITA. I wouldn't call my ds spirited, but he has a very strong will. I agree with you about maintaining my own sanity by using some of the parenting techniques that I do (giving choices and presenting consequences, for example). I try not to overuse any particular technique or approach and always use empathy and validation, but for my child I can't always give him the room to make his own decision - it just makes him act out more (at times).

Anyway, I really agree with what you're saying...I think so much of it depends on your particular child. I think it's similar to long-term nighttime nursing...it's easy for someone to do it whose child wakes up, say, once a night and nurses nicely and goes right back to sleep. For someone else whose child wakes up 15X/night and struggles to get back to sleep it's a completely different story.

We all have our own unique kiddos who require different approaches at different stages in their development.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

As far as the motivation behind the child's behavior, I also agree with the pp that sometimes kids just do things to do them.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *gaialice* 
When I look back, instead, it helps me to think in terms of skills, needs, resources.

That makes sense. I'm kind of literary and when I look back I'm always look for the "moral of the story".


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *swampangel* 
I try not to overuse any particular technique or approach and always use empathy and validation, but for my child I can't always give him the room to make his own decision - it just makes him act out more (at times).

I find this to be true with dd too. For example, for her 2nd birthday she got a toddler bed. Those next few weeks were *rough*. The new found freedom of sleeping in a big girl bed seemed to make her reevaluate everything in her life - she tested all the boundaries to see if anything else had changed in her life. After a few weeks, she settled back in. She is very strong willed - has been since birth (one of those high need types) - and if she is given more choices than she can handle, she gets out of sorts. She thrives on things being very predictable. Luckily she seems to be pretty clever, so she can see my point of view and doesn't challenge me too often. The biggest problem I have with her is she tends to whine alot. Sometimes I feel resentful that I can't enjoy ds as much as I would like because dd is so high need and takes so much care. DS is very strong willed as well, and asserts very loudly when he isn't getting his needs met. It can be really hard some days.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

While I think it's important that kids be given lots of chances to make choices, those have to be tailored to their age. Obviously a 2 year old is not capable of making choices much more complex than "do you want the red socks or the blue ones" and sometimes even that is too much (if they are tired or having a bad day, etc).

This is why redirection and "honouring the impulse" are great tools. When they are young toddlers or babies that is pretty much all you have at your disposal. As they age you give them more choices as they are capable of dealing with. Around age 3 I started involving my DD in "problem solving", but still that doesn't work all the time, sometimes she needs a simple choice and sometimes she needs me to make the choice and I just try to make it as gentle and empathetic as possible. But as she gets older her ability to use "problem solving" discussions to resolve issues gets better, not just because she is maturing but b/c she gains practice with the technique.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Or maybe it's better to say 2 year olds are not as able to make "mutually agreeable choices"?







DD isn't quite sure of what "or" means yet. Do you want to go outside or take a bath? Yes, I do.







But she can tell me what's wrong, and understand when I explain to her why my choice is not her choice.


----------



## jillc512 (Aug 31, 2005)

So I tend to think of selfishness more as a continuum, rather than a label for behavior. For example, a baby is completely 'selfish' because they have zero capacity to take others' feelings/needs into account. As children grow, so does their capacity for empathy and selflessness. Thoughts on this? What would you all say is the ultimate goal on this continuum? Total selflessness? The exact center between selfishness and selflessness?

I'm trying to get this conversation to mesh with:
-Alfie Kohn's thoughts on 'self esteem' (the gist of which to me said that a healthy person doesn't necessarily think highly of himself, rather his view of himself doesn't waver much depending on circumstances, and that in general he thinks about himself LESS)
-An article I read on MSN today about narcissism being at an all-time high among today's college students. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17349066/

Do you worry that this focus on every need/feeling will create overly narcissistic children? Or do you believe that children who have their needs met early on will have a greater capacity for selflessness as adults? Is this a totally different topic that needs a new thread?







:


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

I do like Alfie's defintion there - kind of. I think self esteem is recognizing your strengths and weaknesses and maximizing your strengths.

Every generation seems to think the one that comes after is narcissistic. I think the baby boomers are really full of themselves! LOL All they talk about is themselves - at least on TV!

I do personally think things can be taken too far in focusing on every need and feeling. I think balance is the key. One problem I see with AP is some parents have a hard time recognizing that every want is not a need once a baby becomes a child.

Hmm the ultimate goal.... I think the middle. I don't think total selflessness is healthy. Actually I think the continuum is a circle. You go so far to selflessness and you become selfish - because if you don't take care of yourself, then you are incapable of caring for others. YWIM?


----------



## Thao (Nov 26, 2001)

Quote:

Do you worry that this focus on every need/feeling will create overly narcissistic children?
I'd say it depends on the focus. If the focus is to figure out the need or want so the parent can then immediately provide whatever the child wants, or use it as an excuse for the child's behavior (you know, like "sorry little Susie hit your kid but she's really tired today") then yes it can create narcissistic kids.

But if the focus is to figure out the need or want and then help the child understand it and learn compassionate, socially appropriate ways of expressing it, within proper boundaries, then it is in no way contributing to a narcissistic personality.

My dd is 7, so this is mostly what we are doing now. At this age, I also think it is important that she start learning that there are certain things she needs to do to "jump through the hoops" i.e. things that are not fun but they need to be done for a larger purpose. Like homework for example. It's not fun, but learning good homework habits from the get-go is going to be very valuable for her when she hits college. So we talk about what is difficult for her with her homework (we're only talking 20 minutes a day here, not much) and how to overcome those difficulties. But she has to do it whether she wants to or not.


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jillc512* 
Do you worry that this focus on every need/feeling will create overly narcissistic children? Or do you believe that children who have their needs met early on will have a greater capacity for selflessness as adults? Is this a totally different topic that needs a new thread?







:

Generally, I think that children who have their needs met and experience problem-solving within the family as compassionate and considerate will have greater capacity for compassion and perspective-taking as adults.(*before I get in trouble here, let me say that I generally assume that parents here regularly consider the needs of their children and are compassionate. Also, I think that how a person develops from infancy to adulthood is not the result of a simple equation, so that how I parent does not necessarily predict with accuracy the character my child will develop as an adult.)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Thao* 
I'd say it depends on the focus. If the focus is to figure out the need or want so the parent can then immediately provide whatever the child wants, or use it as an excuse for the child's behavior (you know, like "sorry little Susie hit your kid but she's really tired today") then yes it can create narcissistic kids.

But if the focus is to figure out the need or want and then help the child understand it and learn compassionate, socially appropriate ways of expressing it, within proper boundaries, then it is in no way contributing to a narcissistic personality.









I think of it as cultivating an *awareness* of the child's (and parent's) needs/concerns within the context of the needs of the family/other individual/community. Along with that, I try to cultivate an awareness of the difference between needs/concerns and _strategies that attempt to address_ those needs/concerns. There's usually more than one strategy to address a need/concern, it's when I or my child or both of us get attached to/stuck on one particular strategy that we find ourselves in a power struggle. So in becoming aware of the need/concern my child is expressing, I can help my child express her need/concern more effectively and I can help her learn to address her need/concern _while_ considering and respecting the needs/concerns of others.


----------



## ^guest^ (Jul 2, 2005)

I would say total selfnesses would not be an ultimate goal. Selfishness and selflessness are based on the ideas of give and take in a relationship. Teaching a child to endlessly give of themselves without ever "taking" anything in return, sets them up for emotional exhaustion. While it's a quaint notion in a perfect world, it's not the real world. Everyone does not give endlessly. Can you imagine being completely selfless in your marriage? If your partner is the kind that takes a lot of you emotionally, and you never asked for, say a day, or a few hours to yourself to recharge, never asked anything of them, you'd probably quickly find yourself in a funny farm.

I believe in teaching children a balance between "selfishness" - teaching them it's okay to want something for themselves, whether it's a little extra love, some time to themselves, to play a game, and "selflessness" - that by addressing the needs of others before themselves can add a little good to a world that could always use a little bit more do-gooding. ( think I might copyright that phrase right there =p)


----------

