# Alfie Kohn on "Supernanny"



## mamadawg (Jun 23, 2004)

I thought this would be of interest here: Atrocious Advice from "Supernanny"


----------



## sadie_sabot (Dec 17, 2002)

I have never seen either of those shows ( no tv) but they sound atrocious. this is a good article, even having not seen the shows.


----------



## User101 (Mar 3, 2002)

Great article- he really hit on quite a few things that have been discussed here!


----------



## Pigpen (Dec 12, 2002)

I don't watch the shows either but I've heard what they're about







I love Alfie Kohn's response, especially this...
"These programs elevate viewer manipulation to an art form...We're encouraged to pretend that living with a camera crew doesn't influence how parents and children interact, and to disregard what it says about these people that they allowed their humiliation to be televised. We're asked to believe that families can be utterly transformed in a few days and to assume that the final redemptive images reveal the exceptional skills of the nanny -- rather than of the program's editing staff."

This part is sad but true though...
"We might just laugh off the implausibility of these programs except that they're teaching millions of real parents how to raise their real kids. To that extent, it matters that they're selling snake-oil."


----------



## mamadawg (Jun 23, 2004)

That last quote that you pointed out, Pigpen, really resonated with me. I've been to a few functions at my local mothers of multiples group & these shows get brought up a lot (as a good thing). So many people seem to be taking these shows' advice as gospel.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

I heard Alfie Kohn's interview on Diane Rehm (on NPR) and he also said he thought Supernanny et al were horrid, and very concerned that millions of people were taking parenting advice from these "reality shows".


----------



## willowsmom (Oct 28, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamadawg*
I thought this would be of interest here: Atrocious Advice from "Supernanny"










Very well said. Raises some interesting points about our Reality TV Society


----------



## pamelamama (Dec 12, 2002)

Funny, I stumbled on this too today, and I thought _RIGHT ON!!_

(admittedly I never watche dthe shows but... )


----------



## AngelBee (Sep 8, 2004)

I like Supernanny....







: I honestly don't think she is bad. Those families are out of control.


----------



## pamelamama (Dec 12, 2002)

Oh AngelBee, honey, please go read the article!!


----------



## pamelamama (Dec 12, 2002)

(It's not even that long!)


----------



## AngelBee (Sep 8, 2004)

I did read the article. Twice.

I still like her. The parents that they show are spineless. Children spitting, hitting, swearing, etc. need the consistency and attention show by Spuernanny.

They are crying out for attention, but they need to also learn that bad behavior is not the healthy way to get the attentio that they are longing for. The parents also have to learn to be parents.....not victems (sp?) They are the reason their kids are out of control. They have to regain balance in there homes.


----------



## pamelamama (Dec 12, 2002)

Alright, but I'm with Alfie Kohn on this one!







I dont think the quick fix is really going to address what's truly off balance in those families!

Quote:

Supernanny's superficiality isn't accidental; it's ideological. What these shows are peddling is behaviorism. The point isn't to raise a child; it's to reinforce or extinguish discrete behaviors - which is sufficient if you believe, along with the late B.F. Skinner and his surviving minions, that there's nothing to us other than those behaviors.
If she squashes the "bad behaviors" has she really solved what's amiss in those families? Raising kids is much more complex than that, to me!


----------



## AngelBee (Sep 8, 2004)

I agree. But I do think that it is a start in the right direction.

What now needs to happen is figuring out why the behaviors were happening in the first place and fixing the triggers to those behaviors.

I honestly find Supernanny to be AP. She does not believe in spanking, yelling, or being disrespectful to kids. She wants families to play together and love one another. Isn't that what we are all striving for?

Yes. There is consquences/rewards. Many AP/GD families also use consequenses and rewards also.


----------



## runes (Aug 5, 2004)

thanks for posting this article, it's great! he succintly summarizes all of my feelings that i've had about these shows.

i especially love the ending:

Quote:

If you can bear to sit through them, the nanny programs provide a fairly reliable guide for how not to raise children. They also offer an invitation to think about the pervasiveness of pop-behaviorism and our hunger for the quick fix. ?I guarantee you,? Supernanny earnestly, if tautologically, exhorts one pair of parents, ?every time you?re consistent, [your child] gets the same message.? Granted, but what message?
These shows rely on the dramatic, quick fix, instead of really getting down to the true issues. Am I being snarky to say that for the most part, America can't handle the truth? There is so much dysfunction going on in these families, and coming up with the same formulaic 'solutions' (rules, schedules, assumption that children's behavior is manipulative) is not really getting down to the true issues.

And so, the dumbing down of the US continues.


----------



## pamelamama (Dec 12, 2002)

Like I admitted, I haven't watched the show. But the examples quoted by Kohn in the article don't seem respectful to me at all. (little girl crying it out, boy playing with the hose) Maybe she does a better job of helping the families connect, and that's not portrayed in his article?

I'm in the middle of a big Alfie Kohn study right now, so I'm flipping over a lot of his ideas. Just really thought provoking!


----------



## AngelBee (Sep 8, 2004)

I have watched the show and do not agree with how the examples are being presented.


----------



## pamelamama (Dec 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AngelBee*
I have watched the show and do not agree with how the examples are being presented.

I'm still not going to watch it!!







Thanks for sharing your perspective. Maybe you want to hop over to the Alfie Kohn Unconditional Parenting thread... I'm reading through it now, and it's really fascinating. : )


----------



## AngelBee (Sep 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *pamelamama*
I'm still not going to watch it!!







Thanks for sharing your perspective. Maybe you want to hop over to the Alfie Kohn Unconditional Parenting thread... I'm reading through it now, and it's really fascinating. : )

Thank you pamelamama.....I will check it out!


----------



## Kylix (May 3, 2002)

Wonderful article! What I've been trying to articulate about the show for so long!

I have watched the show (both Supernanny and Nanny 911) and I believe Alfie Kohn hit the nail right on the head. You can't get away from Supernanny these days. We talk about it at work and most of us don't have children. Not surprisingly, I'm the only one that doesn't like the show. Everyone praises the nanny for getting those horrible, no-good parents back in line and say "Wow, if only I had supernanny when I was raising my kids" or "that family need supernanny"







. Gimme a break. It's TV, not reality. She's not turning those families around, editing is. And when she leaves, what then? Like Alfie Kohn said, if they aren't getting to the heart of the matter, then it's all surface.

Kylix


----------



## m0mmaw0lf (May 18, 2005)

I admit it, I've used the "naughty corner"







: but RARELY and only with what I consider to be extreme behavior (like mistreating other people by hitting or something.) That being said, I don't agree with most of SuperNanny's techniques. I've watched it a couple of times and Nanny 911 one time. Both shows stress me out to no end. One of the nannies actually said that the parents were TOO attached to there kids! I was so upset and broke into a rant about it.
And to see those poor families be exploited in such a way. I realize they've chosen to do it. But I know there are times I feel like I just want someone to tell me how to do it right - when I'm feeling completely desparate. And with what some of these parents seem to be dealing with, I can understand why they would feel like they need to do something extreme.
Anyway, I thought this was a great article and thanks for sharing!


----------



## celrae (May 3, 2005)

Great artical! I e-mailed it to my husband who loves to watch these showes. Why? I am not sure. I can't stand watching these crazy families and I think the advice given to way over simplified like te artical points out.


----------



## ared1 (Dec 13, 2003)

Quote:

The little girl in one family is accustomed to having Mom lie down next to her at bedtime. Forget it, says Supernanny, and the tradition is ended without warning or explanation. When the girl screams, that only proves how manipulative she is. Later, Mom confesses, "I felt like I was almost mistreating her." "Do not give in," urges the nanny, and misgivings soon yield to "It's working; it's getting quieter" - meaning that her daughter has abandoned hope that Mom will snuggle with her
What he didn't mention, is that the MOM no longer wanted to go thru the nighttime routine of putting her daughter to bed and having to sleep with her. They were spending like 3 hours trying to get her into bed. There are 2 sides to every story. I have only seen 2 episodes and I think this just happened to be one. The other was the neighbor of a lady in my BF group.

Just like every other bit of parenting advice, there are things that will work for your family and things that won't. I have never read a parenting book and thought it was the end all. I have extracted bits and pieces form many sources and applied the things that I felt my children will respond to individually. My 2 yo is very sensitive and you can not raise your voice to him. It hurts him as much as a spanking would. My DD however thinks timeout is a joke. I do think the Super Nanny gives these families a chance to restore some kind of order so that they can begin to deal with the underlying issues. (quick judgement) IME most children work better on some sort of a schedule (though not set in stone as SN does) again, I reflect on my 2YO who stresses when anything deviates from routine. My other 2 are pretty much go with the flow. I know I am rambling, sorry.


----------



## papapoochie (Mar 24, 2005)

I'm reading Alfie Kohn's book, Unconditional Parenting, as we speak. The notion of punishment and conditional love and their negative impact on the child is the basis of his book. My dw and I are parenting in such a way as to support the concept of unconditional parenting.

The Nanny shows are really just more mainstream American commercial television. Nothing more than another shock show. It is American pop-culture. Shallow, no substance, edited for one's viewing sensory fix. Did you ever notice the homes in which these parents reside? They are ALL NEW McMansions. The parents are the worst!! Totally lost and clueless on how to parent (hmmm, just like most of the parenting I witness in the real world). The nanny comes in and performs her formulaic behavioral vodoo tricks and cures the kids and parents in a couple of days. Yeah, right.

My general advice to anything the American mainstream likes is this:
IF THE GENERAL PUBLIC LIKES IT, IT'S GOT TO BE BAD FOR YOU and the Earth!
Some examples: fast food (destroying our health), SUV's (destroying our environment), conditional parenting (destroying our children, TV Nanny shows(destroying our children)......

Sorry for the rant, but oye! Had to vent. Love the thread.


----------



## mamasadie (May 13, 2005)

There is nothing wrong with a mother realizing the nighttime situation is not working for her, and being committed to changing it.

What is wrong is the disrespectful, hateful, punitive and vicious way of forcing a one-sided change that occurred on SuperNanny.









I have watched every episode of both shows to compile articles on how shamefully damaging and sickening these shows are.

I am sorry, but what universe does one live in to claim that SuperNanny is AP? These shows are so disrespectful to children and parents alike. Yes, these families need help. Quick-fix, behavioristic, punitive approaches are not going to solve anything for them...and are light-years away from AP. I don't know if the person who said this is aware of it, but AP is much more than just not spanking or yelling.





















It's about BUILDING A RELATIONSHIP. Which this Supernanny trash completely fails to do


----------



## Dal (Feb 26, 2005)

Awesome!









I'm looking for a dissertation topic. I'm doing my PhD in philosophy. I was thinking of writing on oppression and children -- whether they are oppressed in our society -- but think I would prefer something more specific. I could argue against the rampant behaviourism in mainstream parenting (and even in a lot of "expert" parenting/child rearing).







I think that would be fascinating. Food for thought.


----------



## treemom2 (Oct 1, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *papapoochie*
My general advice to anything the American mainstream likes is this:
IF THE GENERAL PUBLIC LIKES IT, IT'S GOT TO BE BAD FOR YOU and the Earth!
Some examples: fast food (destroying our health), SUV's (destroying our environment), conditional parenting (destroying our children, TV Nanny shows(destroying our children)......

I'm coming to this conclusion as well--I think if it is mainstream, we should boycott because there must be something wrong with it :LOL

Thank you for posting the thread to the article. I saw the Nanny once when we were staying in a hotel (no TV at home







) and it made me so sad. She kept punishing a child for disrespecting her mother, but the nanny never once noticed that the child was yelling at her mother because her mother was not listening to her. It is a very sad thing when mainstream america is watching these shows and implementing these things in their homes--argh--their poor children.


----------



## girlndocs (Mar 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AngelBee*
Those families are out of control.

No, they *look* out of control.

That is half the point of the article.

I guarantee you that if you let their camera crew in your house for a week, they would be able to edit together a half hour (hour?) episode that made you guys look like total chaos too.

I further guarantee you that even if the "parenting expert" they brought in gave you no advice but to stand on your head twice a day, given another week they would be able to edit together a half hour or hour episode that made you guys look like your lives were 200% better.

You're being fooled by their editing. You're being fooled if you think what you see has anything to do with reality. Sorry.


----------



## Benji'sMom (Sep 14, 2004)

Quote:

if high-quality, low-cost daycare was available.








"if high-quality, low-cost daycare _were_ available." That type of bad grammar is not acceptable in this house! Now go sit on the naughty stool, Alfie.


----------



## kavamamakava (Aug 25, 2004)

I actually had a stranger say I needed a Nanny911 intervention because my 4 yr old was crying at dance class.


----------



## RaRa7 (Feb 29, 2004)

I stopped watching thses shows when in one episode(don't even know which show?)she ridiculed the mom for never putting her baby down ("I've yet to hear that baby cry"--like that was a horrible thing!!)
And then called their family bed a "ridiculous" and "unhealthy" situation!








Suppernanny can kiss my butt!--can I say that?


----------



## AngelBee (Sep 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ared1*
What he didn't mention, is that the MOM no longer wanted to go thru the nighttime routine of putting her daughter to bed and having to sleep with her. They were spending like 3 hours trying to get her into bed. There are 2 sides to every story. I have only seen 2 episodes and I think this just happened to be one. The other was the neighbor of a lady in my BF group.

Just like every other bit of parenting advice, there are things that will work for your family and things that won't. I have never read a parenting book and thought it was the end all. I have extracted bits and pieces form many sources and applied the things that I felt my children will respond to individually. My 2 yo is very sensitive and you can not raise your voice to him. It hurts him as much as a spanking would. My DD however thinks timeout is a joke. I do think the Super Nanny gives these families a chance to restore some kind of order so that they can begin to deal with the underlying issues. (quick judgement) IME most children work better on some sort of a schedule (though not set in stone as SN does) again, I reflect on my 2YO who stresses when anything deviates from routine. My other 2 are pretty much go with the flow. I know I am rambling, sorry.


----------



## AngelBee (Sep 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamasadie*
I am sorry, but what universe does one live in to claim that SuperNanny is AP? These shows are so disrespectful to children and parents alike. Yes, these families need help. Quick-fix, behavioristic, punitive approaches are not going to solve anything for them...and are light-years away from AP. I don't know if the person who said this is aware of it, but AP is much more than just not spanking or yelling.





















It's about BUILDING A RELATIONSHIP. Which this Supernanny trash completely fails to do

Actually if you LISTEN to what she says.....that is the entire point. For them to build a respectful relationship. I still think that she leans very much toward the AP end of the scale. She is huge on encouragement, listening to and validating feelings, parents being playful and interacting with the children.

I honestly think that some of you are not open minded to the fact that she may have something to offer. It bothers me that people are not looking at the whole picture presented in each episode!

By the way, I know how TV is. I do not care if the children were complete angels during the rest of the time....the behaviors that are shown during the "taping" are absolutely inappropriate most of the time!


----------



## mommyofshmoo (Oct 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AngelBee*
I agree. But I do think that it is a start in the right direction.

What now needs to happen is figuring out why the behaviors were happening in the first place and fixing the triggers to those behaviors.

I honestly find Supernanny to be AP. She does not believe in spanking, yelling, or being disrespectful to kids. She wants families to play together and love one another. Isn't that what we are all striving for?

Yes. There is consquences/rewards. Many AP/GD families also use consequenses and rewards also.


So FIRST the kids have to behave- and then what? We think then the parents will start being decent parents, give them the care, attention and guidance they need?

That's a bunch of hooplah. If these parents are so lousy, they just want a quick fix. They want their kids to behave so they can go back to ignoring them and shirking their duties as parents.

BTW- if someone took footage of the worst 5 minutes of a day in ANY of our household and put it on a loop over and over- our kids would look like monsters.


----------



## mommyofshmoo (Oct 25, 2004)

Great article. I love Alphie, I nate supernanny. Maybe I'll send to MIL, but the words are probably too long for her. I kid you not.


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Can't wait to read it...Thanks.


----------



## Vermillion (Mar 12, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *girlndocs*

I guarantee you that if you let their camera crew in your house for a week, they would be able to edit together a half hour (hour?) episode that made you guys look like total chaos too.










ITA!

Even the most "well behaved children" would be totally stressed by that situation.

I watched the show 1 time and I was SO disgusted by it. Even ignoring the "discipline techniques" the fact that any parent would even allow total strangers to come into their home and turn their children into performing circus animals for America's entertainment tells me that they have absolutely NO respect for the kids.







:


----------



## Vermillion (Mar 12, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AngelBee*
Actually if you LISTEN to what she says.....that is the entire point. For them to build a respectful relationship. *I still think that she leans very much toward the AP end of the scale.* She is huge on encouragement, listening to and validating feelings, parents being playful and interacting with the children.

Are you kidding? I don't need to listen to what she is saying, I just need to watch what she is doing. And what she is doing is taking children and humiliating them on TV without their informed consent for the sake of entertainment and HER paycheck.

If she is so big on validating a child's feelings she would be against putting them on television and humiliating them and having total strangers invading their homes & lives. I'm sure they feel real good in that situation, huh? If she cared about respectful relationships between parent and child she wouldn't be in this business. She is making money off of fthese families issues, and you are buying right in to that.

Anyone who puts kids on show like that should be ashamed of themselves, and they have No respect for the poor kids involved, period!


----------



## mamasadie (May 13, 2005)

Quote:

So FIRST the kids have to behave- and then what? We think then the parents will start being decent parents, give them the care, attention and guidance they need?
Couldn't have said it better myself. How the heck do you build a loving, respectful *AP* relationship when the first condition is that one party's will must submit and be under the total control of the other's? What is the child's guarantee that the parent will honor and value their needs and genuinely, cooperatively work out the problems once they agree to let go of any claim to dignity and respect?


----------



## User101 (Mar 3, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AngelBee*
Actually if you LISTEN to what she says.....that is the entire point. For them to build a respectful relationship. I still think that she leans very much toward the AP end of the scale. She is huge on encouragement, listening to and validating feelings, parents being playful and interacting with the children.

FYI, I have watched several episodes. Entire episodes. Beginning to end.

If she's AP, I am underweight.

The heart of AP is trusting your own inner wisdom to form an attachment to your child, not a cookie cutter one-size-fits-all punishment and shame-based approach to parenting.

According to Jolly Jo-Jo, holding a baby "too much" is wrong. Co-sleeping is wrong. This is not AP.


----------



## Vermillion (Mar 12, 2005)

Quote:

The heart of AP is trusting your own inner wisdom to form an attachment to your child, not a cookie cutter one-size-fits-all punishment and shame-based approach to parenting.


----------



## laralou (Nov 27, 2001)

Can I just add that if my boss quotes Supernanny to me one more time to tell me what I am doing wrong with my children, I just might ... Ok, I won't tell you what I want to do to her...

I should add for clarification that my children work with me so she sees us interact quite a bit.

I liked the article and am grateful to have a link to send to her.


----------



## Pigpen (Dec 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Vermillion*
the fact that any parent would even allow total strangers to come into their home and turn their children into performing circus animals for America's entertainment tells me that they have absolutely NO respect for the kids.







:

Thank you!!!! That's it in a nutshell! Nevermind that these parents see the need for some stranger to come in and make their children "behave". THE PARENTS BEHAVIOR SEEMS TO BE SECONDARY!!! Shouldn't it be the other way around???


----------



## Plummeting (Dec 2, 2004)

The only time I ever saw Supernanny was on Oprah. They showed clips of the show and she was making the mother sit on the floor in the baby's room while the baby was CIO. That's enough information right there to prove that she is NOT AP - nor is she leaning towards AP or even spitting in the general direction. Furthermore, I don't feel that putting kids in any kind of time out called "the naughty chair" (or corner or whatever) is particularly AP. I think even AP parents use time out sometimes, but to call it the "naughty" place? How horrible! Why not just tell the kid what a terrible monster you think they are - how "naughty" they are? Not nice! Not nice at all!


----------



## Proudly AP (Jul 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Richelle*
They showed clips of the show and she was making the mother sit on the floor in the baby's room while the baby was CIO. That's enough information right there to prove that she is NOT AP - nor is she leaning towards AP or even spitting in the general direction. Furthermore, I don't feel that putting kids in any kind of time out called "the naughty chair" (or corner or whatever) is particularly AP. I think even AP parents use time out sometimes, but to call it the "naughty" place? How horrible! Why not just tell the kid what a terrible monster you think they are - how "naughty" they are? Not nice! Not nice at all!

i haven't watched the show ever, but the above info (along with alfie's makes me cringe and want to cry for the children).

my mother must have watched the episode about the mom who no longer wanted to lay with her dd to help her to sleep, 'cause i got ranted at (no kidding!) about how good the super nanny is, and how all you need is structure and routine (i was also read the riot act about my 3 year-old dd still wearing diapers and resisting using the toilet!)

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

this sounds SO disrespectful and i totally agree with the point about how terrible a thing it is to put these children on air. i hadn't considered that point, but you can bet they're receiving the message that the issues in their homes are *their* fault. what a terrible, terrible blow to a child's developing self-esteem.









i have bookmarked the link and will consider sending it to my mother, should she again feel the need to tell me how i need to parent my children.


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

"These programs elevate viewer manipulation to an art form."

Couldn't agree more! Only his take is gives more credit to the show for being skilled manipulators...I think they get a little help from their audience...


----------



## AngelBee (Sep 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annettemarie*
If she's AP, I am underweight.

You must be pretty skinny!









Quote:


Originally Posted by *annettemarie*
The heart of AP is trusting your own inner wisdom to form an attachment to your child, not a cookie cutter one-size-fits-all punishment and shame-based approach to parenting.

These parents are repeating bad parenting patterns that they have been taught in thei childhoods. They quite obviously were not taught to trust their instincts. If they did, the show would not exist.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annettemarie*
According to Jolly Jo-Jo, holding a baby "too much" is wrong. Co-sleeping is wrong. This is not AP.

I don't believe that is exactly what was meant. Co-sleeping that causes maritial problems is not AP. Holding a baby to prevent them from having a temper tantrum after being asked to stop.....hitting, swearing, spitting....is not necessarily AP either. As stated in Dr Sears Attachment Parenting book.....if you resent it, change it. Not wanting to co-sleep does not make you anti AP if you prefer to sleep with just your partner. The families that I have seen facing sleeping issues chose not to co-sleep and wanted a loving way to get their children to bed. Anytime you change a schedule/routine on children, you risk tears and tantrums.


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

But, AngelBee, how do you feel about the first part of the article? The suggestion that the vast majority of this is editing? It is an absolute distortion of the truth. For me, it doesn’t even go beyond that.


----------



## mamakay (Apr 8, 2005)

I see what Angelbee is saying and what everyone else is saying.
I don't care how much editing was done. These families are in desperate need of help.
And Supernanny puts most of the emphasis on what the parents are doing wrong (and the producers do find families where there is no consistancy and a tantrum is always fixed by the parents, after ignoring the underlying need, eventually "cave" and do whatever it takes to end the tantrum.
And at least 60% of what she tells parents to do is very AP.
But the remaining 40% is so awful I can't help but hate her.
Between the "naughty chair/corner" and her sickening CIO ideas, I see her as a another force in modern thinking that condones emotional neglect of children.
Her CIO stuff is the absolute worst, though.
She really does not have any feeling for a crying baby that wants his mommy.
Her "Sit in the room but don't respond" technique is one of the most weird, abusive concepts I've ever heard of.
But a lot of the time she surprises me by actually giving good, sound, loving and helpful advice.
(My very mainstream best friend and I record the show and discuss/debate it every week.)

What makes me really sad about the whole phenomenon is how easy it probably is to watch the show and implement the bad, abusive ideas, and not even see, much less practice, the good ones.
A naughty chair is exciting and easy...finding out and providing what your child needs is difficult.
The bad outshines the good...both in critical observation of the show, and, I'd guess, in emulation of it.


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamakay*
I don't care how much editing was done. These families are in desperate need of help.

How do you know?

I was thinking more about the idea that this show helps families and I don't buy it. That is *not* the motivation for this show and I think it does more damage than good for parenting in our culture.

This show(s) gives the impression that parents are incompetent and that all problems with raising kids can be easily solved.

The show is entertainment for some and that's all.


----------



## mamakay (Apr 8, 2005)

ITA that the show does a lot more harm than good.
But the families are "extreme".
The parents openly admit that they are totally inconsistant, and will endure a freaking out kid for a while, and then reward the freakout with extravagent measures to end the fit.
A lot of what Supernanny does is address problems before they happen (in a good way...like, "I know you want to limit soda...offer water"...and it turns out the kid was thirsty).
But, yes, I agree the bad eclipses the good.
The naughty chair thing is what parents talk about the next day at work. Not the thirsty kid.


----------



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

Great article!

I watch these shows all the time. Must be the voyeur and sociologist in me. :LOL

But, to say that SuperNanny is AP is the biggest stretch of what *most* people generally agree AP to be! Someone who doesn't consider a child's emotional needs in the vast majority of situations has taken another path entirely.

All sorts of changes can occur in children's lives (being separated from parents, weaning, ending co-sleeping, etc.). But, there are loving and considerate ways of preparing a child and then helping them transition through these changes and then there are ways of shaming and abandoning the child. SuperNanny *consistantly* uses the latter.

Children left to sob themselves to sleep after having a parent or pacifier or whatever help them sleep is not gentle, it is not AP--it's just cruel. The parents are routinely comforted during these episodes. Too bad the children aren't afforded the same treatment.


----------



## ebethmom (Jan 29, 2002)

I've only seen one show - the episode where the two little boys were hitting and shouting at their Mom, the Dad yelled a lot, and the Mom tried her darndest to ignore her sons.

It aired at a time when I needed to talk to dh about HIS yelling and negativity. So that show helped us talk about our own issues.

Off to read the article now on my s . . .l. . . o. . .w. . . computer.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

I heart Kohn.









Ftr, it's the dumbing down of the entire western world...nearly. The Nanny is an import show.


----------



## cyclemama (Mar 8, 2003)

I've seen maybe five or six episodes of Supernanny. I don't agree with a lot of her techniques (CIO, naughty corner, etc.). However, I believe many previous posters, and Kohn, and are giving Supernanny short shrift when they say she only provides quick fixes and ignores underlying causes of the family's dysfunction and chaos. In many of the episodes I've seen, Supernanny has indeed attempted to address big issues, especially uninvolved fathers who need to step up to the plate and take on some parenting and household responsibilities, and crazy work-at-home arrangements that leave the children with little or no undivided attention throughout the day. For example, I've seen Supernanny:

-- Tell a father that it is totally unreasonable for him to come home from work and spend the rest of the evening watching TV while his exhausted wife takes on all the evening parenting duties.

-- Show a father how to get down on the floor and actually play with his kids, rather than simply supervising them from afar.

-- Convince a work-at-home mom that she needs to turn off the telephone for a couple hours each afternoon so that she can give her children some undivided attention, instead of trying to "manage" her children while answering the telephone all day for the couple's plumbing business.

-- Suggest to a couple that they should consider hiring a "daddy's helper" to assist the work-at-home father with the kids for a couple mornings per week so the kids could get more of the attention they needed (both from the helper and from the father, who'd later be able to give more attention since he would be able to get some work done while the helper was present).

-- Try to convince a mother that she wasn't listening to or validating the feelings of her oldest child, but rather, was unfairly blaming him for the chaos in the house that was actually caused by his unruly younger siblings.

-- Convince a couple that the father could actually take care of the kids by himself for an hour or so every Saturday so the exhausted mother could have at least a short weekly break (and so the father could learn how to become a more active parent).

-- Convince a father that he could actually load the dishwasher instead of leaving all the chores for his already overburdened spouse.

Of course, it is unclear how successful Supernanny's efforts really were, since, as pointed out by many, creative editing is at play. However, I believe it is unfair to say that she doesn't even try to address big issues that affect the family as a whole.

Cylcemama -- Mother to Jasper (3) and Elliot (1)


----------



## User101 (Mar 3, 2002)

I feel about Supernanny the same way I feel about Ezzo, the what to expect books, and Parents magazine. Sure, there may be one or two good ideas in there, but look at all the crap you have to wade through to get to it. Why bother, when there are perfectly good resources out there with all the good info minus the crap?


----------



## sebarnes (Feb 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annettemarie*
I feel about Supernanny the same way I feel about Ezzo, the what to expect books, and Parents magazine. Sure, there may be one or two good ideas in there, but look at all the crap you have to wade through to get to it. Why bother, when there are perfectly good resources out there with all the good info minus the crap?









:


----------



## runes (Aug 5, 2004)

Quote:

I feel about Supernanny the same way I feel about Ezzo, the what to expect books, and Parents magazine. Sure, there may be one or two good ideas in there, but look at all the crap you have to wade through to get to it. Why bother, when there are perfectly good resources out there with all the good info minus the crap?
Not just hands clapping...where's the standing ovation smilie when you need it? :LOL

We here on this board, imho, put a lot more thought into what we read/hear/see on tv than the majority of people out there. We know how to sift through the crap and extrapolate the little gems of wisdom from the enormous turds of ignorance.

If someone put out a show that really truly went by AP principles, it would probably cause a huge uproar in the mainstream. What? RESPECT our children? Imagine that. What a revolutionary concept!


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

AP isn't about WHAT you do, so much as why you do it.

Sure, Supernanny says not to yell at kids, but is it because she respects them as little people with rights, or is it because yelling just isn't effective at getting the kid of response they're looking for? I find it really hard to understand how someone can feel that yelling is disrespectful, but it's okay to let the child bawl their eyes out wanting mommy, and have mommy sit there like a statue ignoring them. I saw the Oprah version where that's what she made a mom do, while her 2 year old screamed for her in the dark, and mommy sat there right beside his crib staring at the floor. It made me so sad, angry, and sick all at the same time.

The things she does may "seem" to be AP, but they are not. Her warnings to "never let your kids in your bed, never lie down with them to get them to bed" are so ignorant. UGH!!

Anyways, like annettemarie said, there are much better sources of AP parenting than the few tidbits she tosses out there amongst all the garbage.


----------



## m0mmaw0lf (May 18, 2005)

This may seem like a dumb question







but for those of you who feel the "naughty corner" is a bad idea, why do you feel that way? How do you think it is different than a "time out" and do you think "time outs" are a bad idea too? If so, then what do you do instead?

Explaining before and after why the punishment is being issued (with the "naughty corner") always seemed like a good idea to me. But I'm always interested in how other parents - particularly AP parents - deal with "discipline." And how maybe I could do it better. So I'm just curious.


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

I finally watched Supernanny after having it recommended to me by so many people. I HATE the idea of a naughty corner. That is setting up a power struggle on purpose - and one that will have to become physical. How many kids would actually sit in a naughty spot without getting up? I'd have to physically hold my daughter down, which is just as physical and wouldn't be any better than spanking. Nope, not gonna happen.

She does seem to have a good suggestion here and there but it's covered up by assuming all children are the same and will respond to the same things the same way, and even that they are behaving in a particular way for the same reason every other kid "misbehaves."

The children I've seen on those shows are victims of neglect. They don't need punishment, they need just involved parents. Preferably involved in a positive way.

Well that's one opinion anyway.


----------



## Plummeting (Dec 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *m0mmaw0lf*
This may seem like a dumb question







but for those of you who feel the "naughty corner" is a bad idea, why do you feel that way? How do you think it is different than a "time out" and do you think "time outs" are a bad idea too? If so, then what do you do instead?

Explaining before and after why the punishment is being issued (with the "naughty corner") always seemed like a good idea to me. But I'm always interested in how other parents - particularly AP parents - deal with "discipline." And how maybe I could do it better. So I'm just curious.

My DD is only 12 months, so she's too young to have had any discipline issues yet, but I can tell you what I _plan_ to do when she gets bigger.







I do believe time-outs are a bad idea most of the time. Why not just talk to the child and explain to them why what they have done is not okay and tell them a better way to handle whatever the situation was next time around? Why do children need to be punished at all? There is a TON of research on why time-out is a bad idea, but I don't have time to give links right now. I'm sure someone else will.... Regarding calling a time-out the "naughty" place. That is just disrespectful. Children should *never, never* be made to feel ashamed as part of discipline. The purpose of discipline is to teach children, not to shame them into doing the right thing, which isn't teaching them anything. Imagine that next time you and your DP got into a fight that was *your* fault and he went and told everyone what an idiot you were in an effort to shame you into not making the same mistake again. Calling time-out the "naughty" place is the same concept. Plus, it's basically telling kids that *they* are naughty when you send them to a "naughty" place. Kids aren't naughty. Period. They just make mistakes.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

m0mmaw0lf: naughty chair = shaming; shaming is a nasty way to treat anybody, even a child; it's also totally ineffective for anything other than teaching kids how to jump through specific hoops; internal motivation to be good, helpful, etc does not come about by shaming

and yes, i think timeouts are just as bad. they use attachment as a weapon, separation is the punishment. they also teach nothing to the child about problem solving, etc.

if you want to know how to raise kids without punishment or rewards just stick around this forum. there are also many good books and websites.


----------



## mamasadie (May 13, 2005)

ITA with PP. I also wanted to add that time outs are withdrawal of love. Basically, it is an attempt to manipulate a child into acting the way one wants by refusing to give them love until they do.

Time out's are also punitive and arbitrary. They rarely are in any way related to the actual behavior the parent is trying to correct.


----------



## mamadawg (Jun 23, 2004)

I'm embarrassed to admit that I've watched more than my fair share of the nanny programs. It's like watching a train wreck--I don't want to, but I can't stop myself. The thing that struck me first & foremost was the "naughty mat" techniques. It just makes me cringe everytime.

I wouldn't hit my children, ever. Nor would I hit any adult, ever. I wouldn't shame an adult if they did something that I didn't like. Why would I do that to my child?


----------



## m0mmaw0lf (May 18, 2005)

Piglet68,

I would like to know alternatives to punishment or rewards. I am not saying that I am an advocate of the naughty corner or time-outs, but I seem to be constantly searching for ideas that don't involve these things. I have read the Sears books about discipline and development. I did not find his books terribly helpful when I got to the point where I realized that I needed to figure some of this out. I'm still trying to figure out what works. As I'm sure I always will be (because just when you think you've got it figured out it changes, right?!)

As for explaining things to DD (as suggested by Richelle) that is what I do all day long. I am constantly explaining to DD - I think it's really valuable. I defintiely believe that children should be treated like people, with respect and compassion. But there are times when it is impossible to rationalize with a toddler. That's why I asked the question - to get ideas about what to do when those times are happening. I admit, I have used the naughty corner (VERY rarely) but realized that it is not in line with how we are raising DD. I just never saw the shame part of it, so thanks for the feedback.


----------



## Claudette (Mar 1, 2004)

The nanny shows have recently come to Australia, and I've found this discussion very interesting, as I co-administrate an Australia AP board, and we have beginning to have similar discussions there... Lots of good points here, especially about the WHY of AP vs. the WHAT of AP (Gentle Discipline isn't just not smacking and yelling, imo)...

About the 3 year old boy who was clinging to his mum (apparently all day, according to the editing)... As a Child Development specialist, I can say that that reflects some sort of mal-attachment, there was definately an issue there. However, Supernanny didn't delve into the issue on the show. She saw that the clinging was upsetting mum, and so deemed it "wrong" and "bad" behaviour on the child's part, but no reference was made the fact that apparently the child spent a lot of time in childcare throughout the week, and perhaps had issues to deal with due to this seperation. Also, different children have different sensitivities, and while for example, my 5 year HATED being seperated (even by a few metres) from me as a baby, my 3 was a little roamer and explorer, so I had to be more sensitive to my older sons needs for the little bit longer it took him to adjust to a new situation (he is still a kid who likes to slowly warm up to new situations while his brother jumps right in, but given 10 minutes to warm up, he's just as enthused as his brother to join in)... Anyway, these nuiances were not explored in that episode.

About the "naughty" corner, and "time outs". We have used "time outs" in our house, but they are not punitive or used to shun the child, in fact, we have taken our children into time outs just as you would in basketball. You remove the child from the situation and comfort them to a point where they are calmer and able to cope better with the situation and are open to listening to advice on how to handle a situation. Time out, is then in essence, a break from whatever was causing the escalated emotions that led to the behaviour you want to address. Punitive time out and naughty corners/chairs/mats etc. are a way of ostracising the child. By shunning the child you definately send the message that the behaviour is unacceptable, but you do not equip the child with the skills to handle the situation differently. You also fail to acknowledge how the child is feeling. Thus, you lose the opportunity to convey compassion and understanding. If you want your children to show others compassion and understanding you need to model it yourself. Compassion is not conditional. The Supernanny's brand of compassion is conditional, I will listen and I will hug you when you behave in a manner I find acceptible...


----------



## mamadawg (Jun 23, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Claudette*
About the "naughty" corner, and "time outs". We have used "time outs" in our house, but they are not punitive or used to shun the child, in fact, we have taken our children into time outs just as you would in basketball. You remove the child from the situation and comfort them to a point where they are calmer and able to cope better with the situation and are open to listening to advice on how to handle a situation. Time out, is then in essence, a break from whatever was causing the escalated emotions that led to the behaviour you want to address. Punitive time out and naughty corners/chairs/mats etc. are a way of ostracising the child. By shunning the child you definately send the message that the behaviour is unacceptable, but you do not equip the child with the skills to handle the situation differently. You also fail to acknowledge how the child is feeling. Thus, you lose the opportunity to convey compassion and understanding. If you want your children to show others compassion and understanding you need to model it yourself. Compassion is not conditional. The Supernanny's brand of compassion is conditional, I will listen and I will hug you when you behave in a manner I find acceptible...

This is the crux of Kohn's critique, as I see it.

I just bought his book "Unconditional Parenting" today, so I look forward to more of his writing.


----------



## Lyci (Feb 10, 2004)

I wish I could anonymously send this article to some of our most conventionally, controlling, time outing, friends and family members.


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lyci*
I wish I could anonymously send this article to some of our most conventionally, controlling, time outing, friends and family members.









I'll send it. PM me their e-mail addresses...


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

he, he, he ICM...!


----------



## Greensleeves (Aug 4, 2004)

Aww, man, I'm a little disappointed. I thought (from the title of the thread) that Alfie Kohn had actually gone on the show!







To help Supernanny get a grip on reality, so to speak.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kavamamakava*
I actually had a stranger say I needed a Nanny911 intervention because my 4 yr old was crying at dance class.









This, to me, is one of the worst effects of this show. It gives people a quick put down to use to shame a parent whose child is acting NORMAL. When my 2 year old is acting 2, the last thing I need is some stranger viewing a 60 second clip of my 24 hour day with her, and judging my parenting because she is too little for her big feelings.

By the way, does anyone know if Supernanny actually has any children of her own? It's great to swoop in and intrude on some family's life with all the answers when you can go home at the end of the day. But these people have a lifetime of complicated interactions, emotions and memories to contend with.


----------



## Claudette (Mar 1, 2004)

No, she doesn't, and in fact, she has categorically stated she never wants children...


----------



## mamasadie (May 13, 2005)

Quote:

No, she doesn't, and in fact, she has categorically stated she never wants children...
Wow.







I wonder why she chooses to work around children, then?


----------



## meemee (Mar 30, 2005)

i watched supernanny twice to really find out what was going on (so i can say yes i have watched it and hate it) and i cannot ever repeat that experience again.

both times i watched supernanny i remember this documentary i watched on children's behav. problem where the parents were feeling out of control. cant remember if i saw it on cable at friends house, or borrowed the video from library but this was a family kinda like the ones on supernanny. of course it wasnt edited to show just the bad behav. anyways i think the psychologists spent a whole month observing the behaviour (bringing them over to the 'lab' and watching them for a few hours everyday) before they agreed on a plan of action. teh POA was to make smooth transitions and assess if both parents and children felt comfortable with the action. so i was one month of observing, then rx and then another month of figuring out what was working and what wasnt. there was no feeling of rush or judgemental behav. in the hour long docum. yes the parents were rich and could afford such a procedure. but it was so much more of a child centered 'remedy'. actually the conclusion was not that the children were demons but what areas the parents needed to improve. they showed how just 5 mins of a parent doing something differently has such a vast impact on their toddler's behav.

for me what is more scary than the tv series is that she has written a book which a lot of parents are buying as their 'bible' for parenting. i sure hope this show is not going to be 'sold' to other countries like 'baywatch' was.


----------



## meemee (Mar 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Richelle*
My DD is only 12 months, so she's too young to have had any discipline issues yet, but I can tell you what I _plan_ to do when she gets bigger.







I do believe time-outs are a bad idea most of the time. Why not just talk to the child and explain to them why what they have done is not okay and tell them a better way to handle whatever the situation was next time around? Why do children need to be punished at all? .

i so agree with u. my daughter is almost 3 and i have really never had to discipline her. talking, negotiating works v. well for us. we DO use timeouts though - on me. when i find i am having a bad day and am irritated by every little thing my daughter does i constantly keep leaving the room and calming down so i dont yell which in my daughters book equates to spanking. or we change the environment. we go for a walk or just go outside which certainly takes my irritability away.

yes i am sure others have found times when my dd could be disciplined but i disagreed with them. instead cuddles and explanations worked much better bringing on smiles instead of more tears.


----------



## Claudette (Mar 1, 2004)

The time-outs (or time aways) we use with our sons, are not so much because they've done some discrete action that is not ok, but rather when we sense an overall energy eminating from the child that says, "I'm overstimulated, I'm not coping with this situation", and then we take the child out of the situation (with one of us, not on their own) to "regroup"...


----------



## IncaMama (Jun 23, 2004)

i also loathe supernanny and i am so happy to say that DH hates it and won't watch it ever again, he says.







it's wonderful when your partner agrees with your parenting strategies. anyway, i have a LOT of friends who take some of her things as gospel and it's really sad to me. i think that time outs can be done in a non-shaming way like we have heard in this thread and in others on here...i have yet to use one, mostly because i don't think that my 2yo is really ready to understand them yet. i know some 2yo are, but i know my son and i know how his mind works (mostly LOL) and i know that it would just be confusing to him so what's the point, kwim?

BUT i have heard some friends literally say that they use the term "naughty corner" and in her british accent, as if that makes it somehow more lighthearted or something.







it's really sad to me. and i'm so sick of cookie cutter parenting shows like this. America values "rugged individualism" so highly, and tries to force independence on children at ridiculous ages yet STILL refuses to believe that each child is DIFFERENT and needs something that is SPECIFIC to him/her. it baffles and angers me.


----------



## Pandora114 (Apr 21, 2005)

I use time outs on my DD ONLY when she's tantruming and needs time to cool down so we can approach the problem with a calmer toddler. She also has this real horrible habit of bashing her head against solid surfaces *floors, walls, you name it* So I put her on the funky easychair type thing we have *It's a chair, with the ottomon attached and it's real comfy..kinda like a chaise lounge but cushyer* so she can't hurt herself and so she can calm down. But when she pulls a fit at the resource center we go to, I have to acctually HOLD her so she doesn't bash herself. The facilitators are wonderful at helping me diffuse the situation.

But back onto the SN thing. Supernanny is like a mushroom farm. You gotta dig through all the crap to get to the good bits. And sometimes you might find a nice juicy portabello.


----------



## Amys1st (Mar 18, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *papapoochie*
The Nanny shows are really just more mainstream American commercial television. Nothing more than another shock show. It is American pop-culture. Shallow, no substance, edited for one's viewing sensory fix. Did you ever notice the homes in which these parents reside? They are ALL NEW McMansions. The parents are the worst!! Totally lost and clueless on how to parent (hmmm, just like most of the parenting I witness in the real world). The nanny comes in and performs her formulaic behavioral vodoo tricks and cures the kids and parents in a couple of days. Love the thread.

This is what DH said too after we watched it a few times. We both decided that even though it shows us what NOT to do- especially since we are not spineless parents and we do not have a child slugging another child every five seconds- we do not need to watch this sort of tv. Main reason- its after parenting hours are over since dd is asleep and why would we want to see other people's children like this?? I do witness a lot of parenting like that too, but since I have surronded myself with like minded parents, its gotten easier.


----------



## vegmom (Jul 23, 2003)

Ok, so i don't get it. We are raising children to become adults. As adults/parents it is not acceptable to raise voices and yell so why is it ok for our children to do so? I realy don't see time outs as bad. If you talk to most adults who are going through a challenging situation - time outs are good. You get a chance to remove yourself from the situation and reflect. After calming down you can then reflect on the situation with less emotion. Teaching children to use time outs can be positive.

Also, one thing that has not been mentioned on this thread is that SN gives out warnings of bad behaviour. If this warning is ignored then time out is used.

And what is wrong with having the child apologize for inappropriate behavior? Children that hit and bite should know that is bad and they should learn to apologize and make peace.

What would happen to society without rules? There has to be some kind of consequence. Without rules and consequences there would be chaos.

Its human nature - Actions are based on gaining pleasure and avoiding pain. Thats it. Its simple.

So i guess i don't understand gentle discipline if it does not involve some sort of consequence. I use the pain/pleasure principle myself
- i excercise, I concentrate on how great i feel when i do
- i fear calling on potential clients, I concentrate on the benefits of when the person becomes a client
- i use consequence for myself ie. if i don't lose x-lbs by x-date then i will post a current bikini photo of myself on my blog.
- i study for exams to do well on them because it feels awesome to get an A and feels awful to do badly.

These are all principle based on Anthony Robbins work and books. These principles have made people extremely powerful and successful.

Children do the same thing. If they know there is a consequence they will refrain from a bad behaviour and will do things that will make them feel good.

I also wanted to add that i do not believe in spanking, yelling or any other abusive discipline techniques. I just don't think that time outs are bad.


----------



## Plummeting (Dec 2, 2004)

Vegmom, time outs wouldn't be bad if the child chose to take one on their own or if the parent did it in a non-punitive way, but to send a kid to time out for any reason other than to cool off is absurd. For example, child colors on the wall and you send her to time out as a "consequence". What has she learned? Has she learned how hard it is to clean crayon off the wall? No. Has she learned why we don't color on walls? No. Has she learned what is an acceptable coloring surface? No. Instead, she has learned that no one wants to be around her when she makes them mad. A more reasonable consequence would be to explain to her why she shouldn't color on walls, what she should color on instead and have her help you clean the crayon off the wall. Then she has actually learned something useful. Plus, it's a real consequence, rather than a punishment.

Also, forcing children to apologize is absurd, IMO. Children should learn proper social behavior by witnessing the adults in their life use it, not by being forced to do things they don't want to. Furthermore, what is the point in an apology when it isn't sincere? How many times have we seen a sullen child hang their head and say, "I'm sorry," after being coerced into it by their parents? And did any of us ever believe they were actually feeling sorry right at the moment? So then, what did they learn by saying those words? Well, they learned that it is perfectly acceptable to lie as long as the lie you tell is the one that everyone wants to hear. They also learned that it's okay for adults to make them say things they don't want to say, so they feel powerless. They also learned that they aren't really in control of their own feelings, since someone else can make them say they feel something they don't. Are these things really what we want our children to learn? Furthermore, in the end, they probably feel even LESS sorry than they originally may have, just because they're so angry about being forced to say something they don't mean. How would you feel if your husband right now, today, forced you to apologize to someone when you didn't feel like it? Would you be angry? Would you be embarrassed? Would you feel like you weren't in control of your own self? If you don't want someone to do it to you, then don't do it to your children. IMO, it is that simple. I don't want someone telling me to apologize just because *they* think that I should feel sorry. Apologies should *always* be an individual's own choice. Better than forcing a child to apologize would be to discuss with them how their actions may have hurt the other person. Then, if they *choose* to apologize they can actually feel in control and feel good about it. If they choose not to, they're just kids and still have some growing to do. No big deal.


----------



## Greensleeves (Aug 4, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Richelle*
Also, forcing children to apologize is absurd, IMO. Children should learn proper social behavior by witnessing the adults in their life use it, not by being forced to do things they don't want to. Furthermore, what is the point in an apology when it isn't sincere? How many times have we seen a sullen child hang their head and say, "I'm sorry," after being coerced into it by their parents? And did any of us ever believe they were actually feeling sorry right at the moment? .

I tend to agree about forced apologies. I think a better strategy, if your child does not apologize for something, is to apologize yourself to the offended party. Then you can talk to your child about the reasons we apologize: it makes the other person feel better. If you apologize yourself, it can soothe over the hurt feelings and restore balance, and after all that is mostly what an apology is for. Same thing with "thank you"; you can say, "Wow, that was nice of the girl to share her crackers! Do you want to say thank you?" If your child doesn't want to, you can do it, and then say something like, "It makes the girl feel good when we say thank you for sharing!"

We have modeled these things with dd (just turned 2), said thanks and sorry to her and for her and gently encouraged her to say these things, and she is quite enamored of using her "manners" now.


----------



## momcat (Aug 9, 2002)

I have to admit, folks, I'm a bit torn.

I have seen SN a handful of times, and was horrified at how she threw away a bottle for a toddler (cold turkey) how negative she was about co-sleeping, etc.

BUT... I agree with vegmom in a lot of ways. We use time-outs with our 3.5 yo but only when he does something like hit someone. Sometimes language does not solve the problem. If he were to color on the wall or something, of COURSE we would explain the situation and make him clean it up rather than put him in a time out. We use them rarely, but when it feels like an important distinction.

Honestly, I don't think it's a problem for kids to feel ashamed of certain behaviours. It's our job to help them figure out what makes them feel good (or not). Wouldn't you want your child to feel ashamed of stealing? Or cheating? I'm not talking about silly little stuff here, I'm talking about big-picture stuff. And we never tell him that HE is bad, or that we are disappointed in him, only that he needs some "thinking time" to decide what a better way to handle himself would have been. Then we talk about his feelings (both current and what brought about the behaviour), hug and kiss, and move on with our day.

I also agree that there are other little gems in the show (like showing parents how to play with their kids, getting help when needed, etc), but that the editing is ridiculous. I find it hard to believe that any family dynamics are as bad as they appear on TV. I also wonder what would happen if they gave the families and SN a month or more to work things out. Would she move more slowly? Encourage "weaning" of cosleeping (or whatever) in a gradual, loving way? Basically, that sort of thing doesn't make for good television. Whoever said it earlier was right - it's the McFix that our society has grown so fond of. But I do think that there are some basic things in the show that are right on target. It speaks volumes, I think, that as a society we are turning to TV to fix our families and learn basic parenting skills. Where are our extended communities and families? It's a shame, really...


----------



## ankh (Feb 23, 2005)

Great article. I must admit I watched both shows at first and was fascinated. I began to feel uncomfortable when both Supernanny and the 911 ladies would stop the Mums sleeping with the kids, saying it was unhealthy etc. UGH...I really feel that should be left up to the Mums. They could have made other suggestions, ie putting a mattress on the floor..something.

I do agree with some of the things they *enforced,* but they seem pretty common sense to me. I don't need to watch a woman with no kids of her own to figure it out.


----------



## mommyofshmoo (Oct 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *vegmom*

Its human nature - Actions are based on gaining pleasure and avoiding pain. Thats it. Its simple.
.


This is not really true. A monkey or dog in a cage with no other stimulus do behave on a pleasure/pain principle under certain circumstances.

However, all of motivational psychology has proven that people are motivated to learn, to grow, to DO things that give their lives meaning. Human beings have complex drives, and pleasure/pain is not very helpful in understanding most human actions.

ALso- there's no evidence that punishments work. They may work short term, but tend to make children more resistant and defiant long term. They also just make kids to stuff behind your back.


----------



## thoesly (Dec 23, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *vegmom*
We are raising children to become adults.

Yes. The question is, what sort of adults do we hope they become? To me, GD is focused on the long-term goal of allowing children to develop qualities such as empathy, sensitivity, self-confidence, and fair-mindedness. It avoids using strategies that sacrifice the long-term goal to achieve a short-term one. The use of punitive time-outs does not foster character development -- it teaches a child that they are unworthy of a parent's attention, and it sacrifices an opportunity to teach a child what he/she *should* do. There are so many consequences in life that are inescapable (if a toddler throws a toy, he/she may well learn that toys can break) that parents don't really need to subject children to artificial ones.

Please remember that toddlers and young children tend to be concrete thinkers. The examples you give of adult consequences entail an intangible future payoff -- a concept that most children don't grasp until they are several years old. If you simplify the examples to "If I do X, then I get Y," then you can look at the lessons a child might learn from them. If a child is focused on getting or avoiding Y, then X ceases to have value. So, for example, if I want my child to develop empathy, then I want her to see the value in sharing her toys with her brother. If she only shares to get a pat on the head or to avoid a time-out, then she is being cheated of an opportunity to develop empathy. Worse, she is learning to have a me,me,me focus rather than caring about others.

As far as the principles that have made people powerful and successful -- I would need to have a definition of both "powerful" and "successful" to decide how I feel about that. The images I currently have of power and success involve money and exploitation -- not values we have in our family.

And, regarding Supernanny, I am saddened by the entire phenomenon because it seems to discourage thoughtful parenting, regardless of whether one leans toward AP or mainstream practices.


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momcat*
It speaks volumes, I think, that as a society we are turning to TV to fix our families and learn basic parenting skills.

I'm not sure if that's what we're doing. I'd love to see the demographics of that show because the only people I know that watch it either don't have kids or have older children.

I think this show is a piece of "reality" entertainment&#8230;no different from the Swan, The Apprentice, Who's Your Daddy, The Bachelor and etc.

I don't believe that this show is motivated in any way by helping parents. Sure, there may be "a gem" in there somewhere&#8230;but that could be said for about anything.

Vegmom, there is lots on this forum about punitive timeouts and consequences in general.

I believe that my child's childhood is her life as much as adulthood is. By US standards, childhood is more than 25% or a person's life. My main motivation for my child is that she be happy but, at the same time, I know that she is already motivated by things like empathy, responsibility, guilt, love, anger&#8230;it's much more than pleasure/pain.


----------



## kiahnsmum (Oct 22, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Claudette*
No, she doesn't, and in fact, she has categorically stated she never wants children...


----------



## IncaMama (Jun 23, 2004)

IdentityCrisisMama-
unfortunately, i know SEVERAL women who take parenting tips from SuperNanny. they take the show seriously and implement many of her strategies, the most common one being that "naughty chair/mat/step". and they often use her british accent while doing it.


----------



## Teensy (Feb 22, 2002)

I have watched many of the shows and I think that the advice given is largely okay. I don't think that any one person can give parenting advice that will satisfy everyone. I bet that MDC members could find some nugget to disagree with ANY parenting advice given, even by Dr. Sears. Most of us have sought advice with our parenting dilemas at some point - look at the number of threads posted today seeking solutions. I've even used some of the suggestions given in the shows - GASP! I don't always agree, of course, but overall I think that the suggestions given are reasonable.

I do have a problem with the issue of children being used - they are unable to give consent and are often shown in a terrible light (at least in the first half :LOL ). I don't think it fair that their problems are being aired for all their friends and classmates (and future teachers, dates, etc.) to see when they are unable to understand the potential consequences.

One point for those who have not watched the show - the children crying at bedtime are not infants being sleep-trained - which is what I picture when I hear CIO. They are children about age three and up who are mad that their mothers aren't laying down with them for hours at bedtime when the moms do not want to spend hours laying down with them at bedtime.


----------



## PancakeGoddess (Oct 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dal*
Awesome!









I'm looking for a dissertation topic. I'm doing my PhD in philosophy. I was thinking of writing on oppression and children -- whether they are oppressed in our society -- but think I would prefer something more specific. I could argue against the rampant behaviourism in mainstream parenting (and even in a lot of "expert" parenting/child rearing).







I think that would be fascinating. Food for thought.









you go! seriously, children are the final underclass, they'll be the last to be liberated properly. No one likes to hear the words Oppression and Children together, but there's no other way to put it.

It's complicated, because I do believe children need some level of control, but we have rampant discrimination and hate for children and teens, and that is not the same thing.


----------



## PancakeGoddess (Oct 8, 2004)

About time-outs/naughty corner. Many have mentioned the shaming, and of course I agree about that.

The other thing, IMO about time-outs as they are traditionally done, is that they are a *separation* from the parent. When a child is out of whack, misbehaving, in serious need of parenting, should we CONNECT or SEPARATE? I think my parenting is unreceivable if I am separating, and flows much better when I'm connected.

So, when my kids tantrum or go nuts, we can go sit down or whatever, but we just call it taking a break, and I stick around unless the kid wants to be alone.

Fwiw, this idea about staying connected with kids as a means to discipline - it's very powerfully articulated in Hold On To Your Kids by Gordon Neufeld. Amazing book. (Canadian version has two more chapters than US version, fwiw)


----------



## kiahnsmum (Oct 22, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *benjalo*

Fwiw, this idea about staying connected with kids as a means to discipline - it's very powerfully articulated in Hold On To Your Kids by Gordon Neufeld. Amazing book. (Canadian version has two more chapters than US version, fwiw)

Thanks so much benjalo, someone recommended this book to me a while ago and i had forgotton the the name and author, now i can get it


----------



## RaRa7 (Feb 29, 2004)

Teensy-
the episode I saw was definately an infant CIO


----------



## meemee (Mar 30, 2005)

the thing i dont like about supernanny is there is a rush thru the whole thing and then there is no transition period. if today someone was to come and separate my 2.75 year old and me - she would be totally devastated. she only knows cosleeping from day 1. i cant just march in and say no suddenly without preparing her at least for a couple of days.

one thing i wonder - if u find something that works for u does that mean it is right. is our children obeying the key thing. they could obey out of fear. the naughty 'whatever' is so disrespecting the child.

those parents already probably dont quite know how to parent. they need help. are they being given some sort of guidance where u take ur child's and parent's view in mind. what would seem more humane to me is if SN stepped in and said 'u know what, that is really extreme behaviour on part of ur son. maybe we should wait and try again later.' isnt that what we would have done? so u kinda take in teh parents needs and the childs needs too. and then make a judgement call. i remember seeing one of the moms being so upset with sleep training. u could see it on her face.


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *meemee*
one thing i wonder - if u find something that works for u does that mean it is right. is our children obeying the key thing. they could obey out of fear. the naughty 'whatever' is so disrespecting the child.

Yea, exactly. Because, you can't punish, strategize or manipulate a need out of a child. Yes, families get into bad habits (don't I know it :LOL) and habits can be changed but it needs to be done gradually and the family needs to understand how and why they got into the habit in the first place.


----------



## oldcrunchymom (Jun 26, 2002)

I haven't seen Supernanny, but I do watch Nanny 911. Nanny Deb is AP, IMO.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Pandora114*

I use time outs on my DD ONLY when she's tantruming and needs time to cool down so we can approach the problem with a calmer toddler.


So long as you are with the child, this is not punitive. It is helpful. Also commonly referred to here as a "time-in".

Quote:



Originally Posted by *vegmom*

If you talk to most adults who are going through a challenging situation - time outs are good. You get a chance to remove yourself from the situation and reflect. After calming down you can then reflect on the situation with less emotion.


Yes. A "time in" can be a great tool for a child. But note in your quote above you say "you GET a chance to remove YOURSELF". There is nobody forcing you to leave. There is nobody abandoning you. These are the differences between a "time in", which is WITH a parent and the parent does it to HELP the child calm down somewhat. And a "time out" which is a forced removal from the parent or situation to a place of isolation, with no guidance to the child while in that isolation.

What Supernanny does is absolutely in the "time out" category. Even if the "isolation" is a chair or mat. Who can argue that this is not completely punitive in nature?

Quote:



Also, one thing that has not been mentioned on this thread is that SN gives out warnings of bad behaviour. If this warning is ignored then time out is used.


This assumes the child is perfectly capable of stopping said behaviour on the basis of a verbal request. And if they do not it leads to the conclusion that they are "bad" and that only a negative stimulus can give them the motivation to stop. I don't follow any of that nonsense. Kids behave because of how they feel, and only by addressing their emotions and teaching them the skills to deal with them will children become able to express themselvs in healthy and socially acceptable ways.

Quote:



And what is wrong with having the child apologize for inappropriate behavior? Children that hit and bite should know that is bad and they should learn to apologize and make peace.


Richelle answered this beautifully.

Quote:



What would happen to society without rules? There has to be some kind of consequence. Without rules and consequences there would be chaos.


This tired old argument is based on the notion that people only engage in behaviours (good or bad) based on what they get out of it or not. Personally, the reason I don't break the law isn't because I'll be thrown in jail. It's because I think stealing is morally wrong and is hurtful to the victims. It's because I think speeding is unsafe and puts others (and myself) at risk. I work hard because I feel a responsivility to my coworkers and supervisors who depend on me, not for fear of being fired. I follow the Law because I have empathy for others, not for fear of punishment. The sad reason why society has rules and consequences?? - because some people have no internal motivation to behave. Ironically, it could very well be due to having punishment and reward as the only motivators from their own parents.

Quote:



Its human nature - Actions are based on gaining pleasure and avoiding pain. Thats it. Its simple.


mommyofshmoo answered this well. The book "Emotional Intelligence" is an excellent resource to explain just how incredibly complex human reactions to emotions are in terms of what the brain does, where in the brain that happens, and at what stage of development such brain centres become fully developed. A great argument against behaviourism.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *momcat*

We use time-outs with our 3.5 yo but only when he does something like hit someone.... We use them rarely, but when it feels like an important distinction.


How interesting that you feel using punishment to be "bringing in the big guns" for when there are behaviours that *in your opinion* are somehow "more severe" than others. So you perceive writing on the walls to be not quite deserving of punishment, yet hitting is. This not only suggest that you think punishment is more effective than non-punishment, but also that the child should somehow appreciate that not being able to control an impulse to colour on the walls is somehow "different" than not being able to control an impulse to hit. I don't buy it. I think punishment fails as a discipline tool, and as such would argue that it's even more important NOT to use it for "high stakes" behaviours.

Quote:



It's our job to help them figure out what makes them feel good (or not).


Are you suggesting that children are born without any innate ability to empathize? That there is no innate craving for parental approval? Are you saying that a child cannot feel bad for hitting without you stepping in to make them feel so? I disagree.

Quote:



Honestly, I don't think it's a problem for kids to feel ashamed of certain behaviours.


Except that the only way such a thing can happen is from within. When you impose shame on them, you make them feel ashamed of who they are, not what they did. And you put the focus on themselves, not the people they affected.

Quote:



Wouldn't you want your child to feel ashamed of stealing? Or cheating?


If you think you have the power to control your child's inner morality, their inner motivations, and how they perceive their own actions, you are sadly misguided. You can affect behaviour all you want, but you can never "make" a child feel empathy or regret or anything else (unless it's regret that they got caught).

Quote:



And we never tell him that HE is bad, or that we are disappointed in him, only that he needs some "thinking time" to decide what a better way to handle himself would have been.


So you think timeouts don't send the message that you are dissapointed in him and that he is bad? And when you tell him he needs time to "think" are you there helping him to learn how to problem solve? Or are you just waiting for him to come up with an answer of your choosing. If he "thinks" about it, and doesn't come to the same conclusion you do, what is your reaction?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Teensy*

They are children about age three and up who are mad that their mothers aren't laying down with them for hours at bedtime when the moms do not want to spend hours laying down with them at bedtime.


First of all, the episode I watched where the child was left to CIO in the dark while his mother _sat right next to his crib with her head down ignoring him_ was with a TWO year old. Secondly, how do you know the child was mad? Maybe they were scared or lonely or didn't want to sleep? There is no excuse for the downright cruelty of that horrible "solution". And one must ask what price has been paid by using it??


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Piglet68*
First of all, the episode I watched where the child was left to CIO in the dark while his mother _sat right next to his crib with her head down ignoring him_ was with a TWO year old. Secondly, how do you know the child was mad? Maybe they were scared or lonely or didn't want to sleep? There is no excuse for the downright cruelty of that horrible "solution". And one must ask what price has been paid by using it??

Also, anger is often just a more advanced stage of sadness. Kids can be sad because their needs aren't being met, and then become frustrated over their needs not being met, and then angry over their needs still not being met.


----------



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

Just stopping to bow down at the alter of Piglet!


----------



## kiahnsmum (Oct 22, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lckrause*
I haven't seen Supernanny, but I do watch Nanny 911. Nanny Deb is AP, IMO.

Wow, if shes AP then I should be up for an AP sainthood!

Does anybody have a link or something so we can have the ideals for Attachment Parenting cos it totally freaks me out that people think theres anything AP about these disgusting shows.


----------



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

From Attachment Parenting International:

8 Ideals for Infants
http://www.attachmentparenting.org/ideals.shtml

1. Preparation for Childbirth
2. Emotional Responsiveness
3. Breastfeed your Baby
4. Baby Wearing
5. Shared sleep and Safe Sleeping Guidelines
6. Avoid frequent and prolonged separations from your baby
7. Positive Discipline
8. Maintain balance in your family life

8 Ideals for School age children
http://www.attachmentparenting.org/idealschindex.shtml

1. Become knowledgeable about your child's development and cognitive levels.
2. Stay emotionally responsive.
3. Strive for optimum physical health.
4. Maintain a high-touch relationship.
5. Develop and maintain positive sleep routines.
6. Be present and available for your children.
7. Use positive discipline.
8. Maintain balance in your life.


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lckrause*
I haven't seen Supernanny, but I do watch Nanny 911. Nanny Deb is AP, IMO.

First, Supernanny's best day is much much worse than Nanny Deb from Nanny 911 on Nanny Deb's worst day. Still, I don't see Nanny Deb as being AP. You should watch Supernanny sometime for a comparison though.


----------



## RaRa7 (Feb 29, 2004)

Piglet-you're awesome!


----------



## kiahnsmum (Oct 22, 2004)

Thanks monkey's mom.

Can we all just say EMOTIONAL RESPONSIVENESS!


----------



## pippet (Aug 14, 2004)

What a great thread - and great arguments for each side too!

I've watched Supernanny just 2-3 times. The thing I always remember with tv shows is that with all the editing and spinning you never really know what's going on - but from what they're showing - yes it's true that most of the kids are bouncing off the walls berserko (or at least that's the clips they chose to show of them!) and the parents are clearly unhappy with their current techniques and the results therein. So obviously some sort of adjustment needs to happen.

I would never be the person that says that one way of parenting is absolutely the right way and no others should be used. I have 2 kids - and they are polar opposites and one brand of parenting or one stream of techniques will not work equally for both of them. I have learned that I have to adjust my parenting to their personality and the behavior in question.

I didn't find anything about SN to be totally offensive, off the wall or potentially damaging. I don't think her approaches will be effective or beneficial for every kid though either. They are better alternatives to spanking for certain. I can appreciate that she labels the behavior and not the child and that certain expectatons of behavior are appropriate (as they are in any stream of life at any age). I agree with what Angelbees said in the first couple pages of this thread on lots of points as far as that goes.

My dh and I have learned in marriage counseling that when things get heated that there are rules of engagement as far as appropriate behavior as well as times when both parties need to shut down the debate and separate and cool down and revisit it at another time. I think those points are totally legitimate and see no reason why the same priniciples scaled down to be kid-sized aren't also valuable. As children, as adults, we all need time to cool down and my mate and I need to learn when we should take our space and perhaps so should our kids.

When my 3 year old misbehaves I explain what was unacceptable as far as the behavior, she is involved in rectifying it (i.e. cleaning the crayon off the wall whether she wants to or not) and if a hideous tantrum ensues then she will take a time out in her room to vent out her rage at the perceived injustice of not being able to do whatever she wants without regard to other people or things (likewise when she hits her baby brother) and then she'll come back to finish the task - we talk about the whys and then because in the past she was told to apologize for hurting someone's feelings as a bridge to reconciliation and building up the relationship - she now apologizes on her own, showing her own repentent heart. (Obviously all of this is vocalized with words she understands).

So MHO is that that works for us and I don't see a problem with it and I suppose some of that would fall within SN's techniques. I also have a friend that initiated a naughty stair instead of spanking and that has worked wonders in her son. The rules in our house as far as respect and discipline are about how we'd want to be treated as human beings and also in line with the reality of how people are treated and how people should be treated as they grow into adults. If my kid steals a car there are punitive damages assessed and in our family there are always consequences for actions that kids know are wrong even though we seek the root or cause of it - and our consequences are gentler than most of society's but they are still there.
Some children are also easier to guide than others. The family's on this show are obviously at the end of their rope and desperate and of course they all look happy and in love by the end of the hour







so it's not all bad. But certainly lots of it is controversial and fodder for great debate as all of us try to just do the best thing for our kids and families.


----------



## Destinye (Aug 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AngelBee*
They are crying out for attention, but they need to also learn that bad behavior is not the healthy way to get the attentio that they are longing for. The parents also have to learn to be parents.....not victems (sp?) They are the reason their kids are out of control. They have to regain balance in there homes.

I do think the green Nanny 911 from Wales has really helped some kids she is very empathic and they TALK to her while most of the time the parents have no clue at all.

Definitely agree with most of the article but these parents do need serious help!


----------



## girlndocs (Mar 12, 2004)

It is very very frustrating to see that despite what the article in the OP pointed out about "reality shows", people _in this same thread_ are still discussing/defending SuperNanny as if it represents reality.


----------



## kiahnsmum (Oct 22, 2004)

:
Where Oh Where is SUPER-AP-NANNY!!!


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

I do not agree with time outs even for less than complacent children. I feel that they are bizarre and don't make any sense.


----------



## katallen (Jan 4, 2005)

I think the Supernanny and Nanny 911 concept is great. It targets a lot of families that don't have much parenting education and it gives them some information on things to do that will be better for their kids than spanking. While it would be wonderful if all families used GD, they don't and they never will but it is nice that a nanny is going on tv and giving the message that if a nanny can get good behavior out of a child without spanking or namecalling or worse than a parent should be able to do at least that if not better.

As to the AP thing, by the standards that Dr. Sear's has set for it which includes knowing your child and tailoring your discipline to your child, time-out starting at 18 months (extreme), and even spanking is considered okay if done in a loving environment (way to extreme for me).


----------



## sadie_sabot (Dec 17, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *katallen*
I think the Supernanny and Nanny 911 concept is great. It targets a lot of families that don't have much parenting education and it gives them some information on things to do that will be better for their kids than spanking. While it would be wonderful if all families used GD, they don't and they never will but it is nice that a nanny is going on tv and giving the message that if a nanny can get good behavior out of a child without spanking or namecalling or worse than a parent should be able to do at least that if not better.
.

I think my primary objectio to supernanny is that it prioritizes so called good behavior over the health of the family and the future health and well being of the child.


----------



## chicagomom (Dec 24, 2002)

My favorite quote about these reality parenting shows - the Piepers:

"Unfortunately, good parenting advice is probably not dramatic enough for TV, so parents will continue to be misled by programs like this one."

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
All of these people who think "time-outs" are bad obviously know nothing about parenting.

Quite a sweeping statement.

I hope you stay long enough to read some of the excellent resources here regarding time-outs. They don't work; withdrawing love is never a good solution to a child's behavior problem.

To start with, here's that nice Alfie Kohn thread
http://69.20.14.30/discussions/showthread.php?t=269724

Off site:

The Case Against Time Out http://www.naturalchild.org/guest/peter_haiman.html

The Disadvantages of Time-Out
http://www.awareparenting.com/timeout.htm


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
All of these people who think "time-outs" are bad obviously know nothing about parenting.

So you think the majority of this board know nothing about parenting? Maybe teh same could be said of you if you cannot think of reasons why time outs may be bad or gentle, effective alternatives.


----------



## sadie_sabot (Dec 17, 2002)

trshile, There are plenty of places to talk about hitting your child. this isn't one of them.


----------



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

Not that I don't think tashile isn't worth responding to directly, but I just want to clear up some things for any other moms reading who might be on the fence about gentle discipline (GD)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
When someone with these ridiculous rules ends up with a 14-year-old in juvenile hall because the child was never disciplined, we'll see how wonderful "just talking" is.

First of all, no one here advocates NEVER disciplining. Secondly, studies have shown that the majority of inmates and juvenile delinquents experienced some form of physical punishment. Zero percent report NEVER having physical punishment or "just talking."

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
Just talking to children doesn't get the message across.

Bull.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
My wife and I both use time-out. It works most of the time. The key is communicating the problem with punishing.

Time out IS punishing.

I won't even touch the spanking stuff, because it AGAINST THE USER AGREEMENT OF THIS SITE TO ADVOCATE IT. You're going to have to edit it out.


----------



## wasabi (Oct 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Piglet68*
Are you suggesting that children are born without any innate ability to empathize? That there is no innate craving for parental approval? Are you saying that a child cannot feel bad for hitting without you stepping in to make them feel so? I disagree.

Many of the GD books I have read do state that children are not born with innate empathy and that it's something that develops only over time around age 3 or so. That part of the reason kids hit is because they don't understand that it hurts the other person like they would be hurt if you hit them. My DD gets upset when my cat scratches her because she doesn't understand that she's hurting him by pulling his tail. One of the things that gets me through the day is the belief that she doesn't really realize that she's hurting me, DD #2 or whoever else. Every now and then I see glimpses of empathy developing. Are you saying that it's really there from the beginning and she's just choosing to bury it? Aren't empathy and desire for parental approval two separate issues?


----------



## Proudly AP (Jul 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
I read the same article. Alfie Kohn has all of the wrong advice and Jo Frost has all of the right advice.

you certainly are entitled to your opinion. i think if you take the time to delve further into this forum, you will find an abundance of well-informed parents, referring to well-researched papers and articles that outline the why's and wherefore's of gentle discipline.

the people here are working to raise their children conscious of the impact that so many of the 'standard' or 'mainstream' practices can have.

and, as someone above mentioned, advocating hitting is not allowed here. (regarding your other post).


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...26&postcount=1


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
This statement is wrong. The numbers you are mentioning relate to people convicted of violent crimes, not all crimes. I have a degree in psychology, specifically in criminal psychology. When I was in college, I did research in deviant behavior of juveniles. The survey targeted individuals who had been convicted of theft. Of those surveyed, most had experienced a great deal of love from their family. Of this same group, nearly 83% had never had an enforcement of rules. Their parents had simply tried to correct bad behavior by explanation. Had the parents of this group of adolescents actually disciplined their children, the majority would not have ended up in a detention facility. This principal has been statistically validated. Most criminals in detention today are there because they were never taught that there were consequences for their actions. Explaining consequences is not as effective has actually performing the action

P.S.

For the record, no where in the user agreement is there a ban against corporal punishment......even though you may wish it!

No, not in the user agreement, but the user agreement says each forum has individual rules, and one of the rules in this forum is no advocating corporal punishment. I gave you a link in my previous post.

Quote:

Please appreciate that this forum is not a place to uphold or advocate physical punishment of children. Personal preferences for and encouragement of use of physical punishment are inappropriately posted here. Posts of that nature will be edited by the member upon request or will be removed.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



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

First of all, as someone kindly pointed out to you there is clause on this forum that prohibits endorsing corporal punishment. When you agreed to the user agreement you agreed to this.

Also, there is a nice line about the PURPOSE of this forum:

Quote:

This forum has a specific aim: to help parents learn and apply gentle discipline methods in raising their children.
You are really speaking out of turn here with your condemnation of Gentle Discipline and now Attachment Parenting.

This is directly from the User Agreement:

Quote:

MDC serves an online community of parents and parents-to-be considering, learning, practicing, and advocating attachment parenting and natural family living. Our discussions on the boards are about the real world of mothering and are first and foremost, for support and information and Mothering invites you to read and participate in the discussions. In doing so we ask that you agree to respect and uphold the integrity of this community. Through your direct or indirect participation here you agree to make a personal effort to maintain a comfortable and respectful atmosphere for our guests and members. We have formed specific discussion guidelines and rules for maintaining a reciprocal and welcoming atmosphere for all discussion board participants.
So, why exactly are you here? Because so far you've only been insulting and disagreeable.


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

Welcome to Mothering, tashile. You seem to have a lot of concerns about AP parenting of children. Do you consider yourself an attachment-style parent?

You say, "From what I have read, the majority of AP parents go overboard and end up "smoothering" their children with love."

Where have you read this?


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

Thank you for the newsflash, tashile. Your tone seems quite disrepectful to the other members here.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

Ahh, tashile, I see where the misunderstanding is. Gentle Discipline is not a debate forum.

From the sticky on guidelines at the top of the forum:

"Welcome to Gentle Discipline. This forum has a specific aim: to help parents learn and apply gentle discipline methods in raising their children. "


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

The words "corporal punishment" are not used, but MDC defines gentle discipline as discipline that doesn't use corporal punishment, so the idea is certainly in the TOS.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
The words corporal punishment are not once used in the user agreement, so your point is wrong.

Listen, you're new and people are trying to point out the forum guidelines to you. Read them, please.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
As to your question, I am here to debate the pros and cons of AP/GD.

This isn't a debate board. But good luck with that.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
If you are so easily offended, perhaps you don't really know why you believe what you believe.

Perhaps.

Mostly I'm just annoyed by you.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

I believe this is the quote people are referring to when they bring up your advocacy of physical punishment:

"I disagree with spanking, however, there are times that this is the only way to get a child's attention. My daughter ran away from my wife and I in the mall. I caught her and smacked her bottom just once. She started wimpering and then looked at me. I explained why I had spanked her and why she shouldn't run off. Just talking to children doesn't get the message across. Anyone who thinks otherwise must have someone else raising their children. I perfectly understand that all children are different."

The statement there are times that spanking is the only way to get a child's attention could easily be read as advocating spanking.

Many here have found that there are many ways to get children's attention without punishing, physically or otherwise.


----------



## sadie_sabot (Dec 17, 2002)

Tashile, there is no shortage of places to debate wether attachment parenting and gentle discipline are meethods with merit. Like, most of the world, most parenting discussions, most playgrounds, most kitchen tables. This is not such a palce. This is a place to discuss HOW to attachment parent, and HOW to use gentle discipline. Clearly you are not here to learn about these concepts, just to annoy, bait, and disrespect those of us who are committed to these things, or working to learn about them.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

I believe Sadie summed it up nicely.

Peace to you and your family.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
Are you offended by the term debate...fine...I'll use the word discuss. Some have mentioned that they disagree with me. That is okay, we all don't have to agree.

Did you read the part of the UA that I posted? Do you not understand it? This is a place where AP parents can find support and people who are interested in AP can learn. It's not a place to come and tell people how wrong and stupid they are and how right you are. Especially with your first few posts. :LOL

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
However, I have read the posts and considered the point-of-view of others.

Can everyone else say the same?

Yes, we get posters like you pretty frequently. Most of us are very familiar with the criticisms of AP and GD. Trust me when I tell you that your input is not novel.


----------



## wasabi (Oct 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
At three, my daughter is incredibly independent. If she is hurt or upset, she still comes to my wife and I for comfort. However, in everyday situations, she wants to everything herself, because she wants to be a "big girl".

You have just described my DD to a tee and yet I do my best to use the AP style of childrearing. She is very attached to me but that is not the same as lacking independence. She is appropriately attached and independent. I on the other hand was raised with a lot of the sort of consequences you apparently advocate (including spanking and not having my feelings taken into consideration at all or in any way treated with respect by my parents) and codependent should have been my middle name until fairly recently (hell I probably still have a bit of a problem with it). I'd be very curious to actually see evidence that children who are lovingly parented actually grow up to be codependent. I'm not buying it myself.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



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

Take it up with Peggy O'Mara, the site's owner. YOU signed the User Agreement, don't cry foul when people call you on violating it.

People are generally intolerant of rudeness here.

There have been lots of polite dissenters here who have sparked wonderful discussions. You are not among them.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



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

:LOL Sarcasm's not allowed either.

This is fun!


----------



## sadie_sabot (Dec 17, 2002)




----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
I am not violating the user agreement in any way because as I mentioned, the words corporal punishment are used no where in it.

Do you have any reading comprehension? The user agreement states you must abide by each forum's individual rules, and this forum says no advocating or upholding corporal punishment, which you did by spanking is sometimes the only way to geta child's attention.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## Pigpen (Dec 12, 2002)

We prefer to be called Kohn-heads, not Kohnies, thanks. I've tried to not respond to this thread b/c of the way you have attacked, name-called, and how you have made such huge assumptions about thousands of us based on the fact that we don't like "Supernanny" (?!?) You have made the assumption that b/c most of us don't hit our children, we must be passive, uninvolved parents.

Quote:

My wife and I definitely respect our children. However, children have limited experience with life and do not know everything.
Good point...why would you not take the extra time to teach, teach again, re-teach if necessary (and with children it's always necessary). Take a watermelon and put it in the middle of the road, have your wife run over it with the car. Let you daughter watch. Talk about what you've just witnessed. Answer her questions and then...don't let her be responsible for her safety until she's OLDER! That's your job, not hers!
Punishment and discipline are different, do we agree on this? I discipline...punishment does NOT work. I was punished as a child and it made me; a. sneaky, b. mad at my parents, c. want to hit my little brother, d. jealous of my friend whose parents "just talked" to her. Being punished NEVER made me reflect on what I had done. It always made me wish I could do worse things to my parents. You have not listed a reference to any study that would support your belief that punishment creates good citizens. You have made the sweeping statement that _not_ punishing children is what fills prisons. It's hard to respond to something so ridiculous...


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
The forum is named Gentle Discipline. It doesn't say anywhere a thing about corporal punishment. You can't enforce rules that don't exist. Implying something does not make it a rule.

I'm sorry, but that has nothing to do with reading comprehension unless you're referring to reading between the lines


It apparently is a matter of reading comprehension because it most certainly says something about corporal punishment :

Quote:

Please appreciate that this forum is not a place to uphold or advocate physical punishment of children. Personal preferences for and encouragement of use of physical punishment are inappropriately posted here. Posts of that nature will be edited by the member upon request or will be removed.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
The forum is named Gentle Discipline. It doesn't say anywhere a thing about corporal punishment. You can't enforce rules that don't exist. Implying something does not make it a rule.

I'm sorry, but that has nothing to do with reading comprehension unless you're referring to reading between the lines


Quote:

Please appreciate that this forum is not a place to uphold or advocate physical punishment of children. Personal preferences for and encouragement of use of physical punishment are inappropriately posted here. Posts of that nature will be edited by the member upon request or will be removed.
Psst..."corporal punishment" and "physical punishment" mean the same thing.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom*
Psst..."corporal punishment" and "physical punishment" mean the same thing.


:LOL

Man I thought that was common knowledge. I am always overestimating people.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...&postcount=124


----------



## Pigpen (Dec 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
I never made a sweeping statement that not punishing is what fills prisons. Lack of discipline, however, is a key factor in this phenomenon

So, what are we talking about here? Did you notice this forum is called "Gentle *Discipline* "? Not, "Look the other way while your child roams the streets".
Have you really looked around this forum? Because I think you'll find that there are many other books/authors that get attention much the same as Kohn. He's just got a fairly new book out so there's gonna be more talk about him right now.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

Gentle Discpline does not mean no discipline, and I don't even like most of Kohn's stuff, but I still disagree with almost everything tashile has said.


----------



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

Dude. There are approximately 5 posts either directly quoting or linking to that exact thing!

My heavens...

So, what should his punishment be for not paying attention? Or realizing the severity of our words? Or not obeying us--b/c we have been here longer and are wiser? Oh, the possibilities abound. Anyone have their Wheel handy, that might help us come up with something good.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Once again, i am responding to trollish postings.







i am incurable, I suppose.

How about, if your toddler is running towards traffic, instead of grabbing him and smacking his little butt, you scoop him safely into your arms and cry "Oh, sweetie!! I was so scared you'd be hurt!" I think one's tears would have as great, or greater, an impact as a slap, but would more honesty express your feelings. So instead of thinking, "My Daddy hit me because i was bad" then think the truth- "My Daddy was so scared I'd get hurt. I don;t want to get hurt!"

What kind of horrible person beats on a kid who was just almost killed?
This 'safety' and 'running into the traffic' justification for hitting is just *so* tired already. Your kid is in danger, you swoop him into safety and tell him why you did. What is so dang hard about that?

I know batters of children would prefer to believe that those of us to do not hit our children are raising 'brats', but the statistics of those is prison, on drugs, as well as those who simply avoid their parents as adults, tell a different story.

Some folks simply can't face that respect begets respect. It would mess up your whole mindset about war and stuff.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## fullofgrace (Nov 26, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom*
Dude. There are approximately 5 posts either directly quoting or linking to that exact thing!

Actually geek that I am, I just counted. It was 15 posts that explained Mothering's stance on physical discipline and the rules of discussion.


----------



## sadie_sabot (Dec 17, 2002)

I had an avacado and cheese sandwich for lunch today.


----------



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

snerk! 15, huh? that's awesome!! must be some kind of record.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

I had a bagel with smoked salmon.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

deleted


----------



## wasabi (Oct 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
In my first example of being hit by a car, a parent doesn't have time to bring out diagrams and charts to explain why being hit by a car is not a good thing.

By what your telling me, I should respect my child's rights and feeling to stand in the middle of the road without giving her a justified explanation of why she should move.

On a daily basis, my wife and I talk to our daughter and explain why certain behaviors are bad. In an emergent or important situation there is not always time.

That is not at all what I am telling you. I'm saying grab your child out of the road and then give her the justified explanation of why she can't stand there rather than spanking her. What does spanking teach her in that scenario other than that when you are scared you hit her?

Oh and btw both my younger brothers were juvenile delinquints despite being regularly "disciplined" just as you would recommend.


----------



## sadie_sabot (Dec 17, 2002)

this morning I had an apple with some peanut butter.


----------



## wasabi (Oct 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Pigpen*
I was punished as a child and it made me; a. sneaky, b. mad at my parents, c. want to hit my little brother, d. jealous of my friend whose parents "just talked" to her. *Being punished NEVER made me reflect on what I had done. It always made me wish I could do worse things to my parents.*









Yes to all of this but especially the bold portion.


----------



## sagira (Mar 8, 2003)

Tashile, as an example about the street incident.. I taught my child since he could walk to stop and wait and hold my hand near a street. He's 23 months now and stops instinctively by the street (it has also become a habit) and proceeds with caution and watches for cars.

About a month ago I asked him what he thought would happen if a car hit us. He looked at me with a very serious face and solemnly, "Ow." That's the word he knows for hurt.

I don't only explain, but teach actively and myself set an example of reverence for the road. My son also knows to look left and right for cars and I ask him if it's safe to cross. It's actually been fun!

When it comes to statistics, anyone can use the data to support his/her beliefs.. yes, including Kohn. It's a matter of the heart and what you believe is right with your conscience.

I'm an aspiring psychologist and have read multiple books on the subject and have a minor in the field. I'm planning on going back to school to get my Master's degree.. or doctoral, not sure yet. In any case, here's a link to a research paper done that I like to use to support my beliefs









http://posdis.org/research/ResearchS...ommunities.pdf


----------



## AngelBee (Sep 8, 2004)

Sadie....share with me! I am hungry!!!


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Dinner was grilled tempeh and pasta.


----------



## sadie_sabot (Dec 17, 2002)

oooh, yum. I'm going to a movie tonight, so dinner might just be popcorn








:


----------



## girlndocs (Mar 12, 2004)

Funny how I never ONCE had to hit my now 6-yo to teach him to stay out of the street. Funny how my toddler is now learning the exact same thing (as well as avoiding hot things like BBQ grills) without ever ONCE being hit either. ETA: or otherwise punished.

Now you're going to backpedal and imply that my kids must somehow not represent the norm, but I guarantee you there are dozens and dozens of parents here who will tell you the exact. Same. Thing. about their kids.

What was that phrase I read a while back? Oh yes. "I appreciate your effort to bring a different viewpoint to this discussion. Next time please try to ensure it is one grounded in reality."


----------



## meemee (Mar 30, 2005)

oooh sadie, so am i. i am going to go watch batman at the 10 pm show while my dd gets to hang out with daddy. so for the first time in almost 3 years i will be going to a movie theater. so popcorn will probably be my dinner too.


----------



## fullofgrace (Nov 26, 2002)

Mmmmm... must go make







:


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

I had tacos for dinner and blueberry peach panna cotta for dessert.


----------



## Proudly AP (Jul 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
Are you saying that you disagree with punishing a child? Because this why so many children are becoming deviants.

sadly (or not







) i don't have much time to be here these days.

if you are a psychologist, then i expect that you know that there clearly is a difference between 'punishment' and 'discipline'. those of us here believe in discipline, not puinishment.

there are myriad reasons and factors (as i suspect you would also be aware) that contribute to the society we live in today, and how it differs from days gone by. one might argue that the *extreme* use of violence, shaming, shunning, disrespecting children and babies, ignoring their needs/cries/ communication etc, could be among the _roots_ of the 'deviance' you mention.

i know that someone has very valid points about this old argument about AP, but i don't recall who it is at this moment.

ETA: okay, okay, i'm off to have some canadian maple ice cream (mmmmm)


----------



## member (Apr 15, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *the_lissa*
I had tacos for dinner and blueberry peach panna cotta for dessert.

Why no invite for me? That sounds awesome.

I've been eating mad amounts of Taco Bell since the boycott ended. Taco Bell and Alfie Kohn books are linked for me now.


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

Next time Selu









I missed a taco bell boycott?


----------



## mamadawg (Jun 23, 2004)

the Taco Bell boycott is over?!?

Where in the bleep have I been?


----------



## Victorian (Jan 2, 2003)

pocket sandwiches for dinner here. it's freakin' hot.

if you are not just a troll, and in fact decide to stick around, I hope that your next attempted in a thread acknowledges that 100% of the women here are intelligent. More than a few of us are educated and can read statistics. IN FACT at least one of us works in statistics every day. Some of us here are *experts* in parenting, have degrees and some advanced degrees in the social sciences. I'd wager that none of us here are impressed with your creds. All of us have made the decision to parent the way that we have based on many factors, none of which include being idiots.

You might want to read the UA again, this time sober.

Victorian


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

I think I am going to cry...a 'GD' thread turrned







into a cooking thread.









OK-- First I sauteed thinly sliced onion in olive oil until soft. I sprinkled it with a *tiny* bit of sea salt. Then I added a teeny bit more olive oil and a crushed garlic clove. Cook until you can smell the *sweet* aroma of garlic. I then added tempeh cut into bite sized pieces and sauteed that until browned. When there was some sticking in the bottom of the pan, I added a half cup of wine and deglazed the pan, picking up all the stuck bits of tempeh, garlic and onion.

I then added two cups of chopped tomatoes & it's liquid to heat through ( you can go ahead and add a large can of stewed tomatoes if you want. Quite yummy).

Add 1 lb drained penne pasta the tomatoes, onion, tempeh and garlic mixture. Stir and heat through. You can add grated cheese if you wish. Salt & pepper to taste.

I served it with sourdough bread, and a big green salad (avo, cucs. tomatoes & sprouts) , tossed with olive oil, sea salt & fresh pepper, and red wine vinegar.

Delish.


----------



## Rainbow Brite (Nov 2, 2004)

I'm so lazy I ate one meal today. The rest was snacks. And it was a cheap meal- pasta, how hard is that?


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

Okay confession time. dd1 is a bit clingy today, so dp and the kids dropped me at work. The afternoon another ap/nfl family called and invited them to go to this warehouse size place with those giant inflatable bouncing things...loud techno music in the backround. They stayed for *two hours.* They picked me up and we went with the same ap/nfl family to "Golden Corral" for the all-you-can-eat buffet. dd2 ate her weight in mashed potatoes.

We came back and the used copy of Shrek 2 I bought off vegsource was here. dd1 watched about 1/2 of it.

I like the cooking thread!


----------



## annab (Mar 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
Humans are naturally selfish.

I am sorry that you have to live with such a dim view of humanity.


----------



## Victorian (Jan 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UUMom*
I think I am going to cry...a 'GD' thread turrned







into a cooking thread.









OK-- First I sauteed thinly sliced onion in olive oil until soft. I sprinkled it with a *tiny* bit of sea salt. Then I added a teeny bit more olive oil and a crushed garlic clove. Cook until you can smell the *sweet* aroma of garlic. I then added tempeh cut into bite sized pieces and sauteed that until browned. When there was some sticking in the bottom of the pan, I added a half cup of wine and deglazed the pan, picking up all the stuck bits of tempeh, garlic and onion.

I then added two cups of chopped tomatoes & it's liquid to heat through ( you can go ahead and add a large can of stewed tomatoes if you want. Quite yummy).

Add 1 lb drained penne pasta the tomatoes, onion, tempeh and garlic mixture. Stir and heat through. You can add grated cheese if you wish. Salt & pepper to taste.

I served it with sourdough bread, and a big green salad (avo, cucs. tomatoes & sprouts) , tossed with olive oil, sea salt & fresh pepper, and red wine vinegar.

Delish.

will someone PLEASE tell me what is tempeh? I hear of it but have no knowledge.....


----------



## mamadawg (Jun 23, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annab*
I am sorry that you have to live with such a dim view of humanity.









Me too. I can't imagine going through life with such a bleak outlook on the human experience.


----------



## mamadawg (Jun 23, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Victorian*
will someone PLEASE tell me what is tempeh? I hear of it but have no knowledge.....


V,

There's this new thing called Google...


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

http://www.tempeh.info/


----------



## mamadawg (Jun 23, 2004)

Don't enable her, lissa.


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

Ooops. Is there a twelve step program for google resisters?


----------



## Victorian (Jan 2, 2003)

shut up! Spankings all around. That is the only way that you will learn (women have short memories you know)

MamaDawg - do I need to call your keeper and tell on you????

V.


----------



## Victorian (Jan 2, 2003)

BTW - I am not google impaired...in fact I am searching for the Feminiation of Poverty RIGHT NOW....back to work...

V.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
Are you saying that you disagree with punishing a child? Because this why so many children are becoming deviants. How would you make a child understand the possibility of being crushed by a car? Because a child is usually not going to have this experience to be able to make an informed decision a method has be adopted to help keep it from happening.

In addition, I tend to not believe parents who say they never have to discipline their children. These are the parents that usually have brats that they are actively not-raising.


You seem to have totally mixed up the concepts of punishment and discipline.

Punishment is not necessary to raise wonderful, well behaved, respectful children.

I have three, all over the age of 8. None have ever been "punished". I get constant comments about how wonderful, polite, respectful etc.. they are. My middle dd won an award this year for having excellent character.
I tell you this not to "brag" but to show you that punishment is simply unecessary. In fact, I believe that it is immoral.

You can give me any scenario and I will tell you how I handle it WITHOUT punishment.

As for your 'not getting crushed by a car' scenario, I am not sure I understand. When my children were too little to understand the dangers of cars, I kept them at my side so that they could not get hurt. No punishment was involved. If you mean, what would I have done if they had broken away from me when there was a dangerous situation, I would have gone after them quickly and explained in a very serious voice that they must not do this because they could be harmed. When children are spoken to respectfully on an ongoing basis they pay very close attention to a low serious voice. But if cars were truly so close that I did not have even a minute to get to them, I made sure there was no way that this could happen.


----------



## Victorian (Jan 2, 2003)

so Maya --- how many of them have been hit by cars? how many times?

V.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Victorian*
so Maya --- how many of them have been hit by cars? how many times?

V.


Umm, none, because I never let them even get near a car. (And you are kidding right?)


----------



## annab (Mar 25, 2003)

One troll and so many generous mamas with extra troll food to share :LOL

OK, I am committed. I WILL try tempeh this week. Look at me, taking on my fears of new food!


----------



## Jessica36 (Oct 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tashile*
As I mentioned before, children do not instinctively care what their parents think. Humans are naturally selfish. To think that a child is going to stop a behavior because the parent is emotional seems strange to me.

As far as statistics go, I've read them. I also know how to correctly interpret statistical data. I can take any data given about the subjects you mentioned and reinterpret it in a manner that makes you wrong. It is all a matter of how the sample is taken and how it is computed.

Spanking a child is not the same as beating a child.

I didn't say not spanking equals a brat. I did, however, mention that lack of discipline can lead to a child who is a brat


So I have no psychology degree, but while "humans are naturally selfish." And "To think that a child is going to stop a behavior because the parent is emotional seems strange to me."

Are you sure you have kids? No offense while my boys tend to push limits, to test their boundries, they also desire to please me. Not in an odd sense, but if I am disappointed in them, they now it. Explaining to them, when you cry cause mommy tells you no popiscle and you feel sad, that's how mommy feels when you don't listen. Yes it is guilt, but it teaches how to use emotions, and not fear to teach a child.

I "remember" my parents disapline, usually involved a belt, I don't want my children to FEAR me but respect me. Are my boys brats sometimes, but you know what my neighbor is so far off the spectrum of respecting their kids and I know they use spanking, but their kids are brats, because they don't respect them, they fear them if they don't run fast enough. They "discipline" them, but they don't listen to them to see what is going on, hence we got 3 "brats" running around unless grandma and grandpa yell at them, because they respect them. Big difference.

Hope to see a response tomorrow when you get back to work!


----------



## mamadawg (Jun 23, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Victorian*
MamaDawg - do I need to call your keeper and tell on you????

V.

:yawning:

go ahead, babe. It won't make much of a difference. My keeper is a cheating oink oink.









I had lots of candy for pre-dinner (yes, I'm PMSing, shoot me







) and peanut butter toast for dinner. It's too bloody hot to cook.


----------



## mamadawg (Jun 23, 2004)

Mmmm....eggs.









Ayn Rand. uke


----------



## sadie_sabot (Dec 17, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraeileen*
Edited to add: I will add that she gets extremely upset lately by anthropomorphized foodstuffs in songs -i.e. on top of spaghetti...lost my poor meatball when somebody sneezed...also the chant about the peanut on the railroad tracks, 5:15 Peanut butter. Have I damaged her for life?









:LOL


----------



## flyingspaghettimama (Dec 18, 2001)

What happened to my post??

I guess I'll go eat some more tempeh.


----------



## tashile (Aug 2, 2005)

Hi everyone,

I want to apologize to everyone I have offended, spoken down to or otherwise. It was never my intention to do any of this. I should know better by now than to get involved in online forums. I am not a "troll" as several of you have mentioned in your posts.

Even though I may not necessarily agree with everyone, I have learned something from most of you. That is the reason I came to the site. I had done a search and found the thread about the "Supernanny" and it caught my attention. You may not believe me, but I never meant to be deliberately hostile or rude to anyone. I'm much better in person. Its difficult to fullly express myself on a thread such as this.

My basic belief with child-rearing is this. If your children are well-behaved, well-adjusted and free to express themselves, you must be doing something right. You may not agree with all of my methods and I may not necessarily agree with all of yours, but what we are all looking for are physically and mentally healthy children.

I know I love my children as much as all of you or we wouldn't be here in the first place.

I will be watching the forum from time to time to look at some of the good techniques you have mentioned (My wife and I love the idea about using a watermelon for an illustration...thank you). However, I will not be posting any more. I have a tendency to post replies like I have over the past few days and I don't want to treat people in the manner that I have. Thank you for your patience.

I will be deleting all of my other posts.

I'm very sorry if I annoyed and/or hurt anyone's feelings.


----------



## babybugmama (Apr 7, 2003)

I'm on dial up at the moment so forgive my scattered responses (too much time and a swiss cheese brain means things I want to say slip away through the holes :LOL)

Can we please refrain from the food talk? I understand (and totally respect) it is an effort to lighten the mood, but can we please keep it on topic. Also, please refrain from calling individuals trolls, inappropriate posts should be reported rather than posting to imply someone is a troll or trolling.

Tashile - I value your willingness to listen and to accept responsibility for your posts. As many have pointed out we do not condone discussions of physical/corporal punishment/spanking etc.


----------



## ExuberantDaffodil (May 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Benji'sMom*







"if high-quality, low-cost daycare _were_ available." That type of bad grammar is not acceptable in this house! Now go sit on the naughty stool, Alfie.









Aww... but he was actually being good!

The word IF signals the subjunctive tense of the sentence. In subjunctive tense, the past tense singular verb is the same word as the past tense plural verb. For example, If I _were_ a rich man" from Fiddler on the Roof. As apposed to "when I _was_ a little girl..." which is not subjunctive. Words that signal subjunctive include the aforementioned If, and also wish and hope, to name a few.

_I wish the man I met *were* Prince Charming... If he *were*, I would marry him._ <--- example of subjunctive sentence.

(*sigh* I am a college English instructor and grammar nerd extraordinaire....)
:LOL


----------



## pinklucy (Jul 8, 2005)

It seems like a long time since this thread was about SuperNanny but I wanted to comment on that.

I live in the UK where this show originated and I confess to being a SuperNanny addict. The really frightening thing is that I had never questioned her methods until I read this post! I've been reading parenting magazines and watching shows like this for 10 years and I just assumed this was the way you raise kids. Then I had my baby boy and within weeks I knew that something was wrong. How could anyone leave a baby to cry? I found out about Attachment Parenting and haven't looked back.

The scary thing is that I am an educated intelligent person. I'm never led by the crowd and usually critique anything and everything mainstream, but I allowed myself to be spoonfed this rubbish! I feel really guilty for things I have put my nephews and niece through based on this kind of advice. My younger sister was young when she had her kids and looked up to me and I advised her to do all this stuff! I've apologised to her recently.

If I can be brainwashed by this stuff it must be pretty powerful! The only good I can see in it is that the way I've seen some people parent is 10 times worse than SuperNanny - these people will never come round to AP but they might at least learn alternatives to yelling at and hitting their kids. I just feel ashamed that I used to buy into all that stuff!! Thank God for places like this which can help me learn.


----------



## Maria'sMom (Jun 24, 2005)

Jeepers Creepers!
Why is it that every thread I go to on every parenting board I find people getting upset at eachother over silly things. It's a TV show! and I know this may seem offensive, and people are going to get mad, but it's just parenting! The philosophies of it change every year pretty much and every generation survives! It saddens me to see so much name calling and hurt feelings over something that shouldn't be such a big deal.

As for Supernanny et al...it's TV, and if people get ideas on how to raise their kids from it, so what...you fail to realize that many parents out there still spank their kids...so in my opinion this may be a good show to get some pointers from! Yes, supernanny isn't with the family for the long haul, but I think she gives the parents some tools that they can use. No one is going to agree with everything she says but then again noone is going to agree with everything I do, or my mom did or any other mom or dad on this board. So let's be nice and remember that loving is what's important not the little things like wheather or not someone agrees with co-sleeping or letting a baby cry it out.
Sorry for ranting, but I am visiting different boards and reading various threads, and some of the things said in this thread make the world of parents seem like a hostile environment!


----------



## Plummeting (Dec 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Maria'sMom*
Jeepers Creepers!
...it's just parenting! The philosophies of it change every year pretty much and every generation survives!

So let's be nice and remember that loving is what's important not the little things like wheather or not someone agrees with co-sleeping or letting a baby cry it out.

Parenting should never be considered "just parenting". It is the most important, meaningful thing a person can ever do. It doesn't matter if the "in" thing this year isn't the "in" thing next year. There are right and wrong ways to treat babies and children. Shaming children by sitting them on a "naughty mat" when they do something you don't like is wrong. Leaving a baby to cry it out is wrong. Both of those things are disrespectful to the child or baby as a human being. CIO and the other horrid, disrespectful things recommended on this show are not "little things". Furthermore, I don't want my daughter to just "survive". Hell, my mother treated me like crap - she called me names, told me I was stupid, etc. And yet, look at me - I survived. By your estimation, that would mean that she did a fine job. I want my daughter to thrive, to succeed, to feel loved and to be able to give love - not just survive.

I'm sorry, but in my honest and not-so-humble opinion, it is sentiments exactly like yours that allow people to continue mistreating their children. You think everyone should just do whatever (s)he wants to and no one should interfere or tell them there is a better way - that we should all just accept everything every other parent does. Well I disagree. I don't go around telling other parents how they should parent, but I'm not going to sit back and think that whatever they do is just fine. If someone asks me, I'm going to tell them there are better ways to treat children. I'm going to make sure my daughter knows that there is a right and a wrong way to treat human beings - whether they are children or adults. You can't change the world with an "everything's okay as long as you don't do it to me" attitude.


----------



## wasabi (Oct 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Richelle*
Parenting should never be considered "just parenting".

My thoughts exactly!


----------



## Maria'sMom (Jun 24, 2005)

I am just saying that it shouldn't be taken so seriously that it causes bad feelings between parents. Yikes! You did illustrate my point exactly:there are so many children who suffer abuse, maybe we should focus on that as being wrong as opposed to focusing on someone who's ideas differ slightly from yours. I think it's very mis-guided to think that one parent's way of parenting is the best or the be all and end all of parenting. And yes, I do think those things are unimportant...a lot of people believe in using the 'naughtly mat' because their children beat the crap out of eachother and that's the only thing that works for them! I think that you should spend less time 'shaming' other parents...if you don't 'shame' your children but 'shame' other adults what message does that send to them? No parents are going to be the same so why do we have to criticize each other? This sucks....I guess my question is...are all parents on this board catty, critical and 'holier than thou'?
Is everyone just going to argue about semantics...like how I said 'just parenting' or are we going to talk about how out of control we have gotten about pushing our lifestyles on others? So many people are very 'preacy' about their chosen life-style, maybe I'm just stereotypical Canadian, but it makes me uncomfortable to be met with a 'my-way-or-the-highway" approach! I don't hit or abuse my children, but I do parent in a different style, this does not make me a bad parent. I love my kids and do what feels right, I don't like being 'shamed' and I've seen a lot of that on this board.


----------



## laralou (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Maria'sMom*
I guess my question is...are all parents on this board catty, critical and 'holier than thou'?


Quote:


Originally Posted by *Maria'sMom*
I don't like being 'shamed' and I've seen a lot of that on this board.

It is beyond impolite to come to a board and immediately start bashing the members who disagree with you. It is also against the UA.


----------



## Plummeting (Dec 2, 2004)

No, I did not illustrate your point. I took examples that you called unimportant and stated that I *do* think they are important, as do many of the other mothers here.

Furthermore, I do not *ever* go around "pushing my lifestyle on others". I clearly stated that! I do not tell other parents that I think they are doing things wrong and I do not shame other parents! I don't discuss how I think things should be done unless someone asks me. However, if someone asks me if I think they should continue to let their baby CIO, I *refuse* to say, "Oh whatever works for you is just fine, dear." No way. I would say, "Actually, there has been a lot of research that shows this is _not_ good for babies. I can share it with you any time you like. And I can also introduce you to lots of people who can give you other tools for helping your baby get to sleep and for helping you feel more rested." Where is the shaming in that? I would not be setting a bad example for my daughter by doing that! I would be setting a good example - I would be teaching her how to stand up for what is right even when everyone else disagrees.

I also find it interesting to see you say that *you* do not like feeling shamed, right after you stated that using a "naughty mat", which is a tool designed specifically to shame children, is an acceptable disciplining technique. Why do you feel that it is okay to shame children, but not adults? Why do you feel that it is setting a bad example to my daughter to teach her that there are right and wrong ways to treat children, but it is okay to shame her into doing what I want her to do? Your example of children beating each other up and the "naughty mat" being the only thing that worked....If it's the only thing that works, those parents haven't tried everything. Period. Shaming children and withdrawing love from them is *never* the best way to discipline.

I know you seem to have gotten the impression that people who are critical of certain parenting practices simply wish to impose their exact form of parenting on everyone else, but this isn't the case at all. We are coming from a place in our parenting lives where we have done a *lot* of research on things and have decided what things are and what things are not a proper way to treat children. No one here is arbitrarily saying, "I think all children should be fed a potato everyday" or something else that has no import. We are stating the researched facts. Did you read the article that sparked this whole thread? There is a lot of research to show that time out is hurtful to chidren and doesn't help them learn to do better. The parents here are discussing factual research, which proves that there are better ways to treat children. I believe that most parents would *want* to know about these ways. Yes, it may be painful at first to hear that something you (general you, not you personally) is not good for your child, but how much better would the world be if we could all embrace the truth and move forward, rather than stubbornly digging in our heels and deciding that we aren't going to let anyone tell *us* how to do anything?


----------



## Maria'sMom (Jun 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Richelle*
Furthermore, I do not *ever* go around "pushing my lifestyle on others". I clearly stated that! I do not tell other parents that I think they are doing things wrong and I do not shame other parents! I don't discuss how I think things should be done unless someone asks me.

Well, I didn't ask...I was just wondering how opinions get so out of hand that someone gets called a troll, that's all. I just wish people could get along, I know that I'm not helping by generlizing and calling people catty, etc, but I don't understand. BTW, I happen to agree with your philosophies Richelle, I just find some people on this board to be a bit harsh to those who don't. Remember, there are 'reputable' sources to support every theory and I have read the article that started the thread and many other parenting articles as well. I am also a teacher, not uneducated or uninterested in early childhood behavior. I don't like being labled 'the kind of person that...'when I was just wondering why people are so serious they are willing to bash and call people trolls. In a typical Canadian way I was trying to see why people fight so much on webboards and I got dragged into one of my own! Gosh, the internet is evil- so impersonal and easy to type the first thing that comes into your head when your feelings are hurt! But, I'm done now, I just wanted you to know that CIO etc are not my philosophies, just examples of what I've seen on the board. Ah well


----------



## BusyMommy (Nov 20, 2001)

OMG great article! Perfect! I'd love to print & frame it for some "friends."

Hmmm...didn't know there was an Alfie Kohn thread.


----------



## Plummeting (Dec 2, 2004)

Oh! Maria'smom, I had no idea you were talking about the whole "troll" thing. I wasn't involved in that part of the thread, so I had forgotten all about reading it a few days ago. Now I can see why you might have the ideas you do...The poster that some were calling a troll came in with his fists raised. You didn't get a chance to read his posts, because he had to delete them since they violated the UA. In his very first post, he said that Alfie Kohn was stupid and we were all stupid as well. He said that kids today were in juvenile detention because they weren't spanked. He said that people who didn't punish their kids were not intelligent, yadda yadda. THAT is why people were calling him a troll - he came in and insulted every one of us and made uneducated statements that don't fit with the philosophy of this forum. It isn't because people simply disagreed with him or wanted to force their opinions on him - not at all! It's because he came in and tried to force *his* opinion on everyone else and then said everyone who didn't agree was basically an ignoramous. (As you can see in his (tashile) last post, I believe he changed his mind.)

Without knowing all the rude and misguided things that man said, I can see where you might think the mothers who responded to him were being rude themselves. That simply wasn't the case.


----------



## BusyMommy (Nov 20, 2001)

Wow...see what happens when you're AWOL. It is really tough when the trollish posts are removed b/c then all the reference posts are out of context and the thread seems unbalanced.

I do think GD can be more controversial than the other forums, though. I'm a somewhat reformed lurker here







due to that. :LOL


----------



## Victorian (Jan 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya44*
Umm, none, because I never let them even get near a car. (And you are kidding right?)

wanted to quickly explain to you why I said this....the person that was on here stirring the you-know-what said that the only effective way to keep children from running into the street was to hit them the first time they tried (so if you didn't do that I was asking how many times they had been hit--my attempt at humor). Hope that explains it


----------



## mumof2andttc (Sep 11, 2005)

I agree with AngelBee. I do like Supernanny. But not because I think she is always right, but because it makes me laugh when I see these families and it makes me think, " how on earth have you let your children get this naughty and disrespectful". I also watch nanny 911 and I think the same with them too. I have 2 children age 2 + 6 and they are complete angels compared to the children who appear on these programmes. I wouldn't stand for any of the







the parents put up with but I do think a lot of it is down the parents being too soft. I am shocked







at some of the behaviour from these children on these shows and I feel very lucky to have such good children. Some of the language that comes out of the mouths of these children is usually down to the parents speaking that way. It just goes to show, children learn from their parents and so the parents are responsible for their children's actions.

Anyway, this is just my opinion and so you might not agree with me but that's what I think.


----------



## MrsMoe (May 17, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AngelBee*
I did read the article. Twice.

I still like her. The parents that they show are spineless. Children spitting, hitting, swearing, etc. need the consistency and attention show by Spuernanny.

They are crying out for attention, but they need to also learn that bad behavior is not the healthy way to get the attentio that they are longing for. The parents also have to learn to be parents.....not victems (sp?) They are the reason their kids are out of control. They have to regain balance in there homes.


I must admit, I tend to agree. Supernanny and Nanny 911 are very against yelling and hitting. They ask the parents to be loving with their kids, to do things as a family, for dads to pitch in more around the house andrespect mom's hard work, they say when you speak to a child get down to their level instead of talking "down to them."

They do use time out - which I don't use - but these children are so out of control and already being yelled at and spanked perhaps this time out is a better solution for this need. I don't have to use time outs because my daughter was never a little tazmanian devil. :LOL It's so easy to say to a parent do it my way, and my way is the only way (no time outs) but in reality that may not work for kids who have been allowed to run the house and do as they please for so long. Beating up their siblings, hitting mom and dad, destroyign the house, spitting, and other seriously rude behavior.

The thing that disappoints me the most is that the children on these shows have gotten to that level of desperation in the first place. I feel really sorry for the kids.


----------



## avivaelona (Jun 24, 2005)

Just wandering off topic for a minute because someone typed this word

Quote:

responsivility
I think it was just a typo but I wanted to point it out because I think it should be a word! A cross between responsibility and civility, its perfect.

I have watched supernanny and I have mixed feelings about it. On one hand I really hate the "naughty corner" and the extreme rigidity of her pronouncements. I detest the idea of forcing a child to apologize in order to receive a hug and a kiss. However, when I listen in to the talk on some of my more mainstream boards I hear exactly the kind of stories that supernanny shows...(edited or not, those situations do exist) Kids totally out of control, and in control of their parents, with parents that go back and forth between complete permissiveness and severe punishments. Kids that are so incredibly stressed from not being heard and being forced into testing the limits all the time just to find them, kids that have no idea what respect from a parent would even look like. I work with children that have been smacked plenty but at the same time have never been truly disciplined and they are a mess...seriously disturbed and anti social and a danger to themselves and others.

When I look at it from that perspective I guess I feel like at least supernanny is better than that. I hate that it is seen as a better alternative than gentle discipline but I love that it is being seen as a better alternative than smacking your kid and then buying him a TV for his bedroom because you feel guilty. I guess I wish that SN was the worst method of child rearing around because then I would rail against it with everyone else, but I've seen worse and I've seen the results of worse







I think we might be forgetting how incredibly prevalent that style of discipline actually is, where time out is truly and improvement.

Aviva


----------

