# what is wrong with punishment and consequences, generic answers?



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

I am deleting all my posts.


----------



## PikkuMyy (Mar 26, 2004)

What you have described are natural consequences. I think that most people here are against arbitrary consequences or punishments that don't relate to the inappropriate behavior.


----------



## Mothra (Jun 4, 2002)

We use natural consequences and logical consequences, which can be a bit contrived but are not arbitrary and random. For example, today my son pushed another little girl on the playground. She cried and ran away. If I hadn't observed the altercation, there would have been no negative consequence at the time-- my son would have been glad that she went home because she was annoying him. I went outside and brought him and told him that he was showing me that he needed some time to himself to cool off and could go back outside after he'd calmed down. Not really a natural consequence, but a logical one in my opinion. There was no shaming, no yelling, just time to cool off.

I think that PikkuMyy is right-- most people here are against arbitrary or illogical consequences. For example, if you don't put away your toys you are grounded. That doesn't really make sense to a kid because the two things are not related.

But you're right, there are some people who don't believe in imposing consequences at all and those people will have to speak for themselves.


----------



## dalbert (Oct 16, 2002)

Most of the examples you list are natural consequences; the action prompts the consequence regardless of any action by you, the parent. I think most everyone agrees that natural consequences are an excellent learning tool for children. What's up for debate are the consequences that are enforced by parents, which may be construed as punitive (whether that is your intention or not).

In my own experience with my dd, the threat of a punitive consequence (or of not receiving some kind of good thing) can often times get her to do or not do what I want...so that might be considered very effective. However, is it effective in the long run in directing her to do the right thing because it's the right thing, not because she will suffer some enforced consequence? And will she continue to do the right thing when no one is watching? And how do I respond when she starts giving consequences back to me? And, most disturbing, how do I get her to stop being so hard on herself over little things because she thinks she needs to give herself a consequence when I don't do it. All of these issues are what has led me to consider alternate approaches to consequences. Still, I believe there are scenarios where a consequence has it's place. (Tonight, despite cries to stop me, I removed from the counter the bottle of essential oils/herbs that we use for dd's teeth when I found her drinking it). However, I think we should have many other tools at hand so that the consequence approach is not routine, but instead utilized only when it's really necessary.

All that said, I'm all for following your instincts. We know our own children best and if it feels right, it probably is right for them.


----------



## Mothra (Jun 4, 2002)

I certainly believe that each kid is different so every parent much choose their own approach, that is to say that different families that follow the same philosophy will use different techniques. I know that with each of my children we use different techniques. My middle child, the one involved in the scenario I described above, needs much more directed guidance than my oldest does.


----------



## mommyofshmoo (Oct 25, 2004)

There is a distinction between discipline and punishment. I don't really do punishment anymore, but I'm working harder than ever on discipline.

Example- if dd won't share with another child, I point out to her how unhappy that child looks and how maybe we should find another toy for the other kid to play with. If dd resists, I simply find another toy for the other kid. So there's teaching, modeling. (When I did this recently, after the playdate, my dd expressed regret to me that she hadn't shared, and we took the opportunity to reflect on how we found a good solution and how we might find a better solution next time.)

Other example- we went to a dance class and dd was not participating. I wouldn't have cared normally, but her friend was taking cues from her and between the two of them they were being disruptive in a way. So I picked her up and gently took her outside. I told her "it makes people uncomfortable when some people don't participate. If you don't want to participate, we should wait out here or go home. Dd said she'd like to go back and participate, and we did. (This is more consequence-like, but I see it as teaching and not allowing behavior that I am not able to accept at the moment.)

There's lots of other examples, but you get my gist.

I feel that punishments draw attention away from people kids hurt or the situation at hand. It makes kids focus on their own feeling of hurt and anger at parents. It makes something that was about, say, safety, and turns it into a struggle between child and parent.

I don't let my kid do things that are flately unsafe, or to hurt others.

As for consequences, my dd is not quite three, so not really able to judge the consequences of her actions yet. I feel like natural consequeces are great for learning- but work better as teaching tools than punishments. When dd didn't want to wear anything other than sundresses in winter I decided to let her. It took a while before she asked for a coat (because I had made it into struggle), but she did eventually ask for one. And in the future, she asked for one faster each time she felt cold. Now she sometimes takes my word for it that it's cold before we go out the door. (A natural consequence, such as making her STAY cold because she disobeyed me would IMO be punative, and even distract from the teaching opportunity.)

Sorry for the long post. Hope you catch my meaning!


----------



## Jen123 (Mar 16, 2004)

punishment: I saw you hit the dog. You are going to be grounded from tv for the rest of the week.

discipline: I saw you hit the dog. I know the dog took your toy and I know you're angry , but we handle anger differently than that. We don't hit animals or people. It hurts them. We need to show respect to animals and people. I'm giving you a short time to recover and think about hitting , then we'll apologize to the dog and see if you can play nicely.

punishment: We don't say dirty words around here. Sit in this corner for , lessee...how old are you? five? Five minutes.

discipline: That was a very dirty word you said. We try not to say dirty words here. What made you say that word? It really was very naughty. Let's sit on the couch for five minutes of quiet. Ya know it's harder and more grown up to NOT say a dirty word ?


----------



## Snowy Owl (Nov 16, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommyofshmoo*

I feel that punishments draw attention away from people kids hurt or the situation at hand. It makes kids focus on their own feeling of hurt and anger at parents. It makes something that was about, say, safety, and turns it into a struggle between child and parent.



Exactly-- this needs emphasis. When a child is focused on anger at the all-powerful punishing parent, they don't learn anything except, perhaps, to be afraid of future punishment. This is especially true of spanking.

As for the example of adults being kept in line by fear of imprisonment, well,l think that's not really accurate. Look at statistics comparing crime rates and imprisonment rates. Also, I don't refrain from stealing because I fear getting caught-- I know I could get away with it, but feel it's wrong. That internally motivated conscience is what we want to cultivate in children. And this, I think, is what our punitive culture is seriously lacking.


----------



## cmb123 (Dec 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jen123*
punishment: I saw you hit the dog. You are going to be grounded from tv for the rest of the week.

discipline: I saw you hit the dog. I know the dog took your toy and I know you're angry , but we handle anger differently than that. We don't hit animals or people. It hurts them. We need to show respect to animals and people. I'm giving you a short time to recover and think about hitting , then we'll apologize to the dog and see if you can play nicely.

punishment: We don't say dirty words around here. Sit in this corner for , lessee...how old are you? five? Five minutes.

discipline: That was a very dirty word you said. We try not to say dirty words here. What made you say that word? It really was very naughty. Let's sit on the couch for five minutes of quiet. Ya know it's harder and more grown up to NOT say a dirty word ?

In my house those discipline examples would be seen as nagging and shaming.


----------



## Jenne (May 21, 2004)

I'm a behavior analyst so these are all terms I work with daily. Here are the "professional" definitions of these terms:

discipline-Training expected to produce a specific character or pattern of behavior, especially training that produces moral or mental improvement.

punishment- Any stimulus that represses a behavior

consequence- what occurs right after a behavior (behavior being ANY action)

The problem I think many people have is associating consequence and punishment with overtly negative things i.e. hitting, yelling, time-out. But this isn't really the case. One can be punished by compliments, praise, and rewards as well as time outs as anything that stops a behavior is considered a punisher. There are several good books on the subject, I think "Punished by Praise" is one of them and there are several MDC mamas who have read them.

A consequence occurs after every action/behavior we make. The consequence of taking the cookies out of the oven on time is a delicious cookie, the consequence of treating people kindly is they listen to you, the consequence of driving safely is lower car insurance. All actions have a reaction. A negative consequence is something that the person doing the action does not like. This gets tricky because what is one persons negative consequence is anothers positive consequence. I like to get to the movies early and watch the previews. It is a positive consequence for me arriving early. My friend hates previews and therefore arriving to the theater early is a negative consequence for her. Ice cream is a positive consequence for me but for DH who doesn't like it is a negative consequence.

Because of these intricacies I have a hard time with people who say, "I don't believe in consequences or punishment." Whether one believes or not they are everywhere







There is nothing evil, wrong, or malicious in consequences or punishment, it is all in how they are used--either to build up or break down--for me that is where GD/AP comes in utlizing skills and parenting techniques to build up a child. Talking and respecting instead of hitting and belittling.

So that is the "more" I have to offer.
Jenne


----------



## Zipporah (Feb 22, 2005)

I am glad someone started this thread b/c i have been wondering about this for some time now. I guess i just don't understand the whole "natural consequences " thing. How is "natural" defined? It seems, from reading through the threads in this forum, that "natural consequences" are solely those that affect the child herself, as a result of the action taken or object involved, and that the response of other human beings is excluded. An example given in another thread was that if a child broke something, the consequence would be that it was broken and couldn't be played with anymore. This, to me, is setting up an extremely unrealistic environment for the child. In the real world, we don't live in a vacuum where the only consequences of our actions are on us and our objects; there are other people around who are also affected by our actions and who will react to them in various ways. I see all human response as "natural" -- humans are not outside nature, we are part of it. A parent disciplining their child (whether punitively or not) falls well within the realm of "natural consequences" in my opinion. To create an artificial boundary between human response and all other consequences seems a very arbitrary and narrow definition of "natural".

Another example: on another thread we were discussing whether it was ever appropriate to swat your child's arm to prevent them from hurting themselves. One mama said that if her child reached out to touch a hot stove, she would not swat his arm b/c the natural consequences of touching a hot stove is getting burnt. Once again, this is creating an artificial environment for the child in which he operates in a vacuum. The natural consequence of reaching out to touch a hot stove is getting burnt, yes, *unless there is a caring person around to stop you.* This is where i have a problem with the whole thing -- it seems to make no provision for real-life human interaction. There will be plenty of times later on when i am not around to save my child from harm or discipline her for wrongdoing (hopefully she won't be doing too much of that!) without me actively refraining from it when i can actually do something! I would rather have my child remember me swatting her arm to prevent her from injury than have her remember me standing by while she burnt herself b/c i didn't want to interfere with the natural consequences. I also would not want to be standing in the emergency ward explaining that particular philosophy to a social worker.

I guess i just see *all* consequences, including sometimes illogical human response, as natural. What seems unnatural to me is parents purposefully restraining themselves from actively shaping their child's behaviour and making themselves miserable over their "failures" when they do impose consequences or punishments of their own devising. Some things *deserve* punishment. Some acts may leave the child totally unaffected but someone else in misery. And sometimes we *should* be ashamed of our behaviour. Shame and guilt get a bad rap but they are necessary emotions or we would all be sociopaths.

Anyway, i didn't mean to hijack the thread but i didn't want to start a whole new one on the same topic... i know there will be plenty of people who disagree with me, but i honestly don't get it and wonder if anyone else finds these logical inconsistencies confusing. Let me know your thoughts, but please don't flame me! I'm not heckling, really, just bemused!







:


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

I am deleting all my posts.


----------



## cmb123 (Dec 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Zipporah*
. A parent disciplining their child (whether punitively or not) falls well within the realm of "natural consequences" in my opinion. To create an artificial boundary between human response and all other consequences seems a very arbitrary and narrow definition of "natural".

That is a really interesting way to think about it. I just want my childrens "natural consequence" of my human response to be one that is teaching and loving, not punitive or abusive (emotionally or physically).

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Zipporah*
Shame and guilt get a bad rap but they are necessary emotions or we would all be sociopaths.

I don't agree with that one at all. I don't think developing a conscience requires shame and guilt. Not in my world.


----------



## cmb123 (Dec 30, 2004)

Kathipaul, we cross posted, so I wanted to respond to your points, just generally.
I have noticed in my personal life, being surounded by AP/GDish people, that you do run into families like "Sams". That makes me nuts too!
I'm sure I'm generalizing, but those parents seem to be the ones that don't use "negative" consequences etc..because they are afraid of upsetting thier children. Like they don't ever want their kids to experience being sad, dissapointed, hurt or unsatisfied with life. THAT I don't think benefits the child (or anyone else!) at all, as you saw.

I DO think (or I know for my own family) that you can raise kind, thoughtful children without shaming them into complience or using punitive measures. Even with out them, my kids do still feel angry, sad, dissappointed, whathaveyou over a decision, or a situation. That's perfectly fine with me- that's life!


----------



## dalbert (Oct 16, 2002)

I think most folks agree that logical negative consequences have their place even in the world of GD. But I think they tend to be over-used because they really are effective in getting an immediate response. However, in many cases it makes sense to subordinate what you want right now (i.e. stop trying to take that toy from that other kid) for what you want eventually (i.e. choose to use words to ask for a turn). The punitive consequence option may be that you say something like "if you don't stop grabbing that toy out of his/her hands, we're leaving right now...1...2...3!" If this is my dd, her hands are off that toy by the time I get to 3. But she's been disempowered. Alternately, I could sit down with them and say "let's think of a solution!" and get input from both kids. Now her confidence is boosted in feeling like she can work through these kinds of situations.

Conversely, if dd starts hitting, there is always a consequence (ours is that I hold her so that she cannot hit and talk to her calmly about using words to express frustration or hitting soft things to let out some steam). Knowing my dd as intimately as I do, I know that this is a situation where she needs a consequence. Though she perceives it as a negative consequence, it's not punitive. If my voice were not calm, it would feel punitive...and that's a very important distinction that can have a drastic impact on her ability to refrain from focusing all her anger at me.

It seems like we're all on a learning curve with GD and a lot of it seems to be trial and error for what works for our particular child in various scenarios. Honestly, this is one of the greatest challenges of my life!









-di (mama to Rylee 11/01)


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jenne*
discipline-Training expected to produce a specific character or pattern of behavior, especially training that produces moral or mental improvement.

punishment- Any stimulus that represses a behavior

consequence- what occurs right after a behavior (behavior being ANY action)

One can be punished by compliments, praise, and rewards as well as time outs as anything that stops a behavior is considered a punisher.

A consequence occurs after every action/behavior we make.

Good definitions! Every single thing we do or say has a consequence of some sort. I agree that whether a consequence is positive or negative, and whether it is a punishment or a reinforcer, is totally subjective. How I perceive things may be totally different from how my child or anyone else perceives them. So really, it's difficult-if not impossible-to ever say that the use of an particular type of consequence is always bad or always good. One person's natural consequences are another person's negligent parenting. One person's praise-as-positive-reinforcement is another person's punishment. KWIM?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jenne*
There is nothing evil, wrong, or malicious in consequences or punishment, *it is all in how they are used--either to build up or break down*--for me that is where GD/AP comes in utlizing skills and parenting techniques to build up a child. Talking and respecting instead of hitting and belittling.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. This is the essence of GD. I think my task as a parent is to know which actions of mine build up my children and which break them down-and that is different for each of them.


----------



## ETW (Feb 18, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
To finish this long story, he ended up in counseling for his anger issues, dad took notice of the problem and changed his work to be more with Sam, Sam moved in with dad to get away from mom who had new boyfriend and no time for Sam, dad started imposing rules and consequences, and by the end of the school year, Sam was a happier, more responsible boy.

It sounds to me like Sam had a lot of stuff going on -- not just his mother's discipline philosophy. Since it all changed at once there's no way to know which change did the trick -- my personal guess is that learning anger management strategies and living with a parent who had time and was willing to pay attention to him were the biggest factors.

I don't remember a lot about my parents' discipline style when I was very young, but starting pretty early I set my own bedtime, I always decided when (and whether or not) to do my homework, I was never given punishments like grounding, no TV, etc. I was a model student and never got in trouble at school. I was valedictorian of my high school class. I earned a BS in Physics with highest honors and am about to finish a PhD in Physics. I'm bragging on myself simply to illustrate that allowing children a lot of autonomy within a loving and supportive family environment does not mean they will not learn to handle structured situations or excel in the "real world."


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

kathipaul wrote:
He had always been allowed to participate in any decision making, even if it affected his health. He could choose to take meds, go to doc, when to go to bed, whether to do homework. He could even make a decision about how to solve problems. If he wanted to hit someone, mom said that he could make his own decisions.

You could be, for the most part, describing my children here. Dh and I give numerous opinions about various things, we share information & experience we might have...but the end choice is almost always made by the kids. I suppose if one of them (Goddess forbid) wanted to kill themselves, well clearly that is a choice I wouldn't be supporting. But those kinds of extreme things aside they make their own choices.

Everything from when to sleep, what/when to eat, when to clean their room, and how to solve problems. Shouldn't we be encouraging children to decide how to solve problems? (Just asking because that bit stuck out at me in your post) My son has made a decision to hit someone in the past. He felt it was necessary, and he dealt with the consequences (with me there for support of course)

. He would have a fit if he did not get points for turning in homework because his was not done. He would throw a fit if he had to miss recess because he had not finished his work. He would throw a fit if he was sent to the office for beligerently not following directions and arguing with the teacher.

That would be very frustrating I'm sure. However, I would have a hard time saying that his freedom to make choices was the problem or cause of his behavior. My guess is that the chaos of his family life (as sometimes happens with divorce, new boyfriends, moving, and not seeing a parent as much) played a large part in how angry and probably sad Sam was.

Sam moved in with dad to get away from mom who had new boyfriend and no time for Sam, dad started imposing rules and consequences, and by the end of the school year, Sam was a happier, more responsible boy.

I highlighted a bit up there that, to me, says alot about why Sam was so ticked off. Mom had no time for Sam. This sounds less like my situation (where the parents are very involved, but there are no punishments etc) and more like a situation where mom was caught up, for whatever reason, in her own drama at the time. Just thinking out loud... I wouldn't be suprised if Sam was happier with his dad, and that said happiness went a long way to him being more responsive and cooperative to the people & situations around him.

See what I mean? I just don't understand how parents think their kids are going to function in the real world without learning about consequences, even negative ones. If they are going to be homeschooled or go to a radical alternative program, that is different. But, if you are going to try to send them to regular program and expect them to go to a regular college and get a regular job, they have to learn how things work.

Well, my kids are unschoolers so you are right that we don't have that public school issue. My kids did decide to take some classes last year though. Dd took violin and journalism, and together her and Ds took Japanese. There were teachers, class rules, homework assignments, and deadlines.

My unschooled children who have no required "chores", no mandatory bedtime, and who are in on the decisions that involve them had no problem meeting the rules of these classes. They were prompt, prepared, and happy to be there... and they did it without any rules to make them do so. We have no worries about college lol







Who is to say that kids can't learn how things work with much discussion from involved caring parents that explain and model?


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

I am deleting all my posts.


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

I am deleting all my posts.


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
If I don't water my plants, they will die. See what I mean? The world is full of negative consequences. What is wrong with teaching that to your child now?

One of the authors of Becoming the Parent You Want to Be taught me that the best way to prepare kids for the future is by meeting their needs now.

So, if you feel *in the moment* that you will be meeting your child's needs *in the moment* by punishment that's what you do but don't punish because of some future lesson you want them to learn.


----------



## Benji'sMom (Sep 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *UnschoolnMa*
kathipaul wrote:

Everything from when to sleep, what/when to eat, when to clean their room, and how to solve problems. Shouldn't we be encouraging children to decide how to solve problems?

But - and I'm just asking, not sarcastically - what if kids choose not to go to bed till 3AM, or never to clean their rooms, then the WHOLE FAMILY has to deal with a cranky kid and roaches crawling around the house because the room is full of God-knows-what.(And I've seen some pretty disgusting bedrooms, so roaches are a possability.) The decisions may be about the child, but they affect EVERYONE, not just the child. It just seems that this way, the child is in control, and the parents/other family members just have to deal with whatever decision he happens to make, so the child can learn through trial and error.







: That doesn't seem fair to anyone else in the household. It sounds chaotic.


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

I am deleting all my posts.


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Benji'sMom wrote: But - and I'm just asking, not sarcastically - what if kids choose not to go to bed till 3AM, or never to clean their rooms, then the WHOLE FAMILY has to deal with a cranky kid and roaches crawling around the house because the room is full of God-knows-what.(And I've seen some pretty disgusting bedrooms, so roaches are a possability.)

Well my son (age almost 14) didn't go to bed until after 3 AM this morning. I went to bed about half an hour earlier or so. This is pretty common at our house. They often choose not to go to bed until 3 AM. My Dd went through a period of really staying up past being ready for bed. She did become pretty frustrated and short tempered, and we did mention it to her. It was pretty easy to deal with all in all.

If they chose to never clean their rooms I would maybe mention to them that things could get pretty ugly as a result. They may not be able to find clothes or toys, they may have very dirty floors, and it may smell in there. I would suggest that they do a little each day to keep that from happening, and I would give help if it was requested. If some really gross mess that attracted roaches developed I would talk to them about how their room is affecting our whole house/family, and then we'd likely work together to fix the problem.

The decisions may be about the child, but they affect EVERYONE, not just the child.

I agree, in part. Sometimes choices affect the whole family. And when that happens we all discuss it together, and work toward a common ground we are all happy with. Most of the choices affect them. They decide they don't want a sandwich but they do want ice cream, they decide they want to wear no coat, etc.

It just seems that this way, the child is in control, and the parents/other family members just have to deal with whatever decision he happens to make, so the child can learn through trial and error.







: That doesn't seem fair to anyone else in the household.

There is definately much trial and error







It's part of being human. We try something, deal with the results whatever they may be, and we have something to go on in the future. In our family each person is in charge of themselves, and we support the family as a whole.

It sounds chaotic.

I can understand how it might seem so to someone who isn't used to this way of life, but really it's quite the contrary. We are happy generally... we laugh alot. We have no battles over food, sleep, clothes etc. That's peace to me


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
So, your child does not water the plant. He is tired and would rather not do it. He ignores it for days. Do you water it for him or just let it die?

In our house either one of those things could happen.

I might tell him "Hey dude, your plant looks like it's getting pretty dry. Do you know when you watered it last?" or "Hey I think your plant needs a drink." or "Your plant was dry so I watered it for you." Or I might just water the plant myself as soon as I noticed it was dry. Or I might leave a note that his plant was dry... whatever.


----------



## mommyofshmoo (Oct 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Zipporah*
Some things *deserve* punishment. Some acts may leave the child totally unaffected but someone else in misery. And sometimes we *should* be ashamed of our behaviour. Shame and guilt get a bad rap but they are necessary emotions or we would all be sociopaths.

Well.... The idea that "doing bad things requires that a bad thing is done to the doer" is as old as time, and very popular. It's eye for an eye, tit for tat. It certainly makes the victim feel better.

But how does it affect the "aggressor?"

Pretty much all research shows that punishment is an ineffective way to stop a person who does something wrong from doing it again. This is true of children as well as adults and both low level punishments and harsh punishments.

(Random note- remember that kid who got caned in Singapore for grafitti? He was arrested a few years later in Colorado for possession of marijuana. Apparently the caning did not turn him into a law abiding citizen.)

As for shame and guilt- I think that comes pretty naturally to people. Obviously not to all people- some people are sociopaths. But there's nothing out there to prove that punishing those people helps them form the ability to feel shame or guilt.

I think that helping your kids see and understand other people's feelings does a lot not only to teach them appropriate guilt, but also gives you the opportunity to teach them how to make up for what they did.

When my kid hurts another kid, I want her to try to figure out how to make it better, not stand in a corner crying because she feels guilty. Beating oneself up over guilt or shame doesn't help anyone.


----------



## mommyofshmoo (Oct 25, 2004)

Had to paraphrase Alphi Kohn...

When a child hits his brother and is sent to his room, do we assume he's sitting there contemplating the error of his ways? Feeling bad for hitting his brother? Thinking about how he'll never do it again?

It's possible, but unlikely. More likely he's sitting there thinking how mean his parents are, how he'll get back at his brother and how he can avoid being caught next time.


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

kathipaul wrote:

Knowing that children's brains are not done developing and growing until they are 18 to 21 years of age, with the reason and logic sections finishing up last, are there ever decisions you would not want your children to make?

Well I can say that I wouldn't want them to do really dangerous things that were likely to maim and or kill them. I would try my best to stop them from stabbing themselves... or shooting themselves... or starving themselves. Things like that? Of course, I am not sure that emotionally/mentally healthy people do those things so if that stuff was happening I would be thinking about getting some help for them.

Children under the age of 18-21 don't have the same faculty for reasoning and making decisions that adults do.

I'm not sure I can agree with that. I know that brains are still developing etc... but the backbone of my parenting
beliefs are that children, given information they understand, are quite capable of making decisions just like I do.


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommyofshmoo*
More likely he's sitting there thinking how mean his parents are, how he'll get back at his brother and how he can avoid being caught next time.









Yep


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

I am deleting all my posts.


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
That is an interesting point and a great book. I consider it one of my models. However, your point is not really related to the example I quoted. So, your child does not water the plant. He is tired and would rather not do it. He ignores it for days. Do you water it for him or just let it die?

It is relevant because you mentioned that the world is full of consequences and that you think your child needs to learn that.

I think that you can best meet your child's needs for dealing with this by meeting your child's needs now.

I don't know how you should deal with the one example of the plant. That's not the point. The point is that you should deal with the plant in a way that best will help meet your child's needs now. What is it that you would like your child to learn now when you give him the responsibly for keeping the plant alive?


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
Having read more of these posts, I wonder how did punishment get differentiated from consequence and become such a bad word? Going back to my plant example, if I don't water my plants and they die that is both a consequence and a punishment in my mind.

Maybe this is all a matter of semantics. I am not a coercive person and really try to practice logical consequences rather than random ones like "go to your room" or " you lose a privilege." That is how I was brought up and all it taught me was not to get caught when I did anything that my parents considered wrong. I am trying something different with dd. I guess what it boils down to is what works for your family. There are truly many ways of doing GD.

I think lots of what we talk about here is a matter of semantics.

The plant example, I don't know if it's a "logical" or "natural" consequence. I think it could be viewed both ways from the conversations I've had here. Yes, the natural consequence of not watering the plant (I'm assuming this is your child's plant and he cares about it) is that it will die. BUT, it becomes a sort of punishment depending on how you feel. Are you helping your child understand? Watching it slowly die? What is your reaction after the plant dies ie. the "natural consequence" takes place.

For me, it's really about how I process the situation. Personally, I think exhausting mama can be a natural consequence and I can be quite gracious about that sometimes. But, I've also reacted to exhausting behavior in a way that seems punitive. The difference is very subtle! It isn't about what I say, if I yell or punish&#8230;it's in my head.


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

I am deleting all my posts.


----------



## allgirls (Apr 16, 2004)

Well I do not use punishment...I allow my children to make decisions with me...I have great kids..my 11 year old is awesome and very easy to live with...I do guide them and the do have guidelines and most of it is about respecting others space and feelings.

The school uses punishment...they have rules and regulations for everything...today she questioned the teacher about signing her planner...she had completed all her homework and didn't understand why she should have to still be on planner signing(reserved for kids who don't take homework home on purpose as a check) The teacher couldn't understand how she could be so rude and said all the other kids were shocked and that it was about "respect"

I asked my daughter about the incident...she said "I thought she was wrong and so I said so" "the other kids were shocked because they are scared of her not because they respect her and they couldn't believe I said something...they all wanted to" and she wasn't scared because "I am always getting punished for something(usually losing recess) so it's no big deal to lose another.

Why is it that at home where I don't use punishment, we talk about issues and find ways to resolve them between us I don't get "rudeness" Of course some of what the teacher might percieve as rudeness I might see as using her power of expression. I don't plan on taking that away from her.

Oh and the teacher said something about functioning in the "real world" and I said school is the most unnatural place in the world to learn about the real world...how many real world situations are most adults in that requires them to sit in rows with 26 people the exact same age for hours.

Home is for teaching about the real world...school is for academics.

The teacher was absolutely speechless...I don't think it had ever dawned on her that maybe school wasn't ideal for kids and that an environment of punishment is not the best way to deal with children.

my daughter is 11 by the way...

guess I am odd..most people get upset about the teacher calling about their children being rude...I was kind of proud...she was right and she stuck up for herself!

Yeah, we are making this teacher's life a bit difficult(actually I think it's her own doing..if she loosened up a bit and enjoyed and listeend to the kids she'd have a much better time)...so what..she's an adult and an educator and should be a little more creative than the rest of us. My daughter is 11 and getting a pretty good grip on how things go in life!


----------



## Snowy Owl (Nov 16, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Benji'sMom*
But - and I'm just asking, not sarcastically - what if kids choose not to go to bed till 3AM, or never to clean their rooms, then the WHOLE FAMILY has to deal with a cranky kid and roaches crawling around the house because the room is full of God-knows-what.(And I've seen some pretty disgusting bedrooms, so roaches are a possability.) The decisions may be about the child, but they affect EVERYONE, not just the child. It just seems that this way, the child is in control, and the parents/other family members just have to deal with whatever decision he happens to make, so the child can learn through trial and error.







: That doesn't seem fair to anyone else in the household. It sounds chaotic.


From my understanding of all of this, I don't think this is what anyone is suggesting. The order and core rules of the house are non-negotiable, just as citizens of a Democracy are not free to break laws in order to be free.

If the child cannot bring dishes back from her room, then, in order to prevent infestations of vermin, she will not be allowed any food in her room until she is ready to start cleaning up after herself.

The parent is stating what she must do in response to the child's choices.

The child is free to make choices within the household order, the rules of which can be flexible and negotiable to some extent.


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *allgirls*

guess I am odd..most people get upset about the teacher calling about their children being rude...I was kind of proud...she was right and she stuck up for herself!


I can relate. DC is only 3.5 and we've already had some situations like this. That's a big issue of mine. The world sucks&#8230;maybe? I don't want my child to get used to that ~ I want her to try to make it better.

How's that for lofty aspirations&#8230;poor child :LOL


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *allgirls*

I asked my daughter about the incident...she said "I thought she was wrong and so I said so" .......


Good for her!







I think that is wonderful, really.


----------



## kavamamakava (Aug 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
You make some very good points. My "Sam" really did have a lot going on in his life. It makes a huge difference to have caring parents help you by explaining and modelling. This has really made me wonder about something else, something sort of related.

Knowing that children's brains are not done developing and growing until they are 18 to 21 years of age, with the reason and logic sections finishing up last, are there ever decisions you would not want your children to make? Perhaps with caring, patient adults, you don't have to worry about them making dangerous decisions. But, what if they wanted to ride their bike off a cliff (this happened in my neighborhood growing up) or ride their bike down a big hill with no helmet (my neighbor died from this at age 15) or something else dangerous. Children under the age of 18-21 don't have the same faculty for reasoning and making decisions that adults do.

Maybe I'm not totally GD, but MY house has MY rules. Hemet+Bike at all times. I don't think my kids have realized you can ride a bike without a helmet. haha

I give them age apropriate responsibilities. One of my rules is that food remains on the table. If the child gets up with food I remind them that food stays on the table. If they don't feel like walking it back, then I physically respond. I will help a 1 year old walk the food back to the table or remove the food from the one year old and remind them that they can eat it later when they want to go back to the table. I will talk to a 2 year old about the destination of the food since 2 yr olds can talk more than 1 yr olds. Maybe discuss how the carpet doesn't like food and that's what happens if you try to eat on the rug in front of the TV. We do have a coffee table and any table is allowed. So then we can compromise that the food is going from the dining room table to the coffee table. A 3 yr old might tell me that s/he is planning to feed the food to the T.V. and then we'll talk about how food could get stuck in the speakers and break the TV and that's why food stays at the table.

I don't punish anyone or shame or guilt anyone for breaking the rule. Not even a time out. I don't yell or get angry or upset. I just insist that food remains on the table by reminding, guiding , discussing, and then just plain putting it back. Is that AP/GD? Does the include any sort of punishment or discipline or logical or fabricated consequences? I'm still trying to understand it all, too.

I've been handed a child who doesn't give a fig about any sort of manipulation tactics. If I say he can't do [his favorite activity] if he doesn't stop [undesirable activity], he doesn't care the least little bit. If I say he can have a reward if he does something that needs doing, he won't do it. If I excessively praise him, he thinks I'm being weird. I think he's just really logical and straightforward. One night he wanted to draw on the kitchen floor with sidewalk chalk right after watching me scrub the chalk from earlier on my hands and knees. I told him he could do it tomorrow. I told him I just got done cleaning and it was bedtime and the kitchen wanted to go to sleep clean. I suggested he wait until later. When I turned my back, he did it. He said "Mommy, you should just tell me NO."

Nadia just climbed into the baby swing for the bazillionth time. If I see her about to do it, I remind her that big girls are too heavy and will break the swing and she says okay. But when I'm not looking, I guess the temptation is too great. Oops. She just climbed in and put the tray down and is stuck. Guess who's not hopping up like her pants are on fire to let her out? Is that mean?


----------



## kavamamakava (Aug 25, 2004)

Carolyn: your daughter reminds me of me. :LOL I was always getting in trouble and my mom fully supported my decisions and I was never bummed or believed I was in the wrong. I was so easy going and got along with everyone at home (for the most part).


----------



## Dar (Apr 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Snowy Owl*
From my understanding of all of this, I don't think this is what anyone is suggesting. The order and core rules of the house are non-negotiable, just as citizens of a Democracy are not free to break laws in order to be free.

If the child cannot bring dishes back from her room, then, in order to prevent infestations of vermin, she will not be allowed any food in her room until she is ready to start cleaning up after herself..

This isn't at all how life is at our house (and I'm betting that Unschoolnma would say the same). There are no core, non-negotiable rules. I actually really dislike it when people pretend to be giving kids "choices" when it's all just a set up - "These are the rules. You can choose to bring back your plates, but if you don't then you're chosing to lose the privilege of having food in your room." Blarrgh! That's a trumped-up choice, not real, just a way for parents to try to make kids feel responsible for their own unhappiness, instead of owning up to their own choices.

For the record, in a democracy anyone is free to break the rules and most people do so daily, and all rulkes can be overturned or amended.

The whole focus on punishment is a problem, I think (and "logical consequnces", from a behaviorist standpoint, are punishments). In the US, our society believes that peaople should have bad things happen to them if they do wrong things - we think this is how things are supposed to work. It's the whole Puritan thing that we've never managed to shake. Even though it's clear that there are better ways, both more effective and less damaging, we still cling to punishment, because it's easier in the short-term, and because our culture tells is it's how things should be.

As far as research on reasoning, we're not expecting children to do calculus problems. The whole abstract reasoning thing isn't really an issue in everyday problem-solving, and children have adults around to help them if they need it. Some adults never master complex abstract thought, but they manage just fine.

Dar


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dar*
This isn't at all how life is at our house (and I'm betting that Unschoolnma would say the same). There are no core, non-negotiable rules. I actually really dislike it when people pretend to be giving kids "choices" when it's all just a set up -

You were betting right







I can't think of a "core" rule for us right now. I suppose I could say that it would be "treat others with respect", but in all honesty sometimes we feel that there are situations that don't call for respect or at least where it wasn't my first priority, KWIM?

I was trying to find another thing I wanted to highlight from your post, but I'll just say I second what Dar said.


----------



## PM (Nov 19, 2001)

Hear, hear!


----------



## Snowy Owl (Nov 16, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dar*
This isn't at all how life is at our house (and I'm betting that Unschoolnma would say the same). There are no core, non-negotiable rules. I actually really dislike it when people pretend to be giving kids "choices" when it's all just a set up - "These are the rules. You can choose to bring back your plates, but if you don't then you're chosing to lose the privilege of having food in your room."

The whole focus on punishment is a problem, I think (and "logical consequnces", from a behaviorist standpoint, are punishments).
Dar


For me, that example wasn't about choices. It was a response to the vermin scenario posed by another poster. Maybe it came across as sounding overly rigid or puritanical, but I think people need to find a balance that works for them. This example is primarily dealing with how a parent responds to the tendency of many children, mine included, to expect their parents to clean up after their messes. When a parent is constantly cleaning up after her children, she's actually protecting them from the consequences of not tidying up, and allowing the child to impinge on other's freedoms. It's not about false choices, it's about interconnectedness. We do not always have the 'choice' to do whatever we want.

About punishment, I posted earlier in this thread about how I thought the focus on punishment is a problem, too. I completely agree!


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

I am deleting all my posts.


----------



## Snowy Owl (Nov 16, 2003)

I had to come back here and ask: How can anyone say they don't have any core rules? Maybe it's a misunderstanding about terminology but, to name some examples, not hitting each other in anger (something dd has been doing and is NOT okay) is a core rule.
Using mom's sewing scissors for paper crafts is against the rules, other scissors are fine.
At gramma's house, the rule is that food stays in the kitchen or dining room.
That's her rule and we respect it at her house.
When we are outside, we respect the rules of public conduct, like keeping hands out of our underpants etc.

These are the kinds of rules I mean, and however you refer to them, every family has them, right?

And it's not something parents inflict on their children, it's something everyone follows, whether adult or child.

"That's the rule, because..." is a useful thing to discuss with children.
Also, my experience is stemming from dealing with a five year old.... don't know what it's like dealing with preteens or teenagers.....


----------



## allgirls (Apr 16, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kavamamakava*
Carolyn: your daughter reminds me of me. :LOL I was always getting in trouble and my mom fully supported my decisions and I was never bummed or believed I was in the wrong. I was so easy going and got along with everyone at home (for the most part).

LOL...she reminds me of me too







: ..only I wasn't supported at home..but I didn't care...I had a strong sense of justice from an early age. My kids have that and I intend to support it.


----------



## Dar (Apr 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
The idea being that kids of 16 are too young to be making good decisions needed to drive a car. With that in mind, it stands to reason that there are other every day decisions that they also have a hard time with.

Except that the vast majority of 16 year olds drive a car just fine, so clearly they have the capability for whatever abstract reasoning is necessary.

I do think it's harder for teens (and preteens) to make good decisions, on average, than it is for me to make them. Part of it is developmental, part of it is wacky brain chemistry, and part is just lack of practice. I don't see that punishment will help with any of those things, though.

And no one is talking about casting our teens adrift to do whatever they want. My daughter is an "old" 12, and most of her friends are teenagers. They don't always make the best choices. Sometimes that means they're late for something, or not there when I pick them up, or get caught in awkward situations. It happens. I don't think punishing her will help, though. What does help is just talking, what-if-ing, knowing what things could possibly come up and have ideas about how to handle them. I think it also helps that we both have cell phones, and she knows that I want her to check in if plans change, or if she's unsure in a situation.

.

Quote:

Of course, I would never do it but the threat is enough and it is kind of logical. Sometimes, I even ask her, caught in the act taking his toy away, to choose which of her toys she is going to give the dog. The threat of that consequence stops her cold.
See, lying and threatening are just not part of my parenting repertoire. YMMV, clearly. Throwing stuff and watching it fall is developmentally so normal for toddlers... it's an exploration of cause and effect, basic physics, all that. If she was my child, I would change the situation - keep the door to the deck closed unless we were both out there, come up with some just-for-throwing-off things and offer those instead (maybe crumpled up balls of newspaper, even, the crumpling could be fun, too), or get some cardboard and block off the sides of the deck... lots of things.

Snowy Owl - yeah, I think it's terminology, but I think terminology is important. We have values, I think, and beliefs, and habits, or usual practices. We keep the scissors and tape in the drawer to the left of the sink because that's where we've always kept them, but if someone wanted to keep them somewhere else that would be okay... but we value kindness and consideration, so we would tell the other person first. It's not a rule so much as how we do it...

Some things are polite and some are impolite, and picking your nose in public into the latter category. And other people may have rules for their house, and if we choose to go there it's respectful to follow them... we don't hang out with many people who have lots of rules, though.

Maybe it's my rebel-teen-thing, but I tend to see rules as unfair constraints and want to break them







It's just an instinct...

Dar


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dar*
What does help is just talking, what-if-ing, knowing what things could possibly come up and have ideas about how to handle them. I think it also helps that we both have cell phones, and she knows that I want her to check in if plans change, or if she's unsure in a situation.

I totally agree. I've said it before that I think discussion and "what-if" talking is such a great thing. It helps us talk about what we (parents & kids) think good decision making looks like, what we think is safe, what options are if they get into something they aren't comfortable with. How punishment will help is beyond me really. To me it (punishment) takes what could be an opportunity to learn something about themselves and decision making and turns it into a way to make a kid feel embarassed, ashamed, and guilty. That just isn't a goal for me in raising kids.

Quote:

See, lying and threatening are just not part of my parenting repertoire.
Mine either. Why would that be something we want to do to our kids? I certainly don't want them to do that to me.

Quote:

We keep the scissors and tape in the drawer to the left of the sink because that's where we've always kept them, but if someone wanted to keep them somewhere else that would be okay... but we value kindness and consideration, so we would tell the other person first. It's not a rule so much as how we do it...
 Right. Sometimes I think people make mountains out of molehills with things like that. But then again I don't see why children are often left out of "rule" making in the first place.


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

I'm generally of the natural consequences school.

I'll address some specific scenarios
1) I can't keep plants alive. I forget to water them. I've killed ivy in a pot! I'm currently nuturing 2 plants - one is 2 years old one is about 2 months old. If I forgot the water the plant, and DH saw it was dry, I'd expect him to water it. I don't need him to "teach me a lesson" that plants without water die. And I think the same situation would be coercive and inauthentic for our daughter. The newer plant is kind of hers, but we water it together. If the plant dies becase WE forget to water it than it's a nautral consequence. If the plant dies because SHE forgets to water it and I notice it but decide to teach her a lesson, then I'm engaging in "logical" consequences.

2)To reiterate, if she goes out without a coat and gets cold, she's got natural consquences, but I'd give her mine or otherwise make her warm. If I refuse to give her the coat, I'm back to logical consequences or punishment.

3) To the poster who got picked up from the police due to bad judgement - do you really think the grounding was necessary? In my own teenage years, the actual police call was enough to scare the daylights out of me! No further punishment would have been necessary. But maybe that goes down to the kid. Mom didn't feel the need to punish me, but maybe another type of reenager would have benefitted.

4) For the 15 yo who rode down the hill and killed himself on his bike - maybe his parents always imposed limits on him, so he didn't develop his own sense of judgement. Think of those parents on the playgound who are telling their kids "That's too high. You'll fall. Here, let me help you. That's high enough. Take my hand." I let my 2 yo develop her own sense of safety and danger. As soon as the parents weren't around to tell the kid it was dangerous, he went out and did something that was.

5) When my 2 yo showed interest in the stove, I took her hand and had her hold it above the burner until it felt hot. When I open the oven, she would probably stay away, but I ask her to stand on the other side of the kitchen because it scares ME, not because I think she is in danger. Likewise, DH is deathly afraid of heights, so I don't stand near the edges of cliffs when he is around because it makes him nervous. I know I won't fall and I know he can't really get over his fear.

6)Someone really set me straight on another list when I was discussing potty-training. DD kept refusing to use the potty and wetting her pants. So I'd take the pants off and put her back in a dipe as a "natural consequence." But they pointed out that the natural consequence of wetting your pants, was wet pants! And I should help her to do what I do when I wet my pants (from a sneeze or cough). Let's get new underwear on.

In that we are "continuum concept" parents, we expect our daughter to do the "done thing," but simply because it is the done thing not because it is a "rule" pe se. And I guess this gets into terminology. So, when DH picks ups the expensive Gingher sewing scissors I say - Those are only for fabric. You don't use those on wrapping paper. But look in the box and you'll find paper scissors. I don't say "The rule is we only use these on fabric." To me, one feels coercive and arbitrary. Who makes the rules anyway? Those with the power. While the other acknowedges that we all need to get along in ways that respect each other.


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

I am deleting all my posts.


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

I am deleting all my posts.


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
We were not the mellow, tow the line type kids some of you in this thread have talked about

I don't think most of us are talking about 'tow the line kids'. I, personally, feel this is a very insulting thing to call someone or someone's kids (based on my own values) so I wanted to point this out. Someone's talking about an 11 year old who isn't afraid of being punished and stands up to what she feels is an injustice in her school. That's cool, imo!

If you want to know what I think is wrong with punishing my kid&#8230;I'll try to tell you. Mostly, it's because it isn't consistent with the rest of our relationship. I try very hard to be in the moment with her. Punishment is about the future, ime.

But, if you ask me if I punish I'd have to think more about that. I'm sure some of the more TCS parents would think I do. Like I said, it's in my head ~ it's my reaction that separates punishment from the facts of life.

For me, I think we could do the exact same thing and one be punishment and not the other. I know this because I've experienced this many times.

An example would be that we leave the book store because DC is making a mess.

Situation #1:

I'm tired, recognize that and take responsibility for that. DC is cranky, I see that. I tell DC that I'm tired and it seems like she's having a rough time. I tell her I want to go.

Situation #2:

I'm tired and DC is cranky. I tell her that we are leaving because she's making a mess.

Piglet posted a topic about a great section in a book she read that gives good reasons not to punish.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
For many, punishment and consequences seem to not be part of the families repetoire but I don't recall reading exactly why punishment and consequences are seen as bad? I wish some of you would elaborate on what you think would happen to your children if they did something you consider wrong and you gave them a consequence or punishment.

I think punishments are problematic because they address a symptom and not the cause. If your kid is crying b/c he's hungry and you send him to time-out to calm down, you may stop the crying. However, the hunger need is still unmet. But worse, in my opinion, is that the kid gets a really lousy lesson in feeling helpless and unheard and the attachment betw. parent and child is weakened rather than strengthened.

Now, who of us would punish a kid crying out of hunger, right? :LOL Because it seems so obvious an unmet need. We've been feeding these babies on demand for years! But, other unmet needs are much harder to diagnose couched in what we consider "misbehavior." And we tend to worry that left unsquelched, these behaviors (or mis-behaviors) will continue until adulthood. But meeting a child's needs, teaching them the socially acceptable way to cope, modeling what's acceptable, and giving them the tools to do something different provide a much better framework for kids' to actually learn what TO do (not just what NOT to do.).

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
And, I flat out don't believe anyone who says they don't have rules in their house. You just don't call them rules and you don't talk about them as rules. But, we all have practices and mores and values and traditions that we teach our children and expect them follow.

You might want to ask people who say this to clarify, then.

There is a difference betw. rules and practices and mores and values and traditions. All those words have distinct meanings.

I like the idea of Principles vs. rules. Principles can generally be summed up in one word: Respect, Kindness, Honesty, Compassion, Safety, etc. This is what I strive for in my family rather than inflexible rules like: No lying.

For example, when my elderly father found out we were having another boy, he sent us a copy of Dobson's Bringing Up Boys. Blorf!! If I had a rule of "No lying," I would have to tell him, when he asked, that I thought the book was complete and utter trash and had already discarded it. However, within my Principles of Compassion and Honesty, I told him how thoughtful it was that he sent us it and that I hadn't really had a chance to look through it, yet. It was thoughtful of him to send it, but I had looked through it and made up my mind that it was horrible and depressing. What would be served by telling my father this? Even if it meant abiding by a rule?

Likewise, when we walk through a parking lot, rather than have a rule of "You must hold mommy's hand." I've adopted a Principle of Safety (THANK YOU, DAR!) whereby my kid can hold onto me or the backpack, be carried, walk right next to me, ride in the cart, etc. It gives both of us more choices and an opportunity to work together.

Here are some links I find helpful--you might, too.

Ten Alternatives to Punishment
http://www.naturalchild.org/jan_hunt/punishment.html

Living by Principles instead of by Rules
http://sandradodd.com/rules


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Another reason I've read about why not to punish is the idea that some kids who are punished leave the situation feeling they've "paid" for their crime. The idea is the punishment diminishes the natural 'guilt' or negative feelings or positive processing after doing something 'wrong'.

Oh, and I agree that in cases where kids are being punished often, there may well be an unmet need happening. You can not punish a need away.

That reminds me of a big one. I have found that during the most challenging times with DC (the times I may have been tempted to punish) she has been sick of had some other need or problem bubbling under the surface. Being wrong and punishing my child is one of the worst things I can imagine when it comes to discipline mistakes.


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *IdentityCrisisMama*
I don't think most of us are talking about 'tow the line kids'. I, personally, feel this is a very insulting thing to call someone or someone's kids (based on my own values) so I wanted to point this out.

I pm'd you an apology.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Read the book Unconditional Parenting. It explains it better than I can.


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Okay, finally get a chance to respond to this post!

*Why are punishments and consequences wrong?*

For the sake of discussion I'm going to limit the terms "punishment/consequences" to those imposed by the parent, rather than getting into a discussion of "natural vs logical consequences", etc...

Here is why I think they are "wrong" (btw, I'd rather use: completely ineffective and damaging, rather than pass a moral judgement on them)...

Parents are able to impose punishments and consequences on kids for one simple reason: they are "bigger", both physically and psychologically. If your 25 month old was 6 feet tall and 200 lbs, you'd have a hell of a time wresting the beloved toy out of her hands and throwing it to the dog. The power to punish stems from the same power we have to nurture (feed, hold, clothe, love...). We can do these things and they cannot.

The first problem with punishment/consequences is that, at some age, you will lose that power. Usually in adolescence. As soon as your child can walk out the door without you, you've lost that power. Right there is, to me, a fundamental limit of this method. I love what Thomas Gordon wrote: "An adolescent does not rebel against her _parents_, she rebels against their _power_." Preventing the whole "teen rebellion" thing is a huge motivator, for me.

Second, even with young children, the ability to punish depends on doing/taking something of value to the child. Threatening loss of the beloved toy to the dog worked. But what if the child decides "to heck with you, go ahead and give my toy away, I don't care, I'm going to keep throwing toys off the balcony". Then what do you do? You may look for a different, stronger punishment...and this is a battle that can go back and forth if your child is strong-willed enough.

But I think the greatest reason for not using punishments/consequences is the effect it has on the child. I sure know how *I* felt when punished, or when my parents imposed a 'consequence" on me...here is a list of emotions/reactions (from Thomas Gordon's book "Parent Effectiveness Training"):

Resistance, defiance, rebellion, resentment, hostility, anger, agression, retaliation, lying, blaming others, cheating, bossing, bullying, sore loser, submission, compliance, obedience, "butt-kissing" other authority figures, conformity, lack of creativity, fear of trying....

These feelings are pretty much universal in humans. I think it goes back to what ICM wrote before: a child who is the victim of the unfair power a parent has over them is unlikely to view their punishment as a "lesson", but rather to focus on their own feelings of being a victim. These emotions put us on the defensive, triggering a "fight or flight" mechanism where we view the situation as "us vs. them"...I don't want that dynamic in ANY relationship I have, including that with my children. And I SURE don't want them growing up thinking that is a normal relationship to have with their bosses, lovers, spouses, etc...

Despite popular belief, it is possible to have "rules" or "limits" or "principles"...boundaries by which children learn, without having to ever impose punishments. So the idea that "no punishment/consequences = no rules" is false.

Punishment does not INFLUENCE a child, punishment FORCES a child. The child threatened with having a beloved toy given to the dog is not learning anything about why it is wrong to throw toys over the balcony, other than it is a specific way to avoid having a loved toy taken away. The child has not been taught or convinced or persuaded or motivated...they have been coerced/forced. As soon as the threat of giving the toy away is gone, or loses its value, the behaviour is free to continue (and research shows it will...the child becomes so focussed on getting back what they had that they tend to do it given half a chance - the parent is gone, for example - just to exert their independence and will). I think this is human nature.

I guess, finally, the reason why I think punishment and consequences are "wrong" is because they are simply unnecessary. It very much IS possible to raise wonderful, self-disciplined, self-motivated children without having to exert parental power in this manner. And it really begs the question...given a choice, why would any parent CHOOSE to use these methods? It seems to me, it is clearly because they have run out of options, a limit of their own knowledge, rather than any proof that it is actually an effective means of discipline. (and we have only to refer to my thread last week of what happened when I ran head-first against the limit of my own knowledge







).


----------



## Dar (Apr 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
The only thing that will make her stop is the threat that if she throws all his toys overboard, I will give him her toy cow. The idea being that if she throws all his toys away, he needs something to play with so he can have her toy. That works. Of course, I would never do it but the threat is enough and it is kind of logical.


Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
I don't lie to my child

I'm not trying to pick on you, but I do think it's important to be aware of what we're actually doing. Telling your child that "she throws all his toys overboard, I will give him her toy cow" when you "would never" give him the cow is lying. You're telling your child that you will do something that you would never do. If that's not lying, what is it?

Another thing: being a classroom teacher is very different than being a parent. I've been both, for years, and the basic constraints of the school system (many kids, required curriculum) make many good "parenting" practices difficult or impossible. I don't teach the way I parent, or the way I hang out with a friend's kids, although I try to incorporate what I can.

Why not punish? I think the better question is, why punish? Punishment doesn't teach, doesn't resolve things long-term, leads to resentment of the punisher, demonstrates that big people can hurt little people, makes a child feel powerless and ashamed, makes a child sneakier ... all this, and the payoff is that you may change behavior in the short-term, with little effort, and that it "feels right" because of society's messages to us.

Dar


----------



## sweetest (May 6, 2004)

Piglet68 ~
Im printing out your post right now to put on my fridge


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

I am deleting all my posts.


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Why not punish? Because it's not helpful, IMO. It shames, embarasses, causes feelings of resentment & fear, and doesn't teach or help move things in a better direction. It sets up an adversarial situation that I don't want in my relationships with my children.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dar*
Why not punish? I think the better question is, why punish? Punishment doesn't teach, doesn't resolve things long-term, leads to resentment of the punisher, demonstrates that big people can hurt little people, makes a child feel powerless and ashamed, makes a child sneakier ...









Yea, what she said.


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
Okay, I am going to ask nicely that everyone return to the original question that I posted: what is wrong with punishment and consequences. This thread has turn into a forum for justification of why one parenting style is better than the other. That is not what I intended and I would like to ask for everyone to stop badmouthing each other and stop defending your practices and just answer the question.

I'm really sorry (seriously, no sarcasm) you feel the thread was going that way. I didn't see any badmouthing...just disagreement. I did answer the question in an earlier post I thought.









Quote:

However, sometimes kids just do things to be mischevious or spiteful or because they are grumpy or angry about something.
Of course, and so do adults. It's part of being human. Sometimes we get frustrated & angry and then we act that way.

Quote:

I wish some of you would elaborate on what you think would happen to your children if they did something you consider wrong and you gave them a consequence or punishment.
I think they'd be offended, and pretty pissed off lol. They'd also be hurt, and maybe angry. None of that is my goal.

Quote:

You may not be practicing the punitive form of discipline, akin to what they do in the armed forces for example, but you are still practicing discipline.
OK, maybe if we can define discipline as gentle guidance through discussion, help, and modeling of desired behaviors then I can say we "discipline".

Quote:

And, I flat out don't believe anyone who says they don't have rules in their house. You just don't call them rules and you don't talk about them as rules. But, we all have practices and mores and values and traditions that we teach our children and expect them follow.
I'm not sure what you mean by rules then maybe. There is no "No ice cream before dinner" "No running in the house" "You must wear a coat when it rains" "No food anywhere but the table" type stuff at our house. Is that the kind of thing you mean? It just doesn't happen here.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

I guess I am not sure how to answer this question. maybe give me an example...

I have a 16 yr old that i have never punished and he is what would be defined as a 'good kid'. He's never done anything that needed punishment, although he has aggravated me.









What sort of things are you looking for?

I've yelled at my kids because i have lost my head, but they survived, even though i was not at my best. They get that, they understand they are human and parents are human. We just allow for mistakes here. But I have never hit them or 'punished' them. What does punishment look like for you? I've told my kids 'I need some space to think about this" . I have not grounded kids or spanked them. I am an imperfect parent, for sure! But that is part of my charm.... :LOL Not.

Dh and I constantly share with our kids our thoughts about family. We talk with our kids, share our feelings and sometimes, me, esp, 'put my foot down'-- which is probably not what some might do. As in "Knock it off. You are being pains and I need you all to leave me in peace for a few minutes so I can think". That's when I am being honest, more than I am being a perfect MDC parent. :LOL

If you're hurting someone, I need to know why, but that is secondary to the hurting. Everyone in our family needs to feel safe to express emotions, ask questions, feel sad and feel happy etc. A family is a place where you can always feel safe. Dh and I encourage our children to express themselves, and if anyone might be inclined to giggle or tease at various revelations, we gently put the kabosh on that. "We are a family, and everyone in this family needs to feel safe. If anyone in this family has worries, they can come to this family and know they will be heard". This sounds odd, I suppose, but dh and I have said this to all of our kids, throughout the years. We are a team.

I just need examples. Lying? Stealing? Hurting a sib? What would send you over the edge that you need to punish? We have 'rules' but I can't think of any that are hard and fast or non negottiable , or that a rule would supersede the genuine needs of a child. We are pretty flexible here.

I draw the line with putdowns, hurting feelings or hitting. It's not an issue, the kids know we don't do that. I would make it a 'rule' if they did not 'get it'. But then i would seriously get to work figuring out why. If I could not figure out why, I'd be hyper-vigilant about shadowing the child who does hurt others. But i wouldn't punish. I'd follow, redirect and hold if i had to. Nobody gets hit here and we take care with our words as well.

If kids (toddlers are a little different--toddlers are about the movement of the body-- and not empathy--which comes a little alter. It's short lived, but trying. But for toddlers it's not a moral issue. it's an impulse control issue which is entirely different) feel safe, protected and heard, I think it's less likely that they will feel a need to act in ways that are not decent and kind.

As I said, little children are a different issue, of course, and that is more about impulse control and learning to be human. Not all wayward actions warrent punishment. Sometimes a "I know you did not mean to do that. I know you were feeling really sad and confused. I want you to know that Daddy and I are here for you. We are here to help you grow. That's our job. Little children sometimes need help, and we are here to help you. You're our girl". etc. A little 'Oh, sweetie, you are so sad, I'm so sorry, I know you did not mean for that to happen. I am here to help you learn about the world" goes a lot further than a punishment, ime. Be real. Talk less, hold more. Empathize.


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

I am deleting all my posts.


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

I am deleting all my posts.


----------



## girlndocs (Mar 12, 2004)

Pardon my jumping in with both feet so late here, Kathy, but I wanted to comment on the situation with the dog's toys. (Yes, I know you didn't specifically ask for input on that situation, but it looks like it's a useful platform, so to speak, for other people to illustrate their different viewpoints. Please keep that in mind, because this isn't about criticism or putting you down, OK?)

I think that if Dd was 2, and she was pitching the dog's toys off the deck, I would assume she simply did not have the self-restraint yet to stop doing something so fascinating, and/or the empathy to really understand that the dog wants his toys, not having the toys makes the dog bored, etc, etc. I agree with Dar that the first thing I would do is somehow block off the deck so she *couldn't* pitch things over. (This would cut down on the whole Mama-blood-pressure aspect of the thing, too.) If she got past it and pitched something, I would say, "Oh no! We need to go get the toy so Fido doen't miss it!" and I'd take her down in the yard to get it and help her give it back to the dog.

I wouldn't feel that a 2-yo was capable of making the fairly sophisticated connections that might make my consequence logical to me. I don't personally think that a 2-yo would get the whole, "These toys don't belong to me. It's not OK for me to throw toys that don't belong to me off the deck. Whe the dog's toys are all gone he'll be bored and the responsible way for me to make restitution would be for me to donate one of *my* toys, since I was responsible for his tys being pitched over the deck." I wouldn't feel like she would _get_ all that.

So this is a good reason why I feel like punishment isn't helpful -- in this case, although the consequence might seem logical to me, what the 2-yo would be left with is an arbitrary punishment: if she doesn't stop this fascinating activity I'll take away one of her toys. In that context, there isn't any lesson learned. It becomes a 1:1, "I obey or Mama does something bad" connection, which is not how I would want my children to learn.

ETA: so I guess what I'm longwindedly trying to say is, maybe most of the time when the threat of "consequences" or "punishment" is the only thing working to stop a child from doing something, it means that they aren't caable of understanding the good reasons not to do it, or of having the self-restraint not to do it, and what needs to be done is to back up and remove or change a situation they're not prepared for rather than control them with "consequences".


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

All right, now I am pissed off and am going to sign off for a while. I am also deleting all my posts so that future readers don't feel the need to misinterpret my writing and pass on their own judgements.

I just don't understand why people feel the need to make comments and offer advice where it is unsolicited. I know that I am a new parent and learning and trying new things and I do not need to be reminded of my mistakes. I am painfully aware of them and always trying to do better, especially where dd is concerned. I am so pissed off at all of you right now that I am considering cancelling both my subscription to Mothering and my membership in MDC. How dare you judge me. One thing that I cannot stand about some people who live a "natural lifestyle" is when they pass judgement on others like they have all the answers and are living the best choices. I try to live a natural lifestyle but I don't condemn others who do not. I enter into honest discussions about choices but I would never offer them ways that they should be living their lives unless they specifically asked me to.

Why can't you all just answer the question and not comment on what you think I am doing wrong? What gives you the right to pass judgement on me? I asked what I thought was an interesting question but all I got in return was grief. I have learned a lot from MDC in my months of coming here but I have to say that one thing I really don't like is to read other mamas make comments that basically tell a mom she is doing something wrong. Especially when that kind of comment is unsolicited.

I believe that I know my child better than any of you and I am very aware of the effect my actions and choices have on her. She is living a life that is very gentle and based on respect and intelligence. You have no need to worry at all about her. I do not need any advice at this time. If I do, I specifically ask it.

You all come across like you know all the answers but I don't buy that you have perfect children. Perfect children, perfect parenting, perfect families - they don't exist. We all make choices and some are not as good as others. When you have walked a mile in my shoes, then you can judge me and offer unsolicited advice. You all claim to have made choices in your homes that seem to work really well for you. That is great. But, you might want to ask yourselves why you did not just answer the question I asked and why you felt the need to offer all this unsolicited advice. What need in you was passing on that advice filling?


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

I'm sorry you are so frustrated with this thread.

I hope you don't mind my saying that I don't see what you see here. I don't see judgment and I don't think anyone meant to say they have all the answers (although I can relate to why you might think that). I see a bunch of individuals talking about ideas. And, I see *many* posts by busy mamas who took time to answer you question.

But, even though I don't understand, I am sorry that you weren't satisfied by this conversation. I hope you find the information you want and that you stay with MDC.


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Well, crud. I certainly was not judging you. I was asking. I was sharing my family 'stuff'. I'd go back and be more specific about the dog toys, but the post is gone and i don't remember all of it. I guess I would put the dog toys away for now, though.

I didn't think you are a bad mother, for gosh sakes. I thought you were asking for thoughts about punishment and I posted some of my thoughts. Maybe go back and reread what people wrote without putting a 'tone' on it. One can only add so many emoticons to try and convey 'lightness' , after all.


----------



## Snowy Owl (Nov 16, 2003)

I have found this thread to be very thought-provoking and interesting.
And Piglet's post, as usual, was terrific.
But I have to say I don't think the purpose of this forum is served when so many people 'jump on' someone like that . It clearly only discourages them. It's easy to feel picked on, although I'm sure that's not what anyone intended.
It's not 'us against them' here, right?


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

I think all of us respond in various ways to 'misbehavior'. It takes a lot t get me angry. I can't take hurting people or being mean. I wish i had perfect kids...well not really, because then that would mean they were robots. Although, wouldn't it be nice to be able to take the batteries out of a busy toddler or a nagging teen?







I think some of us have higher thresholds for normal 'misbehavior', which is really just impulse control issues for tiny children, which don't warrent punishment, just redirection. My own mother has said I am 'too patient', which she sees as a character flaw. So I don't talk to her about kid behavior.


----------



## allgirls (Apr 16, 2004)

The problem with asking "what is wrong" with something and it is something you believe in and do is that you are asking people to disagree with you and tell you why.

It's like me asking "what is wrong with formula" and I am a formula feeder(edited to add..I worded this wrong, I am not a formula feeder but was trying to make an analogy..sorry it wasn't good)...I am going to get some answers I don't like and some suggestions as to what I should have done instead. If I am not ready to hear the answers I should probably not ask the question.

I have been following this thread...it has been very helpful and thought provoking for me and I also thought it was pretty respectful. I didn't see you getting ganged up on at all but I am not sitting and reading from your perspective.

The biggest problem for me is not knowing why punishment is not the best way to go...I know that...the problem for me is knowing what to do instead. It's just so ingrained as a part of child raising that they must be punished and if you don't you are raising tyrants. This thread has certainly helped me with that.

Thanks everybody


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Well, I too am very sad you feel that way Kathy. You asked a great question and stimulated a good discussion.

On this board, one of the great things is how we all learn from each others' experiences. You may not have felt your example needed any input or critique, and that's fine. But it does serve as a very useful and "real" experience that others may be able to learn from. Don't forget that for every post there are likely to be several lurking. While book recommendations and philosophical discussions can be helpful, it is truly the real life examples that teach us the most. You just happened to provide an excellent example for expounding on the practice of non-punishment. I think for those who come here questioning, these are the discussions that are clearest to understand, those that centre around a specific situation that we can all relate to. I also find that laying out how I may have handled a given situation helps give *me* clarity of mind. In effect, by doing so the poster helps themselves as they have to think about it in more detail when typing it out, so it can have nothing to do with you as a parent and everything to do with the poster themselves. Teaching and learning intertwined, y'know? I truly doubt anyone was trying to criticize you, but I'm very sorry you felt that way.


----------



## InochiZo (Aug 17, 2004)

:
I was lurking and subscribed to the post. I too am sad that Kathy is upset. I was really enjoying the discussion and learning.


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *allgirls*
The problem with asking "what is wrong" with something and it is something you believe in and do is that you are asking people to disagree with you and tell you why...
If I am not ready to hear the answers I should probably not ask the question.

I agree. Why ask if you don't really want to know what other people think?

Quote:

I have been following this thread...it has been very helpful and thought provoking for me and I also thought it was pretty respectful. I didn't see you getting ganged up on at all but I am not sitting and reading from your perspective.
I've also really enjoyed this thread, and I am very sorry that Kathi is angry. It was never my goal to be rude, and I was not angry when posting. Just sharing my point of view.







I thought we'd managed to do a good job keeping things mellow thus far. Hope you are feeling better soon Kathi


----------



## sagira (Mar 8, 2003)

Piglet wrote:

Quote:

I guess, finally, the reason why I think punishment and consequences are "wrong" is because they are simply unnecessary. It very much IS possible to raise wonderful, self-disciplined, self-motivated children without having to exert parental power in this manner.
It's comforting to read that. Having long-term goals is great but effects not always immediately apparent.. especially with your first child and no previous experience with children (or children who have never experienced punishment/rewards/time-outs). I don't know any parent who parents in the same way I do and I tend to worry.. a lot.

Kathy, I'm sorry you feel this way. I didn't get any negative vibe from the posts. I thought they were all just sharing their experiences and opinions.

Cheers,


----------



## mommyofshmoo (Oct 25, 2004)

Hiya- I've been lurking for a few pages and I'm really sad that this thread turned sour for you, Kathi.

If it makes you feel better, I used punishments/consequences when I first started dealing with discipline stuff because that's what I needed at the time and it was helpful for me in the short run. It didn't work for me in the long run, so I started changing how I dealt with things. But i can see how some parents feel they need them some of the time.

Now I don't really beleive in punishments, but we do have rules and I try to guide a lot. It's a fine line when you pick your kid up and drag them out of a situation screaming and go home. Is that a punishment? a consequence? or just a reasonable adult response to a situation where a kid was unable to behave approprately? It could be any of the above depending on how the adult/child views it, the words that are said, etc.

Nomatter how GD we are or how little we beleive in punishment, I think we all occasionally force our kids into shoes, or carry them out of a room not to return, or say we won't do something till they eat more sandwich, or raise our voices when we loose our temper. We're all human and kids evoke similar feelings in all of us.

To some extent it's semantics, and a lot has to do with kid's perception. My dd often wrongly assumes I'm angry when I say and enforce a "no." She'll ask later why I got angry even though generally I wasn't angry. She probably saw the interaction as punishing even though I don't mean it that way. So I can say *I* don't beleive in punishment, but apparently my kid has a different opinion.







:

Anyway- I'm sorry if you felt attacked.


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

I am really sorry the orignal poster felt offended, however, I feel deleting all the posts was a *tad* immature--the equivalent of taking your ball and going home. I say that, because I think people just joining the thread should have the oppurtunity to know what the OP actually SAID!!

I didn't feel anyone was attacking the OP at all, and again, maybe because I wasn't in the situation personally...but people have to understand, as another poster touched on...when someone begins a thread with a slightly adversarial tone, it immediately creates an environment where some responding posters may feel as if they have to defend their choices...

I can't directly quote the OP because the post has been deleted *sigh* but I do recall something along the lines of (paraphrasing) "Why is punishing bad? If my child makes a mess, they have to clean it up...if my child hits me, I walk away or they get time out" etc ....now, I am paraphrasing, those ARE NOT the exact examples given...but I recall they were along those lines...

What I saw in response to that, were mamas, 99% of them, being very supportive, offering suggestions, personal experience from their own lives, tips that have worked for them, specific reasons why they don't use punishments (which is what the OP was asking in the first place!!)...etc... I didn't really see any judgement of the OP or her worth as a parent etc...only maybe people putting their own words to the things she described ---for example, some posters said that some of her examples sounded like natural or logical consequences which are a bit different than punishment etc...

Anway, I am sorry the posts were deleted and that the poster felt so attacked. I was enjoying this thread a lot...but at the same time... it does crank me a bit when someone takes their ball and goes home because they don't like what is being said...even though they specifically asked for advice/explanations etc...

It just seems like a knee jerk reaction.


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

I agree. I do not see anyone attacking the op as a parent or otherwise. I just saw people answering the op's questions.


----------



## Rainbow Brite (Nov 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*

I just don't understand why people feel the need to make comments and offer advice where it is unsolicited.


I think because it's an online community, and that's part of posting. I've been reading this, and certianly saw that people view things differently, but I did not see anyone attacking anyone. I know myself, I am a very sensitive person, and can interpret things people say to me in a way they probably didn't mean, so maybe that has happened here.

I'm glad I did read this though, as I really like Unschoolnma's philosophy and am hoping to learn more


----------



## Dar (Apr 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *captain crunchy*
Anway, I am sorry the posts were deleted and that the poster felt so attacked. I was enjoying this thread a lot...but at the same time... it does crank me a bit when someone takes their ball and goes home because they don't like what is being said...even though they specifically asked for advice/explanations etc...

Yeah, what she said.

In an online forum, your words are all you have. If you're not willing to take responsibility for them, don't post them. IMO.

Dar


----------



## the_lissa (Oct 30, 2004)

Yeah. This is the first foruma I have visited where you could even edit your posts. It forces you to own your words.


----------



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

I agree!

And dismissing all the people who took the time to answer the question sucks, IMO. But whatever...good thread for some of us, I guess.


----------



## 2much2luv (Jan 12, 2003)

Quote:

I am really sorry the orignal poster felt offended, however, I feel deleting all the posts was a *tad* immature--the equivalent of taking your ball and going home. I say that, because I think people just joining the thread should have the oppurtunity to know what the OP actually SAID!!
yeah that.

I don't understand, and maybe the OP can clear this up for me, why she doesn't think anyone answered her question.







That's really all I saw people doing here.


----------



## mamadawg (Jun 23, 2004)

I've been lurking on this thread since the beginning.

I didn't see any attacking going on. I was really enjoying the discussion. I'm sorry the original question got deleted. Seems a little immature to me too. As someone who is hypersensitive and apt to getting her feelings hurt easily, I understand how the OP may have felt hurt. But we're all suffering from a good discussion gone completely haywire now.

It's too bad. I was learning a lot from this thread. My girls are only 19 months old & we haven't been faced with discipline issues yet. I was getting a lot of good ideas here.


----------



## Snowy Owl (Nov 16, 2003)

It makes me unhappy to see the word 'immature' flaunted around like that.
I consider it name-calling, and though I wish the posts hadn't been deleted, everyone chiming in to say 'How immature' is kind of well....I would say 'immature' but if I said that than I would be 'immature' too, wouldn't I???








:


----------



## mamadawg (Jun 23, 2004)

I think calling an action immature is different than calling a person immature. The latter would be namecalling. I wasn't calling the OP immature, but I think what she did was a tad....well, you get the idea.

Substitute any other word you like in there, Snowy Owl. But deleted her posts ruined a very good discussion, IMO.


----------



## meco (Mar 1, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Zipporah*
Another example: on another thread we were discussing whether it was ever appropriate to swat your child's arm to prevent them from hurting themselves. One mama said that if her child reached out to touch a hot stove, she would not swat his arm b/c the natural consequences of touching a hot stove is getting burnt. Once again, this is creating an artificial environment for the child in which he operates in a vacuum. The natural consequence of reaching out to touch a hot stove is getting burnt, yes, *unless there is a caring person around to stop you.*


Snce this was me, and you are explaining my POV wrong, I just want to correct it.

I intervene with a word (out key word, "caliente" which my son now says when he is around something hot) and my stopping my son from doing something like touching the hot stove. I definitely do not hit him (or "swat" him). That was were we differed.

Quote:

*swat*
tr.v. swat·ted, swat·ting, swats
To deal a sharp blow to; slap.
n.
A sharp blow; a slap.
How is this any different from hitting a child?


----------



## kavamamakava (Aug 25, 2004)

I think Kathi wants people to answer the question in the title and maybe that's why she feels her posts in this thread are irrelevant. :/


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kavamamakava*
I think Kathi wants people to answer the question in the title and maybe that's why she feels her posts in this thread are irrelevant. :/

YES!!! I've been lurking and sending pms but I have to say YES that is exactly how I feel. I never asked for any specific info related to my life. I never said I was pro punishment and consequences. I am actually opposed to punishments and have only experimented with consequences once. I am still on the fence on that one. I only wanted generic answers to what is wrong with punishment and consequences not what is wrong with my parenting. I still do not understand how it got popular to critique me. Why did that even start? I asked repeatedly for posters to get back to the original question and was ignored.


----------



## kavamamakava (Aug 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
YES!!! I've been lurking and sending pms but I have to say YES that is exactly how I feel. I never asked for any specific info related to my life. I never said I was pro punishment and consequences. I am actually opposed to punishments and have only experimented with consequences once. I am still on the fence on that one. I only wanted generic answers to what is wrong with punishment and consequences not what is wrong with my parenting. I still do not understand how it got popular to critique me. Why did that even start? I asked repeatedly for posters to get back to the original question and was ignored.

I think you ended up defending punishment and consequences somehow and then felt attacked. But I DID post some personal examples from my life. I didn't really get any feedback. I was hoping to.

I tried something new last night. Skanda is sick and he was hungry and dinner was a little late. He sat down to eat but didn't have salad on his plate. He usually doesn't want it. We ended up with this picky little battle going on. "I don't want any of yours." "I don't want onions" "I don't want tomatoes" "Salad means lettuce" "I don't want the white dressing (they are all white)" And then big tantrum on the floor. His dad picked him up and put him in his room. I disagreed and tried to explain that Skanda was feeling sick and hungry and therefore his emotional outburst was fully predictable. He got upset that Skanda was "ruining" dinner and said I was spoiling him by allowing that behavior. I took a raincheck on that discussion and went to Skanda and sat on his bed with him and hugged him and offered him water and then we came back to the dinner table.
The new thing is that I hugged him and soothed him instead of waiting for him to cool down. He didn't want me to at first. He told me to get out of his room. He was angry for being put in there. I can totally see how giving him a "cool down" for his dinner table outburst didn't teach him anything and only created more emotional turmoil







His need was to have a good dinner and then a soothing bath and then bed. But he was beyond rational behavior due to being sick and hungry.
I'm hoping that if I continue to bring him closer rather than giving him space to work his emotions out, I can curb his violent behavior. He tends to hit me when he's mad


----------



## fullofgrace (Nov 26, 2002)

I didn't get to read through the entire thread until now, but from the quoted portions, it reads as if examples from one's parenting were given for how they have used a specific parenting technique. When information is not only offered, but used to demonstrate one side of an issue, the people it is shared with are going to also use it as the example it was offered as.

For instance, when someone says something to me in my offline life, I'm not going to ignore what they have said. I listen and reply based on what they have told me. I do the same thing online. I speak and comment on the words a member has chosen to post, because why would someone say something, yet not want it to continue to be a part of the conversation as a whole? For me, referring to previous posts simply puts a current post in context.

ETA: Oy! My GD part of the post got deleted by little hands.







Will have to rewrite that in a bit. Sorry! This post is out of order now. LOL


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

I would like to point out that this is rule number one here at MDC:

_Posting in a disrespectful, defamatory, adversarial, baiting, harassing, offensive, insultingly sarcastic or otherwise improper manner, toward a member or other individual, including casting of suspicion upon a person, invasion of privacy, humiliation, demeaning criticism, namecalling, personal attack, or in any way which violates the law._

I think that some of us, myself in included, forget this sometimes. I apologize for "ruining" this thread. I have learned a lot about punishment and consequences and I have learned a lot about how my personal examples can be misused against me. I felt attacked in this thread. I have learned that I, inadvertently, stepped into it by posting a real life example that did not clearly describe my views. Sometimes learning hurts and this has been one of those times for me. I hope that future visits to MDC go better.


----------



## fullofgrace (Nov 26, 2002)

Trying again, but far more brief...

For us imposed negative consequences and punishment just don't work, so that's why they are wrong for our family. My kids need to see a distinct correlation between the action and the resulting consequence for them learn something from the whole experience, and to take that knowledge with them when presented with a similar scenario. Punishments, when we tried them a long time ago, only caused the kids to focus on their hurt and upset (and looking back I think DUH! of course it would!!







), so the opportunity for a great discussion and lesson was lost.







Imposed negative consequences only showed them that *DH or I* caused the negative consequence to happen, not their actions, because *DH or I* chose the consequence and *DH or I* set it into motion. So we stopped using both of those! Natural consequences, however, display to our kids the true cause and effect of their behavior.

There are scenarios, though, in which I will intervene if safety is an issue. In those cases, if redirection does not work, I guess what I employ would be considered 'logical' consequences, because I will remove the kids from the danger situation so we can talk and work it out. (I should note that what is deemed to be dangerous varies from child to child in my family since I have special needs kiddos.)


----------



## kathipaul (Sep 24, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamadawg*
I think calling an action immature is different than calling a person immature. The latter would be namecalling. I wasn't calling the OP immature, but I think what she did was a tad....well, you get the idea.

Substitute any other word you like in there, Snowy Owl. But deleted her posts ruined a very good discussion, IMO.


Then, why don't you start a spin off thread?


----------



## Zipporah (Feb 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *meco*
Snce this was me, and you are explaining my POV wrong, I just want to correct it.

I intervene with a word (out key word, "caliente" which my son now says when he is around something hot) and my stopping my son from doing something like touching the hot stove. I definitely do not hit him (or "swat" him). That was were we differed.

Maybe this is an age thing? My dd is only a year old, and she is only just beginning to understand when i say "hot!" Now, she will stop when i say it, but earlier she didn't understand and would reach out anyway, sometimes with no warning whatsoever. That was when i would swat her hand away. Now i haven't needed to do it for a while b/c she understands the word "hot".

Quote:


Originally Posted by *meco*
How is this any different from hitting a child?










It's not different -- it *is* hitting a child, in the strictest sense. But in the situation i described, the hitting part is really incidental to the act of pushing the child's hand away from the source of danger. The "swatting" was only a function of the speed with which i had to move to prevent injury. Which, IMO, is substantially different from a punitive blow intended to create pain to the child. Perhaps my definition of swat is slightly different from the one you pasted; i use the word to mean more of a light, quick slapping/brushing motion, like you might do to get a mosquito off your arm.
Anyway, now we are getting into some major semantics -- i think we just differ on our feelings about physical intervention. I think there are occasions where a swat is the lesser of two evils, whereas you do not. That is ok, and i am sorry if i misrepresented your POV.


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kathipaul*
YES!!! I've been lurking and sending pms but I have to say YES that is exactly how I feel. I never asked for any specific info related to my life.

Maybe not, but you did give examples specific to your life, and that caused us to respond to them. There was never any disrespect intended, but if you use an example in a thread (such as your child and throwing toys etc) or even a hypothetical one, people are going to comment with their opinions. That's part of forum discussions IMO. I absolutely did not mean to hurt your feelings. It's just not how I operate.









Quote:

I still do not understand how it got popular to critique me. Why did that even start? I asked repeatedly for posters to get back to the original question and was ignored.
 I think people responding to your examples felt personal when it wasn't intended that way. It happens. Tone is hard to "get" sometimes on a message board, KWIM? I have to disagree that you were ignored when you asked us to answer the question. I know for a fact some of us did. Again, it's all good on my end and I hope you feel better soon


----------



## dalbert (Oct 16, 2002)

Alright, I have to be bold and pipe in so that I can face head on my greatest dilemma about the MDC boards. I've been primarily a lurker for the past couple years :LOL (gotta laugh a bit with the start of that sentence....feel like I'm at an AA mtg or something!) Well, that is up until this past week, when I've started posting again. Anway, having been a silent listener for so long, I believe my thoughts on this matter may represent the thoughts of at least some subset of lurkers.

When I first joined MDC, I guess it was a couple yrs ago (can't see it in this reply window!), I made a few posts, but mostly lurked. And I saw this kind of thing happen in threads a number of times. Frankly, it turned me off to posting. I was still reading though, after all, there really are so many wise sage women with wonderful and powerful words in this community and I've been such a huge Mothering fan since the day I found out I was pregnant (thanks to a wonderful friend who dropped off a stack of her back issues as soon as she heard the news and got me subscribed right away!). I'm philosophically very much aligned with most of this community of folks. However, as right on and amazing this group of (mostly) women tend to be, damn...we can be self-righteous in our views. I don't believe this is necessarily a bad quality. But I find that in this kind of environment, where tone is very limited to silly little faces







, it tends to be the case that writing style can largely dictate the range of emotions with which a person a person might respond. (I'm very familiar with this phenomenon, as I telecommute for work, so my communication is largely over email) People vary widely in their writing style and some can come off very blunt and abrasive at times without that critical tone factor. It can be incredibly deceptive. Mix that with self-righteousness and oooo boy...you got a potentially hostile miscommunication just waiting to happen. Seriously, no disrespect to self-rightousness, it certainly has it's place in the world. It just makes for a tricky mix with this limited emoticon environment. And, being the relatively sensitive person that I am, despite the fact that I had only been witness to such scenes and had never been personally attacked, still I decided early on not to post but to be a passive observer.

Fast forward to last week when I found myself confronted with a few parenting dillemmas, I opted to start posting again. I posted once in this thread towards the beginning, so I was subcribed to it and followed along. I saw it all growing...I was thinking in my head "lord, no girl...don't go playing devil's advocate with this group, you will be slayed!" Not in the sense that it would happen intentionally...that's not usually how it happens in this community. It's just the toneless self-righteousness factor coming into play.

I must say, now that I have a firm understanding of why this happens, I don't feel as threatened by it as I have in the past. I will likely keep posting despite this latest spat (that is, until my next big project starts rolling and I have to re-focus my attention towards my job!)

Anyway, I hope my thoughts on this issue (which is now a completely separate issue than what the OP wrote!







) provides a helpful way to think about things for at least some of the posters and lurkers out there. (I'm still a lurker at heart!







: )

Spread the peace, mamas.

di - mama to dd (11/01)


----------



## Piglet68 (Apr 5, 2002)

Well, I'm just glad you came back, Kathi. We all learn from each other, no matter what our POV's are.


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Piglet68*
Well, I'm just glad you came back, Kathi. We all learn from each other, no matter what our POV's are.


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Happy Mother's Day, everyone!!!








s


----------



## kavamamakava (Aug 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *IdentityCrisisMama*









Happy Mother's Day, everyone!!!








s

Thank You








And to you too!


----------



## User101 (Mar 3, 2002)

I am confused. When someone starts a thread, do they somehow have ownership of that thread? Do they get to decide what is and is not an acceptable answer? With the exception of the Activism forum, where debate is not allowed, it was my impression that threads sort of wander where they will, and, as long as it is still in the general vacinity of the original topic, it's all good.


----------



## PM (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:

So, if you feel *in the moment* that you will be meeting your child's needs *in the moment* by punishment that's what you do but don't punish because of some future lesson you want them to learn.
So wise! Excellent point! But, damn! That sentence is so terribly constucted! :LOL

Quote:

4) For the 15 yo who rode down the hill and killed himself on his bike - maybe his parents always imposed limits on him, so he didn't develop his own sense of judgement.
Thanks for deconstructing all that, EllienC. I had wanted to come to do it, but I never got the time.


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ParisMaman*
That sentence is so terribly constucted! :LOL


Hey!







:LOL


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

I couldn't read every reply, and a lot are missing?

But to answer the title question~

We do have expectations, both for practical living and for how we treat each other. I am not going to get into a semantics debate over logical/natural/ etc. but, we are all to treat each other respectfully, and clean up after ourselves. If someone isn't living up to that, we figure out why and it gets resolved. Nobody is allowed to continue being disrespectful, but it's hard to summarize how we resolve it, since it's a very intuitive process.

I think for me, what feels wrong with an arbitrary punishment, is that it doesn't really address the actual situation.

I am all for resolving conflicts, and the expectation that everyone commit to it, but I do think it has to about the actual problem, dealt with in the present, and not some abstract set of rules and punishments that we hit each over the head with to express our unhappiness.


----------

