# The Problem with Positive Phrasing



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

I know there have been a few discussions here lately about phrasing things positively, as in, "Do this..." instead of "Don't do that." I know I'm simplifying that a little bit, but I have been trying to do this a lot with my ds, who is a very determined little boy. But I have found a problem.

For example, there are two things he can't do to the kitchen table. He can't climb and stand on it, and he can't bang his utensil on it. We use it for lots of other things, though. We eat at it, we color at it, we wash it, we put things on it, etc.

So I tried to say what tables ARE for, instead of what they AREN'T for, and it was pretty ridiculous. Plus it wasn't clear enough to say, the table is for putting food on (nevermind the dangling participle, or whatever that is). What I wanted him to know is that it is NOT for banging.

So what should I do? Give up being positive? Offer the positive after the negative? Any ideas?


----------



## peaceful_mama (May 27, 2005)

how about 'eat with your spoon/fork'

Or sometimes they understand 'Don't bang' and then followed by what TO do instead. I think though the 'to do' needs to always be there. They're kids, they're learning what TO do....


----------



## faithnj (Dec 19, 2004)

I agree with Zaker's mom--- Kids do need to know what TO do. But leave out ALL negative phrasing???? I think it sounds good in theory. I think it's good to try and to keep the positives in mind. But that whole "People only hear the "bang" but don't hear the don't." I think that's a theory. I'm sure you're mom said "Don't bang on the table." And somehow, I bet you got her point.

You might want to eliminate a lot of negative phrasing. But if you find yourself twisting your mouth into pretzel shapes to avoid what come's naturally, I think your child will pick up on the unnaturalness or the lack of ease you feel when saying some of these things, and perhaps feel your words or intentions are manipulative. (I know I found it that way when my mom would talk to me like the books told her too! LOL!) Surely that's not the message you wish to convey. But when you have to try so hard to do what comes naturally in something as basic as this-- you actually ARE manipulating something, and I think some kids pick up on that. So while it's a good goal, I say don't kill yourself trying to be _perfect_ at it. As granddaddy would say, "Everything in moderation." Over time, you'll strike the right balance.

Faith


----------



## flyingspaghettimama (Dec 18, 2001)

Like zaker's mama said, you just have the item being described "backwards," sorta. With the spoon banging, I'd say, "spoons are for eating/treating gently/banging on the tupperware/whatever"; standing on the table, I'd say, "oh, it looks like you feel like climbing. Let's go outside/on (insert toy where climbing is acceptable)."

Basically, what _can_ they do - what is the way to "yes?"


----------



## nwaddellr (Jan 2, 2005)

We have problems with jumping on the couch/chair. I usually go with the "Please don't jump on the chair. If you want to jump, go to your bed." I'm pretty sure that would work for banging and climbing - if you want to bang, please go X.


----------



## Proudly AP (Jul 12, 2003)

i like, 'your utensil is for eating'

'your feet belong on the floor' or ifyou want to take it further, 'your feet belong on the floor, not on the table'


----------



## rmzbm (Jul 8, 2005)

"Utensils are for eating" is good!







If you're frusterated because of not seeing quicker results, please don't give up. It's normal to have to say things over & over...he is listening though! Don't give up even though it seems pointless, it's not!








Good luck!


----------



## ~member~ (May 23, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *flyingspaghettimama*
Like zaker's mama said, you just have the item being described "backwards," sorta. With the spoon banging, I'd say, "spoons are for eating/treating gently/banging on the tupperware/whatever"; standing on the table, I'd say, "oh, it looks like you feel like climbing. Let's go outside/on (insert toy where climbing is acceptable)."

Basically, what _can_ they do - what is the way to "yes?"









: If you were raised with don't. no, not, etc. it is hard to figure it all out, but it is worth it in the end, as it is empowering and provides less power struggles in the future.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

I came to the same conclusion you did. That sometimes I don't care what he does, I just want him to know specifically what NOT to do. I don't care if he builds with blocks, throws stuffed animals, stops playing altogether, builds with stuffed animals, lol. I just don't want him to throw blocks! lol
What I do, is say "Don't x. (insert explanation) You could do y if you want, or you can do something else." Something like that. So he knows that the important thing is to stop doing x, and that y is open ended, and just something to replace x. Make sense?
I use the same type of phrasing that nwaddellr uses. That leaves it open ended enough to give options, but also gives acceptable alternatives.
I think its probably best to have the positive be at the end, so that's the last thought they have from what they hear. I think "don't bang" leaves the image in their head of "banging" (what other image could it bring up? kwim?). So leave them with an image of something acceptable. I do believe kids understand "don't" I just think it is way easier to follow "don't" if you also have a "do".
(Like the "don't think of a pink elephant" thing. Way easier to "think of a blue giraffe")

Another thing is you could say "It's loud when you bang on the table. I want it to stay quiet." or "I worry that you might fall off the table. I want you to stay safe." (use whatever your real reasons are of course)
I like that, but in the moment it seems easier for both me and ds to just say "don't". I am trying to follow that with one of the totally positive ways I could have said it. So, I say "or I could have said xyz." I say it out loud, just to kinda get the hang of it. kwim?


----------



## Rigama (Oct 18, 2005)

How about asking your ds really silly things and then let him come up with the real answers. Then after he gives the real answers ask him the things he's not allowed to do. Worked every time for us.

YOU: do we shower on the table?
ds: NO!
You: Do we drive the table?
ds: No!
You: Do we...EAT the table?
ds:NO!
You: Well, what can we do at the table?
Ds: Eat, paint, wash etc.
you: Oh, I understand. But can we bang on the table?
Ds: No!


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

How about "Get off the table/Get down (remove child from table)" and "(using your hands to stop the spoon from banging) Stop. _Eat_ with your spoon"? Maybe you could add "stand on the floor only" to "get down"? What bothers you about the banging, specifically? (You don't have to answer.) For me, it's just too loud. So I have said "stop, too loud, gentle with the spoon."

When my little ones were into climbing onto the kitchen table around the age of 15-18 months (both my younger ones went through this phase), I used to take all the kitchen chairs and lay them down under the table whenever we weren't actually eating (or otherwise using them) when I got tired of removing them from the table and redirecting. (They were avid climbers, despite plenty of supervision. And they were fast and nearly silent about it, too.) They couldn't lift the chairs to put them upright, and without the chairs they couldn't get onto the table. And I tried to give them plenty of opportunity to climb in more appropriate places, to meet their need/drive for climbing.


----------



## mamaduck (Mar 6, 2002)

For me, it was about thinking in terms of meeting the child's immediate need and my priority at the time. So in that situation, describing what we *can* do at the table is positive, but doesn't address the child's immediate need. For whatever reason, he feels a need to climb up high and to bang on things. Personally, I have great respect for this sort of inclination -- whatever he is "primed" to learn right now involves climbing and banging. So he needs to do those things. The next question is, how can he do those things appropriately? And then that becomes your positive statement. "You can bang on the floor. You can climb on the sofa. Lets go climb on the slide. Lets bang on a drum." You get the idea.

I am also not opposed to negative statments about how things are used. EG -- _"Tables are not for banging on. You may bang on the floor."_ This is far better, IMO, than "Stop that. Don't do that." etc.


----------



## nonconformnmom (May 24, 2005)

Quote:

'your utensil is for eating'
While that statement is true, it could also be considered quite limiting. Utensils can legitimately be used for many things besides eating (stirring, administering meds, scooping out cookie dough, breathing on and sticking on the end of one's nose







: )

As an aside, I was reading of a study that showed that children demonstrate more creativity throughout their life if things are not initially labeled by use for them, but rather they are allowed to imagine uses for items on their own first (for example, "this is called a 'spoon', what do you think it could be used for?") ... However, that meets an educational objective whereas here we are discussing discipline so it is not direclty relevant. I do think it's of interest, in any case.


----------



## flyingspaghettimama (Dec 18, 2001)

Little Timmy, this is a potty. What sort of uses could you imagine for this potty? Yes. a splash pool...a bird feeder...a...


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

flyingspaghettimama,









I really like what mamaduck said.


----------



## nonconformnmom (May 24, 2005)

I believe I have a children's book that says just that ... "Is it a hat? Is it a milk bowl for the cat?"


----------



## marsupial*mama (May 13, 2006)

I don't think it particularly matters that we might feel silly saying certain things in a positive way when the conventions of our language/dialect would express them negatively or otherwise.

We're aiming for clarity, and our kids have not had the language exposure that we have. So any novel or creative way to express an idea has a better chance of being well received by them than a negatively formed request. You might wish you didn't have to say it in front of company, but if it gains compliance at a time that matters to you then I guess it's worth it?

As for me I say, "Climb down off the table" and "Banging with your fork hurts the table" if it leaves dents and marks or "Here, bang this instead" providing a suitable surface to hit. I think this has already been suggested.


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Thanks for all the ideas! This is the kind of discussion I wanted to hear.

I agree with Deva33mommy, I just wanted him to know what he couldn't do. He's very good at finding things to do.

For example, the banging. We do allow him to bang on the tray of his booster seat, which is very loud, but sooo satisfying for him. So I have a very viable alternative for him, and I started out by saying, "Bang on the tray." And then he did a couple of times, and then he banged on the table, watching me. I just don't think I was giving him enough information. He kept trying to figure out what I was saying. Would I just tell him to bang on the tray every time he banged on the table? Could he bang on the table? Why did I care?

So now I tell him, "No banging on the table, bang on your tray instead. That can ruin the table." I'm not sure he really gets "ruin", but I guess he will someday, and I know he'll stop testing the hypothesis and give up on the table banging someday, too. At least my dd finally did.

Anyway, I guess I'm starting to reach the conclusion that while I want to be very positive with him, he can handle being told no, or don't. I'm still keeping them to a minimum, but like FaithNJ said, I'm not going to twist my mouth around trying to figure out how to phrase something when it's much clearer to tell him, "No, we don't do that. We do this instead." I mean, if we can't figure out negatives, and really only think of the thing that we're NOT supposed to be doing, why do most languages rely on negating a verb? I think we can wrap our brains around it, even at the tender age of 14 months.


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *marsupial*mama*
I don't think it particularly matters that we might feel silly saying certain things in a positive way when the conventions of our language/dialect would express them negatively or otherwise.

We're aiming for clarity, and our kids have not had the language exposure that we have. So any novel or creative way to express an idea has a better chance of being well received by them than a negatively formed request. You might wish you didn't have to say it in front of company, but if it gains compliance at a time that matters to you then I guess it's worth it?

As for me I say, "Climb down off the table" and "Banging with your fork hurts the table" if it leaves dents and marks or "Here, bang this instead" providing a suitable surface to hit. I think this has already been suggested.

Yes, these are all good. I don't worry about company, or about gaining compliance particularly, as he's only 14 months.

But here's another one? What about hitting, a lovely habit he's picked up? I don't think it's enough to tell a baby this young that hitting hurts. "Hurts" is a pretty abstract concept. I don't see any way around telling him no.


----------



## marsupial*mama (May 13, 2006)

"Hurts" is not an abstract concept when you demonstrate it. Personally, I think actions speak clearer than words - so my response to hitting would be to recoil with an "Ouch!" and offer a genuine demonstration that I don't like it. It seems quite unnecessary to say "We don't blah blah" when my manner and gesture clearly demonstrate that it's not on.


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *marsupial*mama*
"Hurts" is not an abstract concept when you demonstrate it. Personally, I think actions speak clearer than words - so my response to hitting would be to recoil with an "Ouch!" and offer a genuine demonstration that I don't like it. It seems quite unnecessary to say "We don't blah blah" when my manner and gesture clearly demonstrate that it's not on.

Hmm. I think I'll have to disagree. The first time my ds hit my dd, they were both playing in the kitchen while I was cooking. He walked up to her with a serving spoon, which he'd been banging on a pot, and thwacked her on the head. Really hard. She started shrieking, I got right down there and was clearly alarmed and disturbed and trying to help her feel better, and he walked up to her and did it again.

Now, I don't think my ds is a psychopath or anything, but I think he was much, much more interested in that exciting reaction that he got than he was in the fact that I was alarmed by it. I'm not sure he could tell it hurt her, though he often tries to comfort her when she hurts herself, looking concerned and making soothing noises. But assuming that a one year old child is going to feel enough remorse and empathy to not hit again when they get such a good reaction would be unfair to my dd.

And I did try that method for a while. I would recoil, say "Ouch, ouch! It hurts when you hit mommy!" or "That hurt Ramona! She's upset!" Then he'd laugh, and try to do it again, at which point I would stop him before hitting and try to redirect, but I had to have something pretty spectacular up my sleeve to get him distracted. So now I'm trying the very serious, down by his face, low voice, "No, Luther, we do not hit. Hitting hurts. Do not hit." This seems to be working much, much better, and his "experimental" hitting has dropped off enormously.


----------



## pookel (May 6, 2006)

I think "ouch" is pretty concrete if you remember to voice it when your kid gets hurt. Obviously, you don't *want* your kid to get hurt, but since they're always falling and banging into things at this age ... at least mine is!







I try to make sure and say "ow! did that hurt?" whenever he hurts himself and cries, in addition to comforting him of course, so that he has words to associate with the feeling.

Along these lines, I was amazed that "hot" was one of his earliest words, but it's probably not surprising since he heard it from me after I accidentally fed him a bite of food that was too hot and burned his mouth.







Now if I hand him something that's too hot, he'll say "ha! ha!" and give it back for me to blow on and cool it down.


----------



## marsupial*mama (May 13, 2006)

Well if a gesture doesn't communicate it, words aren't going to either are they?









Others might not like my methods but I once stepped back and let things take their natural course. Younger brother gonged older brother. Older brother gonged younger brother back. They both stood side-by-side howling with pain for a little while and after that, we hardly ever had trouble with younger brother whacking his siblings on the head ever again.







:


----------



## Aurorah (Jan 6, 2005)

I try to do a lot of facial expressions and gestures when I am communicating that I don't want my (17mos) daughter to do something or to encourage that she does something. So if she's hitting the dog, I will say "We don't hit the dog. [nodding & cheerful tone] We are very gentle! The puppy loovvees to be petted nicely!"

Also, if she hits me, I do a short but exaggerated "ouch! That hurt mommy! [cry] But if you are gentle, I am happy! Thank you, Lauren!! Thank you for being gentle!" She really does respond to that.

So I don't dwell on the negatives even though they are placed here and there in my words to her.

I am a sign language interpreter so sometimes I can use ASL to show the negatives without being too heavy in the negative speech. I think that helps, too.


----------



## kyangel80 (Oct 5, 2005)

I'm sorry, but this gets so confusing for me. I believe in positive re-inforcement. While working with children I learned to offer alternatives, thus "re-direction". Is this re-direction that you all are talking about? Or is that a GD dirty word from mainstreamers? For instance, if the children were screaming and we were indoors where we use a more quiet voice I would say something like "Oh, are you guys excited? When we are excited we can clap are hands!" and all the children would start doing that. Power of suggestion right? OR wrong? BUT if I said something like "Friends, I wanted to remind you that we are indoors and we need to use our inside voice AND if you are excited you may clap your hands instead" would that be the same thing?







:


----------



## Inci (Apr 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaduck*
For me, it was about thinking in terms of meeting the child's immediate need and my priority at the time. So in that situation, describing what we *can* do at the table is positive, but doesn't address the child's immediate need. For whatever reason, he feels a need to climb up high and to bang on things. Personally, I have great respect for this sort of inclination -- whatever he is "primed" to learn right now involves climbing and banging. So he needs to do those things. The next question is, how can he do those things appropriately? And then that becomes your positive statement. "You can bang on the floor. You can climb on the sofa. Lets go climb on the slide. Lets bang on a drum." You get the idea.

Yes, that's what I was going to say, too. When a toddler tries to climb a table, it's not really about the table at all - it's about his need to climb!
Every time the 22 month old I care for starts banging toys/objects inappropriately, I say something like, "You want to bang! Cup is not for banging. Bang the drum!" If he continues to bang the cup instead, after I've verbally suggested and modeled banging the drum, I'll take the cup away and calmly say, "It seems like you're not ready to use this. You can drum, or ______" (filling in the blank with another acceptable activity).

If a child is coloring on the wall, I wouldn't say, "Walls are for dividing rooms, and hanging art on" - I'd say, "Here's a piece of paper!"

If a child throws a block across the room, I wouldn't say, "Blocks are for building," I'd say, "Here's a soft ball you can throw!" (Or, "Throwing blocks is not safe, but you can throw this soft ball.")

If a child finds a tube of toothpaste and rubs it all over herself, I wouldn't say, "Toothpaste is for brushing teeth," I'd say, "You want to get messy - let's fingerpaint in the bathtub!"

That is, it's usually not about the object the child's using inappropriately - it's about the need s/he was trying to fill (e.g. the need for physical activity or a sensory experience), by using the most convenient materials s/he could find.


----------



## kyangel80 (Oct 5, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Inci*
If a child is coloring on the wall, I wouldn't say, "Walls are for dividing rooms, and hanging art on" - I'd say, "Here's a piece of paper!"

If a child throws a block across the room, I wouldn't say, "Blocks are for building," I'd say, "Here's a soft ball you can throw!" (Or, "Throwing blocks is not safe, but you can throw this soft ball.")

If a child finds a tube of toothpaste and rubs it all over herself, I wouldn't say, "Toothpaste is for brushing teeth," I'd say, "You want to get messy - let's fingerpaint in the bathtub!"

That is, it's usually not about the object the child's using inappropriately - it's about the need s/he was trying to fill (e.g. the need for physical activity or a sensory experience), by using the most convenient materials s/he could find.

Very well put, ITA with this idea. This is very explanatory in an understandable kind of way. I think focusing on the need takes away the "need for discipline" that some people may mistakenly apply here(not neccessarily anyone here). I will use this as an example for my more mainstream friends who tend to think that children marking on walls are just misbehaving or that this is a matter of learned behavior and they need to learn not to do it, yk? I think alot of people miss the point that children learn alot by doing and that as parents we need to identify their needs and appropriately direct them.


----------



## northcountrymamma (Feb 24, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *natensarah*
"No banging on the table, bang on your tray instead. That can ruin the table." I'm not sure he really gets "ruin", but I guess he will someday, and I know he'll stop testing the hypothesis and give up on the table banging someday, too. At least my dd finally did.

Just a thought, but since "ruin", is such an abstract term for a child of that age, and it doesn't seem to be the banging that you are opposed to just the table getting destroyed...why don't you just put a placemat down in his spot.
Banging can make some sweet music from a one year olds perspective. And it seems a bit confusing that he can bang in one place that he eats, just not the other.

I know this thread is about the way we phrase things, but if we don't have to discipline, just change things around a bit, isn't that more desirable than saying anything.

However, I also agree with the PP about giving them a better alternative for their energy if you in fact do want the action to be stopped.


----------



## Aurorah (Jan 6, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Inci*
That is, it's usually not about the object the child's using inappropriately - it's about the need s/he was trying to fill (e.g. the need for physical activity or a sensory experience), by using the most convenient materials s/he could find.

What about for hitting people or animals? When the action is most definitely inappropriate? I understand that we can say, "Oh you want to hit! Here is a pillow - go to town!" but is there any attention on the fact that hitting is not okay? If so, when?


----------



## Roar (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aurorah*
What about for hitting people or animals? When the action is most definitely inappropriate? I understand that we can say, "Oh you want to hit! Here is a pillow - go to town!" but is there any attention on the fact that hitting is not okay? If so, when?

I'd say something like "Hitting hurts cats" "Hitting hurts people" and then direct the child to hitting the pillow. We made a point of using the word "hurts" when our son fell and was hurt and he made the connection pretty quickly. Also, I found that I had sort of an "uh uh" noise that just came out in those situations. It quickly conveyed that it what was happening wasn't okay.


----------



## KCMommy (Jun 24, 2006)

This thread is an interesting read. My two cents: I avoid "no" and negativity as much as possible by avoiding potentially negative situations and also by being very tolerant. Almost nothing is out-of-bounds to my 17 mo DD in our house. But, I have to agree with a couple of the PPs that sometimes "don'ts" can be helpfull. I have been experimenting a lot and I think I just confuse dd if I keep redirecting or distracting her from a taboo activity without making it clear that the activity is undesireable. I do, of course, follow up the "Please don't run onto the road" type phrase with an explanation of why and alternatives. But I don't think she really grasps the concept as well if I just say, "Oh, you want to run on the road. You feel like exploring? Lets go check out the park, instead." I liked Natensarah's example about confusion over the boundaries of banging on the table.


----------



## pjlioness (Nov 29, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *marsupial*mama*
Others might not like my methods but I once stepped back and let things take their natural course. Younger brother gonged older brother. Older brother gonged younger brother back. They both stood side-by-side howling with pain for a little while and after that, we hardly ever had trouble with younger brother whacking his siblings on the head ever again.







:

That can work, and when it does, great! Unfortunately, it didn't go that way in my house, so I have to work harder to keep them from whacking each other repeatedly in frustration. Not easy, but ds1 does get it here and there. It helps if I don't get angry at him when he starts it.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kyangel80*
I'm sorry, but this gets so confusing for me. I believe in positive re-inforcement. While working with children I learned to offer alternatives, thus "re-direction". Is this re-direction that you all are talking about? Or is that a GD dirty word from mainstreamers?

I don't do intentional reinforcement (behaviorism style), positive or negative.
I do redirect exactly like you are saying. Redirect in a way that honors the original impulse. Actually, I'd say that's my main discipline strategy at this point, and it's working wonderfully.







I love your examples too! I'm going to have to keep that wording in mind.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aurorah*
What about for hitting people or animals? When the action is most definitely inappropriate? I understand that we can say, "Oh you want to hit! Here is a pillow - go to town!" but is there any attention on the fact that hitting is not okay? If so, when?

Well, hitting indicates that there is something that dc is trying to express. THey are just not expressing that in an acceptable way. So, I'd say "if you want the dog to move, tell her 'MOVE' or come get me." Or, "If you want me to read a book to you, put the book in my hands."
(those would be preceded with "don't hit, the dog doesn't like to be hit." or something else saying what not to do and a short honest explanation why (if an explanation is needed). Though I am finding that ds does not need or want explanations for certain things at this point. I think it takes away from the learning from the situation. He KNOWS that I don't like to be hit, but I think my telling him that every time is a bit harsh for him. Like a reminder that he did something that made me unhappy. Even though he knows right when he did it that he shouldn't have. He'd kinda shut down, and not take any steps to make it "right" or do an alternative thing. All he'd want to do was nurse, which I took as a means for him to reconnect with me.
I actually started saying- "Don't hit me. Lets do that again a better way. This time you can x" (where x is whatever acceptable alternative to his original impulse). He can take that, and try it again with gentle touches (if his impulse was just that he was excited and wanted to play), or whatever.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *natensarah*
For example, the banging. We do allow him to bang on the tray of his booster seat, which is very loud, but sooo satisfying for him. So I have a very viable alternative for him, and I started out by saying, "Bang on the tray." And then he did a couple of times, and then he banged on the table, watching me. I just don't think I was giving him enough information. He kept trying to figure out what I was saying. Would I just tell him to bang on the tray every time he banged on the table? Could he bang on the table? Why did I care?

Yes, I totally saw this too. That redirecting, without first telling him exactly why, was kinda like "ok, mom wants me to bang on my tray." But didn't tell him anything about me not wanting him to bang on the table (we never had that situation, just using your example). So, in his mind, both are acceptable, depending on what he wants to do.
I think it is important to specify what we DON'T want dc to do. I do believe there are ways to do that that don't involve negatives. "Banging on the table can make marks in it. I want it to stay nice and smooth."
That could work for an older toddler. Perhaps ds could get that. But I still think that "don't" is very clear and easy for him. He gets it. I can even say "don't x" without adding alternatives (because I'm trying to think of them) and he'll stop and wait for me. hehehe But I always try to come up with an alternative way for him to express his impulse/energy. Or I ask him to help come up with one.
The reason I can see for wanting to avoid "don't" would be that its a command. It doesn't really invite cooperation. kwim? I'd think that it would be easier for dc to do as we wish if we invited cooperation instead of commanding a specific thing. But at this point, ds is cool with the few donts that I say. Almost everything is cooperation based and/or consensual.


----------



## Inci (Apr 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aurorah*
What about for hitting people or animals? When the action is most definitely inappropriate? I understand that we can say, "Oh you want to hit! Here is a pillow - go to town!" but is there any attention on the fact that hitting is not okay? If so, when?

Yes, I believe there can be attention to the fact that hitting is not okay. Like PPs, though, I try to end with a positive even if I start with a negative.
I might first make an exaggerated sad/hurt face and say, "OUCH! That hurt", either speaking for myself (if s/he's hitting me), or speaking "for" the animal that's being hit.
This is a good example you gave, because there could be multiple reasons for why a child is, e.g., hitting a cat...the trick is to pinpoint the need and respond to that. Is he hitting the cat because he's trying to pat it and is overexcited, and thus it comes out as hitting? Then, it would be helpful to model "gentle touch." (Lately, I've taken to cheerfully saying to overzealous, huggy toddlers, "So and so loves GENTLE hugs!"). If he's hitting the cat because he's mad about something, that would be the time to validate (after doing the "OUCH!" thing), "You're feeling mad! Hit this pillow!" If he's hitting the cat because he likes the yelp-y sounds it makes when it's hurt, I'd give him a toy that squeaks when you squeeze it. If he's hitting the cat in a rhythmic fashion, thus indicating a physical urge to bang in rhythm, I'd give him a drum. If he's hitting the cat out of curiosity, I'd share his excitement about the cat, but ask him to (and physically help him to, if necessary) stop touching the cat, so we can watch the cat and see what it's going to do next. (Oh, look at it run! Isn't it fast!







)

It's often quite tricky for me to figure out what the child's need is! And when s/he doesn't respond to my attempts to help, I assume it's because I guessed wrong about the need. And I just keep trying.

Also, I work in a childcare center, with toddlers, and I initiate a lot of doll play with the children. We'll each have a doll, and I'll hug and kiss my doll, rock it, sing to it, smile at it, say "I love you," etc., and the toddlers watch intently... some of them will then model my actions and be affectionate with their own dolls, others will throw their dolls on the floor to see what happens. I scoop those thrown babies up and ask if they're okay, kiss their boo-boos, etc.

Often, two toddlers will get into a squabble over a toy, and start crying and/or hitting. An adult will rush over to help, of course. If we have enough adults present to allow for it, I will go over NOT to the children who are struggling, but to the other toddler(s) watching wide-eyed from the sidelines. This happened yesterday, actually. Two 3-yr-olds were arguing over who got to park their bike where, and when my co-worker went to help them, I went to the 2-yr-old who was staring at the whole thing, and talked with him - "Wow, Mackenzie is crying and stamping her feet. She's so mad! She wanted that parking spot! So did Nolen - he's mad, too! Betty is helping them. She's helping them talk to each other."
My goal was to help the 2-yr-old develop empathy, an understanding of emotional expression, etc. Sometimes it's easier for children to listen to suggestions for how to handle emotions (e.g. alternatives to hitting) when they're not in the thick of things. They can learn from others' experiences as well as their own.

Some of my co-workers will encourage a child who has just hit/pushed/bit another to go up to the injured party and ask, "Are you okay?", offer to help them up, get the ice, give a gentle touch, etc. I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I agree that it's important for the one who hurt the other to try and make amends. On the other hand, I know that when someone hurts me, I want them to then stay AWAY from me, at least for a while so I can have space to calm down. I've seen some hittees freak out even more when the hitter comes over to try to kiss them or whatever.
What do you think? What would you do??


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

Quote:

Some of my co-workers will encourage a child who has just hit/pushed/bit another to go up to the injured party and ask, "Are you okay?", offer to help them up, get the ice, give a gentle touch, etc. I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I agree that it's important for the one who hurt the other to try and make amends. On the other hand, I know that when someone hurts me, I want them to then stay AWAY from me, at least for a while so I can have space to calm down. I've seen some hittees freak out even more when the hitter comes over to try to kiss them or whatever.
What do you think? What would you do??
I have read the whole thread but I just wanted to comment on this quote first. When you say encourage, do you mean "try to nicely force" or do you mean that the hitter is expressing desire to make things *right* and the coworker tries to find a way to help them? I think it is a very important distinction. If my daughter were to hurt someone else, I would first protect the victim, removing them or my daughter from the situation temporarily, making sure the victim was okay, giving hugs or whatever the victim wanted --- while my daughter was present so she could see me modeling how I try to deal with people who have been hurt. If my daughter expressed interest in making things *right* --- for example if she tried to approach the victim or wanted to give kisses etc, I would see if it was okay with the victim, gauge their body language etc ... but I would not try to make my daughter say sorry/give kisses/etc. Firstly, because I want her actions to be genuine with the hopeful outcome that she will actually feel the empathy or whateve rand really desire to make it right, not because I am *making* her. Secondly, at these very young ages, I feel like children still see us as an extension of themselves (even if they are self aware). I model for her how I handle situations and believing that children are social beings who want to do the socially acceptable thing and who want to please their caregivers, I believe that eventually she will gain understanding and empathy for people around her. I am already seeing signs of this even at 13 months old, just by modeling and striving in every situation to be non coercive.

Regarding negative phrasing, well I think sometimes we overthink things. I do strive to phrase things positively, modeling for our daughter that in almost all situations, an agreeable solution can be reached and modeling how we try to problem solve until everyone's needs and wants are met (though of course this isn't possible in every single situation).

In the example of her biting, which we have struggled with recently though it seems to be tapering off, I have handled it with "Bailey, I DO NOT like to be bitten, it hurts my body." in a firm but non-punitive way, then I tell her what I do like. "Mama likes to be kissed/hugged/raspberried (whatever)"...then if she wants to do that, she does... I usually do that in situations where I get the feeling her impulse is not to bite but to get my attention or whatever --- other times I get the vibe she does want to bite something, so I give her many alternatives to bite something.

I don't think there is anything wrong with telling her how I feel about something. I don't know how I can phrase that biting hurts my body in a positive way







I don't put a moral or emotional context in it -- one of my pet peeves is when people tell their kids "that hurts me" (like emotionally) because I feel (as sledg put it so wonderfully in one of her posts that I still have) that how I feel inside is not as a result of how my child acts. However, biting does hurt my body, physically, and I tell her that and that I don't like it. There is no punishing, guilt trips, crying faces, etc... just matter of fact, then move on happily.

Hope that helps at all.


----------



## soladeo (Feb 19, 2005)

Great thread







:

I agree with a lot of what's being said and just wanted to share something my mom did with my 2-year old ds. She's helping to take care of him as I recover from foot surgery. Anyway, our cats climb up into the windowsill. My ds tried to climb into the windowsill. My mom said, "Are you a cat?" He got a big kick out of this. "no," he said,giggling. "No" agreed my mom "You are a boy, and boys can't fit into windowsills. Come show me what boys do." And they went off to the play area. Of course, she had to do this a few times before he stopped.

In regards to negative phrasing: I think we need to be in the spirit of the law rather than the letter. The idea of gd parenting is to listen, respect, and see things from a child's perspective. There is a difference between screaming, "No, don't, stop it!!!!" again and again day after day and instructing calmly using "don't" or "no," along with positive alternatives. It means being in the moment and using your instincts, rather than following a rule book.


----------



## ~member~ (May 23, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aurorah*
What about for hitting people or animals? When the action is most definitely inappropriate? I understand that we can say, "Oh you want to hit! Here is a pillow - go to town!" but is there any attention on the fact that hitting is not okay? If so, when?

I tell my children, "Hugs and kisses!" "Hands are for holding." "Gentle, please." And then use physical re-direction. ie-grab baby's hand and demonstrate how to be 'gentle' or 'nice'.


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Deva33mommy*
The reason I can see for wanting to avoid "don't" would be that its a command. It doesn't really invite cooperation. kwim? I'd think that it would be easier for dc to do as we wish if we invited cooperation instead of commanding a specific thing.

ITA agree with this. But I agree that my ds doesn't seem too hung up on it, either. In fact, he takes the few don'ts in his life very matter-of-factly. Unlike his older sister.

The other reason I don't want to use a lot of negativity at this age is that I think it can scare babies, and lead them to believe that you think their world is unsafe. And even though it apparently causes a hell of a lot of work for me, I really do like to have my children actively exploring as much as possible.


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Inci*
Some of my co-workers will encourage a child who has just hit/pushed/bit another to go up to the injured party and ask, "Are you okay?", offer to help them up, get the ice, give a gentle touch, etc. I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I agree that it's important for the one who hurt the other to try and make amends. On the other hand, I know that when someone hurts me, I want them to then stay AWAY from me, at least for a while so I can have space to calm down. I've seen some hittees freak out even more when the hitter comes over to try to kiss them or whatever.
What do you think? What would you do??

I wanted to reply to this, because this happens sometimes around here. If my dd hurts her brother, she often wants to make him feel better pretty quickly, mercurial little three-year-old that she is. Sometimes when she comes to tell him she's sorry, he flinches, afraid that she'll hurt him again, and then I just suggest she wait a little while. But sometimes he gives her a little head hug back, or a kiss, and then I'm the only one with the tears welling up.


----------



## karinasusy (Jul 12, 2005)

I think sometimes we tend to talk too much. I find myself overexplaining sometimes and my son just "turns off" (and he's 8 years).

In your specific situation that you mentioned (about banging on the table), I wouldn't say anything at all. I would give a pot or a drum or something and just say "bang this".


----------



## mommy68 (Mar 13, 2006)

Does your child have a musical instrument like a drum? Maybe you can offer to let him go play with his drum before supper (or after is best) if he doesn't do it with his utensils at the table. If he doesn't listen then that will be his punishment, no instrument.

As far as climbing on the table, my daughter did this between 2-3 yrs old. She would also climb on other furniture. It was more of a physical redirection of taking her down and telling her not to do it because she might fall off. I have to use "the fearful approach" with my youngest child because she is a dare-devil, afraid of nothing.







: If I make her scared of something then she will be less likely to do it. Plus she does gymnastics now (4 yrs old) and if she feels like climbing I just tell her she can wait til her class each week and climb there. That usually works.

When your child wants to climb on the table (if time permits) you could offer to take him outside to play for a while and get his energy out or just do that automatically each day so he isn't tempted to get on the table in the first place.


----------



## pjlioness (Nov 29, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommy68*
As far as climbing on the table, my daughter did this between 2-3 yrs old. She would also climb on other furniture. It was more of a physical redirection of taking her down and telling her not to do it because she might fall off. I have to use "the fearful approach" with my youngest child because she is a dare-devil, afraid of nothing.







: If I make her scared of something then she will be less likely to do it.

I cannot agree with scaring a child like this. Redirecting, yes, but not scaring. I believe that if you keep telling a child s/he will hurt hirself, s/he is more likely to do so...and, if s/he does the thing you keep telling hir will get hir hurt and s/he doesn't get hurt, then s/he might stop trusting you.

My boys both like to climb. There are times I wish they wouldn't, and I suppose I could keep them from doing so by scaring them, but I won't. (There are times I tell them that I am concerned that they will fall, but I don't tell them they will/might as though I can see the future.) The result is that they are reasonably confident in their abilities. They have fallen, and have learned form those falls.


----------



## Heffernhyphen (May 3, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Rigama*

YOU: do we shower on the table?
ds: NO!
You: Do we drive the table?
ds: No!
You: Do we...EAT the table?
ds:NO!
You: Well, what can we do at the table?
Ds: Eat, paint, wash etc.
you: Oh, I understand. But can we bang on the table?
Ds: No!

As Dave Barry says, I am not making this up.

One day the kid I babysit for was standing on the end table. So I said, "Conrad, do we stand on the table?"

And serious as he could be, he replied, "Yeah, look, I'm standing on it now."


----------



## Mizelenius (Mar 22, 2003)

With a very young child, sometimes I don't say anything. In the case of hitting, I take her hand and help her stroke me. In the case of banging, I just giver her a substitute. It's been working so far.

It seems to work better than adding talking usually. With talking, it can be distracting and sometimes she'll continue just to see my reaction. With no words, the focus is automatically on what she should do, not "blah, blah, blah."

Oops-- just noticed karinasusy said the same thing!!!







And you're right-- my older DD tirns off, too. I'eve learned not to do it with DH even! When I am explaining (more than briefly) why I disagree, he sees it as nagging . . . .I don't like it when he does it either.


----------

