# The Profile of a GD Family



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

I've been reading through a lot of threads here and discovered that gentle discipline is a philosophy of sorts with a methodology (or 'ies' depending who is asked), not just a description of one's general disposition regarding discipline of children.

So, I am wondering about whether you who are practicing this style/method/philosophy are choosing to do so based upon research, intuition, hope for a specific outcome for your children or something else, or all of the above. What is your assurance that this will result in the effects you are hoping to achieve in your families and society at large (an assumption that this is somewhat utilitarian- greater good sort of thing).

I am certain that you have all at least come across the myriad examples of how various psychology-based philosophies/methods have failed in one way or the other and sometimes with disastrous results. How do you know this won't happen to you? Without getting into the details and individual interpretations of the following, I have friends who were raised according to the Dr. Spock method who now struggle immensely with self-discipline issues and more. They say that their parents sought to help them to develop problem-solving skills, but in their efforts, neglected the importance of boundaries. Many would critisize the parents for missing this all-important aspect of parenting, saying it was not the method that failed, but the parents themselves, and they might be right. My concern is that in adopting a set standard that has evolved outside the needs of your family and then fitting your family into it, could you miss something very important as well?

Attachment parenting is an interesting example of what wasn't (though may have become?) an example of what I'm attempting to describe. Who knew that meeting the needs of an infant was a philosophy of parenting? It may have become that, but the principles seem to lend themselves to the normal interaction between two people who love each other. GD, however, seems to require a lot of retrofitting and somewhat luxurious living, from my perspective.

I completely agree with gentleness, peacefulness, and a generally pleasant atmosphere in the home, but GD seem to go a lot further.

I can't fathom discussing every impulse of my children with them, letting them decide whether or not they'll clean up after themselves, allowing 'natural' consequences of unacceptable behaviour to affect the whole family, etc....

What I'm wondering is, what is the profile of a family who can do this successfully. Are there mothers here with four and more born in consecutive years who stay at home, have no family support, a husband who works long hours and has to travel, a tight budget, and are pregnant, who manage an orderly home (according to your own definition), who are successfully following all the rules (most of the time), and feel that this is really working for them?

A cursory look indicates to me that ideally, a GD family would consist of 2 parents, one child or two that are significantly spaced, their own home (landlords do not take kindly to 'natural consequences' for broken things- they want $), and a budget that allows for the choices that a child makes (like not eating lunch and wasting food, ruining items that must be replaced for the family to function, etc).

Don't misunderstand my intentions or my mothering- I'm not flaming or running a kiddie boot camp and my littles are well-behaved with a lot of freedom. And I don't think they'd burn the house down if I adopted GD.

Tell me your thoughts! I am interested.


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 

A cursory look indicates to me that ideally, a GD family would consist of 2 parents, one child or two that are significantly spaced, their own home (landlords do not take kindly to 'natural consequences' for broken things- they want $), and a budget that allows for the choices that a child makes (like not eating lunch and wasting food, ruining items that must be replaced for the family to function, etc).

.

I very much feel this way. I don't see how with our budget, our schedule, etc we could work the non coercive end of GD.


----------



## Thalia the Muse (Jun 22, 2006)

I think what you're describing is less GD than something further on the scale -- what I've seen described as "consensual living."


----------



## angie3096 (Apr 4, 2007)

No, we do not spend any more money on food than the average family. What dd doesn't want to eat is put in the refrigerator until she is hungry.

I don't believe my child is any more likely to break things than a child in a non GD household. In fact I can't think of anything that she has broken that was not a toy that we just threw away. Any valuables of mine are well out of her reach.

I do not let her decide whether or not she will clean up after herself. But I do let her decide when. And she doesn't get access to any additional toys until she cleans up the ones she has out.

I don't know what you mean by allowing natural consequences to affect the whole family. Can you give an example?

You seem to have a mistaken idea of GD. GD does not mean that the child is allowed to do whatever she pleases. My daughter is discliplined. That's what the D in GD stands for! There can be discipline without punishment. Discipline means education. I teach her to behave. I just don't shame or bully her into it.








Angie


----------



## hippymomma69 (Feb 28, 2007)

Hmmm...I think I have a different definition of GD than you









I'm a soon to be single mother of 2 who are 3 years apart - and I plan to continue GD them...even living in a rental home! LOL

FWIW I'm not real big on natural consequences simply because my DD wouldn't "get it" - she has some learning delays. Also I want her to learn to THINK before she does something. I just feel like it is my role as a parent to TEACH her how to behave in the larger society. And part of that is teaching her to be observant of things that affect others.

But I'm also a firm believer in "don't sweat the small stuff" - if her behavior is something that really crosses the line, I will intervene immediately to teach her another way to behave. But if it's merely an annoyance (like pouring the bubbles all over the patio - SO ANNOYING LOL) then I try to just overlook it and wait for her to move on to some other obsession.

I also like the Becky Bailey approach where the same rules apply to all family members. We are all expected to be polite, considerate, respect other's boundaries, etc So I do alot of modeling. I've never once told my DD to say "thank you" for example but she does all the time just because she hears me doing it.

As to what drew me to this...well I was spanked as a toddler and I didn't feel comfortable with this approach (plus all the stories about how stubborn I got as a result!). After I was about 6, my mom put an end to spankings (from my dad) and she pretty much followed GD by instinct. So in some sense, it's now MY instinct to treat my children as teachable beings who look to me to model good behavior. That's how my mom was. She may have been a little more "permissive" than some parents but she raised 2 moral children who were able to resist the temptations of early sex and drugs and peer pressure and I really respect that and hope to do the same....my husband was raised in a VERY strict authoritarian household and he is hopelessly screwed up today because of his problems with authority.

HTH
peace,
robyn


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

I follow GD now way more than I ever used to, because I've seen that "traditional" discipline is detrimental, not to mention it JUST DOESN'T WORK... my neighbors' all verge on abusive in the discipline of their kids (whip them with belts, do spankings, lots of yelling, etc) and although they are way more authoritarian their kids listen worse than mine do.









EVERY time I've gone back to non-GD methods of discipline (primarily as a last resort, out of sheer overwhelmed-stressed mamaness), they've completely failed me and my kids have wound up LESS disciplined than before.









I don't think there's a portrait of what a GD Family looks like, or if there is, it's decidedly different from the average Mainstream family portrait you painted. Here's us: a colorful single Wiccan hippie mama adorned with rainbow-hued yarnfalls, who works full time and goes to school full time; an extremely Spirited 6 y.o.; and a fantastically wonderfully Two 2.5 y.o. We rent, we're extremely low-income, and amazingly, my kids generally don't destroy anything. Things do sometimes get drawn on or broken, but that happens no matter who you are.


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:

I don't know what you mean by allowing natural consequences to affect the whole family. Can you give an example?
Weekday, dh at work, we plan to go to zoo. Everyone is happy. Pack lunches, but then one of three children decides he doesn't want to go to zoo.
Threatens to make not get in car, run away at zoo. Do we go and I threaten punich him if he ruins the day for the rest of us? Not GD. But if we stay home, he's ruined the day for everyone else. In this case do i let him do whatever he wants with his day at home, ot make him stay in his rrom, or even do chores for me?
With multiple kids we have the potential for one child to ruin outings for everyone else.


----------



## mwherbs (Oct 24, 2004)

gentle discipline and what you are describing are 2 different things to me- when my children were little we were a 1 income family living in a rental- with a car that was long used and given to us by our family. We lived pay-check-to-pay-check and could only buy one used tire at a time for the car- eating at mcdonald's 1 x a year was a luxury. I did not want to beat my children- I came to understand the craziness of punishment, and did not do that-- my children knew and know that I love them unconditionally.
age and ability approprate should come into the mix-- expecting your child to behave a certain way that is not within the realm of their comprehension or ability is like handing a physics calculator to a newborn and expecting them to operate it perfectly. I don't even think that it is a new or invented way to do things, my mother was 5th in a family of 15 children and no one was hit in that family-- the new invention in our family was hitting and violent behavior acted out by emotionally out of control adults-- adults asking children to understand more and act better than the adults they were raised by. My children are all grown and are all socially acceptable adults who are also kind - even at his most macho in action my older son will hold and cuttle a baby-speak softly to a toddler and distract or help with avoiding conflict-war of wills with a child. Our older daughter works in an group home where she cares for devlopmentaly disabled adults- she does a great job of it-- children are humans first- how do you treat other humans? this is how you start out- yes they are your responsibility to care for and raise they are also your gift.
GD works even if you are poor and I know from personal experience as well as extended family experience...


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Wow, these two quotes tell me that you are getting a pretty skewed idea of what gd is! lol.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
I can't fathom discussing every impulse of my children with them, letting them decide whether or not they'll clean up after themselves, allowing 'natural' consequences of unacceptable behaviour to affect the whole family, etc....

I only need to discuss the impulses that ds can't control or redirect on his own. And really, I can't imagine that punishment would help ds control his impulses as fast as what I do!! lol. It usually takes only a couple times of discussing something, then he is aware of the acceptable alternatives, and doesn't do the unacceptable thing anymore.
Sometimes he'll start to do something, say kick the chair, and he'll stop himself and he'll say "I WANT to kick something." Usually if I empathize (oh, you want to kick something? Why? Do you feel angry?) he gets over it and moves on.
I have thought many many times that a punitive method would require WAY more work!!

Quote:

A cursory look indicates to me that ideally, a GD family would consist of 2 parents, one child or two that are significantly spaced, their own home (landlords do not take kindly to 'natural consequences' for broken things- they want $), and a budget that allows for the choices that a child makes (like not eating lunch and wasting food, ruining items that must be replaced for the family to function, etc).
Dp and I have one child. So you are right there. But we haven't had anything broken in our home, nor would we allow it. But it doesn't require punishment to let ds know that! lol. We don't want our dvd's to be ruined, so we taught ds how to hold them properly and why, for example.
We are broke. Very broke. lol. But ds chooses when to eat and how much. I only give him what I think he'll eat (not much at a time). On the off chance that there is much left, either I finish it or put it in the fridge for later or I give it to the dogs. The only thing I REFUSE to do is give him the same thing he already has- like, if he has a banana opened, and wants a new banana, I won't do that. But if he has a banana opened, and eats half of it and wants an apple, that's not a big deal to me at all. I already know going into it that he rarely eats more than a half of a banana at a time, so I just plan on eating the rest. Very very little food gets wasted in our house.

As far as cleaning up, ds doesn't like to clean up his toys, so I do that. But he'll help me with just about anything else that I do- he helps with laundry, sweeping, he'll run and get me a towel if I spill something, etc. He's usually quite happy to help me out if I ask him to go get something for me, even if there is absolutely nothing in it for him.
There's just something about cleaning up toys that makes it hard for him. I think it has to do with the finality of it- like, if the toys are put up, it means I can't play anymore. He used to freak out if *I* cleaned up his toys lol. But, like I said, I don't mind, because he more than makes up for it by helping me with other chores.

oh yeah, we're not CL, but we are closer to the CL end of the gd spectrum I guess. We don't punish (ie- we don't impose penalties for offenses), and we just have a general trust that ds is an innately social being, who wants to do the right thing, and wants guidance from us to help him do so.


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *warriorprincess* 
Weekday, dh at work, we plan to go to zoo. Everyone is happy. Pack lunches, but then one of three children decides he doesn't want to go to zoo.
Threatens to make not get in car, run away at zoo. Do we go and I threaten punich him if he ruins the day for the rest of us? Not GD. But if we stay home, he's ruined the day for everyone else. In this case do i let him do whatever he wants with his day at home, ot make him stay in his rrom, or even do chores for me?
With multiple kids we have the potential for one child to ruin outings for everyone else.

I think the idea that your looking for here is that there is some "third" way. It isn't "kid get his way and ruins it for everyone else or family wins and ruins it for kid." The idea is to find a solution that works and everyone agrees to. The way to get to it is to keep talking. Why does kid not want to go to the zoo? Is there a better solution that allows everyone to have an even better time than they would at the zoo? Would kid be willing to compromise so sibs have time at the zoo and do that kids thing another time? What do sibs think of kids idea not to go to zoo?

This is a lot of dialog and a lot of work, but can't be worse than dragging and unhappy kid around, eh?

Connection before correction. (I think I'll put that in my sig line!)


----------



## angie3096 (Apr 4, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *warriorprincess* 
Weekday, dh at work, we plan to go to zoo. Everyone is happy. Pack lunches, but then one of three children decides he doesn't want to go to zoo.
Threatens to make not get in car, run away at zoo. Do we go and I threaten punich him if he ruins the day for the rest of us? Not GD. But if we stay home, he's ruined the day for everyone else. In this case do i let him do whatever he wants with his day at home, ot make him stay in his rrom, or even do chores for me?
With multiple kids we have the potential for one child to ruin outings for everyone else.

Here's what I would do:
I would pick her up and put her in the car and take her to the zoo. As she is crying, and as I was buckling her into her carseat, I would say, "I can see you do not want to go to the zoo. I am so sorry. The rest of us are going. It would not be safe for you to stay home by yourself. It's okay that you feel angry. I would feel angry too if I did not want to go to the zoo." And we'd go to the zoo. I would be sympathetic of the tears and screaming. I would encourage her to use words to express her anger and frustration. I would NOT say things like "We're going and that's tough, now stop crying". I would not threaten any punishment. I would be empathetic and understanding. But we'd still go to the zoo.

Of course I am assuming that the other two children had their hearts set on the zoo. If they didn't really care, we could just change the plans.

The next week, the child who had a fit about the zoo would get to choose where to go.








Angie


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
What is your assurance that this will result in the effects you are hoping to achieve in your families and society at large.

There are no guarantees in life, so I have no assurance that my children will grow up the way I hope they will. However - I was raised with GD and think I turned out pretty OK







SO I'm doing it with my children, too. The effects I'm trying to achieve are my children doing the right thing for the right reason, and standing up against the wrong thing because it's wrong (I know right and wrong are subjective, but they are the easiest terms to use here theoretically) - not worrying about what's going to happen TO him/her if she does or doesn't do something. It's about internal motivation and self discipline, as opposed to needing external motivation and 'threats' to be kind, thoughtful, generous, etc. It's a different dynamic than the traditional 'parent down' dynamic...but it is not necessarily or inherently indulgent or permissive.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
I can't fathom discussing every impulse of my children with them, letting them decide whether or not they'll clean up after themselves, allowing 'natural' consequences of unacceptable behaviour to affect the whole family, etc....

This is where GD is often misunderstood. There is a large variation in practices of gentle discipline. What you are describing here is more on the consensual end of the spectrum. There are many of us who are more authoritative with our children; the common tie between all of us is that we recognize our children's feelings, impulses, and opinions are as worthy of consideration as ours are, and don't dismiss their thoughts or ideas just because they are children.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
What I'm wondering is, what is the profile of a family who can do this successfully. Are there mothers here with four and more born in consecutive years who stay at home, have no family support, a husband who works long hours and has to travel, a tight budget, and are pregnant, who manage an orderly home (according to your own definition), who are successfully following all the rules (most of the time), and feel that this is really working for them?

I have 2 children who are 2-1/2 years apart - now 3 years old and 9 months old. I work full time at home. My husband is gone from 7am-5:45pm, and home on weekends. My in-laws are in town part of the year, but they rarely watch the kids for more than an hour or so on occasion if we both need to be somewhere - my parents are 2 hours away. We pretty much parent our children on our own. Our budget is pretty tight, we're floating a very very small cushion each month. Our house is a wreck.







- Clean, with clean laundry and dishes done, but not what anyone would call orderly. What we're doing works well for us. We try to find solutions that work for all of us, but will default to making decisions if we cannot easily come to a mutual solution to a situation - and in that way we are on the authoritative side of GD. We have yet to punish our son in the traditional sense, but we do set boundaries that are gently enforced, with no consequence beyond the boundary's enforcement. I think it's working pretty well for us.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
A cursory look indicates to me that ideally, a GD family would consist of 2 parents, one child or two that are significantly spaced, their own home (landlords do not take kindly to 'natural consequences' for broken things- they want $), and a budget that allows for the choices that a child makes (like not eating lunch and wasting food, ruining items that must be replaced for the family to function, etc).

I think this is mistaking GD with permissiveness. Another part of GD to me is preventing situations from getting out of hand if at all possible. That would be situations like wasting food and breaking things excessively - I mean, accidents happen, and happen more frequently with small children in the house. But we have yet to have any willful destruction or food wasting in our house.

I've found that we've not needed to punish our son, that simply enforcing bondaries, giving him acceptable alternatives, consistently stating our expectations, and discussing how his actions impact others has been working relatively well. He doesn't say, "how high?" when we say "jump", but that's not a goal of ours. We want him to understand the reasons behind why we do things we do, so that when we're not there with him, he can make his own decisions (hopefully) based on the values we pass on to him. Because we do respect him and explain a lot, he respects us (as much as a 3-year-old can) and we have a relatively harmonious existence.

Can you give us some examples of situations you're imagining, and allow us to respond? Much of how I respond to situations depends on the child's age, development, and the specific parameters of the situation. It's a fluid style of parenting as far as I see it, and has served well in making our son a good problem solver and critical thinker thus far...even though in the early toddler days it seemed like he wasn't really understanding much, we were clearly laying the ground work because as he hit 3 years old he sort of blossomed and it's all coming together - aside from the occasional 3-yo 'crazies' - but hey - nobody is perfect.







).

Was this what you're looking for?


----------



## hippymomma69 (Feb 28, 2007)

Yeah, what PP (angie) said - that's what I'd do too. Sometimes we all have to do things we don't want to in order to live with others peacefully. Maybe the next time I would let the upset child pick the activity if they could understand what that meant....

JMO
peace,
robyn


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *angie3096* 
Here's what I would do:
I would pick her up and put her in the car and take her to the zoo. As she is crying, and as I was buckling her into her carseat, I would say, "I can see you do not want to go to the zoo. I am so sorry. The rest of us are going. It would not be safe for you to stay home by yourself. It's okay that you feel angry. I would feel angry too if I did not want to go to the zoo." And we'd go to the zoo. I would be sympathetic of the tears and screaming. I would encourage her to use words to express her anger and frustration. I would NOT say things like "We're going and that's tough, now stop crying". I would not threaten any punishment. I would be empathetic and understanding. But we'd still go to the zoo.








Angie









:


----------



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

Yeah, I just don't think you can go wrong by basing relationship on mutual respect.

We're not permissive. We;re more CL, but I'm finding more and more that I expect a LOT more from my kids than many other people seem to.

We don't have broken stuff, writing on the walls has never come up, food isn't "wasted," my kids are complimented lots on their manners, they're often the first to clean up somewhere, they respect us and we respect them.

I don't know why respect is contigent on finances or homeownership or anything like that.


----------



## Justmee (Jun 6, 2005)

I think the OP raised some interesting points about having lots of little kids close in age. We strive to live peacefully & consentually, but it's a lot harder with 2 (or more) nonverbal toddlers / preschoolers. I remember once posting about a situation and even Pat said it was a hard situation & she didn't suggest much I hadn't already tried! *I* can be flexible / agreeable as an adult, but my 1.5 year old is often not agreeable to what the 3yo is wants. It gets harder when they don't really have the skills & experience to reason with (like my kids still don't get the "she can play with it now & you can play later") when they want something it's NOW. Or one (or 2) want to play in their room and exclude the others. I guess ideally I might have 1 room for each child, but it ain't happening in my budget!

Anyway the best I can suggest is try to be as flexable as you can be, and the kids will adapt. If one doesn't want to go to the zoo and the others do, I would take them and emphathise a lot about what it was like and how upsetting it is and try to plan a different outing for next time (but mine are not really old enough to rationally understand that next week we will hit the beach, they want it TODAY).

I also find that unless they are hurting each other physically, the more I can stay out of it the better. When they come running to me that X did this or Y did that, the standard response is "tell her you don't like it when she hits you." I am trying to empower them to work out their own soultions, not wait for big bad mommy to put the hitter in time out. I want them to work out their own stuff (with help & guidence of course). I am finding it's getting easier as they get a bit older & a little more verbal (my twins are delayed so they are at about a 2yo level if that in language).


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

I really appreciate your responses so far! Thank you!

For the record, though, I think three years is significant spacing between children! I have a 3 3/4 yr. old and knowing what he's capable of and how different his discipline needs are from his two younger brothers and soon to be three (brother or sister), I completely understand the non-coercive aspect of GD. At this age, he's very much like having a very young and naive adult with me; discipline for him consists almost entirely in discussion. If he was my only other child and then I had a baby, while I know there would still be challenges, I can see how it would be significantly easier to go through the day pleasantly.

An example of a family-affecting non-coerced choice could be the one that was given in another thread by ? One of the children left wet swimming clothes on the floor in the bathroom. The natural consequence of this is that they will be there, unwashed, and wet the next time she needs them. Okay. That would work if the family didn't have four people in the bathroom at once many times every day for teeth-brushing, bathing, toileting, etc. This is the picture of my family- we have to have a clear floor, otherwise, it would be a safety hazard! Wet clothes on floor= small head on edge of bathtub! You might think this is an unusual or uncommon situation, but I spend a lot of time each day reiterating the rules about just such things. We simply cannot have each person making choices that affect all of us all day, every day, each according to his own preferences. I do think that my approach is a far cry from beating, and I'm sure that most people will recognise that there is a large spectrum between absolute permission and beating, so I don't think that's an example that needs to be discussed. I'm also sure that there are very few people who would advocate for either extreme. I do absolutely advocate disciplining gently, but I can see that this is not the same thing as Gentle Discipline.

Anyway, please keep your responses coming. I am still interested and hope that others are too!

Oh, and I would put leftover food from meals in the refridgerator, but my children enjoy mutilating their food. I couldn't serve that to them later, obviously, and this is a waste that we do have to budget for- we live in the far north and food is hard to come by. I serve them healthy food that I cringe at watching go to waste when I know that it may be a month or so before we can have that particular... fruit again, for instance (like an orange!). And I do give them choices for meals, so they are in agreement with what is served to them... they just don't always _eat_ it!







This is not a very good example, I guess. You can't make a person eat, (and I wouldn't try). Maybe we could work on the swimming clothes one?

Edit: Whoa! A lot of posts while I was writing, so this is lacking a response to specific questions. I'll respond again later. Thanks for patience. Oh, and um... seeing as you are defending gentle discipline, please be gentle in your responses... I'm not attacking, but feeling a bit attacked at the moment.


----------



## LoveBeads (Jul 8, 2002)

In the example that you provided about the wet clothes: I would tell my child to pick up the wet clothes and put them in the hamper or in the laundry room, whatever. If she didn't do it, I would do it for her and tell her that I expect her to do it herself next time. I won't get into a power struggle.

Of course, it also depends on the age of the child that you are talking of. I would have a different expectation if my child is 13 rather than 3.


----------



## LoveBeads (Jul 8, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
I do absolutely advocate disciplining gently, but I can see that this is not the same thing as Gentle Discipline.


I don't understand what this means. I think you are definitely confusing GD with non-coersion (which I don't think I practice although I respect it). Why is there a distinction between disciplining gently and GD?


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Hehe, well, I don't think I'm "there" with GD - I aim in the direction of GD, but I think I sometimes act in ways that would shock some mamas here







I'm only human. I come from a loving but not always gentle background. A big extended family were survival of the fittest sometimes rules.

But having 2 closely spaced and another on the way, I'm actually finding GD much easier to do than more authoritarian type parenting. I simply don't have time or energy to knit-pick and dictate everything my kids do, and when I fall into that pattern, I'm miserable.

Beyond that kindess, patience, gentleness, self control etc. are all goals of my religious/spiritual life, so in a sense I feel it is demanded of me to try my best to grow in those areas.

Just this afternoon, dd didn't want to take her nap because her daddy is home. Instead of getting annoyed that she is bucking authority, I explained to her that I knew she needed a nap because she was crying. She wouldn't be crying if she wasn't tired. She looked at me and said "I want to take a nap." That was sooooo much easier than dragging a crying kid off to bed!


----------



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

In our family, if someone left wet clothes on the floor someone else would just pick them up and toss them over the side of the tub or shower curtain--and probably mention it in passing, "Hey, I put those wet clothes up for you." Maybe with a reminder about our wood floors getting damaged by wet stuff.

We just try to "do" for each other and pick up the slack when it needs it.

Sometimes I get tired and mad b/c I like the house to be REALLY clean. Like hotel clean would be my preference.







So, I end up doing a lot more cleaning and getting a lot more frustrated. And when that happens, everyone pitches in and usually someone brings me a nice cup of coffee or juice and a hug.


----------



## mwherbs (Oct 24, 2004)

and I would not expect a 3 year old to be doing alot with their clothes-- I may talk outloud about what I am doing- starting when they are little I am saying what I do- like ok we are taking the diaper off and then rinsing it and then into the bucket-- opps all your clothes are wet in they go to the tub or sink or right into the washer-- I spend most of the time saying what I am doing- maybe a 2 or 3 year old will pick up their wet clothes I have helped them off with and toss them into the tub- and even if I am going to put them in the washer I say thanks- or yep thats where they go-- most of the time kids want to do what you do---


----------



## Justmee (Jun 6, 2005)

I do much as teh PP said, but I have also seen some do it with an additional consequense if just the parent's dissapointment doesn't help (and parents expressing dissapointment is a consequence).

Sometimes a logicial consiquense is "I had to clean up lots of toys, I am tired now and can't read a story." I have also seen with older kids who get allowence something like "I will pick up the wet clothes & wash them, but I charge X amount" which IMO reflects the real world. If I don't want to clean my house, and it's not agreeable to leave it a mess, I can pay a housecleaner to come in and clean.

Just some ideas


----------



## LynnS6 (Mar 30, 2005)

I don't know where you got your defnition of GD, but it isn't from reading the books I've read! I woudl start with:

Kids Are Worth It : Giving Your Child The Gift Of Inner Discipline by Barbara Coloroso
How to Talk so Kids Will Listen and Listen so Kids Will Talk by Adele Faber
Kids, Parents and Power Struggles by Mary Sheed Kurcinka

We believe in respecting our children, and that they have significant things that they can contribute to the household. By virtue of our being adults, we make a lot of the decisions - we're the ones who understand about money, time, long term consequences. Our kids have input, and we do discuss some things with them. But a lot of stuff is not up for negotiation.

But, the basis of our relationship is respect: we respect them, and we expect that they will want to do the same with us.

Example 1: I'm OK with my kids playing on the back of the couch. They often crawl along the back. Is it the safest thing in the world? No, but I have confidence in my kids' abilities to stay up there. However, I am NOT OK with dd STANDING (or even standing on her knees) on the back of the couch - when she does that, she's within a range of hitting a glass window if she fell. So, dd crawls along back of couch. She tries to stand. I remind her that she needs to stay on all 4s when she's there. She tries to stand again. I come over, take her off the couch, remind her about the window, and tell her that she either stay on all 4s on the couch, find something else to do. If she wants to be up high, I might suggest that she go outside where she can climb and be up high without me worrying. I do not let her stand on the couch. I do not yell and scream (unless I'm having a bad day). I do not take away priveleges for standing on the couch (she's only 2). I remind her of the rules. I explain the reasons for the rules, and I help her comply.

Example 2: Ds was mad at his sister. He threw his beloved fire helmet at her, and it hit the slate floor and part of it shattered. He was devastated. I gave him sympathy, and when he was calmed down, a hug and let him sit on my lap. He screamed that we needed to replace it NOW. I told him how I understood how upset and sad he was that his helmet was broken. He cried and screamed some more. I repeated that I was sorry his helmet was broken, that it was sad and I could tell he was very, very upset. We did not buy him a new one. We told him (a bit later) that he could put this on his birthday list as something he wants. We tried to repair it with superglue (with moderate success).

Did we have the $6 to replace the fire helmet? Maybe. But finances are tight right now. More importantly, I wanted my son to experience the natural consequence of throwing things when he's mad. He hasn't thrown anything since, and he's been angry several times.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
I am certain that you have all at least come across the myriad examples of how various psychology-based philosophies/methods have failed in one way or the other and sometimes with disastrous results. How do you know this won't happen to you?

Well, GD IS based on psychology-based results that show that (a) connection to your parents and (b) coaching your child as to what their emotions are and acceptable ways to express them and (c) clear boundaries generally have kids who are responsible, loving and well adjusted. Do I know I won't raise hellions who go out and start doing drugs when they're 13? Not for sure. But, I'm doing everything in my power to build a loving, respectful relationship so they're not tempted to do that. It's what my parents did. Yes, my parents made mistakes. More so with my older sibs than me. Yes, they should have admitted their mistakes more. But over the long haul, they did respect us and were good parents. They raised 5 more or less healthy adults, all of whom have good, stable, loving marriages. That's quite a record, IMO.


----------



## LynnS6 (Mar 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
One of the children left wet swimming clothes on the floor in the bathroom. The natural consequence of this is that they will be there, unwashed, and wet the next time she needs them. ...Wet clothes on floor= small head on edge of bathtub!

Hmm.. I don't see how what you do isn't Gentle Discipline. I would remind the child of the rule. I woudl remind the child of the safety consequences. If the child didn't pick up the suit, I would help the child do it. I would take them by the hand, lead them to the bathroom and stand there while they picked it up. Then I would say thank you and leave it at that. Yes, I'm more coercive than some on this board. But safety rules are things that can't be ignored.

What I wouldn't do is:
-spank my child for not picking up the bathing suit (not related in ANY way to the 'crime'
-tell the child that they next time she wants it she can't have it because she didn't pick it up (too remote and too big a consequence for that kind of thing)
-take away TV priveleges or dessert or something else unrelated
-put my child in time out (again not related in any way to the wet suit on the floor)
-pick it up and not say anything, but seethe internally. I might pick it up if I'm feeling generous (or my kids are in bed) and just remind my kids later. But mostly I want my kids to learn to pick up that kind of thing themselves.


----------



## angie3096 (Apr 4, 2007)

I do not allow my daughter to leave her wet swimming clothes on the floor of the bathroom. I abhor mildew spots! I say, "Sweetie, please pick up your clothes and put them in the hamper!" and if she refuses I say, "Wet clothes go in the hamper, they cannot stay here." and I help her pick them up. Meaning I hold her hand very gently as I guide it to pick up the clothes and put them where they need to go. If she cries, I cuddle her and rock her until she is calm and say things like "I can see you are angry about putting away your clothes. I am so sorry. It's okay to feel angry. But we can't leave our clothes on the floor."

About the mutilated food: try tinier portions. And don't serve two things on the same plate unless they will still be edible after being mashed together.

Having many small children at once is stressful no matter WHAT discipline methods you use. But I think you'd find GD the least stressful method of all.








Angie


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

I do think some of the more extreme ends of GD assume a lot of privilege in a family: lots of energy from parents who get many breaks, money to replace broken things or wasted food, a loose schedule without many commitments.

This is not my life, and I am not an extreme GDer. I am not committed to non-coersion, CL, or even non-punishment, altho I aim for these things where the cost is not too high IMO.


----------



## abac (Mar 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama*
I do think some of the more extreme ends of GD assume a lot of privilege in a family: lots of energy from parents who get many breaks, money to replace broken things or wasted food, a loose schedule without many commitments.

Do you think people who practice this kind of parenting have more broken things and wasted food? I don't understand why that keeps getting mentioned. We don't have things get broken by ds any more than things get broken by myself or dh. Like a pp said, I keep important breakables out of reach where possible, and tell ds the correct way to handle things and why.
We sometimes have wasted food, (I do my best to be proactive so I can keep it to a minimum,) but I don't see how GD in any form could lead to that, or how punishment could prevent that, (unless that punishment involves starving the kiddos.)

I don't have lots of energy by any means, although I do choose a loose schedule and that helps.

We help each other out. All of us as a family. We each contribute in our own way and nobody keeps score. If ds left wet clothes on the bathroon floor, I would pick them up and next time we went swimming, I would remind ds beforehand that his wet swimsuit should be put to dry.


----------



## mwherbs (Oct 24, 2004)

we rarely had wasted food-- but I also worked hard to have plenty of food on hand- the best thing I learned was kids only need to be offered a reasonable portion- (probably true for adults as well) we used smaller plates for kids as well like the size of a desert plate.if they wanted more and would eat it then they got more-- if we had it- different than wasting food what I found was I bought apples from the farm and they were seconds or thirds in season by the box was that I had to limit the amount of sharing we did with the neighborhood kids because they were usually limited to 1 apple a week or so because their parents bought at the store the expensive stuff... and they skimped on food to be able to have cable or what ever extra they wanted-- we just didn't do that, but there was no food to waste. I think I have more "wasted" food now that everyone is grown and not all the left overs are discovered or eaten- because of busy schedules.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

I have four children and we practice Gentle Discipline. We do not have more broken things or wasted food than anyone else (I'd say less). Not only is it possible to teach discipline gently, without force or punishment, but it is actually more effective. In the book Unconditional Parenting, Alfie Kohn writes that studies show, children that are raised with punishment have more behavior problems than those raised without. This definitely seems true from my experience.


----------



## mommymaemae (Jul 29, 2006)

:


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

Okay, now I have a lot to work with.

So far, nearly every example of discipline that has been posted seems to me to be straight authoritative parenting. I'm not sure how anything in this thread really varies from that all that much, especially to necessitate a distinction of title. When I wrote my initial post, I was more taken aback by examples in other threads of (oh, dear- this will appear specifically critical of individual families, but please don't take it that way. Like I already expressed, it seems that it takes a certain type of life to facilitate the type of parenting that I'm about to describe, not that it doesn't work- that, I don't know) three yr olds who choose to go to bed whenever they want to, eat what they want to, choose not to pick up their toys or clean crayon off the wall and are not expected to do so, or even coersed in any way to participate in the clean-up. When a child doesn't want to clean up and is gently forced to do so by the hand, is he experiencing GD proper? Is that acceptable? It's clearly more than even coersive!

Some of the examples, like the child who didn't want to go to the zoo, had a range of solutions that included what I would just call authoritative, conscientious parenting (putting child in seat and empathising with feelings- obviously not yelling or telling the child to quit whining). I cannot see actually cancelling arrangements according to the whim of a toddler, especially when you have three of them all wanting to do different things and whose desires don't include going to pick up time-sensitive mail from the post office.

The other thing I'm not sure about is the definition of 'natural consequences'. For example: toddler 1 throws wooden block at toddler 2's head. The natural consequence is most likely to be the reciprocation of said assault, or maybe just the displeasure of witnessing the upset of the bruised toddler 2. Taking the block away after explaining that blocks are not for throwing and the scenario occurring a second time, is not a natural consequence. It is an introduced third variable controlled by an outside party (parent or other), which removes the projectile and at least incidentally compels toddler 1 to better choices as he/she sees toys disappearing each time he reoffends. So, to me, taking the toy is a punishment and falls outside (?) the parameters of GD, as I'm trying to put it together from your posts. So this is a safety issue- what about if toddler 1 was running out of the room and putting the block into the garbage, repeatedly? What if locking the garbage is not a viable option? What if toddler 1 has figured out how to slide toys between the doors of the cupboard in spite of them being locked? Can there be no reasonable and lovingly expressed consequence that is punishment?

So, prior to this thread, I was not aware of the wide spectrum of GD in itself. I didn't realise that some include punishment, some not, some include coersion, some not, and so on. How does GD differ from authoritative parenting without spanking?

Another thing to consider is that the reason more things are broken in a home with more children all close together is because any time one of them tries something, they all have to try it and see if the consequence is the same. Dc1 climbs on banister, is told it is unsafe and to please come down, carefully. Dc2 now must do it as soon as Mum's back is turned, but he is younger and less stable; he slips off as Mum is running and telling him the same thing as she did dc1, but he falls, grasping it and causing a creaking sound in the joint. Dc3, who has been playing nicely on the floor, waits a goodly amount of time before he attempts the same thing (maybe 1/2 hr), and he is very much younger. Same speech, same running across room as he falls, gets leg caught and actually dislodges bannister from it's frame in the bottom step. He's okay, but the bannister is broken. More things get broken when there are more people. Now, I wouldn't do anything different than I described in this situation. BUT, next day, DH fixes it and within an hour, dc1 is back at the bannister! I calmly, gently remind him of the incident. He backs off on his own. Then for the next two days, the bannister is the merry-go-round attraction in the house. Do I just keep reiterating the incident to dc, two of whom would benefit marginally from this reminder, or do I issue a firm and lovingly expressed warning of punishment (you will have to sit in the kitchen until next mealtime, or for dc3 who's too young to understand, just watch him and every time he goes to the bannister and climbs, put him in his highchair for a minute)? This is a probably a non-issue for parents of one child, since you have two eyes and one child (as if it's that easy, right?), or for parents whose eldest is old enough to do some of the watching (and even my 3 yr. old is amazing at that!). Broken things are definitely an issue for new and quickly growing families! Responses?

Also, I'm not sure why so many have responded that I have a mistaken definition of GD. I don't even have a definition, other than a generic one (that warrants it having a title) that it is based upon a philosophy of parenting espoused by a psychological analysis of the parent-child relationship. Whether or not it is viable as a way of life is what I'm attempting to determine. I have no interest in changing anyone's mind about adhering to it; I wholeheartedly embrace conscientious parenting, period. If GD is what works according to your definition of 'works', then that's great. I'm just concerned that in its entirety, full-spectrum, it doesn't seem to be a universal application, that's all, and that's what it _seems_ that some people here think about it.

Please carry on!


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Well, my reason for being GD has nothing to do with the way I expect my child to "turn out", really.

At first I was interested in learning about a more thoughtful way of parenting. It takes a while to get over cultural conditioning - that if you don't do certain things your child is a "brat" or a horrible child and will be a horrible adult, etc. Punishment is very much accepted as the way to get things done in our culture.

However, historically and in a variety of other cultures that really is not the case. So it took me a little while to get past current cultural conditioning.

Once I did and once I gave it a lot of thought, I realized that I wanted to treat my child gently and with respect because, contrary to cultural teachings, he IS a human being with as much right to respect as any other human being (perhaps more so for a multitude of reasons).

As for turning out a certain way, I think we have less control over that than we think. However, I have come to believe that setting a good example is the one way I can hope to raise a child who is kind, loving and gentle to the world around him. I'm not always successful in portraying this, god knows since separating from H it has been bad sometimes. But that's what I strive for.

After all - if people don't guide him respectfully and gentle, how can I expect him to act the same?

So what this looks like in this single mama home is that I do sometimes tell him to things, such as pick something up off the floor or to clean things up. I assume he will do them because it's part of being a human in our world and his mind is designed to absorb the social norms of those around him. I ask him respectfully and sometimes I have to reiterate that. Sometimes I will ask and if he doesn't do it I just do it myself. Sometimes I repeat myself until he understands what I need and why (why is important for a 3 year old to understand).

My guy is pretty cooperative so it's not been a problem with me... I could totally understand someone with more children needing to abbreviate my approach or go a different route.

Anyway, those are just my thoughts.


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

I just read this article about GD:
http://www.lalecheleague.org/NB/NBMayJun05p94.html

Does this adequately summarise the philosophy?

It doesn't mention some of the specifics that I've questioned here, but if this is a good overview and doesn't tacitly anticipate non-coersion of any sort, I can completely embrace this. Either way, I will be rethinking my approach to some of the paradigms I've perpetuated in my own home that are definitely not good, from my childhood and current acquaintances, that I knew weren't working, so tried to stop, and at least curbed, but had nothing to replace them with.

So, I am still interested in responses, and I am much more at ease with the concepts, given that there is more freedom of expression in this new definition than I understood previously. It seemed that there was definitely a set of rules to follow, but if that's not the case, then hurray!

This is what I _would_ have called authoritative, conscientious parenting. I guess, like AP, it now has a special name I was unaware of... if this article is accurate, that is.


----------



## angie3096 (Apr 4, 2007)

Personally, I like that article very much. And it does summarize what gentle discipline means to ME.








Angie


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Well, that article was pretty general, it didn't have a lot of specifics.

To me the hallmark of Gentle Discipline, as it is defined with by the Mothering board and as it is defined for me personally, is a lack of punitive measures, and also a committment to finding consensual ways of doing things.

By lack of punitive measures, I mean lack of punishment.

Most GD parents do not believe in punishments from time outs to spanking to "If you don't behave, I will take away your X" and that sort of thing.

Many GD parents (including myself) extend that to using bribery or "positive reinforcement" such as praise to get a child to do things, and praise as a way of providing direction and encouragement.

Hope that helps clarify at least my position. The phrase authoritative parenting confuses me because I don't equate that with a non-punishing form of parenting, but I could be wrong.


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

What a *nice* article! This was particularly helpful to me (my emphasis added):

"Let's step clear of that costly misunderstanding and take a hard look at what gentle discipline is not:

Gentle discipline is not about doing it "right."
It's not a list of things to do and not to do.
It's not a lofty standard for us to somehow measure up to.
_It doesn't make adults able to parent in reasonable, calm, and fun ways all the time._
It's not a way to have idealized children, always cheerful and cooperative.
It's not an insurance policy against times of struggle.

These ideas are holdovers from a more traditional style of parenting, which places a great deal of emphasis on right and wrong and tends to have unrealistic expectations of _both_ parents and children. These notions often become mixed up in perceptions of gentle discipline, but they actually have nothing to do with it. _Gentle discipline seeks to get past right or wrong dichotomies_ and _embraces a realistic view of both parents and children_."


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
When I wrote my initial post, I was more taken aback by examples in other threads of ... the type of parenting that I'm about to describe, not that it doesn't work- that, I don't know) three yr olds who choose to go to bed whenever they want to, eat what they want to, choose not to pick up their toys or clean crayon off the wall and are not expected to do so, or even coersed in any way to participate in the clean-up. When a child doesn't want to clean up and is gently forced to do so by the hand, is he experiencing GD proper? Is that acceptable? It's clearly more than even coersive!

My 3 year old I guess you could say "chooses" when he goes to bed, in that he goes to bed when he's tired and not according to an arbitrary time.

He eats whenever and whatever he wants to, within reason (I am not a domestic slave, but he's also a growing boy and eats several times a day).

He and I pick up toys and clean crayon off the walls together (actually I would do the crayons myself, he wouldn't be effective with a Mr. Clean eraser and I wouldn't want him to use chemicals). He generally participates in that but if there were special circumstances (i.e. he was really upset about something) then I would probably just do it myself.

As far as "gently forcing" a child to clean up, there is a bit of an age differential there. An 18 month old might need help figuring out what to do and how to do it, or even understanding what I was requesting at all. My expectations would be pretty low.

My expectations for a 3 year old are pretty low still in that respect, but he does understand what I'm saying and I wouldn't coerce him in that way, personally.

The times that I have had to coerce him involve when I go to work and we have to leave the house by a certain time, and that sort of thing. I guess my "no TV after 8" rule is coersive... I tell him he needs to turn the TV off at 8 o'clock and he will get upset but he still does it. So not sure if that is coersive or not (how do you spell that darn word??).


----------



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

GD is not one set way. There is definitely a spectrum--from "parents in charge" and/or non-corporal punishments to consensus seeking and/or no punishment whatsoever.

That article is by an MDC mom, and there is a whole book, Adventures in Gentle Discipline which many MDC mamas have contributed to. Lots of different ideas all along the spectrum.

Stick around...you'll see--we argue all different approaches around here!







:


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

Oxford English Dictionary:

coerce
coercive
coercion

That was bugging me too!









I should mention that I was understanding coercion (aahhh, that looks better!) as meaning a verbal action, not a physical one. Apparently, it means a physical action, but my dictionary is old, maybe outdated, and I think it is commonly used to connote a verbal action. Is that what everyone here means? Verbal, physical, and I'm sure there may be a resounding 'BOTH', yes?


----------



## mwherbs (Oct 24, 2004)

very good article --

to me authoritarian parenting is more about power - so although I do think that often we have more experience than children and should provide guidance it is not the same as how some people are "the" authority, sometimes kids want to or need to do something I don't even understand my job would be to provide safe environment, seek out information and then follow their lead --


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
When a child doesn't want to clean up and is gently forced to do so by the hand, is he experiencing GD proper? Is that acceptable? It's clearly more than even coersive!

There is a HUGE range of GD. I think what you are talking about would definitely fall in the realm of GD. It's definitely not non-coercive, and it may or may not be punishment.

Quote:

The other thing I'm not sure about is the definition of 'natural consequences'. For example: toddler 1 throws wooden block at toddler 2's head. The natural consequence is most likely to be the reciprocation of said assault, or maybe just the displeasure of witnessing the upset of the bruised toddler 2. Taking the block away after explaining that blocks are not for throwing and the scenario occurring a second time, is not a natural consequence.
It's definitely not a natural consequence. It would be a logical consequence, maybe a punishment. However, again, what you are describing DEFINITELY is GD. (even if it doesn't mesh with some posters personal parenting philosophy)

What I really wanted to say was what I would do- I would express that it's not ok to throw blocks, and tell ds how his actions affected toddler2. I would find out WHY he threw the block, and tell him other ways to express that impulse that is socially acceptable. I might tell him "Don't throw blocks. You can build with blocks" or "If you want to play with toddler2, say 'let's play!'" or tell him acceptable ways to express anger.

Quote:

So this is a safety issue- what about if toddler 1 was running out of the room and putting the block into the garbage, repeatedly? What if locking the garbage is not a viable option? What if toddler 1 has figured out how to slide toys between the doors of the cupboard in spite of them being locked? Can there be no reasonable and lovingly expressed consequence that is punishment?
There are ways to deal with this effectively that don't involve punishment. Again, it comes down to figuring out why ds is doing this. So...maybe he wants to play a hide and seek game. I'd suggest that to him. There could be a lot of reasons and a lot of solutions that aren't punitive.
If it came down to it, I would put the blocks away, but I'd probably do it when he wasn't watching, or when he wouldn't be upset about it.

Quote:

So, prior to this thread, I was not aware of the wide spectrum of GD in itself. I didn't realise that some include punishment, some not, some include coersion, some not, and so on. How does GD differ from authoritative parenting without spanking?
I think the basics of gd is that you don't yell, spank, shame, etc. (well, not that you never do it, but that you don't view those things as good discipline, and you work to NOT do them again. I sometimes yell, but I am definitely trying not to).

I didn't answer what my reasoning was for "choosing" my parenting style (non-punitive, but not necessarily non-coercive all the time). I believe that people are innately social, and that it is my job to help ds behave in a way that is socially acceptable. Imo, punishment and rewards undermine that innate sociality (because they make the reasons to behave in certain ways, self centered reasons. ie: I won't hit the dog because I don't want a time out. kwim?)
oh, and dp didn't really "choose" this. He is naturally very gd, he is more on the non-coercive end than I am, even.


----------



## Dar (Apr 12, 2002)

I'm an always-single homeschooling mom who gets no financial support unless I earn it, so I don't think we're very privileged in that respect. I do only have one kid, and I'm on the TCS (non-coercive) end of the GD spectrum.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C*
three yr olds who choose to go to bed whenever they want to, eat what they want to, choose not to pick up their toys or clean crayon off the wall and are not expected to do so, or even coersed in any way to participate in the clean-up.

Eleven years ago, that was my daughter. Today, at 14, she is as good as I am at healthy eating, cleaning up the house, and getting enough sleep (actually, she's probably better at all three, to be honest) and she's a complete joy to live with. She does things like write up a shopping list for the grocery store when she notices that we're running low on food (a list for both of us, not just what she wants), because she knows I tend to forget that sort of stuff. I thought Monkey Mama's remark about expecting more from her son than many parents was interesting, because I see that too - Rain can do pretty much anything an adult roommate would do, and she does, and I guess I expect it because she does it. She doesn't _have to_ ... but she does anyway.

I think, PreggieUBA2C, that you may be missing a lot of the stuff that some of us _do_ with our kids, when we're not coercing them. It's not at all laissez-faire, "Sure, kid, do whatever you want" parenting. Young children - and all of us - want to be accepted and to be competent. They're naturally primed to become part of the functioning social unit of the family - we just need to include them, as full members.

I can't imagine seeing Rain's wet swimsuit on the floor and just leaving it there, knowing that she'd want a dry suit later and wouldn't have one. I want to model kindness, and helping the people we love. I sometimes forget to put stuff away in the refrigerator or freezer, and Rain will spot a carton of ice cream or something sitting out and put it away, and maybe mention it to be in case I was letting in thaw out a bit... but mostly, she accepts that I'm sort of forgetful and helps me out. I would be really hurt if she saw it out and just ignored it...

dar


----------



## jillc512 (Aug 31, 2005)

I think the definition "authoritative parenting without spanking" would fall under the wider umbrella of GD. But to me, GD is a different spectrum than the authoritarian/authoritative/permissive spectrum. A/A/P seems to come at it from the parents' perspective, while GD seems to be more child-centered and relationship-centered (like the LLL article said, respect and empathy for your child are the keys). Although maybe this is more my own internal definition?

We are generally non-coercive (depending on the day







), and have found that our kids tend to be more agreeable when we do MAKE them do something. This is in contrast to some families we know whose kids have many more rules to follow and use time-outs and removal of privileges (in my completely biased view







, they tend to be more disagreeable, at least until their parents threaten a timeout).

Re: the bannister problem, I have only sympathy to offer -- my DC today were enjoying banging on the window screens at grandma's house. One would do it, grandma would tell him not to, so he would stop (or we would help him stop). Then DD would run over with a smile and bang on them, waiting for someone to chase her away. What a great game







: ... I know the answer is to find them something else to bang on, or to get them involved in something else away from the windows, but that assumes you have the patience and energy and creativity to come up with something.

I think that's maybe something else entirely -- your ideal parenting style vs. what your actual parenting looks like after a long day alone with small children. Ideally, I would like to be contributing positively to the moral and social development of my children at all times, but on some days the best I can hope for is to 'do no harm'. Now, that doesn't mean that there's something wrong with the method -- that just means I need more sleep/support/alone time/water/chocolate/housekeepers to be the best parent I can be.

This thread is so interesting!


----------



## jillc512 (Aug 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dar* 
I think, PreggieUBA2C, that you may be missing a lot of the stuff that some of us _do_ with our kids, when we're not coercing them. It's not at all laissez-faire, "Sure, kid, do whatever you want" parenting. Young children - and all of us - want to be accepted and to be competent. They're naturally primed to become part of the functioning social unit of the family - we just need to include them, as full members.

I can't imagine seeing Rain's wet swimsuit on the floor and just leaving it there, knowing that she'd want a dry suit later and wouldn't have one. I want to model kindness, and helping the people we love. I sometimes forget to put stuff away in the refrigerator or freezer, and Rain will spot a carton of ice cream or something sitting out and put it away, and maybe mention it to be in case I was letting in thaw out a bit... but mostly, she accepts that I'm sort of forgetful and helps me out. I would be really hurt if she saw it out and just ignored it...

dar

This is such a good point -- that modeling appropriate/respectful behavior is THE MOST effective way to teach kids. Yet, when we introduce punishments and/or rewards, we're messing with the relationship, which in turn lessens our influence with them. Since I view the relationship as the most important thing, I am loathe to do anything that would damage it and cause my children to not confide in me or listen to me or ask me questions for fear of judgement/punishment. (Again, this is in my perfect world where I never yell and am always creative and energetic enough to come up with mutually agreeable solutions to any problem







.)


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

Dar is my hero.


----------



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

Mine too!


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

I have struggled with how to find my footing re: discipline. I finally feel like we're in a balanced place that I feel good about.

I look for the gentlest solution that does not cause the loss of my sanity in every situation. So, kiddo won't get dressed in the morning, thanks to some mamas here I get her dressed night before. Problem solved, no power struggle.









I also don't have IMO unnecessary rules, we are pretty laid back. She eats what she wants when she wants, most of the things she likes are easily prepared, and I only put limits re: sweets, becoz she would eat sweets all day long otherwise. If she doesn't want dinner, fine. If she wants an egg instead, fine. No dinner and then snack of something else later, great. I don't get why people seem to get so hung up about controlling children's food.

I don't care about IMO silly things like t-shirts at the table, getting/being messy, just rules that seem arbitrary and create more stress than they are worth - they do not exist or have been eliminated.

But I have no problem with parent imposed consequences. If my kid coloured on the wall she would be washing it off, absolutely. I can't get into non-coercion for stuff like that, becoz fact is a natural consequence exists, it is just faced by the parent if the child refuses to face it. Crayon on wall = loss of damage deposit + angry landlord, at least in my world. It must come off. My child has no way to understand that, so if it happened here I would coerce her to wash the wall. I have no problem with that, and would happily explain why to her.

But I am not comfortable with no parent imposed consequences, becoz it seems that frequently what is happening is that there is indeed a natural consequence which the parent ends up absorbing. And that seems quite spoiling to me, I just can't figure out how to make that okay.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
Another thing to consider is that the reason more things are broken in a home with more children all close together is because any time one of them tries something, they all have to try it and see if the consequence is the same.

hmm. That must be tough! It's not like that in my house. We do not use imposed consequences though--so the kids wouldn't feel the need to test that.

Quote:

Also, I'm not sure why so many have responded that I have a mistaken definition of GD. I don't even have a definition, other than a generic one (that warrants it having a title) that it is based upon a philosophy of parenting espoused by a psychological analysis of the parent-child relationship.
This is from the forum guidelines: _Effective discipline is based on loving guidance. It is based on the belief that children are born innately good and that our role as parents is to nurture their spirits as they learn about limits and boundaries, rather than to curb their tendencies toward wrongdoing. Effective discipline presumes that children have reasons for their behavior and that cooperation can be engaged to solve shared problems._

Quote:

Whether or not it is viable as a way of life is what I'm attempting to determine. I have no interest in changing anyone's mind about adhering to it; I wholeheartedly embrace conscientious parenting, period. If GD is what works according to your definition of 'works', then that's great. I'm just concerned that in its entirety, full-spectrum, it doesn't seem to be a universal application, that's all, and that's what it _seems_ that some people here think about it.
I think a lot of people that are coming from the mindset of parenting that sees punishment as _the_ way to teach discipline (some people even think the words are interchangeable!) have a hard time imagining what GD looks like. They (general "they" don't take this as directed at your parenting) may not spank, but they still feel they must "do something" when the child "misbehaves" so they insert another punishment like time-out. GD can be difficult to understand because it doesn't fit with that format. It's not a cookie-cutter approach. It requires a parent to be more pro-active in their teaching and to get at the root of problems.


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnysideup* 
hmm. That must be tough! It's not like that in my house. We do not use imposed consequences though--so the kids wouldn't feel the need to test that.

I wasn't referring strictly to imposed consequences. From my experience with not just my own children, yours must be quite unique to not be in any way inclined to try out what the others are doing! I can see how that might make it difficult for you to relate to the scenario I posted about the children each in turn wanting to try out the bannister climb. The children never did have any imposed consequences, but they did feel and see what they were and still enjoyed trying things out until the novelty wore out. I don't think that's anything but curiosity, which I encourage. My concerns about it are safety and repair cost and time- which are in short supply here. This is why I asked if this might be a scenario that others would find necessitates a coerced or punitive measure to deter the behaviour. Your answer is clearly 'no', but then, your children don't follow one another's lead and maybe they aren't very young and born in consecutive years?

Since I posted this, there have been some who would and do use coercion, so i don't think I'm completely misunderstanding the spectrum of what is acceptable and conducive to retaining the empathy and child-focus of GD.

Anyway, I have posted my newly evolving perspective throughout the thread, which if you had the opportunity or interest to read, might soften your tone toward my questions? I'm feeling a bit condescended toward and I'm not sure that is helping me to understand your perspective.


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
I wasn't referring strictly to imposed consequences. From my experience with not just my own children, yours must be quite unique to not be in any way inclined to try out what the others are doing! I can see how that might make it difficult for you to relate to the scenario I posted about the children each in turn wanting to try out the bannister climb. The children never did have any imposed consequences, but they did feel and see what they were and still enjoyed trying things out until the novelty wore out. I don't think that's anything but curiosity, which I encourage. My concerns about it are safety and repair cost and time- which are in short supply here. This is why I asked if this might be a scenario that others would find necessitates a coerced or punitive measure to deter the behaviour. Your answer is clearly 'no', but then, your children don't follow one another's lead and maybe they aren't very young and born in consecutive years?

Since I posted this, there have been some who would and do use coercion, so i don't think I'm completely misunderstanding the spectrum of what is acceptable and conducive to retaining the empathy and child-focus of GD.

Anyway, I have posted my newly evolving perspective throughout the thread, which if you had the opportunity or interest to read, might soften your tone toward my questions? I'm feeling a bit condescended toward and I'm not sure that is helping me to understand your perspective.









I think it depends on what you mean by coercion. In the above example, I think many mamas would explain to their children why they shouldn't climb on the bannister, and reinforce that until it sunk in. Other than that, I don't know how you would use a coercive method that wasn't also punitive. Most mamas here would not use a punitive measure, I don't think, since really punishments are generally accepted to be not part of the GD equation, at least in how this board defines it.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

I think with the banister thing, I'd say "um, no. uh uh. Not gonna happen." lol Then I'd try to redirect to something else that would be fun. It seems that the ideal redirect would be to go outside and do some major climbing and playing! (so I would coerce, but not punish.)

I'm sorry if you feel attacked here. I didn't see anything that it seemed to *me* was meant to make you feel badly, or that seemed condescending. But it's not my perception that matters here, is it?








I think it's easy for the gals here that are regulars and very comfortable with gd, to just delve into what they believe.
We have discussions on semantics all the time, where everyone is argueing one little thing, but really everyone's day to day lives look quite similar! I'm quite sure that no one meant to "speak" to you in a way that made you uncomfortable, and if I'm one of them, I apologize.


----------



## mwherbs (Oct 24, 2004)

what I might do ,talk about it , try to distract away from it- block off the banister with a baby gate so they couldn't get to it-- offer going to the park and climbing equipment that is there because we can't afford to break the house-- I understand the challenge -- maybe when we went out for a walk we would look at other things like the banister- that are the same shape- or look at banisters in a store- maybe be on the watch for a broken one--

to be honest with you to preserve my house I went to the park or was out doors most of the time- we walked everywhere and energetic kids were happy to have an outlet -- they tree climbed , they would climb the slide rather than the ladder as long as safety rules were followed and there wasn't a big line waiting (rarely-almost never a line)good challenge - they would try it with and without socks they would climb the poles of the swings could even get up to the top-
Our 3rd child, younger daughter walked by 8 months and I was not happy about it at all, so her physical ability put her in more danger I think and I wasn't prepared for it as well - more than once she grabbed a hot burner- and I had to switch to using the back burners only on the stove- even before she walked she was a climber and would push a chair get up on it climb on the counter then onto the top of the fridge -- I tapped the fridge shut because she would open the fridge and empty it- or try to climb in and when she climbed up on the counter sometimes she would open the freezer-- there were no velcro straps like now(which she might have been strong enough to open) any how we duct taped it shut, long pieces of tape because she could peel an edge---after walking she would push a chair up to the sink and stack dishes -- stacked them up the way my grandma did and try to wash the dishes, I didn't discourage that I helped.

and through all of this the things that helped me the most- making sure that I ate on time and good food- I also found B vitamins to be a wonder cure for my flagging energy-- and the lower my blood sugar the more likely I would not be as clear headed or even tempered as I could or wanted to be.
I recall after having our 3rd that I was so tired and I finally decided that the way I could doze was to be in the one bedroom- that had no furniture to fall from and had all the toys in it and I layed on the floor with my back or side against the door so everyone was in the same room and safe- now I could not and did not fall sound asleep but could and did doze--


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

There's a lot going on in this thread - I had a thought to throw in the mix.

Do you think that GD takes more "intelligence" than other parenting styles? If you do what do you think the implications of this are for parents of lesser ability?

The reason I ask this question is - the "mainstream" parenting techniques are about *doing*. Child does X; I do Y. It is very easy to remeber, and very easy to teach. But GD requires alot of *thinking* and *talking*. Maybe it's not a higher volume of words - but the fine details of what you say make a huge difference in how your words come across. GD demands that we examine how we talk and interact with our kids carefully and determine the most effective way to present ourselves. I find it mental exercise, and I have a pretty high IQ. What are the implications of a discipline strategy that requires such analytical skill for those who are not by nature analytical?

What do you think? Any validity to this thought?


----------



## ^guest^ (Jul 2, 2005)

Intriguing thread.... incoming wall of text!

My family is poor with a capital P. I'm a SAHM and my husband works as a cold prep cook in a chain steakhouse. We certainly don't let our financial situation dictate how we interact with our daughter. Perhaps my post is not exactly helpful, as we only have one child (and, because of her intense and spirited ways, may stay that way), but I'll say my bit anyways.

GD, for me and my husband, is not a methodology so much as it is a way of breaking a cycle. We both come from authoritarian homes rife with verbal abuse on my side, and physical abuse on his. Neither of us wants these trends to continue. I am prone to losing my temper and yelling, while he is prone to losing his temper and having a full blown adult sized temper tantrum, complete with throwing, kicking, and breaking things. These are not behaviors we are proud of in ourselves, and is not something we want to model to our daughter. It takes every ounce of effort in our soul to stop these behaviors in ourselves.

To me, authoritarian parenting is "because I said so" parenting. It lacks the idea of respecting the child as a person capable of logical thought and deep emotion. For contrast, let's look at the same situation being approached by what I see as authoritarian parenting, and approached by gentle parenting. The old, "I don't want to get into my carseat" game.

Child throws a fit, refuses to cooperate. The authoritarian parent puts little Jr. in the car seat and says, "I don't care if you don't like it, we have to go now! You'll do it because I say you must, and that's all the reason you need." Jr ends up not feeling heard, his feelings and reasons for not wanting to be in the carseat seem trivial and unimportant to his parents, making him feel trivial and unimportant.

The gentle parent, still puts their child in the carseat, but instead of saying "shut up and deal with it", explains why it is important that he be in the car seat, empathizes with the fact they may not be too keen on going wherever they are going, and perhaps plans something more enticing to do later, such as a bike ride, coloring together, going to the pool, whatever. Not as a means to bribe the child into cooperation, but as a reciprocal gesture, much the way adults do. If your DH asks you to attend a car show that you aren't too keen on going to, but you go because it's important to them, you probably wouldn't feel too put out by asking them to do something you enjoy later on, right?

Yes, the GD ways of explaining and empathizing and treating a child with common courtesy do take longer than "because I said so" parenting. I think it's worth it though. I hated being thought too young, too incompetent, or too stupid to understand the reasons behind my parent's requests. "Just because" infuriated me to the point of assuming their reasoning was not logical, and hence a rule or command was not worth following.

Your example of a child messing up something in a rental house is a perfect example of natural consequences that can work. Say the child kicks a hole in the wall. The landlord will either want you to repair it, or the money to pay someone to repair it. If you child is old enough to be receiving an allowance, taking that allowance away until the cost of the repair is covered is a perfectly natural consequence. There's many other options of natural consequences available if the child does not receive an allowance, including having the child apologize to your landlord directly, having them help you or the landlord clean up and repair the mess, etc.

It seems like you might think that only well-to-do, intact families are capable of GD, and nothing could be further from the truth. We have rich and poor, single, blended, and intact families from every walk of life here who practice GD. GD is not a way to get kids to turn out any certain way. It's just respecting that they are a person, with thoughts and feelings that you can't control. Some people have different tactics when it comes to dealing with the problems that arise in a parent/child relationship, which is where those different methodologies spring up. For the most part, though, we recognize GD as simply a way of modeling kindness, politeness, empathy, and respect in our relationships with all people, regardless of age.

If my daughter is not tired, then she is not forced to go to bed. I tried that whole setting a routine for her bedtime thing, and I got it so wrong that there was nearly a year of her life where I endured an hour and a half of screaming before she fell asleep. (Edit: I want to make it very clear I NEVER did CIO - she was screaming in my arms and I rocked, nursed, bounced, sang, and read stories to her) Finally I let go of that need to dictate, and you know what? At 18 months she started grabbing me by the pantleg and tugging me to the bedroom. If she doesn't eat what she's given, then it gets put back in the fridge. If she doesn't like it at all, then so be it. I would hate for someone to force me to eat something I couldn't stand, and if we end up eating something she hates for dinner (which we try to avoid, of course, but kids tastes change rapidly), then she's welcome to a bowl of cereal instead. The cost of making a peanut butter apple while the rest of us are all eating chicken is a small price to pay for a peaceful dinner where everyone wins.

Okay, I've gotten very rambley, and I'm sure I had a point somewhere in there, but my head hurts (DD has rotavirus and the past week of puking, explosive poop and screaming has really done a number on my head) and I'm tired. Basically, all I'm trying to say is I don't think there's a mold that parents who GD fall out of. We do it in different ways and for different reasons, but it mostly comes down to the same thing - we think that kids pick up on things that are modeled to them by adults faster and more thoroughly than the do things they are simply told to do. So why not model the best in ourselves to them?

Edit: And 2bf, I don't think it takes a higher IQ or anything like that, but I do think it takes more willingness to problem-solve creatively, and more willingness for self-reflection and finding the behaviors you do not pride in yourself, so that you do not model them to your children (like my penchant for screaming, snapping, and turning a cold shoulder when I'm mad). It takes a willingness to actively become a better person. Wisdom and Intelligence are very separate things, in my world


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

ITA with most of your post, Neoma, but I have seen it debated here whether taking allowance away is natural, and therefore appropriate, or if the child should only give up the allowance if they want it. And some people would not put a child in the carseat against their will, however gently.

It is that extreme within GD that I think often comes with privilege, an insulated environment where the allowance would not be *required* to pay for the fix, or where mama doesn't have something she has to do requiring the child to get into the carseat.


----------



## ^guest^ (Jul 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
ITA with most of your post, Neoma, but I have seen it debated here whether taking allowance away is natural, and therefore appropriate, or if the child should only give up the allowance if they want it. And some people would not put a child in the carseat against their will, however gently.

It is that extreme within GD that I think often comes with privilege, an insulated environment where the allowance would not be *required* to pay for the fix, or where mama doesn't have something she has to do requiring the child to get into the carseat.

True enough, and I suppose therein lies the debate. To me, doing those things in a gentle fashion is still GD - I think it's important for children to realize that the world does not revolve around them, that parents, siblings, and everyone else in the world has needs and desires too. We just try to do our best to be fair to everyone involved, and fairness to all involved does not imply forcing one person's needs or desires onto another without explanation and the expectation that the other party should just take it without complaint.


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
ITA with most of your post, Neoma, but I have seen it debated here whether taking allowance away is natural, and therefore appropriate, or if the child should only give up the allowance if they want it. And some people would not put a child in the carseat against their will, however gently.

It is that extreme within GD that I think often comes with privilege, an insulated environment where the allowance would not be *required* to pay for the fix, or where mama doesn't have something she has to do requiring the child to get into the carseat.

This exactly what I would have written! Although I can't imagine a situation wherein my children would kick in a wall, markers on the wall that one grabbed from DH's tote without us noticing, hidden in pocket for a while and then used to draw a long line while running down the hall, is more along the line of my landlord concern thing.

Regarding food, preparing something to everyone's liking stopped once our second child was born, and we haven't any other idea how to handle meals other than to offer a few items, and then if none are suitable for some reason (and I always take everyone's preferences into serious account), then it's nothing. We can't afford to just give tomorrow's breakfast for dinner because then there's no breakfast tomorrow. I realise that most people don't have that kind of stricture in their life, but again, we live WaaaaaaY up north where it is -40 to -50 degrees for 5 months and then -25 for three more- food is scarce and in reply to the idea of staying outdoors to preserve the home, clearly, we have some unique challenges! It is unsafe for our children to be outside for a good deal of the year. I have a whole bunch of outside-ish inside activities that we do to keep from getting cabin fever (which actually happens in our town, occassionally). Right now, we have the tent set up in the livingroom and we're playing with wild animal figures while DH is away dogsledding in search of a special kind of wood.

I understand the concept of GD now, I think. It's the extreme end that still seems elusive. I can't figure out how to not coerce in any way. Our 2 1/2 yr. old loves leaving his underwear and pants off after a trip to the toilet. We have a whole happy routine that involves him putting them back on, and most of the time, he's happy to do it, but that once/day when he comes out dressed and proceeds to takes them off again and run around the home without, is an issue to me. I have explained why we wear clothes (protection, warmth -it is too cold to be naked here). I have asked if the ones he's wearing are uncomfortable, offerred to let him choose his own and even a second set at the time he no longer wants the first set, offerred to help him put them on, roll up the bottoms -which he likes sometimes, other things I can't remember, and now I'm down to coercion. None of the options and explanations are suitable to him, so if he doesn't want to wear his pants, I won't make him, but he has to stay in the front room where it's warmer, and that means he can't play with his brothers because there is no playing in that room (it's a small kitchen). This does seem like a logical consequence, but it certainly incidentally carries a smidgen of punishment in it as well. I have decided that, against his wishes, he will not be allowed to play in the other rooms. I have a valid reason that I share with him, but in the end, he has not chosen directly to not play with his brothers- he just chose not to wear pants, but would like to not wear pants and play too. AND then, when he comes out of the warm room, naked, I use my hands and gently, firmly, force him to change directions and walk into that room again. This iis where I don't follow. If we had one child, again, this would not be difficult, but keep in mind that while this is happening, and I am still in first trimester exhaustion, though as cheerful as I can muster, tow other littles are either needing a diaper change, help with the toilet or reaching a book, thirsty, tired and needing cuddle time before a nap, dinner must be prepared, the livingroom moderately tidied up for safety, etc... It was really like a completely different life with one than with more.

I don't think it's impossible to adopt the precepts of GD with my circumstances, but I just think that there has to be leeway for some issues in the arena of coercion -certainly not spanking or harmng the child either physically or emotionally- but gently helping or, really, 'making' them do some things. I just don't think I could ever muster the energy to go any further with relying on their innate ability to understand their own needs or mine to determine what the underlying issues are. Some things have to be overlooked, regretfully, for the welfare of everyone. I cry about that sometimes, but when there are lots of very dynamic, intense, and throw in obviously very advanced, people with very strong wills (DH and me included) not everyone is going to be fully understood or 'seen' all the time, and maybe some days, not even much of the time







. I know _that_! That's _me_ most of the time!

Keep 'em comin'! Still interested!


----------



## LynnS6 (Mar 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
I understand the concept of GD now, I think. It's the extreme end that still seems elusive. I can't figure out how to not coerce in any way.

I can't either. At least I can't figure it out how to do it and preserve my sanity. The 'extreme end' is what some people here call Consentual Living, and that's the end that I can't get. I don't know if it's that I can't get myself to do it or that I can't work it with the personalities we have in the house, or if I'm doing it 'wrong'. But I've decided not to lose sleep over it. Our kids are happy, healthy and generally willing to help.

Question: Just how cold is it in your back rooms? I'm assuming it's above freezing but below 50? What would happen if you let him experience the natural consequence of going pantsless in that room? This is one area where I've learned to be a bit more flexible. Dd hated wearing a coat. When it was 35 degrees out, she would try to go out without shoes and coat. Eventually, I let her. She went without shoes twice. Without a coat more, but learned to go back in for it. Now, obviously you can't do that for going OUTSIDE when it's below zero. But could you do it in the back room? Some people in the Pacific NW wear shorts and sandals year round. Just a thought.

But, if you're just not willing to compromise on this, then I would honestly not sweat it. I coerced (and 'worse' - physically carried her kicking and screaming) to get her diaper changed when she was in diapers because she would get horrible rashes. She's got VERY sensitive skin, and sitting in poop would make her miserable for days. I'm OK with that. 98% of the time we can find a way to do it without coercion. I'm OK with the other 2% to maintain family harmony and my own sanity.


----------



## momma4fun (Jan 23, 2007)

There are so many definitions it seems.

My "issue" with GD is (from real-life families I know and some posts that I see here) that IMO some parents use GD in a developmentally innaproppriate fashion with young children. What this creates then, is a highly verbal child who can deal, negotiate, annoy her way out of anything. These children seem verbally advanced because they can "rationalize" and explain with the best of them, but they are still emotionally at their age stage, and therefore, there's this constant, battling dialogue going on between parent/authority figure and child.

I don't think many children under 6-7 can truly deeply understand the concepts that get tirelessly explained to them for their benefit, in order to practice GD. I think that often a parent needs to calmly and quietly set and example and use getnle physical force (taking a child by the hand, picking a child up, etc.) to model "good" social and family behavior. Just because they seems to understand the words you are saying does not mean they can actually translate that into physical action.

As an example, my friend's 3 kids just can't take no for an answer, and having them over to play is so difficult for me. When I tell them it's time to go homw, they wanna know why they wanna know why they can't stay longer, well then can your dd walk us home? well then can we play outside? no? well why not? well then can she come over to our house for dinner? then can we eat dinner with you? and on and on. It drives me crazy! And it drives their mom crazy to.

Their mother explaines everything to them, all the time -- everyone's needs and possible natural consequences, possible choices, what's gonna happen if you do this or that, etc. She is so often impatient and short with them because of how they demand answers. She gives in and martyrs herself a lot just to get them to stop talking for a few minutes before they come back and asks for the next thing.

I think kids should be able to take no for an answer and to not grow up learning they should try to talk their way out of anything they don't want to do.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
I understand the concept of GD now, I think. It's the extreme end that still seems elusive. I can't figure out how to not coerce in any way.

Yeah, I can't figure that out either.
Even when I was not coercing ds, I wasn't non-coercive in theory. I just honestly don't see the harm in the occasional, gentle coersion (ie, ds is so so so tired, and he refuses to come upstairs to bed because he wants to keep playing. So I carry him up. Once we get up there, he's happy, because he realizes how tired he really is!! btw, that happens only rarely) or insisting that dc do something (without a threat of anything but "I expect you to do x")
I DO however believe that coersion hinders learning, and can be taken too far into something that can potentially cause minor harm in some way (emotionally, to the parent/child relationship). It's one of those things that sometimes I have to choose the lesser of the evils.
I don't think that coersion is *ideal* but sometimes it is the best I can do, and I'm ok with that (and I think ds is too, really).

I want to read The Secret of Parenting by Anthony Wolf. From reading here, it seems he is quite anti-punishment, but also is all for parents being definitely in charge. I don't have any problems with the way I'm parenting, but I am a parenting book addict







and I'm sure I could get something useful from it.


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
ITA with most of your post, Neoma, but I have seen it debated here whether taking allowance away is natural, and therefore appropriate, or if the child should only give up the allowance if they want it. And some people would not put a child in the carseat against their will, however gently.

It is that extreme within GD that I think often comes with privilege, an insulated environment where the allowance would not be *required* to pay for the fix, or where mama doesn't have something she has to do requiring the child to get into the carseat.

Well, I guess I would challenge that thinking by saying that perhaps privilege may make it easier, but I think with non-coercive moms the overriding difference has been the fact that they are incredibly passionate about not doing things coercively, and are willing to dedicate the energy and time to it.

I was there once, but with going through a divorce and being a single mama, I just don't have the energy to be the best mama anymore... sometimes I just settle for good enough.

As for whether GD'ing requires intelligence, yes since it goes so much against the mainstream I believe at this point for most people in our culture it would require more education (perhaps not intelligence) than the average person.

If GD were the norm I don't think people would have to put that much thought into it, honestly, because it wouldn't be so hard to know why your kid is doing x when everyone else's is and they are all telling stories about it at the water cooler, if that makes sense.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Neoma* 
To me, doing those things in a gentle fashion is still GD - I think it's important for children to realize that the world does not revolve around them, that parents, siblings, and everyone else in the world has needs and desires too. We just try to do our best to be fair to everyone involved, and fairness to all involved does not imply forcing one person's needs or desires onto another without explanation and the expectation that the other party should just take it without complaint.

Yep, I'm there with ya.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *KristiMetz* 
Well, I guess I would challenge that thinking by saying that perhaps privilege may make it easier, but I think with non-coercive moms the overriding difference has been the fact that they are incredibly passionate about not doing things coercively, and are willing to dedicate the energy and time to it.

I was there once, but with going through a divorce and being a single mama, I just don't have the energy to be the best mama anymore... sometimes I just settle for good enough.

Yes, ITA that a big difference is the passion and dedication to non-coercion.

I don't, however, think it's the 'best' parenting strategy for everyone, and that others are simply 'good enough' by comparison. I think many strategies within GD have their pros and cons.


----------



## abac (Mar 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama*
I don't, however, think it's the 'best' parenting strategy for everyone, and that others are simply 'good enough' by comparison. I think many strategies within GD have their pros and cons.

ITA with this. There is no best parenting strategy. I parent the way I do not because I want my child to turn out a certain way, but because it is the right way for me to do so.


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
Yes, ITA that a big difference is the passion and dedication to non-coercion.

I don't, however, think it's the 'best' parenting strategy for everyone, and that others are simply 'good enough' by comparison. I think many strategies within GD have their pros and cons.

By "best mama" I just meant "the best mama I can be", at least under the right circumstances.


----------



## cuddleluvinma (Jun 6, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 

1)
or do I issue a firm and lovingly expressed warning of punishment (you will have to sit in the kitchen until next mealtime, or for dc3 who's too young to understand, just watch him and every time he goes to the bannister and climbs, put him in his highchair for a minute)?

2)
This is a probably a non-issue for parents of one child, since you have two eyes and one child (as if it's that easy, right?), or for parents whose eldest is old enough to do some of the watching (and even my 3 yr. old is amazing at that!). Broken things are definitely an issue for new and quickly growing families! Responses?

3) it doesn't seem to be a universal application


1)sitting in the kitchen until next mealtime or putting him in a highchair wouldn't solve anything and would cause you much more problems (such as his anger, a headache for you and the rest of the kids, a feeling that they will not want to listen to you because you have a good point but because they will be afraid of the consequences--and so will not listen to you in the future but rather just get good at hiding what they are doing to avoid the consequences) than just keeping an eye on them when they get near the bannister or just gating that area off. With something said like..."I am really worried about your safety and the saftey of the banister. Unless you can keep yourself and our home safe, I will need to help you by keeping you away from the danger."

2)I do not have but one little one of my own. But, I run a daycare center in my home. Witch involves 5 children (that are not my own)for most of the day 4 days a week. Not to mention my own 2 yr old all of the time (of course). We really done' experience more broken things than the average family (I don't think) Actually the older people in my home do more damage than the little ones. At one time, I was using timeouts and found myself to feel sooo guilty not to mention it not working. I felt that I was at my wits end and I "needed" to try something other than what I was doing. So, I started, within a week, there was more bad behavior than ever before. I will not use it again. Even if the behavior hadn't gotten worse, it just didn't sit well with my stomach or my heart.

3)Why doesn't it?


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abac* 
ITA with this. There is no best parenting strategy. I parent the way I do not because I want my child to turn out a certain way, but because it is the right way for me to do so.

I think this is right on. Kindess, gentleness, patience, understanding... these are all positive character qualities I strive to exemplify because I should - not because I want something out of my kid (wouldn't that be "conditional" parenting?)


----------



## chinaKat (Aug 6, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momma4fun* 
There are so many definitions it seems.

My "issue" with GD is (from real-life families I know and some posts that I see here) that IMO some parents use GD in a developmentally innaproppriate fashion with young children. What this creates then, is a highly verbal child who can deal, negotiate, annoy her way out of anything. These children seem verbally advanced because they can "rationalize" and explain with the best of them, but they are still emotionally at their age stage, and therefore, there's this constant, battling dialogue going on between parent/authority figure and child.

I don't think many children under 6-7 can truly deeply understand the concepts that get tirelessly explained to them for their benefit, in order to practice GD. I think that often a parent needs to calmly and quietly set and example and use getnle physical force (taking a child by the hand, picking a child up, etc.) to model "good" social and family behavior. Just because they seems to understand the words you are saying does not mean they can actually translate that into physical action.

As an example, my friend's 3 kids just can't take no for an answer, and having them over to play is so difficult for me. When I tell them it's time to go homw, they wanna know why they wanna know why they can't stay longer, well then can your dd walk us home? well then can we play outside? no? well why not? well then can she come over to our house for dinner? then can we eat dinner with you? and on and on. It drives me crazy! And it drives their mom crazy to.

Their mother explaines everything to them, all the time -- everyone's needs and possible natural consequences, possible choices, what's gonna happen if you do this or that, etc. She is so often impatient and short with them because of how they demand answers. She gives in and martyrs herself a lot just to get them to stop talking for a few minutes before they come back and asks for the next thing.

I think kids should be able to take no for an answer and to not grow up learning they should try to talk their way out of anything they don't want to do.

Yeah, but nobody *here* has kids like that. That mom is clearly doing it wrong.


----------



## Justmee (Jun 6, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
Yes, ITA that a big difference is the passion and dedication to non-coercion.

I don't, however, think it's the 'best' parenting strategy for everyone, and that others are simply 'good enough' by comparison. I think many strategies within GD have their pros and cons.


I'm gonna sit on thismama's bench, hope there is room









I think you have to do the best y ou can with what you are given. Someone with three non verbal kids under the age of 17 months is obviously goign to parent differently than someone with one 3yo or one 18mo or one a 15 year old and a 12 year old. You grow and evolve as a parent as much as your kids grow and evolve. Strategies that woudlnt' have worked even 2 - 3 months ago are working now.

Typical example of bedtime. Letting 3 kids under 3 decide when they are going to bed was NOT an option for me. Tired, cranky, screaming, rubbing eyesy, yawning kids every night was NOT fun







. And I didn't have the "oh they will sleep when they are tired" type. Nope, all those stories of kids going to sleep when tired, never happened here. I didn't get that golden ticket. So we had a routine. We brush teeth & read books and all go in the room. If they play it's okay. Sometimes dh or I will lie with them, but for about a year everyone went in the room and pretty much didn't come out unless they had slept first (they all wound up in our bed after a couple of hours, but starting in our room just didn't work.)

Fast forward, this is what happened tonight, and it's becoming more typical. Rivka had a nap, so she wasn't tired. But she's used to the routine of going to bed so she went willingly in with the other two. All three played around for a while, and the big girls went to sleep. Rivka came out happy as anything. She played in the living room for a while, and then started to get crabby. Nursed 75 times, turned into a screaming, whiney overtired toddler. She was offered sleeping in her room, the couch, the floor, etc. She played for a little while longer, and then crashed on the floor. I'll move her when I go to bed. No problem. The big girls did come out a couple of times and ask Rivka to come to bed, but I just told them not to worry about it adn she woudl be in bed soon. A couple of months ago they would have refused to go to sleep if she was up, but they are a bit older now and used to the routine, so it's easier now.

Anyway I just wanted to say it does get easier. Hang in there. Having toddlers in the house, let alone more than one toddler in the house is hard, no matter how you parent them.


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *angie3096* 
Here's what I would do:
I would pick her up and put her in the car and take her to the zoo. As she is crying, and as I was buckling her into her carseat, I would say, "I can see you do not want to go to the zoo. I am so sorry. The rest of us are going. It would not be safe for you to stay home by yourself. It's okay that you feel angry. I would feel angry too if I did not want to go to the zoo." And we'd go to the zoo. I would be sympathetic of the tears and screaming. I would encourage her to use words to express her anger and frustration. I would NOT say things like "We're going and that's tough, now stop crying". I would not threaten any punishment. I would be empathetic and understanding. But we'd still go to the zoo.









Angie

Before I answer in a serious vein, I have to chuckle because the child who does this is a 10 year old boy.


----------



## ^guest^ (Jul 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *warriorprincess* 
Before I answer in a serious vein, I have to chuckle because the child who does this is a 10 year old boy.









Lol. Kids of all ages can be tough. In that situation I'd probably still empathize, and maybe even find a way for them to spend the day at a friend's house if they were quite insistant on not going. If all else failed, I'd probably try to think of things they'd enjoy at the zoo and remind them of it. I'd probably ask them to think of things they'd like to do later or the next day. Meeting everyone's needs and desires can't always happen simultaneously, which is an unfortunate fact, but I think usually a fair trade situation can be worked out in most cases. And then sometimes, there are things that just cannot be compromised on, and those are the breaks. I still think it's up to the parent to be compassionate and understanding on the issue if that's the case. The difference between "life's not fair so deal with it" and "I know this really stinks for you, but right now it's got to be done. I'll try to make this as painless as possible" can mean the world to a kid.

Edit: I seem to notice a trend towards "fair play" in my parenting. We "trade" a lot, you know? It might not work for everyone, but it really works for our family and lends itself easily to GD for us.


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

My current method with him is "If you will just please go along and be pleasant you can have extra Gameboy time". I'm pretty sure bribery is a form of coercion, but I'd rather do that than punish.
He's also a very hard kid to empathise with because of the way he phrases things. (Not "I'd rather not go to the zoo" but "Noooooo! The zooooooo! I haaaate it! I 'm going to make you all miserable if you make me go!")
I'm working on that, though.


----------



## ^guest^ (Jul 2, 2005)

Please feel free to swat me if I'm overstepping my bounds, but if you're trying to avoid coercion (if you're not, then please ignore what I'm about to say) but instead of giving it as a bribe, make it an option to make the trip more pleasant, like, "why don't you bring your game boy, you can play on the way there and any time we stop to eat/sit/whatever". Same end result really, but it's less of a "if you do x then you'll get y" situation, ya know? I'm not passing any judgement on the current way you do things, because if it works and you don't have a problem with it, then I see no real problem


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

I like it- I AM trying to rework the way I think of things so I can rework the way I do things. Not easy ( in largest part due to DP's lack of belief in GD) but I am much clamer now than I was this time last year.


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
What is your assurance that this will result in the effects you are hoping to achieve in your families and society at large (an assumption that this is somewhat utilitarian- greater good sort of thing).

What I learned, mostly throught this forum, was NOT to practice "outcome based parenting," don't do ANYTHING because of the supposed effect it will have on the future. When I start thinking too much about the future, "I'm spoiling her, I'm letting her run all over me, etc, etc, she needs to learn x or y will result" then I tend to get off-track. But when I try to respond authentically in the momemt - what does this child need from me right now? What do I need from myself? (again, that future thing - I'll DIE if it her screming goes on like this for another 1, 10, or 20-minutes), then I seem to do OK.

As was mentioned earlier, there are now gaurantees for the future. All we can do is respond authentically each moment - do what seems right in each moment and forgive ourselves for our mistakes.


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ellien C* 
What I learned, mostly throught this forum, was NOT to practice "outcome based parenting," don't do ANYTHING because of the supposed effect it will have on the future. When I start thinking too much about the future, "I'm spoiling her, I'm letting her run all over me, etc, etc, she needs to learn x or y will result" then I tend to get off-track. But when I try to respond authentically in the momemt - what does this child need from me right now? What do I need from myself? (again, that future thing - I'll DIE if it her screming goes on like this for another 1, 10, or 20-minutes), then I seem to do OK.

As was mentioned earlier, there are now gaurantees for the future. All we can do is respond authentically each moment - do what seems right in each moment and forgive ourselves for our mistakes.

I completely understand and empathise with what you've written! This has been a major stumbling block for me and just since writing my initial post and reworking a lot of my preconceived notions (mostly imposed by institutional gatherings of people I no longer associate with... eh hem...not going there...), I really entirely changed my focus. That former focus was an insidious perpetuator of the us vs. them mentality; the latter- the one you've so well described- is a 'we're in this together and we are going to work it out together in love and mutual respect, each of us living with dignity' mentality. How could I have missed this?









Thanks so much, mamas! I'm a convert! I'll be posting a follow-up thread to answer my initial post- take myself to task so to speak (write)- when I can put together a little more time to write.

Thank you again!


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

At our house, we both work FT, and this gives us a lot less leeway than we had when I was a SAHM. DD HAS to be dressed, fed, and in her carseat by a certain time every morning, so no, there's no room for negotiation there. I have forcibly carried and strapped her in kicking and screaming only once, though.

We are no-punishment and generally no-reward, but we are not no-coercion. We aren't able to be, with the needs of our family and a spirited 3yo. The part that bothers me is that I seem to have to threaten coercion ("Please get undressed now or I'll do it for you," "Come take your medicine cooperatively or we'll have to hold you") more than I would like.

My other constant GD struggle is deciding which issues are "worth it" and which are not. DD is going through a stage where most suggestions/requests are met with a "No" or with her idea of how X should be done. I worry a fair bit about this:

Quote:

IMO some parents use GD in a developmentally innaproppriate fashion with young children. What this creates then, is a highly verbal child who can deal, negotiate, annoy her way out of anything. These children seem verbally advanced because they can "rationalize" and explain with the best of them, but they are still emotionally at their age stage, and therefore, there's this constant, battling dialogue going on between parent/authority figure and child.
Yes. It's a concern. And yet I'm not sure a more traditional discipline model would change things that much. If I were using time-out, I know we'd be constantly battling over time-out--haven't you seen that kind of family, where every time-out just raises the stakes and the blood pressure? And taking away privileges is not the kind of thing that phases DD--she's the type of kid who'd rather lose a privilege than change her mind.


----------



## KaraBoo (Nov 22, 2001)

I haven't read all the responses. I will go back and do that but first, I must say, from the original post, you have a very negative view of children.

Why do you assume children will waste food, ruin property, etc? I think your idea of what children are like is going to color your profile.

Now, off to read the posts!


----------



## nancy926 (Mar 10, 2003)

I didn't read the whole thread either....BUT

the idea that a child "wastes food" by not eating it is dangerous, IMHO.

would you rather a child eat when they are not hungry in order to not "waste" the food? Isn't that worse? The food is gone, but you are raising a child who will eat to please others, eat out of guilt, and eat when they are not hungry.

I'd rather have leftover food. Either it's saved for later, or it goes in the compost bucket and we'll use it to grow veggies.


----------



## mwherbs (Oct 24, 2004)

very important note here please read the whole thread--- OP has gone through quite a bit of refinement in her view including just above recent posts........


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
Thanks so much, mamas! I'm a convert! I'll be posting a follow-up thread to answer my initial post- take myself to task so to speak (write)- when I can put together a little more time to write.

Thank you again!










er - emmm - eehh! Great!

and ... I say this from experience - change doesn't happen overnight just because you (general you) have DECIDED to change. It happens slowly in bits and pieces with lots of two steps forward and one step back. So - be gentle with yourself. It's easy to lose your way and just as easy to pick yourself up, say prayer (or centering message) and try again the next time. I'm really saying this all from experience. I sound so great "on paper" here, but in reality I'm one of those "wallmart mothers" (I just made that up) that people in some places are so fond of complaining about.

I hope this came out right. Some one else please pull my foot out of my mouth if not...


----------



## kkar (May 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
I can't fathom discussing every impulse of my children with them, letting them decide whether or not they'll clean up after themselves, allowing 'natural' consequences of unacceptable behaviour to affect the whole family, etc....

What I'm wondering is, what is the profile of a family who can do this successfully. Are there mothers here with four and more born in consecutive years who stay at home, have no family support, a husband who works long hours and has to travel, a tight budget, and are pregnant, who manage an orderly home (according to your own definition), who are successfully following all the rules (most of the time), and feel that this is really working for them?

I agree with what a lot of people have already said. I discuss the consequences of my children's actions at an age appropriate level - no fancy psychology here. They don't have choices about what to clean up, and bad behavior is quickly stopped, and never impacts the whole family.

I have two kids (and another on the way soon). The girls are 14 months apart, I stay home with them all day, everyday, and my husband often works long hours and has a frequent travel schedule. He is supportive of me, but I guess I run the house 80-90 % of the time. My house is frequently clean, if not perfectly picked up. I never let it get to the point of being so messy I couldn't graciously accept a house guest. Our family picks up the house of stray toys before moving onto activities such as meals and bed times..or outside adventures.

My girls are excellently behaved for their ages (2 and 3) - and I know this because I am constantly getting comments from store owners, family members, and waiters/waitresses. And YES I feel this COMPLETELY WORKS for me. Our house is mostly harmonious and squabbles are handled quickly in a gentle manner so that everyone maintains their dignity and we're able to continue working with each other with respect and love.

By following this practice, I have sacrificed nothing, and I think in fact, I am a better parent, and my children are more respectful to each other than other children who suffer harsher discipline.

So I guess I completely blow your original picture out of the water - but then you've changed your way of thinking so perhaps you can see how, once adapted, it isn't much effort at all - in fact I think it saves one from a lot of unnecessary conflict!


----------



## my3peanuts (Nov 25, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
There's a lot going on in this thread - I had a thought to throw in the mix.

Do you think that GD takes more "intelligence" than other parenting styles? If you do what do you think the implications of this are for parents of lesser ability?

The reason I ask this question is - the "mainstream" parenting techniques are about *doing*. Child does X; I do Y. It is very easy to remeber, and very easy to teach. But GD requires alot of *thinking* and *talking*. Maybe it's not a higher volume of words - but the fine details of what you say make a huge difference in how your words come across. GD demands that we examine how we talk and interact with our kids carefully and determine the most effective way to present ourselves. I find it mental exercise, and I have a pretty high IQ. What are the implications of a discipline strategy that requires such analytical skill for those who are not by nature analytical?

What do you think? Any validity to this thought?

I definitely agree with you. I have had to think much more and be much more assertive since using GD than I did when I used to be a spanker. Most everyone where I'm from uses only spankings to "discipline" and they don't see punishment and discipline as two different things. To them discipline=spanking.







For my BIL I would say 99.9% of the time he uses ONLY spankings as his way of dealing with his children.

I think it's extremely lazy parenting.


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ellien C* 
er - emmm - eehh! Great!

and ... I say this from experience - change doesn't happen overnight just because you (general you) have DECIDED to change. It happens slowly in bits and pieces with lots of two steps forward and one step back. So - be gentle with yourself. It's easy to lose your way and just as easy to pick yourself up, say prayer (or centering message) and try again the next time. I'm really saying this all from experience.

I agree with you. In our case, we underwent a major life-changing paradigm shift six months ago after we moved away from everyone we knew and into a remote community up north. When we left, we were liberated from a lot of negative influences in our life (and some good ones, I think), and the sudden freedom allowed us to view our life more clearly than ever before.

We have been at a loss for how to apply our new understanding to how we are raising our children. So we were sort of 'primed', so to speak for this. My original post was not accusatory or even expressing my personal views on everything I wrote, but rather, a clinical approach to examining what I thought might be the way we needed to go.

So, in a way, it has been an overnight change, but not really since we were already 'ready' to implement the right thing once we were certain what it was. In this I am referring to a change in perspective and focus in our parenting.

This is the way I do pretty much everything. I spend a good while reading everything I can, learning and trying little things here and there, discussing only with my husband, and then when I come upon the thing I know I want, I change, overnight, to the new, and what I believe to be right, way. This has long been an annoyance to almost everyone who knows me because it looks to them like I'm fickle. I'm not, I'm just willing to embrace anything that is an improvement upon what I am or think, or whatever. I see no sense in sticking with the old when the new is clearly better. I also stick with good changes, which my family/friends find frustrating and treat me as though I were doing it in spite of them. So, in spite of people (also) being resentful that I haven't discussed things with them and then suddenly change something, I have learned that this is only way to avoid the dreaded 'change back, because I don't want to have to adjust to who you've become or be confronted by who I am' sort of thing that happens in my family and amongst our friends.

Anyway, all that to say that in general, when I come on board, I'm on board. Clearly there will be times when I am not sure of my choices, but I anticipate that for the rest of my life, and this change is actually easy for us because it is the missing link in the life-change we've already made and have settled into pretty well.

Our two youngest have joined right in and our eldest is dealing with some growing pains, but already we see him implementing, by our modelling (and using the new way of communicating that we're working on) the way we are learning and living together.

My husband said it's easier for him to really connect what we're doing with his head if we call it gentle 'discipling' as in bringing our children along with us in life, sharing and guiding them to be who they are and to who they want to be. He said the word discipline in itself conjures up a negative feeling to him because of his past- so we are gently discipling our children, just as we also are disciples!

Finally, wholistic living! A cohesive whole! What a relief!

Thank you all again!


----------



## pacifica (Apr 8, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ellien C* 
er - emmm - eehh! Great!

and ... I say this from experience - change doesn't happen overnight just because you (general you) have DECIDED to change. It happens slowly in bits and pieces with lots of two steps forward and one step back. So - be gentle with yourself. It's easy to lose your way and just as easy to pick yourself up, say prayer (or centering message) and try again the next time. I'm really saying this all from experience. I sound so great "on paper" here, but in reality I'm one of those "wallmart mothers" (I just made that up) that people in some places are so fond of complaining about.

I hope this came out right. Some one else please pull my foot out of my mouth if not...

Oh, thanks for the reminder....And I totally agree with this. I work very hard to continue to grow with my children and change my parenting with their needs. It's so hard to parent young children close in age. I have twin 3 1/2 year old boys. Very energetic, curious, fun, spirited boys. I have been struggling, falling short, reading parenting books trying to make myself the best parent I can. What I really want for my children is the gentle disicpline philosophy........BUT it's very hard for ME to learn! I will not give up, though. I don't handle every situation the way I want. But, I always keep trying. It's hard. Period. I SAH while dh works. We don't have family close. I don't get the breaks I need. We don't have any extra money. Still, I'm trying the best I can. I wake up every morning and hope to handle my battles leaving my dignity intact and my children's dignity intact. Easier said than done, though. This board helps answer my questions and mostly gives me support I need.


----------



## *LoveBugMama* (Aug 2, 2003)

Preggie:

It`s great to read that you feel this is the right way for you to go!









What exactly do you do different now? Or SAY different? How has GD changed your everyday life?

If you don`t mind me asking, that is. I am cronically curious...


----------



## gaialice (Jan 4, 2005)

Joining this thread late to say that the "outcome" in terms of how much resistance will be encountered in GDing a child depends a lot (like pp have said) on the personality of the child, but also on the circumstances, like on whether the GD approach is shared by the whole family, by the grandparents and the family at large, by the community of friends, as well as the daycare providers if any... and the amount of influence that non-GD people have on the young child. In my case, the GD was enforced over an unwilling husband who still has doubts and at times resentment, and has been repeatedly criticized by the family at large. What's more, the children were in daycare since little and not all daycare would meet the definitions of GD on this thread, and no, it was not always possible to choose a better solution. In these cirrcumstances, well, GD may not "work" like it does in other households, but I still strive to GD because I deeply respect my kids, whatever the present and visible outcome is, I planted a good cause in their minds, the end result can only be a good one.... but then, I do plant bad seeds too... to be honest... but I try to do better and apologize...


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
My husband said it's easier for him to really connect what we're doing with his head if we call it gentle 'discipling' as in bringing our children along with us in life, sharing and guiding them to be who they are and to who they want to be.

This is the part of the Continuum Concept (Jean Liedhoff) that really resonated with me. The idea that we didn't need to completely change our lives and our homes (baby proofing, giving up everything for our children) but that we could bring them into our world.

Just thought I'd throw that out there in case it's of use to you.


----------



## AsYouWish (Apr 20, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momma4fun* 
As an example, my friend's 3 kids just can't take no for an answer, and having them over to play is so difficult for me. When I tell them it's time to go homw, they wanna know why they wanna know why they can't stay longer, well then can your dd walk us home? well then can we play outside? no? well why not? well then can she come over to our house for dinner? then can we eat dinner with you? and on and on. It drives me crazy! And it drives their mom crazy to. <snip> I think kids should be able to take no for an answer and to not grow up learning they should try to talk their way out of anything they don't want to do.

I just wanted to throw out that that every kid I've ever known (and this includes my 12 nieces and nephews) has -- to some degree or another -- gone through a phase just like this somewhere between ages 4 and 10. And I can attest that none of my nieces or nephews grew up in or are growing up in GD households. I always saw it as a natural part of child development, however much it might have sometimes worn on my patience. FWIW, the kids who were more on the extreme end of this propensity to constantly negotiate have turned out to be very empathetic, cooperative, gracious teenagers/adults.







Not that there is causality in either situation.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
I really entirely changed my focus. That former focus was an insidious perpetuator of the us vs. them mentality; the latter- the one you've so well described- is a 'we're in this together and we are going to work it out together in love and mutual respect, each of us living with dignity' mentality. How could I have missed this?









It is a hard change at first, or at least it was for me. Luckily for me, ds was 6mos old when I learned about gd. I fell in love with it, and I had a bunch of months to think about it before I really had to do any disciplining at all, really.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
Anyway, all that to say that in general, when I come on board, I'm on board. Clearly there will be times when I am not sure of my choices, but I anticipate that for the rest of my life, and this change is actually easy for us because it is the missing link in the life-change we've already made and have settled into pretty well.

Ime, gd is easier to feel good about the longer you do it. For us (I loved TCC, and use a lot of that info) I see it proven time and time again that the more I trust ds to be a social part of our family, the more he follows through on that expectation and is. And I also see that when I get uncooperative, or when I start to have negative expectations of him, he follows through on that too. So to me, it's a no-brainer at this point, that the way to fix anything in this house is to be more gd. lol (but trust me, I'm not perfect...I'm working on it though







)


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *PreggieUBA2C* 
My husband said it's easier for him to really connect what we're doing with his head if we call it gentle 'discipling' as in bringing our children along with us in life, sharing and guiding them to be who they are and to who they want to be. He said the word discipline in itself conjures up a negative feeling to him because of his past- so we are gently discipling our children, just as we also are disciples!

This is so true. I read a book early on called "Happiest Toddler on the Block" by Harvey Karp. I didn't agree with some of what he had to say, but at the time certain things resonated with me, and still do.

He said that we are our children's ambassadors. It's as if they are in a foreign country, and we already know all of the rules and language and how everything works. And they want desperately to learn - they have been programmed since their conception for that, in many cases. They need a gentle and willing (and patient) guide to help show and teach them all of these things.

It really helped me to think of things that way.


----------



## PreggieUBA2C (Mar 20, 2007)

Thank you all so much for your encouragement!

To respond to CrunchyTamara, I think the biggest change in my behaviour has been in asking soooooo many more questions than I used to. Because I'm not punishing or threatening punishment, I actually have to get a sense of what my dc need and feel in the moment. I can't just tell them what I want and then enforce it. Their desires are at least equal to mine, and needs always override desires, so, I am talking, talking, talking, all day long! I thought it would be exhausting (see previous posts), but because we are engaged in mutual conversation about things that matter to all of us, it's not exhausting at all! It's actually helped me immensely with my mummie-isolation loneliness. Imagine that- not being lonely because I am actually with three other people all day who love me and want not much more than to be with me, living together, learning, etc.... I've discovered that 'rules' are not useful to us, as in artificial sanctions, so now that they are gone, I am spending more time at eye-level with dc, encouraging them, and where they request it, helping them to achieve their goals.

I am also laughing more, joking around a lot more, cuddling more, smiling and dancing more-- I am also challenged a LOT more! It's been awesome, and if what pp wrote is true, that it's gets better the longer you do it, I am sooo excited!


----------

