# I absolutely REFUSE to attempt to control my kids.



## peaceful_mama (May 27, 2005)

That's it. That is my new secret. I don't know what's so new to me about it since i used to use it on my preschool kids *all the time.* (I guess something snapped in me when I started dealing with MY defiant children....I wasn't going to *have* kids who did this stuff because *I* was not going to raise kids who behaved this way or that way...yeah right.)

or maybe the title of this thread should be--"I'm refusing to make a career out of attempting to control my children's every move..." as there's obviously situations where I will take control--obvious safety issues and hurting others come to mind.

I came to this conclusion at some point this evening. I finally decided i was just plain sick of chasing kids through the neighborhood trying to MAKE THEM come in the house.

I went to where they were and announced "If you want to watch a show after your bath, before you go to bed, you need to come home NOW." And I walked away with baby DS on my hip.

DD followed me home...I commented "looks like you want to watch a show..."

DS ignored me, and I ignored him while the younger two took a bath, I prepared a snack, and they started to watch their show and eat said snack.

DS *finally* comes home about 15 mins, later I suppose it was. And I paused the DVR until he was in the bathroom, steered past the TV by me and informed that he had used his TV time playing outside while the other 2 had taken their bath....so now he would have to take a bath and have his snack in the kitchen, away from the TV.

It WORKED....it so WORKED...........even if it hasn't yet WORKED at keeping my kid from trying to get extra time outside and then attempting to argue his "right" to watch TV, it has WORKED in the sense that I am calm, cool, and I feel like I *AM* in control while I do this. (he, by the way, especially loves to watch a show before bed, even if it is a 10 min. short cartoon, so he was not happy to miss out on this. BUT we got through the whole scenario calm, cool, collected......it was a pretty amazing feeling









It's so freeing somehow...a conscious decision to realize that these children are people....of course duh







... people with their own right to make their own decisions, even when the path they have chosen is not the one *I* want in that moment.
AND when they choose to exercise their right not to make the choice i would like them to make in that moment.....that is NOT a reflection on my parenting. It is NOT MY "FAULT" that they don't do what I say immediatly when I say it.

It is NORMAL for them, as human beings, to exercise their free will. NORMAL. It is NORMAL for them to experiment and see what might happen fi they do this or that instead of what was asked. NORMAL. ALL NORMAL.

and it is calming somehow to resign myself to concentrating on another task and waiting for him to come in from outside, for example....and *then* enforce the consequence of not following directions.

I deal better this way....maybe someone else can benefit...


----------



## GoBecGo (May 14, 2008)

Ha, i have a very NORMAL DD1 here. And a very tidy livingroom because as promised, all the toys she didn't put in her toybox in the 40+ minutes she had to do so, are in time-out in the garage. The few favourites she DID manage to tidy up are still here to be loved on, and i don't have to have the nightly argument about tidying up any more, because i'm just going to continue offering her this choice.


----------



## catinthehat (Feb 10, 2010)

Thank you peaceful mama, that is very empowering for all parties involved. A good thing for me to think about today. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## starlein26 (Apr 28, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *catinthehat* 
...that is very empowering for all parties involved.


----------



## Xerxella (Feb 6, 2008)

Read the Secret of Parenting. It's also very confirming.


----------



## hopefulfaith (Mar 28, 2005)

Thank you, thank you, thank you for posting this.









I like that.


----------



## D_McG (Jun 12, 2006)

I think that was an awesome solution! It's still controlling your kids though. Which I think is a GOOD thing.


----------



## peaceful_mama (May 27, 2005)

I agree that it is ultimately having control of the situation, which is my intention as a parent.

But it's the difference between having control over the SITUATION and attempting to control THE PEOPLE and their behavior and choices.

You *can* ultimately have control over a situation--child eventually comes home. When child comes home, they are informed that because they chose to play outside for a longer time, they now do not have time to watch a long movie before bedtime. Their choice, that they have been given the freedom to make. (and, I'm finding, my kids, even the 3 year old, seem to "get" this. I have yet to have anyone balk when I use this.)

You *could*....but it's a major waste of energy, in my experience, try to chase the child down and force them (carrying, dragging, kicking, screaming) to come home. That's an attempt to control the person.

You might also 'give in' to protests when you've informed them of the choice they made and the results. *That* would be not taking control of the situation.
And it's not meant to be punitive. It's just a simple statement of the rules/facts. "Bedtime is this time because you need enough sleep for school. I told you when you needed to come inside if you wanted to have time for Toy Story. You chose to stay and play outside, that's fine, but now there's not time. Maybe tomorrow you can choose to come in when you have time to watch it."

My kids seem to totally 'get it' and *like* having the freedom to choose. *I* feel that ultimately I am in control of the situation because I have planned how I'll respond to their choice. (i.e. it is perfectly fine for them to choose a longer playtime--I accept it even as a *need*, if they *needed* downtime, they would choose to come in and have it. BUT it will mean that they have less time to do something else, like watch TV. And it's much less stressful on me to "enforce" in the setting of my own home versus outside.)


----------



## chaoticzenmom (May 21, 2005)

I had to laugh at your post. I often think that's why moms of many often have such great control over their kids. When we give up control, we actually gain it. You stop chasing the kids and they start following you.


----------



## Surfacing (Jul 19, 2005)




----------



## girlygirls3 (Feb 14, 2008)

I thought this was a great post


----------



## yaM yaM (Nov 9, 2003)

Peaceful_mama, I couldn't agree more with your concept!! In my experience, it is all about self-empowerment, self-control. In my parenting, I focus my attention on what I can support, agree with, participate in, contribute toward. My kids, well, they do what they will do. I am clear that I cannot possibly control them. But the funny thing that happens when I am clear in my self-control is that they just naturally flow with me. Maybe it is because I have effectively communicated that I am the user of my power and, as the brilliant young beings that they are, they realize that it is in their best interest to work with me therefore.









Quote:


Originally Posted by *chaoticzenmom* 
I had to laugh at your post. I often think that's why moms of many often have such great control over their kids. When we give up control, we actually gain it. You stop chasing the kids and they start following you.










Yes, yes, yes!


----------



## Heavenly (Nov 21, 2001)

Well....I'm glad that works for you. It will be interesting to see how that pans out when they are teenagers. Personally I'm of the belief that children are....well, children....and that it is my responsibility to teach them and discipline them. And that they need to understand when I say they need to do something that they need to do it.


----------



## princesstutu (Jul 17, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heavenly* 
Well....I'm glad that works for you. It will be interesting to see how that pans out when they are teenagers. Personally I'm of the belief that children are....well, children....and that it is my responsibility to teach them and discipline them. And that they need to understand when I say they need to do something that they need to do it.

I have found that when I allow my children to self-regulate, they are more willing to do what I say when it's non-negotiable. Because I generally act as if I respect their abilities to make decisions for themselves, when we have times when I need them to do something right now, they do it without any or too much fussing.

Because I show that I generally respect their autonomies, when the rare situation presents itself where I feel I cannot, I explain that, they hear that I'd rather not control them in that moment but feel I have no other choice for whatever reason, and they respect where I'm coming from. In general.

Now, if a 6yo can do this, I don't imagine a teen should have a problem with it.







When there is a conflict, I prefer to look at it as a human thing, not a parent-child thing. I don't expect that my children become more human as they age.


----------



## lonegirl (Oct 31, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heavenly* 
Well....I'm glad that works for you. It will be interesting to see how that pans out when they are teenagers. Personally I'm of the belief that children are....well, children....and that it is my responsibility to teach them and discipline them. And that they need to understand when I say they need to do something that they need to do it.

These are my thoughts as well.
We have friends that with their oldest child they did the....child self regulates thing....and omg there were a couple years where we all dreaded getting together with them and their kids.


----------



## 2boyzmama (Jun 4, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heavenly* 
Well....I'm glad that works for you. It will be interesting to see how that pans out when they are teenagers. Personally I'm of the belief that children are....well, children....and that it is my responsibility to teach them and discipline them. And that they need to understand when I say they need to do something that they need to do it.

I partially agree. I think that you're right that there still needs to be a level of respect for authority within the family dynamic, children still need to learn that the final decision lies with the parent, and sometimes what the parent says goes, no questions asked.

However, in the case of something like this, basically the child was given the opportunity to pick between two privileges...playing outside, or watching TV. The child had the freedom to pick between the two, with full understanding that there would be no negotiating/crying/whining if they regretted that decision later.

So I think it's a little different. If it had been a case of the child choosing to stay outside, then bedtime came and the parent still didn't enforce the child returning home, leaving the decision to come home up to the child, then I think that is wrong. But that didn't happen here.

I am all about giving my kids choices, and teaching them to live with the repercussions of those choices. But I also am VERY big on respect (both ways, I still respect my child) and my kids know that they only have a choice when I specifically give them one. I have been known to say "that was not me asking you to choose to do something, that was me TELLING you to do something, please do it now before mommy gets angry."


----------



## quelindo (May 11, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Xerxella* 
Read the Secret of Parenting. It's also very confirming.

I was just about to post the same thing. I just finished reading this book and it's totally changed the way I deal with my DS. It's like a how-to manual for unconditional parenting.


----------



## peaceful_mama (May 27, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heavenly* 
Well....I'm glad that works for you. It will be interesting to see how that pans out when they are teenagers. Personally I'm of the belief that children are....well, children....and that it is my responsibility to teach them and discipline them. And that they need to understand when I say they need to do something that they need to do it.

And I think that they *will* understand that....when they come in the house and they are informed that because they did not come when I said "If you want to do XYZ, it is time to come in now so that you have time to do XYZ before bedtime."

And I tell them that because they did not come in at that time, they now do not get to do XYZ.

And I'm not waiting till I actually want them in the house to go out and say this...since the option they've been wanting is to watch Toy Story, it's a good couple hours before the actual time they are supposed to be asleep.

I know my kids, and I know that they *will* be ready to come inside before bedtime with that much headway. And I honestly don't care if they'd rather spend that time outdoors on a beautiful evening like the last few nights have been.

I know my kids. I know that even if they don't come immediately, they *will* be back in a reasonable amount of time. And I see no reason to put a show on for my neighbors of chasing the kids around the neighborhood demanding that they get inside immediately.
I have one child in particular who *wants* to play that game, and I've decided I'm just not going to play into it.

What I've found is that it's far easier for me to stay calm, focus, say what I mean and stick with it this way---when I'm giving them a choice I can live with (come inside now and you have time for a show you want to watch before bed, or stay outside and skip it.) and I'm saving the part where there might be a struggle for when they are already inside and they have no audience.

I've moved from option A) chase children around the neighborhood and attempt to catch, drag, kicking and screaming, putting on a show for an audience----controlling the person. to option B) Child chooses from two options I can live with--by giving a very early 'warning', I've taken control and created a situation where I can live with whatever they choose. They are still learning that I'm not going to give in and let them do the extra thing when they did not come inside. (they feel they've got some control and choice, yet ultimately *I* still have control because I've set the boundaries.)

oh and i also know they have common sense--if it was raining, extremely hot, getting dark, whatever, they are not going to choose to stay outside.


----------



## peaceful_mama (May 27, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2boyzmama* 
However, in the case of something like this, basically the child was given the opportunity to pick between two privileges...playing outside, or watching TV. The child had the freedom to pick between the two, with full understanding that there would be no negotiating/crying/whining if they regretted that decision later.

So I think it's a little different. If it had been a case of the child choosing to stay outside, then bedtime came and the parent still didn't enforce the child returning home, leaving the decision to come home up to the child, then I think that is wrong. But that didn't happen here.

That's exactly what it is. What I was doing before was waiting until I really needed them inside RIGHT NOW....and then what would ensue was a major power struggle, especially with DD, age 3.5, who seems to *thrive* on me chasing her through the neighborhood attempting to catch her and bring her home. Great game for her. Tons of stress on me.

Now, I absolutely *refuse* to do that. I offer them the option of coming in now if they want to have time to watch a show after bathtime about 2 hours before I actually want them in bed asleep. It's completely up to them if they want to come in and get ready and have time to do that or not. BUT, when they've made the choice to stay outside, when they come in, they are informed that because they stayed out to play, they now have used up their time before bed to watch TV.
Somehow, they're understanding that this is *their* choice and they have not argued with me on it. And really, I see this as them meeting their own needs--they're pretty good about picking the "downtime" option when they need it.

Tonight it did actually happen that it got to be *serious* time to come in and I had to bring DD in. (with a 2 hour lead-in, this doesn't happen typically) And, miracle of miracles, there was NO SCENE. They know the rule about streetlights coming on means time to come in. (that's for weekends and summer, school nights are obviously earlier, they understand this too.) I pointed out the lights and the moon, she willingly came inside. No chasing, stress, whining, or crying.

I do have some hard and fast rules. For example, there's a little playground near here. I absolutely refuse to stay with them and let them continue to play if they are constantly arguing and refusing all options to resolve their problems. All I have to do is start to walk away with the baby on my hip, and the older 2 see I'm serious, and follow. I've also been known to move the car closer to the playground when we're out at a park....once they really did think I was driving off, which I explained







but now they know that I am absolutely serious.

They do honestly seem to behave better since I started giving them this freedom to choose. Maybe it is that they have a much less stressed mommy who feels more in control because I've taken control of the situation rather than attempting and failing to control their choices. Can I stop the 3 year old from her amusing little keep-away game? No. Not unless I find a way to refuse to participate in it. This is it.


----------



## peaceful_mama (May 27, 2005)

I think this deserves its own place...OF COURSE there are a few, absolutely NON-NEGOTIABLE moments. I absolutely still *would* pick up a child kicking and screaming and carry them back to the car, strap them in, and take them home if they were running away from me downtown, for example. That's an absolute no-choice safety issue.

And OF COURSE they're simply not allowed to stay somewhere if they are hurting, insulting, otherwise acting inappropriately toward others. I *have* held a child in my lap and informed them I absolutely will not allow them to hurt someone else.

We will continue to leave places where they are acting totally inappropriately--unsafe to themselves or others, or "disrespect" like yelling and running in a library. And yes, in those situations, I would carry them out under protest...because they *do* need to know that certain behaviors are absolutely not tolerated.

I guess the real intention and meaning of this post then would be that I refuse to attempt to control my children in typical, everyday situations when their choice is not going to harm anyone.


----------



## peaceful_mama (May 27, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Xerxella* 
Read the Secret of Parenting. It's also very confirming.

got an author? I can't find it in library catalog. thanks


----------



## One_Girl (Feb 8, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heavenly* 
Well....I'm glad that works for you. It will be interesting to see how that pans out when they are teenagers. Personally I'm of the belief that children are....well, children....and that it is my responsibility to teach them and discipline them. And that they need to understand when I say they need to do something that they need to do it.

That is how my mother was with my brother and I and OMG did she get a nasty shock when we stopped allowing her to control us. We were both out of control, me in an open and difficult to live with way and my brother in the secret drug addict way (my whole extended family believes in this type of view point and having kids do things because they are told to and not many of them have turned out well, none of them have bypassed a difficult teen phase). I don't think there is one right way of raising kids, but I try to avoid control and imposing punishment to teach my dd anything because it has yet to teach anyone in my family anything useful like love and respect for others. Even if it turns out that my dd has the same amount of difficulty, at least we have this close time and a respectful foundation that doesn't require me to have to come up with punishments in the name of discipline.

OP: I think that is a nice example of giving a child choices and letting them live with the choice they make. I have fallen into the trap of giving a choice then trying to badger my dd into the correct one and it takes a lot of energy and leaves her feeling resentful because of my obvious attempt at control through false choices and nagging. Giving a choice and letting her truly choose makes both of us happier with each other.


----------



## quelindo (May 11, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *peaceful_mama* 
got an author? I can't find it in library catalog. thanks

It's by Anthony Wolf:

http://www.amazon.com/Secret-Parenti...2392096&sr=1-1


----------



## Minxie (Apr 15, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *peaceful_mama* 
I think this deserves its own place...OF COURSE there are a few, absolutely NON-NEGOTIABLE moments. I absolutely still *would* pick up a child kicking and screaming and carry them back to the car, strap them in, and take them home if they were running away from me downtown, for example. That's an absolute no-choice safety issue.

And OF COURSE they're simply not allowed to stay somewhere if they are hurting, insulting, otherwise acting inappropriately toward others. I *have* held a child in my lap and informed them I absolutely will not allow them to hurt someone else.


I also do this; I tell my DS that "I will control your body for you until you are ready to control it yourself."

Totally agree with the choices option; we do that all the time here and life is usually very pleasant.


----------



## Lisa1970 (Jan 18, 2009)

When I read your title, I thought oh gads, she is one of those parents who thinks her kids are royalty who should rule the world and run amuck with no consideration for anyone else. THEN I read your post. Great job!!! This is what we have done here too!

We have the computer set on the controls for 2 hrs in the evening. I know others said it should be daytime, but once on the computer, all is lost for the day. So they have a set of things to do for the day. If they get it done, they get on the computer promptly at the set time. They do not, they miss part of or all of the 2 hrs. SO, the 2 hrs are from 6-8. At 6, is they say that they suddenly want to do their chore or school work, but then do not get done until 7, I do not reset it, they simply lose out on the first hour. They also know that if they get in to major fights or such during the day, I can take time off their hour too.

Ever since we started doing this, things have been great. I hope they stay that way.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *peaceful_mama* 

I went to where they were and announced "If you want to watch a show after your bath, before you go to bed, you need to come home NOW." And I walked away with baby DS on my hip.

DD followed me home...I commented "looks like you want to watch a show..."



That's still controlling them, just in a different way.


----------



## 4evermom (Feb 3, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *A&A* 
That's still controlling them, just in a different way.









Had you said something more like "There will be time to watch a show before bed if you come in soon for your bath" and left it at that, that would just be letting them know their options. Not letting your ds see what was left of the show the other kids were watching just seems punitive. Sure he missed the beginning because he stayed out later. But he missed the rest because you were controlling him... Still it is a step in the right direction compared to trying to physically force them to do what you want when you want it. Hopefully you are giving them a little warning to give them a chance to wrap up what they are doing, not just suddenly announcing "Come now or else no show for you!" which is essentially threatening them for not demonstrating immediate obedience. Hard to tell from your post quite what your attitude and tone were.


----------



## peaceful_mama (May 27, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *One_Girl* 

OP: I think that is a nice example of giving a child choices and letting them live with the choice they make. I have fallen into the trap of giving a choice then trying to badger my dd into the correct one and it takes a lot of energy and leaves her feeling resentful because of my obvious attempt at control through false choices and nagging. Giving a choice and letting her truly choose makes both of us happier with each other.

That is what I was struggling with too, trying to force them into making teh "correct" choice. I came to a realization that I can't do that. THEY need to learn to make the correct choices for themselves....so *I* need to do things I can live with, and things I can enforce--like 'if you do not come in at this time, then you forfeit the privilege of watching some TV before bedtime. Instead you have chosen to have extra outdoor playtime." (not that I phrase it quite that way to the kids! but it's essentially what I'm doing.)

The 'discipline' of this comes in when I actually enforce the "consequence" of the choice they made. And I DO think that they will learn to make a different choice if they don't like the outcome.

AND another bonus--since i started using this on more negotiable things, like coming inside, and enforcing the limit (you did not come in, now you don't have time to...)
When I really do need them to follow the limit--for example, today we were in a public place and DS2 was in the stroller. I needed to use the elevator. DS1 wanted to take the stairs and meet us. I don't think he is old enough, and I don't want DD to think she can go with him, so I said "We need to stay together and all use the elevator. If you go down the stairs, our next stop will be the van." He came with me.

I think what is happening is that they have some sense of 'control' from the choices I allow them to make at times when I can live with any option I am presenting to them. That sense of most of the time having some control is taking away the *need* to try to assert control (through disobeying) in a situation where they absolutely don't have a choice. That's what I sense anyway.


----------



## peaceful_mama (May 27, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *4evermom* 







Had you said something more like "There will be time to watch a show before bed if you come in soon for your bath" and left it at that, that would just be letting them know their options. Not letting your ds see what was left of the show the other kids were watching just seems punitive. Sure he missed the beginning because he stayed out later. But he missed the rest because you were controlling him... Still it is a step in the right direction compared to trying to physically force them to do what you want when you want it. Hopefully you are giving them a little warning to give them a chance to wrap up what they are doing, not just suddenly announcing "Come now or else no show for you!" which is essentially threatening them for not demonstrating immediate obedience. Hard to tell from your post quite what your attitude and tone were.

I see the point. It wasn't a "RIGHT NOW OR ELSE" type of statement. It was more of an informative "if you want to have time to watch TV, you need to come in now" If he were to come a minute or two or 5 after me, OK. This was more like 30 minutes--I had time to bathe the other two, dress the baby, 3 yr old was in pajamas, and they were eating a snack and had watched half the show.

I know my child, and for my DS1, what I did was what he needs to understand that I am enforcing the choice that he made. Bedtime is a certain time, he needed to take his bath first--that's the rule, bath and pj's before TV so it is done, and by the time he took the bath, the show was over. If it had not been over, I may have let him watch the last couple minutes after his bath and PJ's were on. *that* he would have totally understood and would have been able to see that because he chose to stay outside, he only got the last minute. Getting to delay the bath and watch 15-20 minutes of the show would not have really made him understand the impact of his choice.

That's the point, I'm not going to chase them around the neighborhood basically begging them to obey me. But when they choose to stay outside, I'm also not going to change up the routine and push bedtime back. *If* the TV time matters more to him than whatever he is doing outside, then he will start choosing to come in. If it doesn't, then maybe he NEEDS the activity, the exercise, the outdoor fresh air, the social interaction, SOMETHING that he is getting there. Who am I to say? So far, the way I'm doing it is giving him an advance warning enough that if I do need to go out and say "It's bedtime now", he is willingly coming along.
And I think he is understanding that this is his choice that HE is making, because he is not giving me any real serious objections to my enforcing of the rule. (token protest or two, maybe, just to see if I'm going to back down, but it is clear to me that he understands and this is a test to see if I'm going to back down or if I am going to have him live with the choice that he made.)

I will be watching my tone and wording though, that is a good point.


----------



## aprons_and_acorns (Sep 28, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *princesstutu* 
I have found that when I allow my children to self-regulate, they are more willing to do what I say when it's non-negotiable. Because I generally act as if I respect their abilities to make decisions for themselves, when we have times when I need them to do something right now, they do it without any or too much fussing.

Because I show that I generally respect their autonomies, when the rare situation presents itself where I feel I cannot, I explain that, they hear that I'd rather not control them in that moment but feel I have no other choice for whatever reason, and they respect where I'm coming from. In general.


This has been true for us as well. When I say to my child, "In this situation I do need to insist (xyz)" he is very receptive to following my directions without balking or trying to negotiate.


----------



## chrissy (Jun 5, 2002)

I totally think you are still controlling them. That said, I consider it my job to "control" my kids to a certain degree, and I do the same kind of thing you're talking about.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

That's still controlling them, just in a different way.
But the difference is key. Escalating, direct, or abusive control of a person feels so different to both parties than effective, appropriate, sensitive control of a situation. In my own experience, young children expect adults to have control over their environment--they expect to be fed, clothed, protected, and nurtured 24 hours a day without fail--and it is this expectation which gives an element of control to parents. It is our job to meet the constant needs of a child, and in doing so, we exercise tremendous control over the world as our child knows it. Just by meeting or not meeting those needs, we are controlling our children on a *profound* level. This is partly why debates over whether parents should control children ring a bit hollow for me personally.

I think whenever parents can find a level of control that is not dependent on direct power struggles, the results are usually more positive and effective. I agree the OP is still controlling, but I think she is focusing on the aspects of the environment she can control without inflaming a power struggle with her child, and that is great.


----------



## mimim (Nov 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *D_McG* 
I think that was an awesome solution! It's still controlling your kids though. Which I think is a GOOD thing.

Agreed. And I was glad to see that, because the thread title is a little scary.


----------



## Limabean1975 (Jan 4, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama* 
But the difference is key. Escalating, direct, or abusive control of a person feels so different to both parties than effective, appropriate, sensitive control of a situation. In my own experience, young children expect adults to have control over their environment--they expect to be fed, clothed, protected, and nurtured 24 hours a day without fail--and it is this expectation which gives an element of control to parents. It is our job to meet the constant needs of a child, and in doing so, we exercise tremendous control over the world as our child knows it. Just by meeting or not meeting those needs, we are controlling our children on a *profound* level. This is partly why debates over whether parents should control children ring a bit hollow for me personally.

I think whenever parents can find a level of control that is not dependent on direct power struggles, the results are usually more positive and effective. I agree the OP is still controlling, but I think she is focusing on the aspects of the environment she can control without inflaming a power struggle with her child, and that is great.

Posts like this keep me coming back to MDC to learn.


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

It was still punitive, and yes parents really still control without punishment anyway. And I do think parents have to have some level of control, though I personally avoid punishment. Anyway, it was certainly much much gentler than dragging him in or screaming at him to come in. I do think the title "I refuse to control . . ." isn't really accurate, but I think it's definitely an example of gentle discipline regardless.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

It was still punitive
I'm not trying to change your mind but want to express that I think it was not punitive at all. The family had a certain order of the day, an established evening routine. With three young children I can't imagine what a balancing act it is to meet the needs of all children at once and keep everyone fed, nurtured, and in bed on time. If the family has a routine of dinner, playtime, tv, bath, storytime, and one child wanted to stay out side during tv time--as long as he was informed that this meant giving up tv time (which this child was)--I don't see where he was punished for his actions at all. From what she said, tv time always comes after playtime and bath time--she didn't invent the TV consequence just to punish him. It was bath/tv time and when she told him so, he didn't want to watch, he wanted to play outdoors while his siblings had baths. He made a choice and was trusted to cope with the implications, which it sounds like he did peacefully. He had his bath while the others went to the next step--tv time. It sounds like the mother tried very hard to make sure the child was aware he was making a choice, it sounds like she did this in a matter of fact and respectful way, and not in a vindictive or angry tone--and it sounds like her child heard the choice as a fair one, and not as mom trying to pick a fight and control him unfairly.

I don't see where she invented a negative consequence in response to his behavior (punishment)--if anything she tried hard to make sure he was happy with his choice by keeping him informed of what was next on the agenda, and it sounds like he was, in fact, happy. She didn't bend on the bedtime deadline--she didn't extend his bedtime so he could add more activities-- and I know some parents would have just let him stay up later. But I don't think he was being punished just because bedtime wasn't shifted so he could catch up on his tv watching. At least, that is not my definition of punishment.


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

Quote:

DS *finally* comes home about 15 mins, later I suppose it was. And I paused the DVR until he was in the bathroom, steered past the TV by me and informed that he had used his TV time playing outside while the other 2 had taken their bath....so now he would have to take a bath and have his snack in the kitchen, away from the TV.
That's the part that was punitive. A negative consequence created and enforced by the parent is a punishment. She had to pause the DVR so he couldnt' see it and steer him past the TV and tell him he had to have his snack away from the TV. That is definitely a punishment.

Edited to add that I didn't say it was unfair, just that it's a punishment.


----------



## A&A (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama* 
But the difference is key.

I realize that. I was just disagreeing with the title of the thread.


----------



## yaM yaM (Nov 9, 2003)

My experience is that it is just the opposite WRT 'control' and teenagers.

My 15.5 y/o daughter, who has always been very, very spirited, has also always shown me that she is going to do what she is going to do and that is that. Therefore, she is the one who has taught me to become centered in my own power because (as she ruthlessly points out) - _that it is all I have._

However, my power is grand.







And she is smart enough to know that. The greatness has been to create the kind of relationship where we are both doing what we choose to do and the result is cooperative.

By this age, most kids have learned that they are freer than they previously knew and, let's face it, it is a very short time before they're off in the world on their own. I love that my amazing teenager _wants_ to spend time with me, _asks_ me for my opinions and (most of the time) enjoys being around me. Just the fact that she is not ripping her hair out with frustration toward me like I was with my (very well-meaning-but-controlling) mother is such a joy for me. And I have zero disagreements with her life choices on top of that.


----------



## yaM yaM (Nov 9, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama* 
But the difference is key. Escalating, direct, or abusive control of a person feels so different to both parties than effective, appropriate, sensitive control of a situation. In my own experience, young children expect adults to have control over their environment--they expect to be fed, clothed, protected, and nurtured 24 hours a day without fail--and it is this expectation which gives an element of control to parents. It is our job to meet the constant needs of a child, and in doing so, we exercise tremendous control over the world as our child knows it. Just by meeting or not meeting those needs, we are controlling our children on a *profound* level. This is partly why debates over whether parents should control children ring a bit hollow for me personally.

I think whenever parents can find a level of control that is not dependent on direct power struggles, the results are usually more positive and effective. I agree the OP is still controlling, but I think she is focusing on the aspects of the environment she can control without inflaming a power struggle with her child, and that is great.


This is a great post. 'Control' is the natural effect of providing. When we realize the power inherent in the fact that we are their _providers of_ _everything_, we can become aware of the greatness of our power without ever having to resort to _intentional_ control efforts.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

That's the part that was punitive. A negative consequence created and enforced by the parent is a punishment. She had to pause the DVR so he couldnt' see it and steer him past the TV and tell him he had to have his snack away from the TV. That is definitely a punishment.

Edited to add that I didn't say it was unfair, just that it's a punishment.
Oh I see now what you mean--but I honestly read it differently! I would have paused it because 1) I don't like talking over the tv and 2) if my ds had caught a glimpse of the TV it would have been 10x harder for him to move on as smoothly to whatever else he was supposed to do. And in this case since her child can't have a bath in front of the tv and they might have rules about keeping snacks in the kitchen--I thought mom hitting pause until her son walked through the room was her way of facilitating what her son was doing--pausing the tv until he was out of the room. Kind of like being respectful of the fact that he was there, but not to watch tv, so why flaunt it in his face in a sense--like pausing it when someone answers the phone or the door. Does that make sense? That was how I read it.


----------



## MisaGoat (Jul 10, 2006)

PeacefulMama-I think you are doing awesome.

What I relate to the most about your post and handling of the situation. You handled a situation calmly and felt that your children understood why you are doing what your are. I feel good when I handle a tantrum by staying calm.


----------



## peaceful_mama (May 27, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama* 
Oh I see now what you mean--but I honestly read it differently! I would have paused it because 1) I don't like talking over the tv and 2) if my ds had caught a glimpse of the TV it would have been 10x harder for him to move on as smoothly to whatever else he was supposed to do. And in this case since her child can't have a bath in front of the tv and they might have rules about keeping snacks in the kitchen--I thought mom hitting pause until her son walked through the room was her way of facilitating what her son was doing--pausing the tv until he was out of the room. Kind of like being respectful of the fact that he was there, but not to watch tv, so why flaunt it in his face in a sense--like pausing it when someone answers the phone or the door. Does that make sense? That was how I read it.


thanks heartmama







for both posts. I also dislike talking over the TV, so much that I am currently waiting on DH to MOVE IT and we will only have a portable one that comes in *sometimes.*

Yes, it was intended as a way to keep from totally rubbing it in his face that he wasn't going to be watching TV that night.

And several have said that I'm still 'controlling' them...I agree with at least one, possibly more people that this is my *job.* But what I'm doing is moving away from total attempt to control *them* physically and their choices, and into exerting my control as the parent over the *environment*--the choices I make available to them, the routine we typically have, things like that.

We do have a consistent evening routine--and I've moved from waiting until it's absolutely urgent to come inside NOW, and then chasing, dragging, begging, etc.
to this....a reminder of what is next, and the option to choose. And, so far, they have responded well...like they really understand that they *chose* this.

Yes, it probably is still 'control' to then not give in and let them stay up later if they ask.....but I view that as part of my job of meeting their needs. TV viewing is a *privilege.* Adequate sleep is a *need*. Especially so for my DS1, who typically doesn't sleep past 7-7:30 no matter *what* time he goes to bed. And to top that off, this particular day was during our first week of kindergarten, when he *must* get up at about 7 in order to have enough time to do what we need to do and arrive at school on time.

But it's far less about me controlling him...and more about me starting to give him tools to control his own world, when he is offered a choice on how to spend his time before bedtime.

Yes, ultimately *I* control when bedtime is....but he's 5...he honestly is not old enough yet (in my mind as a 5 year old, and what I know of his understanding) to self-regulate sleep and bedtime when he has to be at school early in the morning. At 5, he understands what he wants to do *right now* and how he feels *now.*

I see probably the most important job I have as his mom as this...meeting his needs while gradually handing over the control for taking care of his needs to him, as he gains the maturity to handle things himself.

I've already done this with allowing him, and his 3.5 year old sister, the choice of how they will spend their time before they need to take baths, brush teeth, and go to bed.
Their not-yet-2 yr. old brother does not choose yet. He pretty much gets to be inside or outside based on where *I* need to be, because he needs constant supervision.

Eventually, I will determine when I think they have enough maturity to regulate when they go to bed with how they feel in the morning...and *yes* I will still enforce going to school those first few times they don't quite get it right and are tired. How would they learn to move their bedtime earlier if I allowed them to stay home and sleep if they didn't get it right?

Maybe the title of this thread really should be that I refuse to engage in power struggles in an attempt to 'control them.' I'd change it, but I tried and can't.


----------



## 2xy (Nov 30, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Heavenly* 
Well....I'm glad that works for you. It will be interesting to see how that pans out when they are teenagers. Personally I'm of the belief that children are....well, children....and that it is my responsibility to teach them and discipline them. And that they need to understand when I say they need to do something that they need to do it.

Natural consequences (barring obvious safety concerns) are usually better teachers than imposed consequences. Learning through natural consequences teaches personal responsibility. In the OP's scenario, the natural consequence of staying outside for an extended time is that the child missed TV time. He has nobody to blame for that but himself, and it may or may not teach him to manage his time better.

I don't think punishments do much except create fear and resentment, to be honest.

I'm someone who questions authority, so it's no great surprise that my kids do, also. That being said, they are well-mannered teenagers who don't engage in recklessness and pretty much do what's asked of them.


----------



## peaceful_mama (May 27, 2005)

I also view it as my responsibility (as I've stated before) and part of discipline--to hand over responsibility to the child as the child grows up and gains understanding and maturity. (In this example, that would be giving the child the choice to stay outside or to come inside and take a bath now so that he has time before bed to watch a show.)

And part of handing over that responsibility includes allowing the child to experience the consequences of the choices they make. (i.e. I don't give in and let him watch even a short show if I have said that there is now not time for *any* TV.)

(this is one thing my mother did not do for me, other than making me go to school no matter how late I stayed up. One example that I'll never forget is the endless hassles in the morning over getting up for school--this went on into HIGH SCHOOL. *I* plan to end this struggle at the point where my children know how to set an alarm clock and use it. They'll have one in their room, I'll help them with figuring out how much time they need, and then THEY will set it and get themselves up. (OF COURSE I will help them if I get up and see that the power went out! Or if I don't hear it and think that they possibly set it for PM instead of AM by mistake!) If they are late to school, that is between them and the school. I think it's absolutely ridiculous to be arguing with a child who, in just 4 short years, will probably NOT be living in your home, will likely have a paid job, etc. about getting out of bed in the morning to get somewhere on time. Better they experience the consequences from school than later in a job where they're dependent on the income, may be fired, and it may affect their ability to be hired at a different job! My job as a parent is to give them ever-increasing responsibility to prepare them for this, and it *should* help end power struggles--by---GIVING THEM POWER.)

I also view it as my responsibility to, when I see something that is not working, revoke certain privileges that they've not shown the maturity level to have, (one example off the top of my head is the alarm clock--if I've given them an alarm clock and promised to leave them alone to get themselves up in the morning and they are consistently late for school due to over-use of the snooze button) or talk to them and brainstorm possibilities. Just because I have handed them a responsibility, does not mean that I have totally now become *not* responsible for helping them learn to manage it. (with the current scenario, if my son were seriously objecting to the TV not being allowed, I might brainstorm with him ideas--like maybe he wants to be told a specific time and see it on a watch that he wears.)


----------



## Fillyjonk (Sep 21, 2007)

I think you are on the right lines.

You are giving them age-appropriate choices, and expecting them to deal with the consequences of those choices.

You are showing that you consider your time worthy of respect

I think you are ending up not only having taught them that actions have proper, human-scale consequences, but also having given them the skills to make these choices. And also that people are not there to act on their whims. Good for you.


----------



## southernmommie (Jan 7, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *peaceful_mama* 
That's it. That is my new secret. I don't know what's so new to me about it since i used to use it on my preschool kids *all the time.* (I guess something snapped in me when I started dealing with MY defiant children....I wasn't going to *have* kids who did this stuff because *I* was not going to raise kids who behaved this way or that way...yeah right.)

or maybe the title of this thread should be--"I'm refusing to make a career out of attempting to control my children's every move..." as there's obviously situations where I will take control--obvious safety issues and hurting others come to mind.

I came to this conclusion at some point this evening. I finally decided i was just plain sick of chasing kids through the neighborhood trying to MAKE THEM come in the house.

I went to where they were and announced "If you want to watch a show after your bath, before you go to bed, you need to come home NOW." And I walked away with baby DS on my hip.

DD followed me home...I commented "looks like you want to watch a show..."

DS ignored me, and I ignored him while the younger two took a bath, I prepared a snack, and they started to watch their show and eat said snack.

DS *finally* comes home about 15 mins, later I suppose it was. And I paused the DVR until he was in the bathroom, steered past the TV by me and informed that he had used his TV time playing outside while the other 2 had taken their bath....so now he would have to take a bath and have his snack in the kitchen, away from the TV.

It WORKED....it so WORKED...........even if it hasn't yet WORKED at keeping my kid from trying to get extra time outside and then attempting to argue his "right" to watch TV, it has WORKED in the sense that I am calm, cool, and I feel like I *AM* in control while I do this. (he, by the way, especially loves to watch a show before bed, even if it is a 10 min. short cartoon, so he was not happy to miss out on this. BUT we got through the whole scenario calm, cool, collected......it was a pretty amazing feeling









It's so freeing somehow...a conscious decision to realize that these children are people....of course duh







... people with their own right to make their own decisions, even when the path they have chosen is not the one *I* want in that moment.
AND when they choose to exercise their right not to make the choice i would like them to make in that moment.....that is NOT a reflection on my parenting. It is NOT MY "FAULT" that they don't do what I say immediatly when I say it.

It is NORMAL for them, as human beings, to exercise their free will. NORMAL. It is NORMAL for them to experiment and see what might happen fi they do this or that instead of what was asked. NORMAL. ALL NORMAL.

and it is calming somehow to resign myself to concentrating on another task and waiting for him to come in from outside, for example....and *then* enforce the consequence of not following directions.

I deal better this way....maybe someone else can benefit...

Thank you for posting this. I was wondering what else I could do, but this makes total sense. I had already been doing this for meal times, but didn't "click" to do it for other things as well.


----------

