# 3yo being dangerously defiant



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

She's almost 4, actually.

She's been going through a new thing where she repeatedly does the following things, which she knows full well she is not supposed to do:

1) Climbing the cat furniture
2) Tipping her chair at meals
3) Climbing up on the sink and toilet in the bathroom

We have explained at length why these things are dangerous. Her reaction to being removed is to laugh, go floppy, and then go over and repeat the behavior, while staring us down. Always more likely to happen she is tired or overstimulated.

I do not think she is doing this because she needs to climb, like a 2yo would. I know she hasn't forgotten the rules. I think she's testing us--we don't have many hard and fast rules about what she or may not do physically around the house, but these ones we stand by. She is experimenting with defiance in other ways, too, but this is the most common problem.

Thoughts? How can we best handle this? We don't want to punish. Can't think of a logical consequnce. She is actually not that coordinated, so it's truly not safe. She nearly took a bad fall in the bathroom the other day when she was climbing--fortunately, I was close enough to catch her.


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

My 6 year old and 3 year old need to climb. A lot. What kind of indoor, rough-housing kinds of play are safe and available at your house?

We've use the beds a lot, including a short loft-like IKEA bed. We have a good spot on a stair landing for climbing outside the rail as well.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

I don't think it's a climbing need (remember, the other problem is tipping her chair at dinner). I could be wrong. I think it's a testing thing.


----------



## abac (Mar 10, 2005)

I think if she tipped her chair once or twice, she would probably stop. Ditto for falling off the cat furniture, sink, and toilet. Sometimes they need to experience these things for themselves, instead of just taking our word for it.


----------



## Ruthla (Jun 2, 2004)

DS gets this way sometimes when he's overtired or sick as well. It's really frustrating- and I often struggle to maintain my own temper when he gets like this. Between his weight and my physical limitations, I can no longer just swoop him up and carry him to safety, and I often end up yelling at him.

With the climbing, I'd suggest picking her up and carrying her out of the room. She climbs, she gets removed from the situation immediately. I wouldn't wait for her to fall and hit her head in the bathroom- that can lead to serious injury!

I do suggest getting a stepstool so that she can safely use the sinks by herself.
Not that this will stop all the climbing if she's doing it just to test the rules, but it will help when she's climbing in order to use the sink.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

I just can't let her fall off the toilet (from standing--she stands on it) or sink onto the bathroom floor. Our bathroom is teeny-tiny. She'd crack her head on the tub. With the cat tree, it's tippy and heavy and would harm her badly if it fell on her. If the chair tipped, she could conceivably break a window. So none of these are okay consequences to experience, IMO. (I do let her do things like climb the couch or jump on her low bed, because I don't think she'd get really badly hurt from that.)

She has a stepstool.







For some reason she wants to climb all the way up on the sink (like get onto her knees on it).

So far we do use removal, but I'm not sure what to do when she just immediately does it again. The bathroom thing happens at bedtime, too, when we need to be in there to get ready for bed.


----------



## dovey (May 23, 2005)

My almost 4 year old son does similar things. He climbs on top of the piano or on the counter when he's feeling defiant. Usually when I am talking to a friend and not giving him all my attention. I think you're doing the right thing regarding removal from the situation. Just lift her up and put her down, making it clear that she's in a dangerous spot. If she does it again, take her down again. Maybe if you see that she's going to climb again right away, just hold her and carry her to another room and do something else, like putting on her pjs or brushing her teeth.


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

I'm no help on the testing thing, sorry. I'm one of those unmet need people in a house full of climbers.







I'm aces at spotting now.

Hope it works out!


----------



## Calidris (Apr 17, 2004)

Sounds exactly like my DD (a month younger than yours loraxc).

It drives me crazy, she "knows better", has had it explained numerous times, flat out told "don't do it". When removed she goes straight back to it. If I get angry she may stop for a bit, but is back at it later on.

I also don't want to punish, but can't really let natural consequences happen (terrazzo floors).

So... basically commiserating here and







: in hopes of some magic advice


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

How dangerous are these things really? I'm a CC-kinda mom, so none of what you've described would necessarily bother me. However, when my child DOES do something that scares me, I tell her, for example, please walk on the retaining wall 12 feet above the street because it makes ME nervous. When she says she won't fall, I agree with her, that she has excellent balance and probably won't fall, but never the less, it makes ME nervous when she walks on the wall and then I don't enjoy our walk because I'm too worried about her.

As for the bathroom sink, I do remove her because I'm afraid her weight will cause it to come right off the wall. We don't have a vanity, but it's attached to the wall.

I think it's important to own the issue about what makes you uncomfortable and not "expect" or project harmful consequences or give the child the idea that they aren't capable of keeping themselves safe. Because I think children ARE capable of guaging their abilities and keeping themselves safe.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

ITA that you can't let your child experience the natural consequences here. If removing and repeating are not working and you're feeling angry about this, I would impose a logical consequence. I rarely do this and I know that folks here are often against it, but I don't see it as punishment. If she can't stay safe, you might have to get involved to insure her safety.

With the chair, I would say that you can either sit in it properly on your knees or bottom or you'll have to get off of the chair. Maybe she can eat her meal on the floor? I think if you can give her some options and enlist her help with coming up with ideas perhaps she'll let it go.

With the bathroom, I would probably call that room off limits to her unless she's with a grown-up if she can't be safe in there alone. I'm not quite sure how you would do this short of locking the door (which I wouldn't be a big fan of mostly for the hassle), but I think this is dangerous and a behavior that needs to stop immediately.

With the cat tree, can you remove it for awhile? I'm not sure what else I would do with it.

These things remind me of what a lot of younger kids do and sometimes removing the temptation is what is needed. I think if she sees you taking these things seriously enough to warrant these actions, she'll see the limits clearly.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ellien C* 
How dangerous are these things really? I'm a CC-kinda mom, so none of what you've described would necessarily bother me. However, when my child DOES do something that scares me, I tell her, for example, please walk on the retaining wall 12 feet above the street because it makes ME nervous. When she says she won't fall, I agree with her, that she has excellent balance and probably won't fall, but never the less, it makes ME nervous when she walks on the wall and then I don't enjoy our walk because I'm too worried about her.

As for the bathroom sink, I do remove her because I'm afraid her weight will cause it to come right off the wall. We don't have a vanity, but it's attached to the wall.

I think it's important to own the issue about what makes you uncomfortable and not "expect" or project harmful consequences or give the child the idea that they aren't capable of keeping themselves safe. Because I think children ARE capable of guaging their abilities and keeping themselves safe.


I agree with you, but I think it's more about an individual child being ready and aware of their body at their own pace and time. I really don't think this is a universal truth for all children. My oldest is very cautious and takes his time with new physical things...I totally trust that he knows what his body can do and he respects his abilities and limitations. I have friends with children who constantly get hurt because they aren't ready to be totally on their own with those judgment calls. Each kiddo is different.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Quote:

I think it's important to own the issue about what makes you uncomfortable and not "expect" or project harmful consequences or give the child the idea that they aren't capable of keeping themselves safe. Because I think children ARE capable of guaging their abilities and keeping themselves safe.
Well...DD is just not a kid with great abilities in this area. I know kids in her playgroup who could climb the sink and toillet safely and not fall (the cat tree and chair things are just inherently risky no matter who does them, even Houdini--it's physics) but she is not those kids. I'm okay with a fall onto carpet, but I'm not okay with a her getting pinned beneath a piece of furniture, going through a plate glass window (really could happen) or cracking her skull on the tile.

I think swampangel has good ideas about the chair. I will try that next time. With the bathroom--I don't even let her brush teeth alone at this point, because of this. But she also does it with us right there, with that gleam in her eye. It's almost less about the actual details and more about what to do about defiance that could be dangerous.


----------



## Aeress (Jan 25, 2005)

I wondered why the child would need to climb the toilet or sink. Do you have a stool for the sink and toilet? If she wants to explore water you can give her a big bowl to play in or someplace that is safer for her to be. I don't see a problem with teaching that some things aren't for climbing, like toilets and sinks.


----------



## abac (Mar 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraxc*
It's almost less about the actual details and more about what to do about defiance that could be dangerous.

She can't defy you if you allow it. You can spot her if you're concerned about her safety. It's just as easy as removing her, probably easier because you won't be met with resistance.


----------



## Roar (May 30, 2006)

My suggestion would be don't overthink it. Contrary to perhaps the prevailing wisdom on MDC, it is perfectly reasonable for you to decide as a parent that what she is doing is unsafe and it isn't something that is permissible.

What I'd do is: Sit down with her outside of the moment. Make sure she understands what she's allowed to climb and what she isn't. You can make a list together. Tell her you notice this has been a problem and you'd like to solve it. What ideas does she have to help her remember the rules and stay safe. Seek her cooperation. Some ideas might be: make a poster with safety rules, put post it notes on the places where she's climbed to help her remember, have a climbing time of day devoted to climbing things that are safe to climb, etc. It isn't so important what you do as much as it is that she wants to do that particular thing and she sees that she's developing a solution. I'd also mention in a breezy way (not a big overkill power struggling sort of way) that if she has trouble following the rules you will help her remember by physically removing her and helping her to the safe climbing place. They key is that she understands 1. there is a limit 2. there is a problem and you'd like to solve it together. 3. if she forgets you will help her.

I heard you say that you don't believe it is about a desire to climb. That's okay, but I'm not sure you really need to accurately identify or define for her the reason why she's doing it. What we often found with our son at this age is that if we started from a place of 100% assuming positive intent, it gave him the wiggle room to get over being four and to find a way comply. If we said "you are testing us" that never would have worked. But, if we said "four year olds need to practice climbing and that's okay, let's make a plan together when your body needs to climb to remember safe places" it worked like a charm.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Quote:

I wondered why the child would need to climb the toilet or sink. Do you have a stool for the sink and toilet? If she wants to explore water you can give her a big bowl to play in or someplace that is safer for her to be.
Yep, she has a stool. It isn't about lack of access to the sink. I think the bathroom climbing is less about "I want to climb up on the sink because then I can..." and more about "I'm clowning around/being provocative."

Quote:

She can't defy you if you allow it. You can spot her if you're concerned about her safety.
I am not going to spot her while she tips her chair as we eat dinner.







Also, I don't want climbing the sink to be something she considers generally allowable. I can't always be there.

Quote:

Sit down with her outside of the moment. Make sure she understands what she's allowed to climb and what she isn't. You can make a list together. Tell her you notice this has been a problem and you'd like to solve it. What ideas does she have to help her remember the rules and stay safe. Seek her cooperation. Some ideas might be: make a poster with safety rules, put post it notes on the places where she's climbed to help her remember, have a climbing time of day devoted to climbing things that are safe to climb, etc.
Roar, these are really good suggestions and are also exactly the kind of thing DD responds to--I appreciate your creativity. BTW, tonight I managed to remember to go over the rules about bathroom climbing before we got in the situation and got her to buy in to not climbing, and she did not climb.


----------



## theretohere (Nov 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Roar* 
My suggestion would be don't overthink it. Contrary to perhaps the prevailing wisdom on MDC, it is perfectly reasonable for you to decide as a parent that what she is doing is unsafe and it isn't something that is permissible.

What I'd do is: Sit down with her outside of the moment. Make sure she understands what she's allowed to climb and what she isn't. You can make a list together. Tell her you notice this has been a problem and you'd like to solve it. What ideas does she have to help her remember the rules and stay safe. Seek her cooperation. Some ideas might be: make a poster with safety rules, put post it notes on the places where she's climbed to help her remember, have a climbing time of day devoted to climbing things that are safe to climb, etc. It isn't so important what you do as much as it is that she wants to do that particular thing and she sees that she's developing a solution. I'd also mention in a breezy way (not a big overkill power struggling sort of way) that if she has trouble following the rules you will help her remember by physically removing her and helping her to the safe climbing place. They key is that she understands 1. there is a limit 2. there is a problem and you'd like to solve it together. 3. if she forgets you will help her.

I heard you say that you don't believe it is about a desire to climb. That's okay, but I'm not sure you really need to accurately identify or define for her the reason why she's doing it. What we often found with our son at this age is that if we started from a place of 100% assuming positive intent, it gave him the wiggle room to get over being four and to find a way comply. If we said "you are testing us" that never would have worked. But, if we said "four year olds need to practice climbing and that's okay, let's make a plan together when your body needs to climb to remember safe places" it worked like a charm.

:Yeahthat

Sometimes the best thing to do is address the situation when it's not currently an issue.


----------



## BellinghamCrunchie (Sep 7, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abac* 
She can't defy you if you allow it. You can spot her if you're concerned about her safety. It's just as easy as removing her, probably easier because you won't be met with resistance.

I agree with this. Get her a helmet and spot her; if its a defiance thing, it should fade away rather quickly. Either way you will have positively affected the connection between you, and maybe have lessened her need to be defiant.


----------



## Roar (May 30, 2006)

I agree if there is a defiance issue parents and kids are finding themselves not on the same side and it is important to try to get to a place where they are working together again. I'm curious though why many posters feel the only way to do that is to remove the restriction. Can you imagine a way for a parent to have a limit and still be on the same team as their kid?


----------



## abac (Mar 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Roar* 
I agree if there is a defiance issue parents and kids are finding themselves not on the same side and it is important to try to get to a place where they are working together again. I'm curious though why many posters feel the only way to do that is to remove the restriction. Can you imagine a way for a parent to have a limit and still be on the same team as their kid?

The OP specifically said she wasn't concerned so much with the details, but with the defiance. If she was concerned with the details, she could take each individual situation as it comes and look for solutions. But if she wants her dd to stop being defiant, I don't think she'll have much luck if she has hard and fast rules and is unwilling to negotiate or discuss them. She even said, it's not a climbing need, it's defiance. Her dd is doing these things solely because she is being told she cannot. If the OP is concerned about her dd's safety, she can spot her and make sure she is safe. I get the feeling though, that her concern is actually more about disobedience. I have a few limits, (like not running out on the road, or sticking his hand down my shirt to grab my boobs,) but I don't tell ds that the answer is no and it's not up for discussion. I am always willing to look for other ways to satisfy his needs. IMO, the issue here is that her dd is being restricted and she doesn't like that, and is fighting against it. There are ways to prevent her climbing on the sink without having a hard and fast rule against it.

If I don't want my ds to do something, the last thing I do is tell him not to do it. That's a sure fire way to make him do it.


----------



## Roar (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abac* 
The OP specifically said she wasn't concerned so much with the details, but with the defiance. If she was concerned with the details, she could take each individual situation as it comes and look for solutions. But if she wants her dd to stop being defiant, I don't think she'll have much luck if she has hard and fast rules and is unwilling to negotiate or discuss them.

Your reaction makes more sense now. I think you are reading a TON of stuff into the original post that isn't there. I just reread it and I see zero of the attitude you are talking about. I see a parent who is saying she's got a clear limit and she's trying to figure out how to make it work within that limit. I got from the poster that she's very much willing to work with her daughter. And, she reacted positively to some specific work with suggestions that I posted (talk, make a poster, etc.)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abac* 
Her dd is doing these things solely because she is being told she cannot.

I'm willing to accept that premise for a minute. That gets me back to my question. It sounds like mom and daughter are locked on different teams. My observation is that on MDC most often if parents are locked on different teams parents are told - get rid of your rule as though that was the optimal or only solution to that problem. I don't really understand that perspective. From my perspective as a positive parent I see being on opposing teams is bad. We need to find ways to work together. You do what you want now and I'll stop saying I disagree doesn't seem like working together.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abac* 
If the OP is concerned about her dd's safety, she can spot her and make sure she is safe. I get the feeling though, that her concern is actually more about disobedience.

I will continue to assume positive intent and to believe the poster genuinely cares about her child and was concerned about her safety. If I felt she didn't love her daughter and was not looking for solutions I wouldn't bother to waste my time responding to her post.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abac* 
I have a few limits, (like not running out on the road, or sticking his hand down my shirt to grab my boobs,) but I don't tell ds that the answer is no and it's not up for discussion. I am always willing to look for other ways to satisfy his needs. IMO, the issue here is that her dd is being restricted and she doesn't like that, and is fighting against it. There are ways to prevent her climbing on the sink without having a hard and fast rule against it.

I am not afraid to let children know that certain things are dangerous or not allowed. It seems to me a kind of creepy manipulation to refuse to be honest about where the limit is. Yeah, you could play around with it and let them continue to believe they are allowed to run in the street and try to distract them with a lollipop or something every time but that seems pretty disrespectful of the child's ability to learn.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abac* 
If I don't want my ds to do something, the last thing I do is tell him not to do it. That's a sure fire way to make him do it.

Perhaps because he's had no experience with limits so he can't understand the idea that they exist?

My personal experience in my own family and with other families I know well is that children who feel they are on the same side as parents and are solving problems together are quite accepting of real safety limits because they trust their parents. This isn't the case when there are heaps of arbitrary rules or when parents genuinely don't respect children.


----------



## mamaduck (Mar 6, 2002)

I can't think of a time when it has ever been useful to label a child as "defiant" or behavior as "defiance." And I also see no particular use in in the phrase "testing limits" or "testing boundaries." I'm not saying that kids don't test, or that kids are never defiant. They probably are sometimes -- but I personally, have never felt it useful to to pursue or act on those descriptions with my children.

For me, it is much more productive to consitantly and firmly support limit, and after the first few time, I stop explaining myself too. A lot of talk can muddy the waters. There is rarely a need to address a child's motivations, unless it is to empathize and validate feelings.


----------



## captain optimism (Jan 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Roar* 
My suggestion would be don't overthink it. Contrary to perhaps the prevailing wisdom on MDC, it is perfectly reasonable for you to decide as a parent that what she is doing is unsafe and it isn't something that is permissible.

Yup. Your feelings matter, and you shouldn't have to be scared that your precious baby is going to fall and hit her head. It really doesn't matter whether that's a rational or irrational fear.

Remove her from the situation, and provide an alternate activity. No reason to lose your temper or act like it's a punishment, because the point is, you just don't want her to get hurt. I believe there was some phrase in the book Becoming the Parent You Want to Be about "if you can't stop doing this yourself, I'm going to help you." If she cries, listen to her cry, but don't let her go back to the room where she was doing whatever. Don't worry about whether this is testing, or an unmet need, or whatever it might be. Just don't let her do something that makes you worry!


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaduck* 
I can't think of a time when it has ever been useful to label a child as "defiant" or behavior as "defiance." And I also see no particular use in in the phrase "testing limits" or "testing boundaries." I'm not saying that kids don't test, or that kids are never defiant. They probably are sometimes -- but I personally, have never felt it useful to to pursue or act on those descriptions with my children.

For me, it is much more productive to consitantly and firmly support limit, and after the first few time, I stop explaining myself too. A lot of talk can muddy the waters. There is rarely a need to address a child's motivations, unless it is to empathize and validate feelings.

Yep, I agree. We just inherited a very groovy dining set from dh's grandparents. He has great memories from it and wants to be able to have it for a long time. Plus, it's nice, high quality furniture, something we have very little of and don't want ruined just for the ethics of it.

Anyway, we don't let the kids tip the chairs because I'm afraid it will break the seats off of the legs. I've explained a few times, then for a while we just told them. Now, I only have to occasionally remind them.

loraxc, I think my kids get most defiant when they sense my irritation with them. I think it's a normal reaction, they can tell I'm displeased, they don't like being "out of relation" with their mother, but it also makes THEM feel a little bit irritated and angry, so they strike back. Plus, they don't have the skills yet to reconnect very well. So I think that you'll be better off if, like Roar said, you don't think about it so much. Don't consider whether she's got the gleam in her eye or whether she's being defiant, because it will just frustrate you, irritate you, and possibly draw you into a power struggle. Just be a robot mama. "Hop off the sink, that isn't safe." Over and over.

I would definitely not try to institute consequences, either. When there's a power struggle, I think consequences just up the ante, and, like Mary Sheedy Kurcinka says, you don't want to win a power struggle, because it just means that you've broken your child's will.

Just my two cents!


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

OP here, trying to get her dander down. (Down, dander!)

TBH, I'm not particularly crazy about the word "defiance" myself. I am not quite sure what else to call it, though, in this situation. Has no one else here ever experienced this, where you set a limit and the child goes right back and does it again, while looking you in the eye and laughing? I'm not talking about a 2yo, either. Experimentation with rules? Inability to follow rules because of fatigue? I mean, what MDC-approved term shall I use to describe the behavior? (Said only slightly snarkily.)

Quote:

But if she wants her dd to stop being defiant, I don't think she'll have much luck if she has hard and fast rules and is unwilling to negotiate or discuss them. She even said, it's not a climbing need, it's defiance. Her dd is doing these things solely because she is being told she cannot. If the OP is concerned about her dd's safety, she can spot her and make sure she is safe.
1. I believe there is a place for hard and fast rules. Safety-based, mainly. DD has a great deal of freedom around the house. I'm sure 90% of people would think it's too much, actually. We have a few things we do not allow because the risk is too great. (I also don't allow her to kick or crash into the floor-to-ceiling plate glass windows in the LR. At this point I wonder if someone thinks I should "spot" her while she does this.)

2. I have already explained that I am not going to spot DD while she eats 3 meals a day. I am just not going to leap up from my own dinner and say, "Okay, DD, I'll stand behind your chair and wait for it to tip while my meal gets cold." Further, there is simply no safe way to climb this cat tree. Its particular design is very top-heavy and unbalanced; we'd like to get a new one, but they are not cheap. The chair-tipping issue and the cat-tree-climbing issue seem to have been neglected in favor of the apparently more provocative climb-the-sink issue.

Quote:

Don't consider whether she's got the gleam in her eye or whether she's being defiant, because it will just frustrate you, irritate you, and possibly draw you into a power struggle. Just be a robot mama. "Hop off the sink, that isn't safe." Over and over.
This is good advice and I appreciate it.

Quote:

Remove her from the situation, and provide an alternate activity. No reason to lose your temper or act like it's a punishment, because the point is, you just don't want her to get hurt. I believe there was some phrase in the book Becoming the Parent You Want to Be about "if you can't stop doing this yourself, I'm going to help you." If she cries, listen to her cry, but don't let her go back to the room where she was doing whatever.
This is feasible with the cat tree, less so with chair tipping and bathroom antics. With the chair, I don't think it's practical to remove her from mealtime. With the bathroom, as I think I said earlier, it usually occurs at bedtime, so we do need to reenter the bathroom sooner rather than later.

Quote:

My observation is that on MDC most often if parents are locked on different teams parents are told - get rid of your rule as though that was the optimal or only solution to that problem. I don't really understand that perspective. From my perspective as a positive parent I see being on opposing teams is bad. We need to find ways to work together. You do what you want now and I'll stop saying I disagree doesn't seem like working together.
ITA with this, and I thank you, Roar, for giving me the benefit of the doubt and for providing workable solutions.

I don't mean to sound obnoxiously aggrieved here, but I am a long-time poster and reader in this forum and it really is off-base to characterize me as someone who is obsessed with enforcing blind obedience. Let's try to tone down the assumptions, okay?


----------



## mamaduck (Mar 6, 2002)

Lorax -- I didn't mean to upset you, and I definately don't think you need to tip-toe or use "approved" language. I only meant that, when you are *in* the situation, trying to determine if she's testing or not is not necessary/useful. Its a sidetrack, because you deal with the behavior the same way you would if it were occuring for some other reason.

I guess I was just chiming in with the "don't overthink it" crowd -- not really meaning to pick apart your words. Sorry!


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Thanks for the apology, mamaduck.









I guess my thinking was that it is important to say that I don't think that this is about a climbing need. I know parents are not perfect interpreters of their kids' behaviors, but I've seen how she is when she's been cooped up and needs to be active, and this is different. The thread could as easily be about a 4yo pulling the cat's tail or drawing on the walls or throwing food on the floor, really (all things she knows the rules about, and all things I consider a 4yo developmentally able to understand) except that the fact that the behaviors are dangerous and can't be ignored (IMO) or dealt with very well in other ways makes the situation trickier. Does that make sense?


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

Just an inspiration...have you read the 5 love languages of children? That might give you an approach you like.


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Roar* 
I am not afraid to let children know that certain things are dangerous or not allowed. It seems to me a kind of creepy manipulation to refuse to be honest about where the limit is. Yeah, you could play around with it and let them continue to believe they are allowed to run in the street and try to distract them with a lollipop or something every time but that seems pretty disrespectful of the child's ability to learn.

Roar, has someone said they are afraid to let their children know that certain things are dangerous? Has someone suggested distracting a child with a lollipop?


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

I haven't read the whole thread. But, hey, we run in the street!







We run the mile from our house to our friend's at the other end of the neighborhood. We run on the left side of the road, and stop and stand in the grass when a car is coming. Ds is the most insistent that we "get off the road", although we have merely modeled/redirected without any fear mongering. Oh, and we run barefoot.

We don't run with lollipops in our mouth though.









Btw, I like Roar's suggestions of problem solving _with the child_.









I find that "not allowing" doesn't eliminate the desire. So, I agree with the suggestions to spot her willingly until the desire is satiated so that your need for safety is met. Partnering together resolves defiance, ime.

Pat


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Hey loraxc, I noticed that your dd is actually not even quite three and three-quarters, but you're referring to her as a four year old. I have a tendency to do this as well, inflate my dc's ages and abilities. Could you be overestimating her self-control here? Distraction might still be a useful technique, especially at dinner time.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Oh, but she IS four, because I'm too lazy to say "almost 3 and 3/4."







J/K. You might be right, but she is so dang wise to the techniques that used to work, like distraction and giving choices. She argues and finds loopholes like a 4yo, for sure. However, in terms of self-control, she's definitely her age, if not younger, so that's worth remembering (or trying to).


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaduck* 
Lorax -- I didn't mean to upset you, and I definately don't think you need to tip-toe or use "approved" language. I only meant that, when you are *in* the situation, trying to determine if she's testing or not is not necessary/useful. Its a sidetrack, because you deal with the behavior the same way you would if it were occuring for some other reason.

I guess I was just chiming in with the "don't overthink it" crowd -- not really meaning to pick apart your words. Sorry!

I gotta say I disagree here. I think if the behavior is connected to wanting to climb, I think the interaction/solution is different - i.e., one might try to find safer things to climb, get outside and climb at the park, etc. It sounds to me that the OP is describing the behavior as defiance because it doesn't have an underlying motivation other that to see what mom will do and where the boundary is. I think this is simply calling a spade a spade. Personally, I find it very helpful to understand the motivation behind my ds's behavior...otherwise, I would just be operating from a behavior modification perspective and that doesn't usually jive with me.

What an interesting conversation!


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Another note...I tend to really follow my instincts. I know my child best and it sounds to me as though the OP has put a lot of thought into this particular situation.

I also find it interesting that being firm is sort of frowned upon here. From the description, she is engaging in dangerous behavior and it sounds like it is to see what will happen or get attention. I think it's totally within reason and appropriate to set firm limits when it comes to safety and not causing damage to herself, others or the house.

If you're going to be firm about these things, I would probably try to give her some wiggle room with things that aren't really that big of a deal, if you know what i mean. Give her power in other areas and "catch" her being safe or making good choices about the stuff you're working on.


----------



## mamaduck (Mar 6, 2002)

I think that I would offer an alternate climbing activity as a solution, even if I didn't think that was the real issue. It isn't going to hurt anything, kwim?

I do think motivation is important when it comes to understanding what our kids want and need, and being able to empathize with them. _I don't think its necessary/helpful to speculate about possible negative intent._


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraxc* 
Has no one else here ever experienced this, where you set a limit and the child goes right back and does it again, while looking you in the eye and laughing? I'm not talking about a 2yo, either. Experimentation with rules? Inability to follow rules because of fatigue? I mean, what MDC-approved term shall I use to describe the behavior? (Said only slightly snarkily.)

A big fat YES from me. You're not alone and I think you're spot on with your interpretation of what's going on. I would trust your instincts.

I think so much of this depends on temperment. For some, perhaps, spotting her until she satiates the need to do it might be fine. But if she's looking for the boundaries and limits that isn't going to satisfy anything. Some children feel much safer when they find the boundaries and limits. I have found that my ds is much happier when he's working with us rather that testing every limit. Those testing times are when he really needs to feel my firm support and limits that I've set. I think he needs to know that I'm in charge and I will keep him safe.


----------



## Roar (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chfriend* 
Roar, has someone said they are afraid to let their children know that certain things are dangerous? Has someone suggested distracting a child with a lollipop?

More than one poster said it wasn't reasonable for her to set the limit and that it guaranteed she'd be in struggle. A poster said she will not directly tell her children not to do things because then they will do them.

I feel this thread would have been more productive if rather than trying to talk the poster out of a limit she is clearly stating she believes is valid and does not intend to change, that people focus instead on helping her find solutions within her clearly stated limits.


----------



## Roar (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaduck* 
I think that I would offer an alternate climbing activity as a solution, even if I didn't think that was the real issue. It isn't going to hurt anything, kwim?

[/I]

I agree. The climbing solution says "hey kid we are on the same team". It can get you out of the power struggle.


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *swampangel* 
I also find it interesting that being firm is sort of frowned upon here. From the description, she is engaging in dangerous behavior and it sounds like it is to see what will happen or get attention. I think it's totally within reason and appropriate to set firm limits when it comes to safety and not causing damage to herself, others or the house.


I don't understand how "being firm" helps to meet an underlying need to "get attention". What is the old adage 'negative attention is better than no attention'? I am not saying this has anything to do with the OP's situation. But the desire for attention/engagement/relational exchanges can be met proactively in many ways which don't include "being firm".

Pat


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Roar* 
More than one poster said it wasn't reasonable for her to set the limit and that it guaranteed she'd be in struggle. A poster said she will not directly tell her children not to do things because then they will do them.

I feel this thread would have been more productive if rather than trying to talk the poster out of a limit she is clearly stating she believes is valid and does not intend to change, that people focus instead on helping her find solutions within her clearly stated limits.

People offered lots of solutions that didn't involved not explaining dangerous situations or offering lollipops. You can disagree without mischaracterizing people's attempts to offer helpful insights.


----------



## lizabird (Jan 19, 2004)

Yep, I pretty much agree here. My almost-4-yr-old is also in the testing mode. He's generally pretty responsive if we explain about dangers, though. I'm not into having him experience the natural consequence for falling out of the upstairs window (for example). It's just not okay to climb up there because it's very very dangerous, and if you want to climb up onto something crazy, let's find a safer place.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Roar* 
My suggestion would be don't overthink it. Contrary to perhaps the prevailing wisdom on MDC, it is perfectly reasonable for you to decide as a parent that what she is doing is unsafe and it isn't something that is permissible.

What I'd do is: Sit down with her outside of the moment. Make sure she understands what she's allowed to climb and what she isn't. You can make a list together. Tell her you notice this has been a problem and you'd like to solve it. What ideas does she have to help her remember the rules and stay safe. Seek her cooperation. I'd also mention in a breezy way (not a big overkill power struggling sort of way) that if she has trouble following the rules you will help her remember by physically removing her and helping her to the safe climbing place. They key is that she understands 1. there is a limit 2. there is a problem and you'd like to solve it together. 3. if she forgets you will help her.

I heard you say that you don't believe it is about a desire to climb. That's okay, but I'm not sure you really need to accurately identify or define for her the reason why she's doing it. If we said "four year olds need to practice climbing and that's okay, let's make a plan together when your body needs to climb to remember safe places" it worked like a charm.


----------



## abac (Mar 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Roar* 
More than one poster said it wasn't reasonable for her to set the limit and that it guaranteed she'd be in struggle. A poster said she will not directly tell her children not to do things because then they will do them.

I feel this thread would have been more productive if rather than trying to talk the poster out of a limit she is clearly stating she believes is valid and does not intend to change, that people focus instead on helping her find solutions within her clearly stated limits.

Roar, if I tell my ds not to do something, he will do it, so it seems to me that I would be a fool to tell him not to do it.







I don't think there's anything wrong with him doing things I tell him not to do, either. He's just having fun. It sounds like the OP's dd is having quite a bit of fun too if she's laughing every time they remove her, and she runs back laughing, ready to do it again.

When ds was a toddler, he loved running down our driveway toward the road, (where cars travel very fast.) I would panic and run after him. He would giggle and run faster. He could predict that every time he would run, I would chase him. This was GREAT fun for him!!! Children love to be chased! I didn't want him running down the driveway, so I stopped running after him. (And, surprise, he never ran out on the road.)

I did make sure I played lots more chasing games with him though, which is also something the OP might consider. Give her something else and tell her not to climb on it, in a joking voice, of course. "Don't climb on that footstool. If you climb on that, I'm gonna have to get you...." Then when she climbs on, run over and grab her and tickle her? Maybe she won't go for the other things if she's getting that chasing another way? A mommy-acceptable way to try out defiance?


----------



## blessed (Jan 28, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WuWei* 
I don't understand how "being firm" helps to meet an underlying need to "get attention". What is the old adage 'negative attention is better than no attention'? I am not saying this has anything to do with the OP's situation. But the desire for attention/engagement/relational exchanges can be met proactively in many ways which don't include "being firm"

My dd is this same age, down to the same month. This interpretation of her adversarial behavior fits more cleanly than anything else I've seen on this thread. If she's acting defiant, it's because she wants my attention. If I shift the paradigm of our interaction from one of battling over some trivial issue to one of engaging her in conversation or play, she's more than happy to leave go the chair she's tipping and come have a chat with me.

As Pat says, that doesn't mean that this is loraxc's situation, but it's what I've found to be true in dealing with my own 3 and 3/4 year old daughter.


----------



## Roar (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abac* 
Roar, if I tell my ds not to do something, he will do it, so it seems to me that I would be a fool to tell him not to do it.







I don't think there's anything wrong with him doing things I tell him not to do, either.

For parents to simply say "fine then I'll get rid of limits" every time they have difficulty dealing with a limit denies children the opportunity to learn. To simply say the way to deal with it is to allow it is underestimating children's ability to learn to understand dangers and to learn to trust in their parents. I can see this might be easier for a parent than putting the work into finding working with solutions together, but over the long term I don't think it serves kids well.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

I think wanting attention could be a factor here, for sure. That makes more sense in some cases (tipping the chair at dinner when DH might be talking) than others (climbing the sink when I'm in the bathroom talking to her about how it's time to brush teeth), though.

If we want to break it down further, I'd venture that she is either seeking attention or trying to delay something/"change the subject" most of the time this happens. Again, though, this is quite different than her trying to fulfill a climbing need.

Quote:

Roar, if I tell my ds not to do something, he will do it, so it seems to me that I would be a fool to tell him not to do it. I don't think there's anything wrong with him doing things I tell him not to do, either.
This is just tough for me to wrap my head around. Even DD, who has been characterized by a not-great preschool teacher as "abnormally defiant for her age" (btw, I found this ridiculous--she's 3) does not automatically do whatever I tell her not to every time. Eeep. And I do think there's something wrong with her doing things I tell her not to, since most of the time I have a pretty good reason. If she objects, she's free to tell me why, just as I almost always tell her where the no is coming from.

Quote:

I think so much of this depends on temperment. For some, perhaps, spotting her until she satiates the need to do it might be fine. But if she's looking for the boundaries and limits that isn't going to satisfy anything. Some children feel much safer when they find the boundaries and limits.
Yes, I do think there is a temperament issue here as well.

Quote:

I think if the behavior is connected to wanting to climb, I think the interaction/solution is different - i.e., one might try to find safer things to climb, get outside and climb at the park, etc. It sounds to me that the OP is describing the behavior as defiance because it doesn't have an underlying motivation other that to see what mom will do and where the boundary is. I think this is simply calling a spade a spade. Personally, I find it very helpful to understand the motivation behind my ds's behavior...otherwise, I would just be operating from a behavior modification perspective and that doesn't usually jive with me.


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

Quote:

For parents to simply say "fine then I'll get rid of limits" every time they have difficulty dealing with a limit denies children the opportunity to learn. To simply say the way to deal with it is to allow it is underestimating children's ability to learn to understand dangers and to learn to trust in their parents. I can see this might be easier for a parent than putting the work into finding working with solutions together, but over the long term I don't think it serves kids well.
"Getting rid of limits" doesn't automatically include "underestimating children's ability to learn to understand dangers and to learn to trust in their parents." Ds does both of these, without "not allowing" on my part.









Pat


----------



## savithny (Oct 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraxc* 
I think wanting attention could be a factor here, for sure. That makes more sense in some cases (tipping the chair at dinner when DH might be talking) than others (climbing the sink when I'm in the bathroom talking to her about how it's time to brush teeth), though.

If we want to break it down further, I'd venture that she is either seeking attention or trying to delay something/"change the subject" most of the time this happens. Again, though, this is quite different than her trying to fulfill a climbing need.









I think someone above used the term "testing," and maybe that might be clearer than "Defiance," but still get at what this may be...

I remember reading "The Scientist in the CRib" when my first was a baby. And one of the points it makes is that children continually experiment with the world, both the physical world ("Hey! If I drop this spoon, it falls down! Every time!!!") and with their social world ("What happens if I do this? What does the big monkey do? Okay, now the big monkey is over there.... I'm going to do the same thing, and see what happens... Oops! She doesn't like that very much!!!")

In other words, it's not defiance in the classical, "bad import" sense that everyone puts on the word. But it is doing something for the sake of doing it and seeing people's reactions. Kids continue that long past babyhood, and it is neither malicious nor manipulative - just natural.

I'd wonder, though, if the chair-tipping might be sensory-seeking in some way (I'm not saying "Disorder" or anything -- EVERYONE has some sensory issues and things they do to fufil sensory needs). I was an inveterate chair-tipper myself, and I just remember it *felt* good to swing it back and feel my legs dangle into different directions and experience the vague swoopign of gravity... you say she gets lots of jumping options -- how much swinging does she get to do?


----------



## theretohere (Nov 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Roar* 
For parents to simply say "fine then I'll get rid of limits" every time they have difficulty dealing with a limit denies children the opportunity to learn. To simply say the way to deal with it is to allow it is underestimating children's ability to learn to understand dangers and to learn to trust in their parents. I can see this might be easier for a parent than putting the work into finding working with solutions together, but over the long term I don't think it serves kids well.

I agree. Life is full of limits, rules and guidlelines- not all of them sensible. Never following through on limits doesn't set children up for life outside the home.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WuWei* 
I don't understand how "being firm" helps to meet an underlying need to "get attention". What is the old adage 'negative attention is better than no attention'? I am not saying this has anything to do with the OP's situation. But the desire for attention/engagement/relational exchanges can be met proactively in many ways which don't include "being firm".

Pat

I wasn't putting those two together. Perhaps she is trying to get attention, which is important to make note of. (This is where I think it's really important to try to understand the motivation to some extent anyway). I would then give her lots of it but not in relation to this behavior. This behavior is unsafe and it's my job to set that limit and help my child with it. With my kiddo, talking about the reasons for the limit works well. For the OP, it doesn't sound like that's working so well and she came here for some brainstorming, I think, as to what to do next.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *savithny* 
I think someone above used the term "testing," and maybe that might be clearer than "Defiance," but still get at what this may be...

I remember reading "The Scientist in the CRib" when my first was a baby. And one of the points it makes is that children continually experiment with the world, both the physical world ("Hey! If I drop this spoon, it falls down! Every time!!!") and with their social world ("What happens if I do this? What does the big monkey do? Okay, now the big monkey is over there.... I'm going to do the same thing, and see what happens... Oops! She doesn't like that very much!!!")

In other words, it's not defiance in the classical, "bad import" sense that everyone puts on the word. But it is doing something for the sake of doing it and seeing people's reactions. Kids continue that long past babyhood, and it is neither malicious nor manipulative - just natural

Excellent points.


----------



## laoxinat (Sep 17, 2007)

Hey mamas!

Some VERY helpful advice I recieved from a very wise woman (thanks, mama Sande!) was to question ALL my assumptions when evaluating my ds's behavior. FTR I am uncomfortable with any statement that ascribes intent on a 4 y o's part. Especially intent to (as if they could) incite a parent's anger. That's a mighty abstract concept for a 4 yo, btw. (I have a BS in Family Studies, special concentrationin child development, FWIW) I often believed my ds was trying to *make* me mad. But as previously mentioned wisewoman pointed out, how could he? Only I can decide to be upset and or angry about a given situation. So often people say, Oh she just wants attention. The only real problem here, IME, is her method of gaining the attention. I would say that if a dc needs to resort to defiant behavior for attention, perhaps a reassessment is needed. This is not to say boundaries and limits are not in order. Every child needs them, to differing degrees. But the way we set and _especially our state of mind_ when implementing them is crucial to their effectiveness. Even *feeling* upset can trigger what looks like defiance. Behavior that looks like defiance is a symptom of disconnection. I say looks like, because I beleive what they are really after is belonging, and they have either learned or are trying out a mistaken goal, or way of belonging. For many of us mamas who grew up in dysfunctional families, to US disconnection feels normal, but to our dcs it is really uncomfortable. We often need to spend some time being extra mindful of our own state and that of our dcs. When we are truly in the moment, and truly present, a child will almost never feel a need to engage in opposition. Now, obviously we are human and will have times we "check out" but with most dcs there is a ratio of attention to inattention within which they feel comfortable. When you really watch, you can figure this out and be there accordingly. HTH!
laoxinat


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Quote:

n other words, it's not defiance in the classical, "bad import" sense that everyone puts on the word. But it is doing something for the sake of doing it and seeing people's reactions. Kids continue that long past babyhood, and it is neither malicious nor manipulative - just natural.
I totally agree with this. Perhaps that wasn't clear because people read something into my choice of the word "defiant," but I don't see defiance as this evil thing as much as just something she does that's natural, but aggravating. Also, nah, I don't think DD is trying to make me mad or unhappy when she does this.

Quote:

Behavior that looks like defiance is a symptom of disconnection.
I am not quite sure I agree with this, though. My DH might suggest that I do something and I might say no and not want to do it. This doesn't necessarily mean I'm disconnected with him--I'm just a different person with different wants and needs. Why should DD always want to do what I want her to? She might have a good reason not to do it (in this case, not really, but in many cases she might).


----------



## frenchie (Mar 21, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abac* 
I think if she tipped her chair once or twice, she would probably stop.

If only that were true....my son has tipped his chair several times. He's taken som really hard diggers by doing to. We've come to the point of raising our voices when he starts to lean in his chair. He eats at a child size table most of the time. It's his craft/school/snack table. My DD is 6 months old and just started crawling. She often ends up right behind his chair. All we need is for him to come down right on her. We have explained to him in length what will happen if he falls on her. He's becoming more aware, so he'll ask me to move his sissy if he sees her within a couple feet of his chair. None the less, I don't want him leaning in the chair.
To the OP, you just have to be consistent and firm with the rules. When Kai decides he doesn't want to cooperate with the house rules (we have very few), I put him in his room to play, read, color...whatever. I let him know that he is free to come out of his room whenever he chooses to abide by the rules. I know this isn't a popular method here, but it works for my son. He will usually sit on his bed for a few minutes, and come out and appologize for his behavior, OR he will fall asleep. Most often the latter. He acts up when he gets tired. Sometimes he'll cry when I bring him to his room...that's when he's overtired....he'll fall asleep within 5-10 minutes. If I suggest that he's tired or needs a nap, all hell breaks loose







So, that's why I just bring him to his room.


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

Quote:

Life is full of limits, rules and guidelines- not all of them sensible. Never following through on limits doesn't set children up for life outside the home.
But, _imposing_ limits isn't necessary, as you just stated "Life is full of limits, rules and guidelines, not all of them sensible." I prefer our child be able to discern for himself which environments meet his needs, rather than having an external locus of control over his life. There are limits, which we choose to live with daily.

Pat


----------



## Roar (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *WuWei* 
But, _imposing_ limits isn't necessary, as you just stated "Life is full of limits, rules and guidelines, not all of them sensible." I prefer our child be able to discern for himself which environments meet his needs, rather than having an external locus of control over his life. There are limits, which we choose to live with daily.

In this case her daughter is not doing a good job on her own figuring out safe limits. That's why she has parents. If she was born with such complete discernment she could go live on her own and wouldn't need parents.

To be clear the original poster certainly didn't say she wanted to figure out how to impose limits for the sake of limits for some arbitrary quest to teach obedience. Rather she is the parent in the room who has seen the physical objects and who has a good idea of her child's motor competence and she's seeing things that are unsafe.


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laoxinat* 
Hey mamas!

Some VERY helpful advice I recieved from a very wise woman (thanks, mama Sande!) was to question ALL my assumptions when evaluating my ds's behavior. FTR I am uncomfortable with any statement that ascribes intent on a 4 y o's part. Especially intent to (as if they could) incite a parent's anger. That's a mighty abstract concept for a 4 yo, btw. (I have a BS in Family Studies, special concentrationin child development, FWIW) I often believed my ds was trying to *make* me mad. But as previously mentioned wisewoman pointed out, how could he? Only I can decide to be upset and or angry about a given situation. So often people say, Oh she just wants attention. The only real problem here, IME, is her method of gaining the attention. I would say that if a dc needs to resort to defiant behavior for attention, perhaps a reassessment is needed. This is not to say boundaries and limits are not in order. Every child needs them, to differing degrees. But the way we set and _especially our state of mind_ when implementing them is crucial to their effectiveness. Even *feeling* upset can trigger what looks like defiance. Behavior that looks like defiance is a symptom of disconnection. I say looks like, because I beleive what they are really after is belonging, and they have either learned or are trying out a mistaken goal, or way of belonging. For many of us mamas who grew up in dysfunctional families, to US disconnection feels normal, but to our dcs it is really uncomfortable. We often need to spend some time being extra mindful of our own state and that of our dcs. When we are truly in the moment, and truly present, a child will almost never feel a need to engage in opposition. Now, obviously we are human and will have times we "check out" but with most dcs there is a ratio of attention to inattention within which they feel comfortable. When you really watch, you can figure this out and be there accordingly. HTH!
laoxinat


You know, I've seen this attitude a lot on here, and while I think it is sometimes very true, I think just as often it's not. I don't think it gives kids enough credit. I truly believe that children might try to make us mad. Sure, we have to own our upset and all that, but as adults that does not give us license to treat people however we want. And children are figuring that out, too. To figure that out, they need to find out for themselves what makes people mad, and how they feel when people are mad at them. Not only that, I remember a lot of times as a child and a young adult that I felt compelled to experiment with unacepptable behavior. Not for attention. Not to get back in relation with my parents (I hid most of it very carefully from them, in fact.) But just to see how it felt. To see what kind of person I wanted to be. I wanted to know what it was like to shoplift, to have casual sex with people I hardly knew, to get high, etc. I can't remember as well when I was four, but I do remember having the same impulse to experiment.

So I guess my point of this whole ramble is that it's just too limiting to explain all misbehavior away as the child demonstrating a need for more connection.


----------



## kayt707 (Oct 17, 2007)

oh I know the feeling. My son climbs on things and jumps off of them. He will drag a chair into the living room and jump to the couch. He will climb over the couch and flop over it. He is 3 coming up on 4. At 2 he climbed up on my bed while I was folding laundry. He threw his legs out to try and do a butt bounce but came down to close to the edge and rolled off. I tried to stop him as soon as he started but got there a split second to late. He must have fallen just right or wrong because he broke his arm. The next day with a splint still on his arm he was trying to do it again!! Fortunately it was on his bed this time. He sleeps on the trundle that came from his brothers bed. In part because Im worried about putting a regular bed in there because he will try to jump on it or off of it. He is a complete daredevil and it scares me. He has taken his ride along and tried to go down his little slide on it! I keep trying to explain why he cant do those things and it just doesnt seem to stop him. I remove him from it and he will go right back to it. Have you found anything that has helped?!


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *natensarah* 
So I guess my point of this whole ramble is that it's just too limiting to explain all misbehavior away as the child demonstrating a need for more connection.

ITA. I recently read a book, written by an attachment theorist, that stated that most disciplinary problems are caused by poor quality attachment (I question the methods of defining/determining quality of attachment, and the accuracy of such definitions). The prescription, according to this author, for any and all disciplinary issues is for the parent to foster better quality attachment (and though the author did recognize that some children do have actual disorders that lead to disciplinary problems, there was still a heavy emphasis on better attachment as a major part of treatment and on poor connection as a major contributing factor to misbehavior). I found this explanation to be quite an oversimplification. I don't doubt for a moment that fostering connection and healthy attachment are beneficial and frequently helpful-it definitely is. But I don't think need for connection and/or "poor quality of attachment" explain all misbehavior. I think the reasons behind misbehavior are varied.

Children are their own people, and they do things for a variety of reasons. I have one child who does things like climb on something after I've consistently told her to get down (even doing Robo-Mommy)--it certainly does _look_ like defiance. She does this, I think, because she wants to choose for herself, and she wants to experiment, and she wants to be in charge of her own body. At times it may be that she's looking for attention, because we've been busy or I've been preoccupied. And it is true for us that the more attuned I am to her and her needs/desires/preferences/personality, and the more we're connecting, the easier it is for us to resolve these issues successfully, in a way that feels good to both of us, and in a way that addresses any needs of hers that need addressing. Connection is part of a good relationship and part of the path to solving problems. But I don't think it's true that the root cause of children's misbehavior is always unmet need for connection. There are so many other reasons why a child might choose to do what parents consider unacceptable or unsafe.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Quote:

She does this, I think, because she wants to choose for herself, and she wants to experiment, and she wants to be in charge of her own body.
And this certainly sounds like my DD, who is very, very independent, strong-minded, and persistent. Her wanting to be in charge of her own body and her own decisions has been a big thing for her almost since day one. (Thank heavens I don't have to change this kid's diaper anymore!) I don't feel she acts this way out of anger or lack of connection (at least not most of the time). It may LEAD to those things, but I don't think it comes from that place initially. I think she just wants her own choices and her own independence that much. I love many things about DD, of course, but one thing I cherish is that her behavior hardly ever feels "personal" or spiteful or malicious. Rather, she is just fiercely herself. This means she is sometimes inconsiderate of others, but it is never done with meanness. She hasn't the first idea of how to hold a grudge and she really hasn't a mean bone in her body. She has a LOT of stubborn, strong, persistent bones, though.









I think of my DD at age 2 in a playgroup full of other 2yos: she did not snatch from other kids, but if anyone tried to take her toy, she would simply HOLD ON like a limpet, staring the other toddler straight in the eye. She did not scream or hit, but man, she had iron fingers! That's her.


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

Quote:


I think of my DD at age 2 in a playgroup full of other 2yos: she did not snatch from other kids, but if anyone tried to take her toy, she would simply HOLD ON like a limpet, staring the other toddler straight in the eye. She did not scream or hit, but man, she had iron fingers! That's her.
I call this "The Toddler Rule": as I offer an alternative which is equally preferable, the toddler releases that which it is holding so tightly = finding a common preference.

It works with adults too.









Pat


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraxc* 
And this certainly sounds like my DD, who is very, very independent, strong-minded, and persistent. Her wanting to be in charge of her own body and her own decisions has been a big thing for her almost since day one. (Thank heavens I don't have to change this kid's diaper anymore!) I don't feel she acts this way out of anger or lack of connection (at least not most of the time). It may LEAD to those things, but I don't think it comes from that place initially. I think she just wants her own choices and her own independence that much. I love many things about DD, of course, but one thing I cherish is that her behavior hardly ever feels "personal" or spiteful or malicious. Rather, she is just fiercely herself. This means she is sometimes inconsiderate of others, but it is never done with meanness. She hasn't the first idea of how to hold a grudge and she really hasn't a mean bone in her body. She has a LOT of stubborn, strong, persistent bones, though.









I think of my DD at age 2 in a playgroup full of other 2yos: she did not snatch from other kids, but if anyone tried to take her toy, she would simply HOLD ON like a limpet, staring the other toddler straight in the eye. She did not scream or hit, but man, she had iron fingers! That's her.

I love your descriptions of your dd...so lovely. My oldest is also very strong-willed and I love to think about all the ways that his personality will serve him very well in the world. My kiddo sounds similar to yours...he's nearly 5 now and mellowed a lot. Talking things out almost always works but there are still those times when he's in that state of disequilibrium and it's a challenge...more or less so depending on where I'm at in my own state of dis/equilibrium!

How are things going since you originally posted?


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Thank you, swampangel. I do think her personality will serve her well in the world. She is a force to be reckoned with, and I mean that positively.

Quote:

How are things going since you originally posted?
Funny you should ask--much better! The bathroom thing was probably the most persistent problem, and I've been handling it just by getting her "on board" with agreeing not to climb and be crazy before we start the bathroom routine. She has been remarkably agreeable to this. If I can just remember to get buy-in BEFORE a situation arises, she always does so much better. (It's just hard to remember to do this for every possible glitch!) I actually haven't seen the chair-tipping in the last few days, but yesterday during dinner she piped up with, "Mama, look, I'm not tipping my chair." And she wasn't, so I acknowledged that and thanked her for making a safe choice.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

That's awesome! Good for you and good for her!


----------



## OakBerry (May 24, 2005)

My ds used to do the chair-tipping thing at about 3 and 1/2. Repeatedly. We had a hard tile floor and after he had fallen twice and luckily escaped any serious injury, I told him that since he was continuing to tip, and that was dangerous, he had a choice. He could sit in the chair on his bottom, with no tipping, or I could bring his booster seat up from the basement for him to sit in. (he had just graduated out of it, I think that was part of his reason for experimenting). It ended the issue pretty quickly. I know this is probably viewed as "coercive" but to me it was a safety issue, and nothing else was working.


----------



## laoxinat (Sep 17, 2007)

Quote-To figure that out, they need to find out for themselves what makes people mad, and how they feel when people are mad at them.- Quote

Please explain precisely how someone can "make" you mad. Honest question. Feel free to give examples.
laoxinat


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laoxinat* 
Quote-To figure that out, they need to find out for themselves what makes people mad, and how they feel when people are mad at them.- Quote

Please explain precisely how someone can "make" you mad. Honest question. Feel free to give examples.
laoxinat

I know what you're saying, but I think short of being totally enlightened, most people don't really operate in this way.

Here's an example. Dh goes to work. I take all of his favorite books and his notebooks full of his own writing, put them in the woodstove, and burn them up. Then I take his Ipod and put it in there too. Dh comes home, he gets mad. I think it's fair to say that I made him mad. Sure, he's the one with the feeling, he should be in control, but I think that's a little bit dishonest. Many of our actions affect others, and we should strive to be aware of what those effects might be.


----------



## laoxinat (Sep 17, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *natensarah* 
I know what you're saying, but I think short of being totally enlightened, most people don't really operate in this way.

Here's an example. Dh goes to work. I take all of his favorite books and his notebooks full of his own writing, put them in the woodstove, and burn them up. Then I take his Ipod and put it in there too. Dh comes home, he gets mad. I think it's fair to say that I made him mad. Sure, he's the one with the feeling, he should be in control, but I think that's a little bit dishonest.

No, the actions were the actions and the feelings that followed were still chosen. It is our attachment to the stuff that fuels the anger. Or our attachment to control. But the truth is, no one can get inside our brains and change the chemistry. Except us. Believing that anything outside of ourselves can influence or change us is a complete illusion. However, it does take most of us quite a while to internalize this. Check out "Happiness is a Choice" by Barry Neil Kaufman more more in depth science on this issue. Emotions really are chosen. Our actions are our actions. People CHOOSE the effect they have. The statement (which I inadvertently cut) that we should strive to know how our actions affect others is true to a degree, but we have to stop short of accepting responsibilty for their feelings. Otherwise, it's like saying it's a battered women's fault for being hit because she should have known not to "make him mad".
laoxinat


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laoxinat* 
No, the actions were the actions and the feelings that followed were still chosen. It is our attachment to the stuff that fuels the anger. Or our attachment to control. But the truth is, no one can get inside our brains and change the chemistry. Except us. Believing that anything outside of ourselves can influence or change us is a complete illusion. However, it does take most of us quite a while to internalize this. Check out "Happiness is a Choice" by Barry Neil Kaufman more more in depth science on this issue. Emotions really are chosen. Our actions are our actions. People CHOOSE the effect they have. The statement (which I inadvertently cut) that we should strive to know how our actions affect others is true to a degree, but we have to stop short of accepting responsibilty for their feelings. Otherwise, it's like saying it's a battered women's fault for being hit because she should have known not to "make him mad".
laoxinat

Sure. I just don't think most people can (or want to) spend the time and effort that it would take to really become so detached that my scenario wouldn't bother them. Nor do I think it's very functional in most societies. Maybe if you were a ascetic celibate. But in a family? As a spouse? As a mother? It's just not very functional. And I don't think it's even really a socially responsible ideal.


----------



## Roar (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laoxinat* 
Emotions really are chosen. Our actions are our actions. People CHOOSE the effect they have. The statement (which I inadvertently cut) that we should strive to know how our actions affect others is true to a degree, but we have to stop short of accepting responsibilty for their feelings. Otherwise, it's like saying it's a battered women's fault for being hit because she should have known not to "make him mad".
laoxinat

What you are saying to me instead sounds like the batterer is not responsible for hurting the feelings of the person he assaulted. After all they could have made the choice not to be hurt.

Oh and by the way just as an aside - every person I've heard promoting this idea is someone who either 1. was a nasty person who hurt other people regularly and was looking for a way out of accepting responsibility for their bad behavior or 2. A powerless person who was tended to often be a victim of unkindness and was looking for a rationalization to validate that choice.


----------



## abac (Mar 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *laoxinat* 
No, the actions were the actions and the feelings that followed were still chosen. It is our attachment to the stuff that fuels the anger. Or our attachment to control. But the truth is, no one can get inside our brains and change the chemistry. Except us. Believing that anything outside of ourselves can influence or change us is a complete illusion. However, it does take most of us quite a while to internalize this. Check out "Happiness is a Choice" by Barry Neil Kaufman more more in depth science on this issue. Emotions really are chosen. Our actions are our actions. People CHOOSE the effect they have. The statement (which I inadvertently cut) that we should strive to know how our actions affect others is true to a degree, but we have to stop short of accepting responsibilty for their feelings. Otherwise, it's like saying it's a battered women's fault for being hit because she should have known not to "make him mad".
laoxinat

While my attachment to stuff might certainly fuel my anger in the above scenario, I can assure you that the blatant disrespect would be the real piss-off. It is empowering to come to the realization that you can choose happiness and peace despite these things, but it's unrealistic, IMO, to suggest that others actions have no effects on our emotions.


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

I agree that no one can _make_ me feel anything. My emotions do arise from my own values, needs, attachments, whatever. BUT I also think that since we (as a society) are all interconnected that our actions do have an effect on one another, and that since we are interconnected we do have a responsibility to be mindful of others (their feelings, values, needs, whatever) and compassionate toward others.

So if I do throw my husband's iPod in the fire along with his other things, sure his feelings do arise from his valuing of those things, his attachment to them, his need to be respected (or attachment to the need to be respected), or whatever. But if I didn't throw the iPod, etc. in the fire then he wouldn't even have the opportunity to feel angry about my tossing it all into the fire--my actions do matter, they do have an effect. Since we are interconnected, I do have a responsibility to be mindful of the fact that our actions affect each other and to be compassionate toward him--and thus, I have a responsibility not to just go throwing his things in the fire.

I don't think it's an either-or thing. I don't think we either choose to take full responsibility for the feelings of others in response to our actions or simply (coldly) choose to act with no regard for how they may feel because their feelings are _their choice_ and we don't _make_ them feel anything. I think there's a middle ground there that accommodates both the idea that no one makes anyone feel anything and the idea that we do affect one another (and have responsibilities toward one another). It's this middle ground that I hope my children learn.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Quote:

Sure. I just don't think most people can (or want to) spend the time and effort that it would take to really become so detached that my scenario wouldn't bother them. Nor do I think it's very functional in most societies. Maybe if you were a ascetic celibate. But in a family? As a spouse? As a mother? It's just not very functional. And I don't think it's even really a socially responsible ideal.








:







:







:


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

:


----------



## laoxinat (Sep 17, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Roar* 
What you are saying to me instead sounds like the batterer is not responsible for hurting the feelings of the person he assaulted. After all they could have made the choice not to be hurt.

*No, he is not responsible for her feelings. He is responsible for his actions. But his actions can't possibly say anything about her, and vice versa* Oh and by the way just as an aside - every person I've heard promoting this idea is someone who either 1. was a nasty person who hurt other people regularly and was looking for a way out of accepting responsibility for their bad behavior or 2. A powerless person who was tended to often be a victim of unkindness and was looking for a rationalization to validate that choice.

FTR I am a monk







and live my life according to ancient principles of love and compassion for others. I take 100% responsibilty for my behavior and my feelings. Which is precisely why your characterization doesn't fit. I never have to resort to either of those things, because my happiness doesn't depend on the whims of others. I choose to be happy regardless of my circumstances. At some point, we all must stop looking outside ourselves for both validation and reasons for self loathing. If not, we are simply, in effect, handing out a remote control for our feelings to everyone with whom we come in contact. I certainly wasn't able to manifest this attitude at all times when my kids were little, but as I grew it became quite possible. And, no they are not delinquents. Though they are dangerously capable of thinking for themselves








laoxinat


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

I've been







: too, but have a question.

In this example,

Quote:


Originally Posted by *natensarah* 
Dh goes to work. I take all of his favorite books and his notebooks full of his own writing, put them in the woodstove, and burn them up. Then I take his Ipod and put it in there too. Dh comes home, he gets mad. .


I think anger is a reasonable response. I think that most people in our culture would agree. So, then, what really is wrong with being angry in this circumstance? Is there something inherently wrong with anger? Doesn't anger serve a purpose?

Is anger something to be avoided when dealing with our children? I am not talking about lashing out in anger....but I am talking about feeling anger, labeling it, and modeling how to handle it. How is it better to choose not to feel anger?


----------



## laoxinat (Sep 17, 2007)

I don't think it's an either-or thing. I don't think we either choose to take full responsibility for the feelings of others in response to our actions or simply (coldly) choose to act with no regard for how they may feel because their feelings are _their choice_ and we don't _make_ them feel anything. I think there's a middle ground there that accommodates both the idea that no one makes anyone feel anything and the idea that we do affect one another (and have responsibilities toward one another). It's this middle ground that I hope my children learn.[/QUOTE]








:
laoxinat


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Continuing on this very OT conversation:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnmama* 

In this example,

Quote:

Originally Posted by natensarah View Post
Dh goes to work. I take all of his favorite books and his notebooks full of his own writing, put them in the woodstove, and burn them up. Then I take his Ipod and put it in there too. Dh comes home, he gets mad. .
I think anger is a reasonable response. I think that most people in our culture would agree. So, then, what really is wrong with being angry in this circumstance? Is there something inherently wrong with anger? Doesn't anger serve a purpose?

Is anger something to be avoided when dealing with our children? I am not talking about lashing out in anger....but I am talking about feeling anger, labeling it, and modeling how to handle it. How is it better to choose not to feel anger?

The point isn't, I don't think, that anger is somehow wrong or bad. IMO, anger certainly does serve a purpose-as a signal that there's something we need to pay attention to. Anger isn't bad at all, IMO. It just is. I think the discussion here is regarding whether others are ever to blame for our feelings (whether others _make_ us feel a certain way), or whether the cause resides within ourselves (whether no one can _make_ us feel anything, even if their actions are a trigger for our emotions).

I personally think that my emotions arise from how I'm thinking about a situation, my beliefs, my values, my preferences--what happens is the trigger, all this internal stuff is the cause. Knowing this is empowering, it gives me a lot of choice. With regard to parenting, knowing that thinking about a situation in a certain way leads to anger gives me the opportunity to think about it differently (or to see if I can think about it differently). Taking responsibility for my feelings frees me from a lot of frustration (which can arise from giving away responsibility for my feelings, as when I depend on someone else's doing something in order to feel better myself--for example "if you would just listen I wouldn't be so frustrated"). Simply reexamining, taking responsibility for my feelings, and reframing has freed me from a lot of anger while at the same time allowing me to still meet my needs--and has allowed me to better communicate and solve problems with my children. This is for my benefit, as well as my kids' benefit and the benefit of our relationship. However, my goal isn't to choose to never feel angry, it's just to take responsibility for my feelings and needs and to feel angry less often/live more peacefully with my kids. Feeling angry at times is part of being human. I think it's fine to feel anger and communicate that I'm feeling it and even to make requests of them, as long as I'm not _blaming_ my kids for my anger and placing the responsibility for my feelings (and for changing my feelings) onto their shoulders. And in fact, since all people feel anger, communicating about my feelings of anger and modeling how to handle my anger does help my kids learn how to handle their feelings of anger (which hopefully benefits them, despite my not being a perfect role model).


----------



## laoxinat (Sep 17, 2007)

:







:







:







:


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)




----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

I get what you are saying, sledg. It has been very useful for me to reexamine my reactive feelings, and it certainly has helped me to problem solve with dd. Sometimes it seems that the most reasonable response is anger, still









Quote:


Originally Posted by *sledg* 
I think it's fine to feel anger and communicate that I'm feeling it and even to make requests of them, as long as I'm not _blaming_ my kids for my anger and placing the responsibility for my feelings (and for changing my feelings) onto their shoulders..


Can you give an example of how this sounds? Because it always seems like semantics to me. The child (after a certain age) knows that their action is causing the anger. What phrasing doesn't blame the child for the anger, but also communicates a need to be responsible for their actions?


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnmama*

Quote:

Originally Posted by sledg
I think it's fine to feel anger and communicate that I'm feeling it and even to make requests of them, as long as I'm not blaming my kids for my anger and placing the responsibility for my feelings (and for changing my feelings) onto their shoulders..
Can you give an example of how this sounds? Because it always seems like semantics to me. The child (after a certain age) knows that their action is causing the anger. What phrasing doesn't blame the child for the anger, but also communicates a need to be responsible for their actions?

Well, of course there's no guarantee that my children won't ever perceive my communication as blaming no matter how hard I try to *not* communicate blame. Their perception is part of the equation, and I can't control how they perceive. But I try to communicate without blaming just by using "I" statements: "I feel frustrated when _*I* see_ that your dirty clothes are still on the floor, because _*I*_ expected[/I] you to pick them up when I asked you to. Would you please pick them up now?"

I know it doesn't seem all that different, when you read it, from "_I'm_ frustrated because _you_ left your clothes on the floor." But I think it's meaning is very different. I felt frustrated when what _I_ saw did not match _my own_ expectations. And maybe more importantly, it changes my internal focus and experience-now I'm not thinking in terms of my emotions being caused by something my child did or didn't do, and I do think this changes how I come across to my child. When I'm consciously putting effort into communicating in this way, I do know that my tone tends to be different, my body language is different, how I approach the problem in terms of finding resolution is different, how long I remain frustrated/angry/whatever is different. And really, I sometimes think it's these kinds of things rather than the words themselves that communicate more to my children.

Another piece of being able to communicate without blame is remembering that the purpose of communicating in this way is not to try to get my children to do what I want them to do. Rather it is simply a way of communicating with the goal of creating connection and without assigning blame. This helps us move forward into problem solving together--and the feelings can come, be felt, and go without struggle and without blame.

I'm thinking, too, of times when I've said "I felt angry when I saw/heard/noticed, because I need/want/expected..." and explicitly added "I'm not blaming you, I'm telling you how I feel. Can we try to work this out together?"


----------



## BellinghamCrunchie (Sep 7, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnmama* 
I get what you are saying, sledg. It has been very useful for me to reexamine my reactive feelings, and it certainly has helped me to problem solve with dd. Sometimes it seems that the most reasonable response is anger, still









Can you give an example of how this sounds? Because it always seems like semantics to me. The child (after a certain age) knows that their action is causing the anger. What phrasing doesn't blame the child for the anger, but also communicates a need to be responsible for their actions?

"There are toys on the living room floor so that its hard to walk from one end to the other without accidently kicking them.

I feel frustrated when I can't walk across the living room without kicking toys.

I need the living room to be picked up because I have a need for organization and order in the common areas.

Would you be willing to pick up the toys in the living room?"


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Haven't read the whole thread, and my ds is only 3 and 1/4 (lol) but one thing that occured to me was that if you are unsure about setting a firm limit, that your dd might be aware of that, and push to see what you *really* mean.
I find myself doing that all the time, even with limits that I know intellectually are perfectly acceptable limits (ie, don't stand on the back of the couch). But I second guess myself. I'm sure that wishy washy-ness on my part is quite obvious to my ds.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraxc* 
TBH, I'm not particularly crazy about the word "defiance" myself. I am not quite sure what else to call it, though, in this situation. Has no one else here ever experienced this, where you set a limit and the child goes right back and does it again, while looking you in the eye and laughing? I'm not talking about a 2yo, either. Experimentation with rules? Inability to follow rules because of fatigue? I mean, what MDC-approved term shall I use to describe the behavior? (Said only slightly snarkily.)


I have not had that specific thing happen, BUT I also have experienced situations where ds was doing something that wasn't ok, just to do it. Like, taking a toy from a younger kid. *Sometimes* he does it because he genuinely wants the toy, but other times I swear he's doing it just because the other kid has it.
I don't like the term defiant either, but I definitely understand that it's much easier to say than a long winded specific explanation, and I think that most people here, knowing your posts, would understand your meaning behind it.


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *BellinghamCrunchie*
"There are toys on the living room floor so that its hard to walk from one end to the other without accidently kicking them.

I feel frustrated when I can't walk across the living room without kicking toys.

I need the living room to be picked up because I have a need for organization and order in the common areas.

Would you be willing to pick up the toys in the living room?"









:

"wow, I feel pretty overwhelmed looking at this mess. And I'm surprised it's so messy because just 20 minutes ago it was clean. Would you help me clean this up before bed?"

"It's hard to walk down to the basement when there are toys piled up at the bottom of the stairs. I'm worried someone is going to trip. Will you please go put the toys where they belong?"

"I feel tense and angry when I hear someone speak to me like that, because I have a need to be spoken to with respect. I hear that you're upset. Let's calm down and start this conversation over again."


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sledg* 
. And maybe more importantly, it changes my internal focus and experience-now I'm not thinking in terms of my emotions being caused by something my child did or didn't do, and I do think this changes how I come across to my child. When I'm consciously putting effort into communicating in this way, I do know that my tone tends to be different, my body language is different, how I approach the problem in terms of finding resolution is different, how long I remain frustrated/angry/whatever is different. And really, I sometimes think it's these kinds of things rather than the words themselves that communicate more to my children.

That makes a lot of sense. Some more food for thought as I continue to work towards healing my relationship with dd after coming thru a very difficult time recently.

But we are not there yet







She just did something so incredibly infuriating....and it involved the baby's safety, so not so easy to just say "I feel angry when I see the baby's head flying back...." Argh.


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sunnmama* 
But we are not there yet







She just did something so incredibly infuriating....and it involved the baby's safety, so not so easy to just say "I feel angry when I see the baby's head flying back...." Argh.

BTDT. It's not always easy.

First, calm down. Then something like: "I felt very angry and also scared when I saw you [do what you did to your sister], because I need us all to be safe. It's just not safe to do that. I love you both, and I want to keep you both safe. What was going on for you when you did that?"


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sledg* 
BTDT. It's not always easy.

First, calm down. Then something like: "I felt very angry and also scared when I saw you [do what you did to your sister], because I need us all to be safe. It's just not safe to do that. I love you both, and I want to keep you both safe. What was going on for you when you did that?"










Yeah, that would have been much better than how I handled it









Ah, but moving onward....we took a walk together and it seemed to smooth out our interactions for the rest of the evening. Try, try again!


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

I'm glad to hear things got better.

"Failure is not in the falling, it's in not getting back up." (can't remember who said it) We all make mistakes, all we can do is get up, dust ourselves off, and try again.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

Quote:

"Failure is not in the falling, it's in not getting back up."
I love that! I think I'll put it on my fridge!


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraxc* 
I love that! I think I'll put it on my fridge!

Yes, that is a very powerful quote.

And I apologize for hijacking your thread, loraxc!


----------



## maciascl (Nov 11, 2004)

: I REALLY, REALLY need some similar help, before I lose my frigging mind







: so I'm subbing. Hope to read all the great suggestions soon.


----------

