# Giving up punishments and rewards=kids who don't respect boundaries?



## purple_kangaroo (Feb 20, 2006)

OK, so I've read a lot of the recommended books and authors, including Alfie Kohn, and have read a lot on here.

I like the idea of avoiding the use of punishments and rewards whenever possible. I love the concept of having a child's behavior motivated internally rather than being motivated by punishments or rewards. In theory, I like the idea of respecting everyone's needs and opinions and finding a balance that satisfies everyone.

But it seems that in giving up the use of consequences for behavior, there is very little motivation for a small child to actually do what they are asked to do, or even what has supposedly been agreed upon.

My 2-year-old doesn't really understand or care that sometimes she has to compromise and give up something she wants in order to find a solution that is mutually agreeable to everyone or takes someone else's needs into account. She is intrinsically egocentric by virtue of her age. She's not interested in sharing, and doesn't really care that hitting hurts people.

All three of my kids feel that they should be able to climb on the back of the couch and jump on the couch. Besides the safety issues, it's not even our couch. We're borrowing it from someone else, and it's important that we take good care of it.

We can talk about how "couches are for sitting and floors are for running and jumping" all day, but that doesn't convince the kids that they shouldn't run and jump on the couch. I can ask them to get down, and the older kids will get down, but the moment I'm not looking they're doing it again. The almost-3yo won't even get down when I ask her to, unless I physically make her. Then she'll be right back up again.

They simply feel that my request that they refrain from jumping and climbing on the couch is unreasonable.

I've explained why it's important to me, but they really don't care. They really don't believe me or care that it's not good for the couch. I have suggested other alternatives. We've talked about balancing everyone's needs and have tried to come up with ways to meet their needs in other ways besides using the couch as a jungle gym. We have a playset outside that they can climb on all they want. I helped them build a beautiful big blanket fort in the playroom so they don't have to use the couch cushions for a fort. I'm trying to find a way to meet their jumping needs in a reasonable way.

Even working out a solution that THEY agree to doesn't seem to work in the long term; they just decide that they don't like it or it no longer applies, and revert back to doing whatever they want.

The problem is that they aren't really willing to give weight to someone else's ideas or opinions. It doesn't matter whether it's my answering a question about how to pronouce a word or trying to explain why pushing someone off a stool is not ok; they just don't respect my word on things unless there is a reason that seems to make sense to them or a consequence they care about. I can use the dictionary to empirically prove to them that a word is pronounced the way I say it is, but I can't empirically prove to them that it's wrong to push someone off a stool.

They'll wear a helmet because they have to do it in order to ride bikes, not because they actually believe they could get seriously injured if they don't or because they agree it's a good idea. It's certainly not consensual. The consequence of refusing to wear a helmet is that that the bike gets put away.

It seems that giving up the use of rewards and consequences (or, even more, trying to do things consensually with small children) would just lead to kids with uncontrollable behavior, and who don't respect anyone else's needs or desires.

If there are no consequences for not respecting others' needs, and they are young enough that their own desires and opinions are more important to them than anyone else's, then how can they be kept from trampling all over someone else's boundaries unless there are consistent, clear consequences?


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

I don't have lot of time to post at the moment, but basically for me, enforcing the limit IS the consequence, and nothing needs to be done on top of it. I am not a consensual parent, but I also do not punish in the sense that I do not do traditional time outs, take toys away, or revoke privileges of things that are unrelated to whatever the situation is. Sometimes me enforcing a limit/boundary may *look* like a consequence and my kids might not be happy with me, like leaving a public place if they're not able to handle being out, or putting a toy out of reach briefly when one kid is using it repeatedly hurting someone (it will come back in a few moments after everyone has calmed down to try again). Most of the consequences I do wind up using are open ended and task-specific, not designed to "show" them anything beyond what is logically attached to the situation.

If my almost 2-yo takes a toy from someone, I find another toy to give her, explain that she needs to wait until that person is done with their turn, and give the toy back to the original person (I know some people don't agree with that). Then when they're done, she can play with it. That's enough of a 'consequence' IMO, explaining it to her and gently but firmly facilitating it.

When my kids take the cushions off the couch and we're not at a time when that's OK, I ask them to help me put them back up and leave them there; and if they don't then they can't play near the couch for a while and have to find something else to do, even if it means me gating off the living room for a while if they can't stay away from the couch.

Pushing someone off a stool would warrant a question about why they did it to see the motivation, then if happened again they'd need to do a time-in kind of thing to calm down before they could rejoin playtime...but nothing on top of that, unless it kept happening and then that would be telling me that they weren't in a place to handle the playtime then and we'd leave wherever we were. Once my son hit about 2-1/2 to 3 years old, I'd give him alternatives to things he was doing - like toy taking, you could ask if they're going to be done soon or see if they want to swap a toy with you; pushing would be to ask them to move or ask for a turn sitting where they were; hitting would be to high five if happy or clap/stomp if mad, etc. He dind't always take me up on it and I sometimes still had to remove him from situations or "solve" them myself, but eventually he started getting it and now is a pretty good problem solver.

For me, it goes beyond being consistent, because my kids know that some things are OK sometimes (playing with couch cushions when it's just us, but not right before we have visitors coming), and that sometimes I might say no initially but may reconsider if they give me a good enough reason to change my mind. For me, more important than consistency is acting after the first or second time you've said something to them instead of asking them 10 times to do something and then snapping at them, and if they are having recurring trouble with your requests, eliminating the temptation or getting them completely away from wherever the "issue" is to short-circuit the 'obsession'.

So for me, I don't "do" punishments in the traditional sense; I also don't do much in the way of rewards because my kids aren't motivated by stuff like that, but I do have high expectations and gently but firmly enforce boundaries and limits by making situations safe and respectful, even if they're unhappy about it - but once the situation is safe/respectful again, I drop it and let them go back to playing or whatever...there's no added punitive measures added on top of the enforcing of the limit ( "enforcing" sounds so harsh, but it's the best word I can come up with).

Sooo, there's 2 cents from a non-consensual, but also nonpunitive mom of two. Hope that helps.


----------



## griffin2004 (Sep 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *purple_kangaroo* 
I love the concept of having a child's behavior motivated by their own decision to be kind, appreciate their accomplishment, or that sort of thing rather than being motivated by punishments or rewards.

That seems like a VERY tall order, even for adults! For example, I appreciate my accomplishments at my job, but 95% of what gets me there is the reward => paycheck. Does that make me lacking in character?

Does no punishment/reward mean no discipline (in the sense that the word means teaching rather than punishing)? If so, that looks like an abdication of parental responsibility to me. I don't expect my child to have the same degree of wisdom and life experience as I do. Can you be consensual with a child who has no concept of danger from bike accidents? It's like expecting her to be on the same playing field as I am.

Expecting children--or even adults--to always act from a place of altruism or self-fulfillment is not realistic and imho places a huge burden on the child. It's my job to teach my child that "gently petting kitty = yes!" and "breaking window with bat = no!" in a way that the child will understand. The younger they are, the more black & white that association needs to be.

I'm rambling and probably not addressing your question at all.


----------



## prancie (Apr 18, 2007)

I think what you are expecting of them is age inappropriate. I don't even think that with punishments you could reliably keepkids that age off the couch. The best thing would be to get a couch that can be beaten up a little so you don't feel so bad.


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

I have to disagree, I think a 7 and 5.5 yo could definitely be expected to not jump on a couch. My 4-yo can do it (er, rather, not do it), and he's not a particularly easygoing guy (meaning he's not compliant by nature/temperament) The 2-yo, I can see not being able to stay off...but the older two I think it's selling them short to say it's not appropriate for them to not be able to jump on a couch.


----------



## Dar (Apr 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *purple_kangaroo* 
But it seems that in giving up the use of consequences for behavior, there is very little motivation for a small child to actually do what they are asked to do, or even what has supposedly been agreed upon.

It doesn't sound like you're really looking to agreed-upon solutions - rather that you're trying to get your kids to do what you want them to do. You're not willing to budge at all - you want to keep the couch you have and you don't want it climbed on. For that, yeah, you probably need to use rewards and/or punishments.

I've avoided both for the past 15 years, though. FWIW, we've always gotten couches free from friends or on bulky pick-up day, and jumping or climbing has never hurt them a bit. So, there's an option...

For the larger ideas, I see having boundaries as entirely separate from rewards and punishments. I've always felt free to set boundaries for what I'm willing to do or not do - and I don't think I have the right to set boundaries for anyone else, so that's where I stop. My non-punished and non-rewarded kid has learned to respect them just fine -I've always respected her boundaries as well.

dar


----------



## dulce de leche (Mar 13, 2005)

This is an interesting question. I think that a lot of it has to do with our view of human nature--do kids really want to do 'good' things, or are they going to do whatever they can 'get away with'. We aren't CL, although I like the idea of it, but we do not use any punishments/rewards, either. Sort of like The4ofUs described, there are boundaries in place, but we don't impose consequences in order to change behavior.

So far, my kids have amazed me with their ability to care about other people's feelings. I am also astounded by dd's negotiating skills--often she comes up with creative solutions that I would never think of that please everyone.

You know your kids best, but I would guess that for your youngest, at least, the idea of jumping on the couch causing problems for someone else is a little abstract at the moment. I know that even as an older child, I wouldn't have understood--I mean, there is no immediate visible damage, so in my mind as a child, it wouldn't have been hurting anything. In your place, I would still enforce that boundary by removing my child(ren) from the couch when they did it, but I wouldn't try to punish by intentionally making them feel miseable, nor would I try to bribe them into leaving it alone.


----------



## Daffodil (Aug 30, 2003)

: to pretty much everything The4OfUs said.

If your kids don't care about or believe other people's viewpoints now, giving them punishments isn't going to help with that. They might stay off the sofa if there were a punishment for climbing on it, but they wouldn't suddenly start seeing things from your point of view and _wanting_ to stay off the sofa. And they'd probably still try to climb on it every time they thought they could get away with it, which I suspect would be pretty often.

My own kids - even the 2 year old - sound a lot more willing to listen to me than your kids. If your kids are as self-centered and unwilling to listen to other viewpoints as you say, they seem particularly in need of an approach that could help them in that area - like emphasizing the reasons behind your requests, rather than the consequences of not obeying them.

I don't try to live consensually, and I don't think it's necessarily wrong for a parent to unilaterally decide that the couch must not be jumped on. But your life might be a lot less stressful if you just gave this couch back to its owner and got a used one that you were willing to see take a bit of damage (and if you decided the safety risk was acceptable.)

If I had a couch that that I strongly felt should not be climbed on, I would do whatever it took to keep that from happening - ever. If the kids couldn't be trusted not to climb on it if they were in that room unsupervised, I wouldn't let them be in the room unsupervised. Of course, that would be a huge hassle, so I would probably just end up getting rid of or replacing the couch.


----------



## purple_kangaroo (Feb 20, 2006)

Quote:



Originally Posted by *The4OfUs*


For me, more important than consistency is acting after the first or second time you've said something to them instead of asking them 10 times to do something and then snapping at them, and if they are having recurring trouble with your requests, eliminating the temptation or getting them completely away from wherever the "issue" is to short-circuit the 'obsession'.


That's a good point . . . maybe I should have them go play somewhere besides the family room for a while if they won't treat the couch gently.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *griffin2004*


Expecting children--or even adults--to always act from a place of altruism or self-fulfillment is not realistic and imho places a huge burden on the child. It's my job to teach my child that "gently petting kitty = yes!" and "breaking window with bat = no!" in a way that the child will understand. The younger they are, the more black & white that association needs to be.


I think this is probably a good point. I try to focus as much as possible on teaching and equipping my kids in my interactions with them. We do a lot of, "let me help you practice how to pet the kitty gently" stuff here.

I greatly prefer focusing on what TO do rather than what NOT to do whenever possible. It's when they're still not getting it after the hundredth repetition of "do this, not that" that I start wondering if maybe we need a different approach for that particular issue.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *prancie*


I think what you are expecting of them is age inappropriate. I don't even think that with punishments you could reliably keepkids that age off the couch. The best thing would be to get a couch that can be beaten up a little so you don't feel so bad.


Getting a new couch at this point is not really an option. It did, however, occur to me that putting slipcovers on the couches might be a helpful solution. It would make taking the cushions off the couch harder, at least.

I do think a 7-year-old and a child who will be 6 next month are old enough to respect a request not to jump on the couch. The almost-3-year-old mainly does it because the other two do it, I think. She normally responds better to being redirected or physically removed from something if the older two aren't egging her on.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *The4OfUs*


I have to disagree, I think a 7 and 5.5 yo could definitely be expected to not jump on a couch. My 4-yo can do it (er, rather, not do it), and he's not a particularly easygoing guy (meaning he's not compliant by nature/temperament) The 2-yo, I can see not being able to stay off...but the older two I think it's selling them short to say it's not appropriate for them to not be able to jump on a couch.


Exactly. I also expect them to stop pulling on peoples' clothes or jumping on someone else's special blankie when asked. Surely they're old enough to be able to do those sorts of things and respect people's bodies and possessions--they're grade school age, not babies.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Dar*


It doesn't sound like you're really looking to agreed-upon solutions - rather that you're trying to get your kids to do what you want them to do. You're not willing to budge at all - you want to keep the couch you have and you don't want it climbed on. For that, yeah, you probably need to use rewards and/or punishments.

I've avoided both for the past 15 years, though. FWIW, we've always gotten couches free from friends or on bulky pick-up day, and jumping or climbing has never hurt them a bit. So, there's an option...


You're right. I am not willing to compromise on letting the kids mistreat the sofas. I would also not be willing to allow them to scratch up the kitchen table with keys, purposely crash their bike into the car, break someone's porcelain doll, or color on the walls with permanent markers. I don't really see a problem with expecting kids to treat things appropriately and with respect, and not ruin things. I am, however, quite willing to work with them on appropriate ways to honor the impulses to do things like jump, color, scratch lines into, etc.

If you were visiting at someone else's house and they asked your child not to jump on their couch, would you expect her to be able to honor that? If not, what would you do?

Quote:



For the larger ideas, I see having boundaries as entirely separate from rewards and punishments. I've always felt free to set boundaries for what I'm willing to do or not do - and I don't think I have the right to set boundaries for anyone else, so that's where I stop. My non-punished and non-rewarded kid has learned to respect them just fine -I've always respected her boundaries as well.

dar


Do you feel that you have a right to set boundaries for what you will or will not allow someone else to do with or to your possessions or your body? Isn't that sort of "setting boundaries for someone else"?

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dulce de leche*


This is an interesting question. I think that a lot of it has to do with our view of human nature--do kids really want to do 'good' things, or are they going to do whatever they can 'get away with'. We aren't CL, although I like the idea of it, but we do not use any punishments/rewards, either. Sort of like The4ofUs described, there are boundaries in place, but we don't impose consequences in order to change behavior.


Or, as another possibility, do kids basically want to get their own needs met, and need help learning how to do this in a way that doesn't infringe on other people's needs? I tend to think that most kids are somewhere in the middle--they don't necessarily want to always do "good" things, and they aren't necessarily always trying to be "bad" or see what they can get away with. They just basically often don't think about much beyond the moment and themselves.

I think one of our tasks as parents is to help them communicate and meet their needs in appropriate ways, but also learn to consider the future and the needs of others.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *dulce de leche*


I know that even as an older child, I wouldn't have understood--I mean, there is no immediate visible damage, so in my mind as a child, it wouldn't have been hurting anything. In your place, I would still enforce that boundary by removing my child(ren) from the couch when they did it, but I wouldn't try to punish by intentionally making them feel miseable, nor would I try to bribe them into leaving it alone.


Yeah, I think you're right here.

Quote:



Originally Posted by *Daffodil*


If your kids don't care about or believe other people's viewpoints now, giving them punishments isn't going to help with that. . . .

If I had a couch that that I strongly felt should not be climbed on, I would do whatever it took to keep that from happening - ever. If the kids couldn't be trusted not to climb on it if they were in that room unsupervised, I wouldn't let them be in the room unsupervised. Of course, that would be a huge hassle, so I would probably just end up getting rid of or replacing the couch.


You had some good points in your post, especially about reaching the goals of having the kids respect others' viewpoints and doing things from motivations other than avoiding punishment.

Right now, though, I'm not sure if I care as much about having the kids understand WHY I don't want them to jump on the couch or push each other off things, as much as I honestly just want them to stop the behavior when asked to.







I kind of think that, especially with young kids, they might possibly need to learn to stop hitting or jumping or whatever when asked to, first, and then understand the reasons later?

I'm curious how you would keep the kids from being in the room with the couch unsupervised, and how that would be any easier/better than just expecting them not to jump on the couch? It's a large open room that flows into the rest of the house. Not allowing them in the room seems a lot more unreasonable than asking them not to jump on the couch.


----------



## Dar (Apr 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *purple_kangaroo* 
You're right. I am not willing to compromise on letting the kids mistreat the sofas. I would also not be willing to allow them to scratch up the kitchen table with keys, purposely crash their bike into the car, break someone's porcelain doll, or color on the walls with permanent markers. I don't really see a problem with expecting kids to treat things appropriately and with respect, and not ruin things. I am, however, quite willing to work with them on appropriate ways to honor the impulses to do things like jump, color, scratch lines into, etc.

And that's your choice, of course. When Rain was little, I found that things went more smoothly if I was less attached to things and more concerned with people, so we owned stuff that was pretty sturdy and also not hard to replace. When she was little Rain drew on all of her blocks with markers and carved up our coffee table - we finally put the coffee tabel outside as a plant bench, but we did use it for many years. I considered that "appropriate" and "respectful" treatment of those things and it worked for us.

We didn't own permanent markers when Rain was two... that would have been asking for trouble at our house!







She was generally very rational, though...

Quote:

If you were visiting at someone else's house and they asked your child not to jump on their couch, would you expect her to be able to honor that? If not, what would you do?
Now? Sure.







When she was little, probably... she never seemed to feel very strongly about jumping on couches, although I don't remember any of our friends then having a problem with it, either. If she wasn't, we'd figure out what to do...

Quote:

Do you feel that you have a right to set boundaries for what you will or will not allow someone else to do with or to your possessions or your body? Isn't that sort of "setting boundaries for someone else"?
I set boundaries for my self and my body. If those boundaries impact someone else, then we negotiate. For example, I used to refuse to read to Rain after midnight, because I would be too tired. She had a bunch of story tapes, though, and usually she was happy to listen to one of thoise instead. If she was dead-set on being read to and I wasn't really tired, then I would, but it usually didn't get to that point.... and I didn't feel like I had to read to her, but that I was choosing to.

Possessions... most of our home-possessions are things I consider family-owned, not mine alone. I'm not strongly attached to things, in general, but if it came up than I would set a boundary, yes...

dar


----------



## purple_kangaroo (Feb 20, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dar* 
And that's your choice, of course. When Rain was little, I found that things went more smoothly if I was less attached to things and more concerned with people, so we owned stuff that was pretty sturdy and also not hard to replace. When she was little Rain drew on all of her blocks with markers and carved up our coffee table - we finally put the coffee tabel outside as a plant bench, but we did use it for many years. I considered that "appropriate" and "respectful" treatment of those things and it worked for us.

Thanks for your reply . . . so was there anything you had to set boundaries about in your home? Not pulling the cat's tail? Cutting up the blankets with scissors? Ripping books? Hitting the car with a baseball bat? I'm just trying to picture a home where a kid was really never told she couldn't do something that would harm a possession, pet, etc?

What would you do if you went to someone else's house and she wanted to cut marks in their coffee table? I'm just trying to picture how this works. Do you ever tell your child she can't do something? It's kind of hard to wrap my brain around.


----------



## Dar (Apr 12, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *purple_kangaroo* 
Thanks for your reply . . . so was there anything you had to set boundaries about in your home? Not pulling the cat's tail? Cutting up the blankets with scissors? Ripping books? Hitting the car with a baseball bat? I'm just trying to picture a home where a kid was really never told she couldn't do something that would harm a possession, pet, etc?

Well, we'd talk about stuff... it wasn't like I'd just smile as she trashed the house. But we were generally able to find solutions that worked for both of us. She never wanted to hit the car with the baseball bat, or cut up blankets... we do have a very cute picture of her at about 6 months sitting by our cat and sucking his tail, but our cats were pretty good at taking care of themselves... and I made sure they had lots of escape routes. Ripping up books was something she did really young, before she was a year old, so she was happy with an old phone book and some library book sale rejects for that.

It did force me to re-examine a lot of my ideas about what things were okay and what things weren't... like, when she was 4 she had a sweater with these little yarn puffballs on it, and she loves to cut them off and give them to her friends. At first I was against the idea, but when I stopped to think about it I couldn't come up with a rational reason why... the sweater was perfectly functional as a sweater with or without puffballs,

Quote:

What would you do if you went to someone else's house and she wanted to cut marks in their coffee table? I'm just trying to picture how this works. Do you ever tell your child she can't do something? It's kind of hard to wrap my brain around.








Well, again, she's 15 now... but when she was little? We'd ask, and if they weren't up for it we'd try to figure out something else...

Dar


----------



## mommy2abigail (Aug 20, 2005)

this is a great thread. Purple_kangaroo, you've put into words what I've been thinking about for over a year. I know I WANT to be CL, I just find it hard to put it into practice most of the time...especially with young kids. I feel like when I do, I am expecting WAY more of them than is age appropriate. Like, I've taken the time to stop, explain, and reason with her, and she is NOT budging. She wants what she wants, when she wants. And that's simply because she's 3. She is often not willing to compromise or find a mutually agreeable solution. I feel like if I just did punishments/rewards, it would be easier to keep her age in mind. But since I am trying to reason with her at every turn, I'm putting more pressure on her. Does that make any sense at all? Sorry, I'm really tired.

I wish I knew some IRL people/families who RU or CL. It would help tremendously to see everyday situations, and how they are handled.


----------



## forestrymom (Jul 13, 2006)

Sorry, but just because I have a couch that I don't think my kids should mistreat doesn't mean that I value it (or things) more than I value my kids (or people). I don't. I value my kids more. But they do need to learn that "things" have a value, and that we work hard for that. My couch is old. And sturdy. And didn't cost me a dime. But I am not willing to spend money to buy another shoudl they ruin it. My having to work to buy another couch wuold simply take time away from me and my kids. Sometimes we can go a little overboard with non-discipline. And I know kids who weren't, and they are not a "pleasure" to be aroudn.


----------



## Daffodil (Aug 30, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *purple_kangaroo* 
I'm curious how you would keep the kids from being in the room with the couch unsupervised, and how that would be any easier/better than just expecting them not to jump on the couch? It's a large open room that flows into the rest of the house. Not allowing them in the room seems a lot more unreasonable than asking them not to jump on the couch.

Well, like I said, it would be such a huge hassle I probably would come up with another solution, like getting a couch I felt I could let them jump on. But if I didn't want to do that, I suppose I would plan on being downstairs whenever one of the kids was downstairs. (My house is small enough that if I were downstairs and paying attention, I would realize it pretty quickly if my kids started jumping on the couch.) If I needed to go upstairs for more than a few minutes, I'd tell them they had to either come with me or promise not to jump on the couch. (This would work with my kids. If I reminded them about it just before I went upstairs, and they agreed they wouldn't do it, I could count on them not to do it for a while.) I might also put barriers in the doorways to that room (not necessarily something they couldn't get over or around, just something to make them have to stop and remember I didn't want them in there.)

How would that be easier/better than expecting them not to jump on the couch? Well, it doesn't sound like just expecting them not to jump on the couch is working very well. Watching them closely enough so that you could stop them immediately any time they started jumping wouldn't be any easier - it would be a lot harder, maybe too hard to make it worthwhile - but it would certainly work better. And I could imagine that if you simply told them to stay out of that room, and put up barriers to remind them, in a couple of weeks they might develop new playing habits and hardly even think about the possibility of going in there, and it might actually end up being easier on you. It might be easier for them to resist going into the room at all than to resist the temptation of climbing onto the sofa once they find themselves standing right next to it. (Of course, this might not work at all if the layout of your house makes it impractical to get around without going through that room.)


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Purple_Kangaroo, ITA with The4ofUs and Daffodil, but I have something to add.

I've noticed that when things get stressful around here, or when we're on a trip and my kids get kind of wild and out-of-control, I start using lots of threats and punishments. It works...in the short term. However, after a few days of it I always notice a definite downturn in behavior.

I think there's two basic reasons. One, if you're threatening and then enforcing punishments upon your child, your relationship will naturally suffer. You can't avoid their resentment, even if they "knew it was coming". They will most likely also feel ashamed. Then when you ask them to do things they feel angry and vengeful.

Two, I think that they start thinking more and more about what is in it for them. Or what the trade-off is. By threatening a punishment, I think an alternative is actually created in their mind. For example, you say, "Stop jumping on the couch or you aren't going to get to watch TV tonight" (or whatever, just using that as an example). They think, "I can either jump on the couch or watch TV tonight. What should I do?" If you had said, "Get off the couch. Jumping on the couch ruins it," there's just not any wiggle room. You have made a definitive statement and your expectation is loud and clear. I have found this to be the most effective way to enforce my boundaries, and I do have them. I completely disagree with Dar that you have to use rewards and punishments to get your kids to do what you want. As long as it's reasonable.







And I think using a couch for sitting only is definitely a reasonable request.


----------



## Adasmommy (Feb 26, 2005)

Purple_Kangaroo, my dd is 3 years old and I'm feeling you on the she-doesn't-get-it-yet when it comes to respecting other people's rights and possessions. But I do think she's getting it more than she used to.

I talk to her a lot about why I'm doing things such as, "I'm cleaning up the living room so that the house will look nice for your daddy when he gets home. He's been working all day and I know it will make him happy to come home to a beautiful house. And I love to look out how beautiful our house looks when it's clean, don't you?" It may not change her behavior on the spot, but I think it's worthwhile and that it is giving her a reason why we should want our house to be clean when before she had no reason.

Also, I expect that it is more difficult to take children who are used to rewards/punishments (if yours are) and then switch to a non-punitive system. If they are used to jumping on the couch until they get sent to their rooms, then asking them politely to quit it probably just means (to them) that they get to keep jumping until they get sent to their rooms.

I think it is totally worth switching to non-punitive, I just imagine that there is going to be a period of adjustment that will be rough. Maybe it would help to sit them down and tell them that you don't want to do rewards and punishments because you feel they are responsible enough to participate in taking care of family belongings and adhere to family values without needing punishment or rewards. Tell them exactly what you expect of them, and tell them that you are not doing the punishment thing anymore, but that if you need to take action to protect a belonging, a value, a person, etc, you will do that not as punishment but because it is important to do. And ask for their cooperation. And ideas. And to help by reminding each other about the new system if need be. And encourage them to come to you if they have any questions about what is acceptable.

Then, when they jump on the couch anyway, TRY not to get mad







and say matter of factly, "We need to take good care of this couch so no more jumping on it." And follow up with, "Come on, let's go jump on (whatever is acceptable)." or "how about playing in the yard instead?" or "Let's sit on the couch instead and we can have a story." or even, "dinner's almost ready anyway, so come on into the dining room." You know, the old redirect plan. And, if your two oldest jump down and wander off but the little one is paying you no heed, then this is where the pp's recommendation of 'enforce' comes into play. You take her hand and say, "Come on, you, that's bad for the couch so let's do something else instead," and take her to do something else.

And if they are thusly stopped any time they start to jump on the couch, I think they'll stop jumping on the couch. And they'll probably appreciate being treated like reasonable people, too.

Anyway, these are my thoughts, and if they are all obvious things that you have tried and have failed, I'm sorry! I know how easy it is to get unhelpful advice on these forums because all of our families are so freakin different!


----------



## prancie (Apr 18, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *The4OfUs* 
I have to disagree, I think a 7 and 5.5 yo could definitely be expected to not jump on a couch. My 4-yo can do it (er, rather, not do it), and he's not a particularly easygoing guy (meaning he's not compliant by nature/temperament) The 2-yo, I can see not being able to stay off...but the older two I think it's selling them short to say it's not appropriate for them to not be able to jump on a couch.

I stand corrected. I didn't realize they were all that old. She OP only really talks about the 2 year old specifically. I still think that it is unwise to have a couch that you cannot afford to beat up a little with that many small children. At 5 or 7 years old I was not into taking care of furniture.


----------



## sunny*pa*mom (Mar 28, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *forestrymom* 
Sorry, but just because I have a couch that I don't think my kids should mistreat doesn't mean that I value it (or things) more than I value my kids (or people). I don't. I value my kids more. But they do need to learn that "things" have a value, and that we work hard for that. My couch is old. And sturdy. And didn't cost me a dime. But I am not willing to spend money to buy another shoudl they ruin it. My having to work to buy another couch wuold simply take time away from me and my kids. Sometimes we can go a little overboard with non-discipline. And I know kids who weren't, and they are not a "pleasure" to be aroudn.









: To me it's not just a thing, it's the wood and cloth used to manufacturer it, the oil used to transport it. We don't want to consume more things just because our youngest is destructo.

To the OP, could you make some floor cushions so they could use those to build forts and leave the couch alone? Or salvage some cushions from bulk trash or the thrift store? Kids are so different. My 4 y/o I could ask him once to not jump on the furniture and he never would again. My 2 y/o I could ask until I was blue in the face and he just wouldn't care. Our rule is that if you are doing something potentially destructive (jumping, playing ball in the house), you do it in your own room. That way the rest of the house stays mostly intact and if something breaks, it's their own stuff.


----------



## kungfu_barbi (Jun 6, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *griffin2004* 
I appreciate my accomplishments at my job, but 95% of what gets me there is the reward => paycheck...

fascinating. your post made me think. i love to think.









i don't think a paycheck is a reward (or a gift); a paycheck is earned (it's wages). if i didn't get a paycheck, i wouldn't be an employee; i'd be a 'volunteer.'

i don't know how that translates into parenting though.

peace


----------



## cotopaxi (Sep 17, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kungfu_barbi* 
i don't think a paycheck is a reward (or a gift); a paycheck is earned (it's wages). if i didn't get a paycheck, i wouldn't be an employee; i'd be a 'volunteer.'

I agree. People always use this example and it's never totally made sense to me - it's a different arrangement. For one thing, it's a voluntary relationship. I choose to work where I work. If I don't like it I can leave. My kid doesn't get to choose who her mother is or where she lives. I'm in almost total control of the situation and the way that our relationship goes (while she's little, at least). So I'm in a position where I could manipulate or coerce her if I'm not careful. My boss doesn't have that kind of power over me.

ETA: But to OP, I'm pretty much seeing things like you are as I try to figure this all out. I have certain limits regarding acceptable behavior, and I don't feel like it's wrong for me to have them. My approach with kids I've babysat (my lo is only one, so no direct parenting experience with this yet) is kind of just to remove them from the situation, over and over, until they realize "okay, she's really not going to let me jump on the couch, and this is getting boring, so I'm going to find something more fun to do." I've had kids to take care of that were dedicated couch-jumpers, and everytime they did it, I'd gently pick them up and say "that hurts the couch, but you can jump here on the floor / trampoline / etc." Over and over.


----------



## annT (Mar 22, 2005)

I'm curious - can you explain?


----------



## griffin2004 (Sep 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kungfu_barbi* 
i don't think a paycheck is a reward (or a gift); a paycheck is earned (it's wages). if i didn't get a paycheck, i wouldn't be an employee; i'd be a 'volunteer.'

I see your point.

My thinking is along these lines: my job requires an advanced degree which took me a lot of time and $$ to get; so I feel like I'm being "rewarded" for making that investment in myself; I've also had other jobs that required the same degree but paid a WHOLE lot less so that makes my current salary even more of a reward in my mind. From a nonfinancial viewpoint, when I work intelligently and creatively, show enthusiasm and dedication, I have a better chance at bigger assignments, promotions, etc. That also seems reward-based to me.

If I didn't get paid at my current position, I wouldn't be there as a volunteer. I simply wouldn't be there. I feel fortunate to get a certain degree of self and professional satisfaction out of my work. But my main motivator is my need for the greenbacks.

Maybe "results" is a better word than "rewards"? Or "cause and effect"?
I eat more healthily; the result/reward is that I feel better, lose weight, etc.
I'm more responsible with money; the result/reward is that I'm not so stressed by family finances.
I donate to a charity or use organic yard products; the reward/result is that I'm contributing to the common good.

How does that translate into parenting? The "reward" of not jumping on the couch is that Mom isn't upset and fussing, that you (the child) get to do other things on the couch (read, color, play games) if you're not banished from it, that you learn to respect yours and others' property, that you don't fall and knock your head on the wall or floor, etc.

I don't think there is anything wrong with pointing these things out to a child in an age-appropriate way. It's not like OP is saying to her kids "don't jump on the couch and I'll give you 5 lbs. of candy." She's actively seeking better outlets for their jumping interests.

What value is there in letting children think they can destroy things as the mood strikes them? Build a sand castle and want to smash it? Lots of fun! Trash the family couch? No, thanks.


----------



## kungfu_barbi (Jun 6, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *griffin2004* 
Maybe "results" is a better word than "rewards"? Or "cause and effect"?

the word reward has lots of connotations. i like your use of the word 'result' in your example, rather than reward. another word in that category might be 'pay-off.'

i am a word person. isn't it interesting how we can all be using the same words - 'reward' or 'punishment' - and each mean something subtlely different? it's a wonder anyone can communicate effectively.









many years ago, i learned in dog school that a treat offered or shown before a command is obeyed is called a 'bribe.' (in this school, the dog owners were not allowed to bribe the dogs.) however, a treat given after command is obeyed was called a 'reward.' (rewards were allowed in dog training.) according to this definition, many parents _bribe_ their children and call it a _reward_!

peace


----------



## Surfacing (Jul 19, 2005)

subbing to come back later and read


----------



## bunnybartlett (Aug 27, 2002)

I need to learn in the area...LOL


----------



## Ironica (Sep 11, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *purple_kangaroo* 
What would you do if you went to someone else's house and she wanted to cut marks in their coffee table? I'm just trying to picture how this works. Do you ever tell your child she can't do something? It's kind of hard to wrap my brain around.









The4ofus said pretty much what I would say ;-) but I thought I'd address this.

Here, the problem isn't that the child wants to mark up the table; the problem is that they have the tool to do it with. Where did they get it? Why haven't I taken it away from them the first time they demonstrate that they (a) want to play with it in a disrespectful way and (b) cannot stop themselves from doing so?

It is MY responsibility as the parent to set and enforce the boundaries. As my child gets older, I can "delegate" that responsibility to him more and more, but ultimately, it's up to me to see that it happens. Like The4ofus, I have found this job to be easier when I'm pickier about what boundaries I set; on another list I used to belong to, people talked about "creating a yes environment" to make discipline easier.

It's tougher to switch over with older kids. With a 2-year-old, you can pick them up and make things happen much more easily. If you start off with a child who you can no longer lift, you've got a much harder job ahead of you. I'd agree that the older kids are developmentally in a place where they can control their impulses and stop themselves from doing the things you ask them not to do... but they haven't yet been taught how to do this without the cue of a reward or punishment. It will take them time to learn, and their behavior will get worse before it gets better.


----------



## Thao (Nov 26, 2001)

I'm another one of those that like the idea of CL but don't believe it works for every family. There are some situations that simply don't have a consensual solution, and so often (it seems to me) what ends up happening is the parent gives up their need in deference to the kid. But that isn't truly consensual.

The OP's desire for the couch to remain in good shape is every bit as valid as the kids' desire to jump (because after all it is a desire, not a NEED for them to jump on that particular couch). So if she ends up giving it up because the kids won't stop jumping on it, how it that in any way consensual?

"Consensual" implies being able to take another's needs into account and creatively brainstorm for solutions. It's a pretty advanced skill IMO, and while I don't doubt that some kids are naturals (my dd's best friend comes to mind) there are other kids that simply aren't there yet (my dd comes to mind).

OP, have you tried positive reinforcement methods on this problem? I don't know if you'd consider it a "bribe" or not, but we used to do a thing where if my dd accomplished a certain behavior for a whole day (I think we were working on respectful communication, so not whining or yelling) she got to put a marble in a jar. When the jar got full (it took a few weeks), we had a special day out. I can't say it solved the problem but it did help her focus and work on establishing some better habits.


----------



## Surfacing (Jul 19, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Thao* 
I'm another one of those that like the idea of CL but don't believe it works for every family. There are some situations that simply don't have a consensual solution, and so often (it seems to me) what ends up happening is the parent gives up their need in deference to the kid. But that isn't truly consensual. [...]"Consensual" implies being able to take another's needs into account and creatively brainstorm for solutions. It's a pretty advanced skill IMO, and while I don't doubt that some kids are naturals (my dd's best friend comes to mind) there are other kids that simply aren't there yet (my dd comes to mind).









ITA


----------



## jackson'smama (May 14, 2005)

thank you OP for posting this. i, too, have had the same questions myself. my oldest is only 3, but i'm having a hard time as well. i REALLY can't wrap my mind around letting children do what they want b/c "it's just an old couch" or "it's just a junk table" or whatever. i mean, we have an old mattress for jumping, but that doesn't mean my ds doesn't also want to jump on the good mattresses. and if we let him do that here, you can darn well bet that he wants to do it at grandma's house too. what if grandma doesn't like it. i really want someone to answer that question....Dar, where are you? you've only said something to the effect of "we'd figure something out". please tell me what you'd do!!! i need some advice from the mother of a teenager b/c i'm having problems here!
let me see if i get this right. in order to discipline (teach) without consequences, we basically spend many many years repeating ourselves over and over again in the hopes that at ____ years of age, it's going to finally sink in and mean something. i'm not being snarky. this is totally serious. and if i might add, it makes me feel like i'm not really being a good parent









i feel like i'm failing my ds by NOT having a consequence b/c telling him not to slide off the arm of the couch, physically removing him, taking him to his slide, assisting him in making a slide out of our leather cushions on the floor, etc... does nothing more than use up 10 minutes before he waits til my back is turned and slides down the arm of the couch again. is this desire/defiance? what is it? my talking and redirecting doesn't seem to mean a hoot to him.


----------



## purple_kangaroo (Feb 20, 2006)

Thanks so much, everyone. I've been reading all the replies and they've been giving me lots of food for thought.

A couple of people mentioned that moving from a more punishment/reward driven parenting to something else (whether that be more teaching, redirecting, more consensual, or whatever) there may be an adjustment period or learning curve. I think this is what's going on with us. We're still trying to figure out where we're going to fall on the curve (at least for the moment) and how we're going to handle situations.

I'm moving toward a direction of trying to use less of things like punishment/rewards, direct orders, etc. and just basically trying to treat the kids with as much respect and as little force as possible. DH is a very gentle person, but he still uses more rewards/punishments than I do (in fact, this weekend he told them he was going to start giving them a penny when he heard them ask for things nicely) and isn't quite to the same point I am yet about being more open-ended in requests when it's not really necessary for them to do it right that moment. I'm still very much in process, and so is he, but we haven't landed in exactly the same place at any given moment.

Ever since we had a talk about why, exactly, it's bad for the couch to jump on it and followed it up with family conversation brainstormong ways to meet the kids' jumping needs, the older two have had a much easier time treating the couch gently. I've had to remind them maybe a couple of times in the last day or two, but they've been much more willing to find other things to do. I've also made a point to play games with them that involve lots of jumping on the floor.









Today my youngest (almost-3-yo) started sliding down the arm of the couch while I cooked breakfast. I went over to her and said, "Ebee, the couch is not for sliding. If you want to slide, you can go outside and slide down the slide." She responded by starting to jump on the couch. I said, "It's not good for the couch to jump on it." She said, "Jump on the floor, and run on the floor?" and got down and started running and jumping on the floor.

Yesterday was one of those "wow, they're really starting to get it" days. One of my biggest realizations was how much more value there is in the kids' freely choosing to do the right thing, and how often I rob them of that opportunity if I step in too soon or with too much authority. I wrote about it at length here, if anyone's interested.


----------



## mommy2abigail (Aug 20, 2005)

A ? for consensual parents...what do you do/say regarding whining?

Seriously, it's making me NUTTY!!! I have NO problem finding a mutually agreeable solution IF she asks in a normal tone of voice, but when she starts whining/screaming/screeching at me, I just shut down and have no desire to work with her. I know, it's MY problem, and I am working on it, but how do I help dd to just ask in a regular tone? I've told her that it bothers me when she talks like that, that I'd (and other people) be more receptive to her requests if she talks politely, I've told her to whine in her (our) room. I don't want her to think I'm loving her on the condition that she not whine, but really, it's all day, every day, about most everything! HELP!!


----------



## maryeb (Aug 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommy2abigail* 
A ? for consensual parents...what do you do/say regarding whining?

Seriously, it's making me NUTTY!!! I have NO problem finding a mutually agreeable solution IF she asks in a normal tone of voice, but when she starts whining/screaming/screeching at me, I just shut down and have no desire to work with her. I know, it's MY problem, and I am working on it, but how do I help dd to just ask in a regular tone? I've told her that it bothers me when she talks like that, that I'd (and other people) be more receptive to her requests if she talks politely, I've told her to whine in her (our) room. I don't want her to think I'm loving her on the condition that she not whine, but really, it's all day, every day, about most everything! HELP!!


Whining drives me nuts as well! Several times a day it seemed for a while I was asking ds to take a deep breath to calm his body. I would take one too, b/c I was very tense about the whining. So we would both take a breath and then I would tell him it is easier for me to understand him if he speaks clearly and calmly. Then I model how he could ask for what he needs. I've noticed him taking a deep breath when he starts to get antsy for something lately and he is whining less. Not that it doesn't happen, but it has been happening less. HTH.

And OP, that sounds great! I wanted to respond to one of your posts where you talked about getting them to stop the behavior first then explaining later. We have always explained why we are asking ds to stop, etc. in the same way you just described how you helped your youngest stop jumping/sliding off the couch. Our interactions about stuff like that usually go much like you described. He is amenable most of the time if he understands the why and is offered an alternative and we do the action with him for a second or sometimes longer. Good luck! Mary


----------



## purple_kangaroo (Feb 20, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommy2abigail* 
A ? for consensual parents...what do you do/say regarding whining?

Seriously, it's making me NUTTY!!! I have NO problem finding a mutually agreeable solution IF she asks in a normal tone of voice, but when she starts whining/screaming/screeching at me, I just shut down and have no desire to work with her. I know, it's MY problem, and I am working on it, but how do I help dd to just ask in a regular tone? I've told her that it bothers me when she talks like that, that I'd (and other people) be more receptive to her requests if she talks politely, I've told her to whine in her (our) room. I don't want her to think I'm loving her on the condition that she not whine, but really, it's all day, every day, about most everything! HELP!!

I don't know if this is CL or not, but . . .

I tell my kids (honestly) that it's really hard for me to understand them when they whine. Then I ask them to repeat what they said in a way that's easier for me to understand. Sometimes I'll model a suggested tone, or try to demonstrate for them how their tone sounded and then how it would sound in a non-whiny tone. With the older kids, sometimes I'll just inform them that the way they said something sounded whiny. I don't withold what they're asking for until they can ask for it "right", but I'll let them know how they're coming across.

The thing I've found the most helpful for them is reminding them that if they smile when they're asking for something, it makes the request sound really pleasant and it makes it more enjoyable for me to fulfill the request. And, it's almost impossible to whine while you're smiling.


----------



## purple_kangaroo (Feb 20, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maryeb* 
And OP, that sounds great! I wanted to respond to one of your posts where you talked about getting them to stop the behavior first then explaining later. We have always explained why we are asking ds to stop, etc. in the same way you just described how you helped your youngest stop jumping/sliding off the couch. Our interactions about stuff like that usually go much like you described. He is amenable most of the time if he understands the why and is offered an alternative and we do the action with him for a second or sometimes longer. Good luck! Mary


Thanks . . . it's especially things like hitting, or stuff that's immediately dangerous and has to be stopped, that I think might sometimes be necessary to stop before explaining why. If my 2yo heads for the street, I'm going to worry first about stopping her from running out in front of a car before I explain, and I'm not going to wait until she understands before I enforce the limit.

With little kids, it just seems to me like sometimes you have to do things like grab the hand and stop it from hitting while you say "No hitting. Hitting hurts. Be gentle, like this." Is a very young child going to really understand that she shouldn't hit until _after_ you have physically prevented her from hitting for a few times? It just seems to me like sometimes maybe the understanding would have to come later.

So, if she hadn't sat down or stopped jumping on the couch, I would see it as reasonable for her age level and developmental stage for me to physically help her do those things. I would assume that my physically helping her sit down or get off the couch and jump on the floor would actually be part of the process of her learning that it wasn't ok to jump on the couch. That I might have to take her off the couch a number of times before she really started understanding WHY. With toddlers, I think there could be a certain point where verbal explanations are just wordswordswords and might not actually be contributing to their understanding.

Am I making sense at all? LOL.


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

I'm not 100% CL, but I don't think consensual living means sitting back and watching kids do whatever they want regardless of how it affects you. My daughter liked to jump on the couch, but I wasn't in a position to buy a new couch. On the other hand, we had recently bought a new mattress that was much firmer than we liked and we weren't in a position to replace that either. So we found a mutually agreeable solution - don't jump on the couch, but by all means jump on our new bed and hopefully soften it up a bit. If you don't have my firm bed problem, then find some other jumping solution, and I've seen quite a few mentioned here.

As for whining, I told my daughter honestly that I can't stand to listen to the whining - it gives me a headache. I asked her why she whines and she said that sometimes she feels like I'm not listening to her and it makes her frustrated. So we got her a bell. If she's feeling like that, she rings the bell and that lets me know that I'm not paying attention as well as she needs me to. I give her my attention and she tells me what she wants to tell me without whining. It hasn't 100% eliminated whining, but I bet it's eliminated 80% or more. Of course now I have to listen to the bell. If anyone goes with this, choose the bell carefully.


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

When I get to thinking "what's the motivation?" I remind myself of a study I read about (I think in "Einstein Never Used Flashcards" but maybe not):
A researcher is writing on a chalkboard while some 9 month olds play near by.
Every so often the researcher drops his chalk.
He doesn't pay attention to the chalk or the babies.

The outcome was that every time a baby would crawl over, pick up the chalk, and hand it up to the researcher.

Children are selfish, but they also want to contribute.


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Glad to see things are working better for you these days! (And so quickly!)

I'm bookmarking your blog post by the way.


----------



## purple_kangaroo (Feb 20, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sapphire_chan* 
Glad to see things are working better for you these days! (And so quickly!)

I'm bookmarking your blog post by the way.

LOL. What seems to happen repeatedly is that I'll be dealing with an issue for days, weeks or months. I'll get so frustrated that I feel like I'm at the end of my rope and post about it.

Within days, it will be much better. Almost every time.

I'm not sure if it's that once I post about it I start being more intentional about dealing with it, or sometimes it's that I get really helpful advice or an attitude-change from the replies. Sometimes I think it's just that it tends to be darkest just before the dawn. I need to remember that by the point I'm feeling at the end of my rope, it's probably just about reached the point of a turn-around.


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annT* 
I'm curious - can you explain the rationale behind the objection to your course of action?

Yes, I just can't do it right now.







Will try to be back in the morning to explain.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jackson'smama* 
and if we let him do that here, you can darn well bet that he wants to do it at grandma's house too. what if grandma doesn't like it.

<snip>

i feel like i'm failing my ds by NOT having a consequence b/c telling him not to slide off the arm of the couch, physically removing him, taking him to his slide, assisting him in making a slide out of our leather cushions on the floor, etc... does nothing more than use up 10 minutes before he waits til my back is turned and slides down the arm of the couch again. is this desire/defiance? what is it? my talking and redirecting doesn't seem to mean a hoot to him.

I have a couple thoughts on this too, that I'll post tomorrow. Just wanted to get this bumped up on my sub list. Be back tomorrow AM!


----------



## maryeb (Aug 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *purple_kangaroo* 
Thanks . . . it's especially things like hitting, or stuff that's immediately dangerous and has to be stopped, that I think might sometimes be necessary to stop before explaining why. If my 2yo heads for the street, I'm going to worry first about stopping her from running out in front of a car before I explain, and I'm not going to wait until she understands before I enforce the limit.

With little kids, it just seems to me like sometimes you have to do things like grab the hand and stop it from hitting while you say "No hitting. Hitting hurts. Be gentle, like this." Is a very young child going to really understand that she shouldn't hit until _after_ you have physically prevented her from hitting for a few times? It just seems to me like sometimes maybe the understanding would have to come later.

So, if she hadn't sat down or stopped jumping on the couch, I would see it as reasonable for her age level and developmental stage for me to physically help her do those things. I would assume that my physically helping her sit down or get off the couch and jump on the floor would actually be part of the process of her learning that it wasn't ok to jump on the couch. That I might have to take her off the couch a number of times before she really started understanding WHY. With toddlers, I think there could be a certain point where verbal explanations are just wordswordswords and might not actually be contributing to their understanding.

Am I making sense at all? LOL.









Of course you would stop your toddler/baby from running into the street, and from hitting others. I bet while you are keeping them safe and preventing them from heading right into the street you are explaining why, in the moment. When ds was about a year and a half, we had several months of him hitting/scratching a couple little friends of his when we played together. One time we were looking at a pay phone together and he tried to hit his friend with it!!! OMG! He was frustrated the friend wanted it. So of course, in the moment I was stopping the behavior and explaining why. It just went together. The interesting thing is that he still remembers this incident and talks about it. He brought it up quite a bit for a while and wanted to repeat what happened, why I stopped him, what he could do next time instead of hitting his friend, etc. So we have talked about it ad nauseum and he has understood why not to do that for a long time. With the running into the street, it just has not ever been an issue. Ds is fantastic about holding my hand or keeping himself safe. But we have literally been talking about keeping safe on the sidewalk forever and I remind him every time we're in a parking lot how we need to hold hands for safety. I don't know if you specifically need ideas on this, I was just kind of referring to your post.

I do notice sometimes that dh explains things too much and I can tell ds isn't really in the moment with him. I keep explanations short unless we have time (not a safety situation) and/or ds asks why I'm asking him to stop or whatever. And I think it's fine to help them physically figure out what to do instead of what not to do, that seems like all part of the process to me. Hope that was helpful, not just rambling.


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annT* 
I'm curious - can you explain the rationale behind the objection to your course of action?

OK, I'm back.









There have been threads in the past about what to do when your child grabs a toy from another, and there have been many mamas who say that you taking a toy from your child's hand is no different than when they took it from the original child (both taking something against the child's will), and a different solution should be found where both kids are happy. I don't personally believe that to be true, because the manner in which I get the toy from my child is not in a snatching manner, and I'm explaining to my child that they need to wait for a turn of the original child. There was also a thread about a grocery clerk giving one piece of cheese to two children, and there were a number of mamas who said they would not explain to the (older) child, take the cheese and split it, and give a small piece to the second child.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jackson'smama* 
i mean, we have an old mattress for jumping, but that doesn't mean my ds doesn't also want to jump on the good mattresses. and if we let him do that here, you can darn well bet that he wants to do it at grandma's house too. what if grandma doesn't like it.

In our family, if grandma doesn't like it, and there's nowhere else we offer that kiddo wants to jump/no other activity he wants to do, then kiddo is going to be disappointed. I'll validate, empathize, offer alternatives, but if my kid ONLY wants to jump on grandma's couch/bed, and grandma isn't OK with that, then grandma's need to have her things stay nice prevails. I don't see anything ungentle about that. If my child is open to alternatives, great. If he's not, then I won't impose upon another person to make him comfortable.

I will mention, however, that kids are pretty savvy, especially when they've had things explained to them a lot when they're younger, and can differentiate between ok and not ok at different places. For instance, my kids know that jumping on their own beds and our couch is OK, but jumping on mom and dad's bed is not OK; jumping on Nana & Papa's bed isn't OK, jumping on their couch isn't OK, but jumping on their spare room bed IS. That seems like a lot to differentiate, and they're almost 2 and 4-1/4, but they just need a quick reminder to get off surfaces that we don't want them on...and that's because they know from experience they will be gently/playfully "collected"







and helped off the surface if they don't do it on their own. They get many, many outlets and options, so if there's something going on where they just want to be mad about something, that's OK too. But it doesn't mean that they get to do something the homeowner doesn't want them to.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jackson'smama* 
let me see if i get this right. in order to discipline (teach) without consequences, we basically spend many many years repeating ourselves over and over again in the hopes that at ____ years of age, it's going to finally sink in and mean something. i'm not being snarky. this is totally serious. and if i might add, it makes me feel like i'm not really being a good parent









Actually, that is the way it works. It sounds lofty and ineffectual to many people, but it does work. The thing is it's NOT "permissive" parenting because you are actively teaching your child along the way, not just letting them do whatever, or making them stop whatever, with no explanations. I've seen it happen with my own son. I explain, and repeat, and enforce limits after the first or second request, and once he's there developmentally, and he really gets it, it's not much of an issue anymore. AND, because we have discussions and conversations about situations he's not only learning about that particular situation, but about similar situations and learning problem solving skills, etc. Enforcing the limit is teaching them something, there's just not always as immediate a 'result' as when you punish the child....the child might stop doing things more quickly because they want to avoid being punished, but it comes out in other ways.

Parenting this way takes a LOT more effort in the beginning because you're not relying on a negative stimulus to externally motivate them to 'behave'...but once that internal motivation clicks there's much less effort on the parents' part.

I was raised this way by my parents, and I was a total goody-goody as a teen/young adult







. I had that inner compass and didn't find the need to rebel/whatever like a lot of my friends who had more controlling/punitive parents. I knew from the beginning that my parents were reasonable, rational people that really did have my best interests at heart and I listened to their counsel.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jackson'smama* 
i feel like i'm failing my ds by NOT having a consequence b/c telling him not to slide off the arm of the couch, physically removing him, taking him to his slide, assisting him in making a slide out of our leather cushions on the floor, etc... does nothing more than use up 10 minutes before he waits til my back is turned and slides down the arm of the couch again. is this desire/defiance? what is it? my talking and redirecting doesn't seem to mean a hoot to him.

When things get to this point, I rearrange the situation to eliminate the temptation or access. As I said above, I've gated off our living room if the kids have been unable to play safely in there on their own while I'm making dinner. It seems as though this is a "thing" for him, so I'd find a way to limit his access until he grows out of it.


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *purple_kangaroo* 
LOL. What seems to happen repeatedly is that I'll be dealing with an issue for days, weeks or months. I'll get so frustrated that I feel like I'm at the end of my rope and post about it.

Within days, it will be much better. Almost every time.

I'm not sure if it's that once I post about it I start being more intentional about dealing with it, or sometimes it's that I get really helpful advice or an attitude-change from the replies. Sometimes I think it's just that it tends to be darkest just before the dawn. I need to remember that by the point I'm feeling at the end of my rope, it's probably just about reached the point of a turn-around.

Hmm, aggravating child behavior is like transition in labor?









As an experiment, try making a post right as something starts to bug you sometime, see if there's a faster resolution.









Forget parenting techniques, just post to MDC!


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *The4OfUs* 

Quote:

Originally Posted by jackson'smama View Post
let me see if i get this right. in order to discipline (teach) without consequences, we basically spend many many years repeating ourselves over and over again in the hopes that at ____ years of age, it's going to finally sink in and mean something. i'm not being snarky. this is totally serious. and if i might add, it makes me feel like i'm not really being a good parent

Actually, that is the way it works. It sounds lofty and ineffectual to many people, but it does work. The thing is it's NOT "permissive" parenting because you are actively teaching your child along the way, not just letting them do whatever, or making them stop whatever, with no explanations. I've seen it happen with my own son. I explain, and repeat, and enforce limits after the first or second request, and once he's there developmentally, and he really gets it, it's not much of an issue anymore. AND, because we have discussions and conversations about situations he's not only learning about that particular situation, but about similar situations and learning problem solving skills, etc. Enforcing the limit is teaching them something, there's just not always as immediate a 'result' as when you punish the child...









:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Nanu*
Gentle parenting does not necessarily produce well-behaved children. Its aim is to produce well-behaved adults.


----------



## Traci mom23boys (Jan 4, 2006)

I don't normally post in this forum but I noticed the thread title on my way to Books. Anyway, my very spirited sons have been raised without punishments and rewards before I had ever heard of Alfie Kohn. For my husband and me it is always about *connection*. Will this action bring about connection or dis-connection? What happened for us is after years and maturity there is a natural authority that falls into place. Our children know that we love and respect their opinions and ideas so we can eventually work out every issue, even if we end up saying no to a request.

I recently had the pleasure of hearing Dr. Gordon Neufeld speak, he really articulates this idea so much better than I ever could. I highly recommend his book *Hold On To Your Kids*.

Blessings,
~Traci


----------



## Isamama (May 2, 2006)

I second Dr. Neufeld's book! He is wonderful!


----------



## Ironica (Sep 11, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jackson'smama* 
let me see if i get this right. in order to discipline (teach) without consequences, we basically spend many many years repeating ourselves over and over again in the hopes that at ____ years of age, it's going to finally sink in and mean something. i'm not being snarky. this is totally serious. and if i might add, it makes me feel like i'm not really being a good parent









i feel like i'm failing my ds by NOT having a consequence b/c telling him not to slide off the arm of the couch, physically removing him, taking him to his slide, assisting him in making a slide out of our leather cushions on the floor, etc... does nothing more than use up 10 minutes before he waits til my back is turned and slides down the arm of the couch again. is this desire/defiance? what is it? my talking and redirecting doesn't seem to mean a hoot to him.

You may be talking too much. ;-) Depends on the age of the child, and where they're at developmentally.

On the same theme...

Quote:


Originally Posted by *purple_kangaroo* 
With little kids, it just seems to me like sometimes you have to do things like grab the hand and stop it from hitting while you say "No hitting. Hitting hurts. Be gentle, like this." Is a very young child going to really understand that she shouldn't hit until _after_ you have physically prevented her from hitting for a few times?

Absolutely not.

It's all about the development of impulse control. That simply doesn't happen until age 4 or 5, and even then it's far from perfect. A toddler who has started to do something really doesn't have the circuits in their brain to STOP themselves after the planning is done.

So, by stopping them physically, we're doing two things: we're playing the role of the impulse control they don't have yet, and we're helping them establish those circuits. With really young kids, especially on safety things, it's best if you can interrupt the motion right when you tell them to stop, rather than after... that way, they associate stopping with what you said.

For example, when DS1 first started walking on his own while we were out and about, I felt it was important that he learn what I meant by "stop." So, for at least two weeks, if I wanted him to stop, I got right behind him, put my flat hands in front of his chest, and said "stop" *as* he ran into them. The first time he got away from me and I yelled "stop!" after him, he actually stopped. He was less than 18 months old. This probably wouldn't work with *every* kid, but it definitely can work.

The issue about "consequences" for undesired behavior is the assumption that there was a failure that the child needs to be responsible for. With very young children, "misbehavior" seems to nearly always be a result of developmentally inappropriate expectations. A four-year-old simply cannot sit properly through a long formal dinner at a restaurant. A two-year-old cannot help but swat at someone/thing that is the source of frustration. To the extent it is feasible, we can create an environment that poses fewer challenges to our children's developmental place. Where it's not feasible, *we* need to make up the ground where they fall short of being able to meet the expectations.

Finally, we have to trust our children to demonstrate to us when they have outgrown the need for our intervention. Maybe your neighbor with a child *exactly* the same age brags about how they always or never do such-and-such, but as with things like talking, eating, walking, or learning to read, every child develops at their individual pace. It can be hard to find a balance between intervening before your child has a chance to fail (and get hurt or hurt someone else) and watching to see when they're ready to handle those situations themselves, but it's important. They *will* take over when they're ready, if we teach them how (by modeling, and by guiding them through the appropriate behavior).

With older children, of course, you are often dealing with premeditated actions that they know are "wrong" from your point of view. Then you have to find out the motivation and come up with responses that are appropriate to the damage done and the motivation behind it. A 10-year-old who scratched up the coffee table in my house would probably find themselves on a trip to the hardware store to procure sandpaper, stain, and varnish along with appropriate brushes and rags, then would be spending a nice Saturday helping mom or dad or uncle Larry refinish the table. ;-) And if they were older, they might just get the whole project themselves, with appropriate guidance to ensure a quality job.


----------



## RaeAnne (Mar 7, 2007)

I need to go to bed so I can't read the replies right now, but I REALLY appreciate the questions posed here. I've wondered the EXACT same things. I always used consequences with my niece, and I always felt like it was BECAUSE I respected her, as I see her as capable of being a responsible person. I am literally the only one in the family that she consistently listens to and doesn't throw tantrums with (she's almost 8). I have also be fortunate enough to have her talk about sensitive issues with me, so I know it's not all about fear. But is it to some extent? If it is, is it necessarily bad, if "fear" is actually "respect," rather than fear of losing love?

I have to go to bed!!







I'll be back.


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

RaeAnn, do other family members give her any boundaries at all? Or are they letting her do whatever she wants without any guidance towards more appropriate behaviors? I would almost wager that the other adults in her life aren't really connecting with her, so she's connecting with you because you're involved with her - *any* attention, even negative, is better than none. If other family members *are* parenting her responsively and setting limits for her, etc. then maybe she feels some other connection with you and that's why she talks to you more. It's hard to say without knowing how other adults in her life interact with her.

I've heard people try to correlate fear with respect, but to me that seems completely incompatible, because to me respect is a feeling that is positive and warm, and fear is a feeling that's negative and cold, so they *can't* be the same thing.

I could understand that a child might not have "fear" of punishment, in the sense of a true scared feeling, but more of an avoidance kind of thing, wanting to avoid being punished because punishment is a negative experience and most of us try to avoid negative experiences if we can help it. The thing that punishment can easily neglect, and one of the big reasons I don't use it, is that while it may stop an undesireable behavior, it a) does nothing to give a more apropriate behavior to replace it with, and b) focuses the child on how the punishment is affecting them, instead of how their actions affected others. The development of self discipline for my kids is what my goal is, and I feel that traditional, externally motivating punishments muck all that up and make it more difficult to get to the teaching self discipline part. Even if you accompany a punishment with a discussion later, the kid still thinks about what happened to THEM first before they had to talk about it, and likely that will be the first thought in their mind if presented with the situation again and debating whether to do it or not, instead of thinking about how that action might affect someone else.

Hopefully that makes sense.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *purple_kangaroo* 
We can talk about how "couches are for sitting and floors are for running and jumping" all day, but that doesn't convince the kids that they shouldn't run and jump on the couch. I can ask them to get down, and the older kids will get down, but the moment I'm not looking they're doing it again. The almost-3yo won't even get down when I ask her to, unless I physically make her. Then she'll be right back up again.

I'm not CL, but I would definitely consider myself UP. We don't punish or reward (well, occasionally I slip, but..). In this situation I would say in clear terms "Do not jump on the couch" and I'd probably give the evil eye (I don't allow jumping on my couch, and they can only sit on the back if they don't use it as a slide). I do give an explanation, but it's mostly as a courtesty and for future reference, not to motivate ds to quit jumping, if that makes sense. That's pretty much enough for ds, and the two kids I babysit/have playdates with (ages 2.5 and 5.5).
When ds was closer to 2, I'm fairly certain it required more work on my part, probably some physical intervention. Which reminds me- at that age, I would have had to redirect him to something that would honor the impulse, or he would be stuck on his current thing. So, if he's jumping on the couch, I'd have to suggest, say, jumping on the bed, take him to the bedroom, and go from there.
There have been times that he's been doing something (like climbing on a box I thought I'd have to reuse), and he *couldn't* stop himself. I could tell he wanted to (he was a little over 2). I asked him if he wanted me to take the tempation to climb on the box away, he said yes, and I moved it to the kitchen table, out of sight. All was good.

Quote:

They'll wear a helmet because they have to do it in order to ride bikes, not because they actually believe they could get seriously injured if they don't or because they agree it's a good idea. It's certainly not consensual. The consequence of refusing to wear a helmet is that that the bike gets put away.
It's not consensual, but Imo it IS UP. That's not what I'd really consider a punishment. It's so related...ah, I can't really explain why I don't see it as a punishment.
I told ds this past weekend that if he didn't let me put sunscreen on him, that we weren't going to the beach. I would have stayed home and played with him. It certainly wasn't intended to make him unhappy or pay for his decisions, yk? It just was the way it was.
It would almost be like saying that my limiting of candy is a consequence for him getting cavities. I'm not punishing him because he has cavities. I just have to limit candy and juice to keep his teeth as healthy as possible.

Quote:

It seems that giving up the use of rewards and consequences (or, even more, trying to do things consensually with small children) would just lead to kids with uncontrollable behavior, and who don't respect anyone else's needs or desires.
I don't use rewards and punishments (unless you consider the bike helmet and the sunscreen things to be punishments, which some people might. But I'm still pretty sure it's UP). My ds certainly doesn't have uncontrollable behavior. He's surprisingly respectful of others for a 3.5yo.
When we first moved here and started going on walks, he would avoid stepping on people's dandilions because they might not want them hurt. That was all his thinking. (he now knows it's ok to pick them or step on them. lol)


----------



## kungfu_barbi (Jun 6, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Deva33mommy* 
I told ds this past weekend that if he didn't let me put sunscreen on him, that we weren't going to the beach. I would have stayed home and played with him. It certainly wasn't intended to make him unhappy or pay for his decisions, yk? It just was the way it was.

fwiw, your use of sunscreen and bike helmets doesn't sound punitive to me, but what strikes me about your post is that you _would have been_ willing to stay home (and play) as an option AND that your heart toward ds was not to make him unhappy or make him pay. that's really quite beautiful.

every family has non-negotiables - they can be spoken or unspoken, obvious or subtle. they can be concrete, like sunscreen, helmets, not jumping on furniture. they can be abstract, like honesty, honor, and personal responsibility. those are the things where one might say 'it's just the way it is.' i don't think anyone has to apologize for that...









in my opinion and in my experience, it's HOW the non-negotiables are taught -harshly enforced or gently re-inforced - that matters.

peace


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *kungfu_barbi* 
fwiw, your use of sunscreen and bike helmets doesn't sound punitive to me, but what strikes me about your post is that you _would have been_ willing to stay home (and play) as an option AND that your heart toward ds was not to make him unhappy or make him pay. that's really quite beautiful.

Why, thank you! It really was an option for him either way (though I knew he'd choose to go). But I don't want to give the impression that I'm good like that all the time. lol. (dp is though- really). I'm not a huge outdoors gal. I would have been happy staying home. There are definitely things that I'm not so great about. Though...now that I think about it, I do have the "make him pay" thoughts less and less all the time.


----------



## purple_kangaroo (Feb 20, 2006)

Thanks again for all the great discussion on this, everyone. I especially love hearing from those who have older children and can say, "Actually, yes it does work!"

I'm still trying to sort through exactly what are all the nuances of difference between punishments, rewards, consequences, results, etc. It's not necessarily always perfectly clear-cut, at least to me.


----------



## kungfu_barbi (Jun 6, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *purple_kangaroo* 
...I'm still trying to sort through exactly what are all the nuances of difference between punishments, rewards, consequences, results, etc. *It's not necessarily always perfectly clear-cut,* ...









i think you just described the *journey* of parenting. to some degree, it's something each family needs to work out for themselves.

and just when you think you have it nailed down, your kid has a birthday...









peace


----------



## jackson'smama (May 14, 2005)

so for those who agreed with my summation of "we keep repeating ourselves over and over for ____ years until one day it sinks in and our child gets it", more or less...
hit me with responses to these specifics...
i have a 3.5 year old ds who is CONSTANTLY on his 10 month old brother - trying to ride him, overly hug and kiss him to the point of knocking him over, pushing, kicking, biting, hitting, shoving, etc.... am i supposed to expect good results by just continually saying "how do you think that makes noah feel?" and "it's not ok to ____. if you want noah to ____ then _____." and just parent like a hawk and try to physically prevent it until he doesn't want to do it anymore (or at least as much!).
part of me feels this is right. the other part of me feels like he isn't capable of understanding that it's wrong if i'm only telling him. there needs to be a more undesirable consequence than his brother crying or me talking to him and trying to tell him what to do differently next time. it's like i really like the notion of parenting now the way I want him to live as an ADULT rather than expecting the fruits of my labor to be seen right now, but there's also this notion of maybe he's just gonna learn it's OK to do all this stuff cause all that's gonna happen is somebody is gonna tell him it's not ok and he'll just think "BIG DEAL", kwim?
and as hard as it is for me to get a handle on this, my DH is REALLY not going for it. help!


----------



## purple_kangaroo (Feb 20, 2006)

jackson'smama, one thing to remember is that even parents who spank have to correct their children over and over and over again for the same thing. It's not like they spank the kid once and they never do that thing again.

However, if it seems like what you're doing isn't working over a period of time, then you can always post here for ideas with a specific situation.

A few things I would look at:

* What needs is the behavior stemming from? Are there ways you can meet those needs in better ways so that the child isn't so driven to do the behavior you don't want?

* Are you being consistent about responding right away, every time, to things like hitting or being rough, etc?

* Are you actively working on teaching the child what TO do instead? It sounds like you are, but this is something I always try to think about--am I teaching the kid what to do, or just telling them not to do and leaving a void for what to replace it with?

* Are there underlying issues affecting the behavior? Food intolerances, sensory issues, sleep deprivation, etc. can all affect behavior.

* Would another approach be more effective? For my 2yo, we needed to add a removal/cooling off step to how we were handling hitting and pushing. We did it in a non-punitive way, telling her that she needed to sit down away from the child she hit and cool off for a minute. It was usually only for a few seconds, and often I'd sit with her if she seemed to want me to. For her, she just needed a short break to calm down before we could talk with her about it. Then we would take her back to the spot where it happened, try to reproduce the situation as much as possible, and literally have her act out a better way she could handle it without hitting.


----------



## lilsparrow (Apr 19, 2006)

I have been lurking and really getting a lot out of this thread.









Could someone clue me in to the meaning of UP?


----------



## hipumpkins (Jul 25, 2003)

Unconditional parenting..it is a book by Alfie Kohn.


----------



## RaeAnne (Mar 7, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *The4OfUs* 
RaeAnn, do other family members give her any boundaries at all? Or are they letting her do whatever she wants without any guidance towards more appropriate behaviors? .....I've heard people try to correlate fear with respect, but to me that seems completely incompatible, because to me respect is a feeling that is positive and warm, and fear is a feeling that's negative and cold, so they *can't* be the same thing.

I can't figure out how to do that multiple quote thing, so hopefully it's clear to whom/what I am addressing.









I was tired when I wrote that, and also hadn't read the thread yet. I was expecting people to talk about not having any consequences whatsoever, basically the idea that children only do what they have a need to do and are capable of doing. So if there is undesirable behavior (hitting, tantrums, whatever), it is ultimately the child's choice/need to do that, and the parent shouldn't expect them to change until the child is ready to, at which point the child will do so on their own. Only one or two people here seemed to agree with that, most seemed to support the idea of limits while also attempting to meet the child's needs, which I totally agree with. When I made the comment on fear vs. respect, I was "arguing" against the idea that any type of limit will only make a child do a desirable behavior out of fear, that in my situation, I feel like it is more that my niece respects me as an adult, someone who can help her set appropriate limits (telling me what she needs instead of screaming and crying, being upfront about her intentions rather than lying, etc.). I do NOT want her to fear me!! It just didn't come out very clear because I was tired.

So with that in mind, no, she doesn't have any boundaries at home, which IS why she responds so well to me. That's what I was meaning about respect. I see her as a capable, intelligent individual who can grow into a capable, intelligent adult, and I believe in her ability to make good choices, with the right support. This respect toward her produces her respect toward me. I actually ask her how she feels about things, and try to help her work through difficult issues, something that is not happening at home. So you were spot on.









Oh, and I think I'm using different terminology than others here, because I haven't read the books. For me, picking up the child who is jumping on the couch while reminding them that they aren't supposed to do that falls under my "consequences" category. I guess I just meant "doing something about it," again in argument against those who would not do anything at all. This has gotten really long, so I'll just say I did/do a lot of what others here have said, it just didn't sound like it in my original post.









I don't see the idea of allowing the child to make their own choices really being explained well here. The pps who said they let their child jump on the couch, carve up the coffee table, etc. haven't really explained how they handle situations out in public, when the child's actions affect others....

RaeAnne


----------



## RaeAnne (Mar 7, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Thao* 
I'm another one of those that like the idea of CL but don't believe it works for every family. There are some situations that simply don't have a consensual solution, and so often (it seems to me) what ends up happening is the parent gives up their need in deference to the kid. But that isn't truly consensual.









You said exactly how I have been feeling, but haven't had the words to express! The child's feelings are the ONLY ones that matter. EXACTLY!


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jackson'smama* 
am i supposed to expect good results by just continually saying "how do you think that makes noah feel?" and "it's not ok to ____. if you want noah to ____ then _____." and just parent like a hawk and try to physically prevent it until he doesn't want to do it anymore (or at least as much!).
part of me feels this is right. the other part of me feels like he isn't capable of understanding that it's wrong if i'm only telling him. there needs to be a more undesirable consequence than his brother crying or me talking to him and trying to tell him what to do differently next time. it's like i really like the notion of parenting now the way I want him to live as an ADULT rather than expecting the fruits of my labor to be seen right now, but there's also this notion of maybe he's just gonna learn it's OK to do all this stuff cause all that's gonna happen is somebody is gonna tell him it's not ok and he'll just think "BIG DEAL", kwim?
and as hard as it is for me to get a handle on this, my DH is REALLY not going for it. help!

Well, for me, when it's physical aggression I do more than just talk - I separate. I put my body between them, say that's NOT OK, and talk abotu why very briefly. But there's no timed time out thing, no shaming about it, and once the event is over and my body has provided a boundayr between them, I let them back to playing. If it happens again in a short time lapse, I'll remain for a longer period or redirect them to another activity. SO for me, it's not just words and feelings. There is a consequence, play is stopped and the aggressor is separated, and cools down for a moment. Which has been enough in my experience to stop it, and teach them to grow out of it. Yes, sometimes I do it 15 times in one day...and then other days I do it maybe twice. It's all a process, just like anything else they learn. purple_kangaroo brings up one of my favorite anti-spanking/punishment agruments, that parents who use those don't just do it once and never have problems again, so how is that working better than what I'm doing?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RaeAnne* 
So with that in mind, no, she doesn't have any boundaries at home, which IS why she responds so well to me. That's what I was meaning about respect. I see her as a capable, intelligent individual who can grow into a capable, intelligent adult, and I believe in her ability to make good choices, with the right support. This respect toward her produces her respect toward me. I actually ask her how she feels about things, and try to help her work through difficult issues, something that is not happening at home. So you were spot on.









Yay me!







I mean, I'm not glad that I was right, that's a real shame for your niece, and she's lucky to have you. No boundaries and no guidance doesn't do anybody any favors, IMO. I have a couple nephews who were parented that way (or, rather, not parented), and they were not enjoyable to be around. One of my hugest peeves is that gentle discipline is often equated with no discipline, when the two are nothing alike.

Even the consensual mamas here who do decide to agree to their children's needs more than theirs still do guide their children; though we all might have different ideas about how much "control" the parent in the relationship should have, I think we all agree that our children *do* need guidance from us and leaving them to just do whatever they want without any input isn't doing anyone any good.

PS - to multiquote you click on the little plus box with quote marks at the bottom right of all the posts you want to quote, and then hit "Post Reply" on the bottom left.


----------



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

I think in lots of parenting styles there is a time when the children are young that that's just kind of the case**. But I think a give-and-take mentality can very much be set up early on (even if it's not entirely equal), and later the pendulum starts to "right" itself.

Anyway, I don't think giving up rewards and punishments = consensual living. I think there are lots of families who don't reward and punish here who don't practice CL or aspire to.

Interesting thread! Thanks OP!

**ETA: I was referring to the posts that talked about children's needs/wants taking precedence. Darn that The4ofUs and her super fast hands!


----------



## Kothi (Feb 13, 2007)

...trying to absorb it in small snatches btw managing toddler and infant

New to theories/authors mentioned. Trying to find solutions for very active, often impulsive/difficulty w/ "aggressive" behavior toddler.

btw - what is CL? I couldn't find it on the acronym list.


----------



## purple_kangaroo (Feb 20, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Kothi* 









...trying to absorb it in small snatches btw managing toddler and infant

New to theories/authors mentioned. Trying to find solutions for very active, often impulsive/difficulty w/ "aggressive" behavior toddler.

btw - what is CL? I couldn't find it on the acronym list.

CL=consensual living


----------



## captain crunchy (Mar 29, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommy2abigail* 

I wish I knew some IRL people/families who RU or CL. It would help tremendously to see everyday situations, and how they are handled.


Hey, you do! Call me!


----------



## mommy2abigail (Aug 20, 2005)

Hey! Where have you been!!! I miss you and B!!














:


----------



## RaeAnne (Mar 7, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *The4OfUs* 
Well, for me, when it's physical aggression I do more than just talk - I separate. I put my body between them, say that's NOT OK, and talk abotu why very briefly. But there's no timed time out thing, no shaming about it, and once the event is over and my body has provided a boundayr between them, I let them back to playing. If it happens again in a short time lapse, I'll remain for a longer period or redirect them to another activity. SO for me, it's not just words and feelings. There is a consequence, play is stopped and the aggressor is separated, and cools down for a moment. Which has been enough in my experience to stop it, and teach them to grow out of it. Yes, sometimes I do it 15 times in one day...and then other days I do it maybe twice. It's all a process, just like anything else they learn.

I just got it.... I've wondered for awhile (since I heard about about AP) if part of why my niece listens to me is because she wants me to like her. I've never told her my love was contingent on her behavior, and I've tried hard to be positive, limit rules to things that are actually important, choosing my battles, etc., but I've still wondered, you know? And I just now got how being upset at your child and using that "upsetness" to make them realize they did something wrong is... shame. I suppose it seems really obvious, but that's how everyone else does it, so I never questioned it. I felt like I was doing a lot better than some people because I try very hard to determine if I want a certain behavior to stop because it's actually bad, or because it is just annoying to me. If it's the latter, I figure out a different way of dealing with it (I calm down, remove myself from the situation, or last resort, ask if she could please just do it somewhere else because I'm crabby right now). But I do the "upsetness" thing too, because I thought that's how you taught them what was acceptable. Wow, if you don't have shame to fall back on, this gentle discipline stuff is HARD, huh?







Well, I've had a feeling something might be off for awhile now. I'm glad I finally figured out what it was!

Quote:


Originally Posted by *The4OfUs* 
PS - to multiquote you click on the little plus box with quote marks at the bottom right of all the posts you want to quote, and then hit "Post Reply" on the bottom left.

And you solve my message board problems as well??


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RaeAnne* 
But I do the "upsetness" thing too, because I thought that's how you taught them what was acceptable. Wow, if you don't have shame to fall back on, this gentle discipline stuff is HARD, huh?







Well, I've had a feeling something might be off for awhile now. I'm glad I finally figured out what it was!

And you solve my message board problems as well??









Aw, shucks.









Now, I personally think there's a difference between letting your child see that you're genuinely upset/aggravated/frustrated by a situation vs. purposely getting into the 'bad/shame' dynamic. My kids know when I'm upset with them...but I don't pile it on and correct them for every thing they do with a disappointed tone, KWIM? I have a friend who uses loaded language with her daughter about almost everything she does when she's misbehaving....and that's just not a dynamic I want with my kids. So sure, they know when I'm upset, but my upset is MY upset (even if it's something they're doing it to "cause" it) and it's not being used as a toodl to get them to behave.

Does that make any sense at all?


----------



## RaeAnne (Mar 7, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *The4OfUs* 
Aw, shucks.









Now, I personally think there's a difference between letting your child see that you're genuinely upset/aggravated/frustrated by a situation vs. purposely getting into the 'bad/shame' dynamic. My kids know when I'm upset with them...but I don't pile it on and correct them for every thing they do with a disappointed tone, KWIM? I have a friend who uses loaded language with her daughter about almost everything she does when she's misbehaving....and that's just not a dynamic I want with my kids. So sure, they know when I'm upset, but my upset is MY upset (even if it's something they're doing it to "cause" it) and it's not being used as a toodl to get them to behave.

Does that make any sense at all?

It does. I think I have personal issues/difficulties with this because of how I was raised, so I think that's what makes it more challenging for me. But saying it that way, I don't "pile it on," or tell her she's bad or hurting me, so I guess I could be a lot worse.







It's just more subtle, I think. You seem very balanced, from what I can tell. Which books do you recommend for practical application, that support having boundaries and the parent's job as guider, if you will, for the child? Also, any that talk about how to start all of this with an older child? My niece will never live with me







but I like to plan as though she magically will some day, and if that did happen, this child will be OUT OF CONTROL, and I think it will take quite some time/effort to help her start self-directing and to be a co-contributor in her own life, other than in making negative choices will no thought for the consequences. I'm just trying to be realistic, I guess (realistic about a situation that will never happen...







:







)


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RaeAnne* 
You seem very balanced, from what I can tell. Which books do you recommend for practical application, that support having boundaries and the parent's job as guider, if you will, for the child? Also, any that talk about how to start all of this with an older child?

Wow, thanks!









I really like Anthony Wolf's "The Secret of Parenting"; it's more authoritative than Kohn's "Unconditional Parenting", but it's still within the realm of GD because it's about parenting without threats or punishments. I think both Wolf and Kohn go a little extreme on their viewpoints (Wolf a little cold and Kohn a little soft), but I find I lean more towards Wolf - so I take Wolf's ideas and soften them up a bit, which I find pretty easy. Wolf's book has tons of examples and scripts to use, which I think is great in a practical sense. I've recommended it to many parents and some it's really clicked for, others it hasn't. I guess it's that way with any book.

Take care!


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *The4OfUs* 
Wow, thanks!









I really like Anthony Wolf's "The Secret of Parenting"; it's more authoritative than Kohn's "Unconditional Parenting", but it's still within the realm of GD because it's about parenting without threats or punishments. I think both Wolf and Kohn go a little extreme on their viewpoints (Wolf a little cold and Kohn a little soft), but I find I lean more towards Wolf - so I take Wolf's ideas and soften them up a bit, which I find pretty easy. Wolf's book has tons of examples and scripts to use, which I think is great in a practical sense. I've recommended it to many parents and some it's really clicked for, others it hasn't. I guess it's that way with any book.

Take care!

Ita. all of it.
I read SOP and thought it was a little harsh/cold. But, like The4OfUs, I softened it a little bit, and just used some of his suggestions when the alternative was that I was going to yell or shame, etc.
I am a much more gentle mom now than I was, and I'm very sure I owe that in part to SOP. Once I realized that its ok for me to insist on something sometimes, and how to insist without yelling, threatening, shaming, etc (iow, insist and stay very calm the whole time), I started being more easygoing about other things.
I think there are certain parenting personalities that it works really well for, and mine is one!


----------



## Carlyle (Mar 31, 2007)

Another fascinating discussion that I want to make sure that I can find again! (Someone please let me know if there's a way to mark cool threads without having to post in them--I hope it's not bothering folks that I keep doing this without adding anything to the discussion!)


----------



## cotopaxi (Sep 17, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Carlyle* 
Another fascinating discussion that I want to make sure that I can find again! (Someone please let me know if there's a way to mark cool threads without having to post in them--I hope it's not bothering folks that I keep doing this without adding anything to the discussion!)

Up at the top where it says "Thread Tools" - open that pull-down menu and click subscribe!


----------



## Carlyle (Mar 31, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cotopaxi* 
Up at the top where it says "Thread Tools" - open that pull-down menu and click subscribe!









BRILLIANT--thank you!!!


----------



## wallacesmum (Jun 2, 2006)

We seek to live consensually. There is a lot to respond to in this discussion, but I am just going to pick one point.

Lots of folks think that CL=acquiescing to the child's preference. However, how often does your child go along with what YOU want, and without debate? Have you ever spent an hour shopping for clothes, fifteen minutes on the computer, 20 minutes doing dishes, or whatever else your priority may have been? Have you ever driven an hour, or waited in a line at the bank?

Our kids work with us all the time, I think. Sometimes we forget to notice.

I avoid language about kids "destroying" the house. They are just playing, and their priorities might differ from mine. We ripped down our kitchen ceiling last month - what does that look like to a toddler? "What makes a house grand, it aint the roof, or the door, if there's love in a house, it's a palace for sure."...


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *wallacesmum* 
However, how often does your child go along with what YOU want, and without debate? Have you ever spent an hour shopping for clothes, fifteen minutes on the computer, 20 minutes doing dishes, or whatever else your priority may have been? Have you ever driven an hour, or waited in a line at the bank?

Our kids work with us all the time, I think. Sometimes we forget to notice.

Thank you. I needed to hear this today. My kids need for me to hear this today. It's so true.


----------

