# TCS Discussion 4



## Ms. Mom (Nov 18, 2001)

Just opening the new thread. Carry on!


----------



## Icicle Spider (Dec 27, 2001)

Quote:

_Originally posted by Ms. Mom_
*Carry on!*
You wouldn't be trying to Coerce anyone, would you?










Thanks Ms. Mom for all your efforts!

Pat


----------



## Ms. Mom (Nov 18, 2001)

LOL :LOL Your too funny! Like YOU could be Cohersed into ANYTHING against your will!!!


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

lunarmama wrote:

"Something is missing here. This feels devoid of soul, of life force. It feels robotic to me. It is a mental excercise for those who can keep up, but leaves most mums way out of the picture. "

That's a pity. TCS is a philosophy that is changing how many people live, including moms and dads and children as well as others who are not parents but wish to interact with children non-coercively.

I think what is different is looking at life from a rational viewpoint, that this is what can seem 'Stepford Parent'ish, sort of like Mr. Spock in the original Star Trek- 'Love is illogical, captain'. But it's not like that.

There is nothing inherently wrong with feelings and instincts and spirituality, but I think we benefit from critiquing them through reason. There are times that feelings and instincts can be wrong, because they arise out of an irrationality.

Think about anger. There are times when anger is an appropriate response, like when someone is intentionally harming you. There is anger that arises out of frustration from not being able to solve a problem.

A person can learn to avoid anger in response to a problem by becoming better at solving problems so that it doesn't have to get to the point where the parties involved become frustrated and erupt into anger. TCS theory offers ideas about what to do in the face of conflict

Most- all?- of us have bad ideas that we picked up while growing up, that cause us to feel and act in ways that, when we think about them in the light of reason, we regret. The more we can realize this and think about it, the more rational we become.

We are still creatures of emotion and instinct and spirituality. But we can wield our emotions and spirituality more appropriately.


----------



## Netty (Dec 16, 2001)

****I hope you continue in this way, Netty. I feel that had you started out this way, there would have been far fewer problems between us. What I appreciate is sensible solutions. What I have reacted to is what I saw as hypothetical theory ramming which makes it look like some proselytisation drive.. And I think that is what others here might have reacted to as well. ****

I simply respond to the questions or comments people offer. If someone asks a theoretical question, I will answer it theoretically (though I often try to include an example for clarification --though, as we've discovered, sometimes the examples end up causing more confusion! LOL). Practical questions are often trickly and I am careful not to invade my children's privacy when offering ideas and solutions from my own life.

****But more than that from my point of view, there is little to disagree with your ways of doing things in your house, or why you do them, because (and I'm sure you know this already, since you've read enough examples that I have given) the way you solve things now - and why - is almost identical, given the technological differences to how I solved things then. ****

I'm glad to hear it.

****A question. What sort of painting do you do?****

I work mostly in acrylic paints and watercolour (when my children paint with me). My subjects are still lifes and figures. I love interiors and people (and people *in* interiors ;-)). In summer I will sometimes do flower paintings because I also like to garden, but even then I often make an arrangment and paint it as a still-life rather than the Monet "plein-air" style.

I've been enjoying your posts lately, JW. It's good to see that we have more in common than we originally thought









Netty


----------



## Raven (Dec 15, 2001)

Please, please, please excuse my ignorance but what does TCS stand for?!


----------



## Icicle Spider (Dec 27, 2001)

Raven,

TCS stands for Taking Children Seriously which is a parenting philosophy. Here is a brief description taking from the home page of the TCS web site:

"TCS is an educational philosophy. Its most distinctive feature is the idea that it is possible and desirable to bring up children entirely without doing things to them against their will, or making them do things against their will, and that they are entitled to the same rights, respect and control over their lives as adults."

The TCS web site has lots of information about it, and can be found by clicking this link.

If you would like to discuss any aspects of TCS, this is the place!

Pat


----------



## Raven (Dec 15, 2001)

Thanks for relieving my confused little mind!










I have not yet followed the link but it sounds a bit confusing to me. I will go to the link as soon as I have posted this reply but before I do here's what I think so far...

I think all children - no matter how young - deserve to be treated with respect and dignity. I don't think that yelling or smacking are productive (in my personal opinion...) and that there are many gentle ways to let your child know when you are unhappy with their behaviour. However....I also believe that there has to be limits. If I continually allowed my 18 month old Dd the freedom to do what she wanted to without doing things against her will I shudder to think where she'd be now....dead? Where does one drawer the line?

I am all for allowing children to discover how the world works and not jumping to attention each and every time they fall or wimper or scream. I am in no way trying to say one should ignore their children....obviously one needs to exercise logical deductions. I make a point of not running to my dd's rescue every time she bumps her head or has a fall and 99% of the time she just gets a little fright and then gets up and carries on going. Children are extremely resiliant but they also need guidance (not dictation) and lots of love. They need to know that what they choose to do affects not just themselves but others too. IMHO I believe that the parent needs to provide that guidance more than any other adults in a childs life, especially in the early years.

I am now going to follow that link....


----------



## Netty (Dec 16, 2001)

Hi Raven,

you wrote:
***I think all children - no matter how young - deserve to be treated with respect and dignity. I don't think that yelling or smacking are productive (in my personal opinion...) and that there are many gentle ways to let your child know when you are unhappy with their behaviour.****

I agree. The best way, IMO, to let a child know you are unhappy is to say, "I'm unhappy. Let's find something that makes both of us happy." And if the child is preverbal, then the parent can skip the words and head straight for the common preference ;-)

***However....I also believe that there has to be limits. If I continually allowed my 18 month old Dd the freedom to do what she wanted to without doing things against her will I shudder to think where she'd be now....dead? Where does one drawer the line? ****

TCS-style non-coercive parenting does not advocate "letting" children do whatever they want to do without regard to their personal safety or the health and happiness of those involved with their care. In a TCS family, a child is helped to do what s/he wants to do in ways that are safe, or if that is not possible s/he is offered alternatives that s/he might *prefer* to hir original desire. So if, for example, my child wanted to drink bleach, I would not help hir do so. I would, however, try to establish what it is s/he really wants to do (I would assume s/he is not trying to poison hirself). Perhaps s/he wants to play with a plastic bottle. Or perhaps s/he's thirsty. Or maybe s/he knows that reaching for the bleach bottle gets a reaction out of me or gets my attention (so I should give hir more attention). etc...

****I am all for allowing children to discover how the world works and not jumping to attention each and every time they fall or wimper or scream. *****

If a child falls and seems okay, I agree that a parent can leave them to carry on with what they are doing. But if a child whimpers or screams, I would see those as signs of distress and I would help that child in whatever way I could.

****I am in no way trying to say one should ignore their children....obviously one needs to exercise logical deductions. I make a point of not running to my dd's rescue every time she bumps her head or has a fall and 99% of the time she just gets a little fright and then gets up and carries on going. Children are extremely resiliant but they also need guidance (not dictation) and lots of love. ****

I agree that children need lots of love. "Guidance" is a tricky term, so it would depend on what you meant by "guidance." I believe that parents should certainly share their best theories with their children based on their own knowledge and experience and the resources they have access to. But I don't think that parents should decide *beforehand* what a child must learn and then find ways of "making" the child do what the parent thinks best.

****They need to know that what they choose to do affects not just themselves but others too.****

I would think this would be something children learn quite rapidly, especially if parents are there to provide information and assistance in helping the child meet hir needs without interfering with others.

****IMHO I believe that the parent needs to provide that guidance more than any other adults in a childs life, especially in the early years. ****

Again, my agreement or disagreement would depend on how you are using the word "guidance." I think that parents are responsible for helping children satisfy their needs in ways that are safe and preferable to all involved parties. If the child seeks a parent's advice or guidance in a particular area, then the parent should certainly offer it.

***I am now going to follow that link....****

Great. I'd love to know your thoughts after reading further about TCS.

Netty


----------



## Raven (Dec 15, 2001)

Thank you for taking the time to reply to my post. I did follow the link and found it most informative. I think it is easy to pre-judge something on a little piece of information and in so doing gain a slightly warped perspective. I purposfully aired my immediate opinion _before_ following the link.

I didn't have a lot of time to go through all the pages on the site but what I did read (FAQ, theory,etc) was inlightening in many regards. However there is still a cord within me that pulls back a bit if you know what I mean...

Quote:

I agree that children need lots of love. "Guidance" is a tricky term, so it would depend on what you meant by "guidance"
To me guidance means steering your children out of harms way and giving them the choice to do something more costructive.

IMHO I dont think that one specific parenting style can work for every single parent and child. I believe that as long the child feels safe and the parents treat their children with respect and give them ample opportunitites to grow and learn everyone will flourish.

Thanks again for taking time out to reply!


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

er...hold on....


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

OK, what I meant to say is:

Heartmama wrote (from her post on TCS discussions 2 page 3):

" I maintain that asking about pain relief etc. is little more than
gathering info to better inform the child. "

Isn't that a good thing? Helpful in solving the problem/s the child is having about the health problem and the ways of treating and the doctor visit.

In the original post on this subject, in TCS discussions 2 page 2,
my understanding is that heartmama thinks that parent sharing just the facts with a child is the only truly non-coercive way to present the problem and solution to the child. I disagree. That would be withholding important information that would have a bearing upon the child's decision to pursue this route of help for hir medical problem or not. Not the least of the factors in this, is the child's trust in the parent's information.

I think it is important for parent to tell the child about what they think of the situation- what, in TCS lingo, we call 'share parent's theories' about what the problem is, what possible solutions could be, and to hear the child's theories about what the problem is and which solution child would prefer. IMO&E, this could take some time and happen in little bits, here and there, when child is receptive to talking about it.

Heartmama wrote:

"However, if the child begins to cry and say they will not go for reasons xyz, then IMO anything you say at this point to allay the concerns, and make the doctor visit seem more attractive, and elicite a willingness to go...that is just coercion, IMO, and nothing more."

I agree with this. The child is obviously feeling coercion, and the thing to do would be to back off and apologize and wait for a receptive time to to discuss the health problem and possible solutions. Once a solution is agreed upon, the appt can be made. And more common preferences might need to be found, over and over again, as preferences change.

I think it is possible to help a child solve a health problem and support them as they do what they have decided must be done, even if they are scared of the pain but determined to go through with the procedure. I could be wrong about this, but if a child is willing to go through with, say, getting a tooth pulled and is afraid of the pain even though it is allayed to the best of modern ability- the pain felt by the child might well be of the psychological 'anticipation' kind, as well, which might be helped by a tranquilizer and maybe a tv on the ceiling to distract hir while being worked on, but still, a factor. A parent can do what they can to help child work through their fear and to find ways to alleviate pain (whatever the cause), but there is only so much a parent can do. Each individual will have to figure out how to deal with pain and fear. Avoiding a medical procedure that will save lots of pain and suffering later on will only work in a person's best interests for so long.


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

Heartmama wrote (in her post on TCS Discussion 2 page 3):

"(heartmama wrote)"One reason is because I think it is unrealistic to confuse a willingness to
go with an absence of reluctance. "

Larsy responds: That would be a faulty theory.

Why is that a faulty theory? Have you never experiences the feeling of being
willing to do something you still harbored doubts about?? I have heard many
people describe such feelings, so I felt this was a possible condition the
child may experience. Why do you disagree?"

Actually, I agree. Sorry I wasn't clear about this. I agree, that would be a faulty theory, to confuse a willingness to go with an absence of reluctance.

Heartmama, again:
"larsy writes "If it is truly a common preference, the child prefers going and solving the problem, than not doing so. Child might still be scared, but determined to confront the fear and do what child feels must be done to help with hir problem. A parent can support their child in this. "

Hmmm. I realize you will not agree, but you are essentially describing the state I feel TCS defines as coercion, which involves the feeling of coping with two opposing forces etc. I realize you feel it is not coercion for a parent to share a personal preference to the child about the situation they are in. I often feel TCS ignores the fact that such statements are more than
just objective observations when they happen in real life. It would be mighty hard for a sick 4 year old to not feel quite a lot of pressure from mommy worriedly noticing his symptoms and suggesting he go to the doctor."

I would think that a sick 4 yr old would be concerned about hir own symptoms, and turn to hir trusted advisor for ideas of what is wrong and what to do about it. How the communication over the issue goes can create coercion in the minds of the parent and/or child, or not. A child might trust their parents' advice, to go to the doctor for a look see and to explore the treatment options and decide to follow that course, despite feeling lousy and really not wanting to stir out of the house (gosh, remember when doctors used to make house calls?!).IRL, a parent might feel upset that their child is exhibiting certain symptoms and the parent's own medical past and possibly entrenched theories might be something that the parent needs to recognize as a factor in the advice they are giving their child- over-reaction would not be in the child's or the parent's best interests, for instance, or if the parent fears going to doctors they might not be the best person to be advising child about child's problem. Seperating out what is the parent's problem to deal with (without involving the child) and what is the child's problem to deal with (their symptoms) is important, to avoid coercion around medical issues- as well as, oh, about everything else









You are right, parents have a huge influence over their children. That is why we are thinking about it, so that parents do not misuse and abuse their power over their children. Some of what is accepted in our society as 'normal' interaction is, morally, abuse of power. It is hard and painful to realize, but I think it is true. Once realized, we can go on to find better ways to interact.

This is a matter of conscience as well as consciousness. Questioning and talking about it can help each person to examine the power issues for their self, honestly and openly, rather than accept possibly harmful memes from previous generations.

<snip> Heartmama wrote:
"I feel this is all good advice and would hope the parent would follow it. Unless the condition poses a health risk, I agree the child could just live with it. However, especially with a young child, I hope you are not saying to simply let a child die from untreated diabetes because it occasionally takes coercion from the parent to take the daily shots?"

I don't think children want to die; a parent has the obligation to help their child stay alive. If that includes life-saving medical intervention, then that is part of their life. If there is coercion in thier minds over this, they should continue to gather information and create new knowledge for themselves, in an effort to do away with the coercion.

"TCS parents here have made it pretty clear they agree to save their child from death even when it involves coercion. I assume this extends to getting treatment for a critically ill child, regardless of whether the child agrees. Does it?"

Well, goodness, I would expect any rational person is going to help another person live! This isn't a case of, say, people who believe in a specific religion (I forget which one it is- Jehovah's Witness? Christian Scientist?) that dictates that God says to not avail themselves of modern medical technology! Parents who treat their children non-coercively will help their children to stay alive, yes, even if they cannot find a way to help their child avoid the state of coercion in regard to life-saving medical treatment. Here again, though, the child is not being coerced into staying alive- children want to live. If they are in pain or are dreadfully fearful of something, those are the problems that need solving, preferably in a non-coercive way; but if it is a matter of time and things are moving fast and life-saving action must be taken immediately or death is a certainty- of course, a parent is going to take those life-saving steps.


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

heartmama:
"I agree that it is always better for the child to consent. However, I disagree that without consent treatment is automatically wrong."

Treatment might be the best thing to do, to correct the medical problem. Engaging creativity and so on to do away with the obstacles to consent also might be the best thing to do. We all lack the creativity, time, energy, information etc to do that, at times, but that does not mean that it is not a preferable way to go.

" I believe it is psychologically unrealistic to expect a child to always "consent" to something they know will really hurt."

Wouldn't we all rather avoid pain? And do what we can to avoid it, as well as avoiding causing pain for others?

So, are we actually being coerced by the fear of experiencing pain? How can we deal with that?

" With a baby, I think it is unrealistic to expect them not to cry in protest if they experience pain."

I agree.

" IMO it can
help the child to be told "If we don't do this, you are probably going to die, and I can't let that happen to you"."

Unfortunately, a parent doesn't necessarily have control over whether a child lives or dies, so this would be a bad thing to say to a child.

" This can be a relief for a child, who may not fully understand death, or illness, and can only relate to the pain part of the treatment. Once a child knows a thing must be done, whether
or not they like it, it can actually lessen their resistance to what is
being done, which in turn makes it less traumatic. I realize this flies in the face of TCS theory, however, in my experience it can work this way so long as the parent is honest and loving and ever present in helping the child cope."

I think our differences have to do with pt of view, rather than what we might do.

A child who 'knows a thing must be done' has gotten enough information and input from trusted advisors to understand the situation and to decide to do what makes sense, what is in hir best interests. While they (just as any one of us) might not like certain aspects of the treatment, they have decided to go ahead with it and might welcome help, then, in ways of dealing with the pain and fear they might still be feeling. A parent who is 'honest and loving and ever-present in helping the child cope' does not fly in the face of TCS theory at all, it is rather a part of it. (sorry to disappoint you there)

"*sighing* Larsy I think we have wandered far from what I was asking"

But it is all good information









"With all of this, what I do not understand, is how TCS distinguishes the influence of "sharing preferences" from coercion. I feel that the qualities that define coercion according to TCS shift every time I try to hold them to a real life example. If a child doesn't want to do something, and we keep addressing their fears, creating incentives, sharing our desire that they choose to do it, and they come around to saying "okay I will do
it"...especially when the resist was out of fear, it is just *SO* unlikely, in real life, that a real child would have 100% set aside fear and become totally excited about doing the feared thing."

Someone else addressed the 'everything could be coercive' aspect of this... what I see might be a difference in the way we think about this, is in 'creating incentives' and 'sharing our desire that they choose to do it' in the efforts of finding common preferences. It seems to me that the parent, in order to enter into the process of finding common preferences, also has to open their mind to more information and the possibility that the child does not have to follow the course of action that the parent has set out. You are right; it is not just a matter of parent keeping at the child until child agrees to go along with the parent's course of action. While the parent and child might come back around to that course of action being the best one, in the course of looking for common preference, they might go far from that starting point (original preference) and find a better solution.


----------



## laelsweet (Dec 6, 2001)

a parent and toddler go out for a walk and see some gorgeous red berries which the parent has been taught are poisonous (but is vague about just how toxic, if one must eat many to get sick, etc. and has never tasted them hirself) toddler really wants these berries and this conflict degrades into a bit of a tussle in order to get berries out of very fast toddlers hands. given that there was little time to talk about different kinds of berries, and the make-you-ill faces and sounds parent was making were having little effect, parent needed to do some apologizing about grabbing and arguing. better ways to handle something like this?


----------



## Britishmum (Dec 25, 2001)

Thanks JW - I loved your s elf por t ra it - i needed a laugh today..... (dd's hel p ing with my tyeping)


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

JW wrote:

"I don't know anyone who has been through something like that, who would write about it, or discuss it in this cerebral theoretical way) "

Well, now you do.


----------



## Iguanavere (Nov 26, 2001)

For the TCS-er's - What would say or can you comment on John Walker?

Here is something that I recently read:
"By Jeff Jacoby, Globe Columnist, 12/13/2001
IT ISN'T THE CASE that the parents of John Walker Lindh - the
Marin County child of privilege turned Taliban terrorist - never drew
the line with their son. True, they didn't do so when he was 14 and
his consuming passion was collecting hip-hop CDs with especially
nasty lyrics. And true, they didn't interfere when once he announced
at 16 that he was going to drop out of Tamiscal High School - the
elite "alternative" school where students determined their own course
of study and only saw a teacher once a week. And granted, they
didn't put their foot down when he decided to become a Muslim after
reading "The Autobiography of Malcolm X" and took to wearing long
white robes and an oversized skullcap.
On the contrary: His father was "proud of John for pursuing
an alternative course" and his mother told friends that it was "good
for a child to find a passion." Nor did they object when he began
spending more and more time at a local mosque and set about trying to
memorize the Koran. Nor when he asked his parents to pay his way to
Yemen so he could learn to speak "pure" Arabic. Nor when he headed
to Pakistan to join a madrassa in a region known to be a stronghold
of Islamist extremists.
And his parents didn't balk when he went to fight in
Afghanistan - but that, at least,they didn't know about: He hadn't
told them. Perhaps he had learned to take their consent for
granted. Only once, it seems, did Frank Lindh and Marilyn Walker
actually deny their son something he wanted. When he first adopted
Islam and took the name Suleyman, they refused to use it and insisted
on calling him John. After all, he had been named for one of the
giants of our time: John Lennon. Their refusal must have amazed
him. For as long as he could remember, his oh-so-progressive parents
had answered "yes" to his every whim, indulged his every fancy,
permitted - even praised - his every passion.
The only thing they insisted on was that nothing be insisted
on. Nothing in his life was important enough for them to make an
issue of: not his schooling, not his religion, not his appearance,
not even whether he stayed in America or moved - while still a minor -
to a benighted Third World oligarchy halfway around the world.
Nothing. Except, of course, their right to call him by the name of
their favorite Beatle.
Devout practitioners of the self-obsessed nonjudgmentalism
for which the Bay Area is renowned, Lindh and Walker appear never to
have rebuked their son or criticized his choices. In their world,
there were no absolutes, no fixed truths, no mandatory behavior, no
thou-shalt-nots. If they had one conviction, it was that all
convictions are worthy - that nothing is intolerable except
intolerance.
But even in Marin County, there are times when children need
to hear "no" and "don't." They need to know that there are limits
they must respect and expectations they must try to live up to. If
they cannot find those limits at home, they are apt to look for them
elsewhere. Newsweek calls it "truly perplexing" that John Lindh,
who "grew up in possibly the most liberal, tolerant place in
America ... was drawn to the most illiberal, intolerant sect in
Islam."
There is nothing perplexing about it. He craved standards and
discipline. Mom and Dad didn't offer any. The Taliban did. Even
when it was clear that their son was sinking into Islamist
fanaticism, they wouldn't pull back on the reins. When Osama bin
Laden's terrorists bombed the USS Cole and killed 17 American
servicemen, John Lindh e-mailed his father that the attack had been
justified, since by docking the ship in Yemen, the United States had
committed "an act of war." Frank Lindh now says that the
message "raised my concerns" - but that didn't stop him from wiring
his son another $1,200. After all, says Dad, "my days of molding him
were over." It isn't clear that they ever began.
It came as a jolt to his parents when John Lindh turned up
at the fortress near Mazar-e-Sharif, sporting an AK-47 and calling
himself Abdul Hamid. But the revelation that their son had enlisted
in Al Qaeda and supported the Sept. 11 attacks brought no words of
reproach to their lips. John Lindh deserved "a little kick in the
butt" for keeping them in the dark about his plans, his father said,
but otherwise they just wanted to "give him a big hug." His mother,
meanwhile, was quite sure that "if he got involved with the Taliban
he must have been brainwashed.... When you're young and
impressionable, it's easy to be led by charismatic people."
Yes, it is, and it's a pity that that didn't occur to her
sooner. If she and Frank Lindh had been less concerned with flaunting
their open-mindedness and more concerned with developing their son's
moral judgment, he wouldn't be where he is today. His road to treason
and jihad didn't begin in Afghanistan.
It began in Marin County, with parents who never said "no."

Just wondering. I mean - I am just wondering what TCS would say about this family.


----------



## k'smami (Nov 20, 2001)

Love the pansies JW.


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

This article and the family were disussed on the TCS list back in December, for anyone subscribed there and wishes to read the discussion, access the archives. www.TCS.ac for info on the list and philosophy.

The family sounds laissez-faire and neglectful, to me. Need I say, not TCS.


----------



## Iguanavere (Nov 26, 2001)

Thanks Larsy,

I went to the list and I don't have the time right now to subscribe,b ut I may do so in the near future - plugged duct....

Anyway, I see what you mean but that is also a criticism of TCS - that it appears neglectful and laissez-faire.

When reading the article - despite the negative tone of the author, which I don't appreciate, the sense that I get is that Walker's parents were doing exactly what TCS subscribes - helping their child get what they want, without judgement of whether their wants are inappropriate or appropriate.

Now, truth be told, I am not sure that I have enough information about Mr. Walker or his parents to make a judgement. And I also believe that it is any persons right to support whatever cause they so choose to believe as long as it does not infringe on my personal freedoms.

But when the outcome is Sept. 11th - I wonder if showing disapproval and making limits on what you will support as parents is coercive.

For example, if my 16 year old child came home and decided that he wanted to shave his head because all of his neo-nazi friends were doing it - I would not allow it in my home.


----------



## k'smami (Nov 20, 2001)

What I don't see in this article or any that I've read on the subject, although it may be something that did happen, is that the parents shared their theories about all of these things with their son. They could have listened to him about all that he was exploring and listening to the music he brought home and shared their theories on the subjects. Or they could have seen all of this happen and took the trepidation they felt, buried it somewhere and said, "Well, ok..." and see Johnny follow the advice of others without his parents' input.

In my opinion I would have been helping my son criticize the ideas he was coming across, not just standing back while he followed somthing blindly (if that's what went on here). I have read Malcolm X (excellent book by the way) and I have listened to the hip hop CD's with the especially "nasty lyrics" and have criticized and thought about all of the ideas presented there with my friends and my husband- some of whom have an appreciation for this music and some who don't. My son will be exposed to these ideas because of the lifestyle I have chosen to lead and he will have access to all of the theories that I have regarding it. He will also have my opinions and theories regarding all matters.

And finally, although I do not support the attacks of Sept. 11th, I have come across many people who (how shall I put it?) are not surprised that they were perpetrated, many of them (if not all)who were not raised based on TCS. I don't think I want to hold a parent responsible if their adult son (He was over 18, was he not?) has an opinion that they would disagree with.


----------



## Netty (Dec 16, 2001)

I think that this article (and others like it) raise a very important issue. I know that these sorts of articles make me really think about parenting and helping children become "who they are". I think it is difficult to judge the situation based on the information we have on how John Walker Lindh was raised. It certainly seems non-coercive, but I'm not convinced it was TCS-style non-coercion.

Based on the article (and others I've read), it seems that Lindh's parents failed to share their theories with their son. They may have believed that any disagreement would be understood as coercive or unsupportive of their child's rights. In other words, they confused "support" with "agreement" (it seems that many in the mothering.com community sometimes do this as well







). The great poet William Blake wrote "no progression without conflict" and I think that idea is important here. Every progressive thought is created out of conflict. This returns us to the idea of learning as a process of conjucture and refutation. If one's theories are never refuted, one cannot hope to improve them. John Walker Lindh's parents may have failed their son because they feared conflict. They thought that saying "I disagree" would be the same as saying "I don't support you for who you are". But that is to make a very grave mistake. Any parent who "enables" a child to live in a world without conflict is denying that child the opportunity for growth.

This came up quite awhile ago on the TCS list because a poster had misunderstood TCS as an attempt to sheild children from the world and from direct experience with conflicting ideas. But *helping* children get what they want (i.e. to avoid remaining in a state of coercion) is not the same as helping children avoid conflict. Without conflict there is no learning. TCS is an educational philosophy based on the idea that all human beings learn through the process of conjecture and refutation (conflict). A parent who fails to share their conflicting theories (non-coercively: i.e. no judgement of the *child* but merely of the child's *ideas*) is not a TCS parent according to my understanding of TCS.

Netty

p.s. Wow JW! I'd be ashamed to show my paintings now. Your work is *incredible*! Thanks for sharing. And I loved the self-portrait. It's exactly how I pictured you and most likely how you picture me as we strive to slay the dragons of opposing thought







). Maybe I'll get the courage to share some poetry sometime but my skills in the visual arts pales--in fact I think it disappears--in relation to yours.


----------



## Jish (Dec 12, 2001)

Did everyone call a truce? I have never seen the TCS thread so far down the list.


----------



## Netty (Dec 16, 2001)

****When reading the article - despite the negative tone of the author, which I don't appreciate, the sense that I get is that Walker's parents were doing exactly what TCS subscribes - helping their child get what they want, without judgement of whether their wants are inappropriate or appropriate. ****

But TCS parents do offer their theories/judgments. Again, they judge the *theories* of the child but not the *child*.

****But when the outcome is Sept. 11th - I wonder if showing disapproval and making limits on what you will support as parents is coercive.****

I would definitely tell my child that I disapproved!!!!! And I would have shared that beforehand.

****For example, if my 16 year old child came home and decided that he wanted to shave his head because all of his neo-nazi friends were doing it - I would not allow it in my home.****

Well, that's a hard one. I would never tell my child what he could or could not do. I would share my theories with him. I would let him know where I stand and why. But I would still support his right to do what *he* thinks is right for him. And I don't think of our home as *mine*...It belongs to the entire family so he would be just as free to do what he wants in it as I am or any other member of the family is.

Netty


----------



## Jish (Dec 12, 2001)

Does TCS ever use the word "opinion?" I notice that everyone talks about sharing their "theories" with their children rather than their "opinions."


----------



## Raven (Dec 15, 2001)

Quote:

I would never tell my child what he could or could not do. I would share my theories with him. I would let him know where I stand and why. But I would still support his right to do what *he* thinks is right for him.
A part of me slightly agrees but the rest of me is just







: .

Aren't there times when a parent *needs* to assert their 'theory' or opinion? I mean, as parents we have been where our kids are...we know the pros and cons better than they do merely because we have already been there.

Quote:

****For example, if my 16 year old child came home and decided that he wanted to shave his head because all of his neo-nazi friends were doing it - I would not allow it in my home.****
I would ask myself what my son is lacking in his life in order for him to feel the desire to be part of such an extreme organisation. It is my humble belief that teenagers only join gangs/cults/groups, etc so that they can feel part of something. Their hormones are going wonky and in their minds they honestly believe that the entire world is watching them and judging them according to whats cool and whats not. I was 16 three yrs ago so I remeber quite clearly....

If my son wanted to join a neo-natzi regime I would seriosly assert my opinion that it was not a good idea. There are so many factors that will contribute to whether or not he will agree....
Do we have a strong bond of trust? Is he able to talk and share his emotions with me? Is he or the family going through a stressfull period?

It is very difficult to say, "I would do x, y or z" before actually having had the experience.


----------



## Wildflower (Nov 25, 2001)

Um, hi...I would really like a TCS perspective on something that I'm curious about, is it okay if I just ask my question here? I didn't have time right now to read all the posts unfer tjis thread, but I think I'm supposed to keep TCS-related stuff within this thread and not start another one, so here goes...larsy? netty? other TCS folks? I'd love to hear from you...

Suppose an infant below age 6 months quite naturally wants to touch grab yank taste gum suck every object (s)he can get hir hands/mouth on, especially stuff that hir parents frequntly have/show interest in, i.e. mugs of hot beverages, newspapers...

Supposes hir parents want to be TCS and therefore want to help the babe learn whatever it is babe seeks to learn through these explorations and therefore are trying to curtail their urge to move things that babe is reaching for out of babe's reach just because they are worried that babe will somehow manage to harm self with the thing...but also. parents want to be conscious that babe prefers not to hurt self and surely prefers that parents prevent babe from hurting self, ie by grabbing mug and spilling hot tea, by poking eye with utensil as she attempts with her still-developing powers of coordination to get it in her mouth...

see what i'm talking about? Parents struggling to negotiate how to keep baby from getting hurt while not coercively grabbing objects away or keeping out of reach stuff babe is obviously straining all hir little muscles to aquire...

Maybe parents could just keep totally clear of all questionable objects, drink lukewarm tea, don't use utensils whicj babe mightsee and want, but that's a lot of stuff since babe is worn in sling/carrier anf is right their with parent through all the parent's daily activitites...

sorry if this is confusing! thanks so much for any replies!


----------



## Nawny (Jan 1, 2002)

Hi Wildflower,

First of all, I don't think doing without utensils and hot drinks sounds very pleasant. TCS is definitely not about self-sacrifice, so you are right to ditch that idea. Instead, here are some thoughts that might help...

For dangerous utensils... Have spoons and forks with rounded tines available for baby to play with whenever s/he wants. Offer these alternatives when child reaches for sharper utensils. If child wants to explore sharper utensils, talk about what the dangers are, and try to find a safe way... Maybe show baby that the tines are sharp? Poke own finger and say "OW!" Or hold fork so that child can touch it but not stab anyone's eyes out.

For hot drinks... Say "HOT!!" with alarm and concern. Offer baby coffee mugs that are empty or have lukewarm water for exploring. Perhaps explore hot as a concept with child, using a lamp or a hot water bottle, or even a hot mug. I do NOT mean burn the baby or allow the baby to be burned. I mean help child safely approach a heat source with adult guidance, while saying "HOT" and pulling away when too close (in my experience, child will want to pull away even before adult). Or talk about hot and cold in the bath, and experiment with cups of very warm water and cups of very cold water.

Have lots of other fun things to touch, drink, and explore around. See if child would like a basket of "adult" things (spoons, mugs, spatulas, scrub brushes, maybe all in a big mixing bowl) to sit in front of and dump out. See if child wants access to more food, or just the tools, and provide that access.

None of these ideas are necessarily new or inventive, but they might help initiate brainstorming. I know I'm saying "talk about" a lot, and most six month old babies don't do a whole lot of talking, but in my experience they do understand a lot.

I hadn't heard of TCS when my child was six months old, so these are things I tried without any support. I'm curious if others have more, better ideas.

Edited to add: You might also want to try posting to the TCS Babies/Toddlers list. Sorry, I don't have the link, but I think you can find it at the TCS site.


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

jbcjmom wrote:

"Does TCS ever use the word "opinion?" I notice that everyone talks about sharing their "theories" with their children rather than their "opinions". "

Opinions are a part of one's theories. They are subjective, a product of each individual's experience in the world and the knowledge they have created so far, reflecting where a person stands on any particular issue at that particular time.

So, yes, I think TCS people talk about their opinions frequently. Theories are more than just opinion, but opinion is definately a part of one's theories. Both opinions and theories are possibly wrong; remembering fallibity.

Jest my opinion


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

Raven wrote:

"Aren't there times when a parent *needs* to assert their 'theory' or opinion? "

If you mean, to force a child to comply with what the parent thinks is the right thing to do but the child does not agree, then I think it would be a mistake to follow that course of action. It sets children and parents up as opponents and brings about a lot of bad feelings- resentment, anger, revenge. It sets kids up to rebel, where they might take action without good advice and information and support and get themselves into a tight spot without anyone to turn to for help.

But certainly, a parent and child who are willing to listen to each other will share their theories and opinions with respect and concern and love and all that, in seeking a common preference, engaging creativity and creating new knowledge for them all.

"I mean, as parents we have been where our kids are...we know the pros and cons better than they do merely because we have already been there. "

We have been in similar situations, at a different time in history, and as ourselves, not as them. They are different people than their parents are. They might have a different set of pros and cons, different priorities, different goals, in a different world than ours was when growing up. As parents, we can offer what we have learned from our experiences and what we think the consequences of a proposed course of action will be for our child now, but each person has to make their own choices in life.

Is there a better way than learning to make decisions based upon one's own best interests (and about how one's own best interests are intertwined with other people's best interests which is an important consideration but does not supercede one's own best interests, imo) with support and good advice and information from trusted sources?


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

Raven wrote:

"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
****For example, if my 16 year old child came home and decided that he wanted to shave his head because all of his neo-nazi friends were doing it - I would not allow it in my home.****
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would ask myself what my son is lacking in his life in order for him to feel the desire to be part of such an extreme organisation. It is my humble belief that teenagers only join gangs/cults/groups, etc so that they can feel part of something."

Yes, in such a situation, I think the parents and child would have a lot of theories to explore, hopefully together.

" Their hormones are going wonky and in their minds they honestly believe that the entire world is watching them and judging them according to whats cool and whats not. I was 16 three yrs ago so I remeber quite clearly.... "

I think it would be a mistake to label the problem 'it's just hormones'. Labeling and preconceived notions tend to short circuit creative problem solving, imo.

"If my son wanted to join a neo-natzi regime I would seriosly assert my opinion that it was not a good idea. There are so many factors that will contribute to whether or not he will agree....
Do we have a strong bond of trust? Is he able to talk and share his emotions with me? Is he or the family going through a stressfull period? "

Exactly! Lots to explore and problems to be defined and solved.

"It is very difficult to say, "I would do x, y or z" before actually having had the experience"

Well, sure, but one's worldview will determine how one goes about solving the problems presented in any particular situation. TCS theory helps us to explore the possibilities of solving problems non-coercively in the face of conflict. It's a way of life.


----------



## Ms. Mom (Nov 18, 2001)

Larcy, I agree with you about trying to find out what my son was lacking. I feel much like you, in that children seek acceptance and belonging. When they reach in directions that can be harmfull to them, I feel its because they arn't getting what they need. It's important to explore with them what's truly going on.

This topic would actually be great to discuss over in the Teenage Years.


----------



## Wildflower (Nov 25, 2001)

I've been making good use of all your suggestions, and its been working out really good, it feels much better in my heart and mind, and baby is happier as well. Thank you. Every time I help to guide instead of hurry to obstruct percieved danger, i feel more and more comfortable with the idea, and somehow more comfortable with myself as well.


----------



## Nawny (Jan 1, 2002)

Glad I could help!

You reminded me of some good advice I got from the TCS list which has helped me A LOT... Instead of panicking or saying "no" to an activity which appears dangerous, I now try to ask myself "how can I help my child do this safely?" It is amazing how this opens up my perceptions...


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

Ms. Mom wrote:

"Larcy, I agree with you about trying to find out what my son was lacking. I feel much like you, in that children seek acceptance and belonging. "

Yes, most importantly and primarily from their parents. If a kid has to look for the acceptance and belonging outside of their family, the family members will need to explore the problems in the family relationship, as painful as that process might be.

"When they reach in directions that can be harmfull to them, I feel its because they arn't getting what they need. It's important to explore with them what's truly going on. "

What they need might be no more than good information and advice from a trusted advisor or three. If parents find that they are not trusted advisors, there is no time like the present to begin to be one- though it might take a while and a lot of proof before a child will begin to trust them in this 'trusted advisor' capacity. Also, they might want to look around for others who the child does consider a trusted advisor and enlist their help in the process of working out the problems.


----------



## Bex (Jan 18, 2002)

Way back at the end of discussion #3, Just Wondering said:
"I have been on the main TCs list for some time now. I lurk in all sorts of places actually......I only stick my oar in though, where debate is welcomed."

Well, I've just recently seen plenty of people on the main TCS list doing stuff like...discussing advice that has been offered, opining as to whether the solutions offered as 'TCS' are truly 'non-coercive', etc....even seen people offer skepticism of the philosophy itself.

Sure looks like debate to me...

-B


----------



## Bex (Jan 18, 2002)

Nawny said:
"You reminded me of some good advice I got from the TCS list which has helped me A LOT... Instead of panicking or saying "no" to an activity which appears dangerous, I now try to ask myself "how can I help my child do this safely?" It is amazing how this opens up my perceptions..."

That's part of what I really respect about the TCS concept...that encouragement to think outside the 'mental ruts' we all can fall into...

-B


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

Apologies, laelsweet, that your post got lost in the thread!

laelsweet wrote:

"beautiful + poisonous
a parent and toddler go out for a walk and see some gorgeous red berries which the parent has been taught are poisonous (but is vague about just how toxic, if one must eat many to get sick, etc. and has never tasted them hirself) "

Oh! I remember wanting to pick those berries my whole childhood, and been warned off them, and to this day I too do not know the details, either, though I have an ureasonable fear of them!







They are terribly attractive, arent' they.

"toddler really wants these berries and this conflict degrades into a bit of a tussle in order to get berries out of very fast toddlers hands. given that there was little time to talk about different kinds of berries, and the make-you-ill faces and sounds parent was making were having little effect, "

Getting down on their level and talking to them might help? 'Do you want to get sick? I've been told that these berries make people sick.'

"parent needed to do some apologizing about grabbing and arguing. better ways to handle something like this?"

In general, in situations like this, a parent has to do some quick thinking about the risks and how to avoid them, while figuring out exactly what the child wants. We can be fairly certain that children do not want to hurt their selves, be it potential poisoning or being flattened by a motor vehicle or falling from a cliff etc. They might want to pick the berries in a make believe game of gathering food for their family; they might want to walk along a busy street or the edge of a cliff; how can a parent help their child get what they want out of the experience, without being hurt?

Possibly finding an alternative use for the gorgeous berries, if people eating them can get very sick, but birds can eat them to live... like, squishing them and drawing with the juice on the sidewalk or rocks, maybe using a stick or rocks to work the berries (like grinding grain between two rocks), or making piles of them for the birds to come and get, or throwing them on the ground with enough force to make them splat. Pretending to be gathering them to eat might be sufficient, maybe gather some to take home to feed to dolly at tea time. ( carrying some handywipes in a pocket can come in handy for these situations! for those with amazing foresight







)maybe stop at the store on the way and buy some edible berries.

If parent is not comfortable messing with the berries at all, not knowing if their information is good about the berries being poison, and their chosen course in the moment is to prevent interaction with the berries with apologies for the coercion involved, they might want to follow up with research to find out exactly what the risks are about those berries and share that info with their child at a receptive time- maybe a website with a picture of the berries, and pointing to the words that tell about the poison, and a visit to the local plant nursery with a picture of the plant or a sprig of it for identification and assessment of the danger. Maybe the sprig could be plucked from the bush and the walk continued to the local plant nursery, if nearby.

If the concept of poison has not been explored yet, parent could do so now. A dramatic dying scene might hold a toddler's attention and get the point across. If nothing else, the situation would draw the parent's attention to a subject that they can help their child learn about as soon as possible, at receptive times.

Hope this helps!


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

Iguanavere wrote:

"Anyway, I see what you mean but that is also a criticism of TCS - that it appears neglectful and laissez-faire. "

TCS is often confused with neglect and laissez-faire upon first examination of the philosophy. I think there is a clash between a coercive worldview- the assumptions about how things must be done without critical evaluation of the memes and expectations and societal structure that dictates those assumptions- and a non-coercive worldview. More thinking about it and in-depth analysis and continued criticism of TCS philosophy and one's own philosophy and theories takes a person beyond those initial perceptions, to the meat of the matter.

The neglect and laissez-faire, imo, is on the part of people who do not wish to question how and why things- in the case of TCS, parenting and education- are done. The powers that be in society prefer neglect and non-interference from the members of society, I expect; so, parents end up neglecting their children's- and their own- rights to individual autonomy. A basic human right, imo.


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

Iguanavere wrote:

"When reading the article - despite the negative tone of the author, which I don't appreciate, the sense that I get is that Walker's parents were doing exactly what TCS subscribes - helping their child get what they want, without judgement of whether their wants are inappropriate or appropriate. "

TCS parents *do* share their theories about what is appropriate and inappropriate! How could people find common preferences in the face of conflict, if that were not so?

"Now, truth be told, I am not sure that I have enough information about Mr. Walker or his parents to make a judgement. '

Agreed.

"And I also believe that it is any persons right to support whatever cause they so choose to believe as long as it does not infringe on my personal freedoms. "

We all live in such a massive web of interdependency that when people choose to believe in something that is harmful to the freedoms and rights of other people, it affects the whole web. Obviously, the morality of what is right and wrong to believe is difficult to know the truth of. In an imperfect world, we may never acheive such understanding. But we can make progress in the direction of truth and goodness, each in our own way. IMO.

"But when the outcome is Sept. 11th - I wonder if showing disapproval and making limits on what you will support as parents is coercive. "

It is absolutely the responsibility of parents to share their moral theories with their children, and to help them explore opposing theories and everything in between. This is a process that begins at birth and lasts...well, all life long, I suppose. Children are not bound to believe what their parents believe. They must make their own way.

I think that learning to solve problems non-coercively in life- learning about gathering information and engaging creativity and creating new knowledge through critical rationalism- are tools that will help to keep people from making mistakes like allowing others to think for them. Finding and listening to trusted advisors who are interested in truth-seeking can help a person to direct their own path through the maze of moral dilemmas in this world.

Beats the hell out of the indoctrination schools and camps that some societies use to control the thought of their populations. Have you seen the video footage of the children- all boys- writing their lessons and rocking and chanting? Beyond horrific. <shudder>


----------



## Jish (Dec 12, 2001)

Just bumping for anyone who might be looking.


----------



## simonee (Nov 21, 2001)

Hi everybody

First my apologies for just jumping in here. I have nothing to contribute to the theoretical discussion at this point, even though I read many of the posts with great interest. However, pretty soon I think I'll be able to articulate some of my questions about this (in my eyes) great approach to family living enough to make them known to the small world this thread represents.

Anyway, I'm looking for practical advice, and I'm mostly (or only? AYYYY intolerant me!!!) interested in the TCS perspective. My husband and I have one child, 2 1/2 years old, and our family interaction has naturally been pretty close to what TCS advocates -- only we didn't know the word until a few months ago. DD HATES fussing with her body, and who can blame her? Nevertheless, some problems seem to be developing.

For one thing, she's hated baths for almost 2 years now. From one day to the next, she went from sheer love to pure hate. She's explained to us that the water was too warm once, so that explains it. She refuses to use the bathtub, even with cold water in it, and even though she likes to float her duckies in the bubbles. Just as long as she can stay out. We've been giving her spongebaths, just once a week, so she doesn't get too cruddy. Every week is disaster. We also sponge her hair, which gets pretty gross, so once a week really is a minimum. Does anyone have suggestions as to how to make this a more pleasurable experience? We have a pool here for summer, but don't live near enough one to consider rinsing her regularly during the rest of the year. She's too smart to fall for trickery, and anyway we prefer not to manipulate.

Same story with combing her hair (we try daily but succeed about once every three days which is OK by me), and especially her teeth. Bad teeth run in the family, and she already has a minor case of bottle mouth. We insist on brushing twice a day, but she can't brush well enough by herself to clean them. WE average a time and a half daily, which is barely enough for my peace of mind. WE've tried mutual brushing, brushing the animals and dolls, explaining, playing dentist, looking at her "owie" and my fillings, but nothing seems to work. The best we do is a 10-count while she whines softly. And sometimes, nothing. Again, any suggestions?

It's probably clear that we end up coercing her. On the washing, and usually on the brushing. I don't want her to end up hating these things throughout her early childhood. Any suggestion, comments and the like will be greatly appreciated! Thanks.


----------



## Jish (Dec 12, 2001)

I have three suggestions for you.

First, about the bath. My son absolutely loves to take showers. We got one of those adaptable shower heads that brings it down to his level. They typically cost about 10 dollars give or take.

About the hair. Could you cut it shorter? Perhaps into a cute, short bob at ear lobe level. Johnson's No More Tears was what my grandma and mom used on me when I was little.

Finally, toothbrushing. I too think it is important to brush teeth. I have been told by my dentist that I have harsh saliva that makes my teeth prone to cavities if I am not careful. I have the silver to prove it. My 15 month ds is not a fan of toothbrushing, but I am hoping to keep him out of the dental chair so we are starting the brushing habit early. Dh and I got a Braun Oral B electric toothbrush for Christmas. I decided to try one of the heads out on ds. It is still not his favorite time of the day, but he is much more willing to let us brush his teeth now. I also feel like I can do a much better job in much less time that with a regular toothbrush.

Not necessarily a TCS answer per se, but they are things to consider.


----------



## Jish (Dec 12, 2001)

Now I have a question of my own. What do you do if you are in a place that has rules that your child doesn't want to follow?

I ask because we were at the Children's Museum tonight and my son kept wanting to take things from one area to the other. Things are supposed to stay in the correct rooms, and I was usually able to talk 15 month old ds into leaving the item, albiet, not always really willingly. I'm just curious what you do when you have to work around other people's rules, and your child's wish to break them.


----------



## Nawny (Jan 1, 2002)

Baths...

I thought the showering solution sounded good. Does the child have any ideas about how bathing could be made more palatable? Does the child want to get really, really dirty? (If so, it is her body, right? She should be able to see what it is like to be filthy if she wants to be filthy!) Or does the child want to be clean but hate bathing? How about the kitchen sink? Or going in to the tub clothed or in a bathing suit? If the child likes swimming pools, can the bathtub be set up to look like a pool? Maybe a little blue food coloring, a towel on the floor, heater on to make it toasty, a friend over to have a "swim." How about painting self and tub while it's empty, then adding water to wash everything clean? Or standing in the empty tub and pouring water over herself from bowls and buckets? I've heard about some desert folk cleaning themselves with sand, but I don't know how it is done or what it feels like... How about a sauna? This could maybe be simulated by making the bathroom really steamy with a hot shower (maybe one parent showering and the other facilitating the sauna if conserving water is an issue), and having a sink full of cold water to dip body parts in, then drying off with a nice clean towel.

Hair...

Does the child want dredlocks? Short hair? A different kind of comb or brush that is softer on the scalp? To comb/brush her own hair? To have her hair styled in front of the mirror with ribbons and ponytails? To look at a book or play on the computer or watch TV or build a block tower while the ends of her hair are gently combed?

Teeth...

I've heard that cheese, apples, and dark chocolate all inhibit bacteria (and dental decay). I've also heard that chewing sugar free gum can be a good way to clean teeth. Sticky, sweet foods I've been told to avoid... I don't know much more than that! You might try posting to smilemomma on the Dental board and see if she has any advice. Remember though, the teeth belong to the child. It is her mouth. I wouldn't want anyone forcing anything into my mouth against my will... You might also try the TCS Babies and Toddlers list... I've gotta get that info!

Good luck!


----------



## larsy (Nov 28, 2001)

Here is the address, for subscribing to TCSBabiesToddlers:

[email protected]

Seems to me, you just have to send a blank message.

Re: the 'child doesn't like to bath' scenario and the issue of a child's autonomy and control over what happens to hir body: I think it is important to think about the child's right to not bathe and not wash or comb hair. Not that I think it is preferable for a person to go through life without bathing or grooming thier self, but I think it is essential for each person to work out for their self when and what to do for their body.

We are so used to the idea that it is ok and even the responsibility of the parent to be sure that their small child has a bath/washes hair X amount of times a week (X being a varying amount, as their is no 'right' answer for everyone, it is an arbitrary number) Those of us who value autonomy and non-coercive parent-child relationships hold these values more important than what we perceive the society expects of a parent and child relationship- the predominate parenting memes.

Because small children are, well, small, we larger parents can force them into a tub and forcefully clean them up. We can hold them down, between two parents, and forcefully brush their teeth, 'for their own good', we tell ourselves and each other. When they get too big to be forcefully compelled to do these things, and refuse to do so, parents can then start abusing their power to take away 'privileges', to manipulate children into doing these things that parents (and society) wants them to do. Kids then need to go 'underground' and find sneaky ways to avoid doing the things they don't want to do, or aquiesce and wait until they are of legal age, and then they can rebel all they want, having formed some entrenched theories about cleaning their bodies and teeth along the way, perhaps to the point of avoiding doing it whether it is in their best interests to do so or not (irrational thinking)

It is not for their own good, that parents force these things upon their kids. To repeat these patterns of thinking from generation to generation, without examining the reasons and criticizing them and becoming convinced of what exactly is the best way to interact, parents and children, is to continue to go down a parenting road that is unsatisfactory for both parents and children, that pits them against each other, that rests upon authority ( I know better than you) rather than autonomy and reason. We are capable of doing better, IMO.


----------



## Icicle Spider (Dec 27, 2001)

Quote:

_Originally posted by jbcjmom_
*Now I have a question of my own. What do you do if you are in a place that has rules that your child doesn't want to follow?*
Depends on the situation. Ideally just avoid them.

Quote:

*I ask because we were at the Children's Museum tonight and my son kept wanting to take things from one area to the other. Things are supposed to stay in the correct rooms, and I was usually able to talk 15 month old ds into leaving the item, albiet, not always really willingly. I'm just curious what you do when you have to work around other people's rules, and your child's wish to break them.*
My experience with Children's Museum is that the staff is usually quite accommodating, particularly if they see that the parent is *actively* involved with helping their child explore the place, and not just letting them run wild on their own. I suspect that is it a nightly ritual for the staff to put everything back to the proper place. After all, it is a *children's* museum and there to serve your child.

Could it be that you are worrying too much about others expectations that you should be controlling your child?

Pat


----------



## Jish (Dec 12, 2001)

Pat,

I don't worry about whether others think I should be controlling my child, but I do think that for me to allow my child to take things from one area to another is disrespectful to others who have paid admission to enjoy the experience and cannot do so because things are in the wrong place. They have had to begin reminding parents and children over the loud speaker several times an hour to please clean up their messes before moving to a new area, because it was getting out of control and the place was becoming a mess. I felt really bad for the employees because things were everywhere. I get tired of having to clean up and reorganize things before my children can begin to play in a new area because the people before us were too lazy to clean up after themselves.

I wasn't referring simply to the children's museum though. What do you do if you are at a friend's house, or on a playdate with people who have "rules" so to speak? Do you choose not to go, even though you and your child might really enjoy yourself if there will be specific rules to be followed? Or do you explain the rules in advance to your child and give them the choice? What if they choose to go, but then fail to follow the rules once you get there? My 16 month old is probably the poster child for TCS. I am finding myself really having to look for different ways to deal with him. I am not necessarily looking for noncoersive ways to deal with him, but less coersive ways to deal with him on a day to day basis. You know me well enough to know that diving headfirst into TCS is not for me. I want to keep our boundries, of which there are few, but I want ds's to learn to follow rules set down not only by us, but by others (ex. the children's museum). I am looking for TCS ways to reduce coersion, even if it doesn't eliminate it. I guess you could say I am looking for the "TCS Cafeteria Plan," -- take what I like and leave the rest. Any suggestions on dealing with a strong willed toddler within the confines of rules and boundries???

Did you check out Sears? I'm curious what you think.


----------



## Mommiska (Jan 3, 2002)

I, too, am interested in hearing an answer to jbcjmom's question. It seems to me that it would be virtually impossible to ensure that you are never in a situation where there are rules (not your own) that MUST be followed. Do you just not take your children to the store with you ever?! To a friend's house ever?!

My poor dd would hate life if I never took her places because there was a chance I might have to 'coerce' her at some point while we were there. Her favourite place in the world is the library. And we are usually there until closing time. At which point we HAVE to leave. And I generally have to 'make' her leave (put her in the stroller and talk about something distracting). She's usually pretty easily distracted, but there are very few days we'd manage to leave without me in some way 'coercing' her. But we can't stay - they are closing (no matter how often dd tells me they aren't!). Should I not take her? She's 27 months and very verbal. I'm sure she would agree to leave at closing time prior to going, and then forget she'd agreed when leaving time came.

I must admit, as well, to being a bit bemused by the implication that perhaps a TCS parent would not insist on brushing their young child's teeth. Luckily, my toddler is quite cooperative about having her teeth brushed. But if she weren't, I would still insist. Bad teeth run in my family (my parents both have mouths full of fillings). So if I don't brush her teeth (and I do avoid sweets and sticky things), and she gets cavitities, what to do? If she really objects to having her teeth brushed, is she going to cooperate with going to a dentist to have a cavity taken care of? So I don't force the dentist thing, and the cavity gets worse and she is in intense pain with an abscess of some such....but I still don't force the dentist thing?

Where do you stop?

Or course, I might decide not to insist on teeth brushing and get lucky - she doesn't get any cavities. But that is not a given by a long shot, and it seems to me that, as the adult, there are times when my dd is unable to forsee that if she gets her way now, there are potentially VERY negative consequences in the future. I feel I would be a neglectful parent if I didn't try to prevent those consequences that she is unable to forsee for herself.

How do TCS parents feel about this? I think my dh and I parent in a pretty non-coercive way. And I like this thread, as there are often some great ideas in it for helping your child to explore safely, etc. But...


----------



## Icicle Spider (Dec 27, 2001)

I admit I have not read Dr. Sears with regards to discipline. I did check out the AskDrSears.com website though and took a pretty quick look at his Discipline Index.

The biggest issue I have with at least the way the material is presented there is that the overriding goal are ways to get the child to do what the parent thinks is best, as directly opposed to helping the child to do what they think is best. It is just all so manipulative and I find it to be down right disrespectful of the child as a complete, rational person.

Is this what we do with our own partners, come up with "techniques" to get them to do what we think best? I know I do not, if my partner does not really *want* to do something, I certainly do not want them to either.

This is a big part of the shift in world view that TCS has been for me. The shift from me figuring out how to get my children to do what I think is best, to helping my child do what *they* think is best (also known as what they want). The shift to realizing that children are complete, fully rational human beings. (And please do not misinterpreted this as meaning complete "adults".)

I just come across an interesting group call the Center for Nonviolent Communication and they have a fairly TCS sounding philosophy towards children. One of the exercises they do in parenting workshops is divide the group in half. Both groups were given the same hypothetical conflict to solve between two people and to come up with a dialogue on how to solve the problem. In one group they were told the conflict was between an adult and their neighbor and the other group is told the conflict is between a parent and a child. When the two groups are reunited and compare the respect and compassion of the two dialogues, the one between the adult and the neighbor has WAY more respect and compassion in it. This link is a introduction to their book called "Raising Children Compassionately: Parenting the Nonviolent Communication Way". I also really like his objection to labeling children, "children", at least in regards to what the term "children" means in this day and age.

Pat


----------



## Icicle Spider (Dec 27, 2001)

During my foray into TCS I discovered that there is really no such thing as The TCS Cafeteria Plan. You are either TCS or you are not. You can not be partly TCS any more then you can be partly pregnant. You either condone Coercing or you do not. You either always strive to help your child get what they want or you don't.

And the reason for this is the Doctor/Patient analogy I have used in the past, which I'll repeat for anybody new here.

The kind of doctor that I want is a doctor who is my trusted advisor. They have more knowledge than I in the area of their expertise, but I have more knowledge about myself. I want a doctor that will inform me about my condition to the best of their knowledge and then let me decide. If my decision is counter to the doctor's advice, I might or I might not want to share my additional knowledge about myself with them to see if common preference can be found. It is not only my decision about what to do about my condition, it is also my decision to decide how much about myself I want to share with the doctor.

Imagine having to use a doctor that *in certain cases* will force a medical procedure upon you no matter what your decision is. Of course, they only do this under certain "non-negotiables", what *they* perceive is clearly a life threatening situation. They will force this procedure upon you, even if you decide to share with them all of your knowledge about yourself in an attempt to explain your line of reasoning.

Now image that this doctor gives you advice about some minor condition and since this situation is clearly non-life threatening, they "allow" you to make the final decision. I would be suspect of *everything* they tell me and more often than not disregard the information they are providing me.

Now, if I was a toddler and I knew darn well that there were times when my most trusted advisor was not always doing their best to help me get what I want, that there were times that they were doing their best to help be get what *they* want me to do, then I would strongly question *everything* they tell me. And toddlers are INCREDIBLY SMART, they *know* when something really is a true consequence and when something is really a road-block being created by what was their most trusted advisor.

So situations like the Children's Museum you describe really do becomes *easier* with TCS once they realize that the information you provide is accurate to the best of your knowledge and that you really are always trying to help them get what they want. Any many TCS suggestions simply do not work for non-TCS families because the complete trust that the parent is *ALWAYS* trying to help the child get what they want is not there.

Pat


----------



## Icicle Spider (Dec 27, 2001)

While TCS is about the elimination of Coercion within the Parent/Child relationship, it does not follow that it is also about the avoidance of any and all Coercion in a child's life. TCS is about how to help the child navigate and deal with Coercion that will present itself quite naturally. TCS readily acknowledges that Coercion exists in today's society, but that doesn't mean that it needs to be a part of the relationships we have with the other members of our immediate family. I know that my if dp was purposely Coercing me by any means our relationship would be in terrible shape. The parent/child relationship is no different! It is my opinion that what a "strong-willed" child is, is those children that understand at a deep level that they are being subtly Coerced. They realize that "one thing does not mean another", to quote a very strong-willed child I know. They are frustrated that what they clearly perceive as the truth is being thwarted by their most trusted advisor, and they are right!

So, in other environments where there are "rules", I try to help my children understand and negotiate those rules to the best of my ability and to help them get what they want. Carolyn's library scenario is a good one. Carolyn stated "But we can't stay - they are closing (no matter how often dd tells me they aren't!)". I agree with dd, they aren't, at least it sure doesn't look like it.

Some TCS ideas in this situation is to find a librarian and ask them when the last possible moment is that you can stay. If needed, ask if you can stay five minutes later, explaining exactly what you want to do. Once the library really is empty of everybody else, maybe dd will understand that the library really is closed. But if not, in the end, let the librarian kick you out and be the Coercer, not you! That way, at the end of the day, your child really knows that you are on their side and that you tried everything you could to help them get what they want. And they learned that there really are "boundaries" out there in the real world that they need to learn about and that the information you are providing them about those boundaries is factually accurate.

Pat


----------



## simonee (Nov 21, 2001)

Thank you all for your responses to my "toddler hygiene" question. Nawny, you presented some bathing ideas that we hadn't thought of yet, and that look like they might really be fun rather than just a trick. Beth, thanks for posting, but we'd already tried these options.

By the way, I think I created a misunderstanding by saying that we coerce DD. We do, but not (like larsy suggests) by holding her and forcing a toothbrush in her mouth. I wouldn't force anything in her mouth unless she had a bee in her throat or something. WE coerce by discussing it, and then saying: OK, no playing/snacking now until your teeth are brushed. No going out until after wishywashy. Sometimes it takes 2 hours or longer to get moving, but that's okay. Half of the protests are for the sake of rebellion, the other half because she doesn't like whatever the problem.

I don't think I'm quite at the point where I can usually let go of my own coerced background. The idea that I know what's good for my child. I'm aware that the idea is b***s***, but I can't quite push it out. I'm okay with pretty dirty, but not dirty to the point of crusty. And teeth are largely nonnegotiable with me. I'm in the middle of a long and painful dental career, and so far my observations combined with my daughter's ideas about her own dental hygiene preferences diverge enough that I see some pain coming her way. And I simply don't want that, and wouldn't forgive myself if I felt I contributed. And by letting her choose more now, and by not verbally coercing her, that's what would likely happen.

Ok snackytime now. Need two hands b/c big kid


----------



## laelsweet (Dec 6, 2001)

icicle spider, you might check out the most recent mothering mag for an article on the center for nonviolent communication. i would be interested in talking about how the ideas they have converge with taking children seriously. i seem to remember some differences- i'll go back and take a look.

i could really use more ideas about toothbrushing. airplane toothbrushes, brushing little bugs off, animals off, watch parents brushing and brush along with, you brush me and i'll brush you, playing with water and toothbrushes in a highchair (this is a hit but teeth don't really get brushed). i have a friend who wiped, brushed, the whole painstaking deal from very early on, and the child got a mouthful of cavities nonetheless, at less than two. o u c h. so i understand the fears and how hard it is not to coerce around this. i've found that i would actually have to force the issue physically if i really wanted to brush, and i don't do that. (i have had issues with nails, and nibbling them against a small person's will. yes, i'm working on it. i seem to fixate on long nails! now i'm not allowed even to gaze too long in the toenails direction! i don't want to make the same mistakes with toothbrushing. to make up for it, i apologized and am currently practicing, "see that long nail? can you put your toe in my mouth? okay, can you let me hold it just a little so i can nibble it shorter?" :0 )

larsy - thanks for the ideas for poisonous berry-grabbing people


----------



## simonee (Nov 21, 2001)

o yeah nails....
I still cut them during sleep. I guess it's not coercion, but who thinks it's a violation of physical integrity? I do in a way, but ooohhh it's soooo much easier than going the argument...


----------

