# "Quirky Discipline Rules That Work" article on CNN.com - Wow



## scoobysgirl03 (Feb 17, 2007)

I found this article on CNN.com. I am amazed at some of the suggestions, but it's the author's tone that bother's me the most. Does she even like her kids? It made me sad.









link to article: http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/paren...ine/index.html

Article Excerpt:

By Barbara Rowley
Parenting.com

I've made a lot of bad rules in the decade I've been a mom, from irrational threats ("No graham crackers in the house ever again if you eat them in the living room even one more time") to forbidding human nature ("You may not fight with your sister"). But occasionally I've come up with rules that work better than I'd ever contemplated. These made-up rules have an internal logic that defies easy categorization, but their clarity and enforceability make them work. Several of them are not, technically, rules at all, but declarations of policy or fact. And they're all easy to remember. A few personal favorites, plus those of other moms:

*You can't be in the room when I'm working unless you work, too*

Goal: Get your child to help, or stop bugging you, while you do chores

It might seem odd, but I don't mind doing laundry, cleaning floors, or really any kind of housework. But I do mind my kids, oblivious to the fact that my arms are full of their underwear, asking me to find their missing doll shoe or do a puzzle with them. Until recently, this was a source of great frustration, especially when our household grew to five kids when my husband, Taylor, and I became temporary foster parents for two months. I tried to explain to my expanded brood that if they helped me fold laundry, we could do something together sooner. But they knew I'd be available anyway if I finished folding myself, so the argument wasn't compelling. And then one day, as my oldest foster daughter sat and watched me work, asking me favors and waiting for me to be done, I came up with a rule that takes into account two important facts about kids:

• They actually want to be with you as much as possible.

• You can't force them to help you in any way that is truly helpful.

I played fact one against fact two and told her that she didn't have to help me but couldn't just sit and watch. She had to go elsewhere. Given a choice between being with me and folding laundry or not being with me at all, she took option one. (Parenting.com: You can't always be evenhanded )

Why it works: I didn't care which she chose. And it was her choice, so it gave her control even as it took it away.

*I don't work past 8 p.m.*

Goal: Regular bedtimes and time off for you

You can't just announce a rule to your husband and kids that says, "Bedtime has to go really smoothly so I can get a break at the end of the day." It won't happen. But if you flip the problem and make a rule about you instead of telling everyone what they have to do, it all falls neatly -- and miraculously -- into place. When this occurred to me, back when my oldest was 6 and my youngest was nearly 2, I announced to Anna and Taylor that the U.S. Department of Labor had just created a new rule and I was no longer allowed to do any kind of mom jobs past 8 in the evening. I would gladly read books, play games, listen to stories of everyone's day, give baths -- the whole mother package -- before then. Then I held firm -- I acted as if it were out of my hands. Sort of like Cinderella and midnight. Suddenly, my 6-year-old (and my husband) developed a new consciousness of time. My daughter actually rushed to get ready for bed just after dinner so that we could have lots of books and time together before I was "off." My husband, realizing that if things dragged past 8 he'd have to face putting both girls to sleep himself, became more helpful. Anna's now 11, and my hours have been extended, but the idea that I'm not endlessly available has been preserved and integrated into our family routine.

Why it works: You're not telling anyone else what to do. The rule is for you, so you have only yourself to blame if it's not enforced. (Parenting.com: TLC for you )

*You get what you get, and you don't throw a fit*

Goal: No more haggling -- over which pretzel has more salt or who gets their milk in the prized red cup and who in the cursed green, or which cast member of "Blue's Clues" adorns whose paper plate

My friend Joyce, director of our town's preschool, told us about this terrific rule, now repeated by everyone I know on playgrounds and at home. Not only does it have a boppy rhythm that makes it fun to say, but it does good old "Life isn't fair" one better by spelling out both the essential truth of life's arbitrary inequities and the only acceptable response to the world's unfairness: You don't throw a fit. When I first heard this, I was skeptical. It seemed too simple. But to my utter surprise, not only did it do the trick but kids seemed to rally around it almost with relief. They must have seen that if it applied to them today it might apply to someone else tomorrow.

Why it works: It's irrefutable -- it almost has the ring of runic or prehistoric truth to it -- and rather than focusing on an abstract notion like "fairness," it speaks directly to the situation at hand.

*Take that show on the road*

Goal: Peace and quiet.

Is it just me or does someone saying "one-strawberry, two-strawberry, three-strawberry" over and over in a squeaky voice make you want to smash some strawberries into a pulpy mess? I want my kids to be gleefully noisy when they need and want to be. But I don't feel it's necessary that I be their audience/victim past a few minutes or so, or that I should have to talk (shout?) over their, um, joyous clamor when I'm on the phone. So once I've shown attention adequate to their display, I tell them that they're free to sing, bang, chant, or caterwaul to their hearts' content, just not here. The same goes for whining, tantrums, and generic pouting. For the irrational and long-winded whining jags sometimes used by her 4-year-old son, my friend Denise has turned this rule to a pithy declaration: "I'm ready to listen when you're ready to talk." She then leaves the room.

Why it works: It gives children a choice rather than a prohibition and does so without rejecting them.


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

I just read the excerpt, but it didn't sound so bad to me! I don't particularly like the take your show on the road, but I could see myself using some modification of those as my kids get older.

Am I evil?


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *natensarah* 
I just read the excerpt, but it didn't sound so bad to me! I don't particularly like the take your show on the road, but I could see myself using some modification of those as my kids get older.

Am I evil?

If you are evil, I am evil-er!
















I use a form of almost ALL of these!

I particularly use the "if I am working in here you have to be also, if you want to stay with me"

Oh, and the "I don't work after 8:00 rule"? Well my kids are older, so it's 10:00. And there are execeptions in the event of illness or nightmares, but that it soooooooo the rule in my house!

I find that they keep me sane, and my family as a whole happy! Oh, and yes I like my kids!


----------



## rmzbm (Jul 8, 2005)

I think it's pretty dumb myself. But then - I don't have ANY rules...besides basic health & safety ones.


----------



## FiddleMama (Feb 27, 2007)

I agree that the overall tone seems as though the author is a bit burnt out on being around her kids, which I'm guessing most of us can relate to from time to time.

Taking each of her "rules" seperately though, here's what I glean from them:

*1. You can't be in the room when I'm working unless you work, too*
There's something to be said for kids who appreciate the companionship of being near a parent without having to be "entertained" all the time. My 17 mo, for example, loves to fold laundry (i.e. pull it out of the baskets and carry it around the room) while I'm folding laundry.

*2. I don't work past 8 p.m.*
Good rule!

*3. You get what you get, and you don't throw a fit*
This rule isn't appropriate until the preschool years or so but it can be actually quite magical with 3 and 4 year olds. I used to teach preschool and the director of the school said this often in a playful way and the kids really responded in a positive way to it. It's a beginning form of learning acceptance and I think it's okay if it's used playfully and respectfully.

*4. Take that show on the road*
To me, this one just sounds like "Go away" and I have a hard time imagining when it might be appropriate. But my kid doesn't talk much yet so it might become clear to me soon enough.









Thanks for posting that! It was interesting to think about those rules.


----------



## Spanish Rose (Jan 29, 2007)

I don't like the tone of the article, but the individual rules are great, as long as they don't throw more fuel on a powerstruggle. Granted, the no-fit rule will just lead to more frustration with tots, but once they get to three or so, it may work.

Rule number one in particular is great. I think all of the rules would be very helpful for a frazzled mommy who just needs some space/order/time to think, you know? it looks as though they could prevent a lot of problems.


----------



## scoobysgirl03 (Feb 17, 2007)

I just can't imagine telling my child that they can't be with me unless they, too, are working. I don't want spending time with me to be a reward.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *scoobysgirl03* 
I just can't imagine telling my child that they can't be with me unless they, too, are working. I don't want spending time with me to be a reward.

Oh, no, no no. Read it again!

It's NOT "you can't spend time with me unless you are working.'

It's *IF* I am working right now, THEN you can't be here unless you are working too.

It's not a "reward' it's simply a statement that if I am working I deserve either 1)help or at least 2) to be left alone to do my work.

There are PLEANTY of times when I can devote myself to you to play etc.... or we can hang out together. NO strings or reward involved.

But when I have to work you have a choice. YOu can work with me, or you can go and do something else. It's not about a "reward" for doing work. It simply something that allows me to get the work done without constant interuptions.

This is VERY reasonable IMO.


----------



## NaomiMcC (Mar 22, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *natensarah* 
I just read the excerpt, but it didn't sound so bad to me! I don't particularly like the take your show on the road, but I could see myself using some modification of those as my kids get older.

Am I evil?

If you are...then I am too...I think some of these rules are great! While children are wonderful and a blessing...there's not your whole entire life. There needs to be adult time too and I think some of these would work to that. I love the "off at 8 p.m." rule


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

Oh Thank God they don't have to revoke my GA credentials for thinking some of these don't sound too bad. Thanks for having the guts to say it mothers!

I agree with the points about the tone though, but that's probably what sells her work and generates a paycheck for her.


----------



## scoobysgirl03 (Feb 17, 2007)

I read it as "you cannot be in the same room as me/spend time with me unless you are working." Personally, I just wouldn't do it.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *scoobysgirl03* 
I read it as "you cannot be in the same room as me/spend time with me unless you are working." Personally, I just wouldn't do it.

It's simply not what it says. It makes clear that it is ONLY when she needs to do work around the house.

She specifically says they are going to get to be with her when she is done with the chores.

Frankly, I think its a supurb rule!


----------



## GinaRae (Mar 27, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FiddleMama* 
*3. You get what you get, and you don't throw a fit*
This rule isn't appropriate until the preschool years or so but it can be actually quite magical with 3 and 4 year olds. I used to teach preschool and the director of the school said this often in a playful way and the kids really responded in a positive way to it. It's a beginning form of learning acceptance and I think it's okay if it's used playfully and respectfully.


This has been a LIFE SAVER!! They know they're allowed to ask for something (respectfully) and they know if we say no, they don't throw a fit, whine, scream, etc... They just accept it. This makes life in public and at home so much less aggravating when you have more than 1 child.

I can only imagine what life would be like if they were all asking, whining, begging and cajoling us into things at home or at the store. Keeping track of three busy boys lost in their own worlds is tough enough!

Once in a while (like today) one of them begins whining in the store and I can easily ask gfor quiet a moment and ask them if they've EVER gotten something from throwing a fit. They answer no. I ask if today's different. They answer no.

They might give me the stink eye or want the last word, but usually the fit is instantly over then and everything's a lot less stressful. My oldest has a mood disorder and things can errupt quickly, but with a solid, consistent foundation under him and experiences with parents who stand solid on everything, I am usually able to reign him in quickly and quietly.


----------



## Spanish Rose (Jan 29, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GinaRae* 
This has been a LIFE SAVER!! They know they're allowed to ask for something (respectfully) and they know if we say no, they don't throw a fit, whine, scream, etc... They just accept it. This makes life in public and at home so much less aggravating when you have more than 1 child.

I can only imagine what life would be like if they were all asking, whining, begging and cajoling us into things at home or at the store. Keeping track of three busy boys lost in their own worlds is tough enough!

Once in a while (like today) one of them begins whining in the store and I can easily ask gfor quiet a moment and ask them if they've EVER gotten something from throwing a fit. They answer no. I ask if today's different. They answer no.

They might give me the stink eye or want the last word, but usually the fit is instantly over then and everything's a lot less stressful. My oldest has a mood disorder and things can errupt quickly, but with a solid, consistent foundation under him and experiences with parents who stand solid on everything, I am usually able to reign him in quickly and quietly.

But how do you enforce it?


----------



## scoobysgirl03 (Feb 17, 2007)

I work FT and don't get to spend as much time with my DC as I would like. So my time with them is precious to me - whether I'm doing chores or otherwise. There are very few situations in which I would tell them they cannot be in the same room with me....and the fact that they do not want to participate in a chore is not one of them. A fine rule for others - just not for me!


----------



## mamalisa (Sep 24, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *scoobysgirl03* 
I just can't imagine telling my child that they can't be with me unless they, too, are working. I don't want spending time with me to be a reward.

I read it more as "I'm not going to stop mopping the floor to fix your Barbie, put together your lego spaceship, make a little man out of playdough, so if you want to hang out here, grap a rag, otherwise let me get this done so we can do whatever we want". I use this all the time in the kitchen. Ds loves to hang out and chat, but really, he just gets in the way. If he's doing something productive (in a 6 year old way) he's learning something, helping and we can chat at the same time.


----------



## eightyferrettoes (May 22, 2005)

Those sound generally reasonable to me-- the bit about working is just a variation of my own mom's well-worn, "you can either help me out, or leave me alone" refrain.

And the bit about Mom not working past a certain hour is really a brilliant way to frame the bedtime issue, imho.

I think we DO tend to put ourselves out there as endlessly on-call, but that's a sure road to hard-core burnout and depression, in my book.


----------



## ThreeBeans (Dec 2, 2006)

I think these rules are great personally.

Gentle discipline goes both ways. It is perfectly ok for parents to say, "I have a limit and I need you to treat me gently and respectfully, too, the same way I do you." (Of course for older kids who understand)

DS early intervention playgroup leader uses a few of these with her (older) kids and from what I see they have a very gentle, loving and AP relationship.


----------



## GinaRae (Mar 27, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Spanish Rose* 
But how do you enforce it?

(Re: You get what you get, and you don't throw a fit)

GOOD question! It helps when the child is old enough to grasp the concept and have self control. Really, you can try this fairly early on and just be patient, but not expect the world. It's sort of a primer. Preschool age seems to be the key.

It was pretty darn easy. Because we're attached parents with attached kids, it seemed to be easier than some might find.

Calm and consistent is key. You explain the concept as best you can and then just remain calm and consistent when putting it to use. Eventually they stop whining, screaming, throwing a fit because you're not giving in, and as parents you are a united front. You're calm, even smiling or giggling as they're having a fit, and it reassures them that they can STOP the fit and you will still open your arms to them.

I think sometimes once a fit has started, a child is afraid to stop because attention will stop or they will get repurcussions. Once the fit stops, you can say positive things to them.

It really just gets easy if YOU can be the consistent one. If you never back down. And that's hard too because sometimes you say no and then re-think it and WANT to say yes, but are afraid to undo what you've built.

In that case, my kids are old enough that I can explain to them that I was thinking about my decision and have changed my mind. They're usually just really grateful but don't expect it all the time.

Also, they need to be surprised and appreciated and they need to have those moments when they think their parents couldn't possibly be cooler than they are at that moment. You need a lot of fun at other times, in other words. The kids are generally so much more light hearted and less stressed then, you know?

I can only imagine there are a few kids that this wouldn't work so easily on. I don't know, because mine, as different as they are, were pretty easy. But they still test me! Expect that too. That's natural


----------



## onemoremom (Jun 8, 2007)

I'm glad I'm not the only one who likes these rules.


----------



## Mamma Mia (Aug 3, 2005)

"You get what you get and you don't get upset" is the bane of my existence.

Somehow, my dd learned it in the few weeks she was in preschool. She claims that's all she learned at school.







But seriously, way to re-enforce to me that I wanted to homeschool all along.

The other ones are not so bad. This particular one is horrid, IMO. Kids have these well developed senses of injustice peole are always trying to quash. Instead of shutting down emotional responses to what's not fair, how about give your child the emotional tools to process the hurt and upset and talk about it?


----------



## ThreeBeans (Dec 2, 2006)

I see a difference between "you don't get upset" and "you don't throw a fit".


----------



## Mamma Mia (Aug 3, 2005)

Whatever. It's a rhyme that is dismissive of kids' feelings. I just wish we could be more grown up ourselves about such things.


----------



## ThreeBeans (Dec 2, 2006)

I guess I don't agree


----------



## Spanish Rose (Jan 29, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *GinaRae* 
(Re: You get what you get, and you don't throw a fit)

GOOD question! It helps when the child is old enough to grasp the concept and have self control. Really, you can try this fairly early on and just be patient, but not expect the world. It's sort of a primer. Preschool age seems to be the key.

It was pretty darn easy. Because we're attached parents with attached kids, it seemed to be easier than some might find.

Calm and consistent is key. You explain the concept as best you can and then just remain calm and consistent when putting it to use. Eventually they stop whining, screaming, throwing a fit because you're not giving in, and as parents you are a united front. You're calm, even smiling or giggling as they're having a fit, and it reassures them that they can STOP the fit and you will still open your arms to them.

I think sometimes once a fit has started, a child is afraid to stop because attention will stop or they will get repurcussions. Once the fit stops, you can say positive things to them.

It really just gets easy if YOU can be the consistent one. If you never back down. And that's hard too because sometimes you say no and then re-think it and WANT to say yes, but are afraid to undo what you've built.

In that case, my kids are old enough that I can explain to them that I was thinking about my decision and have changed my mind. They're usually just really grateful but don't expect it all the time.

Also, they need to be surprised and appreciated and they need to have those moments when they think their parents couldn't possibly be cooler than they are at that moment. You need a lot of fun at other times, in other words. The kids are generally so much more light hearted and less stressed then, you know?

I can only imagine there are a few kids that this wouldn't work so easily on. I don't know, because mine, as different as they are, were pretty easy. But they still test me! Expect that too. That's natural










Well, that makes sense. The rule gave the impression that, as soon as you said it, they would stop screeming. Which is very much not the case with my son-- we work so hard to get him to _just use his words_ that any attempts to silence him will erase a month of work. Still, for some kiddos that sounds like a sensible route-- there are some kids who escalate when you reflect feelings, maybe this would work for them.

Of course, I don't see tantrums as manipulative, so I've never felt the need to point out that they won't work.









Still, the approach seems valid...especially with older kids, who already are secure in their attachments and their abilities to communicate feelings. I think I get it!


----------



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mamma Mia* 
"You get what you get and you don't get upset" is the bane of my existence.

Somehow, my dd learned it in the few weeks she was in preschool. She claims that's all she learned at school.







But seriously, way to re-enforce to me that I wanted to homeschool all along.

The other ones are not so bad. This particular one is horrid, IMO. Kids have these well developed senses of injustice peole are always trying to quash. Instead of shutting down emotional responses to what's not fair, how about give your child the emotional tools to process the hurt and upset and talk about it?

We used "You get what you get and you don't throw a fit" when I was student teaching in a kindergarten class, and it worked great! It was always said in a really lighthearted way, and the kids responded positively to it and learned that every little moment that varies from "perfect" in some way doesn't necessarily need to have a big dramatic response. A classroom is a cooperative environment -- things aren't going to go exactly the way *each child* wants them to at all times, and I think it's great if kids can learn to brush off the small stuff, and to differentiate the small stuff from the big stuff.

We didn't use it in some cold-hearted way; we would never say it if a kid came to us with a true problem or need, but if we were passing out popsicles, we weren't going to sit there for 15 minutes while each kid dug through the boxes to get the particular color they wanted -- they lined up, we passed them out in whatever order we got them out of the box, and that was that.


----------



## bdavis337 (Jan 7, 2005)

Don't throw a fit. This is more appropriate for "older" young ones, like my 6 year old who KNOWS darn well the juice tastes exactly the same in the glass as it does in the Spiderman Crazy Straw Cup that's filthy dirty with crusty milk on it under the table from last night. I think it's about age-appropriateness in some ways.

I also refuse, and I mean REFUSE, to listen to my 6 year old complain that he can't brush his teeth downstairs instead of upstairs when his father has "occupied" said downstairs bathroom and cannot be moved. I will not extend bedtime, fake empathy or even let him stand in front of me and pout. Everything is the same up as it is down. IDENTICAL. He can pout in the bathroom while he brushes his teeth, but not in front of me. It's amazing, but when I installed this little rule about a year ago, his whiny talk decreased dramatically.


----------



## Mamma Mia (Aug 3, 2005)

I still think that talking about why it makes them upset and acknowledging that it sucks (if it can't be changed) and modeling good disappointed talking behavior is better than brushing it off with a catchy little dismissive rhyme.


----------



## myjulybabes (Jun 24, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mamma Mia* 
I still think that talking about why it makes them upset and acknowledging that it sucks (if it can't be changed) and modeling good disappointed talking behavior is better than brushing it off with a catchy little dismissive rhyme.

I mostly agree, but I think that's why "you don't throw a fit" is different than "you don't get upset". It's perfectly fine to feel disappointed that you didn't get the cup you wanted. Kicking and screaming about it...not so much. Well, once they're old enough to understand that there are other ways to express feelings, of course, which is why I think most people are saying this works better for older kids.

We totally do the "Take the show on the road" thing. Dd's favorite game is to "teach the class". She talks (and talks and talks) to a group of imaginary students, and seriously does NOT welcome input from us. So that can happen in her room, especially when I have a headache.









Oddly, the one I don't like is "I don't work after 8". Which is silly, because I'm a huge proponent of bedtimes, my kids have them, we enforce them, even in the summer (bedtime is a little later, but there's still bedtime!). But the wording rubs me wrong somehow on this one. Maybe I'm just weird.


----------



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mamma Mia* 
I still think that talking about why it makes them upset and acknowledging that it sucks (if it can't be changed) and modeling good disappointed talking behavior is better than brushing it off with a catchy little dismissive rhyme.

Maybe ... with one kid, and not a whole class like in my example above.

But ... I don't know, some things (like the color of a popsicle) really *aren't* a big deal. I know that to a kid it can be a big deal, but I think that if an adult enables a kid's fit by having a big emotional discussion over every little thing, it reinforces to the kid that that kind of stuff really *must* be hugely important and something to flip out over.

I agree with teaching them and modelling for them how to express their disappointment in an appropriate manner; maybe the "you get what you get" thing is more fitting for older kids who have been taught that basic stuff and just need a little reminder.

It's fine if the wording bothers you -- I've been bothered by phrases that other people didn't find offensive before. But I think the intended sentiment really isn't "Get over it, kid," but something much more playful and gentle (at least the way I've seen it used).


----------



## woobysma (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bdavis337* 
I also refuse, and I mean REFUSE, to listen to my 6 year old complain that he can't brush his teeth downstairs instead of upstairs when his father has "occupied" said downstairs bathroom and cannot be moved. I will not extend bedtime, fake empathy or even let him stand in front of me and pout. Everything is the same up as it is down. IDENTICAL. He can pout in the bathroom while he brushes his teeth, but not in front of me. It's amazing, but when I installed this little rule about a year ago, his whiny talk decreased dramatically.

Exactly! I liked the rules, but this one "you get what you get...." is definitely an age-dependant thing, My 2 yo doesn't understand that the bathrooms/cups/popscicle colors are no big deal & frankly, it takes way more time to discuss it with him than it does to just go with his little 2 yo flow. My 9yo, on the other hand....... this rule could totally apply to him and be perfectly understood.

Also, I think this rule applies more to things that aren't really a matter of fairness, but a matter of preference. It's *unfair* if DS1 gets bread and water for dinner while DS2 gets steak and glazed carrots. I would totally expect DS1 to raise one heck of a fit over that injustice. If, on the other hand, we have 2 popsicles left, one green and one blue - no one should be throwing a fit over who got the blue one.


----------



## Mamma Mia (Aug 3, 2005)

Teaching kids not to sweat the small stuff can be done with it. Modeling behavior, talking about trigger issues in advance, etc. work. Talking to kids doesn't mean encouraging them to have a huge emotional reaction about everything. Usually those big reactions are triggered by something else anyway. Talking about it gets to the bottom of that. I think that teaching coping skills is better than just expecting them.


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

"I don't work past 8 pm" must be wonderful for parents with a SO to take over.










eta ~ "you get what you get..." - after my son learned that (at daycare







) his whiny behaviour and back-talking increased.







I personally hate it because it socializes children to the idea that you shouldn't question the Status Quo or work to change Social Injustices. Or it lays the foundation for it, at least.


----------



## woobysma (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aura_Kitten* 
"I don't work past 8 pm" must be wonderful for parents with a SO to take over.

so true about the 8 pm "off work" concept. plus, my house would be SOOOO dirty and the kids would be wearing shirts covered in ketchup and snot :yuck:


----------



## Mamma Mia (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aura_Kitten* 
eta ~ "you get what you get..." - after my son learned that (at daycare







) his whiny behaviour and back-talking increased.







I personally hate it because it socializes children to the idea that you shouldn't question the Status Quo or work to change Social Injustices. Or it lays the foundation for it, at least.

ITA. I would bet the whiny behavior increased with you because he wasn't dealing with the other stuff- the stuff he was shutting down.

And yeah, perhaps if people weren't socialized to just accept everything they'd have the well developed sense of injustice that my 4 year old has and they'd get off their asses and do something about the state of their world.


----------



## waiflywaif (Oct 17, 2005)

Oh come on now. It is possible to absolutely raise a child to be concerned about social justice AND to realize that it's not okay to scream and yell because her slice of birthday cake didn't have a frosting rose on it while her cousin's did. You're really reaching for comparisons there. The rule or rhyme (which I don't personally say, but I like the concept) is not used to reinforce racism. It's used to help kids understand that we should focus on the important things (we're all here having fun at the birthday party, sharing cake!) and not the trivial things (my piece isn't the same as yours!)

I could easily turn your statement around and say that any kid who NEVER learns that "you get what you get and you don't pitch a fit," will grow up not to be some kind of social-justice crusader but a whiny, entitled, first-world jerk who thinks every little thing should go his or her way.


----------



## Mamma Mia (Aug 3, 2005)

If you said that, then clearly you wouldn't have read my posts explaining that you can teach coping skills without cutesy little catch phrases that ignore your kids' feelings.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

At our home it's "you get what you get... and it is what it is" period. You can be upset or pitch a fit if you want. But its not going to change whether you get the blue popsicle or the green one. And for things like this I am going to sympathize a little but then I am done. And by things like this I mean stuff like a piece of cake without the exact part of the icing you want, television programs you can't watch because its your sister's turn to choose, getting the mini binnoculars in your goody bag instead of the mini magnifying glass that your sister got etc...)

I find that this attitude about little things, essentially tells a child "you are going to survive not getting what you want and you are going to be able to move on and be happy again without a single thing happening to change it."


----------



## LilyGrace (Jun 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *myjulybabes* 

Oddly, the one I don't like is "I don't work after 8". Which is silly, because I'm a huge proponent of bedtimes, my kids have them, we enforce them, even in the summer (bedtime is a little later, but there's still bedtime!). But the wording rubs me wrong somehow on this one. Maybe I'm just weird.









I have a variation of that here. I get off duty at 6. At that point, I become a co-parent, not MOM. If a kid walks by dad to come bang on the bathroom door just to ask if he can do something, my first answer is I am off duty and taking a break. There's two of us in the house after 6, no need to come disturb me during my private time. It also helps reinforce that dad's a parent, too. Mom isn't Alpha and Omega.


----------



## waiflywaif (Oct 17, 2005)

Quote:

If you said that, then clearly you wouldn't have read my posts explaining that you can teach coping skills without cutesy little catch phrases that ignore your kids' feelings.
I did read them, and I'm not a huge fan of the rhyme either. But I don't agree that you need to "acknowledge that it sucks," like you said before, when we're talking about these minor setbacks---it doesn't suck! You have cake! (Or a popsicle, or a gift, or whatever.) I do agree that one should acknowledge what the child would have preferred, in a neutral way. I've been known to say, "You really wanted the green one" to my daughter or things like that. But I also let her know that it's not okay to carry on about it. Usually acknowledging what she would have preferred (not that the one she got "sucks") is all it takes to avert any carrying on, anyway.

What I object to is the assertion (made by someone else) that teaching kids to accept what they're given is somehow socializing them to accept injustice. That's just not true.


----------



## mistymama (Oct 12, 2004)

Her tone is kinda off .. but then again, I'm sure there are days I would have sounded much worse than that!









I'm not crazy about the take the show on the road rule, but the others are ok by me. We've always had a set bedtime and I *cherish* my adult time in the evenings after DS has gone to bed. I don't tell him he can't be in the room with me unless he's working, but I do get him to help or tell him that he needs to wait until I finish what I'm doing.

So overall, I really don't think those rules are terrible.


----------



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mamma Mia* 
I think that teaching coping skills is better than just expecting them.

I think it's been said several times that the "you get what you get" thing is more appropriate for older kids who *have* been taught coping skills and just need a quick reminder.

I'm sorry but I'm not going to sit there and comfort/sympathize with a child who has a big slab of birthday cake on their plate because they wanted the yellow rose instead of the pink rose to end up on their plate. As waiflywaif said, getting cake, no matter which piece, _doesn't_ suck, and I'm not going to pretend that it does.

If that makes me heartless in your eyes, or likely to say "You get what you get" when that child gets served turnips while everyone else gets cake, then I guess there's nothing I can say to change your mind.


----------



## mamaduck (Mar 6, 2002)

I thought it was an interesting article. I've had to think on my response for a bit though, before I was able to post.

*Tone* - I feel fine with her tone. She sounds practical, and she sounds honest. I like that she is upfront and clearcut about a mother's need for space and boundaries -- it is easy to get burned out and this is her strategy for specifying her needs. She does sound like a mom of older kids -- maybe that would have been harder for me to identify with when my kids were babies.

*Rule 1: You can't be in the room when I'm working unless you work, too* This is the rule I like the best. I do this too, but a little differently. If I am working, and they are in the room -- they need to be busy with something. Not just hanging around bugging me or bickering with each other. They can sometimes help with my work, sometimes not. There is always a choice to find something they can work on and bring it to be near me. It can be something to play with -- play counts as "work" too. But it needs to be constructive and they need to be engaged. We spend many content hours, working side by side. But they cause the most trouble when they are bored, restless, and vying for my attention. When I am busy with something, my response is, _"Find something to be busy with. Find some work, or else find someplace else to kick around."_

*Rule 2: I don't work past 8 p.m.* I don't like this one at all. It bothers me the most. My mother had this rule, and my feeling was always of being abandoned and frightened at nighttime. What if I had a problem past 8pm? Would she even help? I honestly wondered. Of course parents work past 8pm. Parents work around the clock. That doesn't meant that I have to jump up and run upstairs at every little beck and call -- they can be encouraged to meet their own needs, to give me some space to sit and calm down in the evening. But "_I don't work past 8pm_" is too scary.

*Rule 3: You get what you get, and you don't throw a fit* - WHY??? I can see why at school, or at a birthday party, or in a group situation. But why the heck does one need a rule like this for everyday situations at home? I don't see a need for it in our daily lives. I choose my favoriate fork out of the drawer when I eat a salad. I have a favorite coffee mug. I try to choose it when its available. Why shouldn't my kids make choices throughout the day when a choice is available? Yeah, they should learn to take it in stride when its not available --- but I don't like this rule as a household rule of thumb.

*Rule 4: Take that show on the road* I guess this seems obvious to me. "Go be noisy someplace else. I need quiet right now." Can't see a reason to complain -- they always have the choice to quiet down and stay. (And work!







)


----------



## Mamma Mia (Aug 3, 2005)

Why does everyone keep bringing up junk food in "you get what you get" discussions? Firstly, food is food and causes anxiety in kids a lot. There are lots of "small" things that are big things to kids that are easy for kids to develop really strong feelings about.

Just because stuff seems like a not big deal to us doesn't mean we can't empathize with our kids and let them know that they can deal with disappointment.

Oh, and at dd's party we gave kids a choice about which piece they wanted from one half of the cake, with the only caveat being that they had to wait until we got to that spot for cutting. A group of normally impatient kids ages 3-6 were all sitting around getting excited for each other each time one of the got their special piece and that if they picked the same piece they split it or chose new spots. I'm unclear on why it's so difficult to accommodate some requests before they are a big deal. (excepting in large groups, anyway.)

And just because I disagree with some of you doesn't mean I think you are heartless or damaging your kids, okay? I'm talking about a general societal attitude toward kids and parenting advice that I disagree with. I'm not judging you. I disagree with a parenting theory. I get enough defensiveness from mainstream folks who ask why I live my life as I do and then feel like I'm putting them down when I explain why I like my way.


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *waiflywaif* 
What I object to is the assertion (made by someone else) that teaching kids to *accept what they're given* is somehow socializing them to accept injustice. That's just not true.


Well I guess we should have just told all those black people in the south in the 1940's and 1950's and 1960's that they Get What They Get and they Shouldn't Throw A Fit, when they Threw A Fit about segregation... separate drinking fountains... separate bars... separate schools... Just accept what you're given.









Just think about it a minute. Telling a kid, "Don't throw a fit about what you're given, just accept it," is going to be the same to them as, "Don't be _upset_ about what you're given." Kids can't differentiate nuances in language like adults can. So when we tell them and have them repeat a hundred times a day, "Don't throw a fit, you get what you get and you don't throw a fit, don't throw a fit over what you're given, just deal with it..." over and over... they WILL internalize that. So then later, when the little girls grow up and are handed paychecks 13-30% lower than their male counterparts ~~ well, they should be happy they're getting a paycheck at all. You get what you get and you don't throw a fit. Who cares if they're paid less? And if a doctor won't prescribe you birth control ~ so what? You get what you get and you don't throw a fit. And when the office manager won't hire the disabled man because he looks funny, despite the quality of his work ~~ well, he shouldn't throw a fit. You get what you get and you don't throw a fit.

Kids are sponges, and will soak up every message you send them. So while you can sit here and say blithely, well, it's not the same thing ~~ to a child, yes it is. And I think that core idea will stick with them.

And I also think it's the very last thing we need to be teaching our kids right now, because they're growing up in a world rife with social injustice. They need to learn that if something is unfair, they ought recognize it and deal with it.

This doesn't necessarily mean throwing a tantrum (I don't put up with tantrums either, and it's a surefire way to NOT get your way, in my home anyway) ~ but certainly, they need to be given the opportunity to deal with a problem or what they perceive to be something unfair or unequal. And I don't see this process happening at all in schools and daycares where they're repeating this like a mantra all day ~~ it's just a way to avoid confrontation with the child, to shut them up and send them on their way.


----------



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

Oh lord, this is getting ridiculous. Well, I've gotta run -- I have big plans to tie my kid to a chair and make him repeat "you get what you get" 500 times before dinner.


----------



## bdavis337 (Jan 7, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaduck* 
I thought it was an interesting article. I've had to think on my response for a bit though, before I was able to post.

*Tone* - I feel fine with her tone. She sounds practical, and she sounds honest. I like that she is upfront and clearcut about a mother's need for space and boundaries -- it is easy to get burned out and this is her strategy for specifying her needs. She does sound like a mom of older kids -- maybe that would have been harder for me to identify with when my kids were babies.

*Rule 1: You can't be in the room when I'm working unless you work, too* This is the rule I like the best. I do this too, but a little differently. If I am working, and they are in the room -- they need to be busy with something. Not just hanging around bugging me or bickering with each other. They can sometimes help with my work, sometimes not. There is always a choice to find something they can work on and bring it to be near me. It can be something to play with -- play counts as "work" too. But it needs to be constructive and they need to be engaged. We spend many content hours, working side by side. But they cause the most trouble when they are bored, restless, and vying for my attention. When I am busy with something, my response is, _"Find something to be busy with. Find some work, or else find someplace else to kick around."_

*Rule 2: I don't work past 8 p.m.* I don't like this one at all. It bothers me the most. My mother had this rule, and my feeling was always of being abandoned and frightened at nighttime. What if I had a problem past 8pm? Would she even help? I honestly wondered. Of course parents work past 8pm. Parents work around the clock. That doesn't meant that I have to jump up and run upstairs at every little beck and call -- they can be encouraged to meet their own needs, to give me some space to sit and calm down in the evening. But "_I don't work past 8pm_" is too scary.

*Rule 3: You get what you get, and you don't throw a fit* - WHY??? I can see why at school, or at a birthday party, or in a group situation. But why the heck does one need a rule like this for everyday situations at home? I don't see a need for it in our daily lives. I choose my favoriate fork out of the drawer when I eat a salad. I have a favorite coffee mug. I try to choose it when its available. Why shouldn't my kids make choices throughout the day when a choice is available? Yeah, they should learn to take it in stride when its not available --- but I don't like this rule as a household rule of thumb.

*Rule 4: Take that show on the road* I guess this seems obvious to me. "Go be noisy someplace else. I need quiet right now." Can't see a reason to complain -- they always have the choice to quiet down and stay. (And work!







)

Why the "dont' throw a fit" rule? Because I don't want to wait 30 minutes for my kids to decided if they want grape or orange juice. Because I CAN'T always give them what they want (ooops, we're OUT of orange juice, I guess it's water or grape) and I don't believe it's necessary to do more than validate a few minutes of feeling sad over the juice. Save the big stuff for the truly big stuff.

Why "no after 8pm" rule? Because MOM deserves her own space. We talk all the time about how kids need and deserve their space, time and emotions. SO DOES MOM. If Dad is home, why can't Dad do a bit of it so Mom can take a few deep breaths? Sure, if The Kid can't be calmed or really truly NEEDS Mom, Mom will be there. But don't let the evening disappear, or drag on into the wee hours of the morning just because Mom is expected to do it all. I see this more as a family concept than a rule for the kids.


----------



## eightyferrettoes (May 22, 2005)

eh, sorry... I think there is nothing particularly natural about empathizing with a child about every small and possibly disappointing turn of fortune-- I'm struggling to think of any point during human history when that would have been the norm. It does come off as kind of privileged, first-world, etc.

My mom had three closely-spaced kids, and her philosophy about that sort of thing was that eh, you just gotta make the best of it sometimes. I think that has served us all well in our adult lives.

Sometimes we just don't get what we thought we wanted-- but we can always make something better out of our situations.

I think social justice is a fairly sophisticated concept-- you actually need to develop a sense of justice that extends far, far beyond the cake on YOUR plate to see what everyone else actually has...

And actually, most social-justice types seem totally unconcerned about what IS on their plate, having kind of subsumed that selfish concern into something much more communal. A universal sort of desire for peace and acceptance becomes more important than what "I" want.

So I do think there is an element of learned self-abnegation involved in developing an adult sense of justice.

And I don't reallyl see how preserving a 4-year-old's acute-but-undeveloped sense of, er, "proto-justice" is at all desirable-- clearly, they have many, many things to learn yet about acceptance, cooperation, and delayed gratification.

People are certainly going to differ on how to get there, but few will deny that it has to be done. There is a reason that roomfuls of 4-year-olds require adult supervision and rules, yk?


----------



## Viriditas (Aug 30, 2004)

I'm coming into the discussion a bit late, but I just had to say, I'm with Mamma Mia on this one. Just because we don't think something is a big deal doesn't mean our children should feel the same way. I remember the nasty "you get what you get" rhyme being thrown at me SOOO many times as a kid, and I remember exactly how frustrated and weak it made me feel. Yes, it did make me shut up, but it also made me feel ashamed of my feelings and angry at the adult brushing me off. I wish some of the adults in my life could have had the maturity to get off their high horses and let me know that even though I couldn't have things the way I wanted, it was okay for me to feel bad about it. I certainly would've whined less if I was validated once in awhile.


----------



## Mamma Mia (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eightyferrettoes* 
eh, sorry... I think there is nothing particularly natural about empathizing with a child about every small and possibly disappointing turn of fortune-- I'm struggling to think of any point during human history when that would have been the norm. It does come off as kind of privileged, first-world, etc.

My mom had three closely-spaced kids, and her philosophy about that sort of thing was that eh, you just gotta make the best of it sometimes. I think that has served us all well in our adult lives.

Sometimes we just don't get what we thought we wanted-- but we can always make something better out of our situations.

I think social justice is a fairly sophisticated concept-- you actually need to develop a sense of justice that extends far, far beyond the cake on YOUR plate to see what everyone else actually has...

And actually, most social-justice types seem totally unconcerned about what IS on their plate, having kind of subsumed that selfish concern into something much more communal. A universal sort of desire for peace and acceptance becomes more important than what "I" want.

So I do think there is an element of learned self-abnegation involved in developing an adult sense of justice.

And I don't reallyl see how preserving a 4-year-old's acute-but-undeveloped sense of, er, "proto-justice" is at all desirable-- clearly, they have many, many things to learn yet about acceptance, cooperation, and delayed gratification.

People are certainly going to differ on how to get there, but few will deny that it has to be done. There is a reason that roomfuls of 4-year-olds require adult supervision and rules, yk?









I'm not saying that you over empathize with kids on every little issue. I'm saying that there are ways to teach coping skills to kids about disappointing things. I feel like my point is being missed and some other POV is being put on mine and people are arguing with that by way of me.

Why is 4 the age my child has to start being mature about stuff when she didn't have to when she was 2? She obviously wasn't ready to learn that, even though we're working on it and it's different than at two.

And yeah, she has privilege in that she gets upset over things that other kids literally die for and I see that. But instead of telling her to suck it up, why not work to give all kids the chance to choose their dessert. I know that's not going to happen overnight, but instead of shutting her down, why not talk about the injustice that families in poverty face?


----------



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

Yeah that to Veriditas' post.

I'm trying to imagine professional people at say, Starbucks, receiving half a latte and just being grateful that they got some and not worrying about it b/c there is much bigger stuff in the world--you know, like a war in Iraq and aging parents and public schools in crisis....

And how they would react to, "You get what you get...." from the barista.

The whole article left a bad taste in my mouth.


----------



## bdavis337 (Jan 7, 2005)

But that's not even an equal comparison. Your kids aren't paying you to pour them a cup of grape juice, or cut a slice of cake, or what have you. If the green cup is in the sink waiting to be washed, it really won't kill them to hear "well, that cup is dirty. let's choose from these two cups, blue or red? I'm sorry you're not happy that the cup is dirty, you can use it at your next snack/mealtime and we'll choose another one right now". End it then, and let it go. If they choose not to drink anything at all, that's not so bad, is it?

It's also far, far different when you have more than 1 child asking for a certain cup, a specific spoon, a particular traincar for the carwash, etc. Not minimizing indivualism, but learning to function as a social group, even inside a family dynamic, is really important.


----------



## mamaduck (Mar 6, 2002)

Quote:

If the green cup is in the sink waiting to be washed, it really won't kill them to hear "well, that cup is dirty. let's choose from these two cups, blue or red? I'm sorry you're not happy that the cup is dirty, you can use it at your next snack/mealtime and we'll choose another one right now".
That is WAY different than saying, "You get what you get." You are empathizing and giving choices, within limits. You are making a plan for next time that satisfies everyone's wishes. You are teaching and relating very well here.

I dunno. I think many of us are on the same page here, and arguing over semantics.


----------



## bdavis337 (Jan 7, 2005)

Sounds that way, doesn't it?







I think it's really hard to summarize a parenting technique in one snappy sentence. And when you're trying to generalize for a wide age range, it's even less workable.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaduck* 
That is WAY different than saying, "You get what you get." You are empathizing and giving choices, within limits. You are making a plan for next time that satisfies everyone's wishes. You are teaching and relating very well here.

Yes, way different.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bdavis337* 
But that's not even an equal comparison. Your kids aren't paying you to pour them a cup of grape juice, or cut a slice of cake, or what have you.

So for $2.57 it's OK to be upset?









But seriously, what about at an open bar at a wedding? If the bartender gives some guy his scotch on the rocks in a champagne glass, don't you think he's going to say something about it not being acceptable?

"You get what you get, so don't have a fit" just seems soooo disrespectful to me. I wouldn't want anyone to speak to me that way. That's how I feel about most of that article.


----------



## bdavis337 (Jan 7, 2005)

Ok, but again, these don't appear comparable to me.

If my son asks for something and I can't give it to him for a logical, viable reason, I'll tell him. Mummy can't do that because XYZ. And that's nowhere near the same as the bartender doing something un-necessary and foolish. Unless he says "we're out of rocks glasses, you want this in a wine glass or a plastic cup?" which honestly is what would most likely be the scenario if that were necessary anyway.


----------



## glendora (Jan 24, 2005)

Well, I've never seen a grown adult cry, scream, kick the dog, pull their sisters hair, and do their darnedest to ruin everyone else's day, because they got less cinnamon in their coffee than they would like. And, if I ever did... that person would be, in my mind, a jerk.

But, they'd be a jerk with valid feelings, though, right? Cinnamon being so _important_ to them.


----------



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

But, that's my point--it wouldn't even make sense for the bartender to NOT explain it to another adult.

But telling a kid who sees something not meeting his expectations or not making sense, "You get what you get, don't have a fit," is appropriate. And constitutes good advice. ??

I don't think it's respectful or appropriate.

Explaining why something is the way it is and sympathizing for disappointment isn't even in the same category as that dismissive little rhyme to me.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *glendora* 
Well, I've never seen a grown adult cry, scream, kick the dog, pull their sisters hair, and do their darnedest to ruin everyone else's day, because they got less cinnamon in their coffee than they would like. And, if I ever did... that person would be, in my mind, a jerk.

But, they'd be a jerk with valid feelings, though, right? Cinnamon being so _important_ to them.

Ouch.


----------



## glendora (Jan 24, 2005)

It may be ouch, but there seems to be an insistence that there's no such thing as a reasonable response.

Pouting over a cup, because you're disappointed? Reasonable.

Throwing a tantrum over a millimeter more juice in one cup than the other? Not reasonable.

And, I'm just not seeing anything wrong with informing anyone over the age of 4 or 5 or so (assuming it's a child that's not got special needs, of course) that a tantrum is an unreasonable response. And, that's all that the article said to do... to inform a kid that a tantrum isn't a reasonable response to a given situation. How on earth do you get from "Telling a child that a tantrum isn't an appropriate response to disappointment over what type of napkin they get" to "Not getting validation for throwing a fit about the Spongebob plate you want is the same thing as being trained to support apartheid?"


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bdavis337* 
Why the "dont' throw a fit" rule? Because I don't want to wait 30 minutes for my kids to decided if they want grape or orange juice. Because I CAN'T always give them what they want (ooops, we're OUT of orange juice, I guess it's water or grape) and I don't believe it's necessary to do more than validate a few minutes of feeling sad over the juice. Save the big stuff for the truly big stuff.

Why "no after 8pm" rule? Because MOM deserves her own space. We talk all the time about how kids need and deserve their space, time and emotions. SO DOES MOM. If Dad is home, why can't Dad do a bit of it so Mom can take a few deep breaths? Sure, if The Kid can't be calmed or really truly NEEDS Mom, Mom will be there. But don't let the evening disappear, or drag on into the wee hours of the morning just because Mom is expected to do it all. I see this more as a family concept than a rule for the kids.


But for a kid the juice IS the big stuff. Empathizing and still enforcing rules is different than just shucking them off with a rhyme.

And once again, sure, Mom needs space and time to her own emotions ~~ but that's for those of you lucky enough to have someone to step in and take over. I think that throwing that rule out there for all families is pretty elitist.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aura_Kitten* 
Empathizing and still enforcing rules is different than just shucking them off with a rhyme.

Yes. Totally different.

Also, there's a really good article in the sticky called, "A Cry for Connection," about understanding tantrums. I don't think kids are having "fits" b/c they want to or b/c they're trying to ruin anyone's day. From the GD forum sticky:

Quote:

Effective discipline is based on loving guidance. It is based on the belief that children are born innately good and that our role as parents is to nurture their spirits as they learn about limits and boundaries, rather than to curb their tendencies toward wrongdoing. Effective discipline presumes that children have reasons for their behavior and that cooperation can be engaged to solve shared problems.
I can't reconcile the above with telling upset children that rhyme.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Personally, the author's tone and language didn't resonate with me but I do understand the need for mom to have boundaries. I had never thought about the working together rule but I like Mamaduck's variation on it with bringing something to do...not just being there trying to get my attention. I rarely am "working" while the kids are awake now because they are too young, but I think this might be handy down the line.

I think the whole conversation here about "you get what you get" obviously needs to be tailored to the individual child and what they need to learn at the time. Learning to roll with it is important and I think a lot of 4 year olds need to practice that skill...at least mine does! Struggling with so much disappointment all the time isn't helpful and doesn't feel good. I think there was another thread awhile back about validation and how it can go too far.

I often say to my 4yo ds, "If you don't like what I'm saying, you can ask me why and I'll be happy to talk to you about it. But please don't whine/scream/etc.". This opens up the dialogue if he really doesn't understand why he's not getting what he wants and it also gives him a chance to practice rolling with things.

I really don't see what is wrong with helping kids to move through these minor disappointments gracefully.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aura_Kitten* 
But for a kid the juice IS the big stuff. Empathizing and still enforcing rules is different than just shucking them off with a rhyme.

I agree that the rhyme might be a bit silly. I think the issue here is what age we're talking about. For a 2 year old, yes the juice is a big deal. For a 4 year old, they might need to start learning to go with the flow a bit more.

This is the art of parenting, IMO...recognizing when a change is needed in our response to our children's behavior. Having the same response for a 5 year old as one did when they were 2 is not helpful. So all of this is very age-dependent, I think.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *swampangel* 
I really don't see what is wrong with helping kids to move through these minor disappointments gracefully.

I don't think anyone's against that.

But that rhyme to me is the equivalant of, "Talk to the hand!" or "Shut it!" or "Zip it!" vs. politely asking a child to speak quietly or respect a need for silence.


----------



## eightyferrettoes (May 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
Yes. Totally different.

Also, there's a really good article in the sticky called, "A Cry for Connection," about understanding tantrums. I don't think kids are having "fits" b/c they want to or b/c they're trying to ruin anyone's day.

I don't think they are doing it intentionally, either, (though DoG knows it can seem that way







) but I do think that without a certain degree of parental disapproval or "non-validation" of the tantrum, kids tend not to learn more mature ways to handle life's little disappointments.

Heck, we've all met adults who have somehow failed to learn to deal with circumstances beyond their control in ways that don't involve putting their fists through the wall, no?

But then, I'm not sure I really believe children are innately completely virtuous, so maybe I'm not really GD enough for the GD forum.









Anyway, I don't think they're evil, but I do think they need some molding to become the social critters that their human nature requires them to become.
Part of that is learning not to complain about every last every-lovin' trivial thing that happens all day long. At some point, a chronic complainer loses audience members, whether he's 4 or 40.

Plus, seriously, and I dunno about y'all, but I really lack the emotional energy to seriously empathize with my kid about how _awful_ it is that he must drink milk or water instead of grape juice.

"uh-huh. So, I guess you're not that thirsty? mmmkay."










Anyway, if a customer doesn't like the product at Starbucks, the real standard response is to take your caffiene-junkie self to the stand down the road, not b!tch at the barista. The age-old agony of childhood is that you don't get to pick your mama. And she ain't getting paid for her trouble, anyway.

This seems unlikely to change.


----------



## limabean (Aug 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aura_Kitten* 
And once again, sure, Mom needs space and time to her own emotions ~~ but that's for those of you lucky enough to have someone to step in and take over. I think that throwing that rule out there for all families is pretty elitist.

So ... we should be grateful for what we _do_ have ... and not throw a fit about what we don't?


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *limabean* 
So ... we should be grateful for what we _do_ have ... and not throw a fit about what we don't?









Who's not throwing a fit about it??







Man, what I'd give for someone to fill the roll of co-parent...








:


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Aura_Kitten* 
But for a kid the juice IS the big stuff. Empathizing and still enforcing rules is different than just shucking them off with a rhyme.

And once again, sure, Mom needs space and time to her own emotions ~~ but that's for those of you lucky enough to have someone to step in and take over. I think that throwing that rule out there for all families is pretty elitist.

I don't think its "elitist" at all. Where I live, people have tons of money and social status, but many, many, many dads are not home at bedtime. They are working (late or out of town) to bring in those mega bucks. Yet many moms I know adhere to this type of rule.

You don't need two parents there to have this type of rule. You probably have to wait until you child is old ennough to undertand. I instituted this practice around age 4 and my DH was often not home at bedtime. But I made it clear I was "done" after a certain time. No more stories, songs, oodles of cuddeling etc...I was after that time on "emergency duty" only.


----------



## shayinme (Jan 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya44* 
I don't think its "elitist" at all. Where I live, people have tons of money and social status, but many, many, many dads are not home at bedtime. They are working (late or out of town) to bring in those mega bucks. Yet many moms I know adhere to this type of rule.

You don't need two parents there to have this type of rule. You probably have to wait until you child is old ennough to undertand. I instituted this practice around age 4 and my DH was often not home at bedtime. But I made it clear I was "done" after a certain time. No more stories, songs, oodles of cuddeling etc...I was after that time on "emergency duty" only.

I was a single Mama from ages 1-6 with my son and I did have this type of rule. His bedtime was 8 and that was how it was, I seemed to remember it was around 3.5 -4 that I was better able to enforce these policies as far as after 8, its Mama time. To be brutally honest as a single Mama, I needed that time to clean-up, get ready for the next day and just a few minutes to catch my breath. Admittedly I was not what many MDC folks would consider a AP/GD parent with my son.. but I did the best I could.

My son is now 15 and doesn't seem to feel bad about how he was treated, he knew I did the best I could. Hell, at 4, he had to help me carry groceries home and still remembers one day our bags broke and I told him he still had to carry something.. I probably snapped at him and wasn't gentle but he looks back at that time and laughs..

Shay


----------



## Subhuti (Feb 18, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *myjulybabes* 

Oddly, the one I don't like is "I don't work after 8". Which is silly, because I'm a huge proponent of bedtimes, my kids have them, we enforce them, even in the summer (bedtime is a little later, but there's still bedtime!). But the wording rubs me somehow on this one. Maybe I'm just weird.









I agree... i think that calling time with children, especially cuddly bedtime activities, "work" is hurtful. I would use something a little more tactful in front of the kids: "After 8pm, mom goes on break."

Liz


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eightyferrettoes* 
Anyway, if a customer doesn't like the product at Starbucks, the real standard response is to take your caffiene-junkie self to the stand down the road, not b!tch at the barista. The age-old agony of childhood is that you don't get to pick your mama. And she ain't getting paid for her trouble, anyway.

This seems unlikely to change.

But Starbucks' response is not, "Like it or lump it" or "You get what you get...." Because that would be incredibly rude and bad for business. Their response is to apologize, remake a drink, and/or offer a coupon for a free drink.

Just b/c I'm not getting "paid for my trouble" doesn't give me an excuse to be rude and dismissive to anyone. And for me, that's what the author is advocating.

I used to volunteer at a nursing home when I was a teenager. We used to bring around nail polish to the ladies and let them pick out a color and paint their nails. Some of the ladies would take a long time selecting a color--musing over this one or that one, holding them up to the light, considering what outfit they were going to wear that night to dinner, etc. I would never have thought to tell them it wasn't a big deal and that they should just pick whatever and move on--that would be extremely rude in my opinion. It just seems like the same thing with kids. Just b/c it's not important to me, or I'm feeling impatient, doesn't mean that it's OK to be rude to the other person.

Re. the break "rule:" Again it boils down to a level of rudeness that isn't acceptable to me. If I'm in the grocery store and can't find an item, and I ask a uniformed employee walking by to assist me, is it OK for them to just respond, "Sorry. I'm on break," and keep moving? Is that the kind of employee I want my kid to grow up to be? For me, it's not. I'd want my kids to take the minute and help the person or politely offer to find another employee to assist them.

Would I tell my elderly father that after 8 pm, "No, Dad, I'm on break?" I just wouldn't--it would be hurtful and embarrassing to him. I wouldn't want my kids to tell me that if I were old and needed to move in with them.

Obviously, people need breaks. But I think there's a way to say, "I'm beat. Can I get you anything right now before I put my feet up for a few?" instead of, "I'm on break."


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
But Starbucks' response is not, "Like it or lump it" or "You get what you get...." Because that would be incredibly rude and bad for business. Their response is to apologize, remake a drink, and/or offer a coupon for a free drink.

Just b/c I'm not getting "paid for my trouble" doesn't give me an excuse to be rude and dismissive to anyone. And for me, that's what the author is advocating.

I used to volunteer at a nursing home when I was a teenager. We used to bring around nail polish to the ladies and let them pick out a color and paint their nails. Some of the ladies would take a long time selecting a color--musing over this one or that one, holding them up to the light, considering what outfit they were going to wear that night to dinner, etc. I would never have thought to tell them it wasn't a big deal and that they should just pick whatever and move on--that would be extremely rude in my opinion. It just seems like the same thing with kids. Just b/c it's not important to me, or I'm feeling impatient, doesn't mean that it's OK to be rude to the other person.

Re. the break "rule:" Again it boils down to a level of rudeness that isn't acceptable to me. If I'm in the grocery store and can't find an item, and I ask a uniformed employee walking by to assist me, is it OK for them to just respond, "Sorry. I'm on break," and keep moving? Is that the kind of employee I want my kid to grow up to be? For me, it's not. I'd want my kids to take the minute and help the person or politely offer to find another employee to assist them.

Would I tell my elderly father that after 8 pm, "No, Dad, I'm on break?" I just wouldn't--it would be hurtful and embarrassing to him. I wouldn't want my kids to tell me that if I were old and needed to move in with them.

Obviously, people need breaks. But I think there's a way to say, "I'm beat. Can I get you anything right now before I put my feet up for a few?" instead of, "I'm on break."









:









And, ok, sure, you can do the break thing as a single mama but ~~ that's a level of distance I'm unwilling to impose on my children. They've been through enough. I'm one of the only adults with whom they have a solid, unwavering emotional connection. I'm not going to risk harming that bond.

I do take breaks but I don't think it's ... AP I guess... to empose time limits on my working. If they get up with a sore tummy at midnight, there's no way in hell I'd tell them, "go away mama's on break." Like monkey's mom said ~ we would never do that to, or accept it from, an adult.

Furthermore, I still think it's elitist in a way to say this to the general population ~ "off work at 8 pm" ~ because that does _imply_ that there will be someone else there to pick up the slack. For those parents where the SO returns at bedtime, they're still home ~ to do a load of laundry or dishes or general picking up, whatever, the implication is that there will be another "working" adult present to care for the needs of the children. And if that's *not* the implication ~ geez, what message does *that* send to the kids? "Your needs are unimportant after a certain time" -- ?? And single parents aren't going to have that break anyway, so it's pretty inane to say, "everyone stop working at x hours."









Anyway I'll stop ranting.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

I also think it can come down to what we believe our kids are capable of and what we expect. Kids have a very intuitive nature...they can sense if we aren't sure of something. If we are confident in what we are expecting (i.e., I know you can do this), I think we are instilling a sense of confidence and capability in our kids.

I think the bedtime rule isn't too bad...I cringed when I read the author's descirption, but I think it can be tailored. For us, we do respond anytime of the day or night but we send the message that when it's bedtime it's time to settle down for the night. My 4yo ds usually only gets up when he's really not very tired due to having had a nap that day. When we cut out the nap, he crashes and we get "our" time without any problem.

I agree with Mamaduck, though, that being too strict on that one can be scary for a child. I think just talking about the parent(s)'s need to alone time is good enough...it doesn't have to be a strict rule.


----------



## GuildJenn (Jan 10, 2007)

I find it hard to judge without the context.

I don't see anything terrible about any of these rules, but like any list of rules, it's hard to know what they really mean.

For example, if the majority of the family time is spent in chores and maintenance and things, then I think it's hard on a child to be asked to "help or stay away" during all that time - if it's just 40 mins here and there, then it's fine. It also depends on the tone in which it's asked, and what happens if the kids don't comply.

What I think put me off the list is that there weren't ages or other guidelines given. I get that it's a fast one-off article, but that's what stuck with me - they're just floating out there.

Using the same rule as an example, I think this is not a good rule for toddlers (obviously)... but I also think it is not a good rule for adolescents, who often only feel comfortable grudgingly allowing parents a slight glimpse into what they're struggling with when the parents' attention is actually on something else.

I think that's the argument that's mainly coming out over the "get what you get" rule. Like so many things, it really does depend on what else is going on. Fine for a kid who's generally happy and just wanting the red popsicle... not so good for a child just home from school who's needing/wanting to feel reintegrated into the care of love of the family.

Incidently I think a lot of the reason these things work so well in groups is that kids are "more grown up" outside the home - and come home tired out and needing extra care because of all that coping energy!


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

I don't like the idea of "you can't be with me unless you're working' or "I stop being a mom at 8 PM". But I DO use "You get what you get and you don't throw a fit" ( My kids are 10, 8 and 5 and will argue over who got the best chewable vitamen). I also use " take that show on the road" My limits of tolerance just don't extend to two boys making machine gun noises constantly, KWIM?

Oh, and I think I can out evil the author on the boredom thing. If my kids tell me they're bored I give them a chore.


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *warriorprincess* 
If my kids tell me they're bored I give them a chore.


Me too.







I usually immediately hear, "OH I'm not bored anymore! Really mom I'm not bye!!!!!"


----------



## sbgilson (Jun 1, 2007)

I may have to take up the "I am off at 8pm" rule, maybe my dh would help out a little more and be more aware of the time!


----------



## frontierpsych (Jun 11, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *FiddleMama* 
I agree that the overall tone seems as though the author is a bit burnt out on being around her kids, which I'm guessing most of us can relate to from time to time.

Taking each of her "rules" seperately though, here's what I glean from them:

*1. You can't be in the room when I'm working unless you work, too*
There's something to be said for kids who appreciate the companionship of being near a parent without having to be "entertained" all the time. My 17 mo, for example, loves to fold laundry (i.e. pull it out of the baskets and carry it around the room) while I'm folding laundry.

*2. I don't work past 8 p.m.*
Good rule!

*3. You get what you get, and you don't throw a fit*
This rule isn't appropriate until the preschool years or so but it can be actually quite magical with 3 and 4 year olds. I used to teach preschool and the director of the school said this often in a playful way and the kids really responded in a positive way to it. It's a beginning form of learning acceptance and I think it's okay if it's used playfully and respectfully.

*4. Take that show on the road*
To me, this one just sounds like "Go away" and I have a hard time imagining when it might be appropriate. But my kid doesn't talk much yet so it might become clear to me soon enough.









Thanks for posting that! It was interesting to think about those rules.









:

I don't like that last rule, but the rest of them don't sound too bad. I don't think that they are rules I would personally instate, but definitely not shocking.


----------



## frontierpsych (Jun 11, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *warriorprincess* 
If my kids tell me they're bored I give them a chore.

My mom did that, and I HATED IT!

"Mom, I'm bored!"
"Do the dishes"








:


----------



## queenbean (Apr 6, 2007)

I like the idea behind all those rules, but I would modify a couple of them a bit. I like giving children the choice of either helping with your work or going to play somewhere else, because I can remember wanting to be with my mom, but instead of helping her, I would just bug her and get in her way and impede her progress. Not on purpose, but it still happened. I think it should be a choice though, and not a "work when I'm working or else" type thing. Of course, I think that the author INTENDED it to be a choice anyway.

The "you get what you get one" makes sense, but only after a few lengthy discussions on appropriate expressions of disappointment. It's important to remind children that we don't throw tantrums, and sometimes a catchy rhyme does the trick. But the rhyme itself cannot be the end-all. There has to be ongoing discussions about appropriate ways of expressing our feelings.

The "take this show on the road" rule is good, to an extent. Sometimes kids know you're on the phone, but they want your attention, so subconsciously they start making all kinds of noise so you can't talk on the phone. They don't mean to be pests, but they are anyway. But I think there needs to be a balance between sending them on their way all the time and foregoing your own wants to focus on the kids sometimes.

The "I don't work after 8 pm" is an AWESOME rule, but I don't think that bedtime stories and snuggles should be classified as work. I certainly don't view them as work -- they're my favorite part of the day. Maybe the rule should include things like helping brush teeth, giving baths, getting into pjs, cleaning up the living room, or things like that, but the snuggle stuff is not work, and kids shouldn't be made to feel like you do those things out of obligation. Kids should feel that you enjoy spending time with them.

All in all, I think the article made some good points, and I like the rules, just with some modification. I'll bookmark it, and also keep my own changes in mind for when my kids are old enough to need rules like this.


----------



## choli (Jun 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *warriorprincess* 
I don't like the idea of "you can't be with me unless you're working' or "I stop being a mom at 8 PM". But I DO use "You get what you get and you don't throw a fit" ( My kids are 10, 8 and 5 and will argue over who got the best chewable vitamen). I also use " take that show on the road" My limits of tolerance just don't extend to two boys making machine gun noises constantly, KWIM?

Oh, and I think I can out evil the author on the boredom thing. If my kids tell me they're bored I give them a chore.

OMG, I totally do that too! My mother used to do it to me, too. It's very effective. In fairness to myself, I DO try to make it a fun chore that both DDs can do together, like washing a window or sorting photographs....


----------



## eightyferrettoes (May 22, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *choli* 
OMG, I totally do that too! My mother used to do it to me, too.

My mom, too.







. I think what she was saying was, "I'm _not_ your personal entertainer."









Anyway, to answer another poster, nobody HAS to volunteer to paint nails at the nursing home. You can get tired of doing it and stop volunteering anytime. Most people do quit when they get busy doing other things, like working a job or raising their own babies. And it's never a gig that lasts 18-plus years, either.

In more intensive caregiving situations, like when your ailing grandfather moves in to spend his last days with you, most elderly folks understand that their needs are WORK for you, and tend to be appropriately mindful about making their requests. Maybe too mindful, sometimes, but it is what it is.

My elderly great-grandfather did NOT throw tantrums at 11PM because he was overtired and wanted a brownie with milk in the PINK cup, YK? He knew his daughters worked hard to tend to his needs, and didn't wish to impose excessively.

A six year old lacks that kind of learned self-awareness, hence the meanie old "rule."








: I don't think it's terribly rude to crystallize the that expectation in words, given that children haven't yet had a lifetime of becoming attuned to other people's needs. Like our need to have a break from their constant presence and demands!









Basically, I just want my son to understand that women doing traditional domestic women's work are not subject to coddling his every lil whim just because they're there.









Anyway, I freely admit that I'm not all that GD by certain standards. This mama has a limit on the amount of giving she can do before she gets REALLY unbearably grouchy, but I respect that others can keep it up better.

No hard feelings, though.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *eightyferrettoes* 
Anyway, to answer another poster, nobody HAS to volunteer to paint nails at the nursing home. You can get tired of doing it and stop volunteering anytime. Most people do quit when they get busy doing other things, like working a job or raising their own babies. And it's never a gig that lasts 18-plus years, either.

And nobody HAS to have children. Or stick that out for any amount of time.

But in both situations, if I've made that commitment, the least I can do is TRY to be respectful and polite.

I'm not saying that we all don't get impatient or snippy or say things that come out rudely, but to compile a bunch of advice that basically encourages people to be rude and dismissive to their family members as the GOAL? I think that's cruddy.

Like I said, it's not how I would want to be treated and it's not how I would advise new moms to approach this journey. I think there are far less adversarial ways to set boundaries for ourselves and achieve balance.

Anyway, just my take on it...


----------



## fuller2 (Nov 7, 2004)

I don't think these are terrible rules.

The rhyme is silly and I would never say it to anyone, but I certainly agree with those who think it's worth letting children know that throwing a fit over something pretty inconsequential is not a pleasant personal quality to have.

To me it's similar to saying No once, and having it stay that way, no matter how much they whine. (Like begging for a Dove Bar after getting into bed...) Sorry, no Dove Bar--I don't care how much you beg for it. Case closed.

And the idea that telling your kid a popsicle color doesn't matter is going to destroy all sense of social justic seems bizarre, to put it mildly. For one thing, by reminding them that it really doesn't matter, you are teaching your kids that consumer "choice" is usually a farce (notice how almost all our examples here are about consumer products?), and that, IMO, is a very valuable lesson.

The difference between the blue or green popsicle is created by marketers. Feeling that the difference somehow expresses some part of your inner being is exactly what they want you to think. So encouraging them to want only one particular kind of thing (which you do by going along with it) is to me actually destructive--since it totally encourages them to identify with the meaningless distinctions of so many consumer items. As a parent in this society, part of my job is to teach my kid that these differences ARE mostly meaningless, and that there are a lot of far more important things to think about. Like social justice, for instance.

I just think it's very interesting how easily access to meaningless/trivial consumer 'choice' (which is what most people here are objecting to when they agree more or less with the 'you get what you get' thing) becomes conflated with the promotion of democracy, freedom, justice. They aren't the same thing at all. (though access to lots of consumer choice certainly can subdue any interest in social problems)


----------



## ASusan (Jun 6, 2006)

:

VERY well said, fuller2.


----------



## RomanGoddess (Mar 16, 2006)

Sound like good rules to me. Thanks for posting.


----------



## Dal (Feb 26, 2005)

Popsicle colours are inconsequential? They aren't just different colours (which itself can still matter -- how about I give you a fluorescent yellow shirt and tell you that you have to wear it whether you like it or not and be quiet about it -- that may be inconsequential to me... but it may be a huge deal to you), they are quite different flavours too -- you know, yelllow is banana, orange is orange, pink is who knows what (not my favourite!), green is lime... brown is chocolate, white is lemon... or something like that depending on the brand. The different colours taste quite different, much like different flavours of ice cream. I think children's preferences absolutely do matter!!! You get what you get so shut the f up (said with a nice little jingle and a smile)!!!??? Not my style. Something seems inconsequential to me so it therefore is inconsequential and you need to act as though it is also inconsequential to you...??? I'm not much of a fan for cutesy ways of interacting with children (or elderly people... my mother and a lot of other people treat both in the same way). Not necessarily that that is what is going on in the example... but it is hard for me to imagine it in another way.

I think there is a problem with the idea that a child whose needs are met is going to "throw a fit" over getting a pink popsicle rather than a yellow one. Really... I think if someone "throws a fit" over this, it is because there is other crap going on in her or his life and this incident was the tip of the iceberg. It may also be the way the child was given the popsicle and had her or his preferences discounted -- that may have felt humiliating to the child... and on top of a clutter of other frustrations and humiliations may have led to the big emotions. If an adult has a big explosion over something seemingly small, we don't expect the adult to just shut up and be quiet... (if we care about her or him!)... we're apt to ask what rotten things are going on in that adult's life that is contributing to her or his unusual state of sensitivity... and what we might be able to do to help. But for a child... oh they are just that way... losing it over nothing at all... they "need to learn" and unfortunately, they "need to learn" by essentially being broken... Let them wail and scream and tantrum and DO NOT GIVE IN!!! YOU NEED TO TEACH THEM that their rage WILL NOT GET THEM WHAT THEY WANT! They will eventually get it... JUST BE CONSISTENT!!! Um. No. I don't see tantrums as normal and inevitable and yada yada yada.

A rule that children aren't allowed to throw fits could do a lot to take away their ability to express that things are not right in their lives, even if the expression may be annoying to hear and see and may take up some time and may get in the way of what we want to be doing... I think it's there for a reason... and usually has nothing to do with the minor incident that set the child off. So... if children are taught to silence these big emotions, it may become a lot more difficult to help to meet the child's needs and to know when she or he is unhappy or not feeling well... maybe it would also become more difficult for the child to know how she or he feels about this or that or whether things are going well or not...

This is not to say that children should not be given information about how their actions are affecting others. If my son talks to me in a way that I don't like... I let him know that. If he raises his voice at me in anger I let him know how I feel about that and that I will listen to his reasons and consider his point of view and yada yada but I feel less inclined to help him if he is raising his voice at me as I tend to feel angry in response to that... I also let him know that I understand that it can feel good to be loud when one is angry. And so on and so forth...

The wording of that rule... ICK!!! "You get what you get so don't throw a fit"... that is SO DISMISSIVE to me... It also seems to have so many insensitive and problematic assumptions about children thrown into it... I think it may be comparable to asking women who are angry if they are "on the rag" or I guess saying to them "This is the way the world is so don't go PMSing on me." Or something like that! I'm rather tired and a bit stressed myself...


----------



## Oriole (May 4, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dal* 

I think there is a problem with the idea that a child whose needs are met is going to "throw a fit" over getting a pink popsicle rather than a yellow one. Really... I think if someone "throws a fit" over this, it is because there is other crap going on in her or his life and this incident was the tip of the iceberg. ...

That's plain insulting to me. Does that mean that every parent that had a child to throw a fit at the age of 3 is a bad parent and doesn't know how to parent, because popsicle is the tip of the iceberg on a bigger problem?!..

Um no... sometimes popsicle is just.... a popsicle....

It's not about social injustice, and it's not about a kid not being loved to death by their parents, nor is it about bad parenting style.. Sometimes a 3 year old just wants a popsicle, and they want it NOW.

If kids were capable of understanding all of the reasonings of adults - they'd move out at the age of 2.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dal* 
A rule that children aren't allowed to throw fits could do a lot to take away their ability to express that things are not right in their lives...

True... if we were not talking about a popsicle but a visit to a scary doctor... Leaving a kid alone for hours... No stimulating toys int he room... Parents who never hug their kids, or respond to a crying child...

A FIT over a popsicle?.. Um no...

Should a parent expect tantrums from a 2 year old? Yes!..
Should a parent get into lengthy discussion with each tantrum if a kid is throwing themselves on the floor and screaming "give me yellow popsicle". Well.. I will not be that parent.

And if you for a minute think that I would tell a kid "Shut the f up!" (with or without a smile), well then the discussion is not worth continuing. *shrug*


----------



## LookMommy! (Jun 16, 2002)

My ds's therapist (he has mild PDD) is big on "code phrases" for kids who have trouble with higher cognitive skills (like, just about all toddlers and pre-schoolers). So 'You get what you get and you don't get upset' (or, the Hebrew version, Whatever comes out I welcome) or 'When it's time to go, you don't go slow' (mine) are code phrases for "I accept that I can't always be the center of attention, and I realize that sometimes the needs of others need to be considered". We also take turns "One two three four Pass it to the one next door".

I mean, I like red popsicles too, but when there are 33 kids in a class, not everyone is going to get their first choice. It's OK, really. I think kids understand that it may not be fun, but it's fair, and that's the most important criteria. And you can always try to trade!

And not only don't I clean after 9 p.m., I managed to graduate phi beta kappa and all that without ever studying after 9 p.m. through high school and college! (There have probably been a few exceptions over the years to both of the above rules, but they are my personal limits unless it's urgent).

Oh, and I have another rule - I pick who's allowed in my bed (my room is where the only TV is







) and if you have smelly feet, or bad breath, you're not invited!


----------



## Dal (Feb 26, 2005)

Arg! I just wrote a long response and it is gone! Great!!!!

I don't think tantrums are inevitable or natural. I'm even bothered by the term "tantrum" and how it is generally used -- though it's preferable to "throwing a fit." Maybe I'm interpreting "tantrum" differently than others... I mean it in the classic sense... a child who is exhibiting a lot of rage and anger, typically by thrashing around and screaming, usually for some period of time (I wouldn't count throwing a toy in anger as a tantrum... though it may be on the same scale that leads up to a tantrum).

I don't think that a child who tantrums in the classic sense necessarily does so because the primary caregiver(s) are not adequately GD. I certainly don't think children tantrum (or come close to it) over the colour of their popsicle. I think that what parents do often has a tonne to do with it, but a child's environment is so much more than how her mother and father and so on treat her. Some children may just have a lot more difficult time feeling right and at home given how things are set up in our society. E.g., a child with very high social needs may be quite stressed out to live in a nuclear family and rarely spend time with anyone besides his mother and sibling... spending large amounts of time with a group of same-aged peers may similarly be a very poor fit for what is best for a particular child's personality... some children likely have copious amounts of energy to burn and very few resources for expending it... and so on and on and on.

I don't want to offend anyone. I'm not sure if it's what I'm saying or how. To me, "You get what you get and you don't throw a fit" is not all that far off from "take it and I want you to shut the f up about it" (playfully... I should have found an example without slang since I'm not really bothered by it all that much... though it does convey how I feel when I hear the words "don't throw a fit").

Mothering.com is seeming quite mainstream to me and I'm bothered by that... so maybe a bit of my disappointment is creeping in... or a lot of it. I have benefited tremendously from things I've read here from some of the more radical members and I like to share my point of view... but I don't want to upset anyone.

I know that my son (who is 3 and a quarter) would have had (and continue to have) a lot of classic tantrums if he were treated in mainstream ways... including many of the ways described here. Maybe even over a popsicle. The more he is treated in top-down and dismissive sorts of ways... the closer he gets... the more of his needs are unmet... the more upset he gets (though he doesn't get angry with me unless he feels I am being his adversary)... my own experiences and similar anecdotes from other parents whose children have gone through the early years without any classic tantrums... does colour how I read a lot of what I read here.


----------



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

Dal, I totally agree with you.

And really, she's not talking about teaching kids how to deal with disappointment and feelings in socially acceptable ways.

Quote:

*You get what you get, and you don't throw a fit*

Goal: No more haggling -- over which pretzel has more salt or who gets their milk in the prized red cup and who in the cursed green, or which cast member of "Blue's Clues" adorns whose paper plate
She's talking about kids "haggling." Which to me means that very normal stage where kids go, "Hey, I wanted that one." Which is VERY different than dropping to the ground kicking, screaming, and thrashing.

I've worked with groups of kids for most of my life, and even in a large group it's not that hard to say, "Does anyone want to trade their green with Janey?" or "Oh, I'm sorry honey. Hey guys how about next time we make sure there's a green one for Janey?"

It's not that hard to model that level of sensitivity and consideration.

And to those who say, "Well, I don't want to hear it. It makes me cranky and I'm not a good mommy." I have to wonder how you would feel if your mother or husband or best friend said, "Well, you wanted these kids. Suck it up."

Because it seems just as rude and dismissive as what the author advises.

If we choose to have children, perhaps we shouldn't treat them as if they're burdening us. That's my advice!


----------



## daniedb (Aug 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LookMommy!* 
My ds's therapist (he has mild PDD) is big on "code phrases" for kids who have trouble with higher cognitive skills (like, just about all toddlers and pre-schoolers). So 'You get what you get and you don't get upset' (or, the Hebrew version, Whatever comes out I welcome) or 'When it's time to go, you don't go slow' (mine) are code phrases for "I accept that I can't always be the center of attention, and I realize that sometimes the needs of others need to be considered". We also take turns "One two three four Pass it to the one next door".

TY so much for that wonderful Hebrew version of the "fit" rule. I love the simplicity and focus on gratitude in those few words. I think that phrasing it with that in mind turns a negative "don't throw a fit" into a positive, "We are grateful for what we have". What a beautiful concept to use when faced with disappointment.

And before the responses get all, "So we should be grateful if mom hands us a steaming dog turd for dinner?" let's just agree that no mom posting here would ever think of depriving or abusing her child, and assume that we are all working our best to meet our kids' wants and desires in a healthy way.


----------



## mama k nj (Dec 18, 2006)

Wow. Skimming this thread has given me some hope. I am just learning about GD and so far I DO find AP very draining emotionally and physically (babywearing and little sleep) I do what I do 'cause I feel it's best for my LO, but I'd be lying if I said it doesn't get old sometimes.

Thanks for being honest mamas! I can see how some of the "rules" allow you to set personal boundries and teach your LOs to respect others with out getting into a power struggle. I especially like the being thankful for what you are given slant. Gratititude is an awesome value to possess!

I agree that her tone is a bit rough, but I think it's meant as sarcasm and is probably her writing style.

ETA: above all I dont' think any one set of "rules" applies to anyone, including the AP ones (dare I say it) Each child is different and each of us has a different personality as parents. I think the key would be doing what works best for the family so that everyone is getting their needs met most of the time.


----------



## dianamerrell (Mar 15, 2006)

i personally dont like the 8pm off work rule.

i feel that my children should know I will be there for them anytime, even if inconvienent timing.

children hear adults complain about work, and needing a break/vacation. maybe some children will take that personally, that they are another task to be taken care of.

IMO there has got to be a better way for everyone needs to be met.

What do some of the moms here do to get time to themselves, while being repectful to their children?


----------



## Paigerina (Jan 15, 2007)

Quote:

I found this article on CNN.com. I am amazed at some of the suggestions, but it's the author's tone that bother's me the most. Does she even like her kids? It made me sad.








The author's tone bothers me a lot. The approach she advocates made me feel very stifled and resentful as a child. I was subject to similar rules and found them unfair and infuriating. Such rules were the reason I often became angry and upset as a child.

Words like "enforce" have no place in the home. Enforcing is about wielding power. Wielding power over kids teaches kids to wield power. The approach the author advocates leads to kids trying to enforce rules for their siblings and friends to follow, and to misuse of power in adulthood.

Showing kids empathy, patience and respect cultivates empathy, patience and respect. Kids deserve to be treated respectfully, and it's reasonable to expect respect from them. But there is often a limit to what you can expect from young kids. Perspective is something young children often lack. You get perspective by living life and reflecting. Young kids haven't lived long or had the chance to reflect much.

"You get what you get..." is another way of saying "life's not fair." When a meteor flies through the roof and kills someone, it makes sense to say "life's not fair." When people treat others in a way that is ageist, sexist or otherwise disrespectful or dismissive, it makes sense to say they're not being fair!

The author advocates using "clever" tactics to control your kids. But use of tactics shouldn't be modeled or encouraged. Control is not the goal of any healthy relationship.

Social justice is not an abstract concept. Children understand it innately, which is why they often become outraged and shout "It's not fair!" Social justice starts at home.

Quote:

"You get what you get and you don't get upset" is the bane of my existence.
This was the bane of my existence throughout childhood and continues to be!

Quote:

This particular one is horrid, IMO. Kids have these well developed senses of injustice peole are always trying to quash. Instead of shutting down emotional responses to what's not fair, how about give your child the emotional tools to process the hurt and upset and talk about it?
Exactly.

Quote:

I think that teaching coping skills is better than just expecting them.
Makes perfect sense.

Quote:

Obviously, people need breaks. But I think there's a way to say, "I'm beat. Can I get you anything right now before I put my feet up for a few?" instead of, "I'm on break."

Quote:

I think there are far less adversarial ways to set boundaries for ourselves and achieve balance.
This sounds very reasonable.

Quote:

It's not that hard to model that level of sensitivity and consideration.
Agreed.


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

The way Is use "You get what you get" is not to stop ONE child from throwing a tantrum, but to keep multiple children from fighting each other. when you have three kids it's not always as easy to give them all what they want.
Also, I use it a pre-emptive. I don'r wait for a kid to object, I say it before I hand the stuff out ( which I always do randomized).


----------



## Aura_Kitten (Aug 13, 2002)

Quote:

And not only don't I clean after 9 p.m., I managed to graduate phi beta kappa and all that without ever studying after 9 p.m. through high school and college!
A minor side note: this comes off as really ... self-inflating ... kind of arrogant I guess... to those of us who work full time jobs and raise kids on top of that. Sometimes it's _necessary_ to do work after 9 pm.







: If you work 9 to 5 and somewhere in between also attend classes, AND raise children, there's no way you _can't_ study outside of class and learn what you're supposed to learn ~ and for many of us that means late into the night ~ unless you're majoring in something like "Dumb crap you already know."

I agree about the popsicle thing too ~ they DO all have very different flavors.

And I also do agree that kids have a well developed sense of social injustice ~ and it just needs to be guided into proper forms of outlet. No, I wouldn't throw myself on the floor screaming in my boss's office if I found out my coworker was getting paid more than me for the same work; I would, however, find a way to deal with it in an adult manner. And I think kids can learn that too ~ it just takes more effort than repeating a silly little rhyme.

Option 1. "You get what you get and you don't throw a fit."

Option 2. "I see that you're upset about getting a red popsicle. Will you please tell me why you wanted a purple one? Well, there aren't any more purple ones, even though I know that it's your favorite -- are there any other colors you like more than red? Let's trade."


----------



## Mamma Mia (Aug 3, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
If we choose to have children, perhaps we shouldn't treat them as if they're burdening us. That's my advice!









Yes!I think this could be a response to a lot of parenting advice columns.


----------



## fuller2 (Nov 7, 2004)

Yes, popsicles are different flavors. (I personally would rather have no popsicle than the green one.) Yes, if my kid's choice is available, I am happy to give it to him.

But. What I am trying to avoid in my parenting is the idea that just because you want something, you should be able to get it immediately. And also that there are some things you should try to be flexible about. If he wants the red popsicle and I don't have one, I am probably not going to go out and get him one unless we are going to the store anyway. I am also a single mom, and I feel that when it comes to buying things that aren't "needed," like this red popsicle, it's not going to happen. It is not about "injustice," it's about the reality that we simply don't have enough money (nor does Mommy always have the energy) to fulfill every request for things like red popsicles.

Now, if he wants to read his book about planets--all for that. If he wants to build a model robot out of paper clips--I'll sit and do that with him for an hour. But if he wants a red popsicle and I don't have any, and it's 7:30 pm and I am wiped out and he needs to get ready for bed? No, he's not going to have one. (I do agree that his "need" for a red popsicle might mean something else--like that he is tired and hot, in which case I might have him take a cool bath and drink some water. My not buying him a red popsicle does NOT mean that I therefore ignore his feelings.)

I don't know. My totally unscientific observations seem to indicate to me that kids who are given every single thing they ask for--and who have parents who will drop everything and go out at 7:30 pm to the store to buy red popsicles because the child wants one--sometimes end up being very picky, whiny, and unhappy. Perhaps because what they are "asking" for isn't really what they need...which is another thing I use my 35 years of life experience to figure out. (They don't need another red popsicle. They need you to sit and read a book with them, they need to run around outside, etc.)

I really dislike the idea that AP = "absolute maternal sacrifice and children at the center of every single moment," by the way. I don't think that's the intent at all. For me, AP is in large part about integrating children and mothering into all parts of life--not separating them, isolating them, in the way we tend to do in our society. Living in a "tribe" with all ages means that NO ONE is constantly the Most Important--which means that everyone has to learn that everyone else has needs and wants too.

So having a kid learn that it's not cool to demand a certain popsicle when the other people in the group are not able to provide one for whatever reason seems like a fine thing to learn to me. If all is well, they will get a popsicle at another time.

(BTW, I make my own dang popsicles with juice in the freezer! I don't buy ANY popsicles ever!!)


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *fuller2* 
But. What I am trying to avoid in my parenting is the idea that just because you want something, you should be able to get it immediately.

[snip...]

I don't know. My totally unscientific observations seem to indicate to me that kids who are given every single thing they ask for--and who have parents who will drop everything and go out at 7:30 pm to the store to buy red popsicles because the child wants one--sometimes end up being very picky, whiny, and unhappy.

[snip]

I really dislike the idea that AP = "absolute maternal sacrifice and children at the center of every single moment," by the way. I don't think that's the intent at all.

I, for one, am not suggesting anything remotely like what you've described here.

And it's been a big thread, but I don't recall anyone saying anything like this.

I just want to clarify, b/c I would hate for someone to think that I disagree with the original article on the grounds that I think children ought to be given everything they desire--at any cost, or that that has anything to do with attachment parenting or gentle discipline.

I disagree with the article b/c I think it advises rude and disengaging behaviors, it perpetuates negative attitudes about children, and b/c it sounds like a recipe for DAMAGING rather than BUILDING relationships betw. parents and children, which is at the heart of AP (as I understand it).


----------



## Lady Madonna (Jul 2, 2004)

We picked up "you get what you get and you don't throw a fit" at DD's preschool - and she says it more than I do! For us, it's usually about when you get what you asked for - say, cut-up mango - and then proceed to pitch a fit about the fact that it's not cut up *exactly* the way you want it - say, big v. small pieces, strips v. cubes. You *got* what you asked for, if you'd asked for "mango cut up in little pieces", you'd have gotten that. I'm happy to talk to you about how we could make the mango pieces smaller or whatever, but I am NOT going to have that conversation with someone who starts screaming or wailing instead of saying "oh, I wanted it in XXX pieces".

The one I use *all the time* that didn't get exerpted here is "I can't understand you when you speak like that". I'm willing to discuss pretty much anything - in a normal, reasonable tone of voice. Whining or yelling is not going to get a response other than "I can't understand you when you talk in that voice." When I get the request again in a normal tone of voice, I thank DD for using a voice I can understand, and we move forward with the topic.

Fundamentally, I see both rules being about managing interactions and working together in ways that make everyone involved comfortable and respectful. I won't have a conversation with an adult who is whining or screaming, and I try to work that into how I teach DD to interact with other people.

On the others ... I might have to start instituting the mom's off time - more to enforce it for myself than anyone else in the house. I can be lax about bedtime, and then I get cranky and frustrated. But I work well under pressure, even self-created artificial pressure, so a deadline might help!


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lady Madonna* 
I can be lax about bedtime, and then I get cranky and frustrated.

So let me ask you, when you get to that point would you find it more or less comfortable and respectful for your child to say to you, "I can't understand you when you're like this. When you speak nicely to me, I will listen?"

Wouldn't you rather hear something like, "Mama, I'm sorry you're upset. How can I help you?"


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

I'm kind of liking these rule suggestions. We do a few of them around here. Definitely respect for mama doing work. Not necessarily that she must be working, but don't bug me when I am. And don't moan about the characters on your plate, and other petty things like that. I'm all over that.

I don't care much about bedtime, but my daughter is a joy to be around most of the time. Maybe if ppl follow the rest of these rules, they won't mind so much about an early bedtime.


----------



## Lady Madonna (Jul 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
So let me ask you, when you get to that point would you find it more or less comfortable and respectful for your child to say to you, "I can't understand you when you're like this. When you speak nicely to me, I will listen?"

Wouldn't you rather hear something like, "Mama, I'm sorry you're upset. How can I help you?"

I use the phrase "I can't understand you when you talk in that voice" because I *can't*. DD can get that pitch in her voice that truly pains my ears and all I can get is the whining, not the words. She can say the same exact words - even if they're rude or demanding - in her normal voice, and I will do anything I can for her. If she is unable to do that, then I know that there is a bigger issue behind it all, like she's tired or hungry or whatever, and I will deal with that in a kind, compassionate way. But I know my children, and I can usually tell the difference between the two.

Thanks, though, for implying that asking my child to use a tone of voice that doesn't set my teeth on edge means that I'm being disrespectful or dismissive of her feelings.







:

I am not saying "you can't feel like that". I am incredibly careful to NOT be dismissive of any child's feelings, after growing up constantly being told "no, you're not really angry/sad/hurt".

I'm saying "please use a different tone of voice". DD can feel however she wants, and express it to me in any words she wants, but the whining sets me immediately on edge and, if continuous, makes me want to get far far away, not help her out. Saying that I can't understand her gives her a chance to reframe her request if she wants to; if she doesn't want to, she can make the exact same request with the exact same words, as long as she is not whining just because . She doesn't have to be "nice" - she just needs to NOT WHINE.

And I may get cranky and on-edge around my kids, but I don't whine at them. I reserve that for DH







- though I do manage to avoid the squealing pitch DD seems to get to so easily. And believe me, DD has absolutely said to me "Mama, I don't like those words" or "those words aren't kind". Also, it is not DD's job to teach me how to manage my needs and emotions (though she certainly has taught me a lot about what's really important), but it is my job to help her learn how to get her needs met and express her emotions in healthy, positive ways.

So, while it might not work in your house, it works in ours, we all feel respected and heard, and I don't have to walk around with foam earplugs in all day in order to avoid bleeding from the ears because of whining.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lady Madonna* 
Thanks, though, for implying that asking my child to use a tone of voice that doesn't set my teeth on edge means that I'm being disrespectful or dismissive of her feelings.







:

Ouch.

I think you might be hearing a tone in my posts that I don't intend.

I'm really trying to understand how people are hearing these rules in a way that is not rude. Because I can't imagine that I would appreciate someone talking to ME in that way. So I was trying to find out if others thought it was OK for someone to talk to THEM that way.

If you truly can't understand what someone is saying to you, then it's not really following that rule. You can't understand them.

If you're asking a person to speak in a way that doesn't set your teeth on edge (and I do that w/ my son), then, again, it's not that rule. I don't find it rude to ask someone to respect my tolerence for certain noises, sounds, voices.

But, the rule that this woman advocates talks about PRETENDING to not understand your kid:

Quote:

This one requires almost religious consistency of application to work effectively. But, essentially, you simply proclaim incomprehension when your child orders (rather than asks) you to do something, whines, or otherwise speaks to you in a way you don't like. Whispering this helps; it takes the whole thing down a notch on the carrying-on scale. This is a de-escalation tool, so calmly repeat the rule a few times and don't get lured into raising your voice. A child who's whining or being rude is clearly seeking attention and drama, so use this as a way to provide neither.
And I just think this is so counter to what we talk about and advocate here, I'm really, really surprised that this is supported:

Quote:

A child who's whining or being rude is clearly seeking attention and drama, so use this as a way to provide neither.
I don't know how else one could describe that, except as "dismissive."

I don't know....it just makes me sad to think about viewing and treating children like that.

So that's why I was asking how we might feel if we were treated like that.

I was pretty much treated like that, and I can't tell you how lonely and unheard I felt by my parents. And confused at why my feelings were such a threat to them. I don't know, maybe it's just me and my issues, but, this collection of rules really seems to defy what I thought I knew about AP and GD.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
So let me ask you, when you get to that point would you find it more or less comfortable and respectful for your child to say to you, "I can't understand you when you're like this. When you speak nicely to me, I will listen?"

Wouldn't you rather hear something like, "Mama, I'm sorry you're upset. How can I help you?"

I agree with this. Most of the time.

I do think there is a difference between crying/upset vs. whining. Whining drives me nuts and I am more likely to ask for a correction in tone... something like, "Can you use your regular voice?"

But I also think we say things to children that we would not want said to us, or that we would not say to other adults. And I think we often dismiss or seek to ignore children's emotions.

eta - I think the pretending not to understand is really manipulative and messed up. Why not just say: "I feel irritated when you do the whining voice, can you use your regular?" Or something like that. At least that is honest, you are giving the child information about where you are coming from that is true. Rather than lying to them, telling them they are not communicating in a way that is understandable, which I think tells them either a) their parent is lying, or b) they think they are communicating but the feedback is that they are not.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
I agree with this.

Just saving this for posterity...........














:

Back to your regularly scheduled thread............







:


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)




----------



## Oriole (May 4, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
I don't know....it just makes me sad to think about viewing and treating children like that.

Makes me sad to think that I would be regarded as unloving parent who disrespects and damages her child just because I would like for my kid to use appropriate tone within appropriate situation.

My parents are the most loving parents in the world, and just because I was cut off and wasn't allowed to change my dress as we were leaving the house when I was 4 even if I went into a fit over it, doesn't mean I was damaged, disrespected, unloved, and don't care about social justice, or think that my parents don't care about my feelings...







:

I am not promoting here child abuse, I'm not suggesting not to comfort your child when they are sad, I am not saying not to feed them, or play with them, I am suggesting to teach them that certain tone is not ok, and if you have ultrasensitive kid who will be hurt by the rhyme - don't use it!

If it works with my kid, and they laugh it off, and it helps them move on and not to make a big deal out of the color of popsicle - then don't think of me as a monster parent and don't feel sorry for my kid.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Oriole* 
Makes me sad to think that I would be regarded as unloving parent who disrespects and damages her child just because I would like for my kid to use appropriate tone within appropriate situation.

Firstly, not one person has said that they think there is anything wrong with wanting kids to use appropriate tones. Or not fall to the ground kicking and screaming over every little thing.

But I do believe that there is a MUCH more resepctful way to do it than what this woman advocates.

Secondly, NO ONE has said anything about unloving or monster parents. Some people have jokingly called themselves "mean" or "evil" but no one has called people out like that.


----------



## Dal (Feb 26, 2005)

monkey's mom, I love your posts.







I just added to my facebook account, under the "about me" section, that I am chronically misunderstood. It looks like we're in the same boat!!! After adding that I'm chronically misunderstood, I quickly deleted it since I figured I would just be misunderstood anyway. I'm not sure whether that is progress. I find myself doing that a lot here lately too... if I bother to write anything at all. I find it hard (and annoying) to balance being myself and saying what I want to say with the art of trying to predict and correct for the many ways I'm going to be misunderstood or not come across as compassionate or sensitive and on and on (which is also important to me).

It seems to me that some people here are trying to train their children to be thus and so and others of us are more focused on living respectfully with our children and taking care of our relationships with them. I am not saying that the two are incompatible... but I find that the former mindset often gets in the way of the latter. The whole "children need to be taught" approach is foreign and distasteful to the mentality from which I operate.

I do not bend over backwards and dedicate my life to being my son's servant. I am way too much of a hedonist for that. I try to help him get what he wants in ways that work for everyone (me included!). This doesn't mean that there aren't times that he just can't have what he wants... but I don't throw snappy little "deal with it" lines at him. That reminds me... An ex of mine used to tell me to "deal with it" when I was pleading a case to him that was very important to me. Rarely have I felt as infuriated, misunderstood, and disrespected as when he would throw that line at me. I remember being so frustrated and thinking grrrrrrrr he just doesn't get it!!! and he doesn't even care!!!!!!

I find a lot of the popular parenting advice seems to make sense, but inadvertently promotes a lot of the negative traits it aims to squash (or other negative traits). E.g., parents are taught that they need to worry about their children "throwing a fit" over this or that in a store, taught to expect their children to do just this, and taught to view children and to respond to them in ways that end up encouraging them to throw fits time and time again so that the child can learn not to throw a fit. Remember... when they "throw a fit" be consistent (which often comes with advice that translates to being cold and sociopathic or at the very least dismissive or offering pretend empathy). I find this so frustrating!!! I also find it frustrating that I feel a strong vibe here telling me that I'm supposed to be quiet rather than say "Hey... this has not at all been my experience... and I know that it has not been the experience of other parents I know who practice nonviolent communication and consensual living (or whatever else autonomy-supportive parenting might be called)... our children are NOT 'throwing fits'... they get through toddlerhood without the allegedly to-be-expected intense fits of kicking and screaming in rage..."

If I dare to talk about that... I'll be read as holier than thou... People who make such a claim don't understand what other people are going through... we don't understand that different children have different temperaments... I do understand that there are differences... and I also KNOW that my son would be throwing HUGE fits if I engaged in power struggles with him or otherwise followed a lot of mainstream parenting advice.


----------



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

Thanks Dal!







:


----------



## LifeIZBeautiful (Jan 28, 2007)

seems they are geared toward older kids, beyond the young "they just don't comprehend this yet" group. I don't think they are all bad, so long as done respectfully.
The author's tone, IMO, is no big deal. She is writing to _her audience_--*us*--not children. I'll bet she uses gentle and respectful tones with her kids. Hell, who's to say she doesn't sing these rules to them in a playful voice







...


----------



## Dal (Feb 26, 2005)

However my ex would say "get over it" to me... singing it or smiling or saying it in a gentle-sounding way and with good intent... it was still infuriating and humiliating for him to try to silence me and to basically tell me to shut up and that he was neither listening to what I had to say nor taking my point of view seriously. Sometimes it can be even more infuriating when the person is seemingly saccharine about dismissing one's point of view.


----------

