# Do you "punish" your child?



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

I was watching Malcolm in the Middle a little while ago (I love that show) and the boys did something bad (can't remember what).

Of course, the parents (Lois and Hal) had to think up a punishment for them.

For some reason, that rubbed me the wrong way. Will "punishing" my child really help them to behave better? Will it really help them when they get out in the real world?

Yet, if I don't have "punishments", what do I do when DS (or future kids) does something really bad - like hit the dog?

Right now he's not old enough to understand the "punishment" concept anyway, but I would like to be prepared.









Please talk to me about what you do when your child does something you don't want them to, and why you do it that way.

I apologize if this is one of those things that has been covered a million times







: I've lurked in this forum occasionally and haven't seen it talked about that much, at least not directly.


----------



## annakiss (Apr 4, 2003)

I've been thinking about this some lately and reading _Unconditional Parenting_ by Alfie Kohn. First off, in the book he talks about why punishment doesn't work. Haim Ginott says "Misbehavior and punishment are not opposites that cancel each other; on the contrary, they breed and reinforce each other." Punishment doesn't work because it is not fun for the punished. The punished person feels isolated and angry, but probably not much like changing their behavior. If anything, they're given further reason to act out or to simply be more devious and sneaky and manipulative about it. Lots of the things we punish children for we would never punish an adult for. It's better to try to model behavior and influence children than to punish them. Punishment is just manipulation.

So what I do. First, I try to avoid as much as possible the things that make my child act out. I try to avoid taking my 3yo to the grocery store, for example, because he just wants to run around and act like crazy and it's too much trouble for me, especially now with a new baby. I try to ward off negative behavior by making sure that there are lots of things that he _can_ do around and by making sure he doesn't get overtired or hungry.

Second, instead of punishing, I explain, or redirect or offer choices. So with things that I simply don't want him to do like make a mess, I try to offer a different way of accomplishing the same thing. So if he's throwing crayons around, first I stop him physically. Then I ask him to help me pick the crayons up and maybe throw them in the pencil bag we keep them in. We do this with blocks too. Throw them into their storage container. Or give him a ball to throw around. The whole time, I explain why we're doing it. So we don't throw crayons because it makes a mess for mommy to clean up, which I don't like to have to do and we could lose them or break them and he won't be able to use them to color anymore. But we can throw this ball back and forth to each other, or he can throw it and chase it... etc.

With things that are truly off-limits like hitting the dog, I stop him physically from hitting the dog, explain why it's not okay and find something else for him to do or encourage him to pet the dog nicely.

Sometimes it's hard to have the patience required to do all this, and I'm not always successful, but I'd rather do it this way than suffer the long-term consequences of punishing. It's hard to see the short term benefits as well, but I know that he won't likely be exhibiting these undesirable behaviors later on and I try to appreciate that he is not the sum of his behavior. Often, there is a reason behind what he does and it's up to me to figure out what that is rather than simply punishing the symptom.


----------



## Pandora114 (Apr 21, 2005)

And you see where punishment gets Malcom's parents.

The boys just come up with more devious and imaginitive ways to do whatever misbehaviour they want to do, fully knowing it's wrong for them to do it.


----------



## irinam (Oct 27, 2004)

First - anna kiss, I love you







You put it in such great way









Second - I totally see what you are saying Kristi. The word "punishment" rubs me the wrong way too. It's like I am drill sergeant or something "Give me 20 right now!" :LOL I am not that to my kids.

I often compare how *I* would feel if my DH was to start "thinking up" punishments for me, yk







: ?

I am not an angel myself and do stuff that even by a stretch of imagination can not be considered "good"







: I re-think it later, sometimes with the help of other people, regret that I did what I did and TRY not to repeat it again.

Not always can I not repeat it







:

So, to answer your question about what to do "if"... it depends on many things - DC age, circumstances, DC's mood, reasons behind the action.

Basically - access the situation and get to the root of it. Is he/she tired? Does he/she not know any better? Is he/she striving for attention? and so on.


----------



## bec (Dec 13, 2002)

I guess some of the things I do may look like punishment, but I really try hard to think of natural consequences instead. I find they are much more effective than just a punishment. If one of the kids hits or does something violent to their siblings or the dog, for example, that usually gets a time out (occasionally in the corner if I've lost my patience). My reasoning is that, if they hit, they need to be separated for a little bit. This gives me time to see to the injured party, the injured to feel like they are being protected, and for the aggressor to have a few moments to reflect on what they did, as well as to calm themselves down enough so they have control over themselves. Obviously, this works really only on my older daughter right now. Emily is only 19 months, so a bit young for this kind of discipline. Although, if she is the aggressor (and she usually is, frankly), I will separate them for a time.

Bec


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

That's one of the reason we love MITM. The parents are so totally clueless.

I can only think of one punishment- and that was when I sent a 10 yr old to his room for the evening. We did it because we could not get creative that night. I have no idea what the heck we were thinking, really.

Otherwise, no, I can't think of any other punishments. I can't even think of a time my kids did anything really 'bad', either. We haven't had any stealing or fighting or anything like that. I can't even think of any big lies. (Maybe my 16 yr old can...lol but I've never caught him in one).

Oh, wait, one time i did blow up over finding porn on the family computer. I ranted about respect and how there was not going to be any treating humans as objects in *this* family. etc. We said no computer for a few days until Dad and I figure out what we''re going to do about this. But i didn't think of it as punishment...but i suppose it was.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Great responses so far!

Quote:

Yet, if I don't have "punishments", what do I do when DS (or future kids) does something really bad - like hit the dog?
Why do you think your DS would hit the dog? Because he is mean and wants to hurt the dog? Obviously not. Because he doesn't understand that hitting hurts the dog. Why would you punish someone for not understanding? Our goal as parent is to help them learn. Punishments take the focus off of the lesson to be learned, promote negative labeling ("naughty"), and set up an adversarial relationship.


----------



## Silliest (Apr 4, 2004)

>> I really try hard to think of natural consequences instead. <<

If you have to think about it, it's not a natural consequence.

If you have to work really hard at it, it's not even a logical consequence.

jump in the puddle > get wet feet is an example of a natural consequence.

anything that requires parental intervention... isn't.


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

I avoid punishments. I think that other forms of learning are preferable. I also have a 13 year old and I have learned from experience that punishments do not inspire good behavior.
However I would not say that I "never" punish. Sometimes I need to punish just to remove from a situation or to really enforce the severity of the situation.
For example, punishing my daughter for being late coming home from her friends didnt help one bit. I could punish her till the cows came home and she just wouldnt pay attention to the time.
HOwever when she was 13 and purposely disobeyed by taking the city bus to a friends house after school when she was told no and that she must come home. I DID punish her because her safety was at issue and if I could not trust her to use her independance wisely, I couldnt allow her to have it.
Also since I believe discipline is about learning, I think punishment is not called for if the behavior has not yet been mastered.
However if my child shows they have mastered the proper behavior and they exhibit it anyway. I might also to a time out with my 3 year old.
But here is an example. WHen he was a young toddler, as toddlers do, he threw food. I told him repeatedly that we do not throw food and i had him help me clean up. Eventually he stopped throwing food with no punishments needed. HOwever when he ws 2 1/2 he started throwing food again because his younger brother was now 1 and was throwing food. He had already shown the ability to control himself. He had already internalized the expectation that food was not to be thrown. Reminding him and having him help clean up did not have the effect of convincing him that it was important to me that he continue to follow the rule. This was the first time I ever gave him time out. It did work very quickly. BUt time out was NOT the primary learning tool.

So do I punish? Occasionally. But I do not think it is useful as the first line of defense in a parents discipline tool kit and should only be used very sparingly. (and when the child is truly known to be capable )
I do not think punishment is an effective learning tool overall.
Joline


----------



## annakiss (Apr 4, 2003)

Personally, I do not feel that punitive damage in any form is honoring and respecting the individual personage of my children, so I don't do it. Most of the time, it's just not worth it. Without experience, they will never learn.


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Thanks for your responses! They have really gotten me thinking.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momoffour*
Great responses so far! Why do you think your DS would hit the dog? Because he is mean and wants to hurt the dog? Obviously not. Because he doesn't understand that hitting hurts the dog. Why would you punish someone for not understanding? Our goal as parent is to help them learn. Punishments take the focus off of the lesson to be learned, promote negative labeling ("naughty"), and set up an adversarial relationship.

Wow, this really puts is clearly! Thank you!


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

If the child already knows not to hit the dog and does it anyway. What then?


----------



## annakiss (Apr 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
If the child already knows not to hit the dog and does it anyway. What then?

Most children need to relearn the same thing over & over, especially toddlers. If it was a teenager doing this, I might wonder if they didn't have other psychological issues, but for small children, it's completely normal behavior to find this really entertaining.


----------



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

Impulse control plays a factor, too. Just as I *know* I shouldn't eat that whole bag of M&Ms sitting on my counter, well....... :LOL

And to answer the OP, no we don't punish.

Check out naturalchild website for some really good articles on why punishmnent doesn't work.


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

Yes, and the fact that it is so entertaining just MIGHt be powerful enough to make them want to do it even if they know that it hurts the dog and they shouldnt.
THe fact that children sometimes do things that they know they shouldnt. (even if we assume they forgot, a reminder should suffice, but if they do it again after the reminder I think you can be reasonably certain the child is actively choosing not to obey) ANd just for the sake of doing them.
This is where the argument that all misbehavior is motivated by underlying issues falls apart.
SOme things kids just shouldn't do is just FUN, and they will continue to want to do it even after they know mom doesnt want them to.
I really do not think punishment is a good educating tool. And I would never use punishment as a primary tool with discipline.
However I do think that there are times when just teaching your child what you expect, reminding them and redirecting them , and addressing underlying issues is not sufficient.
I do not think it is always entirely inappropriate to back up your rules with the possibility of punishment.
I only hope that everythign I try first works well enough that I never have to resort to it.
Joline


----------



## annakiss (Apr 4, 2003)

But backing up your rules with the possibility of punishment simply teaches children that "might makes right". It doesn't teach anything except "because I said so and if not, I'll make you hurt [emotionally]".


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

Hitting may teach "might makes right" but all punishment is not equivalent to spanking or yelling.
I have heard that suggested and I simply do not believe it. Children expect us as their parents to show them limits. They look up to us and expect us to help them learn. If I refused to show my child that I was still in control ofthe situation, when he or she feels out of control I would be letting them down.
It isnt might makes right. It is that I will help you learn to control yourself until you are able to do it on your own. Yes I am bigger, but I am also older and wiser and have their best interests in heart. It isnt about size or physical power (Might) at all.
Joline


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
Hitting may teach "might makes right" but all punishment is not equivalent to spanking or yelling.
I have heard that suggested and I simply do not believe it. Children expect us as their parents to show them limits. They look up to us and expect us to help them learn. If I refused to show my child that I was still in control ofthe situation, when he or she feels out of control I would be letting them down.
It isnt might makes right. It is that I will help you learn to control yourself until you are able to do it on your own. Yes I am bigger, but I am also older and wiser and have their best interests in heart. It isnt about size or physical power (Might) at all.
Joline

Showing limits, punishing, and controlling are not the same things.

fussy baby....have to run


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:

johub wrote:Yes, and the fact that it is so entertaining just MIGHt be powerful enough to make them want to do it even if they know that it hurts the dog and they shouldnt.
Do you think so? A very young child might take a lot of repition to understand they are hurting. The child might even be too young develpmentally to understand they are causing pain. Or maybe our perception is off and the hitting is not actually hurting the dog at all (why is the dog not running away?). But if an older child was hurting an animal for fun I would have them psychologically evaluated. I just don't think it would be normal to hurt an animal for fun.


----------



## irinam (Oct 27, 2004)

Johub, may be if you gave an example of the punishments you use, it would make it clearer.

What do you consider punishment for your DC?


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bec*
I guess some of the things I do may look like punishment, but I really try hard to think of natural consequences instead. I find they are much more effective than just a punishment. If one of the kids hits or does something violent to their siblings or the dog, for example, that usually gets a time out (occasionally in the corner if I've lost my patience.
Bec

I have to agree with Silliest that in my book this isn't natural consequences. I struggled with this myself on another list. My DD kept wanting to wear underpants, but she would not go to the bathroom even when asked and reminded and so would end up wetting her pants. Then I was minded to put her in a pull-up as the "natural consequence" of wetting her underpants. I wasn't trying to punish or shame her or anything. I just wasn't minded to keep her in underwear if she didn't want to use the bathroom. And somehiow I *thought* that was a "natural consequence."

Thankfully, someone set me straight and said the natural consequences of wetting your pants are wet underwear. And perhaps I could do the same thing for my daughter as I might do for myself if I wet my pants due to sneeze or something (we're all mothers here, right?), and help her get dry underwear. It really clarified the issue for me.

Bec, I'm sure you know this already and it's probably just the writing that's unclear. But since this is a "newbie" kind of discussion and I didn't want anyone else to get the wrong impression of "natural consequences."


----------



## annakiss (Apr 4, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
Hitting may teach "might makes right" but all punishment is not equivalent to spanking or yelling.
I have heard that suggested and I simply do not believe it. Children expect us as their parents to show them limits. They look up to us and expect us to help them learn. If I refused to show my child that I was still in control ofthe situation, when he or she feels out of control I would be letting them down.
It isnt might makes right. It is that I will help you learn to control yourself until you are able to do it on your own. Yes I am bigger, but I am also older and wiser and have their best interests in heart. It isnt about size or physical power (Might) at all.
Joline

Allow me to quote from _Unconditional Parenting_ directly, as it's more succinct than I would be:

Quote:

Announcing how we plan to punish children ("Remember, if you do _x_ then I'll do _y_ to you") may salve _our_ conscience because we gave them fair warning, but all we've really done is threaten them. We've told them in advance exactly how we'll make them suffer if they fail to obey. This communicates a message of distrust ("I don't think you'll do the right thing without fear of punishment"), leads kids to think of themselves as complying for extrinsic reasons, and emphasizes their powerlessness.
But perhaps, as irinam suggested, I'm not understanding you fully when you talk about punishments...


----------



## Miss Juice (Jun 9, 2005)

We really try in our house to make discipline less about punishment and more about teamwork or cooperation. We don't "punish" because that doesn't fit with our teamwork approach. I do think that kids should understand that sometimes there are consequences for certain actions or behaviors, but I try very hard to make that not about me vs. them, just about How It Is. Today in the grocery store 3.5 yo DD wanted to climb all over the cart, jump on and off, etc. I reminded her that this was not how we do things because it isn't safe, and that if she wanted to ride she needed to stay safe and if she couldn't manage that then she would have to walk. But is was about safety, not about I Told You Three Times and Now You Will Walk Because I Said So.

When it comes to things like hitting the dog, which we deal with on a regular basis, at this point our 3.5 yo knows that this is not OK. She does it anyway from time to time, out of frustration or excitement, and we remind her that people don't hit dogs because it hurts them, and if she can't play nicely with the dog then we will have to put the dog outside or in the kitchen. I think it is usually pretty easy to redirect, as long as I pay attention.

I was having a really hard time when she was an early three and her sister was 6 months, and the tantrums would usually end up with both of us totally melted down. I felt like I was yelling a lot and the thing that really helped me was to sit quietly (alone after they were in bed and with a glass of wine) and really think about what my role is as a parent. When I started thinking of myself as a Senior Team Member (or some other like title, it's a thought more than a position LOL) was when I started taking her behavior less personally and looking at things from a What's Going to Help Her Now point of view.

OK now I am just rambling but hey I'm not perfect yet


----------



## sadie_sabot (Dec 17, 2002)

I don't punish my kid.

(sorry for not offering anything else I'm mostly just weighing in and also, subscribign so I can watch this discussion)


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

Here is an example of how I have used punishment and how and why I thought it was appropriate. I believe I already mentioned it in this thread (but it might have been another)
My ds1 is now 3 years old. WHen he was 1 he used to throw his food on the floor as all 1 year olds do. I tolerated this behavior for a while because I believed it was developmentally appropriate and I felt that a part of learning to eat and self feed is learning about textures etc. . . But as he matured I could see it was time to help him learn more acceptable "manners" so to speak and that food was not for throwing. I started by reminding him that we do not throw food. And whenever I saw him throw food I would assume he was done and remove his plate and get him down and have him help me clean up. I did this routinely and Did not consider it punishment at all because in my opinion the throwing was his way of telling me he was done. As he learned to say "all done" and then have his plate removed and his hands washed. and as he learned that if he threw food on the floor he would have to clean it up, he stopped throwing food. This "behavior" issues was handled entirely without punishment because my goal wasa to teach him it is not proper to throw food. And as I said, I do not believe that punishment is an effective learning tool at all.
When he was 2 1/2 his younger brother reached the same food throwing state he had previously been in. Tristan must have remembered how fun it was, or maybe just wanted to play with is brother or whatever, but he had already proven to me that he knew he was not supposed to throw food, he also had the ability to control his behavior (as he had not done it in quite some time). So I started out in the same way I had done before, I gently reminded him and had him help clean up, but these tools were ineffective. He had already learned that throwing food was not ok. He already knew that thrown food had to be cleaned up. And I continued to remind and walk him through cleanups and he continued with the behavior.
Finally, convinced that he Knew what he was doing was unacceptable but that he was choosing to do it anyway I gave him his first timeout. Altogether I gave him 3 timeouts. AFter the third time he no longer threw food. He did not cry or protest or feel rejected going to timeout. He handled it matter of factly. In fact if I told him he could come back to the table he would remind me that he had not heard the bell yet.
Timeout was not (nor would it be) my method to teach my child anything. But already knowing what is expected and having the ability to do what is expected, I think it can serve as a reminder that he is expected to live up to his abilities.
As a rule I do think that behaviorism and punishment is overused on children and their emotional needs and developmental abilities must always be taken into consideration regarding any behavor which may need to be changed.
But I do reject the idea that it is always wrong or misuse of power to use any sort of punishment (no matter how gentle).
I also reject the idea that a child who have a very strong attached relationship with his parents is going to feel rejected or abandoned as a result of being asked to sit in timeout for 2 minutes.

And as for the dog analogy, just because a child knows intellectually that hitting a dog "hurts" the dog and mom says "no" does not mean a child has a psychological problem if he continues to do it. It just means he has not gained sufficient impulse control to resist the temptation (perhaps the dog makes a funny noise, or yelps or just feels interesting when the child hits.) I am not assuming the dog is being maliciously tortured to purposely cause him pain. If a child hit a dog to purposely cause him pain that woudl be different. But knowing it isnt nice and doing it anyway doesnt make a sociopath. It just makes a normal child who needs a little extra help with impulse control.

Joline


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

_Announcing how we plan to punish children ("Remember, if you do x then I'll do y to you") may salve our conscience because we gave them fair warning, but all we've really done is threaten them. We've told them in advance exactly how we'll make them suffer if they fail to obey. This communicates a message of distrust ("I don't think you'll do the right thing without fear of punishment"), leads kids to think of themselves as complying for extrinsic reasons, and emphasizes their powerlessness_

I am a fan of a lot of what Alfie Kohn has to say, but I do not really think his perception of what it means to be a child in this situation is the only way.
For example to tell a child that if they contiinue to do X, Y is going to happen, it gives the child a choice. "You can choose to control yourself, but if you dont I am going to have to help you."
I really dont believe in parenting on the couch with threats, which is what I think he is implying. The above statement is reminiscent of "Dont make me turn this car around. . ."
However, knowing consequences doesnt in my opinion emphasize the childs powerlessness. It reminds the child that they are powerful enough to choose their own future. It is empowering to be able to predict the consequences of their actions with accuracy.
I think that a child is more likely to feel insecure when he does not feel capable of controlling his own actions and there is nobody there to be his safety net and help him stop himself.
In fact I will go so far as to say I have actually seen my daughter practically BEG for punishment. Growing up is very hard to do. At about the time she was turning 13 I was giving her a lot of freedom and benefit of the doubt. I am afraid it was more freedom that she was prepared to handle. She ended up getting in big trouble, and you can hardly imagine the relief on her face when I told her she was grounded. Acting out was her way of begging me to show her that she was not expected to be 100% responsible for herself yet and that I was still there to guide her. Would you believe she was happier during the time she was grounded than she had been in the preceeding weeks when she was constantly pulled in different directions by friends and different influences?
I also do not punish my oldest for your run of the mill stuff. But I would not leave punishment out of my parenting toolkit entirely.
Joline


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

No we do not punish. Punishment creates shame, anger, frustration, and fosters an environment for sneaky stuff and lying. I feel it creates a cycle that breeds the very behavior we trying to get rid of. To me it looks something like this:

Undesirable behavior>punishment>anger in & embarassment of child=dishonesty about undesirable behavior should it come up again=punishment and so on. Also, punishment doesn't teach how to stop doing XYZ, or explain why XYZ isn't appropriate to do. I also feel punishment sets the scene for doing the something "because mom said so" or "because I have to or I will get in trouble." rather than because the child understands for themselves why or why not to do something.

We model the kind of behavior we like, we discuss and discuss and discuss, and we highly encourage the "golden rule" (treat others as you'd like them to treat you).


----------



## PaganScribe (Feb 14, 2003)

No, I don't punish my child. (He's only 2.5, so part of me feels like I should add "yet," but I don't plan to ever punish him.)


----------



## PancakeGoddess (Oct 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
I also reject the idea that a child who have a very strong attached relationship with his parents is going to feel rejected or abandoned as a result of being asked to sit in timeout for 2 minutes.

Joline, this was a really thoughtful post. I apprecate it. I'm not sure I would have handled it the same way, but I agree that you probably did little or no damage to your relationship with your child in the situation as you described it. A lot depends on the child's temperament, as well.

As the mother of older children, I see a serious danger in overuse of punishment or any sort of consequence. I think it's a bad idea to get in the habit of using consequences as a regular parenting tool because your relationship comes to be defined in terms of your greater power.

In the very near future, I will not be able to impose my will on my oldest by any means. We've all seen how effective it is to ground a teenager. It causes disconnection, anger and sneaking. If I rely on rewards/punishments for 10-12 years, how will I suddenly be able to switch gears and expect him to relate to me in cooperative terms?

Unconditional Parenting and Hold on to Your Kids are two books that have really confirmed what my gut has always said: the hard work of connecting with kids and disciplining without relying on parental power is _worth it_.

Now more than ever, I want my son to feel he can be honest with us without fear of "consequences" and that he can trust our advice is not an attempt to manipulate him but is simply our genuine wish for his happiness.


----------



## annakiss (Apr 4, 2003)

I just had a long talk with my DH about this. I don't think that punishing your child _at all, ever_ is going to leave serious lasting effects, but I don't think that punishing accomplishes what needs to be accomplished. As my DH put it, punishment is a missed opportunity for motivation.


----------



## UnschoolnMa (Jun 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annakiss*
As my DH put it, punishment is a missed opportunity for motivation.


I agree. Motivation, understanding something new, etc.


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

_I think it's a bad idea to get in the habit of using consequences as a regular parenting tool because your relationship comes to be defined in terms of your greater power._

I agree with this statement 100%.


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

_In the very near future, I will not be able to impose my will on my oldest by any means. We've all seen how effective it is to ground a teenager._

I think that grounding a teenager is effective and necessary under certain conditions.

_It causes disconnection, anger and sneaking._
It can if you do not have the child's full understanding and cooperation I imagine. I wouldnt know. I have grounded. However only under circumstances which required me to keep my daughter close and under better supervison. In my experience the grounding was the perfect excuse for her to withdraw herself from the influences of friends who were having a bad influence on her, but making it "moms fault". Grounding has also resulted in renewed interest in family and siblings and cooperation. I suppose it depends on the teen and if they are already feeling disconnected and angry. And especially if their relationship with their parents is not unconditional and based on trust.

_If I rely on rewards/punishments for 10-12 years, how will I suddenly be able to switch gears and expect him to relate to me in cooperative terms?_

Now that is the key isnt it? To rely on only one method of anything, what happens when it loses its effectiveness? Which I think it is wiser to have the most parenting tools at your disposal so that you can pick and choose what is relevant to each separate situation.

Joline


----------



## iamama (Jul 14, 2003)

:


----------



## PancakeGoddess (Oct 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
In my experience the grounding was the perfect excuse for her to withdraw herself from the influences of friends who were having a bad influence on her, but making it "moms fault".

So, she wanted to back away from some peers, and having the grounding excuse made it socially a little easier. That makes sense, so you and she were both in agreement about that "excuse"? I'm not sure I'd really call that grounding, if she wasn't actually wanting to be with those friends anyway.

Or you're thinking she probably would have wanted to be with them but being grounded (against her will) gave her the opportunity to rethink? If the relationship is such that she wasn't angry about being grounded, maybe she would have responded to regular ol' discussion of the kids in question?

I don't know... this is very hard. I don't claim to have any answers on this for sure. On the one hand, I can TOTALLY relate to wanting my kid to stay away from sketchy influences. Otoh, I really don't want to do any grounding, as I would hope by then he'll have the fairly stable foundation with which to make decent choices even when we're not around. That's my wish







:

A scary proposition! Our homeschooling is helpful in this respect, because his social circle doesn't consist of a school's worth of kids - and I know the families. This makes communication easier.


----------



## PancakeGoddess (Oct 8, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
Now that is the key isnt it? To rely on only one method of anything, what happens when it loses its effectiveness? Which I think it is wiser to have the most parenting tools at your disposal so that you can pick and choose what is relevant to each separate situation.

I see what you're saying, but I guess I don't see grounding/overpowering as a tool I want to use. I think dialogue and respect are tools that don't ever lose effectiveness.


----------



## Embee (May 3, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annakiss*
I've been thinking about this some lately and reading _Unconditional Parenting_ by Alfie Kohn. First off, in the book he talks about why punishment doesn't work. Haim Ginott says "Misbehavior and punishment are not opposites that cancel each other; on the contrary, they breed and reinforce each other." Punishment doesn't work because it is not fun for the punished. The punished person feels isolated and angry, but probably not much like changing their behavior. If anything, they're given further reason to act out or to simply be more devious and sneaky and manipulative about it. Lots of the things we punish children for we would never punish an adult for. It's better to try to model behavior and influence children than to punish them. Punishment is just manipulation.

So what I do. First, I try to avoid as much as possible the things that make my child act out. I try to avoid taking my 3yo to the grocery store, for example, because he just wants to run around and act like crazy and it's too much trouble for me, especially now with a new baby. I try to ward off negative behavior by making sure that there are lots of things that he _can_ do around and by making sure he doesn't get overtired or hungry.

Second, instead of punishing, I explain, or redirect or offer choices. So with things that I simply don't want him to do like make a mess, I try to offer a different way of accomplishing the same thing. So if he's throwing crayons around, first I stop him physically. Then I ask him to help me pick the crayons up and maybe throw them in the pencil bag we keep them in. We do this with blocks too. Throw them into their storage container. Or give him a ball to throw around. The whole time, I explain why we're doing it. So we don't throw crayons because it makes a mess for mommy to clean up, which I don't like to have to do and we could lose them or break them and he won't be able to use them to color anymore. But we can throw this ball back and forth to each other, or he can throw it and chase it... etc.

With things that are truly off-limits like hitting the dog, I stop him physically from hitting the dog, explain why it's not okay and find something else for him to do or encourage him to pet the dog nicely.

Sometimes it's hard to have the patience required to do all this, and I'm not always successful, but I'd rather do it this way than suffer the long-term consequences of punishing. It's hard to see the short term benefits as well, but I know that he won't likely be exhibiting these undesirable behaviors later on and I try to appreciate that he is not the sum of his behavior. Often, there is a reason behind what he does and it's up to me to figure out what that is rather than simply punishing the symptom.

Beautifully said. And your DH's quote later on in this thread is wonderful as well, right on.









Quote:


Originally Posted by *benjalo*
Unconditional Parenting and Hold on to Your Kids are two books that have really confirmed what my gut has always said: the hard work of connecting with kids and disciplining without relying on parental power is worth it.

Amen.









If it isn't obvious already, we do not punish. IMO, punishment creates bad feelings which cannot possibly create an atmosphere for real learning and healing. Further, it creates negative space between parent and child. Most discipline "issues" are caused by a lack of connection and IMO, punishment simply perpetuates that negative cycle. We choose to connect through discipline rather than disconnect.

The best,
Em


----------



## bleurae (Feb 25, 2005)

The Secret of Parenting by Anthony E. Wolf

He explains it so well. He discusses that when we punish we teach our children that causing suffering is an answer.

It is an awesome book and he has another called

Get Out of My Life, but First Could You Drive Me & Cheryl to the Mall: A Parent's Guide to the New Teenager

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...85464?v=glance


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

_maybe she would have responded to regular ol' discussion of the kids in question?_

Certainly you realize that I would have never needed to ground if discussion had worked. (or anything) I just want to make that clear, that I am only talking last resort here. In every circumstance other methods were tried first and repeatedly.


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

_I would hope by then he'll have the fairly stable foundation with which to make decent choices even when we're not around. That's my wish_

That was my wish as well. I hope it works better for you than it did for me. It turns out that you can do everything right and your child still make some wrong choices. Dont get me wrong, she is a GREAT kid. But just having an open communication and constant dialogue and unconditional love and a very deep connection (all of which we still have) did not keep her immune to growing up and testing waters.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bleurae*
The Secret of Parenting by Anthony E. Wolf

He explains it so well. He discusses that when we punish we teach our children that causing suffering is an answer.

It is an awesome book and he has another called

Get Out of My Life, but First Could You Drive Me & Cheryl to the Mall: A Parent's Guide to the New Teenager

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...85464?v=glance


Here is the quote from Dr. Wolf:

_"Punishment, any punishment, devalues human suffering simply becuase it is the inentional infliction of suffering. Parents are thsoe individuals in a chld's world who are supposed to represent the side of good. When they intentionally inflict suffering, the implict message to the child is that suffering must be a legitimate means to an end. Punishment as a part of child raising practices teaches the child that human suffering is not an absolute harm._

This is why I love Anthony Wolf.


----------



## bleurae (Feb 25, 2005)

Thank you soooo much maya. I have lent my copy of the book out this week so I could not quote exact from it. I adore it, so simple yet so overlooked. I have even bought the book and had it sent to 4 friends as well.


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

Thanks for the reference BTW to the Anthony WOlf book "The Secret to Parenting" I think I will check this out.
HE seems to acknowledge that parents do have a right and responsibility to be "in charge" of their kids and seems to have some practical techniques. I can't wait to hear them.
Most of the other things I have read against punishment have been highly theoretical and use terms like "manipulating children to do what you want" as if it is a bad thing. (which of course turns me off because part of my issue is that I want to avoid punishment and STILL be successful in getting my children to behave.) I am not willing to just accept refusal to behave as a matter of course if the positive discipline techniques I have fail to work.
And this guy sounds like he has some tricks up his sleeve.
Most of my friends who never punish believe that they should respect their children's right to choose not to do what they are asked.
Some of you might also agree with this. It is not my belief however.
I am actually very relieved that someone out there has the answers as to how you can never use punishment and still expect compliance.
I am going to RUN (not walk) to get this book.
Thank you.
JOline


----------



## bleurae (Feb 25, 2005)

Cool Joline, happy to help. I would love to hear what you think of it after you read it.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

johub said:


> _Thanks for the reference BTW to the Anthony WOlf book "The Secret to Parenting" I think I will check this out.
> HE seems to acknowledge that parents do have a right and responsibility to be "in charge" of their kids and seems to have some practical techniques. I can't wait to hear them.
> Most of the other things I have read against punishment have been highly theoretical and use terms like "manipulating children to do what you want" as if it is a bad thing. (which of course turns me off because part of my issue is that I want to avoid punishment and STILL be successful in getting my children to behave.)_
> 
> ...


----------



## HunnyBunnyMummy (Apr 23, 2005)

Before reading your answers, Johub, I would have definately said that I was anti-punishment. However, you brought up some interesting points I hadn't considered before. Particurally, what do you do when you have a pre-teen who is torn between her friends and her parents. I could imagine that she would be pretty stuck, and unable to make a move for certain toward one or the other. Growing up, my parents always told me that if I ever didn't want to do something that everyone else was doing, I could always use them as an excuse. "Can't because my mom and dad won't let me...Can't go out tonight because I have to stay home and clean my room." I used it a couple of times, but then eventually gained enough of my own inner strenght to say "no" without needing them as a crutch.

In sum, I'm still anti-punishment, but am considering that giving kids a nudge when they are stuck could be useful.


----------



## bleurae (Feb 25, 2005)

I really encourage you to read the book and see what you feel after. It is hard to get any complete idea of what he is saying unless you take the time to go cover to cover.

I also want to add I didn't "miss" any of his points myself.


----------



## bec (Dec 13, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Silliest*
>> I really try hard to think of natural consequences instead. <<

If you have to think about it, it's not a natural consequence.

If you have to work really hard at it, it's not even a logical consequence.

jump in the puddle > get wet feet is an example of a natural consequence.

anything that requires parental intervention... isn't.


But there are definitely times that do require parental intervention. And, sometimes, my kneejerk reaction is to yell (I guess that's a natural consequence of pushing mama's buttons too much, but not one I choose to inflict on my child). So, if one kid is picking on the other, the natural/logical/call it whatever you like consequence is that they need to play separately for a time.

And, Ellien, you are correct. It was unclear writing. I was not trying to say that my use of time out was the natural consequence. That would be more of what I would call a punishment. But I guess I like it better than, say, yelling or spanking, because it gives everybody an opportunity to regroup, take a break, and try again. It doesn't shame or humiliate anybody. Just removes them from the situation.

I should also note that I really only make issues with my kids over things that they are doing to each other or the dog. The 19 month old is still learning that some things hurt, so she needs to be supervised and told over and over and over that she may only use gentle touches with the dog, and that eyes aren't for touching, and no, you may not stick your fingers up his nose (he's an amazing animal, and has never even curled a lip at them). When it gets to the point where I think she is simply trying to test limits and isn't just being exuberant, I will send the dog somewhere else where he can be safe. She doesn't get punished, just isn't able to play with the dog.

It gets a little more complicated when the two kids aren't getting along because they both want to be near me, and if Emily is not being gentle with Katie, it isn't fair to her to send her away like I do the dog. She has occasionally elected on her own to go to her room and shut the door if she wants to be alone.

I don't worry about things like what they choose to wear for the day, if they eat a meal with the family or even cleaning up toys for the day. It just isn't worth it to me. As a result we have a fairly peaceful family.

I hope this makes more sense.

Bec


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Me yell? :LOL Never.

Seriously.

I can imagine there could be times I might ground. (Don't make me decide about why/where right this second. lol ).

I fully trust my children, but if I saw they were engaging in dangerous acitvities, I would be highly concerned. Which means I'd react.

I can't talk specific reaction because I have not BTDT--but I will always act in the best interests of my children. Even to the point I change direction---if I think I need to.

Howevr, like i said, I can't answer the question of what that could be, however.

But my children's safety is paramount. I'll do whatever it is that I need to do.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
Hitting may teach "might makes right" but all punishment is not equivalent to spanking or yelling.
I have heard that suggested and I simply do not believe it. Children expect us as their parents to show them limits. They look up to us and expect us to help them learn. If I refused to show my child that I was still in control ofthe situation, when he or she feels out of control I would be letting them down.
It isnt might makes right. It is that I will help you learn to control yourself until you are able to do it on your own. Yes I am bigger, but I am also older and wiser and have their best interests in heart. It isnt about size or physical power (Might) at all.
Joline

If you didn't have the physical might, your child could choose to disobey and you'd have no recourse, right? Punishment - all punishment - is about imposing the will of one person on another; and that can only be done by robbing the other of their power. It just so happens that more severe forms of punishment - hitting, for example - can have other consequences, as well.

There is a wide range of possibility between a parent exercising complete control over a situation and exercising no control over a situation. Choosing not to take an authoritarian role does not mean leaving children hanging out on a wire by themselves. We can use our age and experience to let our children know how we might handle things, to help them brainstorm about how they might handle things, and to support them when they find themselves in a mess. We can show limits without robbing them of their power.

Quote:

And as for the dog analogy, just because a child knows intellectually that hitting a dog "hurts" the dog and mom says "no" does not mean a child has a psychological problem if he continues to do it. It just means he has not gained sufficient impulse control to resist the temptation (perhaps the dog makes a funny noise, or yelps or just feels interesting when the child hits.) I am not assuming the dog is being maliciously tortured to purposely cause him pain. If a child hit a dog to purposely cause him pain that woudl be different. But knowing it isnt nice and doing it anyway doesnt make a sociopath. It just makes a normal child who needs a little extra help with impulse control.
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. Are you saying that a child who does not have the impulse control to choose not to hit an animal can be helped to make that choice through punishment? It seems to me that by the time children develop that impulse control, they are generally at a point where they can understand that hitting an animal can hurt it. Before then, it's up to us to keep the situation from being an issue by keeping them away from the animal or helping them to pet gently.

Quote:

However, knowing consequences doesnt in my opinion emphasize the childs powerlessness. It reminds the child that they are powerful enough to choose their own future. It is empowering to be able to predict the consequences of their actions with accuracy.
I think that this reasoning makes sense from a parent's perspective; but probably not from a child's. If the listed consequences are parent-imposed (i.e., not natural), then the child does not, in fact, have a choice that is independent of the parent's power. If I tell my child that he can either choose to eat the mashed potatoes I've set in front of him for dinner that he doesn't like or he can choose to get up from the table, but he won't be able to have any more food for the evening, then he doesn't really have a legitimate choice. He doesn't have any power, really. He gets to choose my preference or he gets to be hungry. On the other hand, if I tell my child that he can choose to stay up late but it will mean that he will probably be very tired for his activity tomorrow and not enjoy it as much, then he still has power to make an actual choice.

Quote:

I think that a child is more likely to feel insecure when he does not feel capable of controlling his own actions and there is nobody there to be his safety net and help him stop himself.
I don't think that this ever has to be a consequence of parenting without punishment.


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bec*
I was not trying to say that my use of time out was the natural consequence. That would be more of what I would call a punishment. But I guess I like it better than, say, yelling or spanking, because it gives everybody an opportunity to regroup, take a break, and try again. It doesn't shame or humiliate anybody. Just removes them from the situation.


Thank you for posting this. I feel this is a good place to say that I find myself becoming a yeller. I've got some things to work on. I find myself using 1-2-3 or very coercive methods such as "either you do or I'll do it" right before I'm about to yell. Someone gave me the tip to put yourself in "time-out," which I like. It gives me a chance to take a break or just sit down with my DD. "Would you like a little mommy time or snuggle time, just you and me together?"

And I feel like this 1-2-3 business is a stepping stone I need right now until I can do a little deeper in getting my own needs met and understanding my yelling triggers. But I'm not real happy that I'm doing this. But I consider it a bridge until I get better at NVC. I hope that helpful to some people.


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
Are you saying that a child who does not have the impulse control to choose not to hit an animal can be helped to make that choice through punishment? It seems to me that by the time children develop that impulse control, they are generally at a point where they can understand that hitting an animal can hurt it. Before then, it's up to us to keep the situation from being an issue by keeping them away from the animal or helping them to pet gently.

I think she was trying to reassure the OP that it's OK that the toddler hits the dog, even though the toddler *knows* not to. She won't into a sociopath, she's just a normal toddler who 1) may be excited 2) may have forgotten 3) may lack impulse control 4) may be deliberately testing limits or 5) may be exercising control over her own body. All perfectly normal and probably no need for any kind of punishment, just coaching.


----------



## TexasSuz (Mar 4, 2002)

Yes , I use some punishments. Don't have time to read the posts here but wanted to add that I believe that it is my responsibility to shape and guide my children's behavior. I believe that children want limits and rules and that they feel more secure when they know that parents will enforce them in a gentle, loving way.

I think there is a basic philosophy difference between people who use punishments/rules and those who don't. We view our roles as parents differently. Not saying that one is wrong and one is right - but they are very different views.

Thankfully both fit into gentle parenting. We have the same goal, just take different paths.


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

_If you didn't have the physical might, your child could choose to disobey and you'd have no recourse, right? Punishment - all punishment - is about imposing the will of one person on another; and that can only be done by robbing the other of their power. It just so happens that more severe forms of punishment - hitting, for example - can have other consequences, as well._

Regardless of my parenting technique my child "could" choose to disobey me. The difference in my opinion is that with refusing to ever allow the possibility of punishment, once I have reached the end of my GD toolkit and my child still chooses to disobey, I have no recourse.
If I run to the end of my GD toolkit and my child still disobeys, but I leave open the possibility for for well thought out reasonable punishment, I do have recourse.
I think we deeply disagree as to the nature of an individual's power. I believe that as my children grow they gain more power and learn to have control over it. But it is my sacred duty to assist them by giving them more power as they are capable to control it, teaching them how to control it and removing some power when they show that they are not ready for that much yet.
I do not see them as being born imbued with all of the power in the world that is rightfully theirs and I have no business takign any away.
What that means is that I believe it is right and good and in the nature of the parenting relationship that parents have more power.
And physical might has absolutely nothing whatever to do with it. NOthing.
I have things my children want. It is the natural scheme of things that my children will want things from me and I make the decisions as to when or how or if they get what they want. I could be 2 ft tall, but if my teenager wants me to drive her to the mall, but she has been disrespectful to me, she doesnt get to go to the mall.

_There is a wide range of possibility between a parent exercising complete control over a situation and exercising no control over a situation. Choosing not to take an authoritarian role does not mean leaving children hanging out on a wire by themselves._

Nor does choosing to not take a permissive role mean taking an authoritarian role. Authoritative parents are not afraid to take charge of their children when necessary nor afraid to give them the freedom they need to grow when it is appropriate. You are either confusing Authoritarian with Authoritative or somehow believe they are one in the same.

_We can use our age and experience to let our children know how we might handle things, to help them brainstorm about how they might handle things, and to support them when they find themselves in a mess. We can show limits without robbing them of their power_.

Sure we can. Some people are very comfortable with this.
Some of us would rather have a little more of a safety net around our children because we recognize that they are not little adults and their decision making skills, abstract thought processes, comprehension of cause and effect etc . . are immature and need assistance being developed.
Meanwhile I would prefer my child not have the power to do things that are inappropriate, or harmful.
I can give my children the respect they deserve without giving them more power than they are ready to handle.

Again, I suppose it all comes down to a disagreement in the nature of one's power and the nature of the parent child relationship.
Joline


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

Nor does choosing to not take a permissive role mean taking an authoritarian role.
That was exactly my point.

Quote:

Authoritative parents are not afraid to take charge of their children when necessary nor afraid to give them the freedom they need to grow when it is appropriate. You are either confusing Authoritarian with Authoritative or somehow believe they are one in the same.
I'm not confusing them at all. I believe that one can be authoritative (i.e., a leader) without being punitive. It's my opinion that when punishment enters the picture, the parent crosses the threshold from authoritative to authoritarian.

Quote:

Sure we can. Some people are very comfortable with this.
Some of us would rather have a little more of a safety net around our children because we recognize that they are not little adults and their decision making skills, abstract thought processes, comprehension of cause and effect etc . . are immature and need assistance being developed.
Those of us who choose not to have punishment in our parenting toolbox don't necessarily view children as "little adults." On the contrary, I think we often have a much better grip on what children are and are not capable of. We just choose to provide them assistance in developing without being punitive.

Quote:

Meanwhile I would prefer my child not have the power to do things that are inappropriate, or harmful.
I can give my children the respect they deserve without giving them more power than they are ready to handle.
What I've found is that, in showing my child that I can help him navigate the world without imposing my will on him, my child is generally willing to yield the floor to me in situations that he just isn't ready for. I'm sure this will change some as he gets older, but what we get in exchange is more enhanced dialogue and reasoning skills. It is absolutely the natural scheme of things for a parent to be a leader. It is also a child's natural inclination to look to the parent for guidance. Some children do it to greater or lesser degrees, of course, but all children do it unless they've been given some reason to see their parents as unreasonable.

Quote:

Again, I suppose it all comes down to a disagreement in the nature of one's power and the nature of the parent child relationship.
I think, in our case, anyway, it's less about a disagreement over the nature of the parent-child relationship than it is about how to best allow that relationship to progress.


----------



## supernatural (Jul 26, 2005)

Well I was going to use the term "natural consequences" but after reading the other posts, I don't think that exactly fits. I do use what I consider "reasonable" consequences. For example, if my ds were to ride his bike through my garden and I had never before told him this was unacceptable, I wouldn't punish him at all. I would explain why it wasn't a good choice and ask him to try to remember not to do that. However, if I'd told him a thousand times not to do that, and he still did, I might take away his bike-riding priveledges for a few days, or a week or whatever. I would tell him at this point that owning a bike/car/house/fill-in-the-property is a priveledge that comes with responsibility, and if he cannot responsibly manage it, he shouldn't have it. This is reasonable to me because if he were to break rules while driving, he could lose his license... there are lots of things like that in adult life.

I'm really more about teaching my kids why those things are wrong rather than just not to do them. When I was a kid, my mom used to tell me to stay out of the neighbors hog barns. I went anyway, on the sly. Had my mother ever told me I was actually in danger, I would never have gone. "Because I said so," never worked for me and I don't use it on my kids. There are rules in my house, but there aren't many (and the garden thing isn't one of them, my kids are thankfully respectful enough to consider that on their own). And honestly, most of the time we just have a chat about respect of others' feelings and property and that's all that's necessary. My kids are 8, 5, & 2 btw.


----------



## luv my 2 sweeties (Aug 30, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ellien C*
And I feel like this 1-2-3 business is a stepping stone I need right now until I can do a little deeper in getting my own needs met and understanding my yelling triggers. But I'm not real happy that I'm doing this. But I consider it a bridge until I get better at NVC. I hope that helpful to some people.

I just wanted to offer you some support in this.







For most of us parenting is a journey we are working very hard on. I used 1-2-3 Magic for a short time to transition out of the yelling I found myself doing more and more when my first child started misbehaving willfully (at around age 3, I think). I had been spanked as a child for defiance, and I found that deciding not to spank left me not knowing *what* to do! I would get *very* frustrated and angry and resort to yelling and sometimes too-rough handling. 1-2-3 gave me a little more control so that I wouldn't get *so* upset.

I kept learning and found even better methods of responding to misbehavior. (I was very happy to find Anthony Wolf, who has already been mentioned in this thread, and I've been inspired many times by Maya44 and other moms here at MDC.) The 1-2-3 and time-outs dropped away as I matured as a parent. It wasn't an ideal tool for parenting, but it was *way* better than what I was doing before, and it gave me the emotional space to improve even more.

I'm still on the journey! I'm trying to eliminate punishment, but I still fall back sometimes, especially when I'm tired or frustrated by lack of cooperation. I like to be in control of my environment, so lack of cooperation from the kiddos is a big trigger for me. Those are the times I'm most likely to threaten punishment or yell. But I'm getting better all the time, and so will you!


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

*I'm not confusing them at all. I believe that one can be authoritative (i.e., a leader) without being punitive. It's my opinion that when punishment enters the picture, the parent crosses the threshold from authoritative to authoritarian.*
I see. I have never heard that. BUt I suppose that this is where we both disagree because this is where I would say that a parent who chooses to accept her child's choice, even when it is the wrong one or an unwise one without providing any consequences would be considered "permissive". (when punishment exits the picture the parent crosses from authoritative to permissive, not willing to back up what they say)
The definitions are often compared to "jellyfish" "backbone" and "brick wall" parents. I can hardly imagine being anything but a "jellyfish" if one is not prepared to follow through if their child does not willingly "yield the floor".
If the "what then" at the end of the struggle involves the child ultimately getting their own way as long as they are willing to hold out longer than the parent. (no parent imposed consequences ever).
I am not saying that there is anything wrong with being a permissive parent. SOme children fluorish in such environments. I suppose the possibility (however remote) that I will use punishment to back up my discipline when all else fails is what I consider to be the "backbone" in my parenting technique. Whereas Authoritarian parent would never "pick their battles", because they must always be in control. (brick wall, no choices)
Authoritarian parents seek to have ultimate control in all things.
Authroitative parents pick their battles. They will stand firm on a few things that they consider very important and will let the smallies slide.

*What I've found is that, in showing my child that I can help him navigate the world without imposing my will on him, my child is generally willing to yield the floor to me in situations that he just isn't ready for. I'm sure this will change some as he gets older, but what we get in exchange is more enhanced dialogue and reasoning skills. It is absolutely the natural scheme of things for a parent to be a leader. It is also a child's natural inclination to look to the parent for guidance. Some children do it to greater or lesser degrees, of course, but all children do it unless they've been given some reason to see their parents as unreasonable.*

I have found this to be true most of the time as well. However I have also found that there will always be exceptions. THere will always be times where the child tests those limits. And we as parents then need to decide, do we stand back and let them fly even if they are not ready. Or do we stop it before it goes too far.
We can model and explain and role play and do everything right. And still our kids will make some bad choices. Even good kids.
I believe in GD with my whole heart. And I make it a rule to never be arbitrary with my children (so that they never have a reason to see me as being unreasonable). And If reasoning and talking does the trick, I would never have to stoop to punishment.

Joline


----------



## bleurae (Feb 25, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
That was exactly my point.

I'm not confusing them at all. I believe that one can be authoritative (i.e., a leader) without being punitive. It's my opinion that when punishment enters the picture, the parent crosses the threshold from authoritative to authoritarian.

Those of us who choose not to have punishment in our parenting toolbox don't necessarily view children as "little adults." On the contrary, I think we often have a much better grip on what children are and are not capable of. We just choose to provide them assistance in developing without being punitive.

What I've found is that, in showing my child that I can help him navigate the world without imposing my will on him, my child is generally willing to yield the floor to me in situations that he just isn't ready for. I'm sure this will change some as he gets older, but what we get in exchange is more enhanced dialogue and reasoning skills. It is absolutely the natural scheme of things for a parent to be a leader. It is also a child's natural inclination to look to the parent for guidance. Some children do it to greater or lesser degrees, of course, but all children do it unless they've been given some reason to see their parents as unreasonable.

I think, in our case, anyway, it's less about a disagreement over the nature of the parent-child relationship than it is about how to best allow that relationship to progress.


so well said


----------



## sparklemom (Dec 11, 2001)

Quote:

Do you "punish" your child?
my short answer, the only one i have time to offer, is no, we _do not_ punish our children under any circumstances.


----------



## kamilla626 (Mar 18, 2004)

What a thought provoking thread!

I'll have to chime in later when I've had more sleep. BTW Dragonfly, I like - and agree with - what you've said here. (Maybe there's not much I can add after all!)


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
*I am not saying that there is anything wrong with being a permissive parent. SOme children fluorish in such environments. I suppose the possibility (however remote) that I will use punishment to back up my discipline when all else fails is what I consider to be the "backbone" in my parenting technique. Whereas Authoritarian parent would never "pick their battles", because they must always be in control. (brick wall, no choices)
Authoritarian parents seek to have ultimate control in all things.
Authroitative parents pick their battles. They will stand firm on a few things that they consider very important and will let the smallies slide.
*
*
*
*
I agree with this last statement. I think where we disconnect, though, is that you see a parent who does not impose contrived consequences as "permissive" whereas I know that I'm anything but permissive.









I've also read Coloroso's book (where the "jellyfish," "backbone," and "brick wall" concepts come from) and very much take what she says to heart. I don't remember her advocating false consequences for a child, though. I do remember her saying that where there are consequences, it's a parent's job to help a child figure out how to deal with them and, where a child messes up, it's a parent's job to help them figure out how to fix it.

Quote:

model and explain and role play and do everything right. And still our kids will make some bad choices. Even good kids.
I believe in GD with my whole heart. And I make it a rule to never be arbitrary with my children (so that they never have a reason to see me as being unreasonable). And If reasoning and talking does the trick, I would never have to stoop to punishment.
Facing the result of the bad choices is where so much learning happens, though. Of course, if the result is going to be threatening to the child's long-term well-being, then you want to head it off at the pass (though I think there may be other ways to do this than punishment - provided that the parent-child relationship isn't incredibly frustrated in some way). Otherwise, what's wrong with a kid taking the knocks?

Have to come back later - work in need of attention.







*


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

I have never read "Coloroso" but the metaphor of the jellyfish, backbone, and brick wall are not uncommon and are based on the whole permissive, authoritative (also sometimes called cooperative) and authoritarian which just seem to show up in every discipline book/parenting book/parenting magazine. etc. . I dont know who first thought of them. It is irrelevant. But I think that they are pretty good descriptions.

As far as what is wrong with a kid "taking the knocks" well sometimes I take the knocks because I am the mom and the consequences of my child's behavior falls on me and not them unless I impose them on them.
If my child throws food all over the dinette. There is no natural consequence to him, so letting him "take the knocks" means absolutely nothing. There are no knocks. And for beating up his sister, again there are no natural consequences unless you count waiting till she reaches puberty first and can pummel him. If my child makes it difficult to impossible to grocery shop or enjoy a restaurant, again I am the one taking the knocks. There are no natural consequences.
So when it comes to shaping behavior, every time my child's behavior gives me a consequence instead of him, it is my job to, shall we say, apply an a fitting consequence appropriate to him becaue I take what society and life gives and give it to my child in small and reasonable amounts. I get the privilege of catching his consequences for him and bringing them down to his size.
If my child runs into the street "taking the knocks" means being flattenned by a car. If my teenager decides to try drugs "taking the knocks" can mean an addiction, lost brain cells, school failure, death by overdose.
If my teenager decides to lie about her whereabouts and roam the streets at a late hour the consequences could be kidnapping and rape. Robbery. Arrest for curfew violation.

I am certain that you feel you are no where near permissive in the same way I feel that I am no where near authoritarian. So I suppose we are both authoritative (cooperative) in two very different ways.

This has been a very interesting discussion.


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Let's take a look at some of the different ways a parent could respond to one of the situations you mentioned.

Let's say a child continues to throw food during dinner, even though they know mom doesn't like it.

Permissive (or self-sacrificing) mom- Just cleans it up.

Authorataive (or cooperative) mom- Talks with child about why he/she wants to throw the food. They work to find a creative solution together (that's why it's called cooperative







), such as eating outside, child cleaning up the food, throwing something else instead, etc.

Authoratarian mom- imposes punishment for throwing food.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momoffour*
Let's take a look at some of the different ways a parent could respond to one of the situations you mentioned.

Let's say a child continues to throw food during dinner, even though they know mom doesn't like it.

Permissive (or self-sacrificing) mom- Just cleans it up.

Authorataive (or cooperative) mom- Talks with child about why he/she wants to throw the food. They work to find a creative solution together (that's why it's called cooperative







), such as eating outside, child cleaning up the food, throwing something else instead, etc.

Authoratarian mom- imposes punishment for throwing food.


Well I would not do ANY of these. I would continue to make my displeasure known. I would continue to make my expectation that they NOT throw food known.

I would say in a low steely voice "DO not throw your food, it makes a mess" I would also give only small amounts at a time.

So where in the heck do you think I fit in???????????????????/


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momoffour*
Let's take a look at some of the different ways a parent could respond to one of the situations you mentioned.

Let's say a child continues to throw food during dinner, even though they know mom doesn't like it.

Permissive (or self-sacrificing) mom- Just cleans it up.

Authorataive (or cooperative) mom- Talks with child about why he/she wants to throw the food. They work to find a creative solution together (that's why it's called cooperative







), such as eating outside, child cleaning up the food, throwing something else instead, etc.

Authoratarian mom- imposes punishment for throwing food.

I would sort these quite differently

Permissive- would clean it up and tell the child that it is not allowed. But not actually do anything to stop the behavoir. Perhaps beleiving it will stop when the child has outgrown it or when the child internalizes the parents expectations.

Authoritative- Would attempt in every way to get the child to voluntarily cooperate in stopping throwing the food. BUt if child persists the parent still has the "authority" to stop it by imposing a time out.

Authoritarian- Would slap the child's hand each and eveyr time the child throws food. Or take the plate away each and eveyr time the child throws food from the beginning of solids. The child never explores with his food or throws it as a developmental stage that is accepted because it is important to the parents he never do it in the first place. (Think Gary Ezzo)

If a last resort timeout is Authoritarian where to people like Gary Ezzo or The Pearls fit in?

Joline


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
I
If a last resort timeout is Authoritarian where to people like Gary Ezzo or The Pearls fit in?

Abusive? Criminal? Sociopathic?


----------



## Potty Diva (Jun 18, 2003)

Ok this is a total hijack, sorry in advance. Let me preface by saying I love gentle discipline and I want nothing else for my famiyl and for Kailey.

She has been attending an awesome, respectful childcarecenter for nearly two years. Most days out of those two years she hits, kicks, screams, scratches and spits at her teacher and playmates. I am the teacher in the afterschool room. She is on the verge of being kicked out. We redirect, offer choices, assess the situation, etc. Why does she do these things? Because she forgets to use herwords to tell herfriends to leave her alone, or because she can't say what she wants. BUT, what about all of us who are having to deal with her???? I am at my wits end. Today was the final straw. She was screaming, and I reminded her to use her words and ask me for help. Instead she continued her blood curdling scream. I took her away from her friends, reminded her to use her words, even GAVE her words to use, and she chose to scream. I spanked her(not in front of anyone) and of course she screamed that angry scream again. I took her to another room explaining to her that she was hurting our ears, to please use her words, and then she could come back when she was calm. I sat her in a comfy chair, and...she started violently kicking the door. The other children were shocked into silence. I removed her from that room and took her to an empty room where I had to sit silently or I would have really spanked her. She was plum out of control and she just CANNOT do this at school! So MY BOSS said she would give us one week or we would have to find other care. We cant offered other care









So, what now? For TWO years she has done this crap and I am so F***ING tired of it!

Any ideas?


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

http://www.devpsy.org/teaching/paren...nd_styles.html

You all might find the original definitions of "Permissive" "Authoritarian" and "Authoritative" interesting.
These are the original definitions described by Diana Baumrind in 1967.
These are also the working definitions used in any of the studies relating to "parenting style".

{Permissive ... to behave in an acceptant and affirmative manner towards the child's impulses. desires. and actions. She [the parent] consults with him [the child] about policy decisions and gives explanations for family rules. She makes few demands for household responsibility and orderly behavior. She presents herself to the child as a resource for him to use as he wishes, not as an active agent responsible for shaping or altering his ongoing or future behavior. She allows the child to regulate his own activities as much as possible, avoids the exercise of control, and does not encourage him to obey externally defined standards. She attempts to use reason but not overt power to accomplish her ends.

Authoritarian ... to shape, control, and evaluate the behavior and attitudes of the child in accordance with a set of standards of conduct, usually an absolute standard, theologically motivated and formulated by a higher authority. She [the parent] values obedience as a virtue and favors punitive, forceful measures to curb self-will at points where the child's actions of beliefs conflict with what she think is right conduct. She believes in inculcating such instrumental values as respect for authority, respect for work, and respect for the preservation of order and traditional structure. She does not encourage verbal give and take, believing that the child should accept her word for what is right.

Authoritative ... to direct the child's activities but in a rational issue-oriented way. She [the parent] encourages verbal give and take, and shares with the child the reasoning behind her policy. She values both expressive and instrumental attributes, both autonomous self-will and disciplined conformity. Therefore she exerts firm control at points of parent-child divergence, but she does not hem the child in with restrictions. She recognizes her own special rights as an adult but also the child's individual interests and special ways. The authoritative parent affirms the child's present qualities, but also sets standards for future conduct. She uses reasoning as well as power to achieve her objectives. She does not base her decision on group consensus or the individual child's desires; but also does not regard herself as infallible, or divinely inspired.}

Joline


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

OOOPS see below.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

You said that "permissive" is this.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*

Permissive: Would clean it up and tell the child that it is not allowed. But not actually do anything to stop the behavoir. Perhaps beleiving it will stop when the child has outgrown it or when the child internalizes the parents expectations.

Joline

But then you also said it was defined this way:

*{Permissive ... to behave in an acceptant and affirmative manner towards the child's impulses. desires. and actions. She [the parent] consults with him [the child] about policy decisions and gives explanations for family rules. She makes few demands for household responsibility and orderly behavior. She presents herself to the child as a resource for him to use as he wishes, not as an active agent responsible for shaping or altering his ongoing or future behavior. She allows the child to regulate his own activities as much as possible, avoids the exercise of control, and does not encourage him to obey externally defined standards. She attempts to use reason but not overt power to accomplish her ends.*

Telling a child that something is not allowed is NOT behaving in an "acceptant and affirmative manner. It is not "consulting" about policy decisions. It is not "making few demands". It is not failing to "encourage him to obey"

I do what you said in that I tell my children what is not allowed but don't punish. Yet I don'tconsult with them about the rules (at a young age). I do make many demands. I do strongly encourage them to obey my standards. I just don't punish.

That is not permissave under the "experts" defintion that you quoted. Why is it under yours?


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

yeah, but isn't Baumrind pro-spanking?

And if I'm not mistaken, isn't there something in Unconditional Parenting about how her studies were skewed? I think it was something like this- she didn't differentiate between the "permissive" parents who simply didn't care, or didn't take the time to teach or discipline and the "permissive" parents who DID discipline and take the time to teach their children, albeit without force or punishment (ie they made a conscious decision that was the right way to parent as opposed to just doing what was easiest). A different researcher looked at Baumrind's data and found that once the two groups were divided, the group that did discipline has results very similar to the group of "authoritative" parents.
Ok, if I'm wrong please tell me! This is from memory.
I personally don't see anything wrong with her definitnion of permissive!! lol (as far as it being a bad way to raise kids)

Quote from pp Baumrind's authoritative parent (my bold): She [the parent] values obedience as a virtue and favors punitive, *forceful measures to curb self-will* at points where the child's actions of beliefs conflict with what she think is right conduct.

ewww. I don't like that! I'd way rather be what she considers permissive!! lol


----------



## PGTlatte (Mar 7, 2004)

My son is 2.5. I do my best not to respond in any way that feels like punishment, because I don't think it's the best way that he learns. I also do my best not to give "rewards" because I don't want his incentive to be "good" to be getting a reward. I also try not to use the words "good" or "bad" in relation to behavior. I do use "uh oh !" when there is a problem - it seems more to me like I'm stating "there is a problem" than assigning blame. When DS is doing something that is not acceptable (mean to dogs, jumping on couch, throwing hard objects, etc) I interrupt him and sit him down with him and we take a time out together and talk about why it's not ok. Sometimes he's upset at being interrupted, and sometimes there are tears, but it's not a punitive, isolating time out. When he's done something that creates a situation that can be fixed, I tell him how to fix it. Sometimes I show him how to fix it and we fix it together. I want him to learn these skills on the inside, not just to respond to rules being applied from the outside.

I've read several really good books that have helped me a lot:
Loving Your Child is Not Enough (Samalin)
How to Talk so Kids Will Listen and Listen so Kids Will Talk (Faber, Mazlish)
Easy to Love, Difficult to Discipline (Bailey)
Unconditional Parenting (Kohn)
Kids Are Worth It (Coloroso)
Hold On To Your Kids (Neufeld, Mate)

Out of all this reading, the things that have stuck out to me the most and been the most helpful for me are first, giving DS the benefit of the doubt of having a positive intent - this change of perception has tremendous power. Another is to give DS a way to save face and maintain his dignity in all situations - this helps me to find ways for him to dig himself out of a hole as opposed to me just shaming him for being in it. Another is to address how he is feeling as a whole at the time, not just the specific behavior...this can go a long way in preventive discipline too, heading off trouble before it starts. And when I am telling him something is not ok and that I won't let him continue it, I always explain why. I'm not set out on convincing him - I don't expect him to necessarily agree with me - but I think having an explanation goes further toward teaching internal discipline than me just making an unexplained decision.

Linda B


----------



## tippytoes26 (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
_Announcing how we plan to punish children ("Remember, if you do x then I'll do y to you") may salve our conscience because we gave them fair warning, but all we've really done is threaten them. We've told them in advance exactly how we'll make them suffer if they fail to obey. This communicates a message of distrust ("I don't think you'll do the right thing without fear of punishment"), leads kids to think of themselves as complying for extrinsic reasons, and emphasizes their powerlessness_

I am a fan of a lot of what Alfie Kohn has to say, but I do not really think his perception of what it means to be a child in this situation is the only way.
For example to tell a child that if they contiinue to do X, Y is going to happen, it gives the child a choice. "You can choose to control yourself, but if you dont I am going to have to help you."
I really dont believe in parenting on the couch with threats, which is what I think he is implying. The above statement is reminiscent of "Dont make me turn this car around. . ."
However, knowing consequences doesnt in my opinion emphasize the childs powerlessness. It reminds the child that they are powerful enough to choose their own future. It is empowering to be able to predict the consequences of their actions with accuracy.
I think that a child is more likely to feel insecure when he does not feel capable of controlling his own actions and there is nobody there to be his safety net and help him stop himself.
In fact I will go so far as to say I have actually seen my daughter practically BEG for punishment. Growing up is very hard to do. At about the time she was turning 13 I was giving her a lot of freedom and benefit of the doubt. I am afraid it was more freedom that she was prepared to handle. She ended up getting in big trouble, and you can hardly imagine the relief on her face when I told her she was grounded. Acting out was her way of begging me to show her that she was not expected to be 100% responsible for herself yet and that I was still there to guide her. Would you believe she was happier during the time she was grounded than she had been in the preceeding weeks when she was constantly pulled in different directions by friends and different influences?
I also do not punish my oldest for your run of the mill stuff. But I would not leave punishment out of my parenting toolkit entirely.
Joline


I'm way over my head in this conversation because I simply have not read the books being talked about and I don't consider what I do GD. I have a 3.5 year old who is beautiful and bright and witty.. but very defiant. She's started to become very aggressive in seeing how much control she has and has been refusing to do what is expected over her. No amount of "showing disapproval" makes any difference to her. She is very much in her own world and mommy and daddy's approval are nowhere near as important to her now as it was a year ago. I've found myself getting louder and louder and she spends far too much time in "time out" . Both of which are totally ineffective. We are good enough parents to realize that some of her behavior is due to OUR behavior.. my yelling and my husbands giving "orders" (get in your seat NOW, put that in the trash NOW") So we're taking a step back and trying to work on those things and find what works for our family. Once we've mastered that, we'll go onto other things. Everyone has to grow as a parent and trying to make too many changes at once is just too much. So many things make sense in theory, but totally flop in reality.

The posts by jphub seem to really make the most sense for us. I could see myself shooting for no dicipline (and falling short), but my husband just isn't that kind of person. He is a VERY gentle parent, but he 100% believes in limits and consequences etc.. and no amount of reading will change his mind. We've simply gotten off course with our goals and let our emotions get away with us and the habit of yelling and threatening etc... Like most parents I would assume.

I just wanted to say that johub's posts are really encouraging to me that there is a way to parent gently while still enforcing some limits. My daughter practically BEGS to know when to stop. If she knows there are consequences (such is life) besides my disapproval, she's much more likely to reason out her options and choose one that's good, not only for her, but for everyone around her. I want to provide for her some structure within which she can weigh her choices. She is too young to have limitless choices. If she is on the table with a broken leg and I ask her to get down because it's dangerous and she says no, I WILL remove her from the table myself. I don't care to bully my child, but I do care to let her know that her freedom to make certain choices is to be earned.. not just given.

I read a book one time .. love and logic I think. And there was a single point that makes SO much sense to me. The book talks a lot about giving choices. About a pyramid. That many parents tend to have a pyramid that is big on the bottom representing how many choices and the magnitude of the choices the child is able to make. So, as a newborn, the child gets to call all the shots. Then, the parent might see that the child isn't ready for so much responsibility, so they limit the choices and as the child gets older, the parent keeps limiting the number of decisions the child is able to make. So that once they are on their own, they are fairly clueless about how to make decisions.. their reasoning powers are limited. Instead, the books suggests that you shoot for more of an upsidedown pyramid. When they are infants, you decide what they eat, what they wear, where they play etc.. And as they get older, you give them small choices "would you like to wear your coat or carry it?" so they have a chance to learn how to reason, learn from small mistakes (instead of bigger ones later) and as they grow, the kinds of choices they are allowed to make increase so by the time they are away from home, they know how to make choices. Their reasoning skills are strong, and they've taken a few small knocks in order to learn and avoid more painful mistakes later. That's the one that that sticks with me. Some choices are NOT age appropriate. If my 3.5 year old chooses not to wash her hands after playing in the indoor playground, she could become very ill That's not a choice she should be allowed to make. It is for her safety. So, when she refuses to wash her hands, despite my explaining that it will help keep her healthy,and after giving her the choice between washing them with warm or cold water. I feel it is my DUTY as a parent to impose more than just a disapproving look or attitude. She isn't ready to fully grasp what being "sick" is and, it affects the ENTIRE family.. not just her. Since the natural consequences are not within her ability to comprehend, isn't it my job to make some consequences that she can understand? "wash your hands to remove the germs or we cannot eat our snack because our snack will get germs on it" and if she STILL refuses (which my daughter does quite often) then I have to choose something else. "wash your hands or I will wash your hands because I do not want you to get sick" Yup.. I do and plan to bully my child into washing her hands if need be. As she gets older and can comprehend better those consequences, that will be her decision to make. But not right now. I'm all for explaining and teaching and helping kids to reason, but I'm also for making decisions for my child when they are not yet capable of handling certain decisions.

Anyway.. that got long. I really just wanted to ask johub if she had any recommended reading for someone like me who wants to parent gently but still create boundaries. I would love to change the way I parent to reduce the conflict and open communications, but I'm not ready to totally forgo all dicipline. Dicipline is a fact of our society. If I get stopped for speading, the cop doesn't just give me a disapproving look and explain to me how he doesn't approve of what I've done. He does sometimes remind me that speeding can cause accidents and isn't safe. But in the end, the part that gets me to stop speeding is that I'm being punished to some degree. I have to pay a fine and get points on my license. I really want my children to understand that there ARE rules that MUST be followed because it's good for our society. There ARE rules that MUST be followed because it's good for our family. And while I KNOW some families are able to acheive this without dicipline, I also know that my family isn't one of them. So, any suggested reading that is on the gentler side of parenting without going no dicipline at all would be very much apprecaited.

VERY interesting thread!
Really opening my eyes.

Amber


----------



## TortelliniMama (Mar 11, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Deva33mommy*
Quote from pp Baumrind's authoritative parent (my bold): She [the parent] values obedience as a virtue and favors punitive, *forceful measures to curb self-will* at points where the child's actions of beliefs conflict with what she think is right conduct.

ewww. I don't like that! I'd way rather be what she considers permissive!! lol

Actually that's from the authoritarian definition. I was confused at first, too, because the terms are in a different order in that excerpt than the way they usually are. (They're usually presented as a continuum with authoritative in the middle.) It took me a minute, because I read it and went, "She thinks authoritative parents favor punitive, forceful measures to curb self-will?!"


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

_I do what you said in that I tell my children what is not allowed but don't punish. Yet I don'tconsult with them about the rules (at a young age). I do make many demands. I do strongly encourage them to obey my standards. I just don't punish.

That is not permissave under the "experts" defintion that you quoted. Why is it under yours?_

But it is all opinions.
If your child chooses to continue to disobey, you accept rather than punish.
In the final end of the deal. The child decides. The parent does not impose his or her will on the child.
Your way may not seem like permissive at all when you have a child who is willingly compliant. In fact, with some children this is the perfect method of parenting.
As a child I NEVER needed to be punished because if my mom just said "Joline
you shouldnt have done that" and it was all over. I was a mess of tears because I was as compliant by nature as possible. I couldn't bear the thought of my mothers disappointment.
For children of this temperament, a persmissive style is adequate because they dont push boundaries by nature.
So if your child has no inclination to willfully disobey. "encouraging" them to obey is enough.
On the outside it looks the same. You have a willingly obedient child, and very little problems.
If your child was of a different temperament, you might find the outcome from this type of parenting to look quite differently. (more permissive for example)

It doesnt really matter what my opinon is.
All I am trying to say is taht while YOU may think that anybody who punishes at all is Authoritarian. That is not the definition of authoritarian.
You can choose to call it what you will.

Joline


----------



## Maiasaura (Aug 12, 2002)

<<<A very young child might take a lot of repition to understand they are hurting. ......But if an older child was hurting an animal for fun I would have them psychologically evaluated.>>>

what is the demarcation line between "a very young child" and "and older child"?
what if the child is 4.5? in this example, my son would very well keep "hurting" (put in quotes because in your example you mentioned that it might not actually hurt the dog at all, if it hasn't run away) the dog if he knows it might irritate me, or knows it's wrong...it doesn't matter at this point if the dog is actually being hurt, a child still needs to learn not to _try_ to hurt things or hit things.
there are plenty of times my son does X to other people and i say "DS, don't do X, try Y instead" and the person says "oh, it's ok"-- and i say "i appreciate that, but he still needs to learn Y".

i am far from finishing this thread and i will keep reading with interest (i'm only on page 2) but just thought i'd chime in with that idea.

pamela


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
_
But it is all opinions.
If your child chooses to continue to disobey, you accept rather than punish.
_
_
_
_

No, I don't "accept" it. I continue to expect them to obey. I have not told them in any way that it is okay NOT to obey. The expectation of obeyance remains firmly in place. Punishment is not the only way to show a child you believe his behavior is unaccpetable.

Whether a child is "compliant' or not is irrelevant. Even children who are punished do not always obey. I simply beleive that punishement is wrong because I believe that inflicting suffering on my child for no purpose but to "make him pay" for his disobedience is wrong._


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Deva33mommy*
I think it was something like this- she didn't differentiate between the "permissive" parents who simply didn't care, or didn't take the time to teach or discipline and the "permissive" parents who DID discipline and take the time to teach their children, albeit without force or punishment (ie they made a conscious decision that was the right way to parent as opposed to just doing what was easiest).









It certainly seems that way from her definition of "permissive."


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya44*
No, I don't "accept" it. I continue to expect them to obey. I have not told them in any way that it is okay NOT to obey. The expectation of obeyance remains firmly in place. Punishment is not the only way to show a child you believe his behavior is unaccpetable.

Whether a child is "compliant' or not is irrelevant. Even children who are punished do not always obey. I simply beleive that punishement is wrong because I believe that inflicting suffering on my child for no purpose but to "make him pay" for his disobedience is wrong.











These are very important points. Punishment is not guaranteed to create obedient children. (And, when it does, it's important to consider the long-term price of that obedience).

Also, it's extremely important to remember in a conversation like this that there are many ways to show children that you don't appreciate their behavior. It doesn't require imposing your will on them. Occasionally my son gets crazy and starts treating my body like a jungle gym. I was pretty tolerant of this when he was a 17-lb. toddler. Now that he's a 40lb. almost-5-year-old, it hurts and it irritates the heck out of me. When he starts, I'll let him know that it's not okay with me and that I expect him to find something else to climb on. If he continues, I'll remove myself - stand up and leave the area, go sit on the counter, something. He gets the picture.

He's not a "compliant" child, by any means. He's forever seeing how far he can take things. But he *is* exceedingly more cooperative as he gets older and I think it's probably because I've always stressed cooperation - without being a doormat.

Btw, I agree with many of you that too many choices for a very small child is too much responsibility. It seems that what many parents tend to do, though, is to go to the opposite end of the spectrum and really underestimate what their children are capable of handling (while also expecting too much of them in terms of behavior). And I'm no exception. It's something I've struggled with a lot. I've found, though, that the less I micromanage my child and the more I reign in my expectations to be developmentally appropriate, the more harmonious life is in our home.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tippytoes26*
If she is on the table with a broken leg and I ask her to get down because it's dangerous and she says no, I WILL remove her from the table myself. I don't care to bully my child, but I do care to let her know that her freedom to make certain choices is to be earned.. not just given.

I wouldn't see that as bullying; I would see it as protecting. I have to say, though, that your last statement seems out of place to me... but I'm sure that's just because I have a different perspective on this whole thing. When I read the first part, I thought, "Yeah, I'd remove her, too. It's incredibly unsafe and she probably isn't capable of understanding the extent of harm that could come from it." But why is it about telling her that she has limited freedom in choice-making? That's more of an authoritarian mindset. Why isn't it just about letting her know that you're looking out for her and will help her not to endanger herself?

Sorry if I'm picking that apart too much. It just seems like an odd statement.


----------



## Potty Diva (Jun 18, 2003)

So, no one has any actual ideas for me? It's all about reading books and no practical experience? I'm beginning to believe GD is wonderul in theory, but no one i know has any REAL experience(on MDC anyway). Why is that?


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Potty Diva*
So, no one has any actual ideas for me? It's all about reading books and no practical experience? I'm beginning to believe GD is wonderul in theory, but no one i know has any REAL experience(on MDC anyway). Why is that?

The hard thing is that you say you like GD, but you say you spanked your dd, so you aren't currently using GD. And you want results within a week. I personally think it would take more than a week to undo any negative feelings from being spanked and get her back "on your team".


----------



## Potty Diva (Jun 18, 2003)

A week? Excuse me? *I* don't want results in a week, my boss is giving me a week, and for your information I have been using GD for the last 4 years! I am currently ' using' GD in every fricking aspect of our lives! She was popped ONCE! Typical response of you holier than thou people. The truth is YOU have no answers because it doesn't work for you either, does it? Or your child is soft and sweet and wonderful all the time.

We have worked with her for two years with the hitting, and kicking, and screaming. She has NOT been spanked through any of this. If you would have read my post you would have seen what we do. It's all about options, choosing our battles, and giving her space. Assessing the situation (hungry, tired, frustrated) and it is tiresome.

But, I degress, it's all a bunch of talk...


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Potty Diva*
So, no one has any actual ideas for me? It's all about reading books and no practical experience? I'm beginning to believe GD is wonderul in theory, but no one i know has any REAL experience(on MDC anyway). Why is that?

It's kind of hard to respond to your post, PD, because there aren't any details about what the situation in the school is like apart from your daughter's problematic behavior or what life with your daughter is like outside of the school. Is this behavior a situational thing? If so, what is it about the situation that's causing it and what can be done - apart from just reacting to her behavior - to remedy the need for her to act out. Maybe she needs to be in a different class, away from you, if possible. I know when I was nannying, my son *really* acted out. Fortunately, he got over it, but I was just caring for 2 kids, not a roomful. It took a good bit of time and it also took looking at the details of the environment and his trigger points.


----------



## TortelliniMama (Mar 11, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Potty Diva*
So, no one has any actual ideas for me? It's all about reading books and no practical experience? I'm beginning to believe GD is wonderul in theory, but no one i know has any REAL experience(on MDC anyway). Why is that?

I think there's a difference between no one having any real experience with GD (which certainly isn't true -- there are plenty of posts of people's success using it) and no one having a solution for your situation based on our limited knowledge of your dd and what's going on in your lives. Despite the viewpoint of Supernanny, there's no one-size-fits-all set of rules to get the best results when parenting kids. I do think, however, that GD provides the framework and philosophy that will work best for all children. Have you posted your problem as a separate thread in this forum? You might get more views and more responses that way.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Potty Diva*
The truth is YOU have no answers because it doesn't work for you either, does it? Or your child is soft and sweet and wonderful all the time.

Obviously you're frustrated and nervous about what you're going to do, but there's no need to go jumping on people.

GD works for me and it has through some very tough situations - the aforementioned nannying and divorce, for two. And my child, while sweet, is by no means soft. He's quite a challenge.

Tortellinimama's suggestion is a good one. Why don't you start another thread and see if people can help you brainstorm some more?


----------



## Dar (Apr 12, 2002)

Yeah. Spanking sort of skews your whole result.

I've spent a lot of my adult live working with kids who have emotional and behavioral disabilities - I was just punched today, actually. I am trained in 4 or 5 different restraint techniques and I have no qualms about using them when safety is an issue. Spanking, otoh, is a whole different issue.

Perhaps the atmophere of the child care center is just not something she's capable of dealing with right now. I know that's probably not what you want to hear, but 2 years is a long time for this kind of behavior to continue. She's telling you very clearly that she can't handle it. Yes, it will cause hardship for you to have to change your arrangements, but sometimes meeting your child's needs isn't easy.

When Rain was 5, it became clear to me that school was not something she could cope with effectively. For her well-being and mine, I quit my well-paying job a the end of her kindergarten year and decided to homeschool. I had no income, no plan...but clearly things weren't working, and I needed to change.

I think parenting without punishment is a whole different ballgame than parenting with punishment as a "last resort". With the latter, you and your child are still aware that punishment is an option, and you're still in the position of the enforcer. The relationship is still built on obey vs. disobey, on "you do this for me and I'll do that for you", rather than on mutual problem solving.

I don't consider myself to be a permissive parent. I once read about a parenting type called "harmonious parenting", and that really resonated with me. I have pretty firm boundaries for what I'm willing to do, and I'm pretty clear on what I don't want in my environment. The thing is, my daughter has the same rights to her boundaries, and then we work things out. There is no "Well, if we can't resolve this, I'll punish you" escape clause, so we do work it out. Sometimes we're both too angry at the moment and we spend a day just at a standstill, but eventually we make it work. If I could just say, "Fine, you're grounded!" then there would be no reason to keep problem-solving...

Sometimes my kid does stupid things. She really doesn't seem to do the "limit-testing" other kids her age do, because generally the limits are negotiable, by me anyway. After we've talked things through, we've always found a solution we both could live with.

Dar


----------



## PGTlatte (Mar 7, 2004)

Potty Diva,

I have some practical experience with this ! My son (now almost 2.5) was wildly out of control and no kind of discipline had any effect on him at all, until a miracle happened at our house when he was about 20 months old.....we totally eliminated all casein (dairy protein) from his and my diet for eight weeks. On dairy he was hyperactive, sleepless, aggressive, violent, in constant motion, sensory seeking, combative, and basically rolled from one major tantrum to the next all day long. Eight weeks later - he slept more than 40 mins at a time for the first time in his life, started listening, started conversing, played nicely, was no longer violent, just a totally different kid. Getting rid of it also cleared up his reflux, reactive airway, chronic diarrhea, and constant infections.

We didn't have a discipline problem. We had a dietary problem. I think it was a miracle I found out about it and tried the 8 wk elimination. At around 18 months, after he finally started walking, I had had moms I didn't know approach me at groups I attempted to visit, and tell me he wasn't normal, that he had sensory integration problems, and that it wasn't my fault, and that no response to his behavior was going to help. I had him evaluated by EI, and we were going to start OT. I joined an online group for SI, and a lady there kept telling me to try eliminating dairy or gluten or both for 8 weeks, total elimination, 100% compliance. We decided to try dairy first. The rest is history. I finally know my son.

None of the discipline I use now could ever have made a dent in his behavior on dairy, because he was out of his mind. Twice he has gotten dairy accidentally, and for four days, he is sleepless, out of control and violent. Last time, he tried to stab me in the face with a fork, tried to claw my eyes, gave me a bloody lip, and hit DH in the face so hard he had a bruise. He hits, kicks, bites, headbutts, etc. It takes four days for him to come back to his right mind after a dairy exposure. For him, dairy is metabolized into casomorphins, which act like hallucinogenic drugs in his brain. Dairy truly makes him trip.

If you have been dealing with out of control behavior for this long, I highly recommend reading the book "Is This Your Child" by Doris Rapp, MD, and also doing some looking into a casein-free, or gluten-free, or both (GFCF) diet.

I hope this helps. It won't fix your situation in a week. We didn't see any change for six weeks, and it really took eight to see the complete transition. But if your DD has a problem with casomorphins or gluteomorphins, experimenting with total elimination of dairy or gluten could literally change your life.

Linda

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Potty Diva*

So, what now? For TWO years she has done this crap and I am so F***ING tired of it!

Any ideas?


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

_I really just wanted to ask johub if she had any recommended reading for someone like me who wants to parent gently but still create boundaries._

Amber, Dr William Sears has a beautiful book Called The Gentle Discipline book. You can also check out www.askdrsears.com .
He has wonderful gentle parenting advice, much like the mommies here use. He doesn't stop at that however because he also believes that we as parents should expect a reasonable amount of obedience etc. . .
I think I also have a book called "The Everything Guide to Gentle Discipline." (or maybe it was positive discipline)
Both books have how to suggestions about logical consequences and other
"punishments" such as time-out, in addition to advice on how to prevent issues, how to figure out why your child is behaving in these ways, creative ideas etc. . .
Joline


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

_No, I don't "accept" it. I continue to expect them to obey. I have not told them in any way that it is okay NOT to obey. The expectation of obeyance remains firmly in place. Punishment is not the only way to show a child you believe his behavior is unaccpetable._

Here again we are simply arguing semantics over the definition of "accept".
You may not "approve" of the behavior. But given the choice between imposing your will on your child to stop a behavior, and allowing the behavior to continue if the child persists despite your disapproval, you are accepting the behavior as an alternative to punishment.
You might not like it, but there is a limit to how far you will go to stop it.

Anyhow, it is irrelevant what I think.
The word "permissive" is given a bad rap anyway.
If you dont think you are permissive, Great. I don't really mean to argue with you over your label for yourself.
I only take offense that I am authoritarian. Which I am not.
In fact, per the actual definitions I acutally lean more towards "permissive" with my oldest because that is what she responds best to.

Joline


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

_I think it was something like this- she didn't differentiate between the "permissive" parents who simply didn't care, or didn't take the time to teach or discipline and the "permissive" parents who DID discipline and take the time to teach their children, albeit without force or punishment (ie they made a conscious decision that was the right way to parent as opposed to just doing what was easiest)_

She did not. Later researchers did expand on her definitions either by adding sub categories to both permissive (dividing between uninvolved and involved and permissive) and authoritarian (dividing between highly controlling and abusive). Others just added a fourth category for "uninvolved" in order to make the results of their research more relevant.

Joline


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

_The relationship is still built on obey vs. disobey, on "you do this for me and I'll do that for you", rather than on mutual problem solving._

This kind of statement just drives me nuts.
If you are doing mutual problem solving 99% of the time. And 1% of the time it doesnt work out and the situation is important enough that you need to control it in a different way rather than just let go. SUddenly the whole relationship is about "obey vs disobey"
My relationship with my children is based on so much more on the very infrequent times we have an impasse. That is but a moment in time in a lifetime of building a relationship.
My relationship with each of my children is far deeper and resilient than any occasional timeout or grounding could possibly scratch the surface of.
I think it is absurd and insulting to say that a parent child relationship is "built on" any one facet of the discipline style.
Heck my relationship isnt even built on Gentle Discipline, because the discipline issues in our home is only a fraction of our interaction.
Joline


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

Potty Diva,
I so wish I had some good suggestions for you.
I have never had to face behavior of that magnitude.
I think one of the mamas had a great suggestion when she mentioned diet.
Casien is one problem for some children.
Some food additives can cause behavior problems that you might not know about (google "feingold diet") Mothering had an article about it a while back.
I would also suggest getting her an allergy screening. Perhaps there is something less obvious in her diet that is ennervating her so badly.
If her behavior is so out of control most days I would imagine it is something bigger than a regular discipline issue.
I had a friend whose son was pretty out of control and was even diagnosed as borderline autistic. She stopped milk in his diet on a recommendation due to sleep issues, and his behavior problems improved as well.
Good luck
JOline


----------



## PGTlatte (Mar 7, 2004)

My son's behavior would have definitely received an ADHD diagnosis if he had been old enough, and with the sensory integration issues, I had really begun to fear that he was on the autism spectrum. Just getting rid of casein has solved all of it, and all his "medical" problems as well. He still has 2-yr old meltdowns but he is no longer violent and tantrums don't consume his whole day. The new doctor we found is a DAN doctor, because I wanted someone who would understand the connection between dairy and mental problems. He told me that 40-50% of autistic kids and more than 90% of kids with ADHD can be dramatically helped through diet alone, but the parents usually won't commit to doing it...to them it seems easier to use drugs and various therapies.

I am so thankful I was led into a CF diet for Evan...otherwise I am certain we would have been into years of therapies, possibly ADHD medication, and possibly a more controlling and punitive discipline style down the road as he got older and stronger and the tantrums got scarier. When you are at the end of your rope and the situation is out of control, it is easy to panic and do whatever it seems will help you grab control of the situation at the time. At that point you aren't thinking that all those events add up to an overall theme - you are just trying to survive that tantrum. It's a very hard situation to be in. When I first started reading positive/gentle discipline books, all I could think was these people have *no idea* what it is like to have a child like my son, and I didn't think any of it would ever work for him. But what I didn't know at the time was that no discipline of any kind would have worked for him until we got the mind-tripping stuff out of his system. Punitive discipline would only have been abuse - like using punitive discipline on a mentally disabled person who really can't be responsible for their behavior. So I'm really thankful we figured this out before we reached the point of that kind of discipline.

Linda

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
I had a friend whose son was pretty out of control and was even diagnosed as borderline autistic. She stopped milk in his diet on a recommendation due to sleep issues, and his behavior problems improved as well.
Good luck
JOline


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
_The relationship is still built on obey vs. disobey, on "you do this for me and I'll do that for you", rather than on mutual problem solving._

This kind of statement just drives me nuts.
If you are doing mutual problem solving 99% of the time. And 1% of the time it doesnt work out and the situation is important enough that you need to control it in a different way rather than just let go. SUddenly the whole relationship is about "obey vs disobey"


I am really curious. When do you think true "punishment" is required?

In other words, *no*t a 'removing the means of misbehavaior consequence' but a "I am going to do something bad to you because you did something I consider bad"

Or maybe you really don't believe in true punishment.

For example, in the situations we discussed,
*Consequences* of throwing food would be being given only one bite of food at a time, being fed by mom etc...so that the food could not be thrown.

*Punishment* would be anything from being slapped for this behavior to having a favorite toy being taken away to having a meal taken away before the child was done.

It is this what I call true punishment that I beleive is wrong, really just not a moral choice.

I know some would consider these consequences "punishment" but to me since their only purpose it to immediatley stop the behavior, they are not.


----------



## cmb123 (Dec 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Potty Diva*
I'm beginning to believe GD is wonderul in theory, but no one i know has any REAL experience(on MDC anyway). Why is that?

That doesn't make any sense. Just because no one on this thread is dealing with the same situation you are, that means that GD doesn't work? I've always used GD, and I have 3 really well behavied kids, who have survived this long with out "punishments."
I am SO sorry for what you are going through. I'd be at my wits end too. But do you really think that if you give up GD, and start using punishment that her behaviour will change? You said yourself when you spanked her, she just kept it up. Your situation sounds like it goes far beyond the discussions of this thread. How could anyone come up with actual suggestions to such a broad post. Your's is a situation that would require knowing full details of what is going on in her world. It's not just merely-"hey my kids throwing oatmeal."
I also HIGHLY recommend the "Is This Your Child" book. I know many people who have had complete turn arounds after discovering thier childs food intollerances. Many people "poo poo" the food connection, but there is just way, way to much evidence, and like I said, personal experience to "poo poo" it. It does however take time. Unfortunately more than the week you were given.
How unfair for you to be given a "week" for things to change. I work in a school, so I can relate to when we have a child who is completely out of control- for the safety of everyone, we need to do something. But as a parent you must feel helpless knowing that it means your job, and your childcare. I hope something clicks for you two, and things start to move forward more positively.


----------



## wednesday (Apr 26, 2004)

I also have a child who is sensitive to dairy. He never had any plain cows' milk, and very little in the way of dairy products, until he was about 15 months old. That's when the problem behaviors started, but it took us a while to make the connection. His behavior and temperament declined over a period of time to the point that unless he was sleeping or nursing, he was tantrum-ing. I had friends and family telling me he was not "normal." He had stopped using any of his words, and was diagnosed with a speech delay. I was terrified that he was going to turn out to be autistic. Our very cool, AP, family doc had suggested trying dairy elimination, so we did it. It took a week to see a difference, but his behavior totally turned around. He was smiling and laughing and verbalizing once again. "Thank you" was one of his first words before all this started, and I was astonished when out of the blue he said it to me again. He hadn't uttered an actual word in several months by that point. After eliminating milk he "caught up" in language to where he was supposed to be within about three months. Now we have normal tantrum-ing when he is over-tired or hungry, but not the constant miserable moaning and screaming. It is amazing to me the difference it made to eliminate milk. I had not heard about the casomorphins the PPs describe but it makes sense with what I observed. To me it just seemed like he was in terrible pain all the time. Once he turns 2 I want to have him fully tested for allergies so we can know better if he has other problems besides dairy.

You should read this thread, I learned a lot from it:

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...=behavior+diet


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:

Here again we are simply arguing semantics over the definition of "accept".
You may not "approve" of the behavior. But given the choice between imposing your will on your child to stop a behavior, and allowing the behavior to continue if the child persists despite your disapproval, you are accepting the behavior as an alternative to punishment.
You might not like it, but there is a limit to how far you will go to stop it.
You have limits too, I imagine. Will you spank if your time-outs don't work? So you are willing to accept the behavior as an alternative to spanking? I'm sure you'll say something like your methods have worked ok for you, or whatever. Well, for me, we have been able to use cooperation and creative problem solving. I don't feel I accept behavior of which I don't approve, but I don't want my kids to just obey me. That is not enough. My goal is long-term. I want my kids to grow into adults who are not just obedient, but do the right thing because they want to.


----------



## sunnmama (Jul 3, 2003)

Potty Diva
We've also struggled with rage and violent tantrums. My dd is similarly aged (she's 4.5).

We've done *many* things to try to deal with the behavior over the years (I should add that we are not dealing with it right now....she is in a peaceful phase, thank goodness! But we've had other peaceful phases in the past, only to return to violent phases....).

I've actually not tried punishment for this problem, however, because it made no sense to me. Her behavior, while clearly inappropriate and absolutely unacceptable, was a symptom of her state of misery, kwim? I just knew that I had to *help* her somehow, not force her to stop. If I forced her to stop (thru punishment), then she would still be experiencing the same extreme negative emotions, but might not have a better way to express it.

I am feeling your stress about the school. I know first hand that it is HARD to parent with patience and reason when under the critical eye of outsiders. I stopped bringing dd to work when she was 2 because of her behavior (which improved as soon as I stopped bringing her to work!), and I stopped attending MOMS club events this past year because of criticism from other mothers. These were simply bad situations for us, and the atmosphere affected both dd's behavior and my parenting in negative ways.

Things that we've explored that have helped with the rage:
--She's been diagnosed with SID, and we did about 6 months of occupational therapy. Learned a lot there that I still use on a daily basis.

--Began seeing a chiropractor for Cranial Occipital therapy. That is working wonders. Also, the chiro did muscle testing to determine food allergies, and we see improvement with diet change.

--I've decided to homeschool







:. She clearly does best at home, and with small groups of friends (of mixed ages). She is a much more peaceful child when she spends large amounts of time in our quiet home and out of doors. When I think about the option of sending her school, I imagine daily meltdowns (as you describes) as she "lets off steam" from dealing with the school environment all day. No thank you! I am confident that she will outgrow this problem in her own good time, although she may always be a person who prefers the peaceful outdoors to an artificial indoor environment (heck, so do I!).

I am sorry you are dealing with this.


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

I assumed you weren't using GD when you said that GD is a bunch of talk and doesn't really work, and then described a situation when you spanked.

My daughter is pretty high needs - certainly not soft and sweet LOL - and I haven't needed to punish her, HOWEVER I don't need to work so I'm home with her and she has my attention full time. I imagine that having her in day care and needing to work makes it more complicated.

Regardless of whether you want changes within a week or your work does, I don't see how a change of that sort can come about in one week. I'm sorry you're in that situation.


----------



## Maiasaura (Aug 12, 2002)

<<<"We want to say that if they absolutely refuse they do risk our displeasure. We can let them know that we still want them to do it, that we expect them to do it, that we are displeased that they are not doing it and that we expect them to do it in the future"

As Dr. Wolf says, so long as the expectation never goes away, but children's rights are still respected, it does not turn into a battle of the wills and children really do obey most of the time.>>>>

1) expectations are premeditated resentments-- i can't imagine keeping expecting something that never manifests. i don't for one red hot minute respect the "right" of someone to persistantly disrespect me or life in general.
2) they may obey most of the time, but mine does not *at all* when it *really* counts.

we get kicked out of places, and kindly unwelcomed back to others, even by my close friends, because of my son's behavior and my lack of ability to control him, or help him or whatever-him (choose your phrasing).

again, i haven't read all the way through this thread-- *STILL* on page 2! but it is very interesting. i have to say that so far, i'm still on joline's page.
it depends on the temperament of the kid. mine is very, very spirited, strong-willed, and all that. he tells ME what to do (or tries), and has since he was verbal.

parenting him has gotten harder, not easier (he's 4.5 now). and i have turned to harsher ways of parenting (bargaining and/or threatening), in desperation. i've always wanted to be a GD parent-- still do! we talk and talk and talk, not during the crisis times. but it DOESN'T WORK. not with my child. not 95% of the time. when the sh*t hits the fan, when push comes to shove, when it comes time to actually *implement* the "good" behaviors we've talked (in calmer times) about using (in the hard times), he can't or won't.

i'll keep reading, though, and trying things, and looking for new ways. otherwise i'll end up with one of those 13yo's that get brought home at 3am by the police, drunk out of his mind...~shakes head~ i really, really hope not...i hope i find something that gets him to be more social, more caring, better behaved, more respectful...before then.

pamela


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya44*
I am really curious. When do you think true "punishment" is required?

In other words, *no*t a 'removing the means of misbehavaior consequence' but a "I am going to do something bad to you because you did something I consider bad"

Or maybe you really don't believe in true punishment.

For example, in the situations we discussed,
*Consequences* of throwing food would be being given only one bite of food at a time, being fed by mom etc...so that the food could not be thrown.

*Punishment* would be anything from being slapped for this behavior to having a favorite toy being taken away to having a meal taken away before the child was done.

It is this what I call true punishment that I beleive is wrong, really just not a moral choice.

I know some would consider these consequences "punishment" but to me since their only purpose it to immediatley stop the behavior, they are not.

I use punishment, meaning time out or grounding as a TRUE last resort.
What i mean is that I go through every gentle means I can think of to encourage my child to stop the behavior. I consider whether or not this is really an issue as well. (I pick my battles so to speak).
In addition I ONLY use punishment if I truly believe that my child understands the expectation and has the ability to control his behavior. (meaning I do not use it to teach the acceptable behavior, only to reinforce that it is expected).
So I do not "time out" my child for every infraction.
I agree that punishment is used to immediately stop the behavior and is not a good tool to teach appropriate behavior. However once appropriate behavior is learned and internalized, I believe that time out can be an effective reminder that mom expects the appropriate behavior to continue.
I very rarely "need" to use time out. And obviously it is only on a child old enough to already have learned the appropriate behavior.

And as for this definition of punishment "I am going to do something bad to you because you did something I consider bad". Well I certainly have never done anythign bad to my children. You make punishment sound like petty vengeance. That is simply not how it works.
If my child takes of his seatbelt in the car. The car stops and we dont go anywhere until that seatbelt is back on.
That is how time out works. (grounding as well for an older child)
Just as stopping the car isnt "bad" or "suffering" for the child.
Timeout is just like the car stopping. All activity stops for a minute for the parent to really get the child's attention that she is serious and the behavior must be stopped.
For an older child all "activity" stops for a longer period, usually to remind that child about the importance of following certain safety rules or trust issues. (I dont know about you, but if my child lies about where she is going and what she is doing, nothign is going to compell me to trust her the next day. So is this punishment or natural consequences? You might say it is punishment. I say sometimes punishment IS the natural consequence of violating the trust of your parents)

So the answer is YES I do truly to the bottom of my heart believe that true gentle and respectful punishment is sometimes necessary and good. And that not only is it not morally wrong. It is my moral obligation to continue to lead my children to correct behavior even if that means imposing my will upon them.

I do not believe that a parent should use punishment for their own purposes and call it discipline. Punishment is not an outlet for a parent's anger or frustration. Punishment is not to make a child pay for his behavior or the inconvenience to his parents.
Punishment (when applied respectfully) is just a pause button. A way to "stop everything" and deal with a problem behavior. A way to get your chld's attention and say "this is really important to us that you control this behavior" . It removes distractions.

It has its bad points. Like everything, it loses its usefulness when overused. It can be misused as discussed above. It is a highly INeffective primary learning technique, and when it is unjust or makes your child angry it shuts off their brain and makes learning from the experience impossible.

Joline


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

_You have limits too, I imagine. Will you spank if your time-outs don't work? So you are willing to accept the behavior as an alternative to spanking? I'm sure you'll say something like your methods have worked ok for you, or whatever. Well, for me, we have been able to use cooperation and creative problem solving. I don't feel I accept behavior of which I don't approve, but I don't want my kids to just obey me. That is not enough. My goal is long-term. I want my kids to grow into adults who are not just obedient, but do the right thing because they want to._

Hey I agree. I have faced limits where GD had not worked. You have not.
I have not faced limits where gentle consequences have not worked, probably because I use them so sparingly so they do not lose there effectiveness.
I do not consider spanking a discipline technique as it is violent and has no learning value. Whereas a quiet time out does.
You may think that a quiet time out has no learning value. And you have a right to your own opinion. I have also heard it said that time out is "causing suffering" or "withdrawal of love". And as such if you believed that you might find it almost as undesirable as spanking. I however think that is bunk pure and simple. As such time out and spanking have no comparison.
My goal is the same as yours. However I do expect a "reasonable" amount of obedience, in order to keep them safe and alive and out of serious trouble before they reach that adulthood.
I do not in any way believe that an obedient child precludes a morally mature and responsible adult.
Joline


----------



## sunnysideup (Jan 9, 2005)

Quote:

However I do expect a "reasonable" amount of obedience, in order to keep them safe and alive and out of serious trouble before they reach that adulthood.
There's the difference. I do not expect "obedience." I expect my kids to do the right thing. I teach them and help them to make good choices, so that when faced with difficult dicisions -when mom (or another authority figure) is not around- they know how to do the right thing. I think that will keep them safe, alive, out of serious trouble, and help them to be the best people they can be.


----------



## bec (Dec 13, 2002)

Potty Diva - When I was reading your first post, and then you mentioned that your daughter was 4 already, I started thinking about food allergies. It might be worth it to try an elimination diet or get her tested. I don't know if you have considered this, but agree with the others that this could be the issue. I wonder, if you spoke to your supervisor and told her that you were going to try this approach, but that it might take longer than a week to see results, if she wouldn't give you a little more time. Perhaps she just wants to see something being done.

I'm sorry you are frustrated and having a hard time. You sound like you are at the end of your rope. I hope things get better for you soon.

Bec


----------



## tippytoes26 (Mar 19, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
I wouldn't see that as bullying; I would see it as protecting. I have to say, though, that your last statement seems out of place to me... but I'm sure that's just because I have a different perspective on this whole thing. When I read the first part, I thought, "Yeah, I'd remove her, too. It's incredibly unsafe and she probably isn't capable of understanding the extent of harm that could come from it." But why is it about telling her that she has limited freedom in choice-making? That's more of an authoritarian mindset. Why isn't it just about letting her know that you're looking out for her and will help her not to endanger herself?

Sorry if I'm picking that apart too much. It just seems like an odd statement.









That may be a bad example.. it's hard to think of examples off the top of my head even though I live them daily







I simply meant that there are many situations in which I must make the decision.. not her. But my point is that MY child doesn't respond to "I don't want you to get hurt so please don't do that". I DO explain things to her, but at this point, that is unimportant to her. She doesn't fully grasp that I'm "helping" her. As far as she can see, I'm simply not allowing her to do what she wants. Even older children are very self centered and very often feel that way and react based on that feeling.

I guess I'm just missing how dangerous situations are handled. The kid that chooses thug friends for example. You find him smoking pot and staying out late. Well.. I'm living proof that a parent that says "I don't like that and expect more from you than that" isn't going to be enough to keep them away from drugs, sex and other terrible situatins that could have major consequences. AND, I know that you cannot physically keep a child away from things like that if they make that choice. I KNOW that for myself, what kept me from actually getting hurt when I was a teenager was that my mother imposed punishments. I wasn't capable of realizing that if I didn't stay at the arcade and went walking the streets with a boy instead.. I could get raped. So, when I was caught doing that, my mother talked to me about it (yet I still didn't GET it.. I was too wraped up in my own selfish motives as a teen) and then grounded me from some things that were important to me like giong to the football games and I wasn't allowed to go to a friends birthday party. THOSE consequences imposed by my mother .. what most here would consider punishment.. were what kept me safe. Otherwise, I'd have just done it again. It wasn't that I didn't respect my mother, but at that age, I just wasn't capapble of making big decisions like that and she wasn't capable of forcing me to stay home (or at least, it would have caused more problems than it solved). I can only look at things from personal experience. I'm GLAD my mother set some limits for me and gave me consequences/punishment that I was able to grasp since I wasn't able to fully grap the impact of things like going somewhere alone with a man/boy. My daughter doesn't GET that running out in the street can hurt or kill her. No matter how much I explain that, at that age, there is no way her mind can grasp the magnitude of what I'm saying. So, if I just never allow her near the street at all without having a firm grip on her (removing the situaltion), she's not learning that there are grave consequences from running ito a street. And, a disapproving attitude will NOT keep a 3.5 year old out of the street. So, when we were playing in our front yard and she decided to run into the street after I explained to her that we do not play there, I promptly put her in the corner. To her, that's an unpleasant thing that happens when she runs into the street. And now, we can play in the front yard without worrying that she'll run into the street, because she at least understand that there are consequences she doesn't like if she does. Yes, I punished her, but i punished her not to "make her pay" but so that she could understand it could cause something unpelasant. Pretty soon, she'll be able to fully graps what running in the street can mean, but until then, I feel like I need to break it down and show her in terms she can understand.

I'm really not arguing.. I'm just showing you how I see things and why I don't quite understand what some of you are saying. I thought GD was no hitting, belittling, yelling and focusing more on the root of behavior instead of just focusing on "fixing" situations. I didn't realize that there are parents that don't have any kind of consequences beyond a disapproving attitude. This is all VERY difficult for me to take in and even if I don't use it, I'd very much like ot understand it.

I have one more question if anyone cares to answer them (respectfully please.. I'm serious when I say I want to learn and I'm in over my head in this conversation to debate.. I'm simply trying to comprehend a little better).
If you never have any final consequences.. how do your children react when you aren't around? What about school? after they are out on their own? Everywhere else if they misbehave, they will be punshied. Do you ALL homeschool? If a 5 year old is in a restaruante and throw food and don't cease after a warning, they'll be asked to leave (same thing as leaving the table if they don't stop throwing food and I've heard some say that is an unacceptable response). If they are at school and continue to cause distractions during math, they may lose recess. Are your children prepared for this or is it a total shock to them and they have a difficult time dealing with it since it's not how they are raised at home? Rules and punishment for non-compliance are in place in every culture around the world. The reason is to protect not only your rights, but the rights of every citizen. If a theif only got a disapproving attitude from the government.. there would be a LOT of theft. Yes, in a perfect wold, people would not steal because it's not right. And yes we can TRY to teach our children that certain things aren't done because they are inherently wrong but we ourselves don't always follow that creedo unless there is a punishment involved. The reason I didn't speed to our dentist appointment yesterday wasn't because it's wrong and makes other drives angry and isn't safe (yeah.. those SHOULD have been the reasons.. but in all honesty, they weren't) it was because I didn't want to pay a ticket. I find myself a VERY moral person..but I'm not perfect.. nobody is. Therefore, to protect others, punishments are enforced by the government. If my daugher yanks another child's hair repeatedly, doesn't it makes sense that there be some kind of consequence/punishment for that? She caused pain.

Also.. my mother used a lot of sympathy with us. When we were punished (say, sent to our room for five minutes for dumping a glass of milk over someone's head) she would say "I'm really sorry.. that stinks that you have to go to your room. It'll be over soon enough" And I fully remember not thinking SHE was being mean to me.. it was MY actions that caused my misery. That I, and I alone, had chosen to do something to make someone else unhappy and therefore caused my trip to my room. I never felt like she was "you did x so I'm gonna do y to you" kind of thing. If some guy molests my kid, I want him sent to jail (well.. really worse.. but you get the picture







) So, how does your view of parenting mesh with your view of how society deals with punishment? I would like to think that they are separate subjects, but really, they aren't. Many many many adults are just overgrown children and they have to be "parented". Does raising your children with GD prepare them for how the world works? Do you agree or disagree with jails? After the age of 5, aren't most rules in our home there to protect the rights of the other family memebers in your house just like laws in society? If your son hits your daughter had all he gets is a disapproving attitude and an expectation to not do it, doesn't your daughter feel slighted just like if some dude came up and rammed your car with his and the law just says "don't do that again"? I'd be darn mad if I was the daughter or if I was the person with the hit car. Perhaps it was the way I was raised.

Please tell me what I'm missing. I'm not getting a handle on the big picture somehow. It sounds "good" but there seem to be so many holes left in it that it still leaves me confused.

Amber


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

Amber,
Thank you for posting some really good examples you remember from your childhood in which you were punished but it didn't ruin your relationship with your mother or take away your trust in her, didnt cause you "suffering" , didnt make you feel like your parents were unjust, didnt prevent you from internalizing moral values, or didnt make you feel like they were taking away their love.
This is how I also feel.
I have read many of these books and articles which argue against punishments for the above reasons.
But none of it really jives true for me personally.
I like a lot of What Alfie Kohn (for example) says especially about education. But when he tries to tell me how a child feels about something (punishment, even time out for example). I think "what child?" "I was never that child" "I have never met that child"
All children are different as are all parents.
I think it is largely a matter of perspective.

I also thank you for your references to the things you did as a teenager. I feel probably the same way towards my daughters foolish behavior as you mentioned.
She knows better. but often she doesnt do better. Her brain is not functioning properly because it is too busy growing and rewiring itself for preparation for adulthood. It is full of hormones.
Adolescence is a tough time. I personally think it is too much of a burden to place on an adolescent to make them 100% responsible for making 100% of the decisions for themselves and then facing the real life consequences.
Thankfully I have little problem with this because usually my daughter agrees with me.
Joline


----------



## UUMom (Nov 14, 2002)

Thos are a lot of questions Amber. I might have to tackle them over the course of the day.

So here's my first--of course a child doesn't always understand that running into the street means they might be struck dead by a car. That's why the parent has to keep the child safe. If a child can;t understand death, how can she relate that standing in the corner means it will keep her from running into the street? Safety is the parent's job until the child is at a developmental stage to understand. So being in the coner doesn't teach a child that running into the street is dangerous.

If a child has the habit of running into the street, the child needs to watched closely and not be given opportunities to do this. It might mean no playing in the front yard, and it might mean being in a cart of in a sling in parking lots. It means if there is an infant already in a sling, the toddler needs to be in the cart or a stroller or otherwise tethered safely to the parent.

Most of GD in the early years is simply understanding a small child's developmental stages. Once a child develops an understanding of danger and cars and running in the street, you don't even have to worry about that anymore, and you've come out of that stage without punishment. Punishing a toddler does not quicken the pace at which her brains grows.

Ok that's one. I need coffee.


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

It doesnt make their brain grow but it can keep them safe if mom isnt quick enough to catch them.
This might not be a useful tool to a parent of only one child who is capable of catching them every single time.
A parent of three who simply doesnt have enough hands to hold them all might find it compelling to stop the behavior before the child can internalize a fear of death.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tippytoes26*
That may be a bad example.. it's hard to think of examples off the top of my head even though I live them daily









Isn't that always the case? It's like the running mental list of coveted CDs I keep that goes flying right out of my head the second I step foot in a record shop.

Quote:

So, when I was caught doing that, my mother talked to me about it (yet I still didn't GET it.. I was too wraped up in my own selfish motives as a teen) and then grounded me from some things that were important to me like giong to the football games and I wasn't allowed to go to a friends birthday party. THOSE consequences imposed by my mother .. what most here would consider punishment.. were what kept me safe.
This is so interesting to me. I had similar circumstances and punishment didn't work. I just hopped out the window after my mom went to sleep and did things that were probably even more dangerous than what I had been caught for. Don't get me wrong - my mom was a great mom in many ways; I just think that if I had been raised with more trust as to my abilities and my awareness, I probably would have responded differently because I would have trusted that she was looking out for me and not just trying to keep me from doing something that I wanted to do. Pure speculation, of course.









Quote:

My daughter doesn't GET that running out in the street can hurt or kill her. No matter how much I explain that, at that age, there is no way her mind can grasp the magnitude of what I'm saying.
Maybe. Did you try showing her what happens to things that get in front of cars, though? Maybe put a melon in the street and have someone run over it?

Quote:

So, if I just never allow her near the street at all without having a firm grip on her (removing the situaltion), she's not learning that there are grave consequences from running ito a street. And, a disapproving attitude will NOT keep a 3.5 year old out of the street.
A mom will keep a 3.5-year-old out of the street. It's our job. My son was always very reliable around the street because from the time he could walk, I'd hold his hand or carry him and talk to him about why. I've also been hit by a car and was able to talk to him about that, show him my scars, etc. Still, when he was about 3.5 he ran into the street, straight into the path of an oncoming bus. Thankfully, my friend was 2 steps behind and yanked him out of the way. I would not have gotten there in time. The thing is that punishment wouldn't have kept him from doing that. He was 3.5, he was racing one of friends to our car, and he was incapable of seeing the path through to its natural course. It was my job to do that for him and I dropped the ball. The natural consequence of that whole escapade was that I was a freaked out mess. That scared the heck out of him and he talked to me for months about how upset I was. He hasn't gone into the street again, but I don't put it past him. He's not even 5. By virtue of his age, it's still a good possibility that he will, no matter how I approach it. So, I don't leave him by streets unsupervised.

Forgive the rambling. Thinking as I type.







My point is this: Even with the threat of punishment there, would you leave your 3.5-year-old by the street by herself, trusting that she wouldn't venture into it? If not, then maybe it's an issue of waiting until she's further along in her development instead of trying to rush things (probably unsuccessfully in the long run) by punishing her.



> I'm really not arguing.. I'm just showing you how I see things and why I don't quite understand what some of you are saying. I thought GD was no hitting, belittling, yelling and focusing more on the root of behavior instead of just focusing on "fixing" situations. I didn't realize that there are parents that don't have any kind of consequences beyond a disapproving attitude.
> 
> 
> > Natural consequences quite frequently go beyond a disapproving attitude. They're there; they just aren't contrived. I see it as my job to help my son be aware of them and help him figure out how to deal with them (without my making them go away). That's where the benefit of my experience comes in.
> ...


----------



## irinam (Oct 27, 2004)

Amber, indeed many very good questions. I will just take one of the concepts you brought up and try to express my view on it (*try* being the operative word here)
Laws and punishments for grown ups and GD&#8230;
Example of how many grown ups don't do things because there are "right" but because they want to avoid the punishment&#8230;

See, I truly believe GD parents are doing more than providing peaceful environment for kids to grow up. I believe they are actually shifting the paradigm of social thinking of the future generation. I know it sounds "idealistic" and "wishfully spoken". But I believe this is what is happening in our society and I am happy to see that it is..

The whole paradigm of the society as it is right now IS based on the way people were taught. And many (not all, but majority) were BROUGH UP to do things not because they are right things to do, but because they will be punished. Hence, this is the way the current way of living works. But just because it works this way now, does not mean it has to work this way forever. We evolve as human beings and I do believe that the mentality is slowly but surely changing and I believe GD mamas are greatly contributing to this change.

Now for the laws. Some laws are outright stupid. Other laws were in place because of the different than now awareness.
In my country of origin (USSR) there was a LAW according to which one gets IMPRISONED if gay. Sounds barbaric, doesn't it? Yet it was an enforced law. Does it mean parents had to see that this is "the way it is" and prohibit and overpower their kid's different sexuality? No. it meant the law had to be changed.
Earlier yet in some countries if one was caught stealing, his/her right hand would be cut off. Why? Probably because there were a lot of thieves and that was the only way society could deal with them. Awareness IS on the rise. *I* don't steal because its not a right thing to do, not because I am afraid. I am fully aware that if I decided to steal from a big store I will not be caught (if I do it "right").

So I guess what I am trying to say (and it's coming out rather awkwardly, I understand) is - we are changing the future society. Is it too far fetched to think that our kids will be BETTER? Is it too far fetched to think they will do MORE things from the mere consciousness, because they were BROUGHT UP differently?

Ok, open to ridicule now&#8230;


----------



## bleurae (Feb 25, 2005)

Well said Irina.


----------



## SagMom (Jan 15, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tippytoes26*
If you never have any final consequences.. how do your children react when you aren't around? What about school? after they are out on their own? Everywhere else if they misbehave, they will be punshied. Do you ALL homeschool?

Well, we homeschool, but that's really beside the point. Not having consequences doesn't mean that kids aren't TAUGHT anything. They learn what's expected in restaurants by being in restaurants and having others as examples. They learn how to act in a class by being told what the expectations are. They don't hit each other or steal or destroy someone else's belongings out of empathy--they know how they'd feel if it was done to them and they recognize fairness/unfairness. My kids accept that the way we do things at home is not the way others do things, because they're around others all the time and witness this. Some rules they find rediculous but they deal with them because they want to be a part of the activity--other times, they decide not to be involved with something because they don't like the way it's run.

Sometimes they do the "right thing" because they feel it's the right thing, and sometimes they do it because they know it's a rule.

Quote:

Many many many adults are just overgrown children and they have to be "parented". Does raising your children with GD prepare them for how the world works?
It could be argued that maybe those adults were never given the opportunity to regulate themselves. Maybe they still require "parenting" because they've never learned how to act without being told what to do and when to do it. My kids know how their world works and as they've gotten older and their world has expanded, they've had no problem navigating it.

Quote:

Please tell me what I'm missing. I'm not getting a handle on the big picture somehow. It sounds "good" but there seem to be so many holes left in it that it still leaves me confused.
It seems to be a common belief that not punishing means not teaching. That it somehow means parents do nothing. It's not like we're completely ignoring our kids and never discussing right from wrong, we just don't make our points through punishing.


----------



## tippytoes26 (Mar 19, 2002)

Wow.. lots of good responses. Thanks for taking the time to do that. I think those answers will take some time to gel in my head for me to understand. It's so different that my mind is very resistant to it right now and it's not making sense just yet.. but maybe it will soon.

I did want to clear something up so nobody thinks I let my 3.5 year old just run around without supervision. When we cross the street, I do hold her hand (and she hates it) and explain to her why. When we play in the front yard, she has a sidewalk between us and the street. We talk about how past that it's dangerous. But, I'm willing to use a time-out to reinforce that negative things happen when we go in the street until she can fully comprehend something that is just a concept to her and not a reality. I do NOT rely on it as my only means of keeping her safe. But I also know that I cannot be there every time she is near a street and that she is much faster than me. And, she is MUCH faster than my husband who has a prosthetic leg and does not have the ability to run after her if, heaven forbid, she does dart away from us. No matter how much you hold onto your child, at nearly 4, they crave more freedom and can be quite sly about getting it. Just the other day, she learned how turn the deadbolt and open the front door while I was doing laundry. Out she went, but she did NOT go into the street and it wasn't for fear of getting run over. Now we know it's time for a chain lock as well. But so many times, parents can't see situations like that coming until it happens. I really think my one or two time outs will do no (or at the VERY least.. FAR LESS) damage to her than a car going 40mph. That was long.. I just didn't want anything thinking that I don't hold a hand, keep her in the cart or otherwise just trust that punishing her once or twice will be sufficient enough to keep her safe *L*.

Good luck finding a public school teacher that will agree to no enforce any consequences on your child but still on the others. Perhaps you'll be able to find a private school with that philosophy, but even that will be very difficult. With any luck, your child will not do anything to make the teacher feel like imposing any consequenes. But what if another child takes scissors to your childs favorite coat? gives him a black eye? shoves him down stairs? Do you feel that child should not have consequences to face? How would your child feel about that? I'm sure "consequences" are so engrained in me that I just cannot think beyond that. You say to get to the root of the problem. Well.. sometimes kids are just flat out mean and emotional and there is no rational reason for doing something cruel .. in which case, it bothers me very much if there are no consequences enforced. Man this is sending my brain for a roller coaster ride wheeeeew!


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TortelliniMama*
Actually that's from the authoritarian definition. I was confused at first, too, because the terms are in a different order in that excerpt than the way they usually are. (They're usually presented as a continuum with authoritative in the middle.) It took me a minute, because I read it and went, "She thinks authoritative parents favor punitive, forceful measures to curb self-will?!"









d'oh! I guess I oughta pay more attention before I








Sorry!!!!!!!


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
_I think it was something like this- she didn't differentiate between the "permissive" parents who simply didn't care, or didn't take the time to teach or discipline and the "permissive" parents who DID discipline and take the time to teach their children, albeit without force or punishment (ie they made a conscious decision that was the right way to parent as opposed to just doing what was easiest)_

She did not. Later researchers did expand on her definitions either by adding sub categories to both permissive (dividing between uninvolved and involved and permissive) and authoritarian (dividing between highly controlling and abusive). Others just added a fourth category for "uninvolved" in order to make the results of their research more relevant.

Joline

Yeah- uninvolved and involved permissive. hehehe Can you tell yesterday that I was NOT at my best in terms of intelligence? lol.
Oh, and I wanted to say that I really didn't mean to sound argumentative, if I did. I really didn't!
I know that your intent of posting that was to say that YOU were not authoritarian (and I agree with you there). I think it's easy to get defensive of any label- hence my slight defensiveness of possibly being labeled as permissive. But then I realized that I probably would be considered permissive to most people! lol. Oh well. hehehe.
Anyways, it seems like there are BIG similarities between permissive and authoritative, so it would be easy to be a combo of the two.

Ok, that's all I had to say for now









Becky


----------



## tippytoes26 (Mar 19, 2002)

Irina

That totally makes sense. It really does. I guess being a Christian, I'm somewhat unable to get away from the entire concept without a lot of difficulty. Even God (I have no idea how many Christian mamas there are on here.. if there are, I'd like to hear how you work through the contradictions) teaches us to choose right from wrong but still has set up consequences. I REALLY do see what you are saying. That's great.. but something in me says that it's human nature to do things even when we know they aren't right soemtimes. And THAT is the reason society sets up safeguards like prison. The gay thing.. well.. that's because they considered being gay a choice.. just like stealing.. there are many laws like that that are wrong but I'm speaking of other laws that protect other people. These are laws that I don't ever see society being without because of basic human nature (stealing, killing, hurting, abusing). It doesn't mean we shoudn't strive to teach our children to do things because they are right. But knowing that there are consequences for those that never master the internal struggle between right and wrong shouldn't deter from that. I really feel I can still teach my child right from wrong and to listen to that while still using final consequences as a tool in that. Not the only tool.. not the first tool.. and not even a major tool.. but a tool nonetheless. It's when people teach children using those external guides as their first and foremost tool that it becomes a problem in my opinion (do the dishes or you'll be grounded etc.. without any other reasoning or listening). I rather like that there are laws there to safeguard me and my family from those who choose not to care about right and wrong.


----------



## irinam (Oct 27, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tippytoes26*
Irina

That totally makes sense. It really does. I guess being a Christian, I'm somewhat unable to get away from the entire concept without a lot of difficulty. Even God (I have no idea how many Christian mamas there are on here.. if there are, I'd like to hear how you work through the contradictions) teaches us to choose right from wrong but still has set up consequences. I REALLY do see what you are saying. That's great.. but something in me says that it's human nature to do things even when we know they aren't right soemtimes. And THAT is the reason society sets up safeguards like prison. The gay thing.. well.. that's because they considered being gay a choice.. just like stealing.. there are many laws like that that are wrong but I'm speaking of other laws that protect other people. These are laws that I don't ever see society being without because of basic human nature (stealing, killing, hurting, abusing). It doesn't mean we shoudn't strive to teach our children to do things because they are right. But knowing that there are consequences for those that never master the internal struggle between right and wrong shouldn't deter from that. I really feel I can still teach my child right from wrong and to listen to that while still using final consequences as a tool in that. Not the only tool.. not the first tool.. and not even a major tool.. but a tool nonetheless. It's when people teach children using those external guides as their first and foremost tool that it becomes a problem in my opinion (do the dishes or you'll be grounded etc.. without any other reasoning or listening). I rather like that there are laws there to safeguard me and my family from those who choose not to care about right and wrong.

Before I say anything I really want to complement you (and other mamas that participated in this discussion) on the grace with which you hold the discussion.

Hey, you did not do it out of fear being punished (just kidding!)

But see, this is where we distinctly differ in our belief. I trully and completely believe that basic human nature is GOOD! I trully and completely believe that stealing and killing ARE NOT basic human nature!

And... I am not even sure I want to go there, but... I also trully believe that God is not punitive (ok, I might have just opened the can of worms







)

We as humans, as species, are still learning, very much like kids do.


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

_Anyways, it seems like there are BIG similarities between permissive and authoritative, so it would be easy to be a combo of the two._

I was reading a book. It was Dr Phil's Family FIrst.
Now first, I want to say, I did not at ALL like the second half. WHich was very punitive and was focusing on how to get control of your kids once you have lost it.
But the first half had a lot to do with parenting styles and childrens temperaments which was extremely interesting and I very much agreed with a lot of it.
The point was that not only are there three parenting types, but there are different temperaments of children which respond better to the different types. He then described which children tend to respond better to which system of parenting, and even went so far as to say that each style had its strengths and were more appropriate to different children.
For example, I think that one of the types of kids was "rebellious" this is my dd. This type of child really craves control and they respond best to permissive parenting because too much control by parents causes them to want to rebel. (in a nutshell) My dd is like this. And for the most part I am permissive with her unless or until she does something terribly dangerous or over the line. (I overlook chronic lateness or messy room etc. . . and let her control when she wakes and goes to bed). Some children are followers by nature and really want the very concrete guidelines that authoritarian parents set up. (we have all known kids who were obsessed with the rules for example), and there are other kids who are more cooperative by nature and respond best to authoritative parents.
So I guess it was with this in mind that I felt I could use words like "permissive" without sounding judgmental.
Anyway, I really felt that his descriptions were good and it made me feel better about how I handle my oldest daughter. I had often had the nagging feeling I was letting her "get away" with everything, and should be "stricter" with her. It was reading about the rebellious personality and how it was almost exactly the same way my dd responds to me that made me feel better about being more permissive with her than I had felt was "acceptable"
So not only do I agree that they are close, but that the same parent can exhibit qualities of different parenting style when dealing with different children of different temperaments.

Joline


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tippytoes26*
If my 3.5 year old chooses not to wash her hands after playing in the indoor playground, she could become very ill ...I feel it is my DUTY as a parent to impose more than just a disapproving look or attitude.

I feel it is my duty to get her hands washed in the MOST matter of fact way WITHOUT the disapproving look or attitude.

Quote:

If I get stopped for speading, the cop doesn't just give me a disapproving look and explain to me how he doesn't approve of what I've done. He does sometimes remind me that speeding can cause accidents and isn't safe.
I'd much rather the guy just write me the ticket matter-of-factly. I sped, I'm getting fined, yup! I HATE it and react so strongly when the cop has some of attitude.


----------



## writermommy (Jan 29, 2005)

Potty Diva,

Sorry if I missed this, but a few questions:

Do you have these problems everywhere, or just day care?

Did the situation start/get worse after you started working there?

I ask because for 1 1/2 years I worked as Director of a preschool where my 2 younger dds attended. The baby had no problems, but my middle daughter's behavior deteriorated to the point where I could have (but didn't) spank her. I ended up leaving and now I work from home. Her behavior (and our relationship) have totally changed for the better. I really believe that the situation of having mommy be a teacher was just too much for her. She really needed me to just be her mommy.

I don't know if this applies to your situation, but I wanted to share my experiences just in case. I didn't see it at first and wasn't even completely sure that was the problem before I quit. I'm so glad I did.


----------



## Ellien C (Aug 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tippytoes26*
... how do your children react when you aren't around? What about school? after they are out on their own? Everywhere else if they misbehave, they will be punshied.

I accept that at my day care, time outs will occur. When my 2.5 yo tries to impose them on her dolls, I talk to the doll and sit with her (the doll) in timeout. I'm serious. We talk about WHY baby might hit. Baby needed a litte more space from doggie. Baby didn't have the words to say "''scuse me." Baby was feeling a little sad and wanting more loving and holding, and didn't know how to say that.

I follow the Continuum-Concept which describes what we might think of as a punishment-free culture. No one person ever imposes their will on another. This includes small children.

On thievery: Why do you not steal from your family? Is is the threat of punishment? Or because you see yourself as part of the greater whole? You'd only be "stealing" from yourself.

I like the quote "You cannot get another person to behave better by making them feel worse," and think this applies at any age.

Too much else to answer.


----------



## cmb123 (Dec 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *tippytoes26*

If you never have any final consequences.. how do your children react when you aren't around? What about school? after they are out on their own? Everywhere else if they misbehave, they will be punshied.... Rules and punishment for non-compliance are in place in every culture around the world.

Well, my children behave mostly the same way out in the world as they do at home (actually they are better behaved at school than at home, but overall well behaved in both). The school my children attend have a "you break it, you fix it" approach to things, which is fine by me. The school also has a very extensive "social curriculum." They are all very capable of "fixing" things whether it's someones feelings, or a ripped book. Teachers help children with working out difficulties, help them put feelings into words, and help them understand eachother. Every "negative" behaviour is seen as a chance for learning, and is not brushed off but worked with in the moment. "Punishment" is a real, real rarity.
Just because we don't use "punishments" in our house, doesn't mean that undesired behaviour is simply ignored. You mentioned what do you do if one kid hits another? Well, we talk about how hitting is not OK- which is usually followed by the hitter explaining to me why they hit, which is folllowed by me explaining again why hitting is not ok, and a discussion is sparked about what the child could have done instead of hitting. This has happend in my house, and so far the child who was hit has not felt jilted to my knowledge.
We do a lot of talking in our house. We talk about all kinds of behaviour situations, real and hypothetical. Kids ask lots of questions, I answer honestly. We talk all the time about how to treat one another, and analyze situations we witness IRL or on TV, and talk about what other people do in thier homes. When my kids see other children in the store or wherever who's parents are shreiking at them, or timeouting them or spewing empty threats, they ask questions and we talk about it. I do want them to "do the right thing" because it feels good in thier hearts. I know that is what I do. I don't walk through this world doing the right thing because I fear being put in jail. I do it because that's what feels right to me.
Also, working with kids everyday, I really believe that it's the kids who do get punished at home, and/or hit at home who have the worst behaviour of all at school. I don't think the idea of punishment at home = compliance out in the world is true at all.


----------



## Potty Diva (Jun 18, 2003)

Ok so I was a wench, sorry. i am just so stressed and the comment about me not using Gd sent me over the top.

Kailey is GREAT at home and elsewhere, except at granny's which is kind of stressful. But, we have time and energy to work through things with her. Her behavior is scray when she is in a room with me at childcare(generally she is not since i have the older kids but lately we have been low in numbers and combining classes. Today however i had Kailey go with her own teacher, and took another child- she had a great day. Also to add to the problem of yesterday, she didn't go to sleep until 1 am, didn't eat breakfast(didn't want it) and no nap. DUH. so ya I feel like an ass of a mother for not getting the lightbulb on earlier or I would have handled the situation much more appropriately. UGH!

Although the center where i work is wonderful and quiet and loving, easy going, etc...there is something about ME being in the center that sends Kailey over the top. We also had a teacher change a few months ago. It took her six months when she first started to get used to her old teacher. So now we are starting all over again. It pains me to see her go through such strong emotions. I KNOW why she is stressing and it kills me.

I would love to stay home with her again, but RIGHT now it is impossible. My DH only works F,Sat, and Sun as it is and goes to school during the week. I work all day and and come August 15th will be going to school in the am and working until 5:30. Kailey will be there most of the day without me.

I am also feeling crappy that I lowered myself to spanking. Thanks for tolerating my posts.


----------



## Potty Diva (Jun 18, 2003)

Quote:

Also, working with kids everyday, I really believe that it's the kids who do get punished at home, and/or hit at home who have the worst behaviour of all at school. I don't think the idea of punishment at home = compliance out in the world is true at all.
Before having my child I completely agreed, but I guess we are an exception to that rule. Please see above post.

in fact most children who are spanked will behave in front of the punisher, but out of sight will act out aggressively.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Potty Diva*
Before having my child I completely agreed, but I guess we are an exception to that rule. Please see above post.

in fact most children who are spanked will behave in front of the punisher, but out of sight will act out aggressively.









And it seems that children who aren't spanked and who trust their parents often seem to have "worse" (or more authentic, anyway) behavior when with their parents. Which might explain, at least in part, why your daughter does better when she's not in the same daycare room with you, PD. When you're there, she can really be herself. And maybe she's jealous of the attention that the other children are receiving from you, too?

Overall, I guess that's a good thing. It's better than the opposite problem, right? At least she's not hiding everything from you.

I'm glad you all had a better day today.


----------



## Potty Diva (Jun 18, 2003)

Dragon~ Another thing my Psyche Prof said is that, children who are raised with gd discipline act out in front of parents because they feel safe to do so. That always kept me going. he said i would see consistant results until she was 5 or 6. I guess I just forget sometimes, yk? Gawd I hate being human


----------



## bleurae (Feb 25, 2005)

I was beaten almost daily as a kid. I was a scrawny lil kid with a 200lb father who would wail on me very regularly. I was chased down the street often trying to get away with no intervention from neighbors. I did hear as a young adult from a few that they really felt sorry for me back then. The last time my father hit me I was in my 20's. I was disowned over 8 years ago when he found out I was gay. I miss my mom, but not him. I also grew up to be a bully through grammar school and junior high. I was also beaten whenever I hit others. The irony kills me. When at friends houses I was very very well behaved. The only people I was pretty mean to was other kids who made fun or said mean stuff to me. Anyone who "sounded like" my parents with demeaning statements I would rage at. Other than that I was also known for being a protector of small or shy kids. I hated seeing anyone get picked on.

My point is, what is done to us, what we go through at home, in the world.....we all process differently. One child can be left to CIO and may not suffer, another may have lifelong trauma. I don't believe in CIO or "punitive" discipline. I think the test if my actions would be ok to a friend or stranger to see if they are ok for my child is a good one. Not the only one but a good one. I lose it sometimes because of my own "baggage", NOT because of anything Bliss does. When I lose it bad I yell, it is something he does not deserve, ever, and I am working on it. I am so incredibly HONORED to be allowed to be his mother and help guide him for a short time that it takes my breath away. Personally I view parenting as me trying to keep growing healthy enough and fast enough to keep up with him. Safety is my responsibility, training is not IMO.

I want him to know he is respected and valued as another fellow human being, a beautiful wonderous being.

my 2 bits more


----------



## SagMom (Jan 15, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bleurae*

I think the test if my actions would be ok to a friend or stranger to see if they are ok for my child is a good one.









:

Quote:

I am so incredibly HONORED to be allowed to be his mother and help guide him for a short time that it takes my breath away. Personally I view parenting as me trying to keep growing healthy enough and fast enough to keep up with him. Safety is my responsibility, training is not IMO.

I want him to know he is respected and valued as another fellow human being, a beautiful wonderous being.
Well, now I'm all teary-eyed.

I used to work with kids who were abused. Without exception, every one of those parents had been abused when THEY were children. I think it takes amazing strength to break that cycle.


----------



## bleurae (Feb 25, 2005)

Thanks Joan,
I was thinking about it today and sometimes I am so frustrated at where I am starting from ykwim? I think wow what if I had had parents like so many women here, think how much further/calmer/wiser/grounded I would be when dealing with Bliss. I ADORE the GD boards and practice it in my homw to my best ability with constant room for improvement, but I wish I was better. I read about the other terms for 'good job" type of threads, and I work on it, but I feel like the ga I am bridging is soooo wide sometimes. I try not to get on myself to hard, but I do sometimes get so irked at my upbringing for those reasons.
I ultimately sit back, take a deep breath and try to have the sensitivity for myself as I do for Bliss but it is a definate process.
It sure does make a BIG difference to be able to come to these threads and hear such wisdom and grace and stumbles and falls all rolled up from such wonderful women trying to do the best job they can with their beloved children.


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Potty Diva*
Dragon~ Another thing my Psyche Prof said is that, children who are raised with gd discipline act out in front of parents because they feel safe to do so. That always kept me going. he said i would see consistant results until she was 5 or 6. I guess I just forget sometimes, yk? Gawd I hate being human









I hear you. :LOL Sometimes I wish I could be robot super mommy. I just have to remind myself that every time I drop my basket, there's an opportunity for valuable learning for both myself and ds.


----------



## annab (Mar 25, 2003)

WHEW! Just got through the whole thing. I am right there with the food allergy moms. Dairy, wheat or beef and my beautiful boy becomes the troll from hell.

Someone asked for concrete ideas that worked. I have some. This works for my almost three and half year old, and I think it may be an age thing. I fully expect it to stop working as he matures.

We were having a problem with his not doing what I asked when it was necessary (stop screaming down the hallway when the baby is sleeping, no running across the parking lot and not holding my hand, things like this). So I asked him, "What can I do to get you to understand when something is not a choice, but something that has to be done?" He told me to put my hand up like a traffic policeman. It works. I use it very sparingly, but when the hand goes up, he stops and looks at me like, "Foiled again!"

We were having trouble leaving places (with plenty of warning and time for transition) without having total, horrible meltdowns. I asked him what I should do so that he knew we needed to leave and that I did not want a big fit to ensue. "Put your leg in the air like this" (imagine dog hiking leg--very attractive). It works.

Another thing is that when meltdown ensues, I have to get him to remove himself from it physically and mentally. I start with a few simple commands: Touch your head. Rub your tummy. Scratch your ears. When he gets in the groove, I give him something intellectual: Put your hands on your face and count your nostrils. Make a circle with your fingers and count the leaves you see in the circle. Either he is laughing at the end, or at least calm enough that we can work together to find a solution.

HTH!


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

I love those ideas of him thinking up signals for you go give when you "mean it". It involves him in the process even of things he wouldnt usually be involved in. And he has more ownership of the process.
This is something I have not tried.
Joline


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annab*
WHEW! Just got through the whole thing. I am right there with the food allergy moms. Dairy, wheat or beef and my beautiful boy becomes the troll from hell.

Someone asked for concrete ideas that worked. I have some. This works for my almost three and half year old, and I think it may be an age thing. I fully expect it to stop working as he matures.

We were having a problem with his not doing what I asked when it was necessary (stop screaming down the hallway when the baby is sleeping, no running across the parking lot and not holding my hand, things like this). So I asked him, "What can I do to get you to understand when something is not a choice, but something that has to be done?" He told me to put my hand up like a traffic policeman. It works. I use it very sparingly, but when the hand goes up, he stops and looks at me like, "Foiled again!"

We were having trouble leaving places (with plenty of warning and time for transition) without having total, horrible meltdowns. I asked him what I should do so that he knew we needed to leave and that I did not want a big fit to ensue. "Put your leg in the air like this" (imagine dog hiking leg--very attractive). It works.

Another thing is that when meltdown ensues, I have to get him to remove himself from it physically and mentally. I start with a few simple commands: Touch your head. Rub your tummy. Scratch your ears. When he gets in the groove, I give him something intellectual: Put your hands on your face and count your nostrils. Make a circle with your fingers and count the leaves you see in the circle. Either he is laughing at the end, or at least calm enough that we can work together to find a solution.

HTH!


Wow, what fabulous ideas!! I am going to try to remember them for when my DS is a little older.


----------



## cmb123 (Dec 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *annab*
WHEW! So I asked him, "What can I do to get you to understand when something is not a choice, but something that has to be done?"

This is the part I like the best. We do this in our house. When kids are part of the process, and the feel ownership over it, they are WAY more likely to respond when needed. One of the reasons I think my kids "follow the rules" almost all of time is because...they made them up! We sit down and have family meetings often, and talk about what is working , and what is not. The kids write down "house rules" and refer to them often if they see somone breaking them. They feel much more inclined to follow them, when it was they themselves who imposed them, not me.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Bleurae
Your post had me in tears. I'm so sorry that you had that growing up. I'm even more sorry that no one tried to protect you. How awful.
It's great that you are breaking the cycle, and I'm so glad you found this forum for support.
I guess I don't really have much to say but that.









Becky


----------



## bleurae (Feb 25, 2005)

Thanks Becky,
The sad part for me is that it is so common, that so many of my friends have the same stories.


----------



## happeeevraftr (Mar 27, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mercyn*
i'll keep reading, though, and trying things, and looking for new ways. otherwise i'll end up with one of those 13yo's that get brought home at 3am by the police, drunk out of his mind...~shakes head~ i really, really hope not...i hope i find something that gets him to be more social, more caring, better behaved, more respectful...before then.

pamela


pamela, I'm not through this thread either, (and I hope I'm not just bringing it out of from the dust...I don't even know if it's still active!) but I just wanted to say I really recommend you read some actual books, like Kids are Worth It by Coloroso, in addition to this board. When I first started reading this board, I thought most of what the "non-punishing" people had to say was crazy, permissive, wouldn't really work in real life, kids need limits, etc, etc. Then I read the books. I learned the true meaning and explanation behind the terms. Authors of books put much more time and research into what they write than what we have time to type out on this board, and because of that, books are much better at explaining these concepts so that they make sense and actually seem possible. After reading a few books, now I'm back to reading these threads, and I really do agree with what the [previously referred to as crazy] non-punishers say!

Honestly, a few months ago, I would have totally agreed with Joline, and I can really see where she's coming from. But now I am SO on the side of not wanting to do something to shame or cause pain to my child *for the sole purpose of making them pay* for what they did. I don't believe that will TEACH them anything, and I think that if you're lucky and it does make them any more likely not to do it again, the reason is FEAR. They wouldn't be not doing it because they've internalized the moral lesson and realize/understand why it's bad. No, if they "obey" after being punished, it is because they don't want to get in trouble! Maybe some day, down the road, they will internalize it and eventually understand that it's not right, but it won't be because of any punishment you've imposed on them.

Okay, I guess I'm going on a little more than I planned! I have thought about this a lot. My childhood was NOT very good--I was spanked for sure, among other much worse things. Since moving out, going to college, getting a degree basically in Child Development, having a child, and doing lots more research, my views have changed from "spanking isn't terrible and is some times necessary, but I don't want to do it a lot" to "Spanking isn't good, but other forms of punishment are definetly necessary so that kids have limits, etc," to "punishment really isn't a teaching tool, it's a shaming and power tool, and not something I want to use."

I really don't want to exert complete control over my children. From what I read in Joline's posts, you want your kids to CHOOSE to do what you want them to do, and if they don't choose it automatically, you will do everything you can to talk them into it, persuade them, reason with them, etc, etc, but when all that fails and they still choose NOT to do it, you can't handle that. You're going to MAKE them do it. Or else. They DON'T have control over themselves at all. They HAVE to do what you want them to do or they will be punished.

But please don't get me wrong--I'm NOT saying we should just let them do anything they want! Certainly not. I believe we can STOP them from doing something without punishing them for it. For example, the food throwing thing. There are many things you can do to stop it--usually if they're throwing food, they're not hungry anymore, so [kindly, gently!] get them down from the table. But you don't have to put them in time out. You can still be considerate of them. (If they ARE still hungry, you need to try something else, because it would be punishment if you're making them go hungry!) I don't see the need to add some kind of shame on top of just stopping the behavior.

It's 3:15 in the morning and my eyes are getting blurry. I apologize if this isn't the most well written, coherent post ever! But I wanted to share some of my thoughts, and mostly say, I've been where some of you have been (Joline, Pamela, others), and I can see your reasoning for sure. But after reading some very well written explanations of the nonpunishment viewpoint, I have to say it really makes sense to me. I don't think punishment is effective as a teaching tool. Many of you have said that. If it is not an effective teaching tool, what is it and why is it used? It's a power tool, it's spite, it's, you didn't "mind" me, so now you're in trouble! There's no learning involved. Well, I take that back. Some things are learned. Like, "Mom claims I can choose for myself, but if I don't do what she wants, I get in trouble, so I guess I really don't have much of a choice." Or maybe, "I can't do this around Mom or I'll have to go to time out. But I don't really see any reason not to do it when she's not around." I'm going to finally shut up and go to bed now!


----------



## annab (Mar 25, 2003)

I really enjoyed your post, Happee. It is cool to see someone's parenting evolution.


----------



## Earth Angel (Dec 13, 2004)

Just wanted to say thanks to everyone for this discussion









Dh and I are/were in a very bad place. We were the parents that threaten to punish but don't. We felt like we had to use punishments to get "results" but were never comfortable with punishing....so we were caught.....until I started lurking on this thread. I read most if not all (this is a very active thread







) of the responses here and then sat down with Dh. I thought he might think I was crazy but it really resonated with him as well and it took one sentence for me to convince him to try new things and to not threaten to punish Ds
We are now trying to unlearn everything we have learned from our own childhood and society's expectations of us. Over the last week or so I have bitten my toung several times when my natural reaction has been "Ds I need you to do X and if not Y will happen". But, it feels so much better not to say that. And, Ds is happier as well.
It has been such a relief to feel like we have support for our instincts (that we were not listening to by the way) and now that I feel I can trust them there have been many ideas that have been cropping up during times of stress for/with the kids. And, when I put them into action they actually work. I will start looking for some of the recommended reading at the library too, to keep my mind fresh with alternative ideas.....it is always helpful fo me to have new things to try when I come up against and unexpected road block.








The biggest hurdle for Dh and I has been curbing our own frustration and anger. I think for us, using threats of punishment has been our outlet for releasing our own emotions....which makes me understand even more why using these threats of punishment was not OK. My kid should never be my "outlet". It has taken a lot of work but a lot of strategies I have read here at MDC have assisted us in beginning to learn to curb our own emotions, and to not allow them to happen at all (reminding myself to remember it isn't personal is a HUGE one, but there are others too).
I really appreciate this discussion for turning me back to the things I believe in and helping me to let go of the things that I was doing because I felt "expected" to do them. I'm not sure why it happened with discipline when in many other aspects of my parenting self and my own self I refuse to subscribe to society's expectations.....but it happened and I am very grateful to you mammas and pappas for helping me return to my true beliefs about my child


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

I enjoyed your thoughtful post.
I would like to point out however that for those of us who do choose to use punishment as a last resort we are NOT
"to do something to shame or cause pain to my child for the sole purpose of making them pay for what they did. "
Certainly anybody who believes that is the nature of all punishment, would be well advised to not use it.
I however do not think a brief timeout shames or causes pain to my child. I also do not do it to "make them pay" that is not nor has it ever been my purpose.
I respect that some parents choose not to use punishment because to them it would be "to make their child pay" however I want to point out very clearly that this is certainly not the motivation for all of us who do use punishment occasionally.

I agree that punishment is a power tool 100%. I argue however that power does not equal spite. And even when I find myself in the position of punishing my children spite or revenge has never been a part of it.
Joline


----------



## cmb123 (Dec 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Earth Angel*
I really appreciate this discussion for turning me back to the things I believe in and helping me to let go of the things that I was doing because I felt "expected" to do them. I'm not sure why it happened with discipline when in many other aspects of my parenting self and my own self I refuse to subscribe to society's expectations.....but it happened and I am very grateful to you mammas and pappas for helping me return to my true beliefs about my child









Each day we all have the opportunity to do better by our children. Not everyone seizes the opportunity, but you are and I think that is wonderful!!!!


----------



## cmb123 (Dec 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
And even when I find myself in the position of punishing my children spite or revenge has never been a part of it.

So what IS the purpose then? When you do choose to punish, what is your point if it os not revenge, or spite, or to "make them pay" for what they have done? Just curious, not argumentative.


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

I am happy to answer, and I can see that you are just curious!









Anyway. When I choose to punish it is a memory device. A reminder.
I want everythign to stop for a minute for my child to really understand that I am serious about this particular rule.
I never choose a punishment when I am angry.
There have been times when I have told my oldest she was going to have a punishment out of spite, but if that has happenned (and I am in tune with my emotions well enough to recognise it when it does) as soon as I calm down and take a deep breath I go back to her and remove the punishment and apologise. "I'm sorry I said you were grounded off the phone for a week. I was feeling angry, and it was not the right response. YOu are certainly not grounded off the phone."

Spite and revenge are about ME. I never punish my children to make Me feel better or to vent my emotions on them.
Sometimes when I know they understand the rules, know they are capable of following them, and I have tried to gently persuade them to choose to do so voluntarily and it does not work I do of two things. 1. I choose my battles and decide if this is really important. and then 2. Respond accordingly: either continue to try to find ways to help them perfect this skill in a patient manner (toy picking up is one of those smallies) or give a punishment (time out for my 3 year old, somethign specifically related to the "crime" for my 13 year old) to serve as a reminder that "I mean business."

In this way , yes it is about power. Everythign stops and I have to remind my children that even though I want them to be happy and have lots of freedoms, I have to insist on this particular rule.
But it is not because I am angry or spiteful or want revenge etc. . .
It is only a way to draw attention to the moment and make it different from the preceeding and following moments so as to have a longer effect on the memory than my previous efforts have had.

Joline


----------



## annakiss (Apr 4, 2003)

I think this may be a place where we need to agree to disagree. Unless you wanna try reading the books.


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

Oh I think it is true that we shall agree to disagree
We come from two different philosophical viewpoints.
It is like religion.
The Catholics and the Baptists will likely never get along! LOL (at least that is how it looks in my family) And both are pretty certain they have it right.

I am not trying to convince anybdy to use punishment.
I only wish to clarify that punishment means different things to different people and we are all not cut from the same cloth.

Oh and btw, I just got Wolf's book Yesterday. I cant wait to read it.
I still disagree with his statment about "all punishment is about suffering" and it was strange how he put that odd statment in the middle of discussion about why harsh punishments are bad. But again, I am beginning to understand that we all have disagreements about the very definition of punishment.
As long as people define punishment as "infliction of suffering" or " spite" I suppose I can take statements against punishment with a "grain of salt" because we are certainly talking about two very different things.
Joline


----------



## Dragonfly (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *johub*
I only wish to clarify that punishment means different things to different people and we are all not cut from the same cloth.

I'd like to respectfully suggest that it doesn't really matter what punishment means to grown people. What matters is how it is perceived by children.

Quote:

Oh and btw, I just got Wolf's book Yesterday. I cant wait to read it.
I still disagree with his statment about "all punishment is about suffering" and it was strange how he put that odd statment in the middle of discussion about why harsh punishments are bad.
As I'm sure you know, I'd agree with Wolf's statement.







Setting that aside for a moment, though, and going back to your statement about why you use punishment, I have to ask: How does punishment serve as a memory tool for your children if it is not linked to suffering (such as a feeling of isolation, anguish over loss of "privilege," etc.)? For example, isn't the reality of a time-out that the child is forced into isolation (which, for most children, is a negative, anxiety-producing experience)? (Time-outs are generally said not to "work" if the child is enjoying himself in isolation.) If the suffering isn't a key element of the memory tool, then couldn't you just as easily trigger the memory by taking a moment where you sit with your child and discuss the situation with him/her?


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
I'd like to respectfully suggest that it doesn't really matter what punishment means to grown people. What matters is how it is perceived by children.

I certainly agree with you. I also happen to think that as a parent I am in a better position to understand how my children perceive things than an author or other who has never met them. I think it is reasonable to assume that parents know their children best.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
I have to ask: How does punishment serve as a memory tool for your children if it is not linked to suffering (such as a feeling of isolation, anguish over loss of "privilege," etc.)? For example, isn't the reality of a time-out that the child is forced into isolation (which, for most children, is a negative, anxiety-producing experience)? (Time-outs are generally said not to "work" if the child is enjoying himself in isolation.) ?

The reality of time-out is that my child is asked to sit on a perfectly comfortable chair for 3 minutes. This is the same chair he might choose to sit in of his own accord for longer periods at any time of the day. I think it is a serious misuse of the word suffering to use it in this regard. The important thing is that everythign stops. As I mentioned above. In addition, when someone says "most children" they are assuming that they know a parents child better than that parent. Which certainly is not the case.
I would imagine the tone in which the parent sent the child into time out and her attitude towards the child at that time is probably more responsible for any feeling of anxiety etc. . . than sitting for 3 minutes on a chair.
The same goes for revoking privileges for a teenager. While the idea of not using the phone for a few days may be somewhat unpleasant.
To use the term "suffering" is disrespectful to real suffering.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dragonfly*
If the suffering isn't a key element of the memory tool, then couldn't you just as easily trigger the memory by taking a moment where you sit with your child and discuss the situation with him/her?

Absolutely. And it would stop there if it worked.

It simply is beyond my personal belief system and understandig of the word "suffering" to think that having a child forgo doing something they want to do for a short period is suffering at all.
Pain is suffering. Loss is suffering.
Transitory disappointments or not getting your way is not suffering.
If that were true it would be causing our children suffering every time we say the word "no".

I can understand and respect that some parents feel that the slightest amount of discomfort and disappointment is too much for their child and they should never be the source of those things.
I can even understand if based on the knowledge you have of your child and your childs temperament that these things might actually cause sufferign to that child.
However, all children and all parents are different.
I can say with confidence that when I (rarely) get to the point of punishing my children, I am not doing it to make them suffer , make them pay , enact revenge or any of the above mentioned ideas about punishment.
I can also say with confidence that they also do not feel that they are being ill used or that they are suffering.

Joline


----------



## Dar (Apr 12, 2002)

If it's all about making the episode memorable and not about suffering (or "unpleasantness", maybe, if suffering is too strong of a word), why not make the episode memorable in another way. Maybe you could put a fruit bowl on your head and stick bananas in your ears and then reiterate the rule, or stand stock-still for 3 minutes in the middle of the kitchen. That would be memorable, no?

Dar


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

That is an excellent idea and worth trying before resorting to punishment.
However while it is memorable and gets the rule message across. It also contradicts the other message which is "mom is serious about this" which is a message that sometimes I really wish to get across.

Joline


----------



## cmb123 (Dec 30, 2004)

So does sitting in a chair for 3 minutes work? Once one of the kids has sat in the chair for 3 minutes because of a certain behavior or whathaveyou, do they never do that again because sitting there has made them see the light?

I've never used time outs- not because I think they make the child "suffer" in anyway, but because I don't see what children learn from them.

My kids are I think over "time out" age at this point anyway, and not old enough for the "your grounded" thing. I know so far we've done fine without punishments, but I wouldn't swear that I would never ground a teen if I felt it were a matter of thier safety.


----------



## cmb123 (Dec 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dar*
Maybe you could put a fruit bowl on your head and stick bananas in your ears and then reiterate the rule, or stand stock-still for 3 minutes in the middle of the kitchen. That would be memorable, no?


I think that is a fabulous idea Dar. Definately memorable!!!


----------



## johub (Feb 19, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *cmb123*
So does sitting in a chair for 3 minutes work? Once one of the kids has sat in the chair for 3 minutes because of a certain behavior or whathaveyou, do they never do that again because sitting there has made them see the light?

I've never used time outs- not because I think they make the child "suffer" in anyway, but because I don't see what children learn from them.

My kids are I think over "time out" age at this point anyway, and not old enough for the "your grounded" thing. I know so far we've done fine without punishments, but I wouldn't swear that I would never ground a teen if I felt it were a matter of thier safety.


I am right there with you. My ds had reached 2 1/2 and I had never tried time out and I was seriously doubtful as to how effective it would be. I do not believe time out is a good teaching tool.
I had eliminated that behavior (and others as well) through gentle guidance and no punishment up until that point.
However when it returned and he knew he wasnt supposed to throw food, and he was able to refrain from doing so (having proved it for many months) I tried these very same techniques for a couple of months to no avail.
It was only when I finally decided that nothing was working that I tried the time out I described.
After 3 2 minute time outs he almost entirely stopped throwing food.
It went from somethign that occurred at every meal to somethign that occurred maybe once a week.
I can't say why it worked.
After mulling it over I still think time out is not a good tool to educate as to what behavior is appropriate. But I now believe it can be effective to remind children that have already mastered a behavior or skill that it is expected that they use it. THat mom really means it when she says "no".
I still dont use it often at all. I simply do not need it.
I also don't think that every child will respond the way mine did.
I don't think it is the ultimate answer to everybody's behavior issues or a one size fits all approach.
But for my oldest son, it was surprisingly effective. As well as gentle.
My youngest two are only 22 months and I havent used time out (except if that means to separate them when being violent, but not really the same thing) so I cant say whether or not it will be effective.

As for the "you're grounded" thing. I dont like that either for any age. I really think that if punishment is used it ought to fit the crime.
One of my favorite things is to make my responses to them occasionally conditional on their cooperation.
For example. "I asked you to pick up the floor. YOu did not do it so I had to. NOw I am too tired to play trains." or "When you argue with me like that it makes me feel tired and angry. Because I feel tired and angry I cannot drive you to the movies."
It isnt "natural" consequences, but perhaps these things would fall into "logical" consequences. WHich by most definitions are punishments.
My oldest does get a full "grounding" occasionally but this is mostly to remove her from dangerous influences when she is making terribly poor choices. WE dont do it often because it is does not really motivate good behavior. The only benefit is that it is protective against further bad behavior or danger in the immediate future. (which to me is somethign that can be very important under some circumstances)

Anyway CMB I really appreciated your post because I also feld that "time out" wouldnt work. But after 2 months of scraping yogurt off of the walls, I was willing to try it.

Joline


----------

