interesting issue; please advise
Sandra Dodd
I just received an e-mail:
Hello
I see you recommend Siblings Without Rivalry, by Adele Faber and
Elaine Mazlish at the end of:
http://sandradodd.com/siblings
But these authors taught some form of communication in which
manipulation is prevalent : NVC (non violent communication), so I
don't think that's a good idea.
Best regards...
I don't own that book but read it from the la leche league library
maybe, or maybe I owned it and gave it away.
My response was
===================
I don't think it could be classic "NVC" because that's way more recent.
I'll consider removing it. I'm going to ask about it on Always
Learning to see what others who have read it more recently think.
I learned tons from Faber's "How to Listen so Kids will talk" writings
when I had toddlers.
===================
When I had toddlers I wasn't involved with unschooling and hadn't had
or ever heard of most of the thoughts I've put into that website. So
if this is a bad recommendation I should remove it, and if it's okay
to leave there, I should tell my correspondent (who was kind enough to
think to write and suggest it) why I'm keeping it. I'm not attached
one way or the other.
My toddlers all drive and have jobs and get along well, and I can't
speak to or from the use of that book because it's been so long.
What do you think?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Hello
I see you recommend Siblings Without Rivalry, by Adele Faber and
Elaine Mazlish at the end of:
http://sandradodd.com/siblings
But these authors taught some form of communication in which
manipulation is prevalent : NVC (non violent communication), so I
don't think that's a good idea.
Best regards...
I don't own that book but read it from the la leche league library
maybe, or maybe I owned it and gave it away.
My response was
===================
I don't think it could be classic "NVC" because that's way more recent.
I'll consider removing it. I'm going to ask about it on Always
Learning to see what others who have read it more recently think.
I learned tons from Faber's "How to Listen so Kids will talk" writings
when I had toddlers.
===================
When I had toddlers I wasn't involved with unschooling and hadn't had
or ever heard of most of the thoughts I've put into that website. So
if this is a bad recommendation I should remove it, and if it's okay
to leave there, I should tell my correspondent (who was kind enough to
think to write and suggest it) why I'm keeping it. I'm not attached
one way or the other.
My toddlers all drive and have jobs and get along well, and I can't
speak to or from the use of that book because it's been so long.
What do you think?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Joyce Fetteroll
On Dec 3, 2009, at 10:59 AM, Sandra Dodd wrote:
very good. In fact it's a great transition from conventional
approaches to more-mindful-of-children's-perspective approaches.
They definitely don't go far enough. There are definite sections
where the goal is to get the kids to comply with what the parent
wants. But there are big important chunks where the whole focus is on
helping the parent see that their kids aren't aliens and their needs
and wants and actions are coming from a legitimate place so the
parents can work with them rather than against them.
I do definitely still recommend it.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> When I had toddlers I wasn't involved with unschooling and hadn't hadI just reread How to Talk with a parenting group and I still find it
> or ever heard of most of the thoughts I've put into that website. So
> if this is a bad recommendation I should remove it, and if it's okay
> to leave there, I should tell my correspondent (who was kind enough to
> think to write and suggest it) why I'm keeping it. I'm not attached
> one way or the other.
very good. In fact it's a great transition from conventional
approaches to more-mindful-of-children's-perspective approaches.
They definitely don't go far enough. There are definite sections
where the goal is to get the kids to comply with what the parent
wants. But there are big important chunks where the whole focus is on
helping the parent see that their kids aren't aliens and their needs
and wants and actions are coming from a legitimate place so the
parents can work with them rather than against them.
I do definitely still recommend it.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
More from the side. <g>
-=-Yes, there is the same problem with "How to listen so kids will
talk", there is also : "How to talk so kids would listen" in this
title :-)
I should re-read the book to give you precise examples, but it's
really manipulative when you think about it.-=-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
If you're coming from a total and complete "non coercive" point of
view (as in TCS in England), that might look different than it would
to people who are more disturbed by "non coercion" than by normal
everyday give and take. I'll put that note on the list too.
Being no-mail, you can still go in there and read the thread if you
want to.
Thanks for bringing this up!
Sandra
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Although it might not be applicable in this particular situation, I'm
really fascinated by the absolutist "non-coercive" group. The only
"TCS" writer I knew anything about had an only child and a divorce, I
think. So should people who want to live peacefully in families with
a partner or another adult of some sort in the house and with more
than one child really take their philosophical advice from people who
have one child and an ex partner?
If I remind a person (husband, child, friend, neighbor) of a
contractual obligation or moral duty, many would call that
"manipulation." If I set up a situation in which they're harmed or
punished by not doing what I wanted them to do, THAT is manipulation.
And "coercion" is NOT saying "please." To say "AH, you're being
coercive because you asked me to do something" is extremest nonsense,
in my opinion (and in the opinion of any dictionary).
Sandra
-=-Yes, there is the same problem with "How to listen so kids will
talk", there is also : "How to talk so kids would listen" in this
title :-)
I should re-read the book to give you precise examples, but it's
really manipulative when you think about it.-=-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
If you're coming from a total and complete "non coercive" point of
view (as in TCS in England), that might look different than it would
to people who are more disturbed by "non coercion" than by normal
everyday give and take. I'll put that note on the list too.
Being no-mail, you can still go in there and read the thread if you
want to.
Thanks for bringing this up!
Sandra
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Although it might not be applicable in this particular situation, I'm
really fascinated by the absolutist "non-coercive" group. The only
"TCS" writer I knew anything about had an only child and a divorce, I
think. So should people who want to live peacefully in families with
a partner or another adult of some sort in the house and with more
than one child really take their philosophical advice from people who
have one child and an ex partner?
If I remind a person (husband, child, friend, neighbor) of a
contractual obligation or moral duty, many would call that
"manipulation." If I set up a situation in which they're harmed or
punished by not doing what I wanted them to do, THAT is manipulation.
And "coercion" is NOT saying "please." To say "AH, you're being
coercive because you asked me to do something" is extremest nonsense,
in my opinion (and in the opinion of any dictionary).
Sandra
BRIAN POLIKOWSKY
I have those books and they have nothing to do with NVC. I recommend them.
They are very helpful.
Alex Polikowsky
http://polykow.blogspot.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unschoolingmn/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
They are very helpful.
Alex Polikowsky
http://polykow.blogspot.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unschoolingmn/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jenny Cyphers
***I just reread How to Talk with a parenting group and I still find it
very good. In fact it's a great transition from conventional
approaches to more-mindful- of-children' s-perspective approaches.***
Since this is the only book of theirs that I've read, I'll comment on that. I'd have to agree that it's a good book to put out there. What I found especially useful about it, is that it IS more conventional, and it helped me to relay information to more conventional parents in a way that still kept respect for the child in the forefront.
It doesn't go far enough, you're right there. School is still present in the mix. Still, it's a very useful book for transition. I gave my copy away to someone who probably never read it. In my mind I imagine it got left at his girlfriend's house, who has since moved on and gotten married and just had her own kids, so maybe, just maybe, she's using it. That's what I'd like to think anyway, it could be in a landfill instead though.
I don't remember that book using NVC as a tool for communication. Perhaps it's been too long since I read it. Sandra, you did put a disclaimer up there next to the book recommendation that it was outside the unschooling realm.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
very good. In fact it's a great transition from conventional
approaches to more-mindful- of-children' s-perspective approaches.***
Since this is the only book of theirs that I've read, I'll comment on that. I'd have to agree that it's a good book to put out there. What I found especially useful about it, is that it IS more conventional, and it helped me to relay information to more conventional parents in a way that still kept respect for the child in the forefront.
It doesn't go far enough, you're right there. School is still present in the mix. Still, it's a very useful book for transition. I gave my copy away to someone who probably never read it. In my mind I imagine it got left at his girlfriend's house, who has since moved on and gotten married and just had her own kids, so maybe, just maybe, she's using it. That's what I'd like to think anyway, it could be in a landfill instead though.
I don't remember that book using NVC as a tool for communication. Perhaps it's been too long since I read it. Sandra, you did put a disclaimer up there next to the book recommendation that it was outside the unschooling realm.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Nathalie
OK, that was me sending an email and I'm from France. So, for example when they say "let children make choices" (in images p140 in my edition), the choices are "are you in the mood for your grey pants or your red pants?" meaning "put your pants whatever color it is... "Would uou like half a glass of juice or a whole?" meaning you have to drink something or one more, the best one : "what would work best for ? Doing your practice before dinner or after?" meaning... No choice : you have to practice. I'm reading again this book to find other clear examples, but to me, it explains what you can do in order to make your kids do what YOU want. It seems nice at first because it tells you that your child is really person whereas it denies him/her this status alltogether. So, the kid can go from : "what I want is not important" (before the book is read by parents) to "what I want is still not important but my parents think they are very kind about what I want and so certainly hope that I be very grateful". It prevents parents to rethink if what they demand is really so important and the kids become crazy because before : they knew they had to do what their parents say and after: they feel they have no choice whereas their parents want to believe they give them a choice. Crazy, no?
Nathalie, mother of two, 6 and 3, from France
Nathalie, mother of two, 6 and 3, from France
--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
>
> More from the side. <g>
>
> -=-Yes, there is the same problem with "How to listen so kids will
> talk", there is also : "How to talk so kids would listen" in this
> title :-)
> I should re-read the book to give you precise examples, but it's
> really manipulative when you think about it.-=-
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> If you're coming from a total and complete "non coercive" point of
> view (as in TCS in England), that might look different than it would
> to people who are more disturbed by "non coercion" than by normal
> everyday give and take. I'll put that note on the list too.
>
> Being no-mail, you can still go in there and read the thread if you
> want to.
>
> Thanks for bringing this up!
>
> Sandra
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Although it might not be applicable in this particular situation, I'm
> really fascinated by the absolutist "non-coercive" group. The only
> "TCS" writer I knew anything about had an only child and a divorce, I
> think. So should people who want to live peacefully in families with
> a partner or another adult of some sort in the house and with more
> than one child really take their philosophical advice from people who
> have one child and an ex partner?
>
> If I remind a person (husband, child, friend, neighbor) of a
> contractual obligation or moral duty, many would call that
> "manipulation." If I set up a situation in which they're harmed or
> punished by not doing what I wanted them to do, THAT is manipulation.
>
> And "coercion" is NOT saying "please." To say "AH, you're being
> coercive because you asked me to do something" is extremest nonsense,
> in my opinion (and in the opinion of any dictionary).
>
> Sandra
>
Kristi
I found these books to very useful in helping me change the way I spoke to my children. While not an unschooling style--I actually liken them to workbooks--through reading and re-reading certain portions of these books, I was able to practice over and over how to relay my voice to my children in a manner that was not controlling, coercive, demanding, demeaning, or threatening. I found them to be remarkable stepping stones towards becoming the parent I strive to be. Without those books, I may have continued to rely on book sources that provided far worse methods of communicating.
Jenny Cyphers
***If I remind a person (husband, child, friend, neighbor) of a
contractual obligation or moral duty, many would call that
"manipulation. " If I set up a situation in which they're harmed or
punished by not doing what I wanted them to do, THAT is manipulation.
And "coercion" is NOT saying "please." To say "AH, you're being
coercive because you asked me to do something" is extremest nonsense,
in my opinion (and in the opinion of any dictionary).***
The other day Margaux really wanted to use the DS. It belongs to Chamille, she bought it with money she saved up for many months. Chamille used to let Margaux use it a lot, I'd even go so far as to say they shared it. They've even purchased a game together so that they could both play it. Lately though, Chamille's been using it a lot. She has some new games for it that she's purchased on her own and she's been on a bit of a Pokemon revival. Margaux has felt the loss of being able to freely use it.
The other day we asked Chamille if Margaux could use it and Chamille said "no", even though she herself wasn't using it. It caused a huge fight. A bit later, I reminded Chamille that she used to readily share it with her sister and that she'd gotten used to it being shared, enough so, that she had used her own money to help purchase a game for it that Chamille wanted more than Margaux did. Initially Chamille was mad about that conversation because she said I was making her feel bad. I'm keenly aware of the fact that many parents would most definitely say these kinds of things in a manipulative way, but that wasn't my intent at all. My intent was to share Margaux's perspective with her in a way that didn't involve Margaux screaming and crying that her sister was being mean, because that never goes anywhere with Chamille, if anything, it ends the discussion right then and there with a firm "no way, never, no how, leave me alone, you are being
annoying".
I was defininitely trying to get Chamille to let Margaux use the DS. What I wasn't doing was trying to force or manipulate, I was trying to kindly share information and make it so both parties could come to a mutual agreement that would make everyone happy. Right now, at their ages and stages, they aren't able to do this without parental involvement. We all know that the DS belongs to Chamille, we all know that Margaux could really use one of her own and that the best solution would be for Margaux to have one of her own, but until that happens it would be nice to have peace about it. These things are temporary fixes, not permanent solutions. The permanence is the relationship and how to keep it from being destroyed.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
contractual obligation or moral duty, many would call that
"manipulation. " If I set up a situation in which they're harmed or
punished by not doing what I wanted them to do, THAT is manipulation.
And "coercion" is NOT saying "please." To say "AH, you're being
coercive because you asked me to do something" is extremest nonsense,
in my opinion (and in the opinion of any dictionary).***
The other day Margaux really wanted to use the DS. It belongs to Chamille, she bought it with money she saved up for many months. Chamille used to let Margaux use it a lot, I'd even go so far as to say they shared it. They've even purchased a game together so that they could both play it. Lately though, Chamille's been using it a lot. She has some new games for it that she's purchased on her own and she's been on a bit of a Pokemon revival. Margaux has felt the loss of being able to freely use it.
The other day we asked Chamille if Margaux could use it and Chamille said "no", even though she herself wasn't using it. It caused a huge fight. A bit later, I reminded Chamille that she used to readily share it with her sister and that she'd gotten used to it being shared, enough so, that she had used her own money to help purchase a game for it that Chamille wanted more than Margaux did. Initially Chamille was mad about that conversation because she said I was making her feel bad. I'm keenly aware of the fact that many parents would most definitely say these kinds of things in a manipulative way, but that wasn't my intent at all. My intent was to share Margaux's perspective with her in a way that didn't involve Margaux screaming and crying that her sister was being mean, because that never goes anywhere with Chamille, if anything, it ends the discussion right then and there with a firm "no way, never, no how, leave me alone, you are being
annoying".
I was defininitely trying to get Chamille to let Margaux use the DS. What I wasn't doing was trying to force or manipulate, I was trying to kindly share information and make it so both parties could come to a mutual agreement that would make everyone happy. Right now, at their ages and stages, they aren't able to do this without parental involvement. We all know that the DS belongs to Chamille, we all know that Margaux could really use one of her own and that the best solution would be for Margaux to have one of her own, but until that happens it would be nice to have peace about it. These things are temporary fixes, not permanent solutions. The permanence is the relationship and how to keep it from being destroyed.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
I really want to respond, but I have company. I hope others will
discuss this while I'm gone!
Sandra
discuss this while I'm gone!
Sandra
Jenny Cyphers
***So, for example when they say "let children make choices" (in images p140 in my edition), the choices are "are you in the mood for your grey pants or your red pants?" meaning "put your pants whatever color it is...***
I felt the same way about those kind of choices when I read "how to talk so kids will listen, and listen so kids will talk". However, I have seen parents get in daily struggles over kids getting dressed. One way to eliminate that is to NOT engage in a struggle. If the focus is shifted from, "you must wear these red pants that I've picked out for you", to, " which color of pants would you like to wear?", is a huge step in the right direction to giving kids choices in a world that they get very few choices in.
When Chamille was little, her best friend lived with us. Her mom engaged in this struggle every morning. It was painful to watch. The little girl ONLY wanted to wear dresses, little frilly ones with frilly slips underneath. The mom was opposed to it because, one, she wanted her daughter to play more in the dirt and mud and run and get kid messy, and two, because she didn't like that if she played on monkey bars that everyone would see her underwear, and three, she didn't think the frilly dresses were warm enough in the winter or cool enough in the summer. She had set herself up for a fight because of the expectations she had of how her child should play at preschool. I kept suggesting that she ought to let her daughter wear her dresses and offer her some shorts or leggings to go underneath. My own daughter wore dresses with pants underneath, and she picked her clothing out of a handful of hand picked, by me, outfits. We never fought over
what she would or should wear.
At the time, I had never even heard of unschooling or books like this. Yet, I could clearly see that my daughter needed a choice in what to wear and that I could help her choose by selecting a handful of appropriate clothing that I knew she'd like wearing. Some parents don't see that at all, they simply want their kids to put on the clothing that they've selected and compliantly get dressed and eat their breakfast and get out the door on time.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I felt the same way about those kind of choices when I read "how to talk so kids will listen, and listen so kids will talk". However, I have seen parents get in daily struggles over kids getting dressed. One way to eliminate that is to NOT engage in a struggle. If the focus is shifted from, "you must wear these red pants that I've picked out for you", to, " which color of pants would you like to wear?", is a huge step in the right direction to giving kids choices in a world that they get very few choices in.
When Chamille was little, her best friend lived with us. Her mom engaged in this struggle every morning. It was painful to watch. The little girl ONLY wanted to wear dresses, little frilly ones with frilly slips underneath. The mom was opposed to it because, one, she wanted her daughter to play more in the dirt and mud and run and get kid messy, and two, because she didn't like that if she played on monkey bars that everyone would see her underwear, and three, she didn't think the frilly dresses were warm enough in the winter or cool enough in the summer. She had set herself up for a fight because of the expectations she had of how her child should play at preschool. I kept suggesting that she ought to let her daughter wear her dresses and offer her some shorts or leggings to go underneath. My own daughter wore dresses with pants underneath, and she picked her clothing out of a handful of hand picked, by me, outfits. We never fought over
what she would or should wear.
At the time, I had never even heard of unschooling or books like this. Yet, I could clearly see that my daughter needed a choice in what to wear and that I could help her choose by selecting a handful of appropriate clothing that I knew she'd like wearing. Some parents don't see that at all, they simply want their kids to put on the clothing that they've selected and compliantly get dressed and eat their breakfast and get out the door on time.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Kim Zerbe
<< If the focus is shifted from, "you must wear these red pants that I've
picked out for you", to, " which color of pants would you like to wear?", is
a huge step in the right direction to giving kids choices in a world that
they get very few choices in. >>
Then you get all the way to unschooling and let them wear whatever! Damon
spent yesterday entirely in his pajamas. Made going to be easy.
I used to see kids at the mall or grocery store in tutus or in a really bad,
totally non-matching outfit and wonder why the mom let her leave the house
like that! Then I had a kid and it all made sense. Whatever makes them
happy!
<< Yet, I could clearly see that my daughter needed a choice in what to wear
and that I could help her choose by selecting a handful of appropriate
clothing that I knew she'd like wearing. >>
Damon rarely cares to pick out his clothing. I can usually grab a pair of
pants and shirt and underwear and socks and put it on him. Sometimes I do
pull out 2 shirts to see if he cares, and he'll point to one, but if I just
bring one, he's usually fine with that.
Damon is 5 and still likes for me to dress him. He CAN dress himself, for
the most part, but I think he just likes that I do it for him. He's only
been potty trained for half a year and still often leaves his pants (tangled
with underwear) on the bathroom floor. He doesn't flush. So if I find him
playing wii without pants, I might send him back to the bathroom to get them
(and ask if he remembered to flush). Or I will grab the pants if I found
them because I went to pee and I'll help him get into them again. The rumor
is that one day he'll do this for himself! <g>
He does like to choose and put on his own pajamas! Strange. Lately he has
been purposely NOT matching the tops and bottoms. Thinks that's funny. It
is! I'll do it too!
:) Kim
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
picked out for you", to, " which color of pants would you like to wear?", is
a huge step in the right direction to giving kids choices in a world that
they get very few choices in. >>
Then you get all the way to unschooling and let them wear whatever! Damon
spent yesterday entirely in his pajamas. Made going to be easy.
I used to see kids at the mall or grocery store in tutus or in a really bad,
totally non-matching outfit and wonder why the mom let her leave the house
like that! Then I had a kid and it all made sense. Whatever makes them
happy!
<< Yet, I could clearly see that my daughter needed a choice in what to wear
and that I could help her choose by selecting a handful of appropriate
clothing that I knew she'd like wearing. >>
Damon rarely cares to pick out his clothing. I can usually grab a pair of
pants and shirt and underwear and socks and put it on him. Sometimes I do
pull out 2 shirts to see if he cares, and he'll point to one, but if I just
bring one, he's usually fine with that.
Damon is 5 and still likes for me to dress him. He CAN dress himself, for
the most part, but I think he just likes that I do it for him. He's only
been potty trained for half a year and still often leaves his pants (tangled
with underwear) on the bathroom floor. He doesn't flush. So if I find him
playing wii without pants, I might send him back to the bathroom to get them
(and ask if he remembered to flush). Or I will grab the pants if I found
them because I went to pee and I'll help him get into them again. The rumor
is that one day he'll do this for himself! <g>
He does like to choose and put on his own pajamas! Strange. Lately he has
been purposely NOT matching the tops and bottoms. Thinks that's funny. It
is! I'll do it too!
:) Kim
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
lalow66
> OK, that was me sending an email and I'm from France. So, for example when they say "let children make choices" (in images p140 in my edition), the choices are "are you in the mood for your grey pants or your red pants?" meaning "put your pants whatever color it is... "Would uou like half a glass of juice or a whole?" meaning you have to drink something or one more, the best one : "what would work best for ? Doing your practice before dinner or after?" meaning... No choice : you have to practice. I'm reading again this book to find other clear examples, but to me, it explains what you can do in order to make your kids do what YOU want.When my second son was born, I had a 15 month old and this new baby who cried ALOT. He had reflux, food allergies, and difficulty sleeping, nursing etc. I was very stressed as was my husband. He would come home from work with me there, having been there all day with my 15 month old and my crying baby (my 15 month old actually called him "Cry" for along time.) and I would be crazy and I would say to my husband, "Do you want to wash the dishes or do you want to feed the kids?" Or then "Do you want to hold the baby or do you want to give J a bath?" Etc... Drove my husband crazy. One day he flipped out. He yelled, " I dont want to do either of those things. If you need me to do something just ask but I dont want to and giving me choices of two things I dont want to do right now doesnt help!" Kind of put it in perspective for me. That being said, I have found giving choises helps with some of my kids. Sometimes a choice from 8 pairs of pants is just too much. But choosing from 2 helps. The same son from above is now almost 7. He doesnt like changes much and goes many days in the same clothes. When I really feel we should get something different on him, I will say, "B those pants are really dirty, lets get some new ones. Do you want jeans or sweats? He does have the choice to decline but typically I will make a deal with him that by that evening or before we leave home that he will choose to change. Yes, I am trying to get what I want from the situation but its alot more peaceful than it could be.
Bea
--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
I guess you could take it out of book recommendations, and people who read online on lists like this one would still be fine and find the advice here. But for parents who don't have time to read on the lists, or prefer books, or whatever, you would be removing a helpful resource. To me it seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Bea
>I have read Siblings Without Rivalry while I was pregnant with daughter number too (a year ago) and it has helped me a lot. I definitely have avoided a lot of early sibling rivalry because of it. It's not 100% in line with unschooling, but frankly, what book is? (except for the ones written by unschoolers.) When I read I always have my unschooling filter on, and take what I want and leave the rest.
> I just received an e-mail:
>
> Hello
> I see you recommend Siblings Without Rivalry, by Adele Faber and
> Elaine Mazlish at the end of:
> http://sandradodd.com/siblings
> But these authors taught some form of communication in which
> manipulation is prevalent : NVC (non violent communication), so I
> don't think that's a good idea.
> Best regards...
>
>
>
I guess you could take it out of book recommendations, and people who read online on lists like this one would still be fine and find the advice here. But for parents who don't have time to read on the lists, or prefer books, or whatever, you would be removing a helpful resource. To me it seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Bea
Sandra Dodd
-=- While not an unschooling style--I actually liken them to
workbooks--through reading and re-reading certain portions of these
books, I was able to practice over and over how to relay my voice to
my children in a manner that was not controlling, coercive, demanding,
demeaning, or threatening. I found them to be remarkable stepping
stones towards becoming the parent I strive to be. Without those
books, I may have continued to rely on book sources that provided far
worse methods of communicating.-=-
Perhaps that's one of the issues--the best book out there is the best
book there.
Another possible element we could consider is that it could be that
traditional parenting in Europe is not as harsh or controlling as some
aspects of American culture, in which a parent would say "I don't care
which shirt you want to wear, wear THIS one."
If the first step is "which shirt?" that's a step toward more choices.
One example I gave in the Peaceful Parenting talk (there's a sound
file link below) was if you're used to hitting choose between hitting
and yelling.
That's not to say I think yelling is a great idea. I think it's
better than hitting.
The next time, choose between yelling and not yelling. Don't even let
hitting be one of the choices.
Ratchet that up toward really good choices.
http://sandradodd.com/parentingpeacefully
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
workbooks--through reading and re-reading certain portions of these
books, I was able to practice over and over how to relay my voice to
my children in a manner that was not controlling, coercive, demanding,
demeaning, or threatening. I found them to be remarkable stepping
stones towards becoming the parent I strive to be. Without those
books, I may have continued to rely on book sources that provided far
worse methods of communicating.-=-
Perhaps that's one of the issues--the best book out there is the best
book there.
Another possible element we could consider is that it could be that
traditional parenting in Europe is not as harsh or controlling as some
aspects of American culture, in which a parent would say "I don't care
which shirt you want to wear, wear THIS one."
If the first step is "which shirt?" that's a step toward more choices.
One example I gave in the Peaceful Parenting talk (there's a sound
file link below) was if you're used to hitting choose between hitting
and yelling.
That's not to say I think yelling is a great idea. I think it's
better than hitting.
The next time, choose between yelling and not yelling. Don't even let
hitting be one of the choices.
Ratchet that up toward really good choices.
http://sandradodd.com/parentingpeacefully
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Nathalie
The problem is that we can not say : ok take this method, because it is not "as worse as ..." Our kids deserve the best and this kind of book just serves the manipulation of the parents.
I'll give you more examples from the book later. I have to leave.
Just a thought about an extract rapidly : p87 "People have asked us, "If I use these skills appropriately, will my children always respond?" Our answer is : We would hope not (I find this really hypocrit). Children aren't robots (meaning : we can't always program them as we'd like). Besides, our purpose is not to set forth a series of techniques to manipulate behavior so that children always respond." Why do they have to justify themselves if it so clear?
Nathalie (France)
I'll give you more examples from the book later. I have to leave.
Just a thought about an extract rapidly : p87 "People have asked us, "If I use these skills appropriately, will my children always respond?" Our answer is : We would hope not (I find this really hypocrit). Children aren't robots (meaning : we can't always program them as we'd like). Besides, our purpose is not to set forth a series of techniques to manipulate behavior so that children always respond." Why do they have to justify themselves if it so clear?
Nathalie (France)
--- In [email protected], "Kristi" <foehn_jye@...> wrote:
>
> I found these books to very useful in helping me change the way I spoke to my children. While not an unschooling style--I actually liken them to workbooks--through reading and re-reading certain portions of these books, I was able to practice over and over how to relay my voice to my children in a manner that was not controlling, coercive, demanding, demeaning, or threatening. I found them to be remarkable stepping stones towards becoming the parent I strive to be. Without those books, I may have continued to rely on book sources that provided far worse methods of communicating.
>
Valentine
"Talk so kids will listen..." might be a first step toward peaceful parenting, but for parents who are already into unschooling, or not there yet but lucky enough to read sandra's or joyce's pages, reading this book seems to me a huge step backward.
Imagine someone who does not spank nor yell but still sets a lot of limits or whatever... The person visits a website which helps a lot with that, and the website recommends a book which advises yelling (kind of!).
Sincerely, anyone who knows.your websites really does not need to read "Talk so kids will listen".
Valentine
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Imagine someone who does not spank nor yell but still sets a lot of limits or whatever... The person visits a website which helps a lot with that, and the website recommends a book which advises yelling (kind of!).
Sincerely, anyone who knows.your websites really does not need to read "Talk so kids will listen".
Valentine
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
BRIAN POLIKOWSKY
Why do they have to justify themselves if it so clear?
-=-=-=--==-=-
Because people will read and interpret the how they WANT to. If a parent reads this book wanting to find ways to make her/his child do what they want that is how they will read it. Like all that written in the book are tools to manipulate their children.
I am reading a book and one of my homeschooling friends is reading the same book. Its is not about parenting but about what made a difference in some sucessful people's life.
This mom was a very gentle mom I met a La Leche League. She still is in many ways but now that her oldest is 7 and she has 4 kids she has become extremely controlling and she pushes those kids academically ( she used to be very relaxed ) to the point of the 7 and 5 year old studying Latin, Spanish and French! She is not a Christian homeschooler but is following the Well Trained Mind approach.
kids cannot watch TV ( movies are limited to a few days a week), their food is controlles ( the 3 year old already hoards food!), no video games ( they rott their brain, is addictive and makes kids violent)...you get the picture.
Back to the point I was making. She called me the other day to discuss the book and what she got in one chapter was the opposite to what I got. I re-read it and I could not believe that is the conclusion she got to. This is a very intelligent and well spoken woman, a former prosecuter in Miami that quit her carreer to stay at home when her oldest was born.
I also don't agree with many things in the book having read about different intelligences and personalities. Plus just because a person that is considered a genius is happy living as a rancher it does not mean he is not successful.
What it comes down to is what you goals are in parenting.
Some read unschooling list and let their kids hurt others and break other's property without saying much (if saying anything at all!), even when the advice is clearly something else!
Alex Polikowsky
http://polykow.blogspot.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unschoolingmn/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-=-=-=--==-=-
Because people will read and interpret the how they WANT to. If a parent reads this book wanting to find ways to make her/his child do what they want that is how they will read it. Like all that written in the book are tools to manipulate their children.
I am reading a book and one of my homeschooling friends is reading the same book. Its is not about parenting but about what made a difference in some sucessful people's life.
This mom was a very gentle mom I met a La Leche League. She still is in many ways but now that her oldest is 7 and she has 4 kids she has become extremely controlling and she pushes those kids academically ( she used to be very relaxed ) to the point of the 7 and 5 year old studying Latin, Spanish and French! She is not a Christian homeschooler but is following the Well Trained Mind approach.
kids cannot watch TV ( movies are limited to a few days a week), their food is controlles ( the 3 year old already hoards food!), no video games ( they rott their brain, is addictive and makes kids violent)...you get the picture.
Back to the point I was making. She called me the other day to discuss the book and what she got in one chapter was the opposite to what I got. I re-read it and I could not believe that is the conclusion she got to. This is a very intelligent and well spoken woman, a former prosecuter in Miami that quit her carreer to stay at home when her oldest was born.
I also don't agree with many things in the book having read about different intelligences and personalities. Plus just because a person that is considered a genius is happy living as a rancher it does not mean he is not successful.
What it comes down to is what you goals are in parenting.
Some read unschooling list and let their kids hurt others and break other's property without saying much (if saying anything at all!), even when the advice is clearly something else!
Alex Polikowsky
http://polykow.blogspot.com/
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unschoolingmn/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Joyce Fetteroll
> but for parents who are already into unschooling, or not there yetPerhaps if they aren't thinking and are just looking for someone to
> but lucky enough to read sandra's or joyce's pages, reading this
> book seems to me a huge step backward
give them new rules.
If someone is drawn to Sandra's or my site, the respect part of the
book jumps out and meshes with what gets said here. The rest has an
off feel. (And I'm thinking much of the part on getting kids to
comply has to do with school.)
> Sincerely, anyone who knows.your websites really does not need toPhilosophically, no. But there's lots of good practical techniques
> read "Talk so kids will listen".
>
that puts the philosophy into practice.
Joyce
Sandra Dodd
> Sincerely, anyone who knows.your websites really does not need toPhilosophically, no. But there's lots of good practical techniques
> read "Talk so kids will listen".
>
that puts the philosophy into practice.
=============
And there are a lot of people who are hesitant to "know the website"
of someone who's "just a mom." They'll care more about what
psychologist say than they will about what "unemployed housewives"
say. I have a bachelor's degree in English. I figure Joyce probably
has a master's in engineering. Neither of those pieces of paper says
"We sure do know all about relationships between children and parents
that can lead to learning!"
Part of deschooling is detaching oneself from depending on wanting to
see the credentials first, but the first parts of deschooling involve
trusting the deschooling advice of those with credentials first. <bwg>
I think people who know my site don't need Joyce's! (And vice versa.)
But unlike some people with websites, I have as many links out as back
in. Some websites are like wasp traps--you can get in there from
several directions, but once you're in they want you to STAY in.
Having said so many times that unschoolers should learn from the whole
real world, I'm thinking part of that world is parenting books from
people who never were unschooling parents. John Holt. He didn't even
have kids. But I don't say "Okay, don't read any John Holt now; we
have replaced him with parents whose kids grew up without school." I
think reading LOTS of voices is good.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-I also don't agree with many things in the book having read about
different intelligences and personalities. Plus just because a person
that is considered a genius is happy living as a rancher it does not
mean he is not successful.
What it comes down to is what you goals are in parenting.-=-
Priorities. I was at Thanksgiving (none of my kids were there) at a
friend's house, and was talking about Marty's girlfriend, who plans to
go to medical school. Holly's ex-boyfriend was a med school drop
out. I said I could not understand what I was doing wrong. I wanted
them to grow up to marry nice hippie artists, and they were finding
these *med school* people. I was joking, but even as I said it I
realized that my priority was that they were secure and happy, not
that they were competitively impressive and wealthy.
-=-Some read unschooling list and let their kids hurt others and break
other's property without saying much (if saying anything at all!),
even when the advice is clearly something else!-=-
Yes, and they make us all look bad too. Not as bad as their kids
look, but we share their discredit if they say "Oh, we're unschoolers,
so..."
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
different intelligences and personalities. Plus just because a person
that is considered a genius is happy living as a rancher it does not
mean he is not successful.
What it comes down to is what you goals are in parenting.-=-
Priorities. I was at Thanksgiving (none of my kids were there) at a
friend's house, and was talking about Marty's girlfriend, who plans to
go to medical school. Holly's ex-boyfriend was a med school drop
out. I said I could not understand what I was doing wrong. I wanted
them to grow up to marry nice hippie artists, and they were finding
these *med school* people. I was joking, but even as I said it I
realized that my priority was that they were secure and happy, not
that they were competitively impressive and wealthy.
-=-Some read unschooling list and let their kids hurt others and break
other's property without saying much (if saying anything at all!),
even when the advice is clearly something else!-=-
Yes, and they make us all look bad too. Not as bad as their kids
look, but we share their discredit if they say "Oh, we're unschoolers,
so..."
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Marina DeLuca-Howard
I would suggest Non-Violent Communication over that book How to Talk so Kids
will Listen. At least with NVC you can think about your agenda(needs,
feelings) and the child's needs, feelings and their agenda. If you make a
request and can accept a "non" rather than manipulate a "oui". Pas de
problem! NVC is a great tool for understanding other people and your own
emotion. I think with How to talk...well there is the assumption the parent
knows best and can manipulate the child into some goal. It is like the
other La Leche Book: Karen Pryor's Don't Shoot the Dog. This book trains
children to do what adults want with gentle positive reinforcement. My
partner kept thinking the LL books were a godsend and couldn't understand my
refusal to try these "gentle" parenting approaches.
I liked a book called The Wonderchild. I found the exercise where I
switched places with my child really informative. IE He gets to be the
adult. It made me understand what I was doing wrong!
Or try roleplaying with another adult. One of you gets to be "the child".
I remember someone once telling me "you can't reason with a two year old".
Well, not if your position is untenable. They are infinitely logical and
don't have the same frame of reference--we do a lot of illogical things. I
learned a lot from conversations I had with my kids as two year olds.
I remember Rowan learned to put his jacket on. Not the "daycare way" which
involves putting the jacket on the floor and manoeuvres that an adult
teaches a kid. He put his jacket on by figuring out where the hood went and
then put in his right arm and his left, just like any adult. One of my
husband's friends asked his daughter to teach Rowan how to put on his coat,
and they thought she being a year and a bit older had something to show us.
They didn't like my parenting, because I talked to Rowan as though he were a
much older child(respectfully) and seemed to constantly trying to show me
what I was doing wrong and they told my husband, too. Anyway, you guessed
it, barely holding back the smirk I handed my not yet two year old his
jacket and he put it on. The surprize was priceless. How did you do that?
I did not. I spent a week catching up on chores, because Rowan decided
rather than go to the playground and go down the "side" or go on the "sings"
he was going to learn to dress himself. It was painful to watch. Anger,
frustration, determination and then triumph. Rowan was on a roller coaster
ride of emotions, too. Kidding--I was just delighted to catch up on some
chores, but sorry he was going through this struggle. I was offering help,
and he knew support was there. I also encouraged him and cheered him. You
look really frustrated, want to take a break and try again.
I remember one day trying to use manipulative parenting to get Rowan into
the stroller--the infamous line, "are you going into the stroller yourself
or do I have to help you?" I swooped down to pick him up. Rowan looked me
in the eye and said, "Put me down, now". He was two years old. So, I did.
All the other parents were staring. In the end he wanted to stay, and I
had no pressing reason to go, so we stayed. Under the disapproving eye of
all the other parents I sat down, and we cuddled. I told him why I wanted
to go and he told me he wanted to keep playing.
Most of the parents clicked in disapproval. I remember when I talked to the
other parents one said in admiration: my kids would have been kicking and
yelling if I had picked them up. I can't believe he was so calm.
I muttered: well, I do put him down, when he asks. I believe in bodily
sovereignty and if he can't trust his mother not to invade his space and
physically manhandle him how is going to figure out if someone means him
harm. I don't want to raise a wifebeater or anything.
I still remember being told repeatedly he needed to respect me. I think the
fact that he didn't kick me in the stomach was pretty respectful for a two
year old, picked up against his will!
At this point I figured logically, children who are hit normalize the idea
that someone you love hurts you. Or that adults don't need to respect the
soveriegnty of small children. To me this notion was horrible and could be
life-threatening. I figured if anyone didn't respect Rowan's body, he would
know that person meant harm. So no matter how inconvenient I always drew
that boundary for myself and parents seemed more amenable to the idea that I
was modelling respect to protect him from predators, than the idea that I
truly respected my kid enough not to treat him that way.
Marina
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
will Listen. At least with NVC you can think about your agenda(needs,
feelings) and the child's needs, feelings and their agenda. If you make a
request and can accept a "non" rather than manipulate a "oui". Pas de
problem! NVC is a great tool for understanding other people and your own
emotion. I think with How to talk...well there is the assumption the parent
knows best and can manipulate the child into some goal. It is like the
other La Leche Book: Karen Pryor's Don't Shoot the Dog. This book trains
children to do what adults want with gentle positive reinforcement. My
partner kept thinking the LL books were a godsend and couldn't understand my
refusal to try these "gentle" parenting approaches.
I liked a book called The Wonderchild. I found the exercise where I
switched places with my child really informative. IE He gets to be the
adult. It made me understand what I was doing wrong!
Or try roleplaying with another adult. One of you gets to be "the child".
I remember someone once telling me "you can't reason with a two year old".
Well, not if your position is untenable. They are infinitely logical and
don't have the same frame of reference--we do a lot of illogical things. I
learned a lot from conversations I had with my kids as two year olds.
I remember Rowan learned to put his jacket on. Not the "daycare way" which
involves putting the jacket on the floor and manoeuvres that an adult
teaches a kid. He put his jacket on by figuring out where the hood went and
then put in his right arm and his left, just like any adult. One of my
husband's friends asked his daughter to teach Rowan how to put on his coat,
and they thought she being a year and a bit older had something to show us.
They didn't like my parenting, because I talked to Rowan as though he were a
much older child(respectfully) and seemed to constantly trying to show me
what I was doing wrong and they told my husband, too. Anyway, you guessed
it, barely holding back the smirk I handed my not yet two year old his
jacket and he put it on. The surprize was priceless. How did you do that?
I did not. I spent a week catching up on chores, because Rowan decided
rather than go to the playground and go down the "side" or go on the "sings"
he was going to learn to dress himself. It was painful to watch. Anger,
frustration, determination and then triumph. Rowan was on a roller coaster
ride of emotions, too. Kidding--I was just delighted to catch up on some
chores, but sorry he was going through this struggle. I was offering help,
and he knew support was there. I also encouraged him and cheered him. You
look really frustrated, want to take a break and try again.
I remember one day trying to use manipulative parenting to get Rowan into
the stroller--the infamous line, "are you going into the stroller yourself
or do I have to help you?" I swooped down to pick him up. Rowan looked me
in the eye and said, "Put me down, now". He was two years old. So, I did.
All the other parents were staring. In the end he wanted to stay, and I
had no pressing reason to go, so we stayed. Under the disapproving eye of
all the other parents I sat down, and we cuddled. I told him why I wanted
to go and he told me he wanted to keep playing.
Most of the parents clicked in disapproval. I remember when I talked to the
other parents one said in admiration: my kids would have been kicking and
yelling if I had picked them up. I can't believe he was so calm.
I muttered: well, I do put him down, when he asks. I believe in bodily
sovereignty and if he can't trust his mother not to invade his space and
physically manhandle him how is going to figure out if someone means him
harm. I don't want to raise a wifebeater or anything.
I still remember being told repeatedly he needed to respect me. I think the
fact that he didn't kick me in the stomach was pretty respectful for a two
year old, picked up against his will!
At this point I figured logically, children who are hit normalize the idea
that someone you love hurts you. Or that adults don't need to respect the
soveriegnty of small children. To me this notion was horrible and could be
life-threatening. I figured if anyone didn't respect Rowan's body, he would
know that person meant harm. So no matter how inconvenient I always drew
that boundary for myself and parents seemed more amenable to the idea that I
was modelling respect to protect him from predators, than the idea that I
truly respected my kid enough not to treat him that way.
Marina
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jenny Cyphers
***I would suggest Non-Violent Communication over that book How to Talk so Kids
will Listen. At least with NVC you can think about your agenda(needs,
feelings) and the child's needs, feelings and their agenda. If you make a
request and can accept a "non" rather than manipulate a "oui". Pas de
problem! NVC is a great tool for understanding other people and your own
emotion. I think with How to talk...well there is the assumption the parent
knows best and can manipulate the child into some goal. ***
Why manipulate at all? Why not be honest with kids? Yes, I need to do this now, and yes you can do this that or the other thing, but you still need to do this for it to work for everyone else. You can still choose not to, but everyone else may be very pissed with you.
I don't know... I tend to be very blunt and straight forward about these things. I'm not looking for underlying causes all the time. I do think about these things in general, but in the moment, we want what we want, each of us, and navigating that doesn't always require knowing underlying needs. If a child is upset about something, they say so, maybe not in exact words, but through actions sometimes. It's always been pretty obvious to me what my kids need when they are screaming and crying in the moment, even if they don't use words.
In that way, the How to Talk book has been useful. It gives concrete ways in which to offer choices and solutions that are very practical without delving into underlying needs and emotions, not that those don't exist or shouldn't ever be thought about. The assumption that parents know best, well, sometimes they do. That is why kids need parents to help them navigate the world because they do know more and better. Acknowledging that and still respecting a child's lack of reasoning and allowing them to make choices, helps them better define their choices as they get older. If I take the ideas in that book and apply them with unschooling ideas, what I get is, that we can have the same goal. We get to be on a team, my kids and I. The ideas become less about manipulation and more about working together within the parameter of one individual that has more power and more knowledge than the other.
It's not a free choices for everything, kind of world. Sometimes our feelings about things should be kept far away from our actions. I allow a lot more actions related to feelings for my kids than I do for myself and even my husband. If I ask my husband to fix the brakes on my car, I'm not inclined to accept "no" as an answer. Either he does it, or we spend a lot of extra money that he earns by working hard, to take it elsewhere. It's mutually understood that some things should be done, even through a very deep sense of obligation, even IF we happen to not want to do it. I'd really like my kids to understand that too. At a basic level, this is my problem with NVC. I'd rather assume that there are things we should just DO and say "yes" to because there is a need to do so, then shift my perspective from feeling "put out", to doing it because I'm obligated through love and that because of that, it is a pleasure to do things.
Perhaps I misread NVC, but everytime I come across the NVC thinking, it reads as extremely selfish. I put myself out a lot for my family, I can do it with joy, or I can do it with grumpiness.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
will Listen. At least with NVC you can think about your agenda(needs,
feelings) and the child's needs, feelings and their agenda. If you make a
request and can accept a "non" rather than manipulate a "oui". Pas de
problem! NVC is a great tool for understanding other people and your own
emotion. I think with How to talk...well there is the assumption the parent
knows best and can manipulate the child into some goal. ***
Why manipulate at all? Why not be honest with kids? Yes, I need to do this now, and yes you can do this that or the other thing, but you still need to do this for it to work for everyone else. You can still choose not to, but everyone else may be very pissed with you.
I don't know... I tend to be very blunt and straight forward about these things. I'm not looking for underlying causes all the time. I do think about these things in general, but in the moment, we want what we want, each of us, and navigating that doesn't always require knowing underlying needs. If a child is upset about something, they say so, maybe not in exact words, but through actions sometimes. It's always been pretty obvious to me what my kids need when they are screaming and crying in the moment, even if they don't use words.
In that way, the How to Talk book has been useful. It gives concrete ways in which to offer choices and solutions that are very practical without delving into underlying needs and emotions, not that those don't exist or shouldn't ever be thought about. The assumption that parents know best, well, sometimes they do. That is why kids need parents to help them navigate the world because they do know more and better. Acknowledging that and still respecting a child's lack of reasoning and allowing them to make choices, helps them better define their choices as they get older. If I take the ideas in that book and apply them with unschooling ideas, what I get is, that we can have the same goal. We get to be on a team, my kids and I. The ideas become less about manipulation and more about working together within the parameter of one individual that has more power and more knowledge than the other.
It's not a free choices for everything, kind of world. Sometimes our feelings about things should be kept far away from our actions. I allow a lot more actions related to feelings for my kids than I do for myself and even my husband. If I ask my husband to fix the brakes on my car, I'm not inclined to accept "no" as an answer. Either he does it, or we spend a lot of extra money that he earns by working hard, to take it elsewhere. It's mutually understood that some things should be done, even through a very deep sense of obligation, even IF we happen to not want to do it. I'd really like my kids to understand that too. At a basic level, this is my problem with NVC. I'd rather assume that there are things we should just DO and say "yes" to because there is a need to do so, then shift my perspective from feeling "put out", to doing it because I'm obligated through love and that because of that, it is a pleasure to do things.
Perhaps I misread NVC, but everytime I come across the NVC thinking, it reads as extremely selfish. I put myself out a lot for my family, I can do it with joy, or I can do it with grumpiness.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-NVC is a great tool for understanding other people and your own
emotion. I think with How to talk...well there is the assumption the
parent
knows best and can manipulate the child into some goal.-=-
It's an odd tool that doesn't help unschooling. It might be a way to
help an adult deal with other adults who have all voluntarily chosen
to deal with other adults in that stilted and artificial way, but
unschooling needs more direct seeing and fewer filters.
-=-I liked a book called The Wonderchild. I found the exercise where I
switched places with my child really informative. IE He gets to be the
adult. It made me understand what I was doing wrong!-=-
It might have helped you understand, but it didn't "make you"
understand. Every word we choose comes from somewhere. Maybe we
don't have much choice but are repeating phrases we've heard, or using
idioms. Idioms are fine sometimes, but especially when trying to
describe a parent/child exchange or a learning experience on a list
such as this one, every word counts.
-=-I remember someone once telling me "you can't reason with a two
year old".
Well, not if your position is untenable. They are infinitely logical -=-
No one is infinitely logical, and a two year old really, truly and
deeply does not have the logical abilities of an adult.
Adults who do (most of them, mostly) have logical abilities shouldn't
hold untenable positions. If a child holds an untenable position, he
or she should be able to depend on their adult partner(s) to prevent
problems that might come from that. If a three year old wants to know
what happens if she puts dish soap in the toilet, I'll probably say
"try it!" What kind of sadistic, neglectful mom would I be, though,
if a three year old wanted to know what happened if he jumped off the
roof with a towel as a cape and I said "Let's go see!" I might say
"try it off the couch, maybe," but it wouldn't be a set up for
failure, it would be a jumping-off point for discussion. <g>
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
emotion. I think with How to talk...well there is the assumption the
parent
knows best and can manipulate the child into some goal.-=-
It's an odd tool that doesn't help unschooling. It might be a way to
help an adult deal with other adults who have all voluntarily chosen
to deal with other adults in that stilted and artificial way, but
unschooling needs more direct seeing and fewer filters.
-=-I liked a book called The Wonderchild. I found the exercise where I
switched places with my child really informative. IE He gets to be the
adult. It made me understand what I was doing wrong!-=-
It might have helped you understand, but it didn't "make you"
understand. Every word we choose comes from somewhere. Maybe we
don't have much choice but are repeating phrases we've heard, or using
idioms. Idioms are fine sometimes, but especially when trying to
describe a parent/child exchange or a learning experience on a list
such as this one, every word counts.
-=-I remember someone once telling me "you can't reason with a two
year old".
Well, not if your position is untenable. They are infinitely logical -=-
No one is infinitely logical, and a two year old really, truly and
deeply does not have the logical abilities of an adult.
Adults who do (most of them, mostly) have logical abilities shouldn't
hold untenable positions. If a child holds an untenable position, he
or she should be able to depend on their adult partner(s) to prevent
problems that might come from that. If a three year old wants to know
what happens if she puts dish soap in the toilet, I'll probably say
"try it!" What kind of sadistic, neglectful mom would I be, though,
if a three year old wanted to know what happened if he jumped off the
roof with a towel as a cape and I said "Let's go see!" I might say
"try it off the couch, maybe," but it wouldn't be a set up for
failure, it would be a jumping-off point for discussion. <g>
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
Someone wrote -=--=-NVC is a great tool for understanding other people
and your own
emotion. I think with How to talk...well there is the assumption the
parent
knows best and can manipulate the child into some goal.-=-
I wrote -=-It's an odd tool that doesn't help unschooling. -=-
WHOA. I've used an idiom by total accident. <g>
NVC is an odd tool, and I don't think it helps unschooling.
What I had written means more like almost every tool will help
unschooling. Maybe that's true, thinking of hand tools, machinery
around the house, office equipment.... But I didn't mean to suggest
that NVC was as useful a tool to unschooling as most tools. I don't
think it is.
Sorry,
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
and your own
emotion. I think with How to talk...well there is the assumption the
parent
knows best and can manipulate the child into some goal.-=-
I wrote -=-It's an odd tool that doesn't help unschooling. -=-
WHOA. I've used an idiom by total accident. <g>
NVC is an odd tool, and I don't think it helps unschooling.
What I had written means more like almost every tool will help
unschooling. Maybe that's true, thinking of hand tools, machinery
around the house, office equipment.... But I didn't mean to suggest
that NVC was as useful a tool to unschooling as most tools. I don't
think it is.
Sorry,
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-The problem is that we can not say : ok take this method, because
it is not "as worse as ..." -=-
I never say "take this method." I didn't say it about that book. I
don't even say it about unschooling itself.
But in more practical terms, unschooling exists because it's not as
bad (from some perspectives) as school. Yelling at a child is not as
bad as hitting him.
Making the better choice has to do with the place a person is in
experience and knowledge and intention. Perhaps from one person's
point of view that book is awful, while from another one's it's great
progress. Progress toward respectful parenting doesn't come all in
one great leap from anywhere to peace all day and all night. It's a
step at a time toward "better."
I've never recommended that ANYone follow any one book or person at
all, but rather examine each thought and reaction and pay direct
attention to the child.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
it is not "as worse as ..." -=-
I never say "take this method." I didn't say it about that book. I
don't even say it about unschooling itself.
But in more practical terms, unschooling exists because it's not as
bad (from some perspectives) as school. Yelling at a child is not as
bad as hitting him.
Making the better choice has to do with the place a person is in
experience and knowledge and intention. Perhaps from one person's
point of view that book is awful, while from another one's it's great
progress. Progress toward respectful parenting doesn't come all in
one great leap from anywhere to peace all day and all night. It's a
step at a time toward "better."
I've never recommended that ANYone follow any one book or person at
all, but rather examine each thought and reaction and pay direct
attention to the child.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-In that way, the How to Talk book has been useful. It gives
concrete ways in which to offer choices and solutions that are very
practical without delving into underlying needs and emotions, not that
those don't exist or shouldn't ever be thought about. The assumption
that parents know best, well, sometimes they do. That is why kids
need parents to help them navigate the world because they do know more
and better. -=-
Ideally. My mom didn't always know more and better, but by the time I
knew that, I knew when there might be "more and better" to be learned
elsewhere.
I agree that although some parenting moments involve therapeutic
analysis and responses to underlying desires and wounds, other times
it's just "The garage door is open" kind of stuff.
I don't care why Marty leaves the garage door open. He needs to be
reminded to close it sometimes. I'm not manipulating him or punishing
him. I'm saying something is open that for reasons clear to us all
would be better off shut, and that if he opened it and didn't shut it,
and it needs to be shut, and he's not asleep, in the shower, on the
toilet or in the middle of a song, he should shut it.
If I'm closer to the switch (it's electrical from the inside of the
house,) I might just close it. If I'm going out there, I don't mind
that it was open; I'll close it. If someone else is about to pass
through the door I might say "If the garage door is still open, could
you close it please?"
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
concrete ways in which to offer choices and solutions that are very
practical without delving into underlying needs and emotions, not that
those don't exist or shouldn't ever be thought about. The assumption
that parents know best, well, sometimes they do. That is why kids
need parents to help them navigate the world because they do know more
and better. -=-
Ideally. My mom didn't always know more and better, but by the time I
knew that, I knew when there might be "more and better" to be learned
elsewhere.
I agree that although some parenting moments involve therapeutic
analysis and responses to underlying desires and wounds, other times
it's just "The garage door is open" kind of stuff.
I don't care why Marty leaves the garage door open. He needs to be
reminded to close it sometimes. I'm not manipulating him or punishing
him. I'm saying something is open that for reasons clear to us all
would be better off shut, and that if he opened it and didn't shut it,
and it needs to be shut, and he's not asleep, in the shower, on the
toilet or in the middle of a song, he should shut it.
If I'm closer to the switch (it's electrical from the inside of the
house,) I might just close it. If I'm going out there, I don't mind
that it was open; I'll close it. If someone else is about to pass
through the door I might say "If the garage door is still open, could
you close it please?"
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jenny Cyphers
That is why kids
need parents to help them navigate the world because they do know more
and better. -=-
***Ideally. My mom didn't always know more and better, but by the time I
knew that, I knew when there might be "more and better" to be learned
elsewhere.***
Perhaps it should be rephrased to say that parents "should" know more and better. You're right though, sometimes they don't. I don't know how I could forget that since it tends to be one of the more aggrevating things in my life.... really really not very great parents of Chamille's friends.
See, I really like to look at the world through my rose colored, everything is wonderful, glasses!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
need parents to help them navigate the world because they do know more
and better. -=-
***Ideally. My mom didn't always know more and better, but by the time I
knew that, I knew when there might be "more and better" to be learned
elsewhere.***
Perhaps it should be rephrased to say that parents "should" know more and better. You're right though, sometimes they don't. I don't know how I could forget that since it tends to be one of the more aggrevating things in my life.... really really not very great parents of Chamille's friends.
See, I really like to look at the world through my rose colored, everything is wonderful, glasses!
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=--=-The problem is that we can not say : ok take this method, because
it is not "as worse as ..." -=--=-
I'm pretty confident I'm not being accused of not offering people
information, so I'm also confident to say this:
I think it's exactly "this is not as bad as that," in all aspects of
life. People who live out of health food stores entirely, who nurture
every suspected allergy or preference a child has would not have the
luxury of living in that way if they were in a war zone. If my town
were returned to the conditions of 1940 in London, for example, people
would be eating Spam and farina or whatever they already had or could
get free from government assistance, maybe. Those who only use exotic
flour might be back to bleached white flour and if it had weevils
they'd just pick them out.
That wouldn't be as bad as lying down to die.
If the government here had changed their minds completely and said all
children have to be in school, I wouldn't have lived in a cave. I
would have put the kids in school while trying to change the laws, or
I might have gone to work at the school to be where the kids were. If
my kids had to go to school I'd try to arrange for a good one, or a
nearby one. I wouldn't say "well they're in school anyway, so might
as well be a boarding school 400 miles away."
We're not wealthy enough to travel all over the place all the time and
stay in nice hotels next to fabulous museums and historic sites. That
might be a cool way to live, and certainly would be a great learning
life, but sometimes TV and DVDs stand in for Rome and Cairo and
Kyoto. It's not as bad as having no images at all of those places.
Doing incrementally better as we know more seems to me the best (and
possibly only) way to improve one's relationships and understandings.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
it is not "as worse as ..." -=--=-
I'm pretty confident I'm not being accused of not offering people
information, so I'm also confident to say this:
I think it's exactly "this is not as bad as that," in all aspects of
life. People who live out of health food stores entirely, who nurture
every suspected allergy or preference a child has would not have the
luxury of living in that way if they were in a war zone. If my town
were returned to the conditions of 1940 in London, for example, people
would be eating Spam and farina or whatever they already had or could
get free from government assistance, maybe. Those who only use exotic
flour might be back to bleached white flour and if it had weevils
they'd just pick them out.
That wouldn't be as bad as lying down to die.
If the government here had changed their minds completely and said all
children have to be in school, I wouldn't have lived in a cave. I
would have put the kids in school while trying to change the laws, or
I might have gone to work at the school to be where the kids were. If
my kids had to go to school I'd try to arrange for a good one, or a
nearby one. I wouldn't say "well they're in school anyway, so might
as well be a boarding school 400 miles away."
We're not wealthy enough to travel all over the place all the time and
stay in nice hotels next to fabulous museums and historic sites. That
might be a cool way to live, and certainly would be a great learning
life, but sometimes TV and DVDs stand in for Rome and Cairo and
Kyoto. It's not as bad as having no images at all of those places.
Doing incrementally better as we know more seems to me the best (and
possibly only) way to improve one's relationships and understandings.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jenny Cyphers
***Doing incrementally better as we know more seems to me the best (and
possibly only) way to improve one's relationships and understandings.***
One thing that I like to keep in my mind, is that kids pick up on life attitudes. If my life attitude is about doing better, finding a better way, looking for a positive, looking for a path, then, to me, that naturally allows for more optimism and hopefulness. If I'm stuck in my thinking, stuck in a singular way of looking at something, then I'm demostrating through my words and actions that I'm limited, that maybe I can't figure something out, that maybe there isn't a solution. To me, that's really harmful for unschooling.
If I'm doing incrementally better at not getting stuck in singular thoughts, and looking for more and better ways to think and do and be, then my kids will naturally do that too. I see them doing that in their own ways. Schools talk about critical thinking skills all the time... well, this is real life critical thinking skills, the ability to see choices and make decisions. I really think a lot of people have been harmed by the school style of trying to force criticial thinking skills onto people, it's a bit of a paradox, really, the very idea that critical thinking can be forced into another.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
possibly only) way to improve one's relationships and understandings.***
One thing that I like to keep in my mind, is that kids pick up on life attitudes. If my life attitude is about doing better, finding a better way, looking for a positive, looking for a path, then, to me, that naturally allows for more optimism and hopefulness. If I'm stuck in my thinking, stuck in a singular way of looking at something, then I'm demostrating through my words and actions that I'm limited, that maybe I can't figure something out, that maybe there isn't a solution. To me, that's really harmful for unschooling.
If I'm doing incrementally better at not getting stuck in singular thoughts, and looking for more and better ways to think and do and be, then my kids will naturally do that too. I see them doing that in their own ways. Schools talk about critical thinking skills all the time... well, this is real life critical thinking skills, the ability to see choices and make decisions. I really think a lot of people have been harmed by the school style of trying to force criticial thinking skills onto people, it's a bit of a paradox, really, the very idea that critical thinking can be forced into another.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-I really think a lot of people have been harmed by the school style
of trying to force criticial thinking skills onto people, it's a bit
of a paradox, really, the very idea that critical thinking can be
forced into another.-=-
I wonder if it's a school-based or church-based holdover, too, that
people sometimes want to find ONE book or ONE discussion list or ONE
curriculum to tell the what to do and how to do it, rather than being
open to trying different things and changing as they learn more.
Whatever it is, my kids didn't pick it up and I'm glad.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
of trying to force criticial thinking skills onto people, it's a bit
of a paradox, really, the very idea that critical thinking can be
forced into another.-=-
I wonder if it's a school-based or church-based holdover, too, that
people sometimes want to find ONE book or ONE discussion list or ONE
curriculum to tell the what to do and how to do it, rather than being
open to trying different things and changing as they learn more.
Whatever it is, my kids didn't pick it up and I'm glad.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]