Ken Cooper

I've been lurking on this list for about a year, finding it extremely
thought provoking and interesting. My thinking has grown quite a bit as a
result of it. Thanks to you all for your earnest dedication and consistent
expression of clear thought.



An issue that I am grappling with now is how to balance the self direction
and trust of my children with the needs of our family. I see people here say
unschooling is not the same as anarchy, but I'm also seeing people say avoid
punitive measures, and rely on trust building. Both of these feel correct to
me. But how, especially given the inability for a young child to respond to
reason, do you enforce even a minimal set of principles?



Ken





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Angela S.

<<But how, especially given the inability for a young child to respond to
reason, do you enforce even a minimal set of principles?>>

Do you have an example?



Angela

game-enthusiast@...

_____



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

-----Original Message-----

>>>>An issue that I am grappling with now is how to balance the self
direction
and trust of my children with the needs of our family. I see people
here say
unschooling is not the same as anarchy, but I'm also seeing people say
avoid
punitive measures, and rely on trust building. Both of these feel
correct to
me. But how, especially given the inability for a young child to
respond to
reason, do you enforce even a minimal set of principles?<<<<

-=-=-=-=-=-

One doesn't "enforce" principles. That's reserved for rules.

I think a young child can be reasoned with---if you use reasoning from
the *child's* point of view.

He may not understand if you explain from your PoV! <g> Try looking at
it through the child's eyes.


~Kelly

Gold Standard

>>I'm also seeing people say avoid
>>punitive measures, and rely on trust building. Both of these feel correct
to
>>me. But how, especially given the inability for a young child to respond
to
>>reason, do you enforce even a minimal set of principles?<<

Something that helps here is for me to not own the issue as my own. If my
kids are struggling with computer/tv time, it is not *my* problem to solve.
It is my job to assist my children in figuring out what works for them.

Sometimes that means saying, "Oh, I see you both want the computer at the
same time...what can we do so everyone gets what they need?" And see what
the kids come up with, and throw some of my own ideas into the pot too if it
seems useful. Then everyone is invested in the resolution and can follow it
more easily. And they can do this even at 5!

I've also said to the child on the computer, "When you are done, would you
please let Sally know?". This usually always gets agreement from the
computer child and often works for Sally too, because now the computer child
knows Sally is waiting and chooses to get off sooner. At least that is what
happens here. I've noticed that my kids are really thoughtful of things like
that, probably because they have been treated well that way themselves. They
really want to work things out for everyone.

Another thought I had for you...is it possible for you to get another
computer so that they each have free access?

Jacki

Bling Williams

kbcdlovejo@... wrote:
One doesn't "enforce" principles. That's reserved for rules.

I think a young child can be reasoned with---if you use reasoning from
the *child's* point of view.

He may not understand if you explain from your PoV! <g> Try looking at
it through the child's eyes.


~Kelly


I would have thought this would be tricky with under-5's and impossible with Under 3's. C is 2 and is the centre of her universe and she has no concept that other peple have feelings or needs. They exist to serve ;-)
Which of course, makes punishment or bad feelings redundant. Any bad feelings you get about what a 2 yo does are *your* feelings and not to be blamed on the small child!

S


http://nobravery.cf.huffingtonpost.com/

www.celyn.org

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail goes everywhere you do. Get it on your phone.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

> If my
> kids are struggling with computer/tv time, it is not *my* problem
> to solve.

I always saw it as my problem in that I was the one who had decided
to go with something less measured and traditional, so it was my
problem to figure out creative ways to make it work.

To dump my kids in a situation most of the adults around me couldn't
even begin to figure out wasn't fair, so I figured out new ways to
try, and what worked we kept. (I know Jacki wasn't advocating hands
off, but I'm just working from the statement above about whose
problem it is.)

With computers, it was that a turn lasted as long as the person
wanted to play, and it wasn't fair to stand there and say "hurry" or
"aren't you done yet?"

What worked well about it was sometimes a turn was very short, and
the other kid could play longer, or sometimes one who had a favorite
TV show or a playdate or an outing coming up would play until that
time, and the other had the whole time after.

Holly wasn't as computer-drawn (bwg) as Kirby and Marty, so adding
her to the mix wasn't too bad, and I would use it early before they
got up, and when they were outside.

By the time Holly was seven or eight we had two computers. I HIGHLY
recommend that. Now they're all teens and we have four. Kirby
bought his own (friends helped cobble one of used this'n'that). We
got Marty a used one from the guy who fixes mine, and a used laptop
later on which Holly uses.

Leaving kids to solve their own problems is a traditional mom tool I
think is cruel, having been one of those kids whose mom waited until
we failed to figure out how to solve our own problems and then
started punishing. It's better to help them. "That's your
problem" just can't be said in a nice enough way to not be cruel.

Sandra

Sandra Dodd

On Apr 23, 2006, at 9:50 PM, kbcdlovejo@... wrote:

> One doesn't "enforce" principles. That's reserved for rules.


Very true.

I was going to say "the problem is that you're trying to 'enforce'
anything!"

Force. Putting something where it didn't naturally belong. <g>

I do kind of enforce principles, but not on the people, on the
environment. I don't let people do things to my kids that are
against my principles, so I will in a biological/mom way, shoo the
dangerous other creatures away or squawk at them and warn them not to
do that in my nest, as it were. If I want my kids to grow up
peacefully and unmolested, I need to keep others from doing violence
or molestation (emotional or otherwise).
http://sandradodd.com/nest

Wanting them to grow up unjudged and unmeasured, I have discouraged
those who start in on who's above or below "grade level" or
whatever. I nip it in the bud and explain why.

With principles I create an environment for them in which there's
very little need for enforcement of anything.

Sandra

Ken Cooper

> With computers, it was that a turn lasted as long as the person
> wanted to play, and it wasn't fair to stand there and say "hurry" or
> "aren't you done yet?"

Interesting idea. It hadn't occurred to either of us. It is 'fair' in a true
sense, avoiding the artificial fairness that we had tried to dole out (which
may in fact have exacerbated the situation). I'll throw that suggestion out
to them. I'm still a little skeptical, because ds5 doesn't seem to get
fairness yet (or maybe, because he's the littler one and has food allergies,
life seems so unfair elsewhere that he takes what he can get).

"For as long they want" raises my other question. How did you manage the
rest of the flow of your lives? I assume you didn't have one adult per child
available most of the time, so how did you manage situations where you were
the shared resource (e.g. one child wanted to go to park day and see other
kids, the other wanted to sit on the computer)? We've tried "today we'll do
what ds5 wants, and tomorrow what ds7 wants", but ds5 tends to be rather
intransigent on this.

And for that matter, what about your own needs and desires? I understand the
idea of choosing your children's trust and happiness above other
alternatives, but certainly not to the point of martyrdom. My dw, for
example, likes to get outside when the sun is shining (which is rather
precious where we live), but ds5 would rather continue being screenbound.

Ken

lilith_pouia

--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
>
>
> >
>
> With computers, it was that a turn lasted as long as the person
> wanted to play, and it wasn't fair to stand there and say "hurry" or
> "aren't you done yet?"
>
> What worked well about it was sometimes a turn was very short, and
> the other kid could play longer, or sometimes one who had a favorite
> TV show or a playdate or an outing coming up would play until that
> time, and the other had the whole time after.
>
>
I don't know if this method would be fair at my house, but we struggle
with the turn taking delemma as well as the orginal poster. What
usually happens is that ds7 will stay on one game for hours when
allowed and ds4 will be wanting a turn for a very long time. By the
time he gets his turn he has lost interest, or losses interest soon. I
think he ends up feeling overshadowed by his brother's skills at
playing the games and has less of a desire to play when it is his turn
because he ends up feeling like he just isn't good at games.(I get
this idea from the things he says to me.)I think it is a self
confidence issue he has developed that gives him less desire to play
when it is his turn. But he will never get better at the games if he
doesn't play consistently. And i don't think he understands that the
reason his brother is better is because he plays more, and is older,
therefor has been building his skills longer. Encouraging him to
practice more if he wants to get better doesn't help much when he
plays against his brother and gets beat every time. Then he gets upset
and gives up and ds7 continues to play the game. I know ds4 wants to
play, and that he wants to get good at playing, so i feel like i need
to make sure they get equal time to play. For instance, the ds4 may
play for ten minutes and then get frustrated, but he might be ready to
try again five minutes later. Well he can't if i let his brother have
a two hour turn because he walked away for five minutes. He is
continually discouraged if i don't ensure them equal time. Any
suggestions about this? One positive thing to note is that ds4 has
recently gotton interested in a game that ds7 is not into. So he has
no one to compare his skills to and plays longer and enjoys it more.
Also, i do try explaining to them that it doesn't matter who is better
and what matters is having fun. But i just don't think it is fun for
ds4 when he feels overshadowed and his self esteem is suffering.

Lilith

Sandra Dodd

On Apr 24, 2006, at 8:03 AM, Ken Cooper wrote:

> how did you manage situations where you were
> the shared resource (e.g. one child wanted to go to park day and
> see other
> kids, the other wanted to sit on the computer)?


I was the orgainzer of the park days, so we always went to the park.
That was scheduled first and other things were scheduled around it.

When we moved to a bigger house, we started just meeting here, and
within about a year, the kids were tired of it. So I tried to get
someone else to take it over and move it elsewhere, but nobody else
wanted the responsibility of keeping the list and always showing up,
rain or shine, and so the group died out.

It would've died out years sooner if it hadn't been such a priority.
My kids always knew, from La Leche League days, though, when they
were little, that some moms help other moms by always being there and
letting others see how their family gets along. So they were into
it. They just weren't, so much, when they were all eight and older
and did want to do other things instead of modelling for other families.

-=-We've tried "today we'll do
what ds5 wants, and tomorrow what ds7 wants", but ds5 tends to be rather
intransigent on this.-=-

We went by events and appointments. If the week had a zoo trip and
Holly had dance two days (thinking back to when they were much
younger), and Kirby had karate, those went on the schedule to be
worked around. The other kids (who weren't dancing or going to
karate) might suggest things to do during the hour of the class—
shopping, or going to a park to play, or getting ice cream or
something. But we discussed things in advance, and they knew which
commitments they needed to work around. Then when we were home they
"did whatever," not 24 hours a day.

-=-And for that matter, what about your own needs and desires?-=-

Did you need and desire to have children?
You have them. <g>

-=-I understand the
idea of choosing your children's trust and happiness above other
alternatives, but certainly not to the point of martyrdom-=-

You can be a martyr if you want to be, but it's all in your head.
It's a very bad attitude. You'll get a lot of support for it, if you
want, because you'll find LOTS of other parents to whine with, who
are negative about kids and generally cynical and pessimistic, who
will assure you that your life is more important than your children's
lives.

Or you could see all that you do as choices, and know that if you ARE
a partner with each of your children, their happiness will add to
your happiness in ways you probably can't imagine.

-=-My dw, for
example, likes to get outside when the sun is shining (which is rather
precious where we live), but ds5 would rather continue being
screenbound.-=-

Watch the way you phrase things. "Screenbound" seems judgmental, as
as though he's somewhat powerless.

A child who might not want to just go outside because mom wants to go
outside might be lured by a more interesting plan. Kites, bubbles,
taking the dog to a new park and throwing a new dog toy... that
involves sunshine, but doesn't SOUND like "let's go outside because
the sun is shining."

My mom used to say things like "Get your nose out of that book and go
outside and play."

No. At that point, if I went out and played, I was a loser and she
was a winner. Bad tactics. And usually she wanted me outside just
so she would feel like a slightly better mom, while she was sitting
at the kitchen table drinking beer and listening to the radio. Or
she was working outside getting sweaty and didn't want to think
anyone was lounging.

Sunshine isn't inherently better than playing a game or reading. And
I live where the combination of near-constant sunshine and elevation
can make people immediately or long-term sick. We tell kids to put
on some sunscreen, and stand in the shade.

Sandra

Gold Standard

> If my
> kids are struggling with computer/tv time, it is not *my* problem
> to solve.

>>I always saw it as my problem in that I was the one who had decided
>>to go with something less measured and traditional, so it was my
>>problem to figure out creative ways to make it work.<<

Yes, I think there is a difference between *my* problem of helping the kids
work solutions (which is what I was advocating for, and I would actually
more call *my* situation rather than problem ;o) and *the kids'* current
problem with using the computer at the same time, or whatever the struggle
is in the moment.

If I jump into the computer problem acting like that problem is mine and get
emotionally involved, then it will be harder for me to help resolve it
pleasantly with the children, and probably won't be much fun for them.

If I see the problem as one that they are having and I want to help them
with, then I have a better chance of thinking and feeling more clearly for
them.

Helping children with issues without getting negatively emotionally involved
in the issues is what I am/was suggesting. Didn't say it well though :o)

And it's not a matter of being detached emotionally...quite the opposite
really. It's being emotionally clear and connected so that the kids can feel
what they need to feel and think what they need to think to work through the
problem with you without having to worry about the parent's upset.

Of course, we do get upset sometimes, and we need to be honest about that
too...

But hopefully that can be minimal...breathing and releasing helps...as well
as a good cry every now and then...

Jacki

Sandra Dodd

On Apr 24, 2006, at 8:17 AM, lilith_pouia wrote:

> Encouraging him to
> practice more if he wants to get better doesn't help much when he
> plays against his brother and gets beat every time.


Can't they be playing different kinds of games? Can you play against
him instead of his brother?

-=-One positive thing to note is that ds4 has
recently gotton interested in a game that ds7 is not into. So he has
no one to compare his skills to and plays longer and enjoys it more.-=-

Good. Why does it just have to be computer games? Can't you find
them some other cool things to do online? Or other kinds of disks to
explore?
http://sandradodd.com/art
http://sandradodd.com/music
http://sandradodd.com/games
There are some ideas there.

-=-I know ds4 wants to
play, and that he wants to get good at playing, so i feel like i need
to make sure they get equal time to play.-=-

"Equal" isn't always fair. "Equal" can be decidedly UNfair.
I don't want equal time in the garage doing woodwork with Keith. He
doesn't want equal time on the computer for fun. He has to be on at
work, and it's not fun for him at home (outside of intellicast to see
if the sun might stop shining for a while that day <g>).

-=-For instance, the ds4 may
play for ten minutes and then get frustrated, but he might be ready to
try again five minutes later. Well he can't if i let his brother have
a two hour turn because he walked away for five minutes.-=-

You said "if I let" and "two hour turn," neither of which are part of
the "it's your turn when he's done" practice.

It won't work in the presence of much hostility. Parents need to be
soothing and encouraging and have other cool things going on in other
parts of the house or the world.

-=-He is
continually discouraged if i don't ensure them equal time. -=-

If you want to measure hours, do it. There are other, better ways,
though. If you've pushed equal as better, it will be a problem for
you and them too.

When I was a kid there were four girls at our house within four years
of age—my sister and two cousins. My mom was pretty cranky and had
grown up during the depresson and WWII, and had no ideas at all for
making lives more peaceful or flexible. If she got grapes or M&Ms,
she would COUNT THEM OUT in four bowls for us, counting pointedly and
nearly sarcastically, like "here's your share." It was hard to eat
happily when things were so... mean. Measuring exact minutes is
like counting grapes.

-=But i just don't think it is fun for
ds4 when he feels overshadowed and his self esteem is suffering.-=-

Computer games should be a small part of a big busy life. Be with
him more, doing things with him, instead of leaving him to struggle,
maybe.

Sandra

Ken Cooper

> One doesn't "enforce" principles. That's reserved for rules.

What do you call abstract rules that capture the spirit of a family value?

I should have given an example to make this more concrete. In my other post,
I talk about the sharing of the computer. When ds5 is told his time is up,
he starts doing things that violate the XXX of 'do unto others', like
hitting, screeching, breaking things, etc. We have talked many times, in
quiet, screen-free moments, about this XXX. We attempt to model it every day
ourselves. But these events still happen, regularly.

When this happens, what do we do? Tell him he can't use the computer until
he can get with the program? Seems pretty authoritarian. And this may be a
natural consequence, but what if it's not so direct? Say the two boys are
tweaking each other, and it escalates to someone getting fairly hurt (which
is not a hypothetical)?

Ken

Ken Cooper

> Watch the way you phrase things. "Screenbound" seems judgmental, as
> as though he's somewhat powerless.

I use that term with intent. My own experience with these games is that they
are immersive, and deeply engaging. I am not powerless, but I do feel the
influence on my behavior to be great. I've been known to be late for an
appointment or not get enough sleep because of the deep draw.

> A child who might not want to just go outside because mom wants to go
> outside might be lured by a more interesting plan. Kites, bubbles, taking
> the dog to a new park and throwing a new dog toy... that involves
> sunshine, but doesn't SOUND like "let's go outside because the sun is
> shining."

This has been our approach. But we have been unable to come up with enticing
enough things for ds5. It may have something to do with our climate (the
pacific northwest).

> My mom used to say things like "Get your nose out of that book and go
> outside and play."

I completely agree with this, as I was the same way (and still am). My point
was not that sunshine is good and screen time is bad. It was that my wife
likes the sunshine for herself (in fact, has been diagnosed with SAD a few
times), and would like to have the need fed.

We certainly have embraced the fact that we chose children (I actually went
along begrudgingly in the beginning, but have since changed dramatically).
They are the center of our universe, and most decisions are made around
them. But from a balance perspective, there are times when one's other
desires call. Yours, for example, to model to other families.

Ken

Willa Ryan

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Cooper" <ken@...>
I'm still a little skeptical, because ds5 doesn't seem to get
> fairness yet (or maybe, because he's the littler one and has food
> allergies,
> life seems so unfair elsewhere that he takes what he can get).
>
I've wondered about that, too. From a small child's POV, in the short run,
life does not always look fair. Or perhaps, fair is a learned concept and
the readiness only kicks in at a certain developmental level.

I wonder if it would be helpful to work in a looser time frame with the
computer games? Take turns by "morning" and "afternoon" say, rather than
hourly with a timer? Those games do really require immersion and deep
engagement. There may be more natural stopping points and rhythms than a
timer. Sometimes the kids end up coming to a stopping point on their own
if they don't feel locked into a specific time frame.

Slower transitions can be helpful too, with natural motivators to help with
the transitions. Like mealtimes. My kids can accept "time to come to a
stopping point" with computer games, IF they've had enough time to make a
certain amount of progress during their game time. The time it takes to
come to a stop varies from child to child. It also varies with the point
they are at in the game. There is some room for leeway and I don't like to
make it too arbitrary or they start being arbitrary about it, too.

These kinds of solutions haven't stopped all conflict here but they've
helped cut it down and take some of the intensity out of it. In my
experience, sometimes when the intensity has been lessened over time, the
kids are able to take over some of the "fairness" principle for themselves,
in their own way.

Willa

Jenniffer Baltzell

In my limited experience (I've only had this gig for 8 years, now) the only
way my kids seem to really learn our values are through modeling them and
talking about them on a daily basis. It doesn't happen overnight, or in the
course of a week or even a year.

I talk to my kids about how I was parented and that when I'm angry, I feel
like hitting, too, but I have to control that part of myself because I don't
want to hurt them and I don't want them to be afraid of me. I want us to
have a peaceful household and I want them all to feel safe, even when
there's conflict. I ask them how we can all feel safe when there's a
disagreement and they agree that controling our anger and expressing it with
words rather than our hands is the best way for everyone to feel safe and
secure. We also talk about other ways to resolve conflict. We talk about
how everyone's feeling and why in order to model empathy. We brainstorm
about possible solutions. I tell them, in the end, that if the only thing
they can think of in the moment is to hit or hit back, they should come to
me and I'll help them figure out how to resolve the conflict without
resorting to violence. You know, when they do come to me, sometimes it's
hard for *me* to figure out a peaceful solution that satisfies everyone. It
often seems impossible. I don't know why we think kids should be able to do
it in every instance, if even we expert grown-ups can't :P

Even with all we do to avoid it, hittting still happens. My youngest is 4,
and he still lashes out when he's angry or in retalliation. The good news
is that it happens less and less often. My oldest is 8 and rarely hits or
lashes out physically anymore, even when his brothers hurt him. He has to
be in major emotional upheaval to lash out, and, thankfully, those are very
few and far between these days. I guess I've come to an acceptance that
they will hit each other, and I count on our example (and now, the example
of our oldest) along with lots and lots of repetition and brainstorming to
eventually show them what we value and why.

I think the biggest lesson I needed to learn in parenting is that it's less
important to know what the perfect solution is and more important to *not*
do what I know *doesn't* work and *isn't* right. If that makes any sense.

Incidentally, we have computers all over the house, but the boys inevitably
all end up in front of one computer watching what big brother is doing.

--
Jenniffer in Harpers Ferry
http://octopigarden.blogspot.com
Listen, are you breathing just a little, and calling it a life? ~Mary Oliver


On 4/24/06, Ken Cooper <ken@...> wrote:
>
> > One doesn't "enforce" principles. That's reserved for rules.
>
> What do you call abstract rules that capture the spirit of a family value?
>
> I should have given an example to make this more concrete. In my other
> post,
> I talk about the sharing of the computer. When ds5 is told his time is up,
> he starts doing things that violate the XXX of 'do unto others', like
> hitting, screeching, breaking things, etc. We have talked many times, in
> quiet, screen-free moments, about this XXX. We attempt to model it every
> day
> ourselves. But these events still happen, regularly.
>
> When this happens, what do we do? Tell him he can't use the computer until
> he can get with the program? Seems pretty authoritarian. And this may be a
> natural consequence, but what if it's not so direct? Say the two boys are
> tweaking each other, and it escalates to someone getting fairly hurt
> (which
> is not a hypothetical)?
>
> Ken
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ken Cooper

> It doesn't happen overnight, or in the
> course of a week or even a year.

Good point. I need to remind myself of this.

> Even with all we do to avoid it, hittting still happens.

What do you do when the situation calls for immediate intervention, like
when one is holding a stick with a burning ember on it and waving it near
the other, or when one is throwing rocks in the general vicinity of the
other (and hitting them, accidentally)? When you've repeatedly counseled
them these are dangerous activities?

> I think the biggest lesson I needed to learn in parenting is that
> it's less important to know what the perfect solution is and more
> important to *not* do what I know *doesn't* work and *isn't* right.
> If that makes any sense.

Yes it does, and it's great food for thought. I need some compass for
guidance, and this helps. I'm visualizing blacking out part of the compass,
or adding areas of text to a map 'Thar Be Dragons Here.' Funny, it's what dw
has been saying for years, but it never sunk in quite this way. Guess that's
typical human behavior. :-)

Ken

Jenniffer Baltzell

On 4/24/06, Ken Cooper <ken@...> wrote:
>
>
> > Even with all we do to avoid it, hittting still happens.
>
> What do you do when the situation calls for immediate intervention, like
> when one is holding a stick with a burning ember on it and waving it near
> the other, or when one is throwing rocks in the general vicinity of the
> other (and hitting them, accidentally)? When you've repeatedly counseled
> them these are dangerous activities?
>

I say it again. And again, and again. "Keep that hot thing away from your
brothers. I don't want anyone to get burned because it really hurts. Put
down the rocks, somebody might get hurt." I honestly think that many times,
they're just not thinking ahead to the consequences. They rarely really
want to hurt each other, they just fail to think things through and lack
impulse control. "Here, throw them at that boulder across the street and
see if you can hit it," (redirect). "Be careful if anybody comes too near
you while you're throwing. You guys stay back and let's see if he can hit
that big rock over there. Here, you come down here and see if you can hit
that log." Sometimes they're not *trying* to hurt one another, they're just
having fun. Sometimes they don't even care that their brothers are throwing
rocks at them. I show them how to have fun safely.

Sometimes it helps if I think of it as genetic, evolutionary behavior.
They're like lion cubs practicing their pouncing on one another. They're
practicing to throw spears when they grow up to hunt those mammoths.
They're practicing their throw for when that other tribe attacks. It's my
job to help them do what they want to do in a safe way.


--
Jenniffer in Harpers Ferry
Listen, are you breathing just a little, and calling it a life? ~Mary Oliver


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

On Apr 24, 2006, at 8:51 AM, Ken Cooper wrote:

> > One doesn't "enforce" principles. That's reserved for rules.
>
> What do you call abstract rules that capture the spirit of a family
> value?


Whatever you call them, they can't be "enforced."
They can be guiding factors and ways of being.

-=-When ds5 is told his time is up,
he starts doing things that violate the XXX of 'do unto others', -=-

But someone just imposed something on him. Who decides his time is
up? He's not through.

-=-When ds5 is told his time is up,
he starts doing things that violate the XXX of 'do unto others', like
hitting, screeching, breaking things, etc. We have talked many times, in
quiet, screen-free moments, about this XXX. -=-

Instead of a "time is up," do you give him warnings, or can you say
"When you get to the end of this level," so that it's a natural
pausing place of the game?

-=-Say the two boys are
tweaking each other, and it escalates to someone getting fairly hurt
(which
is not a hypothetical)? -=-

Here's what I do:
http://sandradodd.com/peace/fighting
(I'd say it again, but it's long and I couldn't do it better.)

Sandra

Ken Cooper

> I say it again. And again, and again.

My ds5's response to telling him not to do something is to do it more. He
has a history of getting this Calvin grin on his face and doing exactly what
you told him not to. Maybe this is just deschooling going on; we have had
power struggles in the past that I now see are a direct result of less than
perfect parenting. Perhaps as he sees us lightening up, eventually he'll
come to trust our judgment on these things.

Has anyone had this experience?

Ken

Sandra Dodd

On Apr 24, 2006, at 11:26 AM, Ken Cooper wrote:

> What do you do when the situation calls for immediate intervention,
> like
> when one is holding a stick with a burning ember on it and waving
> it near
> the other, or when one is throwing rocks in the general vicinity of
> the
> other (and hitting them, accidentally)? When you've repeatedly
> counseled
> them these are dangerous activities?

When I was a young teacher of 9th graders, I broke up a fight between
two boys bigger than I was. It was scary and dangerous, and I got my
own adrenaline up and started yelling. An older male teacher (who
had been my 9th grade science teacher when I was a kid) advised me
later. He said when you're breaking up a fight, grab the loser.
He'll relax, because he wants to be rescued. The winner can stop
without losing face and feel he would've won if you hadn't
intervened. The loser saves face because he *Might* have won if you
hadn't prevented him. He said if you grab the winner you'll get hurt.

In the case of kids, I always picked up the one who was in danger or
crying, and while I was holding that one, I talked to the other one
about stopping. I'd get that one in a safe place playing with
something or looking at something (distracted/elsewhere) and then go
back and deal with the dangerous stuff.

Repeatedly counseling isn't as good as saying "NO!" or "Stop." If
you rarely ever say NO, that no becomes very powerful. If you say it
all the time, it's quite devalued.

It's been helpful to me lots of times to wonder what I would do if an
adult guest was doing whatever this thing was—waving a burning stick,
or throwing rocks. I'd say, "Hey, don't," at least.

But fire and rocks... those are elemental in the most elemental
sense. And kids NEED to mess with them. So maybe help them be more
safe instead of trying to forbid rocks and sticks. What CAN the kid
throw rocks at? Make a target or something. Go where you can skip
stones on water, or throw rocks off a hill where nobody's around
(that latter one's easy in New Mexico). Play with fire WITH them,
so that playing with fire doesn't become something to do when
grownups aren't around. Then they can learn what to do when embers
fall, on what, and how to put the stick out safely, by watching you
do it.

The side yard of our house had a BUNCH of river rock—fist-sized
rocks. We wanted it out, but it got boring to dig it out, pick it
up, take it away. At a birthday party we made a game of it. We set
up those white plastic buckets that paint and drywall compound come
in now (ten gallon? Five gallon?) and if a kid threw five rocks in
he got a prize. The prizes were fast-food toys and other such
trinkets. So "party favors" were earned by picking up our rocks.
<g> But we didn't say it that way. And even the rocks that didn't
make the bucket were in an easier place for gathering up.

If a kid wants to throw rocks, go there. Throw more rocks. If he
wants to play with fire, get MORE fire. Then he'll quit when he's
through, or when he's tired of it, instead of feeling he wants more.
"Always keep 'em wanting more" might be good for selling circus
tickets, but it's not so good for helping kids learn.

Sandra

Sandra Dodd

On Apr 24, 2006, at 11:59 AM, Jenniffer Baltzell wrote:

> I say it again. And again, and again.

How's that working for you?
<g>

-=-Sometimes it helps if I think of it as genetic, evolutionary
behavior.
They're like lion cubs practicing their pouncing on one another.
They're
practicing to throw spears when they grow up to hunt those mammoths.
They're practicing their throw for when that other tribe attacks.
It's my
job to help them do what they want to do in a safe way.-=-

That's really a sweet way to see it.

Sandra

Ken Cooper

> Whatever you call them, they can't be "enforced."
> They can be guiding factors and ways of being.

I take this to mean modeling is the only way you'd express the value of
these?

> But someone just imposed something on him. Who decides his time is
> up? He's not through.

The only thing imposed on him is that he has to share the computer. He has
agreed, uncoerced, to this system of alternating hours (which I agree is
fraught), so when the timer goes off, it's not one of us doing the imposing.
It's us doing the enforcing of rules they have agreed to.

> Instead of a "time is up," do you give him warnings, or can you say
> "When you get to the end of this level," so that it's a natural
> pausing place of the game?

Yes, frequently. The natural pause even became part of our agreement, but it
was abused by ds7, who likes to build his civilization veeeeerrrrry
slooooowly.

But I agree the natural pause is key to the solution. Perhaps in lieu of
another computer, maybe we might try out making the TV more available to ds5
(his other passion is Disney movies). This might take some pressure off the
'as long as you want' approach to sharing.

Thanks to all for the input, this is great.

Ken

s.waynforth

>
>
> Sometimes it helps if I think of it as genetic, evolutionary behavior.
> They're like lion cubs practicing their pouncing on one another. They're
> practicing to throw spears when they grow up to hunt those mammoths.
> They're practicing their throw for when that other tribe attacks. It's my
> job to help them do what they want to do in a safe way.
>

Yeah, that was the kind of thinking that lead me to attachment
parenting. I figured if I let Simon cry himself out a lion would eat him
and that was just to scary for my little baby to believe.

Schuyler

Ken Cooper

> I wonder if it would be helpful to work in a looser time frame with the
> computer games?

Good idea, worth a try.

> with natural motivators to help with the transitions. Like mealtimes.


A common image in our household: 'DINNERRRR TIIIIIME'. No movement, no
response. We have yet to find motivators that work well - these guys will
even sometimes pee in their pants rather than quit playing.

> In my experience, sometimes when the intensity has been lessened over
> time, the kids are able to take over some of the "fairness" principle for
> themselves, in their own way.

That would be heavenly.

Ken

Sandra Dodd

On Apr 24, 2006, at 12:38 PM, Ken Cooper wrote:

> > Whatever you call them, they can't be "enforced."
> > They can be guiding factors and ways of being.
>
> I take this to mean modeling is the only way you'd express the
> value of
> these?


No, there's conversation.
Advice and counsel aren't enforcement.

Do you mean to say "implemented" instead of "enforced" maybe?

-=-He has agreed, uncoerced-=-

He's little. He's too young to make an agreement he doesn't really
understand. If he's reacting badly to the timer (timers aren't
friendly), he's indicating that he didn't understand fully, so
holding him to the deal seems cruel and unfair.

-=-The natural pause even became part of our agreement, but it
was abused-=

Abused is another harsh word.

-=-maybe we might try out making the TV more available to ds5-=-

I don't really want details on how it was less available, but please
consider reading here:
http://sandradodd.com/tv

If it's been limited, and the computer is limited, you're going to a
lot of effort to build problems.

Sandra

Sandra Dodd

On Apr 24, 2006, at 12:56 PM, Ken Cooper wrote:

> We have yet to find motivators that work well - these guys will
> even sometimes pee in their pants rather than quit playing.


If they didn't have a timer waiting to go off, they could calmly go
to the toilet. Really.

Maybe take some food to the one who's playing, and have a wonderfully
happy sit-down dinner with the one who's not playing.

Sandra

Sandra Dodd

On Apr 24, 2006, at 9:45 AM, Willa Ryan wrote:

> From a small child's POV, in the short run,
> life does not always look fair.


It looked less and less fair the older I got!

But parents can MAKE life unfair with arbitrary rules. They can make
kids littler than they really are, by treating them dismissively.

Sandra

Ken Cooper

> No, there's conversation.
> Advice and counsel aren't enforcement.

Yes, that too, if one can engage in conversation. Often both boys see
'advice and counsel' equated with limitation, and run the other way. Perhaps
this is again historical baggage. I'm motivated to keep at it.

> Do you mean to say "implemented" instead of "enforced" maybe?

The former minimizes the implication of force, however subtle it might be.
I'm trying to get at the sticky situations where counsel has been exhausted,
primarily because of the lack of experience on the part of ds. I spend
considerable time playing the 'imagine you were in X's shoes' game, but it
is frequently ignored.

> He's little. He's too young to make an agreement he doesn't really
> understand. If he's reacting badly to the timer (timers aren't
> friendly), he's indicating that he didn't understand fully, so
> holding him to the deal seems cruel and unfair.

Seems cruel and unfair, to him, I assume you mean? To his brother, it seems
quite reasonable. But your point is well taken.

> Abused is another harsh word.

Yes, I suppose it implies intent. And you're right, frequently the one
taking long periods of time isn't doing so with malice in mind. There are
times, though...

> please consider reading here:
> http://sandradodd.com/tv

Yes, I've read this, agreed with it, and recently internalized it. We are
taking steps to change this aspect of our lives. I agree this may be a big
source of our trouble.

Ken

Ken Cooper

> If they didn't have a timer waiting to go off, they could calmly go
> to the toilet. Really.

Actually, this is independent of the timer. The timer pressure isn't always
on them, but the bladder pressure is.

> Maybe take some food to the one who's playing, and have a wonderfully
> happy sit-down dinner with the one who's not playing.

That's a good idea, thanks.

Ken