Danielle Conger

Oh, and also this, because it's where I try to distinguish between
productive uses of parental judgment and non-productive, fwiw.

"I understand the argument about not blaming but I don't agree that it's
beneficial to not judge a hurtful action as hurtful. I don't believe it
is beneficial to pretend that a hurtful action is playful. I've posted a
couple of times about how important I think it is to not only to help
someone meet a need but to help them find productive ways to express
those needs. Part of helping them do that requires an ability to
distinguish between desirable and undesirable, acceptable and
unacceptable alternatives, which cannot be done without judgment.

I believe that judgment itself can be used either positively or
negatively, productively or unproductively. To help a child sort through
different choices and their effects on others by using our judgment to
discern better and worse choices, that's a productive use of our
judgment. To label a child cruel, lazy or stupid based upon a choice is
a very unproductive use of our judgment."

--
~~Danielle
Emily (8), Julia (6), Sam (5)
http://www.danielleconger.com/Homeschool/Welcomehome.html

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

"With our thoughts, we make the world." ~~Buddha

[email protected]

In a message dated 8/22/05 7:57:51 PM, danielle.conger@... writes:


>
> I believe that judgment itself can be used either positively or
> negatively, productively or unproductively.
>

I think it can be done fairly and thoughtfully, or it can be kneejerk and
nonsensical.
Maybe that's what you mean by "productively or unproductively."

Some people have good judgment and some don't.

Not-good-judgment is probably not "unproductive," it just doesn't produce
positive results.
And probably you're talking about positive results with helping kids learn
how to figure out on their own how to make better decisions in the future.

One way to look at the role of someone (anyone--friend, teacher, parent) who
is helping another person improve behavior is to see them in the role of
coach. Coaches need to see how a person does, advise for the next time, and watch
them again.

I've coached adults because of having apprentices and students within that
context.
One of the meanest things I could have done would have been to be
"non-judgmental" when they were depending on me to advise them on doing better.

There's a phrase I don't like used in fundamentalist Christian circles:
"Hate the sin; love the sinner." They mean to suggest that it's good to accept
the human being (and his money, and his potential to be saved) while condeming
the sin. Problem is, there IS no sin without the sinner. There is no
crime without a criminal. People talk about unconditional love, and I know
that on the extreme end love can have TOO many restrictions and conditions, but
that doesn't mean that someone should love someone (even her own child or her
husband) just as much no matter what he does.

I think that's a related question. Do actions reflect on the person who
acts? Yes. They reflect on his morals, his abilities, his sensitivity, his
awareness, his courtesy, knowledge, and all kinds of things. Some people
don't care about all those aspects of the person. Some care about none
whatsoever. Some care about all of them together.

If a mom doesn't know or care that her chld's actions are socially
unacceptable, that makes her socially unacceptable too, and the two of them socially
unacceptable to that group or individual making the judgment.

It's pretty complicated. <g>

Sandra


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

[email protected]

In a message dated 8/22/2005 11:06:20 PM Central Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:

And probably you're talking about positive results with helping kids learn
how to figure out on their own how to make better decisions in the future.



~~~

This sparked rules vs. principles in my mind. How can you live a principle
based life without using judgments? Aren't the principles based on common
judgments? What are they called in sociology circles....mores?

When helping a child to see what better choices they could or could have
made, the conversation should usually come back to the principles. We don't
have to place a judgment on the actions as "good" or "bad". They're smart
enough to figure out that depending on circumstances the same action could reverse
their judgment of a particular behavior. The point is application of the
principles.

These thoughts aren't fully formed, but I'll think about it some more.

Karen



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

[email protected]

<<If a mom doesn't know or care that her chld's actions are socially
unacceptable, that makes her socially unacceptable too, and the two of them
socially
unacceptable to that group or individual making the judgment.

It's pretty complicated. <g>

Sandra>>
*********************************************************

Socially unacceptable in what group? All unschooled or general public?
That's complicated...
Add older ages and oh boy!
What is accepted for a family with all young children is quite different
than a family who has already been there done that.

Laura


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

[email protected]

> -=-When helping a child to see what better choices they could or  could
> have
> made, the conversation should usually come back to the  principles.  We
> don't
> have to place a judgment on the actions as "good" or  "bad".  They're smart
> enough to figure out that depending on circumstances  the same action could
> reverse
> their judgment of a particular  behavior.   The point is application of the 
> principles.-=-
>
>

Right.

Last week Marty was feeling kind of sick, like mild cold or flu. He missed
three days of work.

It's a long story but the first day he didn't quite get the message to his
boss that he wasn't coming, and when he/boss called to see what happened to
Marty, I had to say he was gone with a friend. It's one of my personal
wounds/guilts that if you're too sick to go to work you shouldn't "earn the privilege"
(leftovers from early childhood) of doing anything fun that day. So I was
embarrassed and grumpy with Marty.

The second day he was still only kind of sick, called in, and perked up
later.

The third day he was unquestionably sick, called in, and his boss was sick
too (but at least couldn't blame Marty for contagion).

Honestly, it's a flexible-hours job. Marty could go in anytime and stay as
long as he wanted to, but he's a schedule-loving kind of guy so goes noon to
five four days a week.

But the point of the story is that on the second day Marty, knowing I had
been so unhappy with him the day before, came and asked me if I thought he should
go. Instead of giving im a yes or no answer, I went through all the
concerns I could think of that Marty should consider.
He works alone lately, so coughing wasn't going to be a problem.
He's a really fast worker usually, so one slow day wasn't going to hurt much.
Did Mike have deadlines or was it a routine week?
Was Marty in danger of hurting himself or making mistakes from being sick?
Was Marty disliking the job and so feeling sick out of avoidance? (No, he
said he liked it, but the reason I brought it up is that not having years of
school experience, Marty might not have known, I figured, that some kids dislike
school to the point that it does make them physically ill when they wake up
and realize it's time to go there.)
I mentioned lightly (reminders) reliability and integrity, and being honest
with himself.

He called his boss and asked him about deadlines and pressing need, and there
weren 't any. So based on that, Marty decided to stay home. And I didn't
mind, because he had given his boss a chance to persuade him to come, or to
say "no problem."

I was judgmental partly because of memories of being prevented from going to
a girl scout or 4-H meeting the evening of a day I had missed school. Those
memories are not as well dissected and cataloged as the school memories
themselves, and so I found a pocket of unresolved childhood resentment and
very-minor trauma, and I knew it was personal and I told Marty it was.

Keith had advised me from work not to try to make him go or shame him, but to
remind him he had a commitment and shouldn't make his decision too lightly.

That complex situation, and the fact that Marty came and asked me to help him
decide whether to go, was the result of years of me helping him decide rather
than dictating what he must and couldn't do.

If I could somehow have said or felt that it made no difference one way or
the other whether Marty went to work, or that it made no difference how sick he
was or whether he had succeeded in getting the message to his boss, then my
advice wouldn't be worth a damn. On what basis could I advise if I had removed
all basis of comparative thought?

Sandra


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

[email protected]

In a message dated 8/23/05 7:43:05 AM, HMSL2@... writes:


> Socially unacceptable in what group? All unschooled or general public? 
>

In a group to which the child or parent might like (or need) to return.

-=-Add older ages and oh boy!-=-

Without considering older ages, the parent isn't making so great a decision.
If every day and every moment is bridge-burning, well... there are six
billion people on the planet, and they could just move on each day I suppose.

"Social" itself requires "acceptable" to exist.

Sandra


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

Laura

> > -=-Socially unacceptable in what group? All unschooled or general
public?-=-
> >
>
> In a group to which the child or parent might like (or need) to
return.
>
> -=-Add older ages and oh boy!-=-
>
> Without considering older ages, the parent isn't making so great a
decision.
> If every day and every moment is bridge-burning, well... there
are six
> billion people on the planet, and they could just move on each day
I suppose.
>
> "Social" itself requires "acceptable" to exist.
>
> Sandra
>
**************************
"Socially acceptable" reminds me of math curriculam. Each user sees
their formula as the right one..

I was thinking how lots of people deal with situations in different
ways. Children are different. What works for one family may not be so
simple a solution or right for that matter. What one family see's as
a principal another may not.

As unschoolers we are respecting our children's freedom to be who
they are(without harming another). This reminds me of the post last
year when a mom had said
how some children at the playground were forbidden from walking on
the rock wall. In that situation no harm was taking place. In this
conversation to fit in or not burn a bridge does the unschool parent
forbid the wall climbing to fit in?...... In the older children
thought i was thinking how older children expand play and creativity
past the toddler stage. When mixed with differing ages it can be a
challenge to accommodate everyone. Who needs to tweak/conform?



Laura

Lisa M. Cottrell Bentley

> If a mom doesn't know or care that her chld's actions are socially
> unacceptable, that makes her socially unacceptable too, and the two of them socially
> unacceptable to that group or individual making the judgment.

What is a mom (that does know and does care) to do about repeat
situations that their child is being socially unacceptable in? Talk?
Model proper behavior? Talk some more? All the talking and modeling
don't work with a person that cannot see other people's reactions to
social situations. Does it matter? I do think so, but I haven't
figured out the details yet.

> It's pretty complicated. <g>

It is very complicated, especially with high needs children.

-Lisa in AZ

Danielle Conger

Lisa M. Cottrell Bentley wrote:

> > If a mom doesn't know or care that her chld's actions are socially
> > unacceptable, that makes her socially unacceptable too, and the two
> of them socially
> > unacceptable to that group or individual making the judgment.
>
> What is a mom (that does know and does care) to do about repeat
> situations that their child is being socially unacceptable in? Talk?
> Model proper behavior? Talk some more? All the talking and modeling
> don't work with a person that cannot see other people's reactions to
> social situations. Does it matter? I do think so, but I haven't
> figured out the details yet.
>
> > It's pretty complicated. <g>
>
> It is very complicated, especially with high needs children.
>
> -

Well, the simple answer, in my mind, is that the child shouldn't
"repeatedly" be in such situations. *shrug*

--
~~Danielle
Emily (8), Julia (6), Sam (5)
http://www.danielleconger.com/Homeschool/Welcomehome.html

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

"With our thoughts, we make the world." ~~Buddha

[email protected]

In a message dated 8/23/05 6:08:36 PM, cottrellbentley@... writes:


>
> What is a mom (that does know and does care) to do about repeat
> situations that their child is being socially unacceptable in? 
>

Find other places to be until the child is older, or find places where it's
more like parallel play or find situations where a short visit is sufficient,
and reinforce good behavior in some normal, friendly way?

-=- All the talking and modeling
don't work with a person that cannot see other people's reactions to
social situations. -=-

Are we talking Asperger's Syndrome not seeing reactions?

Some of the talking I've done has been to point out when others are
displaying full-body hints and expressions of frustration or avoidance. It's
happened. (Less and less as the years go on, whether more practice on my kids'
parts or just maturity.) Then I would distract my kid with some real business
(water, sunscreen, a question about when we need to go, asking him to get
something from the car or help me pack up) and casually mention it seemed like the
other kid wasn't having very much fun, and was everything okay, and see if
talking would help.

Sandra


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

[email protected]

<<In a group to which the child or parent might like (or need) to return.

-=-Add older ages and oh boy!-=-

Without considering older ages, the parent isn't making so great a decision.

If every day and every moment is bridge-burning, well... there are six
billion people on the planet, and they could just move on each day I
suppose.

"Social" itself requires "acceptable" to exist.

Sandra>>



I don't think I was reading this topic in the same thought..


When I wrote older ages I was thinking about the mix in ages in my own home.
Beyond that the mix of my 4 and going places that doesn't always fit all
ages. I try to meet or go places where each of my children will have a friend or
a item they like to play with. That's a challenge...
I was thinking for instance (as i try to respond to this) my 16 mo is trying
to shut the tv off while my 3 yr old is putting his hand over the button to
stop the 16mo from turning the tv off. How I *tried to explain to the 3 yr
old (a very sensitive lil guy) that if he didn't panic (something we are working
on bc he has a speech delay) about the tv being shut off that the 16mo would
move on. In this case knowing both children I did not feel that drawing
attention to the 16mo and letting him know that it's a big deal to us bc he will
pick up on that. He did move on and will soon loose interest in the tv going
on and off as the other kids did.. The tv was just moved to a lower
location for safety reasons so it's location and situation are better than Cameron
climbing the coffee table to get to it.

If I understand correctly it would be socially unacceptable for this to
take place in someone else's home. I agree. That said my kids know that someone
else home isn't theirs and it's just not an issue. They are more interested
in friends and new surroundings UNLESS it's my MIL's because it's all
breakable and she freaks out so we just don't go as often while they are lil.

I think the topic has come up in the past about bigger families. The
challenge with having several children is that the solutions are not always the same
or as easily solved. Our children all play together so sometimes it can be a
challenge to keep the play fun for all.
The 13 yr old goes faster on the bikes so the middle two sometimes get
frustrated. They enjoy playing together and it's not always pretty but they are
learning as they go.

The train table is in the tv room now and that has had it's challenges with
the 16mo,3 and 5 yr old playing at the same time not to mention that the dog
also wants a train...
I have learned as each child came that what was natural in my parenting
required much more creativity everyday.

For the oldest he is generally gone playing with his friends during the
day,playing runescape, im'ing,on the phone etc... We are both night owls so I
nurse Cameron to sleep in my bed(only way he will sleep) and when daddy comes
down with Nicholas I go up stairs with the 13 yr old and play cards or just
talk. Sometimes the 5 yr old plays also but mostly she likes her late night
movies. Then back down and hopefully hubby is still awake for some adult
conversation that wasn't finished after dinner.

Socially acceptable in a larger family with age gaps was my thinking. Away
from home just isn't a concern bc my kids enjoy other kids also. Other
children with many rules and no freedom, limits friendships but those are not the
friends my children seek out.
Laura




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

[email protected]

In a message dated 8/25/05 9:08:02 AM, HMSL2@... writes:


>
> Socially acceptable in a larger family with age gaps was my thinking. 
>

Ah. Sorry, I guessed a wrong direction.

I finally have kids old enough to get away from one another on their own and
also old enough to want to hang around together on their own. It's
WONDERFUL. I think if they'd been schoolkids, a 19 year old wouldn't hang out with a
13 year old, and maybe neither would hang out with the 16 year old, but in
various combinations they do, and happily. Or they don't, and contentedly.

The principle we have here which came up again last week when Kirby did
something to be funny and it made Holly scream her painful (to us) scream is "It's
only playing if everyone's playing." Kirby had taken a bite out of her
food after she said "don't get my food." He did it knowing he had a new one to
replace it with, and he did it to get a laugh out of visiting kids. But
Holly SCREAMED and was too upset to eat, and Kirby thought that was a stupid
response, and I talked to both of them separately and neither could be immediately
soothed.

But from a bigger perspective, within an hour or less Kirby had apologized,
and what we discussed will probably help them both do better in future
situations with each other or anyone else.

Sandra


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

Danielle Conger

SandraDodd@... wrote:

> The principle we have here which came up again last week when Kirby did
> something to be funny and it made Holly scream her painful (to us)
> scream is "It's
> only playing if everyone's playing."

My version of this recently has been the general evaluative advice "If
you're having fun but someone else is upset it's gone from playing to
taunting." We've had lots of conversations recently about "taunting"
both because of shows and books and real life. It seems one of those
recurring words recently--it happens lots in school settings of shows
and books.

--
~~Danielle
Emily (8), Julia (6), Sam (5)
http://www.danielleconger.com/Homeschool/Welcomehome.html

~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

"With our thoughts, we make the world." ~~Buddha

[email protected]

In a message dated 8/25/2005 10:08:11 AM Central Standard Time,
HMSL2@... writes:

I was thinking for instance (as i try to respond to this) my 16 mo is
trying
to shut the tv off while my 3 yr old is putting his hand over the button to
stop the 16mo from turning the tv off. How I *tried to explain to the 3 yr
old (a very sensitive lil guy) that if he didn't panic (something we are
working
on bc he has a speech delay) about the tv being shut off that the 16mo would
move on. In this case knowing both children I did not feel that drawing
attention to the 16mo and letting him know that it's a big deal to us bc he
will
pick up on that. He did move on and will soon loose interest in the tv
going
on and off as the other kids did..


~~~

I wouldn't expect a 3 yo to understand that at all. I'd scoop up the baby
and distract him for a little while, then, when no one was using the TV, I'd
take him in there and let him press the button as many times as he wished. I
might ask my 3 yo to ask me to come get the baby instead of holding his hand
over the button, though.

If the baby was so intent on pressing that button that he screamed and cried
when I scooped him up, I'd find him another TV or other button to push that
had similar excitement.

Karen


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