Tracy Oldfield

Hi Carol

I wanted to answer your post, because this is something that I
struggle with, though I was raised in a very relaxed way (too
relaxed IMO) I've seen what 'laissez-faire' parenting can do on the
receiving end. So I try to be more 'pro-active' with my children,
which sometimes means that I'm harder than I need or want to be.
I find it hard to strike the balance, since even though I feel over-
authoritarian, a lot of the time, I'm still more empathetic and less
judgemental, less patronising than most other people I see around
me.
I don't ask my children to behave like performing dogs for the in-
laws
for example! (this really gets my goat, and I know that's
judgemental!) It's very hard to find role-models to learn from, in
the flesh, which is the best way to learn such things, I think. So I
make do with the support I get from this list and others. On one
such list, there was a debate about smacking and discipline and
punishment, which was quite educational *grin* One of the posts
was
very useful to me, it said everything that I'd wanted to say, and what
I needed to hear, too, along with adding more information than I'd
had
before. I've yet to read the book finally recommended myself,
though
I can recognise the process, since I've read the Faber and Mazlish
books, and while they're a good 'kicking-off-point,' acknowledging
the
fact that children generally behave as well as they feel, so giving
them respect and empathising with their feelings will help things,
they're still about promoting certain behaviours, as oppose to
respecting the whole child for their own sake. So I've included it
here, cos I think it's a great piece of writing, and says what I want
to say, but with the benefit of greater experience than mine. And I
just want to second the person who said that you are a GREAT
parent
for recognising the need and capacity for change, for questioning
the
status-quo, for sticking to your guns, school won't change any of
the
problems you have, and from the sounds of things would just make
it
harder, more competitive, even less time for the fun things. The
very
best to you

Tracy



Forwarded message...


> I suppose I would say wilful disobedience of a clearly given
> parental instruction, given in a normal voice, accompanied by the
> moral/pragmatic reason why ("eg, I should like you to pick up
your
> coat that you left on the floor since it is getting in the way"

Yes, that was how I used to see it too. But gradually I learned a
few
extra things:

1) To some types of people a politely requested, but direct
instruction like that, actually appears as rude and complaining. I
find this hard to comprehend, but my husband assures me it is true
-
although he in his turn tries to see beyond what he perceives as
rudeness in such requests. My YS understands things like I do,
and my
OS understands as my husband does. To YS, a request such as
yours
would be greeted with something like, 'Oh yes, I forgot, sorry' and
immediate - and fairly cheerful - picking up of the coat. To OS,
there would be an instant, 'Why do you always complain at me so
much??'

If your child is of this personality type, then you might simply need
to phrase your requests differently. 'Oh dear, the coat is on the
floor again and I'm worried I'm going to trip over it,' would be the
way I would make such a request to my husband or OS for them to
find
it reasonable and polite, and to respond by picking it up.

2) It's important to distinguish between what is someone else's
problem and what is your problem. In this case (and I realise it's
just one specific minor example, but this can be extrapolated to
almost anything else) the problem is yours. Your child doesn't
mind
the coat being on the floor - but you do. Obviously you could just
pick it up yourself each time, but that wouldn't help the child learn
responsibility, and could lead to repressed anger and irritation all
round as the child might not know where the coat was after it was
hung
up, and you would feel manipulated, as if you were being treated
like
a servant.

But having acknowledged that it's your problem, yet wanting the
child to do something about it, you can have a discussion -
preferably not
at a tense time - where you explain, using I-messages only, that it
bothers you when coats are left lying around. Give as many
reasons as
you can - the coat was expensive and you're worried it might get
torn
if someone treads on it. It will get dirty quickly and it's a
nuisance to keep washing it. It's in an awkward place and someone
might trip over it.
Things might fall out of the pockets... etc etc.

Then listen to the child's point of view. We did this - actually with
the same thing - for ours at one point, and the children explained
that it was difficult to reach the hooks, and the coats kept falling
off. But they didn't want to have to take them to their bedrooms all
the time as it meant running upstairs when they might be tired, and
then it was a nuisance when we went out and they had to go back
up to
fetch them. So we fitted some new - and bigger - coat hooks in the
hallway, for children only, at half the height of adult ones. Problem
solved.

Sometimes a child will come up with what seems like an
unacceptable
solution - if they actually *want* their coat on the floor, for
instance! In that case you might need to come up with some place
where the coat can be left on the floor, but it's unlikely that anyone
will trip over it or step on it. Perhaps a low stool would be a good
compromise, or a chair cushion that's only for the child's coat,
somewhere out of the way. The child might offer to wash the coat
when
it gets dirty... in which case, accept the offer and teach them how
to
wash the coat and hang it out to dry. Seeing what is involved is
often enough to help the child see the adult's point of view.

3) We tend to think we are being reasonable ('obviously' it's not a
good idea to have coats lying around....) and therefore have the right
to tell our children what to do, until they see reason for ourselves.
I do agree with this from a safety point of view (road crossing is my
chief example) but I'd rather help my children understand than just
get them to do something because I say so. Just like HE (yes,
this is
on-topic! <g>) - we help them understand concepts, answer
questions,
and encourage them to research things for themselves and come
up with
their own solutions to problems. We don't do what sometimes
happens
in schools - giving out busywork and drill, coercing them to do it,
and hoping that sooner or later something will catch on.

> the punishment would be given for refusal to pick up the coat, not
> for (absent-midedly?) leaving it there in the first place).

Yes, I did believe this when my children were much younger. I think
it's the James Dobson approach. But when I thought more deeply
about
it, I realised that 'wilful disobedience' is a bit of a strange
concept, really. Children want to please their parents on the whole
-
they *need* to be loved and cared for. So any apparent
disobedience
is due to lack of understanding, or being in a bad mood for some
unrelated reason, or exhaustion.... all the kinds of things that also
make adults sometimes irritable or stroppy. But small children
haven't learned to explain this, or to hide it, and indeed shouldn't
have to hide their feelings in front of their parents.

When they are trying to express their independence by saying 'no',
they're only trying to grow up and act more like adults do! And as
parents frequently say 'no' to their children's requests, it's pretty
unreasonable for the children not to be allowed to say 'no' back.

Of course I speak in retrospect - my children are now much older
and I don't really see 'punishment' as applying at all to pre-teens
and teenagers, because we get along together (on the whole) and
discuss things together. They don't want their clothes to get torn
and dirty any more than I do. It's much more difficult when you're
confronted with a stroppy four-year-old crying 'I won't!!' to what you
perceived as an entirely reasonable request. If you say, 'OK, I'll
pick it up' then it paves the way for the child to expect you to do
that kind of thing every time. If you leave it on the floor, then the
coat may well get torn, or someone might trip over it. If you enforce
some kind of punishment (or even shout and threaten until the child
does what you ask) then you've been controlling, and the child is
likely to be resentful because of feeling powerless. If you keep
arguing, then the child feels caught in a corner too.

But if you sit down with the child, and say, 'OK. you don't feel like
hanging up your coat. But I'm worried that someone might fall over
it. What do you think we should do about it?' then you've done three
things: firstly acknowledged the child's feelings; secondly pointed
out your own worries without being accusatory, thirdly turned the
problem over to the child and asked for suggestions - which leaves
the
child free to come up with an original idea, or even back down and
acknowledge your point of view without feeling humiliated.

> And as I posted earlier, I suspect that in loving families with open
> communction disobedience in these sort of situations this rarely
> happens.

I think a lot depends on the child, and on the parental response.
Some
children just seem determined to be stroppy, and most of them go
through stages of being extra-assertive or apparently doing the
opposite of what they're asked. Sometimes this is a kind of
subconscious test of the parents' love - will we *really* keep loving
them and accepting them even if they're obnoxious? It's how they
learn about unconditional love.

I threw out my James Dobson books when I'd read other parenting
books - firstly Kevin Leman's 'How to make your children mind
without losing yours', which showed me the importance of teaching
about consequences (rather than arbitrary punishments). Yet in
some
ways he's still advocating control, although of a less authoritarian
manner. Then I read 'How to talk so your kids will listen and listen
so your kids will talk', which gives lots of examples of dealing with
'I-messages', and determining whose problem you are dealing with,
and
other techniques. It's an excellent book and I'd highly recommend
it,
but *still* there's an element of control in it - the idea of making
our children do things to make our life easier/more pleasant.

Then I read Ross Campbell's book 'How to really love your child',
and
it revolutionised the way I think about things. He really didn't talk
about discipline much at all, but looked from the point of view of a
child longing to be loved and understood, with an immature
'emotional
tank' that needed constant filling. Campbell's theory is that
whenever a child is behaving in ways that antagonise parents,
they're
crying out for attention. Some need more than others, some are
hurt
in ways we can't begin to understand. But we can respond *first*
by
giving lots of hugs, eye contact, time doing what the child chooses,
listening to all they say and acknowledging their feelings as valid,
and so on. 99% of the time problems are resolved when the child is
feeling truly loved and knows that the parents want to understand.

Well that's quite enough philosophising from me...

Carol Burke

Tracy-

Thanks. I printed the post you forwarded and I will
keep it and read it. I want to read that book, also,
because I felt much the same way about Mazlish and
Faber.
I just wish I could figure a way out to give so much
attention to seven at the same time. Don't get me
wrong-I love having a big family-but sometimes it's
just so darned hard to even focus!

Take care and thanks again-
Carol B.