Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sure, THAT time when you tell them but tomorrow, no, they might think it is different tomorrow so they will try it again...you just never know. THAT is how a 2 or 3 year old thinks. If it doesn't hurt them, it doesn't hurt. They aren't selfish or mean kids, their brains just are not developed enough to understand empathy. This is the age that they start coming around on empathy though so some younger kids get it but most do not.
This is absolutely true since impulse control is a part of development and it's a fact that the ability to do so differs with many children. It's important to remember all development is not linear either. Kids move forward, regress, evolve, etc. when it comes to behavior.
From Somebody New (sorry I don't know how to add quotes from two different posts): I DID have a couple of older kids like 4 and 5 who ... basically didn't care. They had been allowed to run wild. They needed to feel the discomfort of if you cannot play safely, you cannot be allowed to play. I had one little boy who had to shadow me. (I was a solitary provider, not one of many in a center.) I am cooking lunch and everyone else is playing. Sorry you have to sit with me. WHEN you can play safely, THEN you can resume playing with the others. Stubborn child spent many a fun time doing something massively boring with me, of sitting away from his friends with me between them and him. Pretty soon he knew S meant what she said and said what she meant. Mom and Dad would let him do whatever he pleased, but if he meant to play, he had to play safely like S says.
This is missing a 'Part B'. While you do want kids to understand a natural consequence, where is the teaching component? If they truly don't know how to do something which is quite common from ages 1-6, you (the general you) need to get down on the floor and teach them how. This is especially true when kids cannot resolve their own conflicts, play nicely, etc. They need models and instruction, not just separation from the group or a time-out. Those can be necessary for safety reasons, but many parents use them as substitutes for getting in there and really showing their kids the way.
Last edited by LVKim8; 01-09-2012 at 11:19 PM..
Reason: add second quote
This is missing a 'Part B'. While you do want kids to understand a natural consequence, where is the teaching component? If they truly don't know how to do something which is quite common from ages 1-6, you (the general you) need to get down on the floor and teach them how. This is especially true when kids cannot resolve their own conflicts, play nicely, etc.
This is SO true. We tell them play nicely. Play safely. What does that MEAN? We assume that they know. They don't. Discussing how could we solve this conflict better? OK we know not to hit. What CAN we do? How can you speak to Susie to get her to stop pestering you? Let's role play it, I am Susie and I say ...
So with all this freedom and creativity going on what did you say to the little de Goya who decided to paint on the neighbor's dining room wall and the neighbor walked in and did her very own version of "The Scream".
Or were they so self-disciplined at four that that never came up?
They understood that rules elsewhere would be different than at home. 1) Because I talked to them before going places about that and 2) Because I was with them there, too, talking through things with them as they came up.
Hopefully, if the neighbor had young kids over, she wouldn't have paint out where kids could get it, and if she did, we'd be right there with them while they painted.
If she didn't, and the aforementioned happened... we'd clean her wall. Or repaint it, if needed. That's it. No punishment, no contrived consequences. Then, knowing he had a proclivity for painting, I'd make double sure the next time we went somewhere that there wasn't paint out.
A simple, "Oh, she doesn't want you painting her wall!" and making it right lets him know the boundaries. And maybe I'd remind him, "Ask next time, if you see paint and want to paint. You could have painted this big piece of wood outside!" or something like that.
I have lost you right there at "infraction" and throwing any and all behaviors at a chart! Why is the teacher not dealing with the causes of whatever the behaviors are? Out of the gate, the teacher is not addressing whatever your son needs by lumping all "misbehaviors" into one big pot, and drawing a here is how bad you are doing chart. My first question would be what are his troubling behaviors, and why is he doing them *from his point of view*. How old is he would be my next one.
The school uses the Positive Behavior Support system, that is where the chart comes from. That system is pretty common in schools these days and quite a few people on here are familiar with it.
My son (who is 7) is not on any kind of behavior plan, the chart is a common element in any school that uses the PBS system. Every kid starts the day on green and then can have the chart color changed to yellow if they fail to follow the expected behavior. Red is generally reserved for the most serious issues like hitting. The colors symbolize different degrees of intervention that are taken by the teacher and restrictions/consequences that can result.
For instance, the chart may be changed to yellow for talking constantly to a friend while the teacher is talking. This will generally be preceeded by warnings and discussions of what is expected. When the color is changed they get into the "his point of view" part of it and reinforce what is expected and offer him strategies to avoid the behavior. Getting your chart color changed can result in losing free time or another priviledge. We get a note home each time the color is changed that explains the situation and how the teacher handled it as well as what solutions were offered.
So, this isn't some random invention and is used across the country. This is what the "experts" deem to be the best behavior support system for schools. Part of this program is reinforcing at home the discussion at school, talking about how to better handle a situation and yes, reinforcing the consequences for not living up to the expectation.
I expect my son to behave in school. I will in turn arm him with every tool I can think of and teach him how to avoid the negative situations and teach him coping skills and better ways to handle issues. Within all of that I will reinforce the importance of this by limiting his priviledges when he doesn't live up to the expectation. What else am I supposed to do?
Am I supposed to wait until he fails or ends up on a behavior modification plan and then turns into an unemployed 30 year old sleeping on my couch that one day self-realizes that had he only made a better effort in school that he wouldn't be a failure? No, I am reinforcing with consequence that if we don't live up to our responsibilities and expectations that there are negative consequences, one of which is not getting to enjoy the things we like.
Quote:
No I don't agree even a little bit. You are so hyper focused on consequences, that you are not seeing the rest of the package and how it fits together. There is nothing subtle at all about the difference between what I am saying and what you are hearing.
I am not hyper-focused on consequences. I think the rest of it all has merit and is an integral part of a positive discipline strategy. What I am trying to get through is that logical and natural consequences are a CRITICAL component of an effective strategy. You want to relegate it to something that doesn't matter and I think that quite frankly you are full of it, IDK maybe you've read too many books.
I DON'T WANT to punish my kids, but I see the necessity in doing so to reinforce the expectations and behavior I expect from them. I will do everything I can to limit the times that punishment/consequences/whatever you want to call it happen, but they need to happen to reinforce the lesson. Yes, Virginia, when you eff up negative things happen. I'd rather be taking away video games for getting in trouble in school at 7 then having the police show up at 17.
Quote:
You are doing a Pavlovian behavior modification technique which is just not what I am talking about.
You don't think that a statement such as that is the least bit insulting? I am not teaching my kids to respond reflexively to a situation like the soma addled genetic experiments in Brave New World. I am teaching my children that there are expectations and standards that I want them to live by.
We can rationalize and discuss them all they want. I encourage critical thinking and self-realization. However, I will not stand by until they naturally "mature" to the point when they can rationalize their behavior and understand the long term natural consequences of their choices. To me consequences serve as a bridge to encourage better choices and behavior until they reach the point of maturity where they completely understand them.
BTW, I'm still waiting for a response to the second scenario I laid out about cleaning up toys. This is the second time I asked you how you would handle it and told you how we do it in my home. My assumption is that you don't have an answer that would support the point you are trying to make. So, great sage of positive discipline that doesn't involve consequences as a cornerstone, how do you suggest I teach my kids the importance of cleaning up their toys without using the natural consequence of losing their toys for failing to do it?
They understood that rules elsewhere would be different than at home. 1) Because I talked to them before going places about that and 2) Because I was with them there, too, talking through things with them as they came up.
Rules may be different, but there are some general societal standards that most adhere to. Not painting on walls is something the vast majority discourage. What happens when you aren't there to lead or inform Picasso that drawing on walls at so and so's house isn't OK? Why is drawing on walls ever OK and no, I don't think "because they want to" is a good enough reason.
Quote:
Hopefully, if the neighbor had young kids over, she wouldn't have paint out where kids could get it, and if she did, we'd be right there with them while they painted.
The environment shouldn't have to adapt to the kids, the kids should be able to deal with the environment in an acceptable manner. Given, there are some basic things to do, like not leaving paint out, but the macro concept you are presenting I feel is inherently wrong.
Quote:
If she didn't, and the aforementioned happened... we'd clean her wall. Or repaint it, if needed. That's it. No punishment, no contrived consequences. Then, knowing he had a proclivity for painting, I'd make double sure the next time we went somewhere that there wasn't paint out.
A simple, "Oh, she doesn't want you painting her wall!" and making it right lets him know the boundaries. And maybe I'd remind him, "Ask next time, if you see paint and want to paint. You could have painted this big piece of wood outside!" or something like that.
You do realize that making your child clean or repaint the wall is a punishment/consequence right? It is a logical and natural consequence, but it is a consequence regardless. Out of curiosity, what's the next step if little Picasso doesn't find cleaning or repainting the wall to be enough of a deterrent or the piece of wood outside just isn't that interesting compared to the wall inside. Maybe they liked cleaning the wall and enjoyed the attention that they received while doing it. What then? Do we take away the paints until we understand that the behavior is inappropriate? Uh oh, there's those dirty horrible consequences again.
Rules may be different, but there are some general societal standards that most adhere to. Not painting on walls is something the vast majority discourage. What happens when you aren't there to lead or inform Picasso that drawing on walls at so and so's house isn't OK? Why is drawing on walls ever OK and no, I don't think "because they want to" is a good enough reason.
Not painting on walls isn't a general societal standard. That's someone's preference. I have a mural and inspirational sayings on one of my walls. It's quite beautiful, and I get lots of compliments. A friend of mine painted a cityscape on one of her walls, and painted a sun and the sun's rays on her ceiling.
Drawing on walls is frequently OK, especially in families with young kids. Even scribbling, if it's a chalkboard wall, or if the family has a wall dedicated to explorations of that sort.
You said, "When I'm not there to lead or inform" Well, I'm there. And the kids were either in an environment they could freely explore, or were with like-minded parents if I wasn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJGOAT
The environment shouldn't have to adapt to the kids, the kids should be able to deal with the environment in an acceptable manner. Given, there are some basic things to do, like not leaving paint out, but the macro concept you are presenting I feel is inherently wrong.
Macro concept? The macro concept I'm presenting is partnership and communication. I don't expect environments to change. It's wonderful when they do! When people want to make their home kid-friendly when they have small kids coming over. But I don't expect that. If my kids were inquisitive and "busy", I'd keep them out of non-kid-friendly places, until they have grown to a point where they "deal with the environment in an acceptable manner".
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJGOAT
You do realize that making your child clean or repaint the wall is a punishment/consequence right? It is a logical and natural consequence, but it is a consequence regardless. Out of curiosity, what's the next step if little Picasso doesn't find cleaning or repainting the wall to be enough of a deterrent or the piece of wood outside just isn't that interesting compared to the wall inside. Maybe they liked cleaning the wall and enjoyed the attention that they received while doing it. What then? Do we take away the paints until we understand that the behavior is inappropriate? Uh oh, there's those dirty horrible consequences again.
Why would a kid want to continue doing something they knew they shouldn't? If they enjoyed the attention they received, then they're not getting enough attention elsewhere! I'd fill their cup in that case. If they know they have a wall they can paint or draw on at home, why would they insist on drawing on my friend's wall?
And - I wouldn't "make my child clean or repaint the wall". In my post, I said, "we" and I meant, "we". Yes, it's a consequence, but it's NOT contrived at all. You're wanting to nit-pick, and you're missing the larger point. I wouldn't "take away the paints". I'd paint WITH my kid.
This is why imagined scenarios are rarely useful. A person can say, "What if they, what if they, what if they" a million different things, and they're usually things that no healthy typical child would do, and the conversation spirals away into meaninglessness.
Last edited by CharlotteGal; 01-10-2012 at 11:05 AM..
Not painting on walls isn't a general societal standard. That's someone's preference. I have a mural and inspirational sayings on one of my walls. It's quite beautiful, and I get lots of compliments. A friend of mine painted a cityscape on one of her walls, and painted a sun and the sun's rays on her ceiling.
Drawing on walls is frequently OK, especially in families with young kids. Even scribbling, if it's a chalkboard wall, or if the family has a wall dedicated to explorations of that sort.
There's a big difference between a mural and juniors random scribblings in terms of societal acceptibility. I personally don't know of any families that consider randomly drawing on the walls to be acceptable. If you want to draw, here is some acceptable medium for drawing. If you insist on drawing on the walls then we are going to have an issue.
Quote:
You said, "When I'm not there to lead or inform" Well, I'm there. And the kids were either in an environment they could freely explore, or were with like-minded parents if I wasn't.
What happened in school when you weren't there and they weren't surrouned by like-minded people who loved free expression and saying yes? Must have been a rude awakening.
Quote:
Macro concept? The macro concept I'm presenting is partnership and communication. I don't expect environments to change. It's wonderful when they do! When people want to make their home kid-friendly when they have small kids coming over. But I don't expect that. If my kids were inquisitive and "busy", I'd keep them out of non-kid-friendly places, until they have grown to a point where they "deal with the environment in an acceptable manner".
The macro concept you are presenting is that we must foster an environment and/or situation where our children are represented as the center of the universe. Things must adapt to them and allow them to be "free" to explore and do what they wish. You are setting them up for sad disappointment in the future when they realize that the world doesn't bend its knee to the whims of an indulged under-discipined person. Maybe your method worked great for your kids under your constant tutelage, but I feel it would be a dismal failure in my home.
Quote:
Why would a kid want to continue doing something they knew they shouldn't? If they enjoyed the attention they received, then they're not getting enough attention elsewhere! I'd fill their cup in that case. If they know they have a wall they can paint or draw on at home, why would they insist on drawing on my friend's wall?
Why would a kid do something they knew they shouldn't? Seriously, you're a parent and you need to ask this? Sometimes its attention, sometimes its boredom, sometimes its simply because they want to, sometimes they want to "express" themselves, etc.
As for the wall, the answer is that you have made drawing on walls acceptable and appropriate because you wanted to "say yes" and let them have the freedom to express themselves. A young child doesn't see the difference between your wall and a friends wall, it's just a wall and in their world it's OK to draw on walls because I do it at home.
Quote:
And - I wouldn't "make my child clean or repaint the wall". In my post, I said, "we" and I meant, "we". Yes, it's a consequence, but it's NOT contrived at all. You're wanting to nit-pick, and you're missing the larger point. I wouldn't "take away the paints". I'd paint WITH my kid.
So, if your child does something wrong and needs to make amends you go through that whole process with them to the point of doing the work? What are they learning? It's OK to screw up mom will come and pick up the pieces and tell her friend "it's OK Johnny was just expressing himself and I encourage that". Then we will never go back to that house again because it just isn't an environment that is supportive of Johnny's creativity....please.
I'm starting to see where the problem may lie though. You have what, two kids? Currently aged 13 and 19? So, two kids, 6 years apart in age. somebodynew has how many and what ages? She also runs a daycare for younger kids apparently?
I think the strategies are being influenced by the family dynamic in terms of the number and age spread of the kids involved. Mine are 7, 3 and 2...I can only be so progressive before my wife and I would end up chained to a table while the kids ransacked the house in warpaint....but it's OK, they are just expressing themselves.
Quote:
This is why imagined scenarios are rarely useful. A person can say, "What if they, what if they, what if they" a million different things, and they're usually things that no healthy typical child would do, and the conversation spirals away into meaninglessness.
Healthy typical children don't occasionally get in trouble for not paying attention in school, not cleaning up their toys and drawing on walls?
You are setting them up for sad disappointment in the future when they realize that the world doesn't bend its knee to the whims of an indulged under-discipined person.
Back when the kids colored on the wall the first time at our own house, I'd have made them clean it and/or paint it. That is a logical consequence. Putting paper up so they can color on it, on the wall doesn't teach them anything.
Theoretically I love the idea of natural consequences. The issue I have with relying too heavily on them is that it could take too long to get to the consequence; and/or the consequence is too harsh when it finally happens. I'm thinking of things like injuries from falling off of something they weren't supposed to be climbing on. I'm not going to sit around and wait for that to happen. I'm going to tell them not to climb on it. If they continue, they get a time out, or we leave the park, or whatever.
When they get older, do you let them drink and drive and wait for the natural consequence? Of course not! If you find out they do it once they need a parent-given consequence - a big one!
Natural consequences are great, but I think relying on them alone is a mistake.
So, this isn't some random invention and is used across the country. This is what the "experts" deem to be the best behavior support system for schools.
Well I guess we agree with different experts. I certainly don't place a great deal of trust in the schools or that the teachers in them are anything like experts. Having looked into the required education, I definitely don't consider them experts in children.
The notion that one not ought to have to think still baffles me.
Quote:
I expect my son to behave in school.
So do I. But then so does he.
Quote:
I think that quite frankly you are full of it, IDK maybe you've read too many books.
Well I think you are too. But I agree with you that I have read too may books. I wish I had skipped all the crap out of Focus on the Family.
I hope this works for you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why is the teacher not dealing with the causes of whatever the behaviors are? Out of the gate, the teacher is not addressing whatever your son needs by lumping all "misbehaviors" into one big pot, and drawing a here is how bad you are doing chart. My first question would be what are his troubling behaviors, and why is he doing them *from his point of view*. How old is he would be my next one.
