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.
I don't know if you are referring to me. I never avoided the word consequences. I avoided the word punishment. That word tends to mind the meting of often unrelated, arbitrary consequences. Like spanking, removal of privileges...There is a very important difference between saying when you are responsible enough to enjoy a perivildege, then you can enjoy it vs you got in a fight with your sister so I am taking away your television.
Therein lies my question/issue.
OK, I understand your position on the word consequence vs. punishment. It is semantical, they mean the same thing, but I understand the mental framework of the words and the distinction you are drawing.
Do you consider it to be ineffective in terms of the discipline strategy to have clear consequences for negative actions if those consequences are designed to not necessarily be 100% logical/natural, but engender the most effective consequence for the child involved?
Example...
My son has a behavior chart at school and like most kids it starts out green then is changed to yellow and then red based on the infraction. We reinforce the importance of behaving at school, listening to the teacher, etc. with normal talking points. We talk about what happened and how he could have better handled the situation when his color is changed. HOWEVER, we also tie his priviledge of being able to play video games to his school behavior chart. If he gets all greens he is allowed to play his video games under the normal guidelines (chores complete, homework done).
I understand the subtle distinction of saying you earn a priviledge by meeting certain behaviors versus losing priviledges for negative behavior, but the end result is still the same. Perhaps we are only arguing this very subtle point where I see the end result being the same regardless.
Here is another example I used earlier...
My kids are expected to clean up the playroom before we sit down to dinner. This is a clearly outlined expectation and we have discussed the importance for doing it. The consequence is that anything not picked up when we are ready to sit down for dinner (they get warnings at sufficient intervals) is then taken away until they meet the expectation for a couple days in a row, then they get the lost toys back. That is a logical and natural consequence to their actions, you don't clean up your toys, you lose your toys.
Now, the trouble I would have is that how does one spin that to be a priviledge gained versus a priviledge lost like we are able to do with school behavior and video games?
Yeah, I can see how that would be difficult if you had a schedule. Luckily, I can be a bit more flexible in that department.
That sounds great, but my daughter's 4, she couldn't care less what she looks like. You should see the hair brushing rigmarole. I can't wait until she has a least a shred of actual vanity. She doesn't want to miss any school, however.
I'm glad you found something that worked for you. Good for you. Hopefully we can nip our problem in the bud early, and have the same type of success.
Good thing we're here to help each other out.
Enjoy it while you got it! Age 4 is when the whole hairstyle thing started. Not only does she want it combed, but combed in a particular style. I miss the days of doing whatever I felt like doing or had time for! That's why that threat works though...if I did nothing to it, think Diana Ross/Chaka Khan, which I think is adorable, but she doesn't!
If your dd doesn't want to miss school, that's good enough! She'll get moving.
I've gotten a lot of great advice from here, it is good to have other parents to share notes with!
I don't know if you are referring to me. I never avoided the word consequences. I avoided the word punishment. That word tends to mind the meting of often unrelated, arbitrary consequences. Like spanking, removal of privileges...There is a very important difference between saying when you are responsible enough to enjoy a perivildege, then you can enjoy it vs you got in a fight with your sister so I am taking away your television.
I understand showing you are responsible enough to earn a certain privilege. The "punishment" or consequence part, I think, would come in when a child abuses the privilege that he earned. He may have shown he was responsible enough to earn television privileges, but he's now fighting with his sister. Whether or not taking the TV away directly relates to him hitting his sister, wouldn't he get the same message...provided we're not talking about very small children who are unable to make the connection?
CharlotteGal, are you serious that you NEVER use consequences or punishments with your kids? You honestly wait for them to self-realize what they are doing is wrong with simple coaching?
I don't like the term 'coaching', for some reason. I use lots of different strategies - or used - they are 19 and almost-13 now, so we don't have hair-pulling, etc. to deal with. I believe kids are doing the best they know how in any moment. If they're doing something 'wrong', it's because they honestly don't know it's wrong, or are acting out for some other reason. A key for me was heading off those other reasons! Boredom, disconnection, frustration, hunger, etc. I was as proactive as I could be so those states didn't occur.
I also worked to find the 'yes' for whatever it is they wanted to do. Coloring on the walls? Let's line one wall with paper, or paint one with chalkboard paint, or easily washable paint. An atmosphere of 'yes' and free exploration goes a LONG way. Free as in, as free of restrictions as possible, not free as in, without parents. I also think a parent's presence - real, total presence and connection - is what most kids crave, and lots of things are done to get that, even if what they get is negative attention. So if you're WITH your kids as much as you can be, lots of so-called bad behavior won't happen.
OK, I understand your position on the word consequence vs. punishment. It is semantical, they mean the same thing, but I understand the mental framework of the words and the distinction you are drawing.
Do you consider it to be ineffective in terms of the discipline strategy to have clear consequences for negative actions if those consequences are designed to not necessarily be 100% logical/natural, but engender the most effective consequence for the child involved?
Example...
My son has a behavior chart at school and like most kids it starts out green then is changed to yellow and then red based on the infraction.
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.
Quote:
We reinforce the importance of behaving at school, listening to the teacher, etc. with normal talking points. We talk about what happened and how he could have better handled the situation when his color is changed. HOWEVER, we also tie his priviledge of being able to play video games to his school behavior chart. If he gets all greens he is allowed to play his video games under the normal guidelines (chores complete, homework done).
I understand the subtle distinction of saying you earn a priviledge by meeting certain behaviors versus losing priviledges for negative behavior,
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.
You are doing a Pavlovian behavior modification technique which is just not what I am talking about.
I understand showing you are responsible enough to earn a certain privilege. The "punishment" or consequence part, I think, would come in when a child abuses the privilege that he earned. He may have shown he was responsible enough to earn television privileges, but he's now fighting with his sister. Whether or not taking the TV away directly relates to him hitting his sister, wouldn't he get the same message...provided we're not talking about very small children who are unable to make the connection?
What priveledge did he "abuse"? I just don't see how behavior toward sister and television are ever related to each other in the slightest unless he is throwing the television at the sister or some nonsense of the sort.
What priveledge did he "abuse"? I just don't see how behavior toward sister and television are ever related to each other in the slightest unless he is throwing the television at the sister or some nonsense of the sort.
Example: The kid who "earned" the privilege of having TV time. He may have proven he was responsible enough to earn TV time, but then he hit his sister. How can you relate the consequence to that behavior, other than hitting him? He's old enough to know that it's wrong, that he hurt his sister, etc. He's also old enough to understand the consequence of, if you can't treat your sister nicely, no TV for you. I guess I don't understand why they have to "relate" to each other unless we're talking about 2-3 year olds who don't know any better.
Example: The kid who "earned" the privilege of having TV time. He may have proven he was responsible enough to earn TV time,
You put earned in quotes which tips me that you might be setting up arbitrary consequences. I cannot see how anyone demonstrates responsibility adequate to watch tv besides time management skill, getting homework done, getting chores done... business before pleasure blah dee blah.
Quote:
but then he hit his sister. How can you relate the consequence to that behavior, other than hitting him?
I would say that he has not learned adequate self control to be in company. I would further say that if he is older than 3, or 4 tops, that you might be engaged in a destructive and controlling family dance. (See Limit Setting etcetera...)
Quote:
He's old enough to know that it's wrong, that he hurt his sister, etc.
But he may have gotten the message by now that his behavior is based on
- what's in it for me
- am I gonna get caught
- am I willing to pay the price.
Quote:
He's also old enough to understand the consequence of, if you can't treat your sister nicely, no TV for you. I guess I don't understand why they have to "relate" to each other unless we're talking about 2-3 year olds who don't know any better.
Well because when you set up a Pavlovian behsavioral system, you have set up the above.
- what's in it for me
- am I gonna get caught
- am I willing to pay the price.
What has taught him to do what is right because it is right or to care how his sister feels?
I don't like the term 'coaching', for some reason. I use lots of different strategies - or used - they are 19 and almost-13 now, so we don't have hair-pulling, etc. to deal with. I believe kids are doing the best they know how in any moment. If they're doing something 'wrong', it's because they honestly don't know it's wrong, or are acting out for some other reason. A key for me was heading off those other reasons! Boredom, disconnection, frustration, hunger, etc. I was as proactive as I could be so those states didn't occur.
I also worked to find the 'yes' for whatever it is they wanted to do. Coloring on the walls? Let's line one wall with paper, or paint one with chalkboard paint, or easily washable paint. An atmosphere of 'yes' and free exploration goes a LONG way. Free as in, as free of restrictions as possible, not free as in, without parents. I also think a parent's presence - real, total presence and connection - is what most kids crave, and lots of things are done to get that, even if what they get is negative attention. So if you're WITH your kids as much as you can be, lots of so-called bad behavior won't happen.
I agree with this. Whether your freedom allows wall painting or not, when you CAN say yes, SAY YES! And spend vast quantities of time hanging in mutually engaging activities. Very good points. It is not just some add on, it is directly correlated to the motivation to be part of a social group.
I also worked to find the 'yes' for whatever it is they wanted to do. Coloring on the walls? Let's line one wall with paper, or paint one with chalkboard paint, or easily washable paint. An atmosphere of 'yes' and free exploration goes a LONG way. Free as in, as free of restrictions as possible,
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?
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.
I can't wait until she has a least a shred of actual vanity. She doesn't want to miss any school, however.
