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.
Anything I do to another adult's body against his or her will is assault. But if I place my small child, who happens to be kicking and protesting, into a car seat and strap him in, that is not assault. The two situations are not parallel.
And yes, I have heard people say that you should never force a small child to do anything. If they resist going into the car seat, you just calmly wait with them, not showing any anger or impatience of course, until they decide of their own free will that they want to comply. Because, you know, if you are the right kind of parent then your children will always really WANT to behave.
Actually, if you wait, you are showing them a natural consequence. Safety requires being belted in cars. No belt. No car. It does not take long for a kid to realize that sitting there wailing is boring. And then, lo and behold, you have not only won that fight but the future fights around when they are old enough to unbuckle their belts. They won't do it because they know you will just pull over and wait. Yah I get it. I always thought that was more important than WHATEVER it was we were supposed to be getting to. And not everyone feels that way. Thankfully it never happened on the way to the ER or anything!
When the kids were quite small, I was watching a friend's children. We were going to the beach. One kid was my son's age. We were not even out of the driveway. He unbuckled his belt. I stopped the car. I told him, I don't take unbelted people in the car and I don't take 4 kids who won't take safety seriously to the beach. Buckle or we don't go. He buckled. 10 feet down the drive, he unbuckled again... like BRING IT. My son was like... buckle the belt. She means it. She won't take us if you won't listen to her! Never had a problem with that kid again.
Actually, if you wait, you are showing them a natural consequence. Safety requires being belted in cars. No belt. No car. It does not take long for a kid to realize that sitting there wailing is boring. And then, lo and behold, you have not only won that fight but the future fights around when they are old enough to unbuckle their belts.
So you never once had a child that didn't care about the natural consequence? The one who didn't want to go to the beach anyway? The one who doesn't want to go home from the park and doesn't care about missing lunch, much less "not being able to go to the park again tomorrow"?
Maybe people are much better parents than I am and/or have much more compliant children, but while I'm all about natural consequences, there were times when raising my three kids when I found that a teeny weeny bit of force, threat or punishment--depending on the situation--was the only reasonable way to accomplish what I needed to accomplish. If I have two starving kids who need lunch and one who doesn't want to leave the park, I can't really wait for two hours until the stubborn kid decides he wants to get off the jungle gym, nor can I walk off and leave him there. (Not that I didn't try. But my kids figured out very fast that I wasn't really going to abandon them at the park).
So you never once had a child that didn't care about the natural consequence? The one who didn't want to go to the beach anyway? The one who doesn't want to go home from the park and doesn't care about missing lunch, much less "not being able to go to the park again tomorrow"?
Explain to me how not going to the beach, not eating lunch or not going to the park again tomorrow is a problem for anyone? Especially if the pattern is set with your first. I never much liked taking the kids to the park, so if we don't go, that is no skin off my nose. And if they don't eat lunch, I am ok with that. They will be offered food at the next meal. How does that bother me?
Quote:
Maybe people are much better parents than I am and/or have much more compliant children, but while I'm all about natural consequences, there were times when raising my three kids when I found that a teeny weeny bit of force, threat or punishment--depending on the situation--was the only reasonable way to accomplish what I needed to accomplish. If I have two starving kids who need lunch and one who doesn't want to leave the park, I can't really wait for two hours until the stubborn kid decides he wants to get off the jungle gym, nor can I walk off and leave him there. (Not that I didn't try. But my kids figured out very fast that I wasn't really going to abandon them at the park).
Maybe I am very lucky. But having established how things are in terms of action/consequence, the second for me just went with the program. Actually the older helped. As the younger became old enough to understand, the older would tell her how to get what she wanted. Do the right things, get what you want. Done.
ETA I HAVE walked away from my child who did not want to leave the park. Ok, you don't want to go home. See you later. Good luck. And walk. If someone has a learning disabled child, this is not a great idea. But for most kids, they are pretty sure they don't just want to be left alone at the park.
Explain to me how not going to the beach, not eating lunch or not going to the park again tomorrow is a problem for anyone?
Um, because everyone else in the family wants to do it? And can't, because one kid won't obey and no one can "make" him obey? That sounds like a problem to me.
Anyway, you can stop now, I get it. You did everything right with your first kid and the rest just followed in lockstep. You are the perfect parent and raised the perfect kids. Congratulations!
Maybe I am very lucky. But having established how things are in terms of action/consequence, the second for me just went with the program. Actually the older helped. As the younger became old enough to understand, the older would tell her how to get what she wanted. Do the right things, get what you want. Done.
ETA I HAVE walked away from my child who did not want to leave the park. Ok, you don't want to go home. See you later. Good luck. And walk. If someone has a learning disabled child, this is not a great idea. But for most kids, they are pretty sure they don't just want to be left alone at the park.
Yep, there was definitely some luck involved there. Not saying you didn't do things right, but you were fortunate they worked out for you, and quickly.
I've tried that tactic a few times on my kid - walking away - it has never worked. He either just stood there or turned around and went the other way. I pretty much had to cave and return and grab him before I got too far away for it to be a safety risk.
A lot of that common sense, surefire, seems obvious kind of stuff (often things that worked on me when I was a child) doesn't work on my kid. Before I had kids, I too used to think that if you just told your kid what to do, perhaps occasionally in a stern voice, they would automatically obey and it must be all these lazy parents who couldn't be bothered. . Kudos to the folks that all this "you just have to ****" advice has worked for, but there are some particularly persistent children out there who seem to have a thing for testing boundaries, frequently and in spite of what may have been consequences in the past.
Quote:
Originally Posted by saibot
Um, because everyone else in the family wants to do it? And can't, because one kid won't obey and no one can "make" him obey? That sounds like a problem to me.
Anyway, you can stop now, I get it. You did everything right with your first kid and the rest just followed in lockstep. You are the perfect parent and raised the perfect kids. Congratulations!
So you never once had a child that didn't care about the natural consequence? The one who didn't want to go to the beach anyway? The one who doesn't want to go home from the park and doesn't care about missing lunch, much less "not being able to go to the park again tomorrow"?
Maybe people are much better parents than I am and/or have much more compliant children, but while I'm all about natural consequences, there were times when raising my three kids when I found that a teeny weeny bit of force, threat or punishment--depending on the situation--was the only reasonable way to accomplish what I needed to accomplish. If I have two starving kids who need lunch and one who doesn't want to leave the park, I can't really wait for two hours until the stubborn kid decides he wants to get off the jungle gym, nor can I walk off and leave him there. (Not that I didn't try. But my kids figured out very fast that I wasn't really going to abandon them at the park).
^^This! And yes, somebodynew, I did read your response to this post. It wasn't until my youngest was 16 and driving that I found a privilege I could take away that really mattered to her-the car. (We owned it.) And that wasn't really a "logical consequence" to anything, it was punishment. My oldest was a little more compliant.
Um, because everyone else in the family wants to do it? And can't, because one kid won't obey and no one can "make" him obey? That sounds like a problem to me.
Anyway, you can stop now, I get it. You did everything right with your first kid and the rest just followed in lockstep. You are the perfect parent and raised the perfect kids. Congratulations!
Oh brother. Here we go again. We can't just talk. Someone always has to get defensive.
But the incidence of kids with ADHD the past 20 yrs went through the roof.
Coincidence I'm sure.
And 20 years ago people were able to beat the AD/HD out of their children? I'm not a trained medical professional, but I'm pretty sure that is not how it works.
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.
The one who didn't want to go to the beach anyway? The one who doesn't want to go home from the park and doesn't care about missing lunch, much less "not being able to go to the park again tomorrow"? 
