Nonviolent Communication by Rosenberg

[forty-two]

Originally Posted by CelticJourney

'Taking Children Seriously' - a parenting idea that says you never force a child to do anything they don't want to do. It elevates the opinion of the child as equal to the opinion of the parent. I'm open to correction on that, it's from memory.

I largely agree with that description - it's a *no* coercion parenting method.

I think some of the underlying reason comes from a (fairly prevalent) belief that there are *no* objective moral standards - that when a person says "This is right" they might *think* they are invoking an external, objective standard, but really all they are doing is saying, "I like this; you approve as well" - iow, trying to impose their personal preferences on others. Moral standards in this view are not - and *cannot* be - more than a opinion, as there is *nothing* objective to judge them by.

Combine that with the common idea of the autonomous moral self - that the self must freely choose their own moral standards for them to be authentically *theirs* - and it's pretty much inherently selfish to try to impose your standards on another. And that's pretty well accepted in interactions between adults, at least in my corner of the world.

Well, kids are people, too, aren't they? So what gives parents the right to impose their personal standards on their kids? If you've accepted the above two views (and I'd argue they are very prevalent in our culture), absolutely *nothing* except outdated tradition and personal selfishness . The problem with TCS isn't that they take children seriously (although there's an issue with the implied sense of parent-child relationships as one of equals with no inherent parental authority), but that they see the right of the self to determine their own beliefs and moral code as a higher good than any particular belief, and in fact that they have no room for any objective moral standards whatsoever.

[Ms_Dahl]

I have been positively influenced by his book. Did you have any specific questions?

[Yasheluah]

It has been a while since I read the book--about 1 1/2 years I think--and like I said, I read virtually everything with a pretty strong filter on. So it is likely that what my husband and I have assimilated into our parenting style isn't a perfect representation of NVC (and maybe that's ok!). I do know that for my own personal development the book helped me in identifying emotions and needs, which I badly needed. The various traumas of my childhood and my resulting choices rendered me pretty incapable of acknowledging my needs and emotions, let alone communicating them well. And the more I've learned about myself being able to do all that is extremely important. Maybe it is different for everyone. But for me, being able to work through my own emotions, especially strong ones, is really important in how I parent. It is all too easy to revert to old ways of thinking, relating, and behaving--and again, given the patterns that were established for me, these would not be healthy for anybody by any stretch of the imagination. So, my child is much better off because I pay close attention to my own emotions and needs, aim to empathize with and truly understand him, and find ways of making requests of him rather than demands whenever possible.

Would I credit all of this personal growth to the NVC book? No. It's the work of the Holy Spirit first and foremost! God used something secular, and He further shed the light of His truth (Scripture) into my life. (Not that He would replicate the same thing in every person's life, or that those who avoid or dislike the book are any less being shaped by God and Scripture!) I hope and pray to never incorporate anything into my life that is contradictory to His Word. In my understanding of Scripture and the example of communication that Christ appears to have set, what I took away from the book seems to hold water. Again, I have the tendency to "throw out" what doesn't align with my understanding of Scripture and forget it was even there. So it is very possible that there were implications of the book that would indicate a lack of moral absolutes and removal of any sort of authority, parental or otherwise. And that isn't something that I would want for anyone!

My husband and I view my son, even though he is not yet 2 years old, as a human being made in the image of God who deserves just as much respect as my great-grandmother. We would not berate my great-grandmother for needing as much help as she does. We would not try to coerce her into doing things simply because we want her to do them or because it would be convenient for us if she did them. We would not spank her. And so on. So, we don't do those things with our son. This does not mean he gets to do whatever he wants; not by any means! We have very high expectations of him. But, those expectations are tempered with what we know of toddler development and what is reasonable to expect of him. I'm not familiar with TCS so I would need to research it and get a better understanding of it. But I do know I take my son seriously pretty much at all times. However, there are moments we have to lovingly and firmly enforce boundaries and limits. Whenever possible we aim to acknowledge that he doesn't like it and give a good reason why we have to do what we're doing. (e.g., No, you may not run out into the busy street because it isn't safe and I love you too much to let you do that. I know you want to run right now. But if you can't hold my hand while we walk, I will have to pick you up and carry you.) We pray that this gives us a good foundation for our future communication with him and any other children who join our family. I would love to someday have teenagers and young adults with whom I have strong, healthy relationships. So anything that aids in that is useful to me.

I am the first to admit that I am a) very new to parenting; only been at it a little over 23 months, and b) extremely human and prone to error. Part of why I am grateful to have found a community like this one--iron can sharpen iron, others can help me fill in the gaps in my knowledge and give multiple perspectives on things. These things I crave.

[ArmsOfLove]

I wouldn't spend too much time looking into TCS - it isn't actually about taking children seriously. It's approached as a hypothetical exercise and people aren't supposed to ask questions about real children - only hypothetical ones. And the idea of "no coercion" means that one thread I read involved a woman asking how others might handle going to the mall with a child who refuses to go into the bathroom and the suggestions were things like not ever going, or wearing an adult diaper in case she needed to go in order to honor the child's strong feelings about it

I'm all for low coercion And I treat my children with respect

I think it is awesome that you are treating your child with great respect and setting a foundation for teaching You will have a relationship of trust and respect and that is awesome

It's also okay to say 'no' if the answer is no and even if something happens that ends in tears, that doesn't mean you necessarily did anything wrong

[Ms_Dahl]

Ashleylinne, you sound like you are on the right path. It is so refreshing to encounter new mothers who have such healthy perspectives in child rearing.

[HomeyT]

Just wanted to comment regarding NVC and parenting and how it's been taught to me, that has been useful incase it helps, if not, disregard...

1. it's helped me to take a step in emotional situations and give myself empathy, naming my need and feelings. but also naming the needs and emotions of my children. and then taking steps to meet somewhere we can all find some satisfaction.

2. having said that...NVC doesn't mean meeting a child's every whim (as TCS might suggest, although all i know is what was written in this thread which is not much). for example. if my child begs me to watch tv ... and perhaps it's during the day when we don't generally watch tv, i might ask/guess in my mind that her need is for rest? entertainment? and then think of my own needs, such as for her to spend her time in healthy ways. i might be better able to suggest things that can meet both our needs. such as reading a book, playing a game. my daughter at 5 could understand my needs to an extent and understand that tv was not an option, but could see that i was willing to still meet her needs. and sometimes all we need to do is empathize validating feelings and needs. "you look sad because you need entertainment, are you willing to find other ways to entertain yourself?" usually the sadness continues for a bit, but nonetheless she'll find other ways to entertain herself. feelings felt is a good thing! especially for our physical selves. i allow my children to feel, and not always change the feeling by meeting the need...that's something they need learn to do. with good feelings i might say something like 'you look so happy that you are going to your friends house, you must need some fun and play with your friend right now.' we wouldn't try and change a happy feeling, just as we don't always change a sad feeling.

hope that makes sense.... g2g!

[HomeyT]

also just wanted to mention that Rosenberg is pretty clear about intervening if a child is in harm/harming others.

[Auroras mom]

I have not read the books nor done any of the workshops, but I live in a town/am surrounded by friends who are hugely influenced by it, so I have learned a lot about it. I find it super helpful in understanding myself and in giving empathy to my husband. It is comforting to have your feelings recognized and validated. I like the communication style as well, because it is very assertive.