... And I'm the Strict One!

[staceylayne]

This is totally random, but I'll share anyway. (Because I don't really self-censor very well after midnight.) Yesterday as I was watering my plants I was thinking about some GCM conversations and threads and how I really appreciate your input and insight, bolt. And I was mentally bemoaning how I know so very little about you other than what's in your siggy. (Maybe you share more somewhere where I'm not paying attention. )

So anyway, I'm just tickled pink to see a little anecdote from your real life. I feel like I know you better already!

And I second (third?) what Kathy said! So true.

My friends pretty much all know I don't spank and I hear similar things from time to time. It's silly that they can't hear their own inconsistencies and lack of logic. I make liberal use of bean dip, unless someone in a one on one convo is genuinely curious.

[MomtoJGJ]

The funniest comment I've ever had was "I know you don't want to spank, but you really need to start so they'll know you are in control"



So... I have to give up my control to let them know I'm in control?

[filmgirl2911]

bolt. would you mind describing / defining what you mean by "strict"? maybe if you could share a couple of concrete examples with your children.

I'm always looking to learn and grow from mamas here. Especially mamas who are seeing results from their gentle parenting.

I think sometimes I have some difficulty reconciling gentle and strict or gentle and firm

[bolt.]

Ok, here's another tidbit of reality then: my husband is often unwell, and, with rare exceptions, that makes me the only "responsible adult" in my family. That means that, since I can't handle (much) chaos, I can't allow it.

I have lines of painters tape on my floor outlining "kitchen" in my open-plan home. Children don't cross those lines when I am cooking. They haven't for years. If my daughter woke up this morning to find painters tape barring them from exiting their own bedrooms, they would, I am dead sure, stand there and call me, "Mama? Why us this here? Mama, can I cross the tape? Mama, I need to go potty!" To me, strict means that they would automatically treat a line of tape as a physical barrier.

Of course, I worked on that: with gentleness, and repetitiveness, and role play -- and consistent re-enforcement.

My friends don't see that particular example -- but they do see kids who come when they are called, follow instructions, deal with their disappointments without (often) being disruptive about it, obey limits when playing under slight-supervision circumstances, clean up their areas (with reminders), handle their own belongings, and sit quietly when nessisary, and they respect other people's bodies and boundaries.

These things do add up to some impressive kids: but we worked together to learn each important skill, one skill at a time.

Since, one would assume, you "can't" get results like that from being permissive, I "must" be punitive out of the public eye, or they must be natural angels.

Now, I do know that some kids are "harder" than others. I'm not saying that all kids who have trouble behaving because of parenting -- I'm just saying, in this situation, the idea of how such characteristics appear to be distributed by family isn't logical.

[StoryOfGrace]

Wow...it's "funny" that if you didn't have two angles, that their "bad" behavior would be directly attributed to your lack of spanking. But, of course, it doesn't work the other way around!

[PaperMomma]

Ooooo, I love the tape around the kitchen idea. I've already started kicking them out of the kitchen while I'm cooking.

[SewingGreenMama]

I have lines of painters tape on my floor outlining "kitchen" in my open-plan home. Children don't cross those lines when I am cooking.

Yeah we have a small door to the tiny kitchen, right now we use a gate in that door, and no one is allowed in while I cook, but it probably won't be so easy when we get a new place. I like the tape idea!

[MarynMunchkins]

I once had someone tell me "you must have easy children", and the children's minister of the church we were attending was standing next to me. She looked at me; I looked at her, and we both started laughing hysterically.

Think what you want about my parenting, but I don't have easy kids.

[MomtoJGJ]

I do have relatively easy kids... but it still doesn't make them less "kids"... they still are annoying and they still do things they shouldn't do. They still disobey (or don't comply, whatever) They still push limits. They still drive me insane before breakfast on a daily basis.

It's still hard work. Even if you just count the fact that most of them will make it to adult years alive much less functioning!

[blessedmamaofmany]

What would be the consequence of crossing the tape? Both now, and in establishing it as a boundary?

I can handle the boundaries, it is the consequences I need help with. I'm struggling with finding the balance between firm and permissive.

[bolt.]

The tape is a training aid -- I spent a lot of time teaching, "This is the kitchen" / "This is not the kitchen" / "See the tape" / "Step into the kitchen" / "Step out of the kitchen" -- "Yay! What a brilliant toddler you are! You know all about the kitchen!"

Then there was the, "Hey, now, where are you? Is are your feet in the kitchen? How can you tell? Am I cooking? How can you tell? Where do your feet need to be? Yay! That's the right place for your feet!" It's a practical application phase -- and I was very diligent to catch and re-teach every time.

And that's really all it really took. The consequence of transgressing the tape is merely to be shown your error and guided to solve it.

I suppose if there was blatant disregard of what I was saying, I'd probably physically lift the child to the correct side of the line. Then I'd tell them (quite pleasantly) that they were now in the right place, and go over the teaching phase again (while holding the child still if necessary). I'd give a direct instruction that their feet needed to stay on 'that' side of the line, and set the child free -- or initiate a distraction.

If it happened again and again, I'd probably move the child further and further from the line, using a less pleasant voice. If necessary, it would end with the child being put in another room. It might go so far as resulting in a cold supper, since I was prevented from being able to focus on my cooking.

But that hasn't happened to me. It's just what I imagine I'd do if I needed to. I haven't encountered many situations where the kids didn't pick up the skills I needed them to pick up, just by teaching and consistently working through transgressions until they really 'got' it.

Consequences come into play once a child clearly *has* a skill, and is capable of reliably using that skill, even under stress. That's when 'teaching' has done it's work and you have a child who is choosing between compliance and non-compliance by free choice (not ending up not complying for the more natural reason -- that it's genuinely hard for the child to do what you want them to do).

If the 'to do' is *not* genuinely hard any more, then you are in territory where consequences need to be considered.

Honestly, I can't remember the last time I was in 'that place' with my kids. Mostly I spend my energy trying to work with the child to understand a situation, so they can handle what I want them to be doing. Once they can 'handle' it, usually they don't object to doing it just because there's no reason not to do it.

I do things like "if you can't handle being here, we will leave" -- which is something like a consequence, sometimes... but not really. Because (a) if a child really can't handle a situation, it's *kind* to leave that situation, so it's not a threat to 'do better or else' it's just a statement of how you plan to parent through a tough situation. BUT there's also the other possibility -- (b) that the child can handle themself better, but wasn't trying very hard. Then the desire not to leave the situation plays a motivational role in helping the child pull themself together and raise their standard of behaviour.

I really like this double-pronged approach, using consequences that are a form of 'unwanted assistance' -- if the problem is 'beyond' the child's skill, the consiquence will help them cope better -and- if the problem is 'within' the child's skill, the consiquence motivates them to bring all their skill to the table and make a good try at handling things well.

[Heather Micaela]

Originally Posted by MarynMunchkins

I once had someone tell me "you must have easy children", and the children's minister of the church we were attending was standing next to me. She looked at me; I looked at her, and we both started laughing hysterically.

Think what you want about my parenting, but I don't have easy kids.

I got told my kids were good when my 2yo was screaming hysterically in supercuts while I was in the chair and the older two were trying to mute him with lolipops. I felt different

[filmgirl2911]

bolt. that is about one of the best "play-by-play" illustrations I've come across and it just crystallizes so much

[ReadingMommy]

Originally Posted by filmgirl2911

bolt. that is about one of the best "play-by-play" illustrations I've come across and it just crystallizes so much

I agree. Thank you!

[ruhama]

I think the "well your kids are so good you don't need to spank" thing is pretty logical, actually.

Logically, if they decide to believe that your kids are "better" than their kids, then they are not doing anything wrong by spanking them, thus justifying their parenting and not needing to change anything they're doing. However, the alternative belief is dangerous and scary - that they may be spanking unnecessarily. This in itself is an admission that spanking is NOT an ideal! They want to feel "forced" into it so they don't have to do the (extremely) hard work of redisciplining themselves and learning self-control along with a whole bunch of new parenting skills.

So they choose the easy answer that requires nothing of them. "Your kids are angels."