Raising Our Children, Raising Ourselves -Chapter 2

[green_momma2007]

Here it is.

[foodmachine]

Chapter 2 is about "Love". My first "highlight" is p 45 (top), about meeting aggression with love.
I look forward to the discussion, but first I need some sleep.

[foodmachine]

This is all so easy to take in since DD is 13 months and I can't imagine my patience ever being strained, but my next "I like this" line is on p.49 (top) "Instead of expecting respectful behavior, treat your child with respect; instead of expecting him to be able to wait and be considerate of your needs, be kind and generous with him." It makes sense. I hope am this selfless. I want to be.

[Keeta]

Originally Posted by foodmachine

This is all so easy to take in since DD is 13 months and I can't imagine my patience ever being strained, but my next "I like this" line is on p.49 (top) "Instead of expecting respectful behavior, treat your child with respect; instead of expecting him to be able to wait and be considerate of your needs, be kind and generous with him." It makes sense. I hope am this selfless. I want to be.

It really is true, even if we as parents do not live it perfectly. I mean, kids, particularly the toddler set, love to imitate parents and other adults. It makes perfect sense then to assume that if you model respect and generosity and trust, then they will mirror those qualities right back to you. Simple, not easy.

It also makes sense that if a child has a bedrock of trust built up in their parent - that they know that their parent has always in the past met their need - that in the future, they will be more able to delay gratification for just a bit, because they know that their need will be met soon (just as it has always been).

I'm really liking this chapter so far.

[Keeta]

Ok, after finishing this chapter, I do have a pet peeve to share. On the one hand, I really like the italicized conversations between Aldort and parents because it shows some of the principles in action. However, I'm having a serious disconnect around the parent's "a-ha" moments of self-discovery - they seem so forced and smarmy that I just feel yicky reading them. Maybe because hindsight's 20/20 and it seems obvious what they're saying? It also just seems so formulaic - parent has a problem, Aldort asks an open-ended question, parent relates some slight from childhood, cries and resolves to be a better parent. I don't know what my real issue is. Maybe it's the blaming of everything "wrong" in the present with something from our past. I'm trying to get over it, but I don't know, I'm having a block with them. Luckily the rest of the chapter I thought was pretty thought provoking despite these faux conversations. Thoughts?

[foodmachine]

I agree. My thought was "some of these therapy sessions are made up", but I'm trying to over look them. We'll see...
I did like the story about Grandma on p.64 though. It made me smile. It brought to mind Aldort's thought from Chap. 1 "only teach yourself". The Dad doesn't bother trying to explain his theory to Grandma he justs expands it to include her. I would like to be more problem-solving like this. "Teach less, learn more" I read somewhere (chap 1, I think). I really like that.

[Keeta]

Originally Posted by foodmachine

I did like the story about Grandma on p.64 though. It made me smile. It brought to mind Aldort's thought from Chap. 1 "only teach yourself". The Dad doesn't bother trying to explain his theory to Grandma he justs expands it to include her. I would like to be more problem-solving like this. "Teach less, learn more" I read somewhere (chap 1, I think). I really like that.

: Although personally I have to get over my own need to be right. I don't know if I could have swallowed that from the grandma at the end (when she said, see! I was right!). That just gets my goat and I feel like I have to respond in kind. But I know that's not a healthy orientation, it's just something I have to get over from my upbringing.

[foodmachine]

Oh, I hear ya'! I'm a "little" competitive.

I was really struck by p. 54 (bottom) about respecting the child's body. No kisses from Grandpa if the child doesn't want them. By respecting their right to receive affection on their terms, we are actually strengthening their right to say "no!" So obvious! So important!

[Keeta]

Originally Posted by foodmachine

I was really struck by p. 54 (bottom) about respecting the child's body. No kisses from Grandpa if the child doesn't want them. By respecting their right to receive affection on their terms, we are actually strengthening their right to say "no!" So obvious! So important!

Totally! I couldn't help but think of that movie The Three Faces of Eve when I read that - where the main character has multiple personalities, and the first time one of them appeared was after being forced to kiss a relative's corpse at the funeral - blargh! Anyway, extreme example, but seriously an important concept. I like the idea of saying "I have a hug/kiss for you if you'd like it!" and more often than not, DS accepts it, but if he doesn't it's ok for everyone, too. We've been asking our DS if he has a kiss for us lately and he often responds by blowing us kisses. It's so sweet.

[foodmachine]

Originally Posted by Keeta

I like the idea of saying "I have a hug/kiss for you if you'd like it!" and more often than not, DS accepts it, but if he doesn't it's ok for everyone, too. We've been asking our DS if he has a kiss for us lately and he often responds by blowing us kisses. It's so sweet.

Nice idea! And so cute with the blowing kisses.

[foodmachine]

Bedtime quote - p.67, "Cherish her (your child's) choices and communicate yours."
Good night.

[green_momma2007]

"They absorb values of love and consideration by benefiting from them first." pg. 52

This part really hit home for me. The more I read, the more I see my own faulty views of "parents" as superior to children. Now I question myself more when I'm going to "lay down the law". Sometimes I catch myself saying no to something that is so inconsequential. I wonder if I do it just to assert myself as the parent. I really need to stop trying to be so autocratic.
So, my goal for this week:
I'm a mother, not a dictator. My job as a mother is to love my children, not to boss them around.

[foodmachine]

Originally Posted by green_momma2007

"They absorb values of love and consideration by benefiting from them first." pg. 52

This part really hit home for me. The more I read, the more I see my own faulty views of "parents" as superior to children. Now I question myself more when I'm going to "lay down the law". Sometimes I catch myself saying no to something that is so inconsequential. I wonder if I do it just to assert myself as the parent. I really need to stop trying to be so autocratic.
So, my goal for this week:
I'm a mother, not a dictator. My job as a mother is to love my children, not to boss them around.

This is fun!

I also love the part on the bottom of p.67 about the word "should", "If she lies, then she should lie and then you can find out why she is afraid to tell you the truth."
I lied to my parents a lot out of fear. I NEVER want DD to have to fear telling me anything.

[foodmachine]

I just read through our Chapter 1 thread. I liked Keeta's idea of taking a real life situation and applying SALVE. So here is my real life situation. DD (13 months) hates getting her diaper changed a lot of the time. She violently throws her head back and screams. We often try to distract her and hurry to get through it.

Now I'll SALVE the situation:
S- My thoughts are "You really need a new diaper. You've been in this one all night and may get a red bottom." The reality in this case is pretty close - that I need to get her diaper off because I am in fact worried about her developing a rash.
A- I explain to DD that I need to take her diaper off.
L- She cries.
V-I say "Is it boring to change your diaper when you want to play?"
E-???

[green_momma2007]

In pages 61-64 Aldort discusses the fallacy of trying to raise children as if we were part of a tribe. I haven't yet read The continuum Concept by Jean Liedloff, but it seems to me that Aldort is taking aim at that particular take on parenting, particularly with her arguments on being child centered and on having kids watch while we engage in adult activities. Any thoughts on this?

[Keeta]

Originally Posted by foodmachine

I just read through our Chapter 1 thread. I liked Keeta's idea of taking a real life situation and applying SALVE. So here is my real life situation. DD (13 months) hates getting her diaper changed a lot of the time. She violently throws her head back and screams. We often try to distract her and hurry to get through it.

Now I'll SALVE the situation:
S- My thoughts are "You really need a new diaper. You've been in this one all night and may get a red bottom." The reality in this case is pretty close - that I need to get her diaper off because I am in fact worried about her developing a rash.
A- I explain to DD that I need to take her diaper off.
L- She cries.
V-I say "Is it boring to change your diaper when you want to play?"
E-???

E - maybe offering two choices of something to play with while getting her diaper changed? Like: E: "Would you like to play with the remote control or my cell phone while I change your diaper?" (in kind of an enthusiastic, yet either/or type of way).

Giving her some choice (even if it's not the one about the diaper change itself necessarily) may allow her to feel empowered about choosing something in the situation. I still employ this trick with my 2 1/2 year old. Sometimes offering a snack (like fruit leather) gets us through. But the choice option itself may feel empowering to her.

Other thoughts? Does this seem manipulative, or just simply trying to marry two people's needs (yours for the diaper change and hers to play) into one action?

[foodmachine]

Originally Posted by green_momma2007

In pages 61-64 Aldort discusses the fallacy of trying to raise children as if we were part of a tribe. I haven't yet read The continuum Concept by Jean Liedloff, but it seems to me that Aldort is taking aim at that particular take on parenting, particularly with her arguments on being child centered and on having kids watch while we engage in adult activities. Any thoughts on this?

I haven't read Liedloff's book either, so I don't know. I did like this part the chapter though. I had thought I would of enjoyed a tribal type lifestyle but since none of our friends will leave the city (we moved to the countryside 4 years ago), we are a nuclear family. I liked that Aldort is positive to taking advantage of what our current culture offers. It seems realistic.

[foodmachine]

Originally Posted by Keeta

Other thoughts? Does this seem manipulative, or just simply trying to marry two people's needs (yours for the diaper change and hers to play) into one action?

Okay! I'm getting the "E". I don't think that's manipulative. Another "E" could be "Should we change your diaper standing up so you can play with the...?" Right?

Example 2:
Because I work evenings and nights, DH has taken over bedtime and it has gone wonderfully actually with DD falling asleep faster and sleeping better than ever. So she likes being put to bed by DH, but at the exact transition from pre-bed cuddle and boob with me (the evenings I'm home) to DH's arms (he does, teeth, story, song, bed) DD can be upset for like 15 seconds (until they are in bathroom away from me). We have started validating her expression: "Is it comfy in Mommy's arms?", "Do you wish you could sleep in the living room with Mommy?", etc.

Is there an "E" for this situation?

[foodmachine]

I think I got it.
The "E" is the toothbrushing and the whole routine with pappa that she likes. It seems to me the "E" is actually what I would have called "distraction" last week. It's just now we validate before we move to the next (empowering)thing.

[foodmachine]

I guess what I'm getting at is that with a toddler offering an distraction isn't wrong if you validate first. Thoughts?

Any last thoughts on "Love"?