Parenting with Love and Logic and the "Uh-Oh" song.

[festivefeet]

Hi there.

I just wanted to get your opinions on the book "Parenting with Love and Logic" and the particular method of the "Uh-Oh" song? What do you think about this book and the technique suggested?

Thanks.
Jessica

[nigellas]

I hated that book.

[Polliwog]

I dislike that book (and it's sister books) immensely. I find them to be very controlling. May be helpful for children with severe needs but not for most families/schools. Ick.

[sparklefairy]

Originally Posted by festivefeet

Hi there.

I just wanted to get your opinions on the book "Parenting with Love and Logic" and the particular method of the "Uh-Oh" song? What do you think about this book and the technique suggested?

Thanks.
Jessica

The way that it was demonstrated in the video that I saw in the ONE session of the class that I attended was "mocking," IMO. Like "ha ha ha HA ha, you are SOOO busted."

[LynnS6]

Dh and I went to a whole class that was loosely based around Love and Logic. We didn't care for it. I think dh summed it up best: "Too much logic and not enough love."

I do understand some of the points that they are making: They're strong proponents of natural consequences and of letting kids make little mistakes so they can learn from them (rather than always rescuing them). I could see how with some teenagers, it might be an OK approach (without the mocking "uh-oh"). But I think there are a lot better ways to doing the same thing.

[swd12422]

Oh, gosh! I never took that to be mocking. I bought the book when DS was a few months old, and then realized that even though it says "birth to 6 years" it really isn't appropriate for babies that small. I took it out to read again now that DS is in full-bore toddler mode, complete with not listening and getting into stuff.

I'm not so much into the "song" but I was thinking I would try some things once he's a bit older. It seems like the majority here don't like it though, so what would you all recommend instead? To me, it seemed like a great approach (assuming it works, I haven't actually tried it yet) -- definitely more gentle than yelling, which is my usual MO! (And I don't like that, either and am trying to change it...)

[One_Girl]

I read one of the older versions of the book that they had at my library and I didn't like the method. I didn't like the way the author emphasized the importance of training your kids like you would train a german sheperd dog and the roll that hitting kids played in that. I also didn't feel that the method was age appropriate. I do think that kids need to be given age appropriate responsibilities, but I think it is horrible to taunt kids and purposefully withhold help and call that love. I want my dd to be responsible, but I also want her to be a kind, caring, and helpful person and I don't see how that can happen if I don't model that in my interactions with her. The Love and Logic book seemed to encourage parents to let their kids sink and then point out that they chose to sink and then to ignore the child's dillema.

The song sounds like a new thing and it isn't something I read about, but from the title and from the tone of the book I read I think it sounds like something designed to mock and humiliate children. I would definitely not sing an "Uh-Oh" song to my child anyways because I don't believe it is a loving and helpful thing to do.

[sparklefairy]

The way he did it on the video came across to me as mocking. Granted, he was speaking before a room of adults and not actually interacting with a child at the time.

Originally Posted by swd12422

Oh, gosh! I never took that to be mocking. I bought the book when DS was a few months old, and then realized that even though it says "birth to 6 years" it really isn't appropriate for babies that small. I took it out to read again now that DS is in full-bore toddler mode, complete with not listening and getting into stuff.

I'm not so much into the "song" but I was thinking I would try some things once he's a bit older. It seems like the majority here don't like it though, so what would you all recommend instead? To me, it seemed like a great approach (assuming it works, I haven't actually tried it yet) -- definitely more gentle than yelling, which is my usual MO! (And I don't like that, either and am trying to change it...)

[sparklefairy]

I didn't see a whole lot of "logic" either. When the obvious "logical" consequence would be to have a child help clean something up, the consequence suggested was dragging a child to his room by one arm (yes, that's exactly how he said it "with his little feet barely touching the floor") and locking him in there if he won't stay.

Originally Posted by LynnS6

Dh and I went to a whole class that was loosely based around Love and Logic. We didn't care for it. I think dh summed it up best: "Too much logic and not enough love."

I do understand some of the points that they are making: They're strong proponents of natural consequences and of letting kids make little mistakes so they can learn from them (rather than always rescuing them). I could see how with some teenagers, it might be an OK approach (without the mocking "uh-oh"). But I think there are a lot better ways to doing the same thing.

[swd12422]

Originally Posted by sparklefairy

I didn't see a whole lot of "logic" either. When the obvious "logical" consequence would be to have a child help clean something up, the consequence suggested was dragging a child to his room by one arm (yes, that's exactly how he said it "with his little feet barely touching the floor") and locking him in there if he won't stay.

Oooookay.... Either I don't have the same book, or I'm going to have to re-read it more thoroughly. I do NOT remember any dragging, hitting, or dog-training in the book I read. The consequence for not helping clean up his toys was to have the toys taken away. (Whatever you pick up, you get to keep.) I don't have a problem with that. A mess they made gets cleaned up, or they have to "pay" you to clean it up, with payment being either in the form of money if they get an allowance or a toy or other possession. (I don't think I'd keep a 3-year-old's toy for very long as "payment" but as I said, I'm not there yet, so maybe I wouldn't take the toy at all...)

At any rate, no, I'd have to say I wouldn't like L&L either, if it did in fact advocate hitting and dragging.....

[Tjej]

Well, I've read L&L, and I think it's all in the delivery. If you are going to be trite and mocking, then it is a cold way to parent. If you can be truly empathetic and supportive while letting kids make their own mistakes, then I think it can be a very effective and loving way to parent.

Tjej

[sparklefairy]

The part I described was not in the book; it was in a video that was shown in the L&L class, of which I could not stomach more than one session.

I agree with the other poster that there are some good ideas in the book (I've skimmed the one with the orange cover -- I think that's it's earlier editions that mention hitting and dog training) AND that it's all about the delivery.

Such as your example with toys -- I no longer have a 3-year-old but that is something that I would be fine with for my 9- or 11-year-old, provided the consequence was a known factor (not the case with L&L -- they are all about springing surprise punishments). Really, I think that if picking up is an ongoing problem, then there are too many things present and it's up to the parent to come up with a system where the child can succeed. When things bring endless frustration, they aren't serving their purpose in our lives.

The people speaking on the video (Fay and Cline, I believe) and the instructors for the one class that I took did not have a loving attitude toward children.

Originally Posted by swd12422

Oooookay.... Either I don't have the same book, or I'm going to have to re-read it more thoroughly. I do NOT remember any dragging, hitting, or dog-training in the book I read. The consequence for not helping clean up his toys was to have the toys taken away. (Whatever you pick up, you get to keep.) I don't have a problem with that. A mess they made gets cleaned up, or they have to "pay" you to clean it up, with payment being either in the form of money if they get an allowance or a toy or other possession. (I don't think I'd keep a 3-year-old's toy for very long as "payment" but as I said, I'm not there yet, so maybe I wouldn't take the toy at all...)

At any rate, no, I'd have to say I wouldn't like L&L either, if it did in fact advocate hitting and dragging.....

[Polliwog]

I've got the Early Childhood book and it's way too cold. I haven't taken a look to see the exact example, but I know they tell a story of sending an 18-month-old to his room and holding the door shut.

[ssh]

Small children are people, so we should treat them as we do other people we have loving relationships with. If some discipline strategy would be bad for our relationship if I did it with my DH, for example taking away his stuff if I pick it up because he's been messy, I don't do it with my DD. I assume taking away my DD's stuff would harm our relationship too. I feel mutual respect and trust or more important issues than an always tidy living room. Putting a person in a room and just holding the door shut just sounds mean. Children learn how to treat people by modeling how we treat them. Do we want to teach them how to be mean?

[aprildawn]

A good friend of mine uses L&L. She integrated most of the book/seminars. I always felt like the "uh-oh" was somewhat mocking whenever I hear her do it. Also, I feel like letting kids mess up and experience the consequences can be fine in some situations, but, when they're really little, or flighty-brained (like my DD1), I feel like it sets them up for failure.

I will say, however, that for my friend L&L was a huge improvement from how she was parented. She's doing the best she can considering the model she grew up experiencing. Her parenting is maturing and becoming more gentle year after year. If L&L can give people like her tools to keep them from yelling, hitting, and manipulating their kids, then I think it's a positive step even if it's not the best parenting style out there.

[ShadowMom]

I would not let the authors of that book discipline my cat, much less my child.

[swd12422]

I've only skimmed a few pages since deciding to reread it (who has time to read about child discipline with a 20-month-old tearing up the place?), but I'm still not seeing anything that suggests setting them up to make a mistake/fail so you can teach them consequences. It's more about offering choices when something's not negotiable, like putting on a coat in winter. They don't suggest letting your kid freeze their patooty off so they'll never refuse their coat again. They suggest allowing the child to choose whether to wear or carry the coat, so they don't have to put it on til they decide they're too cold without it. I don't see what's wrong with that. And maybe I'm just hot-headed and slow, but I'd be one of those parents fighting with my kid to put his coat on instead of considering this, because that's how I was raised.

My impression of the "uh-oh" song is to get a little one's attention, not to use on a 7-year-old, so you can start teaching them safety things like not climbing on stairs or hurting the dog. Maybe others are interpreting that as too harsh for a toddler, and I think it would be inappropriate to use all the time just for controlling all behaviors, but for dangerous situations I don't see what the problem is. It's much more gentle than screaming from across the room "NOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!" and scaring the life out of everyone. Am I missing something?

[swd12422]

Okay, skimmed some more this morning and NOW I see what everyone objects to! Sorry it took me so long to figure it out. I guess I didn't read it with a clear head the first time around. (DS was an infant, so I just figured it didn't matter just yet. Now that he's a toddler, I can't see doing some of that stuff to him.)

[justthinkn]

I prefer Kids are Worth It, by Coloroso - discusses the difference between logical and natural consequences. For instance, the L&L books (version for young kids at least) advocate requiring a child to somehow refill your energy when they've been doing something that drains it. So they vacuum, sweep, etc... That feels contrived & controlling to me if it's required by the adult (as well as not really possible for a younger child). But the reality is, when DD does certain things, my energy is drained, and I have to take responsibility to recover so that I don't turn in to a raving shrew So a natural consequence may be that I need to take a timeout for a few minutes rather than playing with her or giving her attention, taking her somewhere fun, etc.... The other thing great about Coloroso's book is that the focus is on treating each other compassionately, respecting the dignity of the child, and on second chances, on fixing mistakes.

[DevaMajka]

I have removed a post that was a UAV, and also some posts that were in response to it.

Please PM me if you have any questions.

The GD forum guidelines state:
Welcome to Gentle Discipline. This forum has a specific aim: to help parents learn and apply gentle discipline methods in raising their children.

Effective discipline is based on loving guidance. It is based on the belief that children are born innately good and that our role as parents is to nurture their spirits as they learn about limits and boundaries, rather than to curb their tendencies toward wrongdoing. Effective discipline presumes that children have reasons for their behavior and that cooperation can be engaged to solve shared problems.

Hitting is never the best way to teach a child. Even in the case of real danger - as when a child runs out into the road - you can grab him, sit him down, look him in the eyes, and tell him why he must never do that again. The panic in your voice will communicate your message much more effectively than any spanking. You can be dramatic without being abusive.

'Natural Family Living' by Peggy O'Mara

Please appreciate that this forum is not a place to uphold or advocate physical punishment of children. Personal preferences for and encouragement of use of physical punishment are inappropriately posted here. Posts of that nature will be edited by the member upon request or will be removed.

Please feel free to discuss your problems and needs with the intent to learn more about Gentle Discipline.