Angry voice and Time outs=conditional love

[Mom'n it]

I'm reading a few threads here that talk about these two different things and I would love some more on the topic. What is the consensus on the effect of both of (and individually) these? Not that I'm encouraging either, but I'm just curious what the experienced outcome is?

[gentlestrengths]

I am not a good one to answer this, because I use time-outs. I don't feel like I am conditionally giving love to my child - EVER. I still love my child, and I am still loving. You don't have to scream at your child to "GO IN TIME OUT". Time out can be a very calming act. I don't think I use "time-out" as a punishment, where they HATE doing it. It is just time for them to sit down, where I tell them to sit, and get a handle on things. We all blow up, we all get angry, upset, sad, and lose control. And what do I do? I go to my room usually, and cuddle up in my bed until I feel better. Usually just a few minutes. So that is what I have my children do. I don't see how that is conditionally loving them.

I also don't see how yelling at kids is conditional-love either. Because people who yell at children are just out of control. I don't know very many people who, when they yell, are doing it purposely, strategically. It is usually because they lack the self-control themselves to NOT yell. Whether it's because they were yelled at as children, or because they just have the personality to yell - I don't think it has anything to do with loving conditionally. It is hard for people to change what they know. I know it can be done, definitely, but I don't think a parent is necessarily loving their child less because they use time-out or holler. They just don't know another way, and are loving their child the best way that they can.
JMO.

[mamazee]

I don't know if having an angry voice is relevant to Unconditional Parenting, depending on the specifics. Like, everyone gets angry, so just getting angry in and of itself isn't a punishment. It's just an emotion. But if you're using an angry voice to evoke a response in the hope that it will cause a behavior change, then that does sound like a punishment.

The other day my daughter ran into the house, dropped her school stuff in the middle of the floor, and then ran off again to play. I then was carrying something (luckily not the baby) and didn't see it, and tripped over the school stuff and fell.

When she came back in, I was still angry, and I told her so, and I have no doubt she could tell in my voice. But I didn't run out when I fell and make her stop playing as punishment, and I didn't scream at her or tell her she should be ashamed of herself or lecture her. I said, "I was walking and tripped over your school things. They were in the middle of the floor. I fell and it hurt." She came over and hugged me and said she had been talking to neighbors on the bus about playing and she just got excited and wanted to run right out to play. She said she was sorry. I said I appreciated that, and we hugged, and then got on to what we were doing. I didn't punish her, but I did let her know how her actions impacted me, and I talked about me and not her. I think it's important to not start evaluating kids when this kind of thing comes up, and not place labels on them. "You are lazy. It's lazy to just throw things down on the floor." Or "You get so distracted. You need to be more careful." I think it's more productive to talk about ourselves and how we feel. "I fell down and it hurt." I really like How To Talk so Kids Will Listen for this kind of thing - how to express yourself when you are angry so you communicate and solve problems but don't make your kids feel awful.

As for time outs, the idea behind them is separating yourself and your affection for a period of time. "Conditional love" isn't so precise a term as conditional affection, but it is a case of separating your affection and loving behavior for that period of time. Although, as said in the book, it isn't so important what your intent is as much as what your child feels. So if the parent unconditionally loves his/her child, but the child doesn't feel unconditionally loved, the child is affected by it just as if he/she weren't unconditionally loved.

It's certainly still within the realm of gentle discipline. But I think that's what's meant by "conditional love" within the book Unconditional Parenting.

Here's the first part of the book, and the author talks about this a little:
Unconditional Parenting excerpt If you read through it, it seems to me like he's contrasting UP to a pretty extreme form of time outs and that kind of thing, where parents refuse to show any affection at all after a child has behaved in a way they don't like. In his example, taking away story time and snuggling before bed for misbehavior.

[LynnS6]

I agree with a pp -- yelling isn't 'conditional love', it's a human behavior based on frustration. Am I proud of yelling? No. Do I apologize afterward? Yes. Am I working on it? Yep. At the same time, I would hate for my children to grow up and not have any experience seeing how a mature adult handles losing control, how I get back in control and what I do to make amends.

Time outs are a highly debated 'technique' in terms of conditional love. In my opinion, whether they're conditional love depends on the motivation you have behind using them.

Do you separate your child from you every time they misbehave, regardless of the infraction? That teaches a child that they can only be near you if they're 'good'. That can be interpreted as conditional love.

We use time-outs sparingly, but it's always for either anti-social behavior (like hitting or screaming so loudly that others can do what they need to do) or when the child is out of control and needs separation from whatever is setting them off to calm down. In the case of anti-social behavior, separation is a natural consequence -- if you're hurting me, I don't want to be near you. In the case of calming down, it's not a punishment, it's teaching the child a technique for gaining control. There's no set time. Some kids don't need this. My kids do. Ds will now take himself off to his room, slam the door and hang out for awhile when he's mad. This is a GOOD thing. It removes him from the situation, it gives him time and space to cool down.

We always connect afterward. And as my kids get older and more able to work things out verbally, we're using time outs less and less. I don't think ds has had a time out since he was 5, and I'm hoping that dd (now 5) will follow the same pattern.

[gentlestrengths]

I agree! And yelling is never a good thing. Sometimes exasperation gets the best of us though. People that yell all the time think that it works. But really, the child is responding to the loud/scary situation, and not the words that are being said. It makes me sad when I see mom's being overly harsh to their children when I know they don't have to be.

Still, I grew up with a mom who yelled for fun. (ha). She still yells. She has no self-control, and she has serious issues that she just doesn't know or care to get over. So many times, my first instinct is to shout out, and it seems like that instinct is harder to dissolve the MORE children I have. The house is louder just be default of number of voices contributing to conversation! lol. A struggle, sometimes daily. But I tell my kids all the time it is not okay to yell at each other. And it isn't.

[wake_up]

Originally Posted by mamazee

Although, as said in the book, it isn't so important what your intent is as much as what your child feels. So if the parent unconditionally loves his/her child, but the child doesn't feel unconditionally loved, the child is affected by it just as if he/she weren't unconditionally loved.

I think this is so important to keep in mind. (and so hard to put into practice sometimes!) Even if you feel that you love your child unconditionally, if you withhold affection or connection for whatever reason, the child may still have the experience that your love is conditional. It's not really your intent that matters, it's how it's perceived by your child.

[gentlestrengths]

Originally Posted by wake_up

I think this is so important to keep in mind. (and so hard to put into practice sometimes!) Even if you feel that you love your child unconditionally, if you withhold affection or connection for whatever reason, the child may still have the experience that your love is conditional. It's not really your intent that matters, it's how it's perceived by your child.

I wonder though..... I mean, if I walked around and worried about how everyone perceived me in everything I said and did 100% of the time, that would be a tough life. Some people interpret things differently. I think kids learn the language of their parents.

That being said, however, our first son is very sensitive. You can just look at him with exasperation and he'll cry. So, I get your point, I do. But I wonder, is there a line to draw in the sand in this??

[donttrustthesystem]

I would definitely never ever use time out. Ever. I definitely try to work on the angry voice which has slipped out but usually I can get composure and "rewind". Just ordered Kabat-Zinn mindful parenting book, hoping it will add to my parenting skills on keeping myself peaceful and squash the angry voice, which really does hurt my child's feelings when it slips out.

[Magella]

Originally Posted by wake_up

Although, as said in the book, it isn't so important what your intent is as much as what your child feels. So if the parent unconditionally loves his/her child, but the child doesn't feel unconditionally loved, the child is affected by it just as if he/she weren't unconditionally loved.

I think this is so important to keep in mind. (and so hard to put into practice sometimes!) Even if you feel that you love your child unconditionally, if you withhold affection or connection for whatever reason, the child may still have the experience that your love is conditional. It's not really your intent that matters, it's how it's perceived by your child.

And yet we have limited control over how another person, even our own child, perceives us, our words, and our actions. So I think intent does matter, because to a large extent our intent determines how we handle these things-what words we chose, how we resolve a conflict, how we handle a problem, how we handle that time-out, how we repair and reconnect (or don't) after a conflict.

Also, I think the overall tone of the relationship matters a lot when it comes to how conditionally or unconditionally loved a child feels.

[mamazee]

Originally Posted by gentlestrengths

I wonder though..... I mean, if I walked around and worried about how everyone perceived me in everything I said and did 100% of the time, that would be a tough life. Some people interpret things differently. I think kids learn the language of their parents.

That being said, however, our first son is very sensitive. You can just look at him with exasperation and he'll cry. So, I get your point, I do. But I wonder, is there a line to draw in the sand in this??

I think how much the children learn that the love is conditional regardless of how the parents feel is probably dependent upon the level of withdrawal of affection, and the frequency. Like, anyone will forgive anything once or twice, generally. But the more frequently it happens, the more it feels like just the way things are. Also, in the author's example, taking away a major expression of love like a bedtime story and snuggle time before going to sleep is going to hurt a child more than just missing out on three minutes of day time with other people.

And I agree it would be crazy to consider how every person interpreted everything I do, but I don't think it's unrealistic for me to consider just how my children interpret by how I interact with them. I know them better than anyone, and I can see on their faces how they react.

[BellinghamCrunchie]

Originally Posted by gentlestrengths

I wonder though..... I mean, if I walked around and worried about how everyone perceived me in everything I said and did 100% of the time, that would be a tough life. Some people interpret things differently. I think kids learn the language of their parents.

That being said, however, our first son is very sensitive. You can just look at him with exasperation and he'll cry. So, I get your point, I do. But I wonder, is there a line to draw in the sand in this??

Its around age 7 or 8 that children begin to understand intention, that a person's behavior can be different from what they are feeling or are trying to accomplish.

So it would make sense to remember that before that age, a child doesn't separate what you intend from what you do. And for some time after that age, as well, as the ability is only begins developing at that age.

I agree with PPs that the measure of whether or not a parent's actions are okay is in how the child perceives it, not how its intended by the parent.

[seawind]

Originally Posted by gentlestrengths

I wonder though..... I mean, if I walked around and worried about how everyone perceived me in everything I said and did 100% of the time, that would be a tough life. Some people interpret things differently. I think kids learn the language of their parents.

That being said, however, our first son is very sensitive. You can just look at him with exasperation and he'll cry. So, I get your point, I do. But I wonder, is there a line to draw in the sand in this??

Absolutely. Personally, I feel we need to look at our parenting and relationship with our children as a whole, rather than isolated instances. Does the child feel unloved at the time when you are expressing anger at their inappropriate actions? Sure. But, if a parent is striving toward balance, the child will get over that part and know that he/she is secure in the bond of his/her parents' affection and love.

[jrabbit]

Mamazee, thanks for that link. I can't fnd that book at the library (crazy, right?) I think that it explains UP in a better way than I've been able to find til now.

But my frustration is STILL how to motivate a child to do the right thing if there are no unpleasant consequences (i.e., we do tend to deny book-reading at bedtime when bedtime ritual doesn't go according to plan, and everyone is tired and cranky because it's an hour past bedtime).

thanks for your input
--janis

[ssh]

Originally Posted by jrabbit

But my frustration is STILL how to motivate a child to do the right thing if there are no unpleasant consequences (i.e., we do tend to deny book-reading at bedtime when bedtime ritual doesn't go according to plan, and everyone is tired and cranky because it's an hour past bedtime).
--janis

Small children are little people and can be motivated by the same things we are. Some people do the right thing only because they don't want to get in trouble. These people do whatever they want when they think they won't get caught. Most people do what they think is right because they want to feel good about themselves. Most people do nice things for people they care about because they want those people to be happy.

My DD is almost 4 and we don't use punitive discipline at all. We explain why certain behavioral choices are a 'bad idea' and why others are a 'good idea'. For example we tell her that shouting can hurt peoples ears and feelings or getting water all over the kitchen floor can be slippery and make people fall. If we get angry and yell we apologize DD included. She usually apologizes later after she's completely calmed down, but at least she is feeling sincere regret. We don't expect our DD to "do the right thing" all the time or depending on what it is (like sitting down for most of dinner) even most of the time. She's learning to be a civilized, empathetic, ethical person and we expect it to take her most of her childhood to develop into that. There seem to be a lot of adults who never quite got civilized, empathetic or ethical.

[MaterPrimaePuellae]

Originally Posted by gentlestrengths

I wonder though..... I mean, if I walked around and worried about how everyone perceived me in everything I said and did 100% of the time, that would be a tough life. Some people interpret things differently. I think kids learn the language of their parents.

Originally Posted by Magella

And yet we have limited control over how another person, even our own child, perceives us, our words, and our actions. So I think intent does matter, because to a large extent our intent determines how we handle these things-what words we chose, how we resolve a conflict, how we handle a problem, how we handle that time-out, how we repair and reconnect (or don't) after a conflict.

Also, I think the overall tone of the relationship matters a lot when it comes to how conditionally or unconditionally loved a child feels.

Yes to all of the bolded portion. When my DD was an infant I found myself sometimes "play-acting" as a parent-- saying the things that I thought sounded like the right, motherly thing to do/say. I hated that. I gradually came to the conclusion that I needed to just be myself around DD (which is just to say, I am not always going to be speaking in a gentle, loving, quiet voice, or reacting in the best possible way in any given situation). Now, all of this needs to be worked out, but not really as a parent, as a person.
Anyway, I love her, and she knows I love her. I don't think for a minute that, when I send her to time-out, she thinks, "Mommy loves me conditionally," any more than I think, "DD loves me conditionally" when she screams at me for taking away the juice she's spilled all over the floor. I hope she, and our relationship, are a LOT more resilient than that. I think, sadly but surely, it's a big lesson is life that love doesn't mean perfect treatment or reactions all the time. DD should understand that from her own behavior as much as from mine.

Also, this about, "Children don't learn intent until 7 or 8"-- I don't think DD is overly precocious, but she understands, "I meant to," and "I didn't mean to." Today the dog almost knocked her over and she said, "But he didn't mean to." So....

[everything to one]

right or wrong this makes me feel a lot better. i try really hard to stay positive and loving all the time with our DD. Even though she is a toddler and having pretty bad tantrums I recognize each time where they are coming from and i know i shouldnt get frustrated. But, when you are low on sleep and your nerves are thin its really hard to not show your frustration/irritation. For example, at the grocery store- i am 6 months preg and she wouldn't ride in the cart. It was all the energy i had just to GO to the store, and it was long over due (needed the basics!). So, i really felt like this day in particular carrying her is not an option, and running after her so she wont run away just wasnt working, there were carts everywhere. So she's throwing a tantrum, screaming, etc, as i try to put her in the cart and I just got more and more frustrated. I wasnt even worried about what others thought, but i specifically remember thinking i was failing at AP bc of how irritated i got. I am working on it, for my sanity as much as her well-being, and i will look up that book that someone mentioned on here, but in the mean time, i like the thought that its not the end of the world as long as i give her my love and affection consistently at other times. I have never withheld my affection purposefully, its just i dont want what naturally happens when we have conflict to make her feel bad in any way.