"You let him get away with everything"!

[kdescalzi]

This is what my dh said to me last night after ds hit dh because I did not yell at him. Ds (3yrs) seems to be testing his limits a lot in the last few months and apparently I can not discipline correctly. I try redirection when he is just getting a little crazy, I always get down on his level and make eye contact and explain why he cannot hit/kick anybody. Sometimes he just gives up but sometimes he acts out and hits/kicks more. I do sometimes get fed up and threaten to take him to his room if he continues to try and hurt me or his baby sister. No tactic works everytime and sometimes no matter how many times I explain the "rules" he still acts out. I feel this is completey normal. Dh thinks that discipline involves yelling and so much anger. He told me last night that if he was here all day ds would no longer be hitting etc. I find this not only hard to believe but extremely hurtful since I try to raise our children gently. He is in the camp that gd means passively letting him control me. Please help me convince dh that disciplining in fear is not right and will not provide better "results" Please direct me to any literature you feel is approp. What would be so helpful is to hear how your 3yr olds act to le him know that he is being normal not bratty. tia

[Ruthla]

Three year olds test limits. That's what they do. If you "discipline" with anger and a lot of yelling, you get angry kids who think it's acceptable to yell all the time- plus, angry kids tend to act out physically (hitting, kicking, throwing things ,etc) as well.

Controlling kids' behavior through fear DOES sometimes work in the short term. You end up with kids who are afraid of their parents and are terrified to get caught. But it only teaches kids "not to get caught" rather than fostering an internal sense of right and wrong "I won't do that because I know it's wrong, whether or not I can get away with it."

Also, young childhood is the time to build connections between parents and children. If you discipline through fear, your kids will be afraid of you (or him anyway) rather than close and trusting. Teens who are close to their parents actually listen to what their parents have to say, and are less likely to get involved in dangerous activities. Even if they do make poor choices (and what teenager doesn't?) they're more likely to listen to their parents' guidance about how to get out of bad situations and/or how to cope with the consequences.

Of course, there are no guarantees. Some kids don't rebel in adolescence no matter how they're raised. But, if you're used to "overpowering" your kids as your only way to control them, what will you do when they're too big to overpower? How will you help them make safe choices if they don't trust you?

[Encinalien]

Kind of in the same camp with my dh. Actually down to a "t" what you said. It's so hard to balance both because I see both sides so clearly it's hard to argue. What's the worst you could say, dh is a good dad but he's not very modern.
But sometimes the modern guys are flakey. Like when the neighbor collected unemployment for getting laid off dh said "he shouldn't be sitting around the house, he should be looking for a job. He's got a family. He's got kids to support."
So from the old man's perspective lack of discipline lets people think they are "special" the rules don't apply to them. Just to everybody else. On the other hand he's quick to compliment any mother he sees in public controlling her kids without losing her cool. So, that's what he wants us to look like? Understandable. But my parenting goals are more long-term. I'm a lot more flexible on how we get there.

Is your kid past the four year-old "caveman" age? I showed dh the "happiest toddler on the block" DVD. The thing that impressed me was the guy's a pediatrician. I've seen the difference a good pediatrician with good people skills with the little ones makes. If this is one of their tools, shoot I'll use it.

He got dh's attention on the DVD when he quieted a crying infant instantly without using "boobies" (my main tool in keeping ds mellow). So dh has actually been using the techniques in the video and harping on me to use them too. I think the guys just want to know there's SOME kind of discipline structure in place and to have some kind of plan to harp on us to follow.

Personally I would avoid the route of presenting him a bunch of crap about the negatives of punishment. We avoid negative correction With our children. We should avoid negatives when educating our spouses too. Men are just big kids who work too much. They have feelings to protect too.

Research your butt off to find positive discipline strategies and use your husbands scarce after-work time to present these "positive discipline plans" and don't put him on the spot telling him how wrong everything he thinks about raising kids is.

[Encinalien]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_analysis
someone just gave me this link. check out Injunctions and Drivers to better understand your husband's dysfunction in this area. I don't know the cure, but knoweledge is power.

[Carley]

Originally Posted by kdescalzi

This is what my dh said to me last night after ds hit dh because I did not yell at him.

How did you respond?

A 3yo has comprehension well beyond redirection, especially when the issue is violence & acting out. What type of consequences do you use?

[Encinalien]

Too bad he probably gets off work late. Do you have any other mothers in your local playgroup that you could organize a sleepover party so he can see how little three year olds play togeather?

Also, again... Recommending "the happiest toddler on the block". It's kinda pricey for something you'll only need to see once. But it clearly explains that anyone under four years old hasn't developed higher level order of thinking yet. That when an adult gets mad they temporarily lose iq points. So what do you think that does to a kid, whose already more primitive than us. They temporarily turn into a caveman.

But don't tell him I told you this. Buy the DVD. And yes, it shows how little kids really act and why. And it's recommended by Dr. Phil and used by celebraties like Madonna.

[violet]

There's tons of arguments for and against all styles of parenting and Alfie Kohn's video really helped my dh and I get on the same page. But for a basic, "why we shouldn't yell at our babies" argument, how's this

I once heard this in response to an argument for spanking:
If you spank a 3yo for running into the street do you then trust him to play unattended next to the street? No, he will do it again, even though he's been "disciplined". The same is actually true no matter what method of discipline we use. Once is never ever enough. We are going to be employing these techniques countless times. He's 3, he's hitting, and he's going to be testing this boundary about 144,234,324 more times before he gets it.

So what road do you want to be on? Violence towards my children is never an option, not even once. Yelling at them -- maybe for those horrible situations where only a raised voice will save their lives. But for the everyday issues of childhood, if I want to be on the yelling-angry road, I'm going to be yelling wayyyyy too much and they are going to be yelled at wayyyyy too much.

Your dh is seeing a problem and wanting to fix it. Just FIX it! The flaw in his logic is he thinks yelling will work FASTER than your methods. But the bigger picture is that the solution needs to be tolerable too. And yelling/angry isn't so tolerable when applied liberally. So what method does he want to employ for the next 144,234,323 times your dc tries to hit? Put in that light, I wonder how anybody could want to embrace any technique that causes such hurt/unpleasant feelings as yelling. Why would you sign up for that nastiness when trying other stuff will also work. ANY method will need to be repeated, so I'm picking the methods I don't mind repeating a million times over.

[Carley]

Originally Posted by hablame_today

Too bad he probably gets off work late. Do you have any other mothers in your local playgroup that you could organize a sleepover party so he can see how little three year olds play togeather?

Also, again... Recommending "the happiest toddler on the block". It's kinda pricey for something you'll only need to see once. But it clearly explains that anyone under four years old hasn't developed higher level order of thinking yet. That when an adult gets mad they temporarily lose iq points. So what do you think that does to a kid, whose already more primitive than us. They temporarily turn into a caveman.

But don't tell him I told you this. Buy the DVD. And yes, it shows how little kids really act and why. And it's recommended by Dr. Phil and used by celebraties like Madonna.

1) Better yet use your library - you can borrow books for free

2) It is completely reasonable to expect a 3yo to follow basic rules, such as no hitting. It's also reasonable to expect testing of boundaries, at which point it's perfectly reasonable to enforce the rules via discipline.

I don't see the OP outlining her consequences or discipline - the tactics she describes (getting down to eye level, explaining no hitting & redirecting) sound approrpiate for a 1yo.

[Carley]

Originally Posted by violet

If you spank a 3yo for running into the street do you then trust him to play unattended next to the street? No, he will do it again, even though he's been "disciplined". The same is actually true no matter what method of discipline we use. Once is never ever enough. We are going to be employing these techniques countless times. He's 3, he's hitting, and he's going to be testing this boundary about 144,234,324 more times before he gets it.

In the same idea, a 3yo is going to interpret the severity of running in the street differently depending on the discipline they receive.

If someone stooped down & calmly said "Johnny, we don't run in the street it's dangerous" - that kind of blends in with the time that person stooped down & calmly said "Johnny, we don't play with mommy's lipstick." KWIM? Running in the street needs to be differenciated somehow. I'm not saying that child needs to be spanked, but messages with importance (such as safety issues) need to be delivered differently.

We have flexible boundaries (don't jump on the couch when there are people on it or stop jumping on the couch when someone asks you to stop) and firm boundaries (don't hit, period). We have conversations about flexible boundaries. Firm boundaries are clear & are not tested often because they have reliable FIRM consequences. I only give warnings for firm boundaries *before* they are broken (like when DD & the dog are getting rough - I warn about hitting PRIOR to her hitting the dog. If she hits the dog she has consequnces - not warnings). When they are broken there are consequences, not warnings.

Yes - everyone is different, but if my child hit someone & that person felt badly about the way the situation was handled, I would take that to heart & think about ways I could teach my child to make that person feel better. ESPECIALLY if that person were her father. I can't imagine.

[Dandelionkid]

OP I totally get where you are coming from. My ds 3.5 started getting a bit more crazy around 3, testing boundaries, developing his "self". I was handling it same as his sister, talking, rationalization etc but I realized he needed me to give him firmer boundaries with consistency. He still acts out but it seems that consistency is very important to him. We are still very much gd as you describe but his behavior is getting better with consistent responses to misbehavior.

[kdescalzi]

Thank you for all the excellent replies. Because I did not specify originally, I would like to add that Ds gets one warning after something unacceptable has happened such as hitting. I tell him if x is done again mommy is going to stop playing with you and you will have to sit in your room until you calm down. He never wants to go to his room....he never really has to because he knows that I follow through with what I say and if x does happen again he will be leaving the situation where he is playing with mommy. I don't call it time out or make him feel banished....it is more of a cool down for both of us and an unpleasant activity that ds does not want to do. After the fact he can be quite good at looking at me and understanding that mommy is not happy with his behaviour. BUT a lot of times he acts defiant and I do begin to take him to his room and then he starts to bawl...he hates when I am upset with him....he gets very sad and then I feel like a bad mom. I did not see ds hit dh...I was not in the room. If I had I would have firmly said that we DO NOT hit anyone, you hurt daddy and now it would be nice to say sorry to make daddy feel better. WWYD??

[phathui5]

Ds gets one warning after something unacceptable has happened such as hitting.

I'm thinking that at this point, I'd drop the warning for hurting people and just put him in his room (or have dh do it if he's the parent on duty when it happens) as soon as he does something that could hurt someone, like hitting or kicking.

[CourtBChase]

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thehu...rter-kids.aspx

and

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/nurtu...ing-badly.aspx

Are both interesting to me. I think there is a lot to be said for the idea that using reason as a discipline tool with young children helps them develop important cognitive skills for the future.

[Mama2 '05'06]

We use the "You hit, you sit" rule at our house. No matter your age. And with a 4yo, 3yo and 2yo there are frequent rounds of hitting b/c nobody is completely capable of solving their issues alone and most of the time hitting is the route taken. So, if someone hits another, the hitter apologizes to the hittee and then leaves the play area to sit in a chair- 1 minute per year of age. Of course nobody likes to do that so the older 2 are pretty good about remembering to ask for help or use another simple problem solving measure and its mostly the 2yo who's sitting for hitting these days. And he hits for no reason at all. Just walks up and wacks someone.
AFA the dh thing, my dh is not on board with gentle discipline either. If he sees someone hitting he smacks them and yells "No hitting! That's bad!" and of course he's just hit so I don't expect it to work and it doesn't. And he's made comments along the lines of "If *I* stayed home all day....." and really its a bunch of well, you know what, b/c he doesn't do a blame thing when he is home except yell at people and play on the computer. I did tell him one day that he was welcome to stay home and I'd go get a job and support us and we'd just see how long he lasted. That did shut him up pretty fast.

[Carley]

Originally Posted by phathui5

I'm thinking that at this point, I'd drop the warning for hurting people and just put him in his room (or have dh do it if he's the parent on duty when it happens) as soon as he does something that could hurt someone, like hitting or kicking.

You already have the scene laid out to effectively elliminate the warnings for hitting & follow up any hitting with an undesirable consequence that's already been forewarned. He's already prepared his mind that hitting = warning that he better listen to or he gets a timeout. He doesn't want a timeout so bad that he listens after his warning. Take the warning out of it & he'll not want to hit in the first place.

I expect after one or two turns of that there's no more hitting of mom or dad. That will become a firm boundary that's rarely, if ever, toyed with (until the next leap in development.. you know how that goes ).

DON'T feel like a bad mom for disciplining your kids. You're doing it with love & for their better! If you are spiritual at all, discipline is an arena in which praying for guidance helps in the moment. Your son might cry when he experiences an immediate consequence to hitting that he doesn't like - he might scream like crazy - but I bet when he's ready to talk about it he fully understands that hitting is a new no-push boundary. While he's screaming, instead of screaming with him you can pray for him and pray for guidance yourself (or meditate - whatever helps you hone in on your purpose as a mother).

I'm all for exploring flexible boundaries. We don't have a strict "rule" about jumping on the couch - but any time DD has jumped on the couch with someone sitting on it they've asked her to not jump on the couch while they're sitting. Now she'll even ask if it's a "good time to jump on the couch?" That boundary is clearly open to reason (even a little "sass back" with a warning from mom that it's best to reason respectfully), KWIM? Hitting care providers isn't reasonable. Neither is running in the street.

Also OP - what was your husband's reaction when your son hit him? It seemed like he was upset when *you* didn't yell at your son after he hit your husband... when you weren't even there? That almost seems like he doesn't truly believe abuse (or yelling) is right, but he knows that what's going on now isn't working anymore.

[kdescalzi]

Thank you for the replies. I will impliment the you hit, you sit rule. You mamas made me see that he is old enough and capable in understanding the rules. He may need to loose the warning and see immediate consequenses for his actions. I hope to see better results with this rule. I tried to talk to dh about it this morning but he gets so defensive. He says that I was spanked (ocasionally) when I was little and that I am not traumatized I do not think that is a good reasoning but I think he is thinking that more aggressive discipline is acceptable because we turned out ok. He is simply not on board with gd...at least when his patience is running low. Dh does try but when he doesn't see results he resorts to yelling and that gets ds upset and therefore ceasing of the bad behaviour ( whatever it may be). WWYD?

[Encinalien]

Yeah sometimes I can't tell which one needs more patience, dh or ds. LoL