How are threats different from warnings?

[midnightwriter]

"If you don't get dressed on time, we won't make it to the pool."

"If you end up having a meltdown, I won't be able to explain the material to you, as your meltdowns give me headaches."

Threats or warnings? What's the difference?

Do you try to avoid conditioinal sentences all together?

[Tigerchild]

To me "threats" tend to imply that the person doesn't follow through, or they are given at the height of emotion or out of anger or spite, not a matter-of-fact and consistant enforcement of consequences.

Though I think there can be a very fine line.  I think if you hand out too many "warnings" you're probably either nagging or threatening.  In our family, having clear boundaries/expectations that are enforced consistantly, with no countdowns or "warnings" (since everyone already knows what the expectations are).

If I see a kiddo that is skirting towards the edge of inappropriate behavior, I may say, "Hey, Kid...you seem a little out of sorts today.  Do you need a hug/some attention/is there something bothering you that you want to talk about?  If you want/need it, I am here for you." and try to give them a chance to cool off or vent BEFORE they cross the line.  But I don't do the "Oh dear, you pushed your brother--if you do that again, you'll lose your playdate this afternoon," thing.  If I notice the kids are testy with each other, i try to help them work it out before it escalates to physical lashing out, but once someone puts their hands on someone, then they have an immediate consequence--no warning, no threats, because they know the rules.

Warnings and countdowns are ineffective with my kids.  Consequences enforced every time are effective (they don't have to be major consequences, but they are consistent), when coupled with me helping them learn to recognize how to head it off before that point and guiding them through how to do so (they're getting better and better about that without my intervention, but it was a lot of time investment).  I found with a lot of warnings or naggings, they just tuned me out.

So I guess i kind of do avoid conditional statements (with my unique kiddos, if i'm at the point of saying something conditional, it's probably too late), but it's not that there aren't conditions, either.  I don't know that it would work well with young kids, though, that doesn't seem fair.

[ssh]

There are several differences between warnings and threats. Threats are made to change behavior. Warnings are given to let a person know that what they are doing could have a bad result. For example telling my 5 year old DD that the toy she is playing with in the sink has a small part that could go don the drain is a warning. Asking her if she can quiet down abit or does she want to go home and I can shop by myself later, is a threat. Another way to tell is threats annoy the person you threaten, while warnings are often appreciated.

[midnightwriter]

Originally Posted by ssh 

There are several differences between warnings and threats. Threats are made to change behavior. Warnings are given to let a person know that what they are doing could have a bad result. For example telling my 5 year old DD that the toy she is playing with in the sink has a small part that could go don the drain is a warning. Asking her if she can quiet down abit or does she want to go home and I can shop by myself later, is a threat. Another way to tell is threats annoy the person you threaten, while warnings are often appreciated.

But then you'd ideally hope they'd change behaviour, based on the warning? Losing a small part of a toy might not have the parent invested in the behavioural change, but what if the warning is about a safety issue?

What if a warning annoys the person?

I'm just trying to figure this out, as my DD tends to interpret my warnings, as threats. But my warnings in some cases do imply behavioural change, so maybe they are threats? (even if I don't intend them to be)

I told her that a warning involves a natural or logical consequence. If she has a meltdown while I try to explain something to her (on her request), I won't be enduring this, as I would have a headache. A threat would be me telling her that if she has a tantrum, I'd take away her toys. But I'm not sure whether it is a good distinction.

[babygirlie]

well I just finished my parental autism training and the school system teachers advise neither; BUT we are also autistic so threats nor warnings mean much to the child. They say to always say "This then that". Get dressed THEN we can go to the pool. One grandma in class was very adamant you don't clean there will be no bedtime movie and that it wasn't working most of the time. And they had a heck of a time trying to teach her that is not the way to teach her child. We clean THEN a movie. There is no threats or warnings, just statements. BUT again... our kids are autistic and I have no clue as to how to raise a "normal" child

[ssh]

Which child is having an issue with warnings? The advice is very different if it's your 2 year old instead of the 8 year old.  If it's your 2 year old, she has no impulse control. Basic redirection and helping her do what you want her to do works better than any kind of verbal persuasion.  I don't give warnings about danger issues, I do give explanations about why a dangerous thing can't be done. The warnings I give about behavioral issues are more advice types of things. For example 'If you shout could hurt your friends feelings and they might not want to play with you'.  My DD has lost a couple of toys to drains and vents so she appreciates it when I point out that something is small enough to be lost.

I do agree that too many warnings would feel like nagging. And having threats very often would be ineffective.

I try to keep most of my conditional statements positive. To rephrase your first example "If you get dressed quickly enough, we will be able to go to the pool. So hurry please." If it's your 5 or 8 year old that's having meltdowns you could teach her how to calm herself down. We use slow breathing to calm down. Sort of breath out the anger/upset/sad feelings while counting and then breath in good feelings while counting. I also tell my DD that's it's ok to be angry but not ok to be rude or mean because she's angry. When she was 2 I just sympathized and rubbed her little back when she was overwhelmed with emotion. Your threat about taking away toys involves a punishment. We don't do punishments. Most of my threats involve doing something by myself if my DD is making it where I can't do it with her. When she was little it was often about leaving if she couldn't play safely. Some people might say those are warnings or even choices but it's as close as I get to being threatening. At 5 we don't have situations that involve threats very often. We have a few logical consequences. For example if DD doesn't clean up after painting I won't want her to paint at night. As long as she cleans up well she has unlimited access except bedtime. Another logical consequence "If you get snow inside your waterproof gloves you have to come in until they dry, if it's under 20 degrees." The natural consequence would be getting frostbite.

[One_Girl]

I don't think there is a lot of difference between threats and warnings because in both cases you are hoping for a behavior change that may not come.  I think a threat would be something that isn't followed through with.  A warning would be followed through either logically or naturally but it is still something we say to try to get a behavior change so we can protect our child from the natural consequence or keep the mood light so we don't have to feel the need to impose another consequence.  There is a subtle difference in our intentions that really isn't clear to children, especially if we are in a cycle of giving too many consequences or not following through enough.  I suggest looking at why your dd views them as the same thing and changing the way you use warnings if you feel like you are giving consequences when the natural consequence was enough of not following through enough. 

Keep in mind that to a child scolding them can be seen as a punishment to be dreaded.  My dd is going through a what if stage and she recently was asking me about what would happen if someone hit a teacher, I asked her what she thought would happen and she said that their mom would put a very stern look on and scold them big time.  To her that is the biggest punishment a person could ever get and it would only be something that would happen if a child did something incredibly inappropriate.  It was a cute reminder to me to remember not to speak harshly and treat every situation like that what if one.

[midnightwriter]

Thank you for taking your time to reply. I'm sorry I wasn't very clear in my OP. I was more interested in the discussion of the semantics, than in parenting advice, as my 8yo DD and  I were trying to figure out the difference between warning and threats. I thought it would be an interesting question to pose. We don't use conditional sentences often, especially not with the younger kids, so no, she is doesn't face many warnings or threats, and no, we don't do punishments. We are big fans of Alfie Kohn.

So I finally looked up the definitions. My interpretation of a warning is "advice to beware," but DD thinks it is the first definition. This actually makes sense to me, as DD's personality is such that she very often sees the glass half empty, and expects bad things to happen to her. So when I actually read the definitions, I can see how one's personality can affect the meaning, and her interpretation is natural for her.

threat  (thrt)

n.

1. An expression of an intention to inflict pain, injury, evil, or punishment.

2. An indication of impending danger or harm.

 

warn·ing  (wôrnng)

n.

1. An intimation, threat, or sign of impending danger or evil.

2.

a. Advice to beware.

b. Counsel to desist from a specified undesirable course of action.

3. A cautionary or deterrent example.

4. Something, such as a signal, that warns.

[ssh]

Since it's your 8 year old and she sees things negatively, I'd try to frame conditionals in a positive way. Like "hey lets hurry if you want to make it to the pool". You can even tell her that you're trying to say things more positively and ask her to be patient while you're working on it. I also see warnings as a "advice to beware". I was using "counsel to desist from a specified undesirable course of action"  as my definition of threat. Those words are almost synonyms. Sometimes preteens resent it when we continue to talk to them the same way we did when they were younger. It can be a very sensitive age.  I have 2 DDs one is 24 and the other is 5. My 24 year old still sees things in a more negative light than I do. We just have very different temperaments. My 5 year old is very intense but usually in an exuberant, excited, jumping up and down kind of way. Who knows what kind of preteen or teen she will be.

[One_Girl]

I think that personality may be part of why a child will respond to something in a certain way, but we also condition our children to respond certain ways by the way we react.  I think that no matter what the definition is, if you look closely at what you are doing and are mindful of your reactions you will find ways to change your reaction so your dd sees you as someone who gives counsel instead of threats.  An annoyed tone or affirming how correct you were when you warned them can be all it takes for a child to see your warnings as the same as threats.  I think semantics is a nice thing for discussions, but I think it is also important to be mindful of the way you are using semantics.  I think semantics and the different definitions could be used to open up a great discussion with a child about their point of view and which definition they think you use as well as why they think that.  You can also use semantics to justify continuing to do things your way without taking your child's point of view into consideration because technically you are sticking to the correct use of the definition in your opinion.  Alfie Kohn talks a lot about how semantics are used in his book for teachers called Beyond Discipline.  I love that book because it helped me remember to be mindful about how I use words to justify what I do.  He explains it much better than I ever could.

[mamazee]

To me, a threat is when you intend to punish if something isnt' done, and a warning is when something will happen independant of you as the parent doing anything and you're just giving information.  I think for kids who are sensitve, and maybe all kids, and maybe even all people, it can help to word it more like you're on the same team.  "I'm worried we aren't going to get to the movie before the show starts.  It starts at 7:15, and it takes 20 minutes to get there."  Instead of, "If you don't hurry up, we'll miss the start of the movie."  I try to just give information.  That's in How To Talk To Kids, and is just part of their great advice.

[mom2happy]

Originally Posted by midnightwriter 

So I finally looked up the definitions. My interpretation of a warning is "advice to beware," but DD thinks it is the first definition. This actually makes sense to me, as DD's personality is such that she very often sees the glass half empty, and expects bad things to happen to her. So when I actually read the definitions, I can see how one's personality can affect the meaning, and her interpretation is natural for her.

This is also my DD. Even when things are framed in a positive way. She feels threatened and defensive. She wants to be in COMPLETE control and feels insulted about things that most people wouldnt. I find that when I ask her what she thinks we should do, she becomes proactive and is so much easier to deal with. It has to be HER that came up with the idea. There are times when we are right in the middle of something and I can see that EVERY thing I'm saying, helpful or not is resented by her. When i take a step back and ask her how she thinks we can resolve this situation, she usually comes up with something that I would have advised anyway. She needs to feel powerful.

It doesnt always work, but it's a try.

threat  (thrt)

n.

1. An expression of an intention to inflict pain, injury, evil, or punishment.

2. An indication of impending danger or harm.

 

"If you do this, I will do that".

"If you don't do this, I won't do that, or this is what I'll do."

 

I don't think all threats are bad.

"If you eat all your broccoli, you will get icecream tonight." "If you don't eat your broccoli, I won't be treating you with junk food."

Doesn't bother me with certain things.

"If you don't show up for work, you won't get a paycheck. "

I don't know if these are exactly threats, but they aren't warnings either. They are just limits and implications, which sometimes we have to set.

 

 

 

 

warn·ing  (wôrnng)

n.

1. An intimation, threat, or sign of impending danger or evil.

2.

a. Advice to beware.

b. Counsel to desist from a specified undesirable course of action.

3. A cautionary or deterrent example.

4. Something, such as a signal, that warns.

"Watch out for that cliff, rock, person standing behind you."

"Be careful".

"Drive safely, the roads are icy".