What to do when your child is in danger?

[terese17]

We live on a secluded court.  I allow my children to play outside without direct supervision.  There are no sidewalks and so the kids ride their bikes in the street.  The rules for location are that they are allowed to go further into the court, but cannot go past the neighbors house on the other side of ours which leads out into another street.  The corner to turn in is sharp and it is difficult for cars to see around the corner looking onto our street.  I know my boys understand about different places different rules, as they are not allowed to play in the street at my Mothers house or my sisters house where we frequently are and it does not pose a problem.  The other day, which was really the first day it was nice enough outside for the boys to play outside, my husband went to check on them and they were at the end of the street, right by the corner.  He made them come inside and then when he asked the oldest, who is 6, to come to him, my son ran away screaming and trying to hide.  He ran into me in the kitchen and I told him he wasn't allowed to run away from his dad.  My husband then proceeded to spank him for a.) running away and b.) not following the rules about where they could be outside.  I'm not angry with my husband for spanking him, I've only recently been able to control my temper enough to not hit my children, so its a work in progress for our family.  I would like to know what other parents do when their own children disobey "safety rules" like running in a parking lot or playing where they could easily get hit by a car. 

[mamalisa]

I do my absolute best not to ever spank my kids, so I understand where you are coming from on working on changing.  Good for you.

At 6 he is old enough to know the rules and if he breaks them then he would lose the freedom to go away from the house.  We would go back over the rules of exactly where they are allowed to be and talk about the responsibility that comes with doing "big kid things".  After a week or two I would be willing to try to let them go further again.

Running away from daddy (I'm assuming because he didn't want to come in?) would be an entirely different conversation.  I'm not sure what I would do for that, my big kid doesn't have it in him to break the rules :)  

[EviesMom]

They're not allowed to do whatever the activity is without a parent present, or maybe at all, depending on what it is, until they can establish that they are trustworthy. So in the situation you described, there would be no bike riding by that child for however long would make an impression, a few days. Running away automatically adds a few more days of being treated younger than you are, even if nothing else were being done wrong. 

[faithrainbow]

          It sounds to me like DS ran away because he knew he had done something wrong and was being called on the carpet.  Does that sound accurate?  At six, it seems like he's old enough to have a conversation about it, if that's what it is.  A gentle way to do it is through a story of a similar situation that happened to you when you were a child.  

          Here's how I would do it.  Wait for a time when the two of you are alone and cuddling, and say, "Do you remember yesterday when Daddy called you and you ran away?  That reminded me of one time when I was a little girl.  I wasn't allowed to (fill in the blank here; something you actually did when you were little).  I knew I wasn't allowed to do it, but I got so excited that I just forgot.  When my dad (or mom) came and saw me, he was so mad!  I knew I had done something wrong and I wanted to hide."  I'd go on from there, either saying how I tried to hide and then it was worse, and I knew I could never hide again, or I'd say how I wanted to hide but I knew things would be worse if I did, so I was brave and took my punishment.  It's like reading a book to your child about the subject, but since it's about you it's even more special.  It may lead into a conversation with him about his experience, or it may not, but I  think it could be useful either way. Children often respond strongly to imagery like that, even if they don't talk about it.

That doesn't solve your problem about how to react, but it's one idea.  I would agree with Eviesmom that a good solution is that they can only ride bikes with a parent present until you're comfortable that they'll respect the rules (and even then, check on them frequently until you're really sure).

[Ella Enchanted]

My parents spanked after we had a few warnings and still chose to disobey.  But when it came to safety like this, all bets are off.  Once, when my brother was old enough to know not to cross the road without an adult, he decided to run across the road really fast to see his friend, and he came within inches of being hit by a car.  Rather than warn him not to do it again, since he already knew the rules, that time it was an immediate spanking and he didn't do it again.  My parents preferred a child to be spanked over dead.  

If your son hasn't done this before, since it didn't put his life in immediate jeopardy like dashing in front of an oncoming car, taking away his privileges for a few days may be effective.  Grounding him to his room for an afternoon may be EXTREMELY effective.  

[canadiyank]

"Knowing better" does not always equal "doing better." If that were true none of us would be overweight or in debt, right? ;) So how can we expect a child who "knows better" to always follow the rules? They won't, so - better be prepared! 

Supervised trips outside for awhile, while it's a pain for the parents, is probably your best bed right now. 

Discuss "what they could do better next time." 

What is a solution that is related, respectful, relevant, and helpful for preventing the behaviour in the future? (That's a basic GD question, useful for all sorts of situations). 

Something that helped with my kids with the concern for safety/running was to practice "halting." It's basically red light/green light - you tell the kid to "go" and then yell "HALT!!" at the top of your lungs and see how quickly they can stop. Just do it on a walk or whatever. It's an unusual word - strong, loud, and distinctive - and will help differentiate that you absolutely *need* them to stop for their safety. It's a "running in front of the car" type of thing, though, a true emergency, not a "running away from dad" word. 

[annettemarie]

Originally Posted by Ella Enchanted 

My parents spanked after we had a few warnings and still chose to disobey.  But when it came to safety like this, all bets are off.  Once, when my brother was old enough to know not to cross the road without an adult, he decided to run across the road really fast to see his friend, and he came within inches of being hit by a car.  Rather than warn him not to do it again, since he already knew the rules, that time it was an immediate spanking and he didn't do it again.  My parents preferred a child to be spanked over dead.  

That's really sad to me. Likely he was already shaken up from being almost hit by a car, and then to be hit by a parent on top of it? I've always suspected spankings that occur to drive home safety issues are more about a parent's feeling scared and helpless than anything else. A child behaving impulsively (like running into a street) isn't likely to remember past spankings when they're about to be impulsive.

I think a more natural consequence is that a child loses the freedom to play outside unsupervised, as mentioned above. Or in the case I quoted, the child would have to hold a grown up's hand until they could be trusted not to run out in the street.

[Ella Enchanted]

Annette, he WASN'T shaken up.  He was laughing and thought it was fun!  He didn't understand the danger.  Bu he understood not wanting to be spanked again, and never EVER darted into the street again.

[One_Girl]

If it has been to mucky for quite a while then he really may not remember the rules from last time he was allowed out unsupervised, especially if the fun of having freedom pushed all other thoughts away.  Young kids are very impulsive and don't reliably follow rules.  I do a lot of prevention and in the rare times when something close to bad has happened I let myself freak out.  Freaking out is very effective when it is genuinely motivated out of fear and doesn't happen very often.  I usually hug dd once I am sure she is safe then tell her all the things that could have happened and ended badly.  Don't fake it though if it doesn't come genuinely because that is something some kids see through very easily. 

There aren't a lot of safety issues because I still have dd hold onto my hand or some part of me in parking lots (though sometimes I let her walk right next to me because she is 8 and starting to sometimes want that independence), my dd knows exactly what a car can do to you and that she can't cross the street without my hand, and I don't let her go anywhere I can't see from the window without my permission.  I think prevention is more powerful than punishment, especially if the punishment is one the child fears and it causes them to run away towards the danger instead of back to you.  My cousin was hit by a car when he was three because he was running into the street and knew he was going to get hit when his mom yelled for him in her angry tone so he kept running.  He survived but it could easily go the other way too.  If a punishment is in order then one that isn't feared, like losing unsupervised time seems more reasonable than one that causes running away (though I really love the idea of telling him a story from your past, my mom does this for my dd and she loves it even though she is horrified by the hitting in the stories).

In situations where I know there will be temptation to do other things I make sure my dd knows the rules each time.  I ask dd to recite the boundaries and safety rules before she goes outside alone.  I also do what if scenarios so she has visualized a situation and knows what to say (what if a person asks him to help his cute puppy and says I said it is okay, what if a friend wants you to go to their house for just a second, what if your ball rolls into the street, what if a cat is in the middle of the street and a car is coming, etc...)

[ssh]

Maybe he ran away from his dad because he thought he was going to be spanked. I don't think running away from someone you fear will hit you is wrong, seems like normal instinct.   We weren't spanked as kids, but I had cousins who were. It always felt perverse to expect someone to co-operate with being hit. I used to feel nauseous when my cousins got punished, even though my mom made sure we didn't actually see it. We don't use punishment, but we do expect DD, 5 years old, to play safely. We actually don't allow her in the front unsupervised at all, just in the fenced in back yard. I don't think she has enough impulse control to always make safe decisions while playing in an open area right next to a road. We do go to large public open areas and bike/hiking trails so she can run free, skate or ride her bike. The logical consequence of not following safety rules outside would be not being allowed out without supervision until you prove you can be trusted. We have very firm safety rules about holding an adults hand when you cross the street or walk in a parking lot. When DD was little we'd pick her up if she let go of our hand. Running into a parking lot would have meant being picked up, not being able to play any longer, and probably going home. 

[mamazee]

IMO safety issues are supervision issues rather than discipline issues.  If a child does something unsafe, then they need more supervision.  And I think it's normal for a child to run away if they're afraid of getting spanked, and I'd work on making the child feel safe with me rather than disciplining for that.

[annettemarie]

Originally Posted by Ella Enchanted 

Annette, he WASN'T shaken up.  He was laughing and thought it was fun!  He didn't understand the danger.  Bu he understood not wanting to be spanked again, and never EVER darted into the street again.

How do you know this though? Under 7s are very impulsive creatures and aren't cognitively able to go through the mental gymnastics you're describing. I'm assuming this was an under 7, because even if I felt hitting a child was ever appropriate, which I don't, it's even more of a shame when you have a child old enough to respond to other methods. If I had a child who had demonstrated that they were incapable of playing near traffic, I would take that as a sign that they weren't ready for the responsibility. Do parents hit their kids and then let them play near traffic unsupervised because they assume they've learned their lesson? That seems really dangerous to me.

I agree that it's a supervision issue. And if spanking is wrong, then spanking is wrong, even for "safety issues". And frankly, I think it's lazy you-hurt-me, now-I'll-hurt-you parenting. I think in situations like this, parents are acting out of their emotions. I know that would be difficult for a parent to hear. But I would challenge a parent who was ready to spank because of a safety issue to take a few minutes to cool down, and then see if it still seems like a good idea. Children need us to be strong, to be their rocks, especially when they make poor choices or are out of control. They don't need us to respond with even greater intensity. After all, isn't that what attachment parenting is all about? Forming connections?

[GuildJenn]

I always said I'd never spank my kids, UNLESS they ran in the road. When my son was just shy of 2, he ran into the parking lot and I did spank him with a few taps over a diaper (it wasn't considered - I was angry, which goes to show when I had set that 'unless' in my mind I was setting up failure). I set him down and he ran back into the parking lot, with his hands over his bum.

I brought a harness after that. Also, I have never spanked since.

At 6, I would step the supervision up. I would explain to my child that he can't go out alone because of the safety issue, and sadly that means less time bike riding outdoors. I would gradually ease up over several months. But this is too important to leave to the chance that the spanking worked - really, he (and were there younger kids with him?) needs your watchful eyes right now.

[mom2grrls]

IMO safety issues are supervision issues rather than discipline issues. >>>>>

I absolutely agree.  Honestly there's no way I would let my 6 y/o ride his bike on the street unsupervised, and def. not with younger children either as if he would be in charge.  I don't blame him for running from dad if he thought he would get spanked or punished, i'd expect a child to be scared.

[habitat]

You're trying to make a child to avoid danger and pain except at the hand of those who love him. 

Hurt is hurt. If you expect them to stay away from it, then expect them to run from you if they're afraid you'll hurt them. He's never been hit by a car, but he has been hit by his father. Which one is he going to be more afraid of??

[mamadebug]

I completely agree that safety issues are supervision issues rather than discipline issues.  If a child isn't able to follow the rules that keep him or her safe, then that child isn't old enough to do that thing on their own.  And that means it is the parent's responsibility to supervise.  So, from my perspective, I think your child isn't actually old enough to play outside on his own at 6 years old because he didn't follow the rule.  He may cognitively KNOW the rule but clearly did not have the impulse control to put that into action.  That doesn't mean that the parent hits the kid - it means that the parent has to reevaluate their expectations for that child and then modify accordingly.  That means it is the parent's job to put more controls into place to make sure that child is safe.  Sooo, what that may look like in real life - your kiddo isn't allowed to play outside unsupervised, which means he needs a parent to go with him, and I am assuming that you and your husband won't be able to go outside and watch your son whenever he wants, so he may end up not being able to go outside sometimes when he would like to or as frequently as he is used to.... When he sees how his choice in behaviors effects his ability to do what he would like to do, he will also modify accordingly IF he is able.  It is a matter of giving children only the responsibility that they can manage.   The other day, my 6 y.o. son ran in the school parking lot behind a car that had just turned on and was presumably going to back out.  Although I yelled at my son to stop, I wasn't angry with him for running behind a car - I quickly reassessed how I handled that situation and realized I need to still make my 6 y.o. - who KNOWS he shouldn't do that - walk right beside me because, for some reason, when it came down to it, he did something really unsafe.  But the responsibility is more on me, yk?  

And running away from a person who is going to hit you, parent or otherwise, is really only common sense.  

[*LoveBugMama*]

I find it so sad that children are being spanked for being ... well..., children. A small child will sometimes do things they are not supposed to, It`s totally normal, and to be expected. 

I wholeheartedly agree that this is a supervision issue, too. If there is a dangerous street outside, and the child hasn`t been outside playing for a long time (due to winter, maybe?) it might be a good idea to spend some time going over rules and expectations. And I would spend time outside with them, in the beginning, to make sure they knew the rules very well. 

About the running away from dad issue: I would do the same. Knowing that you will get hurt and then willingly coming? I would never do that. Not as a child and not now. Why should I? And I wouldn`t expect my child to do it either. 

There are so, so manye other options beside spanking! In a saftesituation, I would TALK a lot about what happened, why mommy got really upset, what can happen etc. And if I thought that wasn`t enough, I would make the child stay closer to home/me for a while. Not to punish, but to show me that it was safe to let him/her out of my sight again. 

[treeoflife3]

Originally Posted by mamazee 

IMO safety issues are supervision issues rather than discipline issues.  If a child does something unsafe, then they need more supervision.  And I think it's normal for a child to run away if they're afraid of getting spanked, and I'd work on making the child feel safe with me rather than disciplining for that.

Originally Posted by habitat 

You're trying to make a child to avoid danger and pain except at the hand of those who love him. 

Hurt is hurt. If you expect them to stay away from it, then expect them to run from you if they're afraid you'll hurt them. He's never been hit by a car, but he has been hit by his father. Which one is he going to be more afraid of??

I agree with both of these.  I've heard a lot of people on different forums say they only spank if it is something the child could get hurt doing, usually running into the street as the example but also trying to touch hot stoves and such. The logic makes NO sense to me.  "I'm going to hurt you for doing something that could get you hurt because I don't want you to get hurt... even though I'm hurting you."

If my own child who is 2 and never outside unsupervised were to run into the road, I would probably bring her inside.  I might bring her to the backyard where it is fenced but she would need to take a break from playing out front since in her case, running into the road would mean not listening to me as I tell her to stop and turn around and going in anyway.

[Llyra]

I understand wanting to make a dramatic impression, with certain critical safety issues. Some kids don't respond to calm reasoning. They need something that will stick with them, so that they'll remember it in the moments when an impulse threatens to override their control.

But using physical violence against them is not the answer.

The first time one of my kids ran in the road (it was DD2, and she was about 17 months old.), I picked her up by the waist, held her at my eye level, and talked to her-- not calmly at all. I don't mean I yelled, in an angry or threatening way. I mean I let her see my fear. I cried, and told her that she was precious to me, and that if she ran in the road she could get squashed and killed, and that my heart would break if something ever happened to her, and that it was a stupid, stupid, foolish thing to do, and then I held her close and we cried together, and then we talked about it again a few minutes later, and later that same day, and then every single time we went anywhere near a road, we stopped, I knelt down to her eye level, and remembered with her what had happened and why it was so important. I also never step into the road myself without stopping to look, in an obvious way that a child will understand, and talking out loud to the child about why I'm doing what I'm doing. Whenever we must cross a road, we make a big production out of it, almost like we're crossing the line of fire on a battlefield. I repeat this as needed throughout the toddler and preschool years, and it sticks.

DS was my most impulsive child, and so when he was three, after talking extensively about the dangers of cars for many days, we went outside and I drove the car over a ripe watermelon. I wanted him to see exactly WHY I was so afraid for him. It made a vivid impression, and he has never entered the road without my hand in his, since then. And I didn't have to hit him at all-- the only thing that suffered was an innocent watermelon.

Kids understand when you as an adult are really truly genuinely afraid of something, and for the most part they will quickly and readily internalize that something mama thinks is scary MUST be scary. I think we make a mistake when we react with anger, instead of fear, or turn it into an issue of parental authority. Let them know that whatever they've done is truly and genuinely the most foolhardy thing anybody could ever do, and do it with sincerity and a bit of drama, and reinforce it on a regular basis. Make it extreme-- because the danger is extreme-- and they won't forget.

I prefer to respect the child's dignity and bodily integrity, and protect their trust in me, and instead make an dramatic impression in a non-violent way.

I save this approach for the truly dangerous situations-- the ones that I can be totally honest about being scared about. It won't work if you're doing it constantly. I don't expect it to substitute for adequate supervision-- children are impulsive, and they often act without stopping to think about what they know. They need us to be right at hand to prevent the danger, until they've developed more self-control. But teaching them the WHY of the issue is much more effective than punishment. My DD1 is six, and can be safely trust to cross streets by herself if the traffic is not too heavy. Every morning, she crosses one to get to her bus stop, and I watch her stop on the curb, glance back to my face in the window, and then carefully look left, right, and left again, the way I taught her. That's because she knows I'm on her side, she understands the reason for the rule, and she's internalized the idea that she's inherently a sensible, intelligent person who can be trusted to protect herself against danger.

I think it's terribly illogical to suggest that it's necessary to hit kids to get them to understand danger. Think about it-- "sorry, honey, but I have to hurt you, because I love you and want you to be safe. SMACK." I don't think it's justifiable, particularly when there are so many more effective ways to deal with these issues.

[greencarnation]

I  have never used this one and it is a bit weird, but apparently it works:

A friend of mine used to run into the street as a child, until her father showed her a raccoon that had been run over, and told her that's what happens when you get hit by a car.

Dramatic, but apparently it made a huge impression on her. She never ran in the street again, and she remembered this 20 years later.