or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Childhood and Beyond › Gentle Discipline › Does GD Breed Wild Children?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Does GD Breed Wild Children? - Page 5

post #81 of 128


I agree with the first sentence but IDK what you mean by the second. I am assuming you mean b/c I said discipline and boundaries are important? Like PP said and I have said discipline is not punishment. I don't see it as control either and I certainly don't expect a child who would "reinvent the wheel of social behavior". I strongly agree with Dr.Sears's Discipline book in 99% of the aspects of it accept some of the time out stuff b/c I don't do time outs. Perhaps very rarely as a "punishment" when DD is older and with a more positive mood like "reflection time" or something similar. Just b/c I discipline (which to me is really guidance) often does not mean I am a "militant mother" or anything.



 

I agree with you but the parents would label themselves as GD parents and sometimes that self-identification tarnishes an otherwise good parenting strategy. It is important to distinguish between gently guiding your child and forcing them to reinvent the wheel of social behavior. 



 

post #82 of 128

I guess I think of boundaries as separate from teaching social behavior - some of which really needs to be taught. To me, boundaries are, "no you may not cut the back of the couch" where social behavior is "no one will want to be your friend if you are mean to them all the time". There is some overlap, such as "your friend's mom won't allow you to come over anymore if you throw a ball at the windows even after being requested not to". Modeling works with some kids but not so much with others. So what ends up happening with some of the self-described GD parents is the kids do socially unacceptable things and the parents want them to learn from the natural consequences of losing friends, etc. Some kids really need things spelled out for them though and they don't learn. When I hear about wild kids, I think of those kids.

 

We have 2 of those kids in the neighborhood and unfortunately I have to curtail DD's freedoms because of them. I am not sure how their moms expect them to divine proper social behavior but what they are doing isn't working. They think they are being gentle but IMO they are being negligent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sosurreal09 View Post


I agree with the first sentence but IDK what you mean by the second. I am assuming you mean b/c I said discipline and boundaries are important? Like PP said and I have said discipline is not punishment. I don't see it as control either and I certainly don't expect a child who would "reinvent the wheel of social behavior". I strongly agree with Dr.Sears's Discipline book in 99% of the aspects of it accept some of the time out stuff b/c I don't do time outs. Perhaps very rarely as a "punishment" when DD is older and with a more positive mood like "reflection time" or something similar. Just b/c I discipline (which to me is really guidance) often does not mean I am a "militant mother" or anything.



 



 

post #83 of 128

OIC yes well I can agree with that. Since DD was maybe 9 m/o I practiced with her social skills. If she took a toy from another child I would give it back to that child and say she needed to wait her turn and give her something else. If she got kind of rough with someone I say "gentle" and show her soft patting ect. She does amazingly with her "friends". I do think natural consequence is good too, but you need to intervene in order to use that moment as a teaching one when something happens. It isn't easy but it paid off for us. Now I can sit back and relax b/c she never has any issues playing.

 

There is a child that goes to play dates we attend and she is the same age as DD that runs around slapping babies and stealing all their toys and the mother does nothing...that pisses me off. Her DC is very aggressive which I know some kids can be but she should be on top of her and guide her on what to do and not do. When her DC takes something from my DD and she gets upset I look at the mom as to say with my eyes "do something" and she does nothing or tries to distract my DD as if she were younger...she's not. My DD gets upset with this DC and doesn't want to play with them. DC has slapped, pushed, and bitten DD several times and I feel like I need to protect DD every time they show up somewhere. It is aggravating. I don't want to stop going to play dates b/c they may show up and her DC will attack all the kids. I don't really know this woman so it makes it hard to say something to her. I know she firmly believes what she is doing is GD but it's not it's just doing nothing...

post #84 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by lalaland42 View Post

I guess I think of boundaries as separate from teaching social behavior - some of which really needs to be taught. To me, boundaries are, "no you may not cut the back of the couch" where social behavior is "no one will want to be your friend if you are mean to them all the time". There is some overlap, such as "your friend's mom won't allow you to come over anymore if you throw a ball at the windows even after being requested not to". Modeling works with some kids but not so much with others. So what ends up happening with some of the self-described GD parents is the kids do socially unacceptable things and the parents want them to learn from the natural consequences of losing friends, etc. Some kids really need things spelled out for them though and they don't learn. When I hear about wild kids, I think of those kids.

 

We have 2 of those kids in the neighborhood and unfortunately I have to curtail DD's freedoms because of them. I am not sure how their moms expect them to divine proper social behavior but what they are doing isn't working. They think they are being gentle but IMO they are being negligent.



 




I talk a lot about possible social natural consequences of behavior with my 5.5 year old DD. She's very outgoing and wants other kids to like and play with her. Any time she's rude or doesn't respect others personal space, I point it out and we talk about how other people might react to the behavior. We've been doing this this since she was 3 and we've always talked about why some behaviors are a bad or good idea. I agree that not talking about expected social behaviors with kids is negligent.

post #85 of 128

Ds1 was gd'ed from the beginning (I learned about it before he was 1yo), and he is FAR from a wild child! He was (is) easy to take anywhere, he was very cooperative and compassionate for a toddler (when he was 2.5, he would ask permission before he picked a dandilion from someone else's yard). He was and still is very "rule conscious" and now at 6yo and in 1st grade, he's considerate and helpful to the other kids in the class.

 

post #86 of 128


It started last summer when he was "the baby" at about 18 months, and really could not wait.  Now they just naturally do it for him, AND it led to *them* using more appropriate waiting manners.  Before, they all 3 were jumping around at me literally screaming for ice cream.  Once I started the age-order thing, it's like the structure reassured them and they were able to wait more patiently.  Occasionally, I vary it--especially if someone is being rude.  They wait till last.

I know at  2 1/2 now he's different than 18 months, but they just do it now and I do think it's helping my older ones learn to have some patience with and for younger kids.  His turn will come--the baby is now 6 months old.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda on the move View Post




 

I, personally, don't think it's a good idea to always let the same child go first. It teaches them nothing. So many of us expected so much of our first child when they become a sibling because they seemed so big, and then we end up treating our youngest as a baby for years longer than appropriate because they always seem small!

 

Two is old enough to understand that you can be second and not die. It's old enough to start to learn to wait.

 

 



 

post #87 of 128


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ssh View Post






I talk a lot about possible social natural consequences of behavior with my 5.5 year old DD. She's very outgoing and wants other kids to like and play with her. Any time she's rude or doesn't respect others personal space, I point it out and we talk about how other people might react to the behavior. We've been doing this this since she was 3 and we've always talked about why some behaviors are a bad or good idea. I agree that not talking about expected social behaviors with kids is negligent.



I do that with my kid too. I think that is perfectly reasonable and responsible. When I see the kids here hit another kid in the head and the mom just watches without saying anything, I go a little crazy. Well, gee, no I am not surprised your kid doesn't have friends. Even 5 year olds won't be friends with kids that repeatedly push them in the mud. *grumble*

post #88 of 128



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sere234 View Post

 

So- What is your experience? Does GD REALLY work? When DH and I attempt to raise our son this way, will he turn in to a wild hooligan? Right now I'm obviously very much against spanking and really even time outs.

I missed this part before- We don't do time outs, or any type of punishment, really. I suppose occasionally I give a "logical consequence" because I'm mad (though I usually end up taking it back). But for the most part, we talk, redirect, and explain how one's actions affect other people, etc etc etc.

 

Ds2 is different than ds1, and is more of a wild child already (he's not quite 2yo). I've been on the fence about adding in some logical consequences, but it doesn't fit in with my parenting philosophy, or that of dp. If he's hitting or otherwise harming someone else, I will take away the object he's hitting with, or remove him from the situation. So I suppose that would be a logical consequence? I'm not sure how I feel about calling it that, though, because it's about keeping the person safe, and it's not used as a punishment (defined as: suffering, pain, or loss that serves as retribution). Who knows? lol.

post #89 of 128

I don't see punishment/consequences as "retribution". I feel no desire to exact revenge upon anyone under the age of, I dunno, 15, ever, and especially not my own kids (who are almost 8 and 3).

 

I would be SO into a single "parenting philosophy" if my youngest kid was my only kid. I'm a total softie by nature, and really don't like groundings and timeouts, so with my naturally mellow 3 yo youngest, I just say stuff like "Please don't do that" and explain why, and that usually works. It's weird.

 

My other kid was TOTALLY different and was on the road to a diagnosis at 4. He needed consequences. I'm not sadistic - we don't hit, shame, slap, etc. We grounded (eventually ...right before age 5) him from stuff  (TV, riding his bike, etc) until he understood that he needed to find self-control if he wanted to do a lot of stuff he wanted to do. In retrospect, I do think he was one of those kids who craves authority. At age almost 8, he's really nice and reasonable now (although still unusually emotional). He was totally tantruming and hitting us and throwing stuff and acting like a 2 yo before we incorporated firm consequences, tho. If he had made it to 5, 6, 7 or 8 STILL acting like that, I would have HAD to take him to a psychologist to not feel like a neglectful parent.

 

I have two parenting hills/issues to die on:

1) the false idea all "well-parented" 3 yo's will be "normal/good/whatever" if you do everything "right"

2) the false idea that one grand parenting method/philosophy will fit all kids.

post #90 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamakay View Post

I don't see punishment/consequences as "retribution". I feel no desire to exact revenge upon anyone under the age of, I dunno, 15, ever, and especially not my own kids (who are almost 8 and 3).

that was just (one of) the merriam webster definition :) I see punishment as something that you impose that is so negative to the child, that they will refrain from doing the "misbehavior" because they want to avoid the punishment. That's how it works, right?

I was just saying that in *my* mind, if dc is hitting someone with an object, then taking that object away isn't necessarily punishment. It's not intended to be so negative that he will refrain from hitting in the future. It's intended to stop the hitting.

 

I think it's necessary to be flexible, and parent different children differently, and you have to do what's right for each individual child. I have no judgement there :) It's about knowing your dc, and knowing yourself (ds1 did great with a UP/nearly CL style, but it wasn't a great style for me. I was way more relaxed when I started being "in charge.")

I just don't know that ds2 needs a totally different discipline style. Perhaps more structure, perhaps less cl and a little more "parents as authority." But I think it's possible to do those things and still stick with my views on kids, and humans in general, kwim?

 

 


Edited by DevaMajka - 6/5/11 at 9:36am
post #91 of 128


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DevaMajka View Post



that was just (one of) the merriam webster definition :) I see punishment as something that you impose that is so negative to the child, that they will refrain from doing the "misbehavior" because they want to avoid the punishment. That's how it works, right?

I was just saying that in *my* mind, if dc is hitting someone with an object, then taking that object away isn't necessarily punishment. It's not intended to be so negative that he will refrain from hitting in the future. It's intended to stop the hitting.

 

I think it's necessary to be flexible, and parent different children differently, and you have to do what's right for each individual child. I have no judgement there :) It's about knowing your dc, and knowing yourself (ds1 did great with a UP/nearly CL style, but it wasn't a great style for me. I was way more relaxed when I started being "in charge.")

I just don't know that ds2 needs a totally different discipline style. Perhaps more structure, perhaps less cl and a little more "parents as authority." But I think it's possible to do those things and still stick with my views on kids, and humans in general, kwim?

 

 


I guess I think it depends on your kid, and the age of your kid.

 

I know I don't steal, not because I could get arrested, but rather because I believe that stealing is (generally) wrong. At this point, a LOT of my oldest kid's behaviors are motivated by similar internalized ethics and logical understandings, because he's almost 8 now and old enough to grasp that stuff.

 

Between ages 2 and 5, he lacked the "please mommy" motivation my youngest has and was just kinda crying out "MAKE ME!" over everything between ages 1-4. And he was not a happy camper before firm consequences were added into his life. He actually became happier in general once I was, well, punishing (via grounding from tv, etc)  him into not tantruming all the time.

 

I'm honestly deeply skeptical about the idea that all kids can be effectively parented without consequences/punishment ever being used at any stage. The scientific data indicates that "authoritative" parenting (democratic parenting, but consequences are used) produces kids with less anxiety and depression than either permissive (no consequences) or authoritarian (little negotiation, total hardass) parenting. The sub-effects have never been teased out, but I suspect that's because authoritative parenting both lets the kids have a lot of say (good) while also catching the behavioral outliers who really need *enforced* authority.

 

post #92 of 128

I don't totally get what you mean maybe I am off on GD but kids have consequences....If my 2 y/o is coloring on the wall then I take the crayons and she is mad and I help her through those feelings but I'm not going to let her color all over the walls either. I think a big point of GD is that the child will (usually) want to please and you have built a strong relationship and foundation for your child so they should need less discipline. I think almost any way you decide to discipline will be ok as long as you have a connected relationship from infancy which is what AP is.

 

The whole point of discipline is to teach your child internal control so that they will naturally do what's best (like not stealing, killing, lying....)

post #93 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamakay View Post


 


I guess I think it depends on your kid, and the age of your kid.

 

I know I don't steal, not because I could get arrested, but rather because I believe that stealing is (generally) wrong. At this point, a LOT of my oldest kid's behaviors are motivated by similar internalized ethics and logical understandings, because he's almost 8 now and old enough to grasp that stuff.

 

Between ages 2 and 5, he lacked the "please mommy" motivation my youngest has and was just kinda crying out "MAKE ME!" over everything between ages 1-4. And he was not a happy camper before firm consequences were added into his life. He actually became happier in general once I was, well, punishing (via grounding from tv, etc)  him into not tantruming all the time.

 

I'm honestly deeply skeptical about the idea that all kids can be effectively parented without consequences/punishment ever being used at any stage. The scientific data indicates that "authoritative" parenting (democratic parenting, but consequences are used) produces kids with less anxiety and depression than either permissive (no consequences) or authoritarian (little negotiation, total hardass) parenting. The sub-effects have never been teased out, but I suspect that's because authoritative parenting both lets the kids have a lot of say (good) while also catching the behavioral outliers who really need *enforced* authority.

 


You are the first person I've heard in this thread define "permissive" as not punishing (which is what imposing consequences is). I doubt that's what scientific studies are using as a definition either.

And I've also heard people say they're skeptical all kids can be parented without spanking.

I don't believe all kids need to be spoken to exactly the same or parented exactly the same, but just as I believe it's possible to parent all children effectively without spanking, I believe it is possible to parent all children effectively without other punishments.
post #94 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamakay View Post


 


 

 

I'm honestly deeply skeptical about the idea that all kids can be effectively parented without consequences/punishment ever being used at any stage. The scientific data indicates that "authoritative" parenting (democratic parenting, but consequences are used) produces kids with less anxiety and depression than either permissive (no consequences) or authoritarian (little negotiation, total hardass) parenting. The sub-effects have never been teased out, but I suspect that's because authoritative parenting both lets the kids have a lot of say (good) while also catching the behavioral outliers who really need *enforced* authority.

 


I wasn't disagreeing with you. I was saying that I don't think that *my* ds2 needs a totally different parenting style. You did what you did because you thought it was the best for the people involved, and it indeed seems to have worked out well. That's a parent's intuition.

 

I agree with mamazee that no consequences does not equal permissive. Permissive parents tend to not give consequences, sure. But non-punitive parents are certainly not all permissive. Some have high standards for their kids, they just "enforce" them in non-punitive ways. I think your general point stands, though.
 

 

post #95 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamazee View Post

You are the first person I've heard in this thread define "permissive" as not punishing (which is what imposing consequences is). I doubt that's what scientific studies are using as a definition either.

And I've also heard people say they're skeptical all kids can be parented without spanking.

I don't believe all kids need to be spoken to exactly the same or parented exactly the same, but just as I believe it's possible to parent all children effectively without spanking, I believe it is possible to parent all children effectively without other punishments.


OK, great theory - can we talk nitty gritty?  If i give a scenario, you tell me what you'd do, then i'll tell you what i did?

 

Your 4yo (2 months off being 5) DD is at a friends house with you and her baby sister (who is very little and nursing all the time).  She is playing with her friends dear boy, also nearly 5 and his 2.5yo sister.  Kids are playing in the bedroom where toys are and in the livingroom where parents are (3 parents, you, other mom and other dad).  Parents are taking turns going in to check on the kids and staying put to watch the 9mo baby brother of the friends, who is just beginning to crawl.  At some point it comes to light that DD and DB have painted the toys and bedding of DG with nail varnish.  Nail varnish was in the kids room but neither of the kids who live there can get it off (too young/weak DG and motor delay DB).  En route home DD confesses that actually it was just her, alone, who did it.  2 favourite "lovie" toys are beyond repair, full sheets set (sheet, duvet cover, pillow case) are ruined.  Carpet is marked.  Friend is very upset.  

 

How do you handle it?

 

post #96 of 128

OMG! What an amazingly frustrating situation.
I can't say exactly what I would do (but I'd be beyond pi$$ed). But I don't consider it against my (non-punitive) parenting style to insist that my kids right a wrong that they've committed.

post #97 of 128
I'd pay my friend for the ruined items and apologize, and tell my four year old that friend and friend's parents were really unhappy because their things now had nail polish all over them, and I'd explain (if my kid didn't know) that nail polish couldn't be washed off and so was really important to only use it with an adult and veeery carefully.

I'd also make a mental note that 4 year olds need adult supervision and that I should check for stuff like nail polish before letting my kid play in a room where I can't see her. Yeah, kid did a dumb thing, but she's four, and four year olds do stuff like that. My kid actually remembers being 3 and 4, and how she thought about things when she was that age... and it's really interesting to hear her talk about it because it's so clear that she wasn't able to reason in an adult way, and that things that seem mind-blowingly obviously dumb to an adult made perfect sense to her.
post #98 of 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoBecGo View Post




OK, great theory - can we talk nitty gritty?  If i give a scenario, you tell me what you'd do, then i'll tell you what i did?

 

Your 4yo (2 months off being 5) DD is at a friends house with you and her baby sister (who is very little and nursing all the time).  She is playing with her friends dear boy, also nearly 5 and his 2.5yo sister.  Kids are playing in the bedroom where toys are and in the livingroom where parents are (3 parents, you, other mom and other dad).  Parents are taking turns going in to check on the kids and staying put to watch the 9mo baby brother of the friends, who is just beginning to crawl.  At some point it comes to light that DD and DB have painted the toys and bedding of DG with nail varnish.  Nail varnish was in the kids room but neither of the kids who live there can get it off (too young/weak DG and motor delay DB).  En route home DD confesses that actually it was just her, alone, who did it.  2 favourite "lovie" toys are beyond repair, full sheets set (sheet, duvet cover, pillow case) are ruined.  Carpet is marked.  Friend is very upset.  

 

How do you handle it?

 


I'd pay for the damage and supervise her better until I thought she could handle not being supervised as well. She'd have to play near me and the baby or I'd have to stay with her in the other room. Even if you punish, you'd have to supervise better as well, so why not just supervise better? That's my issue with punishments. There are things you have to do to prevent something bad from happening (hold hand near the street, supervise near the street). But then there are things you choose to do to make your point (like spank for running in the road). Why not just supervise better and hold hands? The rest is extra, and I'm not at all convinced that it actually teaches kids to stop putting nail polish on stuff or to stop running in the road.
post #99 of 128
Oh and my daughter did intentionally put make-up on the carpet in our house around that age, and the stain was there until we got the carpeting replaced. I didn't punish her, and she no longer does that anyway. I supervised her better around makeup and was more careful about what makeup was accessible.
post #100 of 128
For Rain it was 4 ounces of glitter, all over the place. Somehow it got stuck in the paint on the walls, even. I never did get it all cleaned off. And yeah, I kept the glitter out of reach after that.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Gentle Discipline
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Childhood and Beyond › Gentle Discipline › Does GD Breed Wild Children?