You HAVE to do things... (spin-off) - Page 2

[**guest**]

:

[WuWei]

Originally Posted by captain crunchy

I speculate from this post that you are working under the assumption that children are manipulative, selfish beings that don't care at all for the feelings of others, the schedules of others and that they have an ulterior motive to run the household. I don't agree with that or sentiments like it at all. Granted, young children are very age appropriately self centered in that they sometimes are unable to see past their own wants at the moment to work towards the greater good, or agreeable solution. ..

ditto CapatinCrunchy. (We really are not the same person posting under two names. )

I want to respond to AbigailsMomSarah too. But thanks CC for saying what I believe too.

Pat

[captain crunchy]

(We really are not the same person posting under two names.

Nah, just two people who know what time it is.... .... j/k people, don't flame!!

[Storm Bride]

Just to be clear, I have no problem with my children running around naked. I'm glad they enjoy their bodies so much. (I actually had a 3-month long war with former neighbours of mine over this issue as they thought my then-4-year-old son was "sexually abusing" their daughter by being naked. They eventually moved so they didn't have to be around my "pervert" son.)

The issue is the weather. It's cold and very wet, and she had a bug (I think she's over it now). I'm the last person in the world to think that rain is a bad thing (my user name reflects my feelings about the weather). But, when it's cold outside, and it's pouring rain, she's got to wear a jacket. We don't usually go out in the car - we walk. I could put a jacket in her little brother's stroller, but that would mean putting a cold jacket on a cold toddler. And, I know that cold air doesn't cause illness (heating systems do sometimes). But, catching a chill when you've already got a cold is no fun at all.

She also likes to ride in the backpack a lot. I can't put her jacket on if she's already on my back.

I guess I'll just keep going the way we have been. I think she's starting to figure out that we get outside more quickly if she gets dressed more quickly. And, she's usually willing to put on her shoes now...

[HappyHSer]

But having a spirited child turned out to be WAY more work than I ever imagined and it turns out that when we are more respectful of her making her own choices and having equal input in our family decisions (when she knows what is going on) has made things MUCH easier.

I feel much better about our relationship. it is not roses every day, but the tantrums seriously disappeared the day after I changed my own outlook. Bedtime was an absolute nightmare. I had the idea in my head that to be good parents, dd needed a "bedtime". It never worked and created huge conflict in the entire family every night. everyone was resentful, angry, tired, and exasperated.

This is a great, important post. And I want to use it as a springboard. You birthed a child who demanded/required a certain type and style of interaction. This challenged your pre-conceived ideas and theories on child rearing. But you quickly "read" and responded to what your dd's personality demanded of you in terms of the kind of parenting and interaction that leads to the most family harmony and in a way that honors your values.

I also birthed a spirited child (2 of them). One of those spirited children demands a style of parenting that is completely counter intuitive to what I thought I'd be doing. He requires absolutely firm, non negotiable boundaries. He's absolutely whither and disintegrate with the type of parenting your dd needs. Eventually, I abandoned the theories I held dear and parented that child in the way that enables him to feel confident, bold, secure, loved and worthy.

Let me offer an analogy, a related one. I think unschooling is an awesome *option* for education. I don't believe it's the best, the only, a superior or even the natural, organic way for all children to gather information and move into the adult years.

Likewise, I don't agree with the premise that coercion = harm in child/parent relationships. I believe that low coercion as a standard can be an excellent choice. I believe that the process of common *preference* finding can be an excellent tool.

But, no, I don't believe for a second that each child should be or needs to be parenting in the absence of coercion.

[WuWei]

Originally Posted by AbigailsMomSarah

I am curious as to how you will feel allowing your daughter to run your day? You say she will have complete control over her schedule. So, when she wakes up and says she wants to go to the park, will you go? What is you have a scheduled appointment, or a headache, or just flat out don't feel like goig to the park?

If I need to expound on this further, I will. But I have tried to cover it with a prior post about appointments. And I too believe that children inherently are harmonious and desire to please. That when the environment and expectations are developmentally appropriate, conflicts do not occur. So, noone "runs our day". We work together to meet both of our needs. Don't you? Who runs your day? Does it "have to" be either or? If the child's needs are being met what conflict is arising? If your needs are being met what conflict is arising? What specific schedule issues are imposed on you all that is creating a conflict? Could you provide clarification and perhaps we could help trouble shoot some possible solutions so that no one "has to" do anything they don't want to do.

I agree with giving children a sence of ownership in their world, and allow my daughter (almost 3) to make may choices. A choice of two outfits for the day, what she wants for snack etc. I, as the parent howeve, set the plan of the day. I take it the consideration of both my childrens wants, our family needs, and my desires as well.

Our son can wear anything he wants. If it is cold he might want to wear shorts. He is very hot natured. But I have an 'outing bag' with long pants, a jacket vest, ear muff type head warmer, and extra socks. When he opens the door, sometimes he says 'it is cold, I want long pants'. And he puts on long pants. I sometimes find when I open the door, it is cold and I change clothes. We don't have play clothes and dress clothes. He is a child and play is his work. We have some nicer clothes that he has worn to the symphony but he can play at the park in them too. Sometimes his choices do not match! Sometimes, making alterations is agreeable; sometimes not.

What about when you have 2 kids and they each want something different, but at the same time.

I only have one child. I do have a dh of 23 years who has egocentric needs at times too. Especially for my undivided attention. So, we negotiate. I have friends who parent non-coercively with multiple children. It is much easier to live together when everyone has negotiation skills than to rely on a referree, peace maker, judge to decide conflict resolution. The children are facilitated with conflict resolution skills of listening to each's pov and with discussing mutually agreeable alternatives. They have the benefit of more heads doing the brainstorming to find solutions that consider everyone's needs and are agreeable to everyone. Have you read "Siblings Without Rivalry"? The book helps to decrease sibling conflict, especially drawing in the parent to take sides.

Nurturing the tools of reflective listening and win-win conflict resolution decreases conflict, imo. Conflict resolution does not need to occur from the top down. Otherwise, the children just keep coming to you to solve the problem, over and over and over. Modeling and facilitating the communication tools of respectful consideration must be done out loud, transparently. Not dictated, imo in order for the children to learn. I believe that 'wanting things at the same time' is an aspect of a win-lose dynamic. When one Trusts that their needs are going to be met, the immediacy of "now" doesn't seem necessary. However, if one wants something and that precludes the other getting what she wants, I imagine they both want "it" now.

Is there a specific example?

And since you brought it up earlier, what about the car seat situation? What if you have a dentist appointment, which you will be charged for whether you show up or not, and which needs to be scheduled months in advance. What if she doesn't want to get in the seat, or heck, what if she really does not want to see the dentist?

While it sounds good in therory, especially with a child so young and with out many wants and strong opinions, I woulnder how it would really work with a family with older and multiple children.

This hasn't been a problem for us. We discuss the appointments and address concerns and go when we need to go. Since "have to" do doesn't occur in our home, when I have explained to our son that we need to go to the appointment at a specific time, so that we won't need to wait a long time for our turn, he has come along. With coaxing and leaving plenty of time for doddling, and plenty of preparation in advance as CC described. Sometimes, the appointment might be postponed. I have done that when I was too ill for a dental appointment. Life doesn't end if an appointment is cancelled. We have been going to our dentist for 15+ years, they are considerate of the fact that we expect consideration of our son's needs. Same with the family practice MD, the chiropractor, the counselor, friends, playdates, music class, gym class, etc.

[WuWei]

Ditto Yoppervegan again.

I don't consider parenting a sacrifice though. I wanted to share our life with a child for 10 years before our son was born. I have had a rewarding career, travelled, etc. I don't feel like I "have to" do anything as a parent. Sometimes, I don't want to immediately change a poopy diaper but I consider the benefit more important than the cost. Maybe it is because I am old , this time of his childhood is going by so fast to me.

And Yoppervegan made an important point about *leaving* when a child no longer wants to remain somewhere! I think this is challenging but critical too. That is why discussion, consideration, advanced preparation and making back up plans to meet *my* needs (or a sibling's needs) without imposing on our son (or the other sibling) is so important. I guess the alternative is to just expect him to go and like it???

Mutually agreeable solutions are available. For instance, my friend's husband was out of town and he had a motor cycle accident. So, she needed to take the trailer to go bring him and the bike home immediately. Neither of their daughters wanted to make the 6-8 hour round car trip. My friend asked her friend to stay with the girls until she returned, that was agreeable to all. But the younger had planned on going to the Rock Club that evening with mama, so I went with her instead. Our son was agreeable to stay home with dada. Everyone had what they needed and agreed to. No one "had to" do anything they didn't want to do.

Pat

[WuWei]

Originally Posted by Storm Bride

How would you (scubamama & captaincrunchy) handle it when your child wants to do something, but doesn't want to do something else that's a prerequisite? My daughter wants to go out every day. I want my daughter to go out every day, because she's much, much easier to cope with if she gets some fresh air and exercise. However, my daughter does not want to put on clothes...she doesn't want to put on shoes...she doesn't want to put on her coat. If I get her dressed, I'm using force. What do you do?

We had this issue until I realized that our son just gets too hot in the car, and doesn't like the feel of clothing when sitting idle. Even in the house, he strips down to the bare minimum. He has some sensory acuity issues. And he is highly sensitive. And is very hot natured. (unless it is about 35-40 degrees, he doesn't get cold without a coat. I am the opposite so I think he must be freezing but he is perfectly articulate and just is not cold.) He wears the necessary loose clothing to cover his body and he puts his clothes on in the car when we arrive. Same with shoes. He prefers a blanket in the car for when the car is first cold and then throws it off when he gets too warm. I of course have a coat on and heat.

How old is your daughter? I would think the above would work until age 5ish and then naked children in a car might be an issue. But our son is perfectly agreeable to put clothes on to go into an establishment or event. You might try that. It is much easier to dress a willing participant, I imagine.

Pat

[Fuamami]

Originally Posted by scubamama

But, how would a child who grows up under a coercive paradigm recognize disrespect is the Catch 22 question. It is like fish not being able to perceive water; it is all they know. It took me many years of living with my husband, who is always respectful of me and others, to recognize how disrespected my individual will as a child was. In childhood, I was told you "have to"; but I objected to the dissidence of being coerced to comply. And my awareness of being treated with disrespect grew as I experienced respect from teachers and others. The most profound experience was when I was employed, I was respected as an individual. Even though jobs had responsibilities, I still didn't "have to" do the job. I had a choice, unlike "having to" under the coercive 'directed compliance' of childhood.

I, too, had the experience of being coerced as a child. My parents punished, controlled, coerced, the whole kit and caboodle. However, one thing that they were very, very good at was turning power over to us as it became age appropriate. Therefore, I felt plenty able to recognize "respect", and felt that as I grew and learned, I would become more and more capable and therefore be able to control more and more of my life. Which was true. And if I felt there was something I could handle that my parents were still controlling, we could debate it. So by the time I was the age to be an adult, I felt completely ready to be an adult.

If it weren't possible for children to recognize respect without non-coercive parenting, respect would not exist in our society, right?

FWIW, I think non-coercive parenting is great, and it really made me think when I read the first thread on here about TCS.

But, (you knew it was coming) other things are more important in our family.

I want my dc to have close sibling relationships and it would be so hard to parent like this w/children spaced the way mine are.

I want my dc to be able to go to college, and that means we have to make economic sacrifices and they have to come with me to some icky jobs sometimes (like maintaining the sewer at our rental).

There are a million other things I feel would be restricted by this kind of parenting but don't have time to write about. And since I just don't buy that my kids are not going to be able to grow into emotionally healthy, respectful, kind, productive adults w/out a little bit of non-physical, playful coercion, that's the way I'm going to parent.

[Piglet68]

Originally Posted by Storm Bride

How would you (scubamama & captaincrunchy) handle it when your child wants to do something, but doesn't want to do something else that's a prerequisite? My daughter wants to go out every day. I want my daughter to go out every day, because she's much, much easier to cope with if she gets some fresh air and exercise. However, my daughter does not want to put on clothes...she doesn't want to put on shoes...she doesn't want to put on her coat. If I get her dressed, I'm using force. What do you do?

Answering this question is going to make the point I wanted to say....

I think that there doesnt' have to be a separation between "non-coercive" parenting, and having some situations where the child really can't make the decision. I would say I do not practice coercive parenting at all, but I also am not running my day based on the whims of a toddler or preschooler.

In the above scenario, this is what I say "Hey DD, do you want to go to the park?" (in a nice, excited sort of voice). "Yeah!" she says "Okay, well we need to put on our clothes first.". I say this in a matter-of-fact way. If she protests about the clothes I'll just repeat myself "well, I'd love to go to the park but we need clothes" and then might try to distract her a bit with "would you like to wear your blue pants?" or I'll ask her what she wants to bring with her (because she NEVER leaves the house without a couple of fave-trinkets-of-the-day).

But honestly, most of the time just stating something as a fact, as if I were saying "well, you must heat water before it will boil"...this works the vast majority of the time. There is no sense of coercion, no sense of conflicting wills. In fact, by starting out by emphasizing what SHE wants "shall we go to the park?" the whole tone of it becomes "I want what YOU want, and here's what we need to do".

I have found this approach to work really well for us. So while there are aspects of our day that she has no real control over, my goal as a parent is to never make the situation appear to be one of me controlling her. I try to frame all such situations in the sense of the two of us working together to a common goal.

So far, it's worked really well for us. I don't have to coerce or force my kids, but I also don't let them dictate the day's schedule (though of course there are times when they can, and I think that's healthy and educational).

[Fuamami]

Originally Posted by Piglet68

So while there are aspects of our day that she has no real control over, my goal as a parent is to never make the situation appear to be one of me controlling her. I try to frame all such situations in the sense of the two of us working together to a common goal.

ITA with this, and for practical reasons, too. If I really tried to control my dd, I couldn't. I absolutely CANNOT make her do anything she doesn't want. So it's easiest for all involved to approach things from this perspective.

[johub]

Originally Posted by captain crunchy

I woldn't say "no" amount of control. If my child is running towards a busy street, my knee-jerk reaction would probably be to scoop her up, or grab her back, or yell (not at her, but a sort of frantic Stop!) or something...that is control I suppose.

However, things like forcing my child to eat what I think she should eat for breakfast, in my opinion, is not respectful. What if she doesn't want yogurt or whatever else? What if she wants last night's leftovers? Who am I to force her to eat something she doesn't want to, feeling really good that at least I offered her *some* choices? What if those choices weren't acceptable to her?

The reason we don't have a bunch of junk in our house, other than being health concious, is the fact that we don't want to be hypocrites either. I am SO not into the "do as I say not as I do" parenting...so if there are cheetos, she can have cheetos...but there hardly ever is something like that anyway.

The only exception is alcohol, because that is like, ya know, a federal law and I don't want my children being removed from me because they told their friends *mama lets me have beer*....

This isnt really different I think than any of us do it in practice although our theories are behind it. I think you would be hard pressed to find any mom on this board who was the least bit interested in forcing their child to eat anything. And I also think that if a child is offered choices and he is not interested that doesnt mean there is no room for negotiation. My kids will not be having browines or sugary cereal for breakfast but my three year old will often hear my choices and say "how about smoothie instead." And if this is reasonable, he gets his choice. So nobody is talking about forcing them to do anything. Except maybe to go without something bad for them.
If I give 2 choices, there are implied choices I might have not thought of mentioning. But there are still many definite "no's" . But just because I say, no banana split for breakfast it does not mean I am "forcing" my child to eat something else. It is still his choice.
In my house I also pretty much try to follow the second rule, keep stuff you dont want your child to have out of the house. (but that IS control because the child cannot control what groceries are purchased. It is still coercing your child to choose from foods that are availible while you control what is availible. It is no different from controlling choices offered)
But my DH likes stuff that he wants in the house that the kids shouldnt eat. So I dont offer it to them. And once they do get a taste for it (thanks dad) they still only get it sometimes, and then not for meals.

If you know your child would really prefer a banana split for breakfast and you choose not to purchase those items when you are at the store you are doing the exact same thing. You are dictating the choices your child has to choose from.
Joline

[Rigama]

I have to wonder, nice as it all sounds in theory, how will your child take it when they are older, or even grown, and are in a situation where their needs aren't first and foremost on everyone's minds? Because let's face it. In the world, there are things that need to be done and our feelings on the matter don't matter one iota. Perhaps his boss tells him he must work over the holiday weekend or lose his job. Perhaps he proposes to a woman who simply isn't interested in marriage, or perhaps she wants to have a child with a man who doesn't want one. There are countless times when our kids will have to face doing/hearing something that isn't what they desire. Papers that need to be written, red lights that need to be obeyed, student loan bills that need repaying, taxes to be filed, etc.

As a parent, I feel it's my job to give my son a sense of control over his life, but I also believe that I'm doing him a grave disservice by teaching him that if he talks smoothly enough he'll always get his way. Sometimes he won't. Will I let him have caramel popcorn for breakfast? No. Because I know how he acts if he's all sugared up. So, I'll suggest something like "How about if I make you either eggs or oatmeal for breakfast, then you can have caramel corn." And there are other times when I just say "It's non-negotiable" as in...we've just left WalMart, he's been busy touching everything in sight and he wants a snack in the car. "Okay, here's your snack. First lets use hand sanitizer." But I don't want to! "Well if you want the snack, you need to use the sanitizer so you don't get sick" But I want to get sick and barf! "Then i guess you don't want the snack. Let me know if you change your mind and want to clean your hands so you can eat". I do not see myself as a manipulative, controlling, zealot and my son is most certainly a happy and laid back child. A child who knows HE CAN influence his world, but who also knows that sometimes he has to do things that he may not want to do and is *gasp* familiar with personal disappointment. And better still, he knows that when he is simply unwilling to or incapapble of making a decision on his own, he can count on me to make the best decision FOR him.

[SunRayeMomi]

I did not finish reading all the posts yet, but I wanted to add a little anecdotal insight here:

I had a friend who felt very imprisoned and unappreciated as an individual as a child. Her thoughts weren't made to be genuine and things she believed were thought to be ridiculous by her family. When she had children, she vowed to give them love, freedom and guidance. She believed that she was doing these things the best she could. Little did she notice, she was doing them a disservice in the way she went about these pratices. Let me explain: I would best explain her way of parenting as GD, which is great, I GD too. But DD1 was very undisciplined to the point where her misbehavior was constantly being postivley reinforced by mom's worry that she would mame her daughter's self-esteem in some way. The unsupportiveness of her parents has influenced her to be dterimentally lenient, much to the dismay of others - such as myself. It ultimatly led to the downfall of our relationship, her having accused me of compromising her daughter's self-esteem by physically removing her from climbing in MY REFRIDGERATOR. There are extremes at both ends of the spectrum and she passed into extreme at that moment, IMO. What I am really trying to say I think, is that we must find a balance between how our parents directly or indirectly taught us to parent, and how we want to differ from those practices.

[The4OfUs]

For me, doing things I don't *want* to in my daily life just really isn't a big deal to me. I don't have a sense of injustice, unfairness, or lack of choice or control about my day-to-day life. Of course, there are situations where I am genuinely opposed to things, and I try to resolve the situations as best I can to try to get the solution I want (or as close to it as possible). BUT, in day-to-day life, I simply don't see the problem with not getting to do what I want when I want, or negotiating my preference all the time - quite frankly, it seems emotionally exhausting to have to think about things that much. I don't feel cheated or coerced in my life because I sometimes "have" to do things. But maybe it's just me. Looking back at my own childhood, from what I can remember, my parents let me make some choices, but others they made the choices - and it didn't bother me. It wasn't made a big deal by anyone, that's just the way things worked. My parents were most definitely GD (no spanking, no yelling, no shaming), and we all worked together as a family to get things done. Sometimes we did things my way, sometimes we didn't. But when we didn't, it was OK. Maybe it's just my personality, and maybe I'm just blessed to have a DS with the same disposition. OR, maybe because I was allowed to make some decisions, I felt it was OK when I didn't, that it just wasn't my turn that time, and it wasn't a big deal.

I remember reading in some threads that people do chores, or whatever, because they either like the end result better than not doing whatever it was, or along those lines - the consequence of NOT doing something is less appealing than just doing it. I think that either of those are entirely valid, and probably true for me too (though I tend to not really think that deeply about my own life). BUT, I also think that my job as a parent is to help my child *learn* this, not make him eventually come to this conclusion on his own. To help him realize that although he may not *want* to do something (or want to stop doing something), that the end result will be something he enjoys, or the lack of result will be worse than just not doing it...and sometimes that may mean not working out a mutual solution, but sometimes just not getting his way. I don't think small children are capable of thinking that abstractly, and just like with many, many other things they can't do on their own until they are older, it's my job to help him and teach him.

I can understand that if someone came from a family where they never had a say that they would want to make sure that their children did, but I honestly think at some point emphasizing constantly that choices and mutual solutions are always possible could make more out of situations than there needs to be. If you are allowing your child to make regular choices in their life (structured or unstructured), I can't see how leaving the park now versus in a half hour is going to make your child feel like they aren't respected or valued or equal in the family (if you have a need to be somewhere and your kid doesn't want to go) .....I think it is a mindset of balance, and balancing everyone's needs, but not always belaboring the decision trying to find something that works for everyone. Sometimes my needs aren't going to be met - oh well. Sometimes my son will be disappointed that we're leaving a park, or that I ask him to finish his homework before dinner so we can have fun together after dinner (just giving random examples)....but since he does (and will continue to) have a lot of situations where he gets to do what he wants, and I don't make a huge deal of apologizing and sympathizing when things aren't going his way, he sees that it's not as big a deal either, and that life goes on, and that life in general is pretty darn good.

Clearly I'm not talking about parenting where the kids never get a say in anything, but I just don't see the problem in a family working together by not always negotiating things, but by sometimes getting your way and sometimes just not. I can't imagine a child, who is generally respected, loved, and valued, being overwrought and bitter for life over occasions where they don't get to do what they want every time (or seek out a mutual solution). Sometimes mutual solutions or other alternatives are easy to reach, and should be tried if possible, but I think sometimes dragging it out trying to find something that would work for everyone maybe gives too much power to the situation instead of just getting on with it.

[Fuamami]

Originally Posted by johub

If you know your child would really prefer a banana split for breakfast and you choose not to purchase those items when you are at the store you are doing the exact same thing. You are dictating the choices your child has to choose from.
Joline

Exactly. My dd ate Frosted Flakes while at my mother's house, and now she asks for them every time we go to the store.

What would you do in this situation, Captaincrunchy and Pat? Do you really think a two year old would prefer Uncle Sam w/dried blueberries over Frosted Flakes just because they haven't been coerced? I sure don't! Fortunately I have years of practicing self-control under my belt (no pun intended).

[The4OfUs]

Originally Posted by Piglet68

Answering this question is going to make the point I wanted to say....

I think that there doesnt' have to be a separation between "non-coercive" parenting, and having some situations where the child really can't make the decision. I would say I do not practice coercive parenting at all, but I also am not running my day based on the whims of a toddler or preschooler.

In the above scenario, this is what I say "Hey DD, do you want to go to the park?" (in a nice, excited sort of voice). "Yeah!" she says "Okay, well we need to put on our clothes first.". I say this in a matter-of-fact way. If she protests about the clothes I'll just repeat myself "well, I'd love to go to the park but we need clothes" and then might try to distract her a bit with "would you like to wear your blue pants?" or I'll ask her what she wants to bring with her (because she NEVER leaves the house without a couple of fave-trinkets-of-the-day).

But honestly, most of the time just stating something as a fact, as if I were saying "well, you must heat water before it will boil"...this works the vast majority of the time. There is no sense of coercion, no sense of conflicting wills. In fact, by starting out by emphasizing what SHE wants "shall we go to the park?" the whole tone of it becomes "I want what YOU want, and here's what we need to do".

I have found this approach to work really well for us. So while there are aspects of our day that she has no real control over, my goal as a parent is to never make the situation appear to be one of me controlling her. I try to frame all such situations in the sense of the two of us working together to a common goal.

So far, it's worked really well for us. I don't have to coerce or force my kids, but I also don't let them dictate the day's schedule (though of course there are times when they can, and I think that's healthy and educational).

ITA wth your whole post, Piglet - wish I could have said it as succinctly as you did instead of rambling on and on like I did!

[johub]

There was a previous post (I dnt remember who or even if it was this thread so please bear with me) where the poster recognized that their rebellious temperament was a bad fit for authoritative parents while her sister's easy going temperament was a pretty good for authoritative parents.
I think that it is perhaps less an overall parenting goal that everybody is interested in to be less coercive or not at all coercive. But a reaction to traditional parenting by individuals with particularly rebellious personalities.
I did not want to obey as a child. I do not want my child to obey anybody.
I do not feel that as a child I was respected by society. I dont want my child to grow up to be a "worker bee" for society.
I have yet to see an example of a parent who chose this type of parenting based on the soundness of the philosophy who was not influenced by their own rebellious nature. Is it a philosophy based on a reaction to authoritative parenting by adults who were spirited and rebellious as children?
Is it this dynamic which makes it so difficult for those of us with different temperaments to grasp the value of? I have a very easy going temperament, as do three of my children. I simply did not feel disrespected or rebellious or whatever as a result of my parents efforts to control me. In fact I had a sister and brother who were rebellious by nature and for the life of me I couldnt figure out what was so hard about following a few simple and logical rules. It never once occurred to me that there was anythign wrong with my parents parenting style. And yet this did not distort me into a "praise junkie" or somebody desparately seekign the approval of others. Or somebody with no creativity or problem solving skills or independance.
In fact I think my parents must have done somethign remarkably right.

This is so interesting to me. . .
Joline

[WuWei]

Originally Posted by johub

This isnt really different I think than any of us do it in practice although our theories are behind it.

<snip>

If I give 2 choices, there are implied choices I might have not thought of mentioning. But there are still many definite "no's" .
<snip>


If you know your child would really prefer a banana split for breakfast and you choose not to purchase those items when you are at the store you are doing the exact same thing. You are dictating the choices your child has to choose from.
Joline

Joline, I agree that what you describe is coercive. However, our son's choices do not end with what *I* choose to buy. There are no "definite no's" for breakfast or on the grocery list. Same with dh. Dh's food choices are not coerced either. And ds chooses more wisely than dh oftentimes. We discuss what he would like on the grocery list and we discuss what other things we need and we discuss which items are priorites to both of us and we meet both his needs for banana splits and mine for cereal. It really isn't a budgetary issue to meet both of these needs. And neither do we create an artificial control by not buying things that he prefers once he has a preference. I don't introduce things that I don't want in the house. But he is welcome to expect them in our home for his consumption. We also have foods that have artificial colors that dh eats and ds chooses not to eat them. Sometimes, he chooses to try them. So, our practice is very different.

And banasplits are a perfectly welcome breakfast choice, as is spaghetti. Or cereal and chicken salad on crackers for dinner. I prepare meals, offer choices proactively and our son has food choices *unlimited* by me. He makes wise choices because he listens to his body and understands when he is hungry and sweets are freely available so they are not binged. It is a different paradigm of Trusting one's child about their own body. And respecting another's autonomy about their own body in both theory and practice.

Pat

[johub]

I know that there are many tcs parents who practice this. But I was particularly referring to Crunchy because she stated it wasnt really an issue because she kept these foods out of her house.