What all is Non-negotiable? - Page 2

[johub]

Originally Posted by scubamama

I would think that if something were *truly* Non-negotiable, we could all agree on it. Besides making a child get into a stroller to go for a walk what else does *everyone* agree is "non-negotiable" and Must be forced against a child's will if they don't agree/consent/comply/obey? Besides that which is truly Life Threatening.

Btw, there was a study done of the same nature. Amazingly, not *everyone* could agree that some of the most common activities forced on children were "non-negotiable", so perhaps the actions forced on children are "selectively non-negotiable". http://www.takingchildrenseriously.c...cs_survey_1997

Obviously, wearing diapers is not universally non-negotiable even on this forum, "having to" get into the carseat and go somewhere is not universally non-negotiable, shampooing hair is not universally non-negotiable; vaccination is not universally non-negotiable; going to school/daycare is not universally non-negotiable; going to the dentist is not universally non-negotiable; brushing teeth, taking a bath, eating vegetables, eating what is served at dinner or going to bed without, bedtimes, leaving the park, timeouts, saying thank you, going to church, going to the grocery store, sitting at the dinner table, etc.

So, what activities do you feel comfortable forcing your child to do against their will because they are truly

Let's replace this "truly" with "universally" because many things are "truly" non-negotiable for each of us, which do not meet your above definition of "universally" non-negotiable.
I agree that likely only life or death situations would be "universally" non negotiable

non-negotiable? I am wondering if perhaps we could agree on what is truly non-negotiable; or is the use of coercion and force just a subjective *unwillness* to consider/continue negotiating for the sake of expediency? (ie. force is justified because 'I am in a hurry ("it is time to do xyz") and I don't want to deal with negotiating about this any longer in a more cooperative/respectful fashion'.) Or is it the lack of negotiation skills or lack of communication tools? Or is it just a commonly held belief that one has a right to decide to force others to do what one wants "for their own good", because she is the parent?

I think it is likely all of the above. There comes a point where many of us, even those who practice negotiation and playfullness and any other number of ways to gently manipulate our children to willingly do what we want run out of patience and time and become less willing to continue to do that song and dance. The number of things I am willing to try and the amount of time I am willing to give to any number of personally "non-negotiable" situations have limits. Does it mean I am unwilling to consider negotiating altogether? No it just means that at some point I am done. This point may be sooner or later depending on time contsraints and my personal level of creativity and patience.
And yes finally I believe it IS a commonly held belief that one has a right, nay, a Responsibility to decide to force others to do what one wants "for their own good" because he or she is the parent.

I honestly do not understand the paradox. We instruct our children not to use force to get their way. But....many adults model the use of force to get their way. How can our children learn from the inconsistency of our words from our actions? The Center for Non-violent Communications has many communication tools for more effective conflict resolution. See www.CNVC.org.

Some of us believe that the parent child relationship is unique and that children learn about how people should be treated from how adults treat each other, and how children should be treated from how parents treat children. In no other relationship does one person have such an awesome responsibilty over another, so to model all relationships based on the parent/child relationship simply is not the right mold. You may disagree and not understand. And that is ok and a very valid reason why you would choose otherwise. On the other hand, I see no paradox.

However, I believe there is a mutually agreeable alternative available which can be found that respects the child's body space integrity instead. Perhaps, we could continue to seek those together instead of advocating the default to force, except perhaps when it is *truly* and universally necessary due to a life threatening event. When is that?
Pat

Again, it comes down to a core difference in what we believe.
I have no objection to the default use of force (coercion, not necessarily always physical force). And while I am very interested in kind and fun ways to get my children to do what I need them to do. I do not think it is an either/or scenario.

[boongirl]

Originally Posted by scubamama

I would think that if something were *truly* Non-negotiable, we could all agree on it.

I do not think it is possible for all of us, 100% of us, to agree on anything.

[MissRubyandKen]

Well as i said it was an example from the past, DD2 is almost 11 so its not really an issue anymore!

oh! okay , missed that.

[loraxc]

There comes a point where many of us, even those who practice negotiation and playfullness and any other number of ways to gently manipulate our children to willingly do what we want run out of patience and time and become less willing to continue to do that song and dance. The number of things I am willing to try and the amount of time I am willing to give to any number of personally "non-negotiable" situations have limits. Does it mean I am unwilling to consider negotiating altogether? No it just means that at some point I am done. This point may be sooner or later depending on time contsraints and my personal level of creativity and patience.

Yup.

[erika h]

Originally Posted by scubamama

Besides making a child get into a stroller to go for a walk what else does *everyone* agree is "non-negotiable" and Must be forced against a child's will if they don't agree/consent/comply/obey?

A big one for us was "no running in the parking lot" - although not immediately life threatening, when our daughter was 2 and 3, she'd just take off running once she got out of the car.

I finally taught her "hands on the car" until we were all ready to go, and if I was carrying something with both hands, she had to keep her one hand on my coat or in my pocket.

[rumi]

Besides making a child get into a stroller to go for a walk what else does *everyone* agree is "non-negotiable" and Must be forced against a child's will if they don't agree/consent/comply/obey?

did i miss something. i definitely do not think above exmple is 'non negotiable'

also i dont think that true = universal.

i think that for any rule we go through stages where up to a certain age we make the decisions for the kids and they have no say, like no solids before 6 months, no wheat before 12 months, etc. this i have no problem extending to non food items like no TV before x yrs and no sugar before x years.

in the next phase, i would differentiate the things that i think are healthy and lift restrictions in toto, and other things i would offer in a limited way, like sugar - which i also have no problem restricting / limiting. Or for that matter vitamin C. then there would be an age where i would lift the surveillance altogether. this age would vary for different things and i would set it dynamically according to a complex blend of factors.

life threatening things i think follow a similar pattern in that there is a stage where we physically remove our children from dangerous situations like traffic and eventually they get to a stage here they understand and internalise the rule themselves. but i offer the explanations even from the beginning. i dont see a need for anthig becoign nonnegotiable.

anyway, i am the same person who is putting vicks on my dd withut her consent, so go figure ....










Besides that which is truly Life Threatening.

[ambdkf]

Originally Posted by johub

Some of us believe that the parent child relationship is unique and that children learn about how people should be treated from how adults treat each other, and how children should be treated from how parents treat children.

That is interesting, so you believe that they turn 18 and something changes, that they then know - 'now I can be treated x way and should treat others x way' ? Fascinating! Maybe it is different for us because my kids don't go to school, so we are living in the "real", "adult" world always and it wouldn't make sense for them to not understand how adults treat each other or to treat children differently.

[captain crunchy]

While it is my goal to be completely non-coercive and strive to always find mutually agreeable solutions, I can't say that in the 18(+) years that our daughter is living with us that every single thing will be negotiable.

I can say however, that I intend to enter every situation with the pure intention of reaching a mutually agreeable solution and with the mindset, spirit, and determination to not force her to do something she doesn't want to do.

The reason I have to say that is because when someone like me makes a comment like "I would never force her into her carseat" ... someone will inevitably counter that statement with:

"but what if it was snowing and your daughter chose not to wear shoes that day and she was getting frostbite and gangrene and your mother was in an accident and you had to get to the hospital and a knife-weilding murderer was chasing you and your husband said he would divorce you if you didn't leave but your child STILL didn't want to leave... would you force them THEN?????"

So, I am put in a position where I have to relent and say, "well gee, I suppose then I would probably coerce her into the car."

Where the person responds "seeeeeeeeee!!! You are COERCIVE!!! You really don't mean what you say about consensual living!!!!"

*sigh*

So, in conclusion, I enter every interaction with my child with the spirit, intent, and determination inside me to live consensually with her and to honor her autonomy and to find a mutually agreeable solution to any issue that may arise. I think it can be accomplished in almost all situations and that is what I strive for.

[The4OfUs]

I posted this to the other thread that has gotten into negotiation vs coersion, the diaper thread up towards the top - but really meant to post it here (even though it's kind of relevant in both places since the diaper thread has taken a kind of OT turn.....) SO, if you read it there, it's the same thing here!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++



OK, so I keep thinking about this....it's starting to become an obsession....

For me, I don't really go into any situation thinking it's non negotiable...I just have limits to what is agreeable to me, and if DS and I can't come to an agreement, I will make things as comfortable to him as I can, and then just move on. I'm certainly not looking for ways every day for me to exert my power, or impose my will on him, but if we can't come to an agreement fairly quickly, as the adult in the relationship I feel I am responsible for making the best of a situation, helping DS express and explore his feelings, and then move on.

I keep falling back to the feeling that if small children were meant to live on their own and make all the decisions regarding their life for themselves, we'd be like other mammals that are able to (and expected to) survive without their parents after a year or two. However, we are clearly not made that way...at the earliest, a teenager could make it on their own, albeit struggling. If you put a 6-year-old out into the world (even if it was back in the stone ages when there wasn't so much tenchology and rush, rush, rush) they still wouldn't be ableto survive on their own (and I'm not talking about emotionally, I'm talking about literal survival). I firmly believe that children grow into their ability to be independent, develop the ability to reason, gain the insight to see "the big picture", etc. etc. AND, that is why I will gradually hand over the reigns to my child(ren), base don their individual development and abilities.

I also firmly believe that every child is different, and what works in one situation for one child will not be the same for any other given child. This is why it is so important to be in tune with your children and their own individual needs and abilities, and not try to 'cookie cutter parent' by any one means.

I base a lot of my parenting on the way I was parented. I think I turned out pretty well I don't have any resentment towards my parents, I don't have any boundary issues with my personal space, I don't have any feelings of resentment that my parents didn't value my opinions, and I certainly don't have any problem letting someone know if something they are doing to me or around me is NOT OK with me. AND, my parents were gentle, but sometimes coersive. Though I do live much of my life in the "mainstream world" (check out the sorta crunchy/sorta mainstream thread in Finding Your Tribe), I most certainly think critically about things that are going on in the world and do not believe anything told to me by "authorities" just because they say so.

So, for me it's not about things being non-negotiable - many, many times I negotiate with my child and find mutual solutions. However, when we come to stalemates because my son is not capable of *really* understanding the repercussions of things, I feel it is my job to move along the path of least resistance (not necessarily NO resistance), and just get the job done. This often means a compromise on *both* our parts, and I don't think that's a bad thing. I guess I just don't see the necessity for everyone to be 100% satisfied 100% of the time. I have a deep sense of satisfaction with my life, even though I don't always get exactly what I want/need, and quite frankly I have no desire to negotiate with people to be satisfied with the outcome all the time - a lot of things just don't matter that much to me...I'm trying to figure out how to say this nicely....I guess I feel that if someone feels the need to always be 100% satisfied with the solution or outcome to a situation (which to me is what mutually agreeable means, everyone is totally satisfied, but correct me if i'm wrong), there must be something going on (or have gone on previously in your life) that has left you feeling out of control or dissatisfied with your life somewhere...to me it seems, frankly, a bit naive. To me, part of growing into an adult is realizing that not being 100% satisfied with things all the time is OK, and that being mostly OK with things sometimes is just fine, you can have a joyous fulfilled life without always being totally satisfied with things...it seems like a burden to me to always have to figure out how to make myself happy AND make others happy at the same time. PLEASE realize I'm talking about everyday, mundane, daily living scenarios, NOT life changing situations or major life events.

I'm hoping to pass on this deepsense of satisfaction to my child(ren), and the resilience to always glean the best out of a situation even though it might not be exactly as they envisioned it.

AND, AGAIN - if my child was kicking, screaming, crying, etc. DAILY about any one situation or event, I would absolutely get to the bottom of what was causing the problem and find a way to work things out. However, for the occasional minor disappointment during a daily living situation, I just don't want to give it (the situation) that much power in my life, or my child's life. I want him to know that little situations shouldn't have that much power, that there is so much more to life than some of the minor inconveniences of daily living.

OK - I'm going to TRY to stop thinking about this now....at least for a few minutes.

[MissRubyandKen]

I posted this to the other thread that has gotten into negotiation vs coersion, the diaper thread up towards the top - but really meant to post it here (even though it's kind of relevant in both places since the diaper thread has taken a kind of OT turn.....)

yeah I'm starting to feel dizzy from running back and forth.

I do not try to make every thing in our life mutually agrreable. I am striving towards consensual living (for a long time now without ever hearing the phrase) which to me seems quite different. I wish I knew all the things I know now since the beginning of motherhood. I did well for being ignorant simply out of pure love for my dc and a deep desire for them to be happy, respected, and attached. The forced toothbrushing has really been my biggest regret in life.
I do not expect things to always be agreeable to me and neither do my 4 yr old and 6 yr old. Quite often one of us consents to something that is quite obviously more important to the other person, among numerous other reasons. I will assume cooperation can be engaged. I am not perfect though! Frustration, anger, tiredness, hunger all CAN throw me (and dc) off at times, I do my best to work through it in the moment. I EXPECT my dc to listen to safety concerns upon my explaining them. I EXPECT my dc to listen to my needs, wants, concerns, and me theirs'. Doesn't mean all of these will ALWAYS in every instance be met immediately. I EXPECT these things not in a 'I expect this or else' way but in a 'I expect this because it seems like this will happen way'. I do believe my dc WANT to do the acceptable thing almost all the time. When not there is a reason I will do my best to find out and remedy. I DO NOT spend all of my time in negotiations. That is ridiculous and uneccessary. I will negotiate as needed. I do make my expectations clearly available. I do talk about my feelings, wants, and needs and encourage them to do so too. All that said I don't feel that defaulting to force is neccessary. I believe doing so will likely create MORE time-consuming issues and MORE stress and MORE acting out of anger, frustration, and aggression than not forcing my will.

[The4OfUs]

MissRubyandKen, you know, I think when it comes down to it, a lot of us are probably a lot more alike than we're realizing....I think many of us are saying basically the same things, but in different ways, and with only minimal differences.

Gotta love semantics - or how do they say it? "The devil is in the details...."...

re: toothbrushing (another popular coersion/non-coersion situation!), DS wasn't initially thrilled with the prospect - so we tried him having one and us having one - him brushing mine then me brushing his, and several other permutations, all with a little bit of grumbling and resistance but not a huge fuss....UNTIL, we stumbled across the fact that he LOVES DH and my Sonicare toothbrush! We bought a set of extra soft gentle bristles, and he sits happily we "sing" (one sure fire way to get his mouth to stay open) while I buzz his teeth for a minute or two (incidentally, his ped thought this was a great idea - ha!).

Sooo, although there wasn't extreme resistance or tears or anything to it, there was enough protest by him with our other methods that it made us uncomfortable and we kept searching until we found something he liked!

Sooooo, maybe I'm a little more noncoersive than I thought!

[sweetest]

Originally Posted by captain crunchy

I can say however, that I intend to enter every situation with the pure intention of reaching a mutually agreeable solution and with the mindset, spirit, and determination to not force her to do something she doesn't want to do.

The reason I have to say that is because when someone like me makes a comment like "I would never force her into her carseat" ... someone will inevitably counter that statement with:

"but what if it was snowing and your daughter chose not to wear shoes that day and she was getting frostbite and gangrene and your mother was in an accident and you had to get to the hospital and a knife-weilding murderer was chasing you and your husband said he would divorce you if you didn't leave but your child STILL didn't want to leave... would you force them THEN?????"

So, I am put in a position where I have to relent and say, "well gee, I suppose then I would probably coerce her into the car."

Where the person responds "seeeeeeeeee!!! You are COERCIVE!!! You really don't mean what you say about consensual living!!!!"

*sigh*

.

:

This sounds like a conversation I would have with my father!

So many people I run across just dont get WHY I would let dd continue to play at daycare when I have come to pick her up. I see so many parents that are "in charge" and it just makes me feel so I look like an alien when I actually bother to speak to my 2.5 year old and tell her why its time to leave "its time to make dinner. Rico (the dog) is waiting for us to take him outside" The thing is dd gets it - yeah, its takes us 10 minutes longer to leave but she is happy, I'm happy.

For instance, yesterday when I went to pick her up she had just had a poop accident. I knew she was upset and needed some time to play before she was ready to leave. I know my daughter and I know that when she is upset she is especially closed to negotiation. So I helped pick up the toys while she played. Then we got on shoes to go outside. Then I let her play a bit more in the courtyard. Finally, I said "its time to go home and make dinner" and she left. When we got home we talked about it a little, and how important it is to leave daycare so we can come home and take Rico out.

I feel it is my job to teach her and guide her. I want her to do the things I ask of her because she knows it is the right thing to do, not because I said so. That does not happen overnight, its a long process. But I hope that when dd is a teenager and we talk about things like drinking and driving, she will listen to to me then, when I can no longer pick her up and carry her away, she will listen to me because she trusts and respects me, not from fear.

[captain crunchy]

I find the suggestion that people who seek mutually agreeable solutions must be somehow damaged to be very insulting.

What people don't seem to understand about this lifestyle choice, is that I don't parent this way because of how I was raised -- I parent this way in spite of how I was raised.

I parent this way not because of how I was treated, but because of how I want to be treated.

I parent this way because my size advantage, age advantage, financial advantage and maturity will never give me the right to use force on another human being, especially one who is vehemently protesting said force.

I don't recall anyone ever saying that living consensually or finding mutually agreeable solutions meant that you are 100% satisfied 100% of the time. We all live in this world too ya know, we do know how it works. However, I do believe that one can be heard, empathised with, talked with, validated, considered and respected 100% of the time even if we don't always get what we want 100% of the time.

I reject the notion that just because human babies need their caregivers for a longer period of time, it means we as adults have free reign to impose our will over their bodies, choices, opinions, thoughts and actions.

Yes, part of the gift of motherhood is protecting our children and nurturing them, loving them and respectfully guiding them with their consent -- and I don't think anyone, non-coercive or otherwise wouldn't pull their child off the road if a Mack truck was seconds away from making them a pancake. Fortunately, those aren't situations that happen very often and I think hypothetical situations like that are a convenient way to deflect from talking about day to day situations that will occur 1000 times to every 1 mack truck incident.

[irinam]

Originally Posted by captain crunchy

... someone will inevitably counter that statement with:

"but what if it was snowing and your daughter chose not to wear shoes that day and she was getting frostbite and gangrene and your mother was in an accident and you had to get to the hospital and a knife-weilding murderer was chasing you and your husband said he would divorce you if you didn't leave but your child STILL didn't want to leave... would you force them THEN?????"

So, I am put in a position where I have to relent and say, "well gee, I suppose then I would probably coerce her into the car."

Where the person responds "seeeeeeeeee!!! You are COERCIVE!!! You really don't mean what you say about consensual living!!!!"

: : : So true

[Magella]

Originally Posted by captain crunchy

I don't recall anyone ever saying that living consensually or finding mutually agreeable solutions meant that you are 100% satisfied 100% of the time. We all live in this world too ya know, we do know how it works. However, I do believe that one can be heard, empathised with, talked with, validated, considered and respected 100% of the time even if we don't always get what we want 100% of the time.

I think it would help, perhaps, if we understood that we're all operating on the same understanding of "living consenually" and "mutually agreeable solutions." I think that there might be some misunderstanding of these terms, and perhaps concrete examples of this in action, during the more mundane moments, might help. I do agree that one can parent while always striving to hear, empathize with, talk with, validate, consider and respect one's children-but I think this can be done even as I say that something is most definitely not agreeable to me as the parent, that when this happens I can be considerate of my children, I can empathize, I can work to make this situation agreeable to them. I just don't know if this is what Pat and captain crunchy mean consider finding a mutually agreeable solution. I don't think being considerate, respectful, and empathetic toward my children rules out my ever saying a particular thing is non-negotiable at this moment (like, picking up your sister from school is not negotiable, but you can choose to leave early and we'll walk or we can drive, or you can bring a toy if you like, or we can stop somewhere on the way if we leave early....).

I also think there's (at least for me) some confusion about what everyone considers "force."

So perhaps Pat and captain crunchy would elaborate? With examples? (I know cc has already given one about the blood draw.) I ask this in honest curiosity and with an honest desire to learn.

[The4OfUs]

Originally Posted by captain crunchy

I find the suggestion that people who seek mutually agreeable solutions must be somehow damaged to be very insulting.

I apologize, insulting was NOT my intention - as I said, I was tryign to find a way to express myself, but clearly I didn't. However.....this part of your post

Originally Posted by captain crunchy

I parent this way in spite of how I was raised.

is kind of what I was (unsuccessfully) trying to to point out. Since you were dissatisfied with the way you were parented you are going in the opposite direction of your childhood...I never meant to imply that anyone was "damaged", and I do apologize if I offended you or anyone else.
Also,

Originally Posted by captain crunchy

I parent this way because my size advantage, age advantage, financial advantage and maturity will never give me the right to use force on another human being, especially one who is vehemently protesting said force.

I totally agree - I do not feel I have free reign to weild force over my child(ren).....so, I feel that's an unfair assessment of my (occasionally coersive) parenting...I negotiate and come up with alternative solutions with my son a LOT....but it doesn't happen all the time, and based on the nature of our relationship and his continued joyful disposition, pleasant temperament, and strong attachment to me, I'm assuming the times I do occasionally play a trump card are not damaging our relationship....because he does not vehemently protest anything we're doing. If he does, we do find an alternative that though he may still grumble, he is not having a screaming fit...and I don't believe it's because I've crushed his will - hoenstly the times I end up picking him up, or putting him into his carseat when he really didn't want to be, or whatever, it's just not that often. Take today - we were headed out, he was wandering the yard and found a branch with some pine needles on it. I told him it was time to get in the car, and as he was getting in, I started to take the branch from him saying, "why don't we leave this outside?" He protested...so, I said, "OK, didn't realize it was that important to you", and we made the trip with him happily waving a pine branch around the car. No big deal. So, there you go - no coersion.

Originally Posted by captain crunchy

However, I do believe that one can be heard, empathised with, talked with, validated, considered and respected 100% of the time even if we don't always get what we want 100% of the time.

Again, I totally agree with you. But to me, validated, considered, and respected does not always mean that the solution is going to make them happy (which is how I understand consensual/mutual living, that both parties are happy with the solution), because minor disappointment (which is different than vehemently protesting) or not being totally OK/happy with the solution is OK with me sometimes (including in my own life).

Originally Posted by captain crunchy

I reject the notion that just because human babies need their caregivers for a longer period of time, it means we as adults have free reign to impose our will over their bodies, choices, opinions, thoughts and actions.

I agree here too...and I take umbrage with "free reign"...I would never try to tell my child how to feel or prevent them from expressing their feelings. I might ask them to do it respectfully, but would never tell them they were wrong for feeling a certain way. What I am saying is that after attempts at tryign to find an agreeable solution, I am not against finding a *mostly* agreeable solution for my child and going with it...which means he may grumble, but he is not hysterical.

As I said previously, I would bet in practice our parenting day to day isn't really that much different.

[irinam]

Originally Posted by donosmommy04

But to me, validated, considered, and respected does not always mean that it happens "their way"....it would likely wind up a compromise.

Exactly. Compromise is a reason for negotiating. I don't think Pat meant "negotiable" as in "you do what kids say"

[johub]

Originally Posted by ambdkf

That is interesting, so you believe that they turn 18 and something changes, that they then know - 'now I can be treated x way and should treat others x way' ? Fascinating! Maybe it is different for us because my kids don't go to school, so we are living in the "real", "adult" world always and it wouldn't make sense for them to not understand how adults treat each other or to treat children differently.

No certainly that is not it at all.
Everybody knows that the way to teach a child generosity is not to give them everythign they want, but to have them witness giving to others.
I think this is true of many other things.
And certainly of course a relationship progresses and doesnt automatically change at some arbitrary age. But even at 18, ones relationship with ones parents is a different sort of relationship than any other relationship. Even at 30 it usually is not the same as a peer relationship, but is closer.

[4evermom]

Originally Posted by rumi

did i miss something. i definitely do not think above exmple is 'non negotiable'

Based on my limited knowledge of Scubamama's parenting style, that was just a joke.

[ambdkf]

Originally Posted by 4evermom

Based on my limited knowledge of Scubamama's parenting style, that was just a joke.

She's out tonight but it was a joke. There was a recent thread about *having* to get in the stroller and go for a walk.