sharing unconditional parenting with others

[mammal_mama]

The other day I shared some of the stuff I've been learning from Alfie Kohn's "Unconditional Parenting" with a friend. My friend said, "What works with one child won't work with another." Well, duh!

To me, that's part of the beauty of unconditional, as well as attachment, parenting. You listen and respond to each individual child. As Kohn says, when kids aren't worried about punishment, there's less pressure on parents to treat everyone the same. And of course AP is all about letting your child lead the way.

So I guess I don't get it. I've heard similar remarks about unschooling (one friend said, "It'll probably work with your first, but you never know, your next child might be totally unmotivated." -- whadaya mean, she'll shrivel up 'cause she just can't be "motivated" to nurse or even take her next breath? To me, the only "unmotivated" person is a dead person: if you're alive, you're doing SOMEthing to stay that way.) ... and I've even heard similar things said about AP, though I'm hard-put to imagine a child who wouldn't thrive having a parent who's totally responsive and available. Especially since AP isn't about the tools; there's no rule that says you're not "in" if you don't sling or bedshare: these practices are helps to many families (including mine), but if your baby's miserable in a sling, it's all about following Baby's cues, not a list of rules. So WHO doesn't it work for? WHO needs to have their cues ignored, their cries unanswered? I don't get it.

I guess my point is: I'm flabbergasted at hearing people say that responding to your child, and accepting your child for who s/he is -- period -- regardless of behavior is tantamount to following some rigid "one size fits all" approach to parenting. And by the way, this friend uses punishment with BOTH her kids, though she relies on punishment much less than she used to, and is talking to her kids a lot more.

I realize we all start parenting from different vantage points, so my purpose isn't to criticise my friend or anyone else. But how would, or how do, you respond to people who say that your AP philosophy, especially as it pertains to gd, has no respect for the individuality of each child? Am I the only one who's hearing this stuff?

[hubris]

Frustrating, huh? I hate it when I'm trying to explain a philosophy but people think it's a rigid set of behaviors. Some people have trouble seeing big-picture scenarios and need a checklist, so maybe that's what you're running into?

It's also possible that "what works for you might not work for me" is their attempt at a polite way of saying that they disagree with your philosophy.

No idea why they would feel it necessary to warn you about how poorly your parenting might go with a future child, that's just nutso.

[irinam]

I sometimes ask what do they mean by "work"? "It works" - for whom?

But how would, or how do, you respond to people who say that your AP philosophy, especially as it pertains to gd, has no respect for the individuality of each child?

I often compare GD vs mainstream to the conventional medicine vs. holistic approach to the body.

I posted something like that a few month ago:

If your stomach hurts, there are several things you can do:

1) Mainstream/conventional approach (exaggerating here) – take a pain killer.
Pain is gone. It "works"!
Oops… a few days later – the pain is back.
Well, the pain killer "worked", so lets take it again. Seeeee, it worked again!
Then some time passes and the previous doze of the pain killer does not "work" anymore… what to do?
I know, take a bigger doze! It "works" again!
And so on and so forth until you discover that you have ulcer (due to taking so many pain killers)


2) GD / holistic approach – figure out WHY you are having pains. Is it because you have been eating McDonalds for the past few weeks? Are you stressed a lot? Do you get enough rest?
Then go and tackle the REAL problem, not the symptom.


Pain killer is akin to punishment. Addresses the symptoms (behaviour), not the reason.

To me the second approach seems wa-a-ay more individualized than the first one.

Plus, if you excersise the second approach you are probably preventing lots more, before it even happens.

And for unconditional parenting… I love my kids despite <insert a condition>, not because <insert the condition>

[mammal_mama]

Originally Posted by funshine

It's also possible that "what works for you might not work for me" is their attempt at a polite way of saying that they disagree with your philosophy.

No idea why they would feel it necessary to warn you about how poorly your parenting might go with a future child, that's just nutso.

Yes, I think my friend was probably trying to politely disagree. It's funny: I'M the one into the "gentle" approach, but I'm starting to feel so much more strongly about how kids (ALL kids, not just mine, whereas in the past I was mainly just concerned about MY kids) should be loved and respected. My friends who use punishment seem much more able to use gentle diplomacy when disciplinary issues come up in conversations -- but I'm finding it impossible to just politely listen, nod my head, and say mm-hmm when someone explains why she HAD to give her child the "spanking of his life."

True, I'd be seriously alarmed if my child hit her sibling over the head with a crowbar -- but in that situation I honestly don't know how I could administer a spanking calmly with no anger (you know, the experts always say you should NEVER spank in anger, but by the time I'd calmed down enough to do it "right" -- and comforted my harmed child and made sure she was okay -- I think I could actually handle the situation better by talking with my child, listening to find out what she was thinking and feeling when she did it, explaining how badly this could harm someone, and brainstorming together about how she could deal with similar frustrations in the future. My friend seemed to see this incident as a situation where talking "wouldn't work" with her child.

irinam, your analogy about medicalized versus holistic healthcare really clarifies things for me, and I think it would for most people as we're all becoming more aware of the problems caused by treating symptoms of an illness while failing to dig for the root cause. I think that's a very effective way to present the big picture (mentioned by funshine) of punishment versus gentle discipline, especially since most punitive parents are focused on the "quick fix" (how can I get my kids to obey me NOW?), whereas unconditional parents are less concerned about changing specific behaviors and more concerned about helping kids feel right inside (since our behavior really flows from how we're feeling on the inside). But I think ALL parents would SAY they care more about who their kids are growing up to be, that they're really concerned with the long-term. Is it okay if I use your analogy?

[irinam]

Originally Posted by mammal_mama

Is it okay if I use your analogy?

I'd be flattered if you do