GD Questions...

[Enchanted Gypsy]

I will be a first time parent in a few months and am looking into various parenting philosphies. I was hoping someone could answer a few questions for me about GD, which I am really struggling to understand some aspects of.

Are GD kids EVER expected to do somthing they dont want to ? If they absolutely refuse, is there ever a time when a parent, using GD, just makes them do it, or do they just always get to do what they want, regardless ? If not, considering that many do not believe in consequences, how do you handle this ?

What about as they get older, and decide they just dont FEEL like going to school, just like some days I don't feel like doing my work. At a job, your boss will not really care if you don't feel like doing somthing, you will be fired.

Is it not true that often in life we just need to do things we dont want to do? How does a child that never has to do as they are asked, despite how they feel about it, learn this ?

I do not believe in spanking, yelling or living in a dictaorship, and definitely believe kids should be given choices and control, when possible. However, is it not acceptable, using GD, to sometimes just expect a child to do as they are asked, and if not, live with the consequence ?

What is the harm in this, considering that is how life works sometimes ??

~ Pixie

[DevaMajka]

Originally Posted by Enchanted Gypsy

I will be a first time parent in a few months

Congrats

Are GD kids EVER expected to do somthing they dont want to ? If they absolutely refuse, is there ever a time when a parent, using GD, just makes them do it, or do they just always get to do what they want, regardless ? If not, considering that many do not believe in consequences, how do you handle this ?

There are a lot of different ideas about what GD is. For some, gd includes logical consequences and punitive time-outs.
For others, like myself, punitive timeouts definitely don't seem gd at all. I am generally against all types of punishments/consequences, but I can see how logical consequences could potentially be useful in extreme situations (though I've not seen a situation so far with my 2yo where they would be helpful at all).
Others still are against any sort of consequences for any reason.
A lot of gd'er (At least here) are very motivated to find mutually agreeable solutions, to most issues.
There is at least one poster here that does NOT punish that does have a lot of expectations for her children. Perhaps she'll post here.

So to answer your question, is MY child ever expected to do something he doesn't want to do- well, safety issues, sure. He can't run away from me in a mall. No punishments, I will just carry him so he's close to me. He can't hit/harm others (that would not be mutually agreeable, obviously). Same here- no punishments, I'd just physically stop him until I could find an acceptable way for him to express the reason behind the hitting.
Sometimes, there isn't an immediate safety issue, but there is a conflict of desires. Say, we're at the mall and ds wants to ride the trains. We do. Then he wants to keep riding- over and over and over...... Well, if it gets to the point where he is obviously tired, I'm really done riding trains, and we need to get home (I have issues with crowds too), its a little more difficult. My goal is to find mutually agreeable solutions, but sometimes I just can't find one (not that one doesn't exist, I just can't fine it). In those cases, I hold him, while he cries and try to empathize. I certainly don't get mad at him for crying/tantruming, because he's just soooo sad about not riding the train anymore.

But really, the times where there are conflicts are relatively rare. There's a huge misconception in our society about children and their motivations. Children WANT to behave in a socially acceptable manner. They want to because they are innately social beings. (that idea is from The Continuum Concept, which I LOVED).
Our attachment with our kids is our most useful discipline tool (that's in Hold On To Your Kids by Gordon Neufield). If one feels that they need to use punishment as a discipline tool, they either need to examine their beliefs, or they need to examine their attachment and work on THAT. Neufield says that if our attachment is strong enough, punishment is completely unecessary. And that if punishment seems needed, it is the worst thing you could do, as it is a sign that the attachment needs work, and punishment will just take you in the complete wrong direction.
Ds knows that I will cooperate with him, and he cooperates with me. He does things that he doesn't want to do, and he does them willingly, because that's what needs to happen for some reason or another. He knows that I must have a good reason, or I wouldn't be asking. That's not ALL the time, but a lot of the time. There are things that I don't necessarily want to do, but I do it because it's the right thing to do.
Our society sort of thinks of children as "being as bad as we will let them be. They will get away with everything, unless we MAKE Them be good" etc.
Yes, ds did hit the dogs a bit when he was younger. We worked on it, and got out of those phases in a week (there were a couple phases at different ages). I focused on the real reasons to not hit (Dog doesn't like to be hit) and acceptable alternatives for him to express his impulse (if you want her to back off, say MOVE and hold your hand up like this).
But actually, after I thought about it more, I realized he mostly only hit one of the dogs, and she was the one that wasn't much bothered by it. So I think he WAS paying attention to how his actions affected others, even at that age.
Punishment, at best, makes kids behave for self centered reasons (I won't hit the dog because *I* don't want a time out)

Is it not true that often in life we just need to do things we dont want to do? How does a child that never has to do as they are asked, despite how they feel about it, learn this ?

Well, there have been a lot of discussions about "have to" and a lot of people argue that as adults, we don't have to do anything. We choose to go to work, because the alternative is not acceptable. But it's a choice, nonetheless.

I do not believe in spanking, yelling or living in a dictaorship, and definitely believe kids should be given choices and control, when possible. However, is it not acceptable, using GD, to sometimes just expect a child to do as they are asked, and if not, live with the consequence ?

Consequences can be "You didn't live up to your end of the work. Next time, I expect you to help." Or just the child seeing that they behaved in a surprising manner, and that what they did negatively affected someone else, or that what they did was not socially acceptable.
There are consequences without punishments. Imo, all punishments/rewards undermine a child's innate sociality. They lose touch with the REAL reasons to do something, and to lose touch with how their actions affect others. They become so worried about how their actions will affect themselves, that it might begin to only matter to them to behave when Parent is around.
So there are definite consequences of using punishments! (I know I said that I can see how logical consequences may be useful. But sometimes the best one can do isn't exactly the ideal solution. kwim?)
One of my favorite TCC quotes is this "Children need to see that they are assumed to be well-intentioned, naturally social people who are trying to do the right thing and who want reliable reactions from their elders to guide them." TCC Intro xv
(and just to add to this long rambly post, I'm going to say that I try not to give too many choices. I try to avoid giving ds any arbitrary choices. I don't ASK him to make a choice, but I respect any choices that he makes of his own volition (I try. I'm not perfect).

What is the harm in this, considering that is how life works sometimes ??

Well, I've mentioned the harm that I see in punishment. But more than that, my home is "life" and it works the way it works. We are considerate of everyone in this house (ok, we try to be). Everyone's opinions/desires matter just as much as everyone else's.
But I know you are talking about the "real world" (the grown up world), and my answer to that is that my house isn't the grown up world. I'm not going to do something negative to ds to prepare him for the real world. Just like I wouldn't expose him to second hand smoke to prepare him for smokers in the real world, I'm not going to expose him to punishments to prepare him for that.
Actually, I've read (and it makes sense) that by raising a child compassionately, you are doing more to prepare them to deal with the real world than you would by raising them "real world" style. kwim?

[mamaduck]

I have never used the phrase "gentle discipline" IRL, or put any particular philosophical label on my relationship with my kids. I think my parenting fits the defintions most parents here adhere too, but I still don't find it helpful to "subscribe" wholly to a set of standards that someone else has set. It might help you to move away from the idea of "doing GD" and toward the idea of figuring out what sort of relationship you want to have with your child.

For me, parenting has been a journey of "figuring out," that has involved a lot of hard thinking, working out of issues, reading, and disscussing. I think you have to determine your own principles, and then weigh each issue that comes up agains those principles. (And tweak your principles as you go along!)

Dh and I have decided that its important to treat our children with respect. And everything we do needs to be weighed against that concept. Sometimes, we need them to do something they don't want to do. We try to avoid punishing, rewarding, manipulating, forcing, making deals, etc. 99% of the time it works out to say, "Look buddy, I know you don't want to and its hard. This is why we have to though -- and I'm right here with you until its done." Starting out with a strong connection to our children, and making a constant effort to maintain that connection, gives us a lot of power in our children's lives (and they in our lives!) Nurturing a sense of trust will take you a long way in terms of cooperation.

[skueppers]

Originally Posted by Enchanted Gypsy

Are GD kids EVER expected to do somthing they dont want to?

As was pointed out by a previous poster, gentle discipline isn't a single philosophy -- it means different things to different people. The specific kind of gentle discipline you may be thinking of is sometimes referred to as Consensual Living, which I do not practice.

I definitely do expect my daughter to do things she doesn't want to do. If her diaper is soiled, I change it whether or not she wants me to, and no matter how much she protests or tries to run away. If we're going out somewhere, I expect her to be reasonably cooperative about getting dressed and getting out the door, and if letting her choose her own clothes and put on her own shoes and whatever all else doesn't lead to this happening in a reasonable amount of time, I do it for her.

I certainly do give her choices, but I feel that it's my responsibility as a parent to draw the boundaries of those choices. For example, in a parking lot she has a choice between holding my hand or being carried. Running across the parking lot without me is not an option. In a store she has a choice between pushing the cart while I help steer, sitting in the top part of the cart, or riding in a sling. Running up and down the aisles and taking things off the shelves (other than specific items I ask her to get) are not acceptable options.

I do believe that it's appropriate for consequences to occur as a result of her action or inaction, but not as punishment per se. For example, she really likes to pretend to drive the car, but if it takes too long to get ready to go somewhere, then there isn't time for her to drive the car and she'll have to wait until later. Not a punishment, just a statement of fact.

So anyway, that's how I personally apply the idea of expectations within the overall realm of gentle discipline.

[The4OfUs]

I'll save you from a huge, rambling post of mine, and just say : to what the previous posters have said. Aw, who am I kidding, I love to ramble. Here goes.

Unfortunately, GD often gets a bad name because people who do not guide or teach their children at all sometimes invoke "GD" as their parenting style. Even the most consensual mamas here are teaching, guiding, discussing things with their children and will one way or another prevent (or be teaching in the aftermath if something happens) their child from harming others, or others' property. GD is a pretty broad spectrum, ranging from consensual living, to parent-enforced logical punishments. Some parents focus more on the "Gentle", and some focus more on the "Discipline" but I think it's safe to say that we're all in agreement that physically punishing, verbally abusing, and arbitrarily imposing unrelated consequences are NOT effective ways to parent or motivate a child. For most of us, our goal is for our children to do (and NOT do) things because they understand how their actions in a situation will impact on others and themselves, NOT because of them being focused on what might *happen TO them* if they do or don't do something.

As to my personal interpretation of GD...
I try to work with DS to find solutions that work for all of us, but when it comes down to it, I will pull rank if something "needs" to be done and we can't find a solution relatively easily. I'm probably in the middle of the spectrum of GD, if not a bit more towards parent-in-charge. However, I strive to be consensual in as many situations as possible...I believe, though, that young children do not have the same level of abstract thinking ability, ability to delay gratification, or ability to see significantly into the future to make rational decisions about some situations. So, in those situations, I will do my best to make things as tolerable for him as possible. So, things like grocery shopping, doctor appointments, car seats, hand holding in crowds, staying nearby in public and not disturbing others, brushing teeth - those are all things that just get done in our family. He may not like it, and we'll make it as painless as we possibly can, but they will get done. And we do not punish him for expressing his discontent. We'll empathize, validate his opinion, offer alternatives, and explain why we're doing what we're doing, and make it as fun as possible, but it still gets done.

I do have relatively high expectations of DS as far as appointments/obligations, and how he treats other people and other people's property, so as a matter of course in his impulsive youth I have had to sometimes impose my will on him to get him to stop doing something, or start doing something. BUT, since for the most part we have a very cooperative relationship, our relationship has remained very close. And we love on each other all day, so that helps too! I'm finding as he's getting older and more able to have conversations with me about situations, we're able to be more cooperative than we were when he was smaller, which is such a pleasure to me - I love seeing him "get" situations. This is not to say that he doesn't sometimes wig out - but his wig outs are getting fewer and farther between. I love discussing things with him and hearing his ideas, and can see that it makes him feel good that his input is considered, though outcomes might not always be exactly what he wanted.

As to consequences, pretty much the consequence is the actual stopping something or starting something, and discussing the reason behind it. And that's pretty much it. Maybe a short discussion later in the day about the situation if it is warranted. Any natural consequences will run their course, and beyond that, we don't do punishments. I can appreciate some instances where logical punishments might be useful in older children, but as my child is still young (and I'm not even thinking about the 6-month-old ), punishments aren't even on our radar right now.

For me, GD is about having age-appropriate expectations, picking your battles (and a LOT of life is nt worth a battle), offering them alternatives to experiences they're trying to get, modeling that which you'd like them to become, and treating them the way you'd like to be treated, especially in difficult situations. I know when there's a "have to" in my life, I much prefer someone empathizing and explaining it to me and helping me through it than yelling at me and punishing me for disagreeing with them. I personally don't think that authority is *inherently* evil, but I also don't automatically follow someone just because they're supposed to be "the boss" - I think critically about situations, and evaluate them independently before I decide to comply or not, and I am teaching my child(ren) the same thing...to think critically - which I think is often missing in the "obedience/punishment" kind of parenting dynamic. By explaining things that happen in our lives (instead of just "do what I say"), I'm passing on my values, and helping DS see that I'm not arbitrarily making decisions about his life because I'm his parent.

Soooo...for matters of safety: No negotiation. For things like household chores and the daily grind: Negotiation, but it still gets done, in the least painful manner for all of us. For matters of his own body and his property (toys, room, eating): Pretty much his decision, aside from basic hygiene (diapers and teeth), which I will compel him to accomplish. For other situations: Respect others that might be involved, negotiate as much of a mutual solution as possible, and get it done.

I've found that the more cooperatively we live when things don't really matter, the more cooperative he is when things really DO matter.

Whew. Hope this helps.

[Enchanted Gypsy]

Thanks Heather,
That was the most easily understood explanation I have read anywhere yet, and somthing I can get behind.

There are still a few things I dont get though.....

I so often see kids who are just completely out of control with their actions and no amount of talking to them changes anything. They hit, they bite, they walk all over their parents, they do whatever they want no matter what their parents ask them. I often observe the parents in these situations (looking very tired and out of it) try to calm their kid and negotiate with them. I always thought, that was one of the reasons the kids acted the way they did, because they kenw that if they just threw a big enough tantrum, that they could get their way.

I guess I am wondering, if negotiation and choices are always the FIRST option, what incentive is there for a child to do as they are asked, when they just do not want to ? What keeps them from just saying, no, I wont do it, and throw a tantrum ?

I have very llittle experience with kids,and I assume a lot of this will become aparent in a few months when I become a mother.I just wanted to get a heads up on what othere, who have "been there , done that" thought.

Thanks for all your patient replies ! ~ Pixie

[DevaMajka]

I really recommend you read www.naturalchild.com
it is FULL of articles on the why's and how's of gd.
Another book that I really like is Becoming the Parent You Want To Be. It's a pretty good beginners book, imo, and gives some really good (non punitive) concrete ideas on dealing with children's unacceptable behavior.
I'm going to post some articles that say what I'm trying to say, only in a much better easier to understand way:
http://www.naturalchild.com/jan_hunt/proudmom.html
http://www.naturalchild.com/jan_hunt...parenting.html
http://www.naturalchild.com/jan_hunt/looking_past.html
http://www.naturalchild.com/jan_hunt/new_way.html
http://www.naturalchild.com/jan_hunt/tantrum.html

These articles are all by Jan Hunt (I LOVE LOVE LOVE Jan Hunt). They all relate to questions that you have asked in this thread. I have to say, that perhaps I should just have posted these in the first place. I agree with 99% of what she has to say!

Originally Posted by Enchanted Gypsy

I so often see kids who are just completely out of control with their actions and no amount of talking to them changes anything. They hit, they bite, they walk all over their parents, they do whatever they want no matter what their parents ask them. I often observe the parents in these situations (looking very tired and out of it) try to calm their kid and negotiate with them. I always thought, that was one of the reasons the kids acted the way they did, because they kenw that if they just threw a big enough tantrum, that they could get their way.

My first thought would be that perhaps the kids you are seeing are NOT gd'd. Either their parents go from *trying* to be gentle, then swinging too far the other way at times (punishing them when "gentle doesn't work"), or their parents are not taking their job as teachers and authority figures seriously.
My second thought would be that everybody, kids and parents, have bad days. Maybe you are seeing that?
GD does NOT mean letting your kids do things that will harm others. Actually, imo it's the opposite.
There is something that I read once about "giving in" that I really like. Changing your mind, based on dc's feelings, when you realize that it's a bigger deal to dc than it is to you, is not bad. So, if you say no to a cookie without thinking much of it, then dc starts to cry, you may realize that it's not that big of a deal to you, so why not give it? BUT in cases where you are "giving in" simply to stop a scene, or because dc's extreme display of emotions makes you uncomfortable, or because you don't want to be the bad guy, THAT is the type of "giving in" that is no good, that can actually harm the relationship more than help it.

I guess I am wondering, if negotiation and choices are always the FIRST option, what incentive is there for a child to do as they are asked, when they just do not want to ? What keeps them from just saying, no, I wont do it, and throw a tantrum ?

I tried to explain this in my long rambly first post. The incentive is that they are part of the family, and they want to do what is socially acceptable. GD'ed kids know that parents will cooperate with them, and that they are expected to cooperate back. And they get explanations, which let them know that they aren't expected to do not-fun stuff arbitrarily.
And, even if they DO say no (because they are kids, and ALL kids will say "no" sometimes- whether they are gd'd or are punished on a regular basis), well, ok. At that point, the parent decides whether it is a big enough deal, and goes from there. Changing a wet diaper is not a big deal most of the time, so if ds doesn't want it changed, that's ok with me. And because I try very hard to respect when he says "no" 95% of the time diaper changes are just fine with him, he actually asks to be changed most of the time.
Some things, like saying no to holding hands in the mall, isn't ok. So parent either holds hands, or carries dc, or whatever. Punishing isn't going to make that situation any easier. lol.

eta- I read your blog, and I LOVE both of those names!

[skueppers]

Originally Posted by Enchanted Gypsy

I so often see kids who are just completely out of control with their actions and no amount of talking to them changes anything. They hit, they bite, they walk all over their parents, they do whatever they want no matter what their parents ask them. I often observe the parents in these situations (looking very tired and out of it) try to calm their kid and negotiate with them. I always thought, that was one of the reasons the kids acted the way they did, because they kenw that if they just threw a big enough tantrum, that they could get their way.

Well, I think if you give in to tantrums, you're definitely setting yourself up for trouble -- no matter what your parenting style. I don't see any particular relationship between giving in to tantrums and gentle discipline.

Regarding offering choices, that's more of a strategy for encouraging compliance in the first place, rather than something I would initiate once I encountered resistance. For example, I might say, "It's time to get dressed so we can go to playgroup. Would you rather pick out your own outfit, or do you want me to pick something out for you?" Providing choice, within a reasonable set of options, helps a toddler to feel that they have some control over their environment, which is important to toddlers and makes it more likely they'll do what needs to be done. Understanding children's developmental stages helps you to recognize age-appropriate behavior and come up with strategies for coping with it.

I'm not sure what you mean by negotiation -- if you're talking about people who say things like, "if you're good while we're in the store, we'll stop for ice cream later," that's not the kind of strategy I would use either -- I'm not a fan of bribery.

One of the main concepts behind gentle discipline is that it's better to raise children in a way that encourages cooperation and positive family relationships, rather than in a way that encourages obedience based on fear of punishment.

You might want to take a look at some of the books recommended in the Gentle Discipline Book List sticky at the top of this forum. The William and Martha Sears "Disciplne Book" is readily available, and provides a good introduction to gentle discipline for babies and young toddlers.

[The4OfUs]

Originally Posted by Enchanted Gypsy

Thanks Heather,
That was the most easily understood explanation I have read anywhere yet, and somthing I can get behind.

There are still a few things I dont get though.....

I so often see kids who are just completely out of control with their actions and no amount of talking to them changes anything. They hit, they bite, they walk all over their parents, they do whatever they want no matter what their parents ask them. I often observe the parents in these situations (looking very tired and out of it) try to calm their kid and negotiate with them. I always thought, that was one of the reasons the kids acted the way they did, because they kenw that if they just threw a big enough tantrum, that they could get their way.

I guess I am wondering, if negotiation and choices are always the FIRST option, what incentive is there for a child to do as they are asked, when they just do not want to ? What keeps them from just saying, no, I wont do it, and throw a tantrum ?

I have very llittle experience with kids,and I assume a lot of this will become aparent in a few months when I become a mother.I just wanted to get a heads up on what othere, who have "been there , done that" thought.

Thanks for all your patient replies ! ~ Pixie

Glad to be able to help!

As far as hitting and biting, it's so nerve wracking when your child does it, especially when you've been a gentle parent! But it's totally normal deveopmentally; we had about a 4-month time period of DS hitting when he was mad. We just gave the same reponse, got out of his range so he couldn't hit us, tried to prevent the blow from landing as much as possible and remained consistent, and it finally went away. Punishing him for it wouldn't have helped, it would have just escalated the situation. It's especially tough when your kiddo laughs and seems to have no conscience wih the hitting or biting - but that's totally within the range of normal too. So hitting and biting in young toddlers is a tough situation to handle in public. Honestly, I avoided situations where I knew he might not be feeling his best, because that was often a trigger (tired, hungry, overstimulated...) and if we were in a place and he wigged, we'd leave. I think some people aren't willing to do that, though. I wouldn't be angry with him when leaving, just realize that it was too much of a situation for that point in time. Until children are old enough to have impulse control and empathy (which doesn't even start to become reliable until the 3rd year), trying to "fix" hitting and biting is a pretty fruitless proposition, and it will pass as other phases do.

As far as incentive for cooperation as opposed to refusing and tantruming at every request, I guess it's just the same reason why you help out someone you love - you like to make them happy. Also, I think this is where modeling comes into play too - DH and I are very much partners in the household, so DS sees us helping each other out. We help him out, he helps us out. Really, the lvoe bond and attachment go a long way and if you start from the beginning doing things cooperatively (even when they are babies and incapable of helping, just talking about it can set up the framework), it just becomes part of your rhythm. And, on days when he doesn't feel like helping, I don't sweat it. I phrase things as an option and question only when I don't mind if he says no. If it's something I really want done, I won't phrase it as a question, but as a statement of us doing it together. Then, there's less incentive for him to say no, because I'm not dumping it all on him.

Now, really, this is all the "ideal", and in real life and real practice, sometimes he refuses and flings himself on the floor for no apparent reason, and sometimes I raise my voice. Noobody is perfect. BUT, keeping these ideals in mind helps me center myself and makes our lives go a whole lot more smoothly. AND, I can only imagine that if I wasn't working with him, but "versus" him, things would be a lot more stressful and he probably would not be as cooperative as he is, because he would likely feel pushed around.

[DevaMajka]

Originally Posted by The4OfUs

As far as incentive for cooperation as opposed to refusing and tantruming at every request, I guess it's just the same reason why you help out someone you love - you like to make them happy. Also, I think this is where modeling comes into play too - DH and I are very much partners in the household, so DS sees us helping each other out. We help him out, he helps us out. Really, the lvoe bond and attachment go a long way and if you start from the beginning doing things cooperatively (even when they are babies and incapable of helping, just talking about it can set up the framework), it just becomes part of your rhythm. And, on days when he doesn't feel like helping, I don't sweat it. I phrase things as an option and question only when I don't mind if he says no. If it's something I really want done, I won't phrase it as a question, but as a statement of us doing it together. Then, there's less incentive for him to say no, because I'm not dumping it all on him.

Ok, I change my answer to that :