Grr... your punishment just crushed MY kid! - Page 5

[mamazee]

It sounds to me like he probably was punished the first time. And I thought maybe he was refusing to come home because he knew when he got home he'd get punished.

I guess we're just seeing the same story through different eyes.

[kungfu_barbi]

Originally Posted by Leilalu

Well, I guess I must differ than a lot of GD moms here in that I think parental intervention in discipline is sometimes nessecary, and good. In my mind, safety issues take precedence and fall under a different category. There are only so many tricks in my bag and hardly any of them would work if the child wanted to do something risky and dangerous.

i suppose it depends on how you define parental intervention.

if your bag o' tricks includes such intervention as a swat on the rear-end, time outs, and grounding, then we disagree. and that's ok.

if, however, your definition of intervention means parenting proactively, lots of instruction with practicing and training, and correction that is focused on the heart, then we are on the same sheet of music.

peace

[paquerette]

It just seems like the root of the problem is a less than optimal relationship with the parents, and this punishment is not very likely to fix it.

I also don't think there was a huge, real danger to the child. As long as he knows well enough not to run into the street or climb over fences with big dogs behind them or anything like that, was there really anything bad likely to happen to him? Kidnapped? Are people still scaring their kids that bad strangers drive around in vans kidnapping kids? I think the real "danger" is just to the parents' peace of mind as far as not knowing where he was.

[kungfu_barbi]

Originally Posted by LynnS6

But I still don't get what good grounding does. Really. I don't.

i agree that grounding does no 'good.' i think grounding is a bandaid on a gaping wound.

this is my take: a parent feels helpless and powerless (because the child is doing something over which the parent has no control, maybe it's even semi dangerous), the parent needs to do something - to feel some level of control. on the surface grounding seems like a solution; it does meet the parent's immediate need. [this is also true of spanking]

but what does grounding really teach the child? being raised in a punitive home taught me how to do a cost/benefit analysis whenever i wanted to do something, which included (as a teenager) climbing out my window in the middle of the night to meet my boyfriend. i knew i'd be grounded, but i was prepared to "do the time" if/when it was worth it for me to go to a party. my attitude was this: grounding? is that all you got?

peace

[heartmama]

I get that they were really upset with their son (age 6) -- he had gone over to a neighbor's house without permission and didn't come back when asked to. Instead, he ran the other direction when the parents came to find him. It took them nearly an hour to find him/bring him home. He did this twice in one week. Once, Wed and then again on Friday.

It is difficult to guess what family dynamics led to this situation. For me, it would be such a complete "rock my world" shock if my six year old did this, there is no way I would feel reassured it wouldn't happen again just by keeping them home from a party. That kind of response wouldn't factor in my mind as ensuring this problem had been effectively addressed.

This is where abstract punishments don't work for me. I would need to get underneath a situation like this and comprehend the 'why and what' of it all. This isn't because I think my child's behavior is always my fault. It's because, in my experience, the changes that are most effective are those that spring from the specifics of the actual situation, and the party just has nothing to do with this behavior at all. Whatever I did, it would tie in to the original situation where the child was leaving without anyone knowing, and not returning, and avoiding the parents when they tried to find him. I believe there are changes to be made that relate clearer to those behaviors. I think the closer your response is to the actual behavior, the more effective that response will be.

[Cassiopeia]

I don't think it makes much sense either. Missing a birthday party that isn't your own doesn't have that much of an effect on a 6yo, ime. What are they going to do when he runs away again and there's no party for him to miss? Enh, they can do what they want but I don't see this working very well.

[thismama]

I agree Heartmama, that if my kid were to do that I would be really, really shocked and would want to know what was going on. Going to a friend's without saying I would be curious about (um intensely curious and really it wouldn't happen because I wouldn't not know where she was for long enough). Refusing to come home though is a whole other layer, doing it twice is a whole other layer, and I think at that point removing a privilege is a perfectly appropriate thing to do. I wouldn't do it on its own, I would explain how dangerous it was and mama and whoever else were totally freaked out and why did you do that etc. But there would be very likely no birthday party or other similar looked-forward-to thing at my house over something like that.

[ramama]

Although I understand why the mother punished in this manner, I don't think it's very effective. A child who repeatedly runs away from a neighbor's house should not be permitted to go to that neighbor's house. A birthday party for another child really has nothing to do with the "infraction."

To me, attending a birthday party is more than just "fun." It's honoring a commitment and a promise that was made when they RSVPed. It's helping a friend celebrate their birthday. The mother allowed her child to break a promise (or broke the promise for him). I know the child is only 6, but still...they promised a 6yo that they would be at his party and they didn't keep that promise, and that's just sad.

That said, I sometimes "flake out" on informal get-togethers if I notice through DD's behavior that she needs to re-connect with me and we'll stay home and paint and play in the yard together. But DD rarely knows about a pending event (she's only 4) until the day before, and no one is disappointed because they were informal playgroups or what have you.

[dex_millie]

Originally Posted by kungfu_barbi

...................
but what does grounding really teach the child? being raised in a punitive home taught me how to do a cost/benefit analysis whenever i wanted to do something, which included (as a teenager) climbing out my window in the middle of the night to meet my boyfriend. i knew i'd be grounded, but i was prepared to "do the time" if/when it was worth it for me to go to a party. my attitude was this: grounding? is that all you got?

peace

What would you propose to your situation then that wouldn't warrant a " is that all you got?" Talking? Because as far as I see it talking, grounding, time-outs and even spanking(if not 'abusive') can all warrant a 'is that all you got?' depending on the child. So then what is left to do?

[mamazee]

Originally Posted by dex_millie

What would you propose to your situation then that wouldn't warrant a " is that all you got?" Talking? Because as far as I see it talking, grounding, time-outs and even spanking(if not 'abusive') can all warrant a 'is that all you got?' depending on the child. So then what is left to do?

The thing to do, IMO, is to reconnect with the child and have a better relationship. Have you read Hold On To Your Kids? I thought that explained really well how kids can get disconnected from their parents and oriented toward peers instead, and what behavior problems come from that. And it doesn't mean the parenting is bad - good parents get disconnected from their kids all the time. There are so many outside influences in this world that cause disconnection. So lots of family time, one-on-one time if possible, without outside influences like TV.

[sweetmama3]

We are not talking "best men" who are grown adults, we are talking children, and if my Child did this, I would do the exact same thing. In this day and age, Im sorry, but my 7yo NEVER has permission to leave the house without me knowing.
ANd when you have other pressing issues, like a crying baby, that needs to be fed, or dinner in the oven, or similar situations, it is absolutely unnessessary, and 100% disrespectful for a 6yo to act in this manner.

Originally Posted by moondiapers

Well if your bestman runs from the police ..... he will likely miss your wedding as well.

[dubfam]

OKAY...Why are we Hemming and Hawing about this woman's parenting skills?
She isn't even participating in this thread!!!! This is getting a little silly...yk?

I think the only thing that anyone here disagrees about is whether or not the child should have had parent imposed consequence in this situation.

I haven't seen anyone say that they wouldn't talk to their child about it if this happened. Someone punishing or imposing consequences on their child does not automatically equate to "not getting to the root of the problem". I would imagine that one can do both, yes?

When you go through and read this whole thread most everyone is pretty much saying the same thing...
Obviously this is a situation where there has probably been less than optimal parenting in the past, and this child is not getting his needs met. He ran away, which is alarming for most of us on this board. But isn't this EXACTLY why we are all trying to find a better way (GD)?

We are basically preaching to the choir here!

I don't think what this Mom did was GD, and I don't think that anyone is saying it is.
I also don't think it is outrageous to keep a kid home from a birthday party, esp since she was probably worried that he would take off from the party (is that SO far fetched??!!).

And the Mama that we are talking about isn't even participating in this thread

[Leilalu]

Originally Posted by kungfu_barbi

i suppose it depends on how you define parental intervention.

if your bag o' tricks includes such intervention as a swat on the rear-end, time outs, and grounding, then we disagree. and that's ok.

if, however, your definition of intervention means parenting proactively, lots of instruction with practicing and training, and correction that is focused on the heart, then we are on the same sheet of music.

peace

I think we are on the same page. Except that I think time outs with loads of instruction and teaching,and love, for violent behavior can be a good thing. But that is a different subject.

[Leilalu]

Originally Posted by thismama

I agree Heartmama, that if my kid were to do that I would be really, really shocked and would want to know what was going on. Going to a friend's without saying I would be curious about (um intensely curious and really it wouldn't happen because I wouldn't not know where she was for long enough). Refusing to come home though is a whole other layer, doing it twice is a whole other layer, and I think at that point removing a privilege is a perfectly appropriate thing to do. I wouldn't do it on its own, I would explain how dangerous it was and mama and whoever else were totally freaked out and why did you do that etc. But there would be very likely no birthday party or other similar looked-forward-to thing at my house over something like that.

I totally agree. And in that sense, you would be using your wisdom as a mother to turn a situation around. Kids don't always see the end of something.

[Needle in the Hay]

Originally Posted by thismama

I think some of us advocate going so far the other way, questioning always ourselves and not the kids (a la 'omg why would you chase him??'), and the kids just do whatever they please while we sit around psychoanalyzing and taking such pains to not damage the little sweeties that we render ourselves inert. Yk???

No that does not describe me and my family at all! You sound like one of those critics of unschooling who don't understand much about it and say things like "wow I'm glad my parents didn't unschool me, I wouldn't be able to balance my checkbook if they did".

And sorry but I think it's ridiculous to chase a child for 30 mins (where is the dignity?--plus it escalated the whole situation but that's not to say it's just fine and dandy that the kid runs from his mama) but I did come back to this thread to apologize to moondiapers for being too harsh in my reply. I really am sorry and it's been bothering me, but this is the first time I've been able to get back online to say that.

ETA: Also I have a cousin who did the running away from his parents thing (often because he hated school and did not want to go, he also threw up a lot) and they had some serious parenting defects (his mother is a teacher and never seemed to be able to leave that role at school) they never wanted to face. So this thread does hit a nerve. This kid was always punished, never really connected with and he is a pretty troubled young man at this point.

[warriorprincess]

Originally Posted by paquerette

I also don't think there was a huge, real danger to the child. As long as he knows well enough not to run into the street or climb over fences with big dogs behind them or anything like that, was there really anything bad likely to happen to him? Kidnapped? Are people still scaring their kids that bad strangers drive around in vans kidnapping kids? I think the real "danger" is just to the parents' peace of mind as far as not knowing where he was.

I just started letting my 9 yo DD play out front by herself- that's not leaving the lawn at all. If DH comes home and she's out front he makes her come in. I don't think it's unreasonable to say a 6 year old should not be going to other houses by himself.

[One_Girl]

Originally Posted by rabbitmum

I don't think a punishment is called for in this situation at all. The consequence of what happened was that the parents got upset, and they should of course tell him that.

The difference between putting locks on the doors and keeping him home from the party is that putting locks on the doors will actually prevent him from running out on his own again, while keeping him home from the party is done only to hurt him and thereby scare him from disobeying again: "This is what happens when you don't do as we say."

Although I don't think putting locks on the doors is a "natural" consequence, rather a "logical" one. While keeping him home from the party is just punishment.

In the situation he was in it sounded like his parents had allowed him the freedom to leave the house and he was already out of it therefore locks on the doors would not have anything to do with what happened and would only keep him from running away if his parents don't actually allow him out of the house in the first place. It would also have to be a very heavy duty lock to keep a six year old in and as one person mentioned it may be a hazard in a fire and the punishment element would still be there since he wouldn't be allowed out of the locked doors.

There is also the issue of kidnapping and running into a street. Kids don't always get kidnapped when they run off but it is very very easy to lure kids into a home or a car by acting sweet and nice and knowing the rules doesn't make it less likely to happen. I used to think my parents rules about going off on an adventure in a stranger's car were stupid until I found out first hand what happens to kids who do this and I was twice this kids age. Just because he got home safely both times does not mean there isn't a safety issue going on that needs to be addressed.

[LynnS6]

OK, I'm a little afraid to come back to the thread that I started. It's spawned some really interesting discussion about punishment.

It was not my intention to debate my friends' parenting skills (though I will freely admit that when I posted I was royally irritated and so it probably came off that way). For the sake of privacy, I want to back off from discussing their parenting.

My intent, thinking back on this was to make one point, and to ask a question.

The point was:
Sometimes punishment has consequences beyond what you intend for your child. In this particular instance, my son (an introvert who has a hard time making friends) was much more hurt by the punishment than his friend (an extrovert who lets things roll off his back a bit more). (And yes it was punishment. The parents were not afraid he was going to run off at the party. He was still going to school. The punishment was not being able to go to the party.)

The question was:
What OTHER ways of handling this kind of problem are there? I can't ever see my ds doing this (heck, he won't even go to the neighbor's by himself), but I could imagine dd doing this.

Obviously one part of the solution is to work on the parent-child connection. But that's a "slow" solution. How do you get it through a 6 yo's thick skull that this is REALLY dangerous? Kids DO this sort of thing. Even kids with good connections.

I remember when I was in kindergarten, I went home with one of my friends to his house rather than going straight home. (This was back in the "old days" when kindergarteners walked to the neighborhood school by themselves and no one thought twice about it.) What I remember from that situation was that my mom was pretty upset. Specifically I remember my mom telling me that I could NEVER go anywhere without telling her where I was going AND that she was really upset with my friend's mom for not calling. I don't remember a punishment at all. (My parents were oddly good about that sort of thing. They didn't punish for really big things. They spanked/yelled when they lost their temper. It was clear that it was a momentary loss of control, not a discipline strategy.)

Obviously what my mom did was effective with me. But then, I'm a rule-follower. I'm genuinely bothered when people break/disregard the rules. (Yes, I'm the one in the express check out line eyeing your 16 things in the "15 or fewer" line!)

What about a kid, even a kid with good connections, who isn't a rule follower?

[yoginisarah]

Originally Posted by mamazee

I don't think it damages kids, but I think it can damage our relationship with our kids. If I had a bad few days and my mom took away something as important to a child as a birthday party, then next time I was having a rough time, I sure wouldn't tell my mom about it. Punishing the behavior instead of finding out what problem is causing the behavior just doesn't make sense to me. I appreciate that it can be done gently, but I don't think it's effective - effective at stopping the behavior, yes; but not effective at solving the problem behind the behavior or keeping communication open for solving future problems.

Perfectly said!

[dubfam]

Originally Posted by LynnS6

How do you get it through a 6 yo's thick skull that this is REALLY dangerous? Kids DO this sort of thing. Even kids with good connections.

<snip>

What about a kid, even a kid with good connections, who isn't a rule follower?

You instill a logical consequence like not going to a party the very next day that is at a busy rec center.

I think We are in the same city (sorry if I am wrong about that), and I think that I might even know which rec center you were at...busy place on a busy street with lots of exits...the more I have thought about it the more this seems like it could be a parent imposed logical consequence, depending on how it was handled.
It's not like the party was a week later...it was the very next day. DS had run away less than 24 hours prior, and also 72 hours prior to the party.

I think it makes sense. It might not be perfect, but I really don't think it is that far fetched. If something really bad would have happened to him while he was gone (getting hit by a car, kidnapped (this is a big city)) then he would not have been at a B-day party the next day.

I am just surprised that so many people think this was a horrible decision. Could have been better, but it will probably be effective if she also talks to him and gets to the root of the problem.