Giving up punishments and rewards=kids who don't respect boundaries? - Page 3

[maryeb]

Originally Posted by purple_kangaroo

Thanks . . . it's especially things like hitting, or stuff that's immediately dangerous and has to be stopped, that I think might sometimes be necessary to stop before explaining why. If my 2yo heads for the street, I'm going to worry first about stopping her from running out in front of a car before I explain, and I'm not going to wait until she understands before I enforce the limit.

With little kids, it just seems to me like sometimes you have to do things like grab the hand and stop it from hitting while you say "No hitting. Hitting hurts. Be gentle, like this." Is a very young child going to really understand that she shouldn't hit until after you have physically prevented her from hitting for a few times? It just seems to me like sometimes maybe the understanding would have to come later.

So, if she hadn't sat down or stopped jumping on the couch, I would see it as reasonable for her age level and developmental stage for me to physically help her do those things. I would assume that my physically helping her sit down or get off the couch and jump on the floor would actually be part of the process of her learning that it wasn't ok to jump on the couch. That I might have to take her off the couch a number of times before she really started understanding WHY. With toddlers, I think there could be a certain point where verbal explanations are just wordswordswords and might not actually be contributing to their understanding.

Am I making sense at all? LOL.

Of course you would stop your toddler/baby from running into the street, and from hitting others. I bet while you are keeping them safe and preventing them from heading right into the street you are explaining why, in the moment. When ds was about a year and a half, we had several months of him hitting/scratching a couple little friends of his when we played together. One time we were looking at a pay phone together and he tried to hit his friend with it!!! OMG! He was frustrated the friend wanted it. So of course, in the moment I was stopping the behavior and explaining why. It just went together. The interesting thing is that he still remembers this incident and talks about it. He brought it up quite a bit for a while and wanted to repeat what happened, why I stopped him, what he could do next time instead of hitting his friend, etc. So we have talked about it ad nauseum and he has understood why not to do that for a long time. With the running into the street, it just has not ever been an issue. Ds is fantastic about holding my hand or keeping himself safe. But we have literally been talking about keeping safe on the sidewalk forever and I remind him every time we're in a parking lot how we need to hold hands for safety. I don't know if you specifically need ideas on this, I was just kind of referring to your post.

I do notice sometimes that dh explains things too much and I can tell ds isn't really in the moment with him. I keep explanations short unless we have time (not a safety situation) and/or ds asks why I'm asking him to stop or whatever. And I think it's fine to help them physically figure out what to do instead of what not to do, that seems like all part of the process to me. Hope that was helpful, not just rambling.

[The4OfUs]

Originally Posted by annT

I'm curious - can you explain the rationale behind the objection to your course of action?

OK, I'm back.

There have been threads in the past about what to do when your child grabs a toy from another, and there have been many mamas who say that you taking a toy from your child's hand is no different than when they took it from the original child (both taking something against the child's will), and a different solution should be found where both kids are happy. I don't personally believe that to be true, because the manner in which I get the toy from my child is not in a snatching manner, and I'm explaining to my child that they need to wait for a turn of the original child. There was also a thread about a grocery clerk giving one piece of cheese to two children, and there were a number of mamas who said they would not explain to the (older) child, take the cheese and split it, and give a small piece to the second child.

Originally Posted by jackson'smama

i mean, we have an old mattress for jumping, but that doesn't mean my ds doesn't also want to jump on the good mattresses. and if we let him do that here, you can darn well bet that he wants to do it at grandma's house too. what if grandma doesn't like it.

In our family, if grandma doesn't like it, and there's nowhere else we offer that kiddo wants to jump/no other activity he wants to do, then kiddo is going to be disappointed. I'll validate, empathize, offer alternatives, but if my kid ONLY wants to jump on grandma's couch/bed, and grandma isn't OK with that, then grandma's need to have her things stay nice prevails. I don't see anything ungentle about that. If my child is open to alternatives, great. If he's not, then I won't impose upon another person to make him comfortable.

I will mention, however, that kids are pretty savvy, especially when they've had things explained to them a lot when they're younger, and can differentiate between ok and not ok at different places. For instance, my kids know that jumping on their own beds and our couch is OK, but jumping on mom and dad's bed is not OK; jumping on Nana & Papa's bed isn't OK, jumping on their couch isn't OK, but jumping on their spare room bed IS. That seems like a lot to differentiate, and they're almost 2 and 4-1/4, but they just need a quick reminder to get off surfaces that we don't want them on...and that's because they know from experience they will be gently/playfully "collected" and helped off the surface if they don't do it on their own. They get many, many outlets and options, so if there's something going on where they just want to be mad about something, that's OK too. But it doesn't mean that they get to do something the homeowner doesn't want them to.

Originally Posted by jackson'smama

let me see if i get this right. in order to discipline (teach) without consequences, we basically spend many many years repeating ourselves over and over again in the hopes that at ____ years of age, it's going to finally sink in and mean something. i'm not being snarky. this is totally serious. and if i might add, it makes me feel like i'm not really being a good parent

Actually, that is the way it works. It sounds lofty and ineffectual to many people, but it does work. The thing is it's NOT "permissive" parenting because you are actively teaching your child along the way, not just letting them do whatever, or making them stop whatever, with no explanations. I've seen it happen with my own son. I explain, and repeat, and enforce limits after the first or second request, and once he's there developmentally, and he really gets it, it's not much of an issue anymore. AND, because we have discussions and conversations about situations he's not only learning about that particular situation, but about similar situations and learning problem solving skills, etc. Enforcing the limit is teaching them something, there's just not always as immediate a 'result' as when you punish the child....the child might stop doing things more quickly because they want to avoid being punished, but it comes out in other ways.

Parenting this way takes a LOT more effort in the beginning because you're not relying on a negative stimulus to externally motivate them to 'behave'...but once that internal motivation clicks there's much less effort on the parents' part.

I was raised this way by my parents, and I was a total goody-goody as a teen/young adult . I had that inner compass and didn't find the need to rebel/whatever like a lot of my friends who had more controlling/punitive parents. I knew from the beginning that my parents were reasonable, rational people that really did have my best interests at heart and I listened to their counsel.

Originally Posted by jackson'smama

i feel like i'm failing my ds by NOT having a consequence b/c telling him not to slide off the arm of the couch, physically removing him, taking him to his slide, assisting him in making a slide out of our leather cushions on the floor, etc... does nothing more than use up 10 minutes before he waits til my back is turned and slides down the arm of the couch again. is this desire/defiance? what is it? my talking and redirecting doesn't seem to mean a hoot to him.

When things get to this point, I rearrange the situation to eliminate the temptation or access. As I said above, I've gated off our living room if the kids have been unable to play safely in there on their own while I'm making dinner. It seems as though this is a "thing" for him, so I'd find a way to limit his access until he grows out of it.

[sapphire_chan]

Originally Posted by purple_kangaroo

LOL. What seems to happen repeatedly is that I'll be dealing with an issue for days, weeks or months. I'll get so frustrated that I feel like I'm at the end of my rope and post about it.

Within days, it will be much better. Almost every time.

I'm not sure if it's that once I post about it I start being more intentional about dealing with it, or sometimes it's that I get really helpful advice or an attitude-change from the replies. Sometimes I think it's just that it tends to be darkest just before the dawn. I need to remember that by the point I'm feeling at the end of my rope, it's probably just about reached the point of a turn-around.

Hmm, aggravating child behavior is like transition in labor?

As an experiment, try making a post right as something starts to bug you sometime, see if there's a faster resolution.

Forget parenting techniques, just post to MDC!

[Magella]

Originally Posted by The4OfUs

Originally Posted by jackson'smama View Post
let me see if i get this right. in order to discipline (teach) without consequences, we basically spend many many years repeating ourselves over and over again in the hopes that at ____ years of age, it's going to finally sink in and mean something. i'm not being snarky. this is totally serious. and if i might add, it makes me feel like i'm not really being a good parent

Actually, that is the way it works. It sounds lofty and ineffectual to many people, but it does work. The thing is it's NOT "permissive" parenting because you are actively teaching your child along the way, not just letting them do whatever, or making them stop whatever, with no explanations. I've seen it happen with my own son. I explain, and repeat, and enforce limits after the first or second request, and once he's there developmentally, and he really gets it, it's not much of an issue anymore. AND, because we have discussions and conversations about situations he's not only learning about that particular situation, but about similar situations and learning problem solving skills, etc. Enforcing the limit is teaching them something, there's just not always as immediate a 'result' as when you punish the child...

:

Originally Posted by Nanu

Gentle parenting does not necessarily produce well-behaved children. Its aim is to produce well-behaved adults.

[Traci mom23boys]

I don't normally post in this forum but I noticed the thread title on my way to Books. Anyway, my very spirited sons have been raised without punishments and rewards before I had ever heard of Alfie Kohn. For my husband and me it is always about *connection*. Will this action bring about connection or dis-connection? What happened for us is after years and maturity there is a natural authority that falls into place. Our children know that we love and respect their opinions and ideas so we can eventually work out every issue, even if we end up saying no to a request.

I recently had the pleasure of hearing Dr. Gordon Neufeld speak, he really articulates this idea so much better than I ever could. I highly recommend his book *Hold On To Your Kids*.

Blessings,
~Traci

[Isamama]

I second Dr. Neufeld's book! He is wonderful!

[Ironica]

Originally Posted by jackson'smama

let me see if i get this right. in order to discipline (teach) without consequences, we basically spend many many years repeating ourselves over and over again in the hopes that at ____ years of age, it's going to finally sink in and mean something. i'm not being snarky. this is totally serious. and if i might add, it makes me feel like i'm not really being a good parent

i feel like i'm failing my ds by NOT having a consequence b/c telling him not to slide off the arm of the couch, physically removing him, taking him to his slide, assisting him in making a slide out of our leather cushions on the floor, etc... does nothing more than use up 10 minutes before he waits til my back is turned and slides down the arm of the couch again. is this desire/defiance? what is it? my talking and redirecting doesn't seem to mean a hoot to him.

You may be talking too much. ;-) Depends on the age of the child, and where they're at developmentally.

On the same theme...

Originally Posted by purple_kangaroo

With little kids, it just seems to me like sometimes you have to do things like grab the hand and stop it from hitting while you say "No hitting. Hitting hurts. Be gentle, like this." Is a very young child going to really understand that she shouldn't hit until after you have physically prevented her from hitting for a few times?

Absolutely not.

It's all about the development of impulse control. That simply doesn't happen until age 4 or 5, and even then it's far from perfect. A toddler who has started to do something really doesn't have the circuits in their brain to STOP themselves after the planning is done.

So, by stopping them physically, we're doing two things: we're playing the role of the impulse control they don't have yet, and we're helping them establish those circuits. With really young kids, especially on safety things, it's best if you can interrupt the motion right when you tell them to stop, rather than after... that way, they associate stopping with what you said.

For example, when DS1 first started walking on his own while we were out and about, I felt it was important that he learn what I meant by "stop." So, for at least two weeks, if I wanted him to stop, I got right behind him, put my flat hands in front of his chest, and said "stop" *as* he ran into them. The first time he got away from me and I yelled "stop!" after him, he actually stopped. He was less than 18 months old. This probably wouldn't work with *every* kid, but it definitely can work.

The issue about "consequences" for undesired behavior is the assumption that there was a failure that the child needs to be responsible for. With very young children, "misbehavior" seems to nearly always be a result of developmentally inappropriate expectations. A four-year-old simply cannot sit properly through a long formal dinner at a restaurant. A two-year-old cannot help but swat at someone/thing that is the source of frustration. To the extent it is feasible, we can create an environment that poses fewer challenges to our children's developmental place. Where it's not feasible, *we* need to make up the ground where they fall short of being able to meet the expectations.

Finally, we have to trust our children to demonstrate to us when they have outgrown the need for our intervention. Maybe your neighbor with a child *exactly* the same age brags about how they always or never do such-and-such, but as with things like talking, eating, walking, or learning to read, every child develops at their individual pace. It can be hard to find a balance between intervening before your child has a chance to fail (and get hurt or hurt someone else) and watching to see when they're ready to handle those situations themselves, but it's important. They *will* take over when they're ready, if we teach them how (by modeling, and by guiding them through the appropriate behavior).

With older children, of course, you are often dealing with premeditated actions that they know are "wrong" from your point of view. Then you have to find out the motivation and come up with responses that are appropriate to the damage done and the motivation behind it. A 10-year-old who scratched up the coffee table in my house would probably find themselves on a trip to the hardware store to procure sandpaper, stain, and varnish along with appropriate brushes and rags, then would be spending a nice Saturday helping mom or dad or uncle Larry refinish the table. ;-) And if they were older, they might just get the whole project themselves, with appropriate guidance to ensure a quality job.

[RaeAnne]

I need to go to bed so I can't read the replies right now, but I REALLY appreciate the questions posed here. I've wondered the EXACT same things. I always used consequences with my niece, and I always felt like it was BECAUSE I respected her, as I see her as capable of being a responsible person. I am literally the only one in the family that she consistently listens to and doesn't throw tantrums with (she's almost 8). I have also be fortunate enough to have her talk about sensitive issues with me, so I know it's not all about fear. But is it to some extent? If it is, is it necessarily bad, if "fear" is actually "respect," rather than fear of losing love?

I have to go to bed!! I'll be back.

[The4OfUs]

RaeAnn, do other family members give her any boundaries at all? Or are they letting her do whatever she wants without any guidance towards more appropriate behaviors? I would almost wager that the other adults in her life aren't really connecting with her, so she's connecting with you because you're involved with her - *any* attention, even negative, is better than none. If other family members *are* parenting her responsively and setting limits for her, etc. then maybe she feels some other connection with you and that's why she talks to you more. It's hard to say without knowing how other adults in her life interact with her.

I've heard people try to correlate fear with respect, but to me that seems completely incompatible, because to me respect is a feeling that is positive and warm, and fear is a feeling that's negative and cold, so they *can't* be the same thing.

I could understand that a child might not have "fear" of punishment, in the sense of a true scared feeling, but more of an avoidance kind of thing, wanting to avoid being punished because punishment is a negative experience and most of us try to avoid negative experiences if we can help it. The thing that punishment can easily neglect, and one of the big reasons I don't use it, is that while it may stop an undesireable behavior, it a) does nothing to give a more apropriate behavior to replace it with, and b) focuses the child on how the punishment is affecting them, instead of how their actions affected others. The development of self discipline for my kids is what my goal is, and I feel that traditional, externally motivating punishments muck all that up and make it more difficult to get to the teaching self discipline part. Even if you accompany a punishment with a discussion later, the kid still thinks about what happened to THEM first before they had to talk about it, and likely that will be the first thought in their mind if presented with the situation again and debating whether to do it or not, instead of thinking about how that action might affect someone else.

Hopefully that makes sense.

[DevaMajka]

Originally Posted by purple_kangaroo

We can talk about how "couches are for sitting and floors are for running and jumping" all day, but that doesn't convince the kids that they shouldn't run and jump on the couch. I can ask them to get down, and the older kids will get down, but the moment I'm not looking they're doing it again. The almost-3yo won't even get down when I ask her to, unless I physically make her. Then she'll be right back up again.

I'm not CL, but I would definitely consider myself UP. We don't punish or reward (well, occasionally I slip, but..). In this situation I would say in clear terms "Do not jump on the couch" and I'd probably give the evil eye (I don't allow jumping on my couch, and they can only sit on the back if they don't use it as a slide). I do give an explanation, but it's mostly as a courtesty and for future reference, not to motivate ds to quit jumping, if that makes sense. That's pretty much enough for ds, and the two kids I babysit/have playdates with (ages 2.5 and 5.5).
When ds was closer to 2, I'm fairly certain it required more work on my part, probably some physical intervention. Which reminds me- at that age, I would have had to redirect him to something that would honor the impulse, or he would be stuck on his current thing. So, if he's jumping on the couch, I'd have to suggest, say, jumping on the bed, take him to the bedroom, and go from there.
There have been times that he's been doing something (like climbing on a box I thought I'd have to reuse), and he *couldn't* stop himself. I could tell he wanted to (he was a little over 2). I asked him if he wanted me to take the tempation to climb on the box away, he said yes, and I moved it to the kitchen table, out of sight. All was good.

They'll wear a helmet because they have to do it in order to ride bikes, not because they actually believe they could get seriously injured if they don't or because they agree it's a good idea. It's certainly not consensual. The consequence of refusing to wear a helmet is that that the bike gets put away.

It's not consensual, but Imo it IS UP. That's not what I'd really consider a punishment. It's so related...ah, I can't really explain why I don't see it as a punishment.
I told ds this past weekend that if he didn't let me put sunscreen on him, that we weren't going to the beach. I would have stayed home and played with him. It certainly wasn't intended to make him unhappy or pay for his decisions, yk? It just was the way it was.
It would almost be like saying that my limiting of candy is a consequence for him getting cavities. I'm not punishing him because he has cavities. I just have to limit candy and juice to keep his teeth as healthy as possible.

It seems that giving up the use of rewards and consequences (or, even more, trying to do things consensually with small children) would just lead to kids with uncontrollable behavior, and who don't respect anyone else's needs or desires.

I don't use rewards and punishments (unless you consider the bike helmet and the sunscreen things to be punishments, which some people might. But I'm still pretty sure it's UP). My ds certainly doesn't have uncontrollable behavior. He's surprisingly respectful of others for a 3.5yo.
When we first moved here and started going on walks, he would avoid stepping on people's dandilions because they might not want them hurt. That was all his thinking. (he now knows it's ok to pick them or step on them. lol)

[kungfu_barbi]

Originally Posted by Deva33mommy

I told ds this past weekend that if he didn't let me put sunscreen on him, that we weren't going to the beach. I would have stayed home and played with him. It certainly wasn't intended to make him unhappy or pay for his decisions, yk? It just was the way it was.

fwiw, your use of sunscreen and bike helmets doesn't sound punitive to me, but what strikes me about your post is that you would have been willing to stay home (and play) as an option AND that your heart toward ds was not to make him unhappy or make him pay. that's really quite beautiful.

every family has non-negotiables - they can be spoken or unspoken, obvious or subtle. they can be concrete, like sunscreen, helmets, not jumping on furniture. they can be abstract, like honesty, honor, and personal responsibility. those are the things where one might say 'it's just the way it is.' i don't think anyone has to apologize for that...

in my opinion and in my experience, it's HOW the non-negotiables are taught -harshly enforced or gently re-inforced - that matters.

peace

[DevaMajka]

Originally Posted by kungfu_barbi

fwiw, your use of sunscreen and bike helmets doesn't sound punitive to me, but what strikes me about your post is that you would have been willing to stay home (and play) as an option AND that your heart toward ds was not to make him unhappy or make him pay. that's really quite beautiful.

Why, thank you! It really was an option for him either way (though I knew he'd choose to go). But I don't want to give the impression that I'm good like that all the time. lol. (dp is though- really). I'm not a huge outdoors gal. I would have been happy staying home. There are definitely things that I'm not so great about. Though...now that I think about it, I do have the "make him pay" thoughts less and less all the time.

[purple_kangaroo]

Thanks again for all the great discussion on this, everyone. I especially love hearing from those who have older children and can say, "Actually, yes it does work!"

I'm still trying to sort through exactly what are all the nuances of difference between punishments, rewards, consequences, results, etc. It's not necessarily always perfectly clear-cut, at least to me.

[kungfu_barbi]

Originally Posted by purple_kangaroo

...I'm still trying to sort through exactly what are all the nuances of difference between punishments, rewards, consequences, results, etc. It's not necessarily always perfectly clear-cut, ...

i think you just described the *journey* of parenting. to some degree, it's something each family needs to work out for themselves.

and just when you think you have it nailed down, your kid has a birthday...

peace

[jackson'smama]

so for those who agreed with my summation of "we keep repeating ourselves over and over for ____ years until one day it sinks in and our child gets it", more or less...
hit me with responses to these specifics...
i have a 3.5 year old ds who is CONSTANTLY on his 10 month old brother - trying to ride him, overly hug and kiss him to the point of knocking him over, pushing, kicking, biting, hitting, shoving, etc.... am i supposed to expect good results by just continually saying "how do you think that makes noah feel?" and "it's not ok to ____. if you want noah to ____ then _____." and just parent like a hawk and try to physically prevent it until he doesn't want to do it anymore (or at least as much!).
part of me feels this is right. the other part of me feels like he isn't capable of understanding that it's wrong if i'm only telling him. there needs to be a more undesirable consequence than his brother crying or me talking to him and trying to tell him what to do differently next time. it's like i really like the notion of parenting now the way I want him to live as an ADULT rather than expecting the fruits of my labor to be seen right now, but there's also this notion of maybe he's just gonna learn it's OK to do all this stuff cause all that's gonna happen is somebody is gonna tell him it's not ok and he'll just think "BIG DEAL", kwim?
and as hard as it is for me to get a handle on this, my DH is REALLY not going for it. help!

[purple_kangaroo]

jackson'smama, one thing to remember is that even parents who spank have to correct their children over and over and over again for the same thing. It's not like they spank the kid once and they never do that thing again.

However, if it seems like what you're doing isn't working over a period of time, then you can always post here for ideas with a specific situation.

A few things I would look at:

* What needs is the behavior stemming from? Are there ways you can meet those needs in better ways so that the child isn't so driven to do the behavior you don't want?

* Are you being consistent about responding right away, every time, to things like hitting or being rough, etc?

* Are you actively working on teaching the child what TO do instead? It sounds like you are, but this is something I always try to think about--am I teaching the kid what to do, or just telling them not to do and leaving a void for what to replace it with?

* Are there underlying issues affecting the behavior? Food intolerances, sensory issues, sleep deprivation, etc. can all affect behavior.

* Would another approach be more effective? For my 2yo, we needed to add a removal/cooling off step to how we were handling hitting and pushing. We did it in a non-punitive way, telling her that she needed to sit down away from the child she hit and cool off for a minute. It was usually only for a few seconds, and often I'd sit with her if she seemed to want me to. For her, she just needed a short break to calm down before we could talk with her about it. Then we would take her back to the spot where it happened, try to reproduce the situation as much as possible, and literally have her act out a better way she could handle it without hitting.

[lilsparrow]

I have been lurking and really getting a lot out of this thread.

Could someone clue me in to the meaning of UP?

[hipumpkins]

Unconditional parenting..it is a book by Alfie Kohn.

[RaeAnne]

Originally Posted by The4OfUs

RaeAnn, do other family members give her any boundaries at all? Or are they letting her do whatever she wants without any guidance towards more appropriate behaviors? .....I've heard people try to correlate fear with respect, but to me that seems completely incompatible, because to me respect is a feeling that is positive and warm, and fear is a feeling that's negative and cold, so they *can't* be the same thing.

I can't figure out how to do that multiple quote thing, so hopefully it's clear to whom/what I am addressing.

I was tired when I wrote that, and also hadn't read the thread yet. I was expecting people to talk about not having any consequences whatsoever, basically the idea that children only do what they have a need to do and are capable of doing. So if there is undesirable behavior (hitting, tantrums, whatever), it is ultimately the child's choice/need to do that, and the parent shouldn't expect them to change until the child is ready to, at which point the child will do so on their own. Only one or two people here seemed to agree with that, most seemed to support the idea of limits while also attempting to meet the child's needs, which I totally agree with. When I made the comment on fear vs. respect, I was "arguing" against the idea that any type of limit will only make a child do a desirable behavior out of fear, that in my situation, I feel like it is more that my niece respects me as an adult, someone who can help her set appropriate limits (telling me what she needs instead of screaming and crying, being upfront about her intentions rather than lying, etc.). I do NOT want her to fear me!! It just didn't come out very clear because I was tired.

So with that in mind, no, she doesn't have any boundaries at home, which IS why she responds so well to me. That's what I was meaning about respect. I see her as a capable, intelligent individual who can grow into a capable, intelligent adult, and I believe in her ability to make good choices, with the right support. This respect toward her produces her respect toward me. I actually ask her how she feels about things, and try to help her work through difficult issues, something that is not happening at home. So you were spot on.

Oh, and I think I'm using different terminology than others here, because I haven't read the books. For me, picking up the child who is jumping on the couch while reminding them that they aren't supposed to do that falls under my "consequences" category. I guess I just meant "doing something about it," again in argument against those who would not do anything at all. This has gotten really long, so I'll just say I did/do a lot of what others here have said, it just didn't sound like it in my original post.

I don't see the idea of allowing the child to make their own choices really being explained well here. The pps who said they let their child jump on the couch, carve up the coffee table, etc. haven't really explained how they handle situations out in public, when the child's actions affect others....

RaeAnne

[RaeAnne]

Originally Posted by Thao

I'm another one of those that like the idea of CL but don't believe it works for every family. There are some situations that simply don't have a consensual solution, and so often (it seems to me) what ends up happening is the parent gives up their need in deference to the kid. But that isn't truly consensual.

You said exactly how I have been feeling, but haven't had the words to express! The child's feelings are the ONLY ones that matter. EXACTLY!