Submission to authority (GD from a Biblical point of view) [Archive]

LionTigerBear

12-18-2008, 01:05 PM

Well, let's look at wifely submission which is considered by many (but not all of course) a Biblical principle.

If the husband requires and forces submission, (by punishing her or creating "consequences" for non-submission) is that healthy or okay? Would you agree with that? I wouldn't. I would call it abusive! However, if the wife willingly submits of her own free will for spiritual reasons, then that can be a beautiful thing.

So, for me, with my children it is the same thing. Parenting and raising our children should inspire them to want to submit to loving authority, by inspiring trust in those who have more power than they do. Certainly there are times when I lay down the law so to speak, but I try to avoid those times as much as possible. If you force a child to obey, they will most likely rebel, and they will certainly develop either an unhealthy resentment for authority, or an unhealthy attachment to authority (like, from the wrong places). People don't like being forced and it's not a healthy dynamic.

I can't think of a time Jesus never forced anyone to do anything, btw. The cleaning out of the temple might come close-- but I think that was different.

Here are some personal notes I wrote on this subject last week:

* In a caring relationship of any kind, there is no room for punishment. But a child (or adult) SHOULD experience the NATURAL consequences of their actions as much as is safe and appropriate. They should have the benefit of experiencing these consequences WITH the guidance of a loving and caring adult who will not alienate them or withhold affection or compassion.

* Food for thought: in the scriptures, Heavenly Father and Jesus NEVER punish anyone. They simply allow people to sometimes experience the natural consequences of their own choices and actions (always with plenty of prior information given about what those consequences will be or might be). On the other hand, there are also many times when God compassionately shields people from the natural consequences of their actions. Which approach God takes depends on the person’s attitude, situation, and level of understanding.

* Heavenly Father and Jesus allow us to experience consequences even when it would be easier for Them to just punish us. Natural consequences of our actions often sadden God more than they hurt us, because the goal is not revenge, it is growth. Natural consequences may be very inconvenient to the parent. Punishment is often more convenient, but it is not conducive to the child’s growth in the long run.

* Punishment breaks trust and creates resentment.

I'd love to dicuss this more, it's still something I am forming ideas on.

AngelBee

12-18-2008, 01:05 PM

I guess it depends on how you take what you read from the bible.
Give the bible to a hundred different people to read, and they will each take something different from it. Take one passage alone, and each will interpret that differently.
So yes...there are groups of parents out there (perhaps they have their own lables such as we have ones like AP and CL etc) - that take the authority thing from the bible and see that meaning needing to spank your child when they do 'wrong'. Whilst, you can get another group of christians who are very CL instead because that is what they have taken from the bible.
So...it boils down to how you interpret it.
I am not a christian, but I have read the bible - nowhere do I get the idea that children should be submissive to authority. But I have interpreted it differently from those who have.

One scripture comes to mind:

Ephesians 6:1 Children obey your parents in the Lord for this is right.

(Followed by scripture about fathers not provoking their children :thumb )

AngelBee

12-18-2008, 01:08 PM

elizawill

12-18-2008, 01:13 PM

However, what if the child is not at an age of reason yet to determine right from wrong?

well, in that case...even the most radical CL or RU mama is going to intervene and protect her baby from harm's way, yk? if a child doesn't know right from wrong, they will either have natural consequences to teach them or the parent will need to intervene until they learn it (especially in regard to serious safety issues). right?

WhaleinGaloshes

12-18-2008, 01:15 PM

What about when a mutual agreement can not be reached?

Let's say I have to leave for work and kids are not wanting to leave?

There are many, many threads and the CL website out to address the "what about..." No paradigm including parenting or Christianity is a flow chart, if...then...else. It's a philosophy.

The other half of any snippet that says "SoandSo must obey SomebodyElse" is the responsibility of the SomebodyElse. Parents have a responsibility to their children, too. It's my responsibility to take car of my daughter's trust in me, which is exactly why I parent the way I do. You edited: that's always the following sentiment. Not provoking my daughter, to me, is my motivation in the life we life at home; making it easy for her to learn and succeed.

Ephesians is an epistle, it's advice to children that it's right and a good idea to respect and listen to their parents. I'm with that. It doesn't actually say "have to" and it doesn't say "parents, force your children to do what you want."

"Listen to your parents" is good advice, I give it to my daughter all the time. :wink We parents have already been around the block a few times, we're trying to help and we usually know what we're talking about. I don't see it as an issue of submission or mutually exclusive with consensus.

AngelBee

12-18-2008, 01:17 PM

well, in that case...even the most radical CL or RU mama is going to intervene and protect her baby from harm's way, yk? if a child doesn't know right from wrong, they will either have natural consequences to teach them or the parent will need to intervene until they learn it (especially in regard to serious safety issues). right?

Right. But sometimes it may not be an immediate danger. Maybe it is more of a sin issue with attitude or an issue where something HAS to take place and they are being disrespectful about handling it.

For instance, we have been having MAJOR issues with getting out of the house on time. :( It is causing all of us (me included) to be disrespectful. We have talked during calm times and tried to make a plan, but things still get out of control.

My ds (9yrs) actually asked me to punish them if they did not cooperate at the time of leaving :shrug :lol He said that it would teach them to be loving to their mother and be respectful :throb However, the others do not agree :lol

LionTigerBear

12-18-2008, 01:18 PM

This makes a lot of sense. :notes: As a submissive, wife that is a GREAT analogy. :)

However, what if the child is not at an age of reason yet to determine right from wrong?

Well, we have to shield them from some dangers, for sure. And we have to create a safe environment for other family members if the "wrong" in question involves violence, for instance. But as much as possible, I think it is ideal to allow children to learn right and wrong naturally through natural consequnces, while we act as loving, understanding, and compassionate guides along the way.

I alos take to heart the idea that little children are actually holier and closer to God than we are, and so, for the most part, they greatly desire to please us and to do good. When children "act out" it is usually because they do not feel connected/bonded/attached to us as they should and so they are "off-center". Just as God should be my center, children need their parents to be their center, to keep them "good" (feeling good and therefore acting "right").

It's the same with my relationship with God. I am more likely to do the wrong things when I am not feeling close to God or connected to God. When I am working on building my relationship with God, and I am feeling God-centered, feeling His love so close all the time inspires me to be good. Children are the same. Keep them close so that they can always feel your love and they will generally try to be "good".

BTW, I am still working on all of this. Didn't want anyone to think I'm some kind of perfect parent. Nope, not at all. Knowing and doing are two different things. I am working on it! :p BTW, staying God-centered is the best way for me to remember to parent my children the right way.

LionTigerBear

12-18-2008, 01:20 PM

Ephesians is an epistle, it's advice to children that it's right and a good idea to respect and listen to their parents. I'm with that. It doesn't actually say "have to" and it doesn't say "parents, force your children to do what you want."

"Listen to your parents" is good advice, I give it to my daughter all the time. :wink We parents have already been around the block a few times, we're trying to help and we usually know what we're talking about. I don't see it as an issue of submission or mutually exclusive with consensus.

I agree with this. I believe in teaching my children the concept that they should obey their parents-- it's a good thing to do-- but I don't agree with forcing them to do so. It must be their own choice.

AngelBee

12-18-2008, 01:24 PM

I agree with this. I believe in teaching my children the concept that they should obey their parents-- it's a good thing to do-- but I don't agree with forcing them to do so. It must be their own choice.

How do you handle when their choice is extremely disruptive or unhealthy for others in the home?

For example: They are choosing to play loudly. I politely ask them to quite down so that they do not wake the baby. They choose not to quite down.

Result: Baby wakes.

My issue: Their behavior seems to only cause a consequence for ME. :(

Similarly: not leaving the house on time when I HAVE to go to work (they come with me) Consequence? I am late.

Not cleaning up after themselves. Consequence? I have to clean it up. (if I do not want to be punitive and throw their stuff away or pack it away)

Just a couple of examples.

vickjul

12-18-2008, 01:39 PM

I'm very curious to see what others have to say on this topic as well. The first thing that came to my mind, though, was the same husband-wife dynamic LionTigerBear already pointed out. I submit to my husband out of love, not out of fear. I trust him to take all of our concerns/feelings into account and to act in the best interest of our entire family when he makes a decision. In the same way, I want to foster that same love-trust relationship with our children.

As for the oft-quoted "Children, obey" imperative, I see that as a directive from God to children who are capable of understanding. There will be times when our children won't like, agree with, or understand the reasoning behind parental instructions. But in these instances, they have an opportunity to demonstrate their respect for and submission to God by submitting to their parents.

On a related note, I think the Biblical concept of authority is a lot different that the concept that plays out in modern society. In the world at large, authority seems to be about power and control, about whose interests trumps whose. The strong force their will on the weak, use the weak to accomplish their purposes, etc. Biblical authority, as demonstrated by Christ, however, is the antithesis of this. Christ forced His will on no one, used His power to help the weak, and ultimately laid down His life on behalf of those who were "under" Him. If anything, in the Biblical scheme of things, the needs of the weak trump all ... kind of like my 5-month-old's need for comfort at 2 a.m. trumps my need for sleep ...

WhaleinGaloshes

12-18-2008, 01:44 PM

Among the central messages I find in the Bible is, put somewhat indelicately, "work on yourself."

St. Paul gives advice to believers in his epistles, yes, but I'd be hard pressed to find in the New Testament a call to "now that you know exactly what's Right for you and for everyone else, go out and bend others to your will." I find the very premise of Christ's message to be the very opposite of that.

To me, that translates to parenting that it's not my job to bend DD but find my role in conflict and my way to clear the path for her. Sounds wishy-washy and I'm sorry, it doesn't get at all the "yeah but what about"s but that's my address to the original question. It's "attraction not promotion", which is the Christian message IMO.

(I realize that doesn't get your kids out the door any faster :wink)

elizawill

12-18-2008, 01:47 PM

On a related note, I think the Biblical concept of authority is a lot different that the concept that plays out in modern society. In the world at large, authority seems to be about power and control, about whose interests trumps whose. The strong force their will on the weak, use the weak to accomplish their purposes, etc. Biblical authority, as demonstrated by Christ, however, is the antithesis of this. Christ forced His will on no one, used His power to help the weak, and ultimately laid down His life on behalf of those who were "under" Him. If anything, in the Biblical scheme of things, the needs of the weak trump all ... kind of like my 5-month-old's need for comfort at 2 a.m. trumps my need for sleep ...

that's well said and very true!! i really enjoyed reading that!:thumb

LionTigerBear

12-18-2008, 01:48 PM

How do you handle when their choice is extremely disruptive or unhealthy for others in the home?

For me, I often find it helpful to imgaine what I would do if I had the same issue with my dh or a guest or something. It gets me thinking outside of the box of usual parenting norms.

For example: They are choosing to play loudly. I politely ask them to quiet down so that they do not wake the baby. They choose not to quiet down.

Result: Baby wakes.

My issue: Their behavior seems to only cause a consequence for ME. :(

Well, you are the only one feeling the immediate consequences-- you and the baby. But it is normal and healthy to, as a consequence of these actions, create healthy and respectful boundaries. For instance, if my dh was playing too loudly and woke the baby (um, this has happened a lot) then we might discuss options like making more space in between play spaces and baby sleeping spaces, and so forth. This will work with older children (maybe 3 or 4 and up) who are able to think reasonably to a degree. The older children will work with you on this when they feel close and bonded to you. For younger children, I would gently and respectfully and kindly create physical boundaries for them-- i.e., when baby is sleeping in one room they have to play in the other farthest room of the house and I might keep a safety gate up to keep them in the right place during the nap.

Or, I might rethink my desires. Is it really necessary for baby to sleep in a quiet atmosphere? Sometimes, it is, but other times, it might work better to allow baby to learn to sleep around the noise. Different solutions will look different for different families.

But the only other alternative is, what? To inspire your children to obey out of fear? By threatening, creating punishments, withdrawing your patient understanding, etc? I think that this creates distance between you and the child and this will lead them to act out more and be less cooperative in the long run. Remember, you want to keep them close to you and mommy-centered, not alienate them or allow them to withdraw emotionally.

Similarly: not leaving the house on time when I HAVE to go to work (they come with me) Consequence? I am late.

Give yourself more time to get everyone ready to go. Give yourself time to guide each child through the getting ready to go process in a cheerful and upbeat way, possibly making a game out of it.

Not cleaning up after themselves. Consequence? I have to clean it up. (if I do not want to be punitive and throw their stuff away or pack it away).

Well, in that case you only have so many options.

1.) You can get rid of a lot of toys (I don't think this is a bad thing. Children fro mthe beginning of time have lived and thrived with far fewer toys than children to day are used to. And what's better-- children with few toys who are close to their parents and find joy in pleasing their parents, or children with lots of toys who are constantly in conflict with their parents and feeling bad about it and acting out? If you do get rid of a ton of toys (we have done this a couple of times) do it cheerfully, with enthusiasm, non-punitively, and firmly, with confidence that this is a great thing that will make their lives happier-- and it will go over much better.

2.) Clean it up yourself. Really, what's so bad about that? I don't expect my children to wash their dishes, either! I pretty much expect to clean up after them all the time. I hope that by my cheerful example they will learn to love cleaning and they do often join in with enthusiasm. (They are only 4 and 2 now.) So of course I am going to clean up after them.

If they have more toys than I can comfortably clean up after, it's time to get rid of toys. I often invite them to help me clean up, but don't require it. I do keep their toys out of their reach and don't get new toys down for them until the "out" toys have been put away. (A rotation basis.) If I don't feel like putting the toys away right then, then they know that their options are either to 1. put the toys away themselves (sometimes they do) or 2. wait until later to play with a new toy.

So in this case the natural consequences are, have less toys, don't get to play with the toys, that sort of thing. NOT punishments, just the way to goes.

Like I wrote in my notes, natural consequences are often more work/less convenient for the parent. Punishment would be easier for the parent. But God does not punish us.

LionTigerBear

12-18-2008, 01:49 PM

elizawill

12-18-2008, 01:54 PM

For me, I often find it helpful to imgaine what I would do if I had the same issue with my dh or a guest or something. It gets me thinking outside of the box of usual parenting norms.

the only thing with that approach is i would divorce my husband or kick my guests out if they treated me like my kids have sometimes, lol. now, i'm saying that half tongue in cheek of course....but seriously, my husband and guests probably wouldn't be around too long if they spoke to me or treated me as my kids have on some occassions.:p

LionTigerBear

12-18-2008, 01:55 PM

the only thing with that approach is i would divorce my husband or kick my guests out if they treated me like my kids have sometimes, lol. now, i'm saying that half tongue in cheek of course....but seriously, my husband and guests probably wouldn't be around too long if they spoke to me or treated me as my kids have on some occassions.:p

:lol

AngelBee

12-19-2008, 08:18 AM

LionTigerBear

12-19-2008, 09:57 AM

....but seriously, my husband and guests probably wouldn't be around too long if they spoke to me or treated me as my kids have on some occassions.:p

So, what kinds of behavior are we talking about exactly? Now granted, my kids are younger (2 and 4), but I can't think of anything they do that I would kick my dh, or a guest, out over--

Let me see if I can think of an example-- well yesterday I was so tired I went and lay down in bed for a bit (exhausted and pregnant here!) and when I came out, the kids (who had been watching a movie) were using the sink sprayer-attachment-thing to spray water ALL OVER the kitchen. Everything was wet, dripping, and soaking. I was not pleased at all. It took several big bath towels to mop it all up.

So when I think in my head, what would I do if my dh did this? First off, based on our prior relationship, I would respect that it must have seemed like a good idea to him for some reason. I would realize that I need to respect him even if I feel he was in the wrong, because I want to protect out trusting and caring relationship. I would give him the benefit of the doubt that he did NOT do this to hurt me or make my life miserable. So the first thing I would do is listen to what he had to say about the situation. Perhaps DH would have some reasonable explanation for spraying the whole kitchen to soaking-- or at least, a reasonable excuse. Either way, I can be respectful and considerate-- modeling the behavior I want to see more of in my household-- and modeling the way I would like my dh to treat me, as well. After hearing his side of it, I would explain what I didn't like about it and what was bothering me, and we would work it out without blaming and anger.

In the situation with the kids, the biggest thing I can carry over from my hypothetical situation with dh, is trusting in their good intentions-- giving them the benefit of the doubt-- that they didn't do this on purpose to hurt or bug me. They're just being kids. In fact, if anyone was at fault, it was me, for leaving them unsupervised. So being angry at them is pointless (and unrighteous if I indulge it), and being punitive is unjust and will only make them feel bad for being normal, playful, inquisitive kids. Consideration for others is something that takes YEARS to learn. It's amazing how considerate we expect kids to be when they're so little!!! Sometimes we expect them to be more considerate than we might be in the same situation.

As for the "guest" scenario, it might help to imagine this is a guest from a completely different culture, with almost no exposure to Western culture and expectations at all. This is a guest that you have been entrusted to teach and guide while they are with you, and this is someone fairly important-- perhaps a prince or princess. Now imagione that this guest had made a huge mess of the kitchen with the sprayer hose. You wouldn't immediately get mad-- at least not as a good hostess-- you would try to find out what they were trying to do. How exactly did this happen. Maybe they didn't know how the sprayer works. Maybe they were trying to help clean the dishes. Maybe in their culture this is the way people clean a kitchen-- spray liberally with water and then mop up! You would simply explain your customs genially and then take steps to arrange for it not to happen in the future.

You could do this by: 1.) giving them information (some things are damaged by water; I don't like cleaning the kitchen this way, it's too messy; don't worry about cleaning the kitchen for me; I'll take care of it next time) 2.) and if necessary, creating boundaries for next time, like, for the duration of their visit with you, not leaving them alone with a sink full of dishes if you know they like "washing dishes", or not leaving them alone with water at all if it's just the water they like playing with and 3.) if you thought there was a bit of a disconnect in the relationship, that was making them not be as cooperative, trying to do things to "woo" your guest back into your good graces a little bit, or spend more time with them and 4.) guiding their actions more (in this culture they are not familiar with) to help them to make good choices.

So I hope you can see a little better what I meant by trying to think how you might act if it were your dh or a guest. It's not meant exactly literally, but as a tool to help you get away from the mom-always-right-kids-need-to-be-cooperative mindset.

LionTigerBear

12-19-2008, 10:11 AM

Okay, now with older kids, sometimes kids do things deliberately to upset you. This is not something I have dealt with much yet. This might be one of those situations where you would kick out dh or a guest if they deliberately tried to hurt you/upset you.

Let's look at that scenario. If dh were deliberately trying to bother me/hurt me, it owuld be a major red flag that something was really wrong in our relationship. It would tell me immediately that he felt hisneeds were not being met/he felt hurt-- if he felt loved and close to me, this would absolutely not happen. So I would immediately and aggressively go about strengthening our relationship by 1.) meeting his needs 2.) being respectful, giving him his freedom, not punishing or aggravating him and 3.) being more lovable (i.e. courting or wooing his affections again).

I think as parents, when our children are acting out in a hurtful way, we need to not push them away further, but we need to "court" or "woo" them back into our loving arms again. We need to trust in their basic desire to be good, that if they feel right with us, they will not hurt us. If they feel loved and lovable in a relationship with a strong parent-guide, they will want to please us and follow our example, just like the little kids do. There's just more emotional baggage there than a little kids has-- more potential for anger and resentment and so forth. I love the book "Hold On To Your Kids" for more on this subject of "attachment parenting" for big kids and teens.

elizawill

12-20-2008, 06:03 AM

So, what kinds of behavior are we talking about exactly? Now granted, my kids are younger (2 and 4), but I can't think of anything they do that I would kick my dh, or a guest, out over--

my son has hit me & kicked me when angry (from age 1-3 we experienced that)....not popular with guests or dh, lol. my son has outgrown this phase...but he can still call me "diaper face" or "diaper head" and he went through a HUGE "i hate you" phase when he was 3 and young 4 (he'll be 5 soon). you can see my past posts about how much fun that was for me! again, this would not be well tolerated by me from dh or guests. lastly, if my husband or guests had tantrums repeatedly like my son has....oh yea, they would be outta here! lol.

LionTigerBear

12-20-2008, 09:35 AM

my son has hit me & kicked me when angry (from age 1-3 we experienced that)....not popular with guests or dh, lol. my son has outgrown this phase...but he can still call me "diaper face" or "diaper head" and he went through a HUGE "i hate you" phase when he was 3 and young 4 (he'll be 5 soon). you can see my past posts about how much fun that was for me! again, this would not be well tolerated by me from dh or guests. lastly, if my husband or guests had tantrums repeatedly like my son has....oh yea, they would be outta here! lol.

Yeah, my two-year-old does hit me a lot. I pretty much ignore it or laugh at it. If it really hurts (ocassionally) I show him my displeasure.

The reason I would not tolerate or work with this kind of behavior from my husband would be because he is so powerful (physically) that it is just very dangerous. But if he were deliberately showing me disrespect in other fairly harmless ways, which might be more of an accurate parallel to a toddler's impetuous strikes, then I would work with him in the way I described in my last post.

With the preschool name-calling we turn it into a game. They call me diaper head I call them stinker butt. We go back and forth and laugh and hug. Actually, this is what I did with my husband too. We started dating when we were 18 and we used to call each names when we were angry. Eventually I realized that this was dynamic I wanted to change, so when he (or I myself) used a disrespectful term or name I would escalate it in a humorous and overly dramatic way, appealing to his sense of humour, sometimes ending with a ridiculous threat like "I will never talk to you ever again! Ever!" (The facial expressions here are key to making the humor work.) Well, anyway, my dh has a good sense of humor, so it worked-- it really diffuses the tension and makes everything feel less serious. Now when one of us gets angry and starts acting unreasonable, we just look at each other and say, "Jerk!" with a funny face and then burst out laughing and the tension is gone. It's great. :p

Don't know if any of that is immediately helpful or applicable to you but it worked for us. :lol

sahmama_12

12-20-2008, 10:37 AM

Shera971

12-20-2008, 10:54 AM

Yeah, my two-year-old does hit me a lot. I pretty much ignore it or laugh at it. If it really hurts (ocassionally) I show him my displeasure.

If it is ok for your 2 yro to hit you, what do you do if he hits some one else? I'm not trying to be antagonistic, just curious.

ETA: interesting thought on thinking of your children as you would your DH or a guest.... I'll have to chew on that for a while.

LionTigerBear

12-20-2008, 10:56 AM

Thats a beautiful way to put it. Can I borrow your points in my discussions with DH about punishment??

Sure, I'm flattered!

BTW, my two-year-old just had another fit of hitting me this morning. First I ignored it, but he was really mad and kept going (he wanted leftover lo mein for lunch and I vetoed that for health reasons) So then I said gently, "DS2, that's not nice. Hey hey hey, are you okay?" and scooped him up and hugged him. Still angry, he leaned in to bite me and I said "Hey, are you going to bite me?" in a gentle way. He said "No" and his desire to hurt me was immediately gone and we cuddled. Now we are good again. :)

LionTigerBear

12-20-2008, 11:02 AM

If it is ok for your 2 yro to hit you, what do you do if he hits some one else? I'm not trying to be antagonistic, just curious.

Same thing except skip the ignoring part. "Hey hey hey that's not nice"-- said gently-- then pick him up and cuddle him with an attitude of concern and compassion. "Are you okay?" I know when he feels loved he will act loving. Acting angry or punitive is a sure way to continue the violent behavior or escalate it.

This is for situations where he meant to hurt someone. In situations where he accidently hurts someone, I pick him up and comfort the other child if necessary/appropriate, and then tell him with a concerned expression "we've got to be gentle with people." And if it seems like he's not being very considerate of others in general we spend some time reconnecting (recentering him). Otherwise I let him go back to playing.

elizawill

12-20-2008, 11:15 AM

see, i'm totally different. i expect my son to act like a child. he is. my husband and i are almost 40 though. we don't name-call or disrespect each other....and we certainly have had enough time to learn to use "gentle touch", lol. we have bad days of course...we aren't perfect. but we both know how to be reasonable, accept responsibility, talk it out, apologize, etc. my son is still learning so much of this. he's been on the planet a much shorter time, yk? these skills need to be modeled & he still needs redirection and a safe place to learn how to communicate. therefore, what i tolerate from my son is much different than what i would tolerate from my husband....or especially a houseguest...ha ha.

i mean, i'm not their mama... i don't have to put up with disrespect and abuse, ykwim?

Shera971

12-20-2008, 11:24 AM

Same thing except skip the ignoring part. "Hey hey hey that's not nice"-- said gently-- then pick him up and cuddle him with an attitude of concern and compassion. "Are you okay?" I know when he feels loved he will act loving. Acting angry or punitive is a sure way to continue the violent behavior or escalate it..

Nice approach, especially the "he feels loved, he will act loving".

Just wondering why it ok if he hits you?

LionTigerBear

12-20-2008, 02:21 PM

Nice approach, especially the "he feels loved, he will act loving".

Just wondering why it ok if he hits you?

As long as he's not hurting me (and usually it doesn't really hurt), then I don't mind it. At this age, that is. If my four-year-old hit me (not that he ever does but hypothetically) I would tell him that that hurts my feelings, blah blah blah, you know, and then go through the same rebonding process of drawing him closer, but I know it's age-appropriate behavior for a two-year-old and I expect him to grow out of it in a normal fashion even without any "training" on my part. So, no big deal, to me.

LionTigerBear

12-20-2008, 02:42 PM

see, i'm totally different. i expect my son to act like a child. he is.

Right, same here.

my husband and i are almost 40 though. we don't name-call or disrespect each other....and we certainly have had enough time to learn to use "gentle touch", lol. we have bad days of course...we aren't perfect. but we both know how to be reasonable, accept responsibility, talk it out, apologize, etc.

My husband has ADD and a competitive personality that he's still learning to control, but that helps him excel at work-- and he's still in his 20s-- so I have to be patient with him still. :lol I'm sure he'll be quite mellow and self-disciplined by the time he's 40. If not, that's fine too-- but he has come a long way from when we were 18. It was only a few years ago that he would still call me names and refuse to apologize when he got mad. I was patient with it, and it payed off. :thumb I guess you could say I used gentle discipline techniques on him back then, too-- I just didn't know it.

my son is still learning so much of this. he's been on the planet a much shorter time, yk? these skills need to be modeled & he still needs redirection and a safe place to learn how to communicate. therefore, what i tolerate from my son is much different than what i would tolerate from my husband....or especially a houseguest...ha ha.

Okay, I don't know, I guess, for me, I am very patient with guests and with my husband (or would be with my husband, not that I need to be) and not naturally as patient with my children-- it takes more effort for me to be patient with the children because I was raised in an environment where children were expected to be quite convenient to adults at all times-- therefore very little was tolerated from them But guests or adults could get away with anything. :lol So if you're not coming from that place, that little mental "tool" may not work for you as it works for me. That's fine. The point of it all, in the end, is just to be considerate and thoughtful and give the benefit of the doubt. That's all.

i mean, i'm not their mama... i don't have to put up with disrespect and abuse, ykwim?

For me, I would put up with disrespect and even some level of "abuse" (a very small level) if I felt that my marriage could be saved. With a houseguest, I tend to be pretty patient. Again, it's about giving the benefit of the doubt. I'm not going to tolerate abuse from a houseguest, but in some cases I might work with someone who was showing me certain levels of disrespect. I guess I'm kind of nurturing to almost everyone I know, though--I tend to see myself as mothering almost everyone I come across. When I see people, I usually see the inner child first.

Anyway, I think we are mostly on the same page, just coming from different perspectives/backgrounds. I hope I understood you correctly. :)

elizawill

12-20-2008, 03:56 PM

The point of it all, in the end, is just to be considerate and thoughtful and give the benefit of the doubt. That's all.

yep. we'll leave it at that. i totally agree! :)

skreader

12-20-2008, 11:39 PM

My thoughts as a Christian about "submitting to authority".

* Everyone should submit to legitimate authority

* Christians need to strive for justice and peace in this world

*As a Christian, we need to use our powers of discernment to judge what is "legitimate" authority to which we should submit, and that authority which is tyrannical and unjust and must be resisted.

Or, as my mom once put it "the age old problem of how to be a Christian and turn the other cheek without being a doormat."

In my church every week during the intercessions, we pray for (among other things):

"All who govern and hold authority in the nations of the world, That there may be justice and peace in the world."

and

"Guide the people of this land, of all the nations, in the ways of justice and peace; that we may honor one another and serve the common good."

I see these (strive for justice and peace, serve the common good) as guide to the way I live my life, my relationships with others (including my husband and my kids). As a mother, I pray and work to let G-d act through me, so I can guide them in the ways of justice and peace and the common good- which sometimes means telling them "No, you can't do this", or "Yes, you must do that." I try to teach them to honor each other (and me and everyone they encounter).

That said, if I had to define things, I would say that I do GD, but not CL. I've experienced the diificulties of working in co-ops that were run by consensus with ADULTS, to not want to run my home that way when they were under the "age of reason".

However, as they grow older, children's powers of discernment grow. As they "put off childish things" there is less need for me or DH to "lay down the law" (you *must* brush your teeth!) because now at over the age of 10, they both understand why it is a a good and necessary and healthy thing for them to brush their teeth.

I talk w/ my kids about issues of authority and when we think it's right stand up to it, and when it is right not to do.

I would like to have a discussion regarding a child's submission to authority. I have been thinking alot about what the Bible says about authority and thinking about how that fits with GD, unschooling, consentual living, etc.

Many mamas I know IRL and online do not expect their children to submit at all to authority. From a Christian point of view, how is that Biblical?

What is wrong with being under the authority of another?

Am I maybe missing something? :innocent

I do not know how to phrase what I am thinking, so I will leave it at that and be back when I can think more clearly :dizzy: :lol

PaxMamma

12-21-2008, 05:41 AM

Many mamas I know IRL and online do not expect their children to submit at all to authority. From a Christian point of view, how is that Biblical?

there are 5 examples of authority relationship in the bible: husband-wife; pastor-layperson; gov't-citizen; parent-child; elders-younger.

in each relationship, we are to "submit" to the authority. HOWEVER, christological teaching describes these authorities as being responsible to mimic christ, who was a servant. it's completely counter-cultural. the authority persons are suppose to serve the ones under them. so, husbands, serve your wives, parents, serve your children, etc.

in addition, the ephesians passage does not say, "wives submit to your husbands". the word submit is actually not in the original greek. you have to read the verse before (v.21) to get the verb, which says "submit to one another in the lord". so, we are ALL, as christians, to submit to everyone around us: friends, co-workers, enemies.

i also operate under the premise that i cannot control anyone except myself. i can't control my husband, i can't control my children. i can't even control the dumb cat :) all i can do is allow christ to live thru me and serve others in that way. hopefully, by example, others will return the favor. and, if not, i'm still doing what i'm supposed to do. others will have to live w/their choices.

AngelBee

12-21-2008, 10:02 AM

This thread is making me really think. Thank you to all who have responded.

However, I must admit, I am feeling more confused about the issue as opposed to having found clarity. :(

Still thinking though....

LionTigerBear

12-21-2008, 10:29 AM

there are 5 examples of authority relationship in the bible: husband-wife; pastor-layperson; gov't-citizen; parent-child; elders-younger.

in each relationship, we are to "submit" to the authority. HOWEVER, christological teaching describes these authorities as being responsible to mimic christ, who was a servant. it's completely counter-cultural. the authority persons are suppose to serve the ones under them. so, husbands, serve your wives, parents, serve your children, etc.
in addition, the ephesians passage does not say, "wives submit to your husbands". the word submit is actually not in the original greek. you have to read the verse before (v.21) to get the verb, which says "submit to one another in the lord". so, we are ALL, as christians, to submit to everyone around us: friends, co-workers, enemies.

i also operate under the premise that i cannot control anyone except myself. i can't control my husband, i can't control my children. i can't even control the dumb cat :) all i can do is allow christ to live thru me and serve others in that way. hopefully, by example, others will return the favor. and, if not, i'm still doing what i'm supposed to do. others will have to live w/their choices.

Pax Mama, loved your whole post-- especially the bolded parts!!! :love :thumb

So, AngelBee, do you know what it is exactly that you are feeling confused about?

As for me, even though I feel like I pretty much "get it", my issue has been actually remembering to be patient and Christlike and so forth, in the moments when I'm tired and grumpy. :o

AngelBee

12-21-2008, 10:41 AM

So, AngelBee, do you know what it is exactly that you are feeling confused about?

As for me, even though I feel like I pretty much "get it", my issue has been actually remembering to be patient and Christlike and so forth, in the moments when I'm tired and grumpy. :o

No :bag:

Something feels off inside me though when I think about it. :shrug

Twinklefae

12-21-2008, 11:08 AM

AngelBee

12-21-2008, 11:33 AM

I think it is AnnetteMarie who has said that she feels that she is her children's introduction to God. She must treat them with the same gentleness, forgiveness and understanding that she hopes God extends to her. So, following that logic, while God expects you to submit to his authority, he forgives you when you stray away. He does not punish you, he simply asks you to do better next time. Therefore, you would parent your children the same way.

But there ARE consequences for diobeying God.

Maybe that is what I am having an issue with. Natural consequences. Like what to do when there are none and perhaps no motivator for behaving.

My children do not care if I am late for work. :shrug

There is no consequence to anyone but me.

My children do not care in the moment if they are too loud and wake a sibling from a nap.

Only I have a consequence (well.....and the sibling that was awoken)

elizawill

12-21-2008, 11:44 AM

maybe you don't need to strive to be CL so badly. it sounds like it's stressing you out honestly. i'm not UP, US, or CL - but i am very gentle and loving. i don't hit my kids or put them in time-out, etc. i'm not a punitive parent.

i'm completely comfortable using natural consequences AND logical consequences. i don't feel bad at all having house rules, creating boundaries, or stating realistic and age-appropriate expectations. honestly, it helps me not scream and lose my mind... it helps keep me gentle.

WhaleinGaloshes

12-21-2008, 11:45 AM

there are 5 examples of authority relationship in the bible: husband-wife; pastor-layperson; gov't-citizen; parent-child; elders-younger.

in each relationship, we are to "submit" to the authority. HOWEVER, christological teaching describes these authorities as being responsible to mimic christ, who was a servant. it's completely counter-cultural. the authority persons are suppose to serve the ones under them. so, husbands, serve your wives, parents, serve your children, etc.

in addition, the ephesians passage does not say, "wives submit to your husbands". the word submit is actually not in the original greek. you have to read the verse before (v.21) to get the verb, which says "submit to one another in the lord". so, we are ALL, as christians, to submit to everyone around us: friends, co-workers, enemies.

i also operate under the premise that i cannot control anyone except myself. i can't control my husband, i can't control my children. i can't even control the dumb cat :) all i can do is allow christ to live thru me and serve others in that way. hopefully, by example, others will return the favor. and, if not, i'm still doing what i'm supposed to do. others will have to live w/their choices.

Awesome post! Thank you for posting it :joy:

kellykins

12-21-2008, 11:55 AM

I radomly found this thread as I was parusing the New Posts. :) I wanted to thank every one of you tht has posted. Lots of good things to roll around in my head now!!
I have a 2.5yo that doesn't "listen" and is very strong headed and for lack of better word "disobedient" - does things with the specific intent to do something against whatI want her to, the lst straw being instead of hopping up into her carseat as expected the other day, she turned and ran into a parking lot!

PaxMamma

12-21-2008, 12:47 PM

But there ARE consequences for diobeying God.

Maybe that is what I am having an issue with. Natural consequences. Like what to do when there are none and perhaps no motivator for behaving.

My children do not care if I am late for work. :shrug

There is no consequence to anyone but me.

My children do not care in the moment if they are too loud and wake a sibling from a nap.

Only I have a consequence (well.....and the sibling that was awoken)

it sounds like you're hurt, or angry, or resentful. maybe you need to find what it is inside of you that needs to be resolved so that you can enjoy parenting. perhaps you've been hurt in the way you were parented, or maybe you've got societal notions of what "good children" look like that needs to be deconstructed. i can't say what it is for you, but pray diligently and find your answer.

thismama

12-21-2008, 12:59 PM

it sounds like you're hurt, or angry, or resentful. maybe you need to find what it is inside of you that needs to be resolved so that you can enjoy parenting. perhaps you've been hurt in the way you were parented, or maybe you've got societal notions of what "good children" look like that needs to be deconstructed. i can't say what it is for you, but pray diligently and find your answer.

I don't think so, I think AngelBee is pointing out something I've noticed too with some GD advocacy. No parent imposed consequences, right? This ignores the fact that indeed there are consequences for everything, and as our children's guardians and protectors, we absorb a lot of these consequences. So no parent imposed consequences can easily translate into parents absorbing consequences for children's negative behavior, and no negative fallout ever reaching the child. Which is not normal, it is not how things function in the world. I don't think it's representative of a deep psychological issue to notice this, it is simply logic.

AngelBee I do GD, but my GD definitely does include a relationship of authority, and consequences (yes, sometimes imposed by me) where required. I do not 'get' GD that does not include this, and where I have seen it, I have seen some very ill behaved, even aggressive children.

bamamom

12-21-2008, 01:25 PM

How do you handle when their choice is extremely disruptive or unhealthy for others in the home?

For example: They are choosing to play loudly. I politely ask them to quite down so that they do not wake the baby. They choose not to quite down.

Result: Baby wakes.

My issue: Their behavior seems to only cause a consequence for ME. :(

Similarly: not leaving the house on time when I HAVE to go to work (they come with me) Consequence? I am late.

Not cleaning up after themselves. Consequence? I have to clean it up. (if I do not want to be punitive and throw their stuff away or pack it away)

Just a couple of examples.

well, in our house, I'd give them a couple choices to make sure the baby wasn't awakened. As in...

You may sit in the chair with a snack and a movie, or you may go downstairs to play, or you may go to your bed with a book and a cup. Your choice, but right now the baby is sleeping. So hurry up and choose! Time's a wastin!

We call this mandatory quiet time in our house.

And the kids need to understand that it's not nice to mama OR the baby when they disobey and the baby gets awakened.

But then again, I'm not 10000% GD b/c I do enforce everything I say. I guess I'm more punitive than most. :wink

And if they are leaving their stuff out all the time, and you have to clean it up or step over it, maybe they have too much stuff. Maybe you NEED to pack it away or donate a bunch so they can handle a certain amt of stuff. I am doing it this week. WE have too much crap. WE are donating to Goodwill for cmas. They play so much better with less stuff, for some reason.

bamamom

12-21-2008, 01:29 PM

See, I dont feel there's any wrong in being punitive sometimes , Angelbee.

It sounds like you feel like your kids just don't care, and it'smaking life hard on you. And if that continues, you can feel sad and resentful and exhausted *I know I would!*

You can tell your kids...You have to get up 45 minutes earlier. If you don't make it out the door on time, we can get up earlier than that. and repeat repeat til they realize you'll get them up at dawn.

I think the "Loving God, Loving Others" message that i try to teach my kids all the time includes being respectful to one another and trying to work as a team. If your Nine yr old ds is asking to be punished , then maybe the kids are ready for some punitive actionon your part.

I'm not saying beat them with sticks. I'm saying make changes, enforce things, and work out a new system until something works for you.

:hug:

jenners26

12-21-2008, 01:56 PM

I'm not Christian, but we do strive for a CL household, so I thought I'd give you my point of view. Clearly, I'm speaking just for us, and not for all CL families.

I think a lot of people have a mistaken idea that families who are CL allow their children to do anything they want to at any point in the day, no matter how impactful it is on the rest of the family. In our family, CL means that each member of the family is completely equal. My five year old's opinions, feelings, wants, and needs are just as important as DH's and mine. HOWEVER...it does not mean that the whole family revolves around DS. For example, if the babies are napping, DS and I have a conversation after I put the babies to bed about how they're tired and need to sleep, so we will need to find quiet things to do. If he wants to stay downstairs with me, he'll need to find a craft or a movie, or some quiet toys to play with, and if he feels like he cannot be quiet, then he'll need to go play upstairs so the babies are still able to sleep.

Or, if we have an appointment to be to, and DS doesn't want to get ready to go, we'll have a conversation about why we have the appointment and how it's important not to be late. I'll say something like, if we don't hurry and get ready we'll be late, how it's inconsiderate to make the person wait for us. He'll generally say something along the lines of, "But I don't waaannnnnaaaa go!" And then I'll say something about how I don't necesarily WANT to go either, but how we have to because blah blah blah. And then I'll offer to help him pick out some clothes, or whatever. We do a lot of talking, and have a lot of conversations about things, and there are rarely situations that cannot be resolved with a conversation.

I'm probably rambling, but hopefully I'm making some sense. CL is not about giving into every demand your child has. If my DS wants ice cream at 8:00 at night and we don't have any, I'm not going to run to the store just because he's expressed a want. BUT, I would offer to pick some up the next time we go food shopping, and in the mean time offer to help him find something else.

Being the mother doesn't mean that MY needs and wants are less important than their's. I am also a member of my family, and I deserve equal consideration. I would not "consent" to being late to work everyday simply because DS didn't want to get ready to go. But I would be sympathetic to him not wanting to get ready to go, and see if I could help him out somehow.

Anyway...I don't know if that helps at all, or if I'm just rambling!

AngelBee

12-21-2008, 02:14 PM

I don't think so, I think AngelBee is pointing out something I've noticed too with some GD advocacy. No parent imposed consequences, right? This ignores the fact that indeed there are consequences for everything, and as our children's guardians and protectors, we absorb a lot of these consequences. So no parent imposed consequences can easily translate into parents absorbing consequences for children's negative behavior, and no negative fallout ever reaching the child. Which is not normal, it is not how things function in the world. I don't think it's representative of a deep psychological issue to notice this, it is simply logic.

AngelBee I do GD, but my GD definitely does include a relationship of authority, and consequences (yes, sometimes imposed by me) where required. I do not 'get' GD that does not include this, and where I have seen it, I have seen some very ill behaved, even aggressive children.

This is EXACTLY my issue!

I feel like GD with no regard to authority causes me to be a doormat for my children.

It also causes them to be disrespectful and sometimes strike out against eachother. :( There is nothing gentle in that. :crying

I feel like they are telling me "We NEED help controlling our impulses."

The only way I can do that is to set up a more structured environment with SPECIFIC expectations and SPECIFIC consequences. (This is how I feel right now)

I LOVE the idea of no punishments (as in negative consequecnces), no rules, no forcing anyone to do things they do not want to do (like get in the car when I have to go to work), no praise, etc

But I DO NOT see good results when I do any of those things.

The Bible says to judge by the fruit something creates.

GD with no authority/imposed consequences is causing havac on my home!

So....that lead me to think.......if it is NOT producing Godly fruit, is it Godly to begin with?

Now.....I am NOT talking about spanking or unrealistic expectations for a childs age and ability. That to me is where the grace part comes in as in me treating them like Jesus. But I am seeing a calling to guide my sheep more clearly and with predictatble outcomes.

AngelBee

12-21-2008, 02:16 PM

AngelBee

12-21-2008, 02:21 PM

elizawill

12-21-2008, 02:22 PM

This is EXACTLY my issue!

I feel like GD with no regard to authority causes me to be a doormat for my children.

It also causes them to be disrespectful and sometimes strike out against eachother. :( There is nothing gentle in that. :crying

I feel like they are telling me "We NEED help controlling our impulses."

The only way I can do that is to set up a more structured environment with SPECIFIC expectations and SPECIFIC consequences. (This is how I feel right now)

I LOVE the idea of no punishments (as in negative consequecnces), no rules, no forcing anyone to do things they do not want to do (like get in the car when I have to go to work), no praise, etc

But I DO NOT see good results when I do any of those things.

The Bible says to judge by the fruit something creates.

GD with no authority/imposed consequences is causing havac on my home!

So....that lead me to think.......if it is NOT producing Godly fruit, is it Godly to begin with?

Now.....I am NOT talking about spanking or unrealistic expectations for a childs age and ability. That to me is where the grace part comes in as in me treating them like Jesus. But I am seeing a calling to guide my sheep more clearly and with predictatble outcomes.

sounds like you answered your own question:Hug

and fwiw, in my opinion i don't think you should try to look at this as godly or ungodly...think about it in terms of what works for you and your family, ykwim? what one family permits or decides is different from another. i know CL and US families IRL that seem to do wonderful!!! the whole family seems to thrive! for my family though, i am okay with natural AND logical consequences. in addition, my kids have bedtime, meal time, bath time, school time, etc. and i don't feel bad about creating that structure and enforcing it. it doesn't mean i'm punitive. i'm a good mommy (ha ha, well....usually!!) and these routines keep my whole family happy and sane :) hugs to you!

AngelBee

12-21-2008, 02:34 PM

sounds like you answered your own question:Hug

and fwiw, in my opinion i don't think you should try to look at this as godly or ungodly...think about it in terms of what works for you and your family, ykwim? what one family permits or decides is different from another. i know CL and US families IRL that seem to do wonderful!!! the whole family seems to thrive! for my family though, i am okay with natural AND logical consequences. in addition, my kids have bedtime, meal time, bath time, school time, etc. and i don't feel bad about creating that structure and enforcing it. it doesn't mean i'm punitive. i'm a good mommy (ha ha, well....usually!!) and these routines keep my whole family happy and sane :) hugs to you!

Sorry...I should have clarified I mean Godly/Ungodly for MY FAMILY.

Not for others.

I am sure others can get this to work in their situations, but it is NOT working for ours.

Sorry if I offended anyone. I should have been more clear. :)

jenners26

12-21-2008, 02:56 PM

See.....I get all this and we do this too.

But what happens when he CAN'T control the impulse to be loud? Or will not get ready to get in the car? Or freaks out because there is no ice cream?

That is where I am having an issue. You do not consent to the behavior, but what can you do about it?

If you do not have a consequence, what do you do? Deal repeatedly with a sleepy baby who has been woke? Be late for work everyday?

That is where I am just :scratch and :crying

It is like they feel no insentive or responsibility to do what I am asking. Or they do not think about how it will effect others.

Then I become the fix it lady by default and they have no reprocussion but me feeling sorry for myself. :(

If he CAN'T control the impulse to be loud....then punishing him for it probably won't help either. How old is he? I think I missed that somewhere along the line. Maybe you could make the baby's naptime a special time for the two of you. Find an activity....a QUIET activity....to do just with him while the baby sleeps. Or...since you recognize that he cannot control the impulse to be quiet, what can be done to insure that the baby sleeps? Can you get a white noise machine in the baby's room? Or even just a fan, or a quiet cd? Or could you take DS to a different part of the house to play where being loud is okay?

If he throws a fit because he wants ice cream and you don't have it....so what? He's expressing disappointment/frustration/anger about not having something he wants. But he doesn't have the adult ability to say, "Crap! I really wanted ice cream," and then remedy it by either going to the store to get some, or adding it to your food shopping list for next time. YOU are totally in control of whether or not there is ice cream in the house, and he probably feels powerless, which leads to the tantrum. (Clearly, this is a bit of a dramatic example!) So, how to handle it? Give him a hug, tell him when specifically he can expect you to get him some ice cream, and then make him some other special treat. If he doesn't want it...fine. If he still tantrums...so what? Empathize with him, console him, offer to help him, and then move on. No punishment needed.

It seems, from your posts, the main issue seems to be with leaving the house. Again, I'm not sure how old your LO is, and that has to be taken into account. If he is too young to control his urge to be loud, he is probably too young to understand the ramifications of you being late, and in that case, I think you need to realize it is okay to gently help him get ready. Or? Take him in his pajamas, take an "on the go" breakfast with you, tell him you're sorry he doesn't want to go, but Mommy cannot be late to work, and pick him up and head out the door. If it's cold where you live, take a blanket with you if he won't put on a jacket.

I realize that might not sound completely CL, but the fact is, he has no concept of "Mommy could lose her job, we could lose our income, etc," consequences to this action. He's most likely not trying to be flippant or insensitive to you. He just doesn't get it. You don't expect a baby to understand what "be gentle" means, and you can't expect a small child to expect what "Mommy might get fired if we're late" means. My 23 month old doesn't always want to go to bed at 7:00 either, but she is EXHAUSTED and miserable the next day if she doesn't. And since she doesn't understand the consequences, or her own limits when it comes to bedtime, I have set a bedtime for her. I put her to bed gently, and kindly, but I still put her to bed. And, I still consider us to be a CL family.

The same can go for leaving for work. Just because he doesn't want to, and just because he doesn't understand the consequences, doesn't mean that you can't gently, and kindly, and non-threateningly, find a way to get him out the door so you aren't late for work.

brightonwoman

12-21-2008, 03:03 PM

Wow, I stumbled across this in new posts, and YES! This is the kind of thing that turned me off to GD initially, because the places where I was seeing it (I thought) were families where the kids were out of control and the parents seemed to be pushovers.
On the one hand, I agree with being gentle (absolutely), but I am not ok with being a pushover, and I definitely want my kids to respect me, each other, and other people.
I've opted to look to Christ as an example--He set rules, and He absolutely expected them to be obeyed. He allowed natural consequences to occur, and sometimes imposed consequences to help people learn, but was gentle and understanding, and used those times as teaching moments--to explain the rules and encourage forgiveness and future obedience.
If someone really broke a rule, He was willing to get them in big trouble (I think of Him in the temple chasing out the money changers).
He was always respectful--both to authority figures, and to those who saw him as the authority figure. This is the biggest thing to me. It's not that I see my children as being equal to me in authority--they do have to obey me--BUT as fellow children of God, they are equal to me, so I do my best to treat them kindly and respectfully, including when I tell them they must do something, or when I need to discipline them over something. I try to see their point of view, and remember/respect their feelings. I use natural and logical consequences, but I try to use them in a respectful way...

I hope that all makes sense. I kinda feel like I'm talking in circles here, but hopefully it makes sense. :)

Surfacing

12-21-2008, 09:04 PM

:lurk:

mysticmomma

12-21-2008, 09:22 PM

Among the central messages I find in the Bible is, put somewhat indelicately, "work on yourself."
It's "attraction not promotion", which is the Christian message IMO.

(I realize that doesn't get your kids out the door any faster :wink)
are you a 12 stepper?

WhaleinGaloshes

12-21-2008, 09:35 PM

are you a 12 stepper?

Yeah, a long time now. The cliches are too ingrained to edit them out :innocent

AngelBee

12-22-2008, 08:08 AM

Ages of my littles:

Ds 9 (just turned), dd6 (7 in Jan), ds4 (just turned), dd2 (just turned), and new baby girl due April 09 :throb

LionTigerBear

12-22-2008, 08:50 AM

I've opted to look to Christ as an example--He set rules, and He absolutely expected them to be obeyed.

This is an odd choice of words to me. Perhaps I'm not understanding you completely. It seems to me, that he does NOt expect to be obeyed consistently at all. In fact, he pretty much planned for us not to-- what with the Atonement and all. But, He did say "If you love me you will keep my commandments." So at least He expects us to try. But I don't see Him as expecting obedience. Just one example-- remember Peter's denial? He knew that Peter would deny Him (betray Him!). He was prepared for it and forgiving and compassionate about it.

He allowed natural consequences to occur, and sometimes imposed consequences to help people learn, but was gentle and understanding, and used those times as teaching moments--to explain the rules and encourage forgiveness and future obedience.
If someone really broke a rule, He was willing to get them in big trouble (I think of Him in the temple chasing out the money changers).

I don't know, I don't see God ever actively imposing consequences as a tool to help people become disciplined or more righteous. In the situation with the money changers, He was being emotionally honest in expressing his righteous anger. (Interesting to note that Jesus ALWAYS expresses His emotions quite openly-- he just didn't have any destructive emotions ever! His only anger was non-punitive, non-vengeful righteous anger.) One of the natural consequences of one's actions is reaping the fallout of emotional expression of others in reaction to one's choices. This is why I let my kids see my displeasure when they act hurtful.

He was also doing something quite practical in asserting his personal boundaries (the temple was kind of His own personal space. ;)) You never see him barge into someone else's personal home and kick people out for doing sinful things-- no matter how hardened those people's hearts were. It wasn't His personal space so there was no need for Him to assert boundaries there. So, why did He chase the money changers out of the temple? Not because He expected them to change, but only because He wanted to purify His Father's temple. The whipping wasn't to train them, it was just to physically get them out of there. In fact, the people He still had hope to educate and have them grow, He never acted so "punitively" with. I believe He knew that punishment does not cause people to change.

I see natural consequences in parenting as being things like expressing your displeasure where appropriate, asserting your boundaries (or those of a younger child who cannot for themselves) and basically standing up for yourself while also treating your child as an equal.

Creating artificial consequences is the same as punishment, in my opinion. Now, I don't think it's the worst thing in the world, and when I'm at the end of my rope sometimes I do it too, but I don't think it's ideal or Christlike and I feel like there is always a better way.

So, if my child acts up in the grocery store, I might not take him grocery shopping with me for a while. Not a punishment, but me asserting my boundaries in a healthy way is a natural consequence-- the same kind of thing I would do with an adult friend. If my child cannot play appropriately with a toy, I might take away the toy-- not a punishment, but again, me asserting healthy boundaries in a non-punitive way. None of this is done with anger and resentment, but with a an aggreeable and cheerful attitude-- "I know you're having a hard time with this toy right now so we'll just give it a break for now". And then if they're upset about it, validate and listen to their feelings. And then help them move on by introducing a new line of thinking or activity.

To me, an imposed artifical consequence would be something like, "If you don't quiet down and get off of the table I'm not giving you any hot chocolate!" And um, yes, I said that last night in a moment of irritability. :o

What would have been more Christlike would have been to 1.) give them less hot chocolate than I may have been going to originally, without saying anything about it, because it's not a punishment but because I realized they are not in a position to handle much sugar at the moment, 2.) be patient with them because their climbing on the table and yelling was mostly outside of their control at that point (they had a friend over, they'd been cooped up iside most of the day, and they were excited abotu the snow, oh and they were tired.) and 3.) be more respectful of MYSELF and my own boundaries, and realized that all of the noisiness and yelling was getting to me, so I ought to have found a way to try to take care of my needs without taking my frustration out on the boys. It would have been fine if I had stepped away for a moment to breathe and recenter, or put on some soothing music I enjoy, or asked DH to take over for a few.

elizawill

12-22-2008, 08:58 AM

So, if my child acts up in the grocery store, I might not take him grocery shopping with me for a while. Not a punishment, but me asserting my boundaries in a healthy way is a natural consequence-- the same kind of thing I would do with an adult friend. If my child cannot play appropriately with a toy, I might take away the toy-- not a punishment, but again, me asserting healthy boundaries in a non-punitive way.

i totally agree with this. i see these as logical consequences & i use approaches like this when natural consequences don't fit the bill.

LionTigerBear

12-22-2008, 09:10 AM

and 3.) be more respectful of MYSELF and my own boundaries, and realized that all of the noisiness and yelling was getting to me, so I ought to have found a way to try to take care of my needs without taking my frustration out on the boys. It would have been fine if I had stepped away for a moment to breathe and recenter, or put on some soothing music I enjoy, or asked DH to take over for a few.

Oh, this reminded me of one other thing-- an idea I encounter a LOT is that to have dignity or self-respect, one must take care of one's own emotional needs by trying to control other people or change other people. The implication is that in some way, other people are responsible for how we feel.

This is an important myth to debunk, not just in aspect to our relationships with our children, but with our spouses, parents, friends, and anyone. If someone else is bothering us, we can't make them change, and if even if we could wouldn't that be messing up their own spiritual growth path?-- we can only do things within our own power, that is, change ourselves. Depending on the situation, what we can do is either remove ourselves from the situation, change the way we interact the other person (which may change how they are reacting to us), or change how we react to them.

Taking responsibility for how someone else feels is a tricky area. I see it as more of a gift in some ways, although it can also be unhealthy and codependent in some situations. That's a whole other topic. But long story short, we should never EXPECT other people to take responsibility for our emotional needs. When they do, we can accept it graciously, but not require it.

thismama

12-22-2008, 09:50 AM

It's nice to say you won't take your child grocery shopping if they act up, but this is not possible for everyone. For me, my children need to come grocery shopping, and they need to not act like wild animals. I feel as a mother, it is definitely within my realm to 'change someone' insofar as this kind of behavioural expectation is concerned. When my DD was younger, if she couldn't behave walking on her own, she would ride on my back in the pouch. Kinda hilarious to have a toddler screaming 'no!' while you put them on your back, a bit of the antithesis of babywearing, but it did the trick. Nowadays it's a nonissue but I would not hesitate to take away the treat she looks forward to at teh end of the trip for wrong behaviour.

mamabear&babybear

12-22-2008, 10:10 AM

This is a great thread, and you all are giving me so much to think about!!
:lurk:

LionTigerBear

12-22-2008, 10:11 AM

It's nice to say you won't take your child grocery shopping if they act up, but this is not possible for everyone.

Right, it wasn't intended as the ultimate solution for all people, it was just an example of one appropriate consequence.

For me, my children need to come grocery shopping, and they need to not act like wild animals. I feel as a mother, it is definitely within my realm to 'change someone' insofar as this kind of behavioural expectation is concerned.

Why do they need to not act like wild animals? I would say it is preferable if they do not act like wild animals, but not completely within the realm of your control.

You can certainly TRY to encourage your children to act differently in several ways, but you cannot count on them being able to "behave" short of hurting them, in which case they are only cooperating out of fear or shame and in that case, inside they have not learned anything constructive.

When my DD was younger, if she couldn't behave walking on her own, she would ride on my back in the pouch. Kinda hilarious to have a toddler screaming 'no!' while you put them on your back, a bit of the antithesis of babywearing, but it did the trick. Nowadays it's a nonissue but I would not hesitate to take away the treat she looks forward to at teh end of the trip for wrong behaviour.

I don't see anything wrong with that. I also don't see that as controlling her or making her change-- just enforcing your boundaries in the best way you could given the situation. Again, you were doing what you had to do in the most respectful way you could-- respectful to her and to you.

thismama

12-22-2008, 10:13 AM

thismama

12-22-2008, 10:23 AM

I gotta say too, I don't get the 'they aren't learning anything!' arugment. Sometimes they need to learn that it is not all about them and what they are getting out of everything, it is about being cooperative and part of a group of people, prioritizing someone else's needs or family needs over their own desires at that moment in time. Yk? It's like: Dude we need to get this done. Here is why. Now behave yourself so it can happen. Vs: Oh how are you feeeeeeeeeling as you dump the coffee beans all over the floor? Do you really *get* why not to do that? Or maybe there is something I'm not seeing why it's important to make this giant mess and risk people falling down and getting hurt?

Sometimes making them the centre of everything, never enforcing our own needs/agenda as the priority, can do much harm IMO.

LionTigerBear

12-22-2008, 10:25 AM

If my children acted like wild animals at the grocery store, I would be very displeased to say the least.

I feel displeased when my children acted like that, too. But I do not expect them to act convenient to me or to be responsible for my comfort.

They do *need* to act appropriately in situations they are in, and I cannot and will not conform all situations to them so that they never meet up with this requirement in their childhoods.

I think we are defining "need" differently.

You cannot conform all situations to them, and in some situations you shouldn't. A lot of times this is how they learn-- by being faced with situations that stretch their abilities.

It is definitely controlling her though vs just enforcing my own boundaries. Physically putting her in the carrier? Yes that does directly control her.

Yes it is controlling her actions in that you are containing them, but it is not controllinh her mind or behavior. The difference seems to me to be, that one is done to make everyone's life easier, whereas one is done to "train" them to be a certain way.

thismama

12-22-2008, 10:28 AM

I feel displeased when my children acted like that, too. But I do not expect them to act convenient to me or to be responsible for my comfort.

Oh, I do. Insofar as my comfort is affected by whether they act like hellions or not, I definitely do expect things from them.

I think we are defining "need" differently.

You cannot conform all situations to them, and in some situations you shouldn't. A lot of times this is how they learn-- by being faced with situations that stretch their abilities.

ITA.

Yes it is controlling her actions in that you are containing them, but it is not controllinh her mind or behavior. The difference seems to me to be, that one is done to make everyone's life easier, whereas one is done to "train" them to be a certain way.

Not sure where you are seeing people talking about training? IMO it's about parent imposed consequences or not.

chfriend

12-22-2008, 10:39 AM

AngelBee, I am a Christian and I can share my take on it with you. It is true that you can judge by the fruits...and you sound very very clear that something is not working in your situation.

Have you called a gathering of the family to talk to them about how little respect you feel from them? How you feel you are not getting cooperation in getting out the door?

One of the things that "works" with my two is to slow down myself trying to get out the door. I wonder sometimes if that what "works" about giving kids timeouts when they don't cooperate going out the door.

I tend to push myself a little harder as the time of leaving approaches. I get stressed out because I can't be late.

Obvious solutions like prepping well beforehand and leaving adequate time work to a point, but in the actual moment of leaving, I found the kids were responding to *my* stress about whether I was going to be late.

When I can let that go, they move faster and more cooperatively. Ironic, I know.

Some learned Christian mom here once defined being an authority as being a "learned guide." I love that description and strive for it in my own ways of thinking about my interactions with my children.

Another thing that helps is really knowing that families that punish still have the older kids wake the younger kids up during naptime sometimes. Really, I promise.

There is a certain level of chaos that comes with having a large family of closely spaced children, whatever the training people say. Just keeping the noise and mess level down to something habitable is enough some days. Children may be a blessing, but they are loud, noisy blessings.

Make sure you are asking them for real genuine help. Make sure they know what you need as far in advance as you can give them a heads up. Make sure they know that you consider yourself worthy of their respect and love.

elizawill

12-22-2008, 10:49 AM

thismama, i totally get you on kids not acting like wild animals in the store. i feel the same way! my kids are 7 & almost 5 now, so that's not an issue anymore. they can now help me shop, stand on the back of the cart while i push it and they usually behave great. but man, my ds has had some serious tantrums in public when he was 2 & 3 years old. i have had to leave a store, the park, a playdate, etc. when his behavior was unacceptable like that. he would get a warning first & if he continued....we left. heck, just several months ago we were going to eat at pizza hut (which is a huge treat for my kids). my ds was completely misbehaving inside. my dh warned him to stop. ds continued. we left. it was the logical consequence though & unfortunately, we all were effected by one person's behavior. but he learned from it & hasn't done it since.

LionTigerBear

12-22-2008, 10:49 AM

Sometimes they need to learn that it is not all about them and what they are getting out of everything, it is about being cooperative and part of a group of people, prioritizing someone else's needs or family needs over their own desires at that moment in time. Yk?

I have faith that they already want to be cooperative and be part of a group of people. I have faith that they will naturally develop selflessness and thoughtfulness in time, when they get to that developmental stage, and when they can comprehend it, and by learning by example. I do not need to make them be cooperative and sociable-- indeed I cannot-- they already have that innate desire-- all I can do is kill it, or nurture it. If it is being overridden by selfishness, it is because 1.) they do not understand something (possibly that they don't have the capacity to, ie they're two years old, for instance) or 2.) they are not feeling loved, connected, bonded and so are acting from a place of self-preservation/survival and fear.

It's like: Dude we need to get this done. Here is why. Now behave yourself so it can happen. Vs: Oh how are you feeeeeeeeeling as you dump the coffee beans all over the floor? Do you really *get* why not to do that? Or maybe there is something I'm not seeing why it's important to make this giant mess and risk people falling down and getting hurt?

Well, in the first example you gave, the first two sentences are in line with my methods of parenting [we need to get this done. Here is why] because you are giving the child information she may not have had (reminding her, helping to guide her), which is respectful to her. But you are not giving it in a way like, "you should know this what the heck were you thinking?" Which would be disrespectful and create distance in the relationship (ecourage her to not want to cooperate). The last sentence seems disrespectful to me [Now behave yourself so it can happen] because you are implying that she did not already have the desire to behave or be respectful to you. And if you assume she does not, she will feel insulted and it will hurt her self-confidence-- she will see herself as having a natural disposition to misbehave.

I would simply give the first two sentences and then expect her to behave without saying anything about it. Normally this alone works for me. If she did not, I will continue to assume that she will behave when she has the understanding and feels loved, so, first I will give her more information, and then if she is still being uncooperative, I will kindly state my wishes, and of she STILL isn't being cooperative I will help her pick up the beans (or pick them up myself if necessary) and then address her non-connectedness in a more appropriate time and place (soon!) In the meantime, I would not act angry or punitive. I would say, "it makes me feel ___ when you do ___. I don't feel like it's very kind/loving/friendly/whatever. I want us to be loving/friends/whatever with each other again, but right now I need to ____. How about we talk about it later." And if she was aggreeable to it, I would give her a hug and a smile at that time. Remember, all of this is with the intention of courting the child back into a bonded place again, because bonded children seek to please. Of course, if she was being extremely difficult, and I was upset about it, I would forego the hug and smile-- no good to fake it! So in that case we would just take some "space" from each other just until I could act patient and forgiving again.

Sometimes making them the centre of everything, never enforcing our own needs/agenda as the priority, can do much harm IMO.

I agree. I don't see my methods as making them the center of anything. I just try to afford them the same respect and consideration I would want to be afforded.

thismama

12-22-2008, 10:58 AM

I have faith that they already want to be cooperative and be part of a group of people. I have faith that they will naturally develop selflessness and thoughtfulness in time, when they get to that developmental stage, and when they can comprehend it, and by learning by example. I do not need to make them be cooperative and sociable-- indeed I cannot-- they already have that innate desire-- all I can do is kill it, or nurture it. If it is being overridden by selfishness, it is because 1.) they do not understand something (possibly that they don't have the capacity to, ie they're two years old, for instance) or 2.) they are not feeling loved, connected, bonded and so are acting from a place of self-preservation/survival and fear.

I dunno. Definitely at 2 years old they cannot understand things, I agree. But beyond that, I think they can. And I don't think bad behaviour is always about feeling unloved. I personally know two boys, in separate families, who are loved and doted on and whose parents do not impose consequences. Both boys are aggressive hellions. I think there is something about power dynamics in all human relations, and when parents behave as pushovers who are too worried about damaging the fragile child's psyche to assert themselves, an imbalance results and parents can be walked upon.

I think it's interesting how many upper class white women are called to 'GD' that encourages total passivity with children, and that alleges that any use of power will ruin the child for life. The whole rhetoric sends up alarm bells for me.

Well, in the first example you gave, the first two sentences are in line with my methods of parenting [we need to get this done. Here is why] because you are giving the child information she may not have had (reminding her, helping to guide her), which is respectful to her. But you are not giving it in a way like, "you should know this what the heck were you thinking?" Which would be disrespectful and create distance in the relationship (ecourage her to not want to cooperate). The last sentence seems disrespectful to me [Now behave yourself so it can happen] because you are implying that she did not already have the desire to behave or be respectful to you. And if you assume she does not, she will feel insulted and it will hurt her self-confidence-- she will see herself as having a natural disposition to misbehave.

Oh I definitely think parent imposed consequences can be respectful. That is entirely my point! My last line, 'now behave yourself so it can happen' is not a line I would deliver directly to a child, but more is what I am thinking in my approach. However I do not see it as assumptive; fact is the child is already misbehaving. It is simply an observation of what needs to happen. I know we have seen much disrespectul, shame based parenting in the past, but my point is do not throw out the baby with the bathwater here. Asserting power, imposing consequences, do not have to correlate with shame or disrespect.

I don't see my methods as making them the center of anything. I just try to afford them the same respect and consideration I would want to be afforded.

Point is though how much respect and consideration would you expect to be given for the same behaviour? I would imagine much less than *any* of us afford our children. There are always consequences in the world for our behaviour. The nature of the parent/child relationship is that many of the bigger consequences are absorbed by parents. If, in a situation where behaviour is intentional and repetitive, we do not then turn and put some form of consequence back toward the child, it just ends up creating an artificial situation where the child's misbehaviour affects everyone but themselves. That is not real, and it's not doing the child any favours to put them in that sort of bubble IMO.

LionTigerBear

12-22-2008, 11:27 AM

I dunno. Definitely at 2 years old they cannot understand things, I agree. But beyond that, I think they can.

I think it depends. Some situations are more complex than what they can grasp without reminders or help.

And I don't think bad behaviour is always about feeling unloved. I personally know two boys, in separate families, who are loved and doted on and whose parents do not impose consequences. Both boys are aggressive hellions.

Being loved and feeling loved are two entirely different htings. One need that children have (which they require to feel loved) is having their parent/guide be confident and have some degree of certainty and firmness to them. If the parents are pushovers, the children feel insecure, which makes them act out-- not because they want their parents to suffer for the fun of it but because they are subconciously trying to push to find the firm confident place. Undortunately, some parents equate being firm with being unloving or "tough". Firm and loving and kind and thoughtful and confident can all go together. And confidence can go hand in hand with a certain degree of vulnerability and flexibility.

I think there is something about power dynamics in all human relations, and when parents behave as pushovers who are too worried about damaging the fragile child's psyche to assert themselves, an imbalance results and parents can be walked upon.

Absolutely.

I think it's interesting how many upper class white women are called to 'GD' that encourages total passivity with children, and that alleges that any use of power will ruin the child for life. The whole rhetoric sends up alarm bells for me.

I son't think it encourages passivity in children. I think it will encourage them to be leaders, strong, assertive, and free.

My last line, 'now behave yourself so it can happen' is not a line I would deliver directly to a child, but more is what I am thinking in my approach.

Well that makes a big difference.

However I do not see it as assumptive; fact is the child is already misbehaving.

I just think it's sad to label it that way and not leave room for understanding. Just because they were previously being uncooperative doesn't mean they wanted to or don't want to please you if they thought they could or knew how.

Point is though how much respect and consideration would you expect to be given for the same behaviour? I would imagine much less than *any* of us afford our children.

I don't think so. Seriously, if I had the same level of understanding and ability as they do, I would be mentally challenged, and I would hope that people would act compassionately and understandingly with me. As an adult with normal adult abilities, of course people expect more cooperative and understanding behavior of me.

The nature of the parent/child relationship is that many of the bigger consequences are absorbed by parents.

As they should be, and as Christ and God often do for us-- absorbing consequences in some situations while offering gentle guidance and giving information (ie warnings). And then, if we are not listening/learning from that approach, and as appropriate, they then allow us to suffer the natural consequences.

If, in a situation where behaviour is intentional and repetitive, we do not then turn and put some form of consequence back toward the child, it just ends up creating an artificial situation where the child's misbehaviour affects everyone but themselves. That is not real, and it's not doing the child any favours to put them in that sort of bubble IMO.

In a "situation where behaviour is intentional and repetitive" there is a deep disconnect and the child is calling out for help. At that point the child-parent relationship needs to be mended and the responsibility for that is fully on the shoulders of the parent.

I do not think that parents need to directly and parallely model the child's future relationship with the rest of the world and community. That is, you are NOT the "real world" or neighborhood to your child-- you are Mommy. And we ARE directly modeling and paralleling the child's future relationship with God, which is very different (hopefully) than their relationship with the rest of the world. It is okay for mom (and God) to have a different and more understanding relationship with the child than, say, an employer will someday. For instance, if you were to treat your child like an employee so that someday they will be ready for the workplace, you would be doing your child a great disservice.

thismama

12-22-2008, 11:35 AM

I do not think all misbehaviour is about not feeling loved. I do not think the solution to misbehaviour is always to worry about how I must have deeply failed my child in some intangible way and try try try to 'reconnect.' I think in loving relationships, people act like jerks sometimes or push other people to see how far they can go, and I think that as the parent/child relationship is the first prototype for intimacy it is natural for children to push against boundaries. I think reasserting these boundaries is a perfectly appropriate parental task, and where consequences are absorbed by the parent for the child's misbehaviour, I think it is good and important to translate those consequences back upon the child in a milder way.

That's really it.

thismama

12-22-2008, 11:45 AM

I guess what bugs me about the no consequences ever GDers is: how passive woman prototype is it that when someone we are in relationship to acts badly, repeatedly and intentionally, we blame ourselves for not being loving enough, and we worry that if we assert our power in any way we will deeply and traumatically injure them? Yk? It's like a cliche, man! I know these are children, but the OP is describing some children outta control, and I personally *know* some children outta control whose parents are unable to be anything but passive about it in the name of GD.

Meanwhile, my very well behaved empathic 5 year old has been on the receiving end of aggressive behaviour that has not seen consequences beyond nagging and mumbled insincere apologies. These are not unloved children, nor are they children who IMO do not 'feel loved.' They are simply children looking for some boundaries, constantly seeking them and never finding them, while their behaviour becomes more and more out of the realm of acceptable.

I have seen this time again in real life and online and the answer always comes back from a particular GD sect: 'Blame yourself. Stay passive. Be more loving. Your child is wounded in a vague and mysterious way, that you will never find, but that you can always blame his/her behaviour on. And it's all your fault.'

Kwim? Gets old, man.

LionTigerBear

12-22-2008, 11:46 AM

I do not think all misbehaviour is about not feeling loved. <snip>

I think in loving relationships, people act like jerks sometimes or push other people to see how far they can go....

Yeah, I guess we just disagree about that. :)

LionTigerBear

12-22-2008, 11:48 AM

thismama

12-22-2008, 11:52 AM

I think when you are coming from a place of trying to be a disciple of Christ (who was both meek and powerful) and modeling that for your children, it really makes the perspective different. :)

Maybe. But the hot chocolate example you gave? Like give 'em less but don't say anything about it? That's fine if you really *really* don't intend that as a punishment. But I think in relationships we do have an urge to have our voices heard, and that is good not bad, and relationships with our children are real. I think it would be very hard to not say anything about one's anger over negative behaviour, dish out less hot chocolate, and have that *truly* be coming from a 'Christlike' place. Otherwise it's just passive aggression, and that is not what we're aiming for. I think being honest with people, setting boundaries while respecting who they are and loving them, is very Christlike.

LionTigerBear

12-22-2008, 12:05 PM

I think it would be very hard to not say anything about one's anger over negative behaviour, dish out less hot chocolate, and have that *truly* be coming from a 'Christlike' place.

It is hard for me when I'm stressed-out because I revert back to my "old brain" and my childhood conditioning. But, as with any habit, it can be changed. Once you've made a habit of accepting and acknowledging your feelings to yourself, but not outloud to those who would be hurt by it, it is quite easy to:

1.) acknowledge your initial anger which stems from present situations which trigger old hurt 2.) understand that you are not actually being threatended by the current situation and 3.) the anger automatically dissipates and in nurturing your own inner hurt child, you develop a deep and compassionate place to nurture your child from.

I can do this easily when I'm feeling rested and calm, it's the end of the day and sleep-deprived and over-stimulated moments I'm working on. :)

Otherwise it's just passive aggression, and that is not what we're aiming for. I think being honest with people, setting boundaries while respecting who they are and loving them, is very Christlike.

:scratch Not passive-aggressive at all. Not in my case. The key is to change my mindset from seeing them as "misbehaving" (which is such a vague label but they really weren't being "bad" is the point) to seeing them as just temporarily having a hard time being quiet and calm. So, in that case, what can I do to help them be calmer and quieter. Well, I can give them less sugar, for one thing! :lol

thismama

12-22-2008, 12:21 PM

I see what you are saying but I do think a lot of the 'no consequences, no anger, nothing but sunshine and roses or just remove yourself' GD does lead to encouragement of passive aggressive parenting. If we discourage assertiveness, discourage communication of genuine feelings, and blame the parent for vaguely not being loving enough, passive aggression is bound to happen IMO.

I *do* think that some behaviour leads to us actually being threatened in the moment; it is not always about 'healing our own inner child' at the expense of assertively addressing what is actually happening. Peace is threatened, feeling respected is threatened, joy is threatened, ability to go about our lives with our children is threatened. I think there is a place for examining our loving relationships with our children, and certainly there is a place for self examination, but there is also a place for saying, 'Enough' in the moment.

chfriend

12-22-2008, 12:30 PM

I'm confused about the OP's needs and want to clarify. Is this about whether it is possible to conform CL-style GD with Christian scripture or about whether not imposing consequences is a good idea?

AngelBee, would you be willing to clarify your needs?

thismama

12-22-2008, 12:36 PM

I thought she was basically saying, 'Not doing consequences, kids are outta control, this is not the 'fruits' I expected, is it not Biblical to demonstrate authority and give them some consequences?'

Not sure if I've got that right but that was my impression.

LionTigerBear

12-22-2008, 12:37 PM

...If we discourage assertiveness...

Just wanted to address this snippet (since we've pretty much concluded that we have some fundamental disagreements in some other areas :wink).

I do not discourage assertiveness. It's all about what we are asserting. If we are asserting our own personal boundaries, and asserting our right to express ourselves kindly and non-hurtfully, and asserting our right to protect ourselves and our loved ones, great. Asserting control over other people's persons and other people's business and space is, in most cases, not a good thing, and expecting other people to take care of you or bend to your will is not assertive, it's bossy/insecure/controlling/entitled/etc.

thismama

12-22-2008, 12:41 PM

Do we not absorb some consequences for our children though? I think we absorb a lot! This gives license to exert some 'control' or at least make ourselves agents of lesser consequences in return. If my kid draws all over the wall in permanent marker, it is I who owes the damage deposit, not her. So is it not fair for me to impose a consequence? Say removal of said markers, forcing her to help me clean or repaint, possibly some chores to gain money to help pay the costs? These are all parent imposed consequences.

This is where CL loses me entirely.

brightonwoman

12-22-2008, 08:26 PM

If my children acted like wild animals at the grocery store, I would be very displeased to say the least. They do *need* to act appropriately in situations they are in, and I cannot and will not conform all situations to them so that they never meet up with this requirement in their childhoods.
I feel displeased when my children acted like that, too. But I do not expect them to act convenient to me or to be responsible for my comfort.

I agree that it's appropriate to set expectations--that's what I was trying to get at before. I *expect* my kids to be kind and get along and listen when I ask them to do something etc. Now it's true, I'm not surprised when sometimes they don't...everybody slips up sometimes. BUT I genuinely DO expect them to behave. Kids are sharp, and they will live up to what you expect of them. I try hard to have realistic (age-appropriate) expectations, but yes, I do have expectations. I have expectations of myself too--I know they have expectations of me. I think it falls right in step with mutual respect.

Being loved and feeling loved are two entirely different htings. One need that children have (which they require to feel loved) is having their parent/guide be confident and have some degree of certainty and firmness to them. If the parents are pushovers, the children feel insecure <snip>
I do not think all misbehaviour is about not feeling loved. I do not think the solution to misbehaviour is always to worry about how I must have deeply failed my child in some intangible way and try try try to 'reconnect.'
I agree that kids (and adults!) need some consistency and reliability in order to feel secure. I do not think that loving them more (or helping them feel more loved) is the solution to everything though. Sure, sometimes they were acting out to get attention/love, but sometimes they act out to test the boundaries, or because they do not know the rules, or because they want to get something out of it, or because the 'bad' thing is just plain more fun.
Think about your own life--why do you act out? Seriously? Do you think kids are any different?!

I think in loving relationships, people act like jerks sometimes or push other people to see how far they can go, and I think that as the parent/child relationship is the first prototype for intimacy it is natural for children to push against boundaries. I think reasserting these boundaries is a perfectly appropriate parental task, and where consequences are absorbed by the parent for the child's misbehaviour, I think it is good and important to translate those consequences back upon the child in a milder way.

Well, I don't think it's ever healthy/loving to act like a jerk or push someone to see how far they can go...
I do think boundaries get pushed (for reasons discussed above) and I think it's appropriate and important to reassert boundaries--in a kind and gentle and loving way. I think that whenever possible, the child should be allowed to 'take the fall' for his own actions, because that's part of life and learning.
If my kid threw a rock and broke a window, I would talk with him about being careful, then I would take him over to apologize, and I would help provide him with lots of ways to earn the money to pay for it. I wouldn't just pay for it for him though.

bamamom

12-22-2008, 10:01 PM

LionTigerBear

12-23-2008, 08:13 AM

I *expect* my kids to be kind and get along and listen when I ask them to do something etc. Now it's true, I'm not surprised when sometimes they don't...everybody slips up sometimes. BUT I genuinely DO expect them to behave. Kids are sharp, and they will live up to what you expect of them. I try hard to have realistic (age-appropriate) expectations, but yes, I do have expectations. I have expectations of myself too--I know they have expectations of me. I think it falls right in step with mutual respect.

I agree with this. I guess the key is to have realistic expectations-- often I find that parents have "consistent" expectations which isn't fair, as children's abilities fluctuate based on how tired, hungry, over-stimulated, etc. they are. But when your expectations allow for those natural fluctuations in behavior, I agree, it is about mutual respect. :thumb

I do not think that loving them more (or helping them feel more loved) is the solution to everything though. Sure, sometimes they were acting out to get attention/love, but sometimes they act out to test the boundaries, or because they do not know the rules, or because they want to get something out of it, or because the 'bad' thing is just plain more fun.
Think about your own life--why do you act out? Seriously? Do you think kids are any different?!

When I feel securely loved and connected I do not act out. I do not feel irritated, I do not snap at people, I do not test boundaries or whatever other poor behavior I sometimes express when I'm feeling "off". All of the possible poor behaviors are natural expressions of insecurity-- of not feeling right, of not feeling connected. That is why God is so important and needs ot be center. When I stay centered on Him, I have no more desire to behave poorly. It's staying centered on Him and maintaining that knowledge of feeling loved and accepted and worthy that I need to practice. Feeling really loved and accepted and bonded to my husband also provides the same feeling of security, but I'm not feeling that bond 100% of the time. God is the only relationship that we can count on feeling accepted and loved all of the time, and so that is where our center and primary support needs to be.

And to be well-adjusted and emotionally resilient and responsible and so forth, children need to learn to hang onto that feeling of being centered and bonded, accepted and loved, too. We are their direct parallel through which they experience the love of God. We need to almost "be" God for them when they are young, because that's how they perceive and experience us, at least for the first half of their childhoods. It's not always "our fault" if the child is not feeling our love, or not feeling centered on our love, in the moment-- but it's not about who's fault it is-- that is really beside the point. The point is to help them feel it until it becomes habitual for them-- and that is the key to a strong sense of self-worth and confidence. Not necessarily confidence in oneself, but an internalized confidence in one's usefulness and desirability to one's parents, and thus to God (in the old brain these concepts and mixed and confused, one and the same,) is the basis for emotional resilience and stability throughout life.

So yes, I believe that any-- ANY and ALL-- poor behavior, or sin, stems from feeling insecure, i.e., not centered on our attachment to our supreme source of love. As parents it is our duty to help our children feel that love and center on that love.

thismama

12-23-2008, 08:25 AM

I think that there is a dance of power in all relationships, and I think the parent/child relationship is no different. I think the key is balance, and I see an out of balance in some uber GD circles, where the kids really do run roughshod all over the parents. I do not think it is unhealthy that children test out this balance, and I think it is up to the parents to maintain it. I think we can do this *and* love our kids, we can do this *and* respect our kids, and our kids can experience that love and respect even as we assert our boundaries and guide them toward appropriate behaviour. I think imposing consequences and saying 'No' can be part of a loving and positive parent/child dynamic. I know it is in my own life, and I truly have seen some out of control children whose parents are afraid to assert themselves. And I think that is sad, I think they are good and loving parents, but in that way they are doing their children (and themselves) a disservice.

LionTigerBear

12-23-2008, 08:43 AM

I think that there is a dance of power in all relationships, and I think the parent/child relationship is no different.

My opinion: The only reason to desire power stems from a lack of feeling one's self-power (self-worth, Self). And the only reason for a lack of feeling self-power is insecurity. And the only reason for a feeling of insecurity is not feeling securely attached/bonded/loved/etc.

This is why the most truly POWERFUL people are the MEEKEST. They are humble, calm, and confident. They are emotionally honest, they are appropriately assertive, they are interdependent and cooperative with other loving people. They come from all walks of life and all religions. They are powerful because their calm and sense of purpose are unshakeable, and this emotional resilience resides in the fact that no matter what happens or goes on around them, it does not affect their sense of Self and their connection to the Divine and to Love. They have an uncanny ability to get what they want. They are charismatic. Many people love to be with them and try to please them, because being around them makes other loving people feel more secure. Other people who are quite insecure and bitter, hate to be around them, and resent them. But all of the meek-and-powerful people have one thing in common-- they feel centered on God's love and therefore secure in their self-worth. There is no "dance of power" in their relationships.

I think the key is balance, and I see an out of balance in some uber GD circles, where the kids really do run roughshod all over the parents. I do not think it is unhealthy that children test out this balance, and I think it is up to the parents to maintain it.

I often see parents who want to be gentle and give their kids a better life, however the parents are insecure and off-center themselves. Because of this these parents are not very good guides or supports. The children will engage in a "dance for power"-- that is, act out and try to find the boundaries-- in these cases.

Most parents are at least somewhat insecure and at least sometimes off-center (like me :)) so most children do sometimes misbehave and test boundaries and so forth.

I think we can do this *and* love our kids, we can do this *and* respect our kids, and our kids can experience that love and respect even as we assert our boundaries and guide them toward appropriate behaviour. I think imposing consequences and saying 'No' can be part of a loving and positive parent/child dynamic. I know it is in my own life, and I truly have seen some out of control children whose parents are afraid to assert themselves. And I think that is sad, I think they are good and loving parents, but in that way they are doing their children (and themselves) a disservice.

Again, I think that appropriate natural and logical consequences, and letting our children know what appropriate limits are (including saying "no"), are an important part of guiding our children, that is, giving them the information and knowledge they need about the world they live in so that they can fulfill their innate desire to be good, productive, and helpful. But I believe that as long as our children are centered on our love, that desire to do good remains there, if we will only work with it and nurture it.

transformed

12-23-2008, 08:47 AM

:notes:

thismama

12-23-2008, 09:05 AM

My opinion: The only reason to desire power stems from a lack of feeling one's self-power (self-worth, Self). And the only reason for a lack of feeling self-power is insecurity. And the only reason for a feeling of insecurity is not feeling securely attached/bonded/loved/etc.

Nah, I disagree. I notice later you say 'dance FOR power.' Notice I said 'dance of power.' Different things. All mammals seem to have power dynamics in their relationships, I have studied wolves/dogs and horses, and power dances are present in those animals' dynamics. I think it is a natural part of being a mammal, not a sign of some deep psychological turmoil. As I said, balance is the key. I think we fear power and want to sometimes stick our fingers in our ears and say 'lalala' instead of acknowledging that power dynamics exist in all human relationships. A key to healthy relationships IMO is acknowledging that and seeking a respectful balance.

LionTigerBear

12-23-2008, 09:15 AM

Nah, I disagree. I notice later you say 'dance FOR power.' Notice I said 'dance of power.' Different things. All mammals seem to have power dynamics in their relationships, I have studied wolves/dogs and horses, and power dances are present in those animals' dynamics. I think it is a natural part of being a mammal, not a sign of some deep psychological turmoil.

And I think that this is one of the beautiful things that set us apart from animals.

thismama

12-23-2008, 09:16 AM

And I think that this is one of the beautiful things that set us apart from animals.

seriously? do you honestly see relationships that have *no* power balance in them? every single relationship i can think of has a power balance. it is often subtle but it is always, always present.

transformed

12-23-2008, 09:26 AM

thismama

12-23-2008, 09:38 AM

I do this every single day. Especially since I found MDC :wink

Its enough to drive someone to the psych ward, really.

LOL Take a break, mama! :love

I mean, remaining critical of ourselves is really great IMO, in balance, but it's not like every single thing they do wrong is a negative commentary about us. Typical female self blame translated as a parenting style anyone?

LionTigerBear

12-23-2008, 09:39 AM

seriously? do you honestly see relationships that have *no* power balance in them? every single relationship i can think of has a power balance. it is often subtle but it is always, always present.

In all honesty, I am starting to feel exasperated that you do not seem interested in the topic of the Biblical application of the concept of submission/authority (I don't think you've brought it up or related anything to it yet that I can remember). If you want to discuss other issues and applications of GD, why don't you start another thread with a different scope?

That's why I did not address, in detail, your whole post. But since you pressed me for it, here you go.

Nah, I disagree. I notice later you say 'dance FOR power.' Notice I said 'dance of power.' Different things.

Well, if the dance isn't to define and ascertain boundaries of power-- which counts as "for power"-- than what on earth is it for?

All mammals seem to have power dynamics in their relationships, I have studied wolves/dogs and horses, and power dances are present in those animals' dynamics. I think it is a natural part of being a mammal, not a sign of some deep psychological turmoil. As I said, balance is the key.

The first part I addressed. Yes, I see that power betwwen animals comes in to a lot of play in animal relationships, and no I don't see that as what she model or parallel our relationships to. The perfect relationship model that we should strive for are the ones modeled by Jesus in His interactions with the world, His family, and with His Heavenly Father-- He gave us there the perfect example and told us that we were capable and had the potential to be able to achieve that kind of relationship and that that was what we should strive for. Are we capable of acting like animals-- Yes-- but why would we settle for that when we can be more than that? We are not happy as animals. It is not our destiny.

And as to the last sentence, I do not see how it related. What balance? Balance of what and what? This last sentence is very vague.

I think we fear power and want to sometimes stick our fingers in our ears and say 'lalala' instead of acknowledging that power dynamics exist in all human relationships.

The only reason to fear power is insecurity. The only reason to fear anything is insecurity. Insecurity IS fear. When we are insecure, yes, we fear power. We do not need to fear.

Perhaps the real fear, though, is not a fear of power dynamics, but a fear of being truly free of them. It requires clinging to somethign greater than Ego and bigger than ourselves. It requires vulnerability.

A key to healthy relationships IMO is acknowledging that and seeking a respectful balance.

I think it is healthy to be honest and realistic-- and therefore aware of power dynamics that exist in most relationships (because most relationships are imperfect). But I think our focus should be on attempting to model the perfect loving, centered relationship.

And so let me come back again to your last post.

seriously? do you honestly see relationships that have *no* power balance in them? every single relationship i can think of has a power balance. it is often subtle but it is always, always present.

Again, don't know what you mean by "power balance". Take the perfect relationship modeled for us between Jesus and His Father in Heaven. There is power present, of course-- as much power as can be present, indeed-- self-power, in each powerful Personage-- but that doesn't really relate to Their relationship with each other beyond the fact that Self-Power makes each one healthy and whole and capable of pure love and a healthy relationship. There is no dance of power. No.

thismama

12-23-2008, 09:43 AM

Well I don't have much Biblical experience to draw from. I do however feel a strong connection to the essence of what AngelBee is talking about from a secular, or if you like, more widely defined spiritual perspective. So I offer my comments from there. If you don't like them or find them relevant, feel free to ignore them. I however do and found the conversation interesting.

And obviously I disagree with you about power and its presence or not in all relationships. That's a pretty fundamental disagreement. There ya go.

LionTigerBear

12-23-2008, 09:47 AM

I do not think the solution to misbehaviour is always to worry about how I must have deeply failed my child in some intangible way

I do this every single day. Especially since I found MDC :wink

Its enough to drive someone to the psych ward, really.

This is because you do not feel like it is okay for you to make mistakes-- at least, not okay to make certain degrees of mistakes-- isn't it funny how we have this idea that we are allowed to sin in certain ways and at certain times and that is somehow more acceptable than other sin?

Like, failing my child, unforgivable, snapping at the guy who cut me off, understandable. Right?

Wrong. We all make mistakes. We all let down our kids. Yes, we do. I do, you do, it's what we do. It's okay, that's what they're here for, to learn in the face of adversity, and yes, Mom is usually a child's first tasts of adversity.

Enter the Savior and the Atonement with God. We don't have to be perfect. We should not hang on to feelings of guilt and shame when we have tried our best, realized our mistakes, and let God help us, and try to let Him change us as best we know how.

This is where Humility meets Confidence. In fact, righteous Confidence will only do business with Humility. Doesn't even know Pride. False Pride is the guy who sets you up to feel like the Worst Mom in the World because you have to be good enough in and of yourself, without God, without the Atonement, and therefore no room for mistakes. False Pride is tough. Let him go, he's a loser. You're not. You have the Atonement. So you mess up, I mess up, but it will be okay, we try again. That's life. Let the guilt and shame go. Hand it over to God and take a deep breath. You're doing great. :)

GuildJenn

12-23-2008, 09:54 AM

I don't think so, I think AngelBee is pointing out something I've noticed too with some GD advocacy. No parent imposed consequences, right? This ignores the fact that indeed there are consequences for everything, and as our children's guardians and protectors, we absorb a lot of these consequences. So no parent imposed consequences can easily translate into parents absorbing consequences for children's negative behavior, and no negative fallout ever reaching the child. Which is not normal, it is not how things function in the world. I don't think it's representative of a deep psychological issue to notice this, it is simply logic.

AngelBee I do GD, but my GD definitely does include a relationship of authority, and consequences (yes, sometimes imposed by me) where required. I do not 'get' GD that does not include this, and where I have seen it, I have seen some very ill behaved, even aggressive children.

Yah I didn't realize GD meant no parent imposed consequences.

CL, I can see it might.

For us gentle discipline means that we first of all try extremely hard not to resort to anything that disrespects the dignity of the child. We consider the primary role of parenting to be to provide a loving and nurturing relationship, and we believe that discipline methods that threaten a child's dignity are counter to that role.

That includes (for us) shaming, hitting, or isolating in a punitive way. I don't remember Jesus ever striking anyone at all (although I guess it doesn't say if he physically pushed the money lenders?)

It doesn't mean that if you throw a toy it doesn't get put on top of the piano. That is not, in my view, an assault to the dignity of the child.

It means that we won't say "bad boy," or throw the toy out forever or send you to sit in your room by yourself (this last is for my son particularly; some kids do well with timeouts or whatever.)

We also try to keep our child's stage and development at heart. I do not believe that a tantruming 2-3 year old is displaying defiance in the way we would mean it if it were an adult. An 8 year old, maybe, maybe not. For me part of the "gentle" is to take the real ability of the child into account. The "discipline" is also to raise expectations as the child's capacities grow.

Obviously your beliefs will be your beliefs, but I recommend "The Year of Living Biblically" for a (secular) viewpoint on the 'rules' of the Bible.

riverscout

12-23-2008, 09:54 AM

I do not think the solution to misbehaviour is always to worry about how I must have deeply failed my child in some intangible way

I do this every single day. Especially since I found MDC :wink

Its enough to drive someone to the psych ward, really.

Same here. :o Doesn't help that I have a psych degree to make me imagine all the ways I could mess them up. :lol

LionTigerBear

12-23-2008, 10:14 AM

That includes (for us) shaming, hitting, or isolating in a punitive way. I don't remember Jesus ever striking anyone at all (although I guess it doesn't say if he physically pushed the money lenders?)

You know, I always thought it was physical-- in fact, I remember a picture I saw as a child of Jesus literally whipping the offending parties out of temple with, like, a lash or something.

So I went and looked it up and here's what I found:

From Matthew 21:
And Jesus entered the temple and drove out all those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves. And He said to them, "It is written, 'MY HOUSE SHALL BE CALLED A HOUSE OF PRAYER'; but you are making it a ROBBERS' DEN." And the blind and the lame came to Him in the temple, and He healed them...

From Mark 11:
Then they came to Jerusalem. And He entered the temple and began to drive out those who were buying and selling in the temple, and overturned the tables of the money changers and the seats of those who were selling doves; and He would not permit anyone to carry merchandise through the temple. And He began to teach and say to them, "Is it not written, 'MY HOUSE SHALL BE CALLED A HOUSE OF PRAYER FOR ALL THE NATIONS'? But you have made it a ROBBERS' DEN." The chief priests and the scribes heard this, and began seeking how to destroy Him; for they were afraid of Him, for the whole crowd was astonished at His teaching.

From Luke 19:
Jesus entered the temple and began to drive out those who were selling, saying to them, "It is written, 'AND MY HOUSE SHALL BE A HOUSE OF PRAYER,' but you have made it a ROBBERS' DEN."

So, in the first three gospels, nothing about violence whatsoever. In the gospel of John we see examples of physical force, though:

From John 2:
And He found in the temple those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers seated at their tables. And He made a scourge of cords, and drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen; and He poured out the coins of the money changers and overturned their tables; and to those who were selling the doves He said, "Take these things away; stop making My Father's house a place of business." His disciples remembered that it was written, "ZEAL FOR YOUR HOUSE WILL CONSUME ME." The Jews then said to Him, "What sign do You show us as your authority for doing these things?" Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." The Jews then said, "It took forty-six years to build this temple, and will You raise it up in three days?" But He was speaking of the temple of His body. So when He was raised from the dead, His disciples remembered that He said this; and they believed the Scripture and the word which Jesus had spoken.

But it still doesn't refer to Jesus actually whipping any person or laying a hand on any person. He used the scourge of cords to drive out the animals (probably not by touching them but by noise and intimidation, as was the usual method for driving cattle or other herds of domsetic animals), and the money changers probably were intimidated, too. Interesting that they were acting like cattle-- and fearful like cattle.

I also included the rest of the discussion in John 2 where Jesus is questioned about His authority. It seems especially pertinent to the conversation. Again, He was explaining that the temple was His space-- He didn't go into to other people's personal businesses or homes and drive out sinners with scourges.

I still think it is important to note, though, that His treatment of the money-changers was not applicable to a parent-child relationship, unless the child is acting like a money-changer, in which case they would need to be much older to be aware of what they were doing-- like a teen. The parent-child relationship we are supposed to be modeling is the one modeled by Jesus and His Heavenly Father, or when working with little kids, the way Jesus related to young children. Which was so touching and sweet. :love

ETA: Ooooh, I really like this blog essay (http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/9094/actiontemple.html) that discusses that incident.

elizawill

12-23-2008, 10:26 AM

Yah I didn't realize GD meant no parent imposed consequences.

it doesn't. GD is not defined by this. the application of gentle discipline can be very diverse and can be interpreted and applied differently according to the individual family. and ALL can still fall under the GD spectrum. that's why so often people on MDC identify themselves in a thread with a specific philosopy such as positive discipline, unconditional parenting, consensual living, etc.

eqleslie

12-23-2008, 10:51 AM

I do think it is our responsibility to raise children that can think for themselves by utilizing the whole picture. We do not do this by imposing corporal punishment. I feel that corporal punishment teaches them to think of everything in a narrow minded fashion only involving the question of "will I get punished for this." We are trying to teach children to think with the question of "how does this effect other people." With that in mind, I have no problem with imposing consequences relative to their behavior. I do not believe that it is our responsibility as parents to absorb most of the consequences of our children after around 2+years.

The way children think is notoriously self centered. It is this way by God's design. If children have horrible parents he wants to up their chances of survival I suppose. In the bible it talks about our children speaking and thinking like children. For this reason we need to navigate our children through the world until their reasoning matures and they can understand adults ways of doing things. Using harsh punishment or demeaning words to make a child act like an adult is unreasonable and counter productive. By using kind child sized words and child sized consequences are appropriate and productive because you are instructing them in the ways of the world. The reality is that there are rules we have to follow and it is the same for children. Though the rules for children vary greatly in different homes.

As far as the discipline problems I saw here are my suggestions:

Getting ready in the morning may be a hassle because your kids don't want to be away from you. That is understandable. You still have to work however so you need to find a way to make it happen. I would suggest first trying to make a game out of leaving by using a timer for each area of getting ready like getting dressed in 15 minutes, eating in 15 min. you have 10 min to play while mommy makes lunch you better play fast! etc. Something about watching the dial on the timer go down makes them value their play time more. You could even offer some reward for each time they met their timer goal. (It's perfectly ok with me to have the reward be a mommy that's not late and stressed and screaming...) If that didn't work, I would proceed to let them eat something portable in the car that they HATE because they didn't get ready in time for mommy to make something they really LOVE. I would mention ti throughout the WHOLE day. At least 20 times. Remind them how much they hate the yucky breakfast and tell them you hope they get ready in time for you to make (insert their favorite breakfast here) tomorrow. Tell them that you will help them meet the time-line to make it happen. If that fails, I would be willing to let them skip breakfast and do the same scenario as above and not let them eat until lunch. They won't die :) Just keep reminding them that this is their responsibility and you will help them when they are ready to change, but that you will not be begging them to hurry up anymore. If all else fails, I would just bodily get them dressed, strap them in the car seat, and go to work. After doing this I would not sound apologetic, but I would remind them that this is a direct result of their actions and you would prefer they get ready nicely and to not have to do things this way, but if they continue not getting ready in the morning that this will be the new routine.

As far as not picking up after themselves, there needs to be a clear rule about picking up one thing before getting out a new thing. Make sure they are clear where things go. Sometimes we think they know, but they really don't. I have been known to toss a couple of toys while they are watching if I start sweeping and they get into my pile... I don't really care if they get it out of the garbage as long as they put it away. If something does actually make it out of the house I make a big deal out of it when they ask for it. I talk about how I didn't think they wanted it anymore because they weren't taking care of it and just left it lying on the floor all the time. If all else fails, try to weed through some things. It's much easier to pick up if there's not as much stuff.

The kids waking the baby is an easy one for natural consequences for me. If the baby wakes and I don't get to rest and have to pay attention to the baby all evening because he's tired them I don't have the energy to play with the older one or make him that special thing or do such and such with him. Remind him that perhaps next time the baby naps he could let him sleep so that you can do such and such to help the older one. If it keeps going on and you have to keep ignoring the older one for the younger one and it seems that you are getting nowhere after a few days be sure to have a sit down talk with the older one so he doesn't just get resentful about the baby. Make it clear to the older one that you don't want things to be this way. See if he has any solutions. Perhaps you could mention that he let the little one sleep so you can have time with him instead of tending the baby all the time. Help him think that it's his great idea and let him try it out.

In regards to your original post about whether it's wrong biblically speaking to teach submission to authority, I don't think it's wrong. I think blind submission to authority is wrong. I think informed thinking submission is how we present ourselves to God. He allows us to question him and we should allow our children to question us. His laws guide our journey and our laws should guide our children to his laws. The golden rule is my favorite. It is easily explainable to children and covers a lot of bases.

I hope this helps you and I didn't just run on impossibly long... Good luck :)

transformed

12-23-2008, 11:29 AM

what would you guys do if your 6 yr old kept unbuckling his 3 yr old sisters carseat mid-drive? and then lying about it.

:loveeyes:

LionTigerBear

12-23-2008, 11:51 AM

what would you guys do if your 6 yr old kept unbuckling his 3 yr old sisters carseat mid-drive? and then lying about it.

:loveeyes:

First time my initial reaction would be to freak out and yell at him. :o Then I would do something more positive. :innocent

Which would need to address three seperate but interrelated facets of this problem: 1.) Immediate Safety 2.) Guidance 3.) Strengthening his bond to you-- getting him more parent-centered

To address number one, in the moment, do whatever you need to do that you can do respectfully and lovingly. I would probably pull over, talk to him kindly first, then sternly if necessary, and as an absolute last resort I might move him to the passenger's seat (this isn't as safe as having him in the back though.)

To try to proactively prevent the problem, talk about it before you get in the car, look in his eyes and try to connect with him, let him know your expectations and give him all of the information that he needs (about safety, your feelings, consequences, etc.)

To address number two, I would start actively teaching him about Traffic and Car Safety in an age-appropriate way (no need to traumatize him!)-- not just in the moment but make it a recurring theme-- something that you discuss in a cheerful, serious, and non-blaming way. Keep bringing it up, stress it, make it important to him. And I would also discuss with him the virtue of being protective of his sister. (Side note-- if this is hostility against his sister and not against you, then undercurrents of sibling rivalry may need to be addressed before an appeal to his protectiveness would have any affect!) You could tell stories about heroues he looks up to modeling protectivity-- for my boys, they like hearing stories about Buzz Lightyear-- so I might make up a story in which Buzz Lightyear is Protective and ensures the safety of those who are smaller than he is.

For three, I would just focus on rconnecting with him in a more intense way. Sometimes things compete for our kid's attention-- school, media, friends, whatever. Bring him back to you, make yourself his center again, so that he's getting his cues from you, not from the media or school or whatever else. This will involve both courting his affections by playing with him, being sweet and spending time with him, and also could involve cutting out other distractions for a while, like no playdates, no TV, or whatever is distracting him from being mommy-centered. If you have to cut out other distractions, don't do it punitively, but cheerfully and emphasising how much you like spending time with him and how much fun it will be.

Hope that helps.

Think of Winter

12-23-2008, 12:31 PM

what would you guys do if your 6 yr old kept unbuckling his 3 yr old sisters carseat mid-drive? and then lying about it.

:loveeyes:I learned here, months ago, not to set my dc up for lying. Don't ask questions that you already know the answer to, especially if there isn't a good answer. I guess my ideal would be to stop the car, repeatedly, to rebuckle her. My reality would probably involve a lot of yelling and a lecture about safety. :bag:

p.s. we go through a lot of rescue remedy around here, too.

transformed

12-23-2008, 12:37 PM

Think of Winter

12-23-2008, 12:51 PM

how about "DONT YOU KNOW YOUR SISTER COULD DIE?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!"

I didnt know the answer to it until today, and I still cant proove it. the seat belt was just always undone, and today I saw my ds leaning way over in his seat messing around that area and then found the seatbelt unbuclked. So I could be callig his bluff, who knows.

Someone has to PAY. :thumb :lol jk.LOL, yup, that's probably what I would have done. Then I'd cry later when ds gets upset, repeatedly, about the possibility of his sister dying. Yup. Been there.

This is ot, but I'm surprised this seat belt thing doesn't happen all the time. A friends child unbuckled my son last year, and when I hit the brakes, his seat banged forward into mine. Then last summer, my own ds did it to his sister and the same thing happened; I hit the brakes and the seat flew forward. I was even thinking about making a cover for that bright red button.

brightonwoman

12-23-2008, 06:01 PM

what would you guys do if your 6 yr old kept unbuckling his 3 yr old sisters carseat mid-drive? and then lying about it.

:loveeyes:

DS was about 3 when he learned to undo his seatbelt. DH was alone with him in the car at the time, but saw him in the mirror. He happened to be on the freeway, and pulled over to teh shoulder FAST. It scared DS, although nobody was hurt. DH explained to DS that it is not safe to drive without a seatbelt, and that if the car is moving we have to be belted, and if someone is unbelted then we have to be stopped...
DS never undid his belt while we were in motion again.
I agree about teaching him traffic safety. Interesting that he never undoes his own belt--I would guess that it's not about moving around, but maybe because her carseat has more interesting buckles? Perhaps sometime when you are at home in the driveway you can let him do up and undo the carseat buckles a few times. Let him be the one to buckle/unbuckle her when you are getting in/out of the car. Help him understand the proper time/place for that activity :wink :thumb

mom2tatum

12-24-2008, 08:21 AM

Well, let's look at wifely submission which is considered by many (but not all of course) a Biblical principle.

If the husband requires and forces submission, (by punishing her or creating "consequences" for non-submission) is that healthy or okay? Would you agree with that? I wouldn't. I would call it abusive! However, if the wife willingly submits of her own free will for spiritual reasons, then that can be a beautiful thing.

So, for me, with my children it is the same thing. Parenting and raising our children should inspire them to want to submit to loving authority, by inspiring trust in those who have more power than they do. Certainly there are times when I lay down the law so to speak, but I try to avoid those times as much as possible. If you force a child to obey, they will most likely rebel, and they will certainly develop either an unhealthy resentment for authority, or an unhealthy attachment to authority (like, from the wrong places). People don't like being forced and it's not a healthy dynamic.

I can't think of a time Jesus never forced anyone to do anything, btw. The cleaning out of the temple might come close-- but I think that was different.

Here are some personal notes I wrote on this subject last week:

I'd love to dicuss this more, it's still something I am forming ideas on.

Love this. This is exactly how I feel. No one told me this and I didn't read it anywhere...I just feel this way and parent this way because it seems to make the most sense. When your goal is to raise a thoughtful, sensitive, loving, caring, kind, intelligent, confident, independent thinking little soul - then the path to getting that result becomes more clear. I think parents (Christian and non) forget what the long term goal is and run with the short term goal which is getting their child to obey or listen to them. To me, that is something that comes along anyway when ds trusts me - He trusts me because of how we function within our relationship. Mom isn't always boss, but mom is always teacher. I imagine the trusting part is pretty hard to achieve when you don't practice attachment parenting and gentle discipline. :shrug

Something I will never forget:
I smacked ds' hand one time very lightly (and actually I was sort of teasing with him in the grocery cart...I wasn't even serious) and I swear I will never forget the way he looked at me - like very confused and the trust he had in me had definitely been questioned...all in one moment. He was just two. He said in such a hurt sad voice, "Mom, don't hurt me" I teared up just looking at his sweet little face expressing how he had felt. Ugh. I gave him a hug, apologized, and tried to explain that I didn't mean to hurt him, but clearly he had interpreted it differently.

Submission is not something to be forced. It is chosen. If it is forced, its not even real and what is so great about that? No one wants to fear their husband, and I can't imagine you'd truly want your child to fear you either.

transformed

12-24-2008, 08:31 AM

I wonder if she is old enough to move out of her 5 point system into a regular booster. the 5 point thing is annoying me anyways. :)

My 5.5 yr old doesnt get upset at the thought of people getting hurt. ever. :(

Mountaingirl79

12-25-2008, 09:30 PM

I'm just lurking, but I practice GD and when my sons are doing something that is out of place, or maybe a better word is inappropriate, for example jumping on railings that could break while in line at the bank or pestering his brother in his carseat while we are on the road....I just get his attention, and respectfully say " We don't need to do that, because/ that could cause xyz. Here, focus on xyz instead."

That way, he learns what he's doing that isn't working for me, and what is expected of him instead. He's not bullied or embarrassed or threatened, but instead respectfully updated on what we are supposed to be doing.

AngelBee

12-31-2008, 10:51 AM

AngelBee

12-31-2008, 10:51 AM

Still really working through this :dizzy:

magstphil

01-28-2009, 08:24 PM

BUMPING because this is just too good of a thread to let go.

Thank you, AngelBee, for starting up this thread! This is exactly what I have been thinking of in regards to CL. Like thismama I feel sometimes GD turns into "no consequences" and there are consequences in life and I feel my duty as a parent is to help my children to understand that.

LTB~ I have to disagree with you on kid acting out because they aren't feeling loved or it being rooted in their feelings. That, of course, can be the case but little children act out a lot of the time to test their boundaries (well, and because they don't realize it/understand what they are doing). DH and I always keep this in mind- or at least try :o Little children are all about cause and effect "if I do this what will happen?"

That said hopefully this convo will take up again! :love

AngelBee

01-29-2009, 10:52 AM

That said hopefully this convo will take up again! :love

I'd be in :)

Bluegoat

01-29-2009, 01:33 PM

I hadn't seen this thread before but I'll but in with a thought I had.

If we are talking about biblical parenting, what about this issue
[QUOTE=magstphil;13087821
I have to disagree with you on kid acting out because they aren't feeling loved or it being rooted in their feelings.
[/QUOTE]

There have been a few comments on this subject, to the issue of whether kids misbehave essentially because they feel unloved.

It seems to me that Christianity suggests that this is not always the case. What about the fall? Whether you take it figurativly or literally, I don't think Adam and Eve sinned because they felt unloved. It seemed to have more to do with pride or being self-centred.

Wouldn't that also be true of kids in some cases, or that it is an element in many cases? That they misbehave because they are being selfish or want to fufil their own desires and don't care if it's at someone else's expense?

AngelBee

01-29-2009, 02:00 PM

I hadn't seen this thread before but I'll but in with a thought I had.

If we are talking about biblical parenting, what about this issue

There have been a few comments on this subject, to the issue of whether kids misbehave essentially because they feel unloved.

It seems to me that Christianity suggests that this is not always the case. What about the fall? Whether you take it figurativly or literally, I don't think Adam and Eve sinned because they felt unloved. It seemed to have more to do with pride or being self-centred.

Wouldn't that also be true of kids in some cases, or that it is an element in many cases? That they misbehave because they are being selfish or want to fufil their own desires and don't care if it's at someone else's expense?

I totally agree with this!

I do wrong because is FEELS good. Like yelling at dh. Or swearing. :bag: Horrible, but true. I do not do it to get attention.

Why would it be different for my children?

I do think lack or temperary loss of connection can cause misbehavior, but sometimes they just want to use mamas lipstick. Period. They are not feeling unloved. They have a need and do not care if they step on someone else to fulfill it.

magstphil

01-29-2009, 02:05 PM

Yes, BlueGoat, I agree that that can be the case with any human being and that it's important to address that with our children. Though I do not view The Fall the same way. The way my religious beliefs view The Fall (http://lightplanet.com/mormons/basic/bible/eve.html) is actually a prime example of good parenting, IMO. But that's another convo, isn't it? :lol

Point being yes I agree and also on a tangent we need to find prime examples in the scriptures for ourselves and families to follow.

phathui5

01-29-2009, 08:29 PM

I don't see God ever actively imposing consequences as a tool to help people become disciplined or more righteous.

In the New Testament, I see Christ taking the consequences that were meant for us.

In the Old Testament, I see Him cast Adam and Eve out of the garden, kill everyone with a flood, burn Sodom to the ground, threaten to destroy Ninevah if they didn't repent and follow Him...

Imposed consequences, yeah? I think they're there.

phathui5

01-29-2009, 08:44 PM

One_Girl

01-31-2009, 02:49 PM

I totally agree with this!

I do wrong because is FEELS good. Like yelling at dh. Or swearing. :bag: Horrible, but true. I do not do it to get attention.

Why would it be different for my children?

I do think lack or temperary loss of connection can cause misbehavior, but sometimes they just want to use mamas lipstick. Period. They are not feeling unloved. They have a need and do not care if they step on someone else to fulfill it.

Or they are at a developmental stage where they aren't able to think about other people. They may also still be very impulsive because the area of the brain that controls impulsive behavior doesn't develop until you are nearing adulthood. God made people that way and I think if it is wrong to expect kids to be something other than what God made them by saying that they are doing things they shouldn't and not caring about who it affects.

And isn't an obssession about always being listened to a bit selfish in itself. I can't tell you how many times I have just wanted dd to do something quickly so we could do what I wanted to yet again and she dragged her feet. I could use the bible as a fall back and claim that she has to do everything I tell her to no matter how she feels about it or I could try to figure out what her need is in the moment and how to help her also get her needs met. Kids react for many reasons and fun is only one of them, they also get overtired, worn out with constant trips, hungry, sore from sitting a lot, they have a hard time waking up and may just drag fromt that. I think it is more useful to look at how to set my dd up for success than it is to use the something like the bible (or mainstream expectations of children in my case since I don't like religion) as an excuse for abusing my authority.