TCS Discussion Threads - Archived

[larsy]

leaflady was wondering in a recent thread about how some of us are using the word 'coercion' . Speaking for myself, I am using coercion to mean "the psychological state of enacting one idea or impulse while a conflicting impulse is still active in one's mind. " quoted from the TCS short glossary at http://www.tcs.ac/FAQ/FAQShortGlossary.html .

There are lots of implications of this definition, which are explained on that link above.

I like this way of thinking of coercion, because it applies much more accurately to the state of mind of a person- that is where coercion occurs and does its harm, by hindering reasonable thought and learning and problem solving.

limited time now, glad to discuss this further, if anyone cares to.

[Paulab52]

Hey Larsay,

did you used to post under the name Suzan?

[larsy]

Yes'm- that information is buried in my reintroduction post on about page 7 of that thread on 'pleased to meet you' part of this board. :)

[leafylady]

Thanks Larsy. I'm pondering that definition. I'm glad that you started a new thread for it.
So if I choose to bite my tongue rather than say something nasty to a relative (2 conflicting impulses in my mind)- is that self coercion?
Or when I struggle between procrastination and studio work- finally choosing one or the other while still feeling the other tug- is that self coercion?
Is there such a thing as self coercion?

[larsy]

Self-coercion- oh, yeah, is there ever such a thing! I think this is a lot of what we learn as children when forced to pick up the blocks or clean up our rooms or whatever. Eventually, kids internalize that voice, having learned to force thier selves to do things they don't want to do. Voila, self-coercion. And if feels horrible and gets in the way of us living the life we want.

And I think people lose track of the ability to know what they want, through this same process of coercion. This is a form of coercion damage, imo. The ability to identify what a person wants in any given situation is essential, to be able to find common preferences, to find good solutions, or even to make good decisions. Have you ever dithered over what to order off of a menu? What to do today, when today nothing is scheduled for you?(hah! if only...most parents don't have the luxury of a day to themselves! :) But I highly recommend taking one, whenever you can arrange it!) Felt guilty about doing something that you just want to do for yourself? I think we all know how this feels.

I recall a big breakthrough for me, in my thinking, when I realized that it is ok to want what you want, and it is ok to get what you want. That I could figure out ways to get what I want without hurting anyone else in the process, and even to help them get what they want, too. Yahoo!

In the nasty relative scenario- what would the hypothetical person really want in such a situation? First, defense of their child (if there is a child involved). A parent's first responsibility is to their child/ren and their own self. I don't think a person can go wrong, when acting in their own best interests (which would include others' best interests as well, it seems to me, it's all tied up together) and this is the best motivation for children to act from as well! A person could speak directly to their child and reassure them that they have done no wrong, that parent does not agree with the nasty relative, and how about we go get some ice cream (or whatever). If the child is not directly involved, a person might weigh their responsibility to this nasty relative versus their responsibility to their own self- would it be best to extricate one's self from an altercation in a pleasant way, perhaps helping the other person save face and beat a hasty retreat, if this person is not open to new theories? A swift 'I see we do not agree about this. Please excuse me' might be all that is needed. Or, if one is articulate in times of such stress, one could reel off a well thought out defense of their position/theories, and perhaps the nasty relative and the person can have a discussion and both learn something.

I think that the ability to identify what one really wants is essential in taking one's self seriously as well as taking others seriously- I want to finish typing this message, but if a child needs my attention, even though I might heave a mental sigh at having to leave in the middle of a thought, off I would go because my priority, what I really want, is to be available to that child when child needs my help and attention. I know I can come back to this later, whereas a child fobbed off with promises of 'later' 'just a minute' gets a clear message about mom's priorities. Let me hasten to add that if a parent is engaged in something that is not easily interruptable (though these sorts of things can be done at times when there are others available to help children) or that they are really absorbed in or would like to reach a spot that is more easily interruptable, a child is often willing to help a parent out and wait for them to do so- especially if they know that if it was something really important (by the child's lights) that parent would become available immediately.

I think that self-coercion has some things in common with self-sacrifice, which is another aspect of coercion, though they are not exactly the same thing. We do well to learn to recognize when these things are happening, though, because then we can start to find good solutions to these problems. :)

Thanks for the discussion!

[Ms. Mom]

I was wondering if you were susan? Good to see you back! :cool:

[simonee]

Sometimes I wonder whether our 27-month old daughter is too... eek, it's hard to use the word... spoiled. I know dr. Sears insists that "spoiled" is what happens when something is ignored, but I use the word the old-fashioned way by lack of a synonym.

DH and I both work at home, juggling our hours around trips to the park and the store, and squeezing in precious time during nap and sleep. We don't mind the relative lack of money, because we have enough to live by, and don't want to miss anything in these special years. In other words, dd has always had -- almost :) -- all our undivided attention.

The problem is that she's recently started to throw tantrums. They're not full-blast, but pretty exhausting for all of us. She's always been willful, and that's what we both consider one of her best sides, especially because neither of us really is. We're suckers. Usually, in the course of one of these tantrums we realize that whatever the subject is, it's not really worth it, so we give in (e.g. she doesn't want me to wear the black shoes but the white ones, and I could care less). We've tried to not give in a few times, but then it turns into a battle of wills and I don't want to play those kinds of manipulation games. So I put on the white shoes.

I may need to add that she's very good about serious stuff. She won't touch coffee cups or knives, has never tried to put non-food items in her mouth, and runs for a "safe and protected" hug when a car drives by. So we feel that she has some judgment, and we want to respect her emerging view of the world at-that-moment. After all, we often choose what she wears, too.

Still, being raised rather traditionally myself (and having to deal with my family's slightly derogatory comments about "having to be all different again"), I sometimes fear that she'll become a little monster who'll get her way by screaming. Even though the little voice in the back of my head says she won't.

I guess I just need a little support ;)

We bf more-often-than-I-care-to-count (and besides, I've never seen the point in counting), cosleep messily but happily, get around in the sling (though not very much now that she approaches 30 lbs.), and she's very attached to both of us (even though daddy often has to deal with rejection).

Thanx for reading through this rambling!

[larsy]

Congratulations on 'having to be all different again' ;), simonee! Have you taken a look at the non-coercive education and parenting philosophy of Taking Children Seriously? In taking our children seriously, we also have to learn how to take ourselves seriously, and it sounds like you and your dh are going down that road, in finding solutions to problems that you all like- like, working at home which must give you such flexibility to be able to meet your own needs as well as the needs of your child. Sounds wonderful :)

I (and many others) have found that by having the philosophical underpinnings in mind, about what is bad about causing coercion in my own mind or that of my child (or any other intimate loved one), and learning and thinking about the non-coercive conflict resolution skill of finding common preferences, has opened up a whole new world view with vast quantities of solutions everywhere :) It is much easier to defend one's beliefs- all the while holding in mind that one is as fallible as the next person, and always looking for better theories than the ones we already hold- when you have some sort of articulation about why you think it is better to do things this way instead of that.

We are all conditioned to accept coercion as a way of life, and breaking out of that is hard! However, reasonable arguments can be made for the dignity of each person, no matter what their age or level of experience. We parents have the privilege and the awesome responsibility to help our children get what they want in life, while also helping our own selves get what we want in life. It takes some mental work to get past the societal memes we have absorbed, about 'can't always get what you want' and 'suffering is good' <ack!> and 'sometimes children just have to learn that they can't have (fill in the blank)' or conversely that 'they have to (do something that they don't want to do)'.

We can jettison the bad memes (self-replicating patterns of information) and disseminate good ones, like 'it is possible to raise children without making them do things they don't want to do, or have things done to them that they don't want' and 'it is ok to want what you want, and it's ok to get what you want'.

I think that children do want to do what is right. Lots of times, I think we adults have a hard time knowing what is right, being mired in our own coercion damaged thinking entrenchments.

Oh, I could ramble on for a long time! (ask anyone here ;) ) The TCS website is www.TCS.ac. You'll find lots of support and assurance that your child will not turn into a little monster if you help hir get what she wants. On the contrary. Why would a person who is respected and helped not learn to respect and help others? Kids need information and experience and access to the world. We parents have lots of that, and are here for our chidlren.

Very best wishes!

[Ms. Mom]

Simonee - you dd is lucky to have such a caring and attentive mother. I totally understand your concerns. I have 2 and my secound was very attached and insecure when she was young. We held and reasured her a lot and gave her the power to sometime tell us what she was going to do - within reason of course. Now, at age 4 she's pretty wonderfull! She has learned through our compassion for her how to give that to others. She's still quite a tantrum thrower at times - it's all part of her passionate personallity! She's very creative and sometimes has her own idea of how things should be.

I don't beleive that you can 'spoil' a child with attention and meeting their needs. Love and Gentleness are learned behaviors, your setting the example that they will follow.

It's hard to deal with critisism from family, however, I think they'll come around as dd grows and they see how wonderfull she is.

[Paulab52]

Larsy or anyone, can you help me out....

I feel like I'm always telling my kids what to do. Yes, I know I'm the parent and I know what's best, but I swear, they don't listen to me anyway.

Example:

Take of your PJ's and get dressed so we can go out. They aren't doing anything, so having to stop isn't a problem. They just sit there and ingore me, or go the opposite direction from the bedroom. I have to ask them several times to come and get dressed. Then we have the whole clothing issues...

Get buckled into the car. Get buckled into the car, GET BUCKLED INTO THE CAR. Forget it, I'll just do it for you.

No you can't bring in the toy. No, no, no you can't bring in the toy, because it might get lost. LEAVE THE TOY IN THE CAR!!!

Do you want to ride in the buggy or walk? Ride or walk...ride or walk..ok you're riding, well then, walk..make a decision.

No you can't have a candy. Because we're getting ready to eat lunch. If you eat all your lunch, you can have a candy. No you can't have a candy now...BECAUSE I SAY SO. (the worst).

No we're not playing in the front yard when we get home. Because you don't listen to me and you play to close to the road. No, you can't play in the front, you can play in the back. Oh, the back's not good enough, then how about not playing outside at all?? Do you want to stay in the house?? Ok, so back yard it is.

This is just a sample of my mornings. Everything is a super power struggle. I really would like some alternatives to having to say no all the time, and I also don't want to feel like they are pushing me over and getting their way, even if it's something I don't want them to do.

How do all you TCS moms handle it? Please, don't slam me, I'm truely interested in your opinion. I've read the website, but I'm confused.

TIA

[Dragonfly]

Paula,

I'll be very interested in hearing responses to this, as well. While I generally am very flexible with ds and follow his lead, one area I'm struggling with is diapering. Silly, I know, but it's a *big* one here. He HATES to have a diaper on (he's one and is very adamant about his likes and dislikes - just one of the many things I love about him!) Most times around the house, I don't push the issue. If he doesn't want one on, then he doesn't. I let him crawl around naked and sometimes will catch him before he pees, in which case we'll go to the sink or toilet... sometimes not, and then he pees on the ground. No biggie ;) . But sometimes, we have to go somewhere and I really need him to wear a diaper. Then it becomes a power struggle, and I'm not sure how to avoid this one. Of course he doesn't understand the concept "I need you to put on the diaper or we can't go where we need to go" - and I imagine his answer would be "Well, then, let's just not go!" anyway. So, how can this be avoided?

Anyway, sorry for the ramble... I'll be happy to see the answers to your post :)

Dragonfly

[ediesmom]

LOL!!!!

That is Edie to a T!

I have learned over the past 5 years to make time for this type of behavior. We start getting dressed WAY early so it gets done. We do the extra time thing with food, baths,etc. It kinda works.

Another thing we do is if she wants something her way, she needs to tell me in ADVANCE. NO last minute requests! She loves to choose how we are going to drive home. There are 3 or 4 favorites, and she needs to let me know in advance which way she would like to go. There used to be temper tantrums involved with the drive, but giving her the reigned in choice has worked well.

A timer is a good way to get them going. I set the timer(sometimes) for five minutes (or however long) and she has that amount of time to get dressed, brush her teeth, whatever. Sometimes the timer is a bad thing with her, but most of the time its fun... kinda beat the clock.

Good luck.

randee

[talapas]

ooh, you're back Suzan, yay!

You always make me think, even thought I tend to lurk instead of post. So here is a question regarding the coercion issue. I can readily see how coercion can lead to the inability to know what one wants. That was really well explained, thank you! I needed to hear/recognize that today!

You also state that...

"I think this is a lot of what we learn as children when forced to pick up the blocks or clean up our rooms or whatever. Eventually, kids internalize that voice, having learned to force thier selves to do things they don't want to do.

I wonder how we learn to do things that we do not want to do, but that are necessary for survival? For instance, dd does not like to brush her teeth. She would not if she were not made to. However, it is very clear that not brushing her teeth will lead in the long term to ill health.

I was never really "made" to do things like chores too much. As an adult I found that this resulted in a severe handicap, because I didn't learn to do basic things like cooking, and cleaning. I had to spend valuable time learning to do things for myself by trial and error as an adult. I also struggle today with the self discipline to do them. I think these things could have been much easier to learn in childhood. I have had this conversation with other friends I have known since childhood, and they have basically said the same things. The ones who were doing chores and hating it as kids are grateful for it today.

I think sometimes kids don't want to do something because they don't think they can do it as well as mom or dad, or because it isn't convenient, or they are absorbed in something else.

The first one is the easy one, teach them how to do it properly, and make sure you don't judge the results, cause it might be awhile before they can do it as well as you. Self sufficiency is a very valuable tool for self esteem, and I just think it's too important to leave to chance or whim. (i don't feel like cleaning today mom, I may never feel like cleaning....that was me as a kid. Now I recognize the value of having a clean house- it helps my sanity. But it is still hard to muster up the self discipline to do it when I don't want to!)

You say that you can remove yourself from the absorbtion with another task, and respond to the child, which is great! How will they learn to do that as adults, if they are never asked to do that as children? I agree that it is disorienting to kids to be interrupted during deep absorbtion, so perhaps learning how to interrupt it gently is what we need to do. My first challenge is to recognize that state of absorption and facilitate it! Then interruption when necessary, by gentle means.

I kind of took off topic a bit, but I hope you get my drift

Leafy, are you me? LOL I have the same problem...to procrastinate ( thus my presence here) or go to the studio!
Tala

[talapas]

can someone please post the tcs? site that was referred to? I'd like to read up.
Thanks
Tala

[larsy]

www.tcs.ac

I totally don't have time right now- someone else wants the computer, but will come back to this when I can :)

[simonee]

Thank you both, Larsy and Ms. Mom. I read some stuff on the TCS site, and then browsed through these boards for more Larsy posts.

Non-coercion is pretty close to what we like to view as "anarchist childrearing" -- not really making rules, but mostly just going with the flow and adapting to the situation. We indeed take Audrey VERY seriously, because it's been clear from day one (and even before that, because she was one heck of a lively fetus) that there was a full load of wonderful and loving character in that little body.

I think it's just hard to let many deeply bred things go, such as the idea that parents know better just because they've been at it for a longer time. I've always believed that our instincts are probably our most accurate and reliable guides in life, and it would make sense that a child's instincts are not nearly as polluted by socialization and conforming as mine are. I generally feel good when we pretty much let her guide her life, and she is indeed well able to understand why certain things (such as diaper changes) cannot be avoided -- while at the same time protesting things that we somehow deem necessary, but that on second thought really aren't (such as choosing between the stroller and the sling, while we can simply bring both).

It's nice to put a somewhat accepted name to our parenting style, especially because the word "anarchist" always seems to evoke associations with socially unacceptable behavior
:rolleyes:

Again, thanks.
BTW today she said "tacky eaters" for "parking meters." It just cracked me up, especially since we used to live in buffet paradise Las Vegas!

[Alexander]

Aww nuts larsy,

why do you always find these post b4 me? ;)

Simonee, you have almost exactly described our circumstances, uncanily so. Except that we now have 2 DDs.

But I am stunned that you don't "draw the line" right up to health and safty, rather than at your whim. White shoes, black shoes. Why not let her choose. We let ours from as soon as she was able to indicate a preferance for anything (b4 that actually) and if that meant she went to school in pyjamas, then fine.

And that has not "spoiled" either of our childrem, in spite of the continuous warnings we had from that know no better.

In fact, our children willingly share their last strawberry, help, co-operate with just about everything . . .

There are boundaries, but we should seek to empower our children. Then they know what to do with it when they grow up.

Hope this helps.

a

[leafylady]

ditto to what Talapas just wrote. You just wrote everything that I wanted to say, but expressed it much more effectively.

[Alexander]

talapas
I wonder how we learn to do things that we do not want to do, but that are necessary for survival? For instance, dd does not like to brush her teeth. She would not if she were not made to. However, it is very clear that not brushing her teeth will lead in the long term to ill health.


This is a very good question, which intersects with education and the way we do/ought to educate our children.

So, I think I can help answer.

Children are designed through our evolution to survive. This is done by nature endowing certain tools to the human baby. Curiosity is among those at the forefront of our everyday observation. But another equally important one is mimicking, or perhaps that is not quite right, it is the enjoyment of mimicking older people.

Children in the past who failed to properly mimic were not provided with the tools for survival in the environments in which they were living, and thus were more likely to succumb to the dangers of life in the wild. You can see that those children not born with the feature that allows them to enjoy mimicking, die off, leaving those that do to reproduce and strengthen that gene.

This tool of survival, mimicking, is the key to how we can effortlessly provide our children with the tools required to survive in our environment. All we have to do is create a situation in which our children wish to copy us.

Whether it be potty training, brushing teeth, or tidying up, manners, loving and showing affection to one another or reading, children will always strive to emulate their elders.

Hope this helps.

a

[erika]

There have been some very interesting discussions on these boards regarding AP (attachment parenting) and TCS (taking children seriously). I wonder, however, whether use of these methods is a middle class luxury, only possible when parents have a certain minimum amount of free time and low life stress? Is this particularly the case when there is more than one child?

My question stems from personal experience. At the time my first dd was born I had never heard of AP, but I instinctually used many of the AP methods because it just seemed to work the best: cosleeping, babywearing, nursing on demand, focusing on teaching correct behavior rather than punishing “wrong” behavior, etc. Even though dh and I were both graduate students (therefore very poor and under a great deal of stress), I still managed to be deeply connected with dd. We developed a beautiful relationship, and I only rarely raised my voice in frustration – most of the time I could deal with any tantrums or outbursts in a very calm and nurturing way. I could not even imagine using physical violence against a child. In turn, people commented on how sweet and nurturing dd was with her dolls or with other children.

When dd was 4, I became pregnant again, and everything changed. I was vomiting 6-8 times/day and felt weak, miserable and depressed all the time. In desperation I went on medication, which reduced the vomiting to 3 times/day, but I still felt pretty awful. My parenting approach became very authoritarian, and I started barking orders and yelling a lot. After the baby was born, I actually swatted dd about once/day when she did something aggressive toward the baby (which is to be expected, given how she had been treated for nearly a year). During the pregnancy and shortly thereafter, I actually had some incidents like the other Moms Who Say/Do Terrible Things To Their Children In Public who have been excoriated on these boards.

I was very saddened to see what had become of my parenting and of my relationship with dd. I have since been working very hard to restore a more nurturing and respectful approach toward dd. I do find it more challenging to do this now that I have a little baby to attend to, disrupted sleep, etc, but I think for the most part we are healing past mistakes. I think my parenting approach still has that authoritarian edge to it, but we are making progress.

From this experience I wonder whether authoritarian/punitive parenting is really a function of time and stress rather than attitude toward children. Certainly there is a component of learned behavior – we tend to parent the way we were parented unless we make an effort to change. But is it possible to AP/TCS if you are a single parent working two minimum wage jobs to make ends meet – or two parents in the same situation – or a homeless mom trying to figure out how to get shelter and food for her family? Don’t AP and TCS take a certain amount of creativity and time?

Any thoughts anyone?

[peacemama]

What an interesting post, erika, you really bring up a lot of good points.

I wouldn't exactly say that AP or gentle discipline is a luxury, but I do agree that it might be more challenging for parents who are stressed due to lack of time, money, or good health.

On the other hand, many aspects of AP might lead, eventually, to less stress or financial burden - breastfeeding costs nothing and requires less work than formula feeding, cosleeping can be done in tiny apartments, expensive cribs aren't needed and mom and baby sleep better, babywearing promotes bonding and results in happier babies, and so on.

[geomom]

It is difficult in a culture that centers on the nuclear family and independence to create a nurturing web of people not only for our children but for ourselves. I think that it is more difficult to ap if the rest of your relationships are mainstream. If you (the general you, not erika specifically) don't have family nearby to help when things get rough, you end up doing whatever works for just that moment to relieve the tension.

That is why dh and I have moved closer to relatives we trust. And we've made sure that dd has formed a close bond with them. Dh and I work part-time jobs so that dd doesn't have to be in daycare, and we all get time together as a family. So I guess that AP isn't a luxury to us, it is part of a greater philosophy of how we live our lives. But dh and I are without a doubt weird. :) As a child, I thought being called a 'non-conformist and malcontent' was a compliment.

[sagewinna]

I have AP'd during many life changes: Working out of the home, then as a single mother (the kids were 4 years old and 9 months old), now as a SAHM who is happily married.


All along, I just followed my instinct. The situation we were in didn't change what I felt was the right way to parent.

I am, however, much more TCS than I used to be. I think this stems more from getting older and wiser than a change in my life status.

[MeMeMama]

Pardon my ignorance, but what is "Taking Children Seriously"?

Is this a style of parenting?

:confused:

[simonee]

Thank you too, Alexander!

I think there's been a slight misunderstanding, though. The only place where we draw the line is safety and health, even though we hardly have to because Audrey pretty much knows. When I wrote that a diaper change cannot be avoided, I meant that it can't be avoided in the long run. What we do is we talk about it being necessary and she says "don't like that," then we say she can let us know when she's ready and where she wants it done, and then 5 minutes later she'll usually come up and say "diapy floor" or something.

The main learning process is to switch off that autopilot that has allowed me for 20 or 25 years to choose which shoes I get to wear, and when I get to go to the store. My main problem is to get out of the mindset that "letting her have it her way" is something negative. Intuitively I know that anybody deserves to have it her/his way, but I sometimes just need to hear it from someone else because there sure as hell isn't very widespread support for this kind of thing!!

PS I love your description of your girls sharing their last strawberry, Alexander. That alone will boost my confidence for weeks. Audrey likes to tell everybody that .... is hers (like we go to the zoo as we do a lot, and she'll anounce "pink birds (flamingos) MINE!!") Just so there's no confusion there.

And one thing I know: "traditional" (i.e. last 100 years) parenting styles have definitely not resulted in grownups who know how to share!! After all, sharing is death for free-market economies!! ;)

[Mommy22B]

I know just how you feel. I am desprately trying to get over myown hangups on this. Most days I end up disapointed in myself because I get rude and force her around. But this is a new concept for me and I have only been at it a week or so, and I totally notice the bad things I do. I am working at it! I am just so disapointed in myself sometimes. My latest "problem" Is that yesterday I bought this little outfit for her. I didn't think to ask her if she liked it. I am not used to her having such preference yet. Well, she hates it. We were very bad parents and forced her into it yesterday, but today it was rejected. :) I am proud that she is so grown up as to have preference. I will just have to start letting her picko ut what I buy for her.
It is really hard to get over the social ideas that they can't have their way are they will be brats. Why???? How often do I get my way? Pretty much all day long. One question I have is can they learn to compromise? and how early? Like if I wanted to wear my black shoes and she wants me to wear my white shoes...if I really really have a preference for the black ones is there a way to get a 1 1/2 year old to compromise?
Beth

[simonee]

MeMeMama, yes it is a style of parenting, as I found out myself only a few days ago.
Check this website:
or http://www.tcs.ac/
or any of the posts by Larsy (and Alexander) I think.

As far as the rest of this thread goes, I wonder the same things Erika does. I believe that neither AP nor TCS takes up more time or effort in the long run than traditional parenting, but it depends on how you view your child. If you consider yourself a unit during the hours you spend together, it only makes sense to co-everything. No getting out of bed at night with a baby, no need to heat bottles of formula or fret about balancing all those nutrients into tiny portions, fewer endless tantrums because you listen to the child before it gets to that point, and babywearing so you don't have to fold and unfold a stroller all the time, can only save time and effort. If you consider your child a little "counterforce", someone who's out to manipulate you and make your life harder, all these things are only going to seem like "extra work." In that case, AP or TCS is definitely not for you; in that case, you may even wonder if you need assistance so your parenthood doesn't weigh so heavy upon you.

Traditional parenting may seem simpler because there's less time-consuming negotiation and other interaction involved, and children that fear a parent will quickly learn "better" than to interfere. There must after all be a reason why this style is so preponderant in our instant gratification society! Still, a parent like Erika who resorted to this style probably would have been fine if she had found another way to cope with her stress. And, Erika, no matter what your parenting style had been, it would have been much harder with the new baby.

I think the decision to go with any non-mainstream philosophy, whether it's childrearing or something else, requires time. THinking about it, doing research or communicating with other adherents, gaining the ability to articulate a defense when you're forced to do so (and it happens a lot :) ), takes a lot of time. Time that not every double-jobbing single parent (or 60-hour workweek executive) may have. If you choose to live your life in a way that makes many AP or TCS things recognizable, you'll find caretakers, preschools, etc. who think alike. You don't have to spend 24 hours a day with your child to take her or him seriously. On the contrary -- no better way for a time-starved parent to be close to a child than to wear her, sleep with her, and try to listen and negotiate during the hours you do get to spend together!!!

AP

[sugarmama]

i'll just try and tackle one or two of these issues and tell you how i *think* a TCS parent might handle them. (by the way, i am FAR from the perfect TCS parent--if such a thing exists :) ), i have just been reading lots about it and trying to practice it for the last several months.

as far as leaving the toy in the car: TCS would ask: why is it so important to leave that toy in the car? could you explore the idea of allowing your child to take the toy with them? whose toy is it, anyway? you could explain to the child that taking the toy would mean that they'd need to hang on to it, etc. ultimately if the toy belongs to them, they should be able to make the decision about it.

getting in the carseat: TCS parents would try to come up with a way to get their child to agree to getting in rather than giving the child "chances" to get in and then simply doing it for them. you could give them some stickers or something special in the car, talk to them about where you will be going, etc.

no matter what, TCS parents wouldn't force their child to leave the toy just because that was their (parents) preference. arriving at a common preference would mean that maybe the child could take a less expensive toy into the store with them or agree that putting the toy into mom's bag when they were finished would be a good plan.....

can someone who is more TCS savvy (larsy? you know me as ally's jill) verify if what i've said here makes some sense?
thanks and hope that helps some!

[bunny's mama]

anyone heard of abraham maslow? he was one of the humanistic psychological theorists way back in the day. he also taught at brandeis university.

anyway, i bring him up because he had a theory of human behavior that had to do wiht what he called "the hierarchy of needs." (imagine a pyramid with different levels) basically, food, shelter, etc. were on the bottom, and what he called self-actualization was at the top, with other stuff in the middle (get the idea?) anyway, he said that it was impossible to self-actualize or even move to the middle levels without first having met our lower level needs for food and shelter, etc.

anyway, perhaps maslow would agree, erika, that a homeless mother or someone having to work 3 jobs just to put food onthe table, would have no time to parent AP or TCS, not because she wouldn't have the time, necessarily, but because her mind would be on surviving the day to day, not on helping raise her children in an optimal environment.

but on the other hand....i think lots of AP is just how a lot of folks parent naturally and instinctively. so maybe even if a parent was stressed about "lower level needs" she might still choose to sleep with her child, discipline gently, etc.

a very good question. i think how we parent under stress has a lot to do with how we were parented. that's just my theory. ;)

[Paulab52]

Thanks for the reply Sugarmama! I don't know why it irks me so much about the toy. I just know he's gonna lose it and then I'll have to deal with all that :)

Keep the ideas coming. I'm really trying so hard here. I get so frustrated with myself, so I know how frustrated the kids must be.

[Alexander]

Originally posted by Mommy22B

One question I have is can they learn to compromise? and how early? Like if I wanted to wear my black shoes and she wants me to wear my white shoes...if I really really have a preference for the black ones is there a way to get a 1 1/2 year old to compromise?

Beth



A good question. First I would like to point out that for people that are just starting to try this out, you must not expect quick results. Just b/c you start using a new parenting technique will not change the child's view of you over night.



From their point of view, and their entire life experience is of something entirely different, so it may take time for some children to learn the new relationship that you are trying to create. That said, there are perhaps 2 guide lines that are essential to follow:



1) have the patience of Jobe (my middle name;))

2) be consistant



On compromise.



Children love to compromise! Yes it is true. They love to share power too!



"Not my kid!" Well you would be surprised! Children need to feel empowered b4 they can risk sharing or compromise.



Black shoes for Mama, but they want you to wear white? So wear white! A small gift for your child (satisfaction). Of course if it is raining, and you want to wear boots instead of ballet shoes, then there is a case to be made to the child. This kind of logic is something children lap up. It makes sense to them.



We, for such a short time in our lives must "out up with" the demands (sometimes very odd) of our children. In a flash it will be gone.



Complying with our children's peculiar demands helps them to form a model of how the world works. We can not transfere our model to them. They must build their own, and we have a responibility as their primary care givers to ensure that this is done as optimally and "humanely" as posible.



Last night DD#2 saw me pass the black chopsticks to dw, and I started to use the red ones.



"NOT THE RED ONE!!! Your BLACK ones. MUMMY is red!!!"



It was a nuisence to change, but change I did. In her world, she had noticed that Daddy uses the black (longer), and has not lived long enough to know that dw and I frequently interchange.



As children become more aware that they hold power over their lives, the more they DEMAND to interact with others around them, and that can only be done by continuously compromising.



Hope this helps



a

[Linda in Arizona]

Where I draw the line is the kids telling ME what to do. I will wear whatever shoes I want and it isn't any of their business. Likewise, they can wear whatever shoes they want. End of story (I freely admit to putting their sandals at the top of the closet during the winter).

My kids are 3 and 5 and are good at working out comprimises with each other. For example, yesterday they both wanted to watch TV, but one wanted to watch PBS and the other wanted to watch an elephant video she got at the library. They came whining to me and I explained that they had to find a way for both of them to be happy. They started explaining their points of view to me and I stopped them and said they needed to talk to each other. They left and a few minutes later annouced they had agreed to watch the video first, and then PBS. They were both happy with this and it kept me from dictating what they would do.

[Alexander]

Originally posted by Linda in Arizona
Where I draw the line is the kids telling ME what to do. I will wear whatever shoes I want and it isn't any of their business.

Awww, come on Linda! Kids need to tell us what to do! And it's fun!

Ever read John Holt "How children learn" and "how children fail"? There are some examples of how children learn about their environment that are similar to this in those books.



My kids are 3 and 5 and are good at working out comprimises with each other.

snip

They left and a few minutes later annouced they had agreed to watch the video first, and then PBS. They were both happy with this and it kept me from dictating what they would do.

Now, I am impressed! :)

a

[marymom]

I think, in my self evaluation...that TIME and money play largely in the ability to parent ones children with love, and ofcourse having more children immediately affect those things, also, in my opinion, you will find things like, genetic nature, some people get upset easier than others, some people get more stressed-just because thats the way they are, then you could evaluate(if you wanted to<yawn>)diet and then ofcourse greatly factoring in would be the parents own upbringing and experiences with her/his own parents...
and it seems ALOT easier for some people to choose to parent AP or TCS...(I hate using categories but ...)than others
Me, I have 5 great great wonderful children (of my own) in my house...no dad living with us, and I am freakin STRESSED out- and Ive heard all the information on having less children and if I had it all to do over again I might have less(I even have an older child who lives on her own making the total 6) might have started older, might have this might have that
but I am older now, (41- and someone mentioned being older makes it easier, I agree)and as hard (can you sense some frustration here? its been a rough month)as it is to choose to parent lovingly because of all the factors and as IMperfect as I am...I know I am the perfect mom for my kids...I inately know this.
and so are you
and I can choose to decide to try and be a certain way, and reading about some of these perfect moms with non violent loving nurturing kids(okok, I didnt mean perfect) and reading some ofthese perfectly awesome living arrangements helps me,actually supports me and renews my resolve to have more patience,to try not to hit my kids(spank whatever),to try not to yell too loudly,
I can choose to try
and we can all choose -the extent of the challenges some face vary greatly- but
I am so thankful for a place like this-
oh man, that reeeeeealy turned into a vent, Im sorry but it was JUST what I wanted to post about
I camt to this thread because this week I did not discipline gently,
and Erika, you sound lkike a great mom, hang in there sweetie, its all about choice and mistakes and doing your best and yeah, maybe alot of it is time
a child spells love, T I m E so do I and for me its about conscious choice and effort

[larsy]

Compromise is not optimal, when it comes to having no one being coerced. If any one of the parties involved can look back at the solution and say 'I would have rather had X than what I got', then a better solution could have been found. Compromise is a win-lose or a lose-lose proposition. EVeryone has to give something up, that they want. Finding common preferences is the only way I know at present to find/create win-win solutions that everyone is happy with. And it doesn't have to mean throwing the children back on their own resources to figure it out (unless that is what they want). A parent can be a big help in figuring out common preferences- in fact, the more trusted advisors and sources of information and ideas invovled, the better. The larger the pool of potential solutions.

A parent makes a statement of hir theory that the parent does not tell the children what to wear just as the parent does not want to be told what to wear. This is a fine statement of supporting each other's autonomy- each person has the absolute right to say what goes on with their own body. However, hiding some of someone's clothes that one knows they might prefer, even though they are not the best clothes for the season or whatever, puts the lie to the statement of autonomy that goes before. The parent has all the power, and decides how it will be meted out. Just a couple of days ago, I was with a child who had thrown on a pair of sandals before getting in the car, and then on top of the mountain, wanted to get out and play in the snow. A lovely snowball fight ensued, child got cold cold cold, and was happy to get back into the car and go on, wrapped up in mom's snuggly shirt and a towel around hir feet. Yahoo! and not one ill effect. :)

Little kids are dressed by someone else from the beginning, and when they show their preference as best they can, they are often misinterpreted, and somight end up being over or under dressed, or have something uncomfortable sticking them in the where ever, for many months before they can effectively make that fact known. What a person is dressed in is not set in stone in this society any longer- thank the powers the be!!!

Why not ask children what they'd like to wear, out of the entire set of clothing available to them? Why not ask them if they think parent's clothing is appropriate? "Does this look alright? Do these shoes look ok with this? They're the most comfortable, and we will be doing lots of walking, so even though they are purple, I think I will wear them so that my feet feel good and carry me through the day" This kind of interaction gives kids lots of information about why people wear clothes without it having anything at all to do with them and so no implied pressure risking coercion.

Kids learn from their clothing choices. They learn if someone tells them 'that looks really stupid' and they might not care if it looks stupid to that person because it is their very favorite pajama shirt and cape and they like to wear it. The kid wearing sandals in the snow might not want to do it again, or might, in the face of the propect of playing in the snow or not just because of the sandals, choose to play in the snow in sandals again because s/he knows that s/he can warm up effectively after having fun and getting cold. Or this kid might prefer to change into shoes and socks before stepping out into the snow.

Kids know what they want. Some don't care about being cold, if the experience holds great promise of fun. Some don't want to be cold, so will avoid the cold experience or be sure to be bundled up so they can enjoy the fun. We parents can bring along the extra clothes so they are avaiable for those who want them. hypothermia is certainly something to be guarded against and prevented- that is something we parents can prevent.

But I am getting away from the 'child telling parent what to do' scenario. Most kids don't try it very often. They learn early on where the power lies, and it ain't in their court. Except for the stuff they can get away from behind a parents back. or manipulate or tantrum over. That is their only power, in those cases. imo. Kids will own their autonomy, any way they can. Why not help them own it straightforwardly?

'Mom, wear the red shoes!" "Why?" "Because I say so" Is this how children experience the world? Being told what to wear, with no explanation that makes sense to them? If a kid will talk to a parent, parent might find that child has a perfectly reasonable explanation for whay they want parent to wear a particular shoe or sit in a particular chair or eat with particular chopsticks. A discussion can ensue, where both parties can learn about each other and the things they are discussing. Coercion cuts off these opportunities to learn.

off for a walk...

[Alexander]

Originally posted by larsy
off for a walk...

Red or white sandles? ;)

The " 'cos I say so" that children may use is likely learned from what is, IMO, coersive parenting.

I have never (I hope) coersed, and, as a result, our children have never used (or even understood) that phrase.

Thet have always sort to explain their reasons and ideas.

Great isn't it! :D

a

[Linda in Arizona]

[B]

Awww, come on Linda! Kids need to tell us what to do! And it's fun!



May be it is fun for you. It is not fun for me. I'm not interested in raising little pint size dictators who think that want they want is MORE important than what other people want. I am working to raise my kids to know that what they want is AS important as what other people want.

I don't know how many kids you have or if you have pets, but teaching my kids that their autonomy ends with themselves is necessary. In the real world, the only families I know who are totally non-coercise only have 1 child, and the child has trouble playing with peers.


Ever read John Holt "How children learn" and "how children fail"? There are some examples of how children learn about their environment that are similar to this in those books.



yes, I've read those books.

I am not a NCP, though I am far, far less coersive than most parents. I've read about NCP, attended a conference, and even tried it for a while. I ultimately decided it was not the right path for our family. I believe that young children should be given a great deal of freedom and allowed to come to their own conclusions, but within the bounds of respecting other people (even respecting their parents!) and not hurting animals, not hurting themselves so badly they need to visit the ER, ect.

So if I say that I handle things a certain way and you shout that I'm not giving my kids autonomy, I don't care. We are doing what works well for us and allows our family harmony. My 3 year old is much happier being able to go in her room and dress herself and know that what ever she picks is fine, than needing to be concerned that half the choices are inappropriate. For me, finding ways for us to live happily together is the goal, not living up to someone else's definition of a parenting style.

[kama'aina mama]

I am really resistant to the idea that AP is a luxury. I look at AP as a stich in time. Look at your more mainstream friends with their kids. Do they actually seem to spend less time 'dealing with' their kids than you do? it doesn't seem to me that they do, and that much of the time they do spend is in crisis management mode.

My belief is that every child, indeed every person, requires a particular ammount of time spent with them to feel validated, cared for, etc. We then get to choose, do you want it to be time nurturing, teaching and loving or time correcting, punishing and haranguing? Most everyone manages to get the time they want, the question is whether it is the kind of time they want or not.

I am not sure I am being clear, so I may come back later and take another crack at it.

[Linda in Arizona]

I think it is an interesting point. Although we AP don't necessarly spend MORE time dealing with our kids, we spend the time with them before things become a crises. If someone's life is in crises and they can only deal with the crises of the moment, doing those things that will prevent crises later just can't happen.

For example, I think that many kids mishave to get their parents' attention. Because I have the luxury to be home with my kids, and my DH has the luxury to come home to a house with nice hot meal, clean clothes, etc, we have both have a lot more time to spend with our kids. If there were only one of us or if we both had to work, it would be impossible for our kids to get the quality of time with each of us that they get now. Giving our kids attention never gets to the crises level, but if our situation were different it most likely would, even though our intentions and therories would be the same.

The price for us for this luxury has been moving frequently for my DH's job and not living near extended family, which put different stresses on us and different requirements on our kids.

[m&m]

well,

I find humor, or making fave toys do something works a LOT of the time - it is not mommy or daddy doing it - but the toy?

I'm tired, it is 12:30am so bear with me if this is not making sense :)

for ex: I would say: orange cat (whatever toy is called) wants to stay warm and cosy in the car. do you think that would be ok?

wait for response - usually aggrees, if not...

then, if you really insist the toy stay in the car you can add: "she really does not want to get dropped and dirty, you can either hold her really tight, or let her wait in your carseat for you. which do you choose?"

I also pretend to be Supermom - and fly her around places

another of her faves is her papa pretending to be a giant when she needs her diaper changed (she is not ready to completely potty train yet) - he says in a loud deep voice "fee fi fo fumm... I smell a stinky bumm!"


humor does not always work, but when it does we all laugh and feel great. :)

[larsy]

Paulab52, you wrote:

"I feel like I'm always telling my kids what to do."

It is a pretty new world to them, and they are probably glad to get lots of advice from someone they trust- mom and dad are the best candidates for 'trusted advisor' status. Tentatively offering information, and being willing to listen and to adjust one's theories in the light of new information, makes more sense than to order people around without regard for their feelings and wishes in the matter, in the context of close personal relationships.

"Yes, I know I'm the parent and I know what's best, "

Well, there is the biological fact of being the parent, and then there is the trusted advisor capacity. Human beings are fallible- yep, every single last one of them, even the pope ;) If a person approaches any situation, sure that they know what is best, they are apt to miss the opportunity to improve their theories and to find what is more best. :) And, in the parent-child relationship, they run the risk of causing resentment and anger and desire for revenge and closing off lines of communication and such like.

"but I swear, they don't listen to me anyway. "

And I think this is why kids don't listen to parents. Parents have told them how many times? about this is going to happen or that is going to hurt you, and the kid does whatever it is and finds out that *parent was wrong*. Yet, parent seems to think that 'parent knows best'.

Words matter. How a parent talks to their child about what parent wants to do next in the day or about bringing a cherished toy into a store with them or about brushing their teeth or anything at all, makes a big difference as to what sort of solution will be found to any problem. Solutions that come about through non-coercion do not harm people.

Is it right to coerce/cause coercion in the mind of one's child, or in one's own mind, for that matter? What is the harm that it does? What about telling the truth? A parent might want to think about how to tell the absolute, scrupulous truth. Sprinkling a lot of 'I could be wrong's and 'it seems to me' and 'as far as I know' and 'this is how I think it is' and 'my understanding is' let's everyone know that there is room for more information and that we might never know the truth of any matter, but this is our best theory according to what we know now. And the way is open for anyone involved to throw out their ideas, and ne knowledge can be created.

In some instances, child does know better than parent, especially when it comes to what is going on in hir own mind and body.

Quoting Paulab52 again:

"Take of your PJ's and get dressed so we can go out."

How about asking if anyone wants to go out? Including everyone in making the plan, get ideas about where to go. A parent can outline the things that they want to do, and see what others want to do , and they can work out a plan to get it all done, keeping in mind along the way that preferences change, and the plan could change at any time, as well. Flexibility is a virtue! :)

If a parent has a great theory about why the family should all get dressed and go out to do many interesting things, the kids might very well be willing to get dressed and get on with doing the many interesting things. If they are being forced to get dressed when they don't want to, to do things they don't want to do, I can understand the avoidance tactics. Maybe some kids want to go in their jammies. Maybe some would rather stay home with a babysitter or relative or go to the neighbor's while the rest of the family goes out. Maybe they would rather go out in the afternoon than in the morning. Maybe they'd like to stay home all day and have friends visit. EAch person has their own idea about what they want to do, and to ignore that and push one's own agenda upon unwilling people is wrong, whether it is parent and child or boss and employee or government and citizen--- ok, I'm getting off track ;) TCS is about the relationship between parent and child (though there are other lists that talk about the further implications of TCS theory).

" They aren't doing anything, so having to stop isn't a problem."

This is totally an assumption, and quite likely to be wrong and is anyway disrespectful. Check out the college PhD professor in hir office, feet up on the desk, gazing out the window. Doing nothing? Probably not! I would prefer to err on the side of assuming that any person is doing something (in their mind), whether or not I can tell what that is from observing them. And that whatever they are doing is very important to them, and I will tentatively ask to be excused, and is this a good time to talk about something? Or will you let me know when it is a good time?

"They just sit there and ingore me, or go the opposite direction from the bedroom."

Sometimes when people think they are being ignored, they actually have not been heard because the person is busy concentrating on something else. This happens to me, when I am busy thinking about something, and I have observed it happening in others. Again, assumptions can get in the way of treating people respectfully.

If a parent does a lot of controling of things that are not their business- things that any autonomous person should have control of their own self, like when to get dressed and what to put on, when and what to eat, when to sleep, and so on, then I can see where the victims of the intended control might try to avoid that controller.

" I have to ask them several times to come and get dressed. Then we have the whole clothing issues... "

How to change this situation? I think a parent has to become convinced in their own mind that coercion is not right. It is not about results, about finding a method of dealing with children that 'works' so as to produce an obedient child or any other sort of child product. TCS is a philosophy about how to live together in a family non-coercively. It is about the right way to treat people. About non-coercive ways to resolve conflict. About how people learn.

A parent who wants to change the way they interact with their children so that they are dealing with each other non-coercively, would want to apologize to their children for all the coercion they have so far visited upon them. They could explain that they are trying to change their ways, and this is a process, this learning how to live together and solve problems that arise in a non-coercive way, and enlist the children's help in identifying coercion as it happens and then in finding common preferences when conflict does arise. And they would continue to apologize for using coercion, when they fail to find non-coercive solutions, and talk about the failures and figure out better ways for the next situation.

Respect. "Can you buckle your seat belt, or would you like help?' 'If you get tired of carrying your toy, I'll put it in my pocket so you don't lose it' 'If you take your toy into this store, they might think you didn't pay for it when you leave, because they sell that toy here, and we don't want to have to pay for it again! So maybe it should stay safely in the car? What do you think?' 'How about if we tie a string around the toy and the other end onto your beltloop, so you can't just put it down and forget about it and leave it?'

Food is a huge issue that we all have problems with, I daresay. How can we not pass on our poor food theories? That is an issue for another thread, methinks.

If a parent doesn't trust their young child around streets and traffic, the child might need lots more information. Examining road kill when one runs across it ;) (I'm not saying literally run across it) can be very instructional though only if the child wants to look at it. Taking a plastic bottle and putting water in it (maybe even color it with food coloring) and parent and child can watch as someone drives a car over it and see what happens to it and talking about these things can help a small child understand about the danger. Ask child how they would like parent to help them stay safe, in case they forget when running around or chasing a ball. A fence between yard and street might be a good idea. Child might be happy to play in back when understanding about these dangers. The solutions will be different for every parent-child relationship depending upon their dynamics and experiences, and the solutions will change frequently too, I'll bet. Flexibility and creativity.

HOpe something here helps, for starters. :)

[larsy]

Also, anyone wanting to think about how they talk to their kids and wanting to change it- there was an excellent thread on the TCS list maybe sometime last summer, I think, by the subject name 'changing our language habits' that gave great examples and analysis of the power of language and how we talk to kids. I recommend joining the TCS list and getting the archives, if you are interested in learning more about this.

[mama joy]

Linda in Arizona,
I'm with you. I'm picking my own shoes out, my own meals, my own whatever, because it has to do with me. I don't mind allowing my son to do the same for himself. It seems to me that allowing my son to coerce me teaches him that what he wants is more important than what others want. By not being coercive, I'm teaching him that each individual should have control over their own life. If I do whatever he says, then I am teaching him that he has control over my life. I assume he will transfer that to others also. Little dictator is a good description of that person I imagine him becoming.
Has anyone read Thomas Gordon's Parent Effectiveness Training? I love that book because it talks about working together to meet everyone's needs. Using consensus rather than coercion. That's what I am trying to achieve.

[larsy]

Linda in Arizona wrote:

"I'm not interested in raising little pint size dictators who think that want they want is MORE important than what other people want. I am working to raise my kids to know that what they want is AS important as what other people want. "

Er, right, the dictators who think that what they want is more important than what other people want are, uh, parents! ;)

So, does a child have the same responsibility to meet a stranger's need as to meet their own?

echoing that sentiment is mama joy:

"I'm picking my own shoes out, my own meals, my own whatever, because it has to do with me. I don't mind allowing my son to do the same for himself. "

And if a parent did mind 'allowing' their child to choose their own clothes, food, etc, then...tough, eh? Kids don't have any inherent rights? And if the child chooses food or clothing or ways of spending their time that the parent does not agree with? What then?

The language of 'allowing' exposes where the power lies in the parent-child relationship- with the parent, of course. That is the conventional, society-sanctioned way.

Parents have a unique responsibility in the relationship with their child/ren. They are responsible for their children's existence, in the deepest sense. So it is also their responsibility to help their child/ren to grow and learn about their world. The parents have the access to the world, the ability to access the resources of the world, along with having the experience and knowledge of how to operate in the world, so if the parents are not willing to lay their knowledge and access and experience at the feet of their child in order to help the child get what they want in life, the child is stuck with being dependent upon the good graces of what their parent will 'allow' them.

Kids are not able to go out and get their own red or white or black shoes. If they want the red ones, and the parent will only allow the white ones, the child's autonomy suffers and coercion wins the day.

If it is not right for child to tell parent what color shoes to wear, it is not right for parent to tell child what color shoes to wear.

I agree that children's preferences are every bit as important as the parent's preferences. Finding common preferences is a great conflict resolution skill that helps each person involved get their needs respected and met. But there are some things that the decision is really up to the child and a parent should stay out of, beyond offering advice if it is wanted. What goes on or in a person's body, and what is done to one's body, is all morally within that person's right to say. No matter what their age.

[mama joy]

Larsy
Maybe you misunderstood me, but I don't interfere with my son's choices for himself. He just doesn't make decisions for me.

[simonee]

Thanks everybody, for turning this into such an interesting discussion. When I started the thread, my concerns were pretty much what Mama Joy and Linda in AZ have been writing. However, as Larsy's and Alexander's responses kept coming in, I have really started to reconsider these concerns.

I think that my child knows I'm different from other people (I'd sure hope so ;) ). When she "dictates" what shoes she wants me to wear, that doesn't mean she'll do that with other people, too. Also, she has only made "comments" about my shoes a few times. It's not an everyday thing. I know she's influenced my shoe choice MUCH less often than the other way around! If she chooses her own shoes five times a week, because that's the only times she cares, the other two days she just lives with my choice. I get to choose my own shoes about 29 times a month, and I don't feel that I'm raising a dictator if I acknowledge her wishes that one other time.

Even then, she's not "making my decisions." She tells me what she wants, and I honor and respect that. If it freezes, I'm not going to "let her decide" that I should go barefoot. I'd try to explain to her why that's not an option, and I'm pretty sure we'd arrive at an agreement. And yes, if necessary I'd give her a choice between my red and black shoes, ignoring the strappy sandals for that day.

Hey, if I wear the very-unmatching shoes, at least people will have something else to look at while we're bf in public! :p

[m&m]

just want to add my comments to the mix :)

After taking child development classes for several years, I learned that children go through stages - some regardless of parenting styles.

For example tantrums due to frustrations at 18months to 5 yrs
tantrums due to control issues from 2-4 years
calling everything mine or ownership issues from 3-7 years
privacy issues from 5-19 years
etc.

Knowing this, I know that my style of parenting will not determine IF tantrums happen, but how they get resolved. :) That is what is important after all.

And if you have a bad day and get upset and raise your voice, then apologize and that in itself is also a learning example for your child.

I believe in teaching my children respect, but they due must be respected. :) respect does not mean spoil -

[Heavenly]

Well I practice AP but not TCS (a little too lax for my liking!) and I do not think it's a luxury. I am a SAHM, yes, but we do not have a high income at all. My husband makes 31000 a year and we have a mortgage and two vehicles. You do the math! :) AP is the easier way to parent in the long run I think, at least if you TRULY want whats best for your children. How can anyone truly think spanking and yelling is best for their children? Sure it's a knee-jerk reaction (emphasis on the the jerk) but it isn't best. How does it take more time to hug your child and say "I realize you really wanted that toy but someome else is playing with it right now. Why don't we find you something just as nice to play with?" That is easier IMO than smacking the kid for grabbing a toy. In the long run detachment parenting costs you more time as your kids end up with discipline problems and many other problems. So you end up having to take time off work to go to teacher's conferences and you can't get the house clean because the kids are little hellions who won't listen to you. Nope AP isn't a luxury, I think the other is a luxury - the luxury of sounding off and acting like a child yourself whenever you feel like it. It's time to grow up people!

[Linda in Arizona]

Heavenly, I love your post! I, too, think that in the long run it is much easier this way. I think it is sort of funny (and sort of sad) when people tell me I can "get away" with postive discipline because my kids are so "easy." It is much easier to parent kids who know they are unconditionally loved and who feel good about themselves.

[sugarmama]

larsy,
is it possible to get the archives without being on the TCS list? or can i access them from the babies toddlers list that i am on? i didn't like sorting through the many messages of the TCS list and am reluctant to sign up again.
thanks,
sugar

[Linda in Arizona]

If you are happy having your child tell you what to wear and that is what feels right to you, then you should do so.

I have 2 kids, so if I let them decide what other people got to wear, they could argue about what I wear and agrue about what they other one wears. This would just be a silly waste of time, add a great deal of stress to our days, and we would most likely never be able to leave the house again. :) So we all pick out our own clothes.

On things that affect all of us (to go to park or stay home, which board game to play, what book to read next), we talk about it and come to an agreement. Considering that when my kids have a conflict between themselves, they can usually talk it out and figure out something that works for both of them, you'll have to excuse me if I think that I'm doing is working just fine.

[sugarmama]

Heavenly,
it's funny, i agree with all you said except for paranthetically when you said TCS was "too lax". i just wanted to defend TCS parents. they are generally respectful and always there with their children to advise and help their children to get what they want......i have been reading about this recently.....it seems that TCS often gets confused with "laissez-faire" parenting, and that is really not the case. do you feel that children need to be coerced in order for their parents to be truly present?
curious,
sugarmama

[simonee]

Thanks Linda,

I truly believe you're doing a great job. Your kids reaching an agreement on video vs. PBS sounded excellent.

I think agreements are what we all strive for in our homes - agreements on my shoe color, dd's diaper change, and where we go at what time.

I just really love input. I love it from dd when I'm putting on shoes, and from all those other mamas and daddies when I read or write on these boards!

Simone

[Alexander]

Originally posted by Paulab52
Larsy or anyone, can you help me out....
snip
please don't slam me. I'm truely interested in your opinion. I've read the website, but I'm confused.
TIA

No-one is going to slam you. This is all about "non-coersion"!!!;)

But anyway. How old are your kids? How many of them. Who is the worst, and what really pisses you off?
Good examples though. I can get back to you when I have more details.

Can you give more examples? That would give more meat to give a flavor in the answers :)

a

[Alexander]

Ok. I have an admission to make!

Until I met larcy (as suzan), I had never heard of TCS either! In fact, I have not even checked past the first page on their site!

The reason for this is that is that larsy's view on these boards so intersects with mine (though the orogine is different) that I take it as read that I'll intersect with most of www.tcs.ac/


The ax I grind is for a simple humanity and the defence of a child's voice and world view that is little understood, because we as adults take our own W/V so much for granted.

Having admitted all that, :o I will always try to back up my "fly by the seat of my pants" style parenting with logic and fairness.

Fairness.

That concept turns out to be a peculiarity of English culture that is still found and practiced in counties that have found their own democratic roots in English common law.

It's a rare and precious thing, easily lost it seems to me, and in a way, we have a duty both as parents and as fellow humans to those yet unborne, to encourage a cradle able to hold all that is best about humanity such that they can move beyond us, and the mayhem we find in the world.

Sorry. :o I find myself explaining what drives me instead of answering the post. Now I'm out of time and have to put the babe to bed and get back to work!!!

I'll catch this thread later though.

a

[paula_bear]

I think that parents in "lower" socio-economic strata may be less likely to come across AP and TCS information. For example, I saw my first issue of Mothering in the health food store. With my first child, I read more mainstream magazines and those formula-sponsored rags in the OB/GYN waiting room. So unless one is fortunate enough to have had a gentle upbringing, one may not even consider the principles of AP and TCS. However, OTOH, in many developing countries, breastfeeding, feeding-on-cue and cosleeping are the norm and children are treated gently and valued very highly. I think a mother's love is universal, but that is not to say that societal norms don't "mess with it."

As far as putting these principles into action goes, I sometimes agree that stress is a big factor. Despite unbelievable financial pressures since the birth of my daughter, I have tried my best to put AP into practice. At times I envision myself parenting much better, if only all the other problems would just vanish! I guess it all comes down to 1) AWARENESS and 2) the decision to make an honest effort to put that awareness into action.

Hopefully I haven't strayed TOO far off the topic here.

[larsy]

I don't think of TCS as a luxury, but as a necessity. Certainly, survival is a priority, but even as we are hauling water and picking berries and grinding the corn, we are interacting with our children and how we interact is the issue. We are not living on a tribal level, where survival has been linked to strict tradition. We are living in a society where problems are solved by creativity. Being able to think clearly and learn are essential. Coercion gets in the way of thinking clearly and learning, so non-coercive relationships are optimal at this point in our evolution, imo.

Check out the movie 'It's a Beautiful Life' - I'm pretty sure that is the name of it, an Italian film about a guy and his son in a WWII concentration camp, and how this guy keeps his kid safe, using great creativity. It's a great flick, thought provoking. Talk about optimism in the face of difficult life situations!

Erika wrote:

"From this experience I wonder whether authoritarian/punitive parenting is really a function of time and stress rather than attitude toward children."

Oh, no, I think it is first and foremost an *attitude* or a paradigm, one's vision of the world and how best to get what one wants in the world. When a person approaches life from a TCS point of view (I'll talk about TCS, as I don't think that AP is a coherent philosophy that excludes authoritarian beliefs), the problems of time and stress are assumed to have a solution- not that figuring out the solution is easy, but it is out there and can be found. I think the TCS paradigm opens a person to a larger pool of solutions.

"Certainly there is a component of learned behavior – we tend to parent the way we were parented unless we make an effort to change. But is it possible to AP/TCS if you are a single parent working two minimum wage jobs to make ends meet – or two parents in the same situation – or a homeless mom trying to figure out how to get shelter and food for her family? Don’t AP and TCS take a certain amount of creativity and time? "

Yes. In the midst of the time restraints and the frustrations and worries, a parent can become aware of the elements fo the situations that are causing problems- maybe, just little ones- and finding solutions for those problems opens the way to finding solutions to larger ones.

If a single parent is working two jobs, they can still be on their child's side in life. They can work together to figure out how they can get what they want, and help each other. If child doesn't like their childcare arrangements, others can be researched and a better situation found. The more people they can talk to and get ideas from on how to solve problems, the better. The single parent can take hirself seriously, and hir child/ren. They can define their wants and needs, and lay out their resources of time and money and earning power and people available to help, and keep looking for common preferences. If they don't like the way their life is right now, they can identify the things they want to change, and keep working on finding ways to change those things. I've heard it said that by changing just one little thing, great things can happen.

[larsy]

Eek, ack, er... I'd just like to say a word about privacy. Part of TCS is taking people's privacy seriously. When people post personal details about their children to a public list that thousands of people (at least) have access to, it is a gross violation of the children's privacy. It is one thing for a parent to post anything they want about their own self- they have the right to do so. But to post such details that a child would be able to recognize their self if they read it (and it is a distinct possibility that archived posts would be available to anyone including the children in the future) and feel embarrassed and violated and no small amount of coercion- I see that as a violation of privacy as well as contributing to the objectification of children in parent's minds.

I realize this is not a mainstream view, that parents are used to talking about children like possessions, without regards to the child's right to privacy, but this is the wrong thing to do. Isn't there something in the posting guidelines or mission statement or whatever they call it for this website, about not posting information that violates people's privacy? I see that guideline being violated constantly on this board.

So, Alexander, when you ask for more details, I must protest. It is not necessary to discuss any particular child's life on a public board. I urge posters here to think about writing hypothetically, and not embarrassing their children. Even if a kid says, yeah, sure, you can write about that, they might change their mind about that in a minute or a day or a year, and there it will be.

Part of taking children seriously is not violating their privacy on a public board. (did I mention that already?)

[larsy]

sugarmama,

You could subscribe to the TCS and set yourself to nomail so that you don't get the daily posts- or you could just get a digest. I think you could still access the archives even if you are set nomail (I could be wrong about that, but you could try it and see!)

[erika]

Thank you all for your responses!

It has been very helpful to me to read the different opinions on this issue. Besides bringing this up as a discussion/debate topic, I also had a specific agenda here - trying to figure out what happened to ME and why I melted down under pressure.

I think several points that have been made were particularly relevant to my situation - 1) I realize now that I don't deal with stress well, and 2) it is an attitude problem.

It was hard for me to figure this out because AP was so easy when dd was young even though we were under incredible stress - living on $10,000/year. So why now that we are homeowners living a comfortable existence did I melt down? At first I attributed it to the stress of feeling very ill, etc, but now I think that's where attitude came in.. AP was easy for me while dd was under 3, because I never believed it possible for children that age to "misbehave" - I didn't consider tantrum-type behavior or other baby/toddler stuff "misbehavior" and thus I never felt the need to resort to punishment. But I think my view of her changed once she could legitimately challenge my agenda.

But there is still one detail that links this stuff to middle class existence in my mind: we had never owned a car before, but after the new baby arrived, I was really breaking under the strain of getting the older child to walk to doctor's appointments, grocery stores, or even home from friend's houses, at a pace that exceeded .5 mile/hour. Quite honestly, all of the ugly moments I had were about getting her to walk somewhere we needed to go (such as an appointment, or home for supper, or to buy food so there would actually be some when we got home) when she didn't feel like going (yes, coercion). I thought if we had been hunter/gatherers she could have straggled behind and then run to catch up when she was ready, but with modern roads etc it just wasn't a safe option. So we got a car and my life became magically easier in many regards. I would argue that it's a lot easier to run errands or get to appointments without coercion using a car than it is to do it all on foot....

or do you think I'm setting up a straw person here?

[pie]

We have been cooped up for days as every time I tell DS it's time for our walk or time to go to the beach, park etc. he says 'no' and runs off. Later he'll come up and say 'to beets' which means let's go to the beach I'll say 'Great! Let's get you all dressed and ready to go.' Well, then he tells me no again. I really like to get out and so does he but he hates to get dressed. Once we are out the door he's fine but the fits he has when I am trying to help him get ready are not worth it almost. I don't want to force him to go but on the other hand he needs some encouragement to get going... I know this is a small problem and will pass wtime but I don't really know how to handle getting ready to go somewhere w out totally overpowering him. Any advice? I let him choose to stay in when I can but we do have to leave the house from time to time!

[larsy]

Erika, you have put your finger on what I think is a weak point of AP. Once the baby grows up and demonstrates that they have their own agenda, what happens to meeting children's needs? Coercion usually rules the day. TCS seemed like a natural extension, the theory to help with that problem of AP, when I first ran across it. It fills in the blanks.

Gosh, I'd like to say more, but havoc is breaking around me.

[marymom]

larcy, what do you mean we arent living on a tribal level? Who is WE, us here? well ok maybe wee arent but...
It is my opinion that tribal survival is exactly how in fact many americans live, maybe not the majority, certainly not us as we sit typing on our computers, but many are- and for them....AP or TCS would be a luxury, not neccessareily bourne of economics but if socioeconomics indicate general stresss and education levels which we know they do- the rest figures in...so ladies, I must say I adamently believe that there are many practically impovershed families who practice AP and TCS(altho none with 2 vehicles and a mortgage as someone above mentioned would qualify in my humble opinion as being econimically challenged) but MOST of them are FAr far far from the majority and for the most part it is a luxury ,a blessing to be able to parent like this, and I am greatful for the luxury- and I will look upon my parenting values AS luxuries that I may be able to share with others not so lucky by lovingly offering examples and most of all by doing what I do around those who may not do the same that they may see it and see its benifets because as you have all pointed out it is much more economical in the long run anyways monitarily,time wise etc etc

[Mommy22B]

We are going through the exact thing with our dd. How old is yours? Just thepast few days she will have a fit when we try to dress her. She loves going out but hates the getting ready.
She has been sick so we have mostly been letting her stay home. If we absolutely have to go out we will try to make the dressing quick fun and painless. i am hoping this passes soon!
Beth

[pie]

Exactly. Jackson is 2.5 and was sick last week and is also cutting those last few molars. It is awful! I mean, he has much happier days when we go outside a lot. We have both been pretty much not ourselves. I am taking the oppurtunity to wrestle and play with dough and paints and such but the thing is that we need fresh air and I do not want to MAKE him get dressed. I want to help him. It's different now that he's older: he is not easily distracted. Any of you more experienced moms have suggestions?

[pie]

Treelove, you are a love. I never thought to surprise him! I bet that would really help. Here I am trying to be all respectful when it is his developmental nature at this point to oppose me and make decisions. Not that I still can't be respectful, I guess I just need to be more playful and think on his level. Ooh, we have LLL party at ten...I can't wait to try it. Though I've tried the sneaky approach to baths and that doesn't help...any advice there?:D

[Linda in Arizona]

the car thing...

There have been times that I have been very coersive re: car seats and holding hands in parking lots.

[peacemama]

I have to admit that while those really important safety issues tend to lead to what some here call "coersion" (though I don't agree with the term), I have tried the alternative. For example, dd doesn't want to hold my hand in a parking lot (this happens often). If I take her over to a safe spot, get down on her level, and say something like this:

Me: Sweetie, do you see all these cars driving around?

DD: Yes.

Me: What do you think might happen if you ran ahead of me with all these cars moving around?

DD: Maybe I could get hurt.

Me: What do you think we should do to stay safe?

DD: (proudly) Hold Mommy's hand!

Me: What a good idea! Let's hold hands so we stay safe.

I know, I know, it sounds like I made this up, but it really does work that well. Of course, having a verbal child makes a big difference - I don't know what I'd do with an 18 month old other than just carry her!

Of course, I don't always think to do this, and if I'm rushed, I'm even less likely to use this approach. The knee-jerk reaction is to just give the rule and grab the hand, even if she complains. But I've been doing it more and more, and it's becoming more of a natural response, because it's self-reinforcing. Not only does it work, but we both feel better because we've had a positive interaction rather than a negative one, she's proud of herself for coming up with a solution and feels good that I treated her so respectfully.

In my neverending quest for peace in my life (hence the name ;)), I really try to get to the end of each day feeling like dd and I had mostly positive interactions. Doing things this way really helps keep the peace. It takes a little extra time, but you know what? Time isn't nearly as important as we all think!

[peacemama]

Ever try using humor to get him dressed? When dd doesn't want to put on her coat, I'll sometimes say, okay, I'm going to put on my coat, and then very seriously try to put on HER coat and act all confused about why it doesn't fit. (Can you picture this? Do I look like the world's biggest idiot? Then you're picturing it correctly! :p ) She'll usually say, "No, Mommy, that's MY coat!!!" and then all I have to do is laugh, act sheepish, put on my own and then she puts on hers. Hey, she may grow up thinking mom's got a low I.Q. but at least we get out of the house :p

[Alexander]

Originally posted by larsy


Eek, ack, er... I'd just like to say a word about privacy.
such details that a child would be able to recognize their self if they read it (and it is a distinct possibility that archived posts would be available to anyone including the children in the future) and feel embarrassed and violated and no small amount of coercion-


So, Alexander, when you ask for more details, I must protest.

larcy, the more you post, the more I love it. :) So I will start to think about a mechanism to prevent this type of problem.

And your notification about this subject comes not a moment too soon. Other members on this board have PMed me about related subjects, and I have requested permision to some to allow me to use the resulting interactions asseeds for threads.

So for these, and all future posts, I will be editing in a manor that will present the private discussions in an anonomous "Doe" format.

If I err, please let me know so that I may make the appropriate edits.

Thanks again.

a

[Paulab52]

Thanks everyone for your replies. Larsey, you've given me a lot to think about. I've been trying to be concious of the things I say to the kids. A lot of what you say makes sense, but in a way I think it's crazy because my kids are under 5. How much of "reasoning" do they understand?

I'm just so frustrated at myself right now. Yesterday was a COMPLETE failure. If anyone was to get Worse Mother of the Year award, it would go to me for my behavior yesterday.

I look forward to many more of your TCS posts. I'll keep posting about situtations and how different things can be avoided.

Thanks again everyone.

[larsy]

How about wearing comfortable clothes 'round the clock, that can go out or stay in? i'm thinking of cotton knits, sweat clothes, stuff like that.

It seems likely to me that there is something about 'telling' a child that it is time to do this or that, that is offensive/disrespectful to the child. Is this how a parent would present the idea of going out to a fun place to an adult friend? A person of any age might agree to going somewhere, and change their mind about it as the time to go gets closer and they realize that they are more interested in continuing what they are doing, or they just don't want to go, or whatever.

A parent can ask the child/ren for ideas of what they would like to do now/today, and engage in everyone throwing out ideas, considering them until they hit upon one that everyone is happy with, and then do it. If a parent offers an idea tentatively- ' I feel like going to the beach today, what do you feel like doing?'- there is room for child/ren to offer their ideas. Some days, ime, common preferences are easy to come by; other days, it can take awhile or creativity can be lacking and it seems impossible. At those times, it is better for parent to back off and help child get what they want, and to keep thinking and exploring to find the common preference. It is parent's responsibility to back off at these times, because the parent is responsible for the situation in the first place. parent brought child into existence, and so is bound to help child to learn and grow and get what they want in life.

Likewise, giving a child space in which to decide when they want to change clothes and what clothes to change into, supports their autonomy and bolsters the parent's position as trusted advisor, ready and willing to help child. IME, little kids don't need daily bathing (except maybe for some parts of them, which they might consent to when given the space and information- some of which they might need to experience in order to understand about, just like a lot of adults) or even clothes changing (when clothes get trashed, children are often willing to change- some insist upon it!- but parent might need to be willing to re-examine their theories that a food spill or a dirty face is grounds for coercion).

Every person has the right of consent about what goes in and on their body and what is done to their body. This is what makes it right for children to tell anyone a resounding 'no' if they don't want to be touched in any way, be it a parent, sibling, doctor, pedophile. Empower children to understand and claim their rightful autonomy. That probably means figuring out different ways of relating to a child, then the conventional parenting-expert route.

HOpe something here helps :) Best wishes!

[larsy]

Don't mistake lack of experience and information and knowledge for lack of the ability to reason! Coercion will confuse a person so that they become irrational- look at any adult! we all have our areas of irrational confusion, and I trace it back to coercion around these areas- but I think that human beings start out rational, though needing help to negotiate the world and learn about it.

Also, take yourself seriously! Take care of and be kind and respectful to yourself, too. You have a lot of company in feeling like a failure and having bad days. I joined you there a couple of days ago! Apologize and go on, asking the kids for help in identifying coercion and in finding solutions. We all fail at finding common preferences, at avoiding coercion, at opening our minds and having ideas. *This does not mean that we are failures!* We each have a lot of strong points, and we are changing our thinking and learning new skills. Of course we are going to make mistakes along the way! That is how we learn.

It took me months to even be able to broach the subject of coercion with my family. I really had to absorb and learn about it on my own. I had to deal with my own anger at how I had been treated as a child- and I did not have a horrible childhood, but a 'normally' coercive one. It took years before I felt like I understood much about TCS at all, and longer to be able to articulate the theory. It is an exciting, frustrating, painful, exhilirating, worthwhile, life-long process. :)

[pie]

Hi Larsy, I've read a lot of your posts with great interest.I agree with you that making a giant issue out of a bath or getting dressed id not effective parenting. My only question is how do I include my ds, who not only has limited verbal skilss stil at 28 mos. but also completely and totally ignores me when I try to talk to him half the time, in real decision making? I would love to, and try the would you like pancakes or toast, a bath or a wiping, markers or sandplay, what would you like to do approach but usually he doesn't say anything at all! How does your method of parenting apply to toddlers who are still such little babies yet also big boys and girls? It's like he's fighting to stay a baby and fighting to grow up. I'll let him be a baby or grow up, or both, I love everything about him, I just don't understand how to deal with him. He is not very rational by my standards at this point in time. Additionally, I can really feel him growing a little more detatched in the past month or so and I'm wondering ig this is a normal part of growing away from your mom to gain independence. One more thing, he gets so mad whenever I try to read, make up stories for or especially sing to him and always has. He lets me tell him the names of things in his books and what they are doing, but not read. It makes me so sad because I always looked so forward to that part of mothering. I mean, I know it's his deal and it doesn't matter, it just bothers me. Anyone else have a baby who doesn't want to be sung and read too? thanks.

[Lucy]

Larsy, I am curious about this too. Do you mean to say that a child should not even be told he needs to brush his teeth, or wash his hands after going potty? This seems extreme to me. I am all for giving dd choices, within a certain framework though. For instance, yes she dresses herself, picks completely inappropriate things, but who cares, right? I mean the other day she wore underwear as a hat lol! Anyway, she just came out from the bathroom, where I knew she didn't wash her hands, and she told me she didn't want to. Now we learned abt germs, did some fun handwashing experiment s in the past, where we learned how hard it is to get germs off, ect, so she knows intellectually the importance of washing hands. However she would not do it untill I told her, "Yes yoiu need to do that now"

Brushing teeth at night is the same thing. She doesn't like it at all. Her choice would be not to do it. Isn't it my responsibility to see that these basic standards of care are being met?

Just curious Larsy. Trying to understand...

Mamapie, st I think its ok to just go without getting "ready" Just take the clothes in the car, and get dressed when you get where you are going, or just go as he is. It seems like he wants to go, he just doesn't want to do the dressing ect.

[pie]

Lucy, funny you say that. We brought the clothes to the park the other day (well, shirt and shoes) but ds, let me expain, is strong as a bull, weighs in at 36 ibs at 2.5 yrs and didn't want his shoes and shirt on...he wanted to play right now!!! I almost dropped him on his head that day. I don't want to "beat" him into submission but want to teach him how rewarding a little cooporation can be.:confused:

[Lucy]

Mamapie, that is so funny that you had just tried that. I know exactly what you mean. St it feels like dd makes absolutely no concessions, its either her way or the highway!

[Jish]

Lucy,
When you say that the child intellectually knows the importance of hand washing I think that you are giving them too much credit. I too find myself assuming that my three and a half year old ds is on a higher level than he is, and expecting more from him than he is developmentally ready to handle. Things like germs are concept, not a tactile reality that they can touch, and most toddlers and preschoolers are not ready for the abstract. The whole idea that we should give our children a choice in things like personal hygene really bothers me. It is our job to raise our children to be responsible caring adults, and how responsible and caring is it to spread fecal contamination and who knows what other germs and illness to others, including the elderly and those with health issues.

Although they may be the center of our universe, our children are not the center of the universe to anyone else. Giving them too many choices or giving choices where choices are not due creates children who are selfish and self-centered. These children have a very hard time adjusting to life in the real world with others. After all, the school districts and the business world are not going to cater to our children's wants and whims. Years of working with children in a variety of settings has taught me this, and I work hard to ensure that my sons thrive as individuals, but who respect the needs and rights of those around them.

Lucy, this really isn't directed to you, so please, don't take it personally, but I saw the word "intellectually" and connected it with my preschooler and had to laugh.

Beth

[Jish]

Linda,

Thank goodness you posted. I was beginning to think I was the only one here who didn't let my children run my family.

Beth

[larsy]

Lucy wrote:

"St it feels like dd makes absolutely no concessions, its either her way or the highway!"

I suspect that this is the way it is for kids- parent's way or no way at all. And the kids don't have a choice, dependent as they are on parents for shelter and food and love and life.

Why can't a kid play at a park without shoes and shirt? I see this all the time. If child feels cold or wants protection for feet if walking on stones or whatever hurts, parent has the clothes for hir to put on.

As lovely as working together towards mutual ends can be, cooperation cannot be forced (sorry if I'm stating the obvious ;) ). Figuring out what each person wants, and finding a way for both/all to get that, helps everyone feel respected and valued and imo will make each problem-solving situation more likely to be a cooperative experience. People will want to participate, when they know that their wants/needs are going to be considered on an equal footing as everyone else's, regardless of age or power.

Learning to act in one's own best interest is a powerful motivating factor in life, and the best interests in which to act, imo. A person must see the sense of washing hands and brushing teeth. It is not necessarily true that if a person does not wash their hands after using the toilet or brush their teeth every time they eat, they will suffer dire consequences. Parents likely follow these routines, and talk about why they do so with their children as they grow. Children like to imitate, and so practice doing these things in their own way, in their own time. By forcing the issue, I think a parent does more harm than good. It is possible to convince a child that washing hands at appropriate times and brushing teeth are in their own best self interest, and to do so non-coercively.

If a child doesn't want to wash their hands, and the parent is totally grossed out by this, this is the parent's problem, not the child's. A parent can recognize this, and work on improving their theories- but in the meantime, they might be able to find some fun involvement with water and soap in the kitchen or the back yard that would satisfy the parent and child.

The teeth thing- believe me, I've had huge issues with this. In researching, I've come upon a lot of information about stuff like decay in baby teeth not needing to be treated necessarily, but watched in combination with as much cleaning as possible and offering such foods as actually help clean teeth and adjust the PH balance of the mouth to discourage cavity formation (like cheddar cheese) and chew sugarless gum and swish out a mouth with water. It seems that it is the luck of the draw, to a large extent; some people can eat lots of sugar and hardly clean their teeth and still not get cavities, whereas others can clean their teeth scrupulously and avoid sugar and still get cavities.

Lucy again:" However she would not do it untill I told her, "Yes yoiu need to do that now" "

So the message is, even though you don't want to, you have to anyhow... because why? Because children have to learn that there are things they have to do whether they want to or not? I think we are agreed that it is a good idea to wash at certain times, but how to convince a child and respect their autonomy? What if a parent responds to a child who doesn't want to do something, "I think you are making a mistake. There are good reasons for doing X. Do you want to know what they are?" "It is your body and it is up to you how you take care of it. Do you want to take the chance of transferring bathroom germs to your mouth and maybe getting sick? Or to someone else?" and launch into a story about Typhoid Mary ;) Child might listen to this from parent, if they are accustomed to getting good information from parent, and be persuaded. Or they might just want to go do what they want to do and be left alone. Shouldn't that be respected? If a child is forced, and builds up resentment and faulty theories, arent' they likely to not wash/brush at times when they can get away with that? When they do avoid doing what parent wants them to do, they are not getting the benefit of the washing/brushing, just as they don't get the benefit if they decide on their own not to do it, on occasion, and that is respected. If not coerced, they can continue to learn and think about it, and are likely to reach a place where they are glad to do the washing/brushing because it make sense to them. They will not be 40 yr old adults, forcing their selves to wash/brush with a bad feeling in their minds; they will feel good about taking good care of their selves.

Does this make sense?

[pie]

First, jbcmom, I love what you said about children being the center of the universe. My sil's son beats and bites the holy hell out of my son, who is a year younger than her son's 3.5. Anyway, she really doesn't tell him not to hurt other kids. She just goes, oh baby, that's not nice. I am a lot stronger in my objections to my son being violent with other kids, although he hits me when he wants me to stop singing or talking and I'm a big softie about that. As a result, ds really is quite gentle, especially to samller children. Anyway, one day I was tellimg my sil that some people think that their children are more vital to the world than anyone else's and that only your world revolves around your child and you can't expect your neighbor's to. She said,"Oh, I disagree. My baby is the most important thing in the world and the whole world does revolve around him." I was like,"Oh, to you?" And she, in all seriousness, said,"No. I firmly believe he is more importamt than everyone. I don't need to worry about anyone else." I thought that was a really selfish and dangerous attitude.

Larsy, I am beginning to get the concept of non-coersion, however I find the extreme to which you believe in it a little impractical. That is not a dig at you, I am just letting you know how far my understanding of your views goes. I will reiterate that I want to find a way not to force Jackson to do things, but sometimes we have somewhere to go and he has a poopy diaper and no other clothes on and I have to get him dressed. Period. He is not quite up to understanding the reason, and I wish I could just let him run totally wild, and I do AMAP. However, sometimes he, for example, picked up a big dog turd and then turns around and wants another cracker. Guess what? I HAVE to wash his hands. I have no idea how you practically handle situations where it is impossible to cater more to your child's autonomy than to the reality of the situation. How do I change his clothes or wash his hands without stepping on his toes? Because as an adult, there will eventually be situations requiring compromise and I don't want him to remember me overpowering him and thus be afraid of or resentful toward things that life simply requires. I deeply appreciate anyone and everyone's input because I think the situation is bigger than it looks. I mean, a friend said she thinks he is oppositional! To me that is a handy pop psychology catch all term, but he does not like to do anything I need him to do. He is only 2.5, and that comes w the territory but I want to smooth out the situation as it is serious to us both.

[Lucy]

jbcjmom, I wasn't advocating what you were talking abt at all. I also agree with you that things like handwashing aren't issues up for discussion. When I said dd knew intellectually, what I meant was that we spent a while learning abt germs while studying Madeline. We coated our hands in vaseline, and sprinkled pepper on them, and then tried to wash it all off. It was hard to get off, which led to a discussion abt how we must wash hands properly ect. , germs like to stick to us.

Anyway, Larcy when I said its her way or the highway st, I was commisserating with mamapie. And no, its not my way or the highway in this household. Some issues are health and safety related. I should have added, we were fixing food at the time, hands needed to be washed. Shoes at a playground are necessary. Atleast where I live, there may be glass or st . There are things we do to keep our kids safe. Abt the teeth, I think it would be more traumatic for her to undergo a dental procedure than to simply brush her teeth once or twice a day with pretty pink toothpaste and a musical toothbrush!

I am going to bow out here, bc I want this thread to be helpful for mampie, I don't want to sidetrack it. I just wanted to respond.

[pie]

Hey, Lucy, come back! You aren't sidetracking a thing. I learn best when I hear lots of different viewpoints and I liked what you said.:)

[Lucy]

Thanks mamapie, you're so sweet! I was afraid I was distracting from your original ?.

[grisletine]

hello im new to this forum and find that tcs and all its implications fall directly in line with my present beliefs. where can i get this book? amazon doesnt even have it!

[Jish]

Lucy, I new you were going to take that too personally. None of my post other than the use of the word "intellectually" was directed at you. I really liked your idea of vaseline and pepper. If I ever run into hand washing issues with my second son, I'm going to try that.

Here is my problem with this whole TCS theory of child rearing. I am all for a gentle approach to discipline (meaning: to teach, not to punish) and practice this with my sons. I offer choices and try to give explanations for my decisions and actions as best I can considering their age. From what I can see, TCS fails to take into consideration that children are not simply small adults. Their bodies are smaller, their brains are different, they lack the experience and skills that we as adults have gained (yes, by experience, I realize that), but when we became parents our job became to protect, nurture, love, teach , guide and discipline our children. I can not imagine what my life had been like if I'd had basically no rules growing up, if I had been the one to make all my decisions as a toddler. Our children look to us for guidance and wisdom. My son hates to wear his coat, but where we live it becomes a necessity. I would be negligent if I let him run around outside in shorts, a tee shirt and no shoes as our neighbors let their boys (ages 6 and 8) do. These boys have been raised with somewhat of the TCS attitude and they have turned into total brats. Everyone in the neighbor groans when they come outside. The parents are now trying to regain control of their household and are paying a heavy price for their earlier actions.

Anyone who has taken a Psych 101 class knows that children are different than adults. They don't think the same, they don't have the same ability to reason, and they are unable to see things from another's perspective. I worry about these kids who have been the center of the universe when the join the real world whether it be in school, or in the working world. The rest of the world has rules that must be abided by, there is often no room for compromise. I may be running late, but I still have to stop for that red light because if I run it my actions impact others. The same goes for the child who doesn't want to wash his hands after he goes to the bathroom, I use this again for an example. Children carry germs and hand washing not only protects them, but those around them, not just from feces or urine, but from the saliva, snot, etc that they are carrying. After they touch that door handle they leave their germs for every person who follows. This means the frail 85 year old woman, and the two year old with a heart condition. I use this example because it is personal. My God daughter has a heart condition and a couple of other small problems and germs and common illnesses are an issue for them. How are you going to teach a child to love and respect others when, to them, they are the only person in the world who matters?

Am I the only one with a time out chair in my house? When my oldest son hits my younger son, there is no discussion. That is wrong and there are consequences to his action. It is up to me to teach him that it is wrong to hit, not for him to eventually figure out on his own. If your child bites another child on the playground, what are the consequences? Do you discuss it? No three year old on the planet is going to say "yeah, Mom, you were right. I shouldn't have bitten that child, even though he took the shovel I was playing with. It was wrong. I'll apologize and never do it again." Children act on impulse, not logic. All the child is thinking is "That was mine and he took it!" Children react like that because they aren't developed enough, and don't have the faculties to deal with the world as adults do.

Is anyone else with me in thinking that it is our responsibility to raise our children with love, respect and RULES???

Beth

[Tigerchild]

On the one hand, I firmly believe in giving a child as much autonomy as is appropriate, since it would drive me absolutely crazy if I had to make ALL the decisions for anyone all the time! Yuck!

But on the other, I also believe it's valuable for children to learn very early on that we all have to make concessions sometimes. I don't know about the rest of you, but I don't live in a society where my kids will be able to do whatever they want whenever they want in a safe manner. And there are certain pet peeves of mine (which I fully recognize as being 'my problem') that I do not tolerate, in order to protect and preserve *my* integrity.

This being the case, IMO there are just going to be certain times that allowing the child to lead the way is not going to be possible. I think that for most people, this tends to revolve around health and safety issues--but that many of us have certain things that WE need as well, that are less negotiable than others.

For example, maybe Mamapie, for her own mental health and sanity, really NEEDS to get out of the house from time to time. I think it would be a good idea to plan this outing around something her son enjoys, plan for a couple hours preparation time, and offer him as many choices as possible. (Would you like to wear the red shirt, or the blue shirt? Would you like to wear your sneakers or your boots? Should we put cheese or peanut butter crackers in our snack pack? Should we use our sling, or the stroller?) But occasionally allowing him a tantrum and assisting him with getting dressed is not, IMO, tantamount to child abuse. And if mom needs to get out, sometimes she should be allowed to, try to make things as painless as possible, and if the child has a history of protesting during the process but being fine afterwards, then I don't think she should feel bad about meeting her needs occasionally as well. Maybe I'm more callous than some of you, but to be honest, *temper* tantrums don't bug me very much, especially if they're just 'blowing off steam' tantrums. Even I need to 'vent' sometimes before I have to do something I don't like.

This may seem like a topsy-turvy suggestion, but maybe you could try giving your son a bath *before* you go out, Mamapie? You could start from scratch then...at least he'd already be undressed. Does he dress himself? Sometimes that can help a lot. It might be helpful to get him some clothing that's a bit too large, since this can make it a LOT easier for him to self-dress (especially with shirts and socks). Do you think he'd be into making a ritual for going out? (ex. Bathe, Dress, Pack Snackpack, help mom pack car, go!) Is not going out if he's not cooperative a big deal for you personally, or is this just something you feel he 'should' do? I know, for practicality's sake, I tend to only press issues that I truly think are important. Going out isn't a big deal for me personally, since we have a fenced yard, and I'm perfectly content sitting in my garden. But table manners are extremely important to me, and any child that throws food at my table will soon find their plate cheerfully cleared as we continue our lunchtime conversation. Just a personality fluke, I guess.

I like the idea of TCS, and I think that by and large I follow it in most situations, but I think years of childcare have given me a more pragmatic streak than it allows. I have no regrets and will freely admit that I have bodily carried in children from the playground when our time was up because A) they were about to get run over by the horde of older kids that were going to start pouring through the playground doors at any minute, and B) I was required by law to maintain proper child to adult ratio in the class, which meant that I didn't have the luxury of continuing the conversation for as long as I would have liked. Believe it or not, after one or two times of this happening, almost all the kids started respecting that when it was time to come in, it was time to come in...and we teachers learned to respect the kids by giving them ample warning time, and involving them in a going in routine (put away ride on toys, play ring around the rosy or london bridge, and then do log rolls or somersaults down the ramp to the door. Even the kids who didn't regularly participate knew the sequence, so they weren't rudely yanked away from their games with no warning).

I take children's feelings and individuality VERY seriously, but from my perspective part of that means teaching them (again, in an age-appropriate and non-violent manner) how to take me seriously as well. Different people are going to have different tolerance levels--and this includes kids AND adults. As adults, it's our responsibility to own our levels, and to do the self-exploration necessary to know what they are and question ourselves enough to learn how to be as flexible as possible...but *also* to know when we've reached our limit, to not lie to kids that we have, and to honor that limit.

It's a lot easier to do this as a provider, I think, and I am well aware that none of those kids had their primary bond to me. But I *can* tell you that after getting to know them and loving them, the children in my toddler classes loved me too, and trusted me, and did not fear me--and knew that I was there to protect and love them in return. I don't feel that having simple, communicated expectations and enforcing them affected them negatively--in fact, my kids were often the calmest (calmer than the preschool and pre-K kids!) during fire drills and during the earthquake that we experienced, because they knew I would not ask them to do something unless I meant to enforce it, and because I intended to keep them, our equipment, their friends, or the teachers safe. We also enjoyed a relatively stress free and extremely calm classroom (which is hard to do with tods) because teachers and kids were encouraged and helped to communicate their limits and boundaries, and those limits and boundaries were expected to be honored.

Not sure if this was helpful or not, but my point is that sometimes I think that kids do need some help to get things done, and I don't think parents should be made to feel guilty or inadequate for having to sometimes enforce rules or expectations, or if negotiation comes to a stalemate. It happens in the workplace, it happens with our system of laws, it happens within relationships, and sometimes a toddler isn't going to get his/her way. To not get them used to occasionally doing something that's not completely fun or is a tiresome step in order to be able to DO something fun is crueler in the long run, at least in my opinion.

But if there are some people who can make 100% negotiation and 0% enforcement work for them, more power to you! :) I don't deny that there probably are people who can/will/should handle things differently than me!

Sorry for the rambling, I'm a windbag by nature, and getting ready to pop (due date next week, yay!) isn't helping. As always, your mileage may vary. ;>

[larsy]

Have you tried Amazon.co.uk ? There is a link on the TCS website www.TCS.ac, go to 'books', then to 'TCS related books', it's the first book on the list, just click the icon next to the title. :)

[Alexander]

www.tcs.ac/

Please avoid punctuation directly after web addresses.

;)

a

[Alexander]

When it comes to trusting someone, deciding what to do in times where there is no posibility that you could have prepared yourself for a situation (war?), then insticts are maybe a good idea.

But I put it to you that there are no such things as "instincts" when it comes to "dicsipline", or "bringing children up". What we see as or feel are instincts are in fact the ideas and feelings we were programmed with as children ourselves.

Much of that, (love, kindness, concern for others) are good. However. In many cases, the way we were brought up was often dreadfully erronious.

We have to learn to cut through our "insticts", "it doesn't ring true" feelings etc, and address the issues with cold hard logic.

This is often an uncomfortable experience, not for everyone, but it is also a gift of imessurable value we can give to our children.

a

[Linda in Arizona]

I disagree and here is my story of how I found my instincts:

I had a nightmarish childhood of abuse and spent much my 20's in therapy. I had my head on pretty straight when I had kids, but even though I had gotten in touch with my feelings, healed my soul, and learned to be empathetic, I had no sense of instincts when I had my first child in my early 30's. So I tried to do what was natural, even though it didn't feel natural. I breastfeed my baby, I kept her with me where ever I went, I found peaceful ways to help her to sleep. As she got bigger I made her baby food. I read about these things in books and surrounded myself with other moms following the same path. It was like walking along a dark path with a flashlight. I always had just enough like for the next step.

As my DD got older, I had more questions but my wise women friends told me to follow my instincts. I didn't have any. One wise friend told me that eventually I had to learn to hear my heart, that I needed to start listening to it. I tried. Sometimes I can hear a little. As I kept quietly listening, I could hear more.

I kept reading and researching, but reading with my heart. The book that rang the truest to my heart was the Continuum Concept. It is about how stone age indian in south america raise their kids. This book help wake up my instincts, and my heart told me it was true.

When I say I am doing something because it feels right to me, the feeling of rightness has nothing to do with my upbringing. Nothing at all.

[Alexander]

I'm sorry to hear about your childhood. :( Actually, I think we agree more than disagree. One of the things that you said in your post was that you read, and listened to what others had to say.

This is education, and what I argue can enlighten us as to what we can see works.

When something makes sense to someone, is it emotionally or logically?

Both very often, and possibly both are legitamate.

The emotional side can not be argued with though, and that is the weakness.

Logic allows us to admit it when we are wrong.

a

[Alexander]

Originally posted by mamapie

I have somewhere to go and he has a poopy diaper and no other clothes on and I have to get him dressed. Period. He is not quite up to understanding the reason, and I wish I could just let him run totally wild, and I do AMAP. However, sometimes he, for example, picked up a big dog turd and then turns around and wants another cracker. Guess what? I HAVE to wash his hands.


LOL

You know, I feel that many people get confused when they encounter Non-coersion ot TCS. I can't speak for TCS (I'll wait for lacy;)) but for practical non-coersion. . . .

It's more about the way we interact with our children, and how we set examples than letting kids do whatever they want.

I do not let my kids do anything they want.


I draw the line at health and safety, (as every caring parent should), and picking up a poo on the street is not something that young children can grasp the implications of.

(edited to add: this is not the only line either.)

As for brushing teeth, and washing hands after the bathroom, these are activities that have to be brought tho children at their own level. Making it something that they "must" do 'cos that's health and safety, is no fun at all, and our expectations of children to magically comprehend that they "must" 'cos you look"real serious" about this . . . . is a set up for failure.

Health and safety then is a good basic guide.

hope this helps.

a

[grisletine]

thank you although i had already noticed it there i was merely hoping to save some on postage and get it in the us!
have you read it then... is it a valid representation of tcs theory?

[clover]

Ok this may seem strange. I have a very small house, so what I do is sit in the middle of the living room floor with everything laid out(diaper, clothes, shoes.) Every time he passes I say"Ok, if you want togo outside we need to put on your diaper and clothes". And so I just sit there and Try to let him make the decision to come and sit with me to get dressed. It seems to work well.I he really likes the fact that he can decide. The time in which it takes him to cooperate varies. If he really really wants to go out I only have to ask once! If he doesn't come after 6 or so pass by and we are late for somewhere we have to be, I will bring him over to get dressed. He usually fusses a bit at first but then lets me dress him. Compared to the HUGE battle it usd to be to dress him this is great for us. Also sometimes I will lay his clothes on the bed, and ask him to get an article one at a time, he likes this game.

[Tigerchild]

But it may be for mostly semantic reasons.

Logic, IMO, is just as emotionally and culturally based as anything else. And to tell you the truth, being a compassionate being is what allows people to apologize, admit they were wrong, and to be *tolerant*--mostly because we are able to get out of our own head and recognize that other people might feel a different way about a given situation. (I've seen people hide behind logic to prevent themselves from doing this.)

I also believe it is a myth that almost everyone grew up with 'erroneous' parenting--because I don't believe there IS such a thing as 'perfect' parenting. In fact, I think it is this unattainable ideal that often puts parents in a guilt/frustration/despair quandry when it comes to relating with their kids. *Anytime* I see any particular parenting or discipline method being touted as the 'Perfect and Nonerroneous Way', I become just as suspicious as I do when I hear about a drug that's supposed to cure everything with no side effects disclosed.

My parents sure as hell were not perfect. But looking down my nose at them and dismissing them and blaming them is not going to help me be a better parent. Neither is doing everything exactly the opposite. Now that I'm an adult, and have had more experience working around children, I can *see* and *understand* why many people have the reactions they do. I can empathize with them, but retain my self-control enough to think about what I might do differently. And from my personal observations, most people DO have great instincts (if a baby cries, they want to soothe. If they're sitting down to lunch with a young child, they want to make sure the food is cut down to size. Ect.)--it's the 'logic' and 'mores' placed on them by the society around them that drowns this out. (If you never FORCE your child to take responsibility, then they'll never have a chance to learn. If you always comfort your baby, they'll never learn how to do it on their own.) Both sets of assumptions have their own ways of making sense--the trick is to be open to trying new things, observing what works and doesn't for others, and to not be afraid to try something new for your family, despite the objections of those around you.

I'd submit that this takes a very important balance of instinct, emotion, maturity, and logic. And most people don't have the luxury of being long-term observers before they parent.

Mistakes will be made, and I hightly doubt that TCS or ANY other philosophy of discipline is foolproof. We're human beings and parents DO have emotions and baggage, stuff will happen. Not only that, it's in human nature to be adaptable. The culture is constantly changing, and kids and adults will need to negotiate that.

I don't think telling anyone they need to leave an essential component of themselves at the door to 'do' a particular system is useful or helpful. It might be a better way to allow people to acknowledge this, recognize it when it crops up, and later follow up as to why and if this can be eased in the future. People aren't going to follow things they have to grit their teeth through, or feel like horrible human beings if they 'slip' or think naughty thoughts.

And to be honest, I also feel that parenting promotes JUST as much growth for the parent as it does for the child. Both halves of the equation must be cared for and nutured for the best situation. Not always going to happen, but I think it's something to strive for.

I fail to see where in the TCS philosophy it says that instincts are wrong. This is probably because things like 'instinct', 'emotion', and 'logic' are not defined and they mean very different things to different people. To me, being respectful and considerate of children is very instinctive, because I know that all of us have an inner need to feel respected and cared for. There are different kinds of logic, and erroneous logic as well. And if someone were able to completely turn off their emotion, I would not want them within 10 miles of my child or any of the children I care for--that would make them extremely dangerous IMO.

Would you care to explain what you mean by 'instinct', 'emotion', and 'logic'? I'm actually quite curious...because I have a 'feeling' that our philosophies aren't that far apart, but our word choice and definitions are. It's hard to have a discussion that everyone can understand, when somewhat variable and nebulous terms are not defined. (And I'm not talking dictionary here...I'm talking about what they mean, to you.)

[larsy]

I will finally take (I think it was) Ms. Mom's advice and start a TCS thread. :)

Taking Children Seriously is a non-coercive education and parenting philosophy that was founded approximately a decade ago by Sarah Lawrence, with significant contributions to the discussion by David Deutsch and Kolya Wolf. The paper journal 'Taking Children Seriously', the internet 'TCS list', and the website www.TCS.ac are the main places where the discussion continues. The quest (as I understand it) is to come as close to the truth as possible, about these theories of non-coercive education and parenting.

A brief quote from the website:

"We believe that it is possible and desirable to bring up children entirely without coercion (i.e. without doing things to them against their will, or making them do things against their will), and that children are entitled to the same rights, respect and control over their lives as adults.

We are critical rationalists, fallibilists and libertarians. "

When first encountered, TCS is often confused with laissez faire parenting, or neglect; it is neither of those. It is not simply about not coercing. It is about creating a happy life for one's self and one's loved ones, actively living in ways that avoid coercion.

We can recognize the theories and memes that we are programmed with, that keep us believing that coercion is necessary in this case or that case, and deconstruct them in an effort to get closer to the truth about any particular subject that is giving us trouble. Discussions like those here can help tremendously, in understanding one's theories and the practicalities of living a TCS lifestyle. Lets have at it :) Respectfully, of course, discussing the theories and not particular children, if you please. :)

[larsy]

Yes, and yes. :)

[laelsweet]

larsy, are you proposing this thread as a space in which to hash out issues about tcs theory, or as a space in which to propose hypothetical situations to be examined from a tcs view?

[larsy]

either/or, I guess. I see these threads as a conversation, that can go down any/many avenues as it meanders. If it gets too long, we can always start another thread that can meander another way. Whatever people want to talk about is ok by me.

[laelsweet]

i think that taking children seriously is being confused with laissez-faire parenting, and certainly i can understand that one might therefore see tcs as neglect. actually in my experience (short but sweet) tcs has led me to be m o r e involved than my version of 'gentle discipline'. i pay more attention to what is being communicated, and think more about why i think something is not possible and how else it could be, we come up with more creative solutions which everyone is happiest with, and my child assists with finding these commonalities, despite not having many words yet. i am consistently astounded at how much a very young child is able to understand, and so now instead of assuming that something can't be understood, i attempt to find some way to communicate, or some other way to approach this. for example, i believed that i had to clothe children to protect from cold, and that not only would they not know if they were cold and needed clothing, but i would not know if they knew. on this i am happy to say i was quite wrong, and now regularly come to agreements to put on clothing based on asking questions like, how do your legs feel? would you like to slip your foot in here i can pull your trousers on? no? ...then why don't we take them with us and we can put them on upstairs if you feel cold. then i might ask again later, or my child might signal that legs are cold now and ready for trousers. i must say that sign language is critical at this stage! but what is happening here in my opinion is that i am engaged to watch and see what my child communicates, a n d my child is alerted that i am trusting in a small person's ability to recognize discomfort from cold. this is working for us, it makes my child feel proud to handle this and not have to struggle with a chasing, force-dressing parent, it brings us closer! i also believe that my child struggled with me about getting dressed when ready to take more initiative about dressing, if you see what i mean?
i think that my child welcomes opportunities to ask me why? and having read a little about tcs i am less willing to answer " because" (because i say so and have the power to, because i think you can't understand, because i am not willing to find another way to show you why, because that is the way it is and there is no other way). in a way i think that my child's ability to think and act critically and creatively about the world is something i hope to preserve and encourage, rather than strictly the ability to behave appropriately, which i believe is something that children strive to learn anyway. (i think alexander talked about this with 'modeling')
why do people get dressed before going out? maybe more discussion and investigation into this could be done. i suspect larsy has already talked about this...

[k'smami]

I can already forsee many pages to print out to put in my TCS notebook. :)

I'll start something...

A mother, new to implenting the TCS philosphy is working very hard to recognize the coercion that she inflicts on Ds. Dh is not only critical of these attempts at non-coercion, he tries to interfere. For example, the family is at dinner and they are eating hot patties. Dh opens one up for Ds to eat. Ds refuses because he wants the mother's neatly intact pattie instead. The mother sees no problem with switching (she is happy so long as he eats the food) so when she hands Ds the pattie, Dh snatches it out of his hands and tries to give him the one that he broke up for him. Ds refuses and protests, Dw says to leave Ds alone, that it is her patty and she doesn't care if Ds takes it. This starts the long discussion about not letting Ds have what he wants for fear that Ds will think that "he can always get whatever he wants".

The mother has tried to appeal to Dh rationally but he does not seem willing to let go of this entrenched theory, let alone discuss that it is just a theory. The mother fears that Ds will encounter a great deal of coercion damage due to Dh's theories. The mother herself has already used coercion to keep Dh from hitting Ds (mother threatened divorce if physical punishment is used) and will find it very difficult to coerce Dh into following it and also acknowledges that coercion would not be the best/most moral way to ensure Ds' safety from this coercion.

What ideas do you have regarding this?

[Shakti]

Well, there are now two threads about TCS! Here are some of my random thoughts, after closely following the recent conversations but not posting much myself.

First, the whole topic of TCS both intriques me and infuriates me, and this is often my first clue that there is something there for me and I need to pursue it. I suspect that my parenting style is not too far from TCS theory, but some of the *language* of TCS is bothersome to me. Just the name, for example. As in, excuse me, but I *do* take my daughter seriously. She is not a joke to me. We did not choose to have a baby solely for our enjoyment, although she does bring us great joy. So some of the language of TCS rubs me the wrong way, but that does not mean that there are not some nuggets of great wisdom there for me, and I really am trying to understand TCS.

I also do not subscribe to any *one* parenting philosophy. I do not really call myself an APer even though I do most things that would be considered AP. It just so happens that what I do tends to be APish. I believe I do much of my parenting by instinct, even though according to another thread I should follow my logic instead of my instinct. I have read The Continuum Concept and that has influenced my parenting tremendously. Even with TCC, I believe that it is a goal to strive for, but in this society nearly impossible to achieve. I can give my daughter the run of the house so that she can explore and learn at her own pace, but I do not have family in the area, I do not live in a tribal society, and some aspects of TCC are simply impossible for me to implement. It seems it will be the same with TCS - I will probably take from it what I can use and not worry about the rest.

It seems as though much of the TCS solutions are more like, um, searching for a word here... redirection, or convincing, or distracting the child. For example, I was putting shoes on my 10 month old this morning. She doesn't mind having her shoes put on, but this time she simply didn't want to sit still. So I gave her a book to look at while I put on the last shoe and she was instantly cooperative. Is this TCS? In the end I still forced my will on her - she has both of her shoes on. But I didn't coerce her into sitting still, I simply changed the situation so that she would *want* to sit still. Is this non-coercion or manipulation?

Oh, it seems my mind has gone blank and I have lost my train of thought. I will post this and try to post more later. I do look forward to discussing this further.

Patti

[pie]

With all respect, I am not here to debate the finer points of TCS as I know very little about it. I don't think people who practice it are neglectful. Anyone who puts such effort into discipline is most likely not neglectful. Additionally, my questions are serious ones to me. I want to learn more about TCS but am more interested in plain old respectful discipline. To me, and maybe I am missing the TCS disciples points, there are indeed times when I need Jackson to do something. I hope none of you see that as abusive or coercive, but that is how it stands. If it is 50 degrees and windy and raining and we have to go buy food or visit family or simply walk in the rain, then getting dressed is, to me, necessary. If he's been in a wet diaper so long that it's leaky, I feel that not to change it until he thinks it is his idea is not a good idea.
If he's been playing in our freshly composted garden, his hands need to be washed ASAP. He is struggling with me for his autonomy and I respect his struggle, but I am looking for ways to make his struggle less traumatic. I guess that there are no easy answers here: I hate the term, but that's where the idea of the terrible twos comes from, I guess. Do not get me wrong...I see nothing terrible about it. I suppose that the best thing for me to do would be to maintain my sense of humor and encourage his, as well. I really do like the idea of TCS but maybe it is hard for me to apply it to a toddler. I want him to make his own choices but I have real responsabilities and I have to meet them. Like I said, there are *wild* days where he is in charge but I just needed help figuring out how to apply gentle Discipline and or aspects of TCS to major issues like dressing. He simply does not respond to my offering choices. Like I said, he pretty much ignores everything I say, although I very much liked the idea of putting his clothes out and asking him to bring me the shirt, socks, etc. All this is making me wonder if maybe he is oppositional because it sounds like your kids are willing to work with you more than mine is with me. I might be missing the whole point but please, no one take offense to me because I truly mean none and I want to learn from you all. It is just a little frustrating to have tried most every suggestion here and not have it work. I will say, though, that he will let me dress him or wash his hands about 50% of the time so I am probably just being a big whiner, anyway.:)

[pie]

Sorry, I accidently made my reply into a new thread...please read OOPS I meant to post this under COOPED UP

[simonee]

Beth, that sounded a bit nasty. My main point throughout this post was to step away from a view that someone "runs" a family. I tried to open my eyes to group interaction from a non-hierarchic perspective, without viewing someone as a boss. Sorry you have to feel so snippy about that.
Simone

[peggy]

As I was the one who said TCS didn't "ring true" for me, I feel I should respond. In that same post I said I respected that method and the fact that it worked very well for many families. I didn't say " Throw non-coercion to the Wind and Follow your Instincts!" I would expect the same respect from you.
To me, parenting is about heart and soul and not "cold hard logic"
Actually, I feel like I'm being "coerced" into your parenting style

:)

This forum is about Gentle Discpline, which to me means that there is room for TCS and AP

respectfully,
peggy

[Jish]

Your two year old is not being oppositional, he is simply being two. Testing limits is his job. This is how our children learn how the world works and how much they can get away with. I don't want to sound like I give my child no choices and expect him to smile and do what I say, but my older son is 3 2/1 and I would kill for the terrible twos again. This age sucks! I love him dearly and we have good days most of the time, but with two active boys (my younger one is 14 months) if I tried to bargain to find solutions to simple, everyday activites such as getting dressed I would go insane. It is simply not possible to please everyone in my household. If my son wants to wear his sandals on a day that is 40 degrees out I will, of course, try to talk him out of it. If it is feasible with what we have planned and if he really insists I tell him to bring socks. If he says no, tough! I'm not bringing them. The consequence is that his feet will be cold and he will be miserable. I feel it is important to learn consequences to our actions if possible, but every issue that pops up during the day doesn't need to be taken to the bargaining table. My problem with the TCS theory is that if the adult and child cannot reach a mutual agreement then the adult should give in to the child. That is just not how the real world works and that child is in for a big shock when mommy isn't around. Besides, I have rights to, like the right to grocery shop when necessary, the right to wipe the snot off my childs nose so I don't catch his miserable cold, and the right to expect my child to respect me as much as I respect him.

[fire]

Alexander I understand that we do need to combatt some of our instinct certainly in order to attachment parent. I see it as though when my Toddler takes a chunk of skin from my back, while trying to climb up moms tower, my instinct or reflex is to throw him off me with great force. If I want him to learn to be completely compassionate and calm or atleast not retaliate instinctively(?) I need to stop consider my strength, his state his understanding. It is a very sensitive balance.
It is true too that instinct is what allows you to feel remorse for hurting someone.

[fire]

I am very happy to have the ideals of Taking Children Seriously and non-cohersive. I am very grateful of this thread because I've been struggling in my mind trying to sort out balance of respect and compromise..ect I love the the idea of CONSENSUS and believe that it will bring great wonders of peace & joy. I am very willing to strive for it and soooo content to have a philosophy and vision to go by.

The obstacles may get bigger, the tools help and the rewards are bliss.

I do believe that some choices conscerning power struggles are stemmming from fear and as a soppy idealist I know a choice of love, faith and respect is always best.

[pie]

AP is not a luxury but having the time to sit around and debate its finer points is. sorry for short reply, much nursing today.:)

[fire]

I think that if your child is given the chance to "bargain" all the time he will not be a hindrance he will always consider barganing, sharing having every party happy...She will not try to control others she will always consider that everyone has valuable needs and everyone has right to equal imput regardless of sex, role, age, gender. Though I have only herd of TCS tonight, I beleive that is what strives for.
Surely we may be able to find reason for critisim and that is where we listen and allow concepts to evolve into ever better systems.

[Linda in Arizona]

Originally posted by peggy
[B]Actually, I feel like I'm being "coerced" into your parenting style

:)



I'm feeling the same way. NCP/TCS folks say that they believe that their children are the ultimate best judge of their own best interest, but they don't seem to believe that of other parents.

NCP/TCS says that parents offer their experience, but don't assume they are right. (without boundaries pg. 96) Yet the people who say they feel this way toward their children can possible admit here to other parents that their "theory" of non-coersion might be wrong. And they seldom offer their experience, just the theory that children should be allowed to do whatever they want to.

The very nature of the NCP/TCS system is that you must be willing to admit that you might be wrong and someone else i.e. your child might know what is better for them, so how I can you say that is what you think and then be so evangelical and preachy? After all, you might be wrong. We might know what is best for our kids. It is a possiblity.

[larsy]

Many thoughts, crowding around.

Instinct is about survival, isn't it? Perhaps one's instincts are honed upon what it is one has to survive. Parenting by instinct will then not be consistent across the population, but it will support survival on some level. It might not be optimum conditions for living a happy life, but one would be likely to survive. Human life is, however, richer than just survival level, at least I think we are fortunate in western civ countries
to be able to say this.

TCS is a philosophy about the parent-child relationship and the unique responsibilities that lie therin. Parents are responsible for the existence of their children, and so have responsibilities toward them that they do not have towards strangers or even other adult friends and relatives.

When a person is feeling coercion in their minds, it behooves them to figure out what that conflict is about, and find solutions. TCS is a challenging philosophy. IME, if evokes lots of strong feeling in most, if not all, people, myself included. When I first ran across, I thought the definition of coercion was so broad as to be meaningless. I left it alone for months, but it still popped up and niggled at me periodically, so I kept thinking about it. It took years for me to make sense of much of it, and there is
still much that I don't grasp, as yet. It's a process. Many people, no doubt, will never go down the TCS road- more's the pity, imo.

Fallibleism- sure, TCS theory could be wrong and parts of it probably are. There are a lot of people picking it apart and criticizing it thoughtfully, for many years now, on the TCS list, looking for those places where TCS theory does not stand up to the light of critical rationalism. Aren't we all interested in getting closer to the truth? I don't think that truth is relative. If it is true that coercion is harmful in the parent-child relationship, we are
capable of knowing this by examining the theory and criticizing and refuting it. I've seen many convincing arguments about coercion being harmful, and none that have convinced me that coercion is the best way of relating between parent and child- not to say that it might not be appropriate in other
relationships.

I question as to whether a parent would truly believe that it would be beneficial to adopt the theory that a person should not react instincitively to protect their self, if they are being hurt, as in Fire's example. Yes, a parent might want to over-ride their instinct (though it can be very hard! when being hurt, to not react spontaneously) so that they do not hurt a child who has unintentionally hurt them in the process of playing, or even
intentionally (in exploring people's reactions to things). But a child's siblings will probably not be so understanding, and are much more likely to protect their selves when being hurt. Protecting one's self from being hurt is a good survival instinct, very useful in life, as is the knowledge that if you hurt someone, they are likely to retaliate and hurt you back.
That is learning about a very real boundary.

Gotta run!

[Ms. Mom]

I think what I'm seeing here is passionate, loving parents all fighting for what they believe in. Though this is a wonderful response when our children are concerned, I wonder how conductive it is?

What I'd like to see happen in this forum is for everyone’s opinions, views and theories to matter.

Isn't it wonderful that we have these boards to come and discuss gentle, loving ways to raise our children? Everyone here should be encouraging to others weather or not they share views. Making suggestions to those in need of new solutions is a wonderful gift we all have to give to each other.

I'm not saying we should go against our beliefs - we should absolutely go with our own feelings and beliefs. But, I would like to remind everyone to be tolerant and gentle with others here who come for advice and information.

Parenting is an honorable position in life - aren't we lucky to share this gift!

[peggy]

Dear Ms. Mom,
I appreciate the fact that you are here to keep the peace. But I am really surprised you felt you had to step in here. I thought we could have disagreements and be able to discuss them. There was no name calling or insults being thorwn around here.
Everyone currently subscribed to this thread always offers gentle advice to new Moms when asked. The topic of this thread was not about asking for advice, the very title of it implies a discussion about the difference between instinctive parenting and TCS was wanted.
I have read over the rules again and have found nothing in them against this kind of discussion, but this is your forum so I will withdraw from this thread.
I have to say though that I do feel like I just got my hand slapped and it's a very uncomfortable feeling.

peggy

[MamaLeah]

Patti - What you said is something I've always wondered about too! If I know my daughter wants to play with the electric chords and I don't want her to, so I move the couch in front of them when she's not looking, I have used my physical and mental "superiority" to get MY way. If I know we may have a conflict in a store because there is too much there that she wants to play with, so I don't take her, once again, I am forcing her to not get her way. Is it OK to force your will as long as your child doesn't realize it?

Oops, I've been trying so hard not to get involved, but

[Shakti]

Ms. Mom,
I, like Peggy, am surprised that you felt the need for peace-keeping on this thread. I have not posted on this thread but I have been a silent observer of the discussion. I have not felt the tone of the thread is a "fight," but perhaps the people who have been doing the posting have.(?) I find these discussions about different parenting philosophies to be extremely helpful to me, and they are the primary reason that I visit the boards. We learn from each other by having different opinions and *gently* expressing those opinions. From my point of view, the discussions here lately have been, for the most part, respectful.

Peace,

Patti

[zealsmom]

Originally posted by Shakti
I have not posted on this thread but I have been a silent observer of the discussion. ...From my point of view, the discussions here lately have been, for the most part, respectful.


me too. I hope we can continue to "discuss" without be judged (as long as there are no hurt feelings)

[k'smami]

re: scissors and gum.

Perhaps a parent can help a young toddler learn about scissors under close supervision. Getting those safety scissors and sitting him down with them and showing him how to cut paper. Of course I would not recommend that a parent leave him to his own devices until the parent is sure that the child understands how to use scissors safely.

As for gum, perhaps a parent could offer something chewy like gum that the child could swollow- such as dehydrated apricot or papaya slices and find that the child prefers this.

re: only child housholds

TCS people would say that TCS is for all children, no matter what the size of the household. Of course those starting out with TCS will probably have more opportunities to be creative if they have 3 children instead of 1. However, I think that once children see that parents will do their best so that EVERYONE will have a common preference, they will be willing to come up with ideas and be patient enough to wait for a common preference to be found. IMO the key issue is trust. Once a child trusts that the parent will not make hir do something they find disagreeable or withold something that hir wants to learn about, they will be willing to wait and give input to find a common preferece.

I think that you should join the TCS toddlers list the larsy mentioned somewhere around here. Some of these people probably have more than one child and could give you ideas as to how to do TCS with more than one child in the house.

[k'smami]

Originally posted by MamaLeah
Patti - What you said is something I've always wondered about too! If I know my daughter wants to play with the electric chords and I don't want her to, so I move the couch in front of them when she's not looking.

I think most TCS parents would find this coercive depending on the child's age. There may be something that the child wants to learn from playing with the cords and putting the couch in front of them stifles her learning. As with the scissor situation, perhaps the parent can help the child learn about the cords with very close supervision. Showing her what the cords connect to and what happens when you pull them out. Also stressing that the child is only to do this when the parent is available to help until the parent is confident that the child will be able to use the cords safely. The parent should share hir theories about why it may not be a good idea to play with the cords and why it may not be a good idea to put anything that isn't a plug into the socket.

This is an interesting question because I myself have been thinking about how coercive childproofing may be. Such as child safety gates to keep kids out of the kitchen or bathroom. I'm still exploring my theories here.


If I know we may have a conflict in a store because there is too much there that she wants to play with, so I don't take her, once again, I am forcing her to not get her way.


I would say that the parent is forcing the child not to get her way if indeed the child wants to go to that place. If the child doesn't care about the place and the parent avoids it because it would cause too much coercion then, I don't think this is forcing the child not to get her way. I do want to say that I think TCS is about the parents and children finding common preferences, not about children getting their own way despite what the parents want.

[k'smami]

Originally posted by Shakti
It just so It seems as though much of the TCS solutions are more like, um, searching for a word here... redirection, or convincing, or distracting the child.

I think most TCS people would argue that all of those things are coercive.


For example, I was putting shoes on my 10 month old this morning. She doesn't mind having her shoes put on, but this time she simply didn't want to sit still. So I gave her a book to look at while I put on the last shoe and she was instantly cooperative. Is this TCS? In the end I still forced my will on her - she has both of her shoes on. But I didn't coerce her into sitting still, I simply changed the situation so that she would *want* to sit still. Is this non-coercion or manipulation?

I would say that the child preferred to read the book while having her shoes put on. IMO not coercive.

[Jish]

I'm sorry, but letting your children play with power cords, especially when plugged in, and outlets is just plain neglegent. My husband who is an engineer for a power company would flip out if he knew that some one was advocating letting children play with electricity, with or without a parent present. Your mere presence is not going to stop your child from being electricuted. Perhaps it is ideas such as these that make some of us think that TCS is a less than responsible way to parent. Your child relies on you for saftey cues, and letting them play with electricity is a bad example.

I have two active young boys and I try to raise my boys without stepping on their budding independence too much. I offer choices in many day to day situations, but there are times when each of my son's needs, and wants differ. When my younger son (14 months) needs to go to the pediatrician he has to go. There is no discussion. My 3 1/2 year old would rarely choose to go, but he doesn't get a choice in the matter. Some things, like going to the doctor, are just a fact of life if you want to stay healthy and strong. What he does get a choice in is what toys he wants to bring, and what snacks he would like to enjoy while we are there. Of course, as a mother I reserve my right to redirect (gasp)my son's choices away from things that I know are bad for him. I refuse to let my son live on a diet of chocolate chip cookies, juice, candy, doughnuts, etc. Am I coercing him into eating healthy foods? Maybe. Of course, he can always assert his will and refuse to eat what is offered.

What would you die hard TCSers do if both of your children want the same toy at the same time, and remember that it is not always feasible or practical to have two of everything? My household would be total anarchy if I tried to adhear to the strict TCS philosophy. Life would come to a stand still and nothing would ever get done.

[Shakti]

Originally posted by k'smami


I think most TCS people would argue that all of those things are coercive.



I would say that the child preferred to read the book while having her shoes put on. IMO not coercive.
[/B]

k'smami, with all due respect, this seems contradictory. Giving her a book while I put her shoes on is a distraction, and you say that distractions would be considered coercive. But then you say that if I put her shoes on while she is reading a book it is not coercive. Which is it??? :confused:

Patti

[RainCityMama]

I'm really enjoying what everyone has to say here and looking forward to learning more and hashing out my own feelings about this method.


I've been really looking for alternative methods of parenting and
I was recently made aware of TCS - I must say that in theory it makes sense to me, but I fear my own failings may thwart my efforts to practice these methods.

I don't believe I'm a selfish parent, I don't over schedule my son's life - I feel like the majority of time I let my son lead the day and I follow. I have however been struggling with:

Diaper changing - He hates them, but how can I leave him to wander about in a poopy diaper all day?

Touching outlets - He is obsessed with anything electrical, I totally appreciate that he's learning but I'm afraid that if I sat with him and worked the outlet this would only be encouraging him that this was okay.

Touching the fireplace/stove - Once again, he's learning - But if either happened to be hot this could cause serious injury that I'm not willing to do.

and my own selfish need for some order within my home - Is wanting a semi-clean home wrong? I don't care if we have toys everywhere but when my little person wants to drag out all the canned goods, beauty products and rip apart rolls of toilet paper do you just allow it?

I am asking these questions from the heart, I have no desire to pick apart any parenting views but I am truly trying to wrap my brain around this method and understand how it needs to be approached.

Be well,

V

[k'smami]

Originally posted by jbcjmom
I'm sorry, but letting your children play with power cords, especially when plugged in, and outlets is just plain neglegent. My husband who is an engineer for a power company would flip out if he knew that some one was advocating letting children play with electricity, with or without a parent present.

I am not advocating that a parent allow their child to play with electricity. I'm sorry that my post was not clear enough. I am advocating that a parent help a child learn about electrical cords. I am offering ideas as to how to handle a situation. If the parent finds a better idea, then I would hope that they do that instead and of course share it with others. What I am advocating is teaching a child do deal with electrical cords safely. IMO, not only would this demystify the cords but it will also make it less likely that a child would explore these things when the parent is not looking. It would also, IMO, set a precedent in the child's mind that the parent is open to the child's wanting to learn about different things and will also help whenever necessary.

In trying to think of a more satisfying solution I thought of maybe giving a child a surge protecter that is not plugged in and teaching the child how to plug things into socket safely this way. When the parent is satisfied that the child has enough information to use electrical cords safely then perhaps they could move on to the socket in question. But maybe this is a better preference for the child and the parent will not have to deal with a live socket at all.

Your mere presence is not going to stop your child from being electricuted.

Pardon my ignorance, since I am not an electrician, but I would like to know what prevents adults from being electrocuted when they unplug power cords, that would not prevent a child from being electrocuted when doing the same thing with a parent present? Clearly I'm not advocationg that the parent let the child near a socket with live wires exposed or that was prone to sparks. In fact I would hope that even non-TCS parents who would prevent their children from learning about power cords in this way would most certainly not have these conditions in their home either.

Some things, like going to the doctor, are just a fact of life if you want to stay healthy and strong.

Interesting theory but I know many adults, including myself, who disagree with this statement. Some of us may even think the exact opposite ;). I think children should have the right to choose or not to choose who touches them and who examines them. I would certainly hate it if I was taken to the doctor against my will.

What would you die hard TCSers do if both of your children want the same toy at the same time, and remember that it is not always feasible or practical to have two of everything?

There is no blanket answer to this or any of the other examples. Every child and parent is different. What would be a common preference in one family would not be a common preference in another. There is no rule book that says, "When your child does X thing do Y." I have attempted to give TCS ideas in the hopes that this would bring on even more ideas. People could refute my ideas and offer different non-coercive ideas that may be better. Sometimes I think that these discussions about examples are rather unfruitful if people believe that TCS is a less responsible way to parent.

But... I will try to offer an idea anyway in hopes that someone will offer an even better one. Maybe one child would prefer to play with something else but hasn't thought of it because it was put away and not in view when he saw the one he is fighting over? Maybe both children would prefer to go to the park? Maybe they would prefer that Mom read them a story instead? Maybe the reason that they are fighting is not really the toy but some underlying tension that the toy triggered so the parent may want to talk to both of them about their feelings and something may be uncovered that could help the situation. Maybe after the parent's initial idea sharing they will decide on their own what they think is best and end the conflict themselves. If children are not taught that somone always has to lose before they win or that if someone wins then by default they must lose, they may be open to finding a common preference instead of fighting because they may believe that in a family everyone can get want they want most of the time.

What would you do?

P.S. I reserve the right to be mistaken and to continue to learn ;).

[k'smami]

Originally posted by Shakti


k'smami, with all due respect, this seems contradictory. Giving her a book while I put her shoes on is a distraction, and you say that distractions would be considered coercive. But then you say that if I put her shoes on while she is reading a book it is not coercive. Which is it??? :confused:

Patti

In your orginal post you said that your daughter did not want to sit still to put on her shoes and that she usually has no problem with having them put on. I saw this as trying to find a common preference about sitting still. You gave her the book, she preferred to look at it instead of run away, and let you put on her shoes which she doesn't usually mind. In my opinoin that is not coercive. Maybe another TCS parent would think so. That TCS parent would then try to find a common preference with the child or perhaps re-examine hir theories about whether a 10 month old has to wear shoes.

To me, using an obvious example, a distraction is something like a parent eating a chocolate chip cookie and when the child comes up and asks for a taste the parent says, "Wow! Look, a puppy!" and then when the child turns hir head the parent hides the cookies.

[laelsweet]

simonee it sounds like you are already doing a great job and that tcs may help through the conflicts that are coming up. i know that this theory is helping us a lot. i have been lurking on this and other threads and i wanted to say how excited i am to find that more people here find tcs relevant to their lives with children. fire i love the idea of consensus too : ) . i'm so pleased to see so many tcs threads happening, and it's great to hear the challenges that come up from different perspectives, it helps me to think about and use the theory more thoroughly.

[Mommy22B]

This is all so interesting! I am intrigued by this whole "theory" of TCS. I am somewhat TCS. My husband tends to be more than me because I am so impatient at times.
One thing I don't understand about it is how to do it with toddlers. Say, for example, there is a family dinner, or party or something like that. dd, who is 17 months, fresh from her bath, refuses to get dressed. Time is ticking away,.. You try to give her a choice of different outfits...nothing works. What do you do?
I am thinking of an answer my self here I think...would you take her naked and dress her when she is at the party and more compliant? I realize it is winter, but bundled in a blanket she wouldn't freeze....
Or what if the child just refused to go at all. Must the parent give in to the child every time? Often when dd doesn't want to go out and I do I stay home with her, but often there is a party that starts at a specific time and I would really like to go. Would you TCSers ever force a child to go somewhere? Or do you give in every time?
I wonder also, do the parent always give in to the child? Like dd wants a cookie. MOm would prefer she have some fruit since she gave in on the cookie issue for breakfast. I guess i can think of an answer to this one too...just don't have the cookies around...
Well, I seem to be trying to answer my own questions...just trying to understand.
So are these TCS answers? Is the basic idea to sometimes change your own veiw of what is and is not appropriate?
Beth

[Jish]

Simonee,
Sorry you think I am snippy, that is a word that no one who knows me would use to describe me. I don't understand why everyone thinks it is so important that everyone in the family come to an agreement on everything. Obviously we don't agree here, but are either of us WRONG? I don't think I'm wrong, I's sure you don't think you are wrong, and I don't necessarily think you are wrong either. That doesn't mean that I have to agree with your method of child rearing and embrace it as my own. But according to the TCS theory we should try to come to some mutual understanding and agreement between our two theories that we can both live with to raise our children. I am not willing to give up my way in favor of yours and I'm sure you are not willing to give up yours for mine, though I suspect the way we deal with our children on a daily basis is not as different as you might expect. We are never going to come to a firm agreement in this area. Is it so horrible to think that there will be some things that as a parent and child we won't be able to agree on. I am an adult, I am mature, I have experience, and I am the parent. In our family that gives me the trump card in times that my children and I can't come to an agreement. I don't run my family as a dictatorship, but it is not quite a democracy either. God gave me my children and they are my most precious blessing and responsibility. Being raised Catholic it is my job to raise them as responsible, caring, loving, and Christian children. That means that sometimes they can't get their way. I am responsible for their souls and that is a job I take very seriously. I may sound like a religious fanatic, but that is not the case, I just try to be a good Christian and to raise my children that way.

I hope we can agree to disagree if that is alright with you :)

[Ms. Mom]

Re-reading my post I can see how my point was taken wrong. I was actually glad to see a post where people were agreeing to disagree.

I'm so sorry if I hurt anyone feelings. Usually, I wait in a thread until things get heated before I say something.

Your right, no rules have been broken in any way here, and, I was actually glad to see people discussing issues and agreeing to disagree. Sometimes when we write something it doesn’t always come out how it was meant to.

Again, I apologize for sounding like ‘big brother’, that’s not how I want to be perceived. I’m just a mother like you, I volunteer to moderate this forum because I love the ideas here and enjoy being a part of such a loving community.

Please, continue this discussion! We can all learn so much from each other

[peggy]

Thank you so much for clarifying that. I am sorry if I got too defensive. I just totally took your post in the wrong way.


peggy:)

[Heavenly]

Well I'm going to be the thorn here and say I am totally into gentle discipline but do not agree with TCS at all (and I am also offended by that term because I take my son very seriously.) I honestly do not get how people think that a little child knows what is best for them. We were going outside today. It's snowing. my 11 month old hates getting his snowsuit on no matter what I do to try and make it fun. He screamed. I put the snow suit on anyways. IMO that is the RESPONSIBLE thing to do. Letting my 11 month old go out in just a track suit is negligent and I will never change my opinion on that. I am not trying to fight but since you said the thread could be for debate I thought I'd respond. I have read a lot of responses about this issue and went to a couple of boards on it to try and really get what it's about. And I still 100% do not agree! "gee you're standing on a table, go ahead." It is not socially acceptable to stand on tables and last time I checked my son will need to be a productive member of society. My son is a baby, a child. there is no possible way for him to know what is best because he has no experience. I do not spend my day thinking of ways to control him. I play with him and let him explore and try to make transitions happy and gentle. But if doesn't want to go to bed he's still going, being rocked to sleep in my arms, crying. Sleep is necessary - for our whole family. If he doesn't want to take a bath he's doing it. I am not going to breed germs because an 11 month old feels like boycotting bath time. And what happens when these kids are out in society. "well gee boss I don't feel like filing right now, I have different theories about the need for accounts payables to be filed." Buh bye! They get fired. We can not always get our own way and that's a fact. And IMO you are doing your child a disservice by making them believe otherwise. It is our responsibilty as parents to raise our children to make it in this world, not to think they ARE the world.

[Heavenly]

I haven't read the other responses yet but I have to say I completely disagree (and it might be a good idea if you said this is your opinion, not like it's fact). I had an abusive, neglected childhood. I never had any example of good parenting. I did not do any research on this subject during parenting. My son came out and I parented him by instinct. Then someone tells me it has a name (AP). Whatever. The point is my instincts told me to nurture, protect, love my child, never to hurt, hit, or berate. I listened to those instincts and we are both the better for it.

[Ms. Mom]

Larcy, Thank you for starting this post! It was me who suggested it.

Before the boards went down you had a great thread where people asked specific questions (like they're doing here) and you gave them examples of tcs.

Oh, how I wish there were some way to bring back the archives! It was a fantastic thread where everyone was throwing around ideas and learning from each other.

With a VERY feisty 4 yr. old I'm constantly reading to find more effective ways to deal with her passionate personality.;)

[Heavenly]

To me gentle discipline is discipline without yelling or hitting. Gentle discipline is discipline that seeks to teach not scold; to guide. Is this forum supposed to be for TCS? Because I am getting kind of annoyed that a lot of posts keep turning into "do it our way" posts. I'm not talking about the posts started specifically for TCS, I'm talking about ones where a person asks a question and they get the TCS response and when they respectfully disagree they are still hounded about it. Gentle discipline does not equal TCS, IMO. I do not agree with it and I realize that some people do and I am trying to be respectful of that. But I really don't feel the TCS people are making the same effort. All this talk about coercion - I don't like feeling like I am being coerced into a parenting style I don't agree with. Sorry if I've offended.

[larsy]

Sorry to keep repeating meyself, but...

TCS is a philosophy about non-coercive interaction between *parent* and *child*, not between non-related adults. Parents have a different responsibility to their selves and to their children, than they do to people in other relationships. While people frequently find that learning to live non-coercively in the most important relationships in their lives, has a big effect upon how they relate to the rest of the world, as well, please do not mistake the very special relationship responsibilities between parent and child as something that can or should be extended to the rest of the world.

The Autonomy Respecting Relationships list on Yahoogroups was set up to discuss the further implications of TCS theory, beyond the parent-child relationship.

Parents are the ones with the experience and knowlege and access to information and resources, and children are the ones who need help in aquiring those things for their selves.

We talk a lot about helping children get what they want. It seems to me that a lot of what they want, in those early years, is their parents' attention and help.

[larsy]

This is a good question. I respond to whatever I respond to from my point of view, which is unabashedly TCS, and is just one of the viewpoints offered on this forum. I figure that there are maybe hundreds of people lurking about who are learning and thinking about what they read on these boards. I try to depersonalize my discussion, because I believe it is wrong to violate the privacy of children by discussing them and their lives on a public forum.

So, when a person asks a question on these boards, do they realize that they are asking it for a lot of other people who, for whatever reason, do not actually type the words in themselves, but are asking the same questions in their minds and are learning from the answers, in their own way?

[abimommy]

I think Heavenly is speaking for quite a few people. Myself included....

Some of the TCS posts I have found to be argumentative, aggressive and sometimes plain rude.....and some of them are so long I can't even read them
my eye therapy can only do so much...

I think children would rather we discuss their lives than make some bizarre error in judgement that could cause them some sort of problem later.....

[lisamarie]

I'm also in agreement with abimommy and heavenly on this. I have not posted on any of the TCS posts~the posts have been too, too long and detailed for me as well.

But, others here are entitled to their opinion~in a gentle, non-coercion way. I have avoided the TCS threads, because personally I have not liked the tone and feel that gentle discipline works for myself and our family.

Warmly~

Lisa

[simonee]

Thanks Beth. You said exactly what I was thinking, too. Never mind that I'd never really heard of TCS until I started reading these boards a month ago; I definitely don't see myself as a TCS "disciple" even though many of my instincts match the TCS theories.

To me, the theoretical perspectives on childrearing are very unimportant and rather unconsequential, and I'm definitely aware that I'm in a relatively easy position to give my dd the "run of the house" because she's an only child and both me and dh work flexible hours at home. LIke you, I feel that our children are probably raised in very similar ways, and I respect every (and I mean that) parenting style that doesn't resort to emotional or physical abuse and that doesn't teach children any kind of bigotry. Even though I don't know you or anyone else who posts here regularly, I am pretty sure that none of these conscious, loving parents raises their children like that. I therefore respect all styles discussed on these boards, and I feel that there's many that I can learn a lot from. Larsy's comments often ring a bell with me, but there's many more that do. As far as the other go, nothing sets the mind to work like disagreeing! :)

I don't even feel that I have something as circumscribed as a "parenting style" -- more like a broad variety of ad hoc ideas and actions. No dogmatic beliefs here! And though I'm not a Christian, I agree with many Christian values, and I also agree that ultimately the decisions that influence my child's safety and health are mine, so it's almost impossible to avoid some degree of dictatorship.

One of my teachers often told us to get subscriptions to newspapers whose editorial stance felt wrong, because disagreeing would challenge and train our minds. I still agree with that :cool:

[Alexander]

Originally posted by erika
There have been some very interesting discussions on these boards regarding AP (attachment parenting) and TCS (taking children seriously). I wonder, however, whether use of these methods is a middle class luxury, only possible when parents have a certain minimum amount of free time and low life stress? Is this particularly the case when there is more than one child?


Any thoughts anyone?

To be an absolute purist, it may well be necessary. Although I knew next to nothing about TCS, I did quit my part time job when dd#2 was expected, don't run a car, and employed a part-time helper for the first 4.5 years of dd#1 life.

Now I'm skint! :p

But I see it more as an investment than a cost, and I know that I am just "lucky" to be able to do what we did. I am almost certain that this would be very difficult for most people unless they had money, or work that allowed them to do it this way.

I feel that the effort has been paying dividends.

(much harder with 2 kids though! Phew)

a

[Ms. Mom]

To answer the question, what is this forum for, I'll go to the explanation - Parenting without punishment is not just possible - it is the only effective way to discipline your child. Why spanking doesn't work. Alternatives to punishment. What is verbal abuse? Resources for being gentle with yourself and your children.

Another passage that I feel sums things up is from 'Natural Family Living' by Peggy O'Mara, Chapter 15 Discipline, pg. 187

Effective discipline is based on loving guidance. It is based on the belief that children are born innately good and that our role as parents is to nurture their spirits as they learn about limits and boundaries, rather than to curb their tendencies toward wrongdoing. Effective discipline presumes that children have reasons for their behavior and that cooperation can be engaged to solve shared problems.

This is a place to ask questions about discipline, to problems solve and come up with new ideas to raise our children in a loving and respectful way. Obviously, this means different things to different people. I think it's wonderful that we can discuss issues her as long as we don't judge or force our opinions.

I think that some of the tcs theories challenge our thinking and if it isn't feeling right for someone, it should not be put upon them. I'm really glad to see some tcs specific threads started here. This way everyone can have a voice without hurting feelings or making someone feel ashamed because their parenting style doesn’t agree with another’s.

These are of course my opinions. To remind everyone moderators are volunteers - we're just parents like everyone else here and we're learning as we go.

Let's all be gentle here! We can learn a great deal from each other.

Edited to say; when someone answers a tread with thier beleifs and heart we should appreciat what they are saying, weather it's TCS or AP. I don't mean to sound like a thread should only be AP or TCS. I just feel that everyone sould be respected for thier opinions and in tern be respectfull to others.

TCS and AP have a lot more in common then most of us think. Maybe when a post goes against what we feel, we can re-read it and take the information in the spirit in which it was given - with love and concern for children. I encourage everyone to continue learning from each other.

[k'smami]

This is a lot of work to be doing all by myself hint hint....;). LOL

I will try to answer all of your questions soon but right now I don't have the time. I usually have more time when I'm at work. I'll try coming back today during Ds' nap.

I do want to say to those who are trying to be TCS but haven't read the website to please do so. It is a great resource for ideas and you'll get a clear handle of what they mean by coercion. I've read every single page on it :).

I also recommend the book Without Boundaries by Jan Fortune Wood which I may be quoting to answer anti-TCS statements from time to time.

[peggy]

Edited because I've decided not to add my two cents afterall.
I made my point in another thread.

[Shakti]

Originally posted by k'smami


To me, using an obvious example, a distraction is something like a parent eating a chocolate chip cookie and when the child comes up and asks for a taste the parent says, "Wow! Look, a puppy!" and then when the child turns hir head the parent hides the cookies.

k'smami,
hmmm... yes I can how you could consider the shoes example as different from the cookie example. But it also seems like splitting hairs. :) I will think about this for a while and probably ask more questions. Many thanks for replying... and where *did* Larsy go? LOL She started the thread but you are doing most of the replying! ;)

Patti

[discovermoma]

When Larsy does return, she will have her hands full!!!

My thoughts on electrical plugs are that if they always remain a curiousity there will always be danger. I taught my daughter to pug in and unplug electrical cords when she first took notice of them. Now she knows what they are for and has never tried to stick anything else in them.

As far as TCS meaning, I think it means to take the whole child seriously. That means each child's needs, wants, likes, dislikes, etc... Children are little people that are learning from our guidance and support. Each situation is different because the wants and needs of each child is different.

Distracting a child away from something they want is not TCS. (ie hiding the cookies) Force does not always mean physical force. It can involve emotional manipulation. Giving a child a book to read while putting on shoes can be TCS if the reason the child didn't want to sit still was because the child was bored and just wanted something to do while they sat there. It is not TCS if the child didn't want the shoes on in the first place, but gave in with being offered a book when they realized there was no point in fighting it any longer.

These comments really scare me, "social acceptable" and "ready for the real world" and "how are they ever going to learn to lose". I'm not going to even attempt to address these. (Larsy, where the heck are you?)

[discovermoma]

I personally enjoy all the different points of view.

I hope this isn't turning into one of those "us" and "them" things.

I agree that Gentle Discipline does not equal TCS, but it is a part of it. Not one of us here AP's in the exact same way and that doesn't mean that people who don't use slings should not post other options or their reasons in the Parenting Issues because this would offend sling users. Not everyone co-sleeps, should they not be allowed to post opinions in the Night Waking discussions? That's silly!

If you don't like the TCS theory, ignore it. As far as the post being long, I didn't realize there was a maximum lengh rule.

[discovermoma]

Heavenly & abimommy: I could not find anywhere that you guys had posted a question, so how can you feel coerced into a parenting style with an answer that involved TCS when you didn't ask a question?

lisamarie: I did find one post from you where you gave a book about AP to a woman that didn't believe in AP, but was asking you questions about discipline. Why is that so different than getting a TCS response to a post about discipline? And no one mentioned TCS in answer to your post.

Where are all these people that are so offended to a TCS response to their post?

[mamakarata]

I wonder if some of this response is from before the boards went down? I remember getting into the middle of some pretty intense discussions, and can say that some posts were a bit strong from the tcs point of view at times. I had mentioned Waldorf education and got a response back like "I won't even get started on Waldorf" from a tcs'er. At least she refrained from a full attack!

But for the most part, I agree that we are here to share ideas, and have to admit that while I find loop holes in the tcs idea, I also learn a lot from it. I found myself finding ways it wouldn't work, and then decided instead to find ways it could work, and let the rest be as it is. I also agree that there are more similarities between ap and tcs than we think, and that everyone incorporates their own style into their parenting anyway. For me, I just use what works and discard the rest. As for the long posts, I just skim them if they don't suck me in. Like I am sure many might do with this post! ( :

[larsy]

Way to go, k'smami :), and all. You guys have been busy, discussing, while I've been out burning up the roads :) Cool!

There is a Taking Children Seriously t-shirt, that has a graphic of two profiles, one the adult with the mouth closed and the ear visible, the other the child with the mouth open. The adult is located in the upper right-hand corner of a square, oriented down toward the child in the lower left-hand corner.

This is not to say that all/most/many parents and adults do not take children seriously, but TCS philosophy advocates for taking children seriously in ways that conventional society does not. Children are not heard, are expected to learn their place and obey without question. This does not foster independent thinking and creative problem solving, both qualities that I think are crucial for people to learn. While the coercion factor is an important part of TCS theory, what the theory has to say about the way people learn is just as important, as are many other aspects.

I think that each person knows what they want. Small children might lack the experience and knowledge to be able to determine what is the best course of action in any particular instance. That is why they deserve to have access to their parents' best theories. Take the instance of a small child protesting being encased in a snowsuit to go out into the snow. Maybe child does not want to go out. Maybe the snowsuit is unbearable uncomfortable or too hot, it could be itchy or something is poking hir. There could be other options of suitable protective clothing that would be more comfortable and that child would be happy to put on. If a parent resorts to coercion as a matter of course, they are relaying the message that what child wants doesn't matter. The person with the power gets their way. And that is the world they will introduce their child to.

If a parent helps child get what they want- to not go outside at the time if child does not want to, to find comfortable clothing that will suit the needs of the climate and activity, to have interesting (to hir) things to do and help to do them as child wishes, child learns that they are able to affect the world, that they do matter. They can have confidence in their ability to know what they want and to be able to work together with others to get it, to the advantage of everyone. Parent helps their self and child to find common preferences, so child learns that others have preferences that are just as important as their own. They learn that one person does not have to lose in order for another to win.

Not socially acceptable to stand on tables? People dance on tables, make speeches from tables, see over a crowd by standing on tables, escape from mice by standing on tables, reach something high or clean a high place by standing on tables, use a table as an impromptu stage or a boat or a bed or an operating table. Children are capable of knowing the difference between times when it is a good idea to stand on tables, and when it is not- and often they come by this knowledge without someone explicitly saying to them 'it's ok to stand on the picnic table outside or the project table in the basement, but if you stand on the kitchen table mom will have your hide' But do parents really want their kids to behave in certain ways, motivated by fear of punishment/consequences of being found out by parents? This does not help kids learn to act based upon rational thought, but rather upon entrenched theories that make it harder for them to think clearly about, say, tables in the future, and then they'll pass that entrenchment right along to their kids and so on.

A parent can be honest with their child. They can explain that they don't want child to stand on the kitchen table because that is where they eat, and they don't want the floor germs from feet on the surface where they eat. Child might respond with, well then, I'll wash the table with a chlorine solution to kill any germs. Parent could respond, yeah, that would take care of that problem, but you might mar the finish, and the finish is really important to me. Could you do the standing on a different table? They can share theories back and forth, look for more information if they need to, and create new knowledge about how tables can be used and germs can be fought and finishes can be protected and explore if there are even better places to stand to get what child wants out of the experience.

OK, so maybe child is not interested in having a discussion about germs and tables. A preverbal child might require more action and less talk, though I think parent can still offer hir theories and preferences and alternatives that parent likes, and keep looking for the common preferences. parent might also need to question hir theories about how important the social acceptance is, do they really want child to be motivated by being socially acceptable or are there better moral theories to operate by, and does parent really believe that child will become an inveterate table-stander in all places and situations, and how can parent and child communicate about the difference between standing on the table at home when there is nothing on the table to harm or to harm child, and, say, at grandma's or at a restaurant or the library. They could have lots of fun imitating what they think the reactions of grandma and the librarian and so on would be. Lots of good information and learning to be had, for both parent and child.

Likewise, there are lots of ways for families to figure out how to get enough sleep and to get baths, without hurting anyone. Getting more information about germs and exactly what the realistic risks are and how others manage to get enough sleep when their children are small and have various preferences that were not what parents had expected is very helpful in evaluating one's theories. The internet is an invaluable source of information, we are very fortunate to add it to our arsenal of information sources.

People who respect their own and other's autonomy are apt to find/create jobs that they want to do. If a person takes a job with a full understanding of what is required and are willing to do what it takes, they will be doing what they want. It is possible to want something, even though parts of it are difficult or unpleasant. A person can find a way to make even those parts of a task or experience acceptable to their self.

Out of time, for now. :)

[k'smami]

Originally posted by RainCityMama

I've been really looking for alternative methods of parenting and
I was recently made aware of TCS - I must say that in theory it makes sense to me, but I fear my own failings may thwart my efforts to practice these methods.

I completely understand this. I was/am still scared of doing it wrong. And I'm sure in many cases I probably am because I am not perfect. I think the key is doing the best you can in not coercing and constantly looking for areas in which you are coercive and trying to fix those. Learn from your mistakes, don't beat yourself up for them.


Diaper changing - He hates them, but how can I leave him to wander about in a poopy diaper all day?

This seems to be a common situation with toddlers. I have seen parents deal with this in different ways. Some of them have found that the child doesn't mind having a diaper changed if hir can stand up for it. Some parents just take the child to the bathtub put in a few toys and the child gladly lets the diaper come off at the prospect of playing with water. Some parents decide to introduce a potty and let the child go diaperless most of the time. Some parents decide elimination timing will be the way to go with future children but I digress... LOL. Some parents find that the toddler is really struggling because the diaper changing is taking too long so they try a pull-up instead.

Touching outlets - He is obsessed with anything electrical, I totally appreciate that he's learning but I'm afraid that if I sat with him and worked the outlet this would only be encouraging him that this was okay.

The points I have been trying to make are about showing the child to do this safely. So yes, in a way the parent is showing the child that doing this is in the way the parent taught hir is ok. However if the danger of doing it unsupervised and unsafely is removed, then I as the parent would not fear this any longer. Plus Discovermama's example shows that it is very likely the child will lose interest in the cords after the child has gained the knowledge he/she needs from the cords. I have seen this myself with a child who did this when hir parents weren't looking. Once this child saw what , in this case, the socket protector (you know the childproof covers that are supposed to prevent children from touching sockets :rolleyes: ) was for, the child did not even look at the socket again.

Touching the fireplace/stove - Once again, he's learning - But if either happened to be hot this could cause serious injury that I'm not willing to do.

Again, I suggest demystifing these things when it is safe to do so, ie. when they are off and cool. If the child understands the concept of hot then a warning from the parent is good when these things are on, that they are hot. Doing mimicry in this case is really good. Pretending to touch the hot stove and saying "Ouch, hot!" helps the child understand the pain involved. At the risk of being called negligent, I will suggest that perhaps a parent can hold the child's hand close to the item in question so that the child can feel the heat emanating from it.

and my own selfish need for some order within my home - Is wanting a semi-clean home wrong? I don't care if we have toys everywhere but when my little person wants to drag out all the canned goods, beauty products and rip apart rolls of toilet paper do you just allow it?

IMO there are a lot of things that a child learns from making a mess. They can learn sorting and organization among other things. A parent could put away these items when the child is looking in the hopes that the child sees that this is what is done after it has all been pulled out. Making a game out of putting them back is a good idea too. I have seen this happen with a child who liked to throw all of the laundry on the floor. The parent made a game out of it by asking the child to bring hir the clothing items a few at a time so the parent could put them away. The parent allowed the child to try folding the clothes as well.

[k'smami]

Excellent post larsy! :)

[paula_bear]

Hello everyone! I must confess I did not read everything here, because I have my own question and limited time right now. Hope I am not repeating. Anyway, here goes. What exactly does one mean by coersion and non-coersion? Are we talking physical, psychological, or any form of coersion?

Let me give an example. On Monday morning 22 mo dd was wearing her Elmo slippers. Time for us to leave for LLL mtg. I asked her to put on coat, no resistance. Told her we were going to see the babies, she loves LLL and babies. Told her she needed to remove slippers to put on shoes. She didn't want to. I told her she could wear slippers, but then I would have to carry her to the car. She said, "WALK!" I gently explained that slippers may be worn inside only and she could continue wearing them, but she could not walk outside with them. Even though I saw an outburst coming, I let it happen. I sat down on the step and asked myself what dd needed. Then I asked dd if she would like to put Elmo slippers in diaper bag so that she could wear them later. She agreed to this.

Even though I hate to use labels and categories, I do find them useful. I feel that in this interaction w/ dd, I did everything possible to respect her autonomy and to help her to make her own decision that was acceptable to both of us. I believe that we as parents DO use our superior intellect and understanding of psychology, but we do not use it AGAINST our children! We are modeling the behavior we would like to see in them, we are helping to teach them about compromise and we are showing them that conflicts can be resolved without a power struggle or the use of what I would call violent tactics (call it coersion or whatever you like.) DD was very pleased with the outcome of this situation - walking to car independently was more important to her than wearing Elmo slippers - she subsequently forgot about them completely!

Anyway, sorry to post such a long-winded thread here, but I would like some clarification on the definition of coersion. I plan to print out this post as well as info from the TCS website - I always keep reading material handy for when DD falls asleep in car, etc.

Also, as far as following any child-rearing philosophy w/ more than one child, while it does get more difficult and requires more creativity, I think in the long run it makes life easier. Unfortunately I was not as well informed w/ 7.5 y/o DS, but am trying to gently incorporate knowledge as I aquire it. I find that he responds so much better to gentle discipline than to childish outbursts on my part.

I look forward to reading all of your posts and continuing to discuss TCS, etc.

[k'smami]

I had trouble seeing how one can feel "coerced" into TCS. I decided to look up the word to see if there was some definition that I was missing.

According to the American Heritage Dictionary

coerce:
1. To force to act or think in a certain way; compel
2. To dominate, restrain or control forcibly
3. To bring about by force.

I fail to see how someone posting something on the basis of TCS fits the above definition. Unless you intened to say that you felt coerced into thinking of your parenting style (which I can understand although not believe), I don't think anyone here has the power to actually coerce you into anything. Sure the TCS posts could annoy you, frustrate you, and -heck I'll just say it, teach you something since we have an opportunity to learn from every experiece BUT coerce? How?

I will say this, it's not like this board is being overrun by TCS. As far as I know there are only 4 people out of what is it now 1000? that post within a TCS frame of mind so to speak. So again, I'll restate that I fail to see how you are being "coerced" into following TCS. I would venture to say that it's impossible because that's what the ignore button is for. You don't even have to see those responses.

I do not intend to sound hostile. I am just hurt by this thread. Or to use a more approprite word, offended.

offend
1. To cause anger, resentment, or wounded feelings in.

Peace

Only Love Prevails

[k'smami]

From the TCS website www.tcs.ac

Coercion

Our definition of coercion makes precise the idea of being compelled to act against one's own will:

By “coercion” we mean:

1. the psychological state of enacting one idea or impulse while a conflicting impulse is still active in one's mind.


This leads to some subsidiary meanings:

2. the action of intentionally or recklessly placing someone in a state of enacting one theory while a rival theory is still active in the person's mind;
3. behaviour that is intended, or likely, to do this.


Coerce:

* Intentionally or recklessly to place someone in a state of coercion (1); or
* to behave in a way that is intended, or likely, to do this.


Coercive:

* likely to place someone in a state of enacting one theory while a rival theory is still active in his or her mind.


It all hinges on the first definition, labelled (1). If coercion in that sense occurs for any reason, it is harmful. The others are either harmful or risk harm, depending on whether coercion in sense (1) actually happens or is merely risked. (The question of why it is harmful is another matter. Here, I just want to familiarise you with the way we use the words.)

The problem is that if one engages in behaviour intended to or likely to cause (1), that is risking harming the person. One cannot tell in advance that any particular action will definitely cause coercion (1), and indeed, coercion (1) can exist without outward signs of distress, so one cannot reliably know that a person is not in a state of coercion (1). What one can do, therefore, is to think about what actions might be likely to cause coercion (1). Therefore, what we do on TCS is to try to point out actions and behaviours which seem risky in this respect.

Having said all that, behaviours which are intended or likely to cause children to enact one theory while a rival theory is still active in their mind, very often succeed. That is why we argue strongly against many of the methods commonly used in conventional parenting.

In any particular case, a child might have the creativity not to get into the psychological state of enacting one theory while a rival theory is still active in his mind, and thereby avoid harm, but the point is, if we are engaging in coercion (3), the child may well not be able to avoid coercion (1) so it behoves us to try not to behave in ways likely to cause coercion (1).

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consent/Non-coercion

By consent we mean full, free, genuine agreement, or unanimous consent. A consent-based (or “non-coercive”) solution to a problem (which we call a “common preference”) is one that all involved parties actively prefer, not one that they merely reluctantly agree to. This can be contrasted with compromise.

Unanimous consent is the criterion of decision-making in TCS relationships. Wherever there is a disagreement, the parties jointly create a common preference.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

[paula_bear]

P.S. I answered my own question. TCS website has glossary that defines, among other things, coersion. Well, will be happy to further debate this topic, sorry for being too lazy to check that out first!

Warmly,
Paula

[Netty]

[please forgive any problems in format...I'm still trying to figure out how this works now :-)]

Heavenly wrote:

***Well I'm going to be the thorn here and say I am totally into gentle discipline but do not agree with TCS at all (and I am also offended by that term because I take my son very seriously.) I honestly do not get how people think that a little child knows what is best for them.***

TCS advocates do not claim that children know what is best for them. Children need parents (or caregivers) to help them do what they want to do safely and in ways that are preferable to all parties.

*** We were going outside today. It's snowing. my 11 month old hates getting his snowsuit on no matter what I do to try and make it fun. He screamed. I put the snow suit on anyways. IMO that is the RESPONSIBLE thing to do. Letting my 11 month old go out in just a track suit is negligent and I will never change my opinion on that. ***

TCS families decide activities together and no one preference over-rides another. If a child does not want to put on a snowsuit, s/he doesn't put it on. If the child wants to go outside without it, the parent brings it along and offers it frequently. With a very young child or infant, the parent might wrap hir in a blanket or reconsider the outing altogether. I think it is irresponsible to force something on a child that s/he obviously does not want.

*** And I still 100% do not agree! "gee you're standing on a table, go ahead." It is not socially acceptable to stand on tables and last time I checked my son will need to be a productive member of society. My son is a baby, a child. there is no possible way for him to know what is best because he has no experience.***

As you say, your child is young and there is plenty of time for him to learn what is and what is not socially acceptable. Is it socially acceptable to force someone into a snowsuit against their will? A child stands on the table because it is fun or s/he is curious or wants to be tall or get attention. Perhaps the parent can help the child satisfy those needs some other way. Or perhaps the parent can help the child stand on the table in a safe way. Young children want to explore. Help them.

***I do not spend my day thinking of ways to control him. I play with him and let him explore and try to make transitions happy and gentle. But if doesn't want to go to bed he's still going, being rocked to sleep in my arms, crying. Sleep is necessary - for our whole family.****

This makes no sense to me. Do you go to bed when someone tells you to whether you are tired or not? A TCS family finds ways to accomodate the sleep needs of all family members, not just the biggest and strongest ones.

*** If he doesn't want to take a bath he's doing it. I am not going to breed germs because an 11 month old feels like boycotting bath time.***

There are many alternatives to baths. A shower? A sponge bath? A swim? Wait until s/he wants a bath? I don't see how forcing someone into a bath will encourage them to like baths.

*** And what happens when these kids are out in society. "well gee boss I don't feel like filing right now, I have different theories about the need for accounts payables to be filed." Buh bye! They get fired. We can not always get our own way and that's a fact. And IMO you are doing your child a disservice by making them believe otherwise. It is our responsibilty as parents to raise our children to make it in this world, not to think they ARE the world.***

What is your idea of "making it"? I think that "making it in the world" means being as happy as possible without interfering with someone else's happiness. This is what TCS is all about! :)

[EarthWind]

Hey everyone!

I don't post very often and there are only a few forums that I frequent. Gentle Discipline is where I often find myself since I have a 16mo ds and am now thinking about how to be in relationship with him respectfully as he grows older (I hesitate to use the word 'discipline' since I personally have very negative associations with that word). I just want to say that I am very, very grateful for the TCS presence here on this board. I am a newbie at TCS and am always looking for new ways of perceiving situations that I may encounter in the future. I find the TCS input to be very helpful indeed. I am sure that there are other ways of 'disciplining' our children that don't involve TCS, but, it seems to me that TCS could be seen as integral to gentle discipline. However, that's just my opinion.

Mostly, I just want to relay my gratefulness to you moms who are practicing TCS. Please continue to provide your perspective on things in this forum. Many of us are learning so much from your feedback!

Peace,

Michelle

[peggy]

Dear k'smami,
I am sorry you are offended. In the other thread I did say I felt "coerced" into TCS with a smiley face after it, intending it to be a play on words so to speak. Not that I literally felt that way.
I also said I thought there was room for both AP and TCS in this forum. The only thing I took exception to was the fact that in some posts it is implied that we are not taking our children seriously, that we are coercing them at every turn. I guess some of us were getting offended because we felt that instead of offering a another way of doing things, we were being told we were doing it the wrong way. At least that is where my frustration was coming from anyway.
I felt in some instances after answering the original posters question with a TCS slant , the person posting about TCS would then pick apart the answers of some of the others who responded in the post. That I did find irritating.
I hope I am explaining myself in the way I intended. I don't want to see this animosity between the TCS ers and the AP ers. There is room enough for everybody here as long as we respect each others opinion. I really am sorry that I offended you, that was not my intention.

peggy

[k'smami]

This paragraph comes from Without Boundaries from Jan Fortune Wood. Although larcy and netty and discovermama touched upon some of these thoughts, I like how this paragraph puts it together.


We live in a society where children are routinely deprived of the common rights of humanity, where they often cannot choose what to eat or wear, whom they associate with, when they can sleep, what they can learn or even what they can enjoy as leisure. Love is neither compensation nor justification for such total lack of autonomy. The suffering that arises is not character building or a preparation for living in the real world, but rather damages the ability to problem solve creatively and consider solutions rationally. It perpetuates an acceptance of suffering and an inhability to follow one's preferences into adulthood. Children whose autonomy is respected do not expect to never have to solve problems or that life will be handed to them on a plate or that they will never have to work hard at realising thier preferences. Autonomous children know that problem solving is a feature of real life and growth, that risk is inevitable and that change and criticism and new solutions are always going to be needed. What they do not do is conflate problems with suffering or effort with sacrifice. When we live in an ethos of consent, creativity and rationality, boundaries become simply irrelevant. (page 84)

I also want to quote this sentence on page 85:


The prisons are not full of TCS children. Whilst TCS is not primairly concerned with outcome-based parenting, I think we can confidently predict that, unless TCS children are living under unjust and illiberal laws, this situation is likely to continue.

[Heavenly]

I do not have the time to respond to all of this right now but I wanted to say Larsy you are REALLY starting to irritate me with your attitude. You are infering that because I do not practice TCS I am not gentle towards my son (mama will have your hide???). I do not want to start a fight so listen and listen carefully. I do not believe in spanking, yelling, raising my voice. I always try and direct my son in positive ways and do things to try and make him comfortable (not going out when he's tired, etc.). But I do not agree with TCS, okay? I don't think that a parent is being evil or wrong to tell their child when to go to bed, or to take a bath, or wear a jacket. I'm pretty my sure my son will grow up just fine with all my coercion. :rolleyes:

[k'smami]

Dear Heavenly,

I think this is why larsy stressed when she began this thread that people speak hypthotically about children and parents. It is my opinion, and please larsy correct me if I'm wrong, that larsy was speaking about people in general and used an extreme example to illustrate. I also don't believe I've heard anyone here use the word evil.

It is your right to not agree with TCS. Please remember that you offered to debate it by posting on this thread and saying so.

[Ms. Mom]

Heavenly - Your feeling frustrated because the tcs theory dosn't feel right to you and your feeling judged. I can understand your feelings and am sorry that your feeling under attack.

It seems a lot of our members are curious about tcs and do want to discuss it in this forum. This is the logical place to so and I'm glad to see this thread so that everyone interested can come here and learn.

Sometimes the tcs theories do seem a bit much for many members, I can certainly understand that. Before the boards went down there were a few times things got heated. What worked was to have a thread where people could come and discuss the theory and others could skip by.

EVERYONE is welcome on the Mothering Boards and I appreciate the diverse views that are discussed here.

We all beleive in treating children with gentleness, love and respect. Let's do the same here to each other.

If anyone would like to discuss this further please feel free to pm me or email me jsavageau@earthlink.net any time. I always welcome your views.

Edited to say; Welcome back Netty - I wondered where you had gone.

[geomom]

I am not formally into TCS. I think that they may have chosen an unfortunate name for the movement since it has a tendancy to put people off. The immediate reaction I usually see when someone brings it up is along the lines of 'of course, I take my children seriously. But that doesn't mean my toddler knows what is best.'

I have been slowly moving toward consensus as the means of interacting with my child. My attempts at coersion were short lived and just didn't seem like a productive endevour. I am not above some positive reinforcement now and then. :) But when dd and I are not in agreement from the get go, I start working toward a consensus and not just on getting my way.

I too faced hysterical cries at the sight of the snow suit. We found this really perplexing since she has worn it frequently without protest in the past. We dressed her in many layers for a week while we figured out what it was about the snow suit that offended her sensibilities. It turned out that the collar was bothering her. We were able to alter the collar and explain what we did so that the snow suit is once again acceptable to her.

[Linda in Arizona]

Some of the TCS posts I have found to be argumentative, aggressive and sometimes plain rude



and condescending and judgmental. As a mom here who posts about real things with my kids and how I handle them, I'm sick of having my actions judged by people who believe there is one right way.

There are lots of right ways!


I think children would rather we discuss their lives than make some bizarre error in judgement that could cause them some sort of problem later..... [/B]

agreed. I think if I loudly anouced at a Christmas party that one of my children wears pullups at night, it would be an invasion of her privacy. To talk about something quite personally here with other moms who might have experience or tips, can only help. I perfer to raise my kids will all the information and insight I can get. That takes being open and honest. Since my kids are always with me, talking about real problems on-line is a way that I can find other options without invading their privacy.

[Linda in Arizona]

Originally posted by larsy
Sorry to keep repeating meyself, but...

TCS is a philosophy about non-coercive interaction between *parent* and *child*, not between non-related adults.


so it is OK if someone else coerces your child, you coerce someone else's child, you coerce your spouse, etc?????

To me, respecting other people's points of view and feelings are very important, be it my children, other adults, etc. I think we should always respect others' right to feel differently than we do, work toward finding creative solutions to differences, and respecting someone's right to come to a different conclusion when no agreement is reached.

[k'smami]

Originally posted by Linda in Arizona



so it is OK if someone else coerces your child, you coerce someone else's child, you coerce your spouse, etc?????

To me, respecting other people's points of view and feelings are very important, be it my children, other adults, etc. I think we should always respect others' right to feel differently than we do, work toward finding creative solutions to differences, and respecting someone's right to come to a different conclusion when no agreement is reached.

I understood what larsy meant as, there is nothing damaging about not helping strangers get what they want. You can agree to disagree or you can stop associating with them. This is not the case with children. With children and their parents, agreeing to disagree happens very rarely unless you're talking about philosophical ideals. You can't stop associating with your children. You must deal with them daily and this initmate relationship can't be compared with any associations you have with strangers.

[Ms. Mom]

Thanks geomom. Your right about the name. I think it puts peoples defenses up.

I like the snowsuit story. Sometimes a little one needs some time to be able to properly communicate why they don't want to do something. You gave her the time to do so and she must feel so releived that you understand.

[larsy]

So, it's not possible to take one's children more seriously than before? To recognize ways in which one isn't taking them as seriously as one would like to? Sure, everyone's first thought is 'I take my children seriously'. What's the next thought? 'I'm so glad to find others who do too, maybe I can get some more information so that I can do better'? Getting defensive might be a clue, good information, that entrenched theories are flaring.

Human beings are fallible. No matter how seriously we take other people and ourselves, there are still places where we can learn and change and do better. Living takes effort, no matter how one lives. Spending that energy on relating to loved ones in tired patterns that do not support good relationships, that undermine trust and love and instead produce bad feelings and stunt learning... well, is that energy well-spent? If there are better ways to direct energy, to improve relationships and lives, wouldn't you want to know about it? Even if it involves some effort and pain and prodding one's tender spots, to hear and understand and implement it in one's own life?

[Netty]

Originally posted by geomom
I am not formally into TCS. I think that they may have chosen an unfortunate name for the movement since it has a tendancy to put people off. The immediate reaction I usually see when someone brings it up is along the lines of 'of course, I take my children seriously. But that doesn't mean my toddler knows what is best.'

Yes, that is the reaction we usually get :-) But when you think about it, "Taking Children Seriously" is a very fitting name. Yes, most parents think they *do* take their children seriously, but when it comes down to it, they often don't. And that is what the movement is trying to point out. Children are so often treated as second--or even third--rate people. What the TCS movement is trying to change is this very attitude to children. A child who wants to drink bleach, for example, should be taken seriously. No, that doesn't mean that the parent should give the child bleach to drink, but should look at ways of satisfying the child's very *rational* desire. Because we assume that the child's desre is rational, we first realize that the desire is *not* to poison hirself. From there, we try to determine how to satisfy that desire. The child wants a bottle to explore? The child is thirsty? The child wants attention? And so on. We do not simply snatch the bleach away and say "No! Danger!" and leave it at that. Of course we help the child understand danger. But we take their desires seriously at the same time. Many anti-tcs parents will say something like, "I *do* take my children seriously" and then add a "but" immediately after. Isn't that rather telling? ;-) Taking someone seriously does not mean doing whatever they want. It means that we consider their desires on par with our own.

BTW, thanks for the welcome back, Mrs Mom!...I've been frantically busy lately, but I hope I can help out here more in the next while :-)

Netty

[discovermoma]

I'm not picking on you, your just the only one right now posting why you do not believe in TCS and what you think is wrong with TCS. I'm arguing my opinion is all.

You said you don't spank. How do you feel when you see someone spanking their child? Do you think to yourself that this parent is doing wrong to the child and that there are better ways to discipline than by hitting?

That's how I feel when I read in your post that you make your child do something that they don't want to do. I think there is a better way of doing it and I want to share this way with you.

For example making a child take a bath. TCS way does not mean that you should have a dirty child. It means (to me) that I should find out why the child doesn't want to take a bath. Is the water temperature too cold or hot, are they bored with the bath toys and I should rotate toys to keep her interested, does she have diaper rash and the water/soap is causing it to burn, am I splashing water in her face which she doesn't like, is the big tub too scary, was she doing something that interested her when I told her it was bath time...?

Same thing for wearing a coat. I don't think any child likes to be cold. Maybe there is something about the coat that is causing problems. Is the zipper pinching or scratching, does a snowsuit limit mobility...and so on.

I try to put myself in my dd's shoes to find out what it is about something that she is resisting. Power struggles with a child is a lose/lose situation, but finding a common preference is a win/win situation. It makes the days I spend with my dd so much better. It has greatly enhanced my marriage. It has allowed me to become more open minded. TCS doesn't make my life hard, it makes it more enjoyable.

[bigcats]

I have two questions regarding TCS. The first:

When I checked out the website, there was a list that said something like "If you believe any of these statements, you probably will not find the TCS list supportive" and then one of the statements was about children learning from natural consequences. What's coercive about natural consequences? When a child throws a treasured toy out a second story window, and the toy breaks on the sidewalk below (after being given information by the parent that this may happen)... is this something the child cannot, or should not, learn from? I'm wondering if maybe the website authors were referring to "logical consequences" - those that are parent-arranged, such as "If you throw your food at the dinner table, you are done with dinner and you need to leave the table".

Secondly, can TCS be used with children who seem *not* to want to avoid hurting themselves? I work with kids with emotional disorders stemming frmo abuse and neglect, and it seems to me that the assumption the kids do not want to cause harm to themselves is a false one. These kids will intentionally do things they know will be painful or harmful to themselves (putting sand in their eyes, glass in their mouths, walking over to a child who is tantrumming and assaultive, drinking Lysol, etc). It's not just that the child does not have information that these things are harmful... the child does them again and again, after having experienced the painful sensations.

Thanks for your help in clarifying these issues.

[geomom]

To all you TCS folks, I do understand that TCS wants children to given basic human respect and understanding. I just wanted to point out that even those who agree with the philosophical underpinnings of TCS can be put off by the language.

I do tend to disagree that humans are primarily rational. I see emotional responses as being primary and rational thought as secondary. That doesn't mean that I think rational thought is inferior. But I see emotional repsonses as being the basic means by which humanity deals with experiences. For me, rational thought is a means of interpretting and using emotional responses. I also do not see my toddler's thought processes as being rational. Much of what she communicates at this point is magical thinking and fantasy. But these are her means of dealing with the world and just as valid as her mother's love of rationl thought.

[fire]

I was raised with some "good" and bad" (used loosely) parenting skills and also instincts. I found it very easy to intuitively nurture my newborn. However it, for me has become increasingly more difficult, complicated. Because we are all different and each child individual I see that guidelines aren't always relevant but it is not necessary to totaly devalue them. Sometimes I get great help from theories and 'psycology' inspired parenting systems. I think that most of the social sciences are very altruistic; handy in the way that they look at a child growing with an objective point of view, detached from the deep emotions involved with raising your own family. I think this advise is very important and it is mostlikely coming from a place of love for all children. Also for the same reason, I can see how we could rightly distrust the full accuracy of some band box certainty from one who is not directly intimately connected with our loved ones.

[MamaLeah]

I have been mulling over many points of view for the last several months. As many others, the world of being a parent is new to me, and I don't always know what to do/what is best/what makes sense/what will ultimately be the best path. I have posted very few questions and no opinions about TCS because I hadn't had time to really openly explore the ideas. They were very new to me. I have felt defensive and angry at times, but tried to take the time to let my emotions teach me something. I feel like the TCSers take a lot of heat, but I have never seen any posts from a pro-TCS person that in my view was not respectful, thoughtful and honest.

I realized today that I am a better parent because of the ideas I have been exposed to here. It is not easy to open yourself up to a new way of thinking about the world, and I have struggled with it. But because of TCS ideas, I trust my daughter more, I hear her more accurately, I am more calm and patient when she has trouble expressing her needs or wants. These are huge things. Especially the trust. I mean trust is the deepest sense of the word. And I truly believe that she trusts me more, is more able to understand my needs and is more patient with me. I don't think I am ready to label myself a certain way. I'm still learning so much. But I wanted to let those of you who have spent so much time trying to explain these ideas, that I for one am grateful and I think you have improved the quality of my and my daughter's lives. Thank you.

Leah

[k'smami]

Originally posted by bigcats
I work with kids with emotional disorders stemming frmo abuse and neglect, and it seems to me that the assumption the kids do not want to cause harm to themselves is a false one. These kids will intentionally do things they know will be painful or harmful to themselves (putting sand in their eyes, glass in their mouths, walking over to a child who is tantrumming and assaultive, drinking Lysol, etc). It's not just that the child does not have information that these things are harmful... the child does them again and again, after having experienced the painful sensations.


This illustrates how coercion damages thinking and inhibits learning. These children were abused and neglected i.e. expericenced very damaging instances of coercion. I don't think these children are a good example about how children think so cases like these should not be used against the majority of children to say that they aren't rational (not implying that you're saying this, I'm just throwing it out there). This is a very interesting case, I don't know how one would handle these behaviors using TCS. I'll think about it though.

There are a couple of articles on the TCS website that discuss Natural Consequences. According to TCS, natural consequences should be avoided because if parents were able to stop the consequence from happening and didn't then they are being coercive because they are trying to teach their child a "lesson" about whatever the action the child did that the parent disagreed with.

For instance imagine a 6 year old left a precious, delicate toy on the floor. The parent sees it there and thinks that if it stays there it might get broken by someone passing by who may trip on it. Instead of picking it up and giving the child a warning about what happens when you leave delicate things on the floor, the parent decides that this is a Natural Consequence of leaving the toy on the floor (lets say that this is not the first time the child leaves something delicate on the floor) and as such does not remove the toy and someone trips and breaks it. This is coercive because the parent is imposing their will on the child's property. "That toy deserves to get broken because it was left on the floor." Would the parent do that if a guest was the one who left something on the floor? Would the parent say, "That deserves to get broken because so and so left it where it's not supposed to be"? IME the parent would pick the item up to ensure its safety. Why would the parent do this with a guest but not their beloved child?

[Irishmommy]

I would just like to say that I'm with Heavenly on this one. I have a friend who parents like that (TCS, but I don't think she gives it a name), and her child is the biggest brat going. Everything is always what suits her child, no matter how it hurts/inconveniences/annoys other people. For example, at a restaurant, kid wants to run around, kid gets to run around - even with waitstaff carrying trays, coffee pots, etc., and who would be blamed if someone tripped over the kid and the kid was hurt? The parents sure wouldn't be thinking "oh, maybe my kid shouldn't do that"! Or, kid is really tired (obvious to everyone except mom, kid's not particulary verbal), mom keeps child up because child says no to bed. Which is better for kid - following what he says verbally, or what he says body language? This particular kid (3 years old) thinks that everyone on earth should bow to her, and treats everyone like they are only here to serve her (or take her seriously!). She is going to be one miserable kid when she hits school and all of a sudden isn't the centre of the universe, and I don't think her parents have done her any favours.

[larsy]

Irishmommie, what you describe is not TCS.

[Linda in Arizona]

Originally posted by discovermoma
You said you don't spank. How do you feel when you see someone spanking their child? Do you think to yourself that this parent is doing wrong to the child and that there are better ways to discipline than by hitting?

That's how I feel when I read in your post that you make your child do something that they don't want to do. I think there is a better way of doing it and I want to share this way with you.



My, how very condescending of you! This is a gentle discipline board, not a TCS/NCP soapbox. I feel that there needs to be respect for all parents praticing (or trying to practice) positive discipline, even if that takes a different turn that it does in my home.

I attended a conference section on TCS. I've read Without Boundaries. I practiced NCP for a while. Ultimately, I decided it was not the right path for my family. I still work very hard to find common preferences with my children, but if we can't it doesn't mean that they simply get their way.

This attititude that "there is a better way of doing it and I want to share this way with you" is getting old. Just because there is a better way for your family, doesn't mean that it is the one right way for all families.

[Jish]

After reading all the TCS posts I feel like I am at an impasse. I have made it clear that although I agree with some of the fundementals, I am not a whole hearted subscriber. I just read the post about the six year old and the toys left on the floor and here is my problem. I feel like it is a no win situation. If I leave the toy on the floor I have coersed my child with my will in my desire to have her learn natural consequences since if my guest had left something on the floor I would have picked it up. Yet if I pick up the toy for my child, with or without an explanation, I am again forcing my will on my child (or at least my child's toy;) ) since my child made the decision to leave it there in the first place. It often seems like a no win situation where the battle of the wills is concerned.

All in all, I think that we are all more alike than we are different and if we visited each others homes it would often be difficult to determine who "practices" TSC and who doesn't. We all have different personalities, different children and different priorities in our lives that shape what we want for our children and and how we choose to raise them. We have different thresholds for frustration as do our children and we must tailor our discipline and our lifestyle to our individual needs and to our children and families needs. I personally tend to read, for example, Heavenlys posts and see myself in them I can relate to her more than I can Larsy. But in the end, we all take our children seriously or we wouldn't be posting here. Anyone else with me?

[bigcats]

quoted from k'smama:


I don't think these children are a good example about how children think so cases like these should not be used against the majority of children to say that they aren't rational (not implying that you're saying this, I'm just throwing it out there). This is a very interesting case, I don't know how one would handle these behaviors using TCS. I'll think about it though.

To clarify, no, I didn't mean to imply with my example that the majority of children aren't rational. I'm simply trying to decide if TCS would be a good fit with the children I work with.

Regarding natural consequences... in my example the child was given the information that the toy might be damaged by the fall from the window. So then it is still the parent's responsiblity to prevent the toy from being damaged? Using the honored guest analogy, if my guest were eating her sandwich on my couch, I might point out to her that if she chooses to eat there, my dog might snatch the sandwich from her. If she chooses to continue eating the sandwich on my couch, and my dog does snatch it from her, I don't think I'd feel obligated to replace the sandwich for her, even if she was upset about it.

I guess I should check out the discussions about natural consequences on the TCS site that you mention :)

[k'smami]

Originally posted by jbcjmom
After reading all the TCS posts I feel like I am at an impasse. I have made it clear that although I agree with some of the fundementals, I am not a whole hearted subscriber. I just read the post about the six year old and the toys left on the floor and here is my problem. I feel like it is a no win situation. If I leave the toy on the floor I have coersed my child with my will in my desire to have her learn natural consequences since if my guest had left something on the floor I would have picked it up. Yet if I pick up the toy for my child, with or without an explanation, I am again forcing my will on my child (or at least my child's toy;) ) since my child made the decision to leave it there in the first place. It often seems like a no win situation where the battle of the wills is concerned.

If a parent could ask the child if hir intended to leave the toy on the floor or if the child forgot, that would be one way for the parent to make sure that the parent isn't imposing hir will on the child. Parent could share hir theories about why precious toys should not be left on the floor and what could happen if they were left there if the child says that the toy was left there on purpose.

I would like those who don't follow TCS to define what taking children seriously means to them since I see that a lot of what is being argued with is terminology.

[k'smami]

Originally posted by bigcats
Regarding natural consequences... in my example the child was given the information that the toy might be damaged by the fall from the window. So then it is still the parent's responsiblity to prevent the toy from being damaged? Using the honored guest analogy, if my guest were eating her sandwich on my couch, I might point out to her that if she chooses to eat there, my dog might snatch the sandwich from her. If she chooses to continue eating the sandwich on my couch, and my dog does snatch it from her, I don't think I'd feel obligated to replace the sandwich for her, even if she was upset about it.





If the parent has told the child what would happen if the toy goes out the window and the child wants to do this anyway, then I would try to see what the child wants to learn from doing this. If the child is trying to learn about gravity or what happens to things when they fall from a high place then perhaps the parent could suggest that a different, less important toy could be used instead or even a piece of fruit. Maybe the child doesn't like the toy at all and wants to get rid of it in this manner, then no problem, no need to replace it once it goes out the window. Even here a parent could suggest to the child that if hir doesn't like it then it could be donated to someone who would like it and then that rotten apple can go flying out the window instead. Even if the child still insists on throwing the particular toy out the window I would probably replace it. Why? Maybe the child now regrets this decision and feels bad for having done it. (I know I've done things that I've regretted later) I think the child has learned what hir needed to learn from the experience and will probably not do this again in the future. So not replacing the toy would IMO be a form of punishment and as such coercive. And in the end it's just a toy.

[Jish]

To imply that I don't take my children seriously if I don't practice the TCS theory is extremely insulting. You are doing what you feel is best for your family and child. When you can provide unargueable proof that your way is the right way to raise a child I will gladly adopt your theory, but at this point that is all it is, a theory - a method. As an educator I have had too many child/developmental psychology classes to believe that giving in to my child's will is always the right thing to do, nor do I need to always negotiate on small issues, ex. wearing a coat. Many things that our children do are due to their age and developmental phase. I'm not going into specifics.

I take my children very seriously. I take their health seriously. I work with their pediatrician to ensure that they are as healthy as can be. I take their needs seriously and provide for their needs and much of the time for their wants too. I take their feelings seriously, and apologize when I have hurt them. I work with them to find solutions when our wants/needs don't mesh, but as the mother there are things that must be done, and they must come along for the ride (wearing a coat.) Contrary to what you believe, I think that it is healthy for my children to learn that sometimes we need to concede to the wants and needs of others. A child who learns to "give in" and put others first becomes a child who learns that other's needs are as important, and at times more important than his own. I think that it is important that my child knows that when I tell him to put on his coat it is because I love him and I don't want him to be cold. I want him to know that he can count on me to protect him. I think that small children who make every decision in their lives and are allowed to negotiate everything will fail to see their parents as someone they can count on for all the answers. I think when the questions get bigger (drugs, sex) these children are going to look for someone to tell them that drugs are wrong and they should wait to have sex, but are instead going to be told to be careful. I had friends who were allowed to negotiate everything with their parents, and they were often miserable. One friend once told me that she wished her parents would give her a curfew and rules, so that she would know that they loved her.

I strive to make my son's confident and independent people, but not at the expense of others. I take this very seriously. I want my sons to know that I love them every minute of the day, even when they are mad at me because I enforced the rules of the house. Rules that have been made in the best interest of the whole family. I listen to my children's wants and I weigh them against their needs. I think that this is were we differ. We should not get everything that we want, in my opinion it isn't healthy, but we should get everything that we need. My job as a parent is to ensure that my child gets everything that he needs, my love, my attention, my respect, etc, and to get some of what he wants. It is here where we often negotiate. I think it is equally important that my child see that I too, don't always get what I want. Thus the reason that my childs wants often come before my own. This is negotiation and cooperation between me and my children. We must each learn to balance our needs and wants together.

For every book you can find saying that your method is right, or the best, I can find ten saying elsewise (although I may not agree with them all.) For every expert you have saying that TCS is the right way or the best way, I can find dozens of experts saying differently. Parenting is trial and error, and we are all doing the best that we can. I am sure that we all disagree with each others opinions on many things in life but I take serious offense when you insinuate that you care more for your children that I do for mine, or that you take your children more seriously than I do mine. Pardon the snideness in my next comment, but after being told that I do not take my childen seriously I feel it is justified. Perhaps that selfish attitude is the result of the TCS theory. My apologies in advance.

[laelsweet]

looking for more ideas about how to handle cords, plugs, outlets, the electricity problem. dear child is very interested and although parents had a discussion with an 'expert' (parent and engineer) about potential dangers, parents are still in need of ways to talk about it with a toddler (few words)

secondly, a situation. let's say, it's almost christmas in a house where a couple of families live together, a young family and an old family. old family is used to their traditions, their objects; dc in young family is very young and really wants to touch these objects, really really really, and some traditions have already been altered to suit everyone (common preference found for various things). unfortunately young family is quite busy and cannot reproduce most items of interest (eg. gingerbread house, delicate ornaments). dc is young enough that verbal explanation and discussion is not always an ideal approach.

ideas please! and t h a n k y o u

[k'smami]

Originally posted by jbcjmom
To imply that I don't take my children seriously if I don't practice the TCS theory is extremely insulting.

I'm assuming this statement is directed at me because I was the one who answered your post before this one. Please forgive me if I am assuming wrong.

I would like for you to tell me where I implied this. I merely asked what taking children seriously is to you. To me, it is described very clearly with TCS. I want to know where you are coming from, that is all.

In general what I have seen here is that people who have criticised that TCS is negligent or misguided and argue that they do take children seriously but do not say how. They proceed to provide examples of why TCS wouldn't work. And proceed to talk about how the name is insulting. I would like to get past the name. I am here to learn. I want to hear other peoples views. I thank you for having answered the question.


Many things that our children do are due to their age and developmental phase. I'm not going into specifics.

This may be true but I don't understand what you are trying to say with this statement.

Contrary to what you believe, I think that it is healthy for my children to learn that sometimes we need to concede to the wants and needs of others.

Ok. Tell me why you believe this. Maybe I am wrong to think differently. Maybe I won't realize it today but how can I realize it in the future with no rationale?

A child who learns to "give in" and put others first becomes a child who learns that other's needs are as important, and at times more important than his own.

I would say that children learn that other people's needs are important because their needs and wants were seen as important and often not dismissed simply because they are children.

I think that it is important that my child knows that when I tell him to put on his coat it is because I love him and I don't want him to be cold. I want him to know that he can count on me to protect him.

To illustrate how getting offended gets in the way of learning from eachother, I could get picky with this line and take offense with its implication that since I am parenting like TCS my child won't know that I love him and can't count on me to protect him. However, I choose not to be offended. Instead, I will tell you what I think. I think that a TCS child will know that he/she is loved because parents are trying to do everything in their power to not impose thier views (which could be wrong) on hir and find common preferences and share with hir their best thoeries as to how the world works. He/She will trust hir parents because he/she knows that the parents do not think it's right to make hir do things he/she doesn't want to do and will support him in whatever he/she does want to do.

I think that small children who make every decision in their lives and are allowed to negotiate everything will fail to see their parents as someone they can count on for all the answers.

I think that all children will eventually see that they can't count on their parents for ALL of the answers. They can count on their parents to share their experiences, knowledge and wisdom but they will always find thier own answers whether they were TCSed or not. Sometimes these answers are the same the parents have, sometimes they are not.

I think when the questions get bigger (drugs, sex) these children are going to look for someone to tell them that drugs are wrong and they should wait to have sex, but are instead going to be told to be careful.

This is not TCS. A TCS child will be told the parent's best theories about drugs and sex and if those theories are that they should wait to have sex or not do drugs then those will be the theories shared. A TCS parent IMO would provide all of the information possible for the child to see this and even information that may refute the parent's theories in order for the child to make a rational and informed decision (i.e. without the risk of being confused by the parent's entrenched theories).


One friend once told me that she wished her parents would give her a curfew and rules, so that she would know that they loved her.

This doesn't sound like she was raised TCS and I'll explain why. IMO, in a TCS household there are rules BUT they are agreed upon by everyone. This, for example, means that a teenager agrees to the 11:00 pm curfew because he/she had input into the hour and because it is not an arbitary time imposed by the parents, this teenager will most often be home at that time, and if the teenager will miss that time that teenager will most often call hir parents to let them know when he/she will be home. This is much like a spouse would do. A spouse can come and go as he/she pleases without fear of punishment but AGREES to be home at a certain hour for whatever the reasons and most often, gets home on time.


I strive to make my son's confident and independent people, but not at the expense of others.

This implies that TCS parents do this at the expense of others. If this is what you are saying, please explain how you think this is so.

We should not get everything that we want, in my opinion it isn't healthy,

Why not? Why isn't it healthy, if it is done with everyone's consent and in a way that makes everyone happy?


For every book you can find saying that your method is right, or the best, I can find ten saying elsewise (although I may not agree with them all.) For every expert you have saying that TCS is the right way or the best way, I can find dozens of experts saying differently.

Ok. Is this because I quoted the book? I did not quote the book to prove anything. I quoted it because the statements are relevant to the discussion and the theory was well-written. IMO the book "proves" nothing.


Perhaps that selfish attitude is the result of the TCS theory. My apologies in advance.

I accept your apology. And I reserve further comment on this to eliminate any need to apologize. :)

With all due respect,

I.

[Jish]

I actually don't think that your's was the post I was responding to. The post that infuriated me last night seems to be missing. But anyway, I am getting tired of all the bickering about small points in how we raise our children when, for the most part, what we are doing is likely more similar than it is different. I practice many things in the TCS theory everyday, but I also take things from other areas and ideas too. Then I can take all the information and decide what is best for my family. I think that perhaps I am a bit more spiritually religious than many because I feel it is my responsibility to raise my kids in the church and to follow the ten commandments (including, honor thy mother and father.) I am not a zealot, but faith is important to my family and I take raising my children as good Catholics as a serious part of my job and TCS contradicts this in some areas. I'm going to take a break from this thread and this theory for a while and simply enjoy the holidays with my family. If anyone has any advice for my biting post, please let me know, but I won't be here for a while - it is too frustrating.

Happy Holidays everyone!

[lilyka]

AP is easy and make life easier for us. No matter how much we made orwhere we lived or what we have. Even now a my dd is entering the most difficult phase of her life I still see the benifits of an AP lifestyle "In Arms" is still the best place for a hurt, distressed or angry child. We still sleep together on occaision when she is sick or scared. When she plays house I see her being "resposive and nurtiruing" to her dolls. We homeschool and that seems such a natural extension o being there for her when she was little. We stiil lovingly guide her on a day to day basis and genty correct her when she is naughty.

TCS on the other hand seems to me like a luxury. I could see myself doing that if I was never in a hurry to be anywhere, if I could do things at my leisure, if I had the paitence o negotiate, and only had one child. It would be hard enough to find common ground with two people but factor in three minds that want three seperate things and I see issues.

I don't necessarily see how TCS and AP are related. They seem like two entirly different things. I mean I can see how people can do both but I don't think they are all that related. A person can still do all the AP stuff and love thier child and take thier needs and desires seriously while still maintaining that mom knows what is best, safest and sometimes just has to be in charge and make athouritarian decissions. But that is sorta off topic.

[peggy]

A long time ago on the old mothering boards we went through this. We never came to any agreement or consensus, and there were bad feelings all around.
We disagree...so what? As I said before there is room for TCS and gentle discipline here.
When a Mom asks a discipline question the TCS people can give their answer, the gentle discipline people can give their answer. I see no reason why we must convince the other side we are right and they are wrong. Let's just stick to the original posters question and not pick apart each others answers.
Trying to keep the peace,
peggy

[discovermoma]

Sounds like a great idea!!!

Now, what was the question? LOL! LOL!

[abimommy]

my dd is too young for me to start asking discipline advice....

but when I see Ms Mom attacked on her parenting techniques I have a problem.

[lisamarie]

I am not offended, as another user had previously posted here, about TCS responses. Personally, I feel that parents providing gentle and unoffensive TCS information is fine. Just like how recently, I provided gentle, unoffensive gentle discipline/ap information to a friend who does not attachmet parent and wanted additional information on how to discipline her ds.

But, when individuals are being offended and hurt on this forum or on others forums for that matter, we all need to step back, take some deep breaths. And, we want to be gentle with our children, but what about each other? Remember, we all love our children dearly and we all want the best for them. Thats why we come here to this Mothering community.

Happy Holidays~

Lisa

[Sierra]

Wow! It is amazing how much passion has arisen from this discussion. It makes sense, though, that our methods of caring for our children, particularly when we are talking about things as important as helping them or guiding them to grow into healthy adults, invoke a deep sense of meaning in our lives. From meaning grows passion.

Despite this passion, I hope this conversation will continue with a deeper sense of respect and gentleness toward one another as care takers of our children. All of us want to be the best parents we can be for our children.

What colors our various parenting styles in their unique shades is a complex mixture of our own life experiences and history, our cultural backgrounds, our present life circumstances, the composition of our families, our personalities, the personalities of our ever unique children, and numerous other factors that will vary from person to person and family to family.

There are no one-size-fits-all approaches to parenting. Even in parenting our own children, we know that with each child, new strategies and desires and needs develop. I take the stuff that works for me out of many theories. I take what works for me from TCS and leave the rest. I take what works for me out of Gentle Discipline and leave the rest. I am so grateful that I have such a wide array of theories and approaches at my fingertips (in this community, in the library, in magazines, etc.) to examine and learn from.

I do constantly examine my own assumptions and approaches so that I may regularly improve what I'm doing. I think most of us do that or we wouldn't be here.

This forum, and particularly, this thread, provides an excellent opportunity to do this examination. Of course, each of us has the right to choose when we do self-examine as parents, and when we do not want to undergo this self-examination; and each of us has the right to self-examine only to various degrees, as well as the right to make decisions that work for us as individual families despite what others may think about those decisions.

What concerns me in this thread, as someone watching from the sidelines, is that there have been a couple of instances in which folks have lost their cool and entered the realm of flaming and disrespectful posting. Perhaps it's time for a break from this conversation. Maybe we should all agree to come back to this next week??? I don't know. But the fact is, these are support boards, and it is important that the need for support is not trampled on by the passions we have for various causes.

As Peggy said, when folks ask a question, we can support and offer guidance from all our perspectives, but the person asking the question should not then be subjected to a stampede of angry and non-gentle posts that stop adressing the original question.

In this thread, where I believe there was no question and the purpose of the post was to open up a conversation about TCS theories, it is important that that same sense of gentleness and respect is maintained. No matter how much we disagree. No matter how passionate we are. Let's allow each other a little breathing room.

With respect,
Sierra

[Sierra]

Oh, I also wanted to recognize that it looks like a lot of folks are trying to refocus this conversation so that it is more respectful and compassionate. I'm happy to see this progress, and I hope we can all move forward!

Sierra

[marymom]

ok, Im probably exceeding my # of replies to this issue but I was thinking the other day as I spat out my rather hasty post above that maybe it would be more comfortable to have exchange on this if we all had a common definition of what luxury is-


ALl these labels drive me crazy and I may be out of my league but I think good parenting is a luxury- and as someone else said it well-
also an excellant investment-
but the rich always get richer and rich CAN be a state of mind- but that may be getting into prosperity consciousness too?:o

[pie]

It seems to me that every thread in gentle discipline turns into a TCS vs AP debate. It really makes it difficult to get an answer or help here and I need answers and help in this area. I have gotten nice answers from both sides of the coin and am strong enough to choose what is right and wrong for me. Why do the TCS and AP camp have such a problem accepting each other's presence? Look, I don't really understand the whole TCS concept and even if I did I might not posess that kind of patience. And sometimes the more mainstream AP experts are a bit too disciplinarian for my tastes. So I am not choosing sides here. However, this endless debate of who is right and wrong and why is exceedingly tiresome. Can't we agree to disagree, post our posts and comment on what we don't like or agree with specifically and leave it at that? Or keep the debate to it's own thread? Because noone is winning here, especially the kids of mothers who need simple advice and support and not indoctrination.

[paula_bear]

Mamapie - I don't see this as a debate of whether one or the other approach is right. What feels right to you? That is the only right answer, in my book.

[pie]

i know that post sounded raggy but I still maintain that this isn't really a gentle discipline forum but rather a TCS vs AP debate. I am littering this thread by even mentioning it. I will just keep away until everyone can learn to live w each other. I think that feels right to me. I mean that gently, and I wish we were speaking so you could hear my tone and not think I am beiing harsh.

[paula_bear]

Originally posted by Heavenly
If he doesn't want to take a bath he's doing it. I am not going to breed germs because an 11 month old feels like boycotting bath time.[/B]

I know that heavenly has received much criticism, but this statement strikes me as ludicrous! Whoever decided babies need daily baths, anyway? I must say that my children bathe every 2-3 days in the wintertime and they are perfectly happy and healthy. I can see where a daily bath becomes a ritual and some babies thrive on that unchanging routine, but skipping bathtime will not in any way breed germs!

My 22 m/o dd HATES getting her hair washed, so we limit it to once weekly. We could probably wash it even less w/out doing her any harm... Some would consider our weekly hair-washing coercive, but I try to do it as gently as possible and am always racking my brain to come up w/ ways to make dd WANT to do it. (Last time I actually got her to cooperate by letting her do it herself and using a minimal amount of water to get her hair wet initially. I also didn't rinse as much as I would have liked, but stopped when I saw she'd had enough.)

In a way, heavenly's comments were terrific because they sparked such an interesting debate and helped us all to learn more about TCS. I strongly recommend all who haven't done so to check out TCS website (see larsy's original post for link) and see that they encourage debate. We SHOULD NOT "agree to differ," the 'politically correct' way to handle any arguement. Debate should be encouraged, although this is not to say that it shouldn't be done without having respect for both people and opinions...

[Sierra]

Originally posted by paula_bear
Debate should be encouraged, although this is not to say that it shouldn't be done without having respect for both people and opinions...

Right. That's what I'm saying:). But it is also important that never should debate trample over someone's need for support on these boards. These boards are support boards. Please, please, please, let's go gently...

Sierra

[bigcats]

I spent some more time thinking about TCS theory and identified this problem that I have with it:

I do agree that children are rational and logical. In other words, there is a *reason* for every behavior the child exhibits. However, I also believe it's true that children are more myopic in their reasoning than adults are, even when information is given to them. For instance, using my toy-out-the-window example, the child who is given information that a likely outcome of a toy being thrown out a window is that the toy will break. Assume for the example the toy really is a special one to the child, and not one he/she wants to break, but that he/she really wants to throw it out the window (possibly to test gravity, or to check to see if the parent's information is correct, whatever logical reasoning you want to come up with). He/she is not willing to throw something out the window in its place (or is willing to throw other objects, but ALSO wants to throw the toy out the window - I've been in many situations like these!). In this case, the child is not able to hold both the idea that the toy may break AND the idea that it sure would be fun to test this out in their head at the same time, even though they have perfectly logical reasons about why they want to throw the toy. Sort of like Piaget's kids not being able to hold both height and width of a glass in their minds at the same time, and so being unable to conserve volume. In summary, does this mean the child's logic/reasoning abilities are not fully developed, and if so can we then expect children to make good choices most of the time?

Also in regards to the toy-out-the-window example, what if the child does regret the decision to throw the toy out the window afterwards and wants me to buy a replacement, but I feel coerced having to shell out $30 when we're just scraping by as it is? We'll assume for this that the child is 3, not an older child who could perhaps earn the money his or herself (but even in the case of an older child, would requiring the child to do that be considered coercive?)

[discovermoma]

To the original question:
I am an AP/NP parent that pratices TCS. I find that the two have much in common and makes it easy to do both at the same time. I'm a SAHM with only one child so that might make it a luxury to not have to deal with more than one opinon. I consider my life's position and my dh's undevoted support to be a luxury in an emotional sense. We only make $1000/mo so it is not a monetary luxury at all to be able to do both. I never have to be anywhere at a certain time, so that is less stressful. I really don't know if I would be able to do all that I have time to do now if I worked. The last job I had (loan processing for a mortgage company) was very stressful and had long hours. I do go grocery shopping with a friend of mine who has a young child that my dd loves to be around. By the time we get to the checkout I'm very stressed!!! I'm not sure how I would handle two kids. I'm getting stressed out just imagining it.

To the last statements: I have been AP/NP since the birth of our dd, but didn't realize there was a term for our style of parenting until dd was 6mos. I have been learning more about TCS in the last few months, and again, I had pretty much been doing this from the start. I don't think of myself as being AP vs. TCS because I believe the two of these approaches fit well together in our home. As said before, one has become an extension of the other. I am not against gentle discipline as it is a part of TCS theory. I still can lose it when it comes to some of the things my dd does (or doesn't) do. I still try to do my very best for her and I am far from perfect. But, I try to be as perfect as I can everyday by using the AP and TCS methods.

I love any and all advice. I find that I not only learn from things I agree with, but also from those things I disagree with.

I wish I knew how to put smiley faces on my post to show that I'm not talking in a harsh way, but since I don't, all I can do is tell you that I'm speaking/writing in an easy going way, not judgemental and certainly not to be offensive.

[paula_bear]

I have started a thread in the 6-8 yr old section of parenting and would like advise on how to switch from "conventional-type" parenting methods to a more TCS-geared approach w/ an older child. Would appreciate more experienced TCSers to explain how I might do this gently and effectively. Thanks for the input.

[Lila]

I would like to withdraw my statement, as it was off topic, and I do not wish to ruffle any feathers. Sorry:o

[Sierra]

I would like to refocus on this original question a little bit and reiterate what Ms. Mom has said and what I said earlier today in the TCS thread.

The primary purpose of this online community is as a support board. Disagreement and respectful discussion of parenting issues are always welcome, but never should debates trample over someone's need for support.

Let's work to become more gentle and compassionate and respectful with each other, even in our disagreements. And when a mom asks for support and guidance, I hope we can all respond to her needs first and foremost.

Gently,
Sierra

[larsy]

BTW, there are TCS families with all numbers of kids. It is a matter of attitude, not numbers. :)

best wishes!

[Netty]

Originally posted by bigcats
****I spent some more time thinking about TCS theory and identified this problem that I have with it:

I do agree that children are rational and logical. In other words, there is a *reason* for every behavior the child exhibits. However, I also believe it's true that children are more myopic in their reasoning than adults are, even when information is given to them. For instance, using my toy-out-the-window example, the child who is given information that a likely outcome of a toy being thrown out a window is that the toy will break. Assume for the example the toy really is a special one to the child, and not one he/she wants to break, but that he/she really wants to throw it out the window (possibly to test gravity, or to check to see if the parent's information is correct, whatever logical reasoning you want to come up with). He/she is not willing to throw something out the window in its place (or is willing to throw other objects, but ALSO wants to throw the toy out the window - I've been in many situations like these!). In this case, the child is not able to hold both the idea that the toy may break AND the idea that it sure would be fun to test this out in their head at the same time, even though they have perfectly logical reasons about why they want to throw the toy. Sort of like Piaget's kids not being able to hold both height and width of a glass in their minds at the same time, and so being unable to conserve volume. In summary, does this mean the child's logic/reasoning abilities are not fully developed, and if so can we then expect children to make good choices most of the time****

From the TCS point of view, is it wrong to assume that children have certain limitations without first observing them ourselves. And even then, we should not assume that the same "limitation" will be there the next time a problem comes up. We assume that the child is rational and so we *help* the child do what s/he wants to do. In the example you offered, the child wants to throw a favourite toy out of a window. We assume that the act of throwing this toy out of the window will break it and we assume that the child does not *want* the toy to be broken. And, of course, we *always* assume that our assumptions could be wrong ;-)...But in order to help the child do what s/he wants to do and prevent the results from causing distress or harm, we inform the child of the possible consequences. We could also demonstrate the possible consequences by throwing something else out the window first ("see, when I throw this out, it breaks. That might happen to this toy if you throw it"). If the child still wants to throw the toy out, we help hir in whatever way we can. Perhaps the toy won't break. Perhaps it will break and s/he will be fine with that result. But, yes, it might break and s/he might be very upset. S/he made a mistake. Do we punish hir for this? Do we say, "I told you so?". No. I think that a responsible and caring parent does all s/he can at this point to comfort hir child. Perhaps the toy can be replaced. Or perhaps it can be fixed. Or some other solution may be found to help the child out of the state of coercion.

****but I feel coerced having to shell out $30 when we're just scraping by as it is? ****

If this is truly the case (and I think it is important for parents to be honest about these things....If something you valued broke accidentally, would you "find" the money to replace it?), then the parent could provide that information *beforehand* so that the child can take that into account in hir decision. If the child is too young to truly understand these consequences, the parent could offer comfort afterwards and something *else* to cheer the child (ice cream? a game? a walk? etc...).

****We'll assume for this that the child is 3, not an older child who could perhaps earn the money his or herself (but even in the case of an older child, would requiring the child to do that be considered coercive?) ****

If the child did not agree that this was a good solution, then it would be coercive, yes. Replacing the toy by earning hir own money is *one* possible solution. There are certainly many others. The point is that the family would work *together* to find/create solutions that *everyone* was happy with. In a TCS family, no *one* person decides the best solution for everyone else (whether this person is an adult or a child).

[Mommy22B]

Couple of situations for you TCSers.

First, there is a Christmas party atour church this Friday. I am looking forward to going. Let's say on this evening dd decides she doesn't want to go out. If this happened in one of your homes what would you do? The basic core question here is if parent wants one thing and child wants another thing, 2 things that contradict each other, does the child always get her way in the end?

Next, my husband is, IMO, inconsiderate of others. One example, in the grocery store today, we were letting dd walk around carrying something for us. She walks slow as she is only one and a half. She is standing in the middle of the aisles and moving very slow. I notice people trying to get by, waiting for her to move, when she really isn't on her way to move, but rather keeping a straight slow path in front of them. KWIM? I know I am generally care too much about what others think, but this bothers me to no end. My dh seems not to notice whos way she is in. Is it bad of me, in your opinion, to move her out of the way? Or pick her up?

One more example. We were in a small store the other day. DD was picking everything up and smelling it...(actually blowing her nose on it.) The store lady seemed to begetting frustrated. Dh was there with me so he took her outside for a bit, but if I had been alone it would have been awful!
Oh, I thought of another one! ;) When we go to Walmart or whatever sometimes dd doesn't want to ride in the cart. But when we let her walk it is so so slow, looking at everything and touching everything, finding something she wants and then a fit when we put it back ( although we are getting very good and sneaking things back onto the shelves behind her back....very coersive I know, but we really can't afford to get her things.) You might say leave her home...This is kind of sensitive for me because I like going shopping with dh. He works alot so the time we have together is percious to me, so I would like to spend as much of it as we can together.

Anyway, I have to say I love most of what this theory has to offer. I am trying more and more to respect my dd's wishes. I still fail plenty but it feels good when I succeed. A few weeks ago i may have forced my dd to get dressed when I was ready for her to get dressed. Now I know to carve out an hour long block before we have to go somewhere to give time for her to decide to get dressed. This sounds like it is a bad thing, but it is wonderful not having to push her into something she doesn't want. It is amazing to dh and I how these social ideas are all stuck in our brain. That kids are lower class citizens and need to be pushed around. It makes me sad now when I do force her to do something. I feel so abusive because i am so much bigger than her...and I just don't care about what she wants at the time. That is so rude! Anyway, you ladies are really helping me alot to be a better mommy! Thanks. :D
Beth

[grisletine]

ok we have some silly questions over here...

our little girl doesnt like her carseat most of the time... we feel it is obviously very coersive to leave her in the seat when it upsets her.
when we have tiem we will stop on the side of the road and wait for her to accept the seat. when we arre in a hurry, however, into the sling she goes...

is this ok by tcs?

what were really wondering about is baby proofing, namiely baby gates. i know disallwing exploration of dangerous things {stairs, outlets} is coersive..

but how abour if you took the gate down whenever the child expresses interest in the stairs?

we'd be willing to help her explore whenever she wants but would still worry that shed fall down the stairs {some random time when we didnt realize} if we didnt have the gate.

{we have a split level home, with hardwood stairs that end in stone... and a wall. }

:confused:

[Linda in Arizona]

You mean you are driving down the road with your baby in a sling rather than a car seat?

And you are considering leaving your home where your child could fall down steps and land into stone and wall??

I think it is considered child endangerment and is illegal. Kids die from stuff like that.

[bigcats]

Mommy22b's question brings up another one for me... how do TCS parents deal with rules imposed by outside society? For instance, what if a 6 year old wants to go to Toys R Us but wants to be barefoot (no slippers, boots, princess shoes, or sandals will do)? There are laws against going shoeless in stores. This is just one example of the obstacles one could come up against. Wouldn't it be coercive to tell the child she needs to decide whether to wear shoes and visit the store, or go barefoot and not go to the store? But what other choice do you have? This is just a hypothetical example of an outside rule that could cause a problem... one must run into a million of them.

I'm still digesting the reply to my last question! :)

[paula_bear]

Mommy22B, very good questions. As far as the xmas party goes, could you prepare DD for it by letting her know in advance? I'm sure she would have fun as well, could you start pointing out to her what will go on at the party and see if you can't generate some excitement on her part? (p.s. I'm really new to TCS, so if I am giving bad advice, someone pls let me know...) Would it be possible to arrange for a back-up plan - someone to come sit w/ her at a moment's notice if she decides she doesn't want to go? I don't think you and DH should have to miss out if DD doesn't feel like going, since this is important to you... Maybe you could even let her know ahead of time that if she doesn't want to go, so-and-so will come over to play w/ her and Mommy and Daddy will go to the party. Maybe she is too young for this type of interaction, I don't know. I believe they understand way more than we give them credit for!

Now, with the store thing, preparation is key. My sister has a rule - she never buys ANYTHING for her 2-yr-old when they're out together. So far, this has worked for her - he doesn't expect it. The problem with toddlers is that they tend to over-generalize: "We went to Walmart. Mommy bought me a book. When we go to Walmart, Mommy buys me a book." Some parents give children a verbal warning before entering the store, "Darling, we are here to buy such-and-such. You may look at the books if you like, but we won't buy them today." I also use this as an opportunity to practice self-restraint. In order to teach my children to resist that impulse-buying, I must model that behavior myself!

With the cart issue, I allow her out of the cart only in certain stores. This works for us, I don't know if it would be considered coercive, but otherwise I'd have to leave her home to get the grocery shopping done! Much of the time she accepts being in the cart, much as she accepts that when she rides in the car, she must be fastened into her carseat. Believe it or not, I find STAPLES to be a great store for her to run around - she plays in the office furniture w/ big brother, "talks on the phones" etc and the staff don't seem to mind. Allowing her freedom in some stores seems to satisfy her need to explore or to push the cart herself.

As far as putting items back on the shelves, I leave that up to DD. I do not sneak them back. I have found that if I say, "OK, it's time to put that [item] back on the shelf now. Say bye-bye to the [item] now." That works wonders for some reason. She is in control and she has closure. The item itself is not so important to her at this time and usually she knows she is only "borrowing" it, so to speak. I don't usually buy her things at the store when she is with me, so she doesn't have a problem returning them to their proper place. (This even goes for things one might expect her to part with only after having thrown a tantrum.) I hope this method will work for you, too.

As far as your DH being "inconsiderate," I don't really see it that way. If DD is slowly meandering through the aisle, holding up traffic so to speak, don't you think it is up to the people behind her to say, "Excuse me, little girl. Would you mind moving to the right so I can pass by?" I would encourage DD to have her own interactions w/ people. Maybe they are senior citizens w/ no time constraints and love being close to the energy of your daughter. Maybe watching her explore at a leisurely pace was the highlight of their day! I try not to interfere too much when it comes to my childrens' interactions w/ others. Just a thought.

It sounds to me like you are on the right track. I hope what I have said here makes you think of looking at these situations from a different (not necessarily better, mind you) angle. Good luck and I hope you and DH have a wonderful time at church Christmas party on Friday! (Let us know how it all turns out...) ;)

[Alexander]

Hi Grisltine,

As you know, I know nothing about TCS. However I agree with Linda in Arizona in that it is not sensible to ever put your child in danger. I can not imagine TCS would advocate that in the least, because (from what I have seen from these discusions) TCS seems on the whole to be sensible.

You must NOT put your child in danger for the sake of not coersing.

I have noticed that children who are not coersed, or those who are coersed a lot less than normal, they are far more willing to comply to your will. Just don't use up your "credit" with truely unimportant stuff.

When it comes to putting MY kids in the car seet, there is no discussion. Remeber thought that kids love to emulate their elders, so if you always point out that you are wearing a seat belt, they are more inclined to want to too.

Nor is there discussion when there is something dangerous being done in the kitchen. We had a barrier to the kitchen until our children were old enough to understand what was dangerous and that they must not touch certain things. This meant that if they wanted to come into the kitchen, either DW or myself either carried them or was at their side ALL THE TIME.

As for your stairs, keep and use the barrier. "practical non-coersion" here would be to help the little one up or down when-ever she asked. Let her practice with you. One day she will be confident about doing it on her own, and you will recognise the steps towards independence as they occure.

So to summerise:

1) On danger, I lay down the law.

2) I educate to the max of their ability to comprehend.

3) If they are not capable due to age or education, I make special effort to enable them to achieve their objective by being near by to protect them.

4) When they are capable, the "law" desolves.

Hope this helps

a

[Ms. Mom]

This is an interesting scenario. My dh and I had an agreement long ago that even if we did not support each others choice (like giving the intact patty to ds) then we would bit our lip and discuss it later.

It's not that we beleive you shouldn't argue in front of your children. But contradicting your spouse in front of a child is so confusing.

When parents don't agree on parenting styles, they really need to work hard on keeping communications open and try to come to a resolve. In the mean time calling a truce on contradicting each other would be a good idea.

[Alexander]

Originally posted by larsy
BTW, there are TCS families with all numbers of kids. It is a matter of attitude, not numbers. :)
best wishes!

As far as interaction between parent and child is concerned I agree, but sometimes getting kids (or one in particular) to respect the other. . . . phew! :rolleyes: negotiation can rapidly turn to dictation! :(

a

[Alexander]

Thank you all, very much. I have read what everyone has written, and thought about it for the last weak, and realized that the title is not what I think, or have come to think.

A better tiltle would perhaps be "understand your instincts before you follow them."

a

[paula_bear]

I would like to reply to a thread by Laelsweet from Monday concerning non-coercive methods to keep a young child from touching and possibly breaking the old family's traditional objects. The young couple could try to introduce what I call "the one finger touch rule." Any object may be touched as long as the child uses only one finger. Many times this is enough to satisfy the young one's curiosity, but prevents hir from using enough brute force to injure the object in any way!

Another option (depending on the exact age and comprehension of the child) would be to sit down and discuss how these objects are important to [grandparents?] and how it is important for us to respect the property of other people. Maybe give an example of how child would feel if someone broke hir favorite toy? Then the parents could suggest that the child ask [grandparents] permission to explore the object with supervision. I believe that all the "don't touch" talk only makes these delicate objects more desirable for toddler touching! If one can find a common preference for satisfying child's curiosity while keeping objects safe from harm, all the better for everyone.

Good luck and happy holidays.

P.S. As an aside, I see that we have NOT dropped this debate for a week as Sierra suggested, but I feel glad to have noticed a bit more respect from everyone. I also noticed a few new threads have started up - can't wait to check them out! AND I just wanted to point out that if this thread seems like a debate between AP and TCS, well isn't that the point? This thread was started specifically to talk about TCS, isn't a comparison to other methods a natural consequence of that? I also disagree w/ the idea that this debate has overtaken the Gentle Discipline boards - there are still many unrelated topics up for discussion on other treads!

[larsy]

The quote from the TCS website, in the context of Sarah Lawrence explaining that while she owns the journal and the TCS list...

"But there can be no official definition of what it means to take children seriously, just as there can be no official definition of what it means to be a Conservative, a Liberal or a Socialist. No one “owns” such labels. Various thinkers and writers, who want to apply such labels to themselves, simply have to enter the fray in the field of ideas and try to persuade others that their version is true.

So to answer the question directly, “who is to decide whether an evolved version is still TCS or not?”, the answer is no one. Or anyone who wants to. "

I take that to mean that anyone who wants to can criticize and refute the ideas of TCS, in order to determine *to their own satisfaction* what is true. I don't think truth is relative- one truth for me, another for that guy over there, and it is all equally true. I think truth is objective, and we are all capable of knowing it to our best ability. Many people are content with the version of truth they are handed by previous generations, many are not and strive to get closer to the truth.

How to know whether one is closer to the objective truth about morality (right and wrong) or not? That is a question that many have been struggling with in the light of 9/11 which has thrown this question into stark relief. My current theories have to do with the fruits that actions bear, but I am acutely aware of my fallibility in all matters, including morality and parenting and education. I speak the truth as I see it at this time. Like the blind men examining the elephant, I might have ahold of the trunk while another is describing the toenails. By sharing information and experience and looking for more information and bearing in mind that we could be wrong about any part of our most cherished theories, we can all inch closer to the truth of any particular matter.

It's a slippery fish, truth. No one has a monopoly on it. What can we do but speak it tentatively and be willing to learn? Oh, well, I suppose we could remain silent. That doesn't do much for learning, though.

[discovermoma]

Biting into something hot...

My dd will not put anything in her mouth that is hot. I'm not really sure how she knows something is hot, I can only quess. She will either feel it is hot when she picks it up with her fingers, or as she moves a fork/spoon full of food towards her mouth she can feel the heat of the food. Once she determines the food is hot, she will then say "blow" and proceed to blow on her food until it cools down to her liking. She has only been doing this since age 18mos, before this age I never served her food that was hot. I always waited until it cooled down before placing it on a plate for her. Not to say that I now give her hot food all the time, but she has become aware of the temperature of food by wanting bites of our food. That's where the word "blow" comes from. I would say "hot" when I placed the food up to my lips and then say "let mom blow" on it to cool it off.

Why serve a child hot food in the first place? This is not a natural consequence, it is one that is set up to teach a lesson. This is not TCS.

In Ksmami's example sounds like, imo, that the father has a power problem. This has happened with my dh on occassion, usually when he has been working log hours and feels left out. I believe this has to do with father not always being around the child and in his attempt to help with child responsibilities he feels slighted and acts out in a defensively.

TCS has carried over into other relationships. My relationship with my dh has taken on a whole new calmness. After implementing TCS into my relationship with my dd I found that I was also taking everyone else around me seriously. One extreme change in attitude is with my mother. We had a strained relationship since dd was born due to our differences in parenting styles. Now when she makes unwanted comments about dd I don't react so defensively and try to see where she might be coming from.

Well, this is longer than I intended. Everything written is the way our family handles TCS and not to say that our way is the only way or the right way. That is TCS, everyone is allowed to have their opinions, no matter how young or old they are.

[bigcats]

Why serve a child hot food in the first place? This is not a natural consequence, it is one that is set up to teach a lesson. This is not TCS.

I can imagine a scenario when the hot patties have just finished cooking and are cooling on the counter, but the toddler does not want to wait and asks for one immediately. I don't think the poster meant she purposely set the child up to be burned by giving it to the child before it cooled, and before the child asked for it. And she did explain to the child that it was hot and could burn.

I'm interested in this because I'm still unclear about why natural consequences are against TCS philosophy (as stated on the TCS website). I understand trying to come up with alternative ideas that the child might enjoy safely ("Would you like to bite into this apple while you wait for the patty to cool?") but in the end, if the child insists that only biting the hot patty will do (and if it hasn't cooled off enough already due to the length of the discussion!) then how is it un-TCS to allow the consequence to occur (and of course, provide comfort to the child afterwards)?

[larsy]

Just Wondering wrote:

" Before I had children, I had theories. Now I have children and no theories, because both children had to be brought up quite different to each other, and quite differently to my husband's first three children. "

Parents have theories about parenting, whether they are conscious and articulated or not. Theories are complicated and shifting and often a combination of explicit and inexplicit, imo, so it does take some stopping and really thinking about what one thinks about this or that situation and what is the right thing to do. Parents often act in the grip of memes and unconscious motivations (my parent's words came out of my mouth! I was never going to do that to my child!). Dragging out the theories behind the actions and dismantling them and criticizing them in the light of reason is very helpful, ime&o, in figuring the morality of parenting actions. If we were appalled by the way people treated us as children, what suddenly makes it right to treat children that way, now that we are the adults?


Quoting Just Wondering again:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“by the way, if you say ‘fuck’ in front of Grandma, she may react badly”. In this respect, TCS agrees with enlightened conventional opinion. The big difference concerns what happens when the children reject your best theories. TCS advocates scrupulously respecting children's wishes in regard to the conduct of their own lives.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Interesting. So if the said child litters the neighbourhood and grandmas house with said word, you scrupulously respect your child's right to swear in the presence of the grandmother and just let them carry on... Hmmmm. this gives interesting pointers about the possible NATURE of the people concerned. "

Yes, people who respect individual autonomy. The child has the information they need to avoid offending people who would be offended by what is, after all, simply a word, albeit one that is loaded for a lot of people in this society. Child can protect hirself from unwanted consequences of using that word around people who would be offended by it, and those people don't have to hear the offensive word.

"Children learn by seeing behaviour repeated by their parents. What sort of parents constantly swear in front of their children? "

Er...so all children who pick up swear words, do so at home? This is not consistent with tales I have read, probably some on these boards, by parents who do not use certain words who are wondering what to do with their child who has come home with this or that word. And I suspect that all sorts of parents, from horribly abusive to loving and respectful, use some of these loaded words when in the presence of their children. Word choice is not a dependable predictor of character, perhaps.

"I assume the people who set the site up...which raises serious questions about the validity of the ASSUMPTIONS upon which their theory is based. After all, we have to accept the assumptions, to accept the theory."

Assumptions can sure lead a person astray. Assumptions are tremendously subjective. A person can assume they are projecting all sorts of moral messages by the choices they make, while others will interpret their actions and words according to their own assumptions.

Which leads me back to the question of how do we determine objective truth? At this point, I think that critical rationalism is a good way to evaluate information. Conjecture and refutation. Humans are capable of creating knowledge based upon observation and information and experience. We create theories, and we adjust them according to our observations and information and experience.

So, yes, TCS is based upon the theory that coercion is harmful. If a person is not convinced that this is true, then they will not agree with TCS theory. I've yet to hear a convincing argument that coercion in the parent-child relationship is better- that is, a preferable moral theory- than non-coercion.

[paula_bear]

Originally posted by Linda in Arizona


I'm feeling the same way. NCP/TCS folks say that they believe that their children are the ultimate best judge of their own best interest, but they don't seem to believe that of other parents.
I see this as an instance of defensiveness on the part of people who happen not to agree w/ some or all of the tenents of TCS. I would like someone to show me (in the form of a quote) where they have experienced such coercion from TCSers. If one finds oneself reacting violently to another's idea, it usually means that one must examines one's own ideas, not "attack" the offending one, IMO anyway...



NCP/TCS says that parents offer their experience, but don't assume they are right. (without boundaries pg. 96) Yet the people who say they feel this way toward their children can possible admit here to other parents that their "theory" of non-coersion might be wrong. And they seldom offer their experience, just the theory that children should be allowed to do whatever they want to.
I disagree w/ this statement. Again, please show me where TCSers are working on the assumption that parents who follow other methods are wrong! I really think this defensiveness is an indicator that one needs some self-examination. TCSers DO offer their own experience, only they do it hypothetically in order to protect the identity of the children involved. (see TCS website for explanation behind this.) It just takes some getting used to, but I have found a wealth of useful info that I was able to apply to my own situation, in addition to discussions of the theory behind it all.

I would also like to dispute the statement that TCS theory infers that "children should be allowed to do whatever they want to." This is NOT TCS, this would be laissez-faire parenting (or negligence depending on exactly what the child was doing.) The theory behind TCS is to seriously consider what the child wants, and not to automatically impose one's own will. The goal here is to FIND A COMMON PREFERENCE, which may or may not take the form of what the child originally wanted. I think this is a huge difference from allowing a child whatever they want.



The very nature of the NCP/TCS system is that you must be willing to admit that you might be wrong and someone else i.e. your child might know what is better for them, so how I can you say that is what you think and then be so evangelical and preachy? After all, you might be wrong. We might know what is best for our kids. It is a possiblity.
Again, I see this statement as a knee-jerk reaction. Where does one get the idea that TCSers think one or one's parenting styles are WRONG? In all the relational "problems" we have seen as a direct result of these discussions, I see the main culprit to be the defensiveness of those refuting TCS theory. That is my opinion, and may very well be wrong, but I have the right to express it here. Please give concrete examples of how TCSers are "evangelical and preachy." I just would like to see where this judgement is coming from - maybe I haven't read all the threads you have.

As far as the actual discussion (see how these arguements detract from our primary purpose?) I think a better term to alexander's use of the word "instincts" might be "entrenched theories." (see TCS website for clarification of that term) The only instinct we humans are born with is the desire to suck. The only fear we have at birth is that of falling. All the other "garbage" is learned along the way, mostly from our family of origin. So when people have responded, "Yes, I do follow my instincts, and my childhood was just as screwed up as anyone else's..." A more accurate way of describing this would be to say that one has identified entrenched theories and decided to change them. Otherwise, it would be impossible for us to do things differently than our parents.

Well, I'll leave it at that. Hope I didn't step on any toes, but I feel that TCS is constantly under attack and no one has brought up this issue. I would like to see us face it head-on. AND IMO the responses from TCSers haven't been nearly as [insert negative adjective of your choice] as some have made out...

[discovermoma]

This is where maybe the "luxury" of time comes in. I had a terrible time with the carseat after dd turn 6mos and stoped falling asleep the minute the vehicle started. One very frustrating trip was when it took me 2hrs to drive a 45min trip home from the grocery store. I didn't have anywhere else to be and since we live so far from the grocery store I always take a cooler to keep the food in, so no worries about spoilage. Sometimes dd is testing, little whines here and there. This usually means she is bored so I sing songs to her or offer toys and books. But when she is crying, I always stop the vehicle and take her out of the carseat until she will go back in it on her own. This usually happens after a long outing and I think she wants to reconnect with me by being held. She almost always wants to bf.

We don't have stairs, but have been to houses that do. We spent 5 days at BIL house one time, our first experience with stairs. They did not have a child gate so there wasn't an option as to wether to use it or not. Later on I realized this might of been a good thing because we were unable to control the scary situation and had to work with it. Again, time was a "luxury" as we were visiting and had no worries about having to be anywhere or do anything else except hang out. But this also would have been the case if we were at home, I'm a SAHM who hates to go anywhere. In your circumstance I would keep the gate up, but take it down when dd showed interest in the stairs. You could even tie a bell on the gate so you could hear when she is pulling on it. Then she can explore them with you by her side. Stone floors scare me, so I would try to pad it with something just in case. When dd was done with exploring I would put the gate back up. By making stairs off limits, as with anything else, it makes them more appealing. By working with dd through the curiousity she can explore while you are there with her as a safety net.

This advice is given as an example of what our family would do and not in any way to say that it is the only way or right way to handle situations.

[paula_bear]

Just wondering where Just Wondering got all those quotes - I do recognize some of them from TCS or these boards, but others are new to me. I just responded to alexander's thread regarding all the flack directed at TCSers these past few weeks. Why do you think that one theory causes such a violent reaction from people?

I disagree with your assertion that three women are dominating this debate and trying to decide what others should think, although I think I know the individuals to whom you refer. I for one have gleaned some useful information from ALL the posts, all the while retaining my right to disagree. And I have not found it necessary to post every disagreement I have with every idea that causes a negative reation in me. Personally, I believe that my negative reactions can serve as an indicator that I need to take a look at my own ideas and do some serious self-examination. I think all would benefit from at least examining their own feelings before immediately responding to ideas they find provocative.

Anyway, you brought up many interesting points for me to mull over myself. Thanks for your post!

[paula_bear]

I agree that in situations where safety is an issue, sometimes we must impose our will on the child. But I also believe that, much of the time, we can enlist cooperation from the child w/out having to coerce.

Take the example of the carseat - child has never riden in a moving vehicle outside the carseat, so s/he has no reason to expect that s/he will not be asked to sit in carseat. Sometimes it helps to let hir climb in and help me fasten one of the buckles. S/he feels a bit more in control. I also try to provide engaging objects for the ride - books, toys, snacks, etc. And I try to focus on the destination or activity to which we are headed. DH and I have had some resistance lately - child throws head back and tightens body when put in seat - imagine trying to buckle up a long board. We find this very challenging and hard to handle w/out some bit of coercion as child seems to have temporarily lost all ability to reason... (I would welcome additional advise from others on how to handle this situation w/in the confines of TCS.)

I would leave up the gate at the stairs and, as others suggested, explore them together as requested by the child. Same goes for other potentially dangerous areas of the home. TCS is a very logical and rational theory and sometimes it simply makes good sense to childproof the home, removing restrictions as they become unnecessary. There are plenty of other ways one can provide child w/ freedom to explore and learn w/out compromising on safety.

[paula_bear]

Originally posted by discovermoma
Biting into something hot...

My dd will not put anything in her mouth that is hot. I'm not really sure how she knows something is hot, I can only quess.

Why serve a child hot food in the first place? This is not a natural consequence, it is one that is set up to teach a lesson. This is not TCS.
My children are the same and their definition of "hot" is way cooler than my own. I guess their palates are much more sensitive. I don't worry about the young ones getting burned, b/c they don't seem to allow that. Sometimes food is still hot (to them) when served and I don't do that to teach natural consequences - it just fits in w/ our mealtime arrangements. I still think I am following TCS, though.



In Ksmami's example sounds like, imo, that the father has a power problem... I believe this has to do with father not always being around the child and in his attempt to help with child responsibilities he feels slighted and acts out in a defensively.
Yes, I agree it seems like DH has some of his own issues and entrenched theories to deal with. The fact that he seems very reluctant to do this, or even to recognise a problem w/ his methods, could very well turn into a HUGE obstacle to any sort of family harmony or partnership btwn the parents.

Perhaps DW could come from an entirely different angle - instead of "preaching," try to identify the source of these conflicts. Does DH feel left out of parenting decisions? Could DW try to let DH know that his input is valuable, even if she doesn't agree w/ it? Is there a way for DW to foster a more rewarding relationship btwn DH and DS? Maybe, in attempts to protect DS, DW is actually trying to coerce DH into accepting her theories... Just a thought. Perhaps DH could be "in charge" of something, say bathtime, and allowed to do it his way.

I hope k'smami reads these responses!

[Netty]

[i]Originally posted by Mommy22B
Couple of situations for you TCSers.

***First, there is a Christmas party atour church this Friday. I am looking forward to going. Let's say on this evening dd decides she doesn't want to go out. If this happened in one of your homes what would you do? The basic core question here is if parent wants one thing and child wants another thing, 2 things that contradict each other, does the child always get her way in the end?***

It may help to think of the situation in a different way. What would you do if a house guest changed hir mind and decided s/he didn't want to go to a scheduled event? Would you not do your best to accomodate hir? Perhaps someone could stay home with the child? The parent could find something about the event that s/he knows the child will enjoy and remind hir of it? TCS families plan events carefully, ensuring that there are always alternatives available. If it is an important event for one person, then that person is responsible for planning in advance how s/he will be able to attend without coercing anyone else.

****Next, my husband is, IMO, inconsiderate of others. One example, in the grocery store today, we were letting dd walk around carrying something for us. She walks slow as she is only one and a half. She is standing in the middle of the aisles and moving very slow. I notice people trying to get by, waiting for her to move, when she really isn't on her way to move, but rather keeping a straight slow path in front of them. KWIM? I know I am generally care too much about what others think, but this bothers me to no end. My dh seems not to notice whos way she is in. Is it bad of me, in your opinion, to move her out of the way? Or pick her up?****

Again, perhaps it will help to look at it from a different angle. Do you think that it is more important to attend to the needs of strangers or the needs of your immediate family? For whom are you, ultimately, responsible? Why would you be more concerned about a stranger than your own child? And why would you be willing to coerce your child rather than a stranger? With whom do you strive to have a relationship of trust and compassion? While I agree that we should strive to be responsible citizens in society, we also must consider the experience and knowledge of the person in question. If it is possible to move the child or pick hir up without coercing hir, then it is fine to do so. But I think that parents have a responsibility to model appropriate attitudes towards children in our society. Would it be right for someone to be so impatient if the person were in a wheelchair, on crutches, extremely old and feeble? Would we consider physically moving or picking up such a person in order to clear the way for someone in a hurry? Children are people too. Do we physically move a child because it is right to do so, or merely because *we can*? Your child's needs and desires are just as important as that stranger's need. I think it is our responsibility to act as advocates for our children's rights whenever possible.

****One more example. We were in a small store the other day. DD was picking everything up and smelling it...(actually blowing her nose on it.) The store lady seemed to begetting frustrated. Dh was there with me so he took her outside for a bit, but if I had been alone it would have been awful! ****

Why would it have been awful? How is it harmful for someone to smell something? If s/he actually soiled the items, perhaps you could wipe them with a tissue afterwards. I find it helpful to pay no attention to store employees unless they actually address me or my child. If they are concerned that something will be broken, I assure them that I will pay for any broken item. I have even given my credit card to the employee to hold while my child explores the store. This way I can attend to my child rather than the store employee and I can help hir explore things safely and carefully. Children, ime, understand when something is breakable or fragile, and will learn how to handle such objects if given the opportunity to do so.

***Oh, I thought of another one! ;) When we go to Walmart or whatever sometimes dd doesn't want to ride in the cart. But when we let her walk it is so so slow, looking at everything and touching everything, finding something she wants and then a fit when we put it back ( although we are getting very good and sneaking things back onto the shelves behind her back....very coersive I know, but we really can't afford to get her things.) You might say leave her home...This is kind of sensitive for me because I like going shopping with dh. He works alot so the time we have together is percious to me, so I would like to spend as much of it as we can together. ***

Again, in a TCS family, no one person's needs take precedence over another's. And the majority does not rule either ;-). It is the responsibility of the parents to find or create common preferences so that everyone's needs are met. If you like to spend as much time together as possible, why not slow things down and go at your child's pace? Is there a reason why you must hurry? If there are things you *must* get done, is it possible for one of you to go off and do these things while the other helps your child explore? Can you make it *fun* for your child to ride in the cart? Would s/he prefer to ride in a backpack? A shoulder ride? Also, why can your child not choose items to buy in the same way as you do? Have you considered that your child might be less likely to grab many items if s/he trusted that s/he could have whichever item s/he really wanted? I know that most parents are afraid that their children will want to buy everything they see, but ime children only demand lots of things when they are used to not getting them. When a child trusts that s/he can have what s/he wants (or that a preferable alternative will be found for hir), s/he is much less likely to hoard items and throw tantrums.

****Anyway, I have to say I love most of what this theory has to offer. I am trying more and more to respect my dd's wishes. I still fail plenty but it feels good when I succeed. A few weeks ago i may have forced my dd to get dressed when I was ready for her to get dressed. Now I know to carve out an hour long block before we have to go somewhere to give time for her to decide to get dressed. This sounds like it is a bad thing, but it is wonderful not having to push her into something she doesn't want. It is amazing to dh and I how these social ideas are all stuck in our brain. That kids are lower class citizens and need to be pushed around. It makes me sad now when I do force her to do something. I feel so abusive because i am so much bigger than her...and I just don't care about what she wants at the time. That is so rude! Anyway, you ladies are really helping me alot to be a better mommy! Thanks. :D****


That sounds great, Beth! Yes, TCS really challenges our entrenched ideas about children's autonomy. I also find it amazing how differently I see the world since discovering TCS. And it has not only changed my relationship with my children, it has most definitely affected all my personal relationships in profound and far-reaching ways. In a TCS home, *everyone* is liberated. And what an amazing world we create when realize our freedom to do so!

Netty

[larsy]

From the TCS website:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Puzzled parents often ask questions of the form: “what if a child does [insert some absolutely awful thing, X, here]? Then what would a non-coercive parent do?” This question may seem meaningful, but it is pointless and misdirected. It assumes that children are inherently irrational, foolhardy or wicked and asks how non-coercive parents handle these ghastly problems. But such problems arise out of the relationships between coercive parents and their children. They are caused by coercion."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just Wondering asks:

"In other words, our children do what we don't want them to do because we coerce them?"

The perception of children as "irrational, foolhardy or wicked" comes with the mindset of coercion. Coercion can cause a mind to not be able to think rationally in areas/subjects/activities where coercion occurs. The person has a jumble of confusion going on in their mind- conflicting impulses, wanting to do X while being forced to do Y- and so is unable to think clearly about the subject. The oddest coping mechanisms can be laid down, that might serve in the moment, but do not serve well in the years ahead. Entrenched theories are set in place, which can keep a person from dealing effectively in that area, keeping their thinking irrational in that subject, for the rest of their lives. These entrenchments are remarkably difficult to dislodge- even when one can recognize the irrationality of their entrenched habits, they might not be able to stop doing it or feel bad when they force their self to stop doing it. I'll wager every one of us here can recognize an entrenchment (or 20) that give us grief in our lives. Such faulty theories make it difficult to be able to solve problems, let alone be able to think about them clearly ("thinking for one's self").

So, yes, families that operate through coercion will act differently than families that operate through non-coercion. A child who knows that a parent is not going to coerce to solve a conflict will not hesitate to approach parent for help and information about any subject, even one that might be controversial. A child who knows from experience that parent does not want to help hir do something that parent does not approve of, is more likely to try whatever it is out behind the parent's back, without the benefit of parent's information and experience to help child stay safe and to make an informed decision about doing it/doing it safely.

A parent who sees their child as a rational person will be sharing information and their theories (which often requires a parent to really examine their theories in ways that they haven't as they do this theory-sharing, it's a great thing!) with their child about all sorts of things, including drugs and sex and lighting matches and swearing and climbing to high places and playing in the street and how to treat friends and about traditions and on and on, rather than just feeding them what parent thinks is appropriate for child to know based upon their age/stage of development/some other objective or subjective criterion. When the subject comes up, that is the time to explore it as much as the child wants to. Help them learn, when they are interested in learning about it.

This does not mean that 'all TCS children will abuse drugs', for example. People abuse drugs for many different reasons, often, I conjecture, to escape from the painful life they are living and don't see any way to change (hmmm, I guess that also applies to many people who use legal prescription drugs, as well). A person who knows how to solve problems and how to recognize what they want and to figure out ways to get it without hurting other people, is an unlikely prospect for abusing drugs. Many people use drugs for various purposes-including aspirin and caffeine and antibiotics and alcohol and pot- and it improves their lives without causing them harm, and it is their choice to make as autonomous individuals.

I think that coercion bolsters a false sense of control. A person is going to find ways to do what they want. They can do it with support and knowledge, or they can do it sneakily and with limited knowledge. They can wait until they are 18 and then rush out to try all sorts of 'forbidden fruit', most likely with entrenched theories firmly in place and without good information and thought about possible consequences. This is so common in our society, that is thought to be 'normal'. It is normal because of coercion.


Back to Just Wondering:

"Here's another
quote: (from the TCS website)"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The basic human choice is not between ourselves and others: it is between right and wrong"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Whose definition of what is right or wrong? They can't define that, and have admitted that. (though in not defining that they specifically exclude all previous groups as being "wrong". "

Morality is not subjective, imo, so that would be the search for objective right and wrong. I am thinking one can tell what is right by theories that seem to be closer to the truth.

And I think (and TCS theory ariculates) that people are quite rational (though lacking in experience and knowledge of the world and relationships) from birth, so yes, I am convinced that theories that do not treat people as rational and autonomous are wrong. YMMV

"So are we supposed to let the child decide what is right and wrong? "

Is there a magic age when suddenly people know what is right and what is wrong? How do people figure this out? Seems like a life long endeavor, to me, and the more input each of us has when trying to decide what is right and wrong, the better.

Parents are there to help children learn about right and wrong, just as parents are learning about right and wrong. If child wants parent to make that deliberation for hir, all well and good- and that is certainly what parents do for their children before parents are able to understand their children's communication. But once there is no doubt as to what child thinks, and if child and parent differ in their conclusion, a non-coercive family will look for/create common preferences to resolve the conflict.

To default to coercion is to close off avenues of learning for both children and parents.

[sagewinna]

"I know a few young mothers here who I think were pretty much brought up sort of TCS. Certainly not so much Laisse faire. They were never smacked, or yelled at, and always wore what they wanted when they wanted, and got the food they liked... And they are the mothers who are finding motherhood very very difficult. They didn't go through labour (why bother with pain) they didn't breastfeed, (they didn't WANT to)--- in fact, their children are emotional antagonists to their lives, because all their lives, they have got either what they wanted, or forced a compromise. "


Wow! What a sweeping generalization! Geez. What I hear you say here is that there are a few mothers on this board who used drugs during labor and chose not to breastfeed, and who are so used to thinking about themselves that they can't handle the fact that their kids have needs too.

It sounds like you are feeling very emotional about the whole TCS way of parenting. The thing is, it works for some parents. I respect any non-violent, respectful way of parenting. As I have read more about TCS I have come to the realization that a lot of decisions made for children by adults are abitrary at best. (Such as: clothes that match, eating everything on your plate, or riding in the shopping cart instead of walking)If nothing else, waking up to that fact has made me a better parent to my kids, and has lessened the conflict in my household dramatically. My kids are no less well behaved in public, it's just a switch in my reaction to things that happen on a daily basis. I can scream and yell, or spank them when they do something that pushes my buttons, or I can wait a moment, think about why those buttons are there (Usually because it was something I was not allowed to do as a child) and talk with them about it to come to a mutually satifying conclusion.

2 cents from someone who does not follow TCS at all times, but has learned a lot from it!

[larsy]

Paula_bear, I could be mistaken about this, but I think the three people that Just Wondering is referring to are Sarah Lawrence, David Deutsch, and Kolya Wolf, who were responsible for the discussions in the early TCS paper journal and so many of the underpinnings of the TCS theory. :)

[larsy]

From Just Wondering:

quote: (from the TCS website)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"When someone complains of a child being, or growing up to be, ‘self-centred’ or choosing ‘self-gratification’, remember that what they are really saying is: “He is doing what he thinks right – and I fear what he may think.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A fear of people thinking for themselves, of acting in their own best interests. What should people act from, someone else's best interests? Not that others' interests do not intertwine with our own, because they do in close personal relationships, and that is part of acting in one's own best interests. The best interests of the community will also be in there, somewhere. What better motivation to act out of?

<snip>
"With such a new concept, we are looking at an experiment here and now. We cannot look back at a generation of TCS kids and look at them to see if "they turned out alright". No matter what system used, some will turn out alright, and some will not. "

It's all experiments, isn't it? Testing out theories and creating better ones, over and over, all our lives.

Children are not products. They do not 'turn out' like a cake or a wood working project. They are people, autonomous and complex and unpredictable, and it is right to respect each one as such.

TCS is not a system. It is a philosophy, and living one's life is a process. Trying to live by rules and systems and methods will surely bring disappointment. "I did it all by the rules, and it still didin't turn out right!"

[grisletine]

i only out her in the sling in the car when the situation is like discovermoma said... when weve been trying to get home for 2 hrs already... we liveout on a dirt road so with her in the sling and me buckled i dont feel too worried.. i know i shouldnt make a a habit etc... i know its wrong but sometimes my patience wears thin. i wish she was old enough to distract her with toys and things but she will have noneof it!
{i must add.. it is pretty rare that were in that much of a hurry... just wanted to know if tcs would advocate letting her cry until we got there.. which i couldnt do anyways.}

yes i was planning on the gate and pillows at the bottom.. just wanted to see others' thoughts.

[discovermoma]

I wanted to add some other thoughts on the carseat issue. We have added additional padding to our toddler seat in the space directly where her back rest. For some reason our carseat didn't have any there. I have also noticed that if we get in the car after it has been sitting in the sun or it is a hot day, that her carseat is very warm to the touch. Our dd is a "hot" baby that sweats if covered up or overdressed. I think she would sometimes act out against being overheated or even remember how uncomfortable she was the last time she was in the carseat. I remember the "stiff as a board"!!! That was not a fun time for any of us. Trying to find out the cause of her refusal to sit in the carseat was at times frustrating, but not having to listen to screaming during the whole car trip made it worth the effort. It may seem silly to others, but I have actually canceled the "trip" and taken dd back in the house. It is hard to know what is going on in her head when she is unable to communicate this verbal to me. One time after going back in the house she went to get her baby doll then walk over to the door and said "go-go". I had no idea she just wanted to take the doll with her, but she went into the carseat with no resistance afterwards. Go figure!?!

Edited to add: We live off a dirt road, it is another 3 1/2 miles to our house after we turn off the highway. We allow our dd to be out of the carseat on this road. Also, don't require the carseat while she is riding around the ranch in the truck.

CIO is never an option for me! You can call it anything you want, but if dd is crying she needs something and I aim to help her get it.

[Momtwice]

I am very touched by your honest and heartfelt post!

I TOTALLY agree that it is harder to be the parent we want to be when stress, illness, time, money etc. throw us a curve or several.

One time when I had my second child...she was a brand new baby... DH was away on business. I was getting over an emotionally and physically traumatic birth. The baby was nursing constantly, and although a newborn, she did NOT NAP!!!!!

My toddler son suddenly became very jealous that I was cosleeping with the new baby but not him. He started to pitch a fit at bedtime. He was SO ANGRY.
I could not handle it. It is the ONLY time I was ever tempted to spank him! I am glad I managed not to spank but it was only by walking out of the room and giving myself time to cool off. I was horrified at my anger, which YES I think was caused by exhaustion and pain (emotional and physical.) And yes, I was spanked by my father, which is why, maybe, at that awful moment I felt I wanted to spank. (My mother says that her mother only spanked her once...and her mother was "very tired" at the time.) I was so ashamed of myself.

Soon after I decided to cosleep with both children. My son's anger disappeared, so did mine, and we all got a better night's sleep. (I won't say GOOD night's sleep....that came a couple year's later.)

I APPLAUD you for wanting to be a good mom. Naming the fact that you are not happy when you spank... is music to my ears...what sickens me is when people DEFEND spanking as necessary, morally right etc. We all fall sometimes and I applaud you for wanting to get back up and be a better mom and improve yourself. Be kind to yourself. There is no one parenting system that is always "right" but listen to your heart and you will do the best you can.

We were not meant to parent in isolation...yet so many time we have to. No wonder there is so much depression around.

[Wildflower]

To Larsy and others--I've so enjoyed your explanations of TCS. I'm a first time mom of a 4 month old darling. I've been reading all of the TCS threads for a few days and it really resonates with me--its sort of exhilerating that my own natural (though unformed ) inclinations--regarding treating my precious being and all her discovery processes with the utmost respect--already elucidated so well and practiced by others. Very exciting!

One thing stuck with me a lot tha Just Wondering talked about: 'as an AP parent what you want is irrelevant.' I think she was explai ning why its not great to raise kids thinking they can do anything they want, because then they might not choose to do things that are better for other/more responsible, like AP, just because they don't feel like doing them. Sigh...This sentiment makes me feel a little sad. I've found through these 4 months of AP that my wants are in no way irrelevant. In my heart I want nothing more than to cosleep and breastfeed and comfort her when she cries. Our wants are deeply the same wants. It would kill me not to sleep with her sweet self, not to sing and rock and kiss when she cries. Sure sometimes I'm tired, but still, I want very very much to nurse her when she needs milk in the night. Just made me feel sad to think that lots of people's experience might be that they are forcing themselves to do these things out of duty or something, when doing it cancels out they're actual personal wants. Because I think the babes would feel that. And it might feel better to them to be parented in a different way even, if AP parenting is going to be this burdensome thing for the parent. Maybe Just Wondering meant something else. I just wish AP parenting could be joyful for all as it is for us. Sigh...

I would really be interested if anyone has stories or ideas about how to apply TCS to a little little babe. I'm pretty good at reading her cues at this stage (4 months) but about once a week she gets distressed and I try everything I can think of and she's still distressed...We,re going to start babysigning in a few months, which could solve some of the miscommunication factor, but it would be wonderful to avoid coercing her at this early stage just because I couldn't understand what it was she (didn't) want. If we're doing something and she becomes unhappy, I try to change/stop what we're doing, but there are so many variables sometimes (getting cold? tired? hungry? bored?hurting?)...Maybe I'd just like a little reassurance...Thanks for all the inspiration, sacred sisters in motherhood. Be well, all of you.

[paula_bear]

Thanks, larsy, for the clarification regarding the source of some of the quotes used in the original post by Just Wondering. Can you direct me to the source of those papers by Lawerence, et al? I would be really interested to read them...

[larsy]

If there is coercion present-- as in, a crying baby- there is a solution to be found. I think a sling when driving on a dirt road is a common preference. I've used slings on airplanes and in cars and we've all lived to tell of it. Yes, car seats and seat belts help to keep us safe when traveling in cars and there are good reasons to use them. Children can understand those reasons- do the test of large stuffed animal on seat next to belted in child, do a sudden stop at a slow rate of speed, so that child can see what happens when the car stops. Child does not want to be hurt. Discovemama speaks sense, about children needing something and parent helping to get it. Not responding to cries is not responding to needs.

Life is full of risk, and we cannot avoid it all, nor would that be desirable. Parents and children can learn to do realistic risk assessment, do what they can to mitigate risks, take the risks that seem reasonable to them to take, and live life as they wish to live it.

The gate and pillow solutions sounds reasonable to me. When child knows that parent is willing to hir explore and will remove barriers to help hir do so, it sounds like a common preference.

[paula_bear]

Thanks for the response to the "stiff-as-a-board" reaction, discovermama - I will try to take DD back to the apt next time. I agree whole-heartedly w/ your statement about a child's crying being an indicator that they need something! I never heard that phrased quite that way before, but trust me, I will be quoting (and silently thanking) you in explaining my [gentle, I hope] ways of dealing w/ my kids to people who think coercion is the only right way to handle children! WOW! This is such a great place to learn - every day I learn at least 10 wonderful things from y'all.

Fondly,
Paula Bear

[k'smami]

Hey Sagewinna,

I think that when just wondering said "here" she meant New Zealand.

[k'smami]

Dear Just Wondering,

First of all, thank you for actually reading the website to understand the basic premises before deciding that there is a flaw.

And now to your post...

Originally posted by Just Wondering
Everyone who is TCS here treats the concept as if it is fact, and proven, and yet it is not.

Yes. I do this but I do not claim it to be a "proven fact". Meaning that, yes, I believe that this is a fact but I am cognizant of the fact that this has not been "proven". This is much like people who advocate Gentle Discipline. They must believe that hitting is wrong in order for it to work. And although there may be studies that prove that beating children is harmful, there aren't any that I'm aware of that proove an occasional swat not done in anger (as I have seen people advocate spanking) is harmful. However, many women here are committed to not spanking, even in the controlled way that I explained above, because they believe it is wrong. So just as those who advocate Gentle Discipline believe that spanking is wrong, TCS advocates believe that coercion is wrong. So just like for Gentle Discipline to work parents must believe that hitting is wrong, TCS advocates must believe that coercion is wrong in order for TCS to work.

Children learn by seeing behaviour repeated by their parents. What sort of parents constantly swear in front of their children? I assume the people who set the site up...which raises serious questions about the validity of the ASSUMPTIONS upon which their theory is based. After all, we have to accept the assumptions, to accept the theory.

A lot of AP mothers on these very forums swear in front of their children (including me ;)). In fact, a few months ago there was a thread all about it.

Now since I am coming from the opposite side on the swearing issue, I'd like to know what "interesting pointers" you have come up with about the possible nature of these people (which seems a lot like attacking the person, not the argument) and how this affects the validity of the assumptions because I'm not seeing a connection. (Feel free to respond to this privately if you wish. I promise I won't take offence :).)

In other words, our children do what we don't want them to do because we coerce them?

Yes. I've seen this many times. It's commonly called defiance and rebellion. Some children who expereince coercion do not rebel but many children do.

So are we supposed to let the child decide what is right and wrong?

Yes. After the parent has shared their best theories on the subject, the child will decide for themselves. If the arguement is rational, it should stand on its own without coercion. (IMO)

With such a new concept, we are looking at an experiment here and now.

Perhaps. I'm sure that way back when they invented Waldorf and Montessori these education philosophies were looked at in the same way by most people. Someone has to be the first. And if you think that what you are doing is the right thing for your family, who cares how new the concept is?

What they call parental control which is coercive, I might not consider as breaching a child's right at all. For instance:

My child will sit in his car seat whether he wants to or not, and I don't give a brass razzoo about whether the child believes that he should not be in a car seat. And my six year old will not walk through town wearing no clothes, just because he hates them. And my adolescent is not going to have a mercedes Benz as a first car, or to use a more apt definition, the designer jeans that are the current peer pressure - because we don't have the money spare to do that. And if he thinks he is going to do speed, and other recreational drugs in this house, because he thinks that is right, then he has another think coming.

I think that in all of these examples it is possible to find a common preference. Meaning, both parents and children are going to get what they want. So in light of this I would consider it breaching a child's rights (in my family).

re: financial hardship and TCS

I think that a child who is aware of the budget can rationally see when the family can afford something so they probably won't ask for it. To use myself as an example, I was involved with budget discussion from a very young age as well and I had a very clear understanding of what we could afford and if we couldn't afford it, I wouldn't ask. However, this was due to the fact that I was thinking about money rationally, not because my mother used parental control to make me understand.

But then, I have very sensible children, who have always been in on everything in this family. Including Budget discussion from the age of 8 years.

Don't look now, but that sounds a lot like TCS! LOL :D

and which does not prepare children to cope with the wrold today, perhaps even with a view to changing it

Why do you think that TCS does not prepare children to do this?

I know a few young mothers here who I think were pretty much brought up sort of TCS. Certainly not so much Laisse faire. They were never smacked, or yelled at, and always wore what they wanted when they wanted, and got the food they liked... And they are the mothers who are finding motherhood very very difficult. They didn't go through labour (why bother with pain) they didn't breastfeed, (they didn't WANT to)--- in fact, their children are emotional antagonists to their lives, because all their lives, they have got either what they wanted, or forced a compromise.

Hmmm... I don't see how this proves anything about TCS, mainly because thre are plenty of women in the world who think like this and were not parented with TCS.

TCS creates division amongst parents.

I would say that all parenting philosophies do or at least have the potential to do this. How many times do we see AP mothers go to a mainstream website and find that their ideas cause a great deal of division among the parents there?

it does make people like Heavenly and Jbcjmom and others feel sort of railroaded.

Please tell me what you mean by "railroaded". I saw it as disagreeing with eachother's theories but maybe I'm not seeing how I'm wrong. (Perhaps we should discuss this privately since it's off topic to the main points of your thread. I don't want to offend people so I would really like to know.)

You might not like my opinion. But you did ask for it...

I thank you for sharing. :)

[k'smami]

Can you believe I won't be quoting anyone? LOL :D I actually agree with everything that was said. I also definatly see how the mother is trying to coerce Dh into parenting the way she thinks is right.

[larsy]

Just Wondering wrote:

"Though TCS seems to be denying the role of "instincts" I actually feel that true TCS would encompass not only instincts, but an inate understanding of a child's mind. "

How can anyone innately understand another person's mind? You believe that you can read people's minds? <incredulous> This is profoundly disrespectful. Not to mention, impossible (thank goodness!). Most people have a hard enough time knowing what is going on in their own minds, let alone someone else's!

A parent who spends lots of time (or not, I suppose) with their child will be able to make their best guess as to what their child might want, if the communication is not clear, or if they see something that is similar to things that their child has enjoyed in the past (keeping in mind that the child's preferences/interests might have changed), and often be successful at guessing what their child wants and are able to help them get it. But this is not 'innately knowing' what is in another person's mind.

Instincts... well, I have witnessed many discussions about the role of instinct in rational decision making (check archives on the TCS list) and it seems to me that, while instinct might bring something to one's attention from below the level of consciousness, the decision one makes using that input will benefit from reflecting upon it in the light of reason. The instinct might make perfect sense, and be acted upon as such. Instinct can also be over-ridden, when it makes sense to a person to do so- for instance, a hunger strike or a nursing strike.

As humans are able to solve problems creatively, we can go instinct one step better. A mother might instinctively know to put her baby to her breast, but if that baby is unable to latch on properly and use hir tongue and jaw properly to milk the breast, that baby will not be able to get enough milk to thrive. That problem can be solved in a number of creative ways, and that baby is not doomed to die or live weak and sickly because it cannot nurse properly. Humans engage creativity and solve the problem.

instinctively ducking and covering, ;)
l.

[discovermoma]

k'smami, that's not fair! Give us a target!

LOL! LOL! LOL!

[larsy]

Just Wondering referred to "a basic premis from TCS, which is that we are (all) rational." and "the basic premis is that a child is rational, and adults are more so".

Actually, I think the reverse is true- that children are often more rational than adults, before they get confused by coercion.

And it is not across the board. We all have areas where we can think clearly, and areas where our thinking is muddy. Few people, I conjecture, experience systematic coercion in all areas of life- at least, and remain sane. But then, what is sanity... but another can of worms. Never mind. :)

[grisletine]

just wondering... i disagree with your statement that babies are not rational because they do not understand from birth that when mom isnt visble she "hasnt abandoned them forever" .. you go on to sya that they dont know this yet from lack of experience... is that the same as a lack of rationality? i think the fact that a baby eventually learns that mommy is coming back proves that the child *is* rational..
i mean .. the child isnt rational until they have the experience to learn from?

~ sadie

[outlawmama]

I don't know if this has been brought up yet, but we need to remember that what we consider "traditional" parenting--NOT cosleeping, non-intuitive, non AP/TCS, etc--has only been common cross-class for a little over a hundred years, since the industrial revolution. Before the industrial revolution it was only the very wealthy who could afford to pay for somone to watch thier children, to separate themselves from thier kids, have wet-nurses etc. This standard was considered proper. The rest of the masses almost all lived in tight family groups with both parents at home and working together and bringing up the children to help with the houshold. It wasn't until industry forced poor families to separate by out-of-home jobs that high rates of child abuse began to be noticed. And then, of course, with the rise of the middle class people wanted to act as much like the rich as possible--to have a "nursery" for thier babies, to not have to breastfeed thier own child...
This is obviously only the european model. Cultures throughout history--I'm specifically thinking about Native american cultures--have raised thier children in an extemely AP/TCS style where it was inherent in the culture that children were treated with respect and nuturing, with the knowledge that children are our future being at the forefront of every decision. In the Dakota culture, if there was a parent who beat thier child that parent was approached by the community and if thier parenting did not change, they would be exhiled from the tribe and thier child would be adopted into a capable family. It was also considered irresponsible parenting to have children closer than 5 years together, that a mother could not properly give her attention to her kids if they were that close in age--of course, that is also surely due to the nomadic nature of the tribe, but I find it telling none the less, as it was also a common belief among the "eskimo" tribes who were not so nomadic.
Anyway, my point is that historically, there have been cultures where there were none of the luxeries we have today--indoor plumbing, central heating, cars, ready-made clothing etc.--and parents were able to "AP" parent perfectly well because they were culturally expected to do so and it is how they were themselves raised. To do any thing else would be unthinkable. For most of us, who were not brought up AP and who don't have an amazing support network, when we are stressed out due to whatever we fall back on yelling, and punishment, and separation because that is our default parenting. For myself, having two children under five and a less than 25,000 a year income, and no family within 800 miles has been the nost challenging, mind-blowing experience. I know if I had more cultural examples and support I would fall off track much less often than I do. But, alas, living here in this time that is just not reality. So I come here to these boards to remind me of what I believe in, I read mothering mag, and other literature, I try and build my own community.

I've rambled...

[sagewinna]

Originally posted by k'smami
Hey Sagewinna,

I think that when just wondering said "here" she meant New Zealand.

Even so, I think it was a very generalized point of view! :)

[sagewinna]

Just so you know, I have never spanked. I was using yelling and spanking as examples of way some parents deal with things. Perhaps my wording was confusing.

I disagree that AP means you don't have abitrary rules for your kids. I find that many power struggles between parent and child come from decisions for the child that may not make sense to the child. Do AP parents never have problems with bedtime, or keeping shoes on their child or even mealtime battles (There have been several threads about food battles lately)?

[Mommy22B]

I don't understand why everyone has to argue about this?!?!?! Cant we all just accept that we all raise our children differently? Why do people have to get all offended? To me the TCS thread started by Larsy was for those interested to discuss is, or even for those who don't understand it to debate it. Why must people take offence? What if it was your parenting style being attacked ?if this were a mainstream board perhaps all you "AP" parents would be being yelled at for your style.
I just don't understand why we can't all agree to disagree and stay out of each other's business.
Beth