Love and Logic? - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 15 Old 06-21-2006, 01:40 AM - Thread Starter
 
Moochie Mamma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Somewhere on my mountain bike.
Posts: 392
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Have any of you read this book? If so what do you think about it? I read it long before finding this forum and thought it was great, but now I'm not so sure. There is alot in it I still like (for example: advice like giving the child a choice between wearing or carrying his jacket on a snowy day rather than insisting they wear it) but some of it feels icky (for lack of a better word) like saying "uh oh" and giving time outs for every infraction.

Any thoughts?
Moochie Mamma is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 of 15 Old 06-21-2006, 02:31 AM
 
Piglet68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Vancouver Island, Canada
Posts: 10,977
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Haven't read it, but I disagree with the behaviouralist approach to parenting, and do not believe in timeouts. So I'm guessing I would not like it.

teapot2.GIF Homeschooling, Homesteading Mama to DD ('02) and DS ('04)  ribbonjigsaw.gif blogging.jpg homeschool.gif

Piglet68 is offline  
#3 of 15 Old 06-21-2006, 09:44 AM
 
Brigianna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: who knows?
Posts: 7,939
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I've read it, and there are some things I agreed with and a lot of things I disagreed with. The good thing about it is that you can take whatever parts work for you and leave the rest. One thing I agreed with was giving choices as much as possible. But many of the choices talked about I thought were false choices, things that I wouldn't have a "rule" about in the first place. And I don't agree with the time outs, and some parts of it are just creepy, like saying "I love you" after giving a punishment. Basically I think it's a good underlying method, but the way it's explained in the book is much too controlling IMO.
Brigianna is offline  
#4 of 15 Old 06-21-2006, 09:53 AM
 
mezzaluna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 1,093
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
yeah, a few things resonated with me, but by the end of the book i was totally turned off.

-going without food was a frequent alternative choice to behaving: you can show you want to participate with the family by helping clean right now, or you can choose not to participate with the family and not have dinner tonight. um yeah... sending kids to bed without their supper... pretty old school. and it seems like a huge stretch to make that a natural consequence at all. and if it's a logical consequence it seems like a pretty cruel one to me, and one likely to set up food issues.

-"basic german shepherd" my stomach turned when i read this! they say you should expect your child to follow basic commands like stop and come here by the time they're crawling, and if not, starting around 10 months you should spank them for infractions of this. (at least they didn't seem to advocate spanking for anything other than this kind of violation.) let's see... dogs are pack animals whose lives depend on conforming to the pack... humans are a little different - why do we need to make them heel and enforce it with physical violence? besides which people manage to train dogs without hitting them, too.

Rosemary & Gary :
James 12/04 & Cecelia 4/07
mezzaluna is offline  
#5 of 15 Old 06-21-2006, 04:27 PM
 
Brigianna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: who knows?
Posts: 7,939
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I know they advocated spanking in their earlier book, but I'm pretty sure they've since disavowed it. The one I read didn't mention spanking. There was a lot of food control, though, which I vehemently disagree with in any form.
Brigianna is offline  
#6 of 15 Old 06-21-2006, 04:37 PM
 
faeriewisp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: The great northeast
Posts: 335
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I haven't read it in a long time. I remmeber liking a lot of it, but that it just didn't seem appropriate for YOUNG kids, like under 7-8.
faeriewisp is offline  
#7 of 15 Old 06-22-2006, 04:48 PM
 
mezzaluna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 1,093
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
ah, good to know they've taken the spanking out of newer editions. i should contact my library and let them know they have an out-of-date edition that advocates spanking...grrr.

Rosemary & Gary :
James 12/04 & Cecelia 4/07
mezzaluna is offline  
#8 of 15 Old 06-22-2006, 06:13 PM
 
Sijae's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,435
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mezzaluna
ah, good to know they've taken the spanking out of newer editions. i should contact my library and let them know they have an out-of-date edition that advocates spanking...grrr.
http://www.loveandlogic.com/pdfs/spank.pdf

mom to 3 home-born children, wife to a great guy joy.gif

Sijae is offline  
#9 of 15 Old 06-24-2006, 11:44 AM
 
Brigianna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: who knows?
Posts: 7,939
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It is good that they've stopped endorsing spanking, but sad that they think that saying kids would rather be spanked than have "love and logic" done to them is somehow an endorsement of the program....
Brigianna is offline  
#10 of 15 Old 06-24-2006, 04:14 PM
 
aira's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: missing the Grandmother Lodge
Posts: 2,959
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
OMG! So, per #4 and #5 from the linkie, since it makes the kids feel even worse than a spanking, it's the better method? Are they admitting that it's more sadistic punisment than hitting, and therefore better parenting?!

:Puke

Wish there was a #7 about how they how remorseful they are about furthering the idea of hitting children.
aira is offline  
#11 of 15 Old 06-26-2006, 01:46 AM
 
Brigianna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: who knows?
Posts: 7,939
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by aira
OMG! So, per #4 and #5 from the linkie, since it makes the kids feel even worse than a spanking, it's the better method? Are they admitting that it's more sadistic punisment than hitting, and therefore better parenting?!

:Puke

Wish there was a #7 about how they how remorseful they are about furthering the idea of hitting children.
Note also how their idea of effectiveness is synonymous with suffering--because, of course, the method that inflicts the most suffering is the most "effective." They really shouldn't pretend that that part of what they advocate is logical consequences, but rather more creative (and, apparently, more painful) punishments. There *are* good points in it, but you have to sift through all the creepy punitive stuff.
Brigianna is offline  
#12 of 15 Old 06-26-2006, 02:01 AM
 
Nora'sMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: a state of flux
Posts: 2,321
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I wish the search function were active, because there was a great thread about L&L about a year or so ago.

Blech. It sounds pretty demented to me. But I'm sure it's written so as to seem very straightforward and...logical. :

The thing that gets me is the stock phrases that parents are supposed to use: "I love you too much to argue," etc. The sense of frustration and rage that it must engender in children when their parents turn into smug, authoritarian robots - ah it makes my blood boil! No one should be talked to like that. It is blatantly disrespectful. Do the L&L authors think kids don't GET that?
Nora'sMama is offline  
#13 of 15 Old 06-26-2006, 03:14 AM
Banned
 
boongirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: a place where freedom lives
Posts: 4,450
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
There is a great thread ongoing in this forum about love and logic.

Here

There are a few things I like about it and a whole lot I dislike. Read the thread and you will find many similar responses.
boongirl is offline  
#14 of 15 Old 06-26-2006, 05:39 AM
Banned
 
SneakyPie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Somewhere around here . . .
Posts: 1,192
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think it's the same old manipulation disguised as "love" garbage that a lot of parenting books spew out. Just because you love your kid does not mean that everything you do to them is a loving thing, and this book is a prime example of that. I think it just encourages parents to be very passive-agressive, instead of honest with their kids and themselves. Saying to yourself, "I will give my kid only the choices that *I* can live with," for example, is not really honestly giving your kid choice. If you aren't really going to offer true choice, at least admit it to yourself. Talk to me more about it when my kid is older, but we're all about the ideal of consent in this family. (Not that we always live up to it . . .)
SneakyPie is offline  
#15 of 15 Old 06-26-2006, 01:30 PM
 
DevaMajka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 10,344
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Here's two threads about it.
One I started, and I included examples right out of the book. http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=311148
The other is pretty long http://www.mothering.com/discussions...ghlight=secret

Becky, partner to Teague, SAHM to Keagan (7yo), Jonah (2yo)
 

DevaMajka is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off