Obsessive behavior in 4 year old

Doan wrote:

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004, Stephanie Stowe wrote:

"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message

Agree! Spanking/non-spanking has nothing to do with it. It's just
funny
that these purportedly "never-spanked" kids claimed that unlike them,
the spanked kids are DAMAGED.


Some are.
------------
They ALL are, the ones who think that only SOME are, are themselves
damaged more subtly so that they are confused about what damage is.
Steve

This is an interesting tack you take. If you do not agree with me, then you
are damaged in some way that even you cannot see. So by definition,
agreement with you makes healthy.
-------------------------
It's called invalidation, and it's a necessary tack required to
assault evil.


But of course, we all think that.
------------------------
No, many people think they are wrong, inept, imperfect.

The categories of people who believe they are right are, obviously:
1) Those who are actually right,

2) and then those who are actually wrong and either don't know it, or
know it and choose to lie, disingenuously.

It is these latter that we, the former, must invalidate.


By that definition, 99% of the world population is DAMAGED since spanking
is almost universal.
--------------------
Untrue as a whole.

1) It MAY be true, to a small degree, in our culture, but it is by
NO MEANS a human universal, in fact it is an anomaly in most
cultures of our species. Most children in the world's cultures
are incredibly indulged as much as possible, and
anthropologists used to report such facts just to scandalize
westerners.

2) It is true only as amatter of degree. Even in our
culture it is rare among sensible people.


Only the "never-spanked" people like Steve and
Kane are healthy.
--------------------
You said it, we didn't even have to.


Do you want your kids to grow up and be "healthy" like
Steve and Kane? ;-)
Doan
---------------------
They certainly should!
Steve

Doan wrote:

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, toto wrote:

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 09:56:03 -0800, Doan wrote:

I think you are just feeding the troll, Dorothy. Everybody is different.
Giving flowers to a dog will not stop him from barking. :-)

Steve, while he can be abrasive, is not a troll.

Since when is insulting people called "abrasive"?

Doan
-----------
What else would it be?
Steve

Doan wrote:

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote:

Doan wrote:

It's a two-way street. I tend to treat people the same way that they
treated me. Look at the exchange between me and Dorothy in this thread.
Do you see me calling her names?
----------------
Dorothy's defense is to remain abyssmally dense to insult. She doesn't
realize that the best way to deal with **** like you is to kill you.

Are you threaten me, Steve?

Doan
------------------
Speak english.

Not specifically, I'm promoting it as a political position.
Steve

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 16:26:21 -0800, Doan wrote:


On Thu, 12 Feb 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote:

Doan wrote:

It's a two-way street. I tend to treat people the same way that
they
treated me. Look at the exchange between me and Dorothy in this
thread.
Do you see me calling her names?
----------------
Dorothy's defense is to remain abyssmally dense to insult. She
doesn't
realize that the best way to deal with **** like you is to kill
you.

Are you threaten me, Steve?

He named "the best way" not his intended way to deal with you. Mostly
folks that run into you that catch on quick just let you make a fool
of yourself, most being law abiding, I'd presume.

All he'd have to do is, really, is pull that plug you got shoved up
your ass and your brains would fall out. Would that be murder?

Which did he say. Did he say he would murder you, or did he say that
there would be a best way to deal with you?

You have a terrible time with language, when you want to, don't you?
Your pretend foriegn difficulty is kinda cute considering you were
born here and attended school and college here all your life.

Do you wish him to deal with you in the best way, or are there other
ways possible than "the best way?" I mean it's really up to you. Just
tell him you plan on attacking him physically. Go ahead. I DARE YOU I
DOUBLE DARE YOU.

My my, Doan we go all logic impaired when we think someone really
doesn't like us. R R R R R

Or are you doing your usual reframing to change the others meaning, or
am I mistaken and that wasn't a rhetorical question? Or am I just
confusing you by asking you to stick to that strange notion called
"facts?"

I agree with him by the way, in your case. On the other hand I don't
have to deal with you in "the best way" at all, and wouldn't barring
the right circumstances. I can deal with you as I have, by making you
expose what a fool you are, and I've never killed anyone that didn't
threaten my life.

That's my OTHER criteria for "debate" R R R R R, of another kind. And
perfectly legal in my state should you actually attack me. You
wouldn't be fool enough, would you? Or fool enough to assist someone
that IS fool enough? Tsk, Droany, tsk.

Gosh but then YOU wouldn't be threatening Steve would you? Trying to
claim he's threatening you so that you can excuse doing something to
HIM, eh?

Not reframing his statement, and "misunderstanding" the language are
you?

That's called criminal thinking, Droany. Tsk. And very very illogical.

No surprise in your case.

Doan

Kane

I guess I should clarify that it is currently every 4 days that she
gets a toy and we plan to slowly move it to once a week. We tried
starting at a week, but that was too long for her at first. It is the
equivalent of an allowance, and I really fail to see the harm. It has
been a miraculous transformation to us from a girl who was yelling and
back talking constantly who seemed very unhappy to a girl who is
laughing and hugging alot more instead.

I also plan to never reward the children for grades. I want them to
have the joy of learning rather than get stressed to make grades, but
she gets stars for behaving well like picking up her messes, sharing
with her sister and not throwing fits.

KC

Jenn wrote in message ...
In article ,
toto wrote:

On 7 Feb 2004 19:18:26 -0800, (KC) wrote:

I have only recently started getting my dd toys all the time as a
reward for good behavior (we keep a chart). So far she's not
obsessive about it, but hopefully that won't change.

This is a bad idea.

It teaches reliance on external rewards instead of internal
motivation for good behavior. And it certainly can lead to
being obsessive about getting toys as well, imo.

exactly -- using such rewards is sometimes useful when dealing with an
extreme situation -- or an achievement that is a one timer -- but
teaching kids to expect toys candy or whatever, routinely, is teaching
them to be other directed and to also value material things excessively

if the child is retarded or mentally disturbed or has a severe behavior
problem, then the down side of rewards is offset by helping get them to
a place where they are succeeding -- it is why it is a useful technique
for control in juvenile jails or mental hospitals

it has no place in routine discpline of normal kids

In article ,
(Michelle Spina) wrote:

You are VERY close to the heart of the problem here. DH had a truly
lousy childhood (with some great memories sprinkled in, but all in
all, BAD), and I think it's his goal to make his own children have
GREAT memories. I'm SO totally all for that. I just think we can do
that without showering them with gifts at every turn. I did have a
great childhood, and I didn't have a gift parade, so I know it's
possible. :-)

Have you talked to DH about this connection?

--
Chookie -- Sydney, Australia
(Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply)

"Jeez; if only those Ancient Greek storytellers had known about the astonishing
creature that is the *Usenet hydra*: you cut off one head, and *a stupider one*
grows back..." -- MJ, cam.misc

"toto" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 11:26:16 GMT, "Stephanie and Tim"
wrote:


"toto" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 14:53:22 GMT, "Stephanie and Tim"
wrote:

I have to agree with Dorothy on this one, if I can put words
into her mouth. Dorothy, let me know if I am off the mark.


Close, but not exactly what I am saying.

There is nothing wrong with rewards.

In moderation (they are very overused in our current
society).

But not all rewards are presents.

Agreed.

A word of praise can be a "reward."

Yes and praise is also much overused. Praise needs
to be specific to the behavior not to the *child* or it can
become very destructive as well. There is nothing wrong
with encouraging a child by showing that you liked what
s/he did, but the generic *you are a good boy or good
girl* often backfires.


I can agree with this from my own experience. I was doing
this without even realizing it. It set up a fear of being or
becoming a "bad boy" since he did not have a clue what
being a "good boy" was for. I started saying what I meant.

Exactly.

When he did something nice, I would tell him, Boy I really
like it when you help your sister.

Note he you are not defining the value for him, but telling
him what *you* liked. This is a really good way to phrase
things.

Gee look you cleaned up your playdough. Now it won't get
all hard and yucky. No drum beats.

Another good way of phrasing the comment. This one tells
him *why* it was a good thing to clean it up without making
the judgement for him and lets him figure out for himself that
the action was a good one.

And from this reward they get the further reward of a feeling
of pride from the accomplishment.

The praise is actually unnecessary too. It's the fact that they
accomplished a difficult task that gives kids self-esteem.


Agreed. But sometimes it helps to add your value judgement
to the worthiness of the thing he did. That is NOT to say you
should be running around praising for little things of no
consequence.

Note that this is *not* what you did in the sentences above.

And I think it is better for the child to determine the value
judgement and the adult to simply point out the standard
and why it works.



You are right. That is what I meant. But did not say it that way.

Tell me, do you really think we need to praise a child for
learning to walk or to skip or to throw a ball or to jump rope?
Kids do this because they are interested in it.


I will praise my kid for trying soemthing after intending to give
up because it was too hard.

This is good, but phrasing here is important too. I think that
I would just say: *you finished and that was really hard* and
let the child be proud of himself. Often the child will beam when
you recognize him, but be let down if you tell him that *you* are
proud of him. Remember it's his achievement not yours.

Kids will do the same with learning to read, to do math or
anything else because these things are *inherently* interesting
to them.

This can start a powerful positive feedback loop in which
they are able to reward themselves with pride and esteem.

Yes, but the feedback loop doesn't start with adult praise.
It begins with actually accomplishing a task..

When a present is given, all they get is the present.

Yep.

And even sometimes the desire for more presents as
payment, if you will, for good behavior.

Yes.


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, toto wrote:

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 23:43:31 -0800, Doan wrote:

Yes and praise is also much overused. Praise needs
to be specific to the behavior not to the *child* or it can
become very destructive as well. There is nothing wrong
with encouraging a child by showing that you liked what
s/he did, but the generic *you are a good boy or good
girl* often backfires.

Praise is overused??? I thought the criticism is that parents
tend to concentrate on the negative behaviors and forget to
"caught them doing goods". Am I wrong?

In general, some parents do concentrate on the negative.
But catching them being good doesn't mean you have to
praise them for that either.

I didn't say you "have to"! The question is whether praising
is good or bad in such a situation. Can I take it to mean
that you thinkg praising is NEVER a good thing?

Saying *I like the way I saw you playing with your brother.*
lets the child make the judgement. Saying *you are such
a good boy for playing nicely with your brother* imposes
your definition of him as a *good boy* and he knows that
he isn't *good* all the time, so he may judge that praise as
insincere. It's a fine line. I wouldn't say all praise is bad, but
positive feedback that is specific is much better.

First, I don't agree with you that children, who can't tell the difference
between spanking and hitting according to you, can tell the difference
in the subtleness of the language. Second, saying you "like" something
already imply judgement.

And from this reward they get the further reward of a feeling
of pride from the accomplishment.

The praise is actually unnecessary to. It's the fact that they
accomplished a difficult task that gives kids self-esteem.

So praising is bad?

Praise is controlling in the same way that rewards are although
I think used sparingly, it's not awful.

You are dancing around, Dorothy. Why not just say what you believe?
Are you having problem with convincing yourself? ;-)

Read How to Talk So Kids Will Listen and Listen So Kids Will
Talk by Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish and you will see the
difference between encouragement and praise. Praise can be
empty. It can be overblown. It can be used to try to control kids
into doing what you want them to do. Encouragement, otoh,
allows the kids to judge themselves as having done well, instead
of imposing an adult judgement on them.


That is the not same as saying that praise is NEVER any good.

Doan

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004, toto wrote:

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 11:28:20 GMT, "Stephanie and Tim"
wrote:

Kids will do the same with learning to read, to do
math or anything else because these things are
*inherently* interesting to them.

You got to be kidding. Ask any kid whether they like
to read, to do math or watch TV.


Let me tell you, with my son, reading is VERY inherently
interesting. He LOVES counting and writing in his number
book. The tv is also interesting. But the seeds of interest in
these other things is very present if we know how to
encourage its growth.

Also, note that children come into the world ready to learn and
interested in everything.

Again, I disagree. Children are interested in MANY things but, certainly
not EVERYTHING.

Doan, do you think children will not
learn to speak, to walk?

Are you kidding, Dorothy?

Why do you believe they won't love
learning to read and do math?

Because there are other things (TV, video games,playing in the park...)
that are more fun.

They will *if* we don't kill off the
interest by punishing and/or rewarding them to *make* them do
these things.

So much for *compulsive* K-12 education. :-)

Note: school can often kill children's interest by making things
boring to the point of tears. Learning to read, write and do
math has to be as active as learning to speak and walk are.

I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called "unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan

Again, I disagree. Children are interested in MANY things but,
certainly not EVERYTHING.

Not in EVERYONE, either. Just ask Michael Jackson.

This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

It didn't help your spelling or grammar.