"Parenting Without Punishing"

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 12:59:24 -0500, "Lesa"
wrote:


"Doan" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Lesa wrote:


"Tori M." wrote in message
...
This whole thing is unrealistic and will set a child to fail later in
life.
If you do something bad 90% of the time there will be consequences.

What you don't seem to realize is that eliminating punishment is not
eliminating consequences. In a school setting if a child does not do
their
homework, they get a poor-- this is consequences. What is not necessary
are
lectures, remaining after school, notes home to parents, meetings about
what
a terrible child this is, etc. A simple statement from the teacher that
this child *WILL* receive a poor grade if this behavior continues,
followed
by a poor grade is all that is necessary.

And what are the results of this philosophy? Do the students learned
more? Do the schools no longer need cops nor metal detectors?

In the home setting there are also consequences. If you spill your
drink at
diner, you clean it up-- again, no lectures, or spankings or time in the
corner or restrictions are needed.

What if the children don't want to clean it up?

Doan

Quite honeslty this in not something I've encountered on more than a very
very infrequent basis. It is understood that taking responsiblity for one's
actions is expected, and I've found that children will what you expect of
them. If you expect that a child will act in a cooperative manner, they do
so.

While I agree with this to an extent, I also think it is partly how
*you* model cooperation and responsibility.

Do you as a parent clean up your own messes? Does your
spouse or s/o? If so, your child is pretty likely to learn to do so
since you expect it of everyone in the household.

When your child asks you to cooperate with him, do you
help him or refuse because it's *his* responsibility?

If you expect that a child will constantly rebel and refuse to do what
is required, they do this as well.

Yes, agreed. Children *will* live down to your expectations.

On those rare occasions where a child would not want to clean
up, all that is necessary is disussing with the child that you
understand that they don't want to do this now, but that it needs
to be done and you would appreciate their taking care of it --
never had a problem beyond that.




--
Dorothy

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

The Outer Limits

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 11:42:06 -0700, Doan wrote:

Quite honeslty this in not something I've encountered on more than a very
very infrequent basis. It is understood that taking responsiblity for one's
actions is expected, and I've found that children will what you expect of
them. If you expect that a child will act in a cooperative manner, they do
so. If you expect that a child will constantly rebel and refuse to do what
is required, they do this as well. On those rare occasions where a child
would not want to clean up, all that is necessary is disussing with the
child that you understand that they don't want to do this now, but that it
needs to be done and you would appreciate their taking care of it -- neve
rhad a problem beyond that.

Good for you! You seem to have figured out what work with your kids. The
problem I have with this is when you try to generalize it to everyone. As
you acknowledged, it didn't work 100% of the times even with your own
kids! Imagine a single-mom having to catch a bus to work in the morning
and uncooperating child that don't want to go to daycare that day. What
are the consequences in this case? Theory is nice, but reality is what
really bites!

What age is the child? So much depends on their age in cases like
this and on the reason the child does not want to go to this daycare.


Doan


--
Dorothy

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

The Outer Limits

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 03:42:12 -0700, Doan wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote:

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 21:42:25 -0500, "Tori M."
wrote:

To raise a child to not have cause and effect
other then the "natural consequenses" (IE sticking
a fork in the outlet will get the child shocked) is just
as bad IMO then to over punish a child.

Children learn easily that *other people* can be punitive
without having their parents punish them.

Yes, that is why it is better for their parents to prepare
them for the REAL WORLD, not Oz land. Do you want your
children to grow up and be like Steve? :-)

Parents do NOT have to punish kids to prepare them for
the *real world.* They do have to instill a sense of ethics
and a sense of self-discipline.

For some, yes; for all? Kids are individuals. There is no
one size fits all solution.

My children both have that and I am now helping to raise
my grandchildren in the same way.

Good! Are they better than the Serena/Venus Williams sisters?
Are they better than Ted Turner? Mother Theresa?

I have said before that permissive parenting is not the same
thing as positive parenting. Giving in to the whims of anyone
doesn't help them to learn to respect the feelings of the other
person involved. But there is no need to punish children to
accomplish this.

Now where did I say anything about permissive. I am talking about
doing what best for your kids. Parents are the best ones to decide
what discipline strategy works best for their kids.

Doan

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 13:14:36 -0700, Doan wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 03:42:12 -0700, Doan wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote:

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 21:42:25 -0500, "Tori M."
wrote:

To raise a child to not have cause and effect
other then the "natural consequenses" (IE sticking
a fork in the outlet will get the child shocked) is just
as bad IMO then to over punish a child.

Children learn easily that *other people* can be punitive
without having their parents punish them.

Yes, that is why it is better for their parents to prepare
them for the REAL WORLD, not Oz land. Do you want your
children to grow up and be like Steve? :-)

Parents do NOT have to punish kids to prepare them for
the *real world.* They do have to instill a sense of ethics
and a sense of self-discipline.

For some, yes; for all? Kids are individuals. There is no
one size fits all solution.

Kids are individuals. Punishment is a one size solution. Positive
parenting adapts to individuals.

My children both have that and I am now helping to raise
my grandchildren in the same way.

Good! Are they better than the Serena/Venus Williams sisters?
Are they better than Ted Turner? Mother Theresa?

Better how? I would never compare my kids to other people
as they are themselves not those others.

I have said before that permissive parenting is not the same
thing as positive parenting. Giving in to the whims of anyone
doesn't help them to learn to respect the feelings of the other
person involved. But there is no need to punish children to
accomplish this.

Now where did I say anything about permissive. I am talking about
doing what best for your kids. Parents are the best ones to decide
what discipline strategy works best for their kids.

You are talking about permissive vs punitive. That's all you folks
ever do. You cannot get it through your heads that there is another
way that is neither.

Doan


--
Dorothy

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

The Outer Limits

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 13:14:36 -0700, Doan wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 03:42:12 -0700, Doan wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote:

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 21:42:25 -0500, "Tori M."
wrote:

To raise a child to not have cause and effect
other then the "natural consequenses" (IE sticking
a fork in the outlet will get the child shocked) is just
as bad IMO then to over punish a child.

Children learn easily that *other people* can be punitive
without having their parents punish them.

Yes, that is why it is better for their parents to prepare
them for the REAL WORLD, not Oz land. Do you want your
children to grow up and be like Steve? :-)

Parents do NOT have to punish kids to prepare them for
the *real world.* They do have to instill a sense of ethics
and a sense of self-discipline.

For some, yes; for all? Kids are individuals. There is no
one size fits all solution.

Kids are individuals. Punishment is a one size solution. Positive
parenting adapts to individuals.

Punishment is NOT a one size nor the ONLY solution! Punishment that
fit the crime adapts to the individual and the misbehavior. Positive
parenting PLUS punishment as a backup give you the BEST of both worlds.

My children both have that and I am now helping to raise
my grandchildren in the same way.

Good! Are they better than the Serena/Venus Williams sisters?
Are they better than Ted Turner? Mother Theresa?

Better how? I would never compare my kids to other people
as they are themselves not those others.

So you don't mind if your kids turn into a STEVE? Do you of any kid
that overcome so much like the Williams - with your non-punitive
disciplinary style?

I have said before that permissive parenting is not the same
thing as positive parenting. Giving in to the whims of anyone
doesn't help them to learn to respect the feelings of the other
person involved. But there is no need to punish children to
accomplish this.

Now where did I say anything about permissive. I am talking about
doing what best for your kids. Parents are the best ones to decide
what discipline strategy works best for their kids.

You are talking about permissive vs punitive. That's all you folks
ever do. You cannot get it through your heads that there is another
way that is neither.

Doan

Come on, Dorothy! After all these years and you still come up with
such a strawman. There is more than one way! It's up to the parents
to find the way that is BEST for their kids. Notice that I've NEVER
said you are doing it the wrong way with your kids. You, on the hand,
are saying that your way is the ONLY WAY!

Doan

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 11:42:06 -0700, Doan wrote:

Quite honeslty this in not something I've encountered on more than a very
very infrequent basis. It is understood that taking responsiblity for one's
actions is expected, and I've found that children will what you expect of
them. If you expect that a child will act in a cooperative manner, they do
so. If you expect that a child will constantly rebel and refuse to do what
is required, they do this as well. On those rare occasions where a child
would not want to clean up, all that is necessary is disussing with the
child that you understand that they don't want to do this now, but that it
needs to be done and you would appreciate their taking care of it -- neve
rhad a problem beyond that.

Good for you! You seem to have figured out what work with your kids. The
problem I have with this is when you try to generalize it to everyone. As
you acknowledged, it didn't work 100% of the times even with your own
kids! Imagine a single-mom having to catch a bus to work in the morning
and uncooperating child that don't want to go to daycare that day. What
are the consequences in this case? Theory is nice, but reality is what
really bites!

What age is the child? So much depends on their age in cases like
this and on the reason the child does not want to go to this daycare.

The child can be 3,4,5,6. The reason is he/she just doesn't feel like it!

Doan

Doan wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Nathan A. Barclay wrote:


"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message
...
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

You can bully such teachers by arranging appointments with them and
haranguing them, they are late getting home a number of times and
they learn not to **** with your kid. Also, you let the kid leave
school at 14 or 15 or home-school them and dummy the reports to the
state. If you're a great parent your kid will learn more on their own
anyway.

Yet another example of, "Coercion is terrible. Let's use coercion to get
rid of it." (And note, by the way, that this is an example of coercion used
when the person being targeted is NOT violating the law.)
--------------------
They are violating other PEOPLE, the law is a lagging ass!!!
We're gonna correct that!
Steve

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote:

Doan wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Nathan A. Barclay wrote:


"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message
...
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

You can bully such teachers by arranging appointments with them and
haranguing them, they are late getting home a number of times and
they learn not to **** with your kid. Also, you let the kid leave
school at 14 or 15 or home-school them and dummy the reports to the
state. If you're a great parent your kid will learn more on their own
anyway.

Yet another example of, "Coercion is terrible. Let's use coercion to get
rid of it." (And note, by the way, that this is an example of coercion used
when the person being targeted is NOT violating the law.)
--------------------
They are violating other PEOPLE, the law is a lagging ass!!!
We're gonna correct that!
Steve

Typical rant from a "never-spanked" kid. :-)

Doan

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 14:38:21 -0700, Doan wrote:


On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 11:42:06 -0700, Doan wrote:

Quite honeslty this in not something I've encountered on more than a very
very infrequent basis. It is understood that taking responsiblity for one's
actions is expected, and I've found that children will what you expect of
them. If you expect that a child will act in a cooperative manner, they do
so. If you expect that a child will constantly rebel and refuse to do what
is required, they do this as well. On those rare occasions where a child
would not want to clean up, all that is necessary is disussing with the
child that you understand that they don't want to do this now, but that it
needs to be done and you would appreciate their taking care of it -- neve
rhad a problem beyond that.

Good for you! You seem to have figured out what work with your kids. The
problem I have with this is when you try to generalize it to everyone. As
you acknowledged, it didn't work 100% of the times even with your own
kids! Imagine a single-mom having to catch a bus to work in the morning
and uncooperating child that don't want to go to daycare that day. What
are the consequences in this case? Theory is nice, but reality is what
really bites!

What age is the child? So much depends on their age in cases like
this and on the reason the child does not want to go to this daycare.

The child can be 3,4,5,6. The reason is he/she just doesn't feel like it!

You treat a 3 year old differently than you do a 6 year old.

And there is *always* something more to the reason than they don't
feel like it despite the child's inability to express the real reason.

Aside from that, of course, a 5 or 6 year old would be going to school
in the morning not daycare.

With a three year old, you pick him up an bring him with you despite
protests. You do accept his feelings and allow him to vent them. If
he is angry, you find appropriate ways for him to tell you this. You
also have to address what is really wrong. With a 6 year old, it is
quite doubtful that you would have this problem if you handled him
as a 3 year old with love and empathy for his feelings. As long as
you actually allow him to be angry, most kids get over tantrums pretty
quickly and if you have allowed sufficient time in the morning to get
going, he would most likely have finished before you had to get out
the door to the bus stop. If not, you may have to carry him for a
bit. This is not to say it won't be difficult. It will, but if you
deal with tantrums consistently, they don't happen very often even
at 2 years old.

I *would* worry about a child who didn't want to go to daycare or
school on a regular basis because it might mean someone there
was bullying him or that the placement was a poor one for him for
some other reason.

Doan


--
Dorothy

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

The Outer Limits

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 14:38:21 -0700, Doan wrote:


On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote:

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 11:42:06 -0700, Doan wrote:

Quite honeslty this in not something I've encountered on more than a very
very infrequent basis. It is understood that taking responsiblity for one's
actions is expected, and I've found that children will what you expect of
them. If you expect that a child will act in a cooperative manner, they do
so. If you expect that a child will constantly rebel and refuse to do what
is required, they do this as well. On those rare occasions where a child
would not want to clean up, all that is necessary is disussing with the
child that you understand that they don't want to do this now, but that it
needs to be done and you would appreciate their taking care of it -- neve
rhad a problem beyond that.

Good for you! You seem to have figured out what work with your kids. The
problem I have with this is when you try to generalize it to everyone. As
you acknowledged, it didn't work 100% of the times even with your own
kids! Imagine a single-mom having to catch a bus to work in the morning
and uncooperating child that don't want to go to daycare that day. What
are the consequences in this case? Theory is nice, but reality is what
really bites!

What age is the child? So much depends on their age in cases like
this and on the reason the child does not want to go to this daycare.

The child can be 3,4,5,6. The reason is he/she just doesn't feel like it!

You treat a 3 year old differently than you do a 6 year old.

Ok! How so?

And there is *always* something more to the reason than they don't
feel like it despite the child's inability to express the real reason.

The bus is leaving in 5 minutes! Does it matters?

Aside from that, of course, a 5 or 6 year old would be going to school
in the morning not daycare.

Ok!

With a three year old, you pick him up an bring him with you despite
protests.

And that is POSITIVE?

You do accept his feelings and allow him to vent them. If
he is angry, you find appropriate ways for him to tell you this. You
also have to address what is really wrong. With a 6 year old, it is
quite doubtful that you would have this problem if you handled him
as a 3 year old with love and empathy for his feelings. As long as
you actually allow him to be angry, most kids get over tantrums pretty
quickly and if you have allowed sufficient time in the morning to get
going, he would most likely have finished before you had to get out
the door to the bus stop. If not, you may have to carry him for a
bit. This is not to say it won't be difficult. It will, but if you
deal with tantrums consistently, they don't happen very often even
at 2 years old.

And you will figure all of this out before the bus leaves?

I *would* worry about a child who didn't want to go to daycare or
school on a regular basis because it might mean someone there
was bullying him or that the placement was a poor one for him for
some other reason.

Who said on a regular basis. I am giving you a real life problem
for this ONE morning! This daycare center just happenned to be
the most convenient in term of location and price. That's life!

Doan