Parents, please comment

[Preacherman]

I read this article on CNN this morning in utter disbelief:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/HEALTH/parenting/01/15/par.most.annoying/index.html

Please read it before continuing with this thread, or you won't understand what I'm about to say.

I find the approach advocated in that article to be, quite frankly, ridiculous.  I was raised by fairly strict parents, admittedly, and that's colored my attitude and approach in such matters:  but if I'd said the things those kids said, or tried their approach, I'd have had my backside tanned good and hard!  There was no nonsense about a "touchy-feely" way of dealing with kids:  we did as we were told, and that's that.  I accept that a less strict regime might be a good thing in many ways, and lead to greater domestic harmony, but to pander to kids' temper tantrums as that article seems to suggest appears to me to be storing up trouble for the future, and virtually guaranteeing indisciplined teenagers.

What say APS members?  I'd be interested to hear your views.

[cosine]

I'm not a parent yet, but I'll comment anyway.

I think I tried each one of those phrases once, and never again, because I did get disciplined well each time for talking back. In my opinion, a strict regime like that led to greater domestic harmony because I understood that I was the kid, my parents were the authority, that's the way life was set up, and so I didn't continually try to push buttons. 

I am grateful for (what seemed at the time) my parents' strict care. I learned to avoid trouble and to discipline myself, something I now consider to be very important.

[Leatherneck]

Sometimes discipline needs to be strict, sometimes not so. Depends on the age, what's happened previously, the natural temperament of the child, etc. I think the best way to approach discipline is to consider it a teaching opportunity. Kind of like leadership: you'll get far better results if you make the kid WANT to do what you want him to rather than feeling like he has to in order to avoid punishment. Takes more effort, though, and sometimes parents are running low on that.

TC

[mtnbkr]

Sometimes discipline needs to be strict, sometimes not so. Depends on the age, what's happened previously, the natural temperament of the child, etc. I think the best way to approach discipline is to consider it a teaching opportunity. Kind of like leadership: you'll get far better results if you make the kid WANT to do what you want him to rather than feeling like he has to in order to avoid punishment. Takes more effort, though, and sometimes parents are running low on that.
TC

What he said.

We've found that better results are obtained when we make Abby *want* to do something.

Also, spanking rarely works as a motivator for her when she's misbehaving, but Time-Outs work great.  You just have to determine what the child needs in order to learn discipline. 

Chris

[client32]

What he said.

We've found that better results are obtained when we make Abby *want* to do something.

Also, spanking rarely works as a motivator for her when she's misbehaving, but Time-Outs work great.  You just have to determine what the child needs in order to learn discipline. 

Chris

Depends on the kid and the situation.  I have learned from my daughter to have 3 punishments ready to go at any time.  She doesn't always respond to the same thing.  They aren't (at least in my mind) any worse than the other, but just what will get her attention.  Sometime she is fine with a spanking and/or time-out.  That is when I have to get creative.

As for the "brain-dead phrase", if that helps you keep your cool then who am I to judge.  Not something that I plan on using.  I would rather find a way to correct the issue in the long run.

[Declaration Day]

My parents raised me with a healthy balance of love and fear until I was old enough to be reasoned with.  I now do the same with my kids.
When they were younger, poor behavior was dealt with by a warning first, and a single swat on the rear if they persisted.  I stopped doing this at around age 8 with both of them.  They are now 10 and 12, and their behavior and manners, especially in public, are superb.

The article linked above seems to persuade parents to take more of a "best friend" role with their children rather than that of a parent.  Do your children a favor and be a parent first; they have plenty of friends at school.

[Lee]

Ditto what Declaration Day said.  I couldn't have said it better.  Our twins are ten now and they are very well behaved, and responsiible kids.  There are times and situations that require thoughtfull discussion and debate, and others where you just have to say "I'm the parent, here's my ruling, live with it, or it goes downhill from here...for you.   If a kid learns early that 'no' means nothing, or is the starting point for negotiations, you're headed for trouble.

[K Frame]

"We've found that better results are obtained when we make Abby *want* to do something."

Great.

Now I understand...

Abby, you WANT to mash Uncle Muck in the crotch, don't you?

Yes you do!

[280plus]

None of my kids have ever been afraid of me. The secret is to mean what you say and say what you mean. My kids know that when I say no, it's no. Any further discussion could lead to consequences. I find leverage works well once they begin to understand stuff. Find the one or two things the kind can't live without and use that as the leverage. In our case, these days anyways, it's no you can't go to the barn and play with the horsies until your homework, chores, etc are done. Temper tantrums only lead to definitely not getting our way. A temper tantrum means discussion over and the kid loses. They know this becasue that's always the way it's been. That's with me mind you, now with mom, the eternal softie, it's another story. 

She's learning though...

 

[Antibubba]

Whatever happened to just ignoring the outburst until Baby burns herself out?

[mtnbkr]

Whatever happened to just ignoring the outburst until Baby burns herself out?

Doesn't always happen.  Ours, when really pissed off, will go until she pukes, the go some more.  It's one thing to let her do that at home, but another thing entirely when we're in the car or out and unable to return home immediately. 

Chris

[Leatherneck]

I was a single Dad back when my kids were adolescents. Juggling work, home, school and recreation rapidly emerged as a huge problem. The solution I discovered worked best was to turn our little family into a partnership. We went everywhere together, balanced responsibilities, and in short all problems were *OUR* problems to solve and help each other. (Obviously, I reserved grownup problems for private--they didn't even know of most.)

TC

[K Frame]

Whatever happened to just ignoring the outburst until Baby burns herself out?

Doesn't always happen.  Ours, when really pissed off, will go until she pukes, the go some more.  It's one thing to let her do that at home, but another thing entirely when we're in the car or out and unable to return home immediately. 

Chris

I can vouch for that. Last year Abby didn't get her way about something and it was off at the races.

I kept expecting her head to spin a 360 and for her to start projectile puking split pea soup.

I kept one hand on my Bible and the other on a vial of holy water, just in case....

[Stickjockey]

As most have said, it depends on the kid. Mine's a pretty calm kid, although it's obvious he's all boy. We take a fairly calm, straightforward approach to behavior issues with him. My nephew, on the other hand, is a chihuahua-like, constantly-on-the-edge-of critical-mass ball of energy that really needs to be constantly watched.

In general, the article isn't far off, although:

"It's not fair."

Mary Sheedy Kurcinka, a mom of two and author of "Kids, Parents, and Power Struggles," recommends asking your child to start over and try again with less irritating words, such as "Can we please talk about this?" or "Mom, I don't like that rule."

Um, no. Responses like this leave the child thinking he has some say in the House Rules. That may be okay when they're 16-17, but not when they're six. At that age, they need the parents to be in control and set the limits.

"You're not the boss of me."

In a calmer moment, Petersen realized that what her daughter really wanted was control. When her mom gave her options (like "Do you want to do the top buckle or the bottom buckle?"), Eleanor was far more likely to cooperate. You can even head off "You're not the boss of me" by teaching your child to say, "I'd like a choice," instead.

Okay in some spots, not so much in others. If I tell my boy to get dressed for school, there's no choice in the matter. Granted, it's his option to wear the hooded sweatshirt or the sweater, but he is getting dressed, period.

280Plus has a really good point with this gem:

Temper tantrums only lead to definitely not getting our way. A temper tantrum means discussion over and the kid loses.

The surest way for my boy to not get what he wants is to scream and yell about it.

[Tallpine]

Yeah, my sister in law thought that it was wrong to discipline her kids in any manner.  When they were little, they were literally just like animals - kicking, screaming, biting, and tearing up property.  Oh, and she thought it was funny when they did that 

About a year ago, she called and wanted us to take in her oldest (17 1/2) because he had gotten mixed up with some drug gangs and they were going to kill him because he was supposedly trying to go straight.  (we live two states away)  I politely told her to go to hell 

[gunsmith]

A few years ago a married couple, both police officers, got prison time
for the horrible beatings they were giving their children.
They saw themselves as disciplinarians.

Here in Reno some parents got prison for starving and beating their children.
They thought what they were doing was good parenting.

The problem with advocating a spanking now and then is some folks
are just clueless and visit the same horror upon their kids that was visited upon them.

Some folks just cant have discipline without bondage.

[280plus]

The surest way for my boy to not get what he wants is to scream and yell about it.

Mine too, and they know it, that's why it works. They need consistency. If you are consistent with not giving in because they're screaming and yelling they soon understand that the tactic won't work. If you have a track record of giving in to tantrums even just occasionally they know it can work and will pull out all the stops every time.

Speaking of pukers... 

I knew a ~ 4yo girl once who we called "puke on demand". We used to think she got herself all worked up and that's why she puked. Then one day we caught her jamming her finger down her throat when she thought nobody was looking. Kids ain't stupid, not by a long shot. From the day they are born they are trying to figure ways to manipulate mom and dad and they're pretty darn good at it. 

Even now, my 16 yo stepdaughter LOVES to go to the horse farm and not being allowed to can result in a little temper thing happening. Usually it's right when she gets home from school so she has to call mom at work for permission to go. First she asks me, "If Mom says yes will you give me a ride?" And I say, "Yes I will but if mom says no and I hear you arguing with her about it, I won't." When I first started hanging around she used to harangue poor mom at work and get into the crying fits and all that. Not no more, because she knows if I hear it, she ain't going. End of story. These days she doesn't throw nearly the number of tantrums she did when I first met her.

[K Frame]

Supposedly there's a legislator in California who is intending to introduce a bill that would make spanking a felony offense...

[MechAg94]

I loved my dad, but I knew then that if he gave an order, I was to say "Yes Sir" with no argument.  He didn't tolerate yelling and screaming either.  If we were balling after a spanking and didn't stop, we got more swats.  He was very even handed and consistent though.  Never touched us in anger at all.  We always got a 10 minute lecture first explaining exactly what we did that deserved punishment, and a hug afterward. 

Same as above, that last time I got a spanking was at 10 or 11.  Realizing my parents were in authority wasn't a problem.

[Leatherneck]

If we were balling after a spanking and didn't stop

I don't think you really mean that... =DTC

[Perd Hapley]

Attempts to pry her 4-year-old son away from one last episode of his favorite show usually turn into major bedtime battles for Anne Eide of Columbus, Mississippi. "William will say, 'But it's not fair!' Then he'll cross his arms and stomp down the hall, come back again, and repeat, 'Mom, it's not fair.'" That's when Eide sometimes can't help but let loose with "Listen here, Mister, you either turn off the TV now or you won't watch it for a week!"

Sounds like the correct response to me.  I'd better study that article pretty hard; I may be a father some day.

You're not the boss of me!

Wouldn't the correct response be, "Yes, I am. "?  Perhaps accompanied with a smack in the face? 

[gunsmith]

not a smack to the face...please.

[client32]

Supposedly there's a legislator in California who is intending to introduce a bill that would make spanking a felony offense...

http://www.nwherald.com/articles/2007/01/20/news/nation_and_world/doc45b20d0a0a982790579806.txt

A lawmaker said she will introduce a bill next week that seeks to make California the first state in the nation to ban spanking children who are 3 years old and younger.

http://159.54.226.83/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070121/OPINION/70120003/1049

I had also heard that San Francisco was going to try and pass an ordinance for children under 4, but I can't find a link for that.