Over the last few weeks, I proposed that you take a week off from hitting and yelling and teaching hate. Tall orders, I acknowledge, but important concepts to consider. I got some really good feedback about these challenges, so I’m going to be brave and trust that you won’t hand me my head if I offer yet one more challenge:
Take a week off from punishing your kids.
Yep, one week, no punishments, no matter what they do. Instead, take the opposite tack. Only focus on the things they do correctly. As the great management guru, Ken Blanchard, said, “Catch them doing something right.”
If they do something you don’t approve of, it’s ok to talk to them, but don’t punish them. Yes, it might prove difficult. Yes, they may test you (when don’t they test you?). Yes, they may do something really horrendous. But if they do, walk them through the process of understanding what happened. Explain to them your perception of what happened. Don’t tout it as fact, just your perception. Then explain how it feels to you, and explain what you would like to see in the future. Maybe you’ll need to explain to them the consequences of their behavior (hurt feelings, broken cat, police got involved, whatever). But then, at least for a week, give them the opportunity to fix their behavior without a punishment.
And just for grins, offer them incentives instead. According to Steven Levitt, a big-brained economist who wrote a trusted book on the myths of standard societal concepts, incentives work better than fines. When they tested a day-care system involving finding parents who picked up late, economists discovered that no matter what the fine was, the number of late pickups increased instead of decreased. So the theory is, when you want to discourage a negative behavior, you find out a reasonable incentive for changing.
Will it stop them from writing on the walls? Will it stop them from using their baby sister as a test subject for medical experiments? I have no idea. Depends on you, depends on your kid. But it’s possible that you’ll find your child becomes more interested in creating positive experiences for both of you. And that seems like a step in the right direction.
[tags]parenting, kids, punishment, behavior modification, adjustment, challenge[/tags]
Photo graciously provided by Paul, under a Creative Commons license
11 responses so far ↓
A.L. Hatch // Apr 30, 2007 at 6:20 am
Oh Stu, would that I could accomplish this!
I am, as you know, dealing with the whole “two” thing. My daughter is bright and strong-willed, and like her daddy, convinced that she is right all the time.
I try very hard to point out when she does something good: “good listening,” “that was very polite,” “you are so kind!”, etc.
But can you eliminate all punishments (in this case, time-outs) at such a tender age when they are right on the precipice of the age of reason?
I ask as an inexperienced parent to one who has years under their belt!
Stu Mark // Apr 30, 2007 at 1:32 pm
First, Yeah, I hear you. Two is a tough age, no doubt. Sometimes it’s all we can do to hang on and not do something regrettable.
Second, one approach is to work the guilt angle. For example, when she bites or hits, fall on the floor and feign uncontrollable weeping. See if that reaches her.
There may be no answer to raising a young child without some element of punishment. And there are upsides to punishing your child, as it teaches them how the rest of the world behaves.
But if there’s a way to reach a young child without a formal punishment, maybe that child grows up with a healthier ego.
And let me be transparent: Our daughter was raised with little punishment. As such, she has a nice, healthy ego. The downside? She’s 11 and she thinks she’s perfect and that she knows everything. This can be a little frustrating when we want her to take responsibility for her mis-steps.
But we’re working on it, and she’s getting better about respecting her parents’ collective wisdom (which we keep in a thimble).
Allen K. // May 1, 2007 at 8:41 am
When they tested a day-care system involving finding parents who picked up late, economists discovered that no matter what the fine was, the number of late pickups increased instead of decreased.
There, I would imagine the mindset to be “Is it worth the $$ for me to be late today? Yeah, that’s a good trade-off under the present circumstances, today’s special.” Once there’s a monetary value assigned, people are less likely to think “it’s worth the $$ plus being a jerk to the daycare people”, even if that’s the true cost.
All of which says, emphasize the external downside to their behavior (”you hurt me”) rather than the personal cost (”you’re getting a time-out”). Which we were supposed to already know to do!
Allen Holman // May 1, 2007 at 8:53 am
I wrote an article about why you should treat your employee’s like dogs - http://www.management-college.net/71/5-reasons-why-you-should-treat-your-employees-like-dogs/
Maybe we should be treating our kids the same way? :-p
Whitney // May 2, 2007 at 6:40 am
Stu- I LOVE the comment about parental knowledge in the thimble.
Remembering what motivates people is important. With kids, we want them to eventually become internally motivated to do the right thing, and this means teaching them this lesson by making things emotionally pleasant for “good” things, and unpleasant for bad.
Consistancy is REALLY important, but also connecting the punishment to the crime, if you use punishment, is important.
no connection, no impression.
christi // May 2, 2007 at 10:46 am
This whole discussion is freaking me out a little bit - refrain from hitting your kids? Hitting - using physical force - your own flesh and blood? Hmmm. Here’s a challenge - catch an adult behaving in a way you dislike and try hitting them. Just don’t forget that they can fight back.
Time outs work best for twos who are at the end of their rope for one reason or another. What often works best for ensuring good behavior is small healthy snacks and rest throughout the day, attention and interaction and modeling good behavior. Playing out scenarios works better and is so much less manipulative than pretending to be injured - WTF?! I am trying to be diplomatic, but I question the advice posted here - and not like it’s any of my business.
Kids take time. Some parents want instant results. They spend more time cultivating work relationships than they do with children - children that they put out into society where the rest of us have to deal with them. I’ll stop.
I suggest Super Nanny for any parent of a “just two” year old - it works. Painful at times, but you get what you want. When you get some perspective and your child is old enough to understand, I suggest Unconditional Parenting. Anyone who can do this book to the fullest is more evolved than me, but it gave me the tools with which to treat my son with respect while being the teacher and mentor he needs and deserves. I still lose my temper, but I’ve never even threatened to hit my child. In fact, I told him that it’s not OK for him to hit and it’s not OK for anyone - including adults - to hit him. Perhaps if we treat our child compassion for his fellows we won’t have to fear that our kid will be shot by the school punching bag.
Stu Mark // May 2, 2007 at 11:05 am
Allen K,
Exactly, “emphasize the external downside to their behavior…rather than the personal cost.” That is what we preach in our house. Yeah, we don’t *always* practice what we preach, but we sure do try. And we really try to communicate to our kids in a perception-based way. “I felt sad about what you said to me” or “I sense that you are mad at me, is this true?” Oh, don’t get me started on Asking Questions! Now that I think about it, that’s going to be my next column, on the importance of asking emotional questions.
Anyway, yeah, I agree, external downside communications seem to be way more effective.
Stu Mark // May 2, 2007 at 11:08 am
Allen Holman, at first I thought you were kidding, but then I read your post, and I kinda get it. Obviously it’s not a perfect analogy, but a lot of what you say in your post, which is geared for managing adults, can work for managing kids. IMHO, you could rework that post into a parental advice post.
Stu Mark // May 2, 2007 at 11:14 am
Whitney, “No Connection, No Impression.” Wow, that is awesome. And yeah, that’s why I said what I said about feigning weeping in my comment to Amy. To expand, this is what we do at my house (in other words, I’m just a guy who gives his opinion, I’m not a formalist) - When someone does something that I consider “not cool,” I break it down for them. I say, “Hey, you did this thing, right? Well, that was your choice, and we all make choices, so that’s cool. But you should know that my experience of your choice was sadness, anger, frustration, whatever.”
Make sense? It supports what you are saying about connection, that we try to explain things to our kids in terms of basic human emotion, to make the connection.
Thanks for the comment Whit. You bring so much to these discussions!
Stu Mark // May 2, 2007 at 11:26 am
christi,
First, welcome to the discussion.
Second, of course it’s your business, in that you are a reader, and you have a genuine right to comment.
Third, I really appreciate your comment. It was thoughtful and earnest.
Fourth, if you read the rest of the comments, and my responses, it may help to give you some sense of the concepts behind my advice.
Fifth, with regard to my advice, I could be dead wrong, no question. And yeah, sometimes my concepts don’t fit certain households or certain people. I get that.
Sixth, when you say, “… your own flesh and blood?,” what do you mean exactly? Are you supporting hitting your kids as punishment? If so, sure, I get that. There are parents who believe in spanking, and I respect their choice. It’s not mine, and I don’t believe that spanking has enough pros to outweigh the cons, but that’s just my opinion.
If that’s not what you meant, help me understand your point from that paragraph.
Seventh, with regard to being manipulative by feigning injury, my point is that it’s just like feigning extreme happiness over a child’s home-made gift. We exaggerate with our kids when they are younger, because their brains haven’t developed enough to fully comprehend subtle nuances. Yes, it’s manipulative, but I assert that it’s necessary. It’s not lying, for sure, because when my kids hit me or curse me or whatever, I *do* feel like breaking down crying. I don’t, because my first job is to be a parent, my second job is to care for myself. And you can’t really surrender to your tears if your kid is in need of parenting. At least not in the moment.
Does any of this make sense?
I really dig your comment, and I love other points of view. So glad you didn’t pull any punches, you’re a real contribution to this discussion. So, thanks.
christi // May 2, 2007 at 1:02 pm
Thanks, Stu. I am absolutely 100% against hitting - anyone. That was my point. If you can’t hit an adult, why hit children. I am feel as strong against it as I do against any violence - that’s why i was upset that you mentioned refraining from it in your original post. I can’t even acknowledge that it’s a personal choice - it freaks me out that people do that. I’m not a granola momma, either. I’m a full-on punk rocker girl - pavement and media.
I understand your point re: fegning pain, but I’ve seen my son’s face when I’ve faked tears over not sharing a cookie - it’s traumatic and I can’t justify for any end, being the source of anxiety for my small child. I’m sure he’ll end up in therapy one way or the other, but I feel it’s important to separate myself by experience and brain power from those tactics.
I see where you’re coming from, now. I think your post should have included all of your follow up comments. We, too, talk about what makes us sad. My son says it hurts his feelings when I tell him not to do something. I explain that I try only to say no when it’s important and that it hurts my feelings when he ignores me.
So thanks. Much appreciated. People, please don’t hit your kids. I don’t want them to think it’s OK to hit mine.
Leave a Comment