Punishing children creates a number of problems, which, when taken together, are serious and counterproductive. In general, punishments are an invitation to trouble, and often carry with them significant, unintended, negative consequences. Punishments should therefore be avoided with all children, no matter their age. There are better ways than punishments for dealing with children’s unacceptable behavior. More about that later. First, let’s consider some of the problems with punishments.
1. Punishments are often ineffective. Parents run out of things to take away. Children often reach a point where they just don’t care what punishment the parent imposes. Mountains of research over the years conclusively demonstrate that positive consequences (rewards and appreciation) are far more effective than negative consequences (punishments) in influencing children to behave well. (This is true even with animals.) I have heard many, many parents in my classes say that punishments usually don’t deter anything. They just make things worse as the child becomes even more resistant or disobedient.
2. Punishments are hurtful “power and control” tactics, and are really a form of bullying. In our culture the word “discipline” has come to mean “punishment.” The purpose of punishment is to inflict some kind of pain with the hope of both teaching a lesson and deterring future misbehavior. Unfortunately, it’s intended to teach children to behave properly by scaring them into submission. The real lesson that punishment teaches, then, is that when someone doesn’t do what you want, you try to hurt them and/or scare them into submission to your will. Parents are in many ways more powerful than children, and parents who punish use their power to “bully” the child into submission.
3. Through punishments children learn to bully. Children learn what they experience and what their parents model. Thus, punishments really teach them the wrong lesson: namely, “I’ll hurt you if you don’t give in to my will.” This is not only bullying, but also the perfect recipe for creating a bully. Ever wonder why bullying in schools is so widespread? Or why stronger siblings bully weaker ones? Perhaps it’s because parents routinely bully children with punishments and thus inadvertently teach children that it’s okay to hurt someone weaker than you in order to get them to bend to obey you. On the other hand, children raised by parents who use little punishment, but instead use more effective interpersonal skills in response to misbehavior, are not likely to bully weaker peers or siblings.
4. Beyond bullying, children learn that violence is acceptable. American society is perhaps the most violent society in the world. Could it be that a major contributing factor is the way we raise our children, by using varying degrees of violent behavior from verbal bullying to physical abuse, to “beat them into submission”? I am referring here to verbal bullying and abuse as well as physical, and I’m calling all of it a form of violence against children. And it is completely unnecessary.
5. Inflicting pain is not a loving act. The end does not justify the means. Two wrongs don’t make a right. Rather than seeing a child’s misbehavior as an expression of his needs for autonomy and independence, or his need to vent anger, the parent who punishes sees only bad behavior and uses his/her power to inflict pain in an attempt to reduce or eradicate it. However, children are by definition immature, and their methods of getting their needs met or of expressing anger are likely to be self-centered, immature, and primitive. Isn’t this to be expected? Their misbehavior is often the result of a self-centered attitude that causes pain or injury to others–-perhaps intended, perhaps unintended. In any event, children need to be taught to express themselves in loving ways that do not harm others. And parents need to be the ones who do the teaching.
6. Punishments make parents the enemy, not the ally. In the eyes of the child, the parent is now the bad guy who, by inflicting pain, unwittingly invites from the child an anger response and a desire for “payback.” This has the effect of the parent inviting exactly what s/he does not want: greater defiance, more disobedience, and continued unacceptable behavior. The child learns to fight back by “pushing the parent's buttons,” which is her way of using her own unrefined power to express anger and to bully the parent.
7. Inflicting pain on children causes guilt reactions in parents. This is a powerful indicator that there is something inherently wrong with inflicting pain with punishments. Yet many Old School parenting experts and authors recommend it anyway, and expect parents to tolerate their guilt by going against what they instinctively know and feel. Inflicting pain is not a loving act, no matte how you cut it. I say, “Let your conscience be your guide.” If your behavior creates a guilt response in you, then you might just be doing the wrong thing, by your own standards. Your own conscience, your Higher Self, is telling you something important. Thank God you can feel it! A small percentage of sociopathic parents abuse and harm their children because they have no conscience and feel no guilt, and don’t know a better way. Don’t let Old School parenting experts talk you into acting like a sociopath.
8. Punishments encourage children to get better at hiding their misbehaviors. I doubt very much that children who are treated with respect by their parents, and who are taught how to care about others by their parents, will turn to bullying younger, weaker, or more timid peers. To the contrary, children whose parents have the ability to use misbehaviors as occasions for teaching children better relationship skills will actually learn a better way.
9. Most parents punish because they don’t know a better way. In other words, when parents punish, they show their ignorance. Now, ignorance is not a bad thing, and I’m not blaming parents for being ignorant. It just means they haven’t learned something better. Parents raised by Old School, power-and-control parents, and taught by Old School power-and-control experts, quite naturally haven’t learned alternatives to Old School methods, even though those methods may not feel right or may be counterproductive. They need to learn a way of dealing with children’s misbehaviors that teaches children how they affect others and how to get their needs met in socially acceptable ways.
10. Parents rationalize that punishments are not only necessary but beneficial. Many parents in my classes argue that punishments are good. Their own parents used them, and they turned out fine. They maintain that punishments did indeed deter their bad behavior, and they say they learned important life lessons from punishments. To that I say, “Are those methods working with your children?” They usually say “No.” Beyond this, many say they have not had a good relationship with their parents, evan as adults, due largely to the way they were treated. The lesson here is that as Old School, power and control methods, punishments may be effective in the short term, but they often produce long-term damage to the parent-child relationship. What parent would knowingly invite that?
11. Punishments can relieve a child of guilt for doing wrong. In many cases punishments have what on the surface appears to be a short-term advantage: children often feel they deserve to be punished, after which they feel relieved. What could be wrong with that? While societal punishment after a crime may have merit as a deterrent with criminals who feel no remorse, it’s not that way with children in the family. A pattern of a) lack of self-control, b) guilt, c) punishment, and d) relief may inculcate a desire, based on fear, of not getting caught next time. But does it teach the child why what he did is wrong?
12. Punishments do not exact from the child a commitment to do better next time. Punishment might relieve guilt, but where is the personal commitment to do better next time? Finding relief for guilt through punishment is a sorry substitute for a child learning empathy, respect, self-control, and effective relationship skills.
At the beginning of this section I mentioned that there are better ways than punishments for dealing with children’s unacceptable behavior. What are they? I referred several times to the answer: effective relationship skills. If parents really want to teach children appropriate behaviors and how to be caring, responsible, and cooperative, then teaching them to develop effective relationship skills is the way to do it.
So, what are these effective relationship skills? And how is a parent to teach them? In this book I am presenting parents with nine key relationship skills–three listening skills, three illustrating (speaking) skills, and three disciplining skills. Parents who already use them well naturally, or learn to use them by practicing them, will almost assuredly teach them to their children. Why? Because children learn to do what they see their parents doing. The long and the short of it comes down to this: instead of rules and punishments (the Old School approach) I am proposing agreements and accountability (the New School approach). I’m arguing that parents who effectively use listening skills and illustrating skills can then effectively use discipline skills-–one of which is holding the child accountable for misbehavior that breaks their own agreement with the parent.
So, take heart! You can stop using punishments, just as you can stop using other power and control tactics, like yelling. I always say that practicing techniques equals developing skills. By practicing the techniques presented in this book you will learn and also teach the relationship skills that make punishments unnecessary. And that learning and teaching is what discipline is all about.
Are you —
• At the end of your rope?
• Yelling too much?
• Feeling frustrated, angry, confused, manipulated, hopeless?
• Feeling ineffective, powerless?
• Unsure of yourself?
• Being misled by experts whose ideas don’t work?
• Exhausted from trying too hard?
• Trying to be both mother and father?
• Looking for better, practical ideas that actually work?
• Open to experimenting with new ideas?
• Hoping to find the “magic wand”? (There IS one!)
Does your child —
• Manipulate you?
• Embarrass you?
• Defy you, disobey you, ignore you, disrespect you, or blow you off?
• Make poor decisions?
• Not learn from consequences?
• Hang with the wrong peers?
• Stay out too late?
• Get in trouble at school or in the community?
• Argue, yell, fight, hit, or bite?
• Not do homework?
• Not do what he’s told?
• Not get off the computer?
• Throw tantrums, whine, slam doors, break things?
• Seem out of control?
Have you —
• Been feeling angry, hopeless, like giving up?
• Tried everything, to no avail?
• Been in counseling or therapy with no or poor results?
• Searched the interned for answers?
• Read books and articles that just don’t help?
• Talked with your friends and family too much?
• Hospitalized your child?
If you answered “yes” to three or more of the above questions, you are under tremendous stress.
But you've come to the right place!
It might seem like there’s no way out. You might even be feeling desperate or thinking about legally having someone else care for your kid(s).
You are not alone! And you are NOT a bad parent! You love your child dearly, and still you might feel unappreciated or unloved in return. You might feel they are out to get you.
That's not the case. They are NOT out to get you. They are out to get what they feel they need from you--and they are doing it in a primitive, immature, self-centered way either because that's the only way they know how, or that's the way they have learned works best.
They want your permission, your help, your attention, and your energy--even if it's negative, angry energy. And they do get it, don't they?
Before I get into what you can do about this, let's take a look at three reasons why your child's unacceptable, out-of-control, primitive, and self-centered behaviors are driving you nuts.
You’re trying too hard–with ineffective techniques.
First, you learned to be a parent from your own parents or other care givers when you were young. They probably came from the old school, using methods as old as the hills–like yelling, punishments, and other forms of behavior control. Those methods may have worked well for them–on you. But they’re not working well for you now with your own child. To keep using these methods, to no avail and with negative results, is trying to parent harder. If your child is not naturally compliant, this doesn’t work. Punishments don't work. You need to parent smarter. The knowledge you have is too limited–even if the experts have told you how to use those “Old School” techniques more effectively.
You’re unwittingly contributing to your own problems.
Second, you yourself are probably making matters worse, and making your challenges more difficult, than they need to be. I say this with full confidence that you are sincerely doing the best you can, albeit with limited and ineffective techniques. You may be like the guy who keeps looking for his lost keys under the street light–-and only under the street light–because that’s where the light is. The point is, you might be keeping yourself hand-cuffed, and bound within your own little box under the street light not only by your limited and misleading knowledge, but also by one fundamental and self-defeating attitude: your pride (ego). If you feel that “parents make the rules and children should obey them,” or that “I should be able to control my child’s behavior and everybody expects me to,” then you are operating like your parents or care givers. But the ray of hope here is that you can change this. And if you change that attitude, you can change everything. I’m not kidding. And I’ll be showing you how. It can be done! I’ve seen it work.
You’re exhausted.
Third, you’re running on empty...you’re too low on energy. Your battery is run down. You’ve been “chasing your tail,” and “spinning your wheels.” And you’re getting worn out. That’s because you’re trying too hard, using outmoded techniques, fueled by the wrong attitude. It’s no wonder that you’re tired-–sick and tired. You’ve exhausted your internal resources by fighting battles you can’t win. You’re trying to do the impossible, and you’re paying the price. You’re probably at the place where you’ve decided that continuing to bat your head against the wall isn’t worth it–it hurts, and it has worn you down. It’s time for a change. It’s time for you to ease up, back off (that doesn’t mean back down), and start parenting smarter instead of harder. You came to the right place, because what I’ve got to give you is revolutionary. It’s transformational. And I guarantee it’s radically different from what 99% of the experts will tell you (or have told you), because they don’t believe it themselves. I know; I’ve read a lot of them.
What I Offer.
I’m going to help you:
• Reduce your stress
• Change your attitude
• Learn new parenting techniques
• Develop new relationship skills
• Bring harmony into your relationships.
And here’s a monster bonus. What you will learn will be applicable to all your relationships, not just with your children, but also with your partner, your friends, your co-workers, your boss, your employees, your own parents, and even with strangers and new or superficial acquaintances. Buckle up! Hang onto your hat! You’re about to hear things you haven’t heard before. You’re going to be asked to give up punishments and experiment with new techniques, and to judge for yourself. You’re going to turn chaos and conflict into harmony and cooperation.
So let’s get started.
Use this website by using the site’s "categories" to find more than 80 short articles grouped under the following themes:
If you have questions about anything you read, or if you want help on trying to apply the techniques I present (they are not always quite as easy as they might seem), feel free to send me an email with your questions at chuckadam@sbcglobal.net. If you want more in-depth help, with more detailed analysis of your particular situation and more specific ways to apply the ideas presented, trying calling me at 414-778-0634 to look into the possibility of live coaching over the phone.
You want the best for your kids–and for yourself. I’ve got 40+ years of experience working with individuals of all ages, couples families, and groups on improving relationships. You want new and effective ideas? I’ve got them!
There are a lot of things I like about James Lehman’s, and a lot of things I do not like about it. The following comments are based on a study of Lehman’s Total Transformation Program Workbook. I have not listened to the extensive audio or the video programs. Still, I think my comments are a relatively accurate and complete summary of Lehman’s concepts and his approach to parenting children with extremely difficult behaviors.
First, the Things I Like
First of all, I like the fact that he presents parents with a coherent, well-designed, and extensive program for dealing with very assertive, obnoxious, and abusive (both physical and verbal) child behavior. This is certainly a challenge, especially considering that he addresses much of what he says to obnoxious and abusive teenage behavior. He uses video and audio presentations and an extensive workbook as well as offering email contact and advice to parents on his website.
Second, I like the fact that he identifies faulty thinking on the part of the child as the real cause of disrespectful, obnoxious, and abusive behavior. “Inappropriate behavior can best be understood as actions triggered by the need to compensate for an endless variety of perceptions, thoughts and feelings that the child finds disturbing but is unable to resolve” (Total Transformation Workbook, p. 13). Limited and/or ineffective ability to solve problems is what impels children to engage in disrespectful, obnoxious, and abusive behavior. This is a good insight. Along these lines, he does not fall into the Old School belief that punishments for bad behavior are the way to change it.
Third, he presents the program in a structured set of lessons, each with practical and realistic explanations of obnoxious child behaviors and the faulty thinking that spawns that behavior, as well as explanations of ineffective parenting roles that tend to undercut parents’ influence and effectiveness in dealing with very difficult child behaviors.
For example in lesson one he presents a series of 16 characteristics and practices of children with disrespectful, obnoxious, abusive behavior. Some of these are: victim-stance, injustice, one-way boundaries, pride in negativity, anger with an angle, one-way (negative) role models, wishing, dishonesty and misinformation, and false apologies. He asks parents to assess their child’s use of the 16 characteristics, with specific behavioral patterns that characterize each of them.In lesson two he presents seven ineffective parenting roles and asks parents to assess their own use of these roles in attempting to deal with their child’s behavior. He also gives specific behavioral strategies parents can use to improve their own behavior. The seven ineffective roles are: 1) bottomless pockets; 2) over-negotiator; 3) screamer; 4) ticket puncher (i.e., overindulgent, making excuses for the child, blaming others, defending the child’s victim-stance); 5) savior; 6) martyr; and 7) perfectionist (never really satisfied with the child’s behavior).
Fourth, Lehman focuses on specific positive parenting roles. In lesson three he presents three essential roles for parents that “lead to accountability” in child behaviors. They are 1) the training and coaching role, 2) the problem-solving role, and 3) the limit-setting role. In addition he presents (in lesson four) 27 “concepts of behavior management,” or “transformation tools to change your child’s behavior now,” many of which are quite useful, such as: “Accept no excuse for abuse,” “Choose your fights carefully,” consequences, direct statements, honesty, strategic recognition and affection, and role modeling. In this section of the workbook he presents suggestions for age-appropriate consequences and rewards for children ages five to nine, ages 10 to 14, and ages 15 to 17.
Fifth, Lehman identifies (in lesson five) patterns of faulty thinking as the chief interference to effective problem solving and communication. He presents a very good series of 14 examples of faulty thinking, on both the child’s part and the parent’s part, which he says block problem solving and inhibit communication. Some examples are: assuming, all-or-nothing thinking, taking things personally, embracing netativity, “emotionalizing,”projections, blaming, “awfulizing,” and sincere self-delusion.
Sixth, he presents (in lesson six) discussion tools for dealing with children with disrespectful, obnoxious, or abusive behavior which he calls “the alternative response interview” to be used after the child acts out. The alternative response is defined as “a problem-solving process to challenge and confront inappropriate behavior and develop and alternative behavior for the next time the child perceives a similar event, situation or problem.” The alternative response interview is composed of the following eight steps, with the accompanying questions and statements the parent should make, many of which are quite good (Workbook, pp. 94-97).
1. Investigate the facts of what happened and the adolescent’s perceptions.
a. “What was going on just before the problem happened?”
b. “What were you thinking as the problem began?”
2. Confront obnoxious behavior by stating clearly “what you saw going on, what you heard being said, and your knowledge of the facts, not feelings.”
a. “What I just saw happen was....”
b. “I want to tell you what I just saw and heard.”
3. Identify triggers, including perceptions, thoughts, and feelings, that preceded the child’s inappropriate behavior.
a. “Whenever X happens, you do Y.”
b. “When you behave this way, you seem to think someone’s being unfair.”
4. Challenge the child’s reactions, excuses, and blaming.
a. “When you’re angry, the rules still apply to you.”
5. Declare your stance on the unacceptable behavior without hostility or contempt–there’s no excuse for abuse, and everyone is responsible for their own behavior.
a. “You know the rules.” Then state the rule.
6. Probe what the child thinks his alternatives are for the next time he has a particular perception, thought, or trigger.
a. What can you do differently next time you think something’s unfair?”
7. Have the youth choose and phrase in his own words what you or others will see him doing the next time he is upset.
a. “Tell me what you will do differently next time.”
8. Consequences and (especially) amends for the wrong done to others that can be used in place of consequences. His example of this last one is great: “How will the youth right the wrong? What will he do for his victim? Avoid: ‘I’m sorry’s.’ Stick to: ‘I was wrong to _____, Next tune I’ll _____.’”
a. “You cannot use your Nintendo X-Box/the TV for (period of time).”
b. “You need to do your sister’s chores to make it right with her.”
Lehman also presents (in lesson seven) “the trigger management process,” a model for parents to use to manage the child’s thoughts and perceptions that precede an episode of misbehavior, and to stop it before it starts (Workbook, pp. 107-113). I will discuss this in more detail below, as it contains some serious flaws. However, I like the fact that Lehman states that misbehavior is triggered by thoughts and perceptions, and I like the fact that he tries to give parents a way of dealing with the child’s trigger thoughts.
There’s lots to like here, and Lehman appears particularly well-suited to understanding obnoxious child (and especially adolescent) behavior and thinking. He draws on his own experience as a one-time abusive adolescent himself who spent more than six years in various jails and prisons.
The Things I Don’t Like (Or At Least Have Serious Questions About)
Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that the Total Transformation Program contains a certain philosophy that I consider seriously lacking, and even misguided, than to say that I dislike it, or dislike certain parts of it. Similar to my criticisms of Love and Logic, I see here a sophisticated approach to child behavior control by parents that I believe is based on a delusion (a delusion is a belief falsely held): namely, that parents can, and even should, control (“manage”) their child’s behavior. In short, the Total Transformation Program is what I would consider (as I consider Love and Logic) an essentially “Old School” approach to parenting.
As I often say though, Old School parenting is not bad or wrong. In fact, it is often quite effective, especially with toddlers and younger children who usually need more structure and guidance than older children need. But at the same time, the Old School approach is too often ineffective because it is limited in devising effective parenting techniques and skills by the delusional premise upon which it is based: parental control of child behavior. So in my critique of this program I wish to point out some instances where it fails to give parents some valuable concepts and techniques that could, if included in the program, make it more valuable for parents than it already is. (The fact that it is often effective is adequately documented on Lehman’s website in numerous parent testimonials).
I really like one of the core principles of the Total Transformation Program: namely, the premise that faulty thinking-–both on part of the child and on the part of the parent–-leads to the development disrespectful, obnoxious, and abusive child behavior patterns. However, the program does not really help parents deal effectively with the child’s faulty thinking patterns, in spite of the fact that these patterns are so crucial in determining a child’s behavior. Lehman does help parents examine and modify their own faulty thinking patterns and the behavior that results from them.
However, he falls short when it comes to practical ways parents can deal with the child’s faulty thinking patterns. For the most part, Lehman recommends that parents really not focus on the child’s thinking, but rather on their behavior. This is typical of the Old School approach to parenting, and while it can be effective, there are far too many instances when this approach is not only ineffective, but even invites exactly what the parent does not want and is trying to change in the child.
For example, when speaking of using the “transformation tool” of consequences Lehman says,“Do not try to read the child’s mind for good or bad motives; simply deal with the behavior” (Workbook, p. 56). I like the idea of not trying read the child’s mind for motives. Parents can’t do that, simply because none of us are mind readers. Good advice there. However, telling parents to “simply deal with the behavior,” when it is posited that the behavior springs from faulty thinking, seems short-sighted and perhaps even counterproductive. Why not teach parents how to deal with the faulty thinking? Dealing only with behavior is what Old School parenting does, and why it’s often ineffective. This approach too often leads to increased parent-child power struggles that invite more of what the parent is trying to change. Why? Because no one wants to be told what to do, or pressured into doing what someone else (even a parent) thinks they “should” do.
“Getting children to follow the rules or to meet the expectations is a legitimate goal. It is important for parents to know what they are trying to accomplish and why, and to determine if compliance to a particular rule is developmentally appropriate for that particular child” (Workbook, p. 59). These ideas point to the delusion that underlies the program: namely, that parents can “get” their children to do anything, or in other words, to control their behavior. The Old School ideal (according to which 99% of us were raised) of obedience to rules, while it is not bad or wrong, is short-sighted and lacking. It falls short by not helping parents learn to go beyond pressuring their child into obedience (compliance) and instead helping them teach the child how and why to cooperate with them.
Many of Lehman’s suggested parent behavior patterns are pure power-and-control tactics, designed to pressure kids into compliance, like giving orders: “Don’t talk to me that way; I don’t like it” (Workbook, p. 95). For a more complete and satisfying description of misguided parental power-and-control tactics, and the damage they do, see Thomas Gordon’s Discipline That Works, and Parent Effectiveness Training. You may also read a summary of Gordon’s “typical twelve” ways that parents use power and control (as well as the effects these same methods have on parents when they are used against the parents) in my brief summary called “The Typical Twelve: How Parents Trigger Anger and Defensiveness in Their Children,” which can be found on this website: parents trigger anger in children.
When, in chapter six, Lehman advises parents to confront obnoxious behavior by “stating clearly what you saw going on, what you heard being said, and your knowledge of the facts, not feelings” (emphasis added), he makes a serious mistake. Feelings play a powerful role in motivating and determining behavior. Lehman almost totally dismisses them as motivators of child behavior that parents really do need to learn to deal with. While I agree with Lehman that thinking is what determines feeling responses to situations (for both children and adults), I could not disagree more with his idea that children’s feelings do not need to be dealt with (i.e., named, discussed, acknowledged or validated, and related to thoughts) by the parent.
In true Old School style, Lehman suggests that parents not only can and should control their children’s behavior (which is an impossibility), but they should also set the limits of that behavior and demand compliance. “Compliance should be measured in time and tasks. For example, the youth will not curse at his sister for six hours in order to earn back phone privileges” (Workbook, p. 96).
In my New School approach, the parent would not necessarily expect or demand compliance with a parent-imposed standard because this imposition or demand process is what ignites anger and resentment and resistance and “payback” in the child–-inviting exactly what the parent does not want and is trying to change. Along with this goes the basic Old School assumption that somehow the parent can change the child’s behavior.
A New School approach readily accepts a couple of very different starting points: namely, only the child can change the child’s behavior, and cooperation is far more valuable than obedience (compliance) when it comes to child behavior, self-control, and the basis for parental discipline.
The “trigger management process” that Lehman proposes in the final lesson (number seven) of the Total Transformation workbook is where his approach is most handicapped. It is a short lesson by comparison with the other six, and it illustrates well the program’s shortcomings. The program could be strengthened if it would go significantly further than it does in helping parents deal with their child’s “trigger thoughts” and their feelings, because it’s the child’s thoughts and feelings that motivate and determine the child’s behavior, not the parent’s thoughts.
The text states that “thoughts and perceptions trigger the feelings of fear, inadequacy and anger which underlie the disrespectful, and obnoxious behavior you want your child to learn how to manage more effectively” (Workbook, p. 110). I really like that statement. The problem is that the methods Lehman proposes that parents use to help children learn to deal with their thoughts and feelings that motivate their behavior have relatively little to do with teaching children how to “manage” thoughts and feelings. These methods have much more to do with child behaviors, and where they do touch on managing faulty thinking (and corresponding feelings), these methods really don’t teach parents how to help their children with those internal processes.
For example, lesson seven presents parents with an eight-step model for “identifying and managing the trigger thoughts (of the child) before the feelings (of the child) become to intense” (Workbook, p. 110). These are the eight steps, listed on pages 110 and 111, some of which I think constitute a good start and contain some excellent recommendations, but others of which leave the parent hanging as to how to do them. (My comments are included in italics after each step.)
1. Diminish the potential. “The child should avoid situations where he is at a higher risk of acting on triggers that result in negative thoughts and feelings about himself.” (A good idea but clearly not the best solution. CA)
2. Manage the situation. “Teach the child to escape risky situations once he finds himself in one.” (A good idea, but clearly not the best solution. CA)
3. Identify the trigger thought. “Children are taught to identify the feelings that precede the negative behavior, but the thoughts and perceptions that precede the behavior (As in, ‘You were being unfair with the phone and so I got angry and broke the wall.’) are the actual triggers.” (I like this one a lot. CA)
4. Constructive self-talk. “The most effective way for the child to manage trigger thoughts is by learning to identify them, and then utilizing exercises such as talking to yourself constructively in order to manage them. “Is it worth it?” “What do I stand to lose?” “What do I stand to gain?” “I can’t change the past.” “What part am I playing in this?” “What can I do now that I’ve messed up?” (I really like this one, too. CA)
5. Simple plan. “When a child is in distress from anger, frustration or feelings of inadequacy, his problem-solving skills deteriorate rapidly. Plans for coping with these situations must be kept to a one- or two-step maximum. Pre-planning a menu of coping skills for specific situations is recommended. (What would those skills be? CA)
6. Communicate. “Let the people in control, such as parents, teachers, and supervisors, know ahead of time when the child will be implementing a coping skill or planned response, and what that coping skill or response will look like.” (I like this one, too. CA)
7. Implement. “Once a child decides what coping skill or plan he is going to utilize, teach him to do it immediately. The greater the time lag, the more negative his thoughts and feelings will become.” (I like this one, too. CA)
8. Move on. “It is important to move on after a coping skill or plan has been attempted. After evaluating whether the plan was successful or not in avoiding escalation, moving on by saying or doing something different prepares everybody fort the next challenge.” (I’m not sure what this means. CA)
Lehman suggests the following action steps (Workbook, pp. 111-113) for the parent to use in implementing the above recommendations, after stating that “Unacceptable behavior is most often caused by perceptions of powerlessness, unfairness and fear”:
1. List five people, places, or things that make your child feel powerless, resentful or inadequate.
2. Next, write two things he can do to avoid each of these situations as described in section A - Diminish the Potential.
3. Then, write out two ways he can escape each of these situations as described in Section B - Manage the Situation.
4. Next, recall a recent incident of unacceptable behavior. Now, go through sections C through H and write down a possible response for each section.
5. Use this process with your Alternative Response interview after your child acts out...By using this structured approach you will be able to better understand what is going on and begin to see the sometimes small steps toward progress. You are the teacher with the lesson plan for helping your child with this behavioral change. Be open and observant to the changes and supportive of the progress along the way.
I believe these are useful exercises for the parent to go through and to use in the Alternative Response interview. However, the way they are presented makes the parent the teacher with the lesson plan for helping the child with his behavioral change. Granted, the parent has a good plan. The problem here is that it’s the child’s thinking, not the parent’s, that will determine the child’s behavior. Lehman assumes that simply by telling the child what to do and how to think, the parent has taught the child adequately and the child will then change. The challenge for the parent, which is not adequately addressed, is: Beyond telling my child, how can I more effectively work with him to help him accept and use what I am teaching? Lehman assumes that by telling (teaching) the child what to do and how to think, the child will accept them and act on them.
Conclusion
As mentioned above, I like a lot of what Lehman suggests for parents dealing with their child’s disrespectful, obnoxious, and abuse behavior. But the program is based on a fallacy, a delusion in thinking, that the parent is somehow supposed to be in control of the child’s behavior. This is impossible. (See my “Volcano Theory” for a simple, straightforward explanation of why it is impossible.)
What’s largely missing in The Total Transformation Program is dialogue in which the parent and child co-create the assessment and the plan for future child behavior, and in which the parent and child reach some critical agreements. If the child isn’t involved in creating agreements with the parent about his behavior, and about what needs to be changed, the Alternative Response interview could backfire and result in the child’s feeling grilled, lectured, and ordered to change. In this way parents might be inviting what they don’t want by doing the child’s thinking for him, and then trying to impose their own solutions on him–-even though the parent’s solutions are indeed good ones.
Lehman’s methods are obviously helpful to many parents, and worth trying, even though they are rooted in Old School beliefs and techniques. If The Total Transformation Program is not effective with some children, it might be helpful for parents to become familiar with a range of techniques and relationships skills that I call the New School approach to parenting.
In his book Unconditional Parenting: Moving from Rewards and Punishments to Love and Reason-- A Provocative Challenge to the Conventional Wisdom About Discipline (Atria, 2005), Alfie Kohn writes:
The shift away from older methods, however, has to be accomplished by a shift in goal. Specifically, our main question shouldn’t be “How do I get my child to do what I say?” but “What does my child need–and how can I meet those needs?” In my experience, you can predict much of what happens in families just from knowing which of those questions is more important to the parents. You don’t even have to know the answers they’ve found–that is, which tactics are used to get compliance (in the first case), or what t he child is thought to need (in the second). The questions are what count.
To focus on children’s needs, and to work with them to make sure these needs are met, constitutes a commitment to taking children seriously. It means treating them as people whose feelings and desires and questions matter. A child’s preferences can’t always be accommodated, but they can always be considered, and they need never be dismissed out of hand. It’s important to see a child as someone with a unique point of view, with very real fears and concerns (often quite different from our own), and with a distinctive way of reasoning (which is not merely “cute”).
In other words, to make the shift from Old School to New School parenting methods requires not just doing things differently. It also requires a change in how we think about children–a change in our attitude toward them, which actually precedes any change in what we do. It’s not going to be enough to decide that I’m going to stop yelling at my kids. The question is, “Why?” Why would I want to stop yelling at my kids? Is it because somebody told me it’s not nice, and I really do want to be nice to my kids? Is it because by my yelling at this child, I encourage her to yell at me, and at her younger siblings? In these cases I am letting myself in for a punishment of sorts, one that I will find unpleasant to me. In these cases I’m simply looking out for my own ego: I’m going to stop yelling at my kids because it will make me feel better and makes life easier for me. I think there’s more to this–the child’s needs, for example.
What about my attitude about this child? These children? How do I think about them? If’ I’m going to make a shift in my behavior away from yelling, wouldn’t it be closer to the truth to do it because my child doesn’t deserve to be yelled at (which is disrespectful) than because his response will make life easier for me? The one reason pertains to the child’s needs. The other pertains to me and my ego needs (to be “in control,” for example). So, whom am I putting first here? Basing my decision on my child’s needs instead of my ego means changing my attitude from “it’ll benefit me” to “it’s what the child needs.” It means really living by the attitude that “the child is a person just like me, and their needs count just as much as mine–if not more–since I am responsible for raising them to be responsible.” Whatever I want for myself I want for my child. Like respect, honesty, freedom, independence, appropriate protection, choice, creativity, comfort, acceptance, love, understanding, nurturing, and cooperation.
If I see these as some of the things my child needs from me, and if my most important question is “How can I meet these needs of my child?” then the question “How can I get my child to do what I say?” becomes almost irrelevant–and even misguided--comparison.
Of course, we want to raise our children to be responsible and cooperative. How do we do that while meeting their needs? This is the topic of my writings on discipline and Old School and New School parenting on this website.
How does a parent make the shift from Old School methods based on power, control, and punishments, and that aim at obedience, to New School methods that are based on negotiation, agreements, and accountability, and aim at cooperation?
To download an easy-to-read chart that depicts how to make this shift little by little when rules are broken, click on this link:
Download Old_School_to_New_School_Shift_a_cht.pdf (43.8K)
To read an article highlighting a few insights on this topic from noted author Alfie Kohn, click here.
The single biggest problem that parents present in my classes and coaching is control of their children’s behaviors. I should say, misbehaviors. So many children are resistive, argumentative, stubborn, rude, even defiant toward their parents. The parents’ problem is that the parenting methods their own parents used with them (which actually worked quite well) simply are not working well with many of these bright, articulate, independent-minded, but immature and self-centered children.
What I call the Old School methods might, indeed, work well in many families today, where the children are more easy-going and compliant. But in many stressed families, the Old School approach isn’t cutting it. What’s needed is a more sophisticated, more thoughtful approach. And I call it the New School approach to parenting. Here’s a very brief comparison of the two methods.
The Old School Approach to Parenting
For eons, right up till today, the idea of parental authority in raising children has meant top-down authority, with the parents making rules, setting expectations, and demanding compliance or obedience from children. This is not a bad model. The paradigm, or model, for this approach can be summed up this way: 1) the parent has the authority and does most of the talking, including 2) establishment of the rules; 3) the child is expected to obey; and 4) the parent punishes resistance or disobedience in order to encourage compliance.
Parents Speak -----> Rules ------> Obedience ------> Punishment
Again, this is not a bad model. After all, parents do know better than children how the home should be run, what proper behavior is, and what the rules should be. But this model does not work well when commands and punishments are ineffective.
Commands and punishments are often ineffective today because children want their own way, and often do not like being told what to do. (I must say, I don’t blame them–I don’t like being told what to do either!) They have at their disposal highly sophisticated toys and influential networks of other children which stoke the fires of curiosity, independence, and autonomy within them. They often develop their own ways of defying parental rules and expectations, as they become more connected to the world outside the home, more savvy, more desirous of innumerable attractions, and more strong-willed than perhaps we were as children. They might evade their parents’ guidance by getting caught up in sophisticated electronic games, the internet, cell phones, and other influences beyond their parents’ reach.
For parents who are separated or divorced, and suffering the pain of being a single parent who might have enduring conflicts with the other parent, the challenge can be even greater. Children of separation or divorce are almost always confused, hurt, and resentful. They are always sad that their parents couldn’t make it work and often feel that one or both parents have, at least to some extent, abandoned them. They are also immature, and easily find ways to play their parents against each other to get what they want. (Of course, children of positive mother-father relationships find ways to play them against each other too.)
So what are parents to do when the Old School model does not work well with their children? A new, more sophisticated approach to parenting that I call “New School” can be far more effective with strong-willed, independent-minded children. Because this is a more sophisticated model for parents to use in raising children, it can succeed very well where the Old School methods fail and when children don’t comply the way we expect them to. Why?
The New School Approach to Parenting
The reason this model can succeed where the older model fails is that the new one responds so much more directly to children’s innate need for control while not giving the reins of authority and ultimate decision-making over to them. It takes advantage of the children’s intelligence and desire for independence and ability to verbalize their wants and demands. It does this by completely changing the rules of the (parenting) game, and the expectations that parents have of their children. It looks like this.
Dialogue ------> Agreements ------>Cooperation ------> Accountability
In a New School approach, parents start with genuine 1) dialogue with their children about expected behaviors and their consequences. (Yes, parents really can negotiate these things with two-year-olds and with kids who have ADHD!) Thus, parents and children reach 2) agreements about expected behaviors and consequences, rather than the parents unilaterally determining the rules. Children, like adults, are much more likely to follow through on what they have had some control in setting up–-in other words, they’re more likely to 3) cooperate. And a New School approach prefers children’s cooperation over obedience. We want them to cooperate, and voluntarily choose to do what we want them to do. This is not a pipedream. It works.
But not always! Children (just like adults) will at times break their agreements. So instead of punishment, New School parents demand accountability: “What made you break your agreement? I take this very personally, because when I make an agreement with you, you expect me to keep it, don’t you? And that’s what I expect of you, too. Isn’t that fair?” Even young children know that’s fair. Its’ the Golden Rule, which is the ultimate basis for all legal systems in the Western world.
New Expectations
A New School approach requires that we change our expectations of our children: they can negotiate agreements in age-appropriate fashion. It demands that we treat them with the same respect that we that we so ardently desire from them, and that we give to other adults: we don’t just boss them around, or treat them like slaves or robots that we can command by remote control. It demands that we let go of our own egos a bit, and see our children as capable of thinking, of understanding, of being fair, and of being responsible.
All of my writing, my parent classes, and my parent coaching is geared to helping parents to refine (or learn) the skills required to successfully implement the New School model. While it takes some effort and commitment, it can be done. And when done, it is effective. I have posted more than seventy short articles on New School parenting on this website, and another summary of Old School and New School parenting here.
Teaching Children Self-Control
The basic issue is control of children's behavior, and in my New School approach parents admit that they cannot control their children's behavior. Instead, by word and deed, parents take pains to constantly be on the alert for when and how they can teach their children self-control in the interest of living up to their agreements. In my work as educator and coach I focus on helping children learn what self-control means, and they respond quite positively. Here's an example.
Feel free to read, print, and study any of the articles on this site. Who knows? A small change in a parent just might have large, and long-lasting, positive ripple effects on a child.
In my work with families as a coach and educator, I suggest that parents use a variety of different methods of teaching self-control to kids, and to not use punishments.
In my own conversations with parents and children, I often like to make the idea of self-control a central focus of our conversations. When I do this, I am constantly amazed and positively impressed by how well children who demonstrate serious lack of self-control in their daily lives really do understand what it means, and also find the resources within themselves to use it. Here are two examples.
“Wave Your Hands”
Brian, 7 years old, had for quite some time been creating all sorts of problems in the family, with friends, and at school by impulsively erupting into fits of rage whenever he would perceive himself as “losing” in a game or “failing” at some activity. For example, when playing a game with friends he was told by a playmate that he was “the loser.” He went berserk, shouting and hitting, and his mother (who was present) could do nothing to effectively interrupt it or calm him down. When his older brother called him a “stupid boy,” the same thing happened. This behavior was creating serious problems for Brian and his family in many situations.
While discussing these kinds of incidents with Brian and his mother in a coaching session, I asked Brian if he knew what “self-control” means. He said he did not. So I explained that self-control means a person controls themself, and no one else does. When I do something with my hands or feet, or say something with my mouth, it’s me who is controlling my own body, and not someone else controlling me. I’m controlling myself. When he does something with his hands or his feet (he added, “or my elbows”), or says something with his mouth, it is he who is controlling his body and doing or saying those things, and not someone else. He agreed and seemed to fully understand.
So I decided to illustrate this rather self-evident (to me, at least) principle with a concrete example by engaging Brian in a little exercise of self-control. It went like this.
Chuck: Okay, Brian, here’s an example. (I started shaking my hands in front of my face.) See this? Now, who is it that is controlling my hands?
Brian: You.
Chuck: Right. Now you do that. Wave your hands in front of you just like I’m doing. (The intent, of course, was to make the point that it’s Brian waving his hands, not me or his mom.)
Brian: No! I don’t want to! (I didn’t expect this.)
Chuck: See? That’s what I mean. You are the one who decides to not wave your hands in front of your face, aren’t you? I wanted you to do it, but you decided not to, and you didn’t. That is what self-control is. You decide what to do with your body and you control yourself. You do it, or don’t do it, and no one else can make you do what they want. That’s you controlling yourself. That’s called “self-control.”
Brian fully grasped the idea. And so did his mother! For both of them this simple illustration of what self-control means was a significant leaning. I was then able to use it with both Brian, to emphasize that he is always in charge of his own body and what he says or does because he controls himself. I was able to use it with mom, too, but emphasizing that I couldn’t make Brian wave his hands, and neither can she make Brian do anything that she wants him to do, because Brian always controls himself by what he decides to do.
I then applied this principle to Brian’s behavior when someone else says something he doesn’t like, or that hurts his feelings, or criticizes him. We talked about how he controls what he says or does in response. He recognized that some of his wild, uncontrolled responses really were not good ones, and got him in trouble with other people a lot. So I asked him how he could control himself in better ways, and what he might say when someone insults him. He came up with three possibilities: 1) “Blah, blah, blah,” 2) “Whatever,” and 3) just walk away or go tell his mom.
I could tell that Brian fully understood, and he acknowledged, that he was always in control of his own body, and that how he used his self-control was really up to him, not his mom. Mom got the point, too, and resolved to stop trying to control his behavior. They worked out a little scheme where, in the event that Brian forgot to use self-control and started “going off” on someone, instead of physically intervening in some way to stop him, mom would just remind Brian about our conversation by saying, “Remember what Chuck said.” They both felt quite good about this new arrangement of Brian being the only one who would be in charge of controlling himself.
“Okay, But Can We Agree on Something?”
On another occasion I was at a baseball game with some family and friends. Thirteen-year-old Roger, a son of one of the friends (and who has been diagnosed with ADHD), became bored and restless after the first half of the first inning, and started an incessant verbal assault of loud, shrill nonsense, making up all kinds of fantastic games and fantasies. Other fans were clearly irritated (as was his mother, and me too). Along about the fourth inning, as I was about to finish my lemonade, Roger asked if I could have the cup when I was done, as he was imaginatively playing with the one that had contained his own diet cola. I decided to use the request as a potential learning experience about self-control.
I said, “Okay, but can we agree on something? I’ll give you my cup when I’m done if you agree to control yourself by not shouting and screaming and making all those funny noises that are getting other people so upset.” He agreed. When I finished my lemonade, I gave him my cup and he proceeded to play with it in a subdued and self-controlled way. I had to leave the game during the seventh inning, and his mother told me later that after I left he reverted back to his obnoxious behavior. But the point is that he could, and did, exercise self-control when properly motivated by his own agreement to use self-control.
I define self-control as the ability to select an appropriate response to a feeling or thought from among a number of possibilities.
If you accept the assumptions of the Volcano Theory, and if you accept that control over another’s behavior is a delusion (a belief falsely held), then how are you to “manage” or “govern” your child’s behavior? How are you to “get” him or “make” him do the right thing, or do what you want him to do, or behave the way you “need” him to behave?
The answer to these questions is really quite simple. You can’t. So you will stop trying to do the impossible. This means you will stop giving punishments, too.
What?!? Stop trying to make your child do the right thing? Stop punishing bad behavior?
Then what about the child who never picks up her toys? What about the toddler running blindly into the street? Or hitting her mother? Or biting her brother? What about all her unacceptable behavior at school, or in the neighborhood, or in your home? What about your teenager stealing, or fighting, or cheating, or cursing?
Again, you’ll stop trying to make her do the right thing. What am I talking about??
Restraint as appropriate parental control
Let’s consider the toddler running into street or hitting her mother. In these cases, where safety or violence is a real issue, you’ll do whatever you can to make her stop. Yes! That’s the right thing, the preferable thing for you to do. You’ll grab her, hold her, pick her up and carry her, and in this way stop her from doing the dangerous or violent thing (as long as she’s not too big). Likewise, you may want to carry your toddler out of the restaurant or the store if she is making a real scene and disturbing you or others too much with her misbehavior or tantrum.
In these situation you really are (appropriately) taking control of the child’s unacceptable behavior by shutting it down. No argument there! You are in certain sense shutting down unacceptable behavior in much the same that a person is shut down being put in a straight jacket, or locked up in a prison cell. In cases where safety and/or violence is the issue at hand, you are physically, and appropriately, going to physically restrain your child (it she’s not too big).
Beyond child restraint
But these forms of physical restraint don’t–-and can’t-–take the next step and make the unruly child do what you are convinced s/he should do, or do what you want or need them to do, or do the right thing. This simple truth is that the young persons, just like we adults do, will do what they decide to do, what they want to do, even it’s dangerous (running into the street) or violent (hitting or biting), or just plain wrong (cheating, lying, stealing, etc.). And the vast majority of the time you can’t stop them or restrain them from doing it.
The only way they’ll do the right things, the things you want them to do, is if they themselves want to do them. That’s because it’s their thoughts and their feelings that shape, determine, and motivate their behavior at all times–not your thoughts and your feelings. That’s why I always say that the best you can get from your child, and what you really want, is their cooperation, where they want to do what you want them to do.
Most of what I write about and teach is concerned with helping parents 1) understand that influence is not control, and that they can only invite their children to do the right thing and 2) learn some good techniques (skills) to help them do that inviting more effectively than the Old School power and control tactics do. But here I am concerned with the challenge that parents face in helping their children to learn and practice better self-control. I want to help you, the parent, get some insights into how you can use your influence (not control) over your child to teach them the importance of controlling their behavior in socially appropriate ways–that is, cooperative and caring ways. To be successful in relationships and happy in life, children really do need to learn self-control, and learn that it is a big deal–and that it’s rewarding to boot.
Teaching self-control
So how does a parent use his/her influence to teach a child self-control? Specifically, how do you help your young child learn that self-control is necessary, possible, and rewarding? I’m going to propose a
number of tactics you can use.1. Model it.
Above all, you need to model self-control. There’s no question that children learn and value what their parents do even more than what their parents say. If your behaviors in any way conflict with what you say, your child will not only learn to practice what you do, but will also learn that what you say is hogwash–blah, blah, blah–and that you needn’t be taken seriously. “If he doesn’t practice what he preaches, he doesn’t believe it himself, so why should I?” On the other hand, if the child sees you consistently doing what you say they should do, they will not only learn to do it but they will be motivated to do it as well. Actions speak louder than words.
For example, what do you think will happen if you yell at your child, “Stop talking to me in that tone of voice!” or “Stop yelling at me, I’m your mother!”? Or what will the child think if you preach honesty and fairness, but your child sees that you are cheating somebody in some way? What will your child learn (and do) if you constantly remind him in forceful language that hitting is not okay, but then you spank him for some bad behavior? Or if your anger spews forth in loud, argumentative, or critical language? The obvious lesson for the child in these cases is: This is how she does it, and that’s how he is going to learn to do it too. That’s the kind of self-control he’ll learn.
“Time out” presents a great example of this. I always recommend that parents stop giving their children “time outs,” and instead take a time out themselves whenever they are getting angry at their kid. By saying something like, “I need a time out. I’m getting angry, and I don’t want to yell at you. I’ll be right back,” and then walking out of the room, the parent models a great way to handle the feeling of anger. If you do this regularly instead of getting into yelling matches or arguments with your child, s/he will learn to do it too. And soon you’re likely to see your child imitating you, and taking their own time outs as a way to cool down. When you do this, be sure to come back to the child as you promised when you cool down, and finish having the dialogue you were having before you got mad.
2. Talk about it.
Next, you need to talk a lot about self-control with the younger children. It’s a good idea to let them know that you value self-control in them because you cannot control them, and no one can control therm, except themself. This will require that you explain what “self-control” means–that it means a person controls himself, that is his own behavior. You can demonstrate this by shaking your hands in front of you and asking your child to do it too. Even if he refuses to do it (like one seven-year-old did with me in a recent coaching session I had with him and his mother), you can point out that he is the only one who can make his hands do anything. The same is true for his feet, and his mouth: he is the only one who can control his body, or his behavior. You might be wise to also let him know that since that is true, you don’t even want to try to control his behavior, and you are going to stop giving him orders, yelling at him, or otherwise try to “make” him do things. We’ll look at alternatives you can use in a minute, but here I want to stress that your talk about your child’s self-control needs to be supported by your commitment to doing something different, and your willingness to stop using Old School power and control tactics.
For an example of how I talked to a seven-year-old about exercising self-control, click here.
3. Illustrate it.
You need to illustrate self-control by giving examples connected to your talk. In other words, when you are in a tough or challenging situation in the presence of your child, tell her that you are now going to use self-control to keep yourself from doing something impulsive that you would regret. If your child wouldn’t understand those big words, you could say something like, “I’m trying real hard right now to use self-control. I’m trying to control my body so I don’t start yelling at you (or somebody else), or hit (or spank) you, or hit the table (or whatever).” You might say, “I’m going to use my self-control by using my words instead of my hands right now.” I’m sure you get the idea. Make the connection verbally for the child with the words “self-control,” so your child can easily see what self-control looks like in action, and can see you doing it. You’re not only bringing the words, the idea, into her consciousness, but at the same time you’re also illustrating what it means. This is powerful teaching. This is discipline, which means teaching and learning. You’re teaching a highly important relationship skill, and your child is learning to use it by watching you.
4. Disavow any desire to control your child.
As I mentioned earlier, you should publicly disavow all attempts at control of your child’s behavior, and admit your inability (and even your desire) to control him. This may be challenging for you, especially if you are a “control freak.” This is a great example of your own battle with your own ego, your “little self” that wants the whole world to do things your way so you can be happy, or right, or better than, or competent, powerful, or successful. By telling your child you do not want to even try to control him, you’re going public with that commitment, and putting yourself (your ego) on the spot. Then you’ve got to do something else. I recommend three things: listening, requests, and I-messages.
5. Listen.
First, you can use my number one rule of thumb: listen first, talk second. That is, you can invite the child to come up with some ideas about what she thinks would be the best thing to do at that moment. This can be what she thinks it is best for her to do, or for you to do. You’re inviting her to brainstorm ideas of best behavior, and use her “power refinery” (brain) and her words (mouth) to express possible options which can then be assessed with her in terms of consequences to arrive at a good choice of behaviors. You are inviting her ideas, listening to them seriously, and working with her to come to an agreement. When you invite her to tell you what she thinks you should do, you are not giving away your power, free will, or authority. Just because you ask for her ideas about this doesn’t mean you have to do what she suggests. You can always admit that, “Yes, that’s one option,” but encourage her come up with more. And finally, you can come up with your own ideas, too. “Would you like to hear some of my ideas?” is a good way to start the “talk second” part of this rule of thumb.
6. Use requests.
Anytime I hear a parent tell a child to do something (outside of danger situations), I think, “What, is she your little slave?” “Go get my coffee.” “Pick up your toys.” “Stop talking to me like that.” “Be home by supper.” I think it is profoundly disrespectful to tell kids to do things. It’s like we don’t need to tread lightly around their feelings because they’re “only kids.” Or because “I’m the parent.” I say, So what? They’re people too. Maybe I’m just too sensitive, but I don’t like to be told what to do. I’m more than willing to do things for people, but I much prefer them to ask me to do something rather than tell me to do it. “You’re not the boss of me!” is one way I’ve heard a young (and courageous) child resist his parent who was barking orders at him. And it’s true! He himself is the “boss of him” (that is, of his behavior)! Let’s admit it, and let’s put our ego in its place. We’re not “the boss of him,” and he’s not our slave. “Would you please do X?” or “Would you mind doing Y?” These are simple courtesies we would use with any friend, or any other adult for that matter. So why would we not get into the habit of using them with our children? Oh, and by the way! Don’t forget the corresponding use of “Thanks,” or “Thank you.” It always goes will with “please.” Remember my house analogy referring to the parent-child (or any other) relationship? It’s respect, not love, that is the “sticking stuff” that holds the relationship together.
7. Use I-messages
Along with requests, you can stop giving orders (a power and control tactic) by making use of “I-messages.” This is where I tell you what I would like, and why. It’s much softer, and more respectful, and gentler (some would say “weaker”) than a command. “I would really appreciate it if you’d pick up your toys before going to bed, honey.” “I’d like you to not use those bad words when talking to me.” “I’d really like you to eat your vegetables.” “I want you to cooperate with me on this, okay?” “I value your cooperation much more than your obedience, honey, so I’m not going to boss you around. Instead I’m going to make requests.” These are all examples of what I would like. True, they can be easily rejected or blown off by the child. But there is hardly a more powerful and respectful way to exercise self-control than to resist the urge to be your child’s “boss,” “drill sargent,” “dictator,” or “slave driver.” And believe me, your child will notice and appreciate, even if she doesn’t say anything. Not only that, it won’t be long before the favor of your respectful self-control is being given back to you. And it really feels good.
Conclusion
Self-control is a big deal in all relationships. If we as parents can’t exercise it consistently with everyone, including our kids, how can we expect them to learn it? By talking about it a lot, and letting our kids know we place a higher value on it than on us trying to control them, we’ll show them what it means and how it’s done. When we see them exercising it we’ll know we are doing it well ourselves!
NOTE: This piece is written from the Dad’s perspective. It can just as appropriately be read from the Mom’s perspective.
If you as a parent are confident enough, you might speak to your child along the following lines – at any time, really, but especially during the You-and-Me Dialogue, when you have a conversation with the child about how the two of you treat each other.
“My strongest desire is for you to be growing as a person, to be responsible, caring, and cooperative. And if you are growing as a person, you will be doing things like speaking honestly, showing respect for others, cooperating with others, listening to others, caring about others as well as yourself, doing what you say you will do, making responsible decisions, giving an accounting for your decisions and behavior, questioning your own motives as to selfishness, and giving evidence of your belief in the Golden Rule. You will be treating others as you wish to be treated.
“And I’ll be seeing all of that in you. In how you talk to your parents and your brothers and sisters, to your friends, to your teachers, and to everybody else. I’ll be seeing how you deal with all of us day-to-day. I’ll be seeing you doing your work conscientiously. I’ll be seeing you–in one way or another–thinking through your values and maybe even questioning some of your ideas or assumptions. I’ll be seeing you act with self-discipline. I’ll be very proud of you.
“Doesn’t it make sense that I would much prefer to see you doing all those good things, instead of just being obedient, and bending your will to my will because you are afraid of a negative consequence?
“I hope you don’t think that I, as a father who loves you and wants the best for you, prefers to inflate my own ego with a sense of power over you rather than lending you a hand in becoming the best person you can be. I hope you don’t think that I would prefer to see you in pain–like being punished or being afraid of some punishment-–rather than see you joyful, and happy, and good about yourself. Which of these-–your cooperation or your obedience--do you think makes me feel better about you? And better about myself as a father?
“Personally, I hope you understand how it is that I really want your cooperation with me and your mom, rather than your obedience. And I would hope that you, too, see voluntary, caring cooperation as much better for you than obedience could ever be.
“Essentially, I hope you can see this difference as being the difference between love and fear as the motivation for your behavior.
“So, honey, what do you think about all this? Which do you think is better: obedience or cooperation?”
The beauty of giving a child a choice is that the child exercises control of his or her behavior with the parent’s blessing. The parent must be able to live with either choice the child makes. Take a look at two variations on offering choices.The first formula is a straightforward choice between two options. In the second formula, a positive consequence is proposed to the child if she makes one choice, and a negative consequence is proposed if she makes the other choice. In this way the child chooses the positive or negative consequence freely, freeing the parent from the blame for inflicting a punishment on the child.
It is important that the parent start both options with “Would you rather.....” In this way the two options are clearly presented to the child as her choice. It is also important that both options be something the parent can live with, and can actually enforce without the child’s cooperation.1st Formula: “Would you rather A , OR would you rather B ?”
This is the straightforward choice between two options that are both acceptable to the parent.
2nd Formula: “Would you rather A + B, OR would you rather C + D?”
Here A+B = What I want + what you want, and C+D = What I don’t want + what you don’t want.
This formula sets up a choice like this: Would you rather choose A + B, OR would you rather choose C + D? The child is free to choose either option. The first option, A + B, is cooperation with the parent’s wishes and a positive consequence. The second choice, C + D, is non-cooperation with the parent’s preference and a negative consequence (i.e., a punishment).
Example 1:
DAD: Honey, your toys are all over the place, and I’m afraid people will trip on them or step on them and break them. Would you rather put them away and be able to play with them again next time, OR would you rather have me pick them up and put them where they’re out of the way for a couple of days?
Example 2:
MOM: Would you rather do your homework now and then be able to go out and play, OR would you rather do your homework later and stay inside tomorrow?
Example 3:
DAD: Jim, would you rather agree to get home by the 11 o’clock curfew and be able to use the car again next time, OR would you rather just not make any agreement at all about the time you will be home and forfeit the use of the car for a week?
Notice how each option, each “would you rather,” contains a consequence. The one the parent would prefer contains a positive consequence. The one the parent does not want (but fears the child might choose) has the negative consequence, which is actually a mild punishment. The parent can live with the negative choice.
A father in one of my classes started using this technique with a very defiant 12-year-old boy. The child responded, “Dad, now you’re making me think. I liked it better when you just told me what to do, and I could say “No."