Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Lebell · 05-28-2005, 12:28 PM

EULA,

Based on this and our previous conversation, it seems to me that the whole concept of discipline is very black and white to you.

In this article, the writer is talking about "power struggles" without explanation.

But Demeter gave a very good example of a "power struggle" that should never happen.

And here of course is the difference. There are times when a child should listen, no ifs ands or buts, just like there are times a parent should say "no", with no argument or appeal possible.

For example, Sexymama and I take the approach of always saying "yes" unless there is a reason to say "no". You want your friends to stay over? Yes, unless there is a reason for them not to. You want to go swimming today? Yes, unless there is a reason you can't. But just the other day, my 11 year old tried to tell me that because it was her trampoline, she should be able to do something that I had judged unsafe. Uh uh, no way. She also lost trampoline priviledges that day for the attempt, no appeal. And because she knows we will follow through, she knows that if she throws a tantrum or tries to circumvent the restrictions, we will take down the trampoline without hesitation. We do this not out of anger or to maintain our "power", but because we are responsible for her safety and there will be no argument regarding it.

I think that the fundamental difference is that between discipline and consequences and approaching parenting from the angle of a detached parent instead of passionate equals, ie, parents that try to be the kid's "friend" instead of their parent.

05-28-2005, 12:28 PM	#8 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	EULA, Based on this and our previous conversation, it seems to me that the whole concept of discipline is very black and white to you. In this article, the writer is talking about "power struggles" without explanation. But Demeter gave a very good example of a "power struggle" that should never happen. And here of course is the difference. There are times when a child should listen, no ifs ands or buts, just like there are times a parent should say "no", with no argument or appeal possible. For example, Sexymama and I take the approach of always saying "yes" unless there is a reason to say "no". You want your friends to stay over? Yes, unless there is a reason for them not to. You want to go swimming today? Yes, unless there is a reason you can't. But just the other day, my 11 year old tried to tell me that because it was her trampoline, she should be able to do something that I had judged unsafe. Uh uh, no way. She also lost trampoline priviledges that day for the attempt, no appeal. And because she knows we will follow through, she knows that if she throws a tantrum or tries to circumvent the restrictions, we will take down the trampoline without hesitation. We do this not out of anger or to maintain our "power", but because we are responsible for her safety and there will be no argument regarding it. I think that the fundamental difference is that between discipline and consequences and approaching parenting from the angle of a detached parent instead of passionate equals, ie, parents that try to be the kid's "friend" instead of their parent. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate! Last edited by Lebell; 05-28-2005 at 12:32 PM..