Does 'gentle parenting' work ?

It's No True Scotsman again.

Someone comes along and points out a terrible example of Gentle Parenting (tbf this example is unusual in that it's proudly told by the Gentle Parent herself/himself!).
We point out it's terrible.
Everyone insists it's not Truly gentle parenting.

You should have given him an appropriate amount in the first place. One that was unlikely to make him sick. That's what the 'parenting' element refers to.

Then the rest could be saved for another day.

The natural consequence of eating too many Should have been that he didn't have any left for eg tomorrow. Not that he had to throw up.and then clean it up himself!

"I know that you are really sad leaving the park, it's hard to stop something that you are enjoying. We need to leave to collect X from school. I look forward playing with you at the park tomorrow".

See my issue here is the antisocial behaviour isn't the wanting to stay in the park (the boundary you then hold). Its the overreaction/tantrum in response to not getting what they want. You haven't imposed a consequence for that. You've affirmed that yes they should feel aggrieved at not getting their way (they shouldn't).

I would:

• focus on the positive and teach them to appreciate what they had, not the thing they are disappointed they aren't getting: "yes, we have had a great time at the park today, aren't you a lucky boy"
• then I would give some strategies for calming down and set a time frame for them to stop fussing, explaining its not a big thing:

• if they didn't try to calm down, I'd impose a consequence for not trying.

I'm a firm believer children need boundaries to feel safe, imagine how limitless a world might feel to a child without them. In a family I think children want and need leaders so they look to their parents to see if they're calm, in charge, responsible, consistent etc

As a rule of thumb we do authoritarian parenting but it definitely needs consistency. Dr Becky gives great advice on this, setting a boundaries after asking about how it isn't something you say it's something you do. So setting reasonable expectations e.g. after this programme or after 2 programmes the tv is off and then following through and doing what you say. Also at pre school age and younger it's not always appropriate to explain everything fully, a brief explanation or even a simple No in a firm voice without shouting and then redirecting to a safe alternative in a positive way is enough.

I'm gentler than my own parents were, although shouty mum definitely appears more than I'd like (especially ATM when I'm pregnant and lacking in mental and physical capacity). I try and validate feelings, my daughter has a calm down box in her room which she uses when she wants to be left alone and then we rebuild and connect after. Fundamentally I want to treat my daughter with respect and in turn expect respect back, as I would from all our family members.

I think the issue with gentle parenting getting a bad.wrap is parents that don't understand it or use it effectively, or who use it as an excuse to not lay any groundwork/rules etc. I saw an insta reel the other day and it was about how a ladies f one year old wanted to stand on the counter pushing microwave buttons for ten minutes that' was fine with her as they had nowhere to go or anything to do but I'd feel like that's not really something you want a child doing..The baby will only get bigger and can climb on surfaces themselves, other people might not want a child doing the same at their houses etc. I didn't understand why you wouldn't redirect them to an activity which gives a similar effect like button pressing but that's suitable for them. A microwave is ultimately not a toy.

I think she should have prevented a scenario that would predictably result in actual bodily harm for her child.

Just like we prevent young children from burning themselves or drinking alcohol.

Not preventing actual bodily harm from occurring to your young child is literally the definition of neglect, which is a form of child abuse.

Knowingly allowing your young child to eat so many sweets that they literally vomit is harmful to their body.

It is cruel and confusing to a child when their parent won't even prevent them from harming themselves.

I would have removed the sweets. If this makes me Cruel, but allowing them to poison themselves is Gentle, then I'd rather be Cruel any day.

I dread to think what is Cruel Parenting. Horrific

^

Er, teaching accountability?? You eat too many Skittles, vomit, then yes, you just clean up after yourself?? Or your mummy will do it for you?!?!

If you think that's cruel you have no idea what cruelty is.

Yeah, that's not gentle parenting. That's an absence of parenting.

Parenting does not mean letting children do what they want and then just dealing with the consequences of that. That's not what 'natural consequences' means - although the natural consequence of eating too many skittles is that you will be sick, parenting dictates that you get involved and not let it happen in the first place.

In fact, this is so bad that I'm not entirely sure it's not a facetious post!

" firm boundaries, but doesn't promote shouting and hitting etc and generally using fear to get your kids to behave. It encourages understanding a child's development phases and what can and cannot be expected of them at any particular stage. Helping them understand and validate feelings, negative and positive ones etc."

This isn't gentle parenting. This is 'normal' middle ground parenting.

Gentle parents let their kids get away with all sorts. Hitting at softplay should be met with a stern word and consequence not 'how did that make little billy feel? Let's have a cuddle! Would you like an ice cream!' It drives me nuts! That's what teachers mean when it's doing kids no favours. It's a lack of discipline.

First post on this thread - my kids have ASD so I gentle parent.

What happens when they're 16 and no-one gives a shit if they had ASD? Employers, friends, the real world? They won't accept any excuses at all.

No one gives you a free pass in life, never.

There are so many parents that are doing their kids a huge disservice by not teaching them how to function in the real world, it's astounding.

Absolutely not cruel parenting.

He made a choice. He discovered it was a poor choice and encountered consequences.

What did you think should have happened? Rolled up a camping chair and a blanket so that he could watch his mummy clear up all his sick?

Yes, I was implying that, although I admit it's not the smartest comparison. Maybe you're right and "gentle parenting" is not a set of objective standards of parenting, I don't know because I don't "practice" any kind of style. What I see is a lot of people deliberately conflating neglect and laziness to gentleness, and to me that's not correct.

Gentle parenting does work but it's often misinterpreted as permissive parenting.

The kids those teachers are describing in school are the ones who are given lots of overwhelming choices at home, unclear boundaries, inconsistent sanctions, and believe that adults are all their to entertain them and be their friends. They're the ones who are given lots of amazing experiences and stuff, so that they grow up expecting school to be one long theme park ride and are devastated that they have to encounter tasks that can be boring and without much immediate reward.

Obviously not all kids and I'm not judging anyone, but that's how I see it anyway.

The example I quoted above backs my theory that many Gentle Parents try to give their children way too much responsibility over their own well being and that of others, at too young an age.

It is not your child's responsibility to prevent him from poisoning himself. It's yours, the parent's. Letting a child poison himself and then shrug, crowing "natural consequences!" isn't being Gentle, it is in fact, Neglect.

Or not so long ago, when he ate an entire share bag of skittles when I told him not to eat them all. He then promptly puked the Skittles down the loo,
...
But he got little sympathy for feeling a bit green, made to clean the sick off the toilet seat

Wow. If this is Gentle Parenting, I dread to think what is Cruel Parenting. Horrific

Punishment and shouting is not gentle parenting. I mean everyone shouts sometimes but it shouldn't be a regular thing.
Gentle parenting is respectful with firm boundaries and expectations. I think it's fine if you have just one child but when you have 2 of a similar age it's more difficult to do it as it requires more parental effort and that is always possible if both kids are acting out at once.

But in general, threats and punishments don't work so you are just making life harder by removing treats etc.

What are you implying? Are you trying to compare something as nebulous as a parenting style to something real, discrete and clearly measurable like biological sex?! Because that is bonkers.

There is no one clear measurable definition of Gentle Parenting. The majority of parents who claim to use it, in my observation and in that of many others, are permissive. It is used synonymously, by many, with permissivity.

This is absolutely nothing to do with changing the meaning of clearly definable biological terms and I think it is silly and unproductive to make light of that issue by comparing it to something like this.

@SusanSHelit that doesn’t sound like gentle parenting. That sounds like good parenting.

I think you did the right thing. She’s only 4 and she wants your attention when she knows your giving it to her sibling. The important thing is that you are doing something one on one when he’s asleep - hopefully she’ll start to learn that is your special time.

You achieved your goal of getting him asleep and nobody got too upset! A win for sure.

I think gentle and permissive parenting often get conflated but they are very much not the same thing.

I try to gentle parent (more by instinct than any real planned intention, I just copied my own amazing mum and later found it had been given a name)

It's lots of being clear on what boundaries are, explaining why they are, listening to why they maybe should change; and either then explaining why that's not going to happen, or occasionally actually reasesesing the situation, and perhaps changing the boundaries.

For example when ds went into year five he suggested he be allowed to stay up a bit later at the weekend and school holiday. I thought it through and we agreed a slightly later (though not as late as he wanted) bedtime. Another time he wanted to walk to school on his own when he really wasn't old enough. I explained why that wasn't a good idea yet, that it wasn't happening right now, that it would at some point and what criteria would need to be met for that to happen.

Or not so long ago, when he ate an entire share bag of skittles when I told him not to eat them all. He then promptly puked the Skittles down the loo, and learned first hand why I had said what I said. Now he only ever eats a reasonable amount at a time, because the natural consequence of being greedy was pretty unpleasant. I didn't shout at him for eating all of the sweets. There was no need to. But he got little sympathy for feeling a bit green, made to clean the sick off the toilet seat and didn't get the sweets which were supposed to last a couple of days replaced

I think it's mostly just realising that children are people, and if you speak to them in language they understand and with respect and kind authority, everyone rubs along quite nicely.

Ds's teachers are always saying that he's well behaved in school, he's a team player, helps other pupils, is friendly, respectful etc, all traits I see mirrored at home for the most part

I do think it's a good 50/50 mix of nature vs nurture though. He's not a difficult child to parent at all and I would perhaps need to take a more authoritative stance with one who tested the boundaries more

DC now 20 and 23. I would describe my style as warm/strict. Love and cuddles never shied away from but expectations of good behaviour. It goes without saying that was age related, that’s just good parenting not gentle parenting. Distraction was key in averting unwanted behaviour but I’d didn’t shy away from discipline, normally just a firm no and consequences. They are delightful adults who learnt very quick how to behave when in public etc, always had good school reports about manners etc. Those things were very important to us.
The problem with gentle parenting is when it means never saying no to a child. Storing up problem for school. They will be told no and expected to understand that there are rules in every part of life.

That approach is just manipulative and teaching a child they are responsible for other people's emotions.

I also actually believe children do need to see and learn that mum and dad have emotions too, and that they can get angry or upset (and not have to bottle that up), even if its a bit scary to see mum lose her rag because you've done something you know full well was wrong (again). You learn that you don't enjoy upsettimg others and that the behaviour is unacceptable and not worth repeating.

Too many people also take gentle parenting approaches like distraction etc that are intended for pre verbal toddlers, and are still doing only this with bigger school aged kids. You need firmer boundaries/consequences as children get older!

The problem is that people take gentle parenting to mean never ever doing anything to upset their child.

So the boundaries & consequences imposed tend to be soft & lacking impact, and the children don't learn to handle disappointment, sharing, not getting their way.

Its also very affirmatory of "big feelings". Young children can have quite disproportionate reactions to things and lack perspective. Its actually important NOT to overacknowledge, they need to be taught that they are overreacting to minor grievances (whether physical or emotional), pick themselves up and carry on

As a primary school teacher, no it doesn’t.

I had one parent who was shouty and not there very often. The other was more calm and accepting. I think it was a good balance. I think if you are a solo parent then you have no choice but to do both at times.

There was also no tolerance for bad attitudes at school. For example if a class was playing up, the head teacher would come and observe the class. We all stopped then. A lot of emphasis was put on your attitude while accepting that sometimes kids break rules and there needs to be punishments when rules are broken. One thing they did at my school which I hated was that they had this punishment where you had to change into PE kit and run round the games field at break time. Only got that once or twice and honestly hated it. Also participation in sport was compulsory - I think that fostered team spirit, doing something even if you don't feel like it.