Am I being unreasonable to think parents who use “gentle parenting” are just making rods for their own backs?

@jasonandhannahbush Until I clocked your username just now I was wondering if you lived next door but one to me, on the otherwise of the screaming banshee that lives next door!! A full 1½hr of non stop screaming is the record so far. Most days we get something, just things being thrown or doors slammed but on the days it goes beyond 20 minutes is the days I realise I need to save every penny in the hope of buying a detached.

I agree that those are rubbish consequences but nine would be different.

refusing to get out the car for the dentist would result in no more sweet treats because I can’t trust him to care for his teeth properly. And yes, I’d still make him get out the car.

refusing to get ready for school and making us late would result in having to do some catch up work after school which would eat into screen time.

i definitely agree that some things are non-negotiable especially when it comes to education and health.

Jasnah good post

@Sprogonthetyne
Okay, let's take the natural consequences a step further:

not using room appropriately = not using room
Jumping on their bed = not having a bed?
Splashing water all over the bathroom = not having a shower or bath?
Misbehaving in a doctor's surgery = no more GP appointments?

not using a toy appropriately (eg throwing) = not having toy
Throwing a fork = eat your dinner with your hands?
Stuffing toilet paper everywhere = no more toilet paper?
Throwing a tantrum during toothbrushing = no more toothbrushing?

Not sitting safly in car seat = not driving to soft play
Not sitting safely in car seat for school = no more school?
Not sitting safely in the car seat for the dentist appointment = no more dentist?
Not being safe in the shopping trolley = no more food shop?

not behaving safely on outings = going home / not going out
So potentially no trips to any of the boring things we have to drag kids to: childcare/ school, doctors, food/ clothes shop? And stay at home with more and more unburnt energy and the potential to wreck the house even more, because they haven't been outside?

Not been kind on playdate = no playdates for a while
Not been kind at childcare = no more childcare?
Not been kind to the teacher = no more school?
Misbehaved at medical appointment = no more of those?

You see what I'm getting at here. Kids usually don't misbehave if it's something that THEY want to do. Why would they? It's the mundane, boring, necessary stuff that lots of people get into conflict with their children over and natural consequences there Do. Not. Work, because they are either dangerous or would impact the parent in a negative way.

I've had to fight mine over a lot of things, because they have got their stubbornness from me. You may be able to get away with the natural consequence of refusing to get dressed while they're at nursery and just take them in their pyjamas and let them be cold for refusing to put their coats on, because nursery can dress them. You can't do that when they need to be in school uniform.

One of mine refused to open their mouth at the dentist's for necessary treatment the other day. The natural consequence would be to allow them to let their teeth rot. That doesn't sit right with me, so punishment taking away their screen time followed (and yes, that was followed by a conversation about their behaviour and a pinky promise to actually open their mouth next time). I remember refusing to be put on a drip at hospital at that age and having 5 medical staff pin me down in bed while I screamed and kicked at them. You cannot negotiate your way out of these, nor can you let them just run their course.

"Gentle parenting" produces very individualistic children who think their own feelings are always reasonable & valid & are not very good at tolerating a small amount of disappointment, sadness etc for the collective good. They tend to have zero sense of proportion because they've been taught that its valid to be devastated that their peas are green. They lack obedience and expect an explanation for everything, which is not always reasonable, and have an overwhelming sense of entitlement and their own individual importance. Its not good for society which requires that we focus on collective good & often requires us to make sacrifices for those more in need.

Gentle parenting these days seems to either be too passive or too making the child think they will always be the centre of every situation. Neither are setting them up for real life.

Yet again, yet another person doesn't seem to understand 'gentle parenting'... I'm including the nextdoor neighbour in that.

Gentle parenting isn't never saying no. That's crap parenting.

Natural consequences are nothing to do with (REAL) gentle parenting.... and are, really another word for 'punishment', which we know doesn't work on adults or children. Everyone's idea of a 'natural consequence' will be different anyway, so little point in it being seen as a universal law.

I feel like people who REALLY practice ACTUAL Gentle parenting get such a bad name from these permissive/not parenting parents! Really grinds my gears, can you tell!?

Gentle parenting requires firm boundaries. I tell my 4yo no all the time. I’m just not a dismissive asshole in the way I do it.

I’m regularly complimented on how pleasant he is, so it works brilliantly for us.

Regardless of if it's to protect the child or protect the table, not using room appropriately = not using room. The same as
not using a toy appropriately (eg throwing) = not having toy.
Not sitting safly in car seat = not driving to soft play
not behaving safely on outings = going home / not going out
Not been kind on playdate = no playdates for a while

In my view those are natural consequences, as they are a direct response to the behaviour and what needs to happen to prevent the behaviour if the child is unable to prevent it themselves. To me this is very different arbitrary sanctions like not TV or time out or whatever, that has no link to the behaviour.

As for the veg, even with 5 kids I still don't understand why everyone would have to eat everything I had cooked. If I made peas, Carrots & broccoli, and the kid that didn't like broccoli just had a bigger portion of Carrots and peas, it really wouldn't bother me. Another one might love broccoli and have more of it, or if no one liked it I'd just change the proportion of broccoli that I made. I would never be cooking just broccoli and no other vegetables anyway.

Reasonable adjustments just because a child doesn't feel like wearing the uniform? I think not.

This.

And I don't think it's in the child's best interests, either now (because it's attributing a level of cognitive reasoning that developmentally they're just not at, and because children need age-appropriate structure and boundaries) or when they grow up and don't have the resilience to deal with life's slings and arrows.

There is a definite no true Scotsman thing with gentle parenting. For my part I don’t think it is effective at all and I was a little bit disappointed to see that the BBC had quoted Sarah Ockwell Smith as an ‘expert’ in one of their posts on the tiny happy people instagram page the other day. I think she causes more harm than good. But … the battle of ‘well clearly that’s not gentle parenting’!’ will rage on.

This is literally the best and most concise explanation I've seen for a while!

Again, I feel that a lot of these parenting trends are great if you only have one child and plenty of time. If you've got a large family and they are all quite young, with various needs and differing behaviours and characters, no one method of parenting is going to suit all of them, and you need to do whatever works to get everyone dressed, fed and off to wherever they are supposed to be.

Gentle parenting and permissive parenting get mixed up.

Gentle parenting is about understanding brain development and reasons why babies/toddlers/children behave in certain ways. They absolutely need boundaries and of course they are told no.

Eg they learn by repetition, pouring their cup of water over again and again is them learning cause & effect, not to purposefully piss you off. You simply take away the cup and tell them why. Screaming and shouting just scares them and they don't really learn to understand what they've done wrong. Then you'd let them learn that 'skill' another way, such as in the bath or outside with some toys/plastic containers.

another example- toddler in fullscale tantrum/meltdown. The 'primitive' part of their brain has taken over, they literally can't process what you're saying or understand you at that time. Shouting/threats/punishments at that exact point is useless and doesn't help them learn to regulate themselves, the tantrum is likely to go on for longer. Best thing to do is try to stay calm and comfort them/wait it out.

Obviously, if they are about to push another child off a climbing frame, then you probably are going to lose your shit and have a go at them or yank them off the climbing frame- you don't really have time to be 'gentle'.

Permissive parenting is borderline neglectful parenting- it's not preparing your children for the real world.

Have you actually read proper literature about it? It doesn’t involve not saying no and the natural consequences thing doesn’t count if they are in danger. There is an element of childism in society - not allowing them to have age appropriate reactions etc.

Well, that's not true is it? Schools will make reasonable adjustments for children. And that may include them wearing slightly different uniforms etc

I don't understand how people can be insistent that someone's behaviour is wrong and at the same time be insistent that their label for it is right despite evidence to the contrary/

You probably would ruffle some gentle parenting feathers if your description was anything close to gentle parenting but it's not.

There's nothing wrong with holding firm boundaries whilst also understanding that young children lack the ability for many of the rational thought processes and emotional regulation that took adults years to learn.

Natural consequences are not what you think they are. Falling off the table is a natural consequence. Being banned from the dining room and by extension from using the toys kept there is not. The real reason to keep a child off a dining room table is that the child could damage the table - leaves could be broken, the surface could be scratched, etc. It's perfectly fine to tell a child that they can't climb onto the table because you can't let him damage the family table.

Why wouldn't you offer other veg? Because you're not a short order cook, is the answer. Your children are not ordering lunch in a restaurant. How exactly would your shrug work if you had more than one child? Close your eyes and imagine the scene at dinner time when five siblings all want something different for dinner. Would you be happy to do this seven days a week for five children?

If you're British, you're sending your children off to school at four where they will be expected to wear a uniform and footwear that are designed with appearance as the primary value, and do phonics at a level that was originally designed for five year olds. They will be expected to do exactly what everyone else is doing and their preferences won't matter. I'm not saying any of this is right or evidence based. It is reality though.

I admit it's been some years since I had tantrumming toddlers but I don't ever recall "Enough, move on" being the key stopping them! I don't think there is a one size fits all 'cure' for tantrums.

I do think children need structure, boundaries and it's absolutely fine to say no.
Equally I'm fine with reasonable negotiations at bedtime, letting my DC decide if they want broccoli and I absolutely have named their feelings and had discussions about why hitting is wrong.
My youngest is a teenager and my eldest is mid twenties and I like to think they are polite, well rounded individuals. They all love broccoli, get plenty of sleep and don't go around hitting anyone or having tantrums.

Yes basically. I can see you are cross because you don't like what auntie sue has served for dinner. Wasn't she kind to make us all dinner. Let's use our words to ask if I can make you some pasta instead. Do you want to sit quietly while I do that or come to the kitchen with me?

So essentially you feelings are valid but so are other people's.

The biggest problem is that people (like you) don't really know what gentle parenting is and think it's something where you can't say no, can't have firm boundaries and must spend hours 'validating feelings'. That's not it at all.

It's calm, consistent, confident parenting with clear boundaries. It's just basically really good parenting that you have to put time and effort into.

@AmethystRuby I think you misread my post.

I did NOT say parents “let” their kids watch porn or Squid Games. I said they shrugged it off. The kids know what’s permitted but they find ways to do what they want knowing the “natural consequence” is non existent.

Some parents, when they realise their kids broke the rules, found a way around the passwords, or watched inappropriate material at a friend’s house, would then go ahead and discipline - have a strong conversation with the child about the behaviour and then impose a sanction eg remove the phone; impose a penalty eg loss of TV privileges/ ban play dates for several weeks.

Gentle parents will have a discussion and encourage the child not to do it again, explaining why it’s wrong. What’s the natural consequence of watching Squid Games or nasty porn? Nothing truly meaningful to a young child.

My dd went to a “naice” state school. There were Year 6 pupils making wank gestures at the class teacher. And some boys asking girls for oral sex. Someone’s arm was broken in a fight in the loos during class.

No child was expelled. There was a suspension for violence, but the approach was to reward the kids for improved behaviour. It didn’t really work and my dd felt unhappy and unsafe.

I do think this gentle approach isn’t effective and a lot of kids figure out they can do largely what want effectively with impunity.

Agree. I was a relaxed parent but I didn’t stand for nonesense. My SIL (who i get along well with so not bashing her for the sake of it) had to phone my brother to come and collect her and 2yrs old as he wouldn’t cross the road and they stood there for 40 mins. A passer by tried to intervene. She was telling me the story and I didn’t say anything but i’d have picked mine up like a rugby ball and carried them over the road. Also he won’t go in the pushchair so he doesn’t, i remember the old knee trick to hold them in whilst you strap them in fast.

I would describe my parenting as gentle (no shouting household) but my kids didn’t do what they wanted. I took a firm line on cheek / backchat, again not shouting but very firmly told from young age not to talk to me like that. They are 20 and 17 now, amazing kids, couldn’t tell you the last time I told them off, and they haven’t been rude to me in a very long time. I guess gentle parenting has multi facets, mine was largely no shouting due to how I was raised and I think having a calm household has benefitted my kids no end.