or are UP parents really nuts?

[FunnysInTheGarden]

I mean talk about making all your lives difficult....

Am ready BTW for the UP parents cries of dissent [cgrin]

I haven't had time to read this thread. Had no idea this was a new book/philosophy. I have always told the dc that I (and DH) will love them whatever they do because it is the essence of being a parent and can't be taken away. I have also told them that I want to like them and be proud of them too but nothing, even if they went to prison, would ever stop me from loving them. It has never stopped us having boundaries. They are 16 and 12 now and seem to have turned out OK.

Most folk who criticise UP don't understand it.
It's not possible to discuss it meaningfully on a thread with anyone who hasn't read the book IMO. UP has been very useful for me and my family and although the methods are criticised by my parents etc and others who don't understand it, the results are definitely NOT criticised!!

I don't "UP", but I do try to be mindful about the sort of parent I am, and whilst I do sometimes find myself resorting to bribes and threats to get my four year old to bend to my will, I'm never happy about it and I know there are better ways to engage her cooperation. UP seems to be about respecting your children and treating them as individuals; I can't see anything wrong with that, and I'd never describe someone as "nuts" for trying to raise children humanely and responsibly.

I don't see why it's not possible to punish a child for bad behaviour AND help them to understand why its wrong and feel loved. Punishing children isn't the same as not loving children. Punishing can be an expression of love if it is motivated by a desire to help your child be the best they can be.

I never heard of any child feel unloved because of reasonable punishment (obviously not being beaten to a pulp)

I love the idea of UP, it resonates with how would like to parent.

But what do you do before you can talk to them? Ds is 20months, and is obviously testing me a lot. We have enormous tantrums when he doesn't get what he wants. He does stuff he knows he shouldn't- try and touch cooker, hit, etc. He looks at me first, grins then does it.

How do you deal with that? I get that the tantrums are frustration, but I can't explain to him about the cooker, or hitting me.

Just googled 'UP', never heard of it till now. I'd say, for me, this is roughly what I follow already, and I'd say I was raised by 'UP' parents also. Mostly common sense, similar to Authoritative parenting in terms of theories surrounding parenting and anti-social behaviour.

I would never purchase a parenting book, the ones I've 'briefly' looked at caused me to feel upset and a bit little. Since chilling out, our life has been great. DD is very well behaved in the grand scheme of things, she is happy, stable, loving and just a great kid, I don't need a book atm.

Try reading How to Talk so Kids Will Listen and Listen so Kids Will Talk. Essence of UP I think and it's not ground breaking, it's been around for a long time.

There's a lot of people on this thread saying that people turn out ok regardless of how they are brought up. Obviously this is true for most people but you only have to open a few threads on here or talk to a few people in rl to know that loads of people have hang-ups stemming from their relationship with their parents. Just because someone hasn't been to prison, has a job/dp etc doesn't mean that everything is fine for them and that some things their parents did may have been detrimental.

We all know 'people pleasers' who are despertately seeking approval - where does that mentality come from if not from their childhood? Btw, this is not aimed at anyone in particular but I do think the 'common sense' approach does need questioning sometimes. I see it written on here all too often that it is 'common sense' to ignore tantrums - withdraw attention etc and then shower praise and attention (maybe throw in a few stickers!) when beahviour is good. I would really question the message that is sending a young child about how acceptable it is to feel anger/frustration etc.

A few on here have said that children are incapable of reasoned discussion etc when caught up in a tantrum and this is true but I would also say if they are too young to have a discussion then they are too young to fully understand some of the rewards and punishments advocated by many parents. Surely they are being 'trained' rather than encouraged to make their own decisions?

And btw, wtf has letting someone have a whole bowl of cereal for a meal got to do with UP? That just sounds like a kind of non-parenting to me. (Sorry that is aimed at a particular post but can't scroll up to see whose now).

Practically imperfect I would say at that age avoiding the situations and distractions are the best techniqiues to use. I know it's not easy to avoid, I have a mainly open-plan house so can't really keep mine out of the kitchen. I do explain things though to young children because, as we all know, they understand a lot more than they can actually communicate. So I do simple expanations to my 21 month old, while removing him, distracting him. Probably sounds ridiculous to some when I do it in public but I don't care .

"If she hit another child (which is very very rare, even when she's been hit first) then I would remove her and tell her it wasn't a nice thing to do. "

• she knows it's not a nice thing to do. That's why she is doing it.

BTW I agree with the idea of UP, I think most people start out wanting to explain things to their DCs rather than exploding. Explaining is certainly my first port of call. However, certain bad behaviour, especially in public, needs a short sharp telling off.

I parent like FreudianSlipper and I hate labels. I use common sense.
I pick my battles, avoid head on confrontations (as much as possible) but there are some things that are not negotiable. I am not going to endlessly discuss cleaning teeth. Teeth will be cleaned-end of story.

I think that it is practised mainly by those who had an authoritarian upbringing themselves and have no idea how boring it is to a DC to talk things to death, and (if you are a sensitive DC) feel that you have to agree with the parent. (maybe it works better if you are not a sensitive DC)

What UP parents don't seem to realise is that is exactly the same as other methods as they, as end result, want the DC to choose what the parent wants.
e.g. if a DC is going to throw something hard at another DC when they are annoyed it is pointless saying 'do you think that is a good idea-it will hurt' because the honest reaction from the DC would be 'good -I mean it to hurt'!!
Much better to very sharply say 'put that down at once' and discuss the anger afterwards.

We all know 'people pleasers' who are despertately seeking approval - where does that mentality come from if not from their childhood?

I would say that UP makes the sensitive DC a people pleaser. My parents hadn't read books, but they were very much UP. I was sensitive, I knew, when we had discussed things to death, which way I was supposed to behave i.e. the good, sensible choice. My brothers fared much better-they didn't want the 'good sensible choice' and my parents had to resort to a much quicker-no you won't do that stance'-all over and done with much quicker and easier!

DS1 would have responded well to UP I think. DS2 would have laughed in my face and stolen the car by the time he was 4. I'm with colditz on the 'need to adapt parenting style to the child' thing.

The whole reason that I object to books is that the DCs haven't read the same ones! You do have to adapt to the DC and even within the same family you can need different approaches.
The seat belt thing is a ridiculous example-you just tell the DC they are putting it on. I expect the senior cabin crew would have got the same result if he had said , with great authority, 'you will fasten that belt NOW' or given the mother the simple choice 'fasten the belt or get off'!
That poor DC will get a great shock in the real world!

As it was he probably just thought the mad mother wasn't worth the bother!

When a child does something they shouldn't, isn't it just common sense to explain why and talk to them in a way they understand? I don't need to read a book to tell me that.

Nor do I believe that children believe you only love them when they 'behave' if you treat them with respect. I believe children do need boundaries and guidance and while I can respect other parents if they choose to practice UP, it's not for me. And my children are just lovely.

Your last sentence says it all LeQueen (I find I generally agree with you)

UP seems to me all about control anyway-the end result is the parent wants the DC to do as they are told-it is just another way of getting there. (and if they are not very good at it, or don't understand the book, they don't ever get there).

That was wonderfully said, Maryz. Would anybody else like to Join the MaryZ fan club? :)

I take great perverse delight in finding online UP threads where the poster is tied up in knots about some dilemna (like the aeroplane seatbelt one) and everybody replying is bending over backwards to adhere to UP principles no matter how impractical... sorry, but it's hilarious what lengths people will go to.

So yanbu to OP.

I have a copy of the UP book, have read it closely & repeatedly. And I follow the threads (compulsively, I try to only lurk, but sometimes I can't help posting, it's like I need a regular anti-UP fix).

Now I keep flashing to the Amy Chen (?Tiger Mum) approach. She drove her children, bribes, shouting, threats, rewards... and all out of love. She was raised the same way and utterly convinced that her parents did all that work out of love. Never any doubt in her mind or her children's that they were loved, in spite of all that extremely "conditional" parenting.

PlaceMarkingAsGenuinelyInterestedTiggaxx

@Penguin--because people do not feel they need to read manuals on how to be a parent does not make them LAZY parents. How I parent is an extension of my personality; some of it comes from how I was raised by my parents- they were good parents but some things I do differently; its shaped by much wider associations/observations/life experiences/ associations than my own parents. I dont need a book to remind me to evaluate and reassess my relationships with people, including my kids. For some (?most) people parenting IS largely instinctive.

My teenagers said that the thing they appreciated most about my rules is that there was always a reason for them that I was happy to explain.
I was also prepared to listen if they had a logical challenge to my rules, or wanted to negotiate a change.
I plan on reading the book in the Summer holidays, I need to understand it as I'm seeing quite a few UP parents with older children who are finding things hard and keep asking me to support them. And I don't understand why 'no' is not good, and why many of the parents get emotional and irrational when their children are mean and unkind to them.
So I need to understand more about the philosophy.