to dislike being physical with dc and to think words should be enough?

[NeeNawNora]

I am the stricter of the two of us yet am becoming increasingly frustrated with dp having to be physical in some way with our dc in order to get them to do as he's asked. I don't mean smacking or hurting them but restraining or physically removing things. I don't think this is acceptable as ultimately he's using his strength to overpower them and get his way but still has no control.

For example, dd was climbing on a gate today. He told her to get down, she said it's ok I'm nearly over. He said 'no, get down now' and she continued climbing over. He put an arm round her waist and used the other hand to peel her fingers off before dumping her down and her complaining she could of done it/he's hurt her leg/she's got a splinter etc. I didn't see the need for her to get off (he was impatient to open it to go through) because I like the dc being able to climb and explore when appropriate, but if I had wanted her to I'd have said 'dd, please get down because [insert reason]' and she would mostly likely have listened. If she hadn't I'd have reminded her that there are consequences for not listening and she definitely would've listened.

Similarly tonight, younger dd and ds were racing to get a ball and ds got it first the first time so dp told him to let dd get it first next time. Ds still got it first and dp wrestled it off him rather than just repeat his request. I would've reiterated what I'd asked and then if he still didn't listen I'd have given ds a warning that if he still didn't listen and play/share nicely then he wouldn't be able to play at all.

I just think all the physicality is heavy handed and shows a lack of patience and control. Dp thinks I'm too soft but ultimately the dc listen to me and not him and my way causes less upset. Aibu to think being physical is unnecessary or am I being too soft?

You are being very soft. If they were on the road, are you going to wait for them to walk off the road themselves or get them off it before they hurt themselves?

Blimey I'd love it if I could be so sure my kids would listen to reasonable requests and explanations. Sorry but I'm with your dh on this one

Jeez, who's got the time to keep pussy footing around the kids?

He told her to get off the gate so she should have got off...she thought she didn't have to do as she was told, and learnt that wasn't the case.

Same with the ball, although I would have held my hand out and said sternly "Give it to me please", using my death stare.

If that didn't work, I would have done what your DH did.

YABU. I think you're being soft.

She shouldn't have been climbing on the gate, so I wouldn't be interested in the 'I'm nearly over' excuse.

If two of them were fighting over the ball, the best thing to do is get it into neutral territory, i.e. Dad.

Annunziata, there really isn't any comparison between day to day discipline and the situation where children are in danger. OP, I agree with you: far better to teach the children to do what they are told than to force them to do so by using an adult's greater strength.

I do what your dh does.

Well they don't yet listen so intervening is fine

"Down you get please" "nah"

"Take turns nicely please" "nah"

Sounds like the children are preschool age, maybe infants? Impulsive age, innit.

I don't feel any need to explain why I want small children to do something on each individual occasion. I just want them to understand that I'm adult and when I say 'stop climbing' I mean 'stop climbing' or whatever. I'm with your dh.

I don't think that you're too soft or that he's heavy handed, you just do things differently. And that's fine, there is no one perfect way to parent children. In fact I think one of the reasons that children do best out of having two parents is that they see two different approaches to achieving the same thing, which in turn allows them to find their own ways of doing things.

You need to let go a little bit and as long as you trust that your DH is ultimately a good parent, just let him get on with it.

Im with him sorry he asked her to get off she didnt he askec again she didn't he took her orr 6 yr olds dont reason they dont care abouf a lenthy explanation they switch off its really all blah with him, climbing over a gate isnt exploring its doing what you want regardless of anybody else, you need to have control over children they cant police themselves so young, you and their dad are a partnership you need to work this out

Depends on their age, with three and under, sometimes removal/direct action is the best way.

Over that, and it's less appropriate, although I did once remove my tantrumming 6 year old from the dinner table in front of all my rellies. That was so embarrassing.

Sorry lots of typos,

I was in a shop last week when a child aged around 3, kept climbing up the shelves.

His Mum asked him to stop - he totally blanked her.

She then went on to tell him it was 'dangerous darling' - he totally blanked her.

Then she went on to explain the danger in more depth - again totally blanked.

By the time she went on to explain there would be consequences if he didn't get down, I just wanted to grab the kid, pop him on the floor and get on with browsing stock cubes.

Talk about making a friggin meal of it. I thought at one point she was going to phone a behaviour psychologist to come and talk him down...

Who's gate was it?

Of course you can compare them, the child could have fallen off the gate and hurt herself, they could have battered one another over the ball and hurt themselves.

Btw I dont thimk your soft I just think he is their dad he isnt harming them you need to let him get on with it

See worraall blah

I don't use it often but I do use it. Yesterday, DD had a splinter which was getting red and sore. I tried logic, I tried bribery, I tried privileges. In the end we held her down and got it out. Painlessly, I might add.

It is unreasonable, your children were asked once, didn't do it so there are consequences. Carry on that way and you will have more bother when they are teenagers, "come in at 10" "no im not finished getting pissed in the street yet" what the hell - it doesn't matter because they haven't learnt consequence.

Warra
I think its arse licky, like they are deep down scared of their dc's reactions in public if they just be in charge.

I would often do the long explanations

I soon learnt because I told you then remove him (if needed to) if ds wants to do something an explanation from me why he shouldn't is not going to make much difference

Your DH is not wrong. Nor are you. You just parent slightly differently and that is fine.

Personally, I ask. Then I tell. Then I remove (e.g. with the DC on the gate).

Oh I used to do the please dd dont do that you will hurt yourself mummy will be sad if you hurt yourself , then realised she was 2 and staring at me like I was half daft,

Can you imagine having 3 or 4 kids and having to have a deeply involved conversation, every time you found one of them flushing your car keys down the loo...or hanging their sibling out of the window by their ankles?

But what if they were in a dangerous situation and he couldn't physically reach them in time to stop them from doing whatever it is? Surely it'd be better if he could ask them to do something and they listen first time 95% of the time like they do to me?

It was a gate in the countryside that she couldn't open.

I just dislike the idea of parenting being a dictatorship. I think mutual respect is better all round. If I told dp to give me all his chocolate this instant I'd expect him to question it because no reasonable reason has been given. Similarly, he barked at dd to get down with no reason. She knows she's usually allowed to climb over them so saw no reason not to. She should be able to question/challenge inconsistency in my opinion, not be afraid to speak up for herself - so long as it's politely.