Does 'gentle parenting' work ?

[flowermo]

Let me start by saying that I am not an expert at parenting styles.

I know bits and bobs from reading articles, books, talking to other mums/ grandmas and a lot of reading on Mumsnet.

I understand there are a lot of misconceptions about gentle parenting. However let me summarise my understanding- it's about 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.

Another style of parenting, perhaps the authoritarian style or ' traditional ' style that was used a lot in our parents generation, is a lot more shouty. Perhaps even hitting. Children are scolded for having tantrums and punished. Parents rule with fear of shouting / hitting / scolding. Kids are often scared of their parents. I remember growing up in this kind of household, as did all of my friends really.

I would say I use something in between the two styles with my children. But more on the gentler side. I don't hit but sometimes I do shout for example. I try to understand the stage of development they're at and what I can reasonably expect from their behaviour. I try to use consequences like taking toys away or denying them treats they wanted. I don't think my kids are afraid of me. I don't think I'm a particularly good parent. Or that I'm doing things right. They misbehave and I'm often stressed out. They're still small, 2 and 4 and I'm just trying to find my way.

Anyway what I'm trying to say is. I've been speaking to some other mums of slightly older kids who are also teachers. They really think that the gentle parenting approach is hurting kids and kids are out of control more than they were in the past. More authoritarian methods work better apparently and kids should be scared of their parents and should be worried about getting in trouble ( not violence ) at home, if they mess around at school. Teachers are leaving the profession because kids are so badly behaved and parents have no control over their kids.

What do you think about this? Is gentle parenting working ? Is it true that kids are so badly behaved now ? ( doesn't every generation say that about the new generation? ).

One thing I've noticed is that if I discipline my kids in public, by slightly raising my voice, people do stare. I never see any parents doing that nowadays. It was normal to get a telling off if you messed around in public when I was a child.

I'm not trying to be divisive or judge either side of the debate. I don't know what I'm doing or whether it's right. I guess I spend most of my time thinking I should be firmer, then feeling abusive when I do shout at them. I'm also lost. I really don't want to piss anyone off. So please be kind.

To me the above is normal parenting and is time consuming with all the chat waffle but you put the time in there and then reduces what you need to do as they grow but other parents might..
Tell her to shut up crying, telling her that's what you get and throw the doll in the bin

@SingleandProud I'm not sure I know any parent who would react like that, that would be vile.

Yes, I agree, What you describe earlier in your post about explaining why it broke and how it made you feel, is just normal parenting- not gentle parenting.

As others have said there’s a lot of confusion about what is meant by “gentle parenting”. I agree that a lot of people confuse “gentle” parenting with “permissive” parenting and a lack of boundaries.

That said I think there’s a knee jerk response on here and elsewhere that says: “gentle parenting is shit lazy parenting that raises spoiled and entitled brats” which is unhelpfully simple and binary.

I certainly think that having no boundaries or sanctions for children is counterproductive. Allowing the child’s whims to dictate the way things operate for the whole family or community is not good parenting. For example making everyone wait while a child undergoes yet another clothing change when they have been told they need to leave. This for me is permissive, indulgent parenting.

But if gentle parenting means trying not to shout or raise your voice unless absolutely necessary, not snapping at children, reasoning with them and trying to lead by example rather than taking a “do as I say not as I do” approach then I think there’s a lot to be said for it.

A child won’t respect a parent who is a total pushover but neither will they respect one who imposes arbitrary and punitive rules for the sake of them and allows no flexibility or discussion. Children and parents should not be in a state of perpetual antagonism.

This debate recurs on mumsnet often.

Gentle parenting advocates use the No True Scotsman logical fallacy all the time.

They say: xyz is gentle parenting.
We say: here are some examples/contexts where that doesn't work.
They say: ah BUT that isn't TRUE gentle parenting. Because abc.
We say: here are some other examples where abc also doesn't work.
They say: ah but THOSE aren't true gentle parenting either.

Rinse and repeat for 40 pages of thread.

Meanwhile as several pps have noticed, we see a correlation between gentle parenting families and overwrought parents (usually mums because the dads don't tend to bother with it as much) trying desperately to reconcile the absolutist rules of "gentle parenting" with their instincts to be firmer.

I think the big thing for school is that children cannot each have individual negotiations and explanations. So raising children via negotiation etc doesn’t help them or the rest of their class when they will be in a situation where they do just need to follow an instruction. I have never wanted my children to be scared of me, but my boys do know that poor behaviour at school would disappoint me and don’t want that due to our relationship. They are both on the spectrum but still on the whole well behaved.,

The more I read, the more I think ‘gentle’ parenting is an affectation that only the rich can afford.

If you break Barbie, we have a nice chat about feelings and then move on assumes that toys can be regularly rebought. Removing pens if you write on the wall is great when you get the decorators in every few years and redecorate etc

But I don’t think that breaking and destroying things should be condoned (even if chatted about). There should be serious consequences for them (I don’t mean beatings). The child should see that they have done something wrong and their parent is upset, not chatty!

Children won’t just respond to the message but to the tone. If the tone is really friendly and they have a nice one-to-one chat, that is actually a reward, not a consequence. Why wouldn’t they do the same again next time they felt bored?

So if they were off sick or had forgotten or were struggling in general because something had happened at home or they're not academic and were too scared to ask for help the first time round, they'd get a detention? I'm so pleased my children go to schools that have empathy and respect for their students.

Who defines what Gentle Parenting means anyway? The definition of a term lies in how it's usually used.

If the majority of parents who say they are Gentle Parenting are permissive, then Gentle Parenting IS permissive even if that's not what it's "supposed" to mean.

I'm definitely not rich and never had the decorators in. My children losing the pens, helping clean the wall is the consequence and she never did it again, she gets the paper to draw on. Broken toy doesn't get replaced. It's not a nice chat like 'oh dear nevermind' it's taking time to listen and explain. You wanted to draw on the wall because you couldn't find paper, instead ask me for paper, now you have no pens and have to spend time cleaning. Next time she can't find paper she remembers losing pens and cleaning and comes to ask for paper. If she asks for a toy at Christmas she will look after it because she's not had that toy for so long since breaking it.

@Mumoftwo1316

This debate recurs on mumsnet often

It does and quite often I think it’s a bit of a fig leaf for people to have a pop at what they perceive as “middle class parenting” dressed up as faux concern.

Its never that long on these threads before the hoary old trope of “middle class” names gets wheeled out. Before long there will be a “Tristram and Jemima” posited with an example of supposedly permwssive middle class behaviour. (See also the endless trope about parents who talk to their children in public and how this is supposed to be attention seeking).

Bit of a derail really and none of this matters in terms of the debate but a lot of these threads have a veiled class-bashing narrative to them.

Children won’t just respond to the message but to the tone. If the tone is really friendly and they have a nice one-to-one chat, that is actually a reward, not a consequence.

This, so much this.

Parent is sitting at a little distance. 3yo thumps friend. Parent comes over and chirps smilingly "gentle hands! Gentle hands!"

Laughably ineffective.

I totally agree, I think this is a great approach and one I try to follow too. There are some things I take a harder stance on, like if DC were to push another child. It’s only happened once, but I was very strict it’s unacceptable and would hope most other parents are too. I’m also strict on manners. Otherwise the rest of the time I try to listen to DC and understand where he is coming from. I want to DC to feel like home is a safe space and he can let his feelings out. However on the whole I’m very lucky he is only 2 but very well behaved for a 2 year old. So I’ve never really needed to discipline.

What is your problem? That is not gentle parenting, nobody would laugh at a child being hit. Gentle parenting would be apologising to the child and parent, removing my child and taking them home - the consequence for the bad behaviour. They'd be no treatsor reward or laughing it off.

You think it's better to just shout don't hit and that child grows up pushing down emotions he can't name because it's wrong rather than giving your child the vocabulary and understanding of why we don't hit, giving him the knowledge of his emotions, you were feeling frustrated/angry, giving him other options so that he grows up, recognises he feels frustrated or angry and has the tools to deal with that.

So true. I try to “gentle” parent wherever I can but I would not be saying “gentle hands” in this case. They would be get a stern telling off.

A “friends’s” child (5) pushed my son off a chair when he was 18m, the chair flew over and smacked him in the back of the head and really hurt him. The mother just said gentle hands I’ll talk with her later… the child is a brat. So too gentle parenting in this case does not work, although I would argue that it’s actually not parenting at all.

Absolutely agree. If nothing else, there is a big safety concern when teaching children to just carry out any request that comes from an adult.
Unfortunately, we found ourselves in a position where school is not on board with being politely questioned. ‘Rules are rules” is their standard response even if adults are trying to understand their reasoning and I am realising I’ve become “that parent”.

I’ve tried gentle or respectful parenting with mine. She has boundaries, consequences and understands that no means no. She’s a teen and I think we’ve done a good job so far. She’s very caring, hard working, well behaved etc. I work in a school and it’s easy to spot the ones who’ve been brought up in more shouty authoritarian households and also in permissive ones too.

@Newbutoldfather to be fair in my Barbies example I had assumed the toy had been broken by accident. And after the chat I wouldn't have replaced the Barbie until abnormal gift giving time birthday / christmas etc

Purposeful breaking of toys would have had a different response. Identifying my emotions and laying out the consequences "I'm sad that you broke the Barbie and now you can't play with her, these other Barbie's will need to go away until you can play gently wth them" etc and when I gave them back I would remind her what had happened and why and model appropriate play with her.

But raising children is expensive, well it's as expensive as you make it (I was a single parent and not working during DDs early years so wasnt flush myself) but children need appropriate outlets.

Drawing on a wall is so common because it's easier in terms of wrist movement. If a child wants to draw standing up then yes the first time they do it on a wall you get them to help you clear it up but you also set up an appropriate standing up drawing station where they can do what they need to without causing damage - if you've got the money a proper ELC (if they still exist) easel, or a roll of cheap lining paper blutac'd to the wall or a white board aren't that expensive, a set of paintbrushes to water draw outside, get any cardboard boxes / cereal boxes and turn inside out on a table so they can draw standing upright.

I think alot of issues come from parents not meeting the child's instinctive need and play schema, redirecting to other activities that don't hit the spot or unfairly chastising them because when they are the ones that should have met the need.

@tiggergoesbounce ofcourse there are parents that respond like that, my neighbour is one of them and you are correct it is both vile and abusive but it absolutely does happen behind some closed doors.

Just this morning I've already heard "Stop fucking crying over that ball or I'll give you something to fucking cry about...If you carry on like that I'm putting it in the fucking bin." Then she put something in the outside bin and they crying escalated. And that's my Sunday, I have reported them before but the boys are clean and tidy so nothing will happen.

Personally I find the concept of “consequences” eg removal of toys and privileges for small children more cruel and cold than some honest raised voice which the child is not frightened of because 99% of the time their parents are warm and loving to them. Think Italian families etc… everyone shouts ( and even in the 1970s/80s a swipe of a tea towel might be randomly flung in their direction) but the children know they are absolutely adored and it’s a flash in the pan.
I witnessed gentle parenting in a shop the other day… the young mum was cool and calculated and extremely consistent with her replies to her whinging daughter) but that daughter looked crushed. To be honest I was afraid!! She was such a cold fish. I’d far rather have an Italian mum raise her voice, because I’d probably have recognised frustration rather than anger and would know that ( without formal apologies/explanations) there would be cuddles/laughs shortly afterwards.
Children themselves shout at each other and moments later are best friends, so they DO understand these emotions.

So your first assumption would be that the child is not doing the exercise as an act of protest? As a teacher, you wouldn’t try to understand the underlying reasons for the child not completing the work?
You wouldn’t check that they understand what you are asking them to do? That they have a full grasp of the concepts studied in previous lessons? Check that they were actually present at the lesson these concepts were studied?
I work clinically and if someone comes to me unable to tie their shoelaces, I don’t assume they have ideological objection to wearing shoes. I have to do an assessment and find out a reason. Do they understand the concept of what shoelaces are, do they have manual dexterity, bilateral coordination, are they suffering with unilateral neglect, are they able to plan and sequence the activity etc etc. Based on my findings, we see at which stage the activity is breaking down and come up with a plan as to how modify the activity and overcome the barriers. And, yes, sometimes they may still lack motivation to work on the resolution and I need a whole other assessment to understand their value system and motivational drives. Or sometimes, I even might suggest an alternative solution which removes the need for shoelaces altogether.
I might be wrong but I am under the impression that pedagogy involves considering pupil’s needs and applying a variety of teaching strategies to engage the pupils in learning. How can these strategies be applied if we don’t know what the needs of the students are because we didn’t bother asking them? As far as I understand (and, again, I might be wrong) detention is not a learning strategy and appears to have very little effect on academic performance.

This is why it’s not massively effective in a classroom setting.

As I (used to) like to say on the Facebook group, it’s gentle parenting, not gentle teaching or gentle grandparenting. If good teaching was as simple as asking a child a question it would be very easy indeed.

Conversations and explanations are beyond the capacity of young children. This is often the mistake made, people don’t consider the cognitive capacity of the child.

Natural consequences are fine.

What happened in the situation exactly ?
Your post did speak to me and I think I know what you mean.

The child sort of stopped whinging, but looked very crushed. The mum hardly made eye contact, spoke in a “gentle “ low tone and was ruthlessly consistent.
In terms of removing privileges, I also think it’s too cold and cruel a response. Threatening (in a shouty way) to remove toys etc seems more natural and warm somehow

Yep. That worked for me. 👍

I don't think that sounds like gentle parenting imo.
Also shouting 'you'll lose your toy' and not carrying out the threat will have more consequences than a child losing a toy for 10 minutes or a day etc