To think that gentle parenting only works with kids that were easygoing anyway

[Thingything]

Just this.

I live in a yummy mummy part of the UK where gentle parenting is all the rage. Where the parents have kids who are, shall we say, spirited, it seems the result is kids who turn into utter monsters with no sense of boundaries and terrorize their parents.

I also have friends who gentle parent and their kids are delightful and sweet. Though those kids are the ones that even in baby groups would be sat, listening nicely, playing with a toy. I'm going to say 'compliant kids'.

Maybe this is because gentle parenting is based on a lot of talking, so you need kids with a reasonably developed sense of listening, patience and understanding to really apply it, and with some kids that doesn't develop until older.

Interested whether it's just me who has noticed this - and indeed if anyone has successfully managed to do a full Ockwell-Smith on a spirited / not naturally compliant child and can prove me wrong!

I agree and, for me, there is a big difference in feeling ashamed and being shamed.

Eg

My daughter would feel ashamed of her behaviour and come to apologise to me. In that moment, I thanked her for her apology, there would be some restorative action (in her case, she found verbally apologising hard to begin with but would show it through her actions) and we would then move on.

Sometimes, when shebwas younger, a verbal apology felt too 'big' for her. It made her feel to vulnerable and her own sense of shame made it harder.

But she was always met with empathy.

Eventually, she felt safe enough to offer a verbal apology and did so.

If I'd met her apology with shame, Eg "It's a pity you couldn't have just done it straight away" or, "Why can't you just be good in the first place?" type responses, she'd have felt not only her own shame but mine too and that wouldn't have served anyone well.

I also think that 'natural consequences' is a misnomer because, as you say, removing your child isn't a natural consequences, it's just a consequence.

But a consequence isn't the same as a punishment.

The way I see it, a consequence is a necessary action to teach and protect the child from the negative outcomes of their actions eg removing them from a play activiity because they're throwing toys at other children because that's not socially acceptable. The toys might be damaged and someone else might be hurt, whereas the natural consequence would be that toy is now broken and no one wants to play with you.

But a punishment comes from adult emotions eg I'm wound up/angry/upset/frustrated/embarrassed by your behaviour and so I'm going to redess the balance by making you feel similarly.

I think this is part of the problem with the concept of gentle parenting though. It’s perfectly fine for a parent to impose a consequence on a child to avoid a greater harm. When my DS was 4 he would run away from me if we were out anywhere - the park, going to the shops etc. The natural consequence could have been him getting lost, being knocked down by a car, falling and hurting himself, or seriously injuring himself. So I imposed a consequence - if he didn’t walk beside me, he needed to hold my hand while we were out and about. Not a natural consequence, the natural consequence was potentially dangerous.

We’re now at a place where parents are twisting themselves into pretzels trying to explain how X is a natural consequence instead of recognising their authority (and duty) as parents to keep their kids safe, teach them boundaries and how to behave in society.

My kids hear the word “no”, they need to understand that the world won’t bend for them, they also need to feel difficult emotions like anger, frustration, anxiety, disappointment and shame at appropriate times. I’m not doing them any favours protecting them from feeling hard things.

My friend is a big fan of reading a theory then swallowing it whole. Her son is a biter, a hitter, and seems to have fairly destructive instincts overall (he tried to bludgeon my son with a heavy object the first few times they met). She gentle parents him and it's absolutely useless.

But her second kid is a quiet and docile daughter, so she really isn't getting the message that they need different parenting.

My son does little phases of rough behaviour and we hold firm on the no, removing toys, and leaving him for a minute, then needing a sorry and hug before we play again. He gets this! But when my husband deviates from the script and tries to chat through the issue, he just disengages.

I see gentle parenting as the pendulum swing from authoritarian parenting which was abusive, stifling and by definition controlling. Gentle parenting when it is applied permissibly which is what most people have witnessed it as and are describing it as is equally damaging but in different ways. Decent middle ground with limits imposed on behaviours tolerated and teaching emotional regulation skills explicitly probably is more successful.

I have one very stubborn child who was prone to angry outbursts as a toddler. Ignored doing things asked of him (compared with compliant siblings).

He responded well to explaining and discussing things. He cried with telling off and punishment had virtually no impact/ at times definitely counter productive as he would then lie.

He’s a lovely kind teenager now, plays sport, has friends, still stubborn /?independent thinker and pretty much has to decide to do things himself.

Also to point out we were in no way permissive. He was always well behaved in school but this (I believe) is because of lots of gentle parenting prep, I definitely think it could have gone another way. He struggled/ angry with sport but we strongly encouraged and I think this really does help teach cooperation.

You can’t ’chat through’ an issue with a child who’s too young for that conversation. If they aren’t at a developmental stage to feel empathy, or theory of mind, then you’re just talking at them.

‘Natural consequence’ was a distinction from ‘punishment consequence’ ie. You behaved badly at the park so you will have no TV for a week- a random consequence based on your parent wanting you to feel bad.

The consequence of bad behaviour at the park needs to be park related- we leave now. The child may feel bad about leaving, but that’s not the point of it. The point is to stop the negative behaviour.
Next trip to the park, remind Billy how to behave at the park and that we will leave straight away if he doesn’t.
If he can’t behave at the park, we don’t go to the park.
Not as a punishment, but because Billy finds it difficult to behave nicely at the park so we won’t go for a while. We’ll try again when Billy is better at waiting his turn. Then you talk about waiting your turn while you are queuing in the shop, sitting in a traffic jam etc. Waiting your turn is normalised, he sees everyone doing it without pushing in. We try again at the park with a reminder that we all need to wait our turn.

But none of it relies on you being bigger than Billy, louder than Billy, or deliberately making Billy feel bad as retaliation.

I think that there are easy going children that would respond to pretty much any parenting techniques. They might, as an adult have some issues, though. I mean most adults end up pretty ordinary and we all had less that perfect parents doing all sorts of different things depending on the fashion of the day.

Noone seems to agree what gentle parenting is

I think the term “gentle parenting” is basically meaningless as it is used to mean so many different things.

I think permissive parenting is the problem these days - too many parents afraid to say no or have consistent boundaries for their kids, then complaining on here when the kids grow into ungrateful inconsiderate teenagers!

I hate the “SEND kids can’t be parented firmly” approach too - my ADHD/PDA son responds much better to firm boundaries and expectations, and an overly permissive approach would just mean he ran riot and did whatever he wanted instead of learning to be respectful of others and finding ways to handle his emotions and frustration better.

So if a natural consequence is leaving the park because you misbehaved what is a child getting cold feet because they won’t wear shoes? What is a natural consequence if it isn’t something that happens naturally? Why not call it a direct consequence? It directly relates to the incident. But as a PP said, people are getting so stressed trying to use “correct” parenting methods that they mislabel them in order to sound “gentle” or “nice”. There is absolutely nothing wrong with giving your child consequences for their actions. So why do people feel the need to put the word natural in front of it? It’s to sound nice. Same way people like the term gentle. It sounds sweet and lovely. Rather than just saying you parent your child.

“I use gentle parenting and natural consequences” vs “I parent my child and use consequences”. It’s how it sounds. People like the soft fluffy words.

If you google natural consequences most articles I’ve looked at so far all describe things that happen without adult intervention. Anything else, is just a consequence. Some people say direct or imposed. But not natural.

I remember with my eldest (the feral one), trying to sit him down and explain why his behaviour was unreasonable. He made 'flappy mouth' movements at me. He literally did not care one whit about the consequences of his behaviour either on others or himself. He was about three at this point. Some children you can reason with as much as you like, it seems as though their entire raison d'etre is to drive you insane.

He's in his late thirties now. Civilised, married homeowner, well employed. He just didn't like being parented, and he really only calmed down when he got out into the world and realised that it wasn't just ME 'flapping my mouth', NOBODY would tolerate bad behaviour.

In my mind it’s just a consequence - you did X and now Y. Whether it’s a consequence I introduced to encourage particular behaviour, or something that happened as a result of X, it’s a consequence. Bearing in mind children don’t make the link between X and Y until they’re old enough to reason, it doesn’t matter what you call it as long as you’re consistent and make the links for them.

Negotiating with a 2 year old is utter nonsense because they can’t reason in their own mind, developmentally they aren’t there yet so it’s just confusing to them. Giving a clear choice where you genuinely don’t mind the outcome is great, pretending there’s an alternative to putting your shoes on so we can go to the shops is an utter waste of time and yet so many parents phrase instructions as questions “would you like to put your shoes on?”.

Too many parents confuse authority with abuse - I am an authority figure in my kids lives, I’m ok with that. It doesn’t make them or their views matter less, or mean I dictate to them but they know I’m ultimately in charge, because that’s my job as their parent.

I’ve never read the book, I don’t think Gentle Parenting was even a topic of discussion.
My kids are now 24 & 20 and highly successful happy young adults.
We practiced respect for all, talk things through, never strike or humiliate anyone, and good behaviour gets rewarded.
There were boundaries, but we discussed why they were necessary (safety usually)
Rewards were usually screen time, friends over to play, trips to the park, cinema visits etc when they were young.
We usually just had to use the mantra ‘Good Behaviour Gets Rewarded’ (we never mentioned what bad behaviour got, just that they wouldn’t be rewarded)
There were challenges during the teenage years, but love was unconditional and we talked things through (negotiated) as much as possible.
We were fortunate that the majority of the time our kids were willing to cooperate and loved getting into discussing nice things we would do together. We were lucky enough to have some fantastic family holidays when they were old enough to appreciate them.
We had decided before we had them that they would never be slapped and we had to be creative in ways to encourage them to want to behave.
Our kids saw other children being hit by their parents and were horrified that someone who loved them would hurt them.
We didn’t do God either!

I haven't chosen a parenting 'style' to go with from a book. Just winging it.
I decided a few things I wouldn't do, like cry it out, smacking and things that seem outdated but I find it bemusing to choose a parenting style from a book.
I did buy a book on potty training though.

Direct consequences is a far better way of describing them!

Immediate and related to the issue.

I agree that the language is largely where this model fails for all the reasons you gave.

I hear so much wishy washy, "Sweetheart, let's use kind hands... oh no, sweetheart, remember kind hands... show me your kind hands, darling..." all whilst doing absolutely nothing - absolutely no physical intervention. Has anyone even told the child what they mean by 'kind hands'?

I've had parents come to parents evening and had to stop the consultation I'm in the middle of to stop a 'gently parented' child from doing something dangerous (like climbing up bookcases/opening overhead cupboard doors/throwing things). Things they have literally never done in class but as soon as mummy is sitting there looking on and smiling approvingly at their 'adventurous spirit', everything is permitted.

The worst thing is when i tell a child to stop and the parent just smiles back and says, "Oh, it's alright, he's just..." only for them to be sat in front of me 5 mins later for their own consultation asking for support with their child's behaviour at home because he behaves like that at home too and they don't know what to do. Er, parent them..?

But that's not gentle parenting. That's shit 'parenting' (if you can even call it that).

Honestly we could probably gentle parent DS as he takes after his dad but DD takes after me and if she was gentle parented she would be a nightmare. They’re like Miss Piggy and Kermit personality wise.

From what I’ve heard real gentle parenting is different from what most people think it is, but I definitely know a few Tick Tok gentle parents who I think are setting themselves and their kids up for failure.

How about the term 'logical consequences'? When DD was small we needed a lot of those - using the plastic toy sword to hit somebody? Sword gets put away, for everyone's safety. It's not a natural consequence, technically, but it is a logical one. Then it was just a case of waiting out the meltdown, without shaming or punishing.

Gentle parenting, done correctly, avoids illogical consequences that are literally just punishments and avoids shaming. So in the toy sword example, it gets put away because it's not safe for the child to keep it if they're using it to injure others and have not been able to stop at the very first parental intervention. The sword is put away calmly by the parent - not snatched aggressively in anger - and the child isn't also called all sorts of names (naughty, nasty, 'you little shit', etc). And the child doesn't then go without dessert, or be banned from watching TV, or anything else that is just an unrelated punishment.

And the problem doesn't arise again in the short term, because they don't have the sword. And if they ask for it, a conversation can be had about why it was put away. And the parent might allow them to have it again, but of course if it's misused then it immediately goes away again (and the child knows this will happen, because it's happened before, and is hopefully minded to use it in genuine play instead of as a weapon).

but we are not talking about "labelling" people, but sometimes you just call things for what they are.

If someone is being rude, there's nothing wrong with telling them they are being rude. Or lazy, or whatever.

the child has a start point of having a reason for what they do,and honouring that reason,
in term of being lazy for example, there might be very good reasons, but it doesn't mean they are acceptable!

If your child feels shame when you have a normal conversation, you are failing at parenting and you need to teach them some resilience. HOW will they ever cope with friends - who can be brutal - at school and later in normal life?

When I feel shame I don't learn.
If you feel shame when you have a big fat 0 on an essay, or if a teacher tells you that your work is below acceptable standards, it's on you. You don't expect your teachers to give you pity mark and tiptoe around you to protect your feelings.

If you feel shame because you arrive last in a race (or competition, or test, or exam), it's on you. You don't expect others to wait for you.

It has nothing to do with achieving "obedience", don't be ridiculous, it's about raising well adjusted people who are confident individuals and won't pretend they have been publicly humiliated when a teacher makes a joke that would make everyone else smile.

No i disagree. I have kids with neurodivergence who really struggle and gentle parenting works for us better than when I am stressed and fall into the auto reactions of parenting examples from the parents who parented my generation

Yup logical consequences is also a good term! They all make sense and I totally agree with them. It’s not the consequences themselves i disagree with. Just when people incorrectly label them in order to make them sound like a better/nicer parent.

I would have been easy to gentle parent as a kid, quiet and extremely compliant. My son however would probably be dead if I gentle parented him, trying to run in roads jump in ponds, I see gentle parents online saying they let their kids eat what they want and do what they want yeah well if I did that all he’d eat would be pizza and he’d never stop watching tv.

Notice these online gentle parent gurus usually only have one or two very young children?

Why are we so afraid of the word punishment? There are loads of times where no direct/natural/logical consequences would matter a jot to a child who’s being vile.

See most bullying behaviour. If a child is being unkind to another, they aren’t going to care if the “natural “ consequences is that the other child will no longer play with them, and the idea that the rest of the child’s playmates will not play with them because they are being mean to one kid is for the birds. At that point, I would absolutely be engaging in punishment.

THAT summarises exactly my judgment of "gentle parents" and why most of us believe "gentle parenting" is utter nonsense.

The sword is put away calmly by the parent - not snatched aggressively in anger - and the child isn't also called all sorts of names (naughty, nasty, 'you little shit', etc). And the child doesn't then go without dessert, or be banned from watching TV, or anything else that is just an unrelated punishment.

Why on earth does it have to be one or the other? In some people's head, it is. Either you are a so-called "gentle parents", or you are an abuser. There's no middle ground.

So you think that you are a superior person? Really? It's either "gentle parent" or angry unfair violent unreasonable shaming child abuser? Because in many people's head, it's exactly the set-up.

I see gentle parents online saying they let their kids eat what they want and do what they want

let's be honest, they are not gentle parents, just lazy parents.

As are all the ones saying "pick your battles" because they can't be bothered to address some issue and try to do as little parenting as they can possibly can.

I am going to say this. Its not going to be popular. Gentle parenting is more successful with more affluent, intelligent parents.

It takes more attention to the child's actions. It takes more communication. It takes less digital devices. It takes more outside activities. It takes a child to be higher intelligence (Due to parental intelligence) than others. It even takes a better diet for the child and the family. It takes consistency. It takes rules and time.

Compare that with what most 'gentle parenting' is in this country where its a family rushed off their feet. Stressed. Financially struggling. Children are fed a mix of Ultra Processed Foods and given an ipad for entertainment. Time in the fresh air is the mother opening the back door so they can play in the garden. Dad is at work and gets home tired and grumpy. They are then gentle parented and turn into horrible little bastards to everyone. By the time they get to 13 they have most of their behavioural habits ingrained and starting to become too big to introduce any discipline. That's when the parents come on here and ask where it went wrong.

I don't think the majority of the population can make gentle parenting work. I am not saying it doesnt work but for the majority discipline, rules, actions and consequences will result in a much better outcome. I absolutely think this is one of the reasons for all these SEN/ADHD diagnosis. The percentage increases are getting ridiculous