How do you do Unconditional Parenting when you need young DC to stop doing something immediately?

[WildhoodChunder]

DS is nearly 3 weeks, DD nearly 2 - bfing DS so can't always intervene physically with DD unless it's drastic - relying on talking to her to control behaviour... Dinnertime last night, DS on breast, DD will not stay at table, starts running around trying to draw on things with her super-staining spag-bol sauce covered spoon, isn't listening to me explaining/asking not to. I cracked and used Angry Mummy voice - "DD. STOP THAT. NOW!" - which sort of worked, but isn't really the UP way and not how I want to raise my DCs - although with two I can see UP being much harder to sustain. What should I have done?

I think that there is a lot of good in it, but unfortunately some people think they are doing it without understanding it.
I remember one thread where a 2 yr old was getting ready to throw a large stone in a crowded paddling pool with the father, wetly. saying 'do you think that is a good idea?'! 2 yr old obviously did because he threw it and hit a DC. To answer OP that is one time where you take the stone off the 2 yr old, with a loud 'NO,' and explain afterwards!
I think that if you always keep the lines of communication open, which means listening to the DC,you can't go far wrong. If you are more snappish than you intend you can apologise-it helps to see that you are human.

I don't see why it needs a label either Pixie.

It's not a label. It's the title of the book which eplains Alfie Kohn's thoughts.

And while everyone wants their children to grow up into nice people, Unconditional Parenting is a totally different philosophy to the current vougue of super nanny, reward charts, stickers, naughty step etc.

I actually think most people don't think long term about their children. They think about getting tonight's homework done, or eating tonight's dinner, more than what kind of children they are bringing up....

Pixieonaleaf - I'm with you.

I have no problem with a lot of the ideas that someone has labelled Unconditional Parenting, packaged into a book and made a lot of money out of but using a book to parent rather than judging your instincts is a silly as waking your baby ten minutes after they went to sleep just because Gina Ford says you should.

On the other hand, for a new parent, there is nothing wrong with reading a book or a range of books and getting some ideas about how they think they might like to parent. As long as they don't beat themselves up if they find the reality is a little different from the concept.

And Indigobell - I agree with you as well, there is no reason why we should all suddenly start using the naughty step just because it is on Supernanny (another great money making venture).

strandedatseasonsgreetings I'm entirely with you. I think it is a good idea to read a range of things, but then put your own stamp on it and do it your way.
I think that most people do think carefully about the long term, but that real life gets in the way and you get bogged down with dinner and homework etc.
I don't go with Supernanny, naughty steps, reward charts, Gina Ford or anyone else. You have to bear in mind that they are making a living out of it. I would like to see their DCs, I know one or two 'experts' and they don't turn out what I would call a 'well balanced' DC.
I am quite happy to read anyone's 'thoughts,' but you have to realise that it suits the personality of that person, and hopefully the personality of their DCs, and it certainly isn't the way, or the best way.
I put common sense at the top of my list. If a DC is about to chuck a stone you don't pussyfoot around discussing it-you take it off them and discuss it when they are not holding the stone. If they have a tantrum it is tough-you wait until they have finished and then discuss it.

I always remember my dad (not one who otherwise had much to say on the subject of parenting) saying to me "trust your instincts". Best advice ever. Difficult when you are a new mother and there are three hundred parenting tomes looming down at you from the top of book shelves. You always think there should be an answer, a correct way to do something. As my two dd's have grown, and especially with dd2, I have learned to trust my instincts more and more. I might not always have it right, but it's the way I felt most comfortable with.

On the subject of long term parenting - I don't want my children growing up thinking that Mummy can't handle anything wrong that they might do, and would become upset if they balls things up. When they are 15, I don't want them to think I'm going to have some sort of nervous breakdown if they fail their GCSE's.

Emotional blackmail is a shitty way to raise kids.

I feel really bad now. I don't always say that I feel sad if DS draws on walls etc. Usually if he's made a mess I just say "Oh dear what a mess" and he toddles off to find a cloth and we clean it up together. Not some kind of big emotional blackmail deal, just a normal everyday happening. It's just when he keeps doing the same thing that I get fed up and tell him I'm sad or cross or whatever, but I guess that's separate really and nothing to do with UP or teaching him anything other than that I have feelings too.

Cross is diffewrent IMO.

Annoying behavior is ANNOYING. But anyone who is 'sad' at a 2 year old is going to be emotionally devastated at a 15 year old.

colditz

Don't you think tht the type of parent that wants to do UP probably has the kind of child who will respond well to that way of parenting IYSWIM - if the parent is gentle, etc, then the child may well be too and so not prone to "pushing the boundaries" type behaviours?

I believe in trusting my instincts. I also think that you have to respond to the DC that you have, rather than the one you want, so I wouldn't have a 'philosophy' set in stone-you may have all sorts of ideas in theory, but find that it doesn't suit your DC. It isn't even the same within the same family. e.g. a joke to appeal to a sense of humour was the best way to deal with DS1 -it was the worst thing possible with DS2.
Don't beat yourself up BertieBotts-as long as you don't make a habit of making your DC responsible for keeping you happy- there is no harm in once in a while.
I think that new parents would be better off without all the books!

You don't know my brother bigTillyMint! You also don't know the families that I know where DC1 is the gentle soul and DC2 presses all the wrong buttons!

Well obviously I'm not actually sad it's more I'm working through emotions with him at the moment so I thought we'd start simple with "happy" and "sad". I introduced cross but he just thinks that's hilarious, so it's on the backburner for now!

BTW I haven't actually read UP I have just heard about it on various forums. Actually I have a copy and read the first bit of it but was a bit put off by the insistence of the author that it was better your kids turned out deadbeats who still had a good relationship with you than graduates who hated you. Surely there's a middle ground there? I think it's important not to be afraid of upsetting your children. But equally not wanting to upset them any more than is necessary if that makes sense.

mathanxiety, what about children who genuinely don't think a tidy house looks nicer than an untidy one? tbh I've always been a bit that way myself- I really don't feel happier just because the place is tidy, so the only thing that gets me going is fear of public opinion

having said that, I absolutely think you are right about not burdening a child with mummy's sadness; I get very uncomfortable with anything smacking of emotional blackmail

As for the more general question of what kind of child you want to bring up, I always had two goals clearly in mind:

bringing up civilised and sensible children

bringing up the same number of children that I had started out with

It was the second goal that meant that I could not always afford to faff around explaining but sometimes had to resort to physical intervention.

I think most children can appreciate some aspect of what the house's appearance means if you say, 'I can't take you to the park because I'm going to have to spend the best part of an hour cleaning the meatballs out from under the fridge', even someone who is blind to how things look will see that cleaning up is not half as much fun as making the mess. I've always had them clean up with me when things were really dirty I did this with potty training accidents too (they mopped their own pee with paper towels, lots and lots of paper towels...) I don't really know how you would go about introducing the concept of cleaning up after oneself with a child who hadn't grown up with this practice.

I personally see 'tidy' as something in the eye of the beholder too. I like to be able to find things and get annoyed when the DCs can't find jackets, shoes, etc. when we're going somewhere, and that's my motivation. Dirt I see as a health and safety thing.

Not read the whole UC debate, just answering original post - I unconditionally love my children, but that won't stop me using a million different strategies to ensure they are safe, happy and pleasant to be with.

Has anyone suggested straps on her high chair/seat?
My 3 year old still needs a booster seat to eat dinner at the table and there are straps on the chair - she sometimes uses them, we don't! I don't mean pin her down and strap her in, but if there are straps there you can use them for her safety.
Are you sitting at the table feeding or are you sitting somewhere else? I used to feed DD2 on my lap while eating dinner with DD1 (they have a 28 month age gap). Annoyingly DD2 always needed a feed around teatime - which for us is always 5. If you're not at the table I can't blame her for not wanting to be at the table either.
Have you tried to see how mobile you can be while still feeding? I know it's so much more comfy sitting down on a lovely chair to feed, but once you've mastered the holding in one arm while walking DD1 up to the toilet/stirring food etc life gets a million times easier.

I'm not a paid up member of the UC philosophy, I don't really know much about it at all. I'm just not into shouting, threatening, any kind of general bollocking really.

As my second DC was born 6 weeks before my first DC turned two I feel I may have something to offer in terms of empathising and understanding.

Firstly - well done for breastfeeding, it's bloody difficult in the early days when you have an almost two year old galloping around the place too.

Secondly, it probably is an attention thing. I'm guessing that if this it the first time you've posted about this kind of thing then this is recent behaviour for your DD.

I've realised that to keep my two year old happy I need to keep refuelling her with good quality on on one attention. If I can get a good block of time in with her then she will be more forgiving of sharing me when the baby is awake. I've found the best time to do stuff with her is the baby's first nap of the day - if I do loads and loads with her then then she is happier to switch off and let me get on with things later in the day.

I'd like to come back to what Piscesmoon said about trusting your instincts and forgetting all the books. I would really like to agree with you completely. I think instincts fall into two groups: 1) what you would say having spent a lot of time on your own (!) thinking about how you want to bring up children and how children should be treated and 2) what you "instinctively" do in the heat of the moment. The latter is moulded to a huge percent by how you were treated as a child. The former is maybe a reaction to how you were treated as a child or how people around you behave towards children - a feeling that something your parents did wasn't right or something that other people are doing is not right or wouldn't work for you. Once you have come to the conclusion that you want to do things your own way - differently - and you've maybe developed your ideas by feeding on plenty of other people's ideas (like from books) then you still have to try to DO what you instinctively feel is right... because in the heat of the moment you will still often model your parent. This isn't easy. But, if no one had ever been through this as a parent, children would still be calling their parents "Sir" and "Ma'm" and would be seen and not heard. I agree with you that we should be kind to ourselves through this - we shouldn't beat ourselves up about things. But, I don't think it's bad to put "ideals" before "instinct" when that actually means putting your own ideas, feelings and experiences before those that were inculcated into you.
And now I'll go back to mopping up the sick :)

Simic has hit the nail on the head with regards to what UP is all about.

It's not a parenting guide. It's not a "Your child has defied you. March him to the naughty step and say these words..." book. Nor is does it tell you to allow your children to misbehave and then talk about it afterwards.

I don't think anyone is a "full paid up member" because it just lays the foundations for a different way of thinking.

It's a philosophy based upon how what we instinctively say, is not necessarily the best thing to say.

It's helped me to stop (just for second in some instances) and really think about how I want to respond to my DD. Doesn't even need to be anything major. Just the difference between snapping 'Don't be so silly' and actually trying to understand why she's in a little ball of rage.

As others have said, it's a slow burning thing. All about respect, understanding and honesty.

That's not to say children whose parents haven't read the book are going to grow up angry and browbeaten.

My parents didn't read the book, and I always felt unconditionally loved.

But I feel, by putting into practice some of the things I read in the book, my family will be more peaceful. My child(ren) will grow up respecting everyone equally, no matter what their age. My child(ren) will grow up with a handle on their emotions, and will understand how their actions effect other people.

None of these aims are exclusive to "followers" of the book. Nor are they only possible by reading the book.

But UP helped me understand who I want to be as a parent. As did other parenting books that I've found just as influential.

I think the trouble comes in with the term UP, in a similar way to GF (Gina Ford). You hear the intitals (and I'm as guilty as the next person) GF and think of strict routines and ridiculous rules that people follow blindly. But I bet there is actually a very small number of people who follow that book 100% to the letter. Most people will have read it, and then applied some of the ideas to their life.

But people use the term GF to quickly explain the sort of parent that they are, i.e that they are parent who has a relatively strict routine.

I use the term UP to define my parenting (only in certain circles, as most people haven't heard of it) as that instantly tells people that I don't do naughty steps/reward charts and I try and be as respectful and flexible as possible when it comes to my DD.

On the flipside, there are plenty of people who like routines that will never have read GF. And people who do the things that I do that have never read UP.

tillymama - I think you have explained yourself really well and I think I now understand where you are coming from. I suspect a lot of people do try and parent like this, but perhaps in reality fall short some of the time. This is especially true when you have more than one child, and when they are still really young. Which is perhaps why most posters were slightly bemused by the idea that the OP should have done anything other than what she did.

I think it is great to have ideas about how you would like to parent - but to be honest that sometimes, especially under pressure, you might not always do it perfectly the way you would like to.

Thus shouting at your dd to stop doing something in a situation like the OP was in was not what she would want to have done in an ideal situation but totally understandable given the circumstances.

And it would be very sad if the OP went away thinking she had done anything "wrong".

I completely agree Stranded.

All we can do as parents is strive to do the best we can.

We'll all have screaming banshee moments, we'll all say things we then regret, we'll all look back on a situation and think 'Bugger, I think I could have dealt with that better'.

The OP recognised that she didn't handle the situation in the way she really wanted to. And was (I think) after suggestions on what she could have done differently, so she can handle it better next time.

I completely agree with those posters who wanted to let the OP know that she did the right thing, or that she shouldn't beat herself up about it.

But as a fellow UP, I thought it would be helpful to make some suggestions as to why her daughter was behaving in that way. In the hope that this would offer her some perspective and help her understand her daughter so they can work to resolve the problem.

I often struggle to see the wood for the trees, but friends offering their spin on a situation (UP or not) often helps me find my way again.

I just dislike the labels and the idea that someone (who we have no idea how successful they are as a parent; or in GF case isn't a parent)is making a lot of money out of marketing their philosophy, when lots of people are quietly getting on with it. I think it is fine, but not if people follow it slavishly and then get upset when they can't manage it. Books are fine as long as people don't expect them to provide all the answers-you do need to adapt to suit you.

'But UP helped me understand who I want to be as a parent' I think this encapsulates the value of UP as a formal philosophy of child-raising.

Parenting is a humbling experience, if nothing else.