what is "unconditional parenting"?

[ssd]

seen this on a few threads here and have never heard of it

what does it mean?

I would call that common sense avaitrix, he doesn't need to have a bath every night so he might as well have choice, but he does need to clean his teeth every night so he doesn't have an option.

I still think that it is manipulation by the parent. It is fine that he decides he doesn't want a bath one night; but if he decided that he never wants a bath, shower or wash the UP parent would be reasoning and using guile to get him clean but making him think that it was his idea to do it! The parent's agenda is to get him washed.

UP is about trying to understand the reasons behind the child's behaviour and trying to be respectful of that but you as the parent are still responsible for managing your child's behaviour and raising them responsibly. It's not opting out.

For instance, in the bath example, it's about trying to figure out why the child doesn't want a bath - is it something physical, like the water being too cold, or something emotional at the root like the bath seeming claustrophobic from inside or perhaps the child doesn't want a bath as he/she was enjoying 1:1 parental time before and doesn't like sharing the bath (and parental attention) with a sibling... and then you do what you can to fix the issue. Sometimes the issue can't be fixed and it is a non-negotiable but if those instances are minimised then generally the child is less resistant.

DD's 2, there are plenty of times I could get DD to do what I want just because I am bigger than her but the times when I have to do that are quite rare. Having said that, Kohn's book is about an approach rather than a practical how-to, and it is challenging to get away from rewards and punishment behaviourist model of thinking, mainly I think because that's how I was raised, and I'm not above chocolate button bribery on occasion...

It annoys me that UP gets such a bashing by people that don't really know what it is - if you can't be bothered to read the book, or at the very least google the term and do a bit of the background reading on the UP website, then how can you actually debate it's merits and failings from anything like an informd position? I don't knock people who choose to use star charts, it's none of my business. I prefer this model, it seems to work better for me and my child. It's not that long since people who didn't smack their children were thought to be weirdly permissive.

I think that it is used by people as a reaction against a very authoritarian parents. I would say that mine were pretty much UP, as I am. I would say that it was pretty much common sense that if a DC takes against baths you find out why and try and fix the issue and don't just dump him in!

I wouldn't say that parenting is anything to do with being bigger and stronger, it is merely that if you are 32yrs and your DCis 2 yrs you have 30 yrs experience of life and you use it!

Bribery can have it's place. My DS had train track braces on his teeth and it was essential that tooth hygiene was good otherwise they would come off after 18months and he would have straight teeth but brown. He got into terrible trouble with the orthodontist the first visit after the braces. I promised £5 if the orthodontist was pleased with him on the next visit. The orthodontist was full of praise so I owned up about the £5 and he said 'I don't care about the method, do whatever it takes'. My DS did it for the reward, I don't care why he did it, the important thing was that it saved his teeth. Sometimes the end justifies the means. (The orthodontist had also told him that if he didn't clean them his mother would have to do it for him! Very un UP but in the circumstances the threat would have had to have been carried out if the reward hadn't worked). The alternative would have been a very angry young adult asking why I hadn't made him clean his teeth properly.

It is like all these things, OK in it's place as long as it isn't rigid and I don't see why it needs a name when it it is just good communication.
I have my doubts at how well it works if you have one DC who likes their own way and one sensitive DC who likes to please people. Very easy for the sensitive one to 'give way' for an easy life.

Do you really need a book to explain to you how to work out why the child doesn't want a bath? Dear God...

Oh, this old chestnut again!

Principles of UP

UP Support Thread - if anyone is interested in actually discussing UP rather than just dismissing it as "just letting kids do what they like"

And we need to give common sense a term like UP, and build an entire parenting industry around it?

But I don't think it is common sense maisie. When I read the book I was amazed by how much of seemed on the surface counter intuative but when looked at closely made complete sense.

I guess the book helped me question assumptions I made about parenting.

Why not read the book? It's never summed up well on here.

EIther you'll learn something (yay) or see you were right all along (yay). WHat's there to lose?

That is my point exactly Maisie, I have nothing against it, I think it sheer common sense and parents have been following it for decades, it is a question of communicating with your DC. Of course it isn't letting your DC do what they like, (although it gets a bad name from those who don't understand it and do just that).
It seems to me that someone comes along who resented authoritarian parents, reads the book and decides to follow it like a childrearing bible.
I have nothing against Alfie Kohn, if he can get away weith getting a lot of money from sheer common sense then good luck to him!

It depends on the personality of the DC, I am straight forward and prefer to call a spade a spade. If a parent wants me to do something I prefer them to just get on and say so, not ask me what I feel and manoeuvre me around to accepting it. If a younger sibling takes my toy I want my parent to make him give it back immediately and I don't care about his point of view! (he can scream the place down but it is my toy).

It is fine in its place, without a name, and with the assumption that some circumstances call for a different approach.
(I would need to see Alfie Kohn's DCs before I decided whether he had anything worthwhile to say).

To me it is common sense - nothing there that isn't. I don't and didn't have any assumptions about parenting, but do have confidence in my own abilities (which comes from experience), and am not so easily persuaded to part with my cash.

I have neither the time nor the inclination to read the book, as all 3 of my children seem to be developing very nicely at the various stages of their childhood, preteens and teenage years, but if it fulfills a need for you when your child is 11months old, then you go for it

I do action first and talking later.

ie "Let go of Ds1's hair. NOW. That's better. If you pull someone's hair, it hurts a lot, and next time you pull someone's hair, they might hit you and that would hurt. It's a bad idea."

but I have seen "Darling, that hurts, when you pull people's hair, do you think you shoulod be hurting someone? Yes I know he has your car, but you must stop pulling his hair. DARLING, you are hurting him, it's not nice to hurt..." and all the while, the 3 year old has a handful of hair and is furiously tugging, because actually, he's quite happy to hear that it hurts, it was meant to hurt ....

I think that we are 2 of a kind Maisie and prefer our own instincts to someone of whose parenting skills we know nothing, but we know that he knows where to find a good marketing opportunity!
Since mine are older too, they have turned out to be caring, responsible members of society and I am very proud of them. It hasn't hurt them when I have put my foot down, the odd bit of bribery has been fine. The main thing is knowing your own DCs, what makes them tick, keeping open the lines of communication and having a sense of humour. You will get it wrong sometimes but that is quite bonding, something you can laugh about with them when they are older. It is good for a DC to know that mummy gets stressed, can get cross etc, as long as you can explain and apologise afterwards.
Maybe if you haven't had a good role model when you were growing up you need a book but otherwise it is best not to read them! (or only use as a rough guide)

So agree Lamorna

coldtits!
That sums up what I have against it. I know this is not how it is meant, but there are people who read the book who take that interpretation.

When you hear a parent say, as DC is about to hurl a toy at another DC, 'do you think that is a good idea, sweetheart?', you think it would be much better to say 'put that down NOW', and then you can explain why you don't want to do it. The logic of a 2 yr old is , 'yes it is a good idea'!

Masie there is no way that what has been discussed on this thread is an exhaustive explination of what's in the book.

And it cost me all of 70p to ask the library to bring it from another branch. I can part with that if it helps me be a better parent.

I have instincts too. Alot of the time I think they are good. SO good that I'm happy to see how they stand up to other peoples ideas. Because I don't know it all and certainly can't be bothered to read a load of pshchological studies!

Lamorna, My parents were a great example in lots of ways. They did a great job bringing me up. But I do think things can be done better.

Maybe that is the difference, I can't really think of much that my parents did that I would want to change. I was never smacked, we didn't do star charts etc, the 'naughty step' had not been invented as such, I was listened to, but there were things that were just done, firm boundries. The only difference was that it didn't have a name, hadn't made an American masses of money and was just common sense.

"we need to give common sense a term like UP, and build an entire parenting industry around it" - jealous you didn't write the book first, huh? And with respect, I think you are over-egging the 'industry'. It's one book. And these things called libraries exist so you don't have to buy the book. There's a lot more money in sticker charts...

If an UP approach is common sense to you, congratulations, clearly this parenting lark comes more naturally to you. Because actually it's damn tempting sometimes just to say "right, enough messing about, if you don't eat your tea we're not going to the park", but I understand now how that's counterproductive in the long run, the book helped me in that respect. And a lot of what is proposed does seem counter-intuitive, as someone else mentioned. I found it useful. If that means I'm lacking in commoon sense then meh...

Or common sense, even.

Of course I am jealous-who wouldn't be?!

I believe more in the power of language, just a slight change is very effective. Keep to the positive so I would never say ' if you don't eat your tea we're not going to the park' it is negative and the DC hears the don't, that is the part that lodges in the brain. It is like saying 'now whatever you do in the next few minutes I DO NOT want you to think of a lion' naturally you immediately think of a lion! You have to work with the brain, so I would stick to the positive of 'we will go to the park WHEN you have eaten your tea'and the thing that lodges in the brain is the park. It isn't a reward, you are just stating a fact. If they don't eat their tea that is their choice and if they then start on about going to the park all you have to do is state, in tones of mild surprise, 'but that was when you had eaten your tea.' You don't have to state the obvious, either they make the connection and want their tea or you leave it and don't discuss it further.

Fine with one DC, it falls down a bit if you have one DC who wants to go the park and one DC who doesn't and no babysitter!

It wasn't instinctive at all for me to use a UP approach. I think we parent as we were parented unless we see a better way. I had my dcs quite young and only gradually realised that my upbringing was very conditional in lots of ways. Lots of threats, pressure to achieve, doing as you're told with no explanation etc. I guess all that was fairly typical of the time 70s/80s.

I have 3 fairly easy-going dcs and one who challenges me to my limit about 100 times every day. I was glad to find this book as it has shown me that there is another way than the authoritarian style of parenting. My ds responds much better to a UP approach, and I am calmer. I wouldn't say I follow it to the letter, but a lot of it makes so much sense to me and explains a lot of the issues I had/have with my own parents.

I think if I had only had my 3 "easy" dcs I would have carried on fine without the need to read about alternatives. So I do think you can't just rule out an approach because you haven't felt the need for an alternative yourself and your dcs have turned out fine.

OK-I take it back, it is a useful approach if you don't come to it yourself through instinct and common sense. (I would still love to see the Kohn DCs though and I still think that some people call it UP when it isn't and the DC rules the roost).

Lamorna I didn't think there was much I'd want to change either. But when I really started thinking about it (and read the book) I realised that how we rear kids goes against al of of what we know about psychology, and is contradictory.

Now that I have begun to deconstruct how I was formed as a person (ie brought up) I realise it wasn't all great. I was a happy child. I just now realise that happiness was predicated on lots of stuff that isn't great in the long run.

Here's an example of why I would like to rais my kid/s with a UP approach.

Talk about a murder on the news recently involved speculation that the victim knew the attacker. That set me thinking about the times I have (as an adult) put myself in a vulnerable position because of a deep seated need to do as I'm told. I was of course told not to talk to strangers and encouraged to think for myself, but still, the idea that obedience is approved of over-road my common sense.

I am a confident, sometimes gobby person, so if you knew me in rl you probabaly wouldn't believe what I've just said.

This is probably (one of many reasons) why Up appeals to me. I want DS to grow up to know his own mind. Not follow orders because I (or later, someone else) says so.

WC I liked your post

SOrry x post.

Wildhood could you please explain which part of your statement might be counter productive in the long-run? is it the punishing for not eating? or the not going to the park bit?