Seasoned parents - how to balance being firm vs enjoying your kids

[k80pie]

Just want to hear from parents who have raised kids, and who have thoughts on how to strike a good balance between being appropriately firm with your (young) kids, and just having fun and enjoying them.

I know everyone says time goes so fast and just enjoy your kids, have fun with them etc - but I also don't want to raise badly behaved brats!

At 5 our DS is constantly pushing boundaries and we are finding we are always at him to 'stop doing that', 'don't do this' - trying to make sure we bring him up well, to do what we ask and are appropriately firm. But I don't want to crush his little spirit and be nagging parents (which I think we are in danger of becoming) and want to be able to relax and laugh and have fun. I know kids behave better when they feel connected to their parents. But then I worry we will just become pushover permissive parents whose kids don't behave well in the outside world. Any words of wisdom?

One of my kids is a bad loser. I don’t try to let him win. But I also model good losing. And I don’t make a song and dance about it if he gets upset. But if he takes a loss well he gets praise. He’s still a sore loser 50% of them and given to dramatic pronouncements (I’ll never win ever. I never want to play this game again. Etc etc. I don’t argue- I say sure/okay). Has he magically been transformed into someone who is hugely sporting? No. But is he better at losing than he was six months ago, then yes.

If it's at the table then the boundary would be: if you throw, you get down from the table and the meal is over (again obviously when it's developmentally appropriate, this is not suitable for a baby). You wouldn't need to remove everything from the home because they can't throw everything! Unless they can, in which case you friend should be worrying about her child's super strength more than his penchant for throwing.

But, I can't spend all night responding to every imagined scenario. I just wanted to explain the misunderstanding re. what 'holding a boundary' means. The key is it's about your behaviour not theirs. You can only control how good a parent you are, you can't control how cooperative a child your DS is.

No, I’m not expecting you to - I just feel sometimes the boundary talk on here is a bit naive. It assumes that you can enforce every boundary and you can’t, or at any rate not without making the situation worse. And a lot of the time enforcing that boundary isn’t necessarily going to teach the child the error of their ways, it’s just going to lead to frustration and upset on both sides.

DC learn from watching so make sure you are modelling good behaviour; pick your battles and be positive many more times a day than you are negative.

The thing is the boundary and the consequence are within your control. If you can't enforce it or its making it worse then there is a problem with the boundary/consequences setting. The problem isn't with the concept of having clear boundaries and sticking to them.

And we all make mistakes when setting boundaries and consequences because parents are human and mistakes are made. It's definitely not an easy fix or something that will provide you a perfectly behaved child if only you implement it right. It's not about that. It's just about doing the best you can to guide your DC to behaviour that will allow them to succeed in life.

I have 3, two tweens & a little one & generally feel like I have a lovely relationship & a lot of fun with them. They’re all very different & they all have their moments but mostly they’re very good. I think the key is parenting for the kids you have - not the kids you imagined (or wish to have) - I read the phrase “you’re a gardener not a carpenter” once & it really stuck with me. A spirited child needs a different relationship with their parent than a timid one.

With regards striking the right balance, I would say don't just focus on boundaries, think about enforcing them with empathy (trivial eg - but eg saying to a toddler yes it's rubbish we can't have chocolate for dinner, that would be nice!... but it wouldn't be healthy and it's my job to keep you healthy.) That way you hold the line on parenting but you do it in a way that makes them feel understood and not just henpecked all the time.

Thank you everyone for your wonderful ideas and feedback - and the discussion re boundaries, it’s giving me so much to think about.

I suppose it is a case of letting go of the small stuff. But deciding what is small stuff (ie picking battles) is actually a bit tricky. For example: swinging on chairs/bar stools. It’s annoying and distracting. But we tried enforcing it and it just hasn’t worked. Do we let that go? Natural consequences will probably sort it out eventually though two falls haven’t 😂 Also when your kid is naturally a bit defiant when they are told no, that is challenging. I wasn’t like that as a kid. We are firm, united parents. So it does make you kind of have to double down when you ask them nicely not to do something and they just say ‘no!’ It forces you to either come up with a consequence on the spot, or to let it go and decide that’s not a battle worth picking, and let them ‘win’.

I think if your kid isn’t naturally defiant it’s all just way easier. (In saying that, he’s a really good kid in lots of ways. Does do lots of things we ask. Just says no to lots too 😂🤦‍♀️)

I empathise with the above so much @k80pie and I think that’s what I was getting at. Mine is of an age where he wouldn’t say no but he would laugh uproariously as I sit there a bit helpless 😂

On sweat the small stuff Vs letting something slide, I found it helpful to really think about why I would be putting in a boundary.
I realised some of the boundaries I tried to put in place weren't because of safety and weren't because it was something I valued. They came from a sense of obligation and based on what I thought I should be doing. Having clarity over what mattered to me made it easier to hold the boundaries when needed. It also meant I needed to be more proactive and take responsibility for some environments and situations before it came to a boundary.

To use your example, chairs and bar stool swinging would be a no for me because it's a safety issue. I would consider having a wobble cushion on the chair if I had a DC that needed that sensory feedback though and I would also go up stream and consider whether I'd given them enough of an outlet for energy in the day. I'd also probably decide that we don't eat meals on bar stools if they're unable to sit safely and think that's my decision about the environment so that we don't have to get to a point of holding a boundary.

Yeah @Summermeadowflowers I know what you mean. It’s all that much harder when you are tired from getting up in the night to the baby, and worn down from all the boundary-pushing, and you just want a break!

I think DH and I will sit down and reevaluate our core values as PP have suggested (such as safety, manners, etc) and try to shed the rest. And do the fresh air/exercise thing daily. Some days have been hard to do that with the baby. Also he’s been pretty good at adjusting to being a brother but there’s probably been an element of that in the behaviour. Also - positive unconditional outlook is a big one. On a small handful of recent bad days (which involved some hitting, from DS I should say) I’ve found myself quite grumpy and withholding attention/smiles/fun which made me feel like absolute crap, hence trying hard to parent well and consciously. Again - thank you everyone 😊

Reading this thread with interest. Mine are older teens now (and all at a pleasant stage). We have had our difficulties as though and I never felt effective at holding boundaries when they were younger. DP wasn’t great at it either which was hard. I can understand the points summermeadowflowes is making, and it’s interesting to see response from those for whom this seemed to come quite naturally - and for whom it worked. I was reflecting on the fact that my DD was tough as a younger child (she’s a joy now) and was diagnosed as autistic in her late teens. One of my DS’s has what I’d term autistic traits. For both of them, the act of holding a boundary would have just created a major issue for the whole family, as described upthread. It’s thought provoking reflecting on how much of my difficulty with this related to the fact I wasn’t great at holding boundaries, and how much related to having ND kids.

If you find yourself telling him not to do things and him saying no a lot you can get into quite a negative cycle.

It can help to phrase all instructions in the positive, tell him what you want him to do, not want you don't want him to do.

For example:

'Sit still on your seat please' instead of 'Don't swing on your seat'.

'Take the ball into the garden please' instead of 'Don't kick the ball in the kitchen'.

'Gentle hands with the baby please' instead of don't hit/scratch/be rough.

'Put the toys you're finished with in the basket please' instead of 'Don't throw your toys'.

Etc.

Of course, your DS can and will still say 'No' to these requests. You can't control his response, only your own behaviour. You can create a more positive environment with your language and break the cycle of don't/no/stop/no/don't/no.

GREAT reminder, I have read this so many times and yet still often forget to do it. I know PP mentioned this upthread too. I guess even if he says no or refuses at least it technically isn’t a negative exchange both ways 😂

I think the thing I would ask @k80pie is what immediate consequence do you put in place when your child swings on the bar stool? Is it whilst they are eating? They have fallen twice. Either remove them from the stool if they swing or get a chair for him that doesn't move.

My youngest child is now 17 but we did the things described above, immediate consquences, reminders of expected behaviour and what would happen if they didn't adhere to that. They were told why we didn't do things, like not all things are designed to be climbed but these climbing frames are. We never allowed ball games in the house and didn't have balls inside but they had them in the garden. So no running here, the pavements next to roads, but running here, this big open park.

I often think that praising the good behaviour whilst it is happening is important too. So if they are sharing a toy specficially label what is good or taking turns in games. Narrate life a bit, model the behaviour, include in that the adults too, good effort at eating dinner sort of thing. We always used positive language, a prime example is in schools when children are told don't run, instead we say walking please. We say the behaviour we want to see, gentle hands, sitting nicely at the table but telling them what that means.

As for toddlers/preschoolers it is all about redirection and distraction rather than constantly saying no. And consistency, not yes you can play with the tv remote when the tv is off. Just no playing with the tv remote and it is hidden away. Same with keys or mobile bloody phones. It is a marathon not a sprint.

Also don't constantly say your child's name, it doesn't mean stop what you are doing unless you tell them to stop. Once is enough to get their attention and if that doesn't go to them, get down on their level and tell them whatever you wanted to tell them. Otherwise you are teaching them that they can ignore the first 12 times you say something to them.

Exactly! He might still create a negative environment for you, but you'll be providing a positive one for him! It won't necessarily be the case that you'll ask him positively once and he'll suddenly do everything you ask, but long-term being in a positive, affirming environment will be better for all of you.

Slow typing, I can see I have cross posted with Nuff with a lot of things. It is called NLP or Neuro-linguistic programming, never say don't drop the plate, tell them hold the plate tight.

And on that note, in school children are responsible for their lunch tray and their food, which means scraping the left over food into the correct bin, putting their cutlery into the right container etc which means at 5 a child can help set a table and clear it at home. Cleaning the table also encourages cross body movement where one hand crosses over the middle of the body. Great for development.

@marthasmum

Really interesting point about autism and boundaries. My research project for my MSc was around autistic girls at school/home and one of the themes I identified was that autistic girls especially struggle to see themselves as separate to others around them. They’re inveterate people-pleasers at school, which leads to a massive swing the other way at home.

I would have been terrible at enforcing boundaries with my kids had I not been a teacher and learnt the hard way (with rowdy classes of 30 kids) that kids need clear, consistent rules and routines to feel happy.

Something I had to learn the hard way is that if you say yes to everything possible all the time they don't see this as a fun amazing wondrous childhood. They just see the yes as normal and what they are entitled to. Then when you say no, they are pissed off and think you're being supremely mean.

If you want the yeses to be special and exciting then you have to protect them by saying no many many many more times.

Whether that's ice cream for breakfast, eating on the sofa while watching TV, staying up late. You have to establish a norm first if you want breaking the norm to seem fun and exciting. Whereas if you've accidentally established the norm as doing all these things, and the norm of them not being allowed exists only in your head/your own childhood memories, they don't get that, and when you say no, they fight and moan against it and you think "FFS I let you do all these things and you can't give this one to me just now?"

If you want tips on how to get a 5yo to stop doing annoying things, or do things that you want without constantly nagging at them, then the book how to talk so kids will listen and listen so kids will talk, or the video course ABCs of Everyday Parenting on Coursera are both excellent resources. (Original HTT book not little kids. If you already have the little kids one, the original isn't different enough to justify buying it).

I definitely have the balance and so does his dad.
We use firm voices if they do wrong and calmly explain the reason why it's wrong.. as soon as we've told them we go back to our jokey loving chilled selves. We're positive people. They are well behaved fun happy boys.

Natural consequences is a nonsense concept - basically there's a certain parenting crowd which has decided that punishment is unfashionable, which fair enough, it's probably your bluntest tool in parenting, has many downsides, there are so many other ways to influence behaviour which work better.

But, it's quick, easy, and doesn't require much thought. Parents are human. We don't have infinite patience at all times. Sometimes just like you know that home made chicken goujons with lovingly prepared vegetables are the best option but frozen chicken nuggets with tinned sweetcorn is also fine, it sometimes just makes sense to say "DS if you don't stop that you're going to your room".

Anyway gentle parenting influencers have drawn an imaginary boundary between what they call "generic consequences" and "natural or logical consequences".

There are two aspects to this and IMO one of them is right and the other is nonsense.

The part that is right is that if you can see a solution to the problem, or a way to draw the boundary without making it into a challenge, then you should just do that. So if wobbling the chair is a problem, change the type of chairs, get a wobble cushion, eat separately so it's not annoying, whatever. (For another example, if a 2yo keeps running off, put them into a buggy. Or if your child is misusing a toy in a way that is dangerous, take the toy off them).

The part that is nonsense IMO is the claim that using this "natural" or related consequence in exactly the way as you'd use an unrelated one, e.g. "DS I will give you one warning and if you keep wobbling on your chair you'll have to eat somewhere else" is somehow better or more effective or less harmful than saying something like "DS if you can't sit still, there will be no pudding" (I mean, ok yes we could debate the morals and implications of using food as a behaviour modification tool, but just as an example of an unrelated consequence).

It's basically the same. So if you're using consequences and constantly tripping over yourself trying to work out if it's related or not, just don't. Just use a generic one. The whole point of threatening some kind of consequence anyway is that you sometimes need a quick and dirty option, and if you're ok with using the quick and dirty option then don't make it less quick by adding complicated rules to it. And if you don't want to use consequences, then there are plenty of other techniques (many in the resources that I shared).

The part that is right is that if you can see a solution to the problem, or a way to draw the boundary without making it into a challenge, then you should just do that. So if wobbling the chair is a problem, change the type of chairs, get a wobble cushion, eat separately so it's not annoying, whatever. (For another example, if a 2yo keeps running off, put them into a buggy. Or if your child is misusing a toy in a way that is dangerous, take the toy off them).

I agree with this. I think ‘designing your environment’ is an extremely important part of setting boundaries, and one that people often overlook. A PP said that they do better with their DC’s cooperation and can’t enforce boundaries effectively without it. That’s sort of right, and sort of wrong. Setting boundaries with consequences you know you can enforce effectively is key. There’s absolutely no point designing a consequence that is meaningless or impossible to enforce. But also trying not to need the consequence in the first place by designing your environment for buy-in/cooperation/setting the child up
for success is almost more important.

So if (to take the not sitting at the table example) you want to encourage sitting at the table, and not getting down, you need to think about how to engage your particular child into wanting to sit. How can you make it fun and a thing they actively want to do? That’s different depending on the child. In addition, how can you make whatever else is going on less appealing than sitting at the table - TV off, train tracks cleared up, whatever. Keep the rest of the environment non stimulating. And then keeping the expectation very short initially so the DC experiences success, which can be praised, rather than punished.

And you really need to decide is this a boundary I want to uphold and if so what consequence am I prepared to enforce? If the rule is ‘we sit at the table to eat and we don’t get down until we’re finished’ then you have to be prepared to say ‘your lunch is finished, no more lunch’ and mean it if they get down. If you’ve got a fussy eater and you worry about nutrition that might not be something you’re comfortable with. So then you need to rethink your boundary - right now, am I most concerned with sitting nicely at the table for meals or am I most concerned my toddler eats enough, however/wherever it happens?

You can change the rules, or how strictly you enforce the rules, as your child grows. Most people will frown on a 5 year old who can’t sit for long enough to eat but most people will cut a 2 year old a lot of slack.

Clear consistent boundaries is key, if one day they get away with a behaviour and another they don't they will push more

But also trying not to needthe consequence in the first place by designing your environment for buy-in/cooperation/setting the child up
for success is almost more important.

I had huge issue with middle child when they started nursery - they wanted to stay home having settled and not head out in afternoon to pick eldest child up.

It was at times awful - because eldest reacted really badly if we weren't there when they came out so could easily end up with two upset children and a baby joining in and there was no-one else to get her.

So sometimes there was an upset child getting dressed on walk as we had to leave- sometimes screaming in pushchair and baby in sling - other times I'd resort to bribery and that would work or make a game - and that might work. In all cases as soon as we got to playground saw friends and eldest it was all forgotten by child - it was just me left stressed and upset.

I learnt with time -countdowns and plenty of time to faff getting ready, not going home after nursery or heading out well before time and doing park and library - all helped avoid show down and got to in position it was easier for him to comply. Obviously good weather made staying out or being early easier.

Even then things happen bf baby and me being frequently ill that would find ideal of time or doing some other other than coming home didn't happen and we unfortunately have the problem again - but it was much easier when we could avoid the flash point/potential argument. Next child it was never an issue at all with - they liked walk and going out even in poor weather to get siblings.

With seating I'd look at wobble cushions or short term picnic style meals on floor - and constant reminders of we don't rock on the chairs as we could fall over and hurt ourselves when sit at table.

This type of parenting seems to have gone out of fashion but I'm still a fan. Loving, firm but fair.

@Summermeadowflowers I wouldn't have not gone. I'd have gone. 15+ years ago I liked the 'how to talk' book that gave the choices to the child but actually they had no choice at all. Do you want the blue socks or the red, we are leaving in 5 so you do it or I do it, which do you want? we do it now or in 2 minutes which do you prefer?

The child thinks they are getting a choice, but actually they aren't. Always thought that was very clever.