OK, so I'm reading Alfie Kohn...

[Monkeybird]

...and it is very interesting. And is making me feel like SHITE. As if I've been a disaster area my whole parenting life (punishments/consequences: tick. rewards/bribes: tick...). And I can see the WHOLE logic of his argument and it all makes complete sense.

My oldest child is a PITA sometimes. I think I love him unconditionally and that DH does too. But reading the book makes me go OHMYGOD, that is why he's like this, it's ALL US...

And while that's a bit depressing, I'll get over it, that's what parents have to do.

But two questions...

1. I like to think through things and look at evidence. Who challenges Alfie's approach? Who are his critics? What do they put to him?

1. If a family were to make a complete sea-change in approach, how would you do it? I already think me and the DH have different parenting styles: me a bit more Alfie-ish anyway, him quite strict and firm and wanting very clear boundaries and consquences. I can't see him going for it at all...

I haven't got to the bit about what to actually do and the issues with our eldest seem insurmountable sometimes - he can be very defiant. But presumably (Alfie says) some of that defiance is because we're probably too controlling...?

What do you do?

See, Anna, there's the problem with the principle. I have always said no hitting, not allowed. It makes bugger all difference. They still hit. They don't get hit by us. They are not even allowed to watch anything resembling hitting or violence on TV until they're old enough to understand it isn't real.

But that hasn't stopped it.

I don't think the AK approach means no boundaries or no expectations. I think on the contrary its an approach which expects a lot of a child AND the parent.

Siblings will always fight, it is part of their intense relationship

I still don't really understand what AK advocates when the boundaries are crossed though? If there is no time-out or punishment or reward, then what do you do?

he doesn't have a quick fix answer to it
I think we have had it so drummed into us that we must instantly step in to eradicate all disobedience, that his philosophy of taking the long term view (and this does NOT mean doing nothing) leaves us feeling rather adrift and as if something is missing

I do feel a bit adrift F&Z, having had my ideas turned around by the book in a few days. I'd really like to change things, but all our patterns are so ingrained. My kids are violent to each other (Johnso, I'm not sure it's OK to just say'siblings fight') and that is my absolute limit of tolerance. I can deal with lots of things with equanimity and reason but don't think hitting/kicking is of the same order as not tidying up after yourself...

Hmmm.....I will admit to having relatively well-behaved children who never really do anything outrageously bad combined with me probably having a higher tolerance than some parents to certain things in my own house. I let kids be kids, but this does not include things like hitting which I have never had a problem with. Perhaps its easy for parents who don't have massive issues to deal with at home or school to smugly follow AK and we are not really in best position to advice.

erm, I think the problem is not that he doesn't advise what to do, he DOES - it was summarised v briefly earlier in the thread

the problem is that his strategies do not have fast or immediate results

which we are used to seeing as the measure of whether a type of discipline or behaviour control works

something that is more drip drip drip / slow burn is a lot harder to point at and say "see I do THIS, and it works"

I do think AK has only one child though

Is it all just fortuitous coincidence then? The people who get on with and live by AK are those who have very placid children or only one etc...?

I am prepared to accept that it's the household dynamic that creates the situation, so agressive children don't come from nowhere but it's not so simple as model good behaviour and your children will be placid either. My eldest is horrendous until he has eaten. There is a direct relationship between his blood sugar levels and his mood. Mornings are a nightmare. I understand this. But that still doesn't mean I'll accept him whacking his little brother.

no, children have different temperaments, but modelling good behaviour will always improve things

I think there is probably a scenario where parents with very challenging children feel they can't attempt AK (or can't continue with it) a) because it is ruddy hard work having difficult behaviour all the time and you are desperate for QUICK solutions and b) because other people demand to see that you are DOING something about the behaviour, and you can't always see an AKer DOING anything

Oh, I wasn't excusing it, MB, rather responding to your post which suggested that you didn't know the cause of them fighting.
Of course you must step in if they fight.
I must admit that I am I haven't read the AK book but I don't seem to read many suggestions of practical help, only criticism of the way things are done.
Sometimes children need compassionate leadership and that includes discipline, but not punishment.
Personally, I think if your child hurts another intentionally it does help them to remove them from the situation -to their room, or whatever-as a way to learn it is unacceptable.
I do not think this equates to withdrawing your love.
I am happy to be contradicted ion these concerns over AK's philosophy as my information comes second hand , as I explained earlier

see I suspect I do AK by accident. I have one very placid and easy 18 month old and she doesn't really do anything that requires any proper discipline at that age.

But my sister, with all the same parenting attitudes as me, has a child who sounds a lot like yours MB. Contrary, pushing all boundaries, could be violent...

They have used persistence and various tools such as time out etc and with time he has improved (he is now nearly six - worst time was age 3-5). Also his developing emotional maturity has helped.

If I hadn't seen my nephew in action, I would have put it all down to bad parenting. Now I know better.

FandZ- Of course children will always do as we do, not as we say. I believe that you can tell them you love them constantly but if you don't actively enjoy spending time with them they may not feel that you do.

yup, the main thing is how the parent's behaviour is perceived I believe, is that from AK?

most parents believe they love their children unconditionally and that their children will automatically feel this
but the children are perceiving different messages from the adults' behaviour

I think its a long-term approach where you build up a certain relationship and communications with your children which you really benefit from when they get to school age. Not sure if all children respond to this approach, but I think he is calling for parents to be calm in the middle of the storm and understand your child and your child's behaviour. I don't think adults are always very good at this.

Can I also recommend jesper juul and "your competent child"?

I was thinking about the people who doubt AK's credentials as he hasn't got enough children

try the Sears - not dissimilar approach and they have eight, is that enough for you?

Sears has a very irritating style and doesn't seem to have a "theory" underpinning it all, like AK. But then I suppose they come from different p.o.v. If AK starts selling soothing baby music with his name on it I'll quickly change my opinion of him too.

I like Alfie Kohn and when I first read it, I was waiting to get to the 'And here is how you do it...' part too.

But there isnt one, as I am sure other people have mentioned. I was just so used to reading other directive parenting books that I was expecting it.

For me, it has been about thinking about how I see my children, how I want to treat them and interact with them, and finding my own ways to do that in line with other AP/Gentle Discipline concepts. Not about a pasta jar or a time out, but about thinking about something to find a less controlling way to understand why my children act the way they do, not just how to mannage/try to control the consequences of that behaviour.

Punished by Rewards is also excellent, as is the Natural Child Project site, who has some really good articles.

but he's not entirely anti-consequence is he really? There is an example he gives where he his daughter, I think, won't get in the car or something, so he sits and waits with her, takes ages, she gives in but is most unhappy about it then she wants to stay in the car when they get home so he lets her, in acknowledgement of her having given in earlier - It seems to me that its about a compromise and about accepting that DCs do have reasons for their feelings, they're not just being awkward or trying to p*ss us off, they are genuinely not ready to go home/have tea/get dressed so a bit of give and take and negotiation is quite useful really...or am I reading it all wrong?

But that's not consequences is it? Or consequences as I understand it.

Consequences are basically punishments, but just dressed up in a kindly word.

So we have Consequences for violent behaviour. The consequence is that a screen of my choice is removed for a period of time of my choice. [power fraek] So ds1 hits ds2, and as a consequence he loses his DS for a week.

Mine are older though (10, 8, 6) and so I really don't need to do the 'we don't hit people because it hurts and it is unkind' because they do actually know that.

It's more - you decided to do that, or that happened, and this is the consequence (punishment) because I've had it with the hitting, screaming stuff, and you are responsible for that action because you Know The Consequences.

I have been thinking about all this a lot. I think Franny is right about the wanting to be seen to do something - and also you feel the need to do something, and it is quite hard to dismantle the ideas of obedience and disobedience in your mind. Hence my endless talk of Team work. [yawn]

I think he is anti-artificial consequences

I think he feels they can read like threats. And they can, really.

I will say that the only way I manage to do AK at ALL is because we don't have many places we HAVE to go to, or things we HAVE to do.

It is odd that he is anti-HE as I am not sure how you can apply his principles otherwise, except with a naturally very placid child.

I agree 100, but I think there are people who don't agree with/like AK's style because of the perceived lack of consequences or who do in fact parent in that way but think they don't

also-I'd say my kids have been broadly AK'd from birth, not because of AK but because of John Holt, who is similar (bit better )

They are generally very responsive kids (ok I know I have another thread going about ds and his jumping on thing but that is NOT daily behaviour, it is just flummoxing me atm). They are quite easy to handle, at least for me. I don't often have to shout.

BUT the real strength of AK's approach for me is not in the better discipline thing. If you want a well disciplined kid, supernanny will do that for you.

I just find family life a lot more fun and enjoyable when we are all learning how to live and do things together rather than me feeling I am having to train up my kids.