Natural Consequences

[Imanapeman]

I've seen parents refer to natural consequences on here and some make lots of sense, but I've always thought that sometimes there are no natural consequences.

What would be the natural consequence for 1 child roughly batting their hand in the face of another (younger) child while on a walk?

Not as rough as a slap, but an aggressive act.

FWIW both parents were there so 1 walked on with other child and comforted them, the other parent explained that that was not acceptable behaviour, an apology was expected when calm and sent to bed early (suspected behaviour was due to tiredness, but is not an excuse).

Thanks.

I’d say natural consequence is that person won’t like to walk next to you if you do that to them, so I think you did the right thing by splitting them up.

You’re right, there aren’t always natural consequences.

If they were at a fun activity then a natural consequence might be they get taken home, but that could be overkill in this case, and anyway a walk might not be seen as a fun activity that they mind missing. Similarly a natural consequence could be that they have to walk far apart from the sibling, but they might not mind that…

In this case both parents where there, so could separate them. Mostly it's just one parent though, so not always as easy/safe to do.

Thanks for replying to my random Monday musings. The start of September always brings out my 'want to do better' thoughts.

I try to go for natural consequences as much as possible but totally agree that there are plenty of times where there aren't any that are immediately self-evident for a young child! The other thing I think is important for me personally is 'restorative justice' essentially. So in this case that would be via the apology to other child, perhaps a hug or whatever too (if other child is willing) or something else nice to 'make it up' to them.

I think natural consequences are great when they're proportionate and immediate - no jumper equals cold, carelessness equals broken toy and the like.

As you say, they don't really work for something like this, we'd probably have done the same as you did.

In this situation it depends on what your plan was that day. Are both children yours and both parents there? If one child can't keep their hands to themselves then one parent could take the child back to the car or not allow them into the park for a period of time etc. basically poor behaviour is a loss of privilege (whatever that is).

There isn't one.

Splitting them up is probably what the older child wanted tbh, the younger one was clearly irritating them.

I guess you need to just work on the older one using their words to say so if they want the younger one to leave them alone, and the younger one learning to give people space when they ask for it.

Think of the term as meaning "real world consequences".

Sometimes they can be helpful, sometimes not. There are two main issues with the way people try to use natural consequences IMO.

One is where people have an idea that you have to have some kind of threat up your sleeve at all times so are trying to use them as a direct replacement for punishment - e.g. loss of privilege, time out, etc. It doesn't work well for that.

Secondly is the idea that all consequences have to be related otherwise it will be somehow harmful. This causes a problem if you're trying to think something up in the moment. People tend to be much harsher in the moment when they feel angry etc.

I think it's best not to overthink these things and just go with your gut. Split them up and have a consequence appropriate for their age. Don't go overboard but deal with it swiftly and in a way that makes it clear to the child that the behaviour was unacceptable.