Unconditional Parenting in a nutshell (I know this is incredibly lazy)

[SuperBunny]

I am embarrassed to do this but I haven't been able to read the book and need some quick Dos and Don'ts til I can get hold of the book again.

I have read some of the old threads but was really hoping that some nice person could give me a couple of bullet points about unconditional parenting.

I will be very grateful.

Or these from ch.9 about when they have to, but don't want to.

1. Use the least intrusive strategy.
2. Be honest with them.
3. Explain the rationale.
4. Turn it into a game.
5. Set an example.
6. Give them as much choice as possible.

I meant the first batch, thanks.

But the second is useful for distinguishing 'UP' from some of the other ideas on this thread.

About to go away on holiday for a couple of days, but just a quick one for - who was it? cory? pisces?

If someone is getting hurt/about to get hurt by another child, the right thing to do is to stop that happening.

And of course in perfect creative mother land, one does so by immediately finding a collaborative and non-painful activity which everyone would prefer to the hitting/being hit scenario

And in real life, it might involve more along the lines of actually getting between the children with cushions to cushion the blows at you,

or scooping the hittee up and away into safety

or scooping the hitter up and away to do something else

with the UP principle that it's not about punishing the child - there's no need then for talkings to or naughty steps or spanking (yeah, cos that wouldn't send mixed messages at all in such a context...) it's about keeping everyone physically safe without judgement and then, in a better moment, finding ways of offering your best theories about how, mostly, people don't like being hit (and of course with a 6 year old to be explaining to, one can leave out explanations of people into hard core S&M ahem)

Now I have a train to catch...

And, really quickly -

it's a valid point you make, pisces about the single child or big gap leaning.

There are people on the TCS lists and fora who argue LOUDLY that families should only ever have one child, and that to have more diverts too much energy and too many resources away from the first. Those people, AFAIK, are always either parents of singletons or not parents at all...

Big age gap - yes, I think life probably is easier to live consentually when your children are widely spaced, since the needs of the older are likely to be much more GIVE ME MILK LIKE RIGHT NOW than the needs of an 18mo with a new baby sibling would be. And I do know families living consentually who have tended to select for big age gaps (or maybe lots of 'em just took ages to get pregnant )

But I also know families who live this way with heaps of children and small age gaps. The ease of each scenario all depends on the age, aptitude, ability and any SEN the child may have (oh no, wait, that's the legal parental responsibility for educational provision...)

Anyway, just saying, yes, I hear you that it might be harder to see how such living would pan out with lots of small children, but that there are families out there who do it, and who might well say "it's not as EASY as keeping them all under control with carrots and sticks and sometimes-mum's-got-to-make-an-unpopular-decision-on-everyone's-behalf, but it's still the right way to approach things IMO, and we are therefore happier as a family than we would be with the authoritarian trump card".

[and it's really important to say that a parent has a moral responsibility for teaching their child about the social norms of the world in which we live - and that's what Summerhill man was noticing with piano-climbing monster child - that the parents were so busy letting their child be free that they weren't HELPING their child at all. THat is neglectful parenting]

much more less GIVE ME MILK LIKE RIGHT NOW

grr

ommmward on Tue 26-May-09 12:26:55
" it's about keeping everyone physically safe without judgement and then, in a better moment, finding ways of offering your best theories about how, mostly, people don't like being hit (and of course with a 6 year old to be explaining to, one can leave out explanations of people into hard core S&M ahem)"

my scenario was actually one where the child might (indeed does) reply quite logically: but I am hitting him because he doesn't like to be hurt. I want to make somebody unhappy because my Mum is dying/my teacher was murdered/it's unfair that I will have to spend my life in pain/I can't bear it if he's going to be disabled too.

Apologies for butting in but I am astonished and fasinated by this thread. I don't have little ones but if I did I would be reading and following this method.

I did parent in that way 15 years ago much to everyones elses . It felt the only natural way to do it at the time.
My DC has turned out fine, very fine.

Can this work if you lead a very busy structured life?...could it just involve getting everyone around the table to agree the daily schedule?...so we just lay out the facts..ie school bus leaves at x...so what do we need to or want to do before then to make it?...whats a good time for us all to eat?...what shall we eat - each choose a meal? which chores need to be done daily/..weekly..? who is going to do what..?

So you could formulate a plan with input from all...then take collective responsibility for committing to your bit?

Would this deliver on either UP or TCM?

Is this all new thinking?...or have societies? communities? families? workplaces? incorporated this method/philosophy?

Also what are the downsides?..the risks?...what can go wrong?

What do you tell you children to do outside of the homw ...if an adult asks them to do X...do you encourage or support them to question it ?...or do you just say "go with the Flow" out of the home ie..in school or others houses respect and ahere to their requests.

I am not too bothered about whether this approach has a hidden agenda or not...just really what that the agenda is up front ie not hidden and explicit...so we deal with stuff like this because we want to develop children who are empathetic and good at compromise.

Are you up front with the children what the agedna or end game is?

I can see that this approach requires an investment of time ...but looks to me like investment of patience/thought is more important...it can take as long to send someone 27 times to the naughter step as it would to talk it thru.

Is it a case of short pain - long gain?

I appeciate that having 4 under 5 is a big task...been there done that...but maybe it might be worth trying it out on holiday or at the weekend?....I have lived a quite hectic structured life with mine...and it does feel like your are spinning plates...mine are older now...pretty well behaved and cooperative...but I think I will change to UP as a reward for me and them for getting thru the tough years...cant put the clock back. I was brought up in a very tight environment (6 children under 7 mother widowed when we were all toddlers)...so my frame of ref is the bootcamp approach...but I now see that you can still achieve the same (more actually) and get it all done by a nicer more respectful approach. When we alls started parenting I would be critical of those who were really laid back and I must admitt that I sat there waiting for it to all go pear shaped for them...but it didnt!!

I found all AKs headings very sensible, but that some people interpret it in a completely different way. It seems to me that AK is trying to be non confrontational and is about taking the time to listen to your DC, but he doesn't rule out taking charge as a last resort.
Above all it needs time. In real life there are times when DCs have to fit in and they will come across those situations even if they are HEed with a DC led day. I wonder how they would cope with something like a plane journey. How would the 4 yr old cope with having to sit still for 3 hours, not be able to walk around, not to be able to bang the seat in front etc-if they never have to do anything they don't want to.
No one really answered cory's question of what do you do if you spend a week with extended family in basic accommodation and you need to be quiet for grandad after lunch etc.?
If you go back to primitive societies where DCs are with their mothers 24 hrs a day, co sleeping, extended breast feeding, no nurseries or schools etc the children are part of a wide social group. They learn by example, they eat when the group eats, they respect their elders-they don't rule the roost.
I haven't found anything in AK to disagree with as yet (unfortunately his books are not in my library)but I disagree with just about everything in the radical unschooling article. The DC isn't learning from the parents and following their lead-she is doing the leading and the parents are hoping that she will see the error of her ways for herself.
No one answered the question-if she was to continue gorging on crisps and chocolate and became obese would it be child abuse? Not all DCs are going to conclude that they need a sensible diet. I know 2 DCs who had to be hospitalised because their diet was a danger to health.
I can't get my head around some of it- I can't imagine DH and I taking our dinner into 4yr old DSs room because it is a way to see him while he watches his DVD!!
It seems to be set to produce a real little princess. They go around the supermarket-she puts into the trolley whatever she fancies (an ad man's dream!). At home meals are cooked, but carried up to her room for her, and she probably won't want them because she has helped herself to icecream, despite seeing her parents in the middle of cooking!

I also think it is very good for DCs to see the extended family and make their own relationship when you are not there. If parent's know that Gran has no truck with it do they stop the DC visiting? How does the DC get on if they stay with aunties and cousins and they are expected to fit in?
I just wonder these things because I am very lucky in that my brother has 3 DSs similar in age and we share many holidays where all the cousins muck into together; because it is a holiday it is free and easy and unstructured, but sheer numbers mean that meal times have to be organised.

My aim with my DSs is to finally produce adults who are happy and confident, able to make relationships and fit is with any group.
I would rather start at birth with the fitting in part.

I'm with you, piscesmoon. A lot of Alfie Kohn and Up sounds like common sense really, but this radical unschooling article reads like How to Ensure That All Your Little Princess' Whims Are Met At the Expense Of Everybody Else.

I'd get a bad back if I had to take my meals sitting on dd's bed. And I still don't see why her comfort is more important than mine. Both people, aren't we?

I think that the radical unschooling article does a lot of harm, extremes always do.
I don't know what they base it on, for example:

'They eat when they are hungry and stop when they are full. How many adults who were controlled as children wish they had that ability??

I have that ability-my DSs have it-DH -I could do an amazingly long list. We all ate normal,balanced, family meals. The thing that I really object to is that intend her to eat precisely what they wish her to eat once she has gorged on the junk. They say that there are no good foods/bad foods and yet are thrilled when she chooses a carrot over chocolate. I would imagine that their body language shows her exactly what they think.

I think that rather than giving freedom it is giving them total control over their DC. I would doubt whether she ever has time away from the parents-if she does they would have to hand pick the people and give a list of instructions. She couldn't just go to tea with any family and fit in. For example, if she was a friend of my DC it would be a question of -as a guest in my house you sit at the table and eat what is offered. If she was my grandchild she would have to fit in if she visited-do you think that the parents would block loving grandparents because they wouldn't conform?

I think it is good for DCs to fit in with all sorts of personalities, all ages, all colours and creeds etc.

I feel that the parents in the article are experimenting with their DCs.

I agree with that, pisces. She does seem to be living in a bubble, compared to most 5yos I know.

I wonder if she had a friend round to play would she be able to share? By 5yrs mine had enough experience to know that they were the host and had to find something to do, share their things and it was rude to sit and watch a DVD and ignore the guest. I had trouble with DS1 when he was about 4yrs because he was an only child and he would get excited at the thought and have a set idea of what they would do and you could bet the guest didn't want to do it! I had to suggest that he didn't decide in advance but waited and decided together. I thought that it was successful if I didn't have to get involved but just left them to it.
The article brings up a lot of questions.

I had decided that Maya's parents were being very controlling under the guise of being liberal and I would even have called them toxic. However I found his web site and found that his children can actually play out with the neighbourhood children and they are not living in a bubble.
Take this entry one year on when Maya is 6 yrs and the baby 2 yrs.

'Last week after Z threw a doll at M then chased her trying to stab her with a straw

M: I hope you get killed you big pesty pest? NOW GO AWAY YOU YUCKY, HORRIBLE MONSTER? I NEVER WANT TO SEE YOU AGAIN!
ME: (totally ignoring everything I wrote about siblings fighting in my last post and starting to lose it) BLOODY HELL, DO YOU HAVE TO SPEAK SO RUDELY TO HIM!??!
M: Chill out Dad, its just an expression!
Z: Yeh Daddy!!
Me: (deep sigh?)

I began to see him in a new light and found that interchange very reassuring and normal!!
It also shows that 2 children are more difficult than one! 3 must be a nightmare!
I think his children will turn out OK because he gives them love and time, the important things, and so his 'stranger' ideas don't really matter.

He sees to be very influenced by Rue Kream so I looked at her.
Her central theme seemed to be:

'You cannot truly control another person. You may be able to control what she does when she's around you, but you cannot control what she thinks or believes. You can share your values and opinions with her, but in the end she will form her own. I want to know my kids for who they really are. I don't want them to feel they have to hide parts of themselves from me.'

This is central to my beliefs. I always take issue with the 'thought police' and control freaks on mumsnet. I always reply when you get 'Help, I am an atheist and my DC is being told God exists' -I think that is doesn't follow that their DC is going to be an atheist or similar. I also reply when people don't think that a 7 yr old needs time away from parents or they will make them miss a party because it happens to be in McDonalds.

I think that you lead by example but ultimately they will make their own minds up and they are not clones of you.

To a large extent I probably follow UP without having known it. There are always those who take things to extremes. I still think that if you give unconditional love, security, and your time, you can't go far wrong and it is far better to be a relaxed, 'good enough' parent than to agonise over being the 'perfect' parent. If you have a bad day you just try and have a better one tomorrow.
It's my mother's bad days that we laugh about as adults and my mother laughs the loudest-they become an 'in' family joke.

I meant atheist or similar thread,(as in I am a vegetarian and my DC was given a geletine sweet), not similar to an atheist.

Can anyone answer my earlier post ..ie is living a busy structured life possible UP?

piscesmoon, my beliefs seem to be pretty similar to yours.

my only wish for my children is that they are happy in life so i see my role as a parent as educating them (both in social skills and knowledge) to the best of my ability so that they can make the choices that will lead to their happiness.

and i totally agree about the crontolling issues, i hate maccy d's and fizzy drinks and don't give them to the kids but dd has had both while out with friends and thoroughly enjoyed them and i smiled and was pleased for her.

mulranno - I can't see any reason why UP wouldn't be possible with a busy structured lifestyle.

a lot of UP as explained by juule and exemplified by quotes from Kohn seems to be just about respecting your children and giving them a voice, which wouldn't preclude getting them to their hospital appointment on time if that's what you need to do

I suspect this is what confident parents do anyway

the ones that are forever doling out threats and stickers are the ones that seem terrified of losing control

if you're reasonably confident in your own ability, then you are going to be more relaxed

on the whole, this is how I was parented
(my Mum may have slipped up that once in the matter of the optician, but she was usually pretty good)

I was always left very free to have my own opinion of things (e.g. I'm the only Christian in the family)

but of course there is always a measure of thought control in the fact that you have grown up with people with certain values

I have been known to be tempted to do something mean or even slightly dishonest, something that wouldn't obviously hurt anyone but still wasn't right, and to have stopped myself because "I wouldn't want my Dad to know that about me"

and not a bad thing either

mulranno, I've been reading this thread for the last few days, and in my opinion it is absolutely impossible to have a busy structured life like this (if you are going to follow these philosophies to the letter). Everything ahs to be flexible and nothing can be set in stone (such as the time you have to leave the house, dressed appropriately etc.. ). Therefore my conclusion is that while there are some very valuable suggestions for certain issues, as a whole this approach require you not to work and ideally to home-school your DCs. Sorry, hope I haven't offended anyone...

How do you come to that conclusion, cumili?