Discipline without punishment

[FabIsGettingFit]

I have been thinking about this for a few days since the house rules were using their effectiveness and the children were getting violent towards each other. DD (6) pushed and kicked DS1 (9) in the back this morning and threw a heavy magnetic toy in DS2's (5) face on Saturday.
DS2 was in trouble yesterday at school for pushing some other year r kids. He said they weren't listening to him.

Is that not a contradiction?

You have to be prepared to punish sometimes, I think?

When you discipline children they will sometimes feel like they are being punished but as adult we know we are doing them a favour

We have clear rules and boundries in our house. They're not overly harsh or onerous but they're clear and followed through.

The thing is, they wouldn't work without the threat of punishment if they weren't adhered to. So they go hand in hand. Punishment isn't severe either really and is never ever physical or humiliating.

They also get warnings and reminders so we don't go straight to punishment unless something is very serious or dangerous.

We use naughty step, going to bedroom, missing a small treat etc. My kids are 6, 4 and 2 and it works for us.

We use going to your bedromm too- and taking away a privelege such as computer use

punishment isn't a bad thing.

in life if you break a rule you will be punished. it is something that is best to learn early.

why not sit them all down and decide on a structure of discipline.

level 1,2 and 3.

when you feel they have behaved in such a way as to deserve a punsihment you can reffer them back to the punishments they have helped decide upon and you can explain to them why you feel it deserves level 1,2 or 3.

it makes them feel in control of not only their behaviour but the consequences of it.

Thank you for your responses.

I guess it is a contradiction but I guess I was hoping it could be done in a less obvious way.

This afternoon I have been helped by a friend who lives near and all she did was say it was fine that I planned to send them to their rooms and then my oldest school friend phoned me and gave me some really good advice.

The children see, fine. Maybe the realisation is hitting home.

If dd throws something at the cat again though there will be huge trouble .

Thank you all so much, I have no confidence in my parenting and really miss not having a mum.

Sorry your missing your mother, but if it is any consultation my mum can be a hindrance, spoiling my dd, sticking up, covering up for her. But I guess I am glad she is around.

I guess we all have doubts too.

I don't do "think up a punishment" type punishments like taking things away, but I think you can tell them that since they're being a danger to each other/the cat then they're going to have to play in separate rooms, and enforce that. Until they can show that they're not a danger to each other and show each other respect.

I try and go for "natural consequences" or sanctions rather than outright "punishments". Eg, if they don't tidy their rooms/put their clothes away, then we won't/can't go out for the day.

If they hit their sister in the face, then I can't trust them to be left alone/go out with their friends/etc, in case they start hitting someone else.

It's not totally foolproof but trying to make them see that bad behaviour has consequences.

I did send dd1 to bed at 6 yesterday for punching her sister in the nose, after threatening her with a chair, so that wasn't a "natural consequence" but for lesser things it works better. even then I can say "you must be tired if you are reacting so badly to your sister, you must need an early night"

gigantaur, I know that grownups who hit get punished, but when they're learning not to hit I think it's a question of what the most effective means of driving that home to them is.

It took me a relatively long time to learn not to hit (my sister) - I'm sure we were scrapping until we were quite old - and I think I would have learned sooner if my parents hadn't imposed "classic" punishments that just made me resentful and didn't help me to control myself any the better. Obviously we learned in the end, but I'd rather we'd learnt sooner.

Like Fennel, I think the best punishments are the ones which can be quite obviously seen to relate to what they were doing - if playing with X toy/game leads to fights, X is taken away. If they can't play together, they have to go to separate rooms. If they are acting tired and cranky, they go to bed early. If they behave badly when out with a friend, they don't get to do that next time.

Equally, the rewards for good behaviour should mainly come out of what they do - playing nicely means they get to carry on a bit later, and being praised for what they do.

When they are young, discipline has to be something which you do as a parent, until they get the level of understanding where they can see the benefits/costs for themselves and apply it without your help.

But I've never liked "punishments" which were just there to be applied to all behaviour I don't like - like the naughty step etc - because I don't think they improve the child's understanding of why they shouldn't have done whatever it was, just that "mummy doesn't like it".

I agree with vesela. I remember from my own childhood that punishments just made me feel like the victim. I felt that I had been misunderstood and wrongly treated. The punishment completely concentrated my thoughts onto the behaviour of my parents (which seemed to me unfair) and I didn't think at all about what I had been doing and whether it was right or wrong. I think we underestimate children a lot and think that they can't tell right from wrong etc. etc.. As a child I often felt that the reason why I did something was completely unknown to my parents and they just didn't listen if I tried to explain.
My conclusion for how I want to be as a parent is to somehow try to get better at listening to the children so I can work out what the real issue is. Punishment just seems to get in the way of that. I know that often as a child I was taking out frustration about other things on my sister because she was the only one who wasn't in a position of authority over me. I knew this at the time too - probably as young as 7. So she got a lot of violence from me.
I realise there is a big issue of how a parent reacts in the heat of the moment. But maybe there's a better way of concentrating on learning different techniques to deal with problems - rather than them purely concluding that I'm the "baddy".

The thing about hitting though is that, while I agree thumping your siblings is very natural (my dds never ever hit or attack anyone except their own sisters), the other children need protection. So it's not (IMO) a time to be understanding of the agressor, the victim needs to know that their right not to be attacked is upheld.

(but dd1 says she punched dd3 cos dd3 was tweaking her nipples and wouldn't stop. dd3 denies this. Does nipple tweaking count as an aggressive act? if a 6yo does it to a 10yo?)

I'd say it was - could be quite painful! And if she wouldn't stop, then definitely so.

maybe send them both to bed? the separation is a natural consequence, for sure!

I'm surprised that no one has mentioned Alfie Kohn and his book Unconditional Parenting. UP makes no sense to me, mind, but there are those who swear by it -- might be what you mean, OP.

Oh don't get me started on Alfie Con

Well even though we use the naughty step it is used as a time to think about the behaviour that put them there. After their time-out I always ask them to tell me why they were put there. We then talk about why that isn't acceptable in our house.

I think that certainly my older two know why they've been put there each time and they also understand why such actions result in consequences. I never answer 'why?' with 'because I said so.' so I'm fairly at ease with my belief that they are grasping the concept that some things are unacceptable and why, rather than just sulking and thinking Mummy is being unfair.

Well I love reading all those parenting books (and putting very little of it into practice ) and there seems to be at one extreme the 1-2-3 Magic type approach where you see your family as a sort of dictatorship with the parents deciding punishments etc. The children are viewed as "inferior" and there isn't too much talking around rules etc. Then at the other extreme is Alfie Kohn with all talking and explanation and no punishment and the children seen as little adults who are behaving only according to underlying feelings and not just trying to manipulate you.

Just try to think which approach suits you instinctively?

I may be talking out of turn here, but having seen a few of your threads Fab, it appears that you had quite a fear filled children and don't want you children to be afriad of you or scare to talk up/back.

I totally see this but do think that there needs to be some authority in place and this does sometimes involve discipline/punishment. However punishment doesn't have to mean fear, just respect.

I'm going to bow out now as I don't feel it's right for me to comment too far as I'm not yet a parent myself - lots of other more experience people here who have suggested things that sound good.

I like Alfie Kohn, but disagree with him on some things - e.g. he is dismissive of natural consequences because he thinks it's just another punishment - "you can't love me because if you loved me you'd save me from the consequences of the behaviour I don't yet know how to prevent" is I think the gist of what he says about natural consequences, and I think that's taking it too far.

The other thing is that I don't think he encourages you to have high enough expectations of children's behaviour - well, in some ways he does, but in other ways there's too much "remember their ages" - of course you have to be aware what's going on with their development at different ages, but I think it can too easily slide into low expectations.

also (although I may be wrong on this) I don't think he emphasises enough the importance of letting them know you're angry (which e.g. How to Talk does).

Discipline means teaching so discipline without punishment is not a contradiction.

I wonder when children who are punished stop lashing out at their siblings.

DS is 7 and some time over the last year seems to have stopped hitting his sister. I can't remember the last time he did it. And I have never punished him for it, just constantly reminded him that it is not acceptable.

Maybe regardless of how you approach the problem (extremes excepted) they all just stop when they become mature enough to control their natural impulses?

Interesting otherside....I was talking to a friend who moved to UK from another country and she was telling me that in her culture they try to give small children whatever they ask for (the discussion started because I refused dd some chocolate!)until a certain age when they believe children realise they can't always have what they want. It would be interesting to study the differences, if any....?

I didn't have a fear filled childhood but I still don't want my children to be afraid of me or to be too scared to contradict me.

I think that before they are 10 (ish) they need to know that right is best because wrong leads to consequences that are not so good.

When they move up into teenage years, you have to develop a different relationship and keep things in proportion. Decide what is important - achieving at school for instance. They will be pushing boundaries and sorting a way in the world for themselves. In my experience, at this stage, you need to try and build a more equal relationship with them, but they need to be in a position of wanting to please you still.

Hope this makes sense. It came as a bit of a shock when they grow up so fast

It would be interesting indeed, but impossible. We don't punish at home but they are punished at school.