How did YOU get obedience?

[Ariston]

Um, no. that is the avoidance method, or the management method. The more humane method is to actually figure out what the triggers are, and then desensitize the dog to those triggers. Eventually counter condition to the point that the dog goes from snarling at people that walk by the dog bowl to drooling and wagging his tail in joy when people walk by the food bowl. Yup, it is a LOT more work than just beating on the dog. Works better too :)

 

Fixing the problem, not punishing the symptom of the problem. Growling is a symptom. Being unhappy about people near the food bowl is the problem.

 

I've dealt with too many dogs that were "trained" to the point that they no longer growl to give warning...they just bite. Because they were trained not to growl, rather than trained to be happy about people near their bowl.

 

I also know kids that outwardly act obedient, but still are seething inside, like the dog, and like the dog will act out once they think they can get away with it.

 

 

This is the point where I agree to disagree. :)

[ktgrok]

This is the point where I agree to disagree. :)

 

then you have been blessed with resilient dogs.

[Ariston]

Yes, you just need to focus on this for a while. Tell your husband that dinner will be take out or sandwhiches if need be. Cleaning and chores go by the wayside if need be. Behavior issues take the forefront. But again, no hitting required. And again, hitting out of lazyness is not really justifiable, in my opinion. If you know a better way you are obligated to do the better way.

 

The problem for me is that I'm not convinced it is a better way. In other words I'm not convinced that the simpler, more direct and more efficient way isn't better. But I am willing to give it the ol' college try, and I'll be curious to see what I experience.

 

I really want to thank everyone for taking the time to post your thoughts and give me valuable links and resources! I'm sorry i can't respond to everything I found valuable, but thank you!!! I'll keep you all posted on Operation Obedience.

Elena

[Carol in Cal.]

I had another thought about my prior post, and didn't want it to get lost in the 'edited to add' debris.

 

One of my issues with FTO is that it can end up with people who are very easily pressured, or who really can't stand up for themselves. I think that this is particularly dangerous for girls, who can end up going out with guys that they dislike or mistrust, or even allowing themselves to be brought into dangerous situations because it's easier than objecting. I knew so many women like that in my twenties, and having a daughter, I wanted to make sure that she can say no. (Kind of a mixed blessing at times, but there you have it.) And this effort, I will say, has been successful. I'm really glad. She is 15 and very nice, but she can also say 'no thank you' and mean it, in just the time and place that you would hope she would.

[Rosie_0801]

The problem for me is that I'm not convinced it is a better way. In other words I'm not convinced that the simpler, more direct and more efficient way isn't better. But I am willing to give it the ol' college try, and I'll be curious to see what I experience.

 

Make sure your trial lasts long enough to pass through your children's period of scepticism or you won't get an accurate reading, so to speak.

 

Rosie

[Guest submarines]

This is the point where I agree to disagree. :)

 

You don't agree that ktgrok described a more humane method? :confused:

[Ariston]

I hate to be flip... but does this just mean you thought for yourself? That you were human and didn't mindlessly obey? And you're unhappy with that? You wish you had questioned your parents and thought for yourself less? Or are you just re-evaluating all this through the lens of having young kids who are a handful?

 

 

 

:iagree:

 

My mom was proud of the things you've mentioned. I got suspended for not saying the pledge of allegience in 7th grade. I contacted the ACLU on my own to overturn the suspension. I left high school early and went to college, bored with my classes and not wanting to work 'just for grades'. I carved my own path. I had a purple mohawk in 8th grade. So yes, I 'thought for myself' and she was proud that I 'didn't mindlessly obey'. She was prouder still, because I did all this without being disrespectful or rude, and with virtually no discipline problems. So I'm sure I seemed like a success to her and to others.

 

But I can tell you that me and all of my siblings resent our parents for their lack of discipline. I'm not saying permissiveness is not compatible with any child. But it wasn't compatible with me or my siblings. We DESPERATELY wanted LESS freedom. Though, obviously, we didn't know it or express it at the time. I have many friends who are trying to raise their kids the way we were raised. I don't argue with them. They are doing it because they had controlling parents and as someone pointed out earlier the pendulum swings.

 

My mom is very loving and I don't want any of the things I'm saying to sound mean overly critical. I just don't think her parenting style was what we needed, and in fact now with 20/20 neither does she.

[Ariston]

You don't agree that ktgrok described a more humane method? :confused:

 

Wait, are you asking me to describe what I'm disagreeing with? Then I'm not agreeing to disagree--I'd be disagreeing!!

[Guest submarines]

But I can tell you that me and all of my siblings resent our parents for their lack of discipline. I'm not saying permissiveness is not compatible with any child. But it wasn't compatible with me or my siblings. We DESPERATELY wanted LESS freedom. Though, obviously, we didn't know it or express it at the time. I have many friends who are trying to raise their kids the way we were raised. I don't argue with them. They are doing it because they had controlling parents and as someone pointed out earlier the pendulum swings.

 

 

 

This is slightly OT, but I'm a child of overly controlling mother, and I'm very aware of the pendulum. So I'm incredibly interested in your point of view here.

 

Why did you want less freedom? Were you overwhelmed by needing to be on your own, and make your own choices? Or was it something else?

 

I grew up with the notion that children don't have their own thoughts or feelings, and I wasn't allowed to make choices. Needless to say I met my future DH when I was 17, got married 3 weeks after my 18th birthday, moved out, and moved cross country as soon as possible.

 

It is difficult for me to see how a child in a healthy, loving family, who is being treated with respect, might want less freedom. But I'm aware that I might be blind to this issue. I do notice that DD is worried about making her own choices, and I follow her lead, limiting choices so she is more comfortable. However, she has some anxiety issues, as well as mild sensory issues.

 

Anyway, if you could elaborate on why you felt, so desperately, that you needed less freedom, I'd appreciate it. :)

[Peela]

I think the pendulum parenting thing is dangerous. If you are wounded from your childhood, such as not getting enough healthy boundaries, the best thing to do is do some work on your own wounding, so as not to pass on that woundng to your kids. But opposite style parenting is reactionary parenting, not healthy, conscious parenting.

I really suggest reading very widely around this stuff rather than getting fixated on one perspective one viewpoint, one approach. I think we should all be able to see everyone's viewpoint- understand where other perspectives are coming from- and be guided from that open place, rather than reading one book and thinking "that sounds about right". To me, every parenting book, every parenting technique, has some merit, from some perspective. I LOVED the Godly Tomatoes website years ago- really, it had some very relevant information for me at that time. But I didn't swallow it hook line and sinker- I absorbed its perspective and kept going, finding my own unique way with my own unique kids.

Beware of parenting the opposite way to your own parents- to me, it just says you are still wounded and are perhaps, in the boundaries case, looking for those boundaries for yourself, by giving them to your kids in an exaggerated fashion.

[LucyStoner]

I have decided that my brain clicks off when dog training or animal training is likened to raising children. It's like those people who discuss their "kids" and then you realize they have been talking about their pets to you for hours or weeks on end. It just ain't the same, sorry.

[Alenee]

My strong opinion is that there is no one right way to raise children, or even to produce obedient children.

 

My personal experience is that some of my children responded very well to last-resort spanking (and nothing else), and others utterly did not. IMO it is critically important to really show your child that you love them, and to know them, which means spending a lot of time with them, so that you can choose what motivates them best at any given time.

 

And yes, I think my children are obedient. For example, provided they can see me, I can beckon to them across a crowded playground and they will come to me immediately.

 

This. exactly.

[Forget-Me-Not]

I think the pendulum parenting thing is dangerous. If you are wounded from your childhood, such as not getting enough healthy boundaries, the best thing to do is do some work on your own wounding, so as not to pass on that woundng to your kids. But opposite style parenting is reactionary parenting, not healthy, conscious parenting.

 

. . .Beware of parenting the opposite way to your own parents- to me, it just says you are still wounded and are perhaps, in the boundaries case, looking for those boundaries for yourself, by giving them to your kids in an exaggerated fashion.

 

:iagree:

[Catherine]

I'd agree with much of what Pamela has said about Raising Godly Tomatoes. I really appreciated this book. it described perfectly for me what I am trying to achieve, in terms of happiness within my home, and how to achieve it pre-emptively. But, I also found at one point in her description, she reports that her sons were left home alone and tried to walk to the store, which was several miles away, without checking with anyone.

 

At that point, I realized that my disobedient kids had far better judgement and awareness than her perfectly obediant ones. There really is a tradeoff between obediance and development of judgement and critical thinking. I want a little of each, but I realize that a complete emphasis on unquestioning obediance would be not only difficult to achieve, it would be harmful to my own kids' developing minds.

[asta]

I have cooperation rather than strict obedience. Kind of same end result, but the means to that result are far more humane, egalitarian, not to mention achievable. It is not fear based.

Children naturally want to imitate and follow the lead of their elders- their very survival depends upon it, so it is built in. They do not however fold naturally to coercion and control past a certain point, because their survival also depends upon their selfhood. You are better off working with nature than against her.

The cost of mindless obedience is high- the result of cooperation is a family that works together for the greater good, yet is honouring of each individual's unique way of contributing from their own autonomy. I ask a lot more than tell nowadays.. and get better result, and a far better attitude, than when I went around giving orders.

 

1. My service dog was trained entirely with pats on the head and words of encouragement. No treats, no smacks. And she was 5 at the time, so it's not like she was 'easily maleable'. She is 100% off-leash trained.

 

2. The most IMPORTANT part of her training was training ME how to handle her.

 

3. She can lead me home from where ever we are, even if I am in a complete fugue (I have epilepsy).

 

and yet...

 

If I go somewhere without her (I live somewhere that doesn't believe in service dogs unless they are for blind people) with my family -- she tears up the trash all over the kitchen and licks the cat food containers clean. But she doesn't eat the bowl of cat food sitting in the corner (THAT is sacrosanct - the cat would beat her up).

 

Draw whatever correlations you wish. I didn't bring up the stupid dog analogy.

 

 

Kids.

 

Switzerland (so coined because he wisely takes no side in any argument between mom and dad) has lived in all sorts of places. Fun places, placid places, dangerous places. Not unlike any other kid who has lived in and/or experienced different situations.

 

From the time he was able to 'reason' -- e.g. follow directions with the knowledge that they were important (for him, that was approximately 3 yo forward), has been given parameters for each situation we will be in. For example: CH - the people here hate Americans with a passion. Either don't speak English, or don't say anything at all. CH - we're walking into a very crowded area, hold on to mommy and daddy's hands and don't let go. If something weird happens and you get separated from us, remember what the police uniforms look like? Go to one of them. We will find you. CH - We're getting on the subway. If someone pushes and you get separated from us, get off at the very next stop and we will find you.

 

Lessons. Every single day. About every single thing we did. From baking bread to walking down the street. And do you want to hear what's funny? That subway lesson he learned at 5 years old? We got separated on a subway THIS year (age 17). I panicked. He got off at the next stop. I looked at him in absolute amazement and asked him how he knew what to do. He said: "that's the rule - we get separated, I get off at the next stop".

 

Parenting: it isn't for the weak willed.

 

 

asta

[Colleen]

I want my kids to be obedient. By this I mean I want them to do what I tell them, with a good attitude, the first time I ask. All the time.

Why?

 

I do not want this thread to turn into a back and forth about parenting styles. I want helpful, personal advice from parents who have obedient children.

You're sending mixed messages. You do want to hear from those of us who have "obedient" children and don't engage in spanking, but you don't want us to share our parenting styles. You can't have it both ways.

 

Wow, this board just cannot help but debate, can it???

:D

 

I was trying to be clear that I am NOT interested in different ideas about discipline, what the goals should be, or what is even possible. Not that these aren't valid discussions, but its not what I'm after.

Discussion happens. And that's a good thing ~ whether or not it's entirely what you're after or not.

 

From reading these responses, even the mere idea of obedience in children is controversial.

Mmm, no, that's not my impression.

 

In fact in Godly Tomatoes, she addresses situations when a parent does not want to spank, and states that it will be a lot more work but is achievable. That is really what I'm struggling with.

Why? What's the struggle?

 

Do you hit your dogs?

I'm interested in the answer to this as well.

[asta]

Discussion happens. And that's a good thing ~ whether or not it's entirely what you're after or not.

 

I've been wondering this the entire thread.

 

When I read questions such as the one posited by the OP, the first thing that pops into my head is "oh, look, someone is doing research on the homeschool community - how nice."

 

Blech.

 

 

a

[Farrar]

 

Mmm, no, that's not my impression.

 

 

No, I think the OP is right. The idea that obedience is a desired quality in children *is* being questioned in this thread. Many of us don't want obedient children. We want trusting children - children who trust our judgement and therefore do what we say because of that trust, not children who do what we say just because we say it. And a number of people are talking about how we want children who will think through their own actions critically instead of just doing what others tell them to do, because that's a needed life skill.

 

I'm so completely baffled by the idea, Epignone, that, if you were a happy, polite child who listened to her parents as she was growing up, that you somehow don't think that was good enough because you thought for yourself. I'm a "liberal, permissive parent" by your description - as was my mother. However, I give my kids a huge amount of structure and boundaries for all kinds of things. Structure and obedience aren't the same in my mind at all.

 

One of the things that really bothered me in this was not the idea of obedience - which, as I said above, I do question, but I can completely understand - but the idea of cheerful obedience. I don't tolerate whining from my kids. However, to expect them to obey and be happy about it robs them not only of their own critical thinking (as some people are saying in the thread) but of their own right to their emotions, something I have even more trouble with.

 

But I think I can't really read this thread anymore. The attitudes here are just too far from my own.

[Peela]

 

One of the things that really bothered me in this was not the idea of obedience - which, as I said above, I do question, but I can completely understand - but the idea of cheerful obedience. I don't tolerate whining from my kids. However, to expect them to obey and be happy about it robs them not only of their own critical thinking (as some people are saying in the thread) but of their own right to their emotions, something I have even more trouble with.

 

 

 

:iagree:

[Mommyfaithe]

I think the pendulum parenting thing is dangerous. If you are wounded from your childhood, such as not getting enough healthy boundaries, the best thing to do is do some work on your own wounding, so as not to pass on that woundng to your kids. But opposite style parenting is reactionary parenting, not healthy, conscious parenting.

I really suggest reading very widely around this stuff rather than getting fixated on one perspective one viewpoint, one approach. I think we should all be able to see everyone's viewpoint- understand where other perspectives are coming from- and be guided from that open place, rather than reading one book and thinking "that sounds about right". To me, every parenting book, every parenting technique, has some merit, from some perspective. I LOVED the Godly Tomatoes website years ago- really, it had some very relevant information for me at that time. But I didn't swallow it hook line and sinker- I absorbed its perspective and kept going, finding my own unique way with my own unique kids.

Beware of parenting the opposite way to your own parents- to me, it just says you are still wounded and are perhaps, in the boundaries case, looking for those boundaries for yourself, by giving them to your kids in an exaggerated fashion.

 

 

I agree:iagree:. My parents were ultra hands off parents to the point of neglect. It was extremely damaging to my brother and I emotionally, physically and spiritually. I vowed NEVER to follow in those footsteps. They were not bad people...they were good people...just terrible parents.

 

Swinging in the opposite direction would have been a horrible decision. I am notgoing to win any parenting awards, but my kids and I have the relationship I wish I had with my parents. My goal was to raise stable kids...emotionally, spiritually and physically. My goal has been successful with my older ones and hopefully will be with my youngers. They are not perfect. I am not perfect. No one is.

 

I strongly believe extremes are to be avoided, and parenting decisions can be made logically without the damage of extremism is either direction.

 

Faithe.

[stripe]

Lessons. Every single day. About every single thing we did. From baking bread to walking down the street.

I really found this idea really interesting.

 

May I ask, how did you come up with them?

 

However, to expect them to obey and be happy about it robs them not only of their own critical thinking (as some people are saying in the thread) but of their own right to their emotions, something I have even more trouble with.

 

Thanks for articulating this. I totally agree with you.

 

And I know way too many people who had double lives in high school and collapsed as adults when Daddy wasn't there to beat them into submission (or whose younger siblings suffered mental collapse) to want to embrace the robot model of childhood.

 

I guess if I felt more like Dr. Frankenstein, I'd be more comfortable cobbling together a child and dictating its behavior. But because I know my children are not some lab creations, but human beings, whom I believe are entitled to certain rights and have certain moral qualities, I cannot justify expecting them to obey me cheerfully at once.

 

My mother once gave me a book called Tales for the Perfect Child. It's quite hilarious. I think I will reread it now. My favorite story was about two sisters told to wash dishes. One was very careful. The other broke things all the time. The clumsy one was punished by not being allowed to do dishes anymore, while the good girl was allowed to keep washing dishes every night.

Edited August 27, 2011 by stripe

[DawnM]

Very well stated. My mother had a boatload of issues, well, still does.

 

I find some of it creeping into my parenting, especially of my oldest, who is a challenging child. I have to be careful and need reminding to calm down with him.

 

Dawn

 

I think the pendulum parenting thing is dangerous. If you are wounded from your childhood, such as not getting enough healthy boundaries, the best thing to do is do some work on your own wounding, so as not to pass on that woundng to your kids. But opposite style parenting is reactionary parenting, not healthy, conscious parenting.

I really suggest reading very widely around this stuff rather than getting fixated on one perspective one viewpoint, one approach. I think we should all be able to see everyone's viewpoint- understand where other perspectives are coming from- and be guided from that open place, rather than reading one book and thinking "that sounds about right". To me, every parenting book, every parenting technique, has some merit, from some perspective. I LOVED the Godly Tomatoes website years ago- really, it had some very relevant information for me at that time. But I didn't swallow it hook line and sinker- I absorbed its perspective and kept going, finding my own unique way with my own unique kids.

Beware of parenting the opposite way to your own parents- to me, it just says you are still wounded and are perhaps, in the boundaries case, looking for those boundaries for yourself, by giving them to your kids in an exaggerated fashion.

[DawnM]

The Duggars do that First time obedience and cheerfulness thing.....but it all comes strait from Bill Gothard ATI stuff....you can look it up if you are curious. However, I might have been able to take being cheerfully obedient if I had had a cheerful Mom like Michelle Duggar to model after. My mother was nothing of the kind and I am not sticky sweet like that either.

 

Unless you model what you expect 100% of the time, you cannot expect it 100% of the time from your children.

 

Dawn

[asta]

I really found this idea really interesting.

 

May I ask, how did you come up with them?

 

 

Thanks for articulating this. I totally agree with you.

 

 

CH was a sling baby. DS was gone all of the time. I am loquacious.

 

It's a math problem:

 

CH-DS+ME = X

CH + ME = X

 

Substitute:

 

CH for Brain like a sponge

ME for loquacious

X has to equal "something is going to sink in"

 

I have pictures of CH making his first "bread" at 2. Then actually making bread at 5 or 6. He watched / took part in the process every few days. He learned that there are things you do and do not do: you don't fling flour unless you want a mess you then have to clean up. You measure things carefully if you want good results. You don't touch hot things unless you want to get hurt. You clean up your equipment if you want to be able to have more bread in a few days.

 

Now, did I 'punish' him for making a floury mess at 2? Of course not! When you're 2, life is all about textures and sensations and 'wanting to be like mom and dad'. Two year olds want to 'help'. And they usually have the attention span of a gnat. Which is good, because they have an entire world to absorb.

 

I think we, as adults, often forget just how long we've been on the planet. I've been here 44 years, and I've only seen the absolute tiniest sliver -- and I would have missed part of that sliver if CH hadn't slowed me down long enough to look at it. Now imagine if you were TWO! Imagine only being on this HUGE planet for TWO YEARS! Or five years, or ten! And the big people around you expected you to know how to act / behave in x,y,z situations - ALL. THE. TIME. No questions asked. Holy cr@p! How overwhelming is THAT?

 

But I digress.

 

Walking is great. Little kids are, by definition, little. They see things us adults never see. Primarily because they're short, but also because they're just not in as much of a hurry as we are. And they aren't thinking about bills, the fight they had with ____, the size of their thighs, or a bazillion other inane things.

 

Because of this, they see things we overlook. Or don't want to see. A butterfly that didn't quite make it out of its pupae stage (ooo... think of all of the corollaries that can be drawn from that one), a smashed beer bottle with a flower growing up out of it (CH would immediately get me launching into a Kent state lecture on that one, even though it doesn't really have anything to do with it - the imagery would just remind me, ya know?), the way the same garden looks in winter vs spring...

 

It really never ends. Obedience isn't the point, IMO. Listening is. Talking is. Teaching your child that what they see is as important as what you see (no need to lie then, is there?) Showing them that you will defend them against 'all comers', but that they also need to learn to defend themselves, as you won't always be around (parents being older than children and all that). Giving them the opportunity to make decisions based on information they have gathered. Allowing them to fail (without you cleaning up the mess).

 

Trusting that the little ankle biter who followed you around picking 'bouquets' of dandelions will, indeed, make mistakes -- sometimes horrible ones -- but if you have done the rest of it, they will brush themselves off and keep going, not sit on the floor and blame other people.

 

Wow. I just realized that my mom did a lot, even though she did things totally differently. Cool.

 

 

a

Edited August 27, 2011 by asta

[Lily_Grace]

 

However I am left with a question. I want my kids to be obedient. By this I mean I want them to do what I tell them, with a good attitude, the first time I ask. All the time.

 

 

Childhood is a preparation stage. Blind, cheerful obedience is not a good trait in an adult so I will not cultivate it at all costs in a child.

 

I agree with the others - trust is a more appropriate discipline goal. My son trusts me to keep him from harm and make decisions in his best interests. As he gets older he is learning to trust himself and make his own decisions so that he is able to do so as an adult.

[WishboneDawn]

Crate training.

 

My kids love their crates. I put fresh water and Skittles in there daily.

 

Works like a charm. Seriously. My kids have never been arrested and they are very decent folks. One got a free ride to grad school and everything.

 

:lol::lol::lol:

[ktgrok]

I have decided that my brain clicks off when dog training or animal training is likened to raising children. It's like those people who discuss their "kids" and then you realize they have been talking about their pets to you for hours or weeks on end. It just ain't the same, sorry.

 

Definitely not the same. However, GOOD dog training is based on learning theory. Learning theory that is the basis of how humans learn as well. There is not one science of learning theory for humans, and another for all the other creatures on earth. Learning theory is learning theory.

 

 

 

Dogs are not people, people are not dogs. But both need exercise. Me saying that both need exercise doesn't mean I think dogs and humans are the same.

[WishboneDawn]

One thing has become clear to me...in order to achieve obedience, which I would describe you as doing even if you do not call it that, there seem to be two methods. One is spanking, which as you say is easy and quick. The other is what you're describing, which sounds like it takes a lot of focus and hard work. Its what's described in the book I read (How to get your child to do....) and Goddly Tomatoes, if one does not take the spanking route. It sounds, in short, like the kind of thing I'd have to do even if I'd rather be on my laptop reading WTM Forums!

 

:lol: I think that's why the hard work method is a boon not just for your kids' character but your own. I know I used to be a much more lenient and lazy parent. MUCH more. I also spanked. But going the hard work route has helped me grow and mature and be a thought more thoughtful about my parenting.

 

I'm really not anti-spanking and several posters here have said they use a combination of both but I think if you're missing the GOYB, hard work aspect then you're missing a key tool in your parenting toolbox.

[Sevilla]

I believe that our parenting style has to fit the society that our children are living in - and thus hearkening back to 'the olden days' of authoritatian/harsh/physical parenting is at odds with our current society's expectations of its adults. (My children both listen to me and follow my directions well, we have a loving relationship, and they are great kids. I have also never spanked them - not even for 'danger situations' like the street, because they both were trained how to follow the word 'stop' from early toddlerhood and do it every time). But it was hard work of GOYB for the first few years to reach that point, and the active parenting stage extends a long time).

 

Three hundred years ago, harsh physical punishments were the norm across society - in the home as children, husband to wife, schoolmaster to student, employer to apprentice, consequence for breaking the law, etc... Independent thinking of the sort businesses value today was not as highly valued either - you did what you were told or you lost your job.

 

Is that the circumstances today? Is being a 'Yes Man' a valuable skill as an adult? I would say no. If you work in a white collar job, you are expected to provide your own alternate ideas, to know how to respectfully challenge authority, to stand up when someone is wrong. You're expected to know how to handle yourself and your emotions calmly and without physicality. You're expected to show respect to authority but NOT obey them unquestioningly. In the church you have to know how to recognize a healthy congregation vs. one that is excessively controlling. You need to recognize healthy friendships and people vs. those who will bring you down.

 

Why would I parent my kids in an authoritarian style, when such a style will not equip them with the skills that they need to succeed as adults in our society? I fully recognize that were I to be parenting children in Medieval Gaul a thousand years ago, I would likely be far more harsh because the demands of society were extremely harsh (and for my childrent to step outside of them would bring far reaching consequences). But the style of parenting that Elizabeth of the RGT advocates does not seem to fit well with my goals for respectful children. I find her description of how to spank downright icky, actually: The 'S' Word. (FWIW, I recall her writing on her message board years ago that she rarely spanked - that she even went on a 2 week vacation with her family and didn't bother to bring her spanking implement because it was unnecessary - if you're finding yourself spanking dozens of times a day that tells me your parenting toolbix is pretty empty and needs to be filled with more options and tools).

 

On another note, the fact that our society is more complex means that parenting is more time/labor intensive - there is far FAR more that our children have to be trained to handle and navigate, things that didn't even exist a millenia ago when one's world was far more monolithic in terms of worldview, people, work, leisure time (if you had any), religion, etc... When people did not have choices, there was no need to do extensive teaching and mentoring in how to handle choice, critical thinking, etc... In our society which has overwhelming choice, parenting well requires far more of us and it IS exhausting. That doesn't mean the hard work isn't worth it - it most definitely is. But spanking for every infraction does not accomplish this work of teaching/mentoring because that is accomplished best during times of bonding and love.

[WishboneDawn]

Yes, this is exactly what I need to figure out. That was a real eye opener when I read that one book I keep mentioning that I can't remember and it made perfect sense to me (as a dog trainer:tongue_smilie:)...why the heck am I giving them the option of compliance or consequence? Compliance should be the only option. The problem I'm having is that parenting is a 24 hour job. (OK, 16 hour...) and I find this level of focus exhausting.

 

Do I need to just focus on this for one or two weeks? And then I can drop back to maintenance? My son is not the problem so much as my daughter....she has a way of sort of lulling you into not paying attention, and then drifting off and doing her own thing. Its a gift, really...

 

Do you have specific examples you'd be comfortable sharing?

 

I know the methods I mentioned I use more with my son. My daughter has a few different issues that I'm struggling to not slip under my radar and that do need more attention.

[WishboneDawn]

I have decided that my brain clicks off when dog training or animal training is likened to raising children. It's like those people who discuss their "kids" and then you realize they have been talking about their pets to you for hours or weeks on end. It just ain't the same, sorry.

 

The OP has said that herself several times. She's only using it as a metaphor to bridge some points in the discussion. It's really other posters who are making a more direct comparison or assuming one in her words.

[ktgrok]

I believe that our parenting style has to fit the society that our children are living in - and thus hearkening back to 'the olden days' of authoritatian/harsh/physical parenting is at odds with our current society's expectations of its adults. (My children both listen to me and follow my directions well, we have a loving relationship, and they are great kids. I have also never spanked them - not even for 'danger situations' like the street, because they both were trained how to follow the word 'stop' from early toddlerhood and do it every time). But it was hard work of GOYB for the first few years to reach that point, and the active parenting stage extends a long time).

 

Three hundred years ago, harsh physical punishments were the norm across society - in the home as children, husband to wife, schoolmaster to student, employer to apprentice, consequence for breaking the law, etc... Independent thinking of the sort businesses value today was not as highly valued either - you did what you were told or you lost your job.

 

Is that the circumstances today? Is being a 'Yes Man' a valuable skill as an adult? I would say no. If you work in a white collar job, you are expected to provide your own alternate ideas, to know how to respectfully challenge authority, to stand up when someone is wrong. You're expected to know how to handle yourself and your emotions calmly and without physicality. You're expected to show respect to authority but NOT obey them unquestioningly. In the church you have to know how to recognize a healthy congregation vs. one that is excessively controlling. You need to recognize healthy friendships and people vs. those who will bring you down.

 

Why would I parent my kids in an authoritarian style, when such a style will not equip them with the skills that they need to succeed as adults in our society? I fully recognize that were I to be parenting children in Medieval Gaul a thousand years ago, I would likely be far more harsh because the demands of society were extremely harsh (and for my childrent to step outside of them would bring far reaching consequences). But the style of parenting that Elizabeth of the RGT advocates does not seem to fit well with my goals for respectful children. I find her description of how to spank downright icky, actually: The 'S' Word. (FWIW, I recall her writing on her message board years ago that she rarely spanked - that she even went on a 2 week vacation with her family and didn't bother to bring her spanking implement because it was unnecessary - if you're finding yourself spanking dozens of times a day that tells me your parenting toolbix is pretty empty and needs to be filled with more options and tools).

 

On another note, the fact that our society is more complex means that parenting is more time/labor intensive - there is far FAR more that our children have to be trained to handle and navigate, things that didn't even exist a millenia ago when one's world was far more monolithic in terms of worldview, people, work, leisure time (if you had any), religion, etc... When people did not have choices, there was no need to do extensive teaching and mentoring in how to handle choice, critical thinking, etc... In our society which has overwhelming choice, parenting well requires far more of us and it IS exhausting. That doesn't mean the hard work isn't worth it - it most definitely is. But spanking for every infraction does not accomplish this work of teaching/mentoring because that is accomplished best during times of bonding and love.

 

Best post on this EVER. thanks!

[Parrothead]

Oh, and whomever it was that wants to teach the Bassett Hound to come...that is EASY!!! (if we are being reasonable and not asking said hound to come while he is mid rabbit chase...at that point medical studies have shown the part of the brain responsible for hearing is actually shut off). Start by saying "here!" every time you hand the dog a treat or put the food bowl down. After doing this a week straight say "here!" while a step away from the dog..so the dog has to move forward just a step. Do that for a few days. Then say "here" when two steps away from the dog, and give the treat. At this point start hiding the treat on your body, or on a nearby counter, and say "here" just in front of the dog, and give the treat. This teaches that even if your hands are empty, a treat could still appear. Start with greater distances again, but VERY gradually. When you can call the dog from any room of the house go outside to practice, but only from 1 inch away. When you increase distraction you need to decrease distance. Then work up to farther away. Then try again in another location, but from an inch away again. Then fade the treats some..but keep them most of the time. This is the one behavior I still give treats for most of the time. (I fade them for sit, down, stay, etc very quickly). Every now and then give a HUGE treat. A famous trainer told me that twice a year she hides a hamburger in a tree at a local dog park, before taking the dogs into it. While they are playing she will call them, and then produce a hamburger from a tree! The dogs think she is magic, and always come because they never know when she might pull a hamburger out of thin air :)

 

Hand in hand with this, while you are training the dog, don't use the word "here" with anything that the dog would see as punishment. So don't call the dog "here" and bathe it. Don't call the dog "here' and make it come inside when it wants to be outside, that is punishment to the dog. Eventually, when the dog is trained you can call them in those situations, but not in the beginning.

 

Hope that helps.

The problem is he shuts off the part of the brain responsible for hearing the moment he hits the door. As long as he is on the lead he would come every time. I can also call him anywhere in the house and he responds just fine.

 

Now that he is older he will come in pretty easily when I call out "TREAT!!!" He also doesn't think it is great to run out in the street anymore either. He got rolled by a semi (we think) about 3 years ago. He got away from his dog sitter and wouldn't come back until his accident.

 

Now back to your regularly scheduled parenting lesson

[NanceXToo]

This whole blind obedience thing brings to mind the Milgram/shock experiments we learned about in college. Disturbing!!!

 

I think blind, unquestioning obedience being drilled into a human being can lead to disastrous results someday. And especially for girls.

 

It is really chilling to think about the multitude of consequences that can manifest from such conditioning.

 

I want confident, thinking, questioning, strong children who become confident, thinking, questioning, strong adults. Not blind followers of those seen as "authority," too cowed to use their own judgment or common sense or even to protect themselves. Why would anyone want to purposely produce that kind of person?!

Edited August 27, 2011 by NanceXToo
Typo

[JennyD]

I believe that our parenting style has to fit the society that our children are living in - and thus hearkening back to 'the olden days' of authoritatian/harsh/physical parenting is at odds with our current society's expectations of its adults. (My children both listen to me and follow my directions well, we have a loving relationship, and they are great kids. I have also never spanked them - not even for 'danger situations' like the street, because they both were trained how to follow the word 'stop' from early toddlerhood and do it every time). But it was hard work of GOYB for the first few years to reach that point, and the active parenting stage extends a long time).

 

Three hundred years ago, harsh physical punishments were the norm across society - in the home as children, husband to wife, schoolmaster to student, employer to apprentice, consequence for breaking the law, etc... Independent thinking of the sort businesses value today was not as highly valued either - you did what you were told or you lost your job.

 

Is that the circumstances today? Is being a 'Yes Man' a valuable skill as an adult? I would say no. If you work in a white collar job, you are expected to provide your own alternate ideas, to know how to respectfully challenge authority, to stand up when someone is wrong. You're expected to know how to handle yourself and your emotions calmly and without physicality. You're expected to show respect to authority but NOT obey them unquestioningly. In the church you have to know how to recognize a healthy congregation vs. one that is excessively controlling. You need to recognize healthy friendships and people vs. those who will bring you down.

 

Why would I parent my kids in an authoritarian style, when such a style will not equip them with the skills that they need to succeed as adults in our society? I fully recognize that were I to be parenting children in Medieval Gaul a thousand years ago, I would likely be far more harsh because the demands of society were extremely harsh (and for my childrent to step outside of them would bring far reaching consequences). But the style of parenting that Elizabeth of the RGT advocates does not seem to fit well with my goals for respectful children. I find her description of how to spank downright icky, actually: The 'S' Word. (FWIW, I recall her writing on her message board years ago that she rarely spanked - that she even went on a 2 week vacation with her family and didn't bother to bring her spanking implement because it was unnecessary - if you're finding yourself spanking dozens of times a day that tells me your parenting toolbix is pretty empty and needs to be filled with more options and tools).

 

On another note, the fact that our society is more complex means that parenting is more time/labor intensive - there is far FAR more that our children have to be trained to handle and navigate, things that didn't even exist a millenia ago when one's world was far more monolithic in terms of worldview, people, work, leisure time (if you had any), religion, etc... When people did not have choices, there was no need to do extensive teaching and mentoring in how to handle choice, critical thinking, etc... In our society which has overwhelming choice, parenting well requires far more of us and it IS exhausting. That doesn't mean the hard work isn't worth it - it most definitely is. But spanking for every infraction does not accomplish this work of teaching/mentoring because that is accomplished best during times of bonding and love.

 

Great post. For similar reasons, I am not terribly interested in teaching my children to be 'obedient.'

 

That said, since you (OP) do value obedience, one thing that you might think about is how you and your spouse might model this quality. One interesting thing that comes out in some of the Puritan writings about children is the importance of demonstrating to children *how* to be obedient through one's own obedience to authority, especially to divine authority or to those who could claim it.

 

Obviously, it is harder to model the immediate, cheerful obedience to authority that you're looking for in today's society since, as Sevilla points out, that's not quite what is expected in most contemporary adult settings. However, if you truly value this particular quality, it might be worth thinking deeply about how you can really show -- not just tell -- your children how to live it out.

Edited August 27, 2011 by JennyD

[Tangerine]

This whole blind obedience thing brings to mind the Milgram/shock experiments we learned about in college. Disturbing!!!

 

I think blind, unquestioning obedience being drilled into a human being can lead to disastrous results someday. And especially for girls.

 

It is really chilling to think about the multitude of consequences that can manifest from such conditioning.

 

I want confident, thinking, questioning, strong children who become confident, thinking, questioning, strong adults. Not blind followers of those seen as "authority," too cowed to use their own judgment or common sense or even to protect themselves. Why would anyone want to purposely produce that kind of person?!

 

:iagree:

 

It always makes me think of the young lady who was the victim in the McDonald's strip search hoax, who was sexually assaulted. I remember listening to an interview with her when someone asked her why she didn't just refuse. She said that she was always taught to do what a person in authority told her to. It made me ill.

[Colleen]

No, I think the OP is right. The idea that obedience is a desired quality in children *is* being questioned in this thread. Many of us don't want obedient children. We want trusting children - children who trust our judgement and therefore do what we say because of that trust, not children who do what we say just because we say it. And a number of people are talking about how we want children who will think through their own actions critically instead of just doing what others tell them to do, because that's a needed life skill.

I understand that, and am in agreement with you. But to an extent, it's a matter of semantics. We do want "obedience" in the sense that we want/hope/expect a child not to run out in the street when we tell them not to; how you describe that reaction on the part of the child is a matter of personal preference. The original poster's desire that a child respond as a trained dog ~ that a child "obey" immediately, the first time, always, and cheerfully nonetheless ~ is what most of us find particularly disconcerting.

 

I'm so completely baffled by the idea, Epignone, that, if you were a happy, polite child who listened to her parents as she was growing up, that you somehow don't think that was good enough because you thought for yourself. I'm a "liberal, permissive parent" by your description - as was my mother. However, I give my kids a huge amount of structure and boundaries for all kinds of things. Structure and obedience aren't the same in my mind at all.

I hear you.

 

One of the things that really bothered me in this was not the idea of obedience - which, as I said above, I do question, but I can completely understand - but the idea of cheerful obedience. I don't tolerate whining from my kids. However, to expect them to obey and be happy about it robs them not only of their own critical thinking (as some people are saying in the thread) but of their own right to their emotions, something I have even more trouble with.

Yes, it's disturbing. We aren't able to force cheerfulness on others, to force "happy hearts", and we shouldn't pretend otherwise.

 

But I think I can't really read this thread anymore. The attitudes here are just too far from my own.

Actually, many of the attitudes expressed are in concert with yours. But the remarks on the part of the original poster disturb me, to put it mildly. I frankly feel worried about her and her children.

[ktgrok]

 

Actually, many of the attitudes expressed are in concert with yours. But the remarks on the part of the original poster disturb me, to put it mildly. I frankly feel worried about her and her children.

 

 

I'm worried about her kids and the dogs she trains. Koehler is rough stuff..he's basically the Pearls of the dog world.

[Ria]

But the remarks on the part of the original poster disturb me, to put it mildly. I frankly feel worried about her and her children.

 

Amen, my friend. Disturbing is putting it mildly.

 

Missed you!

 

Ricola. :)

[mytwomonkeys]

Disturbing is putting it mildly.

 

I agree. This thread bothered me.

[lovelaughs_times_three]

Mm. My mother was not content with anything less than cheerful. In fact, the less happy I was, the happier I was supposed to act. It's hard to paste delight over miserable. What did I learn? I learned that my mother didn't like me. She wasn't a bad mother in the scheme of things, and she'd be heart broken to know, but I'm still quite sure neither of my parents like/d me.

 

 

Rosie, why did it make you feel like your mom didn't like you? :confused: This makes me so sad! I do try to encourage my kids to have a good attitude. I think sometimes kids use big pouts, grumpy attitudes, etc to "punish" the parents for asking them to do something they don't want to do. I do want my kids to guard their attitudes and not just their behaviors. But I DON'T want them to think I don't like them!!! Could you explain more? I'm concerned and curious!

[PiCO]

Amen, my friend. Disturbing is putting it mildly.

 

:iagree:

However, I am very relieved to see so many posts this morning that I can agree with.

[simka2]

Oh no, is this really true? am I doomed?!

 

I don't know exactly how you'd define 'hit'. I'd beat a very aggressive dog within an inch of his life, if that's what you mean. A 'regular' dog who is merely experimenting with aggression (i.e. growling over food) I'd bop on the muzzle...sort of like a punch but from top down. I would not hit a dog for things other than aggression.

 

So, are your kids being spanked for things other than aggression? Are you more engaged and systematic in the training of dogs than of children?

 

You do not have to answer this, just consider it.

I was in your shoes. I had a loving permissable parent and I decided to go uber controlling. Truthfully, I blamed her for my lack of discipline and rebellious personality. I married a man who was raised with the idea of first time obedieance. Then we landed in a situation with a sick Pastor (a Spiritual Authority) and dh and I were "programmed" not to say "no!"

 

Thankfully, I had my upbrining to fall back on. You do to. You want your kids to be honest with their feelings (even if you do not like it), to think for themselves (even if you disagree), and to say "No" (even if that is seen as disobedience)

 

Remember that back in the "good ole days" it was legal to beat your wife as well. There were never any "good ole days," those are myths!

[Parrothead]

No, I think the OP is right. The idea that obedience is a desired quality in children *is* being questioned in this thread. Many of us don't want obedient children. We want trusting children - children who trust our judgement and therefore do what we say because of that trust, not children who do what we say just because we say it. And a number of people are talking about how we want children who will think through their own actions critically instead of just doing what others tell them to do, because that's a needed life skill.

To me these are seperate thing. Wanting one's chldren to do what one says either because of trust or because of fear is wanting obedience. It is just two different ways of achieving obedience.

 

The other is raising thinking people. One does not necessarily negate the other. When one says, "Pick up your toys," it behooves the child to think critically and quickly through the possible outcomes of not being obedient.

 

 

 

One of the things that really bothered me in this was not the idea of obedience - which, as I said above, I do question, but I can completely understand - but the idea of cheerful obedience. I don't tolerate whining from my kids. However, to expect them to obey and be happy about it robs them not only of their own critical thinking (as some people are saying in the thread) but of their own right to their emotions, something I have even more trouble with.

 

 

Would you rather a whiney, "But mooooommm I don't wannnaaa pick up my toys." Or would you rather an either (depending on age) an, "Okay, I'll get it in just a moment" or an "Okay, mommy."

 

I'll pick cheerful over not cheerful anytime. But yes, it does have to be cultivated, it would be weird being beaten into cheerful submission. The fairly normal parents who practice FTO do not beat it into their kids.

 

I've been wondering this the entire thread.

 

When I read questions such as the one posited by the OP, the first thing that pops into my head is "oh, look, someone is doing research on the homeschool community - how nice."

 

Blech.

 

 

a

I, too, am beginning to wonder. I didn't want to cry the "T" word, but something just seems the slightest bit off. Maybe you're right about someone researching the homeschooling community.

 

Childhood is a preparation stage. Blind, cheerful obedience is not a good trait in an adult so I will not cultivate it at all costs in a child.

 

I agree with the others - trust is a more appropriate discipline goal. My son trusts me to keep him from harm and make decisions in his best interests. As he gets older he is learning to trust himself and make his own decisions so that he is able to do so as an adult.

I don't think you'll find any parents here looking to raise their children to follow blindly or to be blindly cheerfully obedient. Big difference between working on being pleasant and cheerful about doing what one is asked/told and doing so blindly.

Edited August 27, 2011 by Parrothead

[Ginevra]

Rosie, why did it make you feel like your mom didn't like you? :confused: This makes me so sad! I do try to encourage my kids to have a good attitude. I think sometimes kids use big pouts, grumpy attitudes, etc to "punish" the parents for asking them to do something they don't want to do. I do want my kids to guard their attitudes and not just their behaviors. But I DON'T want them to think I don't like them!!! Could you explain more? I'm concerned and curious!

 

I'm not Rosie, but her post resonated with me in my view of my childhood. My parents wanted "happy" obedience and also viewed any discussion as "backtalk." To me, it felt like my parents didn't actually care about ME, as a person, they just wanted me to carry out whatever good behavior they were requiring and to *look* happy about it. I suffered from very serious depression in my teens and this was a lot of the reason. My parents just could not abide any discussion, debate, difference of opinion - they shut every and all such "backtalk" down like a ton of bricks. It was very harmful.

 

With my kids, I don't require them to paste on a smile. I have told them they need to improve their attitude about X,Y,Z, but they are allowed to appeal to me, have a different opinion, see something differently and even be unhappy about something that is going to happen.

[Dana]

Would you rather a whiney, "But mooooommm I don't wannnaaa pick up my toys." Or would you rather an either (depending on age) an, "Okay, I'll get it in just a moment" or an "Okay, mommy."

 

I'll pick cheerful over not cheerful anytime. But yes, it does have to be cultivated, it would be weird being beaten into cheerful submission. The fairly normal parents who practice FTO do not beat it into their kids.

 

 

I think there's a significant difference between a polite response (which is expected here) and expecting a child to be happy as they pick up their toys.

[gardenmom5]

This is slightly OT, but I'm a child of overly controlling mother, and I'm very aware of the pendulum. So I'm incredibly interested in your point of view here.

 

Why did you want less freedom? Were you overwhelmed by needing to be on your own, and make your own choices? Or was it something else?

I grew up with the notion that children don't have their own thoughts or feelings, and I wasn't allowed to make choices

 

:)

 

I'll pipe in. I'm NOT saying I agree with OP's positions (I haven't read all her posts, but a goodly number of them), but I do have experience on this subject.

 

My mother was overly permissive - it was her pendulum swing from her overly controlling mother. I wished my mother would have cared enough about us to have said a frim "no" when it was needed. To give reasons "why", and NOT "because I said so". (channeling her controllling mother). Her permissiveness convyed a sense of not really caring about her children, and that she just wanted us to not bother her so she could do what she wanted.

 

Children lack experience parents are supposed to be able to provide through guidance, but if a parent doesn't care enough to guide, the child is left with trial and error. Hopefully, none of the errors will be so bad they can't recover. I also believe my mother spent her entire life in teenage rebellion to her mother. even when I was a teenager, I often felt I was the parent. I deeply resented that - I wanted to have a parent. (my father was deceased.)

 

but as the child of an overly controlling and emotionally/mentally abusive mother who demanded obedience, my mother was unable to stand up for herself, and was afraid to try anything for fear of failure. As a child of an overly permissive mother, I had to learn how to balance it all with my own children. (and I don't think I'm alone in the precarious balance, because it seems just when you think you've got it figured out, the child changes the rules and you have to come up with a new plan. :tongue_smilie:)

 

1dd's best friend used to be freaked out coming here because she said it was a house full of alpha's and we intimidated her to death. :) While I wanted my children to be civilized, nice, and polite individuals (they are), I also wanted them to be able to stand up for what they believed, what was right, etc. AND to think for themselves *why* they believe the things they do. They think for themselves and they do what's right because that is what they want to do. Really, I want to work myself out of a job, and not run my children's life until the day I die.

 

We also got the "you don't think that . . you don't mean that . . you don't feel that . . etc . . " from my overly controlling grandmother. yeah granny, I DO mean that, think that, feel that!!! and who are you to tell ME what *I* feel??? chlidren's feelings are just as real as an adults. When my kids said they "don't want to . . .", my response was always fine you don't have to want to, just do it. I was determined to treat my children with the respect my sibs and I were not treated with - and consequently, my children treat each other and their parents with respect. and are just nice people.

Edited August 27, 2011 by gardenmom5

[Parrothead]

I think there's a significant difference between a polite response (which is expected here) and expecting a child to be happy as they pick up their toys.

Why would one expect them not to be happy to do their part to keep the household running smoothly?

 

People, children and adults, learn pretty quickly that the way they approach a task (the attitude toward it) makes the task more or less pleasant. Why go about it with a bad attitude? Why cultivate bad attitude?

[Lily_Grace]

Why would one expect them not to be happy to do their part to keep the household running smoothly?

 

People, children and adults, learn pretty quickly that the way they approach a task (the attitude toward it) makes the task more or less pleasant. Why go about it with a bad attitude? Why cultivate bad attitude?

 

But you can't force them to feel a certain way. Everyone has bad days. Everyone has things they don't want to do. Everyone goes through hormonal changes, lack of sleep, sickness, and various other things that can make even a simple task be an exercise in frustration.

 

I believe you can teach a child how to deal with their emotions while at the same time allowing them to own how they feel. Fine, a kid doesn't feel like picking up his bathroom. Which is better, teaching him to pretend to be happy and ignore how he really feels or teaching him how to cope with being upset that he has to stop play and do the chore? To ignore how a a person feels is teaching them to lie and teaching them that they are too insignificant to matter or that they're only worth liking when they act exactly how you want them to.

[justamouse]

I'm worried about her kids and the dogs she trains. Koehler is rough stuff..he's basically the Pearls of the dog world.

 

Oh. That's not encouraging.