Parenting Question on Consequences?

[LovePrevails]

someone was talking to me about the appropriate (not punishment) use of consequences as a parent I said

 

"I'm not yet convinced that imposing some negative consequences for an action to deter it (punishment) is effective or creates good relationships? Can you give some examples of how consequences could be used effectively in the sense which you mean? Consequences for me could be: if you don't learn your lines for the play we have to give your part to another kid who is more eager - that is a consequence which is not selected because it is unpleasant but reasonable"

 

and he replied

 

"If you choose to leave your bike outside and unlocked and it gets stolen, I'm not going to buy you a new one."

 

What are your views on this? Is that right?

 

My initial reaction was to go, "but presumably that would only be necessary if you've already explained the relative merrit of not leaving the bike outside unlocked and the child is being defiant? why aren't they following such a sensible suggestion?"

 

What other views are being repriesented?

 

[Pepin]

The example seems to be more about adjudicating responsibility than inflicting consequence, though poorly. The "I'm not going to buy you a new one" line is very weird. Why would a parent feel the need to say this? Do they think the child expects the parent to replace their property if they fail to protect it? Where would such a thought come from?

 

I would propose that the parent realizes that they haven't taught their child enough about responsibility, that they have replaced somewhat expensive piece of property of the child's in the past, and are now attempting make the child responsible through a bit of a scare statement. It also reveals that the parent does not trust the child to take care of their property.

 

There is certainly an age frame where expecting a child to have a rational understanding of responsibility in relation to their actions does not make sense. Pointing out consequences, such as potential theft, is needed for a child who is not aware of the possibilities. Going further and stating "I won't buy you a new bike if you lose this one" simply isn't trusting your child.

 

Perhaps the parent misjudged the child's ability to understand the consequences. It is not then upon the child to live up to the parent's misjudgment, but rather for the parent to take responsibility.

[LovePrevails]

The example seems to be more about adjudicating responsibility than inflicting consequence, though poorly. The "I'm not going to buy you a new one" line is very weird. Why would a parent feel the need to say this? Do they think the child expects the parent to replace their property if they fail to protect it? Where would such a thought come from?

 

I would propose that the parent realizes that they haven't taught their child enough about responsibility, that they have replaced somewhat expensive piece of property of the child's in the past, and are now attempting make the child responsible through a bit of a scare statement. It also reveals that the parent does not trust the child to take care of their property.

 

There is certainly an age frame where expecting a child to have a rational understanding of responsibility in relation to their actions does not make sense. Pointing out consequences, such as potential theft, is needed for a child who is not aware of the possibilities. Going further and stating "I won't buy you a new bike if you lose this one" simply isn't trusting your child.

 

Perhaps the parent misjudged the child's ability to understand the consequences. It is not then upon the child to live up to the parent's misjudgment, but rather for the parent to take responsibility.

 

thanks Pepin, I thought that was a great response, when I asked why, he said this:

 

"Naiveté / magic thinking ("no one will ever steal my bike / it won't happen to me") or testing ("you don't really mean that") Typical kids (as you know) are motivated by needs and emotions, not logic."

 

this is a good guy btw, not an anti-child person a very pro-children person in general

[cherapple]

I don't get the sense this person is pro child. He's basically calling them stupid and irresponsible, and there's a tinge of resentment to his responses. Is this person a parent?

[LovePrevails]

He is in general pro-child he does a lot of really good work educating parents on how to overcome psychological wounds and teach their children to communicate well, that's why I was bringing up a dispute with him on this point.