James Dean Posted January 17, 2014 Posted January 17, 2014 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sarah-maclaughlin-lsw/7-new-ways-to-navigate-defiance-from-your-child_b_4564781.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009 I read the article, and I was pretty well pleased with the conclusions that this usually lefty 'news' site came up with, but I have to be honest, I read some of the comments below and I actually wept for the children of those parents. I guess it's just a soft spot for me, but whenever I hear the 'because I said so' parents in their cold and unfeeling, un-curious, stupid ex post facto justifications it really makes my blood boil. This is how my mother was and I never had a real relationship with her she was just so cold and frigid.
MysterionMuffles Posted January 17, 2014 Posted January 17, 2014 I'm really sorry to hear that James...it's far too often in this generation still. It seems to lessen over the generations, but with the spread of philosophy I hope it hastens the death of ex post facto justifications. I'm really sad to see that only two people agree with the article and got such few likes. I dunno if it's worth any pursuit, but I think as an anti-child-abuse community, we should raid all of these types of arguments just to defend children's rights. I know it's kind of like e-protesting which is utterly useless...I just feel horribly for the people who say such stupid crap like that. Here's what I posted: I'm really sorry for the unexamined childhoods leaking out from everyone in the comments below me. If you honestly believe that you have the right to treat your children like machines to be owned and controlled, then I'm really sorry that you have no compassion for yourself. It means that you were probably mistreated in the same way you condone, which is just an admission that you yourself don't deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.
dsayers Posted January 17, 2014 Posted January 17, 2014 I was put off immediately just from the title. "defiance from your child" is arrogant in that it presumes the parent is correct. However, you can handle this annoying behavior better when your goal is to utilize your relationship with a child as motivation Using your relationship with somebody as motivation is the definition of ostracism. This is fine when it comes to strangers, friends, etc. It's not so good in the parent child relationship because... 1. Don't ever take it personally. A parent should ALWAYS take it personally for they are responsible for that child. Imagine a day when you get up, and before you can even take a breath someone is telling you what to do. You're told what to wear, what to eat, when to leave the house, and on and on. I am not suggesting that we allow children to run the show. An article that pretends to have the goal of helping the parent-child relationship is approaching children as if they're subservient. This frames the conversation as if negotiation and rational thought are not options. There is no better tool for staying calm than the use of positive self-talk. In order to pull off "Don't take it personally," you will need to speak to yourself inwardly about what is happening in front of you. There is no solution in the moment. If you did not prepare for the eventuality of having a flat tire, thinking about how great it would be to have a spare and the tools and know how to fix it will be of no help to you. This failure to prepare is the driver's fault, not the car. Odd that she more or less addresses this in point 5. Point 4 failed in that it's referring to negotiation as a way to manage damage after it's been done and not as a tool to avoid damage in the first place. Stop aggression with firm arms and say, "I can't let you hit." When they retaliate and yell, "I hate you -- you're the worst mom in the whole world," do not try to now also put boundaries on their words. This doesn't address what led to them wanting to hit or yell. Nor does it address that "putting boundaries on words" is wrong because it's controlling another human being. If you don't want a child to say the word broccoli, don't ever say broccoli in front of them. Just because your child is refusing to leave the house at 3:30, doesn't mean he'll still be refusing at 3:40. Hold the vision that he will eventually comply with your request. Translation: engage the underpowered in a battle of wills. This conflicts with her earlier advice of not letting the child run the show. If the child is negotiated with as if they're a human being, then the times that you have to go somewhere together due to a deadline doesn't have to lead to the parent allowing the child to erase them. Which is damaging to the child who needs to learn that there are other people in the world who have competing needs. Again, this is a failure of the parent to prepare by letting the child know a deadline is coming up. Power play is when you play games that give a child the more powerful role. "Push Dad Over" is a favorite in our house, as is "Invited Defiance," where I build a block tower and beg that it not be knocked down, only to move through the build-beg-knock down process over and over. Building the parent-child relationship by normalizing aggression and playing teammates so the child will aim the aggression away from the parent. I'm all for fantasy play, but in this article, this is a dangerous piece of advice. I know it's hard -- really, really hard -- to keep yourself regulated, calm and in a state of mind from which you can respond (instead of react) when things are fast spinning out of control. This sounds like a good thing to work on BEFORE making the decision of bringing a child into the world. At which point, the parent's lack of control will lead to perpetuating the cycle of violence. This article was by the abused to cajole the abused to assist them in managing the effects of their abuse in ways other than owning it, apologizing for it, and working to correct it IN THEMSELVES. Only a very small portion of the article is dedicated to self-knowledge and only by accident.
James Dean Posted January 17, 2014 Author Posted January 17, 2014 dsayers, That's all very true! I guess on a first skim it seems alright but really falls apart at the in depth analysis. Maybe it just goes to show that anything looks ok in comparison to, you know, abuse. :/ Thanks for the thoughtful points. Mysterion Muffles, thank you for your kindness. It seems so strange to have to trumpet the ideals of not abusing children, and it's baffling that so many people can be blatantly evil. I also feel that urge that do something like an e protest or a freedomain radio cyber raid. That would be emotionally satisfying, but it would be just so futile as to not be worth it. The only thing that can change these abusive people is self knowledge.
Pepin Posted January 17, 2014 Posted January 17, 2014 Though the reactions are disconcerting, I think there is more to be glad about than anything. The very fact that these sorts of things are entering the public conscious is awesome. I see it as being similar to the fight to end slavery and black and female rights. I don't see this as means to change the current opposition, but rather as a means convince those on the edge and to change the future. It will likely take a couple of generations to see the change due to the nature of biology, but it is coming. Really, I think the best indicator of this are all the comedians who talk about it, Lewis CK and George Carlin being the best examples. I tried posting this comment on the article, but ran into some technical difficulties. How the child acts is a complete reflection of how you parent. You are literally laying down the neural pathways that determine current and future behavior with your interactions with them. Those are in opposition to this article, please stop putting responsibility on the child and put it on yourself. How terrible of a parent must you be where you believe it is good to physically or verbally assault them? Where is your conscious? If you are going to abuse you child, be honest. Simply tell them that you want to hit them because you wish to inflict pain and suffering. Tell them that you take great pleasure in their pain. Tell them that they lack responsibility for their actions because you lack responsibilities for your's.
MysterionMuffles Posted January 17, 2014 Posted January 17, 2014 I wanted to engage in some convos but it looks like (at least on my computer) replies to posts disappear after posting them. Either from tech difficulties or people just reporting me as spam...as I have for them!
dsayers Posted January 18, 2014 Posted January 18, 2014 I guess on a first skim it seems alright but really falls apart at the in depth analysis. Beware the sophists! Pepin nailed it when he pointed out that it's good that such things are entering more mainstream evaluation. I just think it's critical that those of us who are on the front line so to speak don't allow ourselves to be compromised by propaganda that dilutes the truth. Really, I think the best indicator of this are all the comedians who talk about it, Lewis CK and George Carlin being the best examples. George Carlin was actually the first exposure I had to the possibility that God might not exist. It was a long process for me, but I can actually credit him for its beginning.
Recommended Posts