Heh. Here's a way of articulating it:
1) try to discipline our children so they do what we want and they don't always get their own way. This requires naughty steps, hitting the children, telling them off, praising the good and ignoring the bad - whatever discipline steps the mum takes, it's basically behaviourism a la Skinner - we are trying to alter who our children are and what they want by the provision or withdrawal of affection. And that's the standard kind of parenting.
2) let our children do whatever they want. disaster. Ends up with burnt out mums having breakdowns, years and years of self-sacrifice with more and more resentment under the surface, mum getting to the stage where she doesn't even really know what she'd prefer herself, she's got so used to servicing the desires of her children. Also very likely to end up with children who find it almost impossible to interact with other children or adults because they don't comply with every request. Likely to be called "spoiled brats".
3) consentual parenting. Unconditional parenting. Natural parenting. Taking children seriously. All sorts of trendy words for closely related philosophies which suggest finding common preferences. there's a battle where child wants a and parent wants b. In standard parenting a happens with a tantrum, or with mum getting hit and bit. In bratty parenting b happens with mum feeling angry underneath. In the third type of parenting, parent and child work together to find either a way of a or b happening which both are happy with, or discover c, which actually both are happier about than either was about a or b. It can happen with pre-verbal children, you just have to get good at reading their cues and offering possibilities in ways they understand. the parent is responsible for helping their child interact with society in constructive ways (ie not becoming a brat), but through reason instead of discipline.
Monday, June 25, 2007
Sunday, June 24, 2007
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Politicians get it wrong
So.. the teachers are saying that testing school children every five minutes is worse than pointless, but both the DfES and the opposition say that they think it's an important way of ensuring standards
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=LW5ZPXF1YA22NQFIQMGCFFWAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2007/06/10/nexam110.xml
Hint: teachers - you should all simply refuse to administer the SATS.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=LW5ZPXF1YA22NQFIQMGCFFWAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2007/06/10/nexam110.xml
Hint: teachers - you should all simply refuse to administer the SATS.
Children playing in fridges
Mother of a toddler says
I think it's a really normal phase for a child to be interested in emptying things out of the fridge.
In this situation, I would get to the fridge quickly, and quietly remove eggs, anything liquid in an open container, and put them somewhere cool (sink of cold water for open milk cartons maybe?) and then I would turn the fridge off and give the child a LARGE tupperware container or washing up bowl to put the food in.
At first, you may well have to help with putting them into the bowl rather than having them strewn across the floor. Encourage child to experiment with tasting butter/cheese/vegetables/fruit (some children like eating raw onion, garlic, brussel sprouts, cabbage at this age...).
When all the food is out of the fridge, help them put it all back. Rinse and repeat.Honestly, if it wasn't for these sorts of passing interests in our children, we'd all have fridges full of archeological specimens we'd forgotten all about... (or maybe that's just me)
(and think in your mind that this exploration is not likely to last more than a month. It might be significantly less time. Anything really perishable can go in the freezer for a couple of hours)
Why are there forbidden zones which a child should not be helped to explore safely?
...those no go areas vary from person to person. For some people it's going in the fridge at all. For some people going in the fridge is ok, as long as it's with the parent controlling what they do in it (and I'm in that camp to an extent, since I'd quietly remove open yoghurt pots before the child noticed), but for some mothers the whole kitchen is a forbidden area and the child is left crying outside a stairgate.
... which means that the "need to leave alone" is not that the child needs to leave it alone for some rational universal reason.
Speeding lorry advancing at 40 miles an hour - every parent would see the middle of the road as a no go for their child at that moment - the child needs to leave the middle of the road alone in order to stay alive, and parent would be right to force their child back on the pavement in the heat of that moment. But the fridge scenario is not black and white at all.
If a child is really keen to get in the fridge and play with the objects in it, I think it is better to find a way for that to happen which makes both parent and child happy rather than to make child very distressed over what is actually parent's arbitrary limitation.
There are all sorts of ways of keeping the food cool while playing in and around the fridge. I'd slip meat into the freezer as soon as it came out of the fridge. I'd probably grab a bag of Tesco economy frozen peas out of the freezer (like about 60p worth of peas) and use them to form a cool cushion at the bottom of the container the food was going into. If this game looked likely to be played tomorrow as well, I'd make a HEAP of ice cubes that night so I could keep the stuff cool for no money at all. The child might even get more interested in the ice cubes than the food, at which point the fridge could be filled and shut and turned on again.
That's just in a 2 minute brainstorm. If this was a real situation in my house, I'd be putting a lot of creative energy into making a good solution for everyone because a) tantrums are exhausting for everyone, children and parents and b) what an opportunity for a child to learn all sorts of things about colours and shapes and textures and tastes and counting and stacking and... so many things our children do can be embraced as learning opportunities rather than things we have to stop them doing and c) it'll be a passing phase. The more the parent helps their child explore whatever the phase is safely and fully, the less likely the child is to want to go back to it again and again and again, when parent's back is turned, eventually finding a way past the fridge lock and destroying a week's worth of groceries.
And no, road safety has NOTHING to do with fridge locks or household safety - that was exactly my point! There's a black and white "children must not be left in the path of speeding lorries". There is no clear right and wrong here - there's no obvious "children mustn't play in fridges because they'll die" - there are only the limitations of their parents' willingness to make it possible for them to explore in this particular environment.
And as for toy/not toy - that's an arbitrary distinction too, as every child (along with any adult who has ever put a 1 year old on a kitchen floor with a metal saucepan and two wooden spoons) knows.
"what do I do? My child keeps playing in the fridge"
I think it's a really normal phase for a child to be interested in emptying things out of the fridge.
In this situation, I would get to the fridge quickly, and quietly remove eggs, anything liquid in an open container, and put them somewhere cool (sink of cold water for open milk cartons maybe?) and then I would turn the fridge off and give the child a LARGE tupperware container or washing up bowl to put the food in.
At first, you may well have to help with putting them into the bowl rather than having them strewn across the floor. Encourage child to experiment with tasting butter/cheese/vegetables/fruit (some children like eating raw onion, garlic, brussel sprouts, cabbage at this age...).
When all the food is out of the fridge, help them put it all back. Rinse and repeat.Honestly, if it wasn't for these sorts of passing interests in our children, we'd all have fridges full of archeological specimens we'd forgotten all about... (or maybe that's just me)
(and think in your mind that this exploration is not likely to last more than a month. It might be significantly less time. Anything really perishable can go in the freezer for a couple of hours)
"no, this is a terrible idea. Children should not explore in fridges"
Why are there forbidden zones which a child should not be helped to explore safely?
...those no go areas vary from person to person. For some people it's going in the fridge at all. For some people going in the fridge is ok, as long as it's with the parent controlling what they do in it (and I'm in that camp to an extent, since I'd quietly remove open yoghurt pots before the child noticed), but for some mothers the whole kitchen is a forbidden area and the child is left crying outside a stairgate.
... which means that the "need to leave alone" is not that the child needs to leave it alone for some rational universal reason.
Speeding lorry advancing at 40 miles an hour - every parent would see the middle of the road as a no go for their child at that moment - the child needs to leave the middle of the road alone in order to stay alive, and parent would be right to force their child back on the pavement in the heat of that moment. But the fridge scenario is not black and white at all.
It's a fridge not a toy. I can't see any rational person entertaining their
child by letting them into the fridge. And it has nothing to do with road safety.
If a child is really keen to get in the fridge and play with the objects in it, I think it is better to find a way for that to happen which makes both parent and child happy rather than to make child very distressed over what is actually parent's arbitrary limitation.
There are all sorts of ways of keeping the food cool while playing in and around the fridge. I'd slip meat into the freezer as soon as it came out of the fridge. I'd probably grab a bag of Tesco economy frozen peas out of the freezer (like about 60p worth of peas) and use them to form a cool cushion at the bottom of the container the food was going into. If this game looked likely to be played tomorrow as well, I'd make a HEAP of ice cubes that night so I could keep the stuff cool for no money at all. The child might even get more interested in the ice cubes than the food, at which point the fridge could be filled and shut and turned on again.
That's just in a 2 minute brainstorm. If this was a real situation in my house, I'd be putting a lot of creative energy into making a good solution for everyone because a) tantrums are exhausting for everyone, children and parents and b) what an opportunity for a child to learn all sorts of things about colours and shapes and textures and tastes and counting and stacking and... so many things our children do can be embraced as learning opportunities rather than things we have to stop them doing and c) it'll be a passing phase. The more the parent helps their child explore whatever the phase is safely and fully, the less likely the child is to want to go back to it again and again and again, when parent's back is turned, eventually finding a way past the fridge lock and destroying a week's worth of groceries.
And no, road safety has NOTHING to do with fridge locks or household safety - that was exactly my point! There's a black and white "children must not be left in the path of speeding lorries". There is no clear right and wrong here - there's no obvious "children mustn't play in fridges because they'll die" - there are only the limitations of their parents' willingness to make it possible for them to explore in this particular environment.
And as for toy/not toy - that's an arbitrary distinction too, as every child (along with any adult who has ever put a 1 year old on a kitchen floor with a metal saucepan and two wooden spoons) knows.
Quote of the month
"I think Montessori isn’t considered proper education - it’s a bit faddy. Nowhere near as faddy as the national curriculum and sats if you ask me. "
http://liveotherwise.co.uk/makingitup/2007/06/09/sunny-saturday/#comments
http://liveotherwise.co.uk/makingitup/2007/06/09/sunny-saturday/#comments
Friday, June 08, 2007
exams are not important
"But how will your home educated child get proper qualifications?"
...rather begs the question of whether those qualifications are worth getting. GCSE Physics has become political and, according to one physics teacher, isn't actually about physics at all: http://www.wellingtongrey.net/articles/archive/2007-06-07--open-letter-aqa.html
Not a GCSE I'd want to touch with a bargepole... rather like the recent incarnation of New Scientist (which should berenamed New Environmentalist)
...rather begs the question of whether those qualifications are worth getting. GCSE Physics has become political and, according to one physics teacher, isn't actually about physics at all: http://www.wellingtongrey.net/articles/archive/2007-06-07--open-letter-aqa.html
Not a GCSE I'd want to touch with a bargepole... rather like the recent incarnation of New Scientist (which should berenamed New Environmentalist)
Wednesday, June 06, 2007
John Bowlby
I've occasionally heard John Bowlby mentioned in "Nurseries are all evil" conversations, so I thought I'd read for myself.
I recently finished "Childcare and the Growth of Love" which was first published in1953. It came out of the context of the end of the second world war, and was the easy-reading version of a UN report on homeless children. There were many children displaced or orphaned during WWII in Europe, and Bowlby was one of the people who studied the effects of different kinds of upheaval.
Not surprisingly, the studies of the time all showed that children are happier at home than in an institution, even if their parents are pretty unsatisfactory, and they are better off with continuity of care in a foster home or orphanage than having lots of different careworkers. So "families" in orphanages were seen as one partial solution. This was all pretty shocking at the time - less than 10 years earlier than Bowlby's studies, children were regularly being evacuated from London and other major cities without their parents. Their physical safety was the main concern, but the emotional damage of such enforced separation had not really been taken into account. Nowadays, of course, it's taken as read that the babies in Rumanian orphanages who were only looked at when it was feeding or nappy changing time would be emotionally, physically and intellectually stunted.
Bowlby quite reasonably concludes that the best place for a child to be is with its parents, and that the state is better placed putting its welfare resources into supporting families rather than whisking children away into institutions, and my understanding is that that is now well entrenched in welfare provision, certainly in the UK.
But he then makes this extraordinary non sequiteur. Children are best brought up in their homes (agreed) so, says Bowlby, mothers shouldn't be going out to work, but should be staying at home with their children. He was, of course, writing at just the moment when thousands of men were being demobbed and needed employment, and I think that must have been the motivation behind the judgement, because his evidence was quite clear that living in an institution is bad for children, and that foster homes are a poor second to the real family home, but his evidence didn't actually show that day nurseries or child minders are a bad thing.
Don't get me wrong. I think day nurseries and child minders may well be a bad thing for small children, but Bowlby doesn't show it, at least, not in this book. Suggestions for further reading in the comments please...
I recently finished "Childcare and the Growth of Love" which was first published in1953. It came out of the context of the end of the second world war, and was the easy-reading version of a UN report on homeless children. There were many children displaced or orphaned during WWII in Europe, and Bowlby was one of the people who studied the effects of different kinds of upheaval.
Not surprisingly, the studies of the time all showed that children are happier at home than in an institution, even if their parents are pretty unsatisfactory, and they are better off with continuity of care in a foster home or orphanage than having lots of different careworkers. So "families" in orphanages were seen as one partial solution. This was all pretty shocking at the time - less than 10 years earlier than Bowlby's studies, children were regularly being evacuated from London and other major cities without their parents. Their physical safety was the main concern, but the emotional damage of such enforced separation had not really been taken into account. Nowadays, of course, it's taken as read that the babies in Rumanian orphanages who were only looked at when it was feeding or nappy changing time would be emotionally, physically and intellectually stunted.
Bowlby quite reasonably concludes that the best place for a child to be is with its parents, and that the state is better placed putting its welfare resources into supporting families rather than whisking children away into institutions, and my understanding is that that is now well entrenched in welfare provision, certainly in the UK.
But he then makes this extraordinary non sequiteur. Children are best brought up in their homes (agreed) so, says Bowlby, mothers shouldn't be going out to work, but should be staying at home with their children. He was, of course, writing at just the moment when thousands of men were being demobbed and needed employment, and I think that must have been the motivation behind the judgement, because his evidence was quite clear that living in an institution is bad for children, and that foster homes are a poor second to the real family home, but his evidence didn't actually show that day nurseries or child minders are a bad thing.
Don't get me wrong. I think day nurseries and child minders may well be a bad thing for small children, but Bowlby doesn't show it, at least, not in this book. Suggestions for further reading in the comments please...
Children mirroring parents
"he kicks, he nips, he shouts, he bites, has the worst tantrums I have ever seen and doesnt listen to a word I say!!!"
He sounds really really angry. Here's what I'd be doing:
1. concentrate on what is making him so furious, and do whatever you can to a) help him do the thing he is struggling with, if it's safe or b) offer something he'll enjoy even better. It's much easier to persuade a toddler into a car seat if you've found out why they don't want to go in it and solved that problem (you want to hold Thomas the Tank Engine all the time while you're getting in??? Oh - ok then! Smiles all round). Someone is more likely not to have any problem leaving the playground if you're suggesting a minimilk from the icecream van on the way home...
2. be very very careful about your responses. Children mirror what their parents do, a lot. I'm not suggesting you're hitting him for a moment, but when you write
"I try and give him trouble"
"I shouted for him to come here several times"
... he might be learning to shout back because that's what people around him seem to do when they are in a situation they don't like. (but maybe I'm reading your words wrong - that was just the interpretation that jumped out at me.
3. You seem to be telling him a lot that things are "naughty". Naughty is just a word, and your child isn't even 2 yet, so he isn't exactly fluent in English yet, let alone being well practised at abstract reasoning. Use as few words as you possibly can to explain what the actual problem is, and to show him without punishing. Punishment is completely meaningless to a child of this age - all they'll see is an arbitrary withdrawal of mummy's love until they do something magic like say "sorry" (whatever that means - just another word). That's why putting him in his room isn't making him penitent - it's just inexplicable, from a child's point of view. If he's reaching for the hot oven, you could say "NO!! That's naughty! Come here at once and listen!" Or you could say "LOOK OUT! Hot!" and then go with him and put your hand near the oven so you can feel the heat without burning and encourage him to do the same, and do safe experiments with the hot water tap and lit candles and things so he really understands the concept of hot. There isn't actually anything "naughty" about exploring the world. Our children just need our help to do it in a civilised and safe manner.
4. Playdates just aren't a time for mums to relax at this age. You need to be down on the floor with the children at all times, helping them interact in a friendly way with each other, making sure both of them have access to toys they want (here's a car for billy and here's one for Jake, look that one's green and this one I've got is red - do you want the red one?). Avoiding toddler conflict requires running pretty constant interference, and I think we are much better helping our children to learn to interact in a civilised manner by being there helping them on the spot than by telling them off afterwards for getting it wrong.
He sounds really really angry. Here's what I'd be doing:
1. concentrate on what is making him so furious, and do whatever you can to a) help him do the thing he is struggling with, if it's safe or b) offer something he'll enjoy even better. It's much easier to persuade a toddler into a car seat if you've found out why they don't want to go in it and solved that problem (you want to hold Thomas the Tank Engine all the time while you're getting in??? Oh - ok then! Smiles all round). Someone is more likely not to have any problem leaving the playground if you're suggesting a minimilk from the icecream van on the way home...
2. be very very careful about your responses. Children mirror what their parents do, a lot. I'm not suggesting you're hitting him for a moment, but when you write
"I try and give him trouble"
"I shouted for him to come here several times"
... he might be learning to shout back because that's what people around him seem to do when they are in a situation they don't like. (but maybe I'm reading your words wrong - that was just the interpretation that jumped out at me.
3. You seem to be telling him a lot that things are "naughty". Naughty is just a word, and your child isn't even 2 yet, so he isn't exactly fluent in English yet, let alone being well practised at abstract reasoning. Use as few words as you possibly can to explain what the actual problem is, and to show him without punishing. Punishment is completely meaningless to a child of this age - all they'll see is an arbitrary withdrawal of mummy's love until they do something magic like say "sorry" (whatever that means - just another word). That's why putting him in his room isn't making him penitent - it's just inexplicable, from a child's point of view. If he's reaching for the hot oven, you could say "NO!! That's naughty! Come here at once and listen!" Or you could say "LOOK OUT! Hot!" and then go with him and put your hand near the oven so you can feel the heat without burning and encourage him to do the same, and do safe experiments with the hot water tap and lit candles and things so he really understands the concept of hot. There isn't actually anything "naughty" about exploring the world. Our children just need our help to do it in a civilised and safe manner.
4. Playdates just aren't a time for mums to relax at this age. You need to be down on the floor with the children at all times, helping them interact in a friendly way with each other, making sure both of them have access to toys they want (here's a car for billy and here's one for Jake, look that one's green and this one I've got is red - do you want the red one?). Avoiding toddler conflict requires running pretty constant interference, and I think we are much better helping our children to learn to interact in a civilised manner by being there helping them on the spot than by telling them off afterwards for getting it wrong.
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Almost enough to make one turn to religion
... clear instructions for making a paper boat, with optional bible study...
http://www.dltk-bible.com/crafts/mboat.htm
http://www.dltk-bible.com/crafts/mboat.htm
Children as prisoners
I used to go off on enormously long bike rides as a child. The only rules were that one had to give an estimated time of return and one was not permitted to go on one stretch of very busy road with very blind corners. No bike helmets, no molbile phones (they were the size and weight of bricks in those days, anyway, if they'd even been invented)
By the age of 14, I was travelling 100 miles to London every Saturday for the professional training of my choice. Train, 2 tubes and a walk, or train and bus, or train and bus and walk - I got pretty confident at getting to my destination in different ways. Alone.
That sort of thing happens less and less in the UK. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6720661.stm
I wonder how parents can now maximise the chances of their children having such freedom? Immediately springing to mind are:
Becoming properly informed about the risks of various activities, the risks of car accidents, bicycle accidents, random abductors etc.
Buying child a mobile phone as soon as they are able to operate one. (maybe - I see problems with parent being a virtual presence there, actually)
Become accustomed to taking their children seriously, so that requests for independent adventures can be rationally approached.
It's all just an extension of parents who don't help their children learn to walk on 6" high walls when they first show an interest aged 1 or 2 because it's "dangerous"
This is somewhat half baked but I have other things I want to do now, so I'll use the old "I should edit this but the baby just jumped off the top of the kitchen cabinets" privacy-violating get-out clause...
By the age of 14, I was travelling 100 miles to London every Saturday for the professional training of my choice. Train, 2 tubes and a walk, or train and bus, or train and bus and walk - I got pretty confident at getting to my destination in different ways. Alone.
That sort of thing happens less and less in the UK. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6720661.stm
I wonder how parents can now maximise the chances of their children having such freedom? Immediately springing to mind are:
Becoming properly informed about the risks of various activities, the risks of car accidents, bicycle accidents, random abductors etc.
Buying child a mobile phone as soon as they are able to operate one. (maybe - I see problems with parent being a virtual presence there, actually)
Become accustomed to taking their children seriously, so that requests for independent adventures can be rationally approached.
It's all just an extension of parents who don't help their children learn to walk on 6" high walls when they first show an interest aged 1 or 2 because it's "dangerous"
This is somewhat half baked but I have other things I want to do now, so I'll use the old "I should edit this but the baby just jumped off the top of the kitchen cabinets" privacy-violating get-out clause...
Saturday, June 02, 2007
Ideas for helping a very physical child
Boisterously physical - as in, climbs all over his mother and kicks and has cracked her two front teeth. By accident, presumably.
I suggested:
Find LOTS of opportunities for climbing - trees? playgrounds? softplay? walls? Round the living room without touching the floor? (I used to love that game) If in doubt, scatter more cushions. And a good pair of reins can function like a climbing harness.
Sounds like he needs rough and tumble. How about swinging him round and round by the arms/feet/one arm and one foot? (hint: keep your gaze fixed on one spot and then whip your head round fast to get to that place again, like a dancer - then you won't get as dizzy as him)
Buy a cheap old mattress for bouncing on. Those child's trampolines are good too.
Pillow fights.
Are there any uncles or other relatives who might enjoy a good old rough and tumble?
In all your hours and hours of free time (*chortle - oh no, that's just in the parallel universe where you have a time machine*) might it be worth learning some kind of judo or wrestling or tumbling or something? Then you would know how to fall well and also how to help your child land safely
I think that Lawrence Cohen book called Playful Parenting has stuff about safe physical play, but I can't actually remember if it gave clear guidelines for wrestling. Might be helpful an
I suggested:
Find LOTS of opportunities for climbing - trees? playgrounds? softplay? walls? Round the living room without touching the floor? (I used to love that game) If in doubt, scatter more cushions. And a good pair of reins can function like a climbing harness.
Sounds like he needs rough and tumble. How about swinging him round and round by the arms/feet/one arm and one foot? (hint: keep your gaze fixed on one spot and then whip your head round fast to get to that place again, like a dancer - then you won't get as dizzy as him)
Buy a cheap old mattress for bouncing on. Those child's trampolines are good too.
Pillow fights.
Are there any uncles or other relatives who might enjoy a good old rough and tumble?
In all your hours and hours of free time (*chortle - oh no, that's just in the parallel universe where you have a time machine*) might it be worth learning some kind of judo or wrestling or tumbling or something? Then you would know how to fall well and also how to help your child land safely
I think that Lawrence Cohen book called Playful Parenting has stuff about safe physical play, but I can't actually remember if it gave clear guidelines for wrestling. Might be helpful an
Monday, May 28, 2007
fussy eater
So a child won't eat a huge selection of foods, and the mother has decided that she's not prepared to cook the same thing every night. She will offer the child whatever the family is eating, and if they won't eat it, they'll go hungry.
Relevant anecdote
I have a vivid memory of a school dinner which came around on the menu once a month. It was fish with a white sauce and tomato ketchup. The rule was that you had to finish your meal before you could go out to play. There was no choice of meal.
Even bringing the memory of that food back to mind is setting off my gag reflex. I have not eaten tomato ketchup since I left that school. So if their plan was to force me to eat certain foods because it would make me like them, their plan completely misfired.
Oh God, I've just remembered the custard tart thing which had what we described as pepper on top but I guess was cinnamon. That WAS possible to swallow, but only if you held your nose. Strangely enough, not a dish I have sought out in adulthood.
Ihad a friend who was fine with the fish and the custard tart, but his bugbear was the cheesecake. Generally he'd just sit in the dining room for the whole lunch time, but one time he was so desperate to go out and play that he took a mouthful and WAS SICK ALL OVER THE PLATE. His mum came in and tore the headteacher off a strip, and after that the rule changed and you no longer had to eat the food you didn't like (there still wasn't any choice though; just the one meal)
My approach
I'd be taking a completely different tack - rejoice at the veg and pasta and fruit and fishfingers - that's a balanced diet before you even start - and just offer other things on the plate or on a separate plate at the same meal time.
If there are things a child will often eat, but not if there's a bowl of pasta available, give them the other things five minutes before you produce the pasta, so they maybe have a bit of whatever else it was.
I'd be offering a selection of things which my child might want to eat in that meal, and the rejected ones I'd eat myself or pop in the fridge or freezer for another occasion.
I'd be aiming at a balanced diet over a week or month rather than every day. And of course my values would reflect in the kinds of things I offered - whether it was all organic tofu or there was a big concentration of chips, or whatever it might be. In that way, I'd be inexplicitly sharing my understanding of what good things and bad things are to eat. [nb I've never tasted tofu in my life but I had chips for lunch today...]
The theory bit
Why would you be punishing someone for not wanting to eat certain foods???? What precisely are you hoping to achieve by that? I just don't get it as a strategy for developing a balanced diet and adventurous palate. It certainly didn't work for me and my friends at primary school.
Worth thinking also about food as control and as battleground. If a person doesn't have control over food - they are forced to eat things they don't want and when they don't want to eat, in circumstances which they don't want to eat in, that can become a really really serious battleground later on. And in their teens, the way a person might well be taking control over that part of their lives if it's been a battleground through early childhood is through anorexia and bulimia and other eating disorders and binge/slim stuff. Maybe these hypothetical unintended consequences are too extreme and unrealistic, but I'd definitely be wanting to watch out carefully for whatever knock on effects this kind of battle might have both on my child's psyche and on our relationship.
Relevant anecdote
I have a vivid memory of a school dinner which came around on the menu once a month. It was fish with a white sauce and tomato ketchup. The rule was that you had to finish your meal before you could go out to play. There was no choice of meal.
Even bringing the memory of that food back to mind is setting off my gag reflex. I have not eaten tomato ketchup since I left that school. So if their plan was to force me to eat certain foods because it would make me like them, their plan completely misfired.
Oh God, I've just remembered the custard tart thing which had what we described as pepper on top but I guess was cinnamon. That WAS possible to swallow, but only if you held your nose. Strangely enough, not a dish I have sought out in adulthood.
Ihad a friend who was fine with the fish and the custard tart, but his bugbear was the cheesecake. Generally he'd just sit in the dining room for the whole lunch time, but one time he was so desperate to go out and play that he took a mouthful and WAS SICK ALL OVER THE PLATE. His mum came in and tore the headteacher off a strip, and after that the rule changed and you no longer had to eat the food you didn't like (there still wasn't any choice though; just the one meal)
My approach
I'd be taking a completely different tack - rejoice at the veg and pasta and fruit and fishfingers - that's a balanced diet before you even start - and just offer other things on the plate or on a separate plate at the same meal time.
If there are things a child will often eat, but not if there's a bowl of pasta available, give them the other things five minutes before you produce the pasta, so they maybe have a bit of whatever else it was.
I'd be offering a selection of things which my child might want to eat in that meal, and the rejected ones I'd eat myself or pop in the fridge or freezer for another occasion.
I'd be aiming at a balanced diet over a week or month rather than every day. And of course my values would reflect in the kinds of things I offered - whether it was all organic tofu or there was a big concentration of chips, or whatever it might be. In that way, I'd be inexplicitly sharing my understanding of what good things and bad things are to eat. [nb I've never tasted tofu in my life but I had chips for lunch today...]
The theory bit
Why would you be punishing someone for not wanting to eat certain foods???? What precisely are you hoping to achieve by that? I just don't get it as a strategy for developing a balanced diet and adventurous palate. It certainly didn't work for me and my friends at primary school.
Worth thinking also about food as control and as battleground. If a person doesn't have control over food - they are forced to eat things they don't want and when they don't want to eat, in circumstances which they don't want to eat in, that can become a really really serious battleground later on. And in their teens, the way a person might well be taking control over that part of their lives if it's been a battleground through early childhood is through anorexia and bulimia and other eating disorders and binge/slim stuff. Maybe these hypothetical unintended consequences are too extreme and unrealistic, but I'd definitely be wanting to watch out carefully for whatever knock on effects this kind of battle might have both on my child's psyche and on our relationship.
No shoes or socks thanks
I'm sure I've visited that challenge before. Here are some possibilities:
Sandals with no socks?
Those jelly shoe things?
Bare feet?
Wellies?
Some of those little leather baby shoes? (like http://www.bambinosbox.co.uk/soft-sole-leather-baby-shoes.html - that's not me spamming, it was just the first google hit)
Some children go through a stage where they HATE putting on shoes and socks before going out, but once they are outside smelling a flower or something, you can slip them on without the child even noticing or minding. Or leave them off till you get to a piece of rough ground and then offer the shoes.
Are you sure the shoes are comfortable? That'd lead me towards the baby shoes because they are just so soft.
I spent most of my childhood running around with bare feet, except when I was in a nettle patch or among too much chicken s**t :-)
Sandals with no socks?
Those jelly shoe things?
Bare feet?
Wellies?
Some of those little leather baby shoes? (like http://www.bambinosbox.co.uk/soft-sole-leather-baby-shoes.html - that's not me spamming, it was just the first google hit)
Some children go through a stage where they HATE putting on shoes and socks before going out, but once they are outside smelling a flower or something, you can slip them on without the child even noticing or minding. Or leave them off till you get to a piece of rough ground and then offer the shoes.
Are you sure the shoes are comfortable? That'd lead me towards the baby shoes because they are just so soft.
I spent most of my childhood running around with bare feet, except when I was in a nettle patch or among too much chicken s**t :-)
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Argument against controlled crying
If considering controlled crying, I'd be asking myself some very honest questions about what I was hoping to achieve, what my perception of the process was, and then what my child's perception of the process was likely to be, and finally what unintended consequences the action might have on top of the grand plan of my child learning to sleep alone.
I personally believe the distress of a crying child left alone for 5 minutes, 10 minutes, an hour, is immensely psychologically damaging to them, both in the short and long term.
I also believe the unintended consequences include: long term damage to child's trust in parent and decreasing likelihood of child being able to communicate their needs successfully; blunting of maternal instinct and increasing inability to respond to child's distress and other wants.
Controlled crying may be training your child to sleep alone, but it is also arguably training you to dismiss their cries as "not serious" or "attention seeking" until they are absolutely frantic.
Maybe I'm wrong. But I'd be really interested to see a correlation study comparing parents who leave their children to cry alone and parents who complain that their children tantrum regularly. There seem to be clear links of relationship dynamic to me.
I'd also be interested to see a correlation studying comparing the controlled crying parents with those who complain later that their teens don't communicate with them at all.
And I also think it is worth noting that Richard Ferber, who invented the technique, has since distanced himself from many of the ways people apply it, saying that while it works for some children to be left alone for a couple of minutes and they drop off, he NEVER intended for it to cause hours of distress for anyone.
I personally believe the distress of a crying child left alone for 5 minutes, 10 minutes, an hour, is immensely psychologically damaging to them, both in the short and long term.
I also believe the unintended consequences include: long term damage to child's trust in parent and decreasing likelihood of child being able to communicate their needs successfully; blunting of maternal instinct and increasing inability to respond to child's distress and other wants.
Controlled crying may be training your child to sleep alone, but it is also arguably training you to dismiss their cries as "not serious" or "attention seeking" until they are absolutely frantic.
Maybe I'm wrong. But I'd be really interested to see a correlation study comparing parents who leave their children to cry alone and parents who complain that their children tantrum regularly. There seem to be clear links of relationship dynamic to me.
I'd also be interested to see a correlation studying comparing the controlled crying parents with those who complain later that their teens don't communicate with them at all.
And I also think it is worth noting that Richard Ferber, who invented the technique, has since distanced himself from many of the ways people apply it, saying that while it works for some children to be left alone for a couple of minutes and they drop off, he NEVER intended for it to cause hours of distress for anyone.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
My child hits other people's children
Not my child; this is the question someone asked advice about at a mainstream board.
Stay with your child in such situations, and get between them and any other children if there's any sign of them hitting. Model the kind of behaviour with other children that you want your child to pick up on. Be really verbal "little girl down the slide and then it'll be your turn. There she goes 1, 2, 3 weee and now it's your go!". "That boy is playing with that ball. Shall we find a ball for you?"
Make sure you always have a soft toy or a book or something in your bag - acts as collatoral in potential toy conflicts. I know some groups of mamas whose children regularly go home with each other's soft toys, because that was the thing each child was happy holding as they parted. Charity shop toys are good for this sort of thing - I'd always be prepared to just give a 60p toy away to some other person's child rather than having a fight start.
Just in case you weren't anyway... you need to be right there with your child, helping them to learn about interacting with the world in a way that will make people love them. It's not a question of telling off, it's just that they've learned to walk and they've learned to talk a bit, and now they are in the process of learning to interact with strange children - they need your loving guidance in getting that right.
Stay with your child in such situations, and get between them and any other children if there's any sign of them hitting. Model the kind of behaviour with other children that you want your child to pick up on. Be really verbal "little girl down the slide and then it'll be your turn. There she goes 1, 2, 3 weee and now it's your go!". "That boy is playing with that ball. Shall we find a ball for you?"
Make sure you always have a soft toy or a book or something in your bag - acts as collatoral in potential toy conflicts. I know some groups of mamas whose children regularly go home with each other's soft toys, because that was the thing each child was happy holding as they parted. Charity shop toys are good for this sort of thing - I'd always be prepared to just give a 60p toy away to some other person's child rather than having a fight start.
Just in case you weren't anyway... you need to be right there with your child, helping them to learn about interacting with the world in a way that will make people love them. It's not a question of telling off, it's just that they've learned to walk and they've learned to talk a bit, and now they are in the process of learning to interact with strange children - they need your loving guidance in getting that right.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
not allowed in the kitchen
And little boy stands on the other side of the stairgate and cries...
I'm trying to think what they could be. Sharp knives? Give child one of those ancient blunt little kitchen knives we somehow all have one or two of, which hardly cut anything, and have him help you chop the veggies?
Dangerous objects in low cupboards? Either move them higher and safe things lower, or get those cupboard fasteners from mothercare
Kettle lead? Attach it to the wall so child can't pull boiling water on their head
Hot pans? I learned at my mother's knee to keep the pan handles tucked inwards so you can't pull them off the cooker
I don't think it's ever too soon to teach your child about hot rings and hot water in safe ways - putting a ring on and holding them far enough away to be safe but close enough to feel the heat, and explaining "hot", or whatever. candles are very good for learning about heat.
In your situation I'd be finding ways of making it possible for my child to come in the kitchen safely - because there's going to come a time when no part of the house is a no-go area, so why not work out how to make that possible as soon as you can? - and I'd be finding really cool things to amuse them safely while they are in there. Some salt and flour and food colouring and water? (make his own playdough) or a basin of water and some plastic mugs for pouring at the sink (And when itgoes on the floor, you just mop it up and feel smug because you mopped your kitchen unlike the rest of us)
He might be right.
"i don't like sam in there when i am cooking for safety reasons."
I'm trying to think what they could be. Sharp knives? Give child one of those ancient blunt little kitchen knives we somehow all have one or two of, which hardly cut anything, and have him help you chop the veggies?
Dangerous objects in low cupboards? Either move them higher and safe things lower, or get those cupboard fasteners from mothercare
Kettle lead? Attach it to the wall so child can't pull boiling water on their head
Hot pans? I learned at my mother's knee to keep the pan handles tucked inwards so you can't pull them off the cooker
I don't think it's ever too soon to teach your child about hot rings and hot water in safe ways - putting a ring on and holding them far enough away to be safe but close enough to feel the heat, and explaining "hot", or whatever. candles are very good for learning about heat.
In your situation I'd be finding ways of making it possible for my child to come in the kitchen safely - because there's going to come a time when no part of the house is a no-go area, so why not work out how to make that possible as soon as you can? - and I'd be finding really cool things to amuse them safely while they are in there. Some salt and flour and food colouring and water? (make his own playdough) or a basin of water and some plastic mugs for pouring at the sink (And when itgoes on the floor, you just mop it up and feel smug because you mopped your kitchen unlike the rest of us)
"i don't want sam wandering or playing the kitchen period, so he has to learnHe thinks you're wrong about that. That's why he cries.
this, it is a boundary or rule i am setting him. i am happy for him to have his
own way on lots of things but not the kitchen. this is just my choice to keep
him out of harms way"
He might be right.
Toddler screaming
"Anytime he cant do what he wants or get what he wants sets him off"
Toddlers are discovering so much about the universe - about what is possible and what isn't possible and what is allowed and what isn't allowed. It must be incredibly frustrating because to them so many rules seem totally arbitrary.
So... I'd be trying to work out really carefully what the child is really after, and then, if possible a) work out a way to make that safe and ok to do right now (e.g. by wheeling the buggy between them and the busy road so they can walk safely without holding hands)
b) work out a way to make it safe and ok to do next time (e.g. by buying toddler reins so they can walk by a busy road without holding hands whether or not the buggy is on the traffic side of them)
c) if you can't think of a b) yet, work out a way to avoid the problem until you do (child doesn't want to hold hands or wear reins, so walk on the back streets for a week or two, maybe)
And remember that it may well be the child who comes up with a), b), or c), even if they are preverbal.
Children are going to get incredibly frustrated at the universe sometimes - it just isn't possible for them to go on the roller coaster because they aren't tall enough, say - but I would save my "no, you can't do that" for the really impossible situations, otherwise working with the child to find a solution that both you and they are happy with.
not allowed to do things
You know the advice women get given about men in Cosmo? "Never try to change a man, just accept him as he is, and then find ways of being happy with the situation" I wonder whether that acceptance might be applied by parents who are in conflict with their children a lot.
Here's an equivalent between parent and daughter:
She thinks you are wrong about not letting her do those things. Either a) you haven't explained or shown why sufficiently well or b) you might be wrong. [and remember that a gesture may communicate more than a word and a sentence may communicate more than a paragraph - if you can't explain and persuade in less than 15 seconds, you maybe don't actually have a very clear and rational reason for forbidding the thing...]
(This is a parent who complained that her child doesn't listen) From her point of view, that's got to look as if YOU don't listen!!!
Don't worry - this one is easy. You say "yes of course you can have a drink. Do you want to get it yourself right now, or do you mind if I quickly finish up what I'm doing and then get it for you?" If she wants you to get it immediately? I'd be inclined to get the drink straight away (that's got to be better than rage), and then in future make sure there are drinks available near her so you don't have to fetch all the time. I know a man who used to keep a stack of bottled water by the side of the couch so that whenever his wife said "can I have a drink please?" he could say "yes of course darling" and hand one over without missing a moment of the footie...
Here's an equivalent between parent and daughter:
"She will deliberately do things she knows she's not allowed to do"
She thinks you are wrong about not letting her do those things. Either a) you haven't explained or shown why sufficiently well or b) you might be wrong. [and remember that a gesture may communicate more than a word and a sentence may communicate more than a paragraph - if you can't explain and persuade in less than 15 seconds, you maybe don't actually have a very clear and rational reason for forbidding the thing...]
"I have started sending her to her room telling her she can come out when she's
stopped crying"
(This is a parent who complained that her child doesn't listen) From her point of view, that's got to look as if YOU don't listen!!!
"Something as trivial as her asking for a drink and being told "in a second
babe" can be enough to set her into a full blown rage and I can't handle it any
more."
Don't worry - this one is easy. You say "yes of course you can have a drink. Do you want to get it yourself right now, or do you mind if I quickly finish up what I'm doing and then get it for you?" If she wants you to get it immediately? I'd be inclined to get the drink straight away (that's got to be better than rage), and then in future make sure there are drinks available near her so you don't have to fetch all the time. I know a man who used to keep a stack of bottled water by the side of the couch so that whenever his wife said "can I have a drink please?" he could say "yes of course darling" and hand one over without missing a moment of the footie...
Monday, May 14, 2007
School's Out
this is astonishing. Good news. No more schools in Knowsley, but drop-in education centres.
Sunday, May 13, 2007
The problem with copying
... is that you end up making these mistakes. Reproduced here just because I adore these long words...
Dittography (writing the same thing twice)
Haplography (missing out one iteration of a repeated passage)
Homoeoarchon (where two passages begin the same, and only the second gets copied)
Homoeoteleuton (where two passages end the same and only the first gets copied)
Nothing to do with children being people or anything else related to the point of this blog. Just revelling in the polysyllables.
Dittography (writing the same thing twice)
Haplography (missing out one iteration of a repeated passage)
Homoeoarchon (where two passages begin the same, and only the second gets copied)
Homoeoteleuton (where two passages end the same and only the first gets copied)
Nothing to do with children being people or anything else related to the point of this blog. Just revelling in the polysyllables.
Saturday, May 12, 2007
A letter to the Guardian
Dear Sir,
I have several concerns about your recent Home Education piece, ‘Educators fear for standards of home schooling’. First, most in the Home Education community prefer to refer to what they do as education, not schooling. In fact, if James Meikle had read the consulation document to which the article refers, he would find that the current guidelines are very clear (see paragraph 3.11 in particular) that home education may not look like home schooling at all.
Your article opens: ‘The government has issued its first consultation into the growing practice of home schooling to find out whether rules need to be tightened over how children are taught out of the education system.’ This is simply wrong. The DfES are planning to issue new guidelines to LAs to assist with their dealings with Home Educators. There is, explicitly, no plan to change the law. In the email informing interested parties that the consultation had opened, Elaine Haste at the DfES wrote: 'it has been decided not to propose any changes to monitoring arrangements or legislation so this consultation is solely on the issuing of guidelines.' This needs clarification in your coverage; it is overly intrusive LA inspectors who are being reined in to follow the law as it stands, and the current consultation has no brief ‘to find out whether rules need to be tightened’ or decide ‘whether new laws were needed’. Again, this is very clear from reading the consultation document itself.
‘Local authorities fear the safety and well-being of "a small number of children" is being put at risk by the "minimal" regulation of standards in home schooling, the Department for Education and Skills said in a consultation document’. Not the consultation document on Home Education – I have searched for these quotations in vain. Perhaps you would clarify the source of them. It is very clear from the consultation document that LAs already have power to intervene when they have good reason to believe that children are not receiving a suitable education (see in particular paragraphs 2.7 – 2.10); the safety and well-being of this “small number of children” is instead put at risk by Local Authorities failing to do their job within the current legal framework, as the recent Eunice Spry case amply demonstrated.
And where is the evidence for the reported claims of Tony Mooney that home educating parents cannot ‘deliver seven or eight subjects entered for GCSE’, getting ‘in particular trouble with mathematics, science and languages’? It would only take a phone call to Education Otherwise to hear to what extent that misrepresents the aspirations and achievements of the home educating community. And Mooney’s anxiety over children from ‘working-class estates where parents have not been able to get their kids to school because they have been bullied or are school phobics’ demonstrates a contempt for the ability of the working class to make the best decisions for their children, and to educate them appropriately. Again, might I suggest that your journalist keeps abreast of the latest media coverage of working class home educating parents (here, for example). Is it possible that instead of having ‘twigged it is easier’, such parents have simply lost patience with a state schooling system in which bullying is endemic and, for some, fatal, and have chosen to provide an appropriate education for their children themselves? Instead of relying on the views of polemicists like Mooney, the Guardian might be better turning its critical attention to the parents whose interpretation of their legal responsibility to 'provide an efficient education suitable to the age, ability and aptitude of the child' is to let them take their chances in the failing state school system, rather than putting out misleading information about those who instead make the decision to take their legal responsibility seriously and, in the absence of adequate school provision, educate their children themselves.
Yours faithfully,
I have several concerns about your recent Home Education piece, ‘Educators fear for standards of home schooling’. First, most in the Home Education community prefer to refer to what they do as education, not schooling. In fact, if James Meikle had read the consulation document to which the article refers, he would find that the current guidelines are very clear (see paragraph 3.11 in particular) that home education may not look like home schooling at all.
Your article opens: ‘The government has issued its first consultation into the growing practice of home schooling to find out whether rules need to be tightened over how children are taught out of the education system.’ This is simply wrong. The DfES are planning to issue new guidelines to LAs to assist with their dealings with Home Educators. There is, explicitly, no plan to change the law. In the email informing interested parties that the consultation had opened, Elaine Haste at the DfES wrote: 'it has been decided not to propose any changes to monitoring arrangements or legislation so this consultation is solely on the issuing of guidelines.' This needs clarification in your coverage; it is overly intrusive LA inspectors who are being reined in to follow the law as it stands, and the current consultation has no brief ‘to find out whether rules need to be tightened’ or decide ‘whether new laws were needed’. Again, this is very clear from reading the consultation document itself.
‘Local authorities fear the safety and well-being of "a small number of children" is being put at risk by the "minimal" regulation of standards in home schooling, the Department for Education and Skills said in a consultation document’. Not the consultation document on Home Education – I have searched for these quotations in vain. Perhaps you would clarify the source of them. It is very clear from the consultation document that LAs already have power to intervene when they have good reason to believe that children are not receiving a suitable education (see in particular paragraphs 2.7 – 2.10); the safety and well-being of this “small number of children” is instead put at risk by Local Authorities failing to do their job within the current legal framework, as the recent Eunice Spry case amply demonstrated.
And where is the evidence for the reported claims of Tony Mooney that home educating parents cannot ‘deliver seven or eight subjects entered for GCSE’, getting ‘in particular trouble with mathematics, science and languages’? It would only take a phone call to Education Otherwise to hear to what extent that misrepresents the aspirations and achievements of the home educating community. And Mooney’s anxiety over children from ‘working-class estates where parents have not been able to get their kids to school because they have been bullied or are school phobics’ demonstrates a contempt for the ability of the working class to make the best decisions for their children, and to educate them appropriately. Again, might I suggest that your journalist keeps abreast of the latest media coverage of working class home educating parents (here, for example). Is it possible that instead of having ‘twigged it is easier’, such parents have simply lost patience with a state schooling system in which bullying is endemic and, for some, fatal, and have chosen to provide an appropriate education for their children themselves? Instead of relying on the views of polemicists like Mooney, the Guardian might be better turning its critical attention to the parents whose interpretation of their legal responsibility to 'provide an efficient education suitable to the age, ability and aptitude of the child' is to let them take their chances in the failing state school system, rather than putting out misleading information about those who instead make the decision to take their legal responsibility seriously and, in the absence of adequate school provision, educate their children themselves.
Yours faithfully,
A letter to the Telegraph
Dear Sir,
The first thing to surprise me about your recent Home Education piece was the title: 'New rules to cover rise in home schooling'
Please could you tell me the origin of this headline claim?
First, most in the Home Education community prefer to refer to what they do as education, not schooling. In fact, if your headline writer had read the consulation document to which the article refers, (s)he would find that the current guidelines are very clear (see paragraph 3.11 in particular) that home education may not look like home schooling at all.
Most importantly, what are these 'new rules'? The DfES are planning to issue new guidelines to LAs to assist with their dealings with Home Educators. There is, explicitly, no plan to change the law. In the email informing interested parties that the consultation had opened, Elaine Haste at the DfES wrote: 'it has been decided not to propose any changes to monitoring arrangements or legislation so this consultation is solely on the issuing of guidelines.' This needs clarification in your coverage; it is overly intrusive LA inspectors who are being reined in to follow the law as it stands - it would take very few phone calls for your journalist to establish that many LA inspectors have a shaky grasp of the law in this area, and rely on equal ignorance on the part of home educators.
'officials fear that many do little or no work as parents use home education as a front for truancy'. Which officials? DfES officials? Or perhaps LA officials, like those notorious in HE circles for their campaign against home education. Might I suggest that you contact Ann Newstead at Education Otherwise once again, ask to make contact with some media-friendly HE families, and send a journalist to collect some information about the real activities of home educating families and the learning outcomes? 'a front for truancy' may be attention grabbing, but it is painfully far off the mark.
The Telegraph might be better turning its attention to the parents whose interpretation of their legal responsibility to 'provide an efficient education suitable to the age, ability and aptitude of the child' is to put them in the failing state school system, rather than putting out misleading information about those who instead make the decision to take their legal responsibility seriously and, in the absence of adequate school provision, educate their children themselves.
Yours faithfully,
The first thing to surprise me about your recent Home Education piece was the title: 'New rules to cover rise in home schooling'
Please could you tell me the origin of this headline claim?
First, most in the Home Education community prefer to refer to what they do as education, not schooling. In fact, if your headline writer had read the consulation document to which the article refers, (s)he would find that the current guidelines are very clear (see paragraph 3.11 in particular) that home education may not look like home schooling at all.
Most importantly, what are these 'new rules'? The DfES are planning to issue new guidelines to LAs to assist with their dealings with Home Educators. There is, explicitly, no plan to change the law. In the email informing interested parties that the consultation had opened, Elaine Haste at the DfES wrote: 'it has been decided not to propose any changes to monitoring arrangements or legislation so this consultation is solely on the issuing of guidelines.' This needs clarification in your coverage; it is overly intrusive LA inspectors who are being reined in to follow the law as it stands - it would take very few phone calls for your journalist to establish that many LA inspectors have a shaky grasp of the law in this area, and rely on equal ignorance on the part of home educators.
'officials fear that many do little or no work as parents use home education as a front for truancy'. Which officials? DfES officials? Or perhaps LA officials, like those notorious in HE circles for their campaign against home education. Might I suggest that you contact Ann Newstead at Education Otherwise once again, ask to make contact with some media-friendly HE families, and send a journalist to collect some information about the real activities of home educating families and the learning outcomes? 'a front for truancy' may be attention grabbing, but it is painfully far off the mark.
The Telegraph might be better turning its attention to the parents whose interpretation of their legal responsibility to 'provide an efficient education suitable to the age, ability and aptitude of the child' is to put them in the failing state school system, rather than putting out misleading information about those who instead make the decision to take their legal responsibility seriously and, in the absence of adequate school provision, educate their children themselves.
Yours faithfully,
Saturday, May 05, 2007
More conversation about "naughty" wall-painting children
why not just allow a child to draw sitting at a table with paper instead of theI'm assuming that the parent has done that. I'm thinking of ways to cope with child not wanting to draw on the paper and colouring books provided.
walls
I'm assuming parent has already spread newspaper on the kitchen floor and let the child have at it with plates of paint and potato prints and hand and foot prints, and walking on the paper with paint-y wellies on and everything else.
This is a child who REALLY wants to paint on the walls, I'm assuming.
I don't think any encouragement to draw on house walls is a good suggestionWhy not? You might get some just stunning murals. Or if they aren't any good, you just wash 'em off at the end of the painting session. What's the big deal?
and also having one rule at home and one rule somewhere else is creating moreLet's turn that the other way round. One of the things children learn about is property. This is my car, that's Billy's car. This is our house, that's Billy's house. Explaining about some things being ok only at our house is a valuable part of that process.
rules and potential confusion to a young child...why is it acceptable mummy to
draw on our walls and not at x house!
Plus: why create a false "no" at home in preparation for a real "no" somewhere else? If your "no"s are usually arbitrary and actually not rational, why would you expect your child to listen when you say a real urgent "no" in order to protect the safety of your child, someone else, or someone else's property? You're much likelier to have your child heed your advice if your relationship is based on honesty and trust than if it is based on authority and Conforming to Normal Behaviour Or You'll Be Considered Naughty.
Plus: if there actually ISN'T any good reason not to paint on the walls together, then does saying "no" really make life easier for anyone? Some might regard it as picking an unnecessary fight, or exerting power over someone small when it could instead have been a wonderful game together.
Also, maybe this is just my impression but why is discipline being looked atBecause discipline implies one person having power over another, simply by virtue of being the adult. I consider that the last refuge of the unimaginative. If you can't persuade someone to your viewpoint by reason, or by offering something better to do, you then "discipline" them, right?
like a dirty word...
But if you've actually got good reason why they shouldn't do that thing, and you've really offered much more exciting alternatives, the child won't do it. If the child still wants to do it, maybe the child is actually in the right and the adult is in the wrong. "Discipline" doesn't allow for that possibility.
I would also imagine that a child that goes to school never having had anyMe too :-) I would just ask: when in history has any good come from people not questioning authority figures when they think they are wrong?
discipline is going to be incredibly sensitive/reactive when it comes their way
through school/authority figures
With grateful acknowledgements to the anonymous Frog Pond poster who provided most of these ideas ready for me to communicate into the wider world.
Friday, May 04, 2007
My child is too naughty!
With a list of misdemeanours...
Think PLAY!!!
"throws things". great! find some things which are good to throw - soft balls or cuddly toys and do lots and lots of throwing with her. No need to tell her off - when she throws something you don't want crashing around the house, just pick it up and get some throwable things and as you throw the first thing gently to her, pop the hard thing somewhere out of sight till the throwing game is over. No need to say anything - she'll soon cotton on that fun throwing games happen with certain types of objects rather than others
"draws on the walls" This is a good one. find ways for her to draw on the walls without staining. ELC ready mix paint is good as long as you wipe it off while it is still wet. Can't guarantee any other brands - I've always found crayola washable a bit staining. There are hints on the web about getting crayon off walls, though I've never had that one. Chalk is billiant because it brushes off dead easily. A paint brush and a little pot of water makes a good temporary mark which just dries off. I like those elc bath crayons too for drawing on any tiled surface or on enamel felt tip pens on the fridge and cooker is good - wipes straight off (er... test it quietly one evening before offering just in case you've got a stainy colour - I steer clear of black, blue, purple)
"wont eat" don't let food be a matter of "naughty". Of course she'll eat - all children do! You just need to offer a variety of foods, at least some of which you know she likes, on terms which she accepts - maybe a carpet picnic while you're playing together, or a sandwich while you're on the way somewhere in the buggy. I think the whole Family Meal is something children join in with when it becomes interesting - the conversation and the company.
"she throws a strop whenever she is asked to do anything " what kinds of things? Ask her things which won't make her throw a strop. It might be exactly the same thing, done differently. eg "time to go inside now" *TOTAL STROP* or "hey, you want to go inside and do some more painting on the tea caddy?" *mum chases daughter up the garden path as they go off to have fun inside!*
A teacher responded, and this was my answer...
[quote]Unfortunately, she still has to learn how to behave in other people's homes and at nursery! [/quote]
Well, of course, and a major part of the parents' job is helping their children learn exactly what is socially acceptable.
I would argue strongly that children can learn, with guidance, that there are different rules in different places.
You don't have to sit quietly on a sofa all the time at home because that is what great-granny demands when you go to her house.
[quote]"Imagine how upset she'd be if she thought it was fine to paint on the walls then did it somewhere else and got into trouble - she wouldn't even know she'd done anything wrong."?)[/quote]
Yes. So parent helps child to understand that that's something we just do at our house.
[quote]"I have taught many children who have never been told 'no' and they have a very difficult time settling at school because they never feel comfortable in case they're doing something wrong (if they've never been told it's wrong, how are they supposed to know?)?)[/quote]
My ideal would be that parents help children ease into the transition into an institutional setting, if they decide to go down that route, by being present all the time to start with (like at toddler group), gradually helping their child learn the arbitrary behavioural codes of that place. Making our children submit to arbitrary authority so they'll placidly submit to the arbitrary authority of teachers is a much worse long term strategy than helping them to dance with the society in which they find themselves.
Because these children forced to submit to the arbitrary authority of parents and then teachers are the ones who all the parents in the older children messageboards and the teachers at teachers forums are saying "they reject our authority and they are 6' tall and we can't do anything with them". Arbitrary external authority has a use-by date on it, that's the problem. End rant.
Think PLAY!!!
"throws things". great! find some things which are good to throw - soft balls or cuddly toys and do lots and lots of throwing with her. No need to tell her off - when she throws something you don't want crashing around the house, just pick it up and get some throwable things and as you throw the first thing gently to her, pop the hard thing somewhere out of sight till the throwing game is over. No need to say anything - she'll soon cotton on that fun throwing games happen with certain types of objects rather than others
"draws on the walls" This is a good one. find ways for her to draw on the walls without staining. ELC ready mix paint is good as long as you wipe it off while it is still wet. Can't guarantee any other brands - I've always found crayola washable a bit staining. There are hints on the web about getting crayon off walls, though I've never had that one. Chalk is billiant because it brushes off dead easily. A paint brush and a little pot of water makes a good temporary mark which just dries off. I like those elc bath crayons too for drawing on any tiled surface or on enamel felt tip pens on the fridge and cooker is good - wipes straight off (er... test it quietly one evening before offering just in case you've got a stainy colour - I steer clear of black, blue, purple)
"wont eat" don't let food be a matter of "naughty". Of course she'll eat - all children do! You just need to offer a variety of foods, at least some of which you know she likes, on terms which she accepts - maybe a carpet picnic while you're playing together, or a sandwich while you're on the way somewhere in the buggy. I think the whole Family Meal is something children join in with when it becomes interesting - the conversation and the company.
"she throws a strop whenever she is asked to do anything " what kinds of things? Ask her things which won't make her throw a strop. It might be exactly the same thing, done differently. eg "time to go inside now" *TOTAL STROP* or "hey, you want to go inside and do some more painting on the tea caddy?" *mum chases daughter up the garden path as they go off to have fun inside!*
A teacher responded, and this was my answer...
[quote]Unfortunately, she still has to learn how to behave in other people's homes and at nursery! [/quote]
Well, of course, and a major part of the parents' job is helping their children learn exactly what is socially acceptable.
I would argue strongly that children can learn, with guidance, that there are different rules in different places.
You don't have to sit quietly on a sofa all the time at home because that is what great-granny demands when you go to her house.
[quote]"Imagine how upset she'd be if she thought it was fine to paint on the walls then did it somewhere else and got into trouble - she wouldn't even know she'd done anything wrong."?)[/quote]
Yes. So parent helps child to understand that that's something we just do at our house.
[quote]"I have taught many children who have never been told 'no' and they have a very difficult time settling at school because they never feel comfortable in case they're doing something wrong (if they've never been told it's wrong, how are they supposed to know?)?)[/quote]
My ideal would be that parents help children ease into the transition into an institutional setting, if they decide to go down that route, by being present all the time to start with (like at toddler group), gradually helping their child learn the arbitrary behavioural codes of that place. Making our children submit to arbitrary authority so they'll placidly submit to the arbitrary authority of teachers is a much worse long term strategy than helping them to dance with the society in which they find themselves.
Because these children forced to submit to the arbitrary authority of parents and then teachers are the ones who all the parents in the older children messageboards and the teachers at teachers forums are saying "they reject our authority and they are 6' tall and we can't do anything with them". Arbitrary external authority has a use-by date on it, that's the problem. End rant.
Giving it Time
Child is angry when pulled away from things...
Often if adults try to hustle a child along, they'll scream blue murder, but if the parent just waits, the child will be ready soon. Sometimes it can help to say to yourself explicitly "I'm not going to suggest moving for 15 minutes" and lo and behold, ten minutes later, the child is halfway out of the door ready to go home.
If there are toys or places a child is getting a lot out of, make as much time for that thing as possible. I know one mum who spent about an hour in the gift shop each time they went to a local attraction, and then after 6 or 7 visits, the child had pretty much sucked all the fun out of the gift shop and was never there for more than 5-10 minutes. She told me she spent a grand total of about £5 in all those visits...
[PS that's a made up hypothetical, but I first posted it on the kind of mainstream board where people give real examples all the time]
Plus, I don't agree with time warnings. I think one should allow enough time on expeditions for toddler pace, and always have snacks etc so there's no pressure to get home for a meal. I'd always leave a child on a toddler ride till they were ready to get off.
why?
because why is the parent's timetable so much more important than the child's?
Often if adults try to hustle a child along, they'll scream blue murder, but if the parent just waits, the child will be ready soon. Sometimes it can help to say to yourself explicitly "I'm not going to suggest moving for 15 minutes" and lo and behold, ten minutes later, the child is halfway out of the door ready to go home.
If there are toys or places a child is getting a lot out of, make as much time for that thing as possible. I know one mum who spent about an hour in the gift shop each time they went to a local attraction, and then after 6 or 7 visits, the child had pretty much sucked all the fun out of the gift shop and was never there for more than 5-10 minutes. She told me she spent a grand total of about £5 in all those visits...
[PS that's a made up hypothetical, but I first posted it on the kind of mainstream board where people give real examples all the time]
Plus, I don't agree with time warnings. I think one should allow enough time on expeditions for toddler pace, and always have snacks etc so there's no pressure to get home for a meal. I'd always leave a child on a toddler ride till they were ready to get off.
why?
because why is the parent's timetable so much more important than the child's?
Wednesday, May 02, 2007
tidying your room
Child was told to tidy room, child didn't. Parent removed (in a black bin bag) all of child's belonging which were not put away properly...
My ideal would be that every person - adult or child - has a space of their own: a flat, a house, a room, a sectioned off area of a room, a cupboard, even. And what happens in that space is for them to decide. It is their fortress, their castle, their cave. If our children invited us in to their place to help tidy or rationalise old forgotten toys, we would help, but otherwise we would give them freedom in that place. That's my dream.
If your child wants her room tidy, she'll ask for help. And the baby? Well, when they arrive they'll want to be in with you to start with anyway, so it would be completely reasonable to put the baby clobber in one of your bits of the house until they are old enough to share a room, surely?
I believe that when parents try to impose their will on the rest of the family, to be the authority figures, to make other people change their behaviour and their personalities, to insist on their own standards of cleanliness and all sorts of other things, the family ends up in enormous conflict. The bin-bag removing your child's belongings is an example of that. What an awful situation for both you and your daughter.
Your daughter obviously isn't ready or willing to keep her room as tidy as you want it to be. So instead of punishing her for her preference, why not work with it? Just off the top of my head:
-If she has no objections, _you_ could clear the path to the wardrobe
-You could make it much easier to tidy - lots of those plastic storage crates maybe, so it's easy to run around throwing everything in a crate rather than putting on a shelf
-You could keep her clothes in the airing cupboard instead of fighting across the floor?
I'm a big fan of disciplining your surroundings rather than your children - making it so the conflict points just don't arise because of the way you've organised your surroundings. EG instead of trying to keep a cruising baby out of the kitchen cupboards, you fill everything in baby reach with things which are fine for the baby to play with
My ideal would be that every person - adult or child - has a space of their own: a flat, a house, a room, a sectioned off area of a room, a cupboard, even. And what happens in that space is for them to decide. It is their fortress, their castle, their cave. If our children invited us in to their place to help tidy or rationalise old forgotten toys, we would help, but otherwise we would give them freedom in that place. That's my dream.
If your child wants her room tidy, she'll ask for help. And the baby? Well, when they arrive they'll want to be in with you to start with anyway, so it would be completely reasonable to put the baby clobber in one of your bits of the house until they are old enough to share a room, surely?
I believe that when parents try to impose their will on the rest of the family, to be the authority figures, to make other people change their behaviour and their personalities, to insist on their own standards of cleanliness and all sorts of other things, the family ends up in enormous conflict. The bin-bag removing your child's belongings is an example of that. What an awful situation for both you and your daughter.
Your daughter obviously isn't ready or willing to keep her room as tidy as you want it to be. So instead of punishing her for her preference, why not work with it? Just off the top of my head:
-If she has no objections, _you_ could clear the path to the wardrobe
-You could make it much easier to tidy - lots of those plastic storage crates maybe, so it's easy to run around throwing everything in a crate rather than putting on a shelf
-You could keep her clothes in the airing cupboard instead of fighting across the floor?
I'm a big fan of disciplining your surroundings rather than your children - making it so the conflict points just don't arise because of the way you've organised your surroundings. EG instead of trying to keep a cruising baby out of the kitchen cupboards, you fill everything in baby reach with things which are fine for the baby to play with
no clothes thanks...
So parent and child have conflict every time parent wants child to get dressed.
I replied:
it's been so warm the last few weeks. Maybe she's too hot in her clothes? (in which case, just a sundress maybe - I'm sure it's too early in the year for burning to be very likely)
Or maybe she would prefer to choose her own clothes? Some children like to be offered a choice and they reject the ones they don't like.
Some children are perfecty happy to BE dressed, they just don't want to GET dressed. It's a passing thing, but you can save everyone hassle for the weeks or few months while it lasts by a) give up on pyjamas and just put tomorrow's clothes on the evening before. b) with some children, it actually works best to wait until they are asleep, and then slip on some easy-on clothes - wait until they've gone really floppy, but catch them in the first half hour of sleep when they are out for the count.
I know families who've had a few days where the child didn't want clothes and the parents just said "ok then" and played at home and in the garden until the child was happy to have clothes again.
I've met others where children refused to wear anything in the house for a while, but if you got in the car to go somewhere, they were perfectly happy to put on t-shirt and skirt/trousers at the same time as climbing in the car seat, and then shoes and socks as they climbed out of the car at the exciting destination.
I replied:
it's been so warm the last few weeks. Maybe she's too hot in her clothes? (in which case, just a sundress maybe - I'm sure it's too early in the year for burning to be very likely)
Or maybe she would prefer to choose her own clothes? Some children like to be offered a choice and they reject the ones they don't like.
Some children are perfecty happy to BE dressed, they just don't want to GET dressed. It's a passing thing, but you can save everyone hassle for the weeks or few months while it lasts by a) give up on pyjamas and just put tomorrow's clothes on the evening before. b) with some children, it actually works best to wait until they are asleep, and then slip on some easy-on clothes - wait until they've gone really floppy, but catch them in the first half hour of sleep when they are out for the count.
I know families who've had a few days where the child didn't want clothes and the parents just said "ok then" and played at home and in the garden until the child was happy to have clothes again.
I've met others where children refused to wear anything in the house for a while, but if you got in the car to go somewhere, they were perfectly happy to put on t-shirt and skirt/trousers at the same time as climbing in the car seat, and then shoes and socks as they climbed out of the car at the exciting destination.
Monday, April 30, 2007
More on toddlers and TV
Also, correlation and causation are being muddled. Autism is triggered by TV? Or a child later diagnosed as autistic watches a lot of TV because they get a lot out of it? So Sigman is maybe suggested rationing or removing the one thing which a particular child finds valuable.
Further, of course, ADHD and similar "disorders" likemild autism spectrum are not at all clearlyscientifically or physiologically defined. Since it isnot clear what they _are_ how can Sigman's research have identified triggers for them?
Maybe the reason some children want to watch so muchis because they are getting a great deal out of it.
He's very worried about people not learning certain skills before three in the "window of the brain's maximum plasticity". But many many very gifted people have hardly spoken at all before the age of 4 (Einstein is the most famous). So much for the blink-and-you-miss-it developmental window.
Further, of course, ADHD and similar "disorders" likemild autism spectrum are not at all clearlyscientifically or physiologically defined. Since it isnot clear what they _are_ how can Sigman's research have identified triggers for them?
Maybe the reason some children want to watch so muchis because they are getting a great deal out of it.
He's very worried about people not learning certain skills before three in the "window of the brain's maximum plasticity". But many many very gifted people have hardly spoken at all before the age of 4 (Einstein is the most famous). So much for the blink-and-you-miss-it developmental window.
Sunday, April 29, 2007
TV is bad for toddlers?
Psychologist Aric Sigman claims that 90 minutes of television watching per day for children under three might increase their risk of attention-deficit disorder, autism and obesity. He suggests that young children who watch a lot of television may not be able to sustain attention, and may fail to acquire language and social skills within the ‘window’ of the brain’s maximum plasticity. He suggests that television watching causes irregular sleep patterns and alters metabolic rate. He believes the government should issue rationing guidelines, advising that children under three should watch no television at all, and three to seven year olds should watch 30 minutes to an hour each day (a Department for Culture, Media and Sport spokesman said the government has no plans to issue such guidelines).
But his ideas haven’t been greeted with universal admiration. As Thomas Sutcliffe writes in the Independent, it’s not so much a question of how much children watch, but what they watch, and the best of children’s television is catered to children’s interests and needs.
There are some wonderful television shows and DVDs which demand action by children and probably parents too – who could watch the Wiggles without dancing and singing along? What better way to learn the alphabet than with Elmo’s gentle guidance? How many parents have tried trickle painting or made crazy icecream sundaes with their children after watching Teletubbies?
As for Sigman’s language anxiety – there must be thousands of families who have seen their children’s language expand exponentially as they learn words and phrases from their favourite shows. Or seen them gradually learning social conventions from examples on screen and then apply them with growing confidence in every day life. It seems strange to me that Aric Sigman is worried about children not having any attention span… because they are paying too much attention to the television! Me, I say embrace the learning and entertainment possibilities that televisual entertainment – particularly DVDs – offers to children.
But his ideas haven’t been greeted with universal admiration. As Thomas Sutcliffe writes in the Independent, it’s not so much a question of how much children watch, but what they watch, and the best of children’s television is catered to children’s interests and needs.
There are some wonderful television shows and DVDs which demand action by children and probably parents too – who could watch the Wiggles without dancing and singing along? What better way to learn the alphabet than with Elmo’s gentle guidance? How many parents have tried trickle painting or made crazy icecream sundaes with their children after watching Teletubbies?
As for Sigman’s language anxiety – there must be thousands of families who have seen their children’s language expand exponentially as they learn words and phrases from their favourite shows. Or seen them gradually learning social conventions from examples on screen and then apply them with growing confidence in every day life. It seems strange to me that Aric Sigman is worried about children not having any attention span… because they are paying too much attention to the television! Me, I say embrace the learning and entertainment possibilities that televisual entertainment – particularly DVDs – offers to children.
Friday, April 27, 2007
Child lives on the naughty step...
...and mother is reduced to tears
You could see this as a big inevitable clash of power and personality, which is leading to a lot of struggles for the upper hand (which is pretty depressing as a weather forecast). He'll spend a hell of a lot of time on the naughty step until he is old enough to tell you where to put your naughty step and go to the pub with his mates.
Or you could break it down into individual problems to be solved as a team. Not "my 4 year old is always defying me and making me cry" but "my four year old wants to do X. Can I find a way to make it possible? Or can I find a way of offering something he'll like even more?"
Potential conflict can often be avoided by play - child says "get me that toy" you can say "no ,get it yourself" and watch the argument escalate, or you can say "oh, ok then" and get the toy, or you can fall down on the ground and say "I can't because I just turned into a JELLYFISH" and see if child wants to play jellyfish games. See what I mean?
You could see this as a big inevitable clash of power and personality, which is leading to a lot of struggles for the upper hand (which is pretty depressing as a weather forecast). He'll spend a hell of a lot of time on the naughty step until he is old enough to tell you where to put your naughty step and go to the pub with his mates.
Or you could break it down into individual problems to be solved as a team. Not "my 4 year old is always defying me and making me cry" but "my four year old wants to do X. Can I find a way to make it possible? Or can I find a way of offering something he'll like even more?"
Potential conflict can often be avoided by play - child says "get me that toy" you can say "no ,get it yourself" and watch the argument escalate, or you can say "oh, ok then" and get the toy, or you can fall down on the ground and say "I can't because I just turned into a JELLYFISH" and see if child wants to play jellyfish games. See what I mean?
How to help a clumsy child?
A parent asked for ideas with a child who, for whatever reason, is considerably less agile than much smaller children, and is frustrated by their failure to manage physical tasks they would like to manage.
I suggested
1. Find a way to help child to be less clumsy. Not sure what that would requre, and it would depend on the interests of the child, but I am thinking of swimming, rock climbing, ball games, drawing, riding a bike or a scooter, climbing at the playground or soft play centre... So many things require physical coordination - it must be possible to find one in which the child shows interest and potential. Also in this category maybe needs to come a sight test (I'm pretty damn clumsy without my glasses, and even with them, because my peripheral vision is so compromised). Probably too expensive, but there are things to think about with relation to faulty kinaesthesia (which most people have - we don't really know where our limbs are or our spines; we think our fingers are straight but when we look down they are usually curved) which might be worth exploring with an Alexander technique teacher. Perhaps dance or gymnastics would aid physical coordination in a non-competitive environment.
2. In tandem with this, help child explore, reinforce, revel in the things they already ARE good at and value.
3. In tandem with THAT, perhaps explore how some people are good at some things rather than other things. While cooking (say) comes dead easily to the hypothetical child, running doesn't, but while Jilly can run like anything, she can't even make a cup of coffee and she's already 9. And then explore how people get good at things. There must be age-appropriate books and films out there about how people gradually get good at things (although if it's a movie, they'll put it in a montage, a la Team America, which is perhaps less useful)
I've reposted this from a discussion board, but on rereading I am now wondering: can you have three things in tandem, or is it two, by definition?...
I suggested
1. Find a way to help child to be less clumsy. Not sure what that would requre, and it would depend on the interests of the child, but I am thinking of swimming, rock climbing, ball games, drawing, riding a bike or a scooter, climbing at the playground or soft play centre... So many things require physical coordination - it must be possible to find one in which the child shows interest and potential. Also in this category maybe needs to come a sight test (I'm pretty damn clumsy without my glasses, and even with them, because my peripheral vision is so compromised). Probably too expensive, but there are things to think about with relation to faulty kinaesthesia (which most people have - we don't really know where our limbs are or our spines; we think our fingers are straight but when we look down they are usually curved) which might be worth exploring with an Alexander technique teacher. Perhaps dance or gymnastics would aid physical coordination in a non-competitive environment.
2. In tandem with this, help child explore, reinforce, revel in the things they already ARE good at and value.
3. In tandem with THAT, perhaps explore how some people are good at some things rather than other things. While cooking (say) comes dead easily to the hypothetical child, running doesn't, but while Jilly can run like anything, she can't even make a cup of coffee and she's already 9. And then explore how people get good at things. There must be age-appropriate books and films out there about how people gradually get good at things (although if it's a movie, they'll put it in a montage, a la Team America, which is perhaps less useful)
I've reposted this from a discussion board, but on rereading I am now wondering: can you have three things in tandem, or is it two, by definition?...
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
consentual grocery shopping
A friend at the Frog Pond was asking about how parent can have preferences considered by family members, rather than ALWAYS doing what the other family members want even if it's not what they want, and I suggested non-verbal communication of preferences being useful.
Here is the third of a set of hypothetical examples I gave to illustrate:
let's stick with the groceries.
1) think of alternatives. Why are you not having groceries delivered? I haven't been serious grocery shopping since 1998. Love the internet.
2) But you still ran out of milk (for me, it's always milk). And Dh is away for 13 days, so you can't get him to pick some up on his way home.
3) so... this is how I'd do it non-verbally.
I'd get myself totally ready to go to the store plus whatever other things we wanted to do.
I'd get everything ready for child(ren) to pick up/ put on and leave.
I'd open the front door.
Child(ren) is/are very likely to want to go out of it. Anything they don't put on/pick up on way out of door, you throw on going down the street or as you get in the car or whatever.
I wouldn't offer verbal options. If walking, I'd walk where I want to go unless child wants to go another way in which case I'd rejig my plan of what happens when this morning. and go their way, eg think "oh, ok, we can go to the 9-11 down here instead". Not sure how you'd do that in a car because I don't drive one, but there must be a way. Maybe have child giving directions "turn right" "turn left" "straight on"
If you do end up at the grocery store, for heaven's sake make it fun to be there, with buying milk as a subsidiary optional extra. depends on age. Some people might like to count fruits, some might like to play in the toy aisle, some might like to ride the trolley, some might like to go on one of those rides where a car goes beep beep when you put a $ in. I don't know - depends on the child and their age. Some people might like to choose something to buy themselves with some money.
Here is the third of a set of hypothetical examples I gave to illustrate:
let's stick with the groceries.
1) think of alternatives. Why are you not having groceries delivered? I haven't been serious grocery shopping since 1998. Love the internet.
2) But you still ran out of milk (for me, it's always milk). And Dh is away for 13 days, so you can't get him to pick some up on his way home.
3) so... this is how I'd do it non-verbally.
I'd get myself totally ready to go to the store plus whatever other things we wanted to do.
I'd get everything ready for child(ren) to pick up/ put on and leave.
I'd open the front door.
Child(ren) is/are very likely to want to go out of it. Anything they don't put on/pick up on way out of door, you throw on going down the street or as you get in the car or whatever.
I wouldn't offer verbal options. If walking, I'd walk where I want to go unless child wants to go another way in which case I'd rejig my plan of what happens when this morning. and go their way, eg think "oh, ok, we can go to the 9-11 down here instead". Not sure how you'd do that in a car because I don't drive one, but there must be a way. Maybe have child giving directions "turn right" "turn left" "straight on"
If you do end up at the grocery store, for heaven's sake make it fun to be there, with buying milk as a subsidiary optional extra. depends on age. Some people might like to count fruits, some might like to play in the toy aisle, some might like to ride the trolley, some might like to go on one of those rides where a car goes beep beep when you put a $ in. I don't know - depends on the child and their age. Some people might like to choose something to buy themselves with some money.
fetching and tidying consentually
A friend at the Frog Pond was asking about how parent can have preferences considered by family members, rather than ALWAYS doing what the other family members want even if it's not what they want, and I suggested non-verbal communication of preferences being useful.
Here is the second of a set of hypothetical examples I gave to illustrate:
When playing with child, make the tidying just part of the activity. Lead non verbally. Putting jigsaws away when finished (I'm thinking of counting the pieces into the box or some more age-appropriate challenge which is genuinely fun). If child doesn't want to play, fine. But make it fun for you yourself.
When child is playing and leaving a trail behind, just LEAVE IT. If you want a tidy home, it's much easier to zoom around at the end of the day putting everything back in place than to drip feed as you go, IMO. And 10 minutes of tidying just once is much easier than constantly reorganising. THere've been good threads before about making tidying a CP (maybe on the TCS Ezboard). Also, you then give child the opportunity to clear space when they need it.
And why on earth are you running hither and yon for child when they want something? "Mum where's my...?" "On the shelf I think ,you go look for it" Taking your child seriously doesn't mean becoming their butler.
You may need to change this pattern through play. I hate that "you're a big boy Charlie, you can do it" thing, but maybe you could try flopping onto the floor and "oh no, I've lost the use of my arms and legs, can you get the book for us?" which mixes things up a bit and might turn into a jellyfish game, so it's a way of expressing your initial preference not to get the book, presenting an alternative (jellyfish game together), and giving child chance to get the book themselves while you er jellyfish. Why is it that hypothetical play examples are always goofier than goofy?
And if child still would prefer you to get the book, then get it and your own and sit down together with your books - that could be a Common Preference too
Here is the second of a set of hypothetical examples I gave to illustrate:
When playing with child, make the tidying just part of the activity. Lead non verbally. Putting jigsaws away when finished (I'm thinking of counting the pieces into the box or some more age-appropriate challenge which is genuinely fun). If child doesn't want to play, fine. But make it fun for you yourself.
When child is playing and leaving a trail behind, just LEAVE IT. If you want a tidy home, it's much easier to zoom around at the end of the day putting everything back in place than to drip feed as you go, IMO. And 10 minutes of tidying just once is much easier than constantly reorganising. THere've been good threads before about making tidying a CP (maybe on the TCS Ezboard). Also, you then give child the opportunity to clear space when they need it.
And why on earth are you running hither and yon for child when they want something? "Mum where's my...?" "On the shelf I think ,you go look for it" Taking your child seriously doesn't mean becoming their butler.
You may need to change this pattern through play. I hate that "you're a big boy Charlie, you can do it" thing, but maybe you could try flopping onto the floor and "oh no, I've lost the use of my arms and legs, can you get the book for us?" which mixes things up a bit and might turn into a jellyfish game, so it's a way of expressing your initial preference not to get the book, presenting an alternative (jellyfish game together), and giving child chance to get the book themselves while you er jellyfish. Why is it that hypothetical play examples are always goofier than goofy?
And if child still would prefer you to get the book, then get it and your own and sit down together with your books - that could be a Common Preference too
Structural Discpline
A friend at the Frog Pond was asking about how parent can have preferences considered by family members, rather than ALWAYS doing what the other family members want even if it's not what they want, and I suggested non-verbal communication of preferences being useful.
Here is the first of a set of hypothetical examples I gave to illustrate:
You know what I think you might really need is structural discipline, but which I dont mean disciplining your child, I mean disciplining your surroundings.
Let me give you a hypothetical. Child likes painting very much this month (I'm not defining this hypothetical child by their preference for painting. It's just what they enjoy this month mkay?). And I mean painting everything. So
1) Parent spreads great big bed spreads on the floor EVERYWHERE to protect the landlord's carpet
2) parent buys in a huge stock of washable paint.
3) parent buys a whole ream of assorted paper and card, putting out little heaps in parentally preferred places (child much more likely to just paint there rather than move the heap)That's a pretty good first pass at structural discipline.
4) Now child starts making handprints on the wall, and painting pictures there. Parent could go crazy about this, except that the walls are just egg shell white. After painting a test area and establishing that standard paint will cover the hand prints, parent leaves child be, but looks out for an opportunity to paint the walls to re set this grand canvas.
5) but now child starts painting EVERYTHING - books, jigsaw boxes, teabag containers, TV screens, pans, plates, you name it. Some of these, parent is ok with, some not (5 minutes of painting a book and then if you don't wipe before it dries, that's the end of the book because the pages are stuck together). Parent could go crazy here. Instead, parent finds better things to paint - magazines, colouring books, those little mini-boxes of cereal. Parent enlists the help of work colleagues to pass on any small interesting cardboard packaging which arrives at the workplace. Parent puts books on a high shelf. Child doesn't mind at all, just says when they want to read stuff, and instead, the cardboard mountain is what comes to hand when painting.
6) But child sometimes still paints stuff parent wants to wipe off straight away, and walking all the way to the sink for a cloth every time is not much fun, so parent manages to turn it into a delivery game where child brings painted objects to parent ready for wiping. "delivery for you" "thank you" "you're welcome" "good bye" *cue noise of wiping with wet cloth*
I extended this hypothetical as far as I could to show that there are several points where parent could easily self-sacrifice, or flip into authoritarian fright show, but instead they find a way for child to still do what they want to do, in spirit if not in exact kind (painting cereal boxes instead of jigsaw boxes, for example). And parent manages to turn their desired outcome of not running around the house into a game. I guess the first few times the parent would have to play the delivery game on their own, and then child would want to join in, not becuase it is manipulative-pretend-fun, but because parent is finding a way to turn that activity into something genuinely fun for a child that age.
Here is the first of a set of hypothetical examples I gave to illustrate:
You know what I think you might really need is structural discipline, but which I dont mean disciplining your child, I mean disciplining your surroundings.
Let me give you a hypothetical. Child likes painting very much this month (I'm not defining this hypothetical child by their preference for painting. It's just what they enjoy this month mkay?). And I mean painting everything. So
1) Parent spreads great big bed spreads on the floor EVERYWHERE to protect the landlord's carpet
2) parent buys in a huge stock of washable paint.
3) parent buys a whole ream of assorted paper and card, putting out little heaps in parentally preferred places (child much more likely to just paint there rather than move the heap)That's a pretty good first pass at structural discipline.
4) Now child starts making handprints on the wall, and painting pictures there. Parent could go crazy about this, except that the walls are just egg shell white. After painting a test area and establishing that standard paint will cover the hand prints, parent leaves child be, but looks out for an opportunity to paint the walls to re set this grand canvas.
5) but now child starts painting EVERYTHING - books, jigsaw boxes, teabag containers, TV screens, pans, plates, you name it. Some of these, parent is ok with, some not (5 minutes of painting a book and then if you don't wipe before it dries, that's the end of the book because the pages are stuck together). Parent could go crazy here. Instead, parent finds better things to paint - magazines, colouring books, those little mini-boxes of cereal. Parent enlists the help of work colleagues to pass on any small interesting cardboard packaging which arrives at the workplace. Parent puts books on a high shelf. Child doesn't mind at all, just says when they want to read stuff, and instead, the cardboard mountain is what comes to hand when painting.
6) But child sometimes still paints stuff parent wants to wipe off straight away, and walking all the way to the sink for a cloth every time is not much fun, so parent manages to turn it into a delivery game where child brings painted objects to parent ready for wiping. "delivery for you" "thank you" "you're welcome" "good bye" *cue noise of wiping with wet cloth*
I extended this hypothetical as far as I could to show that there are several points where parent could easily self-sacrifice, or flip into authoritarian fright show, but instead they find a way for child to still do what they want to do, in spirit if not in exact kind (painting cereal boxes instead of jigsaw boxes, for example). And parent manages to turn their desired outcome of not running around the house into a game. I guess the first few times the parent would have to play the delivery game on their own, and then child would want to join in, not becuase it is manipulative-pretend-fun, but because parent is finding a way to turn that activity into something genuinely fun for a child that age.
Monday, April 16, 2007
Child does not want to go to bed
...but stays up until very late, and parents are dropping with tiredness.
Here's the suggestions I sent to the TCS list
1. It might work to have a bed/mattress in the room where all the fun stuff happens and then when child is sleepy they can just go and lie down without having to leave toys/DVDs etc
2. Having a bed in the activity room also makes it possible for a parent to doze on the bed while child plays.
3. Have low-key activities for 2-year old for late evening where parent can read and book or otherwise relax. For that age, maybe some of those Brainy Baby or Baby Einstein type DVDs with images and music but not narrative (or is it just me who goes into a zoned out trance watching them...? ;-) )
4. Does child still nap during the day? If so, perhaps try parent sleeping at the same time, or else changing activities so child doesn't think of having a nap every so often, then they'll be ready to sleep earlier at night.
5. Make sure child isn't hungry or thirsty. They might also need to defecate, and having a snack will help that happen, and then they won't have a gripy tummy and it'll be easier to sleep.
6. Some children like to be carried in a sling till they fall asleep. For a 2-year old I'd recommend a mei-tei type sling rather than a ring sling. Parent can gently move around the house sorting laundry and loading dishwasher and child is rocked but seeing interesting things - some people sometimes like to fall asleep like that, with activity going on around them.
7. Definitely send one parent to bed in another room so they'll be ready to do the early shift and the other parent can have more sleep in the morning
Here's the suggestions I sent to the TCS list
1. It might work to have a bed/mattress in the room where all the fun stuff happens and then when child is sleepy they can just go and lie down without having to leave toys/DVDs etc
2. Having a bed in the activity room also makes it possible for a parent to doze on the bed while child plays.
3. Have low-key activities for 2-year old for late evening where parent can read and book or otherwise relax. For that age, maybe some of those Brainy Baby or Baby Einstein type DVDs with images and music but not narrative (or is it just me who goes into a zoned out trance watching them...? ;-) )
4. Does child still nap during the day? If so, perhaps try parent sleeping at the same time, or else changing activities so child doesn't think of having a nap every so often, then they'll be ready to sleep earlier at night.
5. Make sure child isn't hungry or thirsty. They might also need to defecate, and having a snack will help that happen, and then they won't have a gripy tummy and it'll be easier to sleep.
6. Some children like to be carried in a sling till they fall asleep. For a 2-year old I'd recommend a mei-tei type sling rather than a ring sling. Parent can gently move around the house sorting laundry and loading dishwasher and child is rocked but seeing interesting things - some people sometimes like to fall asleep like that, with activity going on around them.
7. Definitely send one parent to bed in another room so they'll be ready to do the early shift and the other parent can have more sleep in the morning
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
going in the buggy
Child tantrums whenever invited to go in the buggy.
Tantrums when told to walk instead.
Why doesn't she want to go in the pushchair or walk herself? can she tell you, out of the moment? Or can you work it out from her actions?
If she wants carrying, how about a rucksack or sling? http://www.thecarryingkind.com/products/shw-detail.asp?pid=168
If she wants a snuggle, why not sit on a bench together for 20 minutes with a drink and a snack and a favourite book or a sticker book?
If she isn't ready to leave the place yet, why not keep playing till she's finished? It might take a while to overcome a past history of expecting mum to make her leave before she's ready - the first time it might take ALL DAY playing around the park entrance, but in time you'll find that if you allow plenty of time and don't pressure child to leave, she'll leave when she's had enough and wants to go and do something else. Make sure you take fun things to do yourself, like a book or magazine, and plenty of snacks, in case the park is an all day activity
If she wants to walk s-l-o-w-l-y, can you walk at her pace and enjoy every snail and pebble and leaf you pass?
Tantrums when told to walk instead.
Why doesn't she want to go in the pushchair or walk herself? can she tell you, out of the moment? Or can you work it out from her actions?
If she wants carrying, how about a rucksack or sling? http://www.thecarryingkind.com/products/shw-detail.asp?pid=168
If she wants a snuggle, why not sit on a bench together for 20 minutes with a drink and a snack and a favourite book or a sticker book?
If she isn't ready to leave the place yet, why not keep playing till she's finished? It might take a while to overcome a past history of expecting mum to make her leave before she's ready - the first time it might take ALL DAY playing around the park entrance, but in time you'll find that if you allow plenty of time and don't pressure child to leave, she'll leave when she's had enough and wants to go and do something else. Make sure you take fun things to do yourself, like a book or magazine, and plenty of snacks, in case the park is an all day activity
If she wants to walk s-l-o-w-l-y, can you walk at her pace and enjoy every snail and pebble and leaf you pass?
Sunday, March 04, 2007
take child out of nursery
child recently went to nursery for "social skills". Unsettled, constant viruses. Parent said 'should I remove her?' Lots of people said 'no no stick it out'
I said
'What are the advantages of staying in nursery? You can get all the social exposure for about £1 a time at toddler groups, crafts, sand tray, painting, singing, cool toys...
She'll learn what she needs to learn at her own pace - have confidence in her and youself. She learned some really tricky things, like sitting and crawling and using a spoon, without any professional expert instruction - she can go on learning everything she needs to following her instincts and interests with your support and help.
I think if you don't have to put your child in a nursery for work reasons, it's a waste of money, honestly, given the fantastic toddler groups there are out there.'
Mother is removing child from nursery. And this reaction makes me want to keep posting at the mainstream board I've been frequenting
I said
'What are the advantages of staying in nursery? You can get all the social exposure for about £1 a time at toddler groups, crafts, sand tray, painting, singing, cool toys...
She'll learn what she needs to learn at her own pace - have confidence in her and youself. She learned some really tricky things, like sitting and crawling and using a spoon, without any professional expert instruction - she can go on learning everything she needs to following her instincts and interests with your support and help.
I think if you don't have to put your child in a nursery for work reasons, it's a waste of money, honestly, given the fantastic toddler groups there are out there.'
Mother is removing child from nursery. And this reaction makes me want to keep posting at the mainstream board I've been frequenting
more advice for the mother who's child throws food
Can you let go of the expectation that child will sit at table for a proper family meal time till they are quite a bit older? If you provide them with enough food and enough choice of food so there'll be something they like (rice is rejected again? ok, well here's some cold pasta from the fridge which you know always works...) which they can choose to eat, or throw on the floor or eat later or eat off the floor (All good for the immune system) then they won't end up malnourished.
I suppose I'm suggesting RELAX!!! Trust your child, and follow their lead and life will be much easier.
You really don't have to impose an expectation of a certain kind of meal time at this point in their lives.
Remember that children have tiny stomachs compared to ours - they often prefer to eat lots of little snacks than great big official MEALS 3 times a day.
1) when you act in a manner which is apparently irrational to the child, they will push and push and push around that area trying to make sense of it. Why is throwing some things ok and some things not? Is it just when I'm in this chair? Or is it when Daddy is here? Or... It's not so much "pushing your buttons", though lots of people interpret it that way, it's a rational creature trying to make sense of arbitrary rules made by people in positions of power over them. When that's happening, it really helps to take the child's "defiance" as a clue that you are doing something they are not ready to understand, I think. (and remember they don't speak English yet. I was with the mum of a 7 month old in a cafe recently, and she solemnly and s-l-o-w-l-y and LOUDLY explained to him that if he dropped his rice cake it would have to stay on the floor because it's dirty down there and I just thought WHAAAAAT????? spread a spare muslin over the danger zone, you idiot! You might as well be speaking mandarin chinese!)
2) If your child wants to do something you are resistant to, find a safe way of giving them as much of that as they want. They are learning learning learning. Yes, you might not manage it the first time it occurs but by the second or third time, you need to find some way of making that situation happy for everyone. Child wants to walk by busy road? Fine, buy toddler reins. Child wants to throw food out of high chair? Fine. Find even cooler stuff to throw. Or cook a whole packet of tesco value pasta - they'll have a job throwing more than £1 worth on the floor and you can scoop it up and let 'em throw again, and in 2 years time, you'll look back nostalgically rather than in sadness at the textures-and-gravity-are-fascinating phase.
THere's a wonderful book by Deborah Jackson called something like "Do not disturb" (or maybe that's the subtitle) which is all about how to support your children in living and learning according to their own goals, facilitating their dance with the universe. A similar but much more dated in style old book, which might still be in libraries is Alison Stallibrass's The Self-Respecting Child.
I suppose I'm suggesting RELAX!!! Trust your child, and follow their lead and life will be much easier.
You really don't have to impose an expectation of a certain kind of meal time at this point in their lives.
Remember that children have tiny stomachs compared to ours - they often prefer to eat lots of little snacks than great big official MEALS 3 times a day.
1) when you act in a manner which is apparently irrational to the child, they will push and push and push around that area trying to make sense of it. Why is throwing some things ok and some things not? Is it just when I'm in this chair? Or is it when Daddy is here? Or... It's not so much "pushing your buttons", though lots of people interpret it that way, it's a rational creature trying to make sense of arbitrary rules made by people in positions of power over them. When that's happening, it really helps to take the child's "defiance" as a clue that you are doing something they are not ready to understand, I think. (and remember they don't speak English yet. I was with the mum of a 7 month old in a cafe recently, and she solemnly and s-l-o-w-l-y and LOUDLY explained to him that if he dropped his rice cake it would have to stay on the floor because it's dirty down there and I just thought WHAAAAAT????? spread a spare muslin over the danger zone, you idiot! You might as well be speaking mandarin chinese!)
2) If your child wants to do something you are resistant to, find a safe way of giving them as much of that as they want. They are learning learning learning. Yes, you might not manage it the first time it occurs but by the second or third time, you need to find some way of making that situation happy for everyone. Child wants to walk by busy road? Fine, buy toddler reins. Child wants to throw food out of high chair? Fine. Find even cooler stuff to throw. Or cook a whole packet of tesco value pasta - they'll have a job throwing more than £1 worth on the floor and you can scoop it up and let 'em throw again, and in 2 years time, you'll look back nostalgically rather than in sadness at the textures-and-gravity-are-fascinating phase.
THere's a wonderful book by Deborah Jackson called something like "Do not disturb" (or maybe that's the subtitle) which is all about how to support your children in living and learning according to their own goals, facilitating their dance with the universe. A similar but much more dated in style old book, which might still be in libraries is Alison Stallibrass's The Self-Respecting Child.
on bed sharing
parent is trying to get child out of her bed and into his own...
Is there a safety reason why he shouldn't sleep in your bed?
Perhaps you could put his bed across the bottom of yours and sleep head down so you are face to face together.
Or make a nest of mattresses and duvets on the floor and snuggle down in a heap.
2.5 seems very young to me for a child to want to sleep alone.
If sleeping in his own bed/ room is something he chooses when he's ready, there'll be no stress at all.
Also worth thinking: what would your child have to do to persuade you that both would be happier and better rested if you shared a bed or a room? Sometimes our children are wiser than we are :)
Parent still worried about hour long bedtimes
take those extended bed times as relaxation time - to read a book or meditate or listen to music or watch a film (with headphones on).
If child trusts you'll be there when they wake, they are more likely to fall asleep without fear, I think.
Maybe bedtime is too early? Some people give up on bedtime entirely. THey do bath and stories and snuggles and maybe energetic rumpus, and then when child is tired, they'll fall asleep without needing hours of soothing.
I also suggested books on tape with IPOd or walkman
Is there a safety reason why he shouldn't sleep in your bed?
Perhaps you could put his bed across the bottom of yours and sleep head down so you are face to face together.
Or make a nest of mattresses and duvets on the floor and snuggle down in a heap.
2.5 seems very young to me for a child to want to sleep alone.
If sleeping in his own bed/ room is something he chooses when he's ready, there'll be no stress at all.
Also worth thinking: what would your child have to do to persuade you that both would be happier and better rested if you shared a bed or a room? Sometimes our children are wiser than we are :)
Parent still worried about hour long bedtimes
take those extended bed times as relaxation time - to read a book or meditate or listen to music or watch a film (with headphones on).
If child trusts you'll be there when they wake, they are more likely to fall asleep without fear, I think.
Maybe bedtime is too early? Some people give up on bedtime entirely. THey do bath and stories and snuggles and maybe energetic rumpus, and then when child is tired, they'll fall asleep without needing hours of soothing.
I also suggested books on tape with IPOd or walkman
parenting philosophy for newbies
[All done in the first person for approachable tone, but it's hypothetical really :) ]
Thinking about letting go - jumping off a cliff - will there be a soft landing?
Most of our parenting is based on parental authority. What the parent says goes. If it hurts the child, it is for their own good. We just have to be strong. To hang in there. To hurt our children in their own interests because it will be Better In The Long Run.
When child complies, life is great.
And this situation goes on until suddenly the child is too large and old to obey us Because I Said So and they are out till God knows what hour of the night doing God knows what, and all our old techniques of persuasion can only turn into Not Under My Roof and more and more emotional distance and honestly we have no idea what interests our children or motivates them, all we can do is watch from the sidelines and worry. Just look at the older children forums on the big message boards. That's what every parent is struggling with.
We all love our children so much and are desperate for them to be happy and fulfilled, and we want to help them prepare to take their place in wider society as successful, fulfilled people. We all do.
But look at the threads here, girls: Child won't sleep where I want him/her to sleep. Child doesn't want to go to nursery, how can I make him/her? Child won't go where I want him/her to. Child won't eat a meal the way I want him/her to.
All my posts are coming from having read some wonderful books on parenting and education, by authors like Deborah Jackson, Alfie Kohn, John Holt, Jan Hunt. And from having found out a lot about the philosophy of Karl Popper, which he never applied to parenting but which holds as its central concept the principle of fallibility. and then finding a (now defunct) blog called Rational Parenting and then a radical website called Taking Children Seriously.
And this is what comes out of it:
In a conflict situation, instead of asserting your authority or giving in to your child, try to find a solution which everyone genuinely prefers to their original plan (a "common preference"). Suddenly problems are not a disaster but something to get your teeth into, out of which all kinds of fun and learning and closeness can come.
In a conflict situation, remember, you might be wrong and your child might be right. (that's the fallibility bit) It's that old story where 10 month old is trying to grab your fork and you are going "no no that's not safe" and then you turn away for a second and when you turn back child is solemnly and dextrously feeding you pasta. Humbling.
It's a completely different philosophy of parenting from anything most of us have ever encountered before, and I believe it leads to gloriously happier families.
In a reply, someone said she thought compromise is good
I don't advocate compromise. I hate compromise. I want X, you want Y, and we get Z which is a mish mash of both which noone wanted. A common preference is much better than a compromise. The people involved don't meet in the middle. Instead they find ways for everyone to get what they originally wanted, or they find things which everyone genuinely prefers to their original desire. It sometimes involves some serious thinking outside the box.
A simplified version might be:
Compromise:
I want chicken for supper
You want mushrooms
we have chicken and mushroom pie, which noone really likes.
Common preference:
I want chicken for supper
you want mushrooms
One of us suggests beef instead. Wow! I'd like beef even better than chicken! you'd like beef even better than mushrooms! Everyone is happy.
Thinking about letting go - jumping off a cliff - will there be a soft landing?
Most of our parenting is based on parental authority. What the parent says goes. If it hurts the child, it is for their own good. We just have to be strong. To hang in there. To hurt our children in their own interests because it will be Better In The Long Run.
When child complies, life is great.
And this situation goes on until suddenly the child is too large and old to obey us Because I Said So and they are out till God knows what hour of the night doing God knows what, and all our old techniques of persuasion can only turn into Not Under My Roof and more and more emotional distance and honestly we have no idea what interests our children or motivates them, all we can do is watch from the sidelines and worry. Just look at the older children forums on the big message boards. That's what every parent is struggling with.
We all love our children so much and are desperate for them to be happy and fulfilled, and we want to help them prepare to take their place in wider society as successful, fulfilled people. We all do.
But look at the threads here, girls: Child won't sleep where I want him/her to sleep. Child doesn't want to go to nursery, how can I make him/her? Child won't go where I want him/her to. Child won't eat a meal the way I want him/her to.
All my posts are coming from having read some wonderful books on parenting and education, by authors like Deborah Jackson, Alfie Kohn, John Holt, Jan Hunt. And from having found out a lot about the philosophy of Karl Popper, which he never applied to parenting but which holds as its central concept the principle of fallibility. and then finding a (now defunct) blog called Rational Parenting and then a radical website called Taking Children Seriously.
And this is what comes out of it:
In a conflict situation, instead of asserting your authority or giving in to your child, try to find a solution which everyone genuinely prefers to their original plan (a "common preference"). Suddenly problems are not a disaster but something to get your teeth into, out of which all kinds of fun and learning and closeness can come.
In a conflict situation, remember, you might be wrong and your child might be right. (that's the fallibility bit) It's that old story where 10 month old is trying to grab your fork and you are going "no no that's not safe" and then you turn away for a second and when you turn back child is solemnly and dextrously feeding you pasta. Humbling.
It's a completely different philosophy of parenting from anything most of us have ever encountered before, and I believe it leads to gloriously happier families.
In a reply, someone said she thought compromise is good
I don't advocate compromise. I hate compromise. I want X, you want Y, and we get Z which is a mish mash of both which noone wanted. A common preference is much better than a compromise. The people involved don't meet in the middle. Instead they find ways for everyone to get what they originally wanted, or they find things which everyone genuinely prefers to their original desire. It sometimes involves some serious thinking outside the box.
A simplified version might be:
Compromise:
I want chicken for supper
You want mushrooms
we have chicken and mushroom pie, which noone really likes.
Common preference:
I want chicken for supper
you want mushrooms
One of us suggests beef instead. Wow! I'd like beef even better than chicken! you'd like beef even better than mushrooms! Everyone is happy.
communicating with the mainstream
Parent wrote:
"My daugher is 2 and a half and just lately has become really naughty and cheeky, also very good at completly ignoring me when i speaking to her..."
do you think your daughter means to ber naughty? Is she a bad person? I doubt it :)
Do you think she understands why some things are forbidden and others are allowed? Do you have rational and logical reasons for forbidding certain things? If they are indeed rational, you should be able to communicate it at 2 year old level. (not just THE STOVE WILL BURN YOU, GO TO THE NAUGHTY STEP but experimenting safely with heat, with flames and cookers and hot taps so that when you say HOT the child understands exactly why it's not a good idea to grasp with both hands rather than not touching because they are afraid of your anger)
Parent wrote:
"other times she will throw a massive tantrum over something silly."
forgive me, but who decides it's silly? When you're really angry or frustrated, you don't like it if people say "oh don't be ridiculous, this is a tiny problem" do you? If it was minor to her, she wouldn't throw a tantrum. Try to work out what she's upset about, and find some way of making it possible for the thing she wants to occur, or find something even more fun for her to do.
Parent wrote:
"its the ignoring me that gets on my nevres the most, even when im just trying to speak to her she will completly ignore me..."
maybe that's because what you are saying makes no sense to her - seems illogical or unhelpful or unkind.
We adults are all so verbal, but a 2.5 year old really isn't yet.
Replace a lecture with a sentence.
Replace a sentence with a kind word
Replace a word with a helpful action.
All the best to you - it's a roller coaster journey isn't it? If you can lose the idea of controlling your daughter, it'll free you up to be a guide and free her up to blossom and thrive. You'll be able to wave the kicking-of-granny good bye
"My daugher is 2 and a half and just lately has become really naughty and cheeky, also very good at completly ignoring me when i speaking to her..."
do you think your daughter means to ber naughty? Is she a bad person? I doubt it :)
Do you think she understands why some things are forbidden and others are allowed? Do you have rational and logical reasons for forbidding certain things? If they are indeed rational, you should be able to communicate it at 2 year old level. (not just THE STOVE WILL BURN YOU, GO TO THE NAUGHTY STEP but experimenting safely with heat, with flames and cookers and hot taps so that when you say HOT the child understands exactly why it's not a good idea to grasp with both hands rather than not touching because they are afraid of your anger)
Parent wrote:
"other times she will throw a massive tantrum over something silly."
forgive me, but who decides it's silly? When you're really angry or frustrated, you don't like it if people say "oh don't be ridiculous, this is a tiny problem" do you? If it was minor to her, she wouldn't throw a tantrum. Try to work out what she's upset about, and find some way of making it possible for the thing she wants to occur, or find something even more fun for her to do.
Parent wrote:
"its the ignoring me that gets on my nevres the most, even when im just trying to speak to her she will completly ignore me..."
maybe that's because what you are saying makes no sense to her - seems illogical or unhelpful or unkind.
We adults are all so verbal, but a 2.5 year old really isn't yet.
Replace a lecture with a sentence.
Replace a sentence with a kind word
Replace a word with a helpful action.
All the best to you - it's a roller coaster journey isn't it? If you can lose the idea of controlling your daughter, it'll free you up to be a guide and free her up to blossom and thrive. You'll be able to wave the kicking-of-granny good bye
Thursday, March 01, 2007
mealtimes
Suggestions for a parent in great pain about giving child time-outs and removing food when it goes on the floor at scheduled mealtimes...
This might sound crazy, but here are some ideas aimed at removing the stress from the situation without hurting your child and yourself... maybe one or two will be useful. They are offered in deep sympathy for your pain and your child's.
Spread a big rug on the floor and have a carpet picnic
Sit on the floor next to a child sized table
Lose the idea that everyone has to eat the same food at the same time.
If being with you and husband while you eat is interesting, child will do it without having to be frightened into sitting at the table with you. If not, then it'll be interesting in a week, 6 months, a year. Relax. Spread more tablecloths on the floor :-)
Give child food as background while they do something else - nothing like having a crayon in one hand and a sausage in the other, and somehow the sausage all disappears.
Find lots of really interesting things to throw off the table. You can get 100 plastic balls from Argos for less than £10. Now THAT'S fun. Parents could attempt to throw the balls in a tricky target on the other side of the room. Child is going to prefer to throw coloured balls than pasta, let's face it.
Remember: child is almost certainly not throwing food because they hate your food, they hate you, they intend to be uncivilised, or they are not hungry. THey are throwing the food because they are exploring the universe around them and they want to find out about different textures, things which go flump and things which go splot. Encourage it in ways which don't annoy you - lots of play dough. Lots of finger food. A tablecloth under the chair so thrown food can just get recirculated. Lots of making "soup" out of flour and eggs and food colouring. Make sure child wears machine washable clothes.
You can turn this round to a joyful thing in 5 minutes flat by working WITH your child to help them learn about the world through experiment and play, and incidentally gradually moving towards formal mealtimes as they grow older. If anyone asks what on EARTH you are doing, tell them your child is going to be a genius scientist. :-)
What do you think? I'm hoping it communicates with someone who has never ocnsidered parenting playfully before.
This might sound crazy, but here are some ideas aimed at removing the stress from the situation without hurting your child and yourself... maybe one or two will be useful. They are offered in deep sympathy for your pain and your child's.
Spread a big rug on the floor and have a carpet picnic
Sit on the floor next to a child sized table
Lose the idea that everyone has to eat the same food at the same time.
If being with you and husband while you eat is interesting, child will do it without having to be frightened into sitting at the table with you. If not, then it'll be interesting in a week, 6 months, a year. Relax. Spread more tablecloths on the floor :-)
Give child food as background while they do something else - nothing like having a crayon in one hand and a sausage in the other, and somehow the sausage all disappears.
Find lots of really interesting things to throw off the table. You can get 100 plastic balls from Argos for less than £10. Now THAT'S fun. Parents could attempt to throw the balls in a tricky target on the other side of the room. Child is going to prefer to throw coloured balls than pasta, let's face it.
Remember: child is almost certainly not throwing food because they hate your food, they hate you, they intend to be uncivilised, or they are not hungry. THey are throwing the food because they are exploring the universe around them and they want to find out about different textures, things which go flump and things which go splot. Encourage it in ways which don't annoy you - lots of play dough. Lots of finger food. A tablecloth under the chair so thrown food can just get recirculated. Lots of making "soup" out of flour and eggs and food colouring. Make sure child wears machine washable clothes.
You can turn this round to a joyful thing in 5 minutes flat by working WITH your child to help them learn about the world through experiment and play, and incidentally gradually moving towards formal mealtimes as they grow older. If anyone asks what on EARTH you are doing, tell them your child is going to be a genius scientist. :-)
What do you think? I'm hoping it communicates with someone who has never ocnsidered parenting playfully before.
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Lots of back-up posts
The Unconditional Parenting board is closing down, so I have backed up lots of my posts from there.
Enjoy!
Enjoy!
how can teens experiment safely with alchohol?
I think there's great value in European attitudes to alchohol, where it is something regularly offered to children if adults are drinking some with a meal. In many european families, parents or other relatives would expect to help their children train their palettes - distinguishing between grapes and learning the different scents and flavours. This would model wine drinking (and Scots similarly teach teens about whisky) as something to be savoured rather than a dangerous drug to be experimented with safely.
Also - what better place to first experience the physical effects of half a glass of wine - and to develop theories about how to behave under such circumstances - than in the home?
alchohol being "forbidden fruit" contributes to potentially dangerous attitudes to drinking it IMO
Also - what better place to first experience the physical effects of half a glass of wine - and to develop theories about how to behave under such circumstances - than in the home?
alchohol being "forbidden fruit" contributes to potentially dangerous attitudes to drinking it IMO
How do I protect precious ornaments from my child?
I think if there are communal expensive things a parent wants to protect, then they need to find ways of protecting them without hurting the child.
If things get thrown at TV, put TV in one of those 1970s cabinets? Then the doors can get quickly shut as the throwing begins. Having something on the outside of the cabinet worth throwing things AT would be cool. (like a target painted on or someting)
You could have a whole row of good things to throw on a mantelpiece or shelf so there's always something to hand.
eggs. Buy very very cheap ones. Play outside. Hose down afterwards. Or actually break eggs into a bowl to make scrambled egg, but have a good play with them first.
Make cornflour+water paste (fun texture in itself) and leave to dry in the sun. It goes cracked like a desert. Crumbling the chunks into tiny tiny pieces is cool.
Bottles of water to splash around outside might be a fun substitute for breaking - and for splashing in afterwards.
If things get thrown at TV, put TV in one of those 1970s cabinets? Then the doors can get quickly shut as the throwing begins. Having something on the outside of the cabinet worth throwing things AT would be cool. (like a target painted on or someting)
You could have a whole row of good things to throw on a mantelpiece or shelf so there's always something to hand.
eggs. Buy very very cheap ones. Play outside. Hose down afterwards. Or actually break eggs into a bowl to make scrambled egg, but have a good play with them first.
Make cornflour+water paste (fun texture in itself) and leave to dry in the sun. It goes cracked like a desert. Crumbling the chunks into tiny tiny pieces is cool.
Bottles of water to splash around outside might be a fun substitute for breaking - and for splashing in afterwards.
My child wants to play with toys in shops!
Well then, if child wants to play with toy in shop (as long as it isn't inextricably in packaging, which is another problem to be worked out, perhaps with the help of the shop assistants) then I would stay in shop for as long as child wants to be there playing with toy.
The details of ownership of the toy are then (as Julia Roberts not-quite said) just geography.
Repeat after me...
ALWAYS PACK YOUR BOOK OR ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF ENTERTAINING YOURSELF BEFORE EMBARKING ON ANY EXPEDITION
It can really help to leave the watch at home, and make it possible, as far as packaging makes it possible, for child to play with toys/other interesting objects in the store for as long as they want to. Shall we go to playgroup or shall we go to Walmart today?
Often, a child will have finished with object way before the check out counter. In fact, games of putting umpteen bags of sugar in the trolley and then reshelving them is also tremendous fun (well, maybe less thrilling for a 14 year old than a 3 year old, heh)
There is no law which says that something in the trolley has to be bought. It just shows that these are the objects which have caught your eyes so far.
(I'm not saying that if child really wants to buy the Neutron soup, you should put it in the trolley and then lie to them about having left it behind. What I mean is, the moment of putting something in the trolley or even putting it on the check out counter does not represent an irrevocable decision)
The details of ownership of the toy are then (as Julia Roberts not-quite said) just geography.
Repeat after me...
ALWAYS PACK YOUR BOOK OR ALTERNATIVE MEANS OF ENTERTAINING YOURSELF BEFORE EMBARKING ON ANY EXPEDITION
It can really help to leave the watch at home, and make it possible, as far as packaging makes it possible, for child to play with toys/other interesting objects in the store for as long as they want to. Shall we go to playgroup or shall we go to Walmart today?
Often, a child will have finished with object way before the check out counter. In fact, games of putting umpteen bags of sugar in the trolley and then reshelving them is also tremendous fun (well, maybe less thrilling for a 14 year old than a 3 year old, heh)
There is no law which says that something in the trolley has to be bought. It just shows that these are the objects which have caught your eyes so far.
(I'm not saying that if child really wants to buy the Neutron soup, you should put it in the trolley and then lie to them about having left it behind. What I mean is, the moment of putting something in the trolley or even putting it on the check out counter does not represent an irrevocable decision)
My child throws food out of the high chair all the time
If child is interested in an activity, find a way to help them get LOTS more of it safely and with parents being happy.
How about a carpet picnic on a big sheet? Then food which gets dropped can just get back on to the sheet?
How about passing child loads of objects for throwing while they are in the high chair?
Jenga blocks are fun.
Plastic balls can easily be gathered into their container with a broom later.
Buttons of different shapes, colours and sizes might be fun (if choking hazard doesn't worry you) and can be swept up with dustpan and brush.
Play dough is divinely wonderful. You can do all sorts of different colours, the cooked kind and the uncooked kind, different flours give v. different textures... also wonderful for throwing in small balls.
Paper aeroplanes are of course good for throwing.
Buy a child-sized table and chairs and decamp down there so child can sit at the table for exactly as long as they want.
How about a carpet picnic on a big sheet? Then food which gets dropped can just get back on to the sheet?
How about passing child loads of objects for throwing while they are in the high chair?
Jenga blocks are fun.
Plastic balls can easily be gathered into their container with a broom later.
Buttons of different shapes, colours and sizes might be fun (if choking hazard doesn't worry you) and can be swept up with dustpan and brush.
Play dough is divinely wonderful. You can do all sorts of different colours, the cooked kind and the uncooked kind, different flours give v. different textures... also wonderful for throwing in small balls.
Paper aeroplanes are of course good for throwing.
Buy a child-sized table and chairs and decamp down there so child can sit at the table for exactly as long as they want.
How should one prepare for a long plane journey with small children?
It's very important to have something to suck and swallow during take off and (especially) landing - it can be as much as 20-30 mins of ear popping on the way down.
Talking about what you see when you take off and land - small houses, cars, fields, then up through the white clouds - talking about what clouds are made of. MAKE SURE YOU GET A WINDOW SEAT
There are some great magical Kipper episodes which happen in the clouds - have them in the DVD player? Several Richard Scarry DVD moments in airplanes too.
The tray of airplane food can itself provide literally minutes of innocent entertainment for children and adults alike
Friendly crew might offer them a tour of the cockpit to meet the pilot?
At the airport: escalators and lifts can be fun. Weighing child on an unused check-in carousel? PRetending to drive one of those little electric car things for disabled people (when not in use). Pushing a trolley around? [Although if child rides on trolley, the security staff may come and get officious] Check in, and then go for a walk outside the airport until it's time to go through security? Lots of colouring things? Sticker books?
Wait until the flight is actually called before going to the departure gate. The departure lounge often has amusement arcades for children, some entertainments in which are free; might be worth budgeting $20 for rides? Looking out of the departure lounge windows at the planes and staircases on lorries and baggage trains etc might also be fun
Talking about what you see when you take off and land - small houses, cars, fields, then up through the white clouds - talking about what clouds are made of. MAKE SURE YOU GET A WINDOW SEAT
There are some great magical Kipper episodes which happen in the clouds - have them in the DVD player? Several Richard Scarry DVD moments in airplanes too.
The tray of airplane food can itself provide literally minutes of innocent entertainment for children and adults alike
Friendly crew might offer them a tour of the cockpit to meet the pilot?
At the airport: escalators and lifts can be fun. Weighing child on an unused check-in carousel? PRetending to drive one of those little electric car things for disabled people (when not in use). Pushing a trolley around? [Although if child rides on trolley, the security staff may come and get officious] Check in, and then go for a walk outside the airport until it's time to go through security? Lots of colouring things? Sticker books?
Wait until the flight is actually called before going to the departure gate. The departure lounge often has amusement arcades for children, some entertainments in which are free; might be worth budgeting $20 for rides? Looking out of the departure lounge windows at the planes and staircases on lorries and baggage trains etc might also be fun
what if my dentist tells me that sucking a blanket will lead to my child needing a brace?
1. Get a second opinion.
2. get more info.
Having a brace later might mean all sorts of different things. It might mean one of those round-the-head traction jobs, or having 8 teeth removed to make space BUT...
if the dentist is right and it's just thumb/blanket sucking that is pushing those front teeth out, then my guess is that if it DID need a brace, it'd be a daytime only or nighttime only removable, top teeth only job. Which your child might well consider is a good trade off for several years of happy sleeping.
One of those top-and-bottom, fixed brace with elastic bands connecting to a night time jaw moving machinery... no, that might not be considered a good trade off.
2. get more info.
Having a brace later might mean all sorts of different things. It might mean one of those round-the-head traction jobs, or having 8 teeth removed to make space BUT...
if the dentist is right and it's just thumb/blanket sucking that is pushing those front teeth out, then my guess is that if it DID need a brace, it'd be a daytime only or nighttime only removable, top teeth only job. Which your child might well consider is a good trade off for several years of happy sleeping.
One of those top-and-bottom, fixed brace with elastic bands connecting to a night time jaw moving machinery... no, that might not be considered a good trade off.
If people smoke around my child will they become a smoker?
This was a post where a child started pretending to smoke a pretend cigarette after aunty Flo or someone had smoked near them.
I'd try to see it from the child's POV.
FRom whenever fire experimentation starts, with candles, matches and a trusted adult with a bucket of water, child has been learning that fire is HOT and has flames, and makes smoke.
Child has also been gradually learning about the sorts of things people put in their mouths. And putting fire in your mouth and then blowing smoke out is a new one.
Frankly, I'd be role playing it too.
I would think that parental or peer smoking is likely to be amuch bigger influence on a person taking it up than having one isolated aunt who does it.
(drifts off into happy memories of experimenting with dry cow parsley stalks as huge "cigarettes" as a child. THe smoke was wonderfully viscous and oily, but you had to suck on the stem to get it to come out of the top in a satisfying curly way and if you inhaled it by accident you'd be coughing evil poison out of your lungs for ten minutes...)
I'd try to see it from the child's POV.
FRom whenever fire experimentation starts, with candles, matches and a trusted adult with a bucket of water, child has been learning that fire is HOT and has flames, and makes smoke.
Child has also been gradually learning about the sorts of things people put in their mouths. And putting fire in your mouth and then blowing smoke out is a new one.
Frankly, I'd be role playing it too.
I would think that parental or peer smoking is likely to be amuch bigger influence on a person taking it up than having one isolated aunt who does it.
(drifts off into happy memories of experimenting with dry cow parsley stalks as huge "cigarettes" as a child. THe smoke was wonderfully viscous and oily, but you had to suck on the stem to get it to come out of the top in a satisfying curly way and if you inhaled it by accident you'd be coughing evil poison out of your lungs for ten minutes...)
are manners important?
As far as small children are concerned, you could just as well be insisting that they say "a la la peanut butter sandwiches" before making a request as insisting on "please". It's an arbitrary convention. I prefer a spontaneous (probably occasional) heartfelt "thank you" or a beaming smile, or just a satisfied glug glug glug as the water goes down.
Make it so you don't have to respond to requests that irritate you. Bottles of water (refilled bottled water bottles) around at 4yo level? A water cooler?
I hate it when I have done something for a small child - pass them a toy they wanted, or something - and just in the middle of a beautiful communicative eye-contact moment between the two of us, with gratitude expressed and acknowledged, and sometimes even a spark of joy, the parent wades in with "say thank you". And I think "butt out, you just ruined the moment". And we've completely forgotten what we were doing.
I always say to the parent "no need for thank yous - we're doing fine"
Also, children pick up the way their parents speak. I think communicating with thank you/sorry is NBD - if the parent uses them, the child picks up when to, when they feel like it.
Make it so you don't have to respond to requests that irritate you. Bottles of water (refilled bottled water bottles) around at 4yo level? A water cooler?
I hate it when I have done something for a small child - pass them a toy they wanted, or something - and just in the middle of a beautiful communicative eye-contact moment between the two of us, with gratitude expressed and acknowledged, and sometimes even a spark of joy, the parent wades in with "say thank you". And I think "butt out, you just ruined the moment". And we've completely forgotten what we were doing.
I always say to the parent "no need for thank yous - we're doing fine"
Also, children pick up the way their parents speak. I think communicating with thank you/sorry is NBD - if the parent uses them, the child picks up when to, when they feel like it.
what should I do if my 2-year-old child ignores me?
"for every paragraph you were planning to say, substitute a sentence
for every sentence, substitute a word
for every word, substitute an action."
[copyright a wise friend of mine]
I wouldn't try to communicate verbally with a child this small about how they just spilled water and whether they should be clearing it up. I would just start tidying up (the first time a child helps their parent clear up, of their own accord, could be a really magical one - why spoil it with trying to make it happen for months before the child is ready?)
And I would find ways of tweaking the environment so that things which trigger a parent to fury don't happen often. So...
water in a sippy cup (great for spraying out of mouth, and just evaporates)?
milk in the bath or outside or in a room with tile/wooden/lino floor?
cover the carpet with old sheets or those cheap waterproof camping table cloths (good for spaghetti bolognaise nights too... )
I try to minimise the triggers by tweaking the environment in this sort of way.
If making a connection with the child is the thing bothering the parent, it might help to find time to connect through eye contact and hugs and perhaps reading a book together or having a conversation, either at the beginning of the day or just before sleeping. But in the middle of a busy day? Interrupting what they are doing to ask them to help clean up spilled water? When there's a universe to make sense of?
for every sentence, substitute a word
for every word, substitute an action."
[copyright a wise friend of mine]
I wouldn't try to communicate verbally with a child this small about how they just spilled water and whether they should be clearing it up. I would just start tidying up (the first time a child helps their parent clear up, of their own accord, could be a really magical one - why spoil it with trying to make it happen for months before the child is ready?)
And I would find ways of tweaking the environment so that things which trigger a parent to fury don't happen often. So...
water in a sippy cup (great for spraying out of mouth, and just evaporates)?
milk in the bath or outside or in a room with tile/wooden/lino floor?
cover the carpet with old sheets or those cheap waterproof camping table cloths (good for spaghetti bolognaise nights too... )
I try to minimise the triggers by tweaking the environment in this sort of way.
If making a connection with the child is the thing bothering the parent, it might help to find time to connect through eye contact and hugs and perhaps reading a book together or having a conversation, either at the beginning of the day or just before sleeping. But in the middle of a busy day? Interrupting what they are doing to ask them to help clean up spilled water? When there's a universe to make sense of?
what kind of preparation is cool?
(rather than living seat-of-your-pants all the time)
My life changed when I got given a hand-me-down crock pot aka a slow cooker. Probably 2/3 days a week, I throw ingredients for a meal in there in that early morning mellow time. I always cook at least enough for two meals, so on some of the other days, I'm a 15 minute girl, when I look in the freezer and grabbed something I cooked a week or two ago.
I have a special grab it now rucksack, which contains all the basics that people I go on trips with might want (e.g. biscuits, entertainment and some cash). Then if it's time to go RIGHT NOW, I just grab the bag. This piece of preparation was a once off, 6 months or more ago. I just stick another bottle of water in if the old one is empty when I get home, or whatever. I just added gloves today brrrr.
My life changed when I got given a hand-me-down crock pot aka a slow cooker. Probably 2/3 days a week, I throw ingredients for a meal in there in that early morning mellow time. I always cook at least enough for two meals, so on some of the other days, I'm a 15 minute girl, when I look in the freezer and grabbed something I cooked a week or two ago.
I have a special grab it now rucksack, which contains all the basics that people I go on trips with might want (e.g. biscuits, entertainment and some cash). Then if it's time to go RIGHT NOW, I just grab the bag. This piece of preparation was a once off, 6 months or more ago. I just stick another bottle of water in if the old one is empty when I get home, or whatever. I just added gloves today brrrr.
what do I do if my child keeps picking my plants?
I know people with a big vegetable patch and a rabbit problem. They fenced the whole thing in with chicken wire. It probably goes almost a foot underground and sticks up about 2 feet.
this doesn't just make rabbits pause, but also small children, so that their time in the veg garden among the podding peas can be carefully supervised. I'm not advocating sitting in the enclosure with child crying outside, but it would give you warning that child wants to be among your precious plants with you, so you can concentrate on them.
You could always plant things which child is encouraged to pick around the edge of the fence?
If you can get the first sprouting of weeds out when your plants are seedlings, the vegetables stay ahead of the weeds which are really just superficially annoying then.
Some parents I know go "don't touch me!!!" in a silly high voice when a child puts a finger towards a flower. So that even touching the flower is a hilarious game - no need for picking.
Others I have come across make a big deal out of smelling the flowers with the child, sticking their noses right inside to get a lung full of the scent.
Some avid vegetable gardeners have put many of their gardening ambitions on hold for a year or two, instead making mud pies in the earth on a daily basis for a whole growing season
Hanging baskets for precious flowers?
Raised beds for vegetables?
Lots of lawn space with fun toys - a trampoline, a climbing frame, a swing and slide, a sandpit with lots of toys? You can buy cheap plastic water play tables which can be a great place to stand and do sand games/ water with bubbles/ corn starch and water/ you name it.
Child might like to stand on a step ladder and help you hang clothes.
I'd be thinking about ways of having the child involved with what you are doing, and consider saving the garden maintenance for when another adult is around to amuse the small child.
this doesn't just make rabbits pause, but also small children, so that their time in the veg garden among the podding peas can be carefully supervised. I'm not advocating sitting in the enclosure with child crying outside, but it would give you warning that child wants to be among your precious plants with you, so you can concentrate on them.
You could always plant things which child is encouraged to pick around the edge of the fence?
If you can get the first sprouting of weeds out when your plants are seedlings, the vegetables stay ahead of the weeds which are really just superficially annoying then.
Some parents I know go "don't touch me!!!" in a silly high voice when a child puts a finger towards a flower. So that even touching the flower is a hilarious game - no need for picking.
Others I have come across make a big deal out of smelling the flowers with the child, sticking their noses right inside to get a lung full of the scent.
Some avid vegetable gardeners have put many of their gardening ambitions on hold for a year or two, instead making mud pies in the earth on a daily basis for a whole growing season
Hanging baskets for precious flowers?
Raised beds for vegetables?
Lots of lawn space with fun toys - a trampoline, a climbing frame, a swing and slide, a sandpit with lots of toys? You can buy cheap plastic water play tables which can be a great place to stand and do sand games/ water with bubbles/ corn starch and water/ you name it.
Child might like to stand on a step ladder and help you hang clothes.
I'd be thinking about ways of having the child involved with what you are doing, and consider saving the garden maintenance for when another adult is around to amuse the small child.
what do I do if my child won't sleep?
(post rescued from the soon-to-be-defunct Unconditional Parenting board)
A wise person once told me that on those occasions when you want to sleep and for some reason you can't (like you're on a night shift, or you're caring for a child who, for whatever reason, isn't ready to sleep, or is sleeping in a very unsettled manner) there's a curve of ghastliness, and if you can sit out the curve, about 15-20 minutes after you feel your head will explode, it actually becomes ok to stay awake. It might take a few similar experiences before you can recognise this.
Useful things: put on a DVD in a room with a mattress. You can lie and doze while child watches DVD. Don't expect child to go to sleep for 4 hours - if they happen to go to sleep earlier, then well and good, but it means you stop being impatient. Remember that while lying with your eyes shut is not as restful as sleep, it is much more restful than having eyes open and being alert. As Kipper says "One night without sleep won't matter".
In the time when you are awake, schedule yourself a nap for tomorrow, while child naps. Remind yourself that child will probably sleep in till 11am, and give yourself permission to do the same, cancelling engagements by email or text if you can.
A wise person once told me that on those occasions when you want to sleep and for some reason you can't (like you're on a night shift, or you're caring for a child who, for whatever reason, isn't ready to sleep, or is sleeping in a very unsettled manner) there's a curve of ghastliness, and if you can sit out the curve, about 15-20 minutes after you feel your head will explode, it actually becomes ok to stay awake. It might take a few similar experiences before you can recognise this.
Useful things: put on a DVD in a room with a mattress. You can lie and doze while child watches DVD. Don't expect child to go to sleep for 4 hours - if they happen to go to sleep earlier, then well and good, but it means you stop being impatient. Remember that while lying with your eyes shut is not as restful as sleep, it is much more restful than having eyes open and being alert. As Kipper says "One night without sleep won't matter".
In the time when you are awake, schedule yourself a nap for tomorrow, while child naps. Remind yourself that child will probably sleep in till 11am, and give yourself permission to do the same, cancelling engagements by email or text if you can.
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
tidying a house
Some people hate cleaning and tidying and are happy with the way their house looks. As Quentin Crisp said (and I paraphrase) "After three years the dirt doesn't get any worse. You just have to HOLD YOUR NERVE"
Lots of people hate tidying but want their home to be tidy. They need to get better theories, either about to what extent cleanliness matters, or about whether it is fun to clean or not. I don't think it really matters which route they follow, but if they have decided to be tidy then:
Get lots of stackable plastic crates. Or handwoven organic sea grass ones if that's your preferred asthetic. The plastic ones cost almost nothing, though. They are great for having toys sorted into - lego in one, soft toys in another, musical instruments in another. They are also excellent for building dens, for impromptu tables, for climbing onto large items of furniture...
People with a competitive streak can turn tidying into a competition, with their co-habitees or against themselves. e.g. throwing plastic balls into a filing cabinet drawer from the other side of the room = target practice. Child might want to join in while parents are having fun with such a game - no need for nagging. And if parents are having fun, they won't actually mind if child joins in or not.
I think of tidying as re-setting the house so that all the toys are attractive to whoever might want to play with them - making sure all the jigsaws have all their pieces with them etc. Any toy in its home is a gift to my cohabitees.
Someone said to me that if there are items you move in tidying more than once every 24 hours, then they live in the wrong place. It may be that the home of a very favourite toy is in the corner on the floor, not up on a shelf.
Lots of people hate tidying but want their home to be tidy. They need to get better theories, either about to what extent cleanliness matters, or about whether it is fun to clean or not. I don't think it really matters which route they follow, but if they have decided to be tidy then:
Get lots of stackable plastic crates. Or handwoven organic sea grass ones if that's your preferred asthetic. The plastic ones cost almost nothing, though. They are great for having toys sorted into - lego in one, soft toys in another, musical instruments in another. They are also excellent for building dens, for impromptu tables, for climbing onto large items of furniture...
People with a competitive streak can turn tidying into a competition, with their co-habitees or against themselves. e.g. throwing plastic balls into a filing cabinet drawer from the other side of the room = target practice. Child might want to join in while parents are having fun with such a game - no need for nagging. And if parents are having fun, they won't actually mind if child joins in or not.
I think of tidying as re-setting the house so that all the toys are attractive to whoever might want to play with them - making sure all the jigsaws have all their pieces with them etc. Any toy in its home is a gift to my cohabitees.
Someone said to me that if there are items you move in tidying more than once every 24 hours, then they live in the wrong place. It may be that the home of a very favourite toy is in the corner on the floor, not up on a shelf.
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
splash happy
From a thread at the Unconditional Parenting message board, where a poster asked about a situation in which a 3-year-old likes to splash water out of the bath all over floor/parents.
Brain storm:
Get in the bath with the two children (between them) so you protect smaller child from tsunamis and you are warm and wet instead of cold and wet.
Put washing up bowls along the edge of the bath on the floor to catch splashes.
Buy one of those really cheap carpet mat things which have a plastic base (they look pretty grim, but they soak up lots of water, it doesn't go through to the carpet, and they can easily be hung on the washing line outside to dry off)
Cut up an old towel into strips and attach the strips to the side of the bath with strong tape. Drips going down the outside of the bath get caught in a towel strip rather than going on the carpet.
Make lots of little bottles of potion (food colouring and water) for pouring.
Get a waterwheel for pouring games.
Bubbles may be more fun to pat and throw around than actual tidal wave splashing
If your kitchen has tiled/lino/wooden floor, the sink may be a good place for maxi-splash fun (and you can get just as clean in a sink as in a bath). As long as child isn't in danger of falling on the floor, parent can use it as an opportunity to mop the floor with constant water provision!
Brain storm:
Get in the bath with the two children (between them) so you protect smaller child from tsunamis and you are warm and wet instead of cold and wet.
Put washing up bowls along the edge of the bath on the floor to catch splashes.
Buy one of those really cheap carpet mat things which have a plastic base (they look pretty grim, but they soak up lots of water, it doesn't go through to the carpet, and they can easily be hung on the washing line outside to dry off)
Cut up an old towel into strips and attach the strips to the side of the bath with strong tape. Drips going down the outside of the bath get caught in a towel strip rather than going on the carpet.
Make lots of little bottles of potion (food colouring and water) for pouring.
Get a waterwheel for pouring games.
Bubbles may be more fun to pat and throw around than actual tidal wave splashing
If your kitchen has tiled/lino/wooden floor, the sink may be a good place for maxi-splash fun (and you can get just as clean in a sink as in a bath). As long as child isn't in danger of falling on the floor, parent can use it as an opportunity to mop the floor with constant water provision!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
