Giving up on Gentle Parenting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Gentle parenting basically just means no yelling, no hitting, no time outs. It promotes saying no, physically removing children from situations that are dangerous or when they refuse to comply, physically forcing them to do certain things (they won’t put shoes on, you put them on for them). The whole point is if you face very firm boundaries and expectations you won’t need to yell or punish. I don’t know whether that’s true, but that’s the point.

It does not mean negotiating. In fact, Lansbury specifically says not to do that.

I think it’s super hard for two reasons. One, I find staying calm and patient with hundreds of toddler tantrums a day really hard. Two, you have no leverage or punishment, so you have zero in-the-moment tools for stopping bad behavior aside from physical removal, which is hard or impossible when your child physically resists. Gentle parenting is a long game that assumes that over time your kids will learn your boundaries and comply, eliminating the need to act out and push back.

It’s not working for me, but it’s worth mentioning it’s really not about being permissive or arguing with your kids. Quite the opposite.

I hate Janet Lansbury with a passion. Some of her advice is in fact run of the mill behavioral stuff you might get from any child psychologist. But she serves it with a side of massive condescension to women who don’t perform motherhood correctly. Her methods seem to be more focused on the mom feeling and saying the exact right thing instead of setting up structures that actually work. She also seems to literally believe in magic words, as if following her scripts (“I won’t let you hit!”) will change behavior.

Oh, the scripts. I read the Ross Greene books, followed the scripts, and my little dear one laughed manically each time. Maybe it works on some kids.

We found out later that the youngest DS has ADHD and switched to an authoritative style of parenting, which also doesn't allow for parents yelling or losing their cool. We all are so much happier now, including DS. It's not a miracle cure and that funny kid still pushes boundaries but it's definitely all doable.

This. I have a boundary pusher. He needs clear guidelines. I use the same approach with people who work for me, ha.

What are the rules?
Will the rules be enforced equally?
What is the punishment for breaking the rules?



90% of humans want to know this on some level. If they know the answers and what to expect, it makes things easiers.

My dude. That is gentle parenting. Making boundaries and rules known and enforcing them consistently is essential in gentle parenting because you have no tools for in-the-moment compliance so you are relying on rock solid boundaries and rules.

gentle parenting is against punishments though. negative consequences are a cornerstone for my kid. some gentle parents offshoots are ALSO against positive rewards. so basically the theory is that you just talk to the kid correctly and they will follow the rules. lol.

I admittedly haven’t researched this much but the one time I heard about gentle parenting the psychiatrist explaining it said they were against *unrelated* punishments. So no spanking or withholding screen time because the kid is being loud. But sure yes, separate loud kids from siblings and send to their room if necessary because that solves the loud problem (they can’t disrupt other people’s afternoon if they’re out of hearing distance). Which makes sense to me; my kid gets both negative and positive consequences but they’re (usually; I’m not above bribing occasionally and I can’t say I never yell or scold unreasonably) related to the situation at hand.

that doesn’t work for everything, and it’s unclear why it’s even necessary for the punishment to be related.

Consequences should be as related as possible to the offense because children are still just learning how to be people and the whole point of consequences should be to teach them how to better behave in the future. That's why "natural consequences" are preferable, whenever possible, because natural consequences will not only teach a child to do better next time, it will also teach them WHY to do better next time.

So an example would be trying to get a child clear their plate and help clean after dinner. An authoritarian parent might take away TV privileges or say "no dessert" if a kid failed to follow the expectation that everyone in the family clears their plate after dinner. But neither of those things have anything to do with cleaning up, and also don't teach the kid anything about WHY cleaning up after yourself is a useful skill. But if the consequence is that you leave their dirty plate at the table with the food still on it, and then serve them dessert or breakfast on the plate that still has they dinner remnants on it, and they say "hey, that's gross!" and then you explain that yes, it is gross, which is why you need to clear your plate and rinse it and put it in the dishwasher after every meal, they will start to understand why cleaning up is important. And gentle parenting would suggest doing this in a kind, playful way, so it feels like a lesson and not some kind of horrible punishment, because then your kids are more likely to listen to the part where you explain it instead of just feeling horrible and mistreated.

Natural consequences are not always possible but they are possible more often than many parents think, and if you can come up with at least related consequences the rest of the time, you discover that the lessons tend to stick better and your kids trust you more because they will view you as a guide who has some wisdom to impart as opposed to a jailer who is alway telling them "do this! don't do that!" with no explanation, and then taking away their favorite activities when they can't keep those rules straight.

Jeebus, you would serve your kid rotted food to make a point instead of giving them a 2 min timeout??! That is freaking outlandish. Do you actually have children?

DP. That sounds like Parenting with Love and Logic. Those people seem to really hate their children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The trouble with parenting these days is that we put our kids first. I grew up in the 70's - the child of a single mom. She put herself first - it wasn't easy for her by any means but there was no coddling of us. We went to bed when she told us to, ate (for the most part) what she put in front of us and managed ourselves all day when she went to work. I remember breaking my foot as a child and having to wait until she got home from a late dinner to look at it. My kids are nagging me all day to get them some food or this or that. I have begun to feel like a servant more than a parent - so now I embrace my mother, sit on the couch with a book and give them the evil eye when they ask me to get them a snack.

I think you're onto something. I do often feel more like a servant than a parent. I don't remember my parents playing with us nonstop as kids, yet most parent now spend hours a day playing, reading books and assisting kids. On days like today I get SO burnt out. Just nonstop play, crafts, feeding them and when it all ends, the whole house is trashed, there's laundry everywhere and I'm stuck doing all the chores until bedtime. No play for me, just for the kids.

+1

It’s completely unsustainable. Kids need chores and parents need to run the house. No offense meant to those who love playing, but that’s not me.

I wouldn’t say that is gentle parenting exactly, but making our lives so child centric is creating some entitled kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The trouble with parenting these days is that we put our kids first. I grew up in the 70's - the child of a single mom. She put herself first - it wasn't easy for her by any means but there was no coddling of us. We went to bed when she told us to, ate (for the most part) what she put in front of us and managed ourselves all day when she went to work. I remember breaking my foot as a child and having to wait until she got home from a late dinner to look at it. My kids are nagging me all day to get them some food or this or that. I have begun to feel like a servant more than a parent - so now I embrace my mother, sit on the couch with a book and give them the evil eye when they ask me to get them a snack.

I think you're onto something. I do often feel more like a servant than a parent. I don't remember my parents playing with us nonstop as kids, yet most parent now spend hours a day playing, reading books and assisting kids. On days like today I get SO burnt out. Just nonstop play, crafts, feeding them and when it all ends, the whole house is trashed, there's laundry everywhere and I'm stuck doing all the chores until bedtime. No play for me, just for the kids.

+1

It’s completely unsustainable. Kids need chores and parents need to run the house. No offense meant to those who love playing, but that’s not me.

I wouldn’t say that is gentle parenting exactly, but making our lives so child centric is creating some entitled kids.

How will these kids do it when they are parents?! Will they be able to transition from doing zero chores to doing everything all the time with no breaks? Zero hobbies, zero downtime just nonstop kid play?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The trouble with parenting these days is that we put our kids first. I grew up in the 70's - the child of a single mom. She put herself first - it wasn't easy for her by any means but there was no coddling of us. We went to bed when she told us to, ate (for the most part) what she put in front of us and managed ourselves all day when she went to work. I remember breaking my foot as a child and having to wait until she got home from a late dinner to look at it. My kids are nagging me all day to get them some food or this or that. I have begun to feel like a servant more than a parent - so now I embrace my mother, sit on the couch with a book and give them the evil eye when they ask me to get them a snack.

I think you're onto something. I do often feel more like a servant than a parent. I don't remember my parents playing with us nonstop as kids, yet most parent now spend hours a day playing, reading books and assisting kids. On days like today I get SO burnt out. Just nonstop play, crafts, feeding them and when it all ends, the whole house is trashed, there's laundry everywhere and I'm stuck doing all the chores until bedtime. No play for me, just for the kids.

+1

It’s completely unsustainable. Kids need chores and parents need to run the house. No offense meant to those who love playing, but that’s not me.

I wouldn’t say that is gentle parenting exactly, but making our lives so child centric is creating some entitled kids.

How will these kids do it when they are parents?! Will they be able to transition from doing zero chores to doing everything all the time with no breaks? Zero hobbies, zero downtime just nonstop kid play?

They won't have children. They know parenthood sux and they don't want it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clearly people dont even understand what gentle parenting is (or supposed to be), no wonder it isnt working lol.

I love that parents who admit to yelling at their kids think they are superior to gentle-parenting. Yes, yes verbal abuse sounds much healthier! Congrats!

You do know there’s a middle ground, right? Gentle parenting is letting the kids decide their bedtime letting their kid have ice cream instead of a healthy balanced dinner, giving their kid the lollipop when they demand it because you’re afraid to say no. Some of us can have boundaries and rules and be consistent about them without screaming at our kids.

Honestly I think gentle parenting is somewhat abusive…you are leading your kid to build zero resilience, zero exposure to frustration, zero practice not getting their way—so real life hits and they will understandably not cope and then they’re blamed for being a bad kid or having some disability they don’t really have.

I dont think you understand gentle parenting. Which is fine, but dont trash it if you clearly dont actually understand what it is or means. Especially the second bolded, is absolutely not true.

So then tell me what your definition of gentle parenting is. Because I always assumed it was the permissive parent, the one that asks the kids to stop instead of tells them, and doesn’t actually stop them if they’re doing something they shouldn’t, they just stand there, talking. Give me an example of gentle parenting so I understand. And like I said, I don’t yell at my kids—I do listen to their feelings and needs, I just also have boundaries and they have consequences if behaviors persist.

here is an example:
https://visiblechild.com/2015/10/02/theres-no-trying-in-limit-setting/

[Anonymous]

"If we cultivate connection and respectful cooperation (in all things), approach them closely and with respect, wait for them to be ready, offer them choices (which gives them appropriate levels of power and decision making), explain what needs to be done, and give them time to come to it on their own, they will begin to take responsibility for these tasks themselves, without argument, power struggle, or even reminders. Isn’t that what we’re after? Independent self-care and bodily autonomy rather than simple obedience? Well, it’s what I’m after, anyway. "

This right here explains why kids with ADHD (almost 10% of the population!) and other impulse control disorders struggle with gentle parenting. IT doesn't just "click" for them to take responsibility for those tasks, and they may need reminders indefinitely. A gentle parent might get incredibly frustrated and not-so-gentle when they tell little Johnny for the trillionth time to brush his teeth because he didn't decide to do it on his own. Listen, I'm a 30-year old adult with ADHD and sometimes I need to remind myself that brushing my teeth is important and useful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the gentle parenting books (Lansbury, how to talk so little kids blah blah) and I didn’t come away with anything about not having consequences. I just don’t think you guys have read the books.

Lansbury is against time-outs

https://www.janetlansbury.com/2016/05/why-timeouts-fail-and-what-to-do-instead/

DP, but did you read the link you sent? Her point is not that time-outs are evil or she is "against" them, but that they aren't very effective. Why? Because they fail to actually teach children the skills or tools they need to behave better the next time, in most cases.

Authoritarian parenting (the yelling/hitting/timeout model) is premised on the idea that if you punish kids for bad behavior, they will think about their behavior and the punishment and draw the logical conclusion that if they want to avoid punishment, they must stop engaging in the bad behavior. What gentle and authoritative parenting experts are saying is that this assumption is wrong, ESPECIALLY for young kids who lack the cognitive reasoning skills to draw those conclusions. Instead, yelling/hitting/timeout teaches kids a bunch of other lessons that parents might not intend (lessons like "I'm a bad person" or "when things are hard, my parents want me to go away" and "the bigger and stronger person gets their way") but doesn't actually help them become better functioning people who can avoid the negative behaviors that parents are punishing in the first place.

But consequences are essential to gentle parenting. It's just that Lansbury and other advocates are pointing out that in order for consequences to work, they must be coupled with things like:

(1) Clearly articulated expectations. A child can not meet an expectation they are unaware of, and young children in particular are not just going to pick up on expectations -- you have to tell them.

(2) Consequences clearly linked to negative behaviors. Timeouts are rarely directly linked to the negative behavior, and they also isolate a kid in a moment of upset or conflict when it would be useful for someone (like a parent!) to be there to explain what is happening and why so that the child actually learns something they can apply in the future. Sitting in ones room alone after being yelled at is not actually the learning experience some parents seem to think it should be.

(2) Communication. This is where a lot of parents struggle and with reason -- it can be hard. I think this is wear gently/authoritative parenting resources can be most helpful. I've gotten some very helpful ideas for how to better communicate with my kids from resources like Dr. Becky and (when my kids were younger) Janet Lansbury. It can feel awkward and stilted at first, but you get better with time.

Is there someone on this thread that was advocating authoritarian parenting? I guess I didn't see that post. It doesn't matter though. Just about everyone else advocates authoritative parenting, which apparently is the same thing as gentle parenting so we're all arguing about nothing. Typical.

Time outs didn't work for my kids. They work for me, though! I give myself a time out and I love it.

Yes! Literally OP is like "I want to lay down the law," which is authoritarian. Authoritative parenting requires communication and setting expectations and explaining stuff to kids when they don't meet expectations so they learn (instead of just punishing them without explanation, which is WAY easier but ultimately not as effective). And lots of people agree this is easier and just want to yell at their kids and are tired of the "gentle parenting" (i.e. authoritative) parenting advice which says not to do that and instead to meet a higher parenting standard that requires you actually teach your kids how to do stuff and model healthy emotional regulation. It's hard, that's why people don't like it.

My family uses timeouts, btw, but in the way you mean -- people put themselves in timeout. We don't send kids to their rooms for misbehaving, but when someone is clearly dysregulated, we'll ask if they want to take a break or if spending some time on they own might help them feel more calm. Sometimes the answer is no and sometimes it's yes. Works for adults, too. This actually goes to the question of "giving kids agency" that has popped up on the thread. We always try to give our kids agency to do something that is going to be helpful to helping them behave. So giving a kid space to choose to take a break for a bit, or to choose how to make amends with a sibling they hurt, or to choose how to own up to making a mess, is a good kind of agency. It's not "do whatever you want!" It's "I trust you to make your own choice here, and if it doesn't work out, I'll be there to talk through how to make a better one next time."

“Please Larla stop biting mommy! Mommy doesn’t like that. OW Larla that hurts! Are you feeling sad OW! Would you like some OW alone time OW? Please Larla I can’t OW let you OW bite me OW!”

I don't know what this response is for but I do gentle parenting and my kid doesn't bite me (or anyone) and if they did, I would not ask if they were feeling sad or needed alone time. I don't actually believe you've ever witnessed a parent IRL do that.

Yes of course your kid doesn’t bite. So maybe you should stop acting like you know anything about difficult behavior.

Oh, my kid has been a biter. Was a biter at age 3. A big one. I used gentle parenting techniques to stop the biting. For me, the more difficult the behavior, the harder I have to lean into what I have learned from people like Lansbury and Dr. Becky because the harder it is to stay calm and regulate my own emotions. That doesn't mean I let my kid bite me. It means that I use gentle parenting techniques to keep my own emotions in check so that I can address the difficult behavior. It's so much more effective than responding emotionally. For me at least, it was my kid's difficult behaviors that led me to read up on gentle parenting and authoritative parenting, because my own parents would have just screamed at me or hit me, and that didn't feel right, so I was looking for an approach that was effective but not abusive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the gentle parenting books (Lansbury, how to talk so little kids blah blah) and I didn’t come away with anything about not having consequences. I just don’t think you guys have read the books.

Lansbury is against time-outs

https://www.janetlansbury.com/2016/05/why-timeouts-fail-and-what-to-do-instead/

DP, but did you read the link you sent? Her point is not that time-outs are evil or she is "against" them, but that they aren't very effective. Why? Because they fail to actually teach children the skills or tools they need to behave better the next time, in most cases.

Authoritarian parenting (the yelling/hitting/timeout model) is premised on the idea that if you punish kids for bad behavior, they will think about their behavior and the punishment and draw the logical conclusion that if they want to avoid punishment, they must stop engaging in the bad behavior. What gentle and authoritative parenting experts are saying is that this assumption is wrong, ESPECIALLY for young kids who lack the cognitive reasoning skills to draw those conclusions. Instead, yelling/hitting/timeout teaches kids a bunch of other lessons that parents might not intend (lessons like "I'm a bad person" or "when things are hard, my parents want me to go away" and "the bigger and stronger person gets their way") but doesn't actually help them become better functioning people who can avoid the negative behaviors that parents are punishing in the first place.

But consequences are essential to gentle parenting. It's just that Lansbury and other advocates are pointing out that in order for consequences to work, they must be coupled with things like:

(1) Clearly articulated expectations. A child can not meet an expectation they are unaware of, and young children in particular are not just going to pick up on expectations -- you have to tell them.

(2) Consequences clearly linked to negative behaviors. Timeouts are rarely directly linked to the negative behavior, and they also isolate a kid in a moment of upset or conflict when it would be useful for someone (like a parent!) to be there to explain what is happening and why so that the child actually learns something they can apply in the future. Sitting in ones room alone after being yelled at is not actually the learning experience some parents seem to think it should be.

(2) Communication. This is where a lot of parents struggle and with reason -- it can be hard. I think this is wear gently/authoritative parenting resources can be most helpful. I've gotten some very helpful ideas for how to better communicate with my kids from resources like Dr. Becky and (when my kids were younger) Janet Lansbury. It can feel awkward and stilted at first, but you get better with time.

Is there someone on this thread that was advocating authoritarian parenting? I guess I didn't see that post. It doesn't matter though. Just about everyone else advocates authoritative parenting, which apparently is the same thing as gentle parenting so we're all arguing about nothing. Typical.

Time outs didn't work for my kids. They work for me, though! I give myself a time out and I love it.

Yes! Literally OP is like "I want to lay down the law," which is authoritarian. Authoritative parenting requires communication and setting expectations and explaining stuff to kids when they don't meet expectations so they learn (instead of just punishing them without explanation, which is WAY easier but ultimately not as effective). And lots of people agree this is easier and just want to yell at their kids and are tired of the "gentle parenting" (i.e. authoritative) parenting advice which says not to do that and instead to meet a higher parenting standard that requires you actually teach your kids how to do stuff and model healthy emotional regulation. It's hard, that's why people don't like it.

My family uses timeouts, btw, but in the way you mean -- people put themselves in timeout. We don't send kids to their rooms for misbehaving, but when someone is clearly dysregulated, we'll ask if they want to take a break or if spending some time on they own might help them feel more calm. Sometimes the answer is no and sometimes it's yes. Works for adults, too. This actually goes to the question of "giving kids agency" that has popped up on the thread. We always try to give our kids agency to do something that is going to be helpful to helping them behave. So giving a kid space to choose to take a break for a bit, or to choose how to make amends with a sibling they hurt, or to choose how to own up to making a mess, is a good kind of agency. It's not "do whatever you want!" It's "I trust you to make your own choice here, and if it doesn't work out, I'll be there to talk through how to make a better one next time."

“Please Larla stop biting mommy! Mommy doesn’t like that. OW Larla that hurts! Are you feeling sad OW! Would you like some OW alone time OW? Please Larla I can’t OW let you OW bite me OW!”

I don't know what this response is for but I do gentle parenting and my kid doesn't bite me (or anyone) and if they did, I would not ask if they were feeling sad or needed alone time. I don't actually believe you've ever witnessed a parent IRL do that.

Yes of course your kid doesn’t bite. So maybe you should stop acting like you know anything about difficult behavior.

Oh, my kid has been a biter. Was a biter at age 3. A big one. I used gentle parenting techniques to stop the biting. For me, the more difficult the behavior, the harder I have to lean into what I have learned from people like Lansbury and Dr. Becky because the harder it is to stay calm and regulate my own emotions. That doesn't mean I let my kid bite me. It means that I use gentle parenting techniques to keep my own emotions in check so that I can address the difficult behavior. It's so much more effective than responding emotionally. For me at least, it was my kid's difficult behaviors that led me to read up on gentle parenting and authoritative parenting, because my own parents would have just screamed at me or hit me, and that didn't feel right, so I was looking for an approach that was effective but not abusive.

Lansbury gives you zero tools to stay calm and regulated while you deal with endless defiance and screaming. She gives you the why but NOT the how. This is one of my biggest gripes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: "If we cultivate connection and respectful cooperation (in all things), approach them closely and with respect, wait for them to be ready, offer them choices (which gives them appropriate levels of power and decision making), explain what needs to be done, and give them time to come to it on their own, they will begin to take responsibility for these tasks themselves, without argument, power struggle, or even reminders. Isn’t that what we’re after? Independent self-care and bodily autonomy rather than simple obedience? Well, it’s what I’m after, anyway. "

This right here explains why kids with ADHD (almost 10% of the population!) and other impulse control disorders struggle with gentle parenting. IT doesn't just "click" for them to take responsibility for those tasks, and they may need reminders indefinitely. A gentle parent might get incredibly frustrated and not-so-gentle when they tell little Johnny for the trillionth time to brush his teeth because he didn't decide to do it on his own. Listen, I'm a 30-year old adult with ADHD and sometimes I need to remind myself that brushing my teeth is important and useful.

Where is that quote even from?

I think people are looking at this advice really rigidly. Of course you might have to adjust these techniques to suit a specific child or to make them work for your family. But it's not like authoritarian parenting works well on ADHD, by the way. Harsh punishments for failing to comply with rigid expectations for behavior can sometimes work on a short-term basis for people with ADHD who have great masking skills. But eventually it catches up with you, because it causes anxiety which can lead to far worse procrastination and avoidance issues. I have personally found that one of the best things for ADHD is recognizing that failure is okay as long as you keep working at it, which actually dovetails really nicely with a lot of gentle parenting principles.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the gentle parenting books (Lansbury, how to talk so little kids blah blah) and I didn’t come away with anything about not having consequences. I just don’t think you guys have read the books.

Lansbury is against time-outs

https://www.janetlansbury.com/2016/05/why-timeouts-fail-and-what-to-do-instead/

DP, but did you read the link you sent? Her point is not that time-outs are evil or she is "against" them, but that they aren't very effective. Why? Because they fail to actually teach children the skills or tools they need to behave better the next time, in most cases.

Authoritarian parenting (the yelling/hitting/timeout model) is premised on the idea that if you punish kids for bad behavior, they will think about their behavior and the punishment and draw the logical conclusion that if they want to avoid punishment, they must stop engaging in the bad behavior. What gentle and authoritative parenting experts are saying is that this assumption is wrong, ESPECIALLY for young kids who lack the cognitive reasoning skills to draw those conclusions. Instead, yelling/hitting/timeout teaches kids a bunch of other lessons that parents might not intend (lessons like "I'm a bad person" or "when things are hard, my parents want me to go away" and "the bigger and stronger person gets their way") but doesn't actually help them become better functioning people who can avoid the negative behaviors that parents are punishing in the first place.

But consequences are essential to gentle parenting. It's just that Lansbury and other advocates are pointing out that in order for consequences to work, they must be coupled with things like:

(1) Clearly articulated expectations. A child can not meet an expectation they are unaware of, and young children in particular are not just going to pick up on expectations -- you have to tell them.

(2) Consequences clearly linked to negative behaviors. Timeouts are rarely directly linked to the negative behavior, and they also isolate a kid in a moment of upset or conflict when it would be useful for someone (like a parent!) to be there to explain what is happening and why so that the child actually learns something they can apply in the future. Sitting in ones room alone after being yelled at is not actually the learning experience some parents seem to think it should be.

(2) Communication. This is where a lot of parents struggle and with reason -- it can be hard. I think this is wear gently/authoritative parenting resources can be most helpful. I've gotten some very helpful ideas for how to better communicate with my kids from resources like Dr. Becky and (when my kids were younger) Janet Lansbury. It can feel awkward and stilted at first, but you get better with time.

Is there someone on this thread that was advocating authoritarian parenting? I guess I didn't see that post. It doesn't matter though. Just about everyone else advocates authoritative parenting, which apparently is the same thing as gentle parenting so we're all arguing about nothing. Typical.

Time outs didn't work for my kids. They work for me, though! I give myself a time out and I love it.

Yes! Literally OP is like "I want to lay down the law," which is authoritarian. Authoritative parenting requires communication and setting expectations and explaining stuff to kids when they don't meet expectations so they learn (instead of just punishing them without explanation, which is WAY easier but ultimately not as effective). And lots of people agree this is easier and just want to yell at their kids and are tired of the "gentle parenting" (i.e. authoritative) parenting advice which says not to do that and instead to meet a higher parenting standard that requires you actually teach your kids how to do stuff and model healthy emotional regulation. It's hard, that's why people don't like it.

My family uses timeouts, btw, but in the way you mean -- people put themselves in timeout. We don't send kids to their rooms for misbehaving, but when someone is clearly dysregulated, we'll ask if they want to take a break or if spending some time on they own might help them feel more calm. Sometimes the answer is no and sometimes it's yes. Works for adults, too. This actually goes to the question of "giving kids agency" that has popped up on the thread. We always try to give our kids agency to do something that is going to be helpful to helping them behave. So giving a kid space to choose to take a break for a bit, or to choose how to make amends with a sibling they hurt, or to choose how to own up to making a mess, is a good kind of agency. It's not "do whatever you want!" It's "I trust you to make your own choice here, and if it doesn't work out, I'll be there to talk through how to make a better one next time."

“Please Larla stop biting mommy! Mommy doesn’t like that. OW Larla that hurts! Are you feeling sad OW! Would you like some OW alone time OW? Please Larla I can’t OW let you OW bite me OW!”

I don't know what this response is for but I do gentle parenting and my kid doesn't bite me (or anyone) and if they did, I would not ask if they were feeling sad or needed alone time. I don't actually believe you've ever witnessed a parent IRL do that.

Yes of course your kid doesn’t bite. So maybe you should stop acting like you know anything about difficult behavior.

Oh, my kid has been a biter. Was a biter at age 3. A big one. I used gentle parenting techniques to stop the biting. For me, the more difficult the behavior, the harder I have to lean into what I have learned from people like Lansbury and Dr. Becky because the harder it is to stay calm and regulate my own emotions. That doesn't mean I let my kid bite me. It means that I use gentle parenting techniques to keep my own emotions in check so that I can address the difficult behavior. It's so much more effective than responding emotionally. For me at least, it was my kid's difficult behaviors that led me to read up on gentle parenting and authoritative parenting, because my own parents would have just screamed at me or hit me, and that didn't feel right, so I was looking for an approach that was effective but not abusive.

Lansbury gives you zero tools to stay calm and regulated while you deal with endless defiance and screaming. She gives you the why but NOT the how. This is one of my biggest gripes.

I actually do think Lansbury talks about this on her podcast and elsewhere. Definitely Dr. Becky talks about it. I also like the Instagram accounts Nurtured First and Seed and Sew. They all talk about self-regulation, and discuss things you can do away from your kids to help build up your emotional maturity in order to handle those moments better, as well as things to do in the moment.

But also, one thing I learned from gentle parenting discussions was that you have to just take responsibility for your emotional state as a parent and work on your emotional maturity on your own so that it's not so hard to stay calm in those really tough moments with kids. Like some of the best gentle parenting techniques is "to to therapy" or "rely on your partner or childcare to take breaks from your kids so that you can address your own mental health needs."

I remember very early on as a parent when I was in the sleep-deprived parenting stage, having a conversation at a moms group about "mom rage" and staying calm when nothing you are trying as a parent is working. The group moderator stopped the discussion and asked for everyone who feels like they operate on less sleep than is ideal to raise their hands. We all raised our hands. And then she suggested that maybe we brainstorm ways we could address THAT problem, and then see if addressing sleep-deprivation helped with the "mom rage" issue. Guess what, they are directly correlated.

Gentle parenting requires you to do this other work. If you try to do gentle parenting without also taking care of your own emotional state and working on your own emotional maturity, it probably won't be successful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the gentle parenting books (Lansbury, how to talk so little kids blah blah) and I didn’t come away with anything about not having consequences. I just don’t think you guys have read the books.

Lansbury is against time-outs

https://www.janetlansbury.com/2016/05/why-timeouts-fail-and-what-to-do-instead/

DP, but did you read the link you sent? Her point is not that time-outs are evil or she is "against" them, but that they aren't very effective. Why? Because they fail to actually teach children the skills or tools they need to behave better the next time, in most cases.

Authoritarian parenting (the yelling/hitting/timeout model) is premised on the idea that if you punish kids for bad behavior, they will think about their behavior and the punishment and draw the logical conclusion that if they want to avoid punishment, they must stop engaging in the bad behavior. What gentle and authoritative parenting experts are saying is that this assumption is wrong, ESPECIALLY for young kids who lack the cognitive reasoning skills to draw those conclusions. Instead, yelling/hitting/timeout teaches kids a bunch of other lessons that parents might not intend (lessons like "I'm a bad person" or "when things are hard, my parents want me to go away" and "the bigger and stronger person gets their way") but doesn't actually help them become better functioning people who can avoid the negative behaviors that parents are punishing in the first place.

But consequences are essential to gentle parenting. It's just that Lansbury and other advocates are pointing out that in order for consequences to work, they must be coupled with things like:

(1) Clearly articulated expectations. A child can not meet an expectation they are unaware of, and young children in particular are not just going to pick up on expectations -- you have to tell them.

(2) Consequences clearly linked to negative behaviors. Timeouts are rarely directly linked to the negative behavior, and they also isolate a kid in a moment of upset or conflict when it would be useful for someone (like a parent!) to be there to explain what is happening and why so that the child actually learns something they can apply in the future. Sitting in ones room alone after being yelled at is not actually the learning experience some parents seem to think it should be.

(2) Communication. This is where a lot of parents struggle and with reason -- it can be hard. I think this is wear gently/authoritative parenting resources can be most helpful. I've gotten some very helpful ideas for how to better communicate with my kids from resources like Dr. Becky and (when my kids were younger) Janet Lansbury. It can feel awkward and stilted at first, but you get better with time.

Is there someone on this thread that was advocating authoritarian parenting? I guess I didn't see that post. It doesn't matter though. Just about everyone else advocates authoritative parenting, which apparently is the same thing as gentle parenting so we're all arguing about nothing. Typical.

Time outs didn't work for my kids. They work for me, though! I give myself a time out and I love it.

Yes! Literally OP is like "I want to lay down the law," which is authoritarian. Authoritative parenting requires communication and setting expectations and explaining stuff to kids when they don't meet expectations so they learn (instead of just punishing them without explanation, which is WAY easier but ultimately not as effective). And lots of people agree this is easier and just want to yell at their kids and are tired of the "gentle parenting" (i.e. authoritative) parenting advice which says not to do that and instead to meet a higher parenting standard that requires you actually teach your kids how to do stuff and model healthy emotional regulation. It's hard, that's why people don't like it.

My family uses timeouts, btw, but in the way you mean -- people put themselves in timeout. We don't send kids to their rooms for misbehaving, but when someone is clearly dysregulated, we'll ask if they want to take a break or if spending some time on they own might help them feel more calm. Sometimes the answer is no and sometimes it's yes. Works for adults, too. This actually goes to the question of "giving kids agency" that has popped up on the thread. We always try to give our kids agency to do something that is going to be helpful to helping them behave. So giving a kid space to choose to take a break for a bit, or to choose how to make amends with a sibling they hurt, or to choose how to own up to making a mess, is a good kind of agency. It's not "do whatever you want!" It's "I trust you to make your own choice here, and if it doesn't work out, I'll be there to talk through how to make a better one next time."

“Please Larla stop biting mommy! Mommy doesn’t like that. OW Larla that hurts! Are you feeling sad OW! Would you like some OW alone time OW? Please Larla I can’t OW let you OW bite me OW!”

I don't know what this response is for but I do gentle parenting and my kid doesn't bite me (or anyone) and if they did, I would not ask if they were feeling sad or needed alone time. I don't actually believe you've ever witnessed a parent IRL do that.

Yes of course your kid doesn’t bite. So maybe you should stop acting like you know anything about difficult behavior.

Oh, my kid has been a biter. Was a biter at age 3. A big one. I used gentle parenting techniques to stop the biting. For me, the more difficult the behavior, the harder I have to lean into what I have learned from people like Lansbury and Dr. Becky because the harder it is to stay calm and regulate my own emotions. That doesn't mean I let my kid bite me. It means that I use gentle parenting techniques to keep my own emotions in check so that I can address the difficult behavior. It's so much more effective than responding emotionally. For me at least, it was my kid's difficult behaviors that led me to read up on gentle parenting and authoritative parenting, because my own parents would have just screamed at me or hit me, and that didn't feel right, so I was looking for an approach that was effective but not abusive.

Lansbury gives you zero tools to stay calm and regulated while you deal with endless defiance and screaming. She gives you the why but NOT the how. This is one of my biggest gripes.

If you're having that much trouble staying calm and regulated then you need to go to therapy. I'm saying that genuinely btw, not snarkily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the gentle parenting books (Lansbury, how to talk so little kids blah blah) and I didn’t come away with anything about not having consequences. I just don’t think you guys have read the books.

Lansbury is against time-outs

https://www.janetlansbury.com/2016/05/why-timeouts-fail-and-what-to-do-instead/

DP, but did you read the link you sent? Her point is not that time-outs are evil or she is "against" them, but that they aren't very effective. Why? Because they fail to actually teach children the skills or tools they need to behave better the next time, in most cases.

Authoritarian parenting (the yelling/hitting/timeout model) is premised on the idea that if you punish kids for bad behavior, they will think about their behavior and the punishment and draw the logical conclusion that if they want to avoid punishment, they must stop engaging in the bad behavior. What gentle and authoritative parenting experts are saying is that this assumption is wrong, ESPECIALLY for young kids who lack the cognitive reasoning skills to draw those conclusions. Instead, yelling/hitting/timeout teaches kids a bunch of other lessons that parents might not intend (lessons like "I'm a bad person" or "when things are hard, my parents want me to go away" and "the bigger and stronger person gets their way") but doesn't actually help them become better functioning people who can avoid the negative behaviors that parents are punishing in the first place.

But consequences are essential to gentle parenting. It's just that Lansbury and other advocates are pointing out that in order for consequences to work, they must be coupled with things like:

(1) Clearly articulated expectations. A child can not meet an expectation they are unaware of, and young children in particular are not just going to pick up on expectations -- you have to tell them.

(2) Consequences clearly linked to negative behaviors. Timeouts are rarely directly linked to the negative behavior, and they also isolate a kid in a moment of upset or conflict when it would be useful for someone (like a parent!) to be there to explain what is happening and why so that the child actually learns something they can apply in the future. Sitting in ones room alone after being yelled at is not actually the learning experience some parents seem to think it should be.

(2) Communication. This is where a lot of parents struggle and with reason -- it can be hard. I think this is wear gently/authoritative parenting resources can be most helpful. I've gotten some very helpful ideas for how to better communicate with my kids from resources like Dr. Becky and (when my kids were younger) Janet Lansbury. It can feel awkward and stilted at first, but you get better with time.

Is there someone on this thread that was advocating authoritarian parenting? I guess I didn't see that post. It doesn't matter though. Just about everyone else advocates authoritative parenting, which apparently is the same thing as gentle parenting so we're all arguing about nothing. Typical.

Time outs didn't work for my kids. They work for me, though! I give myself a time out and I love it.

Yes! Literally OP is like "I want to lay down the law," which is authoritarian. Authoritative parenting requires communication and setting expectations and explaining stuff to kids when they don't meet expectations so they learn (instead of just punishing them without explanation, which is WAY easier but ultimately not as effective). And lots of people agree this is easier and just want to yell at their kids and are tired of the "gentle parenting" (i.e. authoritative) parenting advice which says not to do that and instead to meet a higher parenting standard that requires you actually teach your kids how to do stuff and model healthy emotional regulation. It's hard, that's why people don't like it.

My family uses timeouts, btw, but in the way you mean -- people put themselves in timeout. We don't send kids to their rooms for misbehaving, but when someone is clearly dysregulated, we'll ask if they want to take a break or if spending some time on they own might help them feel more calm. Sometimes the answer is no and sometimes it's yes. Works for adults, too. This actually goes to the question of "giving kids agency" that has popped up on the thread. We always try to give our kids agency to do something that is going to be helpful to helping them behave. So giving a kid space to choose to take a break for a bit, or to choose how to make amends with a sibling they hurt, or to choose how to own up to making a mess, is a good kind of agency. It's not "do whatever you want!" It's "I trust you to make your own choice here, and if it doesn't work out, I'll be there to talk through how to make a better one next time."

“Please Larla stop biting mommy! Mommy doesn’t like that. OW Larla that hurts! Are you feeling sad OW! Would you like some OW alone time OW? Please Larla I can’t OW let you OW bite me OW!”

I don't know what this response is for but I do gentle parenting and my kid doesn't bite me (or anyone) and if they did, I would not ask if they were feeling sad or needed alone time. I don't actually believe you've ever witnessed a parent IRL do that.

Yes of course your kid doesn’t bite. So maybe you should stop acting like you know anything about difficult behavior.

Oh, my kid has been a biter. Was a biter at age 3. A big one. I used gentle parenting techniques to stop the biting. For me, the more difficult the behavior, the harder I have to lean into what I have learned from people like Lansbury and Dr. Becky because the harder it is to stay calm and regulate my own emotions. That doesn't mean I let my kid bite me. It means that I use gentle parenting techniques to keep my own emotions in check so that I can address the difficult behavior. It's so much more effective than responding emotionally. For me at least, it was my kid's difficult behaviors that led me to read up on gentle parenting and authoritative parenting, because my own parents would have just screamed at me or hit me, and that didn't feel right, so I was looking for an approach that was effective but not abusive.

Lansbury gives you zero tools to stay calm and regulated while you deal with endless defiance and screaming. She gives you the why but NOT the how. This is one of my biggest gripes.

If you're having that much trouble staying calm and regulated then you need to go to therapy. I'm saying that genuinely btw, not snarkily.

No kidding. Already doing that. It doesn’t magically rewire your nervous system, give you a neurotypical child, or erase literal years of extreme sleep deprivation that make you irritable due to having a hard child who never, ever sleeps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clearly people dont even understand what gentle parenting is (or supposed to be), no wonder it isnt working lol.

I love that parents who admit to yelling at their kids think they are superior to gentle-parenting. Yes, yes verbal abuse sounds much healthier! Congrats!

You do know there’s a middle ground, right? Gentle parenting is letting the kids decide their bedtime letting their kid have ice cream instead of a healthy balanced dinner, giving their kid the lollipop when they demand it because you’re afraid to say no. Some of us can have boundaries and rules and be consistent about them without screaming at our kids.

Honestly I think gentle parenting is somewhat abusive…you are leading your kid to build zero resilience, zero exposure to frustration, zero practice not getting their way—so real life hits and they will understandably not cope and then they’re blamed for being a bad kid or having some disability they don’t really have.

I dont think you understand gentle parenting. Which is fine, but dont trash it if you clearly dont actually understand what it is or means. Especially the second bolded, is absolutely not true.

So then tell me what your definition of gentle parenting is. Because I always assumed it was the permissive parent, the one that asks the kids to stop instead of tells them, and doesn’t actually stop them if they’re doing something they shouldn’t, they just stand there, talking. Give me an example of gentle parenting so I understand. And like I said, I don’t yell at my kids—I do listen to their feelings and needs, I just also have boundaries and they have consequences if behaviors persist.

here is an example:
https://visiblechild.com/2015/10/02/theres-no-trying-in-limit-setting/

To me, this is authoritative parenting. You set the limits and you make sure it happens, but without yelling or punishments. It takes time, but you stick to your word. I’m the pp who you said didn’t understand gentle parenting. I think you and I just have different perspectives on it. To me….

Gentle parents let their kids not wash their hands at all because the kids say no and then the parents say they aren’t feeling ready for it and they don’t want to coerce their bodies to doing something they don’t want to do. Gentle parents let their kids just say “toilet words” because they tried to get them to stop, but can’t because they have no control over their kids so they tell themselves it’s okay because the kids are autonomous. Gentle parents don’t actually see how bad their kids are because they’re so used to it, but everyone else sees it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the gentle parenting books (Lansbury, how to talk so little kids blah blah) and I didn’t come away with anything about not having consequences. I just don’t think you guys have read the books.

Lansbury is against time-outs

https://www.janetlansbury.com/2016/05/why-timeouts-fail-and-what-to-do-instead/

What about that means you can’t have consequences?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clearly people dont even understand what gentle parenting is (or supposed to be), no wonder it isnt working lol.

I love that parents who admit to yelling at their kids think they are superior to gentle-parenting. Yes, yes verbal abuse sounds much healthier! Congrats!

You do know there’s a middle ground, right? Gentle parenting is letting the kids decide their bedtime letting their kid have ice cream instead of a healthy balanced dinner, giving their kid the lollipop when they demand it because you’re afraid to say no. Some of us can have boundaries and rules and be consistent about them without screaming at our kids.

Honestly I think gentle parenting is somewhat abusive…you are leading your kid to build zero resilience, zero exposure to frustration, zero practice not getting their way—so real life hits and they will understandably not cope and then they’re blamed for being a bad kid or having some disability they don’t really have.

I dont think you understand gentle parenting. Which is fine, but dont trash it if you clearly dont actually understand what it is or means. Especially the second bolded, is absolutely not true.

So then tell me what your definition of gentle parenting is. Because I always assumed it was the permissive parent, the one that asks the kids to stop instead of tells them, and doesn’t actually stop them if they’re doing something they shouldn’t, they just stand there, talking. Give me an example of gentle parenting so I understand. And like I said, I don’t yell at my kids—I do listen to their feelings and needs, I just also have boundaries and they have consequences if behaviors persist.

here is an example:
https://visiblechild.com/2015/10/02/theres-no-trying-in-limit-setting/

To me, this is authoritative parenting. You set the limits and you make sure it happens, but without yelling or punishments. It takes time, but you stick to your word. I’m the pp who you said didn’t understand gentle parenting. I think you and I just have different perspectives on it. To me….

Gentle parents let their kids not wash their hands at all because the kids say no and then the parents say they aren’t feeling ready for it and they don’t want to coerce their bodies to doing something they don’t want to do. Gentle parents let their kids just say “toilet words” because they tried to get them to stop, but can’t because they have no control over their kids so they tell themselves it’s okay because the kids are autonomous. Gentle parents don’t actually see how bad their kids are because they’re so used to it, but everyone else sees it.

If you get to just make up what “gentle parenting” is, then what is the point of discussing