Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I spoke to a psychologist with expertise in parenting and she gave this advice:

Give child 3 rules: 1) obedience, 2) respect, 3) no arguing. Parents have three rules when responding to child's breaking of these rules (child not told this but parents know): 1) be consistent, 2) no second chances, and 3) no warning before consequences.

If child breaks one of the rules, they are put in bathroom for timeout, for six minutes, and they must think and be quiet. Presumably if they are not quiet they stay longer or something.

Psychologist also said she doesn't recommend discussing/reasoning with child as it just promotes arguing and doesn't yield much compliance/harmony in the household. She also said kids don't feel guilty enough and her method is designed to foster healthy guilt (not shame).

My gut reaction is no to the bathroom punishment. I had reactions to the rules she gave as well but am curious about what others think.

This may work with a very complaint child but will backfire spectacularly with a different child.

Some kids are not "disobeying" when they break a rule, they just don't have the skillset yet to follow them. It's your job as a parent to teach them, not to "punish" them for not having those skills yet!

For some kids, these skills come more naturally and easily, but for other kids it takes longer (years sometimes) and they have to be taught.

The best way to teach -- emotional regulation, clam disposition, respect of people and property -- is by modeling.

Locking your kid in a bathroom is a slippery slope. What happens when they continue to "break" rules after their timeouts? Or they are not quiet inside but scream? Lock them in longer? And when they get physical, i.e. try to get out of the bathroom, are you going to physically restrain them? Where does this end?

Again, with a super compliant kid this might work (although I still think it is cruel) but with lots of kids you are setting up power struggles that will destroy your family's peace.

Did the psych say lock in or just put in?

I don't see why this has to be a slippery slope. Just like any other parentung method, if one strategy doesn’t work, the only option isn't to escalate. A parent can try a different approach.

Didn't say lock in but I assume that would be the case. I think the psychologist would say that if child disobeys (yells, tries to come out) then you increase the duration, but I could be wrong. Would be odd for her to recommend this as the consequence and then say oh, your kid doesn't like it and yells? Tries to get out? Then this consequence is not for them.

You walk the child back to their bedroom if that happens, so you might do that for s bathroom too.

Anonymous wrote:Obedience and respect are extremely vague rules; no arguing is pretty vague too (can you say "I'll take out the trash in 5 minutes"? can you sigh/groan/roll your eyes? can you say "I'm not cold enough to wear mittens"?)

Also while you can force someone to obey, you can't force someone to respect you.

Putting a pissed off kid in a bathroom could result in your bathroom getting damaged/flooded/etc. or lead a kid (especially a young one) to have trauma associated with the bathroom--good luck getting them to use the toilet at night, take showers, etc.

I think this is all terrible advice.

I agree that this is just awful advice. I agree with setting clear rules, not too many, and not arguing about them. But these rules are not at all clear and while they seem limited (in that there are only three) they are incredibly expansive. And using the bathroom as the time out space is really bizarre. I don’t generally agree with isolation as a general consequence because it’s not typically reasonable related to the infraction. But I did use “go to your room” frequently when a child was disregulated, as it was a good way for them to take a break and return to the task or conversation when they had better control over their emotions. That seems to me an appropriate skill. But just teaching a child that the solution for everything is social isolation seems to me a bad idea.

You’re not a jail warden, you’re a parent.

Anonymous wrote:I think the psychologist is on a better track than you are. Going to bedroom or bathroom isn't really a big difference - but encouraging or discouraging arguing is. And I'm in Team psychologist about discouraging it, rather than your preference of encouraging it via discussion.

If you really think that modern parenting is better than old-fashioned parenting, just look at the results. Kids and young adults today are poorly behaved, argue about everything, rude and disrespectful, anxious and depressed. And lack conpetence and independence.

Hahahahaha. I'm dying.

"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.”

-freaking Socrates

OP what is the actual problem that spurred you to consult with a psychologist?

I have a child who was having some pretty serious behavioral issues and I never would have done a bathroom time-out. The psychologist we worked with did suggest time outs on the stairs but when I told her I didn’t want to do that, she easily pivoted to a different plan for consequences. She also helped us with a positive behavior plan (the actually more important part) and other techniques.

Your therapist does not sound grounded in the effective approaches to discipline.

If you still feel like you need support, seek out a therapist trained in Parent-Child Interaction Therapy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obedience and respect are extremely vague rules; no arguing is pretty vague too (can you say "I'll take out the trash in 5 minutes"? can you sigh/groan/roll your eyes? can you say "I'm not cold enough to wear mittens"?)

Also while you can force someone to obey, you can't force someone to respect you.

Putting a pissed off kid in a bathroom could result in your bathroom getting damaged/flooded/etc. or lead a kid (especially a young one) to have trauma associated with the bathroom--good luck getting them to use the toilet at night, take showers, etc.

I think this is all terrible advice.

Lol

All you are doing is arguing. Can you even see that?

Your poor teachers who have to deal with your kids, who just argue every single little thing all the time.

Oh please. And your poor kids will suffer low self-esteem because you don't let them have thoughts.

Anonymous wrote:Obedience and respect are extremely vague rules; no arguing is pretty vague too (can you say "I'll take out the trash in 5 minutes"? can you sigh/groan/roll your eyes? can you say "I'm not cold enough to wear mittens"?)

Also while you can force someone to obey, you can't force someone to respect you.

Putting a pissed off kid in a bathroom could result in your bathroom getting damaged/flooded/etc. or lead a kid (especially a young one) to have trauma associated with the bathroom--good luck getting them to use the toilet at night, take showers, etc.

I think this is all terrible advice.

Lol

All you are doing is arguing. Can you even see that?

Your poor teachers who have to deal with your kids, who just argue every single little thing all the time.

Anonymous wrote:This would not work for my child. We use methods from "The Explosive Child" and they work well. That book explains really clearly how for certain kids, high rigidity does not work because they just mirror the rigidity back to you and everything is a battle.

On the other hand, passivity/giving in (which is very tempting with really rigid kids) obviously doesn't work either because then the kid runs the show.

So what EC talks about is navigating the space between. It's hard. Holding boundaries with empathy -- hard. Supporting your kid while the find a solution themselves-- hard. There aren't trucks or shortcuts. You're literally teaching a child how to self-regulate, problem solve, be resilient, develop flexibility, etc. How many adults do you know who are great at that? So yeah, it's f***ing hard.

Looking at the long view, my oldest has had many challenges in his younger age. ASD/ADHD combo. I used the EC and Kazdin quite a bit, but I often fell into permissive accommodation. I'm fixing that now with much better boundaries and it's working really well. However, I will say that my kid is starting to notice his own triggers and talk through them. He is learning to be calm when angry (maybe after a very brief outburst) which has been modeled to him endlessly for the past seven years. So I can see the effective piece too.

But it is an incredibly hard line to walk. We can't expect to get it right every time.

Obedience and respect are extremely vague rules; no arguing is pretty vague too (can you say "I'll take out the trash in 5 minutes"? can you sigh/groan/roll your eyes? can you say "I'm not cold enough to wear mittens"?)

Also while you can force someone to obey, you can't force someone to respect you.

Putting a pissed off kid in a bathroom could result in your bathroom getting damaged/flooded/etc. or lead a kid (especially a young one) to have trauma associated with the bathroom--good luck getting them to use the toilet at night, take showers, etc.

I think this is all terrible advice.

This would not work for my child. We use methods from "The Explosive Child" and they work well. That book explains really clearly how for certain kids, high rigidity does not work because they just mirror the rigidity back to you and everything is a battle.

On the other hand, passivity/giving in (which is very tempting with really rigid kids) obviously doesn't work either because then the kid runs the show.

So what EC talks about is navigating the space between. It's hard. Holding boundaries with empathy -- hard. Supporting your kid while the find a solution themselves-- hard. There aren't trucks or shortcuts. You're literally teaching a child how to self-regulate, problem solve, be resilient, develop flexibility, etc. How many adults do you know who are great at that? So yeah, it's f***ing hard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, have you ever watched What Not to Wear? They give the person some rules and send them off. The rules give them a framework and a new way forward.

Your psychologist has given you 3 new rules, a new way forward. You can implement the rules in various ways but they should be in line with the rules.

"Give child 3 rules: 1) obedience, 2) respect, 3) no arguing. Parents have three rules when responding to child's breaking of these rules (child not told this but parents know): 1) be consistent, 2) no second chances, and 3) no warning before consequences."

Those are reasonable rules. They're about consistency, predictability, and reliability. For everyone. Stability and predictability is great for kids. They will test rules and boundaries, that's what they do, but they are a lot happier and more confident when they know where the rules and boundaries are.

This is the definition of authoritarian parenting, which studies have shown lead to poor outcomes.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/authoritarian-parenting

Children reared by authoritarian families tend to depend more heavily on their parents (especially girls), be more submissive, less socially adept, less confident, less intellectually curious, and less committed to achievement in comparison with children reared in authoritative homes. Furthermore, children reared by authoritarian parents often exhibit hostility and shyness toward peers and show higher levels of aggression (Casas et al., 2006).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK568743/

"Furthermore, this parenting style can result in children who have higher levels of aggression but may also be shy, socially inept, and unable to make their own decisions.[1] This aggression can remain uncontrolled as they have difficulty managing anger as they were not provided with proper guidance. They have poor self-esteem, which further reinforces their inability to make decisions.[2] Strict parental rules and punishments often influence the child to rebel against authority figures as they grow older."

No, it's authoritative. As opposed to OP's current permissive parenting that is not working.

I'm not permissive at all, thank you. Not by a long shot. One can be generally authoritative but still need advice on implementation in difficult situations.

I agree with PP that the psychologist's advice is more authoritarian than authoritative, at least as expressed. With some tweaking it can be authoritative. I have direct experience at the hands of authoritarian parenting where there was no talking back and total obedience expected, even when unfair or arbitrary, I had no voice/feelings that were valid. It was not a healthy situation.

Right? Obedience and no arguing? How is arguing defined? Is it any response to a demand, like "could I finish this first?" I can see how it might devolve into authoritarian.

My parents screamed at me if I screwed up, but were not authoritarian overall. As a parent, it has made it hard for me to be authoritative without yelling. I find "If you do _____________, then _______________ can happen. More boundaries than demands.

I think timeouts are fine, but like another PP, they have their limits. I told my DD to go into her room (very calmly I might add) after she pushed her little brother. She came out screaming several times and then I had to negotiate that. Should I have yelled? Smacked her until she stayed in there? I did not. I kept calmly telling her to comply, which she eventually did. I don't think anyone really learned anything.

For the record, she is very well behaved at school, activities and in social situations.

The entire incident left me miserable and drained. And I think that's why a lot of parents "give up." Authoritative parenting is a pretty hard balance to strike and it requires immense mental energy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, have you ever watched What Not to Wear? They give the person some rules and send them off. The rules give them a framework and a new way forward.

Your psychologist has given you 3 new rules, a new way forward. You can implement the rules in various ways but they should be in line with the rules.

"Give child 3 rules: 1) obedience, 2) respect, 3) no arguing. Parents have three rules when responding to child's breaking of these rules (child not told this but parents know): 1) be consistent, 2) no second chances, and 3) no warning before consequences."

Those are reasonable rules. They're about consistency, predictability, and reliability. For everyone. Stability and predictability is great for kids. They will test rules and boundaries, that's what they do, but they are a lot happier and more confident when they know where the rules and boundaries are.

This is the definition of authoritarian parenting, which studies have shown lead to poor outcomes.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/authoritarian-parenting

Children reared by authoritarian families tend to depend more heavily on their parents (especially girls), be more submissive, less socially adept, less confident, less intellectually curious, and less committed to achievement in comparison with children reared in authoritative homes. Furthermore, children reared by authoritarian parents often exhibit hostility and shyness toward peers and show higher levels of aggression (Casas et al., 2006).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK568743/

"Furthermore, this parenting style can result in children who have higher levels of aggression but may also be shy, socially inept, and unable to make their own decisions.[1] This aggression can remain uncontrolled as they have difficulty managing anger as they were not provided with proper guidance. They have poor self-esteem, which further reinforces their inability to make decisions.[2] Strict parental rules and punishments often influence the child to rebel against authority figures as they grow older."

No, it's authoritative. As opposed to OP's current permissive parenting that is not working.

I'm not permissive at all, thank you. Not by a long shot. One can be generally authoritative but still need advice on implementation in difficult situations.

I agree with PP that the psychologist's advice is more authoritarian than authoritative, at least as expressed. With some tweaking it can be authoritative. I have direct experience at the hands of authoritarian parenting where there was no talking back and total obedience expected, even when unfair or arbitrary, I had no voice/feelings that were valid. It was not a healthy situation.

Anonymous wrote:OP, have you ever watched What Not to Wear? They give the person some rules and send them off. The rules give them a framework and a new way forward.

Your psychologist has given you 3 new rules, a new way forward. You can implement the rules in various ways but they should be in line with the rules.

"Give child 3 rules: 1) obedience, 2) respect, 3) no arguing. Parents have three rules when responding to child's breaking of these rules (child not told this but parents know): 1) be consistent, 2) no second chances, and 3) no warning before consequences."

Those are reasonable rules. They're about consistency, predictability, and reliability. For everyone. Stability and predictability is great for kids. They will test rules and boundaries, that's what they do, but they are a lot happier and more confident when they know where the rules and boundaries are.

OP. Yes, I generally agree. I would just tweak it a bit. We have been good about discipline but sometimes get frustrated, raise our voices, and don't necessarily respond in a way we feel is ideal. Having the framework does help a lot. Just need to hold ourselves to it and remember what we planned to do when things happen.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, have you ever watched What Not to Wear? They give the person some rules and send them off. The rules give them a framework and a new way forward.

Your psychologist has given you 3 new rules, a new way forward. You can implement the rules in various ways but they should be in line with the rules.

"Give child 3 rules: 1) obedience, 2) respect, 3) no arguing. Parents have three rules when responding to child's breaking of these rules (child not told this but parents know): 1) be consistent, 2) no second chances, and 3) no warning before consequences."

Those are reasonable rules. They're about consistency, predictability, and reliability. For everyone. Stability and predictability is great for kids. They will test rules and boundaries, that's what they do, but they are a lot happier and more confident when they know where the rules and boundaries are.

This is the definition of authoritarian parenting, which studies have shown lead to poor outcomes.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/authoritarian-parenting

Children reared by authoritarian families tend to depend more heavily on their parents (especially girls), be more submissive, less socially adept, less confident, less intellectually curious, and less committed to achievement in comparison with children reared in authoritative homes. Furthermore, children reared by authoritarian parents often exhibit hostility and shyness toward peers and show higher levels of aggression (Casas et al., 2006).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK568743/

"Furthermore, this parenting style can result in children who have higher levels of aggression but may also be shy, socially inept, and unable to make their own decisions.[1] This aggression can remain uncontrolled as they have difficulty managing anger as they were not provided with proper guidance. They have poor self-esteem, which further reinforces their inability to make decisions.[2] Strict parental rules and punishments often influence the child to rebel against authority figures as they grow older."

No, it's authoritative. As opposed to OP's current permissive parenting that is not working.

Wrong. in the bolded above the rules are obedience and no arguing. That is the definition of authoritarian.

Also wanted to add there is no evidence the OP is a permissive parent.

If her child is having difficulties it may very well be ADHD or something else, and have nothing to do with her parenting style.

Not everything is Mom's fault.

Kids with ADHD need clear rules conveyed consistently. Not confusing, permissive or gentle parenting.

ADHD isn't Mom's fault but she can parent it better or parent it worse.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, have you ever watched What Not to Wear? They give the person some rules and send them off. The rules give them a framework and a new way forward.

Your psychologist has given you 3 new rules, a new way forward. You can implement the rules in various ways but they should be in line with the rules.

"Give child 3 rules: 1) obedience, 2) respect, 3) no arguing. Parents have three rules when responding to child's breaking of these rules (child not told this but parents know): 1) be consistent, 2) no second chances, and 3) no warning before consequences."

Those are reasonable rules. They're about consistency, predictability, and reliability. For everyone. Stability and predictability is great for kids. They will test rules and boundaries, that's what they do, but they are a lot happier and more confident when they know where the rules and boundaries are.

This is the definition of authoritarian parenting, which studies have shown lead to poor outcomes.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/psychology/authoritarian-parenting

Children reared by authoritarian families tend to depend more heavily on their parents (especially girls), be more submissive, less socially adept, less confident, less intellectually curious, and less committed to achievement in comparison with children reared in authoritative homes. Furthermore, children reared by authoritarian parents often exhibit hostility and shyness toward peers and show higher levels of aggression (Casas et al., 2006).

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK568743/

"Furthermore, this parenting style can result in children who have higher levels of aggression but may also be shy, socially inept, and unable to make their own decisions.[1] This aggression can remain uncontrolled as they have difficulty managing anger as they were not provided with proper guidance. They have poor self-esteem, which further reinforces their inability to make decisions.[2] Strict parental rules and punishments often influence the child to rebel against authority figures as they grow older."

No, it's authoritative. As opposed to OP's current permissive parenting that is not working.

Wrong. in the bolded above the rules are obedience and no arguing. That is the definition of authoritarian.

Also wanted to add there is no evidence the OP is a permissive parent.

If her child is having difficulties it may very well be ADHD or something else, and have nothing to do with her parenting style.

Not everything is Mom's fault.