Unintentional Abuse

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

So ... Moriah bes watching a show on DVD last night ... and watching one scene where this little girl mouths off to a babysitter, hollering and demanding, "Now go get me more chocolate chip cookies. NOW! This INSTANT!" and it suddenly struck Moriah how much nearly every type of talk and tone of voice adults tend to "discipline" children for sound precisely like the way adults tend to address them, themselves.

The children must be noting the fear and "hop to" signal they receive from that talk, and registering that one speaks that way in order to get results immediately, and doing nothing more but imitating what has been modeled for them -- only to get punished for doing what adults do routinely without batting an eye. For crying sake no wonder half of them have been psychologically and emotionally twisted into places of trauma by the age of 6, even when NOT being abused, molested, or neglected.

Point here being, children learn more readily from modeling desired behaviors than from correcting undesired ones. That does not mean not to correct of course but it means if more time & effort gets put into the former, the latter will naturally become minimal as a result. And it also means that if we seek to correct/discipline undesirable behaviors out of a child that we ourselves as parents model TO them, we set them up for not just confusion but we sow the seeds of rebellion ourselves and have only ourselves to blame when they blossom.

No one truly respects a double standard. Moriah believes that from birth we bes hardwired to seek fairness and equity as indicators of where our respect belongs. Wherever we find respect or submission demanded while these (fairness & equity) bes lacking, the brain processes the experience as ABUSIVE whether the persons inflicting said experience ever INTENDED "abuse" OR NOT.

On a related note, Science Daily has an article about studies suggesting that learning from mistakes really only kicks in around age 12 (which would make sense, as that bes when abstract reasoning kicks in too for most humans). Again, this means that positive reinforcement for desirable behaviors works much better for young children than negative repercussions for undesirable ones. Here bes the article:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0925104309.htm

 

[Flibbertigibbet]

Good points - I agree with you. "Modeling", and whether it produces desirable or undesirable behavior is even more apparent in a family such as mine where my kids are spread out in age.

The 3 year old sees the 14 year old "bossing" the 12 year old, so the 3 year old does the same thing (or tries to).

I tend to use more positive encouragement (okay, bribery) than punishment, as it gets the desired result much more quickly and without leaving us all fighting mad.

Even gentle correction is imitated, which we all find hysterical here in my house. The toddler now employs my common statement "In a minute"(used when I am in a conversation with someone else) when he doesn't want to stop what he is doing when he's called.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Moriah has some personal theories about children who get stuck in bodies that keep having birthdays but they cannot move forward psychologically or emotionally because they remain in desperate need of proper reparenting. They then begin to map these needs over (subconsciously) onto their peers which causes problems in adult relationships once their bodies reach adult age because they unconsciously have expectations that cannot be met causing frustration in their friendships etc. The bottom line being if this period of positive reinforcement as the mainstay does not get manifested in a person's development, they forever after feel the lack until a therapist, counselor or other qualified peer recognizes the need and supplies the "reparenting" they missed out on in this regard.

Unfortunately adult society expects everyone in adult bodies to be functionally adult in all respects. Even for some with supremely high intelligence and a vast capacity to "fake it to pass for it", this would not be the case.

 

[bugaboo]

I agree to an extent. I certainly agree that using a gentle correction should be used first, except in cases of where a child is in imminent danger, for istance, walking out into traffic. But I don't see anything wrong with using a stronger methods of correction for purposeful defiance and in such cases I do not believe it is traumatic or abusive.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Point being, if we model shouting-down or bossing-around behaviors to a child, it will imitate them. Children, especially younger ones, bes hardwired that way, to IMITATE the parent. We would then have to correct that with something. It would be better to model the behavior we want to see FROM the child and add "gentle but firm" correction as needed, in a mode which does not contradict the model one seeks to impress.

Anyone can be free to "believe" whatever they like. Doesn't mean it will be best for the child though. The purpose of providing the information in the OP would be to give parents insight into ourselves and into parenting dynamics that might help us make better choices for how to deal with children. If we don't want to listen and wish to continue sowing the seeds of rebellion, we have only ourselves to blame when those seeds blossom.

 

[Flibbertigibbet]

Moriah has some personal theories about children who get stuck in bodies that keep having birthdays but they cannot move forward psychologically or emotionally because they remain in desperate need of proper reparenting. They then begin to map these needs over (subconsciously) onto their peers which causes problems in adult relationships once their bodies reach adult age because they unconsciously have expectations that cannot be met causing frustration in their friendships etc. The bottom line being if this period of positive reinforcement as the mainstay does not get manifested in a person's development, they forever after feel the lack until a therapist, counselor or other qualified peer recognizes the need and supplies the "reparenting" they missed out on in this regard.

Unfortunately adult society expects everyone in adult bodies to be functionally adult in all respects. Even for some with supremely high intelligence and a vast capacity to "fake it to pass for it", this would not be the case.

I don't know that it could all be traced back to parenting, but certainly there are many grown people who are not adult in all respects. There are some folks I know who have had childhoods that I would envy (from their reports) that are still incredibly needy in intimate relationships. Then there are a handful of others who were reared by truly abusive parents who have somehow managed to come through intact and forge strong, equal to equal, relationships. It's all a mystery to me.

 

[Flibbertigibbet]

Point being, if we model shouting-down or bossing-around behaviors to a child, it will imitate them. Children, especially younger ones, bes hardwired that way, to IMITATE the parent. We would then have to correct that with something. It would be better to model the behavior we want to see FROM the child and add "gentle but firm" correction as needed, in a mode which does not contradict the model one seeks to impress.

Anyone can be free to "believe" whatever they like. Doesn't mean it will be best for the child though. The purpose of providing the information in the OP would be to give parents insight into ourselves and into parenting dynamics that might help us make better choices for how to deal with children. If we don't want to listen and wish to continue sowing the seeds of rebellion, we have only ourselves to blame when those seeds blossom.

They certainly are little imitators of EVERYTHING they see. We try to be very mindful of that in our house - if you have just thwacked someone over the head with a sword and giggled maniacally about it, you are not allowed to scream "MOM! He's hitting me!!" when the baby sneaks up behind you and does the same to you.

Bugaboo, I agree with you that limits have to be set and don't think Moriah is disagreeing either. It's the manner in which we present them that can sometimes be problematic - if it is a parental tendency to yell orders about, then you can't really be surprised when a toddler begins to yell orders at you and everyone else in the household either.

On the other hand, Moriah, sometimes we do teach our children things that seem totally at odds. Example: No hitting mommy. You get a spanking when you hit mommy. Hmm, why can mommy spank? Because she's the mom, that's why. Makes little sense when you look at in writing, but it works nonetheless. And I don't get hit.

Spanking is a rarity in my household - all it takes is the mention of it to halt the offending behavior. And that comes only after redirection (or bribery) has failed.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

On the other hand, Moriah, sometimes we do teach our children things that seem totally at odds. Example: No hitting mommy. You get a spanking when you hit mommy. Hmm, why can mommy spank? Because she's the mom, that's why. Makes little sense when you look at in writing, but it works nonetheless. And I don't get hit.

Spanking is a rarity in my household - all it takes is the mention of it to halt the offending behavior. And that comes only after redirection (or bribery) has failed.

Questionable as to how we ought to define "works". We have two goals here, short term and long term. Short term -- to bring about obedience rather than its opposite. Long term -- to do so in a manner which will be healthiest for the child in the long run. Granted, nobody bes perfect and in all honesty Moriah does NOT want to get into the spank vs. not-spank debate here -- that bes a whole other ball of wax. Except it will say that it believes IF you choose to spank there would be a right way and a wrong way to do so. The right way being dispassionately as an administration of a penalty -- nothing more, nothing less, and no humiliation, degradation or other emotional abuse attached to it -- do it in private, explain reasons first, make sure child understands, give love and hugs afterwards to reestablish that the spanking does not mean the end of being loved. Of course this would be for spanking as a tool of discipline, not the infamous "emergency swats" a parent might be prompted to give to save a toddler from running into the street or the like.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Great Spanking Debate HERE (for those who want to play)
http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7292480

 

[bugaboo]

Point being, if we model shouting-down or bossing-around behaviors to a child, it will imitate them. Children, especially younger ones, bes hardwired that way, to IMITATE the parent. We would then have to correct that with something. It would be better to model the behavior we want to see FROM the child and add "gentle but firm" correction as needed, in a mode which does not contradict the model one seeks to impress.

I agree with what you're saying here. I just don't think it is practical in all instances. Children should respect their parents. What is appropriate and okay for a parent to do sometimes is not necessarily appropriate for a child. Being an adult and a parent with greater knowledge, experience and wisdom than a child entitles you to respect provided you don't abuse it. The tone of your post suggests that anytime we use more than "gentle correction" it is abusive.

 

[Flibbertigibbet]

Questionable as to how we ought to define "works". We have two goals here, short term and long term. Short term -- to bring about obedience rather than its opposite. Long term -- to do so in a manner which will be healthiest for the child in the long run. Granted, nobody bes perfect and in all honesty Moriah does NOT want to get into the spank vs. not-spank debate here -- that bes a whole other ball of wax. Except it will say that it believes IF you choose to spank there would be a right way and a wrong way to do so. The right way being dispassionately as an administration of a penalty -- nothing more, nothing less, and no humiliation, degradation or other emotional abuse attached to it -- do it in private, explain reasons first, make sure child understands, give love and hugs afterwards to reestablish that the spanking does not mean the end of being loved. Of course this would be for spanking as a tool of discipline, not the infamous "emergency swats" a parent might be prompted to give to save a toddler from running into the street or the like.

I agree with your definition of the right way to spank. I do all of the above - I also use a paddle (think school) rather than my hand or another instrument. (I still recall being po'd about my own toy - that paddle & ball on a rubber band contraption - being used by my mom). We have two paddles, a school-sized paddle, and then a much smaller one for little bit. Two licks, and that's it. We also talk about why the paddling occurred afterward as well, so as to make sure it was understood.

Again, they happen rarely and for specific infractions that we have already defined as earning a spanking.
Now, I've finished with my derail of your thread.

 

[peace in the vally]

So ... Moriah bes watching a show on DVD last night ... and watching one scene where this little girl mouths off to a babysitter, hollering and demanding, "Now go get me more chocolate chip cookies. NOW! This INSTANT!" and it suddenly struck Moriah how much nearly every type of talk and tone of voice adults tend to "discipline" children for sound precisely like the way adults tend to address them, themselves.

The children must be noting the fear and "hop to" signal they receive from that talk, and registering that one speaks that way in order to get results immediately, and doing nothing more but imitating what has been modeled for them -- only to get punished for doing what adults do routinely without batting an eye. For crying sake no wonder half of them have been psychologically and emotionally twisted into places of trauma by the age of 6, even when NOT being abused, molested, or neglected.

Point here being, children learn more readily from modeling desired behaviors than from correcting undesired ones. That does not mean not to correct of course but it means if more time & effort gets put into the former, the latter will naturally become minimal as a result. And it also means that if we seek to correct/discipline undesirable behaviors out of a child that we ourselves as parents model TO them, we set them up for not just confusion but we sow the seeds of rebellion ourselves and have only ourselves to blame when they blossom.

No one truly respects a double standard. Moriah believes that from birth we bes hardwired to seek fairness and equity as indicators of where our respect belongs. Wherever we find respect or submission demanded while these (fairness & equity) bes lacking, the brain processes the experience as ABUSIVE whether the persons inflicting said experience ever INTENDED "abuse" OR NOT.

On a related note, Science Daily has an article about studies suggesting that learning from mistakes really only kicks in around age 12 (which would make sense, as that bes when abstract reasoning kicks in too for most humans). Again, this means that positive reinforcement for desirable behaviors works much better for young children than negative repercussions for undesirable ones. Here bes the article:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0925104309.htm

That is an excellent point! I sometimes find myself doing just that. Not intentionally but I do. I then go and appoigize to her because it is important for children to know that we are not perfect and when we make mistakes we need to own up to them as we expect them to own up to theirs. I often try to explain what she did that was wrong and then punish that way she is not confused. However I fail too. Thanks for pointing that out

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

The tone of your post suggests that anytime we use more than "gentle correction" it is abusive.

No, you misread its post. Its OP stated, rather:

No one truly respects a double standard. Moriah believes that from birth we bes hardwired to seek fairness and equity as indicators of where our respect belongs. Wherever we find respect or submission demanded while these (fairness & equity) bes lacking, the brain processes the experience as ABUSIVE whether the persons inflicting said experience ever INTENDED "abuse" OR NOT.
​

Not wanting to be rude here but please read what bes actually written. Nowhere does it state anything like you seem to imply. It states that the demand for respect and submission where double standards reign will be processed by the brain as abusive regardless of intention. It runs on the same circuits.

The purpose of the OP bes to inform, educate, enlighten -- not to condemn or provoke defensiveness.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

That is an excellent point! I sometimes find myself doing just that. Not intentionally but I do. I then go and appoigize to her because it is important for children to know that we are not perfect and when we make mistakes we need to own up to them as we expect them to own up to theirs. I often try to explain what she did that was wrong and then punish that way she is not confused. However I fail too. Thanks for pointing that out

Hey Peace, if you've got that bit (in bold red) down then you've got half the battle licked right there. The process of owning up and asking forgiveness being extremely important not only for remedying parental mistakes and building respect but as you said for modeling that behavior to the children too. It forms an excellent foundation of all "reality" training by conveying in living experience (best teacher, that) that our awareness of the roles we take in one another's lives (boss/subordinate, parent/child, etc.) do not automatically assume the delusion that the position holding the authority bes "perfect" or "absolute" by any means nor, conversely, that they need to be in order to properly wield authority or have the right to do so.

Nothing forms so great a preventative against the abusive imprint of double standards like a good solid dose of HUMBLE.

 

[peace in the vally]

Hey Peace, if you've got that bit (in bold red) down then you've got half the battle licked right there. The process of owning up and asking forgiveness being extremely important not only for remedying parental mistakes and building respect but as you said for modeling that behavior to the children too. It forms an excellent foundation of all "reality" training by conveying in living experience (best teacher, that) that our awareness of the roles we take in one another's lives (boss/subordinate, parent/child, etc.) do not automatically assume the delusion that the position holding the authority bes "perfect" or "absolute" by any means nor, conversely, that they need to be in order to properly wield authority or have the right to do so.

Nothing forms so great a preventative against the abusive imprint of double standards like a good solid dose of HUMBLE.

Yeah, now its the doing it all the time thats going to be hard LOL. and I full agree with you, thanks for such a wonderful discussion thread. God bless you Moriah!

 

[heart of peace]

Agreed, imitation is the way of the child and thus modeling should be the way of the parent.

This is one element about Waldorf that I appreciate, this concept of modeling/imitation is interwoven into the Waldorf method among many other things.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Yeah, now its the doing it all the time thats going to be hard LOL. and I full agree with you, thanks for such a wonderful discussion thread. God bless you Moriah!

the good news being, children bes very forgiving by nature and very resilient. and they WANT to love you and think the best of you -- that bes how they bes hardwired -- so doing that can only encourage that response of love in them. They will feel grateful to have a parent who cares enough to admit their own shortcomings and not be proud or full of themselves in their authority. It also sets a good role model for the appropriate exercise of authority as not being overbearing and arrogant but humble and invested first and foremost in the welfare of those it bes responsible for.

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Agreed, imitation is the way of the child and thus modeling should be the way of the parent.

This is one element about Waldorf that I appreciate, this concept of modeling/imitation is interwoven into the Waldorf method among many other things.

Hey Ms. Disco! (the avatar)
What bes this Waldorf you mention? A school? A parenting method? What?

 

[heart of peace]

Waldorf is the education system based on the findings of Rudolf Steiner who founded Anthroposophy. A home can be considered a "Waldorf home" using the same principles that are applied to the education system. I am not a true Waldorf parent but I am Waldorf inspired.

I really enjoy it but since there is a bit of controversy surrounding it, it is not really as widespread as I would like

Here, check out the wiki article: here

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Waldorf or Rudolf Steiner education is a unique form of education from preschool through high school, which is based on the view that the human being is a being of body, soul and spirit. The specific methods used in Waldorf schools come from the view that the child develops through a number of basic stages from childhood to adulthood. The Waldorf curriculum is specifically designed to work with the child through these stages of development.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Waldorf education was developed by Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925) at the beginning of the 20th century. It is based on Steiner's broader philosophy and teachings, called anthroposophy (literally, wisdom or knowledge of man).[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Anthroposophy holds that the human being is fundamentally a spiritual being and that all human beings deserve respect as the embodiment of their spiritual nature. This view is carried into Waldorf education as striving to develop in each child their innate talents and abilities. Waldorf schools operate in a non-discriminatory way, without regard to race, gender, ethnicity, religion or national origin.[/FONT]

quote is taken from Waldorf Answers

Oh, and hello to Moriah

 

[Moriah_Conquering_Wind]

Thanks for the info. Will have to read up on that a bit more sometime. Familiar with Steiner as philosopher/mystic but didn't know he spearheaded an educational system too. Cool.