I Am Adam Lanza’s Therapist

By Dr. Faye Snyder,
Psychologist, marriage and family therapist and forensic evaluator

            Less than one week before 20-year-old Adam Lanza killed twenty children and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut I sat with eight children in my RAD Group (children with Reactive Attachment Disorder) who shared a few things in common with one another: contempt for adults and authority, a terror of abandonment, and hatred for siblings and anyone who competed with them for mom’s affections. I frequently look into their eerie little faces that have contemptuous sociopathic smirks or estranged identities. I have learned to see injured souls instead.

            I have treated Adam Lanza, Dylan Klebold, Eric Harris, Jared Loughner and Seung-Hui Cho and their mothers too. Most are in earnest as much as Liza Long, who wrote, “I Am Adam Lanza’s Mother”. Most want help and don’t know what to do. First they will have to learn where things went wrong and understand how it happened.
What Happened to These Children?

            RAD children were not born RAD. They were born to love and be loved. Every child I ever met with a propensity for violence was the natural product of extremely painful treatment, usually beginning with being left in daycare too young (perhaps as newborns) and too long (daily, throughout their first years).  It was so painful the child drew a conclusion that they were alone in the world, and they gave up on the deepest drive and hope of all, love. They gave up on loving and being loved and cherished. They were not loveable. They decided they were on their own and there was no adult in the world they could trust. They decided never to be vulnerable again, because it hurts too much. We all know adults who feel that way. This is why. However, our injuries were small compared to Adam’s, Dylan’s, Eric’s, Jared’s and Seung-Hui’s. It’s relative.

            Sometimes a three-month-old draws this conclusion. I have seen it. The infant will arch her back and push away. If the parent tries to make eye contact or talk tenderly, she will wriggle or point to the corner in the ceiling to “change the subject”. Sometimes a two-year-old draws the same conclusion. It is a decision a child forms before the age of three when the seeds of extreme violence are set. By the same token, the seeds of resilient mental health are set before the age of five, the optimal year to let them leave home for a while. It all stems from how they are treated in the beginning years of life. It’s a decision the child makes that can be unmade, with the right intervention. Everyone wants to love and be loved if it’s safe, only if it’s safe.

            Our evolutionary, genetic design requires a mother’s warmth, holding and interaction. All infants need safety or the feeling of safety. All of us wanted to nurse and be cuddled when we were infants. We all wanted to feel gently touched. We wanted to engage with loving eyes and softly spoken words. All of us got our identity or our idea of what we were worth and who we were by how we were treated in the beginning. It’s during this period that our temperament is formed, something that turns into personality as more experiences are had.

            During the first years our personalities form quickly, and our brains develop faster than it ever will again. More happens in the brain during these years. Unlearning and relearning the material of these years becomes more difficult as the child ages.

            If we spend our first years with one primary caregiver who adores us, but sets a reasonably high bar for us in terms of discipline and behavior, we become resilient and headed for greatness. If we spend our first years in daycare or with rotating caregivers or parents who are distracted, we form fragile identities. Anything in between produces in-between results. Without a secure attachment we are highly susceptible to future insults. From there, other abuses that most children could adequately handle become a tipping point for these children. As they get older, rejection becomes a trigger, rather, the trigger.

            Attachment trauma can be understood on a continuum from severe to ideal. Most of us had early childhoods that fell somewhere in between. Well-bonded children become high functioning and resilient. Poorly bonded children, but those who had it better than RAD Kids, may be more susceptible to wartime PTSD, drugs or a string of hurtful relationships. Their symptoms vary according to the age and intensity of their attachment trauma. RAD children are at the severe end of the spectrum.

            This is not about blaming anyone. It’s about understanding the infant’s point of view and our evolutionary design to stay with our mothers through our first years. It’s about how important mothers or primary caregivers are. I have heard mothers say, “I didn’t abandon my child. I went to work to pay for her food.” I so understand. Their intentions were noble, but their infant doesn’t understand. She thinks her mother prefers other places and other people more than her.

            When a child does not have a successful experience with bonding and attaching in the first few years, they tend to become psychologically stuck at that age, like Adam. The most injured are the most immature and fixated on changing or controlling other people rather than seeing themselves as their own resource. Some RAD children may seem like a super-mature toddler, acting like a little Mafioso, but he is stuck too, thinking the way to survive is to order people around. He is headed for trouble and punishment.

            My son and daughter-in-law just told me of a couple they met that had an infant. When sharing with this couple their plans for parenthood, a vitriolic debate ensued about the Ricki Lake Show on natural childbirth and how to treat an infant. “Infants don’t think,” the couple said. “They don’t care who is taking care of them,” they insisted. “They aren’t smart enough to care until they are older,” both parents argued. I predict they will have a RAD child.

            At the beginning of every violent person’s life there is some version of neglect, even if not abandonment. It could be relentless insensitivity, criticism, disappointment, indifference or a lack of attunement. None of us ever adapts to being someone who is not loveable. It’s a very bitter pill to swallow. He tells himself he doesn’t care, but in his heart of hearts he cares. Actually, he is secretly enraged that he is not loved and protected. He hates to see other children cherished.

The Children

            The root cause of RAD is abandonment trauma or failure to attach. Physical abuse and sexual abuse are much easier to treat than a core, learned belief that one is worthless or bad. Most of the children have been misdiagnosed already and prescribed inappropriate medication that didn’t work, and the worst part about this is that they have lost precious time. The younger they are when I get them the more successful our work. Time is of the essence, and bonding is supposed to take place in the very young.

            Many people think violent children are bad seeds and their parents are victims of these children, not realizing that these violent children suffer excruciating injuries at a very young age.  Each of these children is unique and different. Some are arrogant. Most of these children who kill are boys, however we are having an epidemic of “mean girls”, too. After the attachment trauma, boys are often disciplined more harshly for their defiance and disrespect of authority. They often engage with other RAD children and begin competing for top dog, and at some point, testosterone kicks in.

            Some RAD kids are profoundly self-conscious, like most of the mass murdering shooters we recently read about. Some cannot bear to be touched. Some are highly sensitive to certain sounds. All initially refuse eye contact, unless it’s on their terms.

            They have come to believe there is something wrong with them, and their experiences with rejection during infancy and repressed rage lead them to believe that they are not only unlovable, but inherently bad or evil. That becomes the essence of their identity, as well as their jaded worldview that everyone is out for themselves.

            Further, some medications push some patients, even children, into violent states of psychosis, a level they may not have attained without the catalyst of psychotropic medications. In other words, some children arrive at the psychiatrist’s office simply depressed from childhood experiences and leave as time bombs from medication. Others are near a tipping point and psychotropics put them over the edge. Psychiatrists Peter Breggin and Yolanda Lucire, as well as investigating journalist Robert Whittaker and many others, have been warning the public and writing about this phenomenon extensively. These experts have been evaluating medications that put children and adults at risk of suicidal or homicidal psychotic choices. In the meantime, conventional psychiatry recommends medicating these children without testing them first, even though there is a test to identify a person’s reactivity to medications (Lucire: 2011). You might say I am writing about the conditions that can lead to identifying these time bombs or at-risk children with or without medication and Dr. Breggin et al., is writing about what puts them over the edge if they haven't already tipped. To be clear, the children who become diagnosed all have emotional problems stemming from childhood experiences but they arrive at the psychiatrist’s office with an array of backgrounds which aren’t all necessarily RAD. Some have been close to exploding and are profoundly effected by the medication and some never would have harmed themselves or others without the meds.

            All have already been or could be dangerous without help. When they get my help and I watch them get better, I know I am doing what I need to do and sometimes I wonder how many lives were actually saved. My real wish or drive, however, is to prevent these unnecessary injuries in the first place with information and brainstorming.
           

The Moms

             Of course none of this means that the parents of RAD kids were mean-spirited. Mostly, they have been misguided by bad advice. Some of these parents are regular or almost regular people, or at least they seem so. They may be defensive. They are usually not very good communicators, themselves. They are predictably not open and expressive, as a rule. They are not good with hearing their children’s feelings. They may even be secretive. These characteristics become family traits that impede self-reflection and healing.

            Well-intentioned, good people in their lives, often give them advice and recommend socially acceptable choices that will hurt their children. Some of these advisers have the voice of authority and are grandparents, pediatricians, clergy, therapists, neighbors and teachers. Their harmful advice, like, “Put your child in daycare” or “Take a vacation while your baby is too young to notice you are gone,” may not be obvious to the rest of us.

            Once the child is old enough to show signs of defiance and defensiveness, parents often imagine that the problem is genetic and then resort to home schooling, diet changes, or medication, attempting to change their child's behavior, but never addressing the real root cause, abandonment trauma. It doesn't work. In fact, the child’s behaviors get worse as he gets older.

            Some mothers I have worked with recognized the signs early. Others couldn’t face the fact that their children were in trouble until they had to, something we can all understand. Some thought it was a phase and others thought they simply lacked good discipline techniques. Others thought or were told the problem was genetic. Some parents dislike their child and can’t keep it a secret. Some see themselves as victims and their child as the enemy. Some are single parents with more responsibility than they can handle. Others love their child enough to admit they made mistakes as soon as they can find out just what those mistakes were.

            Some biological parents insist they are innocent of any mistakes and blame the child. They may say she was always that way, but they just want to know how to manage her. As long as parents blame the child, we won’t get results. When parents accept responsibility, half the battle has been won.

            Some of the moms are not their biological moms and have adopted children who suffered major abandonment trauma in early childhood. Since their child was adopted, they may be even more likely to think the problem is genetic rather than attachment trauma. Maybe they understood the ramifications of adopting a child with a broken attachment. Maybe they didn’t. Maybe they thought they did, but didn’t.

            They all have a tiger by the tail.

Getting Help and Becoming Help

            Unfortunately, most of my colleagues are not specialized in such cases, so it’s hard to find a good diagnosis and help, especially affordable help. Even our licensing exams no longer place an emphasis on attachment. Residential treatment facilities often do more harm than good, because they create additional attachment breaks.

            Some of my RAD children come to see me privately with their moms as well as in the RAD Group. A true attachment therapist will never see the child alone. They will always have the mom or primary caregiver, present. Before I work with these children and their caregivers, I will need to teach and train the parents and insure there is a support system. They must learn to become therapeutic parents 24 hours a day, seven days a week, which requires another adult working to support mother and child. The parents must be up to the task. Their mental health must be good, and sometimes we have to put parents in therapy to move forward with the children. Unfortunately, most parents don’t have the time and money.

            There is a residential treatment design that would work, but it would take major funding to build the right facility with the right staff to accommodate the children and their mothers. If there were a facility that could treat them together, we could work faster, train parents on the spot, and single mothers could then get help too.

Healing

            The parents must fully understand that they or the child’s biological parent made hurtful, if not wrong choices, even if it was for a good and necessary cause, like affording food, clothing and shelter. Usually the parent and child have developed a history of resenting each other, so parents will need to find compassion in their heart for what they or a previous parent put their child through, if they are to establish the authority their child will respect. They must be willing to model the expression of remorse. Parents will need to apologize to their child for his injuries, both the ones they caused and the ones the biological parents caused. Such an apology tends to settle the child down, but then they look for change. Real change. If the parent can’t manage the show of remorse, I apologize to the child for what she has been through, while the parent watches. When I do that, the child begins to soften, sometimes almost imperceptibly. The parents may see how it works and then find it easier to apologize to their child. This is the beginning of earning trust. From there, the child can learn how to re-bond, how to relate and then the child will accept corrective discipline. It is only from there that the child can be taught personal responsibility.

            When parents learn that it’s not their child’s fault how they are and agree to make the commitment necessary, I coach these heroic parents in what to do. They provide the home environment that will heal their child and I become just a guide. I don’t treat the child, and the child doesn’t get to bond with me. They treat their child. The child bonds with them, maybe even for the first time. Again, this is more difficult with an older child, but yet possible, if we can persuade him how he must learn vulnerability and to surrender in order to heal. We have techniques that lead to regression where the bonding can begin. I can also tell him true stories or show him footage of strong men, successful men who were vulnerable, such as the late General Schwarzkopf, who cried for his troops and later said, “I would never trust a man who doesn’t cry”. It is necessary that RAD kids can see and believe that real winners know how and who to trust and learn that they must earn respect.  

            Even though I am not a hands-on therapist, so the mother can be, I run my RAD Group for parents and child. I am the teacher or coach for both parent and child, and I model for the parents how to relate to their child. In that venue I am the boss. I have to be. There is no opportunity for debate, and neither should the children should see it. Sometimes I discover that the parents are a bit RAD, themselves, modeling in front of their children a lack of respect for authority. Thus, no one gets to take me on, but anyone can ask questions. I’m not on a power trip. I am modeling healthy authority and strong parenting.  I seek to become the authority the child learns to respect and then the parent becomes that authority too. Finally, teachers, principals and police become the authority the child will respect.

            In the RAD Group parents meet other parents and a support system begins. The children meet other children like themselves, and they learn to socialize with peers first. They are also members of a Kids’ Group, that is, a relationship skills workshop for more regular children, a different group that teaches relationship skills, ethics, how to have a clean argument or disagreement, how to solve problems, how to assess for people who can be trusted, and how to be trustworthy.

            Hopefully, the older children who used to see me privately return at the beginning of adolescence again to maintain their level of mental health as they enter puberty, a disruptive stage for children, especially those with a RAD history. I tell them they have returned as veterans to help younger children, as well as to become vigilant about any possible relapses brought on by adolescence. It’s a self-awareness skill they will need again when they become romantically involved and when they become parents.

Understanding Adam Lanza

            I listen to the experts on television say they have no idea why Adam Lanza did what he did. It’s hard to hear.

            I listen for the information I would need to form a hypothesis. The thing I want the public to understand and hear the most is how his first three years went. Did he spend the first few years of his life in daycare or with multiple caregivers or with a distracted parent, with whom he could not securely bond, or was he simply abused as an infant (probably not). Journalists do not seem to seek such information about his early years. Perhaps, it’s taboo. But I have clues.

            I learn from a newscast that a friend of his mother said Adam’s mother, Nancy, volunteered in the classroom he shot up, and once she even took him there. I learned from a tabloid that he would sometimes demand that she sit outside his bedroom door so he could sleep. I learned that another source said he couldn’t handle school because he couldn’t bear to be touched by anyone. I heard that his mother had a favored son, who turned out healthier. I read in a tabloid that she was checking into putting Adam into a residential facility, of some sort. I learn that she believed the world was coming to an end on December 21, and I learn that she kept assault weapons. Everything I hear is familiar to me. It all fits.

My Tentative Hypothesis

            I have formed a tentative hypothesis based upon the only available information, however limited, that goes like this: Adam’s mother did not hold him or cuddle him in the first months of his life. Who would know? Perhaps she had postpartum depression or she worked and someone else cared for him, leaving him in a crib. In any event, without this touch, he developed intolerance for being touched and a mechanical like personality, as well. He learned to bond with things instead of people as an infant and he developed a fragile identity, concluding very young that he was perceived as worthless by others. As he grew older he learned to socialize with video games instead of people, leading to a childhood diagnosis of Asperger’s Syndrome and an adult diagnosis of Schizoid Personality Disorder. If he, indeed, heard voices, as one tabloid claimed, then perhaps he suffered from Schizophrenia. My cases of Schizophrenia and ones of successful therapists I have known have all included the following childhood ingredients (1) insufficient touch, plus (2) invasive dialogues with the child about his thoughts and how he should think, and (3) finally, bizarre or mind-warping parental choices. Paranoid children and adults experienced unpredictable verbal or physical threats.  

            As his rage and fantasies of retaliation grew, without understanding them, he developed an identity that he was evil or “the devil”. His abandonment issues manifested in fears his mother would leave him, even though he developed some ability to detach. He was allowed to live in a dungeon-like basement or bedroom, possibly absent sunlight and views of trees, clouds and birds. Why? Was he kept from people because it was too difficult to teach him to socialize? Or, did letting him play video games to his heart’s content provide her respite? Did she struggle to get him into relationships with people? It appears that she enabled him to withdraw, probably without any idea that this choice would create more harm.

            Perhaps, when he was still young, Adam’s mother saw that he wasn’t doing well, and some maternal “instincts” kicked in. Maybe she knew what she had done or hadn’t done, but didn’t speak about it. Maybe she had no idea what she had done. In any event, he began to tell her how to treat him, like RAD children do. She apparently complied to some extent or perhaps a great deal.  In some ways she let him be the boss. Maybe she was emotionally unavailable to him and then available and then unavailable and then available, creating more expectations for Adam and more tension between them.

            There was a healthier older brother (who must have had more bonding, healthier adult personalities have enjoyed some degree of bonding if not a secure attachment with their primary caregiver), with whom she probably compared Adam, when she was trying to inspire him to try harder. Maybe the older brother was jealous of a second child because he didn’t get all the affection he needed, so possibly he picked on Adam. Maybe not. But, there appears to be some evidence of animosity between them, especially on Adam’s part. Yet, one could understand it would be frustrating to have Adam for a brother. And, it would be threatening to Adam to have a higher functioning brother.

            If she did, indeed, check into institutionalizing Adam, and he knew it, it would have been extremely provocative. It would have been that rejection trigger. Perhaps, she should have just done it, if she was going to do it, without warning. Sometimes parents have their children picked up. This is a relatively common technique used to put teens into Wilderness Therapy, a very useful tool sometimes in turning RAD kids around.

            Wilderness Therapy is very expensive, about $30K, but my impression is that Adam and his mother lived in a large home, almost estate size. They probably could have afforded Wilderness Therapy, where the child learns to cooperate and interact to survive, as well as to air his feelings to someone who cares. In the meantime, parents are given parenting lessons. If Wilderness Therapy turns down a child, that would be a huge red flag.

            Why shoot up a classroom of kindergarteners? If his mother took him to see the classroom she visited when she left him so often, for no pay, preferring to be with these children rather than him, as she had done in his infancy, this would be the reason why Adam Lanza targeted that class. He thought she favored those normal children over him. That must have burned inside of him, causing excruciating pain.

            Without bonding, he had little empathy or compassion for others, if any. It is the experience of bonding with our primary caregiver that gives us intimacy, empathy, compassion and a conscience. If he had been sufficiently bonded to her as an infant, he would not have been threatened by this act. The less secure an attachment the more volatile the adult. Insecurely attached babies become adults who lack resilience, teenagers who get pregnant, stalkers, dangerous domestic partners or killers, depending upon the degree of infant neglect and the other types of experiences they have, especially when they get older and it becomes time for discipline.

            For some children, the lack of bonding leads them to accept friendships from strangers who molest them. It can also exacerbate parents and lead to brutal punishments. The icing on the cake for Adam may have been his mother’s catastrophic philosophy of life and her possible shared apocalyptic belief that the world was coming to an end soon, coupled by her affinity for violent weapons. This would meet the mind-warping component that creates schizophrenia. To live in an environment of expected doomsday, amongst assault rifles, is a mind-warping environment. I imagine such ideation was schizogenic or to be more clear, mind-fucking.

            Once again, why did Adam Lanza shoot up a classroom of kindergarteners? My tentative hypothesis can be summed up thus: He suffered from a profoundly insecure attachment and was unbearably rageful. He was jealous of the children he killed, and assault weapons were the way to go.

            I cannot help all the Adam Lanzas and Eric Klebolds, but I ask that journalists become part of the solution. I can hope journalists will learn to ask the most important questions about the child’s first years and get the information out to the public at large. If it becomes common knowledge how we innocently create killers in our homes, the public will begin to become part of the solution and we can learn how to prevent these tragedies.

For more information, Dr. Snyder has written a small book on Healing Your RAD Child, available at drfayesnyder.com.

This article may be reproduced without permission but must be sourced to the author.

Four Stories About the Beginnings of Violence

Story #1: Born to a teenage mother who landed in jail shortly after, this little boy was given up to be raised by his devoutly religious aunt and her emotionally abusive husband, who made him attend his first day of school wearing girls clothing, in an attempt to teach him to "be more of a man." After several years of abuse with his aunt and uncle, his mother came back to claim him but would constantly abandon or leave him with strangers. Her drinking and drug habits led her to want nothing to do with him and she eventually "sold him" for a pitcher of beer. With nobody to care for him, he ended up in reform school, where he experienced sadistic abuse from peers and guards alike. 

Story #2: This little boy was described to have been a happy baby, even though he was born to parents whose marriage was tumultuous. At the age of six, he underwent an intensive and traumatic surgery, which he was fearful of and left in the dark about. Post surgery, his upbeat and positive demeanor had drastically changed into near total isolation and seclusion, which he never came out of. The psychological stresses of the surgery and his ferociously fighting parents led him to believe that his home environment was not a safe place. And at school, he was also an outcast.

Story #3: Immediately abandoned at birth, this boy was given to his maternal grandfather, who pretended to be his adoptive father. He was told that his real mother was his father's sister, even though she was the daughter of the man who was raising him. Many years later, he eventually discovered their lie and it has been said that he was perpetually angry about their deceiving him and never really got over it. The grandfather who raised him was well known to be a violent and racist man, abusing the family dog, torturing neighborhood pets and abusing his wife and children. In his teenage and young adult years, he admitted that he was unable to relate to interpersonal relationships and had no friends because he didn't know how to make them.   

Story #4: Born into a violent marriage, her mother abandoned her and her siblings before she was the age of four. Her grandparents raised the children as their own, who didn't reveal that they were not their real parents. At the age of 12, she found out on her own and reacted violently. Her grandfather was physically and sexually to her and her siblings and her grandmother was an alcoholic. At 14, she became pregnant with her grandfather's child and was sent away to a home of unwanted mothers. The child was immediately given up for adoption and she returned home shortly before her grandmother had died. Her and her siblings were then made wards of the state.

You have just read the childhood summaries of Charles Manson,  Jeffrey Dahmer, Ted Bundy and Aileen Wuornos, respectively. Not all children who come from abusive homes grow up to be violent people, but all violent individuals experience some version of neglect and abuse early on in life. Every one of them has emotional problems stemming back from childhood that have been left untreated or worsened by their parents' futile attempts to resolve the problem. This creates a strong psychological disconnect and extreme rage for not being understood and accepted.

While we may be able to remove weapons out of more households, we still won’t be addressing a deeper issue: Showing parents how to relate to their children in a loving, positive, accepting, attentive way.  While P.E.T. is in no way a panacea, I wonder what the world would be like if our children could grow up in a Gordon Model home……

by: Selena C. George, P.E.T. Program Manager

The Problem with Authoritarian Parenting

As a sequel to our last post (and newsletter) about the problems with permissive parenting, now couldn't be a more perfect opportunity to summarize the problems with strict parenting. Much has been published about the negative affects of authoritarian styles of parenting, so I'll aim to outline as many broad-spectrum points about the subject as possible.

If permissive parenting is described as lackadaisical, lenient and submissive in the context of conflict, then it's safe to say that strict parenting promotes iron-fistedness, aggressiveness and dominance above all. Strict parents will often "win" or "get what they want" in any given conflict, but the visible and emotional affects on the child include much (if not all) of the following:

1. Externally compliant, but internally depressed and defeated
2. Compliant but internally enraged, build-up of aggressiveness
3. Feigned sycophancy in aims to manipulate
4. Fear of trying/Fear of failure
5. Lying
6. Forming "groups" in order to fight back in numbers
7. Rebelling/Outlashing - especially after long periods of submission
8. Withdrawing from parents and social interactions
9. Tendency to seek out adult relationships that are controlling (acting as the controlee)
10. Increased probability of developing anxiety disorders
11. Tendency to forfeit and ignore their own needs
12. Self-imposed, impossible attempts at perfection

Although this list is dismal, many of these points resonate with adults who are the product of authoritarian parenting in their childhood. It is often the case that when parents realize the affects that their childhood had on them, that they realize it is not something that should be continued through the next generation.

More on the effects of punishment and parental power can be found in Chapter 10 of the Parent Effectiveness Training (P.E.T.) book.

by: Selena C. George

The Problem With Permissive Parenting

The most common misconception about Parent Effectiveness Training is that it encourages parents to "give-in" to their child's every desire. The idea that permissiveness is the alternative to power is a false dichotomy in itself. While permissiveness is, by definition, the opposite of strict, these options are not the only two that parents have. Moreover, the idea of meeting somewhere in the middle (i.e. compromise) falls on the same Strict-to-Lenient continuum, of which P.E.T. does not endorse. 

Much is to be said about the negative outcomes of using parental power, but the effects of permissive parenting are just as damaging.

In any win-lose relationship, the unbalance of power takes form in a multitude of ways. Depending on the relationship and degree of power used on the parent, the side effects on the child can include:

• Lack of consideration for the needs of others
• Resistance in cooperation in group dynamics
• Lack of empathy toward others
• Inability to adapt to new environments
• Lack of problem solving skills
• Difficulty maintaining healthy adult relationships

This style of parenting has effects on the parent as well:

• Resentment/Passive Aggressiveness toward the child
• Lack of affection toward the child
• Emotional distance toward the child

Permissiveness can also show up in the form of becoming falsely accepting toward your child and his or her behaviors. False acceptance is a common method for parents who "don't want to deal with it" and submit to their children's demands, while simultaneously bearing resentment. One of the most serious symptoms of false acceptance is a lack of trust toward the parent which results in constant questioning, uncertainty and delinquency  It's usually quite easy for children to pick up on the non-verbal signals that their parents send them, leaving them in a perpetual state of confusion about what their parent really feels and wants. 

With permissive and authoritarian styles out the window, there lies a need for an alternative. P.E.T. teaches parents the communication methods and skills used for decades by many psychologists. By neither winning, losing or compromise, the P.E.T. method is unique in that it is the only (yes, I said only) approach that is on an entirely different spectrum—one that relies on influence, respect, and true fairness.  

Inconceivable? Check out the Parent Effectiveness Training book or find a workshop near you.

By: Selena George, P.E.T. Program Manager

Three Outcomes to What Happens When Parents Use Hurtful Words

We've all heard the (very old) familiar saying about sticks and stones breaking bones, but words not hurting us, right? I'm guessing that this phrase was coined somewhere around the same time that the idea of the world being flat was a logical theory. How archaic and grossly wrong they both were! 

Another age-old theory is the idea that children should be verbally "put in their place," insulted, criticized, blamed, yelled at or scolded in order to achieve one of the following:

• Teach them learn a lesson
• Change their behavior
• Prevent them from doing something wrong

The underlying idea here is: say something harsh = get something done. They're just words, right? No harm done? But let's take a look at what happens when you resort to this method...

Outcome Number 1: Defensiveness. Beyond the fact that children aren't typically perceptive to "negative" comments about themselves, people (of all ages) just don't like being told that they are a different person than they like to perceive themselves as. In order to protect one's own self image and self esteem, our natural instinct is to defend ourselves! The loss of self-esteem over time as a result of the cruel words of parents is one of the biggest tragedies that a parent can be responsible for. The following possibilities after this only grow worse.

Outcome Number 2: Feigned acceptance. In order to avoid conflict, many personality types would rather just pretend that they are getting the message, submit or agree to something on the outside, while what they are really doing is "faking it" in order to end the conflict as quickly as possible. This type of response can be seen quite often when children act differently when their parents are around versus when they aren't. How effective is this really, if their behavior varies from situation to situation?

Outcome Number 3: Rebellion. Being ordered what to do only works for so long, if at all! Particularly in the teenage years (after many years of being told what to do), children's frustration and resentment tends to take a turning point. It is also during this time in their life when they realize that they are not so reliant on mom and dad to take care of their needs. "Why listen to what they say if I can take care of myself anyway?", is a common attitude. And often, their anger from this type of treatment simply turns into spite and rebellion in its pinnacle.

Keep in mind that the above list is just a short version of the most common responses to scolding and insult.

So then, how do parents express their expectations and frustrations with their children? By using a non-blameful method of communication called I-Messages. For more on I-Messages, check our website, Wikipedia or the Parent Effectiveness Training (P.E.T.) book.

What do you think? Let us know!

by: Selena George, P.E.T. Program Manager

No Punishment?

Recently, we had an interested question sent to us on our Facebook page:


"Does this program promote no punishment for bad behavior? I don't get this program?"




We responded, and would like to elaborate to our readers here.

First off, to simply say "no," that P.E.T. is not an advocate of punishment would only be giving half of the answer. The use of the term "bad behavior" is a major underlying issue here. P.E.T. encourages parents not to view behaviors as "bad" or "good" because such labeling does not encourage children to change their behavior, among other things (at least, not in the long run!). Given the idea that all behaviors are simply attempts to get a certain need met, we can view things from a different frame of mind. 

For example, in a traditional sense, a screaming child would likely be seen as "behaving badly". But consider that this child is screaming for a reason. Active Listening is the way to find that reason behind the commonly misunderstood behaviors of a child, or of anyone for that matter. This child is experiencing a problem or obstacle to getting his or her need met. She might be hungry, tired, in need of attention/affection, feeling unsafe or insecure, etc. It would be absurd to think that a child could communicate these feelings in an effective manner; especially considering that many adults still struggle from doing this. The question at hand then becomes: Why punish a child for expressing an unmet need?

Our response to the question on Facebook sums it up:

P.E.T. does not promote punishment of any kind, but the most important part of this is the reasoning behind it. Being commonly mistaken as "passive parenting", P.E.T. does not reject the use of punishment simply because "it's bad." When parents begin to look at their child's behaviors as attempts to get a certain need met, they can begin to realize that their children aren't deliberately "misbehaving" in order to upset their parents. On the contrary, children are desperately seeking approval from their moms and dads. When we look at a screaming child and think: "they're behaving bad," this is when the parent-child relationship gets into real trouble. In actuality, children are commonly seeking fulfillment of some need that they don't know how to express in any other way. 

As for the punishment factor, years of psychological and neurological research has proven that using control to manipulate the behavior of your children (or anyone) has serious consequences on the relationship between parent and child. In the short term, punishment can be a quick fix and often does work. But in the long term, it's effects turn out to be quite the opposite of what punishment aims to achieve. Case in point: teenage-hood! 
What are your thoughts on this? We'd love to hear from you. Please feel free to comment below or send us an email to: family@gordontraining.com

by: Selena George, P.E.T. Program Manager

Has PET Been Taught in Religious Institutions?

Because the Gordon Model aligns so well with many religious values, churches have played a substantial role in making P.E.T. and other Gordon programs available. P.E.T. has been taught at the following religious organizations:

• The Uniting Church in Australia

• Presbyterian

• Methodist

• Baptist

• Jewish synagogues

• 30,000 Lutherans thru Missouri Synod (paid in part by Aid Association for Lutherans insurance).

• The Lutheran church in Finland has been a major sponsor of P.E.T. and other Gordon courses since P.E.T. began there in the late 1970’s and still is. Many thousands of parents and youth have participated in P.E.T. and Y.E.T.

• P.E.T. has been practiced in many Catholic dioceses. Instructors have been/are both priests and nuns as well as lay persons. Father Patrick Tyrrell who began in Ireland and then moved to Chicago has trained over 4,000 people in the Gordon courses—P.E.T., T.E.T., Be Your Best and Y.E.T. He’s still teaching at age 79. A Catholic priest, Robert Pereira in Canberra, Australia has taught a similar number of people. He’s also still active.

• The U.S. Army, Air Force and Navy thru chaplains—these P.E.T. courses were attended by active duty personnel and their spouses both stateside and in Germany, Italy and South Korea. (The courses were promoted in part as a way to help military personnel be combat ready).

To All Children, Their Parents Are First Seen As Gods

An excerpt from the P.E.T. book

This "psychological size" differential exists not only because children see their parents as bigger and stonger, but also as more knowledgeable, more competent. To the young child there seems to be nothing her parents to not know, nothing they cannot do. She marvels at the breadth of their understanding, the accuracy of their predictions, the wisdom of their judgement.

While some of these perceptions may at times be accurate, others are not. Children attribute many traits, characteristics and capabilities to their parents that are not based on reality at all. Few parents know as much as young children think they do. Experience is not always the "best teacher," as the child will later conclude when she becomes an adolescent and an adult and can judge her parents against a broader base of her own experience. And wisdom is not always related to age. Many parents find it difficult to admit, but those who are more honest with themselves recognize how exaggerated are children's evaluations of Mom and Dad.

While the cards are stacked in favor of the parents' far greater psychological size to begin with, many mothers and fathers foster the difference. They deliberately hide their limitations and mistakes in judgement from their children; or they promote myths as "We know what's best for you" or "When you're older you'll realize how right we were."

I've always been intrigued to observe that when parents talk about their own mothers and fathers, they readily see in retrospect their mistakes and limitations; yet they will strongly resist the notion that they are subject to the same kinds of errors of judgement and lack of wisdom in relation to their own children.

-Dr. Thomas Gordon

The Problem With Using Power

You can force your daughter to stay in college. You can insist that your subordinate dress differently.  But, as most of us know, power tactics are often a costly way to preserve relationships.  They’re also unlikely to have any positive effect on the other person’s values. In fact, the use of power practically guarantees being "fired" as a consultant.  

Using power to influence the outcome of a values collision can be tempting, particularly as a shortcut if other available approaches are complex and time consuming, and you hold most of the power in the relationship.


When you act as an influencer through modeling and consulting, you're offering people an opportunity to change by encouraging an evolutionary process.  The adaptations in their lives may be slow and gradual, but they will be lasting because they’re not imposed; they’re part of that person’s learning and growth.

By exercising your influence, you’re saying, in effect:

"I have no power over you, but here are the facts and figures that support my position. I leave responsibility for change with you. I won't hassle or nag if you don't make the changes I've suggested. I want to be influential and, above all, to preserve a good relationship with you. I accept the fact that the outcome of my consulting efforts is uncertain."

 When you use power methods in a values collision you are denying people a chance to evolve at their own pace, in their own way. You're applying a "revolutionary" approach-instant change through coercion. The message you send comes through like this:

"I don't trust you to make this change on your own. I'll use whatever power is available to me to force the change after all, it's for your own good."

Using power to alter another's values is frequently justified as being in the other's best interest. But consider what people throughout history have been forced to accept in the name of their "best interest"! That should give us pause when we set out to coerce change in others. Non-power methods that people can adapt to their own needs and experience are more likely to yield change that's desired by  you and truly accepted by the other person.

Author Unknown, Posted by Selena George, P.E.T. Program Manager

They're Not Teaching You I-Messages

Just yesterday we received a phone call from someone who was in the middle of taking an (unmentionable) communication skills course, and called us to ask for clarification on giving the I-Message. This extremely frustrated young man sounded relieved to be finally getting some real help and clarification on how this skill works. As he delicately approached his question, he began by explaining something that was actually very different from what an I-Message really is. Because just as common as the term is used, it is mis-used. Here was yet another example of it's misuse.

He proceeded to ask for reassurance on whether or not he should be following the formula: I feel______ when______ and I would like______ so can we _______.

I politely explained to him that we do not teach that formula and that unfortunately, I could not help him in his search for how to correctly deliver this four-part confrontive statement of sorts. After several more attempts to get me to answer him about this, I began to listen closer to his frustration. He told me that he was desperately trying to get this thing down right and that every time he asked for more questions in the class, he was accused of not doing his homework. Nobody was giving him the proper formula for how to fill in those four blanks and when he tried it at home, it was not working at all like they said it would.

I listened. (And by that I mean, I active listened.) After what I believed to be a minor breakthrough on his part, I offered to teach him the original, three-part I-Message by Dr. Thomas Gordon. He asked for examples and I provided them. He wrote down the formula and was pleased. "Finally," he expressed, "this is something that makes much more sense. It's like now I have the right equation to plug into."

I couldn't help but then ask him what this class had taught him about running into resistance after you give someone your I-Message. What were you supposed to do then? His answer was painful. He was advised to repeat himself, act "appropriately" and then tell the other person something along the lines of: "You don't want to talk about this now so let's set up a time when we can talk later."

I can't say I was shocked, but there was some serious head-shaking happening on my end. The poor guy! I could tell how badly he wanted to improve his communication skills and how strongly his desire for help was. To be given a set of tools that didn't work must have been like buying a bicycle without wheels. I wondered aloud: "What are you supposed to do after your second attempt to talk with them and they respond in the same way? Repeat the cycle?"

He sighed. I could hear his shrug right through the phone.

When I explained to him what shifting gears into Active Listening was, it was like a light turned on in his head. Knowing that he had written all this new information down, he sounded eager to continue his research. He thanked me graciously and we ended our conversation.

I hope the rest of the students in that class give us a call!

There Is Only One Real "I-Message"

The I-Message is now a term that is commonly used. Since the origination of the I-Message by Dr. Thomas Gordon in 1962, the term has been borrowed, misrepresented and generally watered-down. While the intention still aims at effectively confronting another in order to get your needs met, there is a true science and research behind Dr. Gordon's three part I-Message. Without each necessary piece, it simply will not work.

In hopes to bring clarity to this commonly misunderstood term, President of Gordon Training International, Linda Adams, explains what an authentic I-Message really is:


"As developed by Dr. Gordon and as taught in all of our courses for parents, teachers and leaders, the I-Message has three parts:  1) A non-blameful description of the unacceptable behavior; 2) the concrete effect that behavior has on the sender; and 3) the feeling the sender has about that effect.  In short, an I-Message includes:   Behavior, Effect, Feelings.  Examples of an I-Message from a parent to a child:  “When the music is on so loud, I can’t concentrate on my work and that frustrates me” or “I was upset when the gas tank was almost on empty and I had to stop and get gas which made me late for work.”  It doesn’t matter which order these three parts are in, just that they are all there.

The I-Message doesn’t contain a request or suggestion or solution about what the child or other person should do or what concrete action should be taken. An I-Message leaves responsibility with the other person to change their behavior out of consideration for the needs of the sender.      

There’s another essential skill that’s needed with most I-Messages.  Because people don’t usually like to hear that their behavior is interfering with someone else, they often respond in a defensive or resistant way.  So the I-Message sender needs to be prepared to Active Listen to that resistance and hear the other person’s feelings in order to give the I-Message a better chance of being heard and responded to in a positive way."

Is It Ever Okay to Use Power Methods With Children?

  It has become a joke with those of us who teach P.E.T. that in almost every new class some parent will challenge the validity or limits of Method III by one of two questions:

"But what if your kid runs into the street in front of a car? Don't you have to use Method I?"

"But what if your kid gets sever appendicitis? Don't you have to use Method I to make her go to the hospital?"

  Our answer to both these questions is "Yes, of course." These are crisis situations that demand immediate and firm action. Yet prior to the crisis of the child's running in front of a car or needing to be taken to the hospital, non power methods can be used.

  If a child develops a habit of running int the street, a parent might first try to talk to the child about the dangers of cars, walk her around the edge of the yard, and tell her that anything beyond is not safe, show her a picture of a child hit by a car, build a fence around the yard, or watch her when she is playing in the front yard for a couple of days, reminding her each time when she goes beyond the limits. Even if I took the punishment approach, I would never risk my child's life on the assumption that punishment alone would keep her from going into the street. I would want to employ more certain methods in any event.

- excerpted from "Aren't There Times When Method I Has To Be Used" in Dr. Thomas Gordon's Parent Effectiveness Training (P.E.T.) book

image: http://www.littleheartsbooks.com/2012/06/10/youre-not-the-boss-of-me/

Treat Friends, Kids The Same

by Erma Bombeck


On the TV the other day, a leading child psychologist said parents should treat their children as they would treat their best friend...with courtesy, dignity and diplomacy.

"I have never treated my children any other way," I told myself. But later that night, I thought about it. Did I really talk to my best friends like I talked to my children? Just suppose...our good friends, Fred and Eleanor, came to dinner one night and...

"Well it's about time you two got here! What have you been doing? Dawdling? Leave those shoes outside, Fred. They've got mud on them. And shut the door. Where were you born in a barn?"

"So Eleanor, how have you been? I've been meaning to have you over for such a long time. Fred! Take it easy on the chip dip of you'll ruin your dinner. I didn't work over a hot stove all day long to have you nibble like some bird."

"Hear from any of the gang lately? Got a card from the Martins. Yes, they're in Lauderdale again. They go every year to the same spot. What's the matter with you, Fred? You're fidgeting. Of course you have to go. It's down the hall, first door on the left. And I don't want to see the towel in the middle of the floor when you're finished."

"Did you wash your face before you came, Eleanor? I see a dark spot around your mouth. I guess it's a shadow. So how're your children? If you ask me I don't think summer school is great for them. Is everybody hungry? Then, why don't we go in to dinner? You all wash up and I'll take up the food. Don't tell me your hands are clean, Eleanor. I saw you playing with the dog."

"Fred, you sit over there and Eleanor you can sit with the half glass of milk. You know you're all elbows when it comes to milk. There now, your host will say grace."

"Fred, I don't see any cauliflower on your plate. Have you ever tried it? Well, try a spoonful. If you don't like it I won't make you finish it, but if you don't try it, you can just forget dessert. And sit up straight or your spine will grow that way. Now, what were we talking about? Oh yes, the Gerbers. They sold their house. I mean they took a beating, but Eleanor..., don't talk with food in your mouth. i can't understand a work you're saying. And use your napkin."

At that moment in my fantasy, my son walked into the room. "How nice of you to come," I said pleasantly.

"Now what did I do," he signed.

How to Get Your Kids to Do Their Chores

(...Without Nagging Them!)

Let us first remind ourselves of the old, straight-forward theory which tells us that generally, people don't like to be "told what to do". This absolutely includes kids. It's no wonder that kids need to constantly be reminded of what they were supposed to do - they don't want to be doing it in the first place! But with some guidance from the Gordon Model and bit of psychological insight, we think we can help.

In most households, here's how chores are usually delegated:

Mom: "I need you to wash the dishes, clean up your room, feed the dog and take him for a walk."
Child: "I don't feel like it."
Mom: "Do it!"
Child: "Fine."

There's one way to get a child to "agree" to do something! His willingness is lacking and his compliance is artificial. The mother will likely need to remind him: "You said you would do the chores I asked! Why aren't they done? Do them now - I won't ask you again." Adding a tinge of threat here might get your child to do what he's told (for the time being, at least*) but will likely entice him to resist even more. Not only are you telling him what to do without any reason or consideration of what he is needing to do, but your reminding/nagging him comes across as condescending; as if he isn't intelligent enough to remember. This holds true for nagging in all shapes and forms.

Now let's consider two important Gordon Model skills to help in this situation:

1. The Preventive I-Message: These types of I-Messages are useful in preventing problems from occurring in the first place. They give the listener (the child, in this case) important information that they will need to know for the future. For example, you are having guests over for dinner and you would like your child to have his toys picked up off the floor before a certain time of day. Remember that the I-Message must have all three parts to increase the probability that it will be effective. Using this example, here is an I-Message that could be used: "I need to have the toys off the floor by 5 pm when the neighbors will be arriving, so that I don't feel embarrassed about inviting guests into a messy home and don't have to take up extra time that I will need to finish preparing dinner."
2. Method III: The No-Lose Method to resolving conflicts is the perfect skill to use when it comes to chore-setting. Many things are in play here. First off, is the principle of participation, which says that a person is more motivated to carry out a decision that he has been a part of making, versus a decision that has been made on his behalf, without his consent. Secondly, Method III considers the needs of everyone involved. It could still, for example, allow the kids to watch their favorite show at the same time every night, while also lessening the burden of all the household duties on just Mom or Dad. Method III must be carried out in all six parts in order to be the most effective. More on Method III - including the numerous positive side effects - can be found in Chapter 11 of the P.E.T. book.

Parents must also remember that none of these are guaranteed quick-fixes for the conflicts in your family. But with time, practice, and a constant consideration for the needs of others, the benefits of using the Gordon Model skills are truly astonishing.

Try it for yourself and let us know how it worked for you. Feel free to always comment below or on our Facebook page.

* See Chapter 10 of the P.E.T. book to read the effects of parental power on Children

How to Deal When Your Children Are Violent

Violent tantrums: even the term is cringe-worthy. These mortifying experiences are commonly misunderstood by parents. More common still, is knowing the best way to handle these situations. Whether you're dealing with this in your family right now or think you have the best solution to cure these screaming, slapping and crying little people, consider the following:

First and foremost, parents should re-set their frame of mind. Remember that all behaviors (for children and adults alike) are attempts to fulfill a certain need. For example, your two-year-old runs away from the tub everyday at bathtime. What his behavior is saying = "I do NOT want to do that!" With a bit of Active Listening (verbal and non-verbal), you might find out why he is resistant to taking baths. Maybe he knows that right after bathtime is bedtime, and so he's trying to delay. Maybe you run the bath water too hot. A child this young might not have any way of verbalizing this to you and may not even realize that taking a bath can happen any time of day, or that the bath water can, in fact, be ran at a cooler temperature. When your children show you strong resistance, they are showing you that they're experiencing a problem.

Active Listening is the number one tool in finding out what's going on behind their behavior, which often asks as a masking agent. If your child is upset, it's not the time to cut them off and tell them to "put a cork in it." While you can explain (as a consultant) the effect that certain violent behaviors have on those around them, commanding them to stop will not solve their issue. Problems handled in this way lead to repetitive and often more passionate outburtsts. Children, like adults, want to be listened to and want their feelings to be considered. After Active Listening, sometimes the tantrum will stop right there. But other times it won't...

Particularly in families where the child's needs are rarely considered, if ever, a change in the child's behavior from tantrums to peacefulness will take some time to appear. Active Listening isn't usually an overnight fix. It takes time for the child to get used to the fact that you are actually listening to their needs and considering their feelings. In parent-child relationships which have been power based and the child usually "loses" the battle, trust will need to be rebuilt in order to have a solid foundation for Active Listening to be effective.

With time, skill, and some patience, these outlashes will begin to subside. By showing your children that you aren't going to simply "make them do something because you said so", you are also teaching your children an extremely important lesson in how to deal with conflicts. Raising children in this way will provide our society with the kind of adults who handle the needs and feelings of others in a respectable and effective manner.

For much more on this, check out the Parent Effectiveness Training book or learn about P.E.T. classes near you!

What do you think? Let us know!

Say WHAT?

You've probably seen this circling through Facebook by now. The re-posts, likes and supporting comments are growing in numbers on the daily. When it came around to us, we thought: Are these people SERIOUS??!! (And we can only imagine what the children of these people are thinking!)

It's sad to see parents taking pride in viewpoints like this. While we understand how charm, humor and a dose of  "tounge-in-cheek" can be appealing, I think it's safe to say that the supporters of this message are alarmingly serious!

Here are just a few of the reasons why this is awful:

1. Threatening - need we say more?
2. So because you love me, you're going to scare the heck out of me? Is that what you do when you love somebody?
3. It's a parent's job to invade their children's privacy? Ahem...sure...that'll be a real trusting relationship!
4. Wait I'm still confused, so the person who "loves me the most" is going to treat me the worst and it's okay for them to do that?
5. Parents want their children to hate them? Careful what you wish for!!

Intentionally creating fear and resentment in the relationship with your children is one of the most terrible things you can do to them. If the intention is to create discipline and obedience, these methods actually create the very opposite.

Have anything to add to our list? Please share with us what you think and SPREAD THE WORD!

Do Schools Deny Your Children of Their Civil Rights?

Excerpted from the Chapter "The Other Parents of Your Children" in the Parent Effectiveness Training book, by Dr. Thomas Gordon:

      In most schools, students are blatantly denied civil rights - the right of free speech, the right to wear their hair as they prefer, the right to wear the clothes they like, the right to dissent. Schools also deny children the right to refuse to testify against themselves, and if kids get into trouble, administrators seldom follow the customary procedures of "due process of law" guaranteed to citizens by the judicial system

     Is this a distorted picture of schools? I think not. Many other observers of the school system are seeing the same deficiencies. Furthermore, one need only ask youngsters how they feel about schools and schoolteachers. Many kids say they hate school and that their teachers treat them disrespectfully and unfairly. Most kids come to esperience school as a place where they must go; they experience learning as something that is seldom pleasant or fun; they experience studying as tedious work; and they see their teachers as unfriendly police officers. 

     When children are assigned to adults whose treatment of them producessuch negative reactions, parents cannot be expected to shoulder all the blame for the way their kids turn out. Parents can be blames, yes, but other adults must share the blame.

 How closely do you think this relates to your child's school or learning environment? Let us know your thoughts. Please feel free to comment here or on our Facebook page.

Should You Make Your Child "Finish What They Started"?

So your kid gets excited about starting a new hobby or sport and she begs you to sign her up for classes. Proper attire or equipment has been bought and lessons have been paid for. But a few sessions in, she tells you that she doesn't want to do it anymore.

You're now at a crossroad - do you "let" your child quit and lose out on the money, not to mention the apparent opportunity to teach them a lesson in making commitments? Or, do you accept the fact that she is no longer interested and don't want to force her into doing something unwillingly?

Your needs:

1. To teach your child the importance of commitments
2. To not lose out on money that has already been spent and could have possibly been used for something else 

Here's where most parents would tell their kids something along the lines of:

"I already paid for it and I don't want my money going down the drain. You've got to finish what you started!"

The question is, how do you deal with this situation to get yours and your child's needs met?

A Quick Lesson in Discipline:

When motivation in doing something comes in an external form (like the parent forcing a child to do something), they usually will simply do the bare minimum to finish the job at hand. When problems are resolved this way, parents often have to nag, remind and constantly check in on their child. One of the most important factors in place here is that children do not learn discipline and the consequences of real-life decisions in external forms. You might be able to "make" your child eat broccoli, but that doesn't mean that you are making them actually enjoy it. You might scare your child into not giving up on something that they started, but what you're really doing is just making the child scared of you -- not scare them about how the real-life consequences on giving-up may affect them. Your forcing her won't make her interested. Almost always, when the parents needs "win" over the child, the child will bear hate and resentment.

Three "Gordon Model" Methods To Use:

Preventive I-Message - Tell your child ahead of time that the money spent on their activities is something that you cannot get back whether they decide to continue or not and how losing that money could affect you. Explain to your children (as an informant, not a disciplinarian) the importance of making commitments and how they affect other people that are involved in the commitment.

Modify The Environment - Here's an easy one! Don't sign your child up for classes that are non-refundable. Wait to purchase necessary materials and see if you can have your child sit in and participate in a few classes before they make the commitment. Or find a place where you can pay per session, instead of for a whole month, for example.

Method III - In this situation, we are in the area of both people owning a problem (you and your child). Go through the six-step process and begin by finding out what your child's needs are in this situation and what the underlying reason is behind his or her feelings. Maybe she isn't comfortable taking karate in the same class as boys or maybe her skill level is more advanced than the rest of the kids, leaving her un-stimulated.


Before jumping to the first conclusion you can think of in these types of situations, consider the option that both you and your child can get your needs met and resolve conflicts in a respectful and effective way.

Do Kids Really Need to be "Toughened Up" for the Real World?

Some parents believe that their children should be treated with the use of punitive power in order to prepare them for the "real world".

This belief leans toward the idea that in the crass adult world, kids need to be "toughened up" in their childhood in order to survive as grown-ups. Those who belong to this school of thought believe that this tough love should be shown in form of punishment and the use of punitive, parental power. 

Here's why this theory is amiss:

Let's start with the general idea that parents want their children to grow up to become responsible, capable adults. They raise their children to show them the differences between "right and wrong" and the skills needed to fulfill their basic needs. Growing up, children learn a language for communicating with others, how to use numbers, how to drive, etc. Very few of these children take a course that teaches how to communicate effectively with others in order to get their needs met, especially during times of conflict. They learn how to talk with people and how to problem solve by mimicking what their parents do. After all, "modeling" is the most powerful way to teach anyone, anything.

In a world where most of us grow up with the use of punishment and parental superiority, it's no wonder that the "real world" we are planted in is so tough. Imagine millions of crying, whining adults scolding each other, telling each other what to do, striking out in anger and stepping on the heads of others; all of this in attempt to get some need met. The inadequacy of trying to solve problems this way is monumental.

Let's delve deeper into the mind of a child raised this way. What happens to the human psyche when our needs are met with threats, commands, blame, judgement and name-calling (just to name a few)?

These common reactions to children produce a countless number of side-effects. When a child begins to fear a parent, they are also hearing a threat of getting hurt by someone bigger and stronger than they are. While the power might work to modify the child's behavior for the moment, the child will almost ALWAYS fester resentment, which will trigger hostile responses in the future. Alternatively, this may cause a child to become submissive and fearful. 

Parents' use of demanding or ordering their children to do something communicate to the child that the parent does not have faith in the child's own judgement or capability. Patterns like this create reluctance in decision-making and an inability to problem-solve on their own, simply because they haven't been given the chance to practice using their own judgement. The common thought here would be, "I always do it wrong so why try?"

Criticizing and name-calling have some of the worst effects on children. Dr. Thomas Gordon wrote, "A child's self-concept gets shaped by parental judgement and evaluation. As the parent judges the child, so will the child judge himself." Like adults, children will respond with defensiveness even in cases disguised as "constructive criticism." In order to protect their own self image, children can become very hostile in the face of blame, ridicule and disagreement.

Stepping out from behind the microscope, we know how and why punitive parenting causes hostile and apprehensive adults. The failure of many marriages, business partnerships and friendships can be found as a result of "how you were raised" versus "how he/she was raised." It's important to know that the true test of a relationship isn't how many conflicts occur, but rather, how each conflict is handled. Gordon said conflict to be the "true test of a relationship."

When one learns how to deal with their own feelings AND the intense feelings of others, while accomplishing the common goal of each person getting what they need WITHOUT having to compromise, our work here is done.
 By now, you might be wondering: "How can I do that?!" Well, ahem, there are half a dozen books that can explain it all! Check out the work of Dr. Thomas Gordon and Linda Adams here.

And as always, let us know what you think.

written by: Selena George

What's In a Tantrum?

As toddlers everywhere are screaming bloody murder, destructing living rooms, attempting to escape car seats and harassing their siblings, their frazzled parents are on the verge of experiencing meltdowns of their own. After "trying everything," parents still can't seem to put an end to their children's exasperating behaviors. Difficult as it may be, understanding what lies behind these actions is the key to finding the solution that will help bring peace to everyone within earshot.

Dr. Thomas Gordon said that "all behaviors are solutions to human needs." When parents begin to understand and accept this basic principle, things might start to get a bit clearer. If all of our behaviors are expressions or attempts to fulfill an inner need, then what's in a tantrum?


Gordon wrote: "Children don’t misbehave. Their behaviors are simply actions they have chosen to meet these important needs. These principles suggest that all children’s actions are behaviors. Viewed in this way, all day long a child is behaving, and for the very same reason all other creatures engage in behaviors–they are trying to get their needs met. 

This does not mean, however, that parents will like all the behaviors their children engage in. Nor should they be expected to, for the children are bound to do things that sometimes produce unacceptable consequences for their parents. Kids can be loud and destructive, delay you when you’re in a hurry, pester you when you need quiet, cause you extra work, clutter up the home, interrupt your conversation, and break your valuables.

Think about such behaviors this way: they are behaviors children are engaging in to meet their needs. If at the same time they happen to interfere with your pursuit of pleasure, that doesn’t mean children are misbehaving. Rather, their particular way of behaving is unacceptable to you. Don’t interpret that children are trying to do something to you–they are only trying to do something for themselves. And this does not make them bad children or misbehaving children. But it may cause you a problem.


An infant cries because she is hungry or cold, or in pain. Something is wrong; her organism needs something. Crying behavior is the baby’s way of saying, “Help.” Such behavior, in fact, should be viewed as quite appropriate (“good”), for the crying is apt to bring the child the help that is needed." 

When seeing children as a fellow human being who is doing whatever means necessary to get his or her needs met, you might be inclined to find out what the child's need really is. Your child is not throwing a fit in order to frustrate you. On the contrary, your child inherently wants your approval and acceptance. Since children are dependent creatures who rely on external assistance in getting their needs met, denying them of such would simply be cruel. 


Could it be that they refuse to wear shoes because they're causing pain? Might they stretch and pry out of their high chair because they want their bottle they see sitting at the other end of the table? Do they hate taking showers because it reminds them of the time that they slipped and fell?


Let them be the ones to tell you. How? Start by Active Listening.


More on Active Listening to very young children can be found in Chapter Five of the P.E.T. Book.


What do you think? Let us know!

Click here to learn more about our once in a lifetime P.E.T. Instructor Training this year.