Who Owns the Problem?

PROBLEM OWNERSHIP

In your relationship with your child, you will have one of two attitudes towards everything you hear her say or see her do -- acceptance or unacceptance.

When you feel unaccepting of the behavior (placing it below your line), YOU OWN THE PROBLEM. To solve it, you will want to take appropriate action to change that behavior somehow so that it becomes acceptable to you. P.E.T. teaches some powerful tools to do that effectively without damaging the relationship.

On the other hand, some of your child's behaviors which are acceptable to you -- and thus do not cause you a problem -- are indications that the child has a problem.

Examples: You hear the child crying or saying, "I don't have any friends." These behaviors are placed above the line in the window, but in a special area at the top; they are not causing you a problem, but indicate that something in the child's life is unacceptable to him. NOW THE CHILD OWNS THE PROBLEM.

P.E.T. teaches an entirely different set of skills for helping the child take the responsibility for solving her own problems.

And, finally all the behaviors that are acceptable to you and are not cues or clues that the child has a problem are placed between the "problem" areas in a space labeled "NO PROBLEM AREA." P.E.T. also teaches skills and concepts for enhancing your relationship with your child in this area.

The purpose of P.E.T. is to enable parents to enlarge the NO PROBLEM AREA in their relationships with each of their children through the use of skills -- to help the child take charge of the problems in her life and to enable the parent to solve her problem when her child's behavior is unacceptable.

*Excerpt from P.E.T. Participant Workbook

"Can We Use All Three Methods?"

We occasionally encounter a parent who accepts the validity and believes in the effectiveness of the no-lose approach, yet is not willing to give up the two win-lose approaches.

"Won't a good parent use a judicious mixture of all three methods, depending on the nature of the problem? asked a father in one of my classes.

While understandable in view of some parents' fear of giving up all of their power over their children, this point of view is not tenable. As it is not possible "to be a little bit pregnant," it is not possible to be a little bit democratic in parent-child conflicts. In the first place, most parents who want to use a combination of all three methods really mean that they want to reserve the right to use Method I for the truly critical conflicts. Translated into simple language their attitude is: "On matters that are not too important to the children I will let them have a voice in the decision, but I will reserve the right to decide my way on issues that are very critical."

Our experiences seeing parents try this mixed approach is that it simply does not work. Children, once given a taste of how good it feels to resolve conflicts without losing, resent it when parents reverts back to Method I. Or they may lose all interest in entering into Method III on unimportant problems because they feel so resentful of losing on the more important problems.

A further outcome of the "judicious mixture" approach is that kids acquire a distrust of their parent when Method III is tried, because they have learned that when the chips are down and the parents has strong feeling on a problem he will end up winning anyway. So, why should they enter into problem-solving? Anytime it gets to be a real conflict, they know Dad is going to use his power to win anyway.

Some parents muddle through by occasionally using Method I for problems where the kids do not have strong feelings--the less critical problems--but Method III should always be used when a conflict is critical, involving strong feelings and convictions on the parent of the kids. Perhaps it is a principle in all human relationships that when one doesn't care much about the outcome of a conflict, one may be wiling to give in to another's power; but when one has a real stake in the outcome one wants to make sure to have a voice in the decision-making.

*Excerpt from Dr. Gordon's P.E.T. book

How Do I Prevent Some Problems with My Children?

How to Prevent Some Problems

When you're experiencing no problems at all in your relationship with your children (the relationship is in the No Problem Area of the Behavior Window), you may want to send a message to prevent an unacceptable behavior in the future.

The purpose of these Preventive I-Messages is to inform kids ahead of time about your plans, needs, etc.:

"I need to finish a course I'm taking online, so I'd like us to discuss how we can share the computer this weekend."

"I'd like us to figure out what needs to be done before we leave for our trip, so we make sure we have time to get it all done."

"I'd like to know when we're having dinner because there's a long phone call I want to make."

These assertive messages naturally won't always get parents exactly what they want, but it's far better to let your kids know ahead of time what you have in mind than wait until they behave unacceptably out of ignorance of your needs. A Preventive I-Message in time might save nine confrontations.

A less obvious effect of this kind of Preventive I-Message is that kids learn that their parents are human: they have needs, wants, preferences, and wishes like every one else. And, of course, they give kids a chance, without being told exactly what to do, to behave so their parents will be pleased.

A divorced mother, raising her three teenage sons on her own, described how she sent a preventive message to one of them, about a school event:

"I feel Dan has been closer to me--I can tell him what I feel. The other night I went to this thing at school where he was going to play the guitar and sing. He wanted me to go, but I'd never been before, and I was feeling like I didn't want to be dumped in there and left alone, not knowing anyone. So I said, 'Dan, I've never been to your school meeting before and I'm feeling just a little nervous, you know because I don't know anybody--I'd like you to help me out in there.' And he did! He took me in and introduced me to a bunch of people I didn't know and brought me a cup of tea. He just really looked after me!"

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's Parent Effectiveness Training, P.E.T. book

Happy Preventive I-Messaging!

When Do Confrontive I-Messages Not Work?

SIX REASONS WHY CONFRONTIVE I-MESSAGES DON'T WORK

I-Messages carry fewer risks to a relationship than do You-Messages and have a high success rate; however, they don't always work.

There are six reasons for this and actions you can take when these happen.

1.

Incomplete I-Message: While I-Messages with only one or two parts can work, many situations call for all three parts - Non-Blameful Description of Behavior, Effects on you and your Feelings.

What to do: Send a second I-Message and include all three parts.

2.

Hidden You-Message: Included in your message is some form of blame or label, i.e. "When you are so messy...". Or, you include your solution: "I'm frustrated because I can't work when your music is so loud, so turn it off."

What to do: Change the blame to a description of behavior, i.e. messy to - "When your toys are all over the floor." Send your I-Message without a solution attached: drop "so please turn it off." Remember, the goal is for the child to come up with his own solution (which is acceptable to you).

3.

Message is Too Weak. After a very unacceptable behavior has continued for several weeks, you say: "I am just a little frustrated because..." Or, "Too Strong when your child's behavior is relatively minor you say: "I am really furious because..."

What to do: Too Weak; send a stronger I-Message that reflects the importance and intensity of the effect(s) on you and your feeling(s). Sending an I-Message does not mean you need to be calm, collected and use a quiet voice. You can send a very strong message with a raised voice when the situation requires it.

Too Strong; reduce the intensity of your message to match the situation.

4.

Continuing Behavior is Meeting Needs. The child understands the effects of her behavior and your feelings but continues her actions because it is meeting important needs. This indicates it is a "Relationship-Owned" problem - you both have needs to meet.

What to do: Listen to the child, acknowledge you both have needs and use Method III Problem Solving to come up with a situation you both like.

5.

Behavior has No Effect on You. You don't like the child's behavior but it does not seem to have any concrete effect on you.

What to do: This may indicate that you are in a Values Conflict. Use the PET Values Conflict Strategies to deal with the situation.

6.

Other Gets "Flooded" by your I-Message. I-Messages don't blame or attack; however, people don't like to be confronted about their behaviors. Your child may still feel picked on, hurt, guilty, etc. and react defensively.

What to do: Active Listen to the child to reduce her emotional "flooding" before sending another I-Message. Continue this process of "Gear Shifting" until she can hear her behavior effects you.

*Excerpt from Dr. Gordon's P.E.T. Participant Workbook

How Do Families Solve Conflicts?

We don't need to look in the dictionary to find out what the word "conflict" means. We know because we experience it often in many of our relationships. In our roles as bosses or employees, teachers or students, customers or clerks, friends, spouses, and certainly as parents or children, conflict seems inevitable.

Most of us have come to accept a certain amount of conflict in our lives as "normal" and have learned effective ways of handling it. This is certainly true in families where day-to-day living together regularly results in mild disagreements and disputes that are usually quickly resolved and forgotten. Unfortunately, more serious conflicts can also occur--fights that lead to resentment, hassles that come up over and over again, stand-offs that result in tension and alienation--making family life seem almost unbearable at times. In a Utopian world conflict would not exist, but the reality is that it does and will as long as people live and work together. Thus, the goal of P.E.T. is not to reduce it. Rather, the mission is to teach families skillful ways of handling and resolving conflict - constructive and healthy ways which give everyone a say.

Needs Versus Solutions

A common definition if "people fighting against each other." In a family, this definition suggests that the parents is trying to block what the child wants, and the child is struggling to block what the parent wants. Strange as it may sounds, this is almost never really the case! Most conflicts between a parent and a child are conflicts-of-solutions rather than conflicts-of-needs. Actually parents and children have essentially the same basic human needs. Conflicts result from the way in which the parent or child goes about meeting some important personal need.

So often parents and children get into conflicts because both fail to communicate their underlying needs to the other. Instead each sets out on a course of action (the solution) to meet a very legitimate need, and these incompatible solutions create the conflict.

What Are The Benefits To Self-Disclosure?

Self-Disclosure Benefits You and Your Relationships

Although there are some risks in being self-disclosing, the potential benefits are overwhelming--both for yourself and for your relationships with others, especially your children. These benefits include:

Knowing Yourself Better

When you disclose yourself to your children and others, you are, at the same time, talking to yourself, keeping in touch with your own thoughts and feelings, values, and beliefs. You maintain awareness, responsibility, and control of your inner experiences.

Liking Yourself Better

You feel better about yourself as a parent, and as a person, when you are open, honest, and clear with your children; when you express who you are and what you think and believe, you feel strong, responsible, confident.

Being Better Understood By Others

Your self-disclosure leads to a more accurate understanding by others of who you really are. Your children will know the important thoughts, feelings, and values you want them to know. They won't be confused, in the dark, and worried about where you stand on certain issues. Tension and uncertainty will be replaced by a new, secure awareness of who you really are.

Encouraging Self-Disclosure In Your Child

Your openness, directness, and sincerity will invariably encourage the same from your children and from others around you. Honesty is very contagious in families when it is modeled by the parent, along with the attitude that the home is a "safe place" for everyone to express true thoughts and feelings. Generally, this kind of self-disclosure draws families closer together. Indifference, alienation, and tension recede. Trust and mutual caring take their place.

Conflicts Are Prevented

The other members of your family can better meet your needs when they have a clear picture of what you want. The chances of having conflicts with your children resulting from unknown or uncommunicated needs are thus greatly reduced. Expressing yourself openly and clearly will eliminate unwanted surprise, unpreparedness, and the unexpected from your relationships. In a family where openness and genuineness prevail, tension, resentment, and silent suffering simply have no opportunity to grow.

What Is The Key To Assertiveness?

The key to assertiveness is self-disclosure--knowing what you value, need, and want and sharing those thoughts and feelings "with your children, your spouse, and others". Self-disclosure is important because many of our needs must be met through our relationships. Indeed, we often must gain the cooperation of our children, family members, or others to get what we want--to meet our goals as parents and as persons.

Self-disclosure is communication which describes you, your inner experiences, literally--your self. Self-disclosing messages are about your beliefs and ideas, your likes and dislikes, your feelings, thoughts, and reactions. Self-disclosing message let your children and others know how you feel and where you stand.

Self-disclosure is obviously easiest when we perceive that others share or agree with our own experience. Asserting ourselves is more difficult when we risk disagreement and resistance from others. We often fear opening ourselves up to possible judgment, evaluation, or criticism from others. Should I tell my husband how I feel about certain things? What might result? Can I share my values with my teenager without "turning her off"? Can I tell my friend about her irritating behavior without losing her friendship? Can I speak up at the school meeting without others feeling I'm a "trouble maker"? These are hard, sometimes frightening decisions to make. Our willingness to self-disclose, then, is largely determine by our feelings of trust in the intentions of the other person to support us or hurt us.

Ingredients of Effective Communication

You want your communications to be heard, understood and responded to in positive ways. Three key ingredients make this possible as well as help you to build and keep strong relationships with your children, partner and others. These communication ingredients include being:

1. Clear - simple uncomplicated and understandable. You as the sender need to be sure that what you are saying is presented in a way that makes it easy for the receiver, child or adult, to get your message and it's meaning. Keeping your communication short and simple saves time and prevents frustration.
2. Congruent - what you think and feel is what you need to show and say. When you tell our child one thing but your face and body language say something else, it sends mixed messages and creates confusion. Children as well as adults usually believe what they see over what is said if the send is not congruent.
3. Connected - it is important to be aware of who you are talking to and how that child or adult communicates. You as the sender need to be on the child's "wave length", communicating at his speed and using words and language the child or other person is comfortable with. If your child feels you are connected to her and her world, she will be much more apt to pay attention and listen to what you have to say.*

Find out Thursday what the benefits are for you and your relationships when you Self-disclose...

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's P.E.T. Participant Workbook

How Do I Use Active Listening When My Child Owns A Problem?

Using Active Listening When The Child Owns A Problem

When your child "Owns a Problem" or is experiencing strong feelings and Basic Listening is not enough, then the Skill of "Active Listening" is needed.

WHEN TO LISTEN

To successfully use your Active Listening tool when another person has a problem a decision to make or strong feelings about something, you must:

• Have time and be willing to listen
• Want to understand and help the other
• Be able to focus your attention on the other, not on yourself
• Trust the child or other person to come up with solutions that are best for him

WHY LISTEN

1. Relieves "emotional flooding". When your child is experiencing a problem, feeling can overwhelm thoughts. A child can become emotionally flooded when feeling crowds out thoughts. Active Listening relieves emotional flooding and frees the intellect to get back to work.

2. Helps the other person to identify her real problem. When your child tells you about a problem, it is easy to immediately begin thinking about how you can help him/her resolve that situation. But what the child first tells you is not the real problem or complete problem. By Active Listening to the child, you can help her peel back the layers of the problem and identify the central issue.

PRESENTED PROBLEM: "I hate Tanya!"

SECOND LAYER: "Tanya gets so much attention"

THIRD LAYER: "It's so easy for her to make friends."

REAL PROBLEM: "I want to get better at making friends."

3. Assists the child in solving her own problem. Once the "real problem" has been identified, most children as well as adults, have within themselves the solution that is best for them. Solving their own problems increases creativity, self-confidence and problem solving abilities.*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's P.E.T. Participant Workbook

What is the Difference from Control vs. Influence?

What is the Difference from Control vs. Influence

(from a child's perspective)

There is interaction amongst the entire family, parent-to-child, parent-to-parent, and child-to-child/sibling-to-sibling. Let's focus on the siblings perspective. I like to call it "sibling rivalry"--families deal with this often, perhaps on a regular basis or enough to find a solution for the problem.

Control vs. Influence

When people use control to get others to do something, they use threats, praise or punishment; the controller gives the other person no choice.

When people use influence to get others to do something, they share information, give advice, teach or suggest to the other person; influencers give the other person a choice to accept or reject their influencing.

Example:

Control: You lend your brother your motorbike with the understanding that he'll be back by a certain time. He brings the bike back later than he said he would. You tell him he can't borrow it again. (Brother feels resentful.)

Influence: You give your brother an I-Message about how his not bringing the bike back on time caused you to be late for soccer practice. (Brother feels bad he caused this problem.)

Ask yourself these questions about control in your life:

Who can keep you from getting something you really want?

Who can give you something you need or want very much?

Who can make life most unpleasant/pleasant for you?

And these questions about influence:

Whom do you look up to and really listen to what they have to say?

Whose advice, experience or knowledge do you ask for and often follow?

Who really influences what you think and do?

Now this about relationships in which you are either a controller or an influencer.

Be aware of the times when you behave as a controller or an influencer of someone and also of those times when you are controlled or influenced by someone else.*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's Family Effectiveness Training, Young Adult Resource Book

Don't Children Want Authority and Limits?

A belief commonly held by both laypeople and professionals is that children actually want authority--they like parents to restrict their behavior by setting limits. When parents use their authority, so the argument goes, children feel more secure. Without limits, they not only will be wild and undisciplined but also insecure. An extension of this belief is that if parents do not use authority to set limits, their children will feel the parents do not care and will feel unloved.

While I suspect this belief is embraced by many because it gives them a neat justification for using power, I do not want to discredit the belief as a mere rationalization. There is some truth in the belief and so it must be examined rather carefully.

Common sense and experience strongly support the idea that children do want limits in their relationship with parents. They need to know how far they can go before their behavior will be unacceptable. Only then can they choose not to engage in such behaviors. This applies to all human relationships.

For example, I am much more secure when I know which of my behaviors are unacceptable to my wife. One that comes to mind is playing golf or going to my office to work on a day when we entertain guests. By knowing ahead of time that my absence will be unacceptable because my wife needs my help, I can choose not to play golf or go to the office and avoid her displeasure or anger and probably a conflict.

However, it is one thing for a child to want to know the "limits of her parents' acceptance" and an entirely different thing to say that she wants her parent to set those limits on her behavior. To return to the example involving my wife and me: I am helped when I know her feelings about my playing golf or going to the office on days we entertain. But I certainly will bristle and be resentful if she tries to set a limit on my behavior by some such statement as, "I cannot permit you to play golf or go to the office on days we are having guests. That's a limit. You are not to do those things."

I would not appreciate this power approach at all. It is ridiculous to suppose that my wife would even try to control and direct my behavior this way. Children respond no differently to limit setting on the part of the parent. Equally strong is their bristling and resentment when a parent unilaterally tries to set a limit on their behavior. I have never known a child who wants a parent to set a limit on her behavior like this:

"You must be in by midnight--that's my limit."

"I cannot permit you to take the car."

"You cannot play with your truck in the living room."

"We must demand that you not smoke pot."

"We have to restrict you from going with those two boys."

The reader will recognize all these communications as our familiar "sending the solution" (also, all are You-Messages).

A much sounder principle than "children want their parents to use their authority and set limits" is the following:

Children want and need information from their parents that will tell them the parent's feelings about their behavior. so that they themselves can modify behavior that might be unacceptable to the parents. However, children do not want the parent to try to limit or modify their behavior by using or threatening to use their authority. In short, children want to limit their behavior themselves if it becomes apparent to them that their behavior must be limited or modified. Children, like adults, prefer to be their own authority over their behavior.

One further point: children actually would prefer that all their behavior were acceptable to their parents, so that it would be unnecessary to limit or modify any of their behavior. I, too, would prefer that my wife would find all my behavior unconditionally acceptable. That's what I would prefer, but I know it is not only unrealistic, but impossible.

So parents should not expect, nor will their children expect of them, that they will be accepting of all behavior. What children have a right to expect, however, is that they always be told when their parents are not feeling accepting of a certain behavior (I don't like to be tugged and pulled when I'm talking to a friend"). This is quite different from wanting parents to use authority to set limits on their behavior.*

*An excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's P.E.T., Parent Effectiveness Training book

What is Active Listening?

Active Listening is a way of listening to acknowledge the reaction of the person to being confronted by your I-Message.

Here are some reactions of others to I-Messages and appropriate Active Listening responses:

"How would I know it would effect you."

-> "You're saying you would have no way of knowing." (Active Listening)

"I'm sorry you feel that way."

-> "You're sorry that I feel upset." (Active Listening)

"I didn't do it, Victor did it."

-> "Oh. You know that it was Victor, not you." (Active Listening)

"I couldn't help but be late...I had a flat tire."

-> "Oh. It was out of your control?" (Active Listening)

"It's not what it looks like. You're making a big fuss out of nothing."

-> "You think my feelings are not justified." (Active Listening)

As you can see Active Listening is a verbal mirroring of the other's reactions to your Confrontive I-Message. It is sometimes called "feeding back" the others response to show that you understand the other's response and to convey that you are not simply out to get your need met at the other's expense. And you may not always want to abandon your needs, yet you do want to understand the other's response to your confrontation. This can often lead to both of you finding a good no-lose situation to the problem.

What is the Difference? A Values Difference vs. Values Collision

What is a "value"?

Many countries and organizations have constitutions. These constitutions are made of ideals, and beliefs which spell out how that country or organization is to function.

Values are the ideals and beliefs which make up our own personal "constitution" and determine how we behave and interact with others.

A behavior is not a value.

Ask yourself this question, "Does the attitude or belief of the other person have a direct and tangible effect on me?"

If the answer is no, it may indicate a values conflict.

VALUE: a belief or ideal which shapes behavior

We feel very strongly about some of our values and less strongly about others and this can determine whether or not we have a Difference of Values or a Collision of Values with our child or other person.

Values Differences

We may not like something our child or another person says, believes or does, but our feeling is; "I can 'live with it'."

Factors that can influence this are:

• my relationship with the other person; i.e. my child or a casual acquaintance

• The situation: i.e. young child living at home or 24-year old son/daughter living on his/her own

Values Collisions

In other situations the value involved may be one about which you feel very strongly and it is a fundamental part of your "Personal Constitution".

Additionally, the other person is your own child, partner or very close friend or colleague and your life or work together is directly affected by your conflicting values.

In these situations you want to influence your child/other because you don't feel you can "live with it". You feel the child/other has a problem and that his/her ideal, belief and accompanying behaviors will have a negative impact on his/her life.

Here's an example:

A pre-teen wanting to wear very short skirts and skimpy, provocative tops.

What do you think this is? A Values Difference or a Values Collision?

What can the F.E.T. Program Do For Me?

What This Program Can Do For You

• Parents who as children suffered a disappointing, painful and unsatisfying relationship with their parents will be given a second chance by having a close and loving relationship with children of their own.

• People living together will learn how to create "partnership" relationships, in which neither dominates the other, each respects the needs of the other, and conflicts of needs are resolved peacefully.

• Parents will learn why using rewards with children not only is ineffective but also decreased their self-discipline.

• Family members will become more accurate listeners and clearer communicator both with each other and with persons outside the family.

• Parents will have children become more accurate listeners and clearer communicators both with each other and with persons outside the family.

• Parents will have children who do better in school, have many friends, will become school leaders, will be self-disciplined and self-motivated, and will become good problem-solvers.

• Families will learn what is needed to build a "democratic family" where each member actively participates in doing the work, setting rules, and making decisions.

• Married couples will greatly decrease the odds of separation and divorce because both will be getting their needs met.

• Married, separated or divorced couples will learn how to tackle conflicts head on and resolve them peacefully.

• Married couples will increase the odds of being physically and emotionally healthier.

• Couples will experience much less fighting and using verbal or physical abuse.

*Excerpt from Family Effectiveness Training, F.E.T. Adult Resource Book

How to choose the right parenting program for you

By Linda Adams, President of Gordon Training International

When Dr. Gordon taught the first P.E.T. class in 1962, parent training was a brand-new idea. At that time, most parents felt that they didn’t need training—that the way their parents had raised them was good enough. Still the idea caught on and in 1975, the New York Times called P.E.T. “a national movement.”

Now it’s been a little more than 46 years to the day since that first P.E.T. course began. And so much has happened since that day. Like every new idea, P.E.T. attracted a lot of imitators. In addition, people with very different views about how parents should raise their children came on the scene. Today, there are literally hundreds and perhaps thousands of parent training books and courses. Clearly, it’s an idea whose time has come.

Now, we know that parent training can have a major impact on how parents raise their children. There is overwhelming evidence that ineffective parenting is the cause of many of the problems that children and adolescents develop and struggle with throughout their lives. And we know that effective parenting can prevent many, if not most of these problems. In fact, it can do much more than that—effective parenting can create family relationships in which both parents and children can thrive.

With so many choices, how does a parent choose which model to follow?

Each model offers a specific philosophy of child-rearing and some offer skill training as well. There are several parent training models within which many parent training programs loosely fit. Most of them are based on the work of well-known and respected psychologists who have written books describing their theories. In most cases, their students and/or advocates developed courses for parents based on these theories.

Some of the courses advocate that parents be in control (autocratic), though the degree of control varies. Almost none advocate permissiveness. Some, like P.E.T., show parents how to have a collaborative, cooperative relationship with their children (democratic).

To help those parents faced with the daunting task of choosing a model, I have summarized the philosophy and skill training (if any) of some of the most well-known and/or current parenting models in an article, “How P.E.T. Compares to Other Parent Training Programs.”

How P.E.T. Compares to Other Parenting Programs

Programs Included in this comparison:

Parent Effectiveness Training (P.E.T.)

Nonviolent Communication (N.V.C.)

How to Talk so Kids Will Listen and Listen so Kids Will Talk

Systematic Training for Effective Parenting (S.T.E.P.)

Active Parenting

Love and Logic

Triple P (Positive Parenting Program)

Dare to Discipline

Parent Effectiveness Training (P.E.T.)

Author: Dr. Thomas Gordon

Philosophy: Democratic

Applies to All Relationships: Yes

Year of Origin: 1962

Book: Parent Effectiveness Training (P.E.T.), 1970, 2000.

Course: Parent Effectiveness Training (P.E.T.), 1962, 1976, 1989, 2005.

Course Length: Eight 3-hour sessions

Summary of this Model:

This book and course offer a philosophy and set of communication and conflict resolution skills for helping parents develop and maintain a democratic, mutually satisfying relationships with their children and with each other. The conceptual model is the Behavior Window, a framework that Dr. Gordon developed for determining who owns the problem. Parents learn to use this window to help them to decide which skill to use depending on whose problem it is. There is heavy emphasis on learning the communication and conflict resolution skills so they can be used right away, both at home and in all relationships.

Main Concepts and Skills of this Model:

• Three types of parenting styles: Authoritarian, Permissive, Democratic

• Focus is on teaching the Democratic style

• No use of parental power; needs of both parent and child important; conflicts solved so both get their needs met

• Training is needed to learn any new skill

• Behavior Window provides a framework for dealing with all behaviors

• Problem Ownership

• Communication and Conflict Resolution skills to handle any relationship problem

• Acceptance of child as s/he is

• Acceptance demonstrated through Active Listening

• 12 Communication Roadblocks

• “Misbehavior” is the language of power

• Authentic, congruent expression of true feelings without blame

• Avoidance of labels and judgments

• Anger and what’s beneath it

• I-Messages vs. You-Messages

• Shifting gears to deal with resistance to I-Message

• Modifying the physical environment to prevent problems and conflicts

• Harmful effects of both rewards and punishments, including logical consequences and time-out

• Disadvantages of both strict and permissive parenting styles

• Win-lose conflict resolution methods as compared with the No-Lose Method

• Parents use influence, not control

• Family rule-setting; Principle of Participation

• Conflicts resolved so that the needs of both parent and child are important and both are satisfied with the solution; no one loses

• How to handle values differences through modeling, consulting, I-Messages.

Nonviolent Communication (N.V.C.)

Author: Dr. Marshall Rosenberg

Philosophy: Democratic

Applies to All Relationships: Yes

Year of Origin: 1975

Book: Nonviolent Communication: The Language of Life, 2003

Course: Nonviolent Communication

Course Length: 13 2/12hour sessions

Summary of this Model:

This book and course offers a philosophy for having more meaningful, deeper connections with children, other people and oneself. It focuses on needs—one’s own and those of the other person and makes a case for learning to communicate in ways that create harmony and peace between people instead of arguments, misunderstandings and even violence. And it demonstrates the attitudes and skills that are needed to have such relationships both in the family and with others.

Main Concepts and Skills of this Model:

• Observing behavior without evaluation

• Identifying and expressing feelings and needs without judging

• Taking responsibility for one’s feelings

• Receiving other’s communication empathically

• Reflecting back other’s feelings

• Self-counseling

• Avoiding self-judgment

• Expressing anger by connecting it with unmet needs

• Harmful effects of punishments and rewards

• Expressing appreciation vs. praise

P.E.T. as compared with N.V.C.

N.V.C. and P.E.T. are grounded in the same philosophy. They have quite different ways of presenting their models. Both Thomas Gordon and Marshall Rosenberg were students of Carl Rogers.

How to Talk so Kids Will Listen and Listen so Kids Will Talk

Authors: Elaine Mazlich and Adele Faber

Philosophy: Democratic

Applies to All Relationships: Yes

Year of Origin: 1980

Book: How to Talk so Kids Will Listen and Listen so Kids Will Talk, 1980

Course: How to Talk so Kids Will Listen and Listen so Kids Will Talk

Course Length: Six sessions, six 30-minute videos or audios.

Summary of this Model:

This book and course offer parents empathic listening skills, authentic self-disclosure and problem-solving skills for raising children with high self-esteem and autonomy. It focuses on helping a child view him/herself differently by letting go of old ineffective roles or labels and as a result have freedom to develop and change.

Main Concepts and Skills of this Model:

• Helping children deal with negative feelings

• Accepting and acknowledging children’s feelings

• Avoiding typical unhelpful ways to get children to cooperate

• Gaining cooperation by being congruent (describe the problem, express feelings)

• Instead of punishment, expressing feelings, stating expectations, telling child how to make amends, giving choices, taking action, problem solving

• Setting boundaries and limits.

• Encouraging autonomy by helping children function on their own

• Praising children by describing their behavior, not evaluating it.

• Avoiding labeling, allowing freedom for children to develop and change

P.E.T. as compared with How to Listen so Kids Will Talk…..

This model is based on the work of Dr. Haim Ginott (a student of Carl Rogers) and has a philosophy with some similarities to P.E.T.

Systematic Training for Effective Parenting (S.T.E.P.)

Authors: Dr. Don Dinkmeyer and Dr. Gary McKay

Philosophy: Democratic

Applies to all Relationships: No

Year of Origin: 1976

Book: The Parent’s Handbook: Systematic Training for Effective Parenting (S.T.E.P.), 1997

Course: Systematic Training for Effective Parenting (S.T.E.P.)

Course Length: Nine 2-hour sessions

Summary of this Model:

This book and course focus on how children grow and behave, on misbehavior and effective ways to deal with it, on the importance of encouraging children and how to do that effectively, on listening to children with empathy and talking to them authentically. It deals with both Natural and Logical Consequences as alternatives to rewards and punishments in disciplining children. (Natural Consequences are those which occur naturally. Logical Consequences are those created by a parent in response to a child’s misbehavior.) It advocates family meetings (to plan for fun, to express feelings, to make decisions, to resolve conflicts).

Main Concepts and Skills of this Model:

• Three types of parents: Authoritarian, Permissive, Democratic

• Focus is on teaching the Democratic style

• Democratic style helps children become responsible by setting limits and giving choices within those limits

• Why children misbehave

• How to deal with misbehavior

• Setting limits

• Giving encouragement instead of praise

• Reflective listening

• Messages vs.You-Messages

• Problem Ownership

• Problem-Solving

• Family Meetings

• Giving choices

• Disadvantages of punishment

• Applying Logical Consequences as a way to discipline

• Logical Consequences different than Punishment

P.E.T. as compared with S.T.E.P.

S.T.E.P.’s focus is on why children misbehave and how parents can deal with misbehavior effectively. The S.T.E.P. program offers many of the P.E.T. skills in a shorter version including Problem Ownership, Active Listening, I-Messages, Problem Solving. While both programs are opposed to the use of rewards and punishments as a way of disciplining children, S.T.E.P. advocates the use of Logical Consequences. In the P.E.T. philosophy, Logical Consequences are a form of punishment. S.T.E.P. is a combination of parenting methods based on the work of Alfred Adler/Rudolf Dreikurs and Thomas Gordon.

Active Parenting

Author: Dr. Michael Popkin

Philosophy: Democratic

Applies to All Relationships: No

Date of Origin: 1983

Book: Active Parenting Now, 2002

Course: Active Parenting

Course Length: Six 2-hour sessions

Summary of this Model:

This video-based program is very similar to S.T.E.P., i.e. its foundation is based on the work of Alfred Adler and Rudolf Dreikurs and it includes a major component of P.E.T. ideas and skills in an abbreviated form.

Main Concepts and Skills of this Model:

• Three types of parents: The Doormat, The Dictator, The Active Parent

• The Active Parenting style is described as “freedom within limits” (see S.T.E.P. above for other concepts and skills)

P.E.T. as compared with Active Parenting

(see S.T.E.P. above)

Love and Logic

Authors: Dr. Foster Cline and Jim Fay

Philosophy: Autocratic

Applies to all Relationships: No

Year of Origin: 1980

Book: Parenting with Love and Logic, 1990, 2006

Course: Love and Logic

Course Length: Six modules

Summary of this Model:

This book contains two parts, the first of which explains the authors’ parenting philosophy. The focus is on teaching children to be responsible by setting limits, giving choices and encouraging the child to think for him/herself. The other part of the book deals with common discipline problems and how to handle them. These 48 “pearls” give parents advice on what to do about such issues as: “allowances, anger, bedtime, bossiness, church, discipline 101, homework, nasty looks and negative body language, pacifiers, sassing and disrespect, spanking, temper tantrums, toilet training”.

Main Concepts and Skills of This Model:

• Three types of parents: Helicopter, Drill Sergeant and Consultant

• Consultant parent is the Love and Logic type: one who gives thoughtful guidance and imposes firm, enforceable limits

• Parents in control

• Problem ownership

• Setting limits by describing what parent will do or will allow

• Applying enforceable statements (“either…or…”)

• Using empathy to help children learn from consequences of their behavior

• Importance of child having positive self-concept

• Encouraging instead of praising

• Encouraging children to think for themselves

• Logical Consequences and time-out as methods of discipline when children misbehave

• Differences between Logical Consequences and punishment

P.E.T. as compared with Love and Logic

The Love and Logic model advocates that parents use their power to get children to obey, i.e., “healthy control”. It is based on the belief that this kind of discipline will teach children responsibility. P.E.T. is a model which advocates that parents not use their power to control their children. Instead, it advocates the use of communication and conflict resolution skills to influence children and empower them to become self-reliant, make positive decisions and control their own behavior.

Triple P (Positive Parenting Program)

Author: Dr. Matthew Sanders

Philosophy: Autocratic

Applies to All Relationships: No

Year of Origin: 1992

Book: Every Parent: A positive approach to children’s behaviour, 2004

Course: Triple P (Positive Parenting Program)

Course Length: Three 1 ½-hour sessions and other formats

Summary of this Model:

This book and course offers the concept of Constructive Parenting and defines that as a way of raising children to help them become socially and emotionally competent. Parents are in control; they set the rules and enforce them. How to deal with misbehavior is a main focus. The book contains chapters with age-specific advice on how to deal with such behaviors as crying, whining, temper tantrums, disobedience, interrupting, sleeping and bedtime problems, swearing and chores.

Main Concepts and Skills of This Model:

• Helping parents learn to teach children self-control, how to follow rules, behave acceptably and respect others

• Creating a safe, secure, engaging environment, i.e. interesting, amusing, purposeful activities

• Fostering a positive learning environment, i.e. giving recognition, encouragement, acknowledgment

• Using assertive discipline; dealing with disobedience and misbehavior

• Parents deal with misbehavior quickly, decisively and consistently

• Applying appropriate Logical Consequences so that children learn to accept responsibility for their own behavior

• Difference between assertive discipline and punishment

• Using rewards and praise (when children “behave”)

• Making behavior charts

• Parents set rules; enforce them

• Taking care of self as a parent, i.e., eating well, getting enough exercise and sleep, etc.

P.E.T. as compared with Triple P

The Triple P model advocates the idea that parents exercise control over their children, expect obedience and apply discipline when children misbehave. P.E.T. views the parent/child relationship from a different frame a reference and teaches parents how to have collaborative, cooperative relationships with their children. It teaches a non-power method of raising children and offers skills of empathic listening, honest, clear and non-blameful self-disclosure and conflict resolution skills.

Dare to Discipline

Author: Dr. James Dobson

Philosophy: Autocratic

Applies to All Relationships: No

Year of Origin: 1970

Books: Dare to Discipline, 1970, 1996, The Strong-Willed Child, 2004

The Strong-Willed Child Workbook, 2005

Course: Unknown

Course Length: Unknown

Summary of this Model:

This model is based on the idea that parents need to begin teaching respect for authority starting when children are very young. The main job of parents is to teach their children to obey. When they are “defiant” and don’t obey, parents should punish the disobedient child by spanking him/her. After such confrontation in which the parent has demonstrated his/her right to lead, it’s important to explain to the child why s/he was disciplined and to let the child know how much the parent loves him/her.

Main Concepts and Skills of this Model:

• Parents’ job is to shape the child’s will without breaking the spirit

• Parents in control; expect children to be obedient

• Children are willfully defiant

• Immediate proper response (punitive discipline) required when they’re defiant

• Compliant child is the goal

• Encourage normal curiosity; valuable means for learning

• Difference between crushing the will of a child and teaching the child to rein it in for his/her own good

• Logical Consequences

• Love and control present in balanced proportions.

• Anger is an ineffective tool

• Physical punishment

P.E.T. as compared with Dare to Discipline

Dare to Discipline comes from the point of view that the parent/child relationship is a contest of wills and that the parent must always win at all costs. It is imperative that a child be taught to obey. Dobson advocates the use of corporal punishment as the way of dealing with “defiance” and disobedience. This is the only model in this comparison that advocates physical punishment. P.E.T. shows parents how to have a relationship with their children that is based on mutual respect as opposed to obedience. It offers evidence about the harmful effects of punishment on children and on the relationship between parent and child. And it offers communication and conflict resolutions skills that make punishment (and rewards) unnecessary.

Do Parents Who Have Learned the Skills for Creating Democratic Family Environments Also Foster Good Health and Well-being in Their Children?

YES!

In a study that combined the findings from 26 independent studies produced these findings:

• P.E.T. trained parents showed improved scores on tests measuring "democratic ideals", acceptance and understanding of their children.

• The greatest effect of P.E.T. training was an increase in child self-esteem (Cedar, 1985).

In a classic study done many years ago, three types of families were compared: autocratic, permissive and democratic. Children of these families were tested periodically until they reached adolescence. The findings were:

• The IQ's of children decreased slightly in autocratic families, remained the same in permissive families, and increased on the average of eight IQ points in democratic families.

• Children in the democratic families were given higher ratings by their teachers in originality, planfulness, patience, curiosity and fancifulness.

• They held more leadership positions in school and scored higher in emotional adjustment and maturity (Baldwin, Kalhorn and Breese, 1945).

The idea that parents can actually make their children physically sick is not really surprising considering the intricate relationships between emotional stress and illness. Parental domination, punishment, criticism, restrictiveness, and rejection typically produce in children, fear, anger and frustration--behavioral manifestations of physiological stress. Certainly it is logical to assume that in families in which parents are less dominating and restrictive and more accepting, children would have a greater chance of growing up physically healthy and more resistive to physical illness.

Clinical evidence has shown that the feeling of losing control of one's life, of one's destiny, can be a cause of poor mental health--particularly depression, anxiety and stress. At the core of the F.E.T. blueprint is the value of promoting children's self-control versus adult control, inner control versus external control. Social scientist have recently become very interested in this issue, using the term "fate control." Autocratic teachers and parents who rely heavily on external control of children produce students with feelings of dependence and lack of fate control. Democratic teachers and parents who give children a lot of freedom and responsibility make children feel they are the ones responsible for the control of their destiny (Baumrind, 1971).

Are There Benefits To a Democratic Relationship?

Long-range Benefits of Democratic Relationships

Over the years I have come to believe more and more strongly that democratic relationships make people healthier--both physically and emotionally. They foster well-being, self-esteem, self-confidence and self-discipline.

On the other hand non-democratic relationships make people unhealthy. They produce both physical and emotional illness, low self-esteem, lack of confidence, aggression, rebellion, violence and lack of self-discipline. They produce delinquent, violent youth.

We see it in organizations. One study found that managers who use a democratic leadership style and practice "participative management" develop workers with high productivity and morale, low turnover, fewer grievances and low absenteeism. They feel better about themselves, like to go to work, have more self-esteem and self-confidence, less sense of powerlessness and fewer illnesses (Simmons and Mares, 1983).

We also see it in schools. In a study involving 600 teachers and 10,000 students from kindergarten through grade 12, the students whose teachers were trained in the skill of communicating empathic understanding (i.e. Active Listening) respect and regard for students as persons were compared with students whose teachers were not trained in those skills (Aspy and Roebuck, 1983). Students of the trained teachers were found to:

• Miss fewer days of school during the year (four fewer days per child)

• Make greater gains on academic achievement measures, including both math and reading scores

• Be more spontaneous and use higher levels of thinking

• Increase their scores on IQ tests (from kindergarten through fifth grade)

• Make gains in creativity scores from September to May

• Show increased scores on self-esteem measures

• Commit fewer acts of vandalism to school property

• Present fewer disciplinary problems

The study also found that teachers who were trained in the helping skills had classrooms in which there was:

• More student talk
• More student problem solving
• More student verbal initiation
• More verbal response to the teacher
• More student asking of questions
• More student involvement in learning
• More eye contact with teacher
• More physical movement
• Higher levels of cognitive thinking
• Greater creativity

Do parents who have learned the skills for creating democratic family environments also foster good health and well-being in their children?

Find out on tomorrow's post!