Have you "Changed the Environment" Recently?

Changing the Environment

* Simplifying: making the home easier for the child to function independently and effectively

Examples: mirror at child's level; stool to reach water faucet and cup; clothes rack lowered; cereal and plastic bowls in low cupboard

* Rearranging: displaying, storing and placing elements in the home to eliminate or encourage certain behaviors

Examples: covers over dangerous electrical outlets; plastic cups; door guards against slamming; T.V. out of "traffic pattern"; locked medicine cabinet.

It is important to understand that the concept of modifying the environment does not sanction parents to impose physical changes upon unwilling children. Instead, parents should seek mutual acceptance of physical changes in the home, especially if they get resistance from their children. Moreover, it is likely that the best possible modifications can be made if all family members put their heads together--and certainly the commitment to supporting the changes will be higher if the process used is Method III.*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's F.E.T. Adult Resource Book

What Are the Negative Effects of the 12 Roadblocks?

The Negative Effects of the 12 Roadblocks

Here's a list of reactions people have told us they had when they owned a problem and the other person used the Roadblocks:

They made me:

• stop talking, shut me off.
• argue.
• feel resentful or angry.
• feel I'm being pressured to change--not accepted as I am.
• feel I'm not being understood.
• feel I've been interrupted.
• feel I'm on the witness stand being cross-examined.
• defensive and resistant.
• feel inadequate, inferior.
• feel guilty or bad.
• feel the other person doesn't trust me to solve my problem.
• feel my feelings aren't justified.
• feel frustrated.
• feel the listener is just not interested.*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's F.E.T. Young Adult Resource Book

Do What's Right For You

We obviously see many benefits for self-disclosure, both for the parent, the child, and others. But where do you draw the line? Should you disclose everything you think and feel? What should you share with your children? With your spouse or friend? Or with no one?

The best guideline we can offer is: do what's right for you, and what's right for your relationships. The ultimate purpose of self-disclosure, after all, is to enhance your effectiveness as a parent and a person.

Therein lies the rule of thumb: "Will my thoughts and feelings here, now, and with this child or other person, enhance me and enhance them and contribute to the quality of our relationship?" When the answer is "Yes," self -disclose. When the answer is "No," choose not to self-disclose; and when the answer is "I'm not sure," we strongly suggest that you take a chance and trust that your honesty and humanness will pay off. We're convinced that children especially thrive when their parent is a genuine, open and even vulnerable human being -- not an actor in a carefully controlled and rehearsed "parent" role.*

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

Why Are There Conditions for Active Listening?

The Appropriate Conditions for Active Listening

To listen to another with the intention of helping that person deal with a personal problem is to assume a counseling posture. Such a postures is characterized by having the intention of helping another person; using good attending behavior; being accepting, empathic, and genuine; and using Active Listening. For this counseling posture to work well, certain conditions must be present; otherwise, either the sender of the listener, or both, may resent or regret the experience. The following are the necessary conditions:

Conditions Within the Other Person

____________________________________________________________

1. Must be having strong feelings and/or be aware of having a problem,

2. Must be giving off cues and clues that express those feelings or problems ("I'm worried, I've got a problem," crying, sulking, etc.) and

3. Must be willing to talk to the listener about the situation.

What happens if these conditions are not present in the other person?

If feelings or problems are not present in the other person, or s/he is not willing to talk, taking a counseling posture can imply that the sender is "sick" and the listener is well, and Active Listening may seem like a maddening, demeaning word game. The "counselor" at such times may be greeted with scorn or hostility.

Conditions Within the Listener

______________________________________________________________

The listener must have a genuinely helpful "set" in the following areas:

1. Feel genuinely accepting (not needing to change the sender).

2. Want to help (not just be turning on a technique).

3. Have, and want to take, enough time.

(If not, a later appointment can be set up. Or if talk takes more time than expected, it can be continued at a later, agreed upon time.)

4. Trust that the other, with some helpful support, can solve their own problem better than the listener can.

What sometimes makes this difficult to believe is our long exposure to the authoritative, culturally-accepted "medical model" for helping another. In that model, any helper is seen as analogous to a "doctor" who gathers symptoms and data, diagnoses the patient's problem, and decides on an prescribes the best treatment. The helpee, as the "patient", is then expected to follow "doctor's orders." Within this cultural orientation, it is often hard to believe that the other people are their own best experts for solving their own problems.

(Incidentally, the medical profession itself is beginning to trade in this archaic approach in favor of involving patients more more in their own treatment.)

5. Feel reasonably separate from the other person and the problem.

This means recognizing clearly that you are not the other person; that his or her pain is not your pain; the other person owns the problem, not you; and that you are empathizing, not identifying.

What happens if these conditions are not present in the listener?

If these conditions are not met, the listener's Active Listening will inevitably (and usually unconsciously) reflect that in the form of:

1. Attempts to change or influence the other person with hidden solutions, judgments, etc. buried in the feedbacks.
2. Nonverbal cues of unacceptance or lack of interest.
3. Inability to decode the other person's real messages. The "inner ear" will be turned off.

The send will experience such Active Listening as manipulative, condescending, frustrating or boring, and will react with scorn or hostility.

In short, if these conditions are not met inside the listener, the time is not right for him/her to become a counselor. Instead, the listener should reevaluate the behavior responded to in terms of its placement in the Behavior Window and look again for the most appropriate choice of skills.*

* Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's F.E.T. Adult Resource Book

Do Children Who Get Spanked Really Have Lower IQ's?

A co-worker forwarded this article to me and after reading it, I felt I had to share it here:

Children Who Get Spanked Have Lower IQs

By Jeanna Bryner, Senior Writer

posted: 24 September 2009 09:12 pm ET

"All parents want smart children," said study researcher Murray Straus of the University of New Hampshire. "This research shows that avoiding spanking and correcting misbehavior in other ways can help that happen."

One might ask, however, whether children who are spanked tend to come from backgrounds in which education opportunities are less or inherited intelligence lower.

"You can't say it proves it, but I think it rules out so many other alternatives; I am convinced that spanking does cause a slowdown in a child's development of mental abilities," Straus told LiveScience.But while the results only show an association between spanking and intelligence, Straus says his methodology and the fact that he took into account other factors that could be at play (such as parents' socioeconomic status) make a good case for a causal link.

Intelligence quotients

Straus and his colleague Mallie Paschall of the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation in Maryland studied nationally representative samples of two age groups: 806 children ages 2 to 4, and 704 ages 5 to 9. The researchers tested the kids' IQs initially and then four years later.

Both groups of kids got smarter after four years. But the 2- to 4-year-olds who were spanked scored 5 points lower on the IQ test than those not spanked. For children ages 5 to 9, the spanked ones scored on average 2.8 points lower than their unspanked counterparts.

The results, he said, were statistically significant. And they held even after accounting for parental education, income, cognitive stimulation by parents and other factors that could affect children's mental abilities.

Straus will present the study results, along with research on the relationship between average national IQ and prevalence of spanking around the world, Friday at the 14th International Conference on Violence, Abuse and Trauma, in San Diego, Calif.

Spanking science

Whether or not spanking equates with dumber kids is not known, and may never be known. That's because the only way to truly show cause and effect would be to follow over time two groups of kids, one randomly assigned to get spanked and another who would not get spanked. Barring that method, which is unfeasible, Straus considers his study the next best thing, as he looked back at a nationally representative set of kids who were followed over time.

Jennifer Lansford of Duke University's Center for Child and Family Policy and Social Science Research Institute called the study "interesting," and agrees the method is a strong one. Lansford, who was not involved with the study, said following kids over time as this study did rules out the possibility that children with lower IQs somehow elicit more physical discipline.

However, unlike research showing the link between spanking and a kid's aggressive behavior, in which kids model parents' actions, this link is less clear to her. She added that a question still left unanswered is "what are some of the other mechanisms that could be responsible for this link between physical discipline and lower IQ?"

How spanking harms

If spanking does send IQ scores down, Straus and others offer some explanations for what might be going on.

"Contrary to what everyone believes, being hit by parents is a traumatic experience," Straus said. "We know from lots of research that traumatic stresses affect the brain adversely." Also, the trauma could cause kids to have more stressful responses in difficult situations, and so may not perform as well cognitively.

By using hitting rather than words or other means of discipline, parents could be depriving kids of learning opportunities. "With spanking, a parent is delivering a punishment to get the child's attention and to get them to behave in a certain way," said Elizabeth Gershoff who studies childhood development at the University of Texas, Austin. "It's not fostering children's independent thinking."

So when a child gets in a bind, he or she might do the right thing to keep from a spanking rather than figuring out the best decision independently, added Gershoff, who was not involved in Straus's current study.

And then there are genes, as some kids are just born smarter than others.

Even though spanking has been shown to cause negative consequences, Gershoff said many parents still fall back on the behavior-shaping tool. As for why, she says it's a quick fix, though its seeming success is short-lived and the negative consequences often outweigh the positives. Parents also might have been spanked themselves and so continue the tradition.

Beware of the GLOP!

By Linda Adams, President of GTI

"She's unfriendly."

"He's a skeptic."

"My child misbehaved."

While these may seem like simple, harmless descriptions of people, in fact, they are laden with judgment.

What did that person do or say for me to jump from focusing on their specific behavior to the conclusion that they're "unfriendly" or "skeptical" or "misbehaving"? Why is it that we automatically put labels on people and then start acting in accordance with those labels? Once we have made such a judgment about someone else whether it is positive or negative, we tend to categorize or type them based on that judgment, and then act as if it's a fact which in turn, determines how we treat them.

For this reason I have an issue with personality instruments which are very widely utilized in companies to classify employees and their co-workers into categories. I've heard people describe themselves or someone at work as an "INTJ" and the like. A colleague once said to me "You're a high 'D', right?" Granted, many of these tools help people gain a better understanding of themselves and a tolerance for differences among people. A problem is that some employers rely on these instruments as a basis for hiring, firing, promoting and assigning jobs. "Maybe we shouldn't promote her to that position--she might not do well as a manager." "I don't think he should be assigned to that project--his head is in the clouds."

The "blue states" vs. the "red states" is another example of this kind of labeling. In this case, red and blue aren't merely descriptive colors, they're judgmental statements. Even though it's a current, quick, easy way to make a point, I think the use of these labels is divisive and tends to separate us even more and in ways that aren't real. Just like any other judgment-laden label that categorizes people, this one is narrow and limiting and doesn't fully or accurately describe a state or group of people.

GLOP

Labels such as these make it easier to forget our common interests and concerns. Instead we focus on the differences between us and emphasize them which creates distance, tension and friction in our relationships. In our L.E.T. and P.E.T. courses, we refer to such labels as GLOP or General Labeling Of People.

GLOP can cause us to see ourselves and each other not as unique individuals but as a certain type of person. Think back to when you were a child and remember some of the things your parents said to you. Mine include: "You're being selfish," "You're so responsible," "You're stubborn," "You're as independent as a hog on ice." Isn't it amazing how these labels stick with us and if we allow them to, they continue to define us?

Another problem associated with GLOP is that we look for information, for behavior that confirms our original judgment and often discount evidence to the contrary.

Another Way of Looking at Behavior

Behavior is only what you can directly observe by seeing or hearing. What did that person say or do? Their attitudes, feelings, moods and thoughts are their own inner reality and are not behaviors because you can't directly observe them. You can only guess what they might be.

Here is the difference between GLOP and descriptions of behavior using the examples I gave above:

GLOP Description of Behavior

"She's unfriendly." "She didn't smile at me or say 'Hi'."
"He's a skeptic." "He asked lots of questions in the meeting."
"My child misbehaved." "She took stuff off the shelves in the grocery store."

Notice that in each case, there's a behavior that can be described--with no judgment or blame attached to it. It's easy to see that the problem lies in our tendency to leap to an assumption about someone's attitude or feeling underlying that behavior.

Here's a quick assignment for you: try changing these judgmental labels into descriptions of the other person's specific behavior (it's harder than it seems).

"He's a nerd."
"You're too picky."
"She's irresponsible."
"You're just jealous."
"You're being a brat."

What You Can Do

Become aware of any tendency you have to judge and label both yours and others' behavior. Each time you catch yourself interpreting or evaluating or judging, make a conscious effort to go back and focus on and describe the specific behavior.

There is a major benefit of describing behavior instead of leaping ahead to label it. It is that you will maintain and improve and strengthen your relationships causing them to spiral upward.

Listen!

Listen!

There’s a poem about listening by an unknown author. This little poem expresses several thoughts about what people want from their partners, friends, and children.

Listen

When I ask you to listen to me

And you start giving me advice

You have not done what I asked.

When I ask you to listen to me

And you begin to tell me why

I shouldn’t feel that way

You are trampling on my feelings.

When I ask you to listen to me

and you think you have to do something

to solve my problem

you have failed me,

strange as that may seem.

Listen! All I asked was that you listen,

not talk or do…just hear me.

advice is cheap; twenty five cents will get

you both Dear Abby and Billy Graham

in the same newspaper.

And I can do for myself. I am not

helpless. Maybe discouraged

and faltering, but not helpless.

When you do something for me

that I can do for myself

you contribute to my fear

and inadequacy.

But when you accept as a

simple fact that I do

feel what I feel,

no matter how irrational,

then I can quit trying to convince

you and can get about this business

of understanding what’s behind

this irrational feeling.

And when that’s clear, the answers are

obvious and I don’t need advice.

Irrational feelings make sense when

we understand what’s behind them.

Perhaps that’s why prayer works

sometimes, for some people…because

god is mute, and doesn’t give

advice or try to fix things.

He (or She) just listens

and let’s you work it out

yourself.

So please listen and just hear me

and if you want to talk, wait a minute for

your turn…and I’ll listen to you.*

*Writings from Dr. Thomas Gordon

What Are The Benefits of Active Listening?

The Benefits of Active Listening to Children

Feelings get dissipated

Troublesome, negative feelings are more apt to go away when they are expressed and accepted.

Feelings become friendly

If a parent accepts a child's feelings with Active Listening, it helps the child accept them and not feel they're "bad."

Produces a deeper feeling of caring

Being heard and understood by their parent makes children develop warm feelings toward the parent.

Children will start listening to the parent

If parents take the time to hear out their children, then children will be more apt to want to listen to the parent.

Children will become more responsible

Talking out a problem helps them think it through, discover their own solutions and become more self-responsible.

Parents will learn to trust their children

As the child begins to solve his/her problem, the parent will gain more trust in the child's capacity to handle problems.

Parents will become more accepting

Watching children deal constructively with their feelings, parents will become more accepting, too.

Parents will enjoy being a new kind of helper

Parents will find they won't have to shoulder the burden of finding solutions for their child's problems.

Parents will see children as separate persons

The child will become a separate person--with his/her own feelings, own problems, own solutions--no longer "joined at the hip" with the parent.

The parent won't have to be a "super-parent"

Parents will feel relieved not having to solve all their children's problems, be in charge, always be right, be totally responsible and even assume all the blame for their failures.*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's F.E.T. Adult Resource Book

What Appreciative I-Message Will You Send to Your Mom?

In honor of Mother's Day, let's find ways to show our Mother's that we appreciate them--by sending Appreciative I-Messages!

Appreciative I-Messages

These are I-Messages that describe your positive feelings about another person. Appreciative I-Messages express appreciation, enjoyment, affection and love towards parents, brothers, sisters, friends, grandparents, etc. They can contribute greatly to warmer, closer and more enjoyable relationships.

• "I appreciate your taking my turn making dinner. It gave me time to finish my homework."
• "I really like the story you wrote."
• "Mom (Dad, Grandma, etc.), I love you."*

What Appreciative I-Message will you share with your Mother and/or loved ones? :)

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's F.E.T. Young Adult Resource book

What Are the Teen Years Like?

The Teen Years

I am now convinced that most theories about the "stress and strain of adolescence" have focused incorrectly on such factors as adolescents' physical changes, their emerging sexuality, their new social demands, their struggle between being a child and an adult, and so on. This period is difficult for children and parents largely because adolescents become so independent of their parents that they can no longer be easily controlled by rewards and punishments. And since most parents rely so heavily on rewards and punishment, adolescents react with much independent, resistive, rebellious, hostile behavior.

Parents assume that adolescent rebellion and hostility are inevitably a function of this stage of development. I think this is no valid--it is more that adolescents become more able to resist and rebel. They are no longer controlled by their parents' rewards because they don't need them so much; and they are immune to threats of punishment because there is little parents can do to give them pain or strong discomfort. The typical adolescent behaves as she does because she has acquired enough strength and resources to satisfy her own needs and enough of her own power so that she need not fear the power of her parents.

An adolescent, therefore, does not rebel against her parents. She rebels against their power. If parents would rely less on power and more on nonpower methods to influence their children from infancy on, there would be little for children to rebel against when they become adolescents. The use of power to change the behavior of children, then, has this severe limitation: parents inevitably run out of power, and sooner than they think.*

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

Why is Clear Self-Disclosure Difficult?

We sometimes hide our true selves--our thoughts, feelings and opinions.

We're afraid of disapproval, disagreement, criticism or rejection by others. The need to be liked and accepted is very strong.

So we keep our real thoughts and feelings to ourselves.

We lose touch with what our true feelings are.

We later become angry and resentful because we didn't speak out.

Other's don't know what we really think, feel and need so they can't help us get our needs met.*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's F.E.T. Young Adult Resource book

Method III (Democratic): Nobody Loses, Both Win

Remember this part of the Credo:

At those times when one of us cannot change to meet the other's needs, let us acknowledge that we have a conflict and commit ourselves to resolve each such conflict without either of us resorting to the use of power to win at the expense of the other's losing. I respect your needs, but I also must respect my own. So let us always strive to search for a solution that will be acceptable to both of us. Your needs will be met, and so will mine--neither will lose, both will win.

The Gordon Model teaches a non-power alternative to the two win-lose methods. It's called Method III--a method in which each conflict is seen as a problem to be solved. The people who have a conflict with each other--parent and child, spouses, coworkers--talk together in search of a solution that is acceptable to both so that no one loses; both win.*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's F.E.T. Adult Resource book

The Disguised You-Message

Mr. G., the father of two adolescent boys, came to class and reported that his first attempt to put I-Messages to work has ended dismally.

"My son, Paul, contrary to what you told us, started sending his own You-Messages right back to me, like h always does."

"Did you send I-Messages yourself? asked the instructor.

"Of course--or I think I did; I tried to anyway," Mr. G. replied.

The instructor suggested acting out the situation in class--he would play the part of Paul and Mr. G. would be himself. After explaining the situation to the class, Mr. G. began to recapture the situation:

MR. G: I feel strongly that you have been neglectful of your chores.

PAUL: How's that?

MR. G: Well, take your job of mowing the lawn. I feel upset every time you goof off. Like last Saturday. I was angry at you because you sneaked off without mowing the backyard. I felt that was irresponsible and I was upset.

At this point, the instructor stopped the role-playing and said to Mr. G., "I did hear a lot of 'I feel's' from you, but let's ask the class if they heard anything else."

One of the fathers in the class immediately chimed in with, "In a few seconds, you told Paul he was neglectful, he was a goof-off, he was sneaky, and he was irresponsible."

"Wow. Did I? I guess maybe I did," Mr. G. said sheepishly. "those sound just like You-Messages."

Mr. G. was correct. He had made the mistake many parents initially make--sending You-Messages under the disguise of putting "I feel" in front of name-calling messages.

It sometimes takes this kind of re-enactment of a real situation for parents to see clearly that "I feel you are a slob" is just as much a You-Message as "You are a slob." Parents are instructed to drop the "I feel" and state what they did feel specifically--such as "I was disappointed," "I wanted the lawn to look nice Sunday," Or "I was upset because I thought we had agreed the lawn would be mowed Saturday."*

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

What is the Principle of Participation?

Families Need Rules

All groups, of whatever size of nature, need laws and rules. Without them, groups may very well fall into confusion and conflict. The functions that rules can serve are essential. They can prevent misunderstandings and conflicts between people; define rights and privileges; establish what is considered appropriate, fair and equitable in human relationships; and provide guidelines to help people know what limits they must set on their own behavior.

The issue is not whether groups need rules. They do need them. The real issue is how to motivate all group members to comply with them.

At some time in our lives we all have felt unmotivated to comply with some rule or making a rule. Most people feel imposed upon and resentful of the new rule. But when people actively participate in setting a rule or making a decision that will affect them, they are more highly motivated to comply with it. We call this the Principle of Participation.

When family members are given the opportunity to participate in setting rules, several good things happen. They are: (1) a higher motivation on the part of all family members to carry out or comply with the rules; (2) better decisions; (3) closer, warmer relationships between family members; (4) higher self-esteem, self-confidence, and sense of control over fate; (5) more personal responsibility and self-discipline, and (6) less need for parents to enforce the rules.*

*Excerpt from Dr. Thomas Gordon's F.E.T. Young Adult Resource book

Identifying Who Owns the Problem

Here are the answers to yesterday's quiz! The answers are in blue.

1. Your child tells you she is worried about failing an important test at school. - Child Owns Problem
2. Your daughter expresses her disapproval of her brother's friends. - Child Owns Problem
3. Your children often leave a mess in the kitchen and leave you the responsibility for cleaning. - Parent Owns Problem
4. Your child is learning to play the guitar and asks you to listen to the chords he's learned. - No Problem
5. Your child fails to come home on time to leave for a dental appointment which you must pay for anyway. - Parent Owns Problem
6. Your baby begins to cry while getting a tetanus shot. - Child Owns Problem
7. Your daughter often gets up too late to catch the school bus and then asks you to drive her to school. - Parent Owns Problem
8. Your son needs the car to pick up a friend at the airport; you need it to go to a meeting. - Both Own Problem

Please note: These are not the only correct answers; special circumstances in your family may make different answers correct for you.

Can You Identify Who Owns the Problem?

Here's an exercise/quiz to help identify who owns the problem and an opportunity to receive a 15% discount on your purchase from anything in our GTI store!

(http://www.gordontraining.com/store.html)

The purpose of this exercise is to learn to identify who has unmet needs and therefore "owns the problem."

Directions: Read the following situations. Have The Behavior Window handy to enter the number of the situation in the appropriate window. If you feel the behavior demonstrates that the child has a problem, place the number of the situation in the "Child Owns Problem" area of the window. If you feel the behavior cause the parent to have a problem, place the number in the "Parent Owns Problem" area of the window. If neither child nor parent seems to have a problem, place the number in the "No Problem" area of the window. If you feel that there is a conflict and both seem to have a problem, place the number in the "Both Own Problem" area.

Here are the situations:

1. Your child tells you she is worried about failing an important test at school.
2. Your daughter expresses her disapproval of her brother's friends.
3. Your children often leave a mess in the kitchen and leave you the responsibility for cleaning.
4. Your child is learning to play the guitar and asks you to listen to the chords he's learned.
5. Your child fails to come home on time to leave for a dental appointment which you must pay for anyway.
6. Your baby begins to cry while getting a tetanus shot.
7. Your daughter often gets up too late to catch the school bus and then asks you to drive her to school.
8. Your son needs the car to pick up a friend at the airport; you need it to go to a meeting.

E-mail us at family@gordontraining.com with answers that correctly identifies who "owns the problem" in the situations above. I will choose the first (5) winners. The contest will end tonight, Tuesday, April 20th at 7:30pm PST. I will post the answers to the questions tomorrow, Wednesday, April 21st.

Have fun identifying who owns the problem! Good luck to you! :)

Do I Keep Active Listening?

Beyond Active Listening to Method III

When the messages are not clear, as in the case of prolonged anger or silence, a lot of Active Listening is necessary. Sometimes even vigorous Active Listening isn't enough and the parent needs to introduce Method III and offer to guide the children through it. A good deal of confronting may be necessary to resist the children's tendency to either give up (Method II) or solve the problem with a solution imposed by the "rescuing" parent.

Children sometimes arrive at satisfactory solutions without anyone's help, but more often than not this does not happen because the real issues are not uncovered. The antagonists rarely listen to and understand each other (even though a lot of words get exchanged).

There is no process for the defusing of strong feelings, and problem-solving doesn't get organized and underway. Parents who facilitate their children to solve their own problems realize a triple benefit: resolution of the immediate problem between the children, more effective problem-solving skills in the future, and mutual respect within all family relationships.*

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

Do You Intervene in your Child's Activities?

Nonintervention to Show Acceptance

Parents can show acceptance of a child by not intervening in his activities. Take a child who is attempting to build sand castles at the beach. The parent who keeps away from the child and occupies himself with an activity of his own, permitting the child to make "mistakes" or create his own unique design for a castle (which will probably not be like the parent's design or, for that matter, may not even look like a castle)--that parent is sending a nonverbal message of acceptance.

The child will feel, "What I am doing is okay," "My castle building behavior is acceptable," "Mother accepts me doing what I am doing as of now."

Keeping hands off when a child is engaged in some activity is a strong nonverbal way of communicating acceptance. Many parents fail to realize how frequently they communicate nonacceptance to their children simply by interfering, intruding, moving in, checking up, joining in. Too often adults do no let children just be. They invade the privacy of their rooms, refusing to permit them a separateness. Often this is the result of parental fears and anxieties, their own feelings of insecurity.

Parents what children to learn ("Here's what a castle should really look like"). They are uncomfortable when children make a mistake ("Build the castle farther from the water so a wave won't topple the castle wall"). They want to be proud of their children's accomplishments ("Look at the perfect castle Cody made"). They impose on kids rigid adult concepts of right and wrong ("Shouldn't your castle have a moat?"). They have secret ambitions for their children ("You're never going to learn anything, building that thing all afternoon"). They are overly concerned about what others think of their children ("That's not as good a castle as you're capable of making"). They want to feel that their child needs them ("Let Daddy help"), and so on.

Thus, doing nothing in a situation when the child is engaged in an activity can communicate clearly that the parents accept him. It is my experience that parents do not permit this kind of "separateness" frequently enough. Understandably, a "hands-off" attitude comes hard.

At the first party that one of our daughters gave during her first year in high school, I remember feeling very rejected after being told by her that my highly imaginative and constructive suggestions for the entertainment of her guests were quite unwelcome. Only after recovering from my mild depression after being asked to stay out could I comprehend how I was communicating nonverbal messages on nonacceptance--"You can't give a good party by yourself," "You need my help," "I don't trust your judgment" "You are not being a perfect hostess," "You might make a mistake," "I don't want this party to be a failure," and so on.*

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

How Do Children React to Control?

How Children Really React to Control

by Thomas Gordon, Ph.D.

When one person tries to control another, you can always expect some kind of reaction from the controllee. The use of power involves two people in a special kind of relationship - one wielding power, and the other reacting to it.

This seemingly obvious fact is not usually dealt with in the writings of the dare-to-discipline advocates. Invariably, they leave the child out of the formula, omitting any reference to how the youngster reacts to the control of his or her parents or teachers.

They insist, "Parents must set limits," but seldom say anything about how children respond to having their needs denied in this way. "Parents should not be afraid to exercise their authority," they counsel, but rarely mention how youngsters react to authority-based coercion. By omitting the child from the interaction, the discipline advocates leave the impression that the child submits willingly and consistently to adults' power and does precisely what is demanded.

These are actual quotes from the many power-to-the-parent books I've collected along the way:

• "Be firm but fair."
• "Insist that your children obey."
• "Don't be afraid to express disapproval by spanking."
• "There are times when you have to say 'no'."
• "Discipline with love."
• "Demonstrate your parental right to lead."
• "The toddler should be taught to obey and yield to parental leadership."

What these books have in common is advocacy of the use of power-based discipline with no mention of how children react to it. In other words, the dare-to-discipline advocates never present power-based discipline in full, as a cause-and-effect phenomenon, an action-and-reaction event.

This omission is important, for it implies that all children passively submit to adult demands, perfectly content and secure in an obedient role, first in relationships with their parents and teachers and, eventually, with all adult power-wielders they might encounter.

However, I have found not a shred of evidence to support this view. In fact, as most of us remember only too well from our childhood, we did almost anything we could to defend against power-based control. We tried to avoid it, postpone it, weaken it, avert it, escape from it. We lied, we put the blame on someone else, we tattled, hid, pleaded, begged for mercy, or promised we would never do it again.

We also experienced punitive discipline as embarrassing, demeaning, humiliating, frightening, and painful. To be coerced into doing something against our will was a personal insult and an affront to our dignity, an act that devalued the importance of our needs.

Punitive discipline is by definition need-depriving as opposed to need-satisfying. Recall that punishment will be effective only if it is felt by the child as aversive, painful, unpleasant. When controllers employ punishment, they always intend for it to cause pain or deprivation. It seems so obvious, then, that children don't ever want punitive discipline, contrary to what its advocates would have us believe. No child "asks for it," "feels a need for it," or is "grateful for it." And it is probably true, too, that no child ever forgets or forgives a punitive parent or teacher. This is why I find it incredible that the authors of power-to-the-parent books try to justify power-based discipline with such statements as:

• "Kids not only need punishment, they want it."
• "Children basically want what is coming to them, good or bad, because justice is security."
• "Punishment will prove to kids that their parents love them."
• "The youngster who knows he deserves a spanking appears almost relieved when it finally comes."
• "Rather than be insulted by the discipline, [the child] understands its purpose and appreciates the control it gives him over his own impulses."
• "Corporal punishment in the hands of a loving parent is entirely different in purpose and practice [from child abuse]....One is an act of love; the other is an act of hostility."
• "Some strong-willed children absolutely demand to be spanked, and their wishes should be granted."
• "Punishment will make children feel more secure in their relationship."
• "Discipline makes for happy families; healthy relationships."*

*Writings from Dr. Thomas Gordon