"We seldom get into trouble when we speak softly. It is only when we raise our voices that the sparks fly and tiny molehills become great mountains of contention."
There is a poster in
my children’s school that quotes Margaret Mead, “Children
must be taught how to think, not what to think.”
Discipline should be
the same. We teach them the corresponding consequences of their
available choices, and then let them decide what to choose. We don’t
force them to choose what’s right, but we enforce the
consequences of their choices.
Adults know that if
we do certain things or make certain choices, we may have to face
certain consequences: if we smoke, we can expect respiratory health
problems; if we drive recklessly we can expect to get a ticket (if we
are lucky) or get in an accident (if we are unlucky); if we want to
earn money, we have to go to work.
If the main point of
childhood is to be prepared for adulthood, then children need to
learn that one-to-one relationship between their choices and the
consequences that go with them.
Enter The Time-Out.
As corporeal
punishment began to be viewed as somewhat barbaric, slews of parents
turned to The Time-Out as the catch-all discipline technique. It
teaches that when we make certain choices (say, hit our sister or
scream at mommy), we lose freedom.
To be sure, this
smacks of the real world. If an adult hits another adult, he may very
well end up in jail.
However, loosing
freedom is not the endgame of every poor choice. If an adult is
impolite or inconsiderate to those around her, do we throw her in
jail? Of course not.
What will likely
happen to her? She won’t have many friends; she may find it
difficult to find a job if she has a history of antagonizing past
co-workers or bosses. These are the natural consequences to her
behavior. If she is wise, she will eventually see this relationship
between her choices and these consequences.
If one child is
trying to get her way all the time in a playdate and refusing to take
turns or share, what is the natural consequence to this poor
behavior? Other children will not want to play with her.
So, do we put her in
time-out to show her this? Or do we hope she will grow out of it? Do
we think she will learn it naturally in the course of life?
Would you teach her
to drive safely by making her sit by herself in a parked car? Or,
letting her do whatever she wanted behind the wheel until she gets in
an accident, and THEN teach her safe driving techniques?
The better
discipline choice is to sit down with her and label for her what she
is doing, “It looks to me like you were making all the choices
in the game and not letting Sally have a turn. Is that true?”
Then, identify the natural consequence of her choices for her, “Sally
is not going to want to play this game with you if she is not having
fun. I am sure she would like a turn.” And then, invite her to
make a better choice, “Let’s go ask Sally if she wants a
turn now.”
The Natural
Consequences method, like most good parenting, takes more work.
Casting a Time-Out blanket over all poor behavior is sure easier.
Hoping the child will figure things out for herself by adding a
“spend this time thinking about what you just did, missy!”
when you park them on the time-out stool is not likely to teach her
much.
Sometimes, using
Natural Consequences means my husband and I turn to each other and
whisper, “What do YOU think the natural consequence of this
is?” because there are situations that we have never really
thought through to a natural endgame.
And sometimes we
tell our child, “OK you know you are in trouble, but we need to
think a minute about what your punishment should be.” Making
the punishment fit the crime takes a lot more thought than using one
discipline technique.
When one of our
children has done something to the other to cause them difficulty or
extra work, the sentence for the offending child may be to help the
victim do her chores; when a child fails to complete a job in the
prescribed (generous) time period, she doesn’t get to go to the
movies with the others. When a toy is being fought over, that toy
gets put on the highest shelf for a while until the two children can
work out how they will share it.
The natural
consequence of sneaking candy from the candy jar is the jar goes away
until you show you can be trusted again. The natural consequence for
a tantrum is that you, for sure, will NOT be getting whatever it is
you are tantruming about. (Yes, I just made up that verb.)
At the end of the
day, we prepare our children best for adulthood by teaching them what
consequences to expect from their choices in life, so they can make
informed choices. They will still sometimes choose unwisely. But they
will not choose ignorantly, if we have done our job.
Emily
Jorgensen received her bachelor's degree in piano performance from
Brigham Young University. She earned her master's degree in
elementary music education, also at BYU. She holds a Kodaly
certificate in choral education, as well as permanent certification
in piano from Music Teacher’s National Association.
She
has taught piano, solfege, and children’s music classes for 17
years in her own studio. She has also taught group piano classes at
BYU.
She
is an active adjudicator throughout the Wasatch Front and has served
in local, regional, and state positions Utah Music Teachers'
Association, as well as the Inspirations arts contest chair at
Freedom Academy.
She
gets a lot of her inspiration for her column by parenting her own
rambunctious four children, aged from “in diapers” to
“into Harry Potter.” She is still married to her high
school sweetheart and serves in her ward’s Primary.