"If the baby gets into the cat-dish one more time..." This is the item for
venting your spleen about stuff kids do- solutions welcome.  No final ones,
please.

33 responses total.

Does that mean nothing fatal allowed?

I think that's the general idea.

Duh.

Well, ask a stupid question ...

Yea, Yea, I know... I know...
You don't need to rub it in like a stupid asshole.

on the other hand, the occasional fantasy of tossing the baby out the window
while snarling; "I'll give you something to cry about" may be a lovely safety
valve >:}

I really shouldn't respond to this item since it is directed towards 
parents.  But... Nah... What I was about to say belongs in the Gen X
conference, in item 12.

        Is this item for problems, or solutions? Or both?  I.e., do
you want to hear about the history with the cat-dish, or about the
interesting future being projected for the child as a consequence?
We have this child who *will* not stop talking (unless a "stranger"
is looking at him, who might be tempted to say "Does he ever talk?")
but I have no creative solutions, when I really can't stand it any
more I shut myself into another room and put my fingers in my ears
for a while.

(Grace is talking about an almost-4-year-old, not a teenager or something,
in the foregoing.)

This response has been erased.

They don't keep very well.  After an hour or so they spoil and become
friends, and on comes the tap.  (Sometimes 5 minutes or so.)

rotfl!
The best response to venting frustration I can think of is "I'll help". Barring
that, solutions or questions are always welcome.  
Timothy never shuts up either.  Sometimes I just tell him I've had it and need
a break from his questions, then crank up the radio a bit.  It seems to work
long enough to calm me down.  If I'm feeling more energetic I'll try to steer
the conversation in a direction that is more interesting/creative so at least
I'm not being dragged around by a 4 year old.  
Strangers don't work for us- to Timothy there are no strangers: just fans he
hasn't captivated yet. :)

Kami, that was 100% serious, I'm afraid.

I know.  It's still funny.

I just (a few hours ago) got back from Meijers.  I was almost tempted to LET
the little rat fall on his head after the umpteen ba-zillionth time I pulled
him back to a sitting position inthe front of the cart, scolded him (harshly)
and he LAUGHED!  That kid may not live to grow up... Tim did pretty well, 
though.  I think he knows when it would be in his better interests NOT to
push my buttons...  Well, they look so sweet when they're sleeping, I think
I'll let them live yet again. :)

I just read this item and wondered about the child in #8 that talks
non-stop.  Have you tried setting aside 15 minutes a day (or 10
minutes twice a day) when you will listen with 100% of your attention
on your child?  If you explain this first then do it consistantly,
you may find that your child gets bored talking to you when you're
not listening.  Of course this would work after he knows what you're
like when you are listening, and when he knows that there will be
a time soon when you will listen.
 
Disclaimer:  I don't have kids.  Beats me whether or not it will work.

Interesting idea, Carl.
(A friend once told me: you spend two years teaching them to walk and talk,
and the rest of your life trying to teach them to sit down and shut up.
I now know what he meant.)

Carl, the immediate response to the technique mentioned in #16 is likely to
be the most silence heard in 3 years.  the subsequent response is likely to
be a passionate demand for 24 hours of similar attention... They know a good
thing when they have it.  And they don't do moderation.  Soon means NOW.
But it is a good idea anyway...

        It might work with a 6 or 7-year-old.  With my three-year-olds,
no.  Interesting difference in individuals:  Jonathan went through a 
stage about like this.  With him, I could say "BE QUIET for 3 minutes
[or whenever] until the timer goes off, or [undesired consequence]."
He got the point quickly, and after a brief period of silence I had
more patience for dealing with chatter.  Too often, Paul just doesn't 
seem to be able to do that -- at best, if I get his attention by
covering his mouth and speaking in moderate tones, close to his ear,
he figures out that Mommy needs a break, & he'll go & chatter in the next 
room for the specified amount of time (and of course want to set the timer 
himself, later).  He also seems to want *me* to talk as much as he wants to
talk himself, which is maddening when I'm trying to eat.  (This too
will pass)

Is this linked to enigma?

vidar, do you think it should be linked to enigma? why or why not?

Not really.  But in repose to why: see Re#19/

        Re #20: Each child is, like Russia, "a riddle wrapped in a 
mystery inside an enigma."  Is that the connection, O enigmatic Vidar?
        In any case, "know your child" is the only hope for a real 
solution.  (And those who saw him at a parenting class for 2 hours on 
Monday morning would not recognize him from my description!)

Great.  I think I'll become a communist now.  No, it's not from this.
I'm reading _the Grapes of Wrath_ in American Literature.
Damn, ttyh2 is still broken!

tell us about the parenting class- who ran it? what was the basic method or
message? was it well done? what age kids did the participants have?

I don't know that much about it myself, yet (haven't gotten more than the
briefest mention), but it's being held at the elementary school & is more
than one session.  I'm sure Grace will be glad to fill in more.

The school itself is sponsoring the course, "a well known parent
education program entitled Active Parenting Today." (quoting from 
the letter of invitation that came home with every child)  It lasts
six weeks, so far it seems to be non-spectacular good stuff.  Since
this series is in the mornings, not surprisiingly all the students 
are female; it's aimed at parents of 2-12 year olds, ages of children
mentioned ranged from 3 to 24.  There are some videos to watch, &
then class discussion.  (After laments about the kids who WILL NOT
[whatever] we drifted into comments by some people who *really* had
a different kind of problem, in each case relating to divorce and
related dysfunction)  This first week we were mostly talking about
"parenting styles", permissive  vs. autocratic vs. more-suitable-
for-a-democracy, or, jellyfish vs crab vs vertebrate.

sounds interested.  Please keep us posted.  Life's getting interesting with
Timothy.

They provided a textbook, BTW, which we'll be able to purchase at the end
of the course, instructing Grace not to write in it if she wasn't going to
buy it.  I've only looked at it very briefly so far, but given the rather
high price-to-number-of-pages ratio I urged her to make sure it's kept clean.
(At a glance, it seemed sensible but not all that informative.)  The text
is called _Active Parenting Today_, too, I think.

The best parenting class I've ever known of is called STEP (Systematic
Training for Effective Parenting).  Very pragmatic, non-technical in
orientation . . and the m,anual only cost $5.00 a few years ago.  Anyone
ever participate in one?

is it like an updated version of Parent Effectiveness Training?  My mom took
that in the late 60s or early 70s, and I hated it (as a recipient).

I took a PET course a few years ago.  I hated it, it struck me as very
manipulative.

I was grown up before it hit, so my own knowledge of PET comes from
reading about it.  There are certainly some good things in it, but I
wouldn't recommend it in general.  The idea (as I recall) is that all
use of parental authority is just plain wrong and bad, so you are to
treat your kids (even quite young ones) as completely equal partners
and negotiate only solutions acceptable to them as well as to you.

Of course, a five year old (say) is *not* his or her parents' equal
partner, in general needing protection & direction both.  To make a
tolerable life for *everyone*, the parent's going to have to provide
those, to some degree; in the case of very young children, to a great
degree.  If appeal to authority is *completely* ruled out, manipulation
is what's left.  So I suspect Misti's right about that.

PET operated out of the idea that kids are basically completely good at
heart, and all problems in dealing with them come from their resentment
of their parents' unreasonable behavior.  (If that sounds like a
parody, it's not - a *slight* oversimplification, but seriously that's
what it boils down to, I think.  For example, the line is that lying
doesn't come naturally to kids, but only because their parents use
rewards & punishments.)

This is, of course, at least in part an overreaction to abuse of parental
authority & to fairly rigid models of childrearing.  It also encouraged
skills such as active listening, which is all to the good.

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss