Conference moira::parenting_v3

    p.s.  I just looked around and realized that Aaron had put down his
    book and wandered off somewhere.  This reminded me of having taken him
    to work with me for a few hours one Sunday afternoon when he was 3 3/4. 
    This was ACO, a sprawling, mostly dark place with unlocked computer
    labs, hundreds of open offices, and the like; completely deserted,
    except for us.  I told him not to go outside, not to mess with any
    stuff, and to shout if he got lost.  He had a wonderful time exploring,
    and checked in with me every half hour or so.  I would do the same
    today with Eric, if need be.

    
    I never had problems either. I started bring Jo in to work with me
    on special occasions when she was 18 months, during working hours. 
    She never bothers anybody and never attempts to tear any computer apart
    in my office . We had a couple of cabinets latched at home for
    about 6 months, we had all outlets capped and that's about the extent
    of childproofing we had. We didn't have any gates. Our entertainment
    center don't have doors. We had a wood stove in the other house and
    the only creature that got burnt by the stove was one of my cats!
    
    But we were strict with her. We made sure she understood what the
    limits were way from the beginning. I am not a very tolerant person,
    I don't put up with cr*b from kids. So, I figure it will be easier
    on everyone that the kid knows what the rules are before anything
    happens, rather than teaching the lesson when the milk is spilled.
    We never had to spank her once. 
    
    I don't know if the second one will be as easy. But as I said before
    I don't put up with unruly kids. 
    
    Bruce, maybe you are right about the responsiblity bit. But, it
    is really hard to pin point the evidence.
    
    Eva.

    We're also talking about considerable differences in developmental
    stages, age, and emotional maturity in different children.  
    
    If Kat had been 18 months instead of less than 9 months when she
    crawled out of her crib, I doubt that I would have done anything
    with doors or gates.  But at 9 months she wasn't old enough to
    understand either the limits of what was reasonable or the dangers
    of what she was doing.  
    
    She has, as I think I've mentioned in other notes, always been as
    responsible, reasonable, and independent as her age and
    development allowed -- she was getting herself up and getting her
    own breakfast by age 3, for instance.  But there are some things
    they want to do that are beyond their abilities.  
    
    Steven is much more prone to be easily scared and needed closer
    supervision, not because he was more likely to get into trouble
    but because he was more likely to need reassurance when something
    went wrong.  He also seems to be less able to anticipate when
    something might be dangerous -- what things are sharp, what things
    might fall. 
    
    And there's also an element of luck.  Obviously not every child
    drinks poison from under sink counters.  But if it's there, a
    certain percentage of them, even otherwise well-behaved kids, are
    going to get into it and injure themselves. 
    
    --bonnie

    re .0  You don't mention the ages of your children.  I would suspect
    you didn't give them all the responsibility they have now from the
    beginning.  But eased them into it as you saw fit.
    
    A lot depends on circumstances.  I have twins - double trouble. 
    Whereas one child in a given situation may not get into trouble, two
    may egg each other on.  I have always kept my kids in cribs until two
    or 2 1/2, for the very reason of not wanting them to wander around the
    house.  Not one of them has ever climbed out of their crib.  I always
    wondered how kids can climb out of their cribs, when you put the
    matress down to its lowest hook, they can't get a leg up and over.
    
    Also, we have a lot of staircases in our house.  There is certainly an
    age at which children are capable of handling stairs.  But if you don't
    have them, you don't have to worry about them.  
    
    A couple of years ago while at home, I decided to take a shower and
    when I came out it was strangely quiet.  Upon going downstairs, I found
    my 3 year old twins and my two year old outside playing on the
    swingset.  They had figured out how to open up two very locked doors,
    and go outside.  Well, at that age I did not want them outside
    unsupervised.  We put another (higher) lock on the door.
    
    I guess what I'm saying is it depends on your situation, how many kids,
    their ages etc.  And I consider my kids quite responsible for their
    ages.
    

re: .4
    
    >Not one of them has ever climbed out of their crib.  I always
    >   wondered how kids can climb out of their cribs, when you put the
    >   matress down to its lowest hook, they can't get a leg up and over.
    
    Kat apparently shinned up one of the bars like you would a rope --
    this was in the days before 2 5/8" spacing so she had a little
    more room to maneuver.  Then she sort of rolled over the top and
    shinned down the other side. 
    
    She made a good gymnast later on . . .
    
    --bonnie

    The problem is that it only takes once.  We live on a main road and as
    many times as I told my son (then about 4) not to go near the road,
    he did it once when he and a little buddy decided to go to his house.
    
    They knew they were doing the wrong thing but the temptation was just
    too much.  Fortunately they made it across the road ok and in another
    minute we realized what they had done and went after them.
    
    It is up to us grown-ups to understand possible consequences and to
    be prepared at all times.  I once read something that said a parents
    main responsibility to their child is to make sure they live through
    childhood!!
    

    You said it... a main part of a parents responsibility is to make sure
    they live through childhood.

    ...and to teach them how to take care of themselves so they live
    through young adulthood . . . 
    
    --bonnie

    I think that how much "responsibility" a kid can handle is highly
    individualistic, and depends on the kid's personality and developmental
    stage. 
    
    Both my kids would put anything in their mouths until about 14 months -- 
    obviously I couldn't leave things lying around that they could choke on!  
    By about 18 months, they'd gotten through this developmental stage, and 
    I'm not quite so cautious.
    
    As for personality, my daughter was verbal at an early age.  I could
    explain and reason with her.  I knew what to expect from her.  My son,
    at almost 2, is largely non-verbal.  He communicates by action.  If
    he's thirsty, he goes to the refrig, opens it, takes out the juice
    bottle.  Now, if I'm willing to take the risk that he'll drop it on his
    foot, or break it, and I'm willing to clean up alot of spills, that's
    OK.  Otherwise, I'm working on a way to prevent him from opening the
    refrig!
    
    He also seems to be much more curious than my daughter, and much less
    susceptable to "NOs".  The stereo and VCR buttons are too much of a
    temptation for him.  He knows he's not supposed to do it, but he can't
    resist!  So again, I'm looking for a glass-fronted and relatively
    childproofed stereo cabinet (any suggestions??).
    
    If my kids were animals, I think my daughter would be a dog -- she
    learns rules and will obey them in order to get or maintain love and
    attention.  My son would be a cat -- as a cat owner, I maintain you can
    teach a cat what they're not supposed to do, but you can't teach them
    not to do it (at least when you're not watching).
    
    Liz

    re: .9
    
    >My son, at almost 2, is largely non-verbal.  He communicates by
    >action.  If he's thirsty, he goes to the refrig, opens it, takes
    >out the juice bottle.  Now, if I'm willing to take the risk that
    >he'll drop it on his foot, or break it, and I'm willing to clean
    >up alot of spills, that's OK.  Otherwise, I'm working on a way to
    >prevent him from opening the refrig!
    
    Liz, would a compromise be possible here -- getting juice in
    smaller cardboard containers, or in individual servings, or
    pouring it into a smaller plastic pitcher that he can handle?
    
    Steven loves to pour his own milk but couldn't handle the full
    plastic gallon jugs we used to get.  So we switched to the half
    gallon cardboard cartons, which he can manage even when they're
    full, and he will now fix his entire breakfast by himself.  (He's
    6, started doing it when he was 5.)
    
    --bonnie

    
    
    re. 9
    
    As .10 suggested, instead of discouraging him to be independent,
    make it safer for him. You could fill a sippy cup with drink and
    leave in the fridge for him. If there is a spill, clean up will be
    minimal. You could even show him where to get a wipe/towel for clean up.
    I keep a towel accessible for my daughter in case she spills something.
    How about getting your son toys with buttons and knobs? We keep our
    stereo equipments and toys in different rooms, so my daughter was not
    constantly "exposed to the temptation" (out of sight, out of mind!).
    You might try moving the equipment higher up. You can stack them on
    a bookshelf with open back.
    
    Eva. 

    
    re -2
    
    My daughter Katie is 10 months, crawling around and "getting into" 
    everything.  I also do not tolerate unruly children and I don't want
    her to become that way.
    
    However I am having a hard time making her understand the word "NO".
    I have tried saying "no" firmly, sometimes slapping her hand gently
    when she has been playing around with the knobs on our stereo, or
    pulling on the floor lamps.  She doesn't seem to understand.  Some
    times she will even laugh, thinking its funny or some kind of game.
    
    I don't think this is a matter of responsibility and I don't think
    knowing what and what not to touch is something that is inborn.
    IMHO, "doing the right thing" is not innate, it has to be taught.
    I don't see how an infant can know what is poisonous or that they
    can get hurt by pulling on a floor lamp.  They don't do these things
    out of malice (at least at this age) or to cause trouble, they are
    just acting out of their innate curiousity.
    
    Any opinions/suggestions?
    
    Sue

    My mother taught me that the way to teach an infant what "No"
    means is to accompany it by a firm and immediate removal from the
    site of the infraction -- say "no" and pick her up and move her
    away from the stereo, for instance.  
    
    --bonnie

    I read somewhere that the goal is to get kids to do the "right" thing
    without having to say NO all the time (think of how often we say that
    word in one day!).  I used to say "not to touch" for objects that
    weren't designed for little fingers.
    
    At 10 months, they're curious and persistent. Diversion is really the
    most useful tool at this point -- turn her around and aim her in a more
    appropriate direction.
    
    I also think that there are certain things you can have around the
    living area that you can teach them not to touch; other things (in our
    case the VCR) should be moved to a higher level so that they're not
    even tempted. It saves wear and tear, and saves on your frustration
    level as well.
    

We have two no statements. If it's a not-to-touch, we say, "Not
for Sam". If it's a danger item, we say "NO!" Sammy reacts to
each very distinctly since we have a busy street, down hill from
our house.

cal

    
    I think the tone of voice with which "NO" is said should be
    different - firm. I would look into the kid's eyes and make sure the
    kid knows I mean business. I would also remove the kid or the
    object of concern. 
    
    In case of stereo epuipment, I would move them
    somewhere else for just a few months. They don't have to be down 
    low to work right. We kept ours on a bookshelf for a while and
    now they are back down low again - my daughter doesn't even look
    at them, she is too old to be interested in knobs and buttons!
    
    Our philosophy is - things we don't care that much, we'll leave
    them out, things thatare dangerous, dear to our hearts or cost big bucks to
    replace, we'll store them out of reach, things are that dangerous
    but cannot be moved, we'll make sure the kid understand. So, there
    are a limited number of no-no's. In our house, the wood stove,
    the plants, the cats and the projection TV screen were no-no's and 
    everything else that my kid could find was fair game! It made 
    our lives much simpler and more pleasant!  Afterall, we can't expect
    our kid to hear no-no's all the time.
    
    
    Eva.
                                           

    You also have to consider how much damage the kid is going to do
    or have done to him.  Our stereo isn't terribly expensive, so  we
    let David play with the buttons and knobs sometimes.  He likes to
    twist them and watch the needles wiggle back and forth, and he has
    figured out which knob controls the volume.  He blasted everybody
    a couple of times, and now he only turns it up real loud, instead
    of REAL LOUD.  I figure, yes, he'll mess up all the setting and I
    have to reset it, but he's not going to actually damage the stuff
    by poking buttons, and he's not going to hurt himself either. 
    
    Now that he's figured out how it works, he isn't as interested in
    it.  He's gone to pulling unread magazines off the end table
    instead.
    
    --bonnie

 I wasn't going to reply to this note, but since other noters are entering
their personal philosophies, I'll take it as a green light.  There are at
least two words in the English language that I feel are better left unspoken 
(aside from the obvious - vulgar language, taking the Lord's name in vain, etc)
they are NO and SHUTUP. (caps used as a highlighter not a raised voice)

 These two words are IMO not necessary and are too often used when people 
have gotten to "the end of their rope".  I think that there are many more 
productive and non-limiting ways to achieve a desired result. My son is 9
months old today and I am constantly removing him from dangerous situations.
He gravitates to fireplaces, VCR's and electrical cords!  When I see him
about to slam his fingers in a draw or butt up against a radiator, I move him
away from the danger zone, interest him in something else and explain what
I am doing - while I'm doing it. ie "Chris you're going to hurt yourself, 
play over here.."  No, I can't be there every time (I don't follow him 
around the house) but when I can intervene, I do.  He understands my explanation
as much as he would understand the word "No", so why not use a little
extra breath and keep the potential line of communication open.
 
 I am not a saint and do not have an extraordinary wealth of patience, but
until my child reaches a level of maturity where he knows right from wrong,
I prefer to make his existence as limitless as possible. Yes, he is our
first child and you veteran parents may be correct in assuming my tune will
change after a few more :-)!
                    Laura

    Think about what you will say the first time your child runs into the
    road, or the first time he picks up a knife or any other emergency.
    
    If you don't teach the value of NO! or STOP! early you will be lost
    when (hopefully IF) you should ever really need it.

    But if you wear it out now on things that don't matter, like
    turning up the stereo too loud or dropping things on the floor,
    the child often learns to discount it -- "Oh, I can keep going,
    Mommy's always saying that and nothing bad ever happens."  It's
    like crying wolf too often.
    
    --bonnie

    
    I believe that there is a place for NO. Because other people who
    may take care of my kid will use NO (eg. sitter, teacher, relatives,
    friends, etc) I think it is wise to teach the kid the norm, for the
    kid's safety. I don't think we should overuse NO, but we should teach
    the meaning of the word.
    
    
    Eva.

    No is a very useful word.  Try taking your child visiting at a friend's
    house that is not child proof.  Or shopping after he gets mobile and
    wants to pick up everything he sees.  A child must know his limits, as
    well as his abilities, in order to grow up healthy and happy! (not to
    mention survive!)  The key is in you as his parent, knowing how far to
    allow him to go for his age and capability.
    

    re: .22
    
    I wasn't talking about allowing the child to do harmful things! 
    I'm only saying that you don't need to shout "NO NO" at
    everything.  There are alternative ways to teach them to stay out
    of things, etc. 
    
    --bonnie

In addition to "responsibility", there is the concept of "judgment" that I 
take into account when I have to make a decision as to whether an activity 
is appropriate.  In my mind the difference is that a "responsible" person will 
react appropriately to a known or anticipatable situation, but a person with 
good judgment will react appropriately to a non-anticipatable situation, and 
will enough foresight to avoid situations in which acting responsibly is 
difficult.

IMO, a kid who is brought up to understand _why_ something is bad to do is
more likely to develop good judgment; as they develop reasoning power, they 
will begin to apply the "whys" to situations that they haven't encountered 
before.  A child who is brought up with only "NO" to regulate their behavior, 
probably not develop good judgment.  They will always look to mommy or daddy 
for a yes or no.

To me, the word "No" is useful, and I see no need to purge it entirely from my 
vocabulary.  But I certainly agree that its use should be minimized, and 
replaced, as much as possible with an explanation, particularly as the child 
gets older.

Clay

	While I agree with the premise that "shut up" has no place in a parent's
vocabulary, I think that "No!" does.  It another of those cases where moderation
is the key.  We say "no" to Katie AND we distract her/remove her from the 
situation and explain why the "Act" is forbidden/not a good idea.  I agree that
kids understand much more than we give them credit for.  (Katie started 
responding to complex commands/requests and concepts MUCH earlier than I 
expected.  Maybe she's just a genius and not all kids do understand but I doubt 
it. ;-))  But there is also merit in being able to stop the kid quickly.  When 
your toddler is strolling out to the road and about to step out in front of a 
car, you don't have time to say "Now, Katie, we don't go into the road without 
holding mommy's hand and looking both ways."  You shout "No!" or "STOP!" and 
once the kid is out of danger *then* you explain.

	And of course as Bonnie said, you don't want to dull it's impact by 
over use.


Tracey

I'm another parent of the "Just say NO to NO" philosophy. I rarely say no.
I often say yes. I always explain why or why not. There are very few rules in
my house. I very rarely raise my voice and I never hit. I go on the assumption 
that my son is logical, trustworthy, intelligent and cooperative. When I 
explain things I am careful not to sound patronizing or bossy, just calm, 
matter-of-fact or like I have something really interesting to tell him. And I 
use the distraction method (more when he was younger than now when he is 6). 

So far I am thrilled with the results. He is incredibly well-behaved and a 
pleasure to be around. I get compliments on his behavior from almost everyone 
we meet! Even my non-parent friends who claim to "hate kids and never want any"
say Jeffrey could change their minds about that. 

The fact that I rarely say no doesn't mean that he doesn't understand the word.
If anything it has MORE impact because I reserve it for serious occasions, not
for every little act of curiosity. When I say no it is in a loud voice, and the
effect is immediate: he stops whatever it is, and runs or turns to me, usually 
teary-eyed and scared. He knows I don't use that word and that tone of voice 
unless something is really dangerous. 

It's also not true that my method will cause him to be unprepared for other
environments. He's at a sitter's during the day, and she uses No and Yelling.
That's how she raised her kids (the youngest is 13 and she isn't about to
change to please me). Jeff also lives with his dad half the time. His style is 
to childproof eveything in sight. He says No more than I do, but he doesn't 
raise his voice either. Both the sitter and dad agree with me that Jeffrey is 
delightfully well behaved. So whose method deserves the credit? ("Mine of 
course", we all shout simultaneously! :-).

Seriously, I wonder sometimes how much is method and how much is in-born. I 
would start off the same way with my next kid (if there ever is a next kid)
because that is MY preferred style, it's what I believe in, it's similar to
how my father raised me. But if Kid #2 did not respond the way Kid #1 does, 
then I would gradually alter my methods and try other ways and commiserate
at length with the parents whose bright, curious, headstrong kids get into
everything and keep 'em hopping! 

	Sue