I truly enjoyed pages 38-42 on the golden rules about rules. It was SO like my house to read about the food rule (no food in the living room... okay, no wet food... okay, wet food today because we're in a hurry... okay, no wet food today because I'm tired and out of patience...). I love that in the end the "rule" was that food choices would be negotiated daily. I loved being freed from the idea that a rule must be the same over time because somehow children can't understand the subtle reasons they would change based on circumstance. "Life is about change and inconsistency - about having different feelings, moods, and needs from one day to the next"(p.41). I've had this discussion with my husband, who has some concerns about "consistent boundaries". I much prefer the concept of communicating needs, and making sure that there are "rules" in place to make sure everyone's needs are being met. And if needs change, why wouldn't the rules? And as for children needing consistency for security...."Knowing the specifics expectations of each situation makes a person more secure than knowing the general rule that tries to cover all situations and breaks down because of inconsistency." (p.41). Yay!
I also appreciated this passage on page 40: "At what age should a parent seek input into a rule from a child? Usually, when the child is ignoring, rebelling against, or balking against a rule. That's a first indication the rule doesn't meet everyone's needs and may require reworking." And on page 42: "If you've made a rule that isn't working for all concerned, don't be afraid to change it. Simply tell the child or family member, 'This rule isn't working for me. My needs are not getting met. What can we do instead?'. And finally, also on page 42, "We don't have discipline problems in our house. We have conflicts that need to be negotiated."
This whole way of framing things really resonates with me. How about you? Do you feel a need to be "consistent" in your rules? If so, why? When your child balks at a rule (or breaks it), is your instinct to enforce the rule more strictly, or to renegotiate the rule into something that the child is more likely to follow?
I also appreciated this passage on page 40: "At what age should a parent seek input into a rule from a child? Usually, when the child is ignoring, rebelling against, or balking against a rule. That's a first indication the rule doesn't meet everyone's needs and may require reworking." And on page 42: "If you've made a rule that isn't working for all concerned, don't be afraid to change it. Simply tell the child or family member, 'This rule isn't working for me. My needs are not getting met. What can we do instead?'. And finally, also on page 42, "We don't have discipline problems in our house. We have conflicts that need to be negotiated."
This whole way of framing things really resonates with me. How about you? Do you feel a need to be "consistent" in your rules? If so, why? When your child balks at a rule (or breaks it), is your instinct to enforce the rule more strictly, or to renegotiate the rule into something that the child is more likely to follow?
we have more trouble trying to help him be flexible and learn "Life is about change and inconsistency".
Comment