Disciplining Children

We all seem to get caught up at times in confrontations with our children, especially teen-agers. They do something we don't like, and when we try to deal with it we often find ourselves locked in a power-struggle. The battle becomes about who is in charge and must be obeyed, like a pair of 8-year-olds in a fight. As the older and the parent, we believe we can enforce our will, like that of the neighborhood bully.

As a result, the fight becomes about the power issue, not about whatever was done wrongly by the child. Lines are drawn; the chip is on our shoulders and we dare one another to knock it off. Meanwhile, the real issue, whatever it was, has been lost in the smoke and turmoil of battle. Win or lose, we end up being defined by our children as the "bad guys", the evil bullying villains who want to deprive them of their liberty. This is always the problem with “punishment” as a problem solution; it creates many more problems than it solves, especially with people older than 6.

I want to propose an alternative way of looking at this kind of conflict, and to do so I want to back up a little and ask us to rethink what it is we are trying to accomplish. Are we using this issue to establish (again and temporarily) our absolute authority? Are we trying to enforce limits that the child does not accept as valid? Consider as an alternative that we should be trying to teach the child to think clearly for himself, to teach good problem-solving techniques and that to solve a problem cooperation may be required between us and the child rather than a solitary exercise of power..

Suppose, for instance, we have a teenager without a driver's license, who, during the night, took the car keys and went for a "joy ride" in our car. The teenager is not covered by our accident insurance since he isn't licensed. When we are ready to deal with the problem, what can we expect?

Firstly, the teenager will attempt to defend and justify himself, perhaps even counter-attacking, since he may choose to see our confrontation as an attack on his independence, competence and self-hood. Much of the time, I regret to say, when I had to deal with these issues with my own (now grown) children, I handled it poorly, which is to say, with the usual head-on battle for power. The usual shouting and threats were as useful as they always are, that is, not at all. We all know that punishment simply increases fear and anger on both sides, and while such battles can be exciting they are absolutely ineffective at resolving issues. Punishment simply avoids dealing with the problem because it is easier to punish and be punished than to think, and it's also more gratifying in an unhealthy way. Many children (of all ages) prefer to provoke an “authority” into anger and/or punishment, not only because it defines the parent as the villain in the fight, but because the parent very often feels guilty when they over-react, and then are much easier to manipulate.

Later in my life, raising children for the second time, I began to rethink this entire issue, and have begun developing some alternative ways of dealing with conflicts with children. Now, as a great-grandfather, I have continued to observe and refine my thoughts, which I hope you may find useful in avoiding the ineffectiveness and frustration which we so often find in dealing with children.

In my hypothetical example, suppose that instead of confrontation, I had done something like this: I tell him to sit down with me quietly. I say something like "We have a problem. Your taking the car without permission creates several problems for me, and I want you to help me solve them."

"Yeah?" he says doubtfully.

I get out a piece of paper and a pencil. "Tell me what you think the problems are." I prepare to write things down.

"I don't know", he says, sullenly.

"I think it might be easier for you to think this through if you didn't have to do it face to face with me. I know you expect me to get mad and let you have it, or find something wrong with everything you say. How about you sit down somewhere and write down your thoughts about this problem, from your point of view as well as mine. My intent is to work something out with you that we can both live with, and it's going to take some thinking. Just let me know when you're ready for us to discuss this or if you need any information from me."

And then I leave the room (with the keys, of course). The first issue to be dealt with is the definition of the problem or problems. From my standpoint, I need to know where my car is, and I need to know that we are covered by insurance. I further need some assurance that the car will be available and undamaged when I need it. Finally, I need to know that my property rights will be respected.

From his standpoint, he needs to have some freedom to go places, see people, feel like an empowered adult, all of which I want him to have as well. He didn't ask to use the car, not because he is a "thief", but because he didn't think I would give him permission to use it. He probably has a pretty good idea why I wouldn't give permission to use it, even though he doesn't want to admit that.

The second issue(s) to be dealt with are the solutions to the above problems, solutions for both his AND my problems, and moreover solutions that represent fair compromises that deal with the reality issues without getting into punishment. First the problems have to be defined. His problems as well as mine have to be examined and treated with respect. Until he is willing to be clear with me, we can't go forward.

How would I enforce my demand, if he is not cooperative? I have lots of options, since I don't require that he like me every minute. I can refuse cooperation with him, refuse to drive him places, refuse to provide other privileges until he is willing to talk with me. I'm in no hurry, and refusing to provide him with privileges is not so much a punishment as it is that I'm responding to a relationship he is defining as uncooperative. If he comes up with a realistic appraisal of the problems in 5 minutes, that's fine with me. If it takes two months, that's OK too, since it's up to him, not to me.

I found that putting this idea into practice involved some additional issues. For instance, in the example, the young man might offer to solve the problem by “giving his word” that he won’t take my car again. I would respond to this (and other equivalent “quickie” solutions) by saying that I would be willing to accept his solution. I would then point out that if he didn’t keep his word, I would not accept that solution again, for that problem or any other. I would use the occasion to emphasize how an overly general “solution” can become useless if not honored.

The point is that I take the problem seriously enough to recognize that I can't solve it alone, and that I need to develop an approach which recognizes his needs as well as mine. I'm sure he would prefer to have me get angry and punish him. That way he can comfortably see me as the bad guy and ignore his disregard for my problems and needs, or the problem he has caused me. It would all be over with, he thinks, and his life will return to normal, and in addition I'll probably feel guilty for the punishment and overdo the forgiveness.

But actually thinking and solving problems is hard work, and I need to teach him all I can about solving problems through thinking instead of feeling. I can teach him control and respect by showing control and respect. I can teach him about boundaries by respecting his and my own.