Charlie Sheen is the perfect icon for a culture that encourages, even idolizes, unconditional rather than transactional relationships.  We laud those who become so powerful/wealthy that they don’t have to answer to anyone.  We promote self-esteem as the primary virtue and value speaking your mind over responsibility to others.  While most people see Charlie Sheen as having gone too far, he’s only taken our culture’s delusions to their logical conclusion.
Internet pornography is the ultimate unconditional relationship.  Bill Maher recently made headlines when he said, “Now psychologists are telling us that for a sizable percentage of men in America, masturbating to porn is Plan A, and doing it with your wife or girlfriend is more like a fallback option for when the power goes out.”
So what do Charlie Sheen, our national porn addiction, and parenting have in common?
Raising children where the emphasis is placed on the many and elaborate ways in which the parents should recognize the child’s needs while sacrificing the assertion of their own needs creates children who are self-absorbed, narcissistic, and filled with feelings of their own omnipotence.  This creates adults who understand the world as unconditional and not transactional and is the number one contributor to our growing national porn addiction.
Boys with mothers who don’t assert their own needs and desires grow up to become men who want women without needs and desires.  And since empowering children through martyrdom parenting is so in vogue, they will be hard-pressed to find adult women who will suppress their own needs and focus primarily on them like dear old mom.
These boys are being groomed to seek the non-transactional, virtual sex lives found in Internet porn.  Why bother with a real woman with wants and needs of her own when they can have all the selfless, unconditional, virtual women they want who’ll demand nothing of them, just like mom.
Alternately, these boys might become men with powerful feelings of their own omnipotence (think Adonis DNA and tiger’s blood) that propel them to successful, take-no-prisoners careers and money.  In this case they can run through strings of women who each eventually become tiresome due to the assertion of desires, needs, aging, and real life.  Perhaps becoming as successful as Charlie Sheen who exchanges his brides every few years in between having porn stars come to him.
As a culture we have gradually shifted our childrearing away from transactional to unconditional.  Transactional childrearing requires a give and take, respect, appreciation, and courtesy.  Entitlement is its nemesis.
Unconditional Parenting prepares children for an unconditional world. A world where friends don’t leave you no matter how abusive or obnoxious you’ve become, where everyone gets an “A” whether they made efforts or not, where employers won’t fire you when you refuse to show up, and where wives stay with husbands who continually beat them. The world is not unconditional (unless you’re Charlie Sheen?). The world is transactional. Love is transactional.
This worship of children –this idea that we should be kind and respectful to children even when they are rude and inconsiderate –is inane, and ironically, self-serving; self-serving because it is born of the narcissistic desire to see in our children our own unfulfilled perfection and to create for them a perfect world free from disillusionment.  It is the popular conceit in a society where we strive to inflate our self-identity based on our selfless acts toward our children.  But when adults make themselves selfless children are left all alone.  How about giving our children a break and finding our self-identity without them?  Children need real people with real needs, not parents who will service them unconditionally.

Tips for Transactional Parenting
Insist your children treat you with respect. Set consequences that make their lives very difficult when they choose not to.
Require your children participate in the upkeep and maintenance of the home.  The things parents provide shouldn’t be taken for granted and your children will appreciate your efforts more when they are required to chip in regularly.  Making dinner, cleaning up, walking the dog, etc.
Assert your needs and desires. Parents provide all of the resources for a family to function and should make the lion’s share of decisions.  When parents continually make decisions with the priorities placed on the children’s preferences, the children learn they are entitled to this everywhere.

• » Comments (3)

I heard about a Buddhist philosopher recently asking a group, “What is the opposite of thank you?” After the listeners had offered a variety of responses he said to them, “The opposite of thank you is: you’re supposed to do that.” In others words, a feeling of entitlement. Living in the condition of thank you is happiness. Living in the condition of that’s what you’re supposed to do is suffering because you’ve set yourself up for constant disappointment.

I watched a woman reading to her three-year-old grandson, Ryan. Halfway through the book Ryan had chosen, he decided he wanted her to read a different book. Grandma said, “No. You chose this book and I want to finish this one.” Ryan whined and started to cry, “But I want the other one!” Ryan’s mother came over and said, “Come on Mom, why don’t you read him the other one?” But the older woman wouldn’t budge. “He needs to learn he’s not the only one around here,” she stated. By asserting her desires, Ryan’s grandma was insisting that he recognize her. She was instinctively trying to establish mutual recognition.

In order for Ryan to develop a healthy capacity for mutual recognition, the adults around him must be willing to have faith in his ability to survive disappointment and frustration. They must not let their fear or anxiety sway them toward indulgence. The fear implicit in Ryan’s mother’s impulse to give him what he wants in this situation is, What if he doesn’t develop a love of reading? or, What if he doesn’t learn to assert his wishes? Or, maybe just, I want this moment to be one of joy, not of disappointment.

The accumulation of so many moments when adults have yielded their wishes and desires to the wishes and desires of the child results in the imbalance toward children developing power over connection. While these moments, when viewed in isolation, appear harmless enough, the cumulative effect is a child who develops a very strong feeling about their entitlements and a very weak feeling about the needs of others.

When giving your child choices, remember that you must prepare her for being successful and happy at school. If home is a place of unlimited choices and accommodations and school is a place of limited choices and few accommodations, don’t be surprised when your child doesn’t like school.

The parenting practice that is closely tied to choices is regularly soliciting the child’s opinion. This can range from letting him choose what clothes he’ll wear to asking his preference of which restaurant to go to, to choosing what color to paint the kitchen.

Whether it’s the boy who wants to continue to wear his Halloween costume to school two weeks into November or the girl who refuses to wear anything but her favorite dress even though her mother hasn’t had a chance to wash it in five days, I can’t count the number of times I’ve seen a parent dragging a tearful, puffy-eyed kindergartener into school late after a long battle over what the child will wear.

Children who are given choices about everything learn to question anything they don’t prefer. This might seem fine for a tolerant parent at home, but by the time these children enter school it becomes extremely difficult to deal with their belief that their opinions are just as valuable, or more valuable, than the opinion of their teacher.

I’ve seen third grade math classes where children argue with the teacher about the way she’s teaching. This isn’t spirited discussion aimed at clearing up a lack of understanding, but rather an insistence that their way is correct and the teacher’s is not.

A veteran teacher approached me after a seminar I gave and said, “It’s like you’ve given us permission to be adults again.” As parents and teachers, we are encouraged to provide so many choices and to elicit so many opinions from our children that we are left feeling as though our opinions are less important than those of the kids. We are supposed to make everything fair, consider everyone’s opinion, see to it that no one is inconvenienced (except us), and that everyone’s needs are met, all while facilitating some great, chaotic democracy. But in the middle of all this have we forgotten that we are the adults? We should decide what is good and not good for our children.

Giving children choices and soliciting their opinions can have many positive effects only when you also regularly assert the needs, to which children must yield, of the others in the home. Additionally, you should be prepared to set and hold firmer, more tenacious boundaries to balance the powerful identity your child consequently develops.

Children who are given choices –and asked their opinions –about everything grow up feeling entitled. Children who are practiced in considering the wants and needs of others learn to live in the condition of thank you.

Joe Newman is the author of Raising Lions.

• » Comments (0)

Although often misunderstood, when used correctly, time-outs are a simple and effective tool for managing behavior and helping your child develop the ability for self-regulation and deferred gratification.  This blog will focus on understanding how to use this powerful parenting tool.

If you initially use time-outs frequently for minor misbehavior before things get too severe in a short time you will need to use them less and less because your children will take your rules and boundaries seriously.  I use short (one-minute) time-outs with 2 to 16-year-olds to great effect at home and in the classroom.  Because the time-out is so short I get very little resistance once I’ve established a no-negotiation precedent.  I also stay strict about the time-out doubling if I get an argument.  You can take the emotional/oppositional element out of it with comments like, “You’re not it trouble.  I just need you to take a one-minute break” and “It’s no big deal.  You can come back to what you’re doing in one-minute.”

While longer time-outs may be necessary for more severe behavior (i.e. hitting) it is much easier to give frequent short time-outs for small behaviors and children are more likely to take your direction before things get too heated.  Think of yourself as an emotional air conditioner that turns on with a minute or two of cool air when things get to 75° instead of waiting until the temperature reaches 90°.

Recently someone asked me about how to handle crying during time-outs.  She and her friend had both read in my book Raising Lions that time-outs shouldn’t start until the child stops crying.  However, when she watched her friend use do this it didn’t look right to her.  When her friend’s 4-year-old son was given a time-out he began to immediately cry.  His mother told him to “Stop Crying!” and “I’m not going to start your time-out until you’re quiet.”  The boy’s crying continued and even got louder.  Every minute or so his mother would tell him “You need to stop!” or “I’ve told you to stop the crying.”  The other woman felt like it was unfair and ineffective to yell at the boy for crying and asked me what I thought.  Below is my response.

While time-outs shouldn’t start until your child has stopped crying you should also let your children know that crying is perfectly acceptable and natural.  The last thing we want to do is shame them for crying or create a power struggle when there’s no need for one.  So when a child is crying when they’re on time-out we can empathize and recognize their power while still holding a firm boundary.

If a child is crying when I’ve given them a time-out I might say, “Yeah, time-outs aren’t any fun.  If you need to cry that’s okay.  When you’re finished crying we’ll start the time-out”  (Sometimes when I say this the crying gets louder, they might even cry louder and yell, “I want to start the time-out now!” which is a clear indication the crying is at least in part a manipulation.)

If the crying continues I do my best to ignore it (so long as the child remains in the time-out chair) and will occasionally say to them, “Let me know when you’re finished and I’ll start your time-out.”  My tone is tender and empathetic, coach not adversary.  I also make an effort to let the child know that they, not me, have control over when they stop crying and therefore also control when the time-out starts. By recognizing their power and letting them know that I have no desire to control their choices I’m able to avoid a power struggle over that which I really have no control.

The purpose of requiring your child to stop crying before a time-out starts is so they will exercise self-regulation after a moment that lacked self-regulation.  Additionally, we want to take away any manipulation that might be motivating the crying.  Quite often, children have learned that if they cry loud enough then the adult will begin negotiating with them and the original consequence will be amended.  So crying or tantrums become effective tools to avoid or decrease consequences for behavior.

Time-outs are meant to be boring, a minute or two when the child is denied access to interaction or activities that are fun.  If an adult holds and comforts a child who’s crying because they’ve been given a time-out they are creating a reward in response to the misbehavior they are trying to discourage.

Time-outs are only effective if they’re boring.  If a parent or teacher talks with or comforts a child in an attempt to calm them down during the time-out they make the time-out interesting and deny the child the opportunity to exercise the psychological muscles of self- regulation and control.

The ideal time-out combines strictness and compassion in the same moment.  It asserts firmly the boundary while acknowledging the child’s power and choices without judgment.

Joe Newman

• » Comments (0)

19 years ago I was working as the Crisis Intervention Specialist at a summer camp for all-star behavior problem children.  There were about 280 children that came from all over the country and a few from other countries.  Most of them had been thrown out of several camps and schools before coming to us.

That summer I noticed that the biggest problems came up in the “Education Department”.  The teachers couldn’t keep any control or get anything done, there were constant arguments about behavior, and the kids hated being there.  I think I understood the sources of the problems so the next summer I came back as the Director of Education in charge of the program for myself and six other teachers.

There were three problems I sought to remedy.  First, the nature of the curriculum focused on learning in the modalities that were most difficult for them (sitting still, waiting your turn, keeping your hands to yourself, being quiet, etc.).  Second, there was judgment attached to the consequences and too much argument about behaviors.  Third, there was no effective means of reigning in the constant disruptive behavior in order to get anything satisfying done.

So I created a curriculum that required the children use their hands, move around, build things, call out, act things out and run around.  We built 12-foot tall freestanding dinosaur skeletons, played casino games with poker chips to learn math, acted out scripts to practice reading and learn history, and ran all over the camp during science and math scavenger hunts.

The next change I implemented was a clear behavior management system that utilized short breaks (time-outs) as its primary motivator.  If Billy kicked Jason under the table I’d say, “Billy I need you to take a break for a minute just over there.”  I wouldn’t engage any argument or discussion about the behavior.  If the child attempted to argue or got upset I’d tell them, “You’re not in trouble, and it’s no big deal, but you do need to take a break for a minute and I’m not discussing it.”  If they continued to argue I would double the break time.  If they needed to be taken from the room then the break was five minutes.

On the second day of class I’d add a warning prompt when a behavior was starting to become disruptive, “Do you need to take a break for a minute?”  This was a serious question, not sarcasm.  Children could always choose to step out of the lesson.  Occasionally, a student would say, “yes” to needing a break and take one.   The method communicated to the children that if they didn’t want to be in the lesson that was okay.  It was the student’s prerogative to choose to participate in the class or not.  It was the teacher’s prerogative to set and enforce the parameters of the lesson.

It took one or two hours of class time for this behavior system to start working smoothly.  At first the children got upset about getting a consequence and wanted to argue or tried to offer an apology or promise to stop the problem behavior in lieu of taking the one-minute break.  But soon they realized how simple and easy the small consequence was.  Because there were no long-term consequences when the break was over they returned to the activity of the group with fresh with a clean slate.  There was also an emotional relief because problem behaviors weren’t being pointed out or even mentioned at all.  These were children who were used to hearing about or discussing what they were doing wrong all day long.  If a child was upset about being given a break or didn’t understand why we would be happy to talk tot hem about it after they had taken the short break.  On average, once a week a child would choose to talk about he consequence they had just gotten.  I’d assumed correctly that these children would be able to figure out for themselves what had caused the small consequence.

By the third day of class the children would happily take the breaks that were given with very little argument, resistance or upset.  Sometimes in a class of 12 eight-year-old boys I might give 10 or 15 one-minute time-outs in a single lesson.  They would take the break at the end of which I’d ask them, “Are you ready to come back?”  “Yes” “Come on in” and they’d return eagerly to the lesson.

Classes became enormously productive.  The children were proud of what they were accomplishing.  There were no lectures, and almost no arguing, about behaviors.

Some of the most satisfying days occurred when the first half of camp ended and half the campers went home and were replaced with campers coming for the second half only.  The new classes were now composed of some children who were used to the program and some who were new to it.  When a new camper would become irritated or attempt to resist the one-minute break the veteran campers would coach them through it with, “It’s no big deal.  He’ll let you come right back” or “Your not in trouble.  You should take the minute” or “Don’t argue.  Joe never changes his mind.”

On visitor’s day many parents were shocked that the first place their children dragged them to see was Education.

The emotional judgment had effectively been taken out of the consequence.  The teachers had an effective tool with which to manage behaviors and teach.  The children were free from the emotional weight of constantly being reminded about what they had done wrong.  Great things were accomplished in class that every child was proud of.  The children did their best to self-regulate and respect their teachers and peers.

I’ve seen classrooms that have a clear and effective behavior management method but curricular content that is dry and boring.  I’ve also seen classrooms with exciting, well-varied curriculum and a poor or ineffective behavior management method.  And neither of these comes close to motivating and inspiring like a classroom that has both.

In the 18 years since that summer I’ve taught dozens of teachers to use immediate, nonjudgmental, short consequences to manage their classrooms.  And at the same time taught them how to drop the use of harsher, more punitive consequences, reward and point charts, behavior contracts, threats and judgmental or moralistic language.

• » Comments (0)

Although they’re often misunderstood, when used correctly, time-outs are a simple and effective tool for managing behavior and helping your child develop the ability for self-regulation and deferred gratification.  This month’s series will focus on understanding how to use this powerful parenting tool.

Use time-outs frequently for minor misbehavior before things get too severe.  I use short (one-minute) time-outs with 2 to 16-year-olds to great effect at home and in the classroom.  Because the time-out is so short I get very little resistance once I’ve established a no-negotiation precedent.  I also stay strict about the time-out doubling if I get an argument.  You can take the emotional/oppositional element out of it with comments like, “You’re not it trouble.  I just need you to take a one-minute break” and “It’s no big deal.  You can come back to what you’re doing in one-minute.”

While longer time-outs may be necessary for more severe behavior (i.e. hitting) it is much easier to give frequent short time-outs for small behaviors and children are more likely to take your direction before things get too heated.  Think of yourself as an emotional air conditioner that turns on with a minute or two of cool air when things get to 75° instead of waiting until the temperature reaches 90°.

Recently someone asked me about how to handle crying during time-outs.  She and her friend had both read in my book Raising Lions that time-outs shouldn’t start until the child stops crying.  However, when she watched her friend use do this it didn’t look right to her.  When her friend’s 4-year-old son was given a time-out he began to immediately cry.  His mother told him to “Stop Crying!” and “I’m not going to start your time-out until you’re quiet.”  The boy’s crying continued and even got louder.  Every minute or so his mother would tell him “You need to stop!” or “I’ve told you to stop the crying.”  The other woman felt like it was unfair and ineffective to yell at the boy for crying and asked me what I thought.  Below is my response.

While time-outs shouldn’t start until your child has stopped crying you should also let your children know that crying is perfectly acceptable and natural.  The last thing we want to do is shame them for crying or create a power struggle when there’s no need for one.  So when a child is crying when they’re on time-out we can empathize and recognize their power while still holding a firm boundary.

If a child is crying when I’ve given them a time-out I might say, “Yeah, time-outs aren’t any fun.  If you need to cry that’s okay.  When you’re finished crying we’ll start the time-out”  (Sometimes when I say this the crying gets louder, they might even cry louder and yell, “I want to start the time-out now!” which is a clear indication the crying is at least in part a manipulation.)

If the crying continues I do my best to ignore it (so long as the child remains in the time-out chair) and will occasionally say to them, “Let me know when you’re finished and I’ll start your time-out.”  My tone is tender and empathetic, coach not adversary.  I also make an effort to let the child know that they, not me, have control over when they stop crying and therefore also control when the time-out starts. By recognizing their power and letting them know that I have no desire to control their choices I’m able to avoid a power struggle over that which I really have no control.

The purpose of requiring your child to stop crying before a time-out starts is so they will exercise self-regulation after a moment that lacked self-regulation.  Additionally, we want to take away any manipulation that might be motivating the crying.  Quite often, children have learned that if they cry loud enough then the adult will begin negotiating with them and the original consequence will be amended.  So crying or tantrums become effective tools to avoid or decrease consequences for behavior.

Time-outs are meant to be boring, a minute or two when the child is denied access to interaction or activities that are fun.  If an adult holds and comforts a child who’s crying because they’ve been given a time-out they are creating a reward in response to the misbehavior they are trying to discourage.

Time-outs are only effective if they’re boring.  If a parent or teacher talks with or comforts a child in an attempt to calm them down during the time-out they make the time-out interesting and deny the child the opportunity to exercise the psychological muscles of self- regulation and control.

The ideal time-out combines strictness and compassion in the same moment.  It asserts firmly the boundary while acknowledging the child’s power and choices without judgment.

• » Comments (0)

I recently talked with a mom whose seven-year-old son, Jacob, would become enamored with girls at school and wouldn’t take “no” for an answer.  Once he fell for a girl (usually a year or two older) he’d transform into a little stalker, relentlessly wanting to play with them, constantly trying to strike up a conversation and even sneaking up to kiss them when they weren’t looking.  It didn’t seem to matter whether the girls told him “no” politely or abruptly Jacob was undaunted in his pursuit of their affections.

Jacob didn’t have any problem taking “no” for an answer in other social situations.  In fact, he seemed to be socially astute and respected the boundaries of peers and adults.  His mom sat him down several times and tried to explain to him the importance of respecting the wishes of the girls he liked and listening when they told him “no”.  Although Jacob seemed to understand this, he had a harder time understanding that the girls actually didn’t like him.  After one conversation about this he was reduced to tears and inconsolable for almost ten minutes.  Thirty minutes later when he saw the girl in question he tried to kiss her when her head was turned.

Things came to a head when Jacob’s mother discovered he’d gotten the girls phone number from the online PTA directory and was now calling her at home despite the girl repeatedly telling him she didn’t want to talk to him.

Now I’ve known this family for some time and know that her son has been raised surrounded by loving, attentive women.  There was a nanny that was with her son whenever mom was working and a grandma who doted on him.  So I asked the mom, “Before he went to school was there ever a woman or girl who didn’t welcome his affections?”  “No” she immediately responded.  “And when he wants your attention to talk or show you what he’s doing or interested in, do you try to always be available?”  “Yes.  And I know Maria (the nanny) is the same with him.  It’s a very rare that I won’t give him my full attention if he wants it”, she said.

So for her son the idea that a woman might not want his attention and welcome his affections was completely out of his realm of experience.  The conversations his mother or teacher might have with him about “no mean no” must be weighed against his years of experience that taught him “women/girls always welcome my affections.”  The bottom line was the history of his interactions with women outweighed any conversation about boundaries.

It’s a common myth that if a child is misbehaving it’s because they don’t understand how they’re supposed to behave.  So we’re surprised when after a rational conversation the problem behavior continues.  But behaviors don’t have to be “appropriate” or “good” for a child to choose them.  They just have to work.  All the rational conversation and explanation in the world won’t change the fact that 99.9% of the time when Jacob has wanted the affections and attentions of females he’s gotten it.  “No” isn’t part of his experience, and experience trumps reason.

Jacob’s “little stalker” behavior is a natural result of his experiences, not a sign of an inability to understand social norms and cues.  And his behavior will change as he accumulates experiences that contradict his previous ones.  His mom and I talked about setting consequences for his “stalker behavior” that could speed up the realization that Jacob needed to come to, namely that his not taking “no” for an answer wasn’t going to work for him any more.

Our conversation about his led to a discussion about the experience an affluent, only-child has versus that of a less affluent child in a big family.  My wife, who is fifth of six children, commented that being aware of social cues was part of surviving when she was a child.  Her mother had five others to feed, cloth and attend to so if she wanted attention, or even her share of dinner, she needed to stay aware of those around her.  From a very young age it was important for her to read the social cues and know how to communicate her needs effectively to those around her.

On the other hand, many children today have parents that are so attentive to their needs that there’s not much need for them to become aware of the needs of others or the social cues around them.  While there’s inevitably a lot of healthy development in children with such attentive parents there’s a downside to not needing to consider others.

Much of our children’s behavior and thinking about things is a direct outgrowth of their experiences in the home.  Just as parents of children in bigger families should make special efforts to make sure no child’s needs get lost in the shuffle, parents of only-children and affluent parents should make special efforts to create situations for children to postpone or let go of having some of their needs met in order to meet the needs of others.

Joe Newman author of Raising Lions

Autistic Spectrum autism A.D.D. A.D.H.D. Adderall Concerta Ritalin parenting toddler social skills Autistic Spectrum autism A.D.D. A.D.H.D. Adderall Concerta Ritalin parenting toddler social skills

• » Comments (0)

There are lots of parenting guides on how to deal with defiant children, but this is probably the only one written by a former defiant child. Joe Newman knows all about the kids that drive parents bonkers. After being diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and being put on Ritalin in second grade, he went on to achieve success in business before deciding to make a career out of helping problem kids. He has spent the past 20 years working with teachers, parents, and children on managing behavior problems. His new book, Raising Lions (CreateSpace, $18.99), explains why children today are fiercer than they used to be. I spoke with Newman; here’s an edited version of our conversation.

Why did you decide to start working with “not polite” children?
When I was in my late 20s I did some soul-searching. I realized in the years since high school a lot of what I had been doing was damage control for what I had done in school. I thought, “There must be a lot of kids out there like me.”

I just walked into an elementary school and said I wanted to volunteer: “I want to work with the kids who drive you crazy.” They were ecstatic. Six months later, I applied to work at a summer camp where it was all ADD kids. I told the owner about my experience, and how you have to start from understanding their capacities and gifts, since that’s the only place you could build from. He hired me as their crisis intervention person. I learned by doing over the years, watching people who were better than I was.

What kind of trouble did you get into as a kid?
Before I was medicated [with Ritalin], I was getting into fights at school every day. It was mostly the result of my need to constantly push things one step further. One little push led to a bigger push— to a smack, to a harder smack. Next thing I knew I was rolling around in the dirt with another boy.

Throughout my school years I found it nearly impossible to stay in a seat for an hour, or keep myself from yelling out something interesting or funny. I was impulsive and always trying to get attention at school. I once brought in magic “disappearing ink” and squirted it all over my favorite teacher’s dress. The “disappearing ink” took a couple of hours to fade away.

I remember in high school I’d bring home all of my books every day fully intending to do all the homework I had. And nine out of 10 times I wouldn’t even open a book. If I did open a book, I didn’t last more than 15 minutes until I was distracted and onto something else. I only passed my classes because once a month my mother would take my dictation. I’d walk in a loop through the kitchen, the living room, and down the hall while I’d dictate and my mother would type [my essays].

I did a lot of vandalism and stealing in my early teens. I was never arrested because I never got caught; being on the wrestling team reined in a lot of my bad behavior later, because I didn’t want to be [kicked] off the team.

You think kids today are different than they were a few decades ago?
Parents have spent a lot of effort building up the self-esteem and confidence of their kids. As a result, kids have a strong fierceness to them; they assert their will, they’ll fight for it. They also understand manipulation. They know how to use it, and they’re less susceptible to it. They’re also less eager to please. I see a lot of kids who are so strong-willed that people don’t know what to do with them.

But you think parents also misunderstand that strong-willed nature as inability, and that’s dangerous. You’re saying that when you were doing things your parents didn’t want you to do, it wasn’t because you didn’t know better. You were being defiant.
As a toddler, I looked at my father as I put my finger in an electrical socket again and again. My father slapped my hand away repeatedly, but I didn’t stop until he gave up and carried me away. When I wrote about that in my blog, a woman wrote that clearly my father didn’t understand my impulsive behaviors. I thought that was a bizarre thing to say; it was willful behavior on my part. If you treat willful behavior as impulsive behavior, you create a monster. I see a lot of children who feign inability whenever they want to avoid struggle. They develop a whole set of behaviors that allow them to continue to win power struggles. And that’s not healthy.

You say parents are too quick to protect their children from failure. Why is that a bad idea?
There’s a misunderstanding about the place of struggle in childhood. Society thinks avoiding struggle leads to happiness. But struggling to create and accomplish things is what makes us happy. It’s a natural part of life. We need to calmly coach children through the struggle and difficulty, as opposed to taking away that learning moment. Then you raise children who, instead of being afraid of failure, are comfortable with trying.

What should parents do if they feel their children are already defiant and hard to control?
First: Understand what you have power over and what you don’t. You work on what you can control, which is primarily access to resources. Set it up so children only have access to what they want—cell phones, TV, nights out—when they are cooperating.

The second thing is to use language that doesn’t try to manipulate them, but recognizes their power, so you don’t personalize the power struggle. When my daughter was a teenager, we had an agreement that she had to do two hours of homework before she could go out. She wanted to go to an open-mic night, and said, “I did an hour of homework, but it’s all I have, and I want to go out.” An emotional response on my part would have been to say: “You said you’d do it, you have to do it.” Or, “You’re lying to me that you only have this much homework.” Instead, I said: “You can make the choice. If you decide not to do the work you don’t go out. Maybe you want to argue with me for two hours, but at the end of two hours I’ll still insist that you do the homework. I really have no control over what you’re going to do, aside from the fact that I won’t let you out until you do what we’ve agreed on.”

Acknowledge their choices, acknowledge that you don’t have power over the things they choose, just the things you choose, and let it play out.

You’re happy with the fact that kids today are fiercer; in fact, on your website it says “I hate polite children!”

My website does have a blog titled “I hate polite children!” but this is a reference to something a boy I worked with said.  While I definitely relate to why the children I work with might “hate polite children” (because they get all the love in school) I don’t dislike polite children, I just prefer the fierce ones.”

I like a kid who knows his power. Yesterday at school there was a boy who got in trouble in one of the classrooms, and the teacher lost his composure and sent him to a classroom one grade down as a punishment. The boy was like, “Forget it. I’m not going there; you can’t make me.” He basically called the teacher’s bluff. I talked to the teacher later and said, “You never want to set a consequence where they can call your bluff.” The kid wanted to hang onto his dignity. I like those kids; they’re kids I relate to.

• » Comments (0)

I remember sitting in a kindergarten class when all the children were on the carpet while the teacher read to them. A little girl had asked the teacher something after which the teacher announced in a loud voice, “Did you hear the way Kristen said that! That was so polite. I love polite children.”

• » Continue reading or Comments (2)

A mother recently asked me what I thought about her going in to her son’s fourth grade class in order to observe and perhaps intervene to stop another boy who was taunting, teasing and excluding her son.

Here’s my response:

• » Continue reading or Comments (1)