Punishments and consequences are built on the expectation of learned fear on the part of the one being punished. The hope is that once punishment has been exacted the punished person will from now on refrain from doing the bad thing he/she was punished for out of fear of being punished again. This may very well be true. However, once fear is instilled it does not simply get absorbed and disappear. Rather, fear is a kind of energy that will, sooner or later, show up somewhere else as plain anger or another misdeed (which also will have to be punished).
But punishments and consequences are important. They serve as reinforcements of boundaries and limits, a kind of border patrol, without which we all may sometimes go off into realms of inappropriateness. But for this to work and for a punishment not to produce more anger it is absolutely essential that the person punished trusts the punishing person. In short, the punisher has to be able and willing to explain to the punishee that this punishment, this consequence, is indeed good for them. Yes, that is a very, very tall order. And we mostly remain unable to fill it.
What does this mean for parents and children? It means that trust building and trust maintenance are integral parts of the punishment process. This in turn means that parents essentially fail when they punish in an electro-shock kind of way: bad behavior is followed by quick and decisive counter-behavior (e.g., time-out, loss of privilege, etc.) In some cases, with very small children, this strategy may be effective. I am thinking, for example, about the parent who, just in the nick of time, prevents the toddler from running into a busy street and, to reinforce the idea that busy streets are dangerous, gives the child a few slaps on his/her rear. But, really, such an action would not be considered "punishment" to begin with but rather a spontaneous parental response to an immediate danger for the child.
This type of spontaneous response to immediate danger may be, in part at least, the culprit for our rampant culture of punishment (especially for children). Parents are increasingly instilled with fear about what their off-spring is up to, how well they do in school, where they'll end up in college, life, etc. The extent to which parenting today is fear-based is stunning and anxiety producing in itself. Fear is likely the single-most worst aspect of parenting a child. Often this fear is no longer simply a fear about the child's well-being. Rather, it is a fear of not being seen as a competent parent when our children act up, fail or get into some kind of sticky situation.
The problem with fear is that when it forms the matrix of our punishments than punishment will no longer aim at reinforcing a boundary but rather at squelching a behavior. Such punishment is intent on exterminating, not on educating. And like I said in the beginning, such extermination may seem partially successful, but in my experience, it seems that a negative behavior always resurfaces somewhere after a while. It is like the sorcerer's apprentice who, by trying to destroy the forces he called up only succeeds in multiplying them.
Dealing effectively with children especially from the toddler stage and up means that we pay attention to why they engaged in the behavior we find so displeasing. Really finding out the reasons means that we have to get into a genuine conversation with them. They "why" is not an accusatory one. It is an inquisitive "why." One that implies curiosity, desire to get to know the other person better and an implicit suggestion that talking it through will make things feel solid and safe (even though a punishment or consequence may still be given).
Dealing effectively with children also means that we figure out which behaviors to pick and which to simply ignore. I sat with a teen and his parents today. The teen was outraged and used most every expletive in the book to make known his discontent with the parents' actions. It would have been so very easy to become distracted by his word choices and miss the opportunity to work on a conversation about the boy's perception of the parents' rules as restrictive and unfair. We needed to get to a point where he could trust those rules and could, therefore, not afford veering off into doling out punishments for his word choices.
On the other hand, if the child steals or continually bothers a sibling it may be important to think of consequences (like paying back the money stolen, apologizing to the sibling, etc.) But it will remain equally important to have an indepth conversation about the behavior in question. Such a conversation is not a lecture. It is not a monologue. It is real dialogue based on the complex ways in which children, like adults, see and respond to the world.
Of course, such a conversation will not just be driven by insight and mutual understanding. The child may resort to blaming others, not wanting to take responsibility, etc. Those are normal, instinctual responses when we are under pressure. We have to validate them as such, if we want to make progress towards responsibility. By validating them we actually help take off the pressure. Validating means "what you're feeling makes sense to me," "I have felt similar things," "your anger is understandable." Once that validation has taken place the step towards responsibility is, while not effortless, considerably easier.
Why is that? I think it can be construed in this way: being under pressure and blaming others are not good feelings. They makes us feel guarded and defensive as if we have to constantly protect ourselves. They require lots of energy and can feel quite relentless, like a never-ending battle. Validating these feelings means that we think of them as "normal, " we know how the feelings and concomitant behavior came about and we know how exhausting they can be. When that point is reached, moving to responsibility will seem like a relief ("You mean I don't have to defend myself anymore? The battle is over?")
Here is where the title of this blog becomes relevant: as parents we need to do what we can to make clear that we come in peace. This means that we're peaceful inside and outside. It means that we are intent on restorative acts rather than destructive ones, even in the face of destructive acts. It means that we can move into the conflict or confrontation with attention and genuine curiosity about the other, his/her motives, his/her feelings. It means that we can parent fearlessly and with confidence in our wish for our children's true independence and self-governance.
1 comment:
I'm not sure this is what you mean, but it sounds like the "emotional bank account:" punishment (consequences), even when appropriate, is always a withdrawal and is only effective when there is enough of a cushion of deposits.
Post a Comment