I was very lucky to attend a local event where we had Kim John Payne (see http://www.simplicityparenting.com) come to give a talk on child discipline. Kim has a Masters degree in education and has been a school counselor, adult educator, consultant, researcher, educator and a private family counselor for twenty seven years. He regularly gives key note addresses at international conferences for educators, parents, and therapists and runs workshops and training’s around the world. Our event was sponsored by our local Waldorf School here in Nelson, B.C..

Kim started off with a clarification on the word “discipline”.  It really comes from the word “disciple” which means “to be followed”.  This underscores the importance of how parents must set an example for their kids, who are constant imitators of our actions. Kim then gave some historical perspective on discipline by pointing out that before the 1930s, there was no discipline.  Children back then simply worked, and so were judged by the quality of their work rather than their behaviour. In fact, homework, was literally that – baking, cleaning, taking care of animals, fixing/building and so on all done within the home.

In the past, according to Kim discipline has been all about “behaviour modification” and telling children about “natural consequences” of their actions to change behaviour.  The flaws with this approach are that changing child behaviour often leads to “sneaky” children, and also denial of their actions.  Children are motivated individuals, and will find a way around obstacles that their parents present.  Kim talks about thinking about children as being “disoriented” rather than “disobedient”.  He made a great metaphor about discipline being similar to how a sculptor takes away all the unwanted materials from a block to reveal what is left behind as the sculpture.  This allows us to concentrate on de-emphasizing unwanted behaviour, and focus more on the positive outcome of how we want our children’s values to be shaped.

Kim is also much more fond of “time-ins” vs “time-outs”.  He sees many issues with time-outs (our most popular article by far on rootparenting.org).  The main issue he feels is that they are a means of sending away your problems rather than addressing them.  This approach will encourage our children to grow up and avoid/walk away from problems or stressful situations rather than talking about them and addressing them.  These times are opportunities for resolving tough issues and forming stronger bonds with our children.  Gordon Neufeld is also greatly opposed to the use of “time-outs” with children.

Kim continues to revisit the history of discipline by talking about how, during the 1990s, our parents were deeply entrenched in working in team focussed environments.  This time was where parents who were often managers in their companies would bring this corporate approach home to use to “manage” their children.  As Kim says, when children are managed, “they will unionize!”.   Our parents were also part of a generation who started to give children too many choices.  Children at a young age especially he says, feel unsafe when given choices because it makes it appear that their parents don’t know what is best for them.  Children need the security of a parent who will make the important choices for them to guide them.  Kim talks of a parent needing to progress from a caring “governer”, “dictator” or “authoritative role-model” during the younger years (under age 6 or 7) to then a “gardener” (age 7 to 12) to finally a “guide” when they reach their teen years.  This is a key concept since when a child is “rebelling” or “disoriented” in their behaviour, they must be brought back to a previous stage until they earn their parents trust again.

Kim is also not fond of any kind of reward or punishment model.  Parents who give their children under the age of 9 or 10 years consequences will not get results, since children simply don’t fully understand them at that point.  It’s not until age 5 or 6 that the left and right brain have actually started to connect, so that they can connect rational and creative thoughts.  Children at a young age may appear to understand that if they don’t treat their sibling well, they won’t get dessert, but more often than not, they are operating in the present rather than thinking much at all about the future.  Their brain simply isn’t wired yet for that complex forward thinking.

Then there are the “good jobber” parents.  Kim talks of many “praise junky” parents who can’t help themselves from saying how great their children’s paintings, block houses or somersaults are.  They reality Kim says, is that this is teaching children to rely on your input and approval, rather than their own sense of satisfaction and self worth.  When a child brings you a painting, he suggests that you ask questions about it and show interest (why did you choose all black for this part?) rather than blind praise.  Children are also smart enough to know that when parents offer nothing but positive comments on anything they do, they start to become naturally skeptical.  Kim feels that words are not always required to show your child your approval.

When children start to “push our buttons” as parents, what they really are doing is testing us for approval.  They need to become oriented towards what is right and wrong, and so constantly “ping” us for feedback.  Being honest (even if negative) is actually a more healthy approach rather than sugar-coating the truth.  Kim says parents, as much as 80% of the time, ask questions too politely to get their children to do things, rather than “telling them” what to do.  We need to be clear and authorative with our kids, so they know their boundaries and what is expected of them.  As Gordon Neufeld also says (and Kim quotes Gordon often), you must “connect, then direct”.

“Stand on 2 feet, be 2 feet away, look at your child squarely in the eyes, and tell them what to do. Say it only once. “

If you start having to repeat yourself, you are simply not connecting with your child and will lose their attention.  When a young (4 to 6 years)  child interrupts you, you must be clear and even use your hand as  sign language to indicate that you are not ready to talk to them.  Pause and stay close, but you need them to respect and listen to you.  You still need to foster a connection with them for them to listen, but stick to your guns even if they start to cry and meltdown.  When telling a child to do something, like get dressed to go to the car, Kim says you need to “pause, start small, insist and stay close”.  This is not easy, but as long as you stay focussed on your child (vs your phone or computer especially), they will listen and follow your lead.  It requires patience, but a consistent approach like this is typically effective within not more than 3 attempts according to Kim’s 27 years of experience.

When dealing with teenagers, who are now aware of consequences, your approach is a little different.  Kim says that you must “meet them in the middle” so that they feel heard.  Your role is still the guide, so you must help them draw boundaries with their decisions.  They are capable of being able to decide among choices, and this is empowering to them, so be respectful of what they want to do, and try to find a safe alternative to ideas that are not favourable to you.  They still need to feel a connection with you, and feel loved and listened to.

“Creativity is as important as literacy” in our education system, he says.  ”We are educating people out of their creativity”.  He has advised the British government on Education issues, and was even knighted for his efforts.  I’ve also read his book entitled “The Element: How Finding Your Passion Changes Everything”.

Often, the reality is that people are more likely to be competing with themselves rather than others.  Competition in young children can actually encourage them to become selfish, narcissistic and inwardly-focussed rather than have compassion or empathy for others.  Many parents think that the benefits to self-esteem are reason enough for their kids to attempt to excel in a sport that suits their physical abilities the best. But in fact, child development experts confirm that it is not self-esteem we should be teaching our children, but rather self-compassion.

Concept of Competition is Lost On Them

The concept of competition has been seen by researchers as something young children age even up to 6 or 7 can not grasp.  It is simply not age appropriate. Having winners and losers can be extremely damaging to the delicate developing self-image of children. I hear from many parents about the value of learning to win or lose is required in “real-life”.  But when you really look at any activity that is seen to be competitive, such as applying for a job, or trying to get into a school, it’s not actually about competing “against others”.  These life stages are typically internal struggles, where a confidence and a strong self-worth as well as self-compassion is most important.

Competing for a specific “prize” or goal has also been proven to actually reduce the quality of performance in athletes vs improve it.  There is a “goal blindness” that distracts you from focussing on the activity, and rather focusses you on the end prize/medal/recognition etc..  Children should not be pressured into competing to achieve a prize, but should want to do things for their own self gratification, versus pleasing others.  This is another example of where excessive praise is counter-productive.  Are children performing for themselves, or their parents or even worse, their peers?

Children Under 12 Don’t Want To Compete

Many alternative school systems actually go out of their way to discourage competitive sports until the age of 10 years or older.  Other child development specialists such as  Dave Richardson,  a Lecturer in Sport and Exercise Science at Liverpool John Moores University, specializing in child and sport development suggests the age of 12 is the earliest when children should be exposed to competitive sports.  Waldorf education warns against sports due to their characteristics of promoting “fixed movements” in children, versus more natural flowing and playful motions.  Sports are seen by Rudolf Steiner as uncreative expressions of bodily movement vs their preferred practise of “eurythmy“, a more etherial performance art.

Other outcomes of competitive sports can include “burn-out” as well as “repetitive stress injuries” that can permanently damage young, growing bodies. Interestingly enough, many of the most successful Olympians are typically much older than you’d think, and have often even started their particular sport as late as into their 20s. Some of the 10 most dangerous sports for kids starting from the most dangerous are basketball (ACL knee injuries), biking, football, soccer and baseball.  Interesting that 4 out of the top 5 are competitive team sports. In the US, an estimated 3 million athletes under age 14 are injured annually while playing an organized sport or recreational activity, according to Children’s Hospital Boston. The most common causes of sports-related injuries include falling, blunt force trauma, collisions or overexertion.

Cooperate Vs Compete

Competing to win games must be secondary to the goal of teaching the skills of the game, especially in children under 12 years. Children must be empowered to “self select”, meaning that they must choose if they want to participate in a sport, and if so, how much if any competition they want to be involved in. As an alternative, there are many cooperative games which allow exercise, team-work and still allow children to exercise in a safe and more compassionate way.  An outdoor building project or garden requires lots of lifting and physical excersion.  Riding bikes, playing tag and hide and seek are classic games for young children, and don’t require a single winner or loser. Even just going for a hike in a group provides opportunities for “guides” to lead and find natural items along the way without making the activity a race or competitive activity.  We have to leave behind our parents ideals of always striving to be a “winner” and think more holistically about empathizing with others and being compassionate towards ourselves.

The Waldorf school system also warns strongly against overstimulation of our children, especially from mainstream media.  Here is a passage from an experienced Waldorf teacher;

“The etheric body is the life wisdom which builds in the body.  Up until the change of teeth, the child’s forces are forming their organs.  If we wake up the child’s thinking prematurely then these forces move into the nervous system before the organs are properly formed. “

Basically, the jist of this I think is that we need to protect our children from over-stimulation at all costs.  It hurts not only their imagination but also impacts their delicate nervous systems. Children  lack the filters that adults have for sense impressions that flood into our bodies.  Children are imitators, and will echo bad language, violence and actions that they see in videos, or elsewhere for that matter.

The best way to stimulate the imagination and mind with young children, according to Waldorf and other education experts, is through spoken stories.  In fact, since the beginning of time, spoken word storytelling was the only way to carry our culture forward through the generations.  Books are still of course great for visual cues, especially at a younger age when they don’t have language skills yet, but books can actually give too much visual information and can actually hamper child creativity.  It’s often a good idea not to just read a book, but also pause at the pictures, and engage children with questions about them. Ask them to explain what they think is happening in the story just from the pictures first, before you read it to them.  Better yet, tell them true stories about your day or stories of when you were young.  I know my daughter loves when I tell her about my adventures after I come back from backcountry skiing, complete with “snow ghosts” and “tree bombs”.  As long as it’s age-appropriate and told in kid language, then she laps it up.

So, does this imply don’t read your children books?  No, of course not, but it does raise an interesting concept about letting our children’s mind do the work rather than us.  Waldorf dolls, for example, have blank faces and basic body forms… vs Disney characters that show all details on the face, with ornate dresses, make-up etc..  Waldorf toys are typically basic wood objects, such as blocks or a simple stage or shelter where kids can then embelish and decorate with their own imaginations. What is important I believe is in planting seeds of ideas and stories in our children’s minds, and then let their creativity and imagination grow them organically.

Attachment Parenting experts have always said that crying is a behavior that is natural to humans from birth.  As an infant, babies learn that crying will result in comforting, which creates a relationship bond.  This behaviour is continued to create attachments in life.  In fact, humans are the only species that is capable of crying, indicating that it is actually a highly evolved function.  And when tears themselves are examined, they are found to be highly toxic.  Crying is our way of cleansing our bodies.  Research has also shown that after a crying episode, you will generally feel better than you did before.  This is increasingly true when there is someone else there to comfort you.  So what does this mean from a parenting perspective? This means that being there for your child while crying is critical to reinforcing your bond with them.

Child development experts like Gordon Neufeld feel strongly that crying also plays an important role in cementing memories (both good and bad) in our kids.  In fact, connecting a learning experience with a strong emotion, be it fear, anxiety or elation – makes that behaviour far more likely to be remembered than anything else.  Parents can understand this, by thinking back to any vivid childhood memory (e.g. pants pull down from behind while on stage).

OK, so how does this relate to sleep then?  Well, the top selling book on Amazon.com under parenting happens to be “The No Cry Sleep Solution” by Elizabeth Pantley, with a foreward by Dr. William Sears MD.  Firstly, most attachment parents already know that the best so called “sleep solution” is simply co-sleeping, it’s that simple.  But of course, many of us don’t always enjoy sleeping next to a wriggling sack of knees and elbows.  That said, there are many variations, such as a “side-car” bed, or “musical beds” (our family’s favourite) depending on the needs of your kids.

Personally, I always hesitate to take advice from a medical doctor on behavioural issues with children.  They simply are not experts in the field of child development.  I also caution anyone looking for a single “solution”, since in parenting, that almost never exists.  Sure, there are short-cut tricks provided by some “experts” to get your kids to appear to do what you want in the short term, but in the long term, you need to go back to your attachment parenting roots, and place the needs of your child first.  With sleep, that is connection.  Did you know that when you are next to your child, their vocal chords vibrate along with yours?   You are literally connected by your voice vibrations which echo through their body and yours.

Taking a 3 year-old and placing them alone in a dark bedroom and telling them to “go to sleep!”, from their perspective, is like placing an adult in a solitary confinment prison cell and telling them to “enjoy their stay”.  Children need to be feel safe and secure as they go off to sleep.  This is often a time when they are most vulnerable, and need their parents most.  We need to keep in mind other good staples of parenting, such as setting up a good pre-sleep routine (e.g. bath, story), creating a comforting and safe quiet environment.  But at the end of the day, your child will want you close by as they drift off.  No ultimatums, no raised voices or commands to “get to sleep”, just the soothing sound of your breath next to theirs.