No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems • Hacker News Board

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#261

Post by sjg007 » Mon, Dec 05, 2016, 6:53 AM UTC

Waterluvian wrote: post #226

maxxxxx wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the problem with one-size-fits-all methods. Kids are just different and what worked for one child doesn't necessarily work for another child. Even if you do exactly the same thing. My girlfriend used to train dogs for a living. She always said "it's the owner's fault, not the dog's". Now we have a Chihuahua who won't listen, doesn't respond to rewards, doesn't respond to punishment. She just does her own thing…

I think some breeds are just kind of fundamentally flawed. Were chihuahuas bred to be obedient or were they bred to be toys and possibly food?

Probably bred to be rodent dogs.

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#262

Post by inimino » Mon, Dec 05, 2016, 6:56 AM UTC

cwp wrote: post #249

inimino wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These quote marks were not semantically correct. It is not a point of grammar. The comment literally reads: > the psychologist's advice is literally "[not a quote]" When you put something in the form of a quotation, the accepted meaning is that it is a quotation. In this case it is, literally, not something the psychologist actually advised.

Not at all. When you put some words inside quotes, you're saying you want to talk about those words, without using them yourself. I can say, for example, that I've never heard anyone claim, "The sun is made of purple gumdrops," because that would be ridiculous. I know that the sun is actually made of hot gases, and you know that I know that. The problem with SerLava's comment was that it put words in the author's mou…

That is why I said "in the form of a quotation" which includes mentioning the psychologist directly before introducing the quote. Roughly, the form of a quotation is an attribution, followed (or preceded) by a direct quotation enclosed in quotation marks, or by an indirect quotation without quotation marks.

The problem was the potential impression of putting words in the author's mouth, and punctuation was part of what created that impression.

In your example there is actually no need for the quotation marks, although they do not create any ambiguity because you didn't attribute the words to anyone in particular.

It seems like you mostly agree with me, but you have a funny way of showing it.

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#263

Post by kriro » Mon, Dec 05, 2016, 6:58 AM UTC

Step 0: Always treat your kid like an actual human being (apply Kant).

Step 1: Identify if your kid leans introvert or extrovert (lemon squeeze at a very young age seems to work but it shouldn't be hard to figure it out with other methods).

Step 2: Structure the reward structure accordingly. Guess what, some kids want to go to the zoo and some kids would rather play with Legos by themselves.

Hot fixes like providing choices to give an incentive to go outside seem a bit broken to me. I'd much rather provide a good reason to go outside (or figure out that the child actually wants to stay inside and...stay inside).

tl;dr: If in doubt spend more time with the child. I feel very strongly that as a parent the thing you should optimize for is "will this allow me to spend more time with the child?" If you are already in a rush in the morning to make your important meeting there's a fundamental flaw in your approach.

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#264

Post by cookiecaper » Mon, Dec 05, 2016, 7:03 AM UTC

analog31 wrote: post #229

Afton wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and unlimited time. So much advice of the form: "Really sit down with the child during a tantrum. Listen to their concerns, and make sure they feel heard. Only then engage with them in problem solving.". Uh. Sure. I'll just do that. I mean, dinner is going to burn, we'll be late for swimming, and I was on my way to wipe my other child's butt before helping my _other_ other child with their homework. I can only assume…

I became a better manager after having kids. Not because I'm managing people like they're kids, but just because of dealing with those kinds of impossibly, comically insane situations.

Children are great instructors on what's going through everyone else's head. I really don't think people's natural impulses ever stop being childlike, they just learn how to control, cope with, or hide them (to an extent anyway).

That makes children hugely instructive for how to deal with your colleagues. Understand that underneath the facade, everyone has that native wiring that kids lay bear. What kind of things do children respond well to? What do they pull away from? How do you bring the child back to your good side when they're upset?

While the incentives may become more complex with adults, the fundamentals and principles are the same, and children are a powerful lens into the human psyche.

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#265

Post by c3534l » Mon, Dec 05, 2016, 7:10 AM UTC

I recall there was a bit of a reaction against the strictness of Victorian parenting in the 1800s that advocated essentially this. That children are precious little things who should be allowed freedom and not be punished. Those kids were known to have serious impulse control issues as adults and often had difficulty working in structured or formal environments like offices or courthouses. So it strikes me that if you're never going to give time outs for uncontrolled and inappropriate or destructive behavior, then you need to replace it with something significantly more powerful than what is being offered in the article. I think the psychologist is taking the position that positive reinforcement is better than negative and taking it to an extreme that I have a seriously hard time believing will be beneficial to the long-term mental health of the child.

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#266

Post by bronson » Mon, Dec 05, 2016, 7:17 AM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #237

cheald wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For me personally, having kids has resolved the nature vs nurture debate squarely in the "nature" side. Amen to that. I have 3 boys. We put in the same ingredients and got wildly different results with all three. I'm convinced that parenting is more about working with what comes factory installed than it is about moulding some ideal human from a formless block of potential. Incentives and punishments that work with…

Well, there's also the fact that unless you are homeschooling and preventing your children from experiencing human and media contact, your nurture input is only part of a whole. I learned a lot of what I did and did not want to be like from my parents growing up, but I also learned a lot from my siblings[1] and my friends, and my school experiences. That is, you may provide the same ingredients, but ultimately the ki…

Except the differences start showing up long before school age.

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#267

Post by bluejekyll » Mon, Dec 05, 2016, 7:19 AM UTC

nhebb wrote: post #254

maxxxxx wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the problem with one-size-fits-all methods. Kids are just different and what worked for one child doesn't necessarily work for another child. Even if you do exactly the same thing. My girlfriend used to train dogs for a living. She always said "it's the owner's fault, not the dog's". Now we have a Chihuahua who won't listen, doesn't respond to rewards, doesn't respond to punishment. She just does her own thing…

Yeah, after having three kids with widely different temperaments, I can only offer two pieces of advice to other dads: - You're going to have to change diapers anyway, so you might as well get good at it. I was a one-man Formula 1 pit crew of diaper changing. AMA. - Invest in a vasectomy.

Wait. After three kids your advice only covers the first 2-3 years?!

Since I basically followed both of those pieces already, am I good?

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#268

Post by manmal » Mon, Dec 05, 2016, 7:22 AM UTC

simplexion wrote: post #88

manmal wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then let her. Would you want to be forced to talk to someone? My benchmark is "What would I feel if my father did this".

Maybe you should think, "What would I feel if my father did this while I was screaming at him, throwing objects at him, and hitting him?"

Little kids don't grasp a situation that good. If you don't expect them to have an adult brain, it's a lot easier to deal with them. Your emotions are generated by what you think is true - if you think that the little brat is hitting you just for the lulz, then you will get very angry.

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#269

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Dec 05, 2016, 7:25 AM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #237

cheald wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For me personally, having kids has resolved the nature vs nurture debate squarely in the "nature" side. Amen to that. I have 3 boys. We put in the same ingredients and got wildly different results with all three. I'm convinced that parenting is more about working with what comes factory installed than it is about moulding some ideal human from a formless block of potential. Incentives and punishments that work with…

Well, there's also the fact that unless you are homeschooling and preventing your children from experiencing human and media contact, your nurture input is only part of a whole. I learned a lot of what I did and did not want to be like from my parents growing up, but I also learned a lot from my siblings[1] and my friends, and my school experiences. That is, you may provide the same ingredients, but ultimately the ki…

[deleted]

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#270

Post by kbenson » Mon, Dec 05, 2016, 7:26 AM UTC

bronson wrote: post #266

kbenson wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, there's also the fact that unless you are homeschooling and preventing your children from experiencing human and media contact, your nurture input is only part of a whole. I learned a lot of what I did and did not want to be like from my parents growing up, but I also learned a lot from my siblings[1] and my friends, and my school experiences. That is, you may provide the same ingredients, but ultimately the ki…

Except the differences start showing up long before school age.

Well sure. Notice I said homeschooling and preventing most contact (which actually makes homeschooling redundant).

Kids likely won't turn out the same even with the exact same environmental inputs, but I'm just pointing out that we often vastly over estimate our ability to control those environmental inputs in the first place, so the point is somewhat moot.