Corporal Punishment (part 1)

For the purpose of distinguishing between Corporal Punishment (CP) and Physical Abuse, I will use the definition of corporal punishment as defined by Straus (1994a). 

“Corporal punishment is the use of physical force with the intention of causing a child to experience pain but not injury for the purposes of correction or control of the child’s behavior”

I consider anything beyond this limited definition of CP to be physical abuse. 

Physical abuse as defined by the National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information (2000), is: "Physical abuse is characterized by the infliction of physical injury as a result of punching, beating, kicking, biting, burning, shaking or otherwise harming a child. The parent or caretaker may not have intended to hurt the child, rather the injury may have resulted from over-discipline or physical punishment. (What Are the Main Types of Maltreatment? section, para. 2)" 

Just to be clear, I'm personally and professional opposed to the use of corporal punishment and physical abuse. This is my bias.  I make every effort to focus on helping parents develop constructive methods for addressing unwanted behaviors and for teaching children the adaptive behaviors, values, and character traits they will need to become successful adults. 

Parents have approximately 6,600 days between birth and age 18 to gradually guide their children toward adulthood. Unless someone is on fire or gushing blood - there is no emergency or critical behavior that needs to be 'fixed' right this moment with the use of physical force.  Take a step-back, take a breath, relax, and make a coherent and constructive plan.      

Neither corporal punishment nor physical abuse is effective in correcting children's behavior. 

Punishments, even severe punishments, only serve to suppress an unwanted behavior within a specific situational context, but not elsewhere in the child's life.  Suppressing an unwanted behavior does nothing to address underlying drivers or to teach new, adaptive behaviors.  Suppression is temporary.  The behavior will be back.  Many parents find this to be very frustrating, contributing to an ever increasing level of punishment severity. 

Corporal Punishment should never be utilized to address children's behavior, except only under the direct supervision and guidance of a team of highly qualified professionals to address a very specific set of severe and extreme behaviors. 

If your family is struggling with this level of severity, please do consult with a team of highly trained and highly qualified medical and behavioral experts.

Kenneth H. Little, MA / 135 Lee Brook Road / Thornton, NH 03285 / 603-726-1006 / Achieve-ES.com

The Tragedy of 'No' (Draft)

Draft

The “No” Word 

As many parents have pointed out, the word "no" can create an avalanche of horribly cascading dysregulation, and not just among toddlers.  A toddler's tantrum can be taxing, although sometimes cute, but a toddler's tantrum is never as difficult or as dangerous as the tantrum 'tweens and teens can throw. 

A 'tween's tantrum can become a property destroying rampage; and anything a tween can do, a teen can double-down on.    

Note: All of these blog posts are based on case compilations involving 100s of children and families that I've worked with over the years.   

Mom of an 11 year old: My son can go from zero to tantrum in the blink of an eye.  

me: What's the trigger?   

Mom: When he hears the word "no".  

me: What's the tantrum look like?  

Mom: Oh, it's hell on wheels.  He swears, tips over furniture, breaks things, threatens me, slams doors, punches holes in his bed room walls."

me: What did you say "no" to?

Mom: He wanted more juice .... 

Special note:  No, a "whooping" won't help.  I'll explain another time.

There are three basic rules for the "no" word.

~ Rule #1) If you say it, you have to mean it and make it stick.

~ Rule #2) Don't say it if you don't mean it.

~ Rule #3) If you say it but don't really mean it, ignore rule #1. 

Wait, what? Why ditch rule #1?  Doesn't my kid just have to learn to accept a simple "no"?  Yes, she does.  How many years have you been trying?  How's it going so far? 

If you are happy with the way things are and want to persist along your current path, carry on.  

If you want to try something different, read on.

The reasons we ditch #1.

First, if we said "no" when we did not mean it, saying it was our mistake, not the child's.  We can own the mistake, take responsibility, and work to fix the problem.   

Second, it's just pragmatic. The tantrum is not worth living through.  There is no truly important issue on the table worth tipping the entire family and household over.    

Most importantly, teens, tweens, and younger children who still tantrum tend to be (no, not brats) ... cognitively inflexible. It's a neurological thing.   

Their brains gets stuck.   They need to learn new skills.  

They can have tremendous difficulty shifting mental sets: transitioning from one activity to another; transitioning from a preferred to non-preferred activity; adapting to changing plans, circumstances; etc.  

Stress can make people even more inflexible and life, if nothing else, is highly stressful to kids who are cognitively inflexible.    

Adult inflexibility is not a helpful response in the moment.  It does not role model flexibility. In other words, adult stubbornness teaches and reinforces child stubbornness.  Adult inflexibility supports and encourages child inflexibility.

The adults are responsible for leading by example; to model flexibility. 

Try to meet inflexibility with flexibility, a maladaptive response with an adaptive response.  Role model the adaptive opposite. The opposite of inflexibility is flexibility.

So, what happened to rule #1 above? 

Reserve the word "no" for situations that matter.  

If your 8 year old wants to camp-out in the living room, say yes.  If he asks if he can build a fire pit in the middle of the floor, "no" makes perfect sense.  Or, if your 12 year old asks if she can drive the car down to the store, "no" makes sense. 

These are logical, hard "no" situations.  Safety is at stake.  You say "no" and make it stick.  It's hard to argue with and it really matters.  

There is always room for some skilled finesse in how you say "no", but "no" is the only possible answer in these situations.

You might say, "camping out in the living room is so much fun, but, hmmm, having a fire in the living room might turn out badly.  How about if we make the fire in the back yard?"

This is saying "no", then suggesting (redirecting the child's brain to) a better idea. 

You can say "no" firmly, but empathically.  

Example, "sorry, Buddy, absolutely no to the fire in the living room.  It's not safe.  Our house will burn down." 

Logical "no"s make sense. Kids can understand them even if they do not like them.  

On the other hand,

• Casual "no"s
• Kneejerk "no"s
• Habitual "no"s
• Convenience "no"s

... all tend to be fairly arbitrary.  They don't make sense and can be infuriating. Kids know they don't make sense.  Parents know they don't make sense. It's a no-win situation.  

Tween arriving home from school: "Mom, can I have juice?"

Mom: "no, it's too close to dinner."

Bam!  The tantrum hits in a great explosion.  Swears fly, the book bad soars across the room, smashing the lamp; tween stomps off, slamming doors and crashing around.    

Immediately, Mom knows her  mistake.  This is just not worth fighting about.  What to do, what to do?     

Arbitrary rules and enforcement can be infuriating, not just to children.  Adults get frustrated with arbitrary rules and enforcement.            

There are options. 

Think for a moment about what you really mean before speaking.  Instead of "no, not today", try "yes, we can do that tomorrow (or this weekend, etc)."

Think about how you frame your response.  If you are not sure, be honest.  For example, "hmmmm, I'm not sure.  Let me think about it for a few minutes."  Doing this models thinking things through. Ask a few clarifying questions: how much, how long, what's your plan?  

If you say "no" then try to make it stick but eventually give in to the tantrum, you have sabotaged your authority.  If you say "no" to a situation that does not matter, you come across as thoughtlessly arbitrary ... and sabotaged your authority.   

It’s better if you only say “no” when you really mean “no”. 

If you do say 'no" when you do not mean it, do be open to changing you mind, if possible, when your child uses positive verbal reasoning skills to explain her perspective.

Allowing yourself to being “persuaded” by your child when he uses positive verbal reasoning skills is a good way to help him develop a sense that verbal reasoning skills are valuable and can be used effectively.

Using verbal reasoning skills is the positive opposite adaptive behavior to tantrums and misbehavior.  This is what we want to help our children practice more of.  More verbal reasoning, fewer, less severe tantrums. 

Verbal reasoning is a primary life skill.

Bad Words! Bad!

No, not swear words.

There are certain words we use to describe children and their behavior that are counter-productive; one of the most destructive of which is the word "manipulative".

Bad words!  Bad!  Words matter.  To keep one's head straight, it's important to think about and describe behaviors in a constructive manner that makes success more likely.  

Using the wrong words makes success less likely.

Have you ever had a phone call from someone trying to sell you something, during which you felt like you were being manipulated?

If yes, what did you do?  

I hang up, cut the call off . Bam!  Discussion over. Problem solved.

As parents and mental health professionals, the last thing we ever want to do during our work with a child is to "hang up on them".  We can take breaks, this is sensible, but we never want to cut the conversation off.  

Try this.  Re-conceptualize "manipulative" behavior as a maladaptive behavior to get a need met.  

By changing the way we describe the behavior, we also change our relationship with the behavior. 

When we think of a behavior as a maladaptive effort to get a need met, we feel compelled to wonder -- what is the need and what would be an adaptive way to get that need met?

This is what parenting and treatment are all about, the process of teaching adaptive skills to children so that they can cope with and navigate the complexities of life in a better, healthier, more effective manner.

And, yes, we all want our needs met.  Let's not be 'judgy' about this. The challenge is to get needs met in an adaptive manner.      

When we think of behavior as manipulative, we feel a strong need to disengage, withdraw from the child (see Counter-Transference).  When we think of behaviors as maladaptive, it leads us to ask ... how can we help this child and what would be the adaptive opposite behavior?   

What we really want, is to keep the communication open, to figure out what the need is and how to teach, train, encourage more adaptive ways for the child to get his needs met.   

It's best to be very careful what terms we use to describe behavior.  

Always respond to maladaptive behaviors in an adaptive way.

Kenneth H. Little, MA / 135 Lee Brook Road / Thornton, NH 03285 / 603-726-1006 / Achieve-ES.com