Parenting with Love and Logic: Teaching Children Responsibility

by Foster W. Cline

“Josh, I saw what you did to Parker. Do you approve of that? What would be the right thing to do now? How do you think Parker feels? I hope next time you’ll find a better way to solve that kind of problem.” Such comments put the burden of resolving the problem as well as the future response on Josh’s shoulders.

To repeat: The best solution to any problem lies within the skin of the person who rightfully owns the problem.

we allow our kids to mess up, and we don’t drive home the lesson of their misdeeds with our words. We are slow to lecture; we never actually tell our kids what they have just learned. We believe telling our kids what to think is counterproductive. We can give them guidance (more on that in subsequent chapters), but they must think for themselves. Making enforceable statements and giving choices forces that thinking back on them.

The boundaries we set for our children are in reality the boundaries we set for ourselves. The more squishy and indecisive we are about our own boundaries, the more soggy and inconsistent we are about the limits we set for our toddlers.

Children lucky enough to have limits placed on them in loving ways become secure enough to not only deal effectively with their own emotions but also form satisfying relationships with others. These limits allow children to develop self-confidence. As a result, these children are easier to teach, they spend less time misbehaving, and they grow up to be responsible adults.

For many parents, setting limits means issuing commands and backing up those limits with more commands spiced with sternness and anger. They figure every time they say something to their kids, they’re setting limits, and the louder their voice gets and the more often they repeat it, the firmer the limits become. They may get results with their orders, but they’re setting their kids up for a fight (against them) and doing them a great disservice at the same time. You’ve probably noticed that there’s something different in how Love and Logic parents talk to kids. We’re always asking questions. We’re always offering choices. We don’t tell our kids what to do, but we put the burden of decision making on their shoulders. As they grow older, we don’t tell them what the limits are; we establish limits by offering choices.

LOVE AND LOGIC TIP 15 Fighting Words and Thinking Words

Observe the difference between some fighting and thinking words:[4] Child says something loud and unkind to the parents. FIGHTING WORDS: “Don’t you talk to me in that tone of voice!” THINKING WORDS: “You sound upset. I’ll be glad to listen when your voice is as soft as mine is.” Child is dawdling with her homework. FIGHTING WORDS: “You get to work on your studying!” THINKING WORDS: “Feel free to join us for some television when your studying is done.” Two kids are fighting. FIGHTING WORDS: “Be nice to each other. Quit fighting.” THINKING WORDS: “You guys are welcome to come back as soon as you work that out.” Child won’t do his chores. FIGHTING WORDS: “I want that lawn cut now!” THINKING WORDS: ‘‘I’ll take you to your soccer game as soon as the lawn is cut.”

from early childhood on, parents must always be asking thinking questions: “Would you rather carry your coat or wear it?” “Would you rather put your boots on now or in the car?” “Would you rather play nicely in front of the television or be noisy in your room?” We don’t use fighting words: “You put that coat on now!” “Because I said put your boots on, that’s why! It’s snowing outside.” “I’m trying to watch this football game, so be quiet!”

Mom and Dad have a problem. They must convince this child that such dinner behavior is unacceptable. They must set limits. They could slap his little hands, grab his little shoulders, and peer directly into his little eyes while saying, “Lukas, eat nice or Daddy spanks.” And Lukas would show them just how strong his little lungs are. Or they could say, “Lukas, would you like to eat nicely in the chair, or would you like to play on the floor?” Notice that the parents do not ask Lukas to “play nicely” on the floor. We can’t make a child play nicely on the floor, but we can help him to eat nicely. One thing is under our control; the other is not.

If Lukas chooses the floor, he may learn soon enough that it’s a long, hunger-filled time until breakfast. Naturally, when providing such options as waiting until breakfast, the average child will make the rest of the night as miserable as possible. Older children will whine that they are hungry, and younger children will keep parents up with wails of unhappiness. Wise parents show compassion, stick to their guns, and show minimal frustration in spite of the child’s best attempt to provoke it.

Brandon was attempting to wrest back some control of the situation. He was fighting. I’ll go, he said inside. But I won’t go your way — I’ll go my way. A sure sign of passive-resistant behavior in children is prolonged parental frustration.

We’d Rather They Think Than Fight Fighting words invite disobedience. When we use them, we draw a line in the sand and dare our kids to cross it. They will fight the limits we impose when we use fighting words. Fighting words include three types of commands: 1. Telling our kids what to do — “You get to work on that lawn right now.” 2. Telling our kids what we will not allow — “You’re not going to talk to me that way!” 3. Telling our kids what we won’t do for them — “I’m not letting you out of this house until you clean the living room.” When we issue such commands we are calling our kids to battle, and in many cases these are battles we cannot win.

Limits can be set much more effectively when we’re not fighting with our kids. It has been clinically proven that kids who are thinking cannot fight us at the same time. Love and Logic parents make statements with enforceable thinking words, telling their kids: What we will allow — “Feel free to join us for your next meal as soon as the lawn is mowed.” What we will do — “I’ll be glad to read you a story as soon as you’ve finished your bath.” What we will provide — “You may eat what is served, or you may wait and see if the next meal appeals to you more.”

The rule with “no” is that we use it as seldom as possible. But when we use it, we mean business. All of the other times we are tempted to use “no,” we can avoid a fight by replacing “no” with a “yes” to something else. In this way, we use thinking words instead of fighting words,

that’s the way the world works for me. First I get my job done, then I get paid, and then I eat. If it’s good enough for me, who do you suppose I think it’s also good enough for?”

And we always respond with, “Good thinking.” When we give our children the right to make decisions, there is no anger for them to rebel against.

CHILD: “Can I have (candy, prom dress, car)?” MOM: “Honey, if anyone deserves that (candy, prom dress, car), it’s you. Buy it!” CHILD: “I don’t have the money.” MOM: “Sorry about that. It’s like that a lot for me too. I guess then you won’t buy it.”

Mean What You Say, and Say What You Mean Just as quickly as kids learn the limits, they’ll test them. In fact, they need to test them in order to assure themselves that the limits are firm enough to provide the needed security. They need to find out if we mean what we say

Kids would prefer you went back to your old methods than continue as things are now. However, Love and Logic parents are ready for the siege and know how to come through it with everyone the better for the experience.

we tell them so in all kindness and understanding: “It is a bummer to miss a meal. Any of us would feel hungry. But, boy, do I ever enjoy the next meal.”

Using enforceable thinking words, giving choices, displaying no anger — these are the ingredients for establishing firm limits with our kids.

We don’t feel like good parents unless we can run our kids around like little robots. It all boils down to control. We want to control our children. We want them to do what we want them to do, when we want them to do it. At times, our kids fight us with a passion. Before we know it, we’re locked into a control struggle. How much easier it would have been for Natalie to use thinking words,

Control is a curious thing. The more we give away, the more we gain. Parents who attempt to take all the control from their children end up losing the control they sought to begin with. These parents invite their children to fight

Kids will take this stuff for a while, but eventually they shake off this blanketlike control. One day Brooke said to herself, Mom is getting out of line. It’s about time to reel her in. Maybe it’s time for her to get a C on the report card. Brooke received the C, and Amy came unglued. She ranted, raved, grounded, withheld, lectured, yelled at the teachers, and recruited her husband to deliver his “Get good grades now or you’ll never cut it in college” speech. Brooke sat back and thought, You haven’t seen anything yet. Wait until Mom gets an F. Poor Amy. She has yet to discover that kids get report cards, parents don’t.

When parents pull in the reins, these children resist and are filled with anger. Kids who start with too much power force us to tighten the limits around them, and that makes them angry. Adults are no different. When control in some area of life is reduced, we also react with anger. We feel that what is rightfully ours has been stripped away.

What, then, is the right amount of control to give children? Psychologist Sylvia B. Rimm, PhD, says people of all ages compare the amount of control they have in a relationship to only the amount of control they used to have — not to the amount they feel they should have.

Rimm’s analysis is called the “V” of love. The sides of the “V” represent firm limits within which the child may make decisions and live with the consequences. The bottom of the “V” represents birth, while the top represents the time when the child leaves home for adult life.

These are battles we can’t win with commands. They pertain to what children learn, think, and eat; when they go to bed or the bathroom; and so forth. In each, children fight tenaciously to win, and when we get involved in these battles, we invariably lose. We influence our children in these areas only by modeling.

The secret to establishing control is to concentrate on fighting battles that we know we can win. That means we must select the issues very carefully.

We cannot afford to demand blind obedience to our every wish. When faced with such demands, kids dig in their heels and hold out for their own values — and that’s a control battle we’ll lose every time. LOVE AND LOGIC TIP 19 Three Rules for Control Battles 1. Avoid a control battle at all costs. 2. If you’re going to get into one, win at all costs. 3. Pick the issue carefully. Whenever a control battle is lost, it’s because the issue was not chosen carefully.

Choices Change Everything Winnable war is waged through choices, not demands. Choices change the entire complexion of the control struggle. They allow us to give away the control we don’t need and gain the control we do.

One reason choices work is that they create situations in which children are forced to think.

Second, choices provide opportunities for children to make mistakes and learn from the consequences.

the punishment comes not from us but from the world around them. Then children don’t get angry at us;...

parents should offer choices only when they are willing to ensure that their children are forced to live with the consequences.

“Is there a way we can get better cooperation from our kids regardless of how strong-willed they were born?” Yes, there is a way. A small change in the way we talk can

battle line is drawn. Regardless of how the child reacts, she is actually obeying the adult’s request. Both the dignity of the adult and the dignity of the child can be maintained. Disciplinary action to help Megan learn the wisdom of cooperating with the teacher can be provided at a later time if

TEACHER: (walking up to the student and whispering) “Megan, I need you to move your chair back. Would you consider doing that for me? Thank you.” (The word consider takes away any threat and eliminates the opportunity for Megan to be defiant.) MEGAN: “But I want Brittany to help me.” TEACHER: (still whispering) “I’m sure that’s true, and I’d like you to consider moving.” MEGAN: “No. I don’t have to.” TEACHER: (still whispering) “Thanks for considering it. Do you really think that it’s wise to refuse when I ask in a nice way? Personally, I don’t think that’s a wise decision. We’ll talk about that later.” (The teacher walks away, and Megan remains where she is, provided she does not create a disturbance.) Because Megan was not ordered to move, she has already complied with the teacher’s request. She was not told to move, only to consider moving. Nobody has lost a battle at this point. The other students are not aware of the problem, and the teacher’s authority has not been challenged in front of the group. Megan’s teacher now has the time to figure out how to deal with Megan’s lack of cooperation. If discipline is necessary, it can be done in private.

parents can set themselves up to be winners as authority figures by using some of the following “Thinking Word Requests” instead of “Fighting Word Demands”: FIGHTING WORD DEMAND: “Take out the trash, and do it now!” THINKING WORD REQUEST: “I’d appreciate your taking out the trash before bedtime. Thanks.” FIGHTING WORD DEMAND: “Don’t you talk to me that way! You go to your room!” THINKING WORD REQUEST: “Would you mind taking those words to your room? Thank you.” FIGHTING WORD DEMAND: “You come here right now!” THINKING WORD REQUEST: “Hey, would you mind coming here? Thank you.” FIGHTING WORD DEMAND: “Go help your little sister. Do it now. I mean it!” THINKING WORD REQUEST: “Would you mind helping your sister now? I’d appreciate it.”

MOM: “Would you mind taking those words to your room? Thank you.” SON: “No! I don’t have to.” MOM: “Did I ask in a nice way?” SON: “Yeah, so what? I’m not leaving!” MOM: “Not wise, son. I am learning a lot from this.” Mom walks off and allows her son to temporarily believe he has won the battle. However, he will learn later about the foolishness of his decision. The following day he asks his mom to take him across town to his soccer game and discovers the results of being uncooperative: SON: “Mom, will you take me to my game? Mrs. Howarth can’t drive today.” MOM: “I don’t know. Did you ask in a nice way?” SON: “Sure. What’s this all about?” MOM: “Yesterday I learned from you that asking in a nice way doesn’t get the job done. Remember that little episode when I asked, in a nice way, for you to go to your room? What did you teach me at that time?” SON: “I don’t know.” MOM: “You taught me that asking in a nice way doesn’t mean all that much. I’d appreciate your giving that some thought. And some day when I feel better about your level of cooperation, I’ll be glad to help out.”

Soon the corners of his mouth begin to tighten into a curt, self-satisfied smile. When Dad sees it, he jumps out of the booth and yells, “Okay, that’s it! We’re going shopping without you, and do you know what’s going to happen to you, buddy? Cops are going to come get you!” Aidan, no doubt, is thinking something like this: Look at me. I’m only six years old, and I’ve totally controlled these two adults for twenty minutes without even opening my mouth. What a power trip! I control their tone of voice, the color of their faces, and whether or not they make fools of themselves in public. The last thing on my mind is worrying about being picked up by cops.

Love and Logic parents would say, with a smile on their face, “No problem, Aidan. My car will be leaving in five minutes. There are two ways to leave with me: hungry is one way; not hungry is the other.” That gives the parents as much control as they need. They don’t need to control whether the burger goes down the child’s throat — in fact, they can’t control that. But the parents can control when the car leaves. By offering Aidan the choices, the struggle is transferred inside Aidan’s head. Aidan’s too busy to argue — he’s weighing his choices, Hungry … not hungry … hungry … not hungry — and Mom and Dad have five minutes of welcome tranquility. They gain control by relinquishing control.

“Don’t forget, my car is leaving in three minutes. If you don’t eat that food, you’re going to be hungry. You’ll wake up in the middle of the night, and there won’t be anything to eat. It’s going to be a miserable night.” These sorts of reminders are put-downs. Cut the kid some slack. Aidan’s smart enough to remember the choices he’s been given.

Human beings crave emotion. In fact, most folks believe God wants His people to love Him, so maybe even He craves emotion. People will pay big bucks to satisfy their cravings. Indeed, the most-requested speakers, the most sought-after entertainers, and the world’s greatest sports stars are among the most highly paid people on earth. What do they have in common? They all stimulate our emotions.

Love is important, for loving parents generally raise great kids. But to children, everyday, plain old love can be a little boring. It’s not the movies about love that they love to see! Which movie do most kids want to see: Jurassic Park (about dinosaurs dining on humans) or a sweet little love story like Sleepless in Seattle? Most kids would rather see a dinosaur eat a lawyer in an outhouse any old day! But by far the most effective emotion for modifying children’s behavior is the showing of frustration. From a kid’s point of view, frustration is an irresistible mix of wonderful emotions. Adult anger and adult loss of control — no kid could ask for anything more exciting! As a matter of fact, we all love frustration and loss of control by others. Most of today’s sitcoms and many comic strips are based on frustrated authority figures. The toddlerhood game of peekaboo and the subsequent, “Oh, no! You see me!” is often based on mock frustration. Kids love mock frustration. “Oh, no, you beat me to the car!” Whenever adults show real frustration, they give off vibrations of strong emotion, usually anger, and then delightfully declare they have no control in the situation. Frustration almost always indicates a loss of control. This is the irresistible combination frustration shows: The parent turns red, lights up, gets noisy, and hands control to the child. Now what kid wouldn’t want that?!

LOVE AND LOGIC TIP 20 “No Problem” The phrase “No problem” is a lifesaver for the parent confronted with a misbehaving child. When Mom or Dad says it, even the dumbest kid in the world can figure out what it means: No problem for the adult, big problem for the kid. When we say, “No problem,” we give ourselves a few precious seconds to come up with thinking words that will inform our children what we will do, not what they have to do.

“My car is leaving now.” Probably Aidan will say, “Yeah, but I’m not finished.” Once again Dad would offer Aidan choices: “No problem, son. You can go under your own power or my power. Either one.”

(An important note on choices: There are always three. In this example, Aidan can do it one way, or he can do it the other way. The third option is that the parent will decide. Aidan didn’t decide, so his dad decided for him.)

he will probably be kicking and screaming like a banshee. Everybody in Burger King will be watching every move Dad makes as he hauls this wild, flailing kid out the door. Let them watch. First, the people in the restaurant aren’t saying to themselves, Look what a bad parent that guy is. They’re thinking, Thank goodness that’s not my kid. Now I can eat in peace. Second, parents of six-year-olds don’t go into a place like Burger King to build lasting relationships with the other people dining there, so who cares what they think? And third, teaching a child responsibility is not a free ride. We must steel ourselves for resistance and opposition. There’s a price we must pay.