Jump to content
baddad

ooooohhhh... a new series of...

Recommended Posts

Jo Frost extreme parenting!

 

A 6 year old who beats the cr*p out of his mum every bedtime...

A 2yr old Sweary Mary...

A bad loser...

and kids who kick off when out in public!

 

And that's only the first fifteen minute section!!

 

Oh JOY! :whistle: :whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know you love it BD sittin there in your armchair of an evening :curlers::wine:

 

That's what they call viewin pleasure at its best :devil:

 

 

Oh no, no wine on a weekday :shame: And I only cross dress / put in the curlers on VERY special occasions...

 

What I really like is seeing very, very unhappy, confused, distressed, unlikeable children come out the other side as happy, confident, destressed, likeable children.

 

Anyone who watched tonight, didn't the wee fella look really happy trotting off to bed on his own at half past eight? And didn't the other little boy seem so much motre fulfilled when his parents introduced the routines that gave him and his sister with rhetts syndrome the reassurance and 'quality time' they each needed? The words 'socks', 'bless' and 'cotton' all come to mind, no? :thumbs:

 

L&P

 

BD

Edited by baddad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was riveted as usual, always amazed that it always works! missed the bit where the little girl pulls her eyelashes out, well the outcome of that, anyone see it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was riveted as usual, always amazed that it always works! missed the bit where the little girl pulls her eyelashes out, well the outcome of that, anyone see it?

 

I'm never amazed that it always works! :lol: The girl pulling her eye-lashes out was only a minute or so from her 'roadshow' - Basically Jo identified it as a manipulative/controlling behaviour which was confirmed by a few more questions about previous behaviours, and she told the parents not to allow themselves to be manipulated by it or any other variations on the same theme. The parents went away nodding their heads, but you could tell they were going to go back to the same old same old... dunno why they bothered asking, really :rolleyes:

 

Next week's looks interesting - ten year old boy (or somesuch age) who eats nothing but custard creams and has never eaten a proper meal in his life.

 

ladeez and gentlemen, place your bets... I'm putting my money on Jo and common sense rather than mum's 'instincts' being right and the kid being the exception to the rule :whistle::lol:

 

L&P

 

BD

Edited by baddad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh no, no wine on a weekday :shame: And I only cross dress / put in the curlers on VERY special occasions...

 

What I really like is seeing very, very unhappy, confused, distressed, unlikeable children come out the other side as happy, confident, destressed, likeable children.

 

Anyone who watched tonight, didn't the wee fella look really happy trotting off to bed on his own at half past eight? And didn't the other little boy seem so much motre fulfilled when his parents introduced the routines that gave him and his sister with rhetts syndrome the reassurance and 'quality time' they each needed? The words 'socks', 'bless' and 'cotton' all come to mind, no? :thumbs:

 

L&P

 

BD

I'll take your word for it one the old wine box BD :thumbs: I barely ever drink so no wine for me...

 

I watched it last night - missed a few bits due to my chains being attached to the cooker :( just kidding, but I did miss a few bits.

 

I loved the little boy with his super hero costumes, I laughed out loud when they showed him the clock and explained it and he just trotted off quite happily to change (its amazing what clear explanations and expectations can achieve eh?).

 

As for the other little boy - well, my housemates were watching the show under duress (I pulled rank because I only watch about 3 hours of tv a week and mostly not on the main house tv, whereas the ole HM's use it for hours and hours) Anyway, I didn't believe him (the little boy) his anger just didn't look convincing to me, I think it was all a ploy to get a reaction (or attention?) out of his mum. By this I mean that I didn't think he was truly aggressive, I think it was just his way of communicating his unhappiness (maybe about the lack of boundaries?).

 

It was nice seeing him happy at the end :)

 

The statistics shocked me (on the roadshow bit) - when they did that ad that was similar to ones on tv for child abuse - which I knew straight away what those statistic would be for - but the actual figures were still quite shocking!!! Does anyone else think this may be an explanation for the yoof of taday?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The naughty step is moulded to the shape of my bum after the years of action it's seen. Ben's step is lower down, and hasn't seen a great deal of action for the past five or six years or so...

 

Aggressive boy - no, not attention seeking, I don't think, or 'communication'; just controlling. Didn't want to go to bed, and believed (quite accurately) that if he behaved that way he wouldn't have to... Controlling is a perfectly natural human impulse while 'communication' and 'attention seeking' are more complex and considered. It's over-complication, IMO, that's the biggest problem these days - parents trying to 'understand' natural behaviours that don't really need understanding and then compensating inappropriately for the assumptions they make

 

The clock -

I'm wondering if JF comes here and reads my posts for research purposes... :whistle:;)

 

If you look back about eight years you'll find posts about Ben's dad-designed Wacky Races clock... as Mssrs Reeves and Mortimor used to say, 'that was myyyyy idea...' :lol:

 

I think all sorts of dynamics apply to the 'yoof of today' but certainly issues like quality time, modelled behaviour, warehousing rather than greenhousing and toys instead of playgrounds and parks is a big part of it...

I did think, (very smugly, I'll admit) about Ben's childhood and the hours and hours we spent doing stuff together at the park, seaside etc and with indoor 'golden time'... Even though he had a climbing frame and trampoline up the garden we still went OUT and did those things more often than not, and even up the garden I'd usually be doing them with him. Don't get me wrong, I know we were very lucky (complicated, because it didn't feel lucky at the time) to be in a position where we could do those things and I don't 'blame' parents who aren't, but the truth according to those statistics is that there are many who could be doing much more without having to make any major adjustments other than turning off certain bits of technology a couple of times per day. I think the hardest part for me to understand is why that seems to be a chore for many parents, when for me it felt like an opportunity - whether it was helping him to queue for the slide at the park or developing his counting, turn taking and fine motor skills playing 'build a beetle' on the living room carpet...

 

Sorry, i'm going all :tearful: ... I'm off to watch his 'earlybird' video and get all maudlin. Who needs wineboxes when you've got earlybird videos?! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The naughty step is moulded to the shape of my bum after the years of action it's seen. Ben's step is lower down, and hasn't seen a great deal of action for the past five or six years or so...

 

Aggressive boy - no, not attention seeking, I don't think, or 'communication'; just controlling. Didn't want to go to bed, and believed (quite accurately) that if he behaved that way he wouldn't have to... Controlling is a perfectly natural human impulse while 'communication' and 'attention seeking' are more complex and considered. It's over-complication, IMO, that's the biggest problem these days - parents trying to 'understand' natural behaviours that don't really need understanding and then compensating inappropriately for the assumptions they make

 

The clock -

I'm wondering if JF comes here and reads my posts for research purposes... :whistle:;)

 

If you look back about eight years you'll find posts about Ben's dad-designed Wacky Races clock... as Mssrs Reeves and Mortimor used to say, 'that was myyyyy idea...' :lol:

BD the kiddy technique guru eh? :) Bet that didn't come easy to start with. Bet it took work and lots of it.

 

The little angry bedtime lad? Well I just meant that when I watched him he didn't really seem to be all that angry, it seemed a put on, like he was just acting angry, like the anger version of crocodile tears. If you've seen enough of the other programmes you'll know what I am trying to say cuz some other kids have gone completely psycho (it seems) where they appear to have lost control in their rage... this boy just didn't really seem that mad. Yes it was controlling behaviour and because he was allowed to get away with it. I still think he was trying to let her know he wanted the boundaries and routine and attention.

 

I think all sorts of dynamics apply to the 'yoof of today' but certainly issues like quality time, modelled behaviour, warehousing rather than greenhousing and toys instead of playgrounds and parks is a big part of it...

I did think, (very smugly, I'll admit) about Ben's childhood and the hours and hours we spent doing stuff together at the park, seaside etc and with indoor 'golden time'... Even though he had a climbing frame and trampoline up the garden we still went OUT and did those things more often than not, and even up the garden I'd usually be doing them with him. Don't get me wrong, I know we were very lucky (complicated, because it didn't feel lucky at the time) to be in a position where we could do those things and I don't 'blame' parents who aren't, but the truth according to those statistics is that there are many who could be doing much more without having to make any major adjustments other than turning off certain bits of technology a couple of times per day. I think the hardest part for me to understand is why that seems to be a chore for many parents, when for me it felt like an opportunity - whether it was helping him to queue for the slide at the park or developing his counting, turn taking and fine motor skills playing 'build a beetle' on the living room carpet...

Maybe circumstance forced you to look at things in a new way? Like when in life something happens that makes you stop and think? Not everyone does... Some people leave their blinkers on.

I agree its not about blame, and there are ways that without too much effort time can be spent with children, I think there's too many hours spent staring at screens.

I also don't understand why it appears a chore to some, and your right, it is an opportunity, one phrase I like is what a parent said to me about it being the most life changing adventure he had ever experienced, it totally changed him, opened his eyes, taught him lessons that he'd never have learnt. It is an opportunity. You sound like a good dad - or if you prefer - you sound like you always aspire to be a good dad (as a continuing process that requires failures to succeed - if that makes sense?)

 

I always wonder something about these JF programs... Do you think parents learn from them? Do you think it opens their eyes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BD the kiddy technique guru eh? :) Bet that didn't come easy to start with. Bet it took work and lots of it.

 

Hmmm... the 'lateral thinking' was always there - I've just always liked kids and known how to engage with them (it's adults I struggle with!). Likewise, I've never had the illusions some people seem to have about children being innocent little angels, and I've always found that side of their nature that isn't innocent and angelic to be (within reason) part of the charm of them. There is a lovely WYSIWYG quality to kids, and it always amazes me when people go looking for big, grown up, complicated reasons for why i.e. they might not like sharing toys or waiting their turn, or going shopping, or going to bed or eating anything but chocolate and crisps or whatever...

 

What was hard, though, was coming to terms with not being able to exclusively be my son's 'best friend', and not being able to fix everything with a magic wand made of equal parts sugar and spice and love. And there was a lot of self-loathing attached to that - to not knowing intuitively what to do and for sometimes messing up in ways that made both of us miserable. And for sometimes not being as kind, considerate, calm and collected as I should have been or wanted to be (and he deserved), and, when things were really bad, for not being able to cope very well at all and for the spriraling sense of despair and fear arising from that. Thinking about your question in that way,there was lots of hard work, but it was more about becoming a 'me' guru than a 'Ben' guru, iyswim. I'll not say helping Ben achieve all the stuff he's achieved was easy, because of course it wasn't, but it became easier for recognising and accepting my own flaws, because it helped me see the real problems more clearly and address them more accurately. (And just for the record, that recognising and accepting my flaws wasn't / isn't the same thing as whinging and moaning 'I know I'm a bad parent' purely to receive reassurance and reinforcement that I wasn't /aint - that's a very different and self serving kind of dynamic all together, and I admire the way that JF has developed ways of skirting round it when she meets it while I tend to still get angry about it!). In a nutshell, understanding kids means taking the rose coloured spectacles off and seeing them for the lovely little monsters they are. Often the biggest part of the battle is getting the adult to discard the glasses, especially if the adult has invested a huge amount in making them, or even worse is in complete denial about their existence!

 

If you've seen enough of the other programmes you'll know what I am trying to say cuz some other kids have gone completely psycho (it seems) where they appear to have lost control in their rage...

 

No, more often than not they are just more accomplished or determined actors... To test the validity of whether they are genuinely undercontrolled personalities you have to put them into situations where there are genuine negative consequences to their actions. In 99 cases out of 100 if you do that consistently the behaviour will prove situation specific, which by definition means it is not 'uncontrolled'... That's precisely the flaw in situations where children are 'undercontrolled' personalities at home while 'controlled' personalities at school (or vice versa), and no amount of psychobabble about them feeling 'safe to let it out' in one specific environment or any amount of new-age terminologies to justify it can undermine the fundamental logic of that. I do think there are a tiny TINY number of people for whom the term 'uncontrollable rage' can consistently be applied, and institutions like broadmoor are probably the kind of places to find them. I think any parent willing to tar their six year old with that particular brush is probably making a grave error of judgement, even if in the fullness of time it is proven that they do fall within that tiny TINY percentage for whom it is genuine...

 

Maybe circumstance forced you to look at things in a new way? Like when in life something happens that makes you stop and think? Not everyone does... Some people leave their blinkers on.

 

Common sense, in the end, and that growing spiral of despair mentioned above that meant I either had to cr*p or get off the commode. Blinkers/Rose coloured specs - they amount to the same thing.

 

I always wonder something about these JF programs... Do you think parents learn from them? Do you think it opens their eyes?

 

Sadly, no. Other than those directly involved. Those watching at home just say 'well that IS what I do' (when they don't), or not recognise the behaviour their seeing onscreen as the same behaviour they see with their own child or family dynamic, or they will believe their child is 'the exception that proves the rule' or they will find some totally invalid excuse or justification; 'well, she's a girl - it wouldn't work with a boy like I've got'...

 

ASD, of course, is the ultimate 'get out of jail free' card - you can buy t-shirts and coffee mugs that tell you just that :) Interestingly, the mum of the 'super-hero boy' said that about her daughter with Retts syndrome - a condition with many direct associations with autism - effectively 'oh, there's nothing we can do about... [her]... (sorry, forgot her name). It was actually the daughter's routines Jo focussed on, and by 'fixing' them was able to help the family create the time their son needed. :whistle:

 

(as a continuing process that requires failures to succeed - if that makes sense?)

 

Yes, very much an ongoing process, and plenty of time for me to royally mess up some more as he progresses through the tricky teens and all that other cr*p he has to negotiate.

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interestingly, the mum of the 'super-hero boy' said that about her daughter with Retts syndrome - a condition with many direct associations with autism - effectively 'oh, there's nothing we can do about... [her]... (sorry, forgot her name). It was actually the daughter's routines Jo focussed on, and by 'fixing' them was able to help the family create the time their son needed. :whistle:

 

I haven't seen the programme, but just a thought...

 

Rett's Syndrome is a degenerative disease with a progressive loss of functions. While I agree that there is still a definite need for clear routines and boundaries in such a situation, I think we need to cut the parents some slack over this one. I work with one student who has a very similar degenerative condition, and I think any parent facing these kinds of challenges and the on-going grieving process needs very real compassion and support (which I'm sure Oberscharfuhrer Frost Super Nanny Jo did show ;) ).

 

Not trying to start an argument :fight: as I do actually agree with Ole SN, just thought it was worth pointing out that in this particular case, Rett's is not the same as an out-of-control spoiled kiddiwink!

 

Bid :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No - you've misinterpreted (I think? :unsure: )... I wasn't being critical of the parents and totally agree retts is a different kettle of fish etc... the point I meant to make was that the parents had been focussing so much on their daughter with retts and assuming so many things she couldn't do (in terms of routines) that it had basically taken over the whole family/house.... the 'problem' they had called in to get JF to fix was their little boy being totally obsessed with super-heroes to the detriment of everything else - including school work etc...

Jo got them to establish routines for the daughter (which they achieved very quickly and almost 'off camera' as the show wasn't about the daughter/retts), which freed them up to spend more time with their son who then came on in leaps and bounds! :thumbs::dance:

 

So the moral really was 'don't have a "can't do" attitude' (even for Retts) - and the parents and Both kids had the chance to shine as soon as the parents made that adjustment.

 

Everyone's a winner, bob's your uncle, fanny's your aunt, I thang yew, Elvis has left the building etc etc etc! :lol:

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not gonna fill the page with quotes, I'd just like to say thank you for your honesty, it is a subject of interest to me, and I appreciate the candid way you allow people to see your life, maybe they can take things from it, like learn from mistakes and tips on how to try doing things.

 

Don't you think it's slightly risky if parents don't use techniques like this properly? Cuz that's giving more mixed messages?

 

What always amuses me is when people say that JF is teaching the kids how to behave and its totally the parents who need to learn first, in order to show the kids.

 

I used to watch a program called dog borstal (loved the angry swearing guy) well he always said - we aren't training the dogs, the dogs are fine, its the bl00dy owners that need the training.

 

Similar principle? Or way off the mark?

 

Best

 

Darkshine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't you think it's slightly risky if parents don't use techniques like this properly? Cuz that's giving more mixed messages?

 

I think that happens quite often. It's not a question of the adults (it's not only parents - there are all sorts of carers in a child's networks, but of course generally parents will be the most significant and influential) not using the techniques 'properly', because they're pretty straightforward and black and white. Mostly it's inconsistency and the kind of irrational 'rationalisation' and denial mentioned above that over-complicates things. Almost without exception these programmes start with adults saying they have 'tried everything', and swearing that they are consistent and always follow through but that's invariably not the case. I've noticed that this new series seems to have dropped that, and wonder if it's because it was a bit too in yer face for viewers to deal with and was losing JF viewers(?). It's certainly not going to be because it doesn't apply, and the only logical alternative if Jo succeeds is that the adults didn't even think they were doing everything they could - which is actually worse! - but I can fully understand from a commercial point of view why JF would need to placate the adults and play to the gallery rather than just telling it like it is. I think that happens far too much already in professional circles, and does cause mixed messages and much bigger problems of negative reinforcement (for the adults) but don't know what can be done about it. If the grown ups can't listen to constructive criticism, what chance does the kid have of learning that skill? I noticed recently that the 'premise' behind ODD is basically parent's/carers offering negative reinforcers to their kids, and the 'intervention' is just retraining the adults. Everything else - including the term 'ODD' is just window dressing and sugar coating to enable the parents to avoid confronting the unpalatable truth! Go figure!!

 

What always amuses me is when people say that JF is teaching the kids how to behave and its totally the parents who need to learn first, in order to show the kids.

 

And when you say that are you 'parent bashing', or 'having a pop' or do you have any sort of nasty 'agenda'? Tread carefully, you're on dodgy ground here and accusations like that can come thick and fast however well intended the post might be :whistle: Part of teaching anyone about anything is telling them what they are, might be, or run the risk of getting wrong (and I'm talking about JF there, lest anyone asks after my qualifications to 'teach' anyone anything.. I (and others here) are just offering 'advice' not tutorials). I think if people respond to that aggressively, then it's perfectly reasonable to defend yourself, and if they insist they are right by offering explanations that don't hold water to acknowledge and highlight the holes so that the leaks can be plugged. Not everyone seems to agree with that... I do think if you can make a nice 'criticism sandwich' it can help, but often it doesn't matter how thickly you cut the bread the stuff in the middle still proves completely indigestible, and sometimes the quantity of 'filling' is just so great that the bread sort of gets lost anyway.

 

I used to watch a program called dog borstal (loved the angry swearing guy) well he always said - we aren't training the dogs, the dogs are fine, its the bl00dy owners that need the training.

 

Similar principle? Or way off the mark?

 

A bit of an oversimplification, and a difficult analogy for many people to swallow ("children aren't animals, you know!" :angry:), but there is a certain logic to it. There was an old saying back in the day when dog's were licensed (some OHMSS - and licensed to kill!) that 'you need a license to keep a dog while anyone can have kids'. Of course, there are a very VERY small number of dogs who really are just beyond training. As there's no broadmoor for dogs they end up getting put down. I think an owner willing to tar a young puppy with that particular brush is probably making a grave error of judgement :(

 

I wonder if this post will seem like a blue touch-paper to some, or whether this thread has already ceased to be of interest to many who are less admiring of the delightful Ms F's methods, and there are just a few die-hards left reading? :lol:

 

L&P

 

BD

Edited by baddad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another thought...

 

I have 2 other kids who are good ole fashioned NT, and a third who is pretty spectrumy but dx-free, and of course Big A with his triumvirate of AS, ADHD and Dyspraxia.

 

Thinking about my two NTers, you can bring up perfectly nice kids within a much broader scheme of perfectly successful parenting, if that makes sense.

 

By that I mean that I found that with my ASD one (the eldest) I needed to have a very firm family routine underpinning everything to start with (regular bedtimes, set mealtimes, etc, etc). And then once we had been shown how to tweak things to make them autism-specific (e.g. no point having a star chart for a week, we needed to start by breaking each day into three, using clear, simple language, etc) we had to realise that things were going to take much longer to sink in, much longer to be able to transfer skills, etc.

 

But from my NTers, I've realised you have much more wiggle space with your parenting. I know parents who had a much more laid back approach to parenting, etc, and their kids have grown into perfectly nice adults. And it is perfectly OK for people to have different parenting styles, which usually reflect their own personalities...it's just that if you have a kid with ASD you may find you have to parent in a way that doesn't reflect your personality!

 

Bid :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another thought...

 

I have 2 other kids who are good ole fashioned NT, and a third who is pretty spectrumy but dx-free, and of course Big A with his triumvirate of AS, ADHD and Dyspraxia.

 

Thinking about my two NTers, you can bring up perfectly nice kids within a much broader scheme of perfectly successful parenting, if that makes sense.

 

By that I mean that I found that with my ASD one (the eldest) I needed to have a very firm family routine underpinning everything to start with (regular bedtimes, set mealtimes, etc, etc). And then once we had been shown how to tweak things to make them autism-specific (e.g. no point having a star chart for a week, we needed to start by breaking each day into three, using clear, simple language, etc) we had to realise that things were going to take much longer to sink in, much longer to be able to transfer skills, etc.

 

But from my NTers, I've realised you have much more wiggle space with your parenting. I know parents who had a much more laid back approach to parenting, etc, and their kids have grown into perfectly nice adults. And it is perfectly OK for people to have different parenting styles, which usually reflect their own personalities...it's just that if you have a kid with ASD you may find you have to parent in a way that doesn't reflect your personality!

 

Bid :)

 

Yeah.... sort of... but I think AS kids just like NT kids come in all different flavas too. If you think about it, many parents will point at their well behaved kid and say, defensively, 'well if I'm such a cr*p parent how come he/she came out alright?' Not all of the 'naughty' kids are AS - they just have different needs to their sibling. And the thing is, in every such case the parent always interprets the good behaviours of their well behave kids as evidence of their brilliant parenting, when it's at least as likely to be the other way round entirely. Even when there are four or five kids in the family, family dynamics are such that things that happen to one didn't happen to others and/or that some were more/less resiliant to things that did happen across the board than others. The important thing is how the more 'difficult' one (or six or whatever) is (are) responded to... What's really bl00dy annoying is the gainsaying argument that's always levelled at the parents who have worked their nuts (or t!ts) off toddler taming one of the 'difficult' ones of "well every child is different" and the offensive (and untrue) suggestion that they've somehow copped lucky! :angry::angry::wallbash::lol:

 

 

L&P

 

BD :D

 

Oh PS - Yes, I am aware that we're both saying exactly the same thing! I was just broadening it out to include all those 'naughty step' NT's as well as the AS Naughty steppers, because I think even the suggestion that different rules apply as a matter of course is an inherently dodgy one!

Edited by baddad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah.... sort of... but I think AS kids just like NT kids come in all different flavas too. If you think about it, many parents will point at their well behaved kid and say, defensively, 'well if I'm such a cr*p parent how come he/she came out alright?' Not all of the 'naughty' kids are AS - they just have different needs to their sibling. And the thing is, in every such case the parent always interprets the good behaviours of their well behave kids as evidence of their brilliant parenting, when it's at least as likely to be the other way round entirely. Even when there are four or five kids in the family, family dynamics are such that things that happen to one didn't happen to others and/or that some were more/less resiliant to things that did happen across the board than others. The important thing is how the more 'difficult' one (or six or whatever) is (are) responded to... What's really bl00dy annoying is the gainsaying argument that's always levelled at the parents who have worked their nuts (or t!ts) off toddler taming one of the 'difficult' ones of "well every child is different" and the offensive (and untrue) suggestion that they've somehow copped lucky! :angry::angry::wallbash::lol:

 

 

L&P

 

BD :D

 

Oh PS - Yes, I am aware that we're both saying exactly the same thing! I was just broadening it out to include all those 'naughty step' NT's as well as the AS Naughty steppers, because I think even the suggestion that different rules apply as a matter of course is an inherently dodgy one!

 

I came back to say that I couldn't really remember why I wrote my last post, as it isn't particularly relevant to the thread :lol:

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is that some maybe more laid-back parenting can work perfectly fine with NT kids, but if you are that sort of parent, you will probabaly have a much steeper learning curve if you take delivery of an ASD kid, than someone who is by nature more organised and perhaps regimented. I remember being told in the very early days that, lovely though it might be, I couldn't be the laid back parent I had imagined.

 

Bid :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I came back to say that I couldn't really remember why I wrote my last post, as it isn't particularly relevant to the thread :lol:

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is that some maybe more laid-back parenting can work perfectly fine with NT kids, but if you are that sort of parent, you will probabaly have a much steeper learning curve if you take delivery of an ASD kid, than someone who is by nature more organised and perhaps regimented. I remember being told in the very early days that, lovely though it might be, I couldn't be the laid back parent I had imagined.

 

Bid :)

 

I wouldn't worry about relevancy - it was sort of an 'apropos of nothing' thread in the first place! :lol:

 

Yes, I think 'laid back' parenting styles may be more the preserve of parents of non-autistic kids, but I think the need for 'more organised / regimented' parenting styles (not sure if that's quite the right phrase(?)!) can apply for both. Certainly the kids JF generally tackles fall into the 'need for more organisation/regimentation' category, but are only very occasionally identified as AS or ADHD or whatever. And of course the beauty of an early start with organisation/regimentation is that whether AS is a factor or not the likelihood is that once the positive patterns are set then a more laid back parenting style will be achievable. In fact, I'd say that now stuff's established for Ben he's generally less manipulative then most of his NT mates. Don't get me wrong, he's no saint, and the 'wysiwyg' naivety is problematic in different ways, but for the most part he's more easy going and straightforward than your average thirteen year old... I don't know whether that would be 'typical' (not met enough well behaved thirteen year old autistic kids to be able to say :o:o ), or whether that's an area in which I genuinely have 'copped lucky', but I do know that if the groundwork hadn't been done years ago and had I given him the get out of jail free card many autistic kids get given then things now would be very different...

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't worry about relevancy - it was sort of an 'apropos of nothing' thread in the first place! :lol:

 

Yes, I think 'laid back' parenting styles may be more the preserve of parents of non-autistic kids, but I think the need for 'more organised / regimented' parenting styles (not sure if that's quite the right phrase(?)!) can apply for both. Certainly the kids JF generally tackles fall into the 'need for more organisation/regimentation' category, but are only very occasionally identified as AS or ADHD or whatever. And of course the beauty of an early start with organisation/regimentation is that whether AS is a factor or not the likelihood is that once the positive patterns are set then a more laid back parenting style will be achievable. In fact, I'd say that now stuff's established for Ben he's generally less manipulative then most of his NT mates. Don't get me wrong, he's no saint, and the 'wysiwyg' naivety is problematic in different ways, but for the most part he's more easy going and straightforward than your average thirteen year old... I don't know whether that would be 'typical' (not met enough well behaved thirteen year old autistic kids to be able to say :o:o ), or whether that's an area in which I genuinely have 'copped lucky', but I do know that if the groundwork hadn't been done years ago and had I given him the get out of jail free card many autistic kids get given then things now would be very different...

 

L&P

 

BD

 

Yeah, 'regimented' isn't the best word, but the caffeine hadn't hit in properly ;)

 

And agree about the majority of the kids featured on Nanny MacPhee Jo...and sort of contradicting myself in a way, proof that a basic family routine does underpin everything else because she always goes back to the basics. But I do think I'm right about there being more wiggle room with parenting standard issue kids IYSWIM!

 

Have to say that, aside from difficulties specifically linked to his special needs, I never had any teenage horrors with Big A at all! Far more teen angst with You-Know-Who!! Or maybe it's a question of interpretation? It never worried me that he has had (variously) long/mohawk/dyed/shaved hair, tattoo, 'interesting' clothes...because he has always worked and paid his way, cares for those more vulnerable (Gilbo!!), and has never messed around* with girlies or drugs/been in trouble with the police. Maybe his appearance would have worried some parents, or is this my 'laid-back' parenting coming out, I dunno??

 

Mind, I did have a giggle a few years back when she was doing something on healthy eating, because bless her, she's a big ole lass!! :lol:

 

Bid :)

 

* or possibly never got caught messing around... ;)

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Mind, I did have a giggle a few years back when she was doing something on healthy eating, because bless her, she's a big ole lass!! :lol:

 

 

 

:o:o

Yes, she's a big ol' bus, there's no escaping it, but maybe she just eats LOTS of healthy stuff? And though they are few and far between (and I'm certainly not saying this is or isn't the case for JF - I couldn't possibly know!) there a a small number of people who do eat healthily, don't overeat particularly but who still end up looking like puffa fish! It is not as simple as 'sensible diet and exercise' for some (but is for many) and there are orlso plenty of skinny minnies wot eat like orses all day every day (and often nowt without added lard, sugar, choklitt or all three), never walk further than living room to kitchen and cetera and cetera...

 

I'm not sure what you mean by 'messed around with girlies'? :lol::lol: If you mean he's always treated them as equals etc then that's great, but in every other respect I'm hoping it's more a case of 'ignorance is bliss' on your part and the more of it the better! ;) Drugs and police can only be a good thing, but the former isn't quite as black and white as it's made out to be so lets just say 'sensible and responsible', 'cos today I think that's the best any parent can hope for (and the odd confiscated spliff, maybe? :whistle: )...

Funnily enough, Ben said yesterday 'are there any countries where alcohol is banned?' I reminded him of the mentions of prohibition in the Simpson's etc and told him about places like (i.e) Saudi Arabia. He made some very sensible observations... :)

 

NB: If he still looks in you may owe Gilbo an apology :lol:

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm not sure what you mean by 'messed around with girlies'? :lol::lol: If you mean he's always treated them as equals etc then that's great, but in every other respect I'm hoping it's more a case of 'ignorance is bliss' on your part and the more of it the better! ;) Drugs and police can only be a good thing, but the former isn't quite as black and white as it's made out to be so lets just say 'sensible and responsible', 'cos today I think that's the best any parent can hope for (and the odd confiscated spliff, maybe? :whistle: )...

 

Which is why I qualified it with:

 

* or possibly never got caught messing around...

 

:devil:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:o:o

Yes, she's a big ol' bus, there's no escaping it, but maybe she just eats LOTS of healthy stuff? And though they are few and far between (and I'm certainly not saying this is or isn't the case for JF - I couldn't possibly know!) there a a small number of people who do eat healthily, don't overeat particularly but who still end up looking like puffa fish! It is not as simple as 'sensible diet and exercise' for some (but is for many) and there are orlso plenty of skinny minnies wot eat like orses all day every day (and often nowt without added lard, sugar, choklitt or all three), never walk further than living room to kitchen and cetera and cetera...

 

I don't know what you mean...

 

Bid :whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm looking forward to tonight's show. I always thought there was one giant custard creame factory that wrapped up their biccies for all the different shops, but they actually all taste different (been doing some important research :eat:) and I'm yet to find one I could live on, so hoping the boy's mother will be able to impart some shopping tips. :thumbs::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm looking forward to tonight's show. I always thought there was one giant custard creame factory that wrapped up their biccies for all the different shops, but they actually all taste different (been doing some important research :eat:) and I'm yet to find one I could live on, so hoping the boy's mother will be able to impart some shopping tips. :thumbs::lol:

 

There's also a girl who 'gets bullied at school' and comes home and takes it out on M&D...

 

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's also a girl who 'gets bullied at school' and comes home and takes it out on M&D...

 

:D

I'm sure you won't have anything to say on that, BD... :whistle:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And when you say that are you 'parent bashing', or 'having a pop' or do you have any sort of nasty 'agenda'? Tread carefully, you're on dodgy ground here and accusations like that can come thick and fast however well intended the post might be :whistle: Part of teaching anyone about anything is telling them what they are, might be, or run the risk of getting wrong (and I'm talking about JF there, lest anyone asks after my qualifications to 'teach' anyone anything.. I (and others here) are just offering 'advice' not tutorials). I think if people respond to that aggressively, then it's perfectly reasonable to defend yourself, and if they insist they are right by offering explanations that don't hold water to acknowledge and highlight the holes so that the leaks can be plugged. Not everyone seems to agree with that... I do think if you can make a nice 'criticism sandwich' it can help, but often it doesn't matter how thickly you cut the bread the stuff in the middle still proves completely indigestible, and sometimes the quantity of 'filling' is just so great that the bread sort of gets lost anyway.

I think I was just saying that it seems to me that parents are the ones who need to set the examples in life and that surely children learn also by example as well as being told/shown what to do/how to behave. I'm not parent bashing at all, or having a pop and I definitely have no nasty agenda - I am merely interested in people's responses to the programmes and also the responses of parents.

 

Hence this response is quite interesting to me....

I think that happens quite often. It's not a question of the adults (it's not only parents - there are all sorts of carers in a child's networks, but of course generally parents will be the most significant and influential) not using the techniques 'properly', because they're pretty straightforward and black and white. Mostly it's inconsistency and the kind of irrational 'rationalisation' and denial mentioned above that over-complicates things. Almost without exception these programmes start with adults saying they have 'tried everything', and swearing that they are consistent and always follow through but that's invariably not the case. I've noticed that this new series seems to have dropped that, and wonder if it's because it was a bit too in yer face for viewers to deal with and was losing JF viewers(?). It's certainly not going to be because it doesn't apply, and the only logical alternative if Jo succeeds is that the adults didn't even think they were doing everything they could - which is actually worse! - but I can fully understand from a commercial point of view why JF would need to placate the adults and play to the gallery rather than just telling it like it is. I think that happens far too much already in professional circles, and does cause mixed messages and much bigger problems of negative reinforcement (for the adults) but don't know what can be done about it. If the grown ups can't listen to constructive criticism, what chance does the kid have of learning that skill? I noticed recently that the 'premise' behind ODD is basically parent's/carers offering negative reinforcers to their kids, and the 'intervention' is just retraining the adults. Everything else - including the term 'ODD' is just window dressing and sugar coating to enable the parents to avoid confronting the unpalatable truth! Go figure!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

A bit of an oversimplification, and a difficult analogy for many people to swallow ("children aren't animals, you know!" :angry:), but there is a certain logic to it. There was an old saying back in the day when dog's were licensed (some OHMSS - and licensed to kill!) that 'you need a license to keep a dog while anyone can have kids'. Of course, there are a very VERY small number of dogs who really are just beyond training. As there's no broadmoor for dogs they end up getting put down. I think an owner willing to tar a young puppy with that particular brush is probably making a grave error of judgement :(

 

I wonder if this post will seem like a blue touch-paper to some, or whether this thread has already ceased to be of interest to many who are less admiring of the delightful Ms F's methods, and there are just a few die-hards left reading? :lol:

 

L&P

 

BD

Yeah, well I'm not saying children are like dogs - well not really - but the history of using positive reinforcement etc did get more refined using dogs (in a very basic way) and that I just noted that the logic in certain very basic areas did seem to have a couple of similarities to me - e.g. lack of control, lack of interest, lack of education on dogs seems to produce naughty dogs that don't listen and don't do what they are told.... apply to young kids and the situation in basic terms has similarities. If those same dog owners stop shouting, be clear, praise when its due, guide and teach and are consistent then the dogs' behaviour improves.... this seems to be the essence of what also happens with children when the same things are applied.

 

Yes, I am stripping it back to its bare bones and just looking at the logic - and obviously there are many other factors when children are involved. If it was a bad example that bothered anyone well that's not what I intended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I am stripping it back to its bare bones and just looking at the logic - and obviously there are many other factors when children are involved. If it was a bad example that bothered anyone well that's not what I intended.

 

I'm sure it wasn't and didn't...

I think you might have missed the 'tone' of my post. I didn't think for a minute that you were having a pop at parents or anything like that - just saying 'tongue in cheek' (hence this emoticon :whistle: ) that it is how some people can interpret it if they feel they are being got at.

 

Same applies to the 'children aren't dogs, you know!' comment (hence exclamation and 'rant' emoticon) and I do fully agree that your 'stripped down' model reflects a general principle very well.

 

Mumble: Have you ever known me to not have anything to say? On anything? :whistle: I think what will be interesting is the 'bullying' dynamic - to see how this evolves/why etc. The rest of it, taking out at home, I've already discussed many times on forum, and it is, IMO and under any circumsstances a big :shame:

 

L&P

 

BD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh look, it was the parents that needed the discipline. Now there is a surprise. :rolleyes: Next week's looks fun - more parent tantrum training. :shame:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've completely lost all ability to tell what's a joke or whatever this week obviously :rolleyes:

 

Next weeks looks more interesting for want of a better word....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've completely lost all ability to tell what's a joke or whatever this week obviously :rolleyes:

If I'm involved, assume the default position of 'joke'. :lol: :lol: It's the way I tend to cope with life. Some people don't agree with that approach; I don't really care if it works for me. :wacko:

 

Next weeks looks more interesting for want of a better word....

I'm looking forward to seeing Ms Frost deal with the stroppy Daddy - hopefully she'll use the same no-nonsense approach she used with Custard Creame Boy.

 

There's a programme on tonight (BBC1, 10:35pm I think) about disruption in primary classrooms and asking where the blame lies - will be really interested to see where they go with this one and the stance they take. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I'm involved, assume the default position of 'joke'. :lol: :lol: It's the way I tend to cope with life. Some people don't agree with that approach; I don't really care if it works for me. :wacko:

 

 

I'm looking forward to seeing Ms Frost deal with the stroppy Daddy - hopefully she'll use the same no-nonsense approach she used with Custard Creame Boy.

 

There's a programme on tonight (BBC1, 10:35pm I think) about disruption in primary classrooms and asking where the blame lies - will be really interested to see where they go with this one and the stance they take. :unsure:

I can't be the only ones who gets so lost they can't tell!!!! :unsure::blink:

 

I don't mind, it happens :lol:

 

I am also interested in next weeks for that reason - think he should definitely go on the naughty step :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hold on - give him the benefit of the doubt... they've probably edited it out of context... :whistle::whistle:

Now where have I heard that before? :lol:

 

On a (slightly) serious note I would add that certainly as far as I'm concerned (and I'm fairly sure other posting, but wouldn't presume to speak for them) this thread - indeed Jo Frost's programme - isn't about 'blaming' parents, or calling people 'bad' parents.

 

For me what it does highlight is that even very kind, very loving, very caring parents can invest so much in being those things that they lose sight of the other things parent's need to be. And it highlights the fact that children aren't all sweetness and light (even the sweetest and brightest of them) and that they will manipulate, control, demand, bully and abuse if they are not shown other ways of behaving. These kinds of programmes reveal those truths time after time, and in all but the tiniest of cases when those twin dynamics are addressed things change very rapidly for the better. And that applies to kids with ASD's and ADHD's and ODD's too - and on the very odd occasions we see children with these issues featured that proves pretty much invariable too. The hardest job (and I'm guessing next weeks will show some of this) is overcoming the barriers people put up to avoid having to face those issues, and the defensive stance and denial taken when people try to overcome or even acknowledge them.

 

So far, the parents in the main stories featured have been pretty open to the advice being offered, but it's taken TV crews and an on-site TV 'celebrity'(?) to achieve that, when they could have /would have got pretty much exactly the same advice from any halfway decent child psychologist at CAMHS or whatever. In all probability, they HAVE been told these things by someone they've consulted along the way, and have said that's what they've been doing all along... You do see that on the 'Roadshow' clips; parents asking the question, being given the answer and walking away with faces that say emphatically 'been there, done that, got the t-shirt' and you just know they're going home to do the same old same old. :(

 

 

What is really really great (and I hope helps to break some barriers down but I suspect not in the wider context) is seeing unhappy kids get happy, seeing kids who don't know how to 'play' learn the skills to make friends, seeing parents who are worn to a frazzle and feel trapped by their kids looking well rested and enjoying doing stuff with their kids, etc etc etc...

 

L&P

 

BD :D

 

Oh - PS: Before anyone says how 'useless' i.e. CAMHS might be I think there's another very real issue here and that is that parent's can be very, very paricular about who they will take advice from, and the ways in which they won't take it from anyone but adapt depending on the 'who'... A 'friend' might be able to suggest advice and be ignored politely, but quite often a CAMHS psych or any other professional will be aggressively ignored. That's led to a situation where professionals have to so candy-coat any advice they give that often parents come out of such a meeting feeling they've been told the opposite of what they've actually been told, 'cos they stopped listening after the 'but' in the sentence 'you're a good parent, but...' Instead of fixing the problems, the problems get reinforced...

 

Another part of that, of course, is that the CAMHS psych/whatever has only one source of information - what they are told by Mum and/or Dad. They don't have 24/7 camera footage that shows the reality - they just have anecdotal evidence. And the evidence in all earlier versions of these types of shows (but which has been dropped from this one - see theory above!) is that anecdotal evidence from mum and/or dad just isn't that reliable. :(

 

L&P

 

BD (stepping down off the soapbox)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There's a programme on tonight (BBC1, 10:35pm I think) about disruption in primary classrooms and asking where the blame lies - will be really interested to see where they go with this one and the stance they take. :unsure:

 

Well frankly I'm stunned! Turned out to be over defensive parents who didn't believe their kids were disruptive in class were wrong! :o

OMG - Totally stunned! Turned out the cheeky little devils were lying to their mum's and dad's about their behaviours (swearing, winding up/playing up for other kids, temper tantrums etc) and the teachers were telling the truth! :o :o One mum actually said the teachers weren't being strict enough :o Oddly, she was the one who looked a bit of a battle axe who might go in and have a pop at the teachers if they were to suggest in any way that what was happening in school might have been her son's doing, so it just goes to show how deceptive appearances can be, no? And even wierder, once the parent's accepted what the school was telling them (well, more were presented with the irrefutable video evidence) and started working with the school everything improved dramatically...

 

I 'spect it was down to the editing, don't you? Or this school/these kids being the exception to the rules? And none of them were on the spectrum, of course...

 

Hold on, what's that dripping noise I can hear? Can anyone else hear it? drip...drip...drip... :unsure: ooer... :unsure:

 

Saddest thing? One of the kids seemed to have genuine learning problems that may have been more than just having spent the previous four years avoiding doing any work. His mum's response was 'Now I've realised I think I've got to take a back seat and let the school take over'... So no extra 'golden time' at home doing fun activites that taught the skills he was behind in, no stories at bedtime to help him catch up on his reading... just more pressure on the teachers who were already struggling to help him and more expectations from home on him to achieve and the school to achieve in the very environment where he was absolutely most disinclined and therefore likely to achieve anything. :angry::wallbash: :wallbash:

 

Four potentially lovely kids. I particularly liked the little blonde kiddy who won lots of awards but never bothered to take them home and the littlun who seemed to have genuine learning issues and a big self-esteem/attention seeking issue, but really hope all of them will be enabled to achieve their potential and be lovely...

 

L&P

 

BD

 

NB: I missed the first quarter/possibly half of this, so if there was something in that that provided a 'context' I'm missing please tell me nicely!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This one made me :angry: , frankly! Two idiot parent's of a manipulative little girl who wouldn't sleep claiming they had not had a night in bed on their own for six years or something... ONE NIGHT of tantrums, ONE Morning of lost computer privileges and the next night all three of their kids were in their own beds and asleep within 10 minutes of tucking them in! :wallbash::wallbash: The bit that really made me angry was her father, a lorry driver, whinging about being scared he would knock down and kill somebody else's child through falling asleep at the wheel! Applying the same logic that is now applied to drink-drivers who knowingly take the wheel when knowing it's unsafe for them to do so, what you were effectively seeing was a grown man willing to commit murder :o of someone else's child rather than attempt to responsibly parent his own :angry:

 

I am, of course, overstating slightly, but technically..........

 

Then the other family there were two adults behaving like children and then blaming their kids for not being able to take on the adult roles left vacant through their idiotic, selfish, behaviours! Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhh...

 

They started out making it look like it was all dad's fault - and no getting away from it he was a complete tool - but if you look a bit more closely there's plenty of indications that mum wasn't quite as innocent as it first appeared. My guess is mum had final release as far as filming / consent went :whistle: That said, Jo handled the tantruming daddy perfectly and called his bluff in exactly the same way his wife should have years ago. Pity we didn't see her doing that with mummy too, although, as i say if you're sharp eyed you can see several indicators that off camera she probably did.

 

Anyhooo - all finished with some much happier kids, all going to bed at bedtime, all eating their meals nicely and all behaving far more appropriately etc and reaping the rewards for doing so. That the problems all centered on the behaviours of the adults in the dynamic surprised me not a jot, but i'm sure that'll not come as a shock to anyone. And again, all of the parents had 'tried everything'... :whistle:

 

L&P

 

BD :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When we were talking about this episode before it was due on, and I said the dad should go on the naughty step and you said hold on - well, I am so glad I didn't come on here and say anything - cuz halfway through I was gonna say "see, he's a total idiot"

 

Thankfully I waited cuz the mum should so be on that step too

Then the other family there were two adults behaving like children and then blaming their kids for not being able to take on the adult roles left vacant through their idiotic, selfish, behaviours! Ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhh...

 

They started out making it look like it was all dad's fault - and no getting away from it he was a complete tool - but if you look a bit more closely there's plenty of indications that mum wasn't quite as innocent as it first appeared. My guess is mum had final release as far as filming / consent went :whistle: That said, Jo handled the tantruming daddy perfectly and called his bluff in exactly the same way his wife should have years ago. Pity we didn't see her doing that with mummy too, although, as i say if you're sharp eyed you can see several indicators that off camera she probably did.

I also think they minimised the role of the mum in this, she clearly wasn't letting go of their relationship IMO, and also seemed to use the kids as emotional blackmail in a way. I think my opinion of the dad got completely disproved cuz I thought he was a jerk before the show (yes, based on a ten second edited clip :rolleyes:) and afterwards I thought that he was potentially being more adult and more focused on the kids well-being than I initially thought, I had more respect for him than her cuz i think he was more willing to move forwards in a better way by the end than she was.

 

 

This one made me :angry: , frankly! Two idiot parent's of a manipulative little girl who wouldn't sleep claiming they had not had a night in bed on their own for six years or something... ONE NIGHT of tantrums, ONE Morning of lost computer privileges and the next night all three of their kids were in their own beds and asleep within 10 minutes of tucking them in! :wallbash::wallbash: The bit that really made me angry was her father, a lorry driver, whinging about being scared he would knock down and kill somebody else's child through falling asleep at the wheel! Applying the same logic that is now applied to drink-drivers who knowingly take the wheel when knowing it's unsafe for them to do so, what you were effectively seeing was a grown man willing to commit murder :o of someone else's child rather than attempt to responsibly parent his own :angry:

 

I am, of course, overstating slightly, but technically..........

Overstating is fine I think, and the fact that she looked after kids as a job as well (should she have known better?). And how quick was it "sorted" as well.....

 

 

Anyhooo - all finished with some much happier kids, all going to bed at bedtime, all eating their meals nicely and all behaving far more appropriately etc and reaping the rewards for doing so. That the problems all centered on the behaviours of the adults in the dynamic surprised me not a jot, but i'm sure that'll not come as a shock to anyone. And again, all of the parents had 'tried everything'... :whistle:

L&P

BD :D

What is it about that? That the parent always say they've tried everything? I always find myself thinking "well obviously not or there wouldn't be a problem" OR "maybe the problem is they try everything and don't stay consistent with the things they try".

 

Hopefully next weeks won't be so anger inducing :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also think they minimised the role of the mum in this, she clearly wasn't letting go of their relationship IMO, and also seemed to use the kids as emotional blackmail in a way...

 

 

Yes, that's what I meant about mum having the final word about filming/consent - she did seem equally culpable, and the programme did intimate this, but you had to watch very closely :whistle:

 

Overstating is fine I think, and the fact that she looked after kids as a job as well (should she have known better?). And how quick was it "sorted" as well.....

 

Oh yes - I'd forgot that bit, but it was another reason for me going a bit :angry:! I hope anyone who warehouses their kid's with her during the day asked themselves the same question after seeing the show, and whether the 'very reasonable rates' I'm sure she charges over a more traditional nursery/daycare environment might actually be a false economy :whistle:

 

 

What is it about that? That the parent always say they've tried everything? I always find myself thinking "well obviously not or there wouldn't be a problem" OR "maybe the problem is they try everything and don't stay consistent with the things they try".

 

I'll put my hands up and say I had a few crossed swords with a CAMHS behavioural management specialist over this, so it's an easy trap to fall into where you think you're doing everything but can actually be doing all sorts of things that make the situation worse. 'Negative reinforcers' :shame: Luckily, the penny dropped for me when Ben was around 3.5, when a BM programme called '1,2,3, Magic' hit me with a very simple piece of logic I couldn't deny: Children can't 'reason' like adults, so trying to reason/negotiate with them as though they were adults only creates bigger problems. When they've learnt the difference between 'No' and 'Yes' and respond appropriately you have the first stepping stones towards reason, and you can begin to negotiate, give them more self responsibility etc etc, but giving the latter before the former is established will only cause collisions. In most cases the hardest thing is getting the parent to admit they're wrong, and overcoming the knee jerk 'you're calling me a bad parent', 'every child is different', 'I'm autistic what's your excuse' defence mechanisms that kick in when they're confronted with it...

 

J F is very good at negotiating those defence mechanisms, but quite often professional's actually make the situation worse by offering the parents negative reinforcers of their own... they come out of the CAMHS meeting thinking they've just been told they're the bees knees, having stopped listening after the 'but', and are thereafter even more adamant that they've 'tried everything' and quote the consultant who's only ever heard anecdotal evidence from them regarding how they parent as evidence of this. :rolleyes:

 

 

Hopefully next weeks won't be so anger inducing :lol:

 

Don't hold your breath! Though even then I'm sure there will be some lovely, happy kids at the end whose lives have been enhanced, and that's the bit worth watching! :thumbs:

 

L&P

 

BD

Edited by baddad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...