3 ms·

Wait, are you saying you can negotiate with terrorist or with 2 year olds? I have no experience with terrorists, but I have five kids. There are absolutely ti

Wait, are you saying you can negotiate with terrorist or with 2 year olds? I have no experience with terrorists, but I have five kids. There are absolutely times when a two year cannot be negotiated with. And there are times children have to be taught that under no uncertain times their current behavior is acceptable. And that time is a temper tantrum.

martin1975 11y ago
I've 2 kids... and you catch my drift - they act (sometimes) like terrorists, and that is when you cannot negotiate, meaning, your word is absolute. Otherwise, any negotiation when they are acting like terrorists usually would end at their peril (yours too, probably), for they not know what they do. This is what I mean, "don't negotiate with terrorists". Of course, at other times you can negotiate, and they get the tradeoffs rather than being absolute in their attitude, sticking to their guns, without thinking. It is an ongoing commitment, a 'battle' of staying present, guiding them, drawing a line when necessary, and letting them win too... It is absolutely through contradictinction they will learn the most - what worked once, may or may not work again, behavior wise.... of course, there are absolutes - don't kill or hurt others, don't lie, cheat or steal...those are usually easier to teach. And then there's wisdom...that's lifetime learning.
roel_v 11y ago
He's saying that beating children doesn't help because they cannot be negotiated with. Children don't have the brain development to respond to threats. It's like beating someone with an epileptic seizure until he stops. That doesn't mean disruptive behavior doesn't have to be or can't be dealt with, just that beating children ('so they'll think twice next time') doesn't have positive effects (i.e. it doesn't stop or prevent the behavior next time) but it does have negative effects (teaches violence, weakens the trust bond, etc.)

martin1975 11y ago

I've 2 kids... and you catch my drift - they act (sometimes) like terrorists, and that is when you cannot negotiate, meaning, your word is absolute. Otherwise, any negotiation when they are acting like terrorists usually would end at their peril (yours too, probably), for they not know what they do. This is what I mean, "don't negotiate with terrorists". Of course, at other times you can negotiate, and they get the tradeoffs rather than being absolute in their attitude, sticking to their guns, without thinking. It is an ongoing commitment, a 'battle' of staying present, guiding them, drawing a line when necessary, and letting them win too... It is absolutely through contradictinction they will learn the most - what worked once, may or may not work again, behavior wise.... of course, there are absolutes - don't kill or hurt others, don't lie, cheat or steal...those are usually easier to teach. And then there's wisdom...that's lifetime learning.

roel_v 11y ago

He's saying that beating children doesn't help because they cannot be negotiated with. Children don't have the brain development to respond to threats. It's like beating someone with an epileptic seizure until he stops. That doesn't mean disruptive behavior doesn't have to be or can't be dealt with, just that beating children ('so they'll think twice next time') doesn't have positive effects (i.e. it doesn't stop or prevent the behavior next time) but it does have negative effects (teaches violence, weakens the trust bond, etc.)