Customer Reviews

Parenting With Love and Logic : Teaching Children Responsibility

5 star:		(176)
4 star:		(40)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(16)
1 star:		(45)

 

 

Basically, this book is about how to create a positive learning environment for our children, by giving them control of non-essential choices designed to be the desired outcome regardless of which choice they choose. It also provides some great insight into how to create a trusting and positive environment while teaching some positive habits.

My wife read this book first and I noticed an immediate change in how she reacted to our rather headstrong two-year old. Staying calm, and giving choices like: Do you want to have milk before you go to bed, or juice? This instead of the battle on whether or not she was going to bed. We find ourselves laughing at some of the absurd choices we come up with, and it's harder than it appears to consistently think this way. What is easy to see is that it works, and works well. Some of our biggest battles over dressing, or going to bed, or eating dinner have become much easier and the "uh-oh" said calmly has stopped some poor behavior in its tracks!

While we both embrace the fact that testing the limits is a natural and healthy way for young children to learn, this book gave some great insights on how to facilitate and not discourage that type of learning, and yet still teach the right behaviors.

I was not thrilled with the overall editing and layout of the book, as it jumped around a bit, and half-way through would say things like: This may not work for children under three! OK, this is information we could have used four chapters ago when the authors were making a point we were attempting to follow. That minor complaint notwithstanding, this is an excellent book and is highly recommended for all parents with young children.

I found the "thinking words" vs. "fighting words" sections very helpful. Instead of "Stop yelling!" try "When your voice is as calm as mine, I'll be glad to talk with you." (works for whining too!) Once you've read this book, the "pearls" are easy to use later as a quick reference (about 50 issues including bossiness, getting ready for school, bedtime, teeth brushing, TV, temper tantrums and whining ). The first time I read the book a few years ago, I knew there were some great ideas, but I also felt like I was about to let my children initially experience too many logical consequences, and perhaps a drop in self-esteem. I think the book missed an opportunity to give parents an option to gradually implement their method of teaching responsibility by first acting as an emotional coach. A recently released book used in conjunction with this one was the answer I was looking for. If you have young children or think you may want to help coach your children first, try this book along with "Kids, Parents, and Power Struggles" by Mary Sheedy Kurcinka (author of "Raising your Spirited Child"). The combination is powerful! I keep both books on hand for quick reference and my favorite ideas from them taped to my refrigerator.

I borrowed this book from the library and have just finished reading part one. I will admit first that I am the product of what the authors call "helicopters," so some of the ideas in the book are unusual to me.

In general, I like the idea of natural consequences, enforcable choices, and encouraging children to think through their problems. I can see myself using these principles with my own daughter, but not always the way the authors do it. Some of the sample dialogues in the book are reasonable but many do not sound as genuine and empathetic as the authors imply.

Some of the examples in the book and in the "pearls" are making me very upset. In one case, a child has been neglecting her dog by not feeding it, so the mom just gives it away with no warning and without confronting the girl about it. The authors admit this is a really tough approach but that's how kids learn that unless you take care of your health and your animals serious illness or death can result. Now this sounds crazy to me. In our home, we think of pets as a family responsibility, so that might be one difference. Still, wouldn't it teach the girl more about empathy to sit her down and say "you can either come up with a schedule and feed the dog or we are giving it away, you have one week to improve." Why do these authors feel that giving someone a second chance is a bad thing? It seems this might teach her "if I don't fulfill my responsiblity, someone else will take care of it for me."

Another example is a mom who asked her son to do something and he mouths off and refuses. So the next day when he asks for a ride she says, yesterday you showed me that asking nicely can be ignored, so I'm not going to drive you to your activity, even though you asked nicely. Isn't that just being petty and/or spiteful? That's a great lesson for your kid.

A third example is a kid who blows his lunch money and allowance on a carnival and has no money for lunch at school. So he asks his dad if he can make a lunch from food in the fridge. The dad says, yes, but you have to pay for it because I already gave you money for lunch once. Really? Your kid offers to take responsibility to make his own lunch all week and you are going to charge him for it? I'd think remembering to make lunch everyday would teach him the lesson. I agree to not giving him more money, but charging for the food in the fridge sounds stingy - won't he learn that as part of the lesson too?

I think it is possible for kids to learn self-reliance with this method but some of the examples just sound like the kids would end up feeling like their parents are not willing to help them out without significant groveling. It sounds as though a Love and Logic parent is not supposed to give advice or help a kid work on the solution, or not until the child has time to ponder it and slink back to ask for help. I'm not advocating parents do the solving, just help, like talking it out with them or brainstorming. I thought helping others is an important value to teach our kids (not being doormats, being a sounding board to say "what do you think would happen if you used that solution?"). This seems to teach "I'm genuinely sorry you have a problem but it's still yours." Nice.

I just wonder if some of these examples I've listed would make the kid feel like their parents view them as impositions or that the parents really begrudge them something. I realize that how you do it depends on the age of the child, but some of this still seems pretty harsh the way the authors do it. In some cases I don't think that helping them is equal to bailing them out. The examples sound like the parent says "I know you will come up with a solution" and then they just walk away.

I greatly prefer How to Talk so Kids Will Listen and How to Listen so Kids Will Talk. It also emphasizes consequences and letting kids make choices and solve problems themselves but it shows you how to do this and keep talking with them at the same time. If Love and Logic is a turn-off for you, consider reading this other book before throwing out the consiquences/choices method entirely.

I add my name to the countless others who share my concern about where they feel the line should be drawn (or their lack of a line at all).

They lost me, and I expect countless others, at the example of the family allowing the animal to go hungry long enough that his ribs were showing. They do not step in when the child neglects the dog, expecting the child to be responsible for the dog. THEN after puppy has gotten so thin it's ribs are showing (not a fun period of time for our furry friend I'd imagine) the parent steps in to say the dog has gone to a "new home" They state that "We sometimes worry that this approach sounds too tough, taking a pet out of the home with the possibility it may never return". I don't see this as the primary problem! An animal is not fed to the point his ribs are showing in order to provide a teaching moment.

Interesting the book only a few pages prior states we should "tremble" at what parents' model.

Uh Oh! - Love and Logic modeling neglect, pets are disposable, and to add insult to injury the mom says it hurts her eyes to see the starvation and her ears to hear the cries of hunger. Really?! Don't know I want to teach my children that those who "suffer" the observation of neglect yet choose not to act are the ones who should have our compassion.

They have some good fundamental ideas but I am suspect of how far they go with their approach. I'm unwilling to allow my child to abuse or neglect another living creature and think I'm going to sleep well suffering the "consequences" of that.

I've seen reviews stating other concerns about lines that are drawn, or not draw and am happy to spare myself the frustration of reading those examples.

Many of the basic premises of this book are based in wisdom and truth. I agree with the authors that it is important for parents to raise responsible children; that it is critical for children to be allowed to learn from their mistakes; that parents should not rescue children from the consequences of their behavior; that children need the opportunity to practice decision-making in order to become responsible; that children must be presented with circumstances that cause them to reflect and internalize the choices they are making rather than have everything imposed on them externally. I also agree with the authors that parents' words are useless when not accompanied by parallel actions that demonstrate that what is said is meant, and that effective parents remain calm and not display frustration when addressing their kids.
All of these truths need to be built intentionally into effective parenting.

However, allowing children to experience natural consequences and learn from their own mistakes is simply one aspect of effective parenting. It is not the whole thing. This book advocates a comprehensive parenting philosophy built upon the effort to make all learning experiences relate to natural consequences. This is neither practical nor appropriate.

The authors assume, for instance, that basically any direct instruction from a parent to a child will be less effective than allowing the child to learn the information himself through experience. Children need parents to explain life to them, to help them unpack their mistakes, and to communicate clearly with them. Much of this can and should be done through direct, clear, respectful communication between child and parent. Direct communication does not have to be "lecture," as the authors presume and repeatedly state, and in fact, effective parenting requires the parent to learn fruitful communication methods with her child that is not in lecture-format.
The authors advocate to always "keep your mouth shut" when enforcing a consequence and "allow the consequences to do the teaching." In some cases this may be most effective, but in many cases, to avoid discussion of lessons being learned by the child is to rob him or her of the counsel that a child needs from her parent.

It is also unwise to assume that experience is always a sufficient teacher. Children lack the life experience and wisdom that parents have gained by their own decades of experience. While it is true that many lessons will need to be learned firsthand by children for them to fully `take,' it is also true that children can (and should) benefit enormously from hearing about and discussing the wisdom that parents have gained through their own life experiences. Children can receive wisdom from their parents, and it behooves parents not to assume that they can't hear it or won't want to.

Further, the authors state: "Allowing children to solve their own problems presumes an implicit, basic trust that their behavior will change as they learn from their experiences." While this is often true, it is not always true - and it is inappropriate for parents to believe that their child will gain wisdom and maturity only from being allowed to learn from their mistakes. Humans are flawed and fallen and often arrive at wrong conclusions as a result of their life experiences. Wise parents should not assume that experience alone will be a sufficient teacher.

It is also wrong to presume that allowing children to learn from their mistakes is always the most loving way to parent, as the authors state. ("Our intervention into our child's problems demonstrates a selfish love. We must rise up in a higher love - a love that shows itself in allowing our children to learn on their own.") Children need input from their parents, and oftentimes they need it to be explicit. Just because some may resist the input at the time it is rendered does not mean that to speak into their lives is unloving - or less loving than letting them learn the information themselves. Part of good parenting is teaching, and much of teaching is direct and candid - not hidden behind parental orchestration of choice-based events for the child.

One area that is wholly neglected by this book - and by advocating the consequence-based teaching method to the degree that these authors do - is the arena of authority and obedience. (It's interesting, for example, that while the authors start each chapter with a Bible passage, none of them are the classic New Testament verses on parenting that emphasize obedience such as Eph 6:1, Col 3:20, or 1 Tim 3:4). The parent-child relationship is predicated on the authority that the parent has over the child, and a wise parent will ensure that the child is taught, understands, and accepts the right role of the parent as the authority in his life that whom is expected to obey and respect. This goes against the grain children's natural desire to run and control their life, but it is critical for children to grasp and eventually accept the appropriate role of authority over them for them to succeed and thrive in society. The authors advocate parents' maintaining control but always allowing the child to believe they are in control - and in fact, a central goal advocated for parents by this book is to manipulate teaching situations so children always see themselves as in control.

This does a disservice to the child. Yes, children should be given choices, and yes, parents need to help them become independent and responsible through ensuring they have many opportunities to make decisions that have consequences. But children should also learn and come to respect the authority of their parents when it is directly applied. There is no space for this in the Love and Logic method. In fact, it is explicitly recommended against. To the authors, to directly exert authority or to employ discipline that is not consequence-based is always to be a `drill sergeant parent' - ordering their children around and rendering themselves ineffective.
Appropriately exerted authority, offered respectfully and in a balanced fashion, does not have to look like this, and actually should not look like this.

There is a balance. Parents do their children no favors when they build autonomy and independence in them at the expense of their learning to accept appropriate, respectful authority in their lives. Wise parents will teach their children to obey and respect them for their role as parents - indeed, children crave and appreciate the security that this creates in their world so long as it occurs appropriately and respectfully - while at the same fostering a willingness to accept and yield to appropriate authority from their parents.

This book serves to highlight the role of consequences to children's learning, and to their becoming responsible individuals. Some examples it provides illustrate ways that parents can effectively introduce consequences into children's lives (particularly effective for older children.) However, it takes one tenet of childrearing and tries to extend it to all of parenting, which is inappropriate and even, in some cases, is an abdication of true parenting responsibilities. Boundaries with Kids presents the majority of the same information in a manner that is much more balanced and doesn't over-extend its scope in the manner of this book.

I have been reading parenting books for years. I read this book completely. As the adult child of an alcohol and drug councilor with 3 young children, I have taken great interest in therapy and communication techniques. I don't generally offer my opinion in reviews but I felt that this book should receive the credit that it is due. The focus of this book is to help your child to eventually become an unusually functional and mentally healthy adult. It makes a humorous, but truthful analogy of the learning patterns of very young (2 and under) children to that of dogs. It explains why, unlike a dog, children must begin to think for themselves and how to help them do that. It recognizes that some parents use corporal punishment, explains why this is sometimes effective and how to use it to the least detriment of the child, but over all discourages it and offers alternative methods of discipline. The book teaches how parents can assist instead of disrupting the child's natural process of learning. Permit a child the consequences of their own mistakes when they are young and they will learn not to make big, life changing mistakes when they are adults. Become a friend and respected confidant to your child whose opinion he respects. There are excellent, real life accounts of how to apply the techniques. Most teachers will recognize the authors names. The authors are well known and highly acclaimed in the educational field and have raised responsible, successful children themselves.

This book provides sound parenting philosophy and easy to use guidelines to apply it. As a teacher, it is clear to me which students have been raised with loving and logical parents. So many parents confuse love with protection. Parenting with love and logic means allowing your kids to make choices ... and sometimes mistakes. Some may object to the "Basic German Shepard" tactics or the idea that claims that spanking is sometimes alright. Use what you wish from the book. I have never spanked my child, nor do I order him around like a dog. To avoid a power struggle with my son who didn't want to put on his clothes or coat for a 5 minute ride home from my sister's house, I used Love and Logic principles. On a cold January evening in Michigan I carried him to the car in his underwear. Moments later, he said, "I'm cold." I simply kept driving and said, ... Perhaps next time you will make a different choice?" A natural instinct would be to cover him up and protect him from the cold. He was not injured in any way. By sticking to the principle, however, he learned two very important lessons: 1) mom is not kidding around, and 2) it's smart to wear your clothes and a coat. Since that evening, we have not struggled to get dressed. Try it!

i have just completed reading this book. It teaches a very good technique for parenting in which the parents let their child take responsibility of problems that are his/hers (keeping the room clean, whether or not to wear a coat outside etc). By making kids take responsibilty for their actions, parents make them more responsible in picking the right choices in life. This way parents also teach them problem solving and other important skills. The entire book is devoted to explaining this technique. The first few chapters are really valuable. I have tried the technique with my kids and they work.

One thing i didn't like about the book is that the enitre book is devoted to this same technique. The same point repeated and discussed! Also, at times one feels that making the kids always face consequences for themselves and always solve their problems themselves may be too harsh. On the other hand, maybe that is not what the authors intend to say. If it seems like the authors are carrying the point to limits, it may be because they wish to give many different situations in which their technique can be used. But it does sometime feel like the child's whole life is centered around being taught a lesson of taking care of his problems or face consequences that may be harsh.

Also, for non american parents or for people who belong to asian or other cultures, this may not be an entirely appropriate book. For example , as an Indian i would never dream of telling my mother that she needs to have my permission before disciplining my child. Or telling her something like this: "People get together on vacations either out of a sense of obligation and guilt or to have fun together. I'm wondering if you see our times together as fun".

As an Indian parent, in order to teach my kids consequences, i would also not bargain with them on the money that they will have to pay me from their allowance if they do not do xyz! Giving and taking money in family relationships is usually a no-no. In our culture, we grow up with our parents taking full care (monetary and otherwise) of us till we get married or find a job, and as adults we take care of them giving them unquestioned and unconditional love.

A year after our introduction to Love and Logic, my husband and I are firm believers. But I didn't start out that way. It seemed too easy, and at times, too harsh. I was reluctant to try what seemed to be pat answers to vexing parental challenges. But, after putting the principles into practice for a very short time, a little bit at a time, we saw an amazing improvement in our 6 year old son's behavior and self-esteem. Letting him experience the consequences of his actions while offering much love and empathy was a much better teacher than our lectures, tirades and punishments ever were. I would also suggest that parents of toddlers listen to the Cline/Fay tape: Toddlers, which applies the Love and Logic principles to that age group, and Parenting Teens with Love and Logic.

Jim Fay believes that we must teach our children HOW to think, not just WHAT to think. I am a very "over-protective mom" and reading his book has encouraged me to stop making so many choices for my children. I am now better able to allow my child to fail and take ownership of the consequence that follows his actions without feeling so much guilt myself. Kids can definitely learn from their mistakes without losing their self-esteem. Although I do not agree nor use every strategy in this book (like "The German Shepard Technique"), I feel the Love and Logic philosophy has contributed positive change in the way we communicate with our children as well as to the degree of compliance we get from them. We like this book because there are many specific suggestions in the real life annecdotes demonstrating the exact words to try. We also recommend another book with quick-read suggestions for parents of 2, 3, 4, and 5-year-olds called 'The Pocket Parent.' This book is not written in paragraphs, but rather hundreds of short bullets of practical information. The philosophies of both authors are very similar--offering many sanity saving alternatives to yelling, bribing, threatening, critizing, and nagging that we often resort to at our wits' end.. Both books are helpful, humorous and worth keeping handy for when you need some quick advice or just some empathy on one of those really bad days when you think you are about to lose your mind!