Raising Self-Reliant Children

RAISING SELF-RELIANT CHILDREN in a Self-Indulgent World

H Stephen Glenn and Jane Nelsen

I found this book in a by-the-poolside library/exchange. I offer a summary and commentary below. The book’s intention is to provide a template for helping any impaired individual achieve self reliance, be they developing children or people with psychopathology or substance abuse issues.  I, for one, felt successful in this regard with my children when at twenty-five years of age, each was completely self-sufficient with health insurance coverage no less.

Background: things are different now, for parents raising children. They were different when I grew up when compared to the experience of my parents and that in part is a basis for how we perceive developing children now. And they don’t look particularly resilient.

Examples:

In the 1930’s over half the nation lived in a rural setting with diminished resources compared to what we take for granted. They had to be resourceful and transfer skill to children and young adults rapidly both for sharing the workload at home but also providing income. Most homes across the country housed extended family members. Most had multiple siblings under one roof as well a a grandparent. Schooling was different: it was decentralized and low-tech. Older students helped teach younger students in classrooms with 20-25 students. Tasks at school were non - negotiable: behavior in class, doing class assignments, helping when asked, no questions without a raised hand.  A child with problems at school would come home to chores and siblings, a parent, or grandparent to vent to and get advice.

The depression might find 12 year olds foregoing education and working for wages —often having to make decisions that affected the lives of co workers of all ages. Despite a lack of emotional immaturity, this setting and those pressures found (the surviving) kids capable of making intelligent and resourceful decisions. In a word, they were in this respect, resilient.

World War II’s closure ended this pattern. The country became populated by a majority of urbanites. Schools were larger and grew with more and more technology over time. Classrooms were larger. The breadth and variety of topics to be taught was greatly expanded. Most parents became part-time parents ie carrying jobs to afford a middle class life and families became smaller. Fewer non nuclear family members were to be found in the usual households in 1980. Currently, 80% of children don’t see their parents at least 10 hours of the waking day. In this setting, the child coming home with issues with friends or school commonly does not have a member of their family or “tribe” for solace and advice, but rather, a peer or ……the internet.

The authors ask, “If a child is to become a true part of a family and with time, become resourceful and self-reliant, what needs to occur and how does one develop that?

1. Kids (or impaired adults) need support networks. We think of networks as support for people who are not complete but in fact, most self reliant people develop and use networks as a tool of the trade. Consider the role of a team and coach, raising horses at a stable, Boy/girl scouts, or church activities as examples of how this can be supplemented when the family unit is constrained. When at home, consider ways to build that network. Without a tribe or support system, individuals experiment without a plan or guidance. What can go wrong with that?

2. Meaningful roles: find ways to give a meaningful role to a child who may have undeveloped skills. They give examples such as a kindergartner checking with mom/dad who is preparing dinner or cleaning house and asking if they can help—-a busy part time parent will tell the child no thank you, go play. The message? You are no help at all. Take a breath and find a simple task—the child contributes, feels valued, and you get feedback on what they can or cannot really do. Another example: playing pickleball with my grandson, he postures and acts out on the court like a McEnroe. He will leave in a fit of anger when the game is not going his way. When I asked him to coach me on a technique I could not master, he had a personality change and was helpful, directive, and polite. The authors assert that the passivity many young people seem characterized by is this issue of not having a meaningful role or input within a family setting.

3. On the job training: Help the child get this; a proper school with shared family values, a sport/team, church, clubs all can contribute as well as expectations, age appropriate within the setting of the family. Expected work done, timeframes, being on time, being helpful without being asked can all be taught and built on to make functional individuals of all ages. In the absence of structure and expectations, people will seek relief from boredom with entertainment which none of us has much control over. Entertainment: where violence is often a legitimate force for “good” and resolving problems—where language and sex is casual without consequences—where a conclusion fits into a timeframe of hours. Delayed gratification examples are the exception, not the rule. On the job training requires practice, solving problems, failing, adjusting, and trying again—it requires delayed gratification and discipline.

The significant seven tools for building resilience are outlined:

1) Perception of personal capabilities

2) Perceptions of personal significance

3) Perceptions of persons power or influence over life

4) Intrapersonal skills

5) Interpersonal skills

6) Systemic skills

7) Judgement skills.

It is easy for us to assume genetics plays a role in skills we observe in others. They certainly form a foundation. For years psychologists thought delayed gratification was innate when they tested small children offered more cookies if they just delayed for 15 minutes.About 1/3 of them could do it.   It turns out, you can teach people to do this when it is not a tendency they are born with.

If you have personality based perceptions, there are patterns observed: if you are born confident and strong—you will face frustration when dealing with parents and peers. If you are born less confident, you default may be withdrawal or rebellion. To educate positively, you need the child to define the experience, identify what annoys them, generalize what that means and develop an adjustment. Simply telling a child to “knock it off” or “you will be punished if you don’t stop” is not creative, effective, nor does it address what needs to change with the child in charge of managing that.

Personal significance: The older child teaching a younger child fosters this. The parent helping the child re-think the problem and options, that they (the child) can control fosters this. The authors suggest a weekly family meeting for thirty minutes. The agenda items can be placed by any family member. Any changes in family processes stemming from the meeting have to be agreed to unanimously with conditions for what happens if the change does not work as planned. The example given was acquiring a dog that the parents did not want. The conditions were that the children would walk and feed the dog, and clean up the yard. Failure to do so regularly would lead to the dog finding a new home. This in fact happened in the example given. This was an unpopular idea as I discussed with family and friends but there was agreement that there should be consequences identified ahead of time when “a deal is made."

Growth and Skill building:  A study done in 1986 showed that levels of critical thinking, judgmental maturity, and emergence of moral and ethical capability we’re measured in 6th grade and in same students, re-measured in 12th grade.  NO change was found when there was great capacity for such (expected) change. Why is that? Suggested: Objective testing is easier to grade vs requiring and evaluating essays. Grammar was easily targeted but thoughts, organization, structure, and ideas less so with multiple choice testing. Can the educational system value conformity to the degree that it  suppresses growth? I would argue that I never depended on school for this and that much of this work is directed from home. But it is an interesting question because schooling methodically works through material in a way that families do not. Note, if one considers young kids, “passive” in their communications and commitments, this question of schooling methodology is an interesting variable. Multiple choice is passive and an essay is “active.”   Can you (the child) risk giving an opinion in the face of likely defeat?  94% of teachers and 98% of parents are said to use negative management of school work ie detailed criticism and very non specific praise. Praising everyone for turning in the work is wrong and fosters mediocrity—mediocrity that the student is fine owning……(When reviewing homework, be specific: your paper had excellent detailed footnotes and a clear thesis. Your supporting argument was most persuasive when I read sentences a, b, c…..). Author’s bottom line: there is no wrong answer, just answers that require more discussion…..

Intrapersonal skill building: If you pamper a child too much the skill they develop is one of manipulation. If you over control or discipline a child, the skill you develop is obfuscation, lying, and deception. If you find the sweet spot…….

How do you find the sweet spot?  Communication is two - way: (when my father angrily lectured to my brother about risk taking and contraceptives in my presence, he paused, looked at me, and asked, “Do you understand what we are talking about?”  My response?  “Yes SIR.”  I in fact did know, but, how could he be sure?).  When confronting a problem behavior, get the information and don’t accept yes/no answers—this is not a multiple choice test. What happened, what was the plan, what went wrong, what lessons come from this and what about next time all fit into a process for helping develop skill and responsibility. When talking about curfew with an adolescent, open with, “As you know, we think it is safer if you are in by 11:00. For tonight, is there any reason you might need to stay out later?” The answer tests honesty, judgement, and lays out expectations with include, what needs to happen if the plan changes (coming home late). AND: you don’t want your kid racing home at 100 MPH to meet a curfew time because of proposed punishment. There should be next steps if this process breaks down which gets to the concept of “grounding.”

The authors make some interesting points: If you ground a child to get revenge for being disappointed, you are likely making things worse. Grounding should be a tool. First pass: if you are angry when the child comes home, can you manage your anger the way you would want them to manage theirs? This may require a time out for both of you: “I was a bit nervous about your being late and worry that you might have been doing something that should make me nervous. Rather than jump in now, let’s plan on talking tomorrow and working through what happens.” As a parent you lose credibility when you lose your temper whether it is justified or not.  The morning conversation should review what happened, what was agreed to, possible solutions last night, for next time, and of course if previously acknowledged whatever the consequences of violating the trust are to be.

Guidelines and rules are unconsciously welcomed by most kids; having clarity and structure will prevent a sense of arbitrariness or oppression on the part of a parent. They allow the child to understand the tools they need to meet with a sense of being respected and loved, and not just being controlled. The idea is to get everyone on the same page.

The model broadens to many decisions kids make: a budget for school clothes and a poor choice made; have them live with the consequences. I had a daughter who in near freezing weather, would go to high school in sandals and shorts; she understood that if she changed her mind, we were not bringing warmer clothes to her. The same daughter got an F on a homework assignment for not turning it in on time when the completed work was in her backpack. We did not intervene and agreed with the teacher, “it is not my responsibility to babysit you on clear expectations like turning in your homework on time. She adjusted (this was Junior High) She STILL got into college.

Children need to learn to link feelings to behavior and to avoid painful experiences manage them. Once this is done, self control can be learned: feelings are real and legitimate, behaviors are real, we have choices managing these and there consequences for all the possible choices. Once this is integrated and self control is demonstrated, self discipline can come to be.

Self discipline is defined as the process by which options are considered and how one will feel after the option is acted on. Developmental ages are critical here: small children, under seven or eight, are mostly unable to do this. To have real life experience getting there, the authors suggest bruises and skinned knees should be the norm. For older kids, the consequences of not being home for the established dinner time might mean no dinner, or a cold dinner. Along  with a conversation about what happened, options managing it that they develop, and “next time.”  If a warm dinner is always provided, the need to manage options with consequences is lost.  Testing responsibility and judgement used when exercising that responsibility is key: how else will you know you (or your child) is learning?  A nine year old learns that they can stay up as late as they want? Sure, provided they wake up on time and in a good mood with the ability to do what they are called on to do without someone dogging them. If they fail that, they lose the privilege. The failure is a learning that allows for growth. And the child bought into it ie had control if they had chosen to use it.

Anger management: we all need this. Something really make you angry? How often do you break it down and generalize the cause, the stimulus that sets it up, and the variables that can be used to change that outcome?  Who does that?  We might ask an angry child to do that but how often do we model it ourselves? Always a good question; there is a child in all of us.

Lastly the book addresses Technology—often—-as with schools, families should consider the pros and cons of smart phones and computer access. These are incredible tools and incredible sources of entertainment that does not foster intra or inter personal growth. We all need entertainment but how to put guardrails around that while developing trust and a sense of independence with a child is a tough nut to crack. We did not experience red flags in the behavior or schooling of our kids and given that, would have though intruding on a journal or diary wrong. We did not search our children’s rooms. We did not put location services on a cell phone shared with us. There were circumstances where those might have occurred and we would have been clear about the problem faced by us,, options, solving the problems, and “next time” planning.

A bottom line of sorts: we likely were successful evolutionarily because of our ability to cooperate and work in groups. Our culture ,  our wealth, and our technology all contribute to making each person—of all ages—have a sense of being the center of the world and independent, even when in fact, they are not.  A sixteen year old girl who seeks out “community” may get pregnant and earn the distinction of being an independent adult when in fact, she remains a child for some time to come. “What is the problem you are trying to solve?”  That is an orientation I held onto as a doctor and sometimes, a counselor, and it has value for parents even when you have children in middle age.

Last thought: guidelines, rules, and advice coming from a place of love and trust is essential to be credible. There are things that adolescents naturally struggle with when parents are the go-to resource. I assume that for most adolescents, they are not. I had an older brother who I could bounce of issues freely that I could never have discussed with my parents—-substance abuse and risk taking for example. Consider resources for an impaired individual or family member who is still developing who can serve as an outlet when the subject is too risky.