The subject of consequences causes disagreement in the world of psychology/therapy of traumatised children. Some professionals insists that it is important and others say that it is not effective. Here are some of my thoughts. Let me know what works for you.
Remember that most traumatised children:
a. have little sense of cause and effect
b. use negative behaviour to protect themselves from unsafe feelings such as fear or even love
c. are unable to take responsibility for what they have done
The aim of consequences is to help the child feel some remorse or empathy about the hurt caused, respect boundaries and not repeat the behaviour. The intention is to keep the child and others safe, and to learn new postive behaviours. My feeling is that if we concentrate on the consequence we may miss the message that the behaviour was intended to give us. The child may take the consequence, but is unlikely to link it to the behaviour - and instead will assume that he or she is 'bad'. This could have the opposite effect to what is hoped for. But the shout is 'We can't let them think they can get away with that behaviour'.
So what do we do?
We are trying to develop 'trust' - for the child to believe that he or she can trust that she is worth being cared. Every strategy for managing behaviour needs to have this as the ultimate goal.
It is important that children are kept safe, and it is abusive for a child to be able to hurt others - this is damaging to the self. Keeping safe is not the same as a deterant consequence.
There are 3 groups of consequences:
1. natural consequences of what we do - if we are horrible to someone - that person will not want to be with us; if we waste time over breakfast - we will be late for school; if we don't read the instructions - we will make a mistake; if a child refuses to put on a seat belt in a car a natural consequence could be that they can't go on the trip - that is about safety. etc. etc.
2. Imposed and controlled consequences that have no connection to the behaviour but are more about satisfying a need to 'not let the child get away with what they have done'. The boundary between this and punishment is small.
3. Repair consequences. If we hurt someone - and have learned empathy for this - the consequence is that we do something to put it right. If we break something we can mend it or replace it or at least apologise. If we hurt someone's feelings, we can be expected to do something to make them feel better.
I like the first group of consequences where it is safe, because when the child does not like the consequence it can be made clear that this is 'your choice' - 'I am sorry you don't like the choice you made'.
I believe that the second group satisfy the parent or teacher and may help to make a point to other children about what happens if anyone behaves like this. If a child is sent to their room, or sent out of the class, this could give the child and adult time to calm so that the incident can be thought through. Other consequences in this group are usually a waste of time and just generate higher anxiety because they don't work. Also consequences of depriving children of something for more than minutes can add up until the parent has nothing left to remove - feels powerless and angry - and the child is satisfied that they have brought chaos into the home (what they feel familiar with).
The third group is what we are working towards. Traumatised children can't take responsibiltiy for what they have done because they dissociate from their feelings of shame, so they can't repair. This was probably never modelled to them. Dysfunctional parents always blame the child - and do not repair the attachment relationship - no reattunement.
I suggest: If something has gone wrong - focus on repair - and use it as a joint action. 'How can WE make this better?' When a child is able to repair - their sense of self lifts and they begin to be able to take responsibilty. If you can't repair something (any of us) anxiety about consequences increases. If you can then anxiety decreases. Repair must be done postively and acknowledging the child's bravery when they succeed.
I suggest: When things are calm - think about what the child is achieving through any behaviour; what feeling it gives you - these are the child's feelings, not yours; what are they trying to to tell you - usually something to do with fear of rejection; address this message and you may not need consequences.
What works for you??
Joy
In our house consequences have no purpose or place. They just increase the stress levels and cause more drama. It is a difficult habit to break - if you don't do this then...When I'm in the position of speaking before I think I declare quite loudly I am about to wet myself and need the loo. I then make a dash for the loo and give myself the time needed to get in control and get a plan of action together - which should be to calm the situation and don't make a drama when more often than not a drama isn't needed. The world will carry on if teeth aren't cleaned, if a bath isn't had or homework isn't done or indeed if you are late for school or work. A calm and happy household is the aim of the game and then the rest might just follow. The line between consequence and punishment I think is just too fine for a child who has been through trauma and neglect. The loo dash often brings a laugh and a smile which in itself can defuse the situation. Works for us - sometimes!
ReplyDelete