[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Child Discipline & Cultural Controversies
Sharon,
I thank you for your question, partly because I've had to deal with
the same issue both in trainings and clinically, and because it has yielded
such helpful responses from the group. Special thanks to Dr. Strauss for
the reply.
Both in trainings and clinically, I have found the Motivational
Interviewing (MI) and Stage of Change/Transtheoretical Model (TTM)
approaches of great help. Just as persons with addictive behavior disorders
cycle through various stages of readiness to consider change in their
substance use, I believe that we all cycle through stages of readiness to
consider change in other behaviors. If this is true, it follows that we
should work differently with persons who aren't about to consider their use
of CP as a problem than with persons who think it is or may be a problem.
A great source of interventions for those at early stages of
readiness is Motivational Interviewing (Miller & Rollnick, 1991). At the
heart of this approach is a spirit of acceptance and respect, communicated
primarily through high-level reflective listening. A number of strategic
components are also used in this approach, many of which can be applied very
well to trainings. Some MI-related techniques that I have used include:
1. Communicating genuine respect for your audience. Most important by
far, you must consistently show respect for their opinions and avoid
argumentation. The best way to achieve both goals, while also not
endorsing any beliefs that you disagree with, is empathic listening.
Confronting, challenging, disagreeing, etc. open you up to mutiny and
often help them to reinforce their beliefs by arguing for them. If you
don't do this, there will be nothing to attack. The trick is to
elicit what you want from them....
2. Engaging in a detailed consideration of the pros and cons of the
behavior (in this case, CP). Dividing a box into four
sections on an overhead, first elicit from the audience all of the pros of
CP, and place their answers in one section. Then ask them to help you
complete the rest of the box--cons of CP, cons of reducing CP, and pros of
reducing CP. Be completely reflective and open during this
exercise--you'll simply engender argumentation if you're not. An
agenda can be smelled a mile away.
3. Using a harm reduction model. The all-or-nothing approach is a
difficult place to start from. Most of us certainly hope for the
"nothing" option, should continue to work towards it in policy
activities, and can be open about our beliefs on the subject. However, when
working with individuals or groups, our goal of achieving safety for
children is often best met via: (a) focusing more on what good
discipline/parenting is rather than on what it isn't; (b) attempting to
frame CP as less effective, less comfortable, and less ideal, rather than
in extreme pejorative terms; and (c) discussing advantages of less CP,
rather than complete disavowal of what may be an important part of an
audience's culture.
4. Using Russell Barkley's (Defiant Children, 1997) "Worst and Best
Supervisor" exercise. Have audience members think about the worst
supervisor they ever had, and volunteer that person's
characteristics. Write all responses down where all can see, and attempt
especially to get them to note how that supervisor's behavior affected their
motivation to work for them. Next, have them think of the best supervisor
they ever had, do the same, especially discussing their motivation to
work for this supervisor. Relate this to parenting.
5. Using Lizette Peterson's hammer exercise. Start with two nails, two
hammers, and a block of soft/friable wood. Have an audience member pound
one nail in with the smaller hammer, and another do so vigorously with
the big hammer. This can become a metaphor for CP versus other forms
of discipline, in that the big hammer does it faster, but does damage
along the way. Parents accept this especially well because it doesn't imply
that CP is completely without merits--it's faster and takes less
concentration.
There is much more that can be done; I can't recommend the
Motivational Interviewing text highly enough, as well as the Barkley text.
I'm sure that many have tried similar techniques, and that they aren't
always effective. However, they've been very helpful for me, and I'm
encouraged by the very solid empirical evidence this approach has when
applied to addictive behaviors (see Miller & Heather, Treating Addictive
Behaviors: Second Edition, 1998, for reviews). What the substance abuse
field has learned, and that I have realized the hard way, is that
effectiveness is improved when labels, extreme positions, and confrontation
are avoided. I hope that some of this is helpful.
Steve Ondersma
Steven J. Ondersma, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor of Research
Center on Child Abuse and Neglect (CHO 3B-3406)
Department of Pediatrics
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center
940 NE 13th Street
Oklahoma City, OK 73104
(405) 271-8858 (Office)
(405) 271-2931 (Fax)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sharon Carnahan <Carnahan@Rollins.Edu>
> To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
> <CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu>
> Date: Tuesday, January 12, 1999 12:29 PM
> Subject: Child Discipline & Cultural Controversies
>
>
> >I am giving a workshop this Friday on child discipline, something I have
> >taught about many times. This time, though, the audience is a group of
> >family support workers. They are mostly African American, as are their
> >clients; in addition, many are conservative Christians raised on the
> >"spare the rod" lore. Many believe that spanking is an acceptable form
> >of discipline, although that is against the policy of NCPCA. I've just
> >learned that this argument (about spanking) has torpedoed previous
> >trainings with this group on this subject, as workers demand to know if
> >the speaker has ever spanked a child, why they can't teach parents about
> >spanking, and that the speaker does not understand the rigors of
> >raising a compliant child in a terrible environment. I want to bring
> >these issues out in the open, not just wash over them, and to help the
> >group reach consensus on a policy they will wholeheartedly support.
> >
> >How have others handled this issue? I am considering a workshop in which
> >we spend 1/2 the time developing a list of unacceptable ways of
> >disciplining, before we move on to alternatives.
> >
> >I am also looking for written position statements on discipline from
> >professional groups.
> >
> >Thanks!
> >
> >Sharon Carnahan, Ph.D.
> >Associate Prof of Psychology
> >Rollins College Box 2760
> >1000 Holt Avenue
> >Winter Park, FL 32789-4499