copyright ed young, ph.d. 1 section 4 lesson 5 dynamic interactions: parenting styles and conflicts;...

copyright ed young, Ph.D. 1

SECTION 4 LESSON 5

Dynamic Interactions:

Parenting Styles and Conflicts; Divorce and Blended Families;

Developing Good Judgment

Under Construction


SEQUENTIAL STAGES IN THE SCENARIO OF: COMMANDS-PROHIBITIONS, COMPLIANCE, PERFORMANCE, and REACTIONS

1. Commands And Prohibitions:

1. Harsh

2. Abrupt

3. Peremptory

4. Moderately Peremptory

5. Pressure

6. Mild Pressure

7. Influence

8. Strong Suggestion

9. Moderate Suggestion

10. Mile Suggestion

11. Strong Request But Permissive

12. Moderate Request

13. Mild Request

14. Polite Request

15. Ultra Polite Request

2. Compliance- Defiance:

1. Explosive Defiance2. Hostile Argumentative3. Annoying Debate4. Manipulative Non-compliance5. Rationalizing Non-compliance6. Protesting Unfairness7. Objecting Due to Distaste8. Negotiating Delay9. Proclaiming Dependability 10. Conformity11. Indicating Willingness12. Indicating Pride in Compliance13. Expressing Strong Interest14. Extreme Enthusiasm15. Expressing Honor and Pleasure to Serve

3. Performance:

1. Far Exceeding Expectations

2. Superior Work

3. Above Average

4. Exactly Meeting Expectations

5. Average

6. Below Average

7. Inferior

8. Neglect

9. Intentional Sabotage

10. Violent Destructive Defiance

4. Reactions:1__ Approval2__3__ 4__ Passive

Approval5__6__7__ Neutral8__9__10__ Passive

Disapproval11__12__13__ Disapproval14__15__


Parental Control Style Versus Child’s Compliance Behavior: CYCLICAL SCENARIOS

Current or Anticipated

Situation Requiring

Command or Prohibition

SITUATION:_________

Level of Parental

Command or

Prohibition Given

Level or Quality of

Child’s Performance of Command or Abstinence

from Prohibition

Level of Parental

Reaction to Child’s

Performance

Parental Residual Feelings After

Completion of Scenario

Child’s Residual Feelings after


Anticipation of Next

Situation Involvin

g Comman

ds or Prohibiti

on

1. Commands And Prohibitions:

1. Harsh

2. Abrupt

3. Peremptory

4. Moderately Peremptory

5. Pressure

6. Mild Pressure

7. Influence

8. Strong Suggestion

9. Moderate Suggestion

10. Mile Suggestion

11. Strong Request But Permissive

12. Moderate Request

13. Mild Request

14. Polite Request

15. Ultra Polite Request

2. Compliance- Defiance:

1. Explosive Defiance2. Hostile Argumentative3. Annoying Debate4. Manipulative Non-compliance5. Rationalizing Non-compliance6. Protesting Unfairness7. Objecting Due to Distaste8. Negotiating Delay9. Proclaiming Dependability 10. Conformity11. Indicating Willingness12. Indicating Pride in Compliance13. Expressing Strong Interest14. Extreme Enthusiasm15. Expressing Honor and Pleasure to Serve

Level of Child’s

Compliance-Defiance Response

Negotiating mutually equitable agreement


Dynamic Interaction Between Authority Figures And Youth


Parental Style of Reacting to the Child’s Quality of Performance

Current or Anticipated

Situation Requiring

Command or Prohibition

SITUATION:___________

Level of Parental

Command or

Prohibition Given

Level or Quality of Child’s

Performance of Command or

Abstinence from Prohibition

Level of Parental

Reaction to Child’s

Performance

5. Parental Residual Feelings After


5. Child’s Residual Feelings after


6. Anticipation of Next Situation Involving Command

s or Prohibitio

n

Level of Child’s

Compliance-Defiance Response

3. Performance:

1. Far Exceeding Expectations

2. Superior Work

3. Above Average

4. Exactly Meeting Expectations

5. Average

6. Below Average

7. Inferior

8. Neglect

9. Intentional Sabotage

10. Violent Destructive Defiance

4. Reactions:

Approval

1__2__3

Passive Approval

4__5__6

Neutral

7__8__9

Passive Disapproval

10__11__12

Disapproval

13__14__15

Hi 1 2 3 4 5 Lo

Hi 1 2 3 4 5 Lo

Parental stance is objective-non-judgmental evaluation, listening, forgiving, exploring alternatives with child, correcting, positive respect for child’s opinions and suggestions, expressing unconditional love, negotiating for next occasion.


1. A. COMMANDS

1. HARSH: Main verbs are usually brief and at the beginning of the sentence, e.g. "DO, GET, GO, COME, MAKE, ETC.". This type of command is often used with curse words, labeling the person with extremely negative attributes, and spoken in loud, harsh voice tones, with extreme threats. Usually used with the sound of extreme urgency and implying extreme cost for non-compliance, and implying personal involvement or extreme importance to the authority.

2. Abrupt: Brief, action, main verbs are at the beginning of the command. "Do this! Get over there now! Be here in five minutes or else . . .! Find it right away or else you're grounded, etc.!" Usually this form includes a sense of urgency, a deadline or time condition, and threats of severe punishment. This is usually accompanied by negative labeling and the assumption of unwillingness to comply.

3. Peremptory: In this case the form is strongly obligatory, e.g. "You + shall or will" + an action verb, indicating there is no choice of when, whether to or how to do what is commanded. There is a sense of urgency and a sound of impatience. Sometimes punishment or negative consequences are specified in case of failure to respond exactly when and as commanded. Rebuttal or discussion is precluded.

4. Moderately Peremptory: The emphasis is at this level is upon one's authority over the child. Initial phrases are such as: "You must or will have to; It is imperative that you," followed by an action verb. There are often brief, moderate specifications for carrying out the command, sometimes small allowances for conditions or contingencies are included. Usually, moderate threats of punishment or negative consequences, such as, "if you don't, you will not get to , you will have to, I will make you,. . . ." The implication is that it should be done exactly and without question simply because the person has the authority to command it. "You'll do it because I say so, because I am your parent.

5. Pressure: The emphasis is on a sense of obligation. "You + should or ought to." "It is the right thing to do. Anyone with a sense of responsibility should feel bound to!" The implication is that non-compliance would be an indictment of the child's character and they should be viewed as guilty for non-compliance, should be looked down on, ostracized, seen as unworthy, etc.

FIRM COMMANDS


MODERATE COMMANDS

6. Mild Pressure: The emphasis is upon the authority's personal right and capacity to influence or to make a strong recommendation. "I advise you to." or "You had better!" "I really feel that this is important

7. Influence: Emphasis upon weight of authority's personal preference, or the child's personal character or own interests. "I want you to." "You should want to." Sometimes room is made for negotiation or compromise based on relative interests and/or values of each.

8. Strong Suggestion: At this level the suggestion indicates an ability on the child's part, but questions the child's willingness. Sometimes the suggestion is made politely allowing the person to make a choice, but the implication is that non-compliance will suggest unwillingness and that that will be held against the child. "You could; Could you" (spoken with emphasis).

9. Moderate Suggestion: This level Indicates an assumption of ability but there are no undertones of personal or moral accountability for being unwilling to comply. It is used as a means of commanding without the sound of authority. It is merely directing one's attention to what needs to be done or implying the authority's desire that `the job' get done, preferably by you if you are able at this time. `You can.' `Can you?' Spoken matter-of-factly with the expectation the it will be done without question but if not, there will be no consequences.

10. Mild Suggestion: This is a mild form of directing one's attention to tasks available or there to be done. `You might' is used instead of you can; you might and you may.' People sometimes (and often with a tone of put-down or sarcasm) refer to the thing that needs to or should have been done: `This needs to be done' or `I noticed those bags have not been moved!' The implication is that the authority hopes the child will feel responsible or want to cooperate, and if so this would be met with recognition of the child's good will.


PERMISSIVE COMMANDS

11. Permissive but Strong Request: Permission. Used with the assumption that the person is motivated to do the task. `You may,' Sometimes this is modified to a much more polite form with the addition of `if you like or prefer.' This involves a positive attribution and is supposed to motivate the child to want to be recognized in this manner.

12. Moderate Request: This request is presented as a question permitting the possibility of refusal. No attempt is made to overcome a mild lack of motivation, thus making it possible for the subordinate to seem to present himself as positively motivated, because there is no negative consequence, if he chooses to comply. Stated as: "Will you take care of that? Won't you please help out here? Here is something you could do." The option to choose not to do it or choose to do something of higher priority to oneself is open without any negative consequence.

13. Mild Request: This request is presented with a question which is meant to imply how much the subordinate cares for the authority. "Would you?", "Wouldn't you like to?", "Could you?", "Couldn't you please, just for me?" Compliance, therefore, suggests solidarity with the authority rather than obeisance, but non-compliance only suggests that the two of you are not that close or not that synchronized in terms of personal interests or priorities.

14. Polite Request: Requests presented with an implied question of ability or freedom from other encumbrances, really leave the widest margin for possible departure from what is requested and therefore are most likely to reveal the child's true motivations and interests uncontaminated by imposed agendas of the authority or parent. Spoken plaintively in contrast to 9. "Can you, if you don't mind" or "Could you, if, when, and as you feel like it." This is sometimes stated more indirectly and prefaced with a suggestion that the person can or has natural inclination to do something. "I know you are good at such and such, so would you like to...?"

15. Ultra-Polite Request: Extremely mild and polite requests. This form is used at a point of maximum uncertainty where the authority doubts the legitimacy or his right to command or even request such an act. "You would be doing me a great favor if"; "I wonder if you would, could, or-"; "I wish you would;" "If it would not inconvenience you or trouble you. . .". This is sometimes used as lighthearted sarcasm toward either party as goad to compliance but without any negative consequence.


COMMAND LANGUAGE

Below, you will find a list of commands that are ranked in levels from HARSH to ULTRA POLITE REQUEST. Each level has illustrative examples. Your task is to identify the types of commands you use and when you use them. After you have viewed the list, describe, in the blanks below the commands you feel you use and the types of situations or occasions in which that command language is used. Describe the persons involved in these situations and describe their roles or styles of interacting. Indicate the frequency of occurrence of each category of levels of commands that you use. Add comments or your own version of the command that will help clarify what is happening in this interaction.

________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________


1. A. PROHIBITIONS1. HARSH: Brief main, command verbs with negative superlative modifiers at the beginning of the sentence.

Example: "Don't you ever do that again." Often with threats of bodily harm or severe psychological or material consequences. Usually uttered in a loud voice with curse words and labeling the person with curse words and with negative, superlative modifiers: "You are the worst; you are so unbelievably bad; etc." "Damn you little ____, if you ever do that, you'd better not ever, or I'll kick your ____."

2. Abrupt: Brief, bold, action verbs are at the beginning of the prohibition. Usually includes a sense of urgency, a deadline or time condition, and threats of punishment, or grounding, for non-compliance. "STOP. Don't ever do that. Quit.", sometimes with swearing, bringing up past, labeling the person, attributing incorrigible traits or characteristics to the person. "You always do what you're not supposed to, you're such a ____, I better not find out that you've disobeyed me again!"

3. Peremptory: "You + shall or will + not or never"; "No you won't!, shall not, will not!, You'd better not ever!" There is a sound of impatience and anger or irritation. There is a strong implication of distrust and disrespect. Punishment or negative consequences are specified in case of failure to comply. Rebuttal or discussion is precluded, even for alternatives or substitutes.

4. Moderately Peremptory: The emphasis is upon one's authority over the child. Initial phrases are such as: " You must not; You will have to stop; You must never; Never, never, ever do ...; You can not ..." Some slight degree of exceptions or tolerance or lack of perfect compliance is sometimes allowed. Usually, moderate threats of punishment or negative consequences, such as, "if you do, then you will have to, you will not get to , you will have to, I will make you,. . . ..

5. Pressure: "I really do not want you to; I really disapprove of that so you are not going to; I will be very upset with you. You had better not disappoint me in this; You must not upset so and so by doing that!"


PROHIBITIONS6. Mild pressure, SOCIAL Pressure: "People in our family do not do that sort of thing; I never did that when I was your

age; I'm surprised you would ask; That the kind of thing only `_____' would do, no I can't have you doing that sort of thing! It will really make me (us) look bad if you do that! What would people think (about us) if they knew you were doing that sort of thing?".

7. Influence: "I would rather you didn't; Please don't do that; Why don't you do something else; I really do not think that is a good idea; If you will not do that, then I will (promising an inducement for compliance)." Let's discuss what should be done here; let's talk about the pros and cons of this. There is a suggestion of negotiation and rational compromise possible in this case. The decision is of mutual or family concern.

8. Strong Suggestion: "You couldn't": used to suggest inconsistency with one's character as a means of controlling the person. "I know you are not the kind of person that would do that. I'm really surprised at you that you would think of such a thing, who put you up to that?" This avoids the tone of authoritarianism but puts a general moral authority in its place.

9. Moderate Suggestion: Sometimes the suggestion appears as "You can not do that, you are not that sort of person; why on earth would you even think that that would be OK?", implying that you are forbidden and suggesting that you will comply because it is inconsistent with one's personality. The authority, however, owns responsibility for his judgment that the act is not acceptable.

10. Mild Suggestion: "You might consider not doing that! Think it over carefully, I'm sure you will see my point of view and not do that!" The implication is that, if the person defies the prohibition, the reflection is on his weak character or poor judgment and not on the lack of responsible guidance from the parent.


PROHIBITIONS11. Permissive but Strong Request: The form `You may not' is paradoxically used as an abrupt prohibition and often

also as a diplomatic, polite prohibition. Spoken in a light hearted, kidding way, subtly suggests the possibility of permission, thus leaving the child in a state of confusion: if he defies he might be damned but if he complies he might be ridiculed. The choice seems to be up to him, but the outcome in the end can be at the whim of the authority.

12. Moderate Request: Somewhere between influencing and begging, usually with "pleases" as "Will you please try and stop doing that!"

13. Mild Request: Pleadingly: "Would you not, or would you try and stop, would you please try and avoid. Do you think you could maybe not do that, at least this time?; I'm sorry, I really do not want to upset you, but I really feel you shouldn't; Don't you think it would be better if you didn't?" "If you just have to, then please be sure that _________________!" The latitude being allowed here is probably designed to prevent the authority from having to meet out consequences for non-compliance, or to avoid the possibility of knowing for sure whether or not there was genuine compliance.

14. Polite Request: When "Can you" or "Could you" plus "please not!" are used with prohibition in a polite but hopeless manner, the suggestion is that that which is being forbidden is something the person has a strong compulsion to do and probably will not respect the wishes of the authority. There is a sarcastic implication that perhaps the person lacks the strength of character to stop, and to avoid such an implication, he must stop. For example: "Can you, if you can find it within your power, please refrain from . . .!" However, the point is to remove from the authority the sense that they are ineffectual as an authority, the cause, rather, is in the subordinate, which almost pushes the person toward disobedience.

15. Ultra-Polite Request: The prohibition at this level is spoken as though it were a completely unwarranted encroachment on the other person's rights. "I know you are going to think this is unreasonable or rude of me, I hate to impose, please forgive me for asking, but could you . . . ; I will try to make up for it in some way; thank you so very much, I'm so sorry I asked."


PROHIBITIONS

Just as you did with the Commands, describe the situations or occasions in which the prohibition language listed below is used. Describe the persons and their roles involved in these situations. Indicate frequency of occurrence. Add comments or your own version that will help clarify what is happening in this interaction.

________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________


2. COMPLIANCE-DEFIANCE SCALE

1. Explosive, angry, oppositional language, curse words, with extreme protestations and threats and sometimes with physical violence.

2. Extensive arguing and rebuttal in angry, loud, resentful tones; sometimes with the accompaniment of accusations and negative attributions toward the authority. Refusing acknowledgment, complete lack of response with cold or sullen expression, stalking out with a sullen look. This is usually designed to provoke a rage response from the authority as a distraction or in order to extract an emotional cost so high that the parent will never make that command or prohibition again.

3. Long winded, aggressive arguments in opposition to the command or prohibition with threats of non-compliance or retaliation if coerced. Sometimes threats of self destruction or self mutilation or self defeating strategies when the subject feels that the threat is involves something the authority eagerly desires for the welfare of the child. "If you make me comply in spite of the fact that I make this self defeating threat, that is proof that you do not care and you are a phony and a bad, uncaring person."

4. Trying to manipulate by giving false excuses, veiled threats, resorting to pleas based on self pity and emotional pain, protestations of past inequities, demanding unreasonable trade offs and concessions, promising compliance after a delay or at a later time, especially with no past record of reliability in this regard.

5. Offering opposing arguments based on unreasonableness, lack of community consensus, accusations of favoritism, questioning parental right to exercise authority in this case, etc., in order to justify non-compliance. Protests that if only the parent would not ask, demand or prohibit, it would get done, that giving the order results in resentment and resistance that otherwise would not be there.


COMPLIANCE-DEFIANCE SCALE

6. Appealing to lack of reciprocity and parental inconsistency in order to invalidate parent's right to command or prohibit in this case. Requesting that parent demonstrate give and take or equality in this case before one complies. Objecting to the manner in which the command or prohibition was given.

7. Indicating personal distaste or psychological handicap as a grounds for being excused from the particular duty or restriction. Giving half-hearted objections, expressing annoying statements of resentment and complaints with whining. Endless, unreasonable bargaining designed to irritate and wear the parent down.

8. Requesting rational, fair negotiation concerning the what, where, when, and how of the command or prohibition.9. Acknowledging the command/prohibition and suggesting that it will be done but also suggesting negotiation on this

issue at `sometime' in the future.10. Conveying the idea that one always does as told, always does one's duty, and therefore does not need to be told.

Suggesting that one be given trust and respect for one's record of responsibility.



11. Indicating a willingness to go along with the requirements of the authority. Asking for specifics about the requirement.

12. Indicating pride and pleasure in complying and serving and also soliciting details about the manner and specifics about the requirement.

13. Statement of a strong interest and desire to please and an interest in the job. Expressing a desire to do a good job. Expressing a desire to prove themselves, their competence, or their desire for approval.

14. Statement of extreme enthusiasm and commitment to the authority and a desire to make them happy, to be worthy of their being selected to fulfill the requirement or to conform, usually with elated affect.

15. Effusive statement of what an honor and pleasure it is to serve the authority, that no request is unreasonable or would be refused.



Levels of responses of compliance or defiance to commands or prohibitions are listed on the following pages. Select the compliance-defiance responses that occur in your situations. Describe the situations or occasions in which these responses are evoked. Describe the persons involved in these situations and their behavior. Indicate frequencies of occurrence of particular levels of compliance or defiance. Add comments or your own version that will help clarify what is happening in this interaction.

________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________


Type of Surrogate Parental Role, Basis for Authority and Control, and Strategy

Parents role ‘standing’ between both parents and with other relevant adults in the child’s environment.Control versus disciplinary functions of parents and parent figures.What does the parent define as the reason for child to obey or as the source of power or authority?

Parents reliance upon alliances and support for their position, actions, and strategies.Parents definition of domains subject to control and domains exempted from control.

Parents threatened versus demonstrated strategies for enforcing control.Parents choice of type of consequence:material or psychological rewards and costs versus restriction of preferred activities; allocation and exclusion of time; according privileges versus imposing duties.Parents style of administrating control: child growth oriented versus obedience and task-obedience orientation.

Perception of authority among parents and relevant present adults.Perception of parental figures in terms of behavior to be expected from each.Understanding of reasons for obedience and conditions under which obedience is obligatory versus contingent.Perception of alliances and actual sources of support and learning the art of leverage.Perception of domains legitimately evoking reflex obedience, optional domains, and domains of complete self determination.Differentiation of strategies with consequence versus gestures with no consequence.Perception of and evaluation of relative values attained through defiance versus costs in terms of parental choice of type consequences.

Perception of parents’ ‘child’ versus ‘obedience’ orientation and cognitive orientation to parents’ communications.

Parent Role, Basis, and Strategy Child Cognitive-Behavioral Learning


3. PERFORMANCE SCALE

1. Far exceeding expectations. An inappropriate overkill in task performance. Excessive, overbearing conformity.

2. Superior work or conformity.

3. Above average performance.

4. Exactly meeting expectations.

5. Average performance, nothing noteworthy nor deserving criticism.

6. Below average, requiring minimal correction or assistance.

7. Inferior performance, excessive delay, requiring intervention and checking up.

8. Total neglect of requirement.

9. Obvious or suspected intentional messing up or sabotage.

10. Open, violent destruction or defiance.


PERFORMANCE SCALE

Describe the situations or occasions in which the responses, or level of performance, listed below are evoked. Describe the persons and their roles involved in these situations. Indicate frequency of occurrence. Add comments that will help clarify what has happened at this stage and why you think it happened that way.

________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________


4. THE PARENT'S REACTION TO THE LEVEL OR DEGREE OF PERFORMANCE OR ACCOMPLISHMENT

APPROVAL

1. 'Where do you get ideas like those? This is terrific!! You are the best.' Endless praise and bragging follows. Everyone is told!2. You know, you are my pride and joy, you are really invaluable to us, really a pleasure to us. That's really wonderful!3. Well, I see, as usual, you did an excellent job. I want you to know I am very proud of you. You must have put a great deal of effort into this.

PASSIVE APPROVAL

4. Yes, that is what I wanted. Thank you. OK, you pass!5. That's OK. You did fine, but I'm sure you can do better. You know you can do better than that!6. I can see improvement here. I know you are trying. Let's get together again before you start on this the next time. OK!

NEUTRAL

7. I can understand this part, but why did you do that? Its pretty good. Please don't get offended, but this is not really what I had in mind. Would you mind doing this part over?8. Is this really the best you can do? Did you: hear what I said? understand what I wanted? listen? What happened? Did someone come by and distract you?9. You really weren't interested or motivated for this were you? What were you thinking about? Did something happen that made you do this the way you did? I know this is not you. Why didn't you just tell me you did not want to do -- were not going to do -- what I asked?


THE PARENT'S REACTION TO THE LEVEL OR DEGREE OF PERFORMANCE OR ACCOMPLISHMENT

PASSIVE DISAPPROVAL

10. What makes you think that's what I wanted? You didn't listen to what I asked you to do, did you? You don't really care do you? We've got to make sure we understand what's needed next time, because I really can't have this!11. Well, that's no more than I expected of you. I guess I have to treat you like (naming a younger age). This is what I all inconsiderateness; irresponsibility. Why don't you grow up!12. I don't know how you can continue to expect to get away with doing things like that. No one will ever want you around or to work for them. You will never make it in life. You are really taking advantage of me; letting me down. I can't afford this.

DISAPPROVAL

13. You call this a finished product? You call this doing what I told you? I don't think I can trust you with anything. You are so stupid, irresponsible, inconsiderate, hateful, etc.!14. 'Do you realize what you've done? You wasted everything, made people late, you've ruined everything for everyone. You should be kicked out of the house for this. You should be grounded forever for this. I'm making a note of it, I won't forget it, you damn well better show definite improvement next time, and if not, you are really catching hell! I hate you. I wish you had never been born.'15. What are you trying to do: Make me look bad? Make me ill? Break my heart? Ruin my life? Etc. You really make me sick! *@#$!, what a screw up! Why don't you just get the *%$&@# out of here before I beat the %@~|%@ &*%{<$ out of you! I don't want to ever see you again! Oh my *&% get out of my sight before I kill you!


5. PARENT AND CHILD REACTION SCALES

PARENT'S INNER PROCESSES1. What was the parent, or were you as parent, feeling and thinking as you perceived the completed or incomplete task?_________________________________________ __________________________________________

2. In addition to the initial parental reaction, what additional thoughts and feelings could have occurred but were left unexpressed?

_______________________________________________________________________________

3. How did the scene end? How did the parent play out their part in the ending?

_______________________________________________________________________________

4. After the scene was over, what kinds of thoughts and feelings might have occurred to the parent later on?

_______________________________________________________________________________

5. What do you anticipate will happen the next time this type of scenario recurs? How do you feel parent and child will interact next time?

_________________________________________

__________________________________________

CHILD'S INNER PROCESSES1. What was the child or were you, as child, feeling and thinking as a result of the parent’s reaction?

________________________________________

________________________________________

2. How did the child visibly respond to the parent’s reaction to the child’s task performance? What other thought and feelings could have occurred but were left unexpressed?

________________________________________

________________________________________

3. How did the scene end? How did the child play out their part in the ending?

________________________________________

________________________________________

4. After the scene was over, what kind of thoughts and feelings might have occurred to the child later on?

________________________________________

________________________________________

5. What do you anticipate will happen the next time this type of scenario recurs? How do you feel parent and child will interact the next time this situation occurs?

________________________________________

________________________________________

ASSUMPTIONS AND/OR SELF OBSERVATIONS ABOUT PARENT’S INNER PROCESSES AND CHILD’S INNER PROCESSES ACCOMPANYING AND FOLLOWING THE FINAL REACTION TO CHILD’S COMPLETED OR INCOMPLETE TASK


PARENTAL AND SOCIETAL APPROACHES TO INCORRECT BEHAVIORTrend A in parenting and social instittions is legalistic, judgmental, negativistic, expressive of conditional love and evokes superficial conformity but inner fear and alienation toward authority and self rejection and despair.

Actual Pattern

Ideal Pattern

Parental Comparison:

Does the actual behavior

conform to your Ideal Pattern?

Ideal Pattern

Parental Comparison

:Judging and

Finding Match

Incorrect

Ideal Pattern

Parental Response: Criticizing, Rejecting,

Condemning, Punishing for

Incorrect Match

Ideal Pattern

Comparison:Child’s Behavior Corrected.Child’s Feeling Reaction:

Alienated, Resentful,Self Rejecting,

Hostile to Guidance and Correction

Actual Corrected Pattern: ConformingActual Pattern Does NOT Conform.

Actual Pattern Does NOT Conform.

TREND

A

Actual Pattern

Ideal Pattern

Parental Comparison:

Does the actual behavior conform

to your Ideal Pattern?

Ideal Pattern

Comparison: Assessingand Finding Incorrect

Match

Ideal Pattern

Parental Response: Forgiving,

Understanding,

Correcting

Ideal Pattern

Comparison: Child’s Behavior Corrected. Child’s

Feeling Reaction:Corrected, Happy,

Bonded, Self Accepting,Open to Guidance and

Correction in the Future.

Actual Corrected Pattern: ConformingActual Pattern Does NOT Conform Actual Pattern Does NOT Conform.

TREND

B

Trend B in parenting and in social institutions is assessing, forgiving, correcting, positive, expressive of unconditional love and evokes bonding with authority, openness to guidance and correction, self acceptance, and happiness.


THE PARENT'S REACTION TO THE LEVEL OR DEGREE OF PERFORMANCE OR ACCOMPLISHMENT

Describe the situations or occasions in which the responses listed below are evoked. Describe your own and other persons' roles involved in these situations. Describe emotional states as felt by you or inferred from their behavior. Indicate frequency of occurrence of this kind of reaction. Add comments that will help clarify what has happened at this stage and why you think it happened that way.

________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________


6. Detection of Patterns and Their Causes

6. Now, begin to look deeper and examine your own past for causal influences over your current behavior. Can you detect themes or patterns in your relationship with your parents that were troublesome to you, that you were not able to change, correct, or resolve? Can you recall having a feeling or sense in those earlier years that you would want to do things differently with your own children, would want to prevent them having to go through what you went through, would want to make sure your children would know some quality that you missed in your relationship with your parents? Can you recall critical or traumatic incidents involving you and your parents that left you with a sense of deprivation, abandonment, abuse, neglect, disinterest, excessive indulgence in one area because they were not capable of providing in another critical way or area, etc.? Do you recall certain compelling scenes or scenarios that were particularly distressful or humiliating that you could not change or stop and you wanted to make sure these did not recur with your children? These are themes of unfinished business or themes of incompleteness, leaving you with a feeling that something had not been working or did not turn out right and even though you could not do anything about it at the time, you maintained a feeling that in some future time you would change the scenario and finally make it come out right? Take some time now and try to recall and write out, in the space below, descriptions of these early influences and analyze how they may be affecting your current relationships.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________


Rewrite the Scenario So That It Will Run Its Course More Effectively and Have a Better Outcome.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Project ahead and select and describe a situation you will use to practice your new approach to assisting your child to use its own judgement to think through behavioral choices.

What Could You Do Differently Next Time?


The Young Child Is Happy When Parents Are Happily Married

A. Happily married parents from the child’s point of view.

Oh, Happy Days!


When Parents are in Conflict, the child becomes anxious, fretful and feels its heart is splitting just like the marriage

B. Signs of Serious Conflict

“Oh no ! What’s happening?”


When Parents Are Divorced and Alienated, the Child Feels Split Into Two Alienated Persons, Lives in Agony, but Maintains Hope That It

Can Bring ‘Them’ Back Together

Child: “My world is split apart. I am split apart. I am anxious, scared, and depressed. All I want is for them to be back together so I can be back together again and my world can be back together again!!

C. Parents: divorced, alienated, and angry. Incapable of focusing on the effects on the child. Fighting each other and each trying to get the child to takes sides against the other. Each is trying to use the child as a spy and pawn to ‘get’ and manipulate the other.


Without Reconciling, Parents Can Give the Child Permission to Continue Loving Each Parent Just As Before Divorce. Not Using the Child Against Each Other, Helps to Mend the Child’s Broken Heart. It Can Eventually Be Happy Again.

.... 2. “No. You can

love us both. You don’t have to take sides.”

1. “Do I have to love just one and not the other?”

1. “Do I have to love just one and not the other?”

3. Wow! Am I relieved

and happy now!!

2. “No. You can love us both. You don’t have to take sides.”

D.


DYNAMIC EFFECTS OF THE STRUCTURE OF FRAGMENTED AND BLENDED FAMILIES ON THE CHILDREN WHO MOVE BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN FAMILIES

WITH DRAMATICALLY DIFFERING STYLES OF PARENTING.

Divorce , courts, law, family structure, family history, structure of fragmented, reconstituted, blended families all have powerful effects on the development of the child’s character and personality.

One family structure, the ‘Red’ family, is diagrammed below. Mr. and Mrs. Red divorce and each remarry people who have also been married before. Mr. Red remarries the ex Mrs. Blue and Mrs. Red remarries the ex Mr. Green. The Newly (newly remarried) Reds and the Newly Greens are diagrammed. Their children now have step or half siblings. The custody and visitation arrangements are described. Each child now has multiple parent types and sibling types that move in and out of each other’s lives in highly complex patterns. The relations between these fragmented and then blended families require complex and confusing new relationships, roles and rules. The personalities of the children, once influenced by one intact family, are now influenced by a new, highly complex structure of multiple families that requires a complex pattern of movement between and adaptation to these reconstituted families within the new complex structure. Each such complex structure of fragmented and blended families develops a unique Gestalt or nature of the whole structure. The Gestalt of the whole structure necessarily generates dynamic relationships with tendencies and pressures that begins to change the direction of the shaping of each child’s personality. In other words, the features of the structure itself, independent of the individual personalities and parenting styles of those within the structure, begins to shape each child’s personality.


The process of divorce itself has dramatic effects on the children, as illustrated in Figure 3 below. The breaking up of the child’s original nuclear family generates fear, anger, guilt, confusion over how to relate to whom, grief over the move of one parent to a different locale, a sense of abandonment, depression over a loss of familiar patterns and rituals, loneliness due to the parents’ sudden absorption in their struggle to survive and make a new life, despair over loss of future plans and goals whose meaningfulness was connected with an absent parent, all result in the child having an intense preoccupation with their wounds and how to mend their divided, broken heart. Some of the structural factors relate to the simple division into two new households that are still somehow connected. First, being with a single parent most of the time; second, moving back and forth between the custodial and non custodial parents; and third, having to adapt to parents’ new mates, all demand adaptations that are very difficult and complex for the child. Then, having to adjust to step siblings, and sometimes, eventually, to half siblings is a very difficult adaptation process. The expectations and rules change with each changing configuration: two separate single parents, two parents who remarry, and the strange pattern of exceptions that result from having a new parent with a set of rules for the child they bring with them and the relinquishing and assuming power and governance of each other’s blood children.


Children as well as parents and stepparents struggle with feelings grounded in the territoriality of blood relations versus legally sanctioned relations. The blood versus legal ties generate deep, sometimes bitter feelings over the requirement of joint accountability for children and of children’s legal accountability to step parents. The child and the biological parent have difficulty accepting the stepparent’s authority. Biological parents give stepparents mixed messages: “You have to assume responsibility.” and “Don’t treat my child that way.” This creates anger, frustration, and confusion in both the child and the stepparent. The problem is compounded many times over when we bring the non-custodial parent and their new spouse and children into the picture. Redesigning the family roles, relationships, and rules in these new structures can be a very arduous, painful, interminable process. The personality types of each of the new constituents of these complex, new family structures can facilitate or hinder the construction of a new, effective, comfortable, consistent, family system. What generally happens is that when this process gets really difficult and seems not to be working, the members tend to focus on each other’s individual personalities or even to just attribute the difficulty to their gender.


Figure 1. CONFLICTING PARENTING STYLES AND THEIR EFFECTS ON THEIR CHILDREN

Conditional Love, high expectations, rules and demands, and somewhat formal, distant and cold, but intensely interested in having his children develop properly and behave properly and be high achievers.

Unconditional Love, warm, empathic, understanding, guiding but emphasizing the children learn to use their own judgment and deal with the consequences of bad choices, but learning to correct rather than blame.

EFFECTS ON CHILD: Performance anxiety, approval seeking, pressure and stress, self consciousness

EFFECTS ON CHILD: Good judgment, responsibility, spontaneity, warmth, confidence, focus on process of tasks rather rewards,

EFFECTS OF COMBINED STYLES ON FIRST CHILD: Intrinsically motivated, ambivalent about conformity, resentful of imposed goals from father and external evaluations, driven to attain, ambivalent toward closeness, confident, takes calculated risks, extroverted, sensitive but controlling

Mr. Red Mrs. Red

Little Red One

EFFECTS OF COMBINED STYLES ON SECOND CHILD: Similar to first child, but closer to Mom, more openly resistant to imposed goals and evaluations, less confident, less risk taking, less extroverted, but closer with few friends, more intrinsically motivated, more likely to resist control.

Little Red Two

THE ORIGINAL RED FAMILY


Rarely are the members able to look objectively at the diverse patterns of relating, independent of the intentions, dispositions, or personalities of the members. It is not typical, although not impossible, for any of the involved parties to have malicious intentions. Even when the ex and new spouses are bitter and suspicious, they generally do not intend to hurt or negatively shape the children’s personalities In spite of their good or benign intentions, the children do begin to demonstrate disturbed behavior and emotions The personalities, the newness of relations, the different styles of parenting, the effects of trauma on both children and adults, and the effects of blood territoriality all make their contribution to these disturbances.

However, a factor that is seldom perceived or understood is the effect of the Structure encompassing all of the related families. This is the major factor that is emphasized in this paper Mr. and Mrs. Red married and had two children: Little Red One and Little Red Two. Eventually, after some nasty conflicts, they divorced. Mrs. Red got the children and soon remarried to Mr. Green. Mr. Green already had a child. The Little Green One visited her father every weekend. This became a blended family, with Mr. Green, the Ex Mrs. Red, the two Little Reds, and the Little Green one every weekend.


Figure 2. Marriage, Divorce, Remarriage

Little Red One Little Red Two

Little Red One Little Red Two

DIVORCEEx Mr. Red Ex Mrs. Red

Ex Mr. Green

Little Red TwoLittle Red One

The Newly Greens.Mrs. Red

Little Green One

REMARRY

WeekendsEx Mrs. Blue

REMARRY

Little Blue One

Visit every other six months.

The Newly Reds

Weekends

Mr. Red

Mr. Red Mrs. Red


“

Mr. Red was only allowed to see his children onweekends. Mr. Red eventually remarried to the ex Mrs. Bluewho brought her only child with her. The ex Mrs. Blue’schild, Little Blue One, was allowed to live with her father andhis new wife every other six months. She visited the parentshe was not living with at the time every weekend.

After the divorce, Mr. And Mrs. Red viewed each otherwith suspicion and animosity.

The Ex Mrs. Red had been loving and empathic andemphasized allowing the children to adventure andexperiment. She discussed decisions and consequenceswith them to help them learn to use their own judgmentbetter and to learn to be responsible by thinking thingsthrough for themselves. She remarried to Mr. Green and theparenting became more consistent as Mr. Green deferred tothe Ex Mrs. Red, but approved of the her children’sbehavior.

The diagrams above in Figure 2 outline The Redsbefore and after divorce in the first two diagrams and the lastdiagram outlines the increasingly complex relationships afterthe Reds remarry. Mr. Red remarries to the Ex Mrs. Blueand Mrs. Red remarries to Mr. Green. The diagram of theNewly Reds and the Newly Greens includes the custody andvisitation arrangements of the children of Mrs. Blue, Mr.Green, and the Reds.


“

Mr. Green had been a patient listener who had left the raisingand discipline of the children to his ex wife. He was very tolerant, noninterfering, and accepting. If asked to get involved in the interaction,he would modestly say that he was sure that she was a much bettermother than he.

The ex Mrs. Green had been over protectivetended to baby, and was overly concerned with the Little Green One’s,health.

The ex Mrs. Green married Mr. Orange, who was emotionallydistant but very responsible for the children. He, also aligned with the

ex Mrs. Green In everything involving children, but left the decisionsand the interaction with her child to her.

While he did not interfere, it was obvious that he had a greatdisdain for weakness, incompetence and sicknessOne would go from the Ex Mrs. Green to her father’s new home onweekends and be homesick and feel sick to get sympathy, but herfather’s new wife and step children were too robust and mature forthat.

The Little Red Ones would ignore Little Green One, as wouldMr. Green. The Ex Mrs. Red tried to counsel, coach, and encouragethe Little Green One, but to no avail.

The ex Mrs. Blue was oriented toward making children into highachievers, especially in school, and teaching them to be polite, wellmannered, serious and responsible. Mr. Red had been strict,consistent, and devoted to guiding and educating his children to reachhis high expectations.

Mr. Red and the ex Mrs. Blue generally agreed on child rearing,but tended to engage in long intellectual arguments over small detailsconcerning how Little Blue One and Little Red One and Two should betrained and educated. Mr. Blue and ex Mrs. Blue parted amicably.Mr. Blue’s personality was somewhat childish and fun loving and hebelieved in being lenient , permissive, and indulgent. He married amuch younger woman who had not been married before and whoshared his crazy, fun loving ways. For the six months each year whenMr. and Mrs. Blue had Little Blue One, they all had a rollicking goodtime with no thought to limits, schedules, or responsibilities. Forsecond six months there was discipline and high expectations with theNewly Reds. The Little Reds would come on weekends and complainthat they did not need to be told what to do, were responsible, andcould make their own decisions. They would then turn on the LittleBlue one and ridicule her for being whiny about having so many rules,so much to do and no fun. They felt quite superior to the Little BlueOne, who felt rejection and pouted and rebelled, and acted silly like amuch younger child.


Mr. Red was only allowed to see his children on weekends. Mr. Red eventually remarried to the ex Mrs. Blue who brought her only child with her. The ex Mrs. Blue’s child, Little Blue One, was allowed to live with her father and his new wife every other six months. She visited the parent she was not living with at the time every weekend. After the divorce, Mr. And Mrs. Red viewed each other with suspicion and animosity.

The Ex Mrs. Red had been loving and empathic and emphasized allowing the children to adventure and experiment. She discussed decisions and consequences with them to help them learn to use their own judgment better and to learn to be responsible by thinking things through for themselves. She remarried to Mr. Green and the parenting became more consistent as Mr. Green deferred to the Ex Mrs. Red, but approved of her children’s behavior.

The diagrams above in Figure 2 outline The Reds before and after divorce in the first two diagrams and the last diagram outlines the increasingly complex relationships after the Reds remarry. Mr. Red remarries to the Ex Mrs. Blue and Mrs. Red remarries to Mr. Green. The diagram of the Newly Reds and the Newly Greens includes the custody and visitation arrangements of the children of Mrs. Blue, Mr. Green, and the Reds.


The ex Mrs. Blue was oriented toward making children into high achievers, especially in school, and teaching them to be polite, well mannered, serious and responsible. Mr. Red had been strict, consistent, and devoted to guiding and educating his children to reach his high expectations Mr. Red and the ex Mrs. Blue generally agreed on child rearing, but tended to engage in long intellectual arguments over small details concerning how Little Blue One and Little Red One and Two should be trained and educated.

Mr. Blue and ex Mrs. Blue parted amicably.

Mr. Blue’s personality was somewhat childish and fun loving and he believed in being lenient, permissive, and indulgent. He married a much younger woman who had not been married before and who shared his crazy, fun loving ways. For the six months each year when Mr. and Mrs. Blue had Little Blue One, they all had a rollicking good time with no thought to limits, schedules, or responsibilities.

For the second six months there were discipline and high expectations with the Newly Reds. The Little Reds would come on weekends and complain that they did not need to be told what to do, were responsible, and could make their own decisions. They would then turn on the Little Blue one and ridicule her for being whiny about having so many rules, so much to do and no fun. They felt quite superior to the Little Blue One, who felt rejection and pouted and rebelled, and acted silly like a much younger child.


Mr. Green had been a patient listener who had left the raising and discipline of the children to his ex wife. He was very tolerant, non-interfering, and accepting. If asked to get involved in the interaction, he would modestly say that he was sure that she was a much better mother than he was. The ex Mrs. Green had been over protective and indulgent, tended to baby, and was overly concerned with the Little Green One’s health.

The ex Mrs. Green married Mr. Orange, who was emotionally distant but very responsible for the children. He, also aligned with the ex Mrs. Green In everything involving children, but left the decisions and the interaction with her child to her. While he did not interfere, it was obvious that he had a great disdain for weakness, incompetence and sickness. The Little Green One would go from the Ex Mrs. Green to her father’s new home on weekends and be homesick and feel sick to get sympathy, but her father’s new wife and stepchildren were too robust and mature for that. The Little Red Ones would ignore Little Green One, as would Mr. Green. The Ex Mrs. Red tried to counsel, coach, and encourage the Little Green One, but to no avail.


“

Studying the complex relationships within the structurethat developed out of the fragmenting of the marriages,Reds, Blues, and Greens, and the blending of the Reds andGreens, the first, and most dramatic impression is that thiscomplex structure, in and of itself, has a profound role inshaping the personalities of the children. The parentingstyles of each of the four parents of the blended diagram,and ultimately the additional four parents in the New Bluesand the new family of Mrs. Green, exert their own influence,but also are re shaped by complex extended structure. Nowfor each of these families, there is a greatly reduced controlover the shaping of their children’s character. Neither, forexample, the Newly Reds nor the Newly Greens havecontrol over what happens when their children are with theirex spouses and their new mates. The step parents in eachcombination are now in the difficult position of beingaccountable for the behavior of their step children in spite ofthe preemptive rights of the blood parent and accountabilityfor the behavior of their blood children over whom they nowhave very limited control. The seemingly logical recourse forthe latter dilemma is to try to exert some control over thechild rearing practices of their former spouses and their newmates. Such attempts usually only succeed in generatingresentments, intensifying the intra family warfare, andincreasing pressure on the child who is typically used as aspy and pawn in these battles. Conflicting loyaltiesexacerbated by the requirement to betray either bloodparents results in a night mare like existence for the child.


“

Complicating these dysfunctional relationships is aprocess going on inside the children of divorce that no oneanticipated and few are likely to suspect and even deal withonce they do become aware of the children’s inner crisis.The effect of the divorce on the child is graphicallyrepresented in Figure 3, Effects of Divorce on Children. Thechildren’s heart’s are broken and divided. They have to livewith anger and confusion for divorcing, grief, split loyalties,anger of being a pawn and spy and enemy by each towardeach attempts of get them back together resentment ofsteps confusion over authority and new roles confusion andinsecurity moving back and forth dealing with new stepsiblings fear of being displaced guilt a cause of divorcedoubt of being loved anger for remarriage rejection of valuesof both families having to learn deception and manipulationfeeling abandoned and deserted and betrayed anxiety anddepression loss of self esteem especially among peersinability to concentrate and drop in grades and pressurefrom this sense of hopeless and meaninglessness, Figure 5shows the effects of a divided mind on the ability toconcentrate. Hiding and dealing with these feelings the waythis affects peer relations and later love relations


The Effects on the Children of Being Involved in Fragmented and Blended Families“

THE NEWLY REDS

Mr. Red showed conditional love, was rule oriented, strict emotionally distant, made decisions, and told the children how to do all tasks.

The Ex Mrs. Blue showed conditional love, was cold, strict, intellectual, focused on school achievement, discipline, punishment, and conformity.

The Little Reds, angry with step father’s up-tightness, rebel. The Blue child, having been indulged, rebels. The children are allies against parents but do not like each other. Together they badger the Newly Reds so as to get out of their overbearing demands.

The Little Reds hate to go to the Newly Reds on weekends. They start to resent authority and manipulate and compare them negatively to the Newly Greens and compare their behavior to Little Blue’s.

Little Blue hates to go to the Newly Reds and regresses, becomes silly, and plays nasty jokes on the little Reds.

THE NEWLY GREENS

Ex Mrs. Red tries hard to continue unconditional love, discussing decisions, letting them decide and then discussing what to learn from the consequences. Becomes suspicious of the Newly Reds & upset with Little Green.

Mr. Green defers to his new wife, tolerates, with embarrassment, Little Green’s whining, sickly behavior; gets defensive with wife resentful toward the Newly Oranges.

The Little Reds were learning leverage & resentment got the Green’s to indulge them with things. Their disgust with Little Green hardened Mr. Green against them.

Little Green dreads coming to the Greens because she gets little sympathy, is ridiculed by the Little Reds & em-harasses her father.


“

The Little Blue One was once an only child. Now, sixmonths of every year, Little Blue One has two step siblings,Little Red One and the younger, Little Red Two. Having tolearn to share is difficult for Little Blue One. The Little BlueOne also lives with her father and his new, young wife whoare indulgent, permissive, fun parents for six months andthen for six months she lives with her mother and Mr. Redas parents, who are strict, serious, and hold her to highexpectations.Each weekend gives her an abrupt change in the way she istreated. Also, on every other weekend, she is exposed tothese two step siblings who, for most of their lives, havelearned both to enjoy having fun as a child and also thinkingand making decisions responsibly as an adult.. The LittleReds feel quite grown up, as though they do not needanyone to tell them what to do. The three of them, LittleRed One and Two and Little Blue One, have to share theirblood parent with a stranger- the step parent. They have toendure the interference of an outsider, step parent, who isalso trying to parent them. Their response to the unwantedstep parenting is to engage in comparisons betweenhouseholds and embellish how much nicer it is at their homewith the Ex Mrs. Red and Mr. Green, and Mr. Blue and wife,respectively. Little Red One and Little Red Two have theexperience of a step mother who is very different from theirblood mother. This new step mother is much more like theirblood father who, from their point of view could not let thembe themselves and eventually he had deserted them.


“

Now, on weekends, they have two of a kind lining upagainst them. Little Blue One and Little Red One and Two,therefore, begin to be allies and co-conspirators on someoccasions and bitter enemies and rivals on other occasions.The Newly Reds, being jointly opposed to anything impoliteand unmannerly, become very harsh on the all of thechildren, forcing them to go underground with theirfrustration and anger. The Newly Reds begin to attack eachother for lack of ability to control their own and for havingbad kids. This was a pattern both had had in their formermarriages, which had been one of the major causes for theirrespective divorces. They also each blame their exspouses. When the children go to their respective homes,they tell their blood parents about how bad things are at thestep parents, how unfairly treated they are compared to thestep children, and how much The Newly Reds blame theother parents, both the Blues and the Greens. This tattlingbehavior heats up suspicion and animosity between each ofthe families.

The Little Green One visits the Newly Greens everyweekend. Every weekend the Little Green One has had toface these robust children of the ex Mrs. Red. She isoverwhelmed by them, especially since they were becomingadept at in-fighting with the Little Blue One. The Little GreenOne would run to Mr. Green who un-demonstrably andcoldly rebuffs her. Feeling somewhere between dismay andhysteria, she would turn to this alien being who was takingher mother’s place. The new Mrs. Green would at leastlisten to the Little Green One but could not be made to doteon and coddle, thus making The Little Green One feignincreasingly dreadful symptoms. When The Newly Greenswould take both sets of children out for some adventurousfun, the Little Green One would hang behind one of theparents and refuse to join in insisting that it was toodangerous or difficult.


“

The Little Red One and Two would laugh in ridicule andtriumph, making Mr. Green, in his quiet, benign mannerbecome uncomfortably ambivalent and in some slight waycommunicate to the Little Green One that they were perhapssecret allies. After all, even though her behavior disgustedhim, she was still his blood daughter. Under his breath, andsometimes audibly, he would curse the Ex Mrs. Green. Thelittle comfort Little Green One took from her father’sambivalence was undermined as she perceived his rejectionof the Ex Mrs. Green and, by implication, herself. All thewhile, the Little Reds Ones were learning to becomearrogant, cold hearted, defiantly insistent on making theirown decisions, and frustrating to the Newly Reds and Mr.Green and eventually even to the Ex Mrs. Red. They werealso learning to openly question authority.

The kinds of situations that would arise with the NewlyReds and Newly Greens, and also Mr. Blue and his youngwife and the ex Mrs. Green and her new husband, are verycomplex dilemmas and in some cases indecipherable. Theywould be unprepared to handle the difficult situations thatbegan to arise even if they did understand fully what wasgoing on. Taking a step back and looking at the structure ofthe various relationships should provide a differentperspective and understanding of why the various persons,parents and children, involved are the way they are. Each ofthe parents comes from an imperfect family of origin with itsown unique imperfect family system and family dynamics.However, once they enter into the marital relations, thepersonality of each partner is changed somewhat by thepersonality of the other.


“

As in most relationships, the partners first begin to try toaccommodate to the other. After a while, their true naturebegins to surface. Important values that they had keptsubordinated begin to surface. They try to work out theirdifferences and negotiate, compromise, and restructure therelationship so that they can survive emotionally. However,when children arrive, another dynamic factor intrudes fromthe past. The way one was treated as child is the firstresponse that emanates from our behavioral repertoire. Wemay have strongly disapproved of the way we were treatedand may have sworn that we would never treat our childrenthat way, but for the particular behavior in question, that isour first response. Of course no two parents are exactlyalike, and therefore, parents will have different responses tothe same child behavior. This results in disagreements.Typically a gradual polarization effect takes place. Seeingthe other’s parenting reaction that one disagrees with mayeventually result in taking a position a little more to the otherend of the scale, becoming a little more extreme in one’sown position. Eventually the other follows this same patternof moving a little more to the other end of the scale. Atsome point the polarization may become so great that itbecomes a point of intense, irreconcilable disagreement.Disagreements of this nature can be stored in a semi-conscious list of items (sometimes referred to as dirtylaundry) that could justify divorce.


As in most relationships, the partners first begin to try to accommodate to each other. After a while, their true


“

As in most relationships, the partners first begin to try toaccommodate to the other. After a while, their true naturebegins to surface. Important values that they had keptsubordinated begin to surface. They try to work out theirdifferences and negotiate, compromise, and restructure therelationship so that they can survive emotionally. However,when children arrive, another dynamic factor intrudes fromthe past. The way one was treated as child is the firstresponse that emanates from our behavioral repertoire. Wemay have strongly disapproved of the way we were treatedand may have sworn that we would never treat our childrenthat way, but for the particular behavior in question, that isour first response. Of course no two parents are exactlyalike, and therefore, parents will have different responses tothe same child behavior. This results in disagreements.Typically a gradual polarization effect takes place. Seeingthe other’s parenting reaction that one disagrees with mayeventually result in taking a position a little more to the otherend of the scale, becoming a little more extreme in one’sown position. Eventually the other follows this same patternof moving a little more to the other end of the scale. Atsome point the polarization may become so great that itbecomes a point of intense, irreconcilable disagreement.Disagreements of this nature can be stored in a semi-conscious list of items (sometimes referred to as dirtylaundry) that could justify divorce.


“

The children, of course, are in some primitive sense, awareof what is going on with their parents. Being immaturechildren with primitive, unsophisticated, self interest, thechildren will typically try to play one parent off against theother, or one household against the other in cases of divorceand remarriage, in order to achieve goals of getting whatthey want, winning in a rivalry with a sibling or step sibling,or getting back at a parent. These ploys and manipulationscan generate bitterness and chaos. Children, therefore,often unwittingly, exacerbate the growing parental conflictand inter-family conflict.

When and if a divorce comes, the children’s priorinvolvement in these processes is not just magically setaside. The children continue to play their part in thedisrupting interaction, the divorce, and the aftermath of thetwo enemy camps. However, being two separate campswith minimal communication, which at its best is usuallydistorted, the structure for the child has become much morecomplex and disturbed. The structure itself, then, becomesa magnified factor in altering the direction of the child’spersonality development. Thus, we see, with the examplesof the fragmented and blended families above, that eachchild’s personality is virtually thrust into a training programfor the development of unhealthy and even pathologicalpersonality and behavior patterns.


“

TECHNIQUES FOR DEALING WITH STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS

LESSONS IN FAMILY SYSTEMS WITHIN OVERARCHING MULTIFAMILY STRUCTURESNEGOTIATIONMEDIATIONINTER FAMILY CONTRACTSFAMILY OF ORIGIN AND INTERGENERATIONAL TRANSMISSION OF PARENTING STYLES

PARENTING SKILLS TRAININGLISTENING SKILLS TRAININGTRAINING IN ATTRIBUTION THEORY AND LOCUS OF CONTROL THEORY

INTER FAMILY CONTRACTS


The Role Structure of Institution Staff and Parents is Analogous

and has Similar Negative EffectsAn institution’s Supervisors & Dorm

Parents & a Family’s Father are enforcers & dispensers of withdrawal of privileges, punishment, & negative feedback to children. Youth perceive them in a negative light, learn to be deceptive toward them, & contrast them with the Counselor/Mother. Alliances are seldom formed with enforcers against nurturers. Enforcers have final control & are targets of demands, resentment, & grievances. The stress both feel in working for peace & survival is repaid by the youth with alienation.

An institution’s Counselors & a Family’s Mother are the comforting, understanding, nurturing ones who dispense the goods. Youth perceive them in a positive light, tend to play on their sympathy, confide their hurts, fears, hopes, & desires in them & contrast them with the Dorm Parent/ Father. Children often form alliances with the Mother/Counselor against the Father/Dorm Parent. Mother/ Counselors are both in similar positions as children dependent on the Dorm Parent/Father who has the ultimate, enforcing control.


Fragmented and Blended Families,Extended Families,

and Parent Surrogates in Institutions Complicate the Child’s Bonding and Alliances

The Child’s Extensive and Complicated Network of Relationships Inevitably Affects Its Degree of

Closeness to Each of the Members in Its Network.

Degrees of Closeness Are Affected by Conflicting Alliances and Polarizations and Can Contribute

Significantly to the Course of the Child’s Personality Development.


Diagram of Closeness Between Family Members


ANALYSIS OF FAMILY CLOSENESS DIAGRAM

Psychological Analysis of Closeness and Distance

Between Family Members and Significant Other Persons

1. Describe why you are close to the one you placed closest to you on the grayboard.

2. Describe why you are not close to the one that you placed most distant fromyou on the gray board and then moved closer to you on the yellow board.

3. Describe why you moved others closer when you moved to the yellow board.

Describe why you moved others farther away from you when you moved to4. the yellow board.


Developing Good Judgement and a Healthy Personality in Your Child

in Spite of the Conflicting Social Structures Within Which the Child Must Grow up in

Today’s World.


Child Intending and Adventuring

Assessing the situation Experiencing Pleasure/Pain Orienting self to situation Envisioning possibilities for action in the situation Carrying out the act with anticipation of outcome Monitoring progress of acts Experience at completion Assessing outcome and process and Revising for future reference Storing in memory in appropriate category of Schemata

Parents convey that they are interested in the child’s inner processes as well as its effects on the world. Parents convey that they want the child to learn from and enjoy experience, gain competence, benefit from good judgment and have a strong, healthy independent will for self reliance, success, and happiness in life. This is the highest priority lesson and it should begin being taught when the child is an infant.

GOLDEN RULE OF PARENTING

What is the child doing now? How has the child perceived and assessed the situation? Is the child’s reaction to what he/she sees and assesses pleasant and inviting or unpleasant and uninviting? What could the child have imagined he/she could do with this situation? What is the child about to do? How is the child going about the activity and with what possible outcome in mind? Is the child aware of what effects he/she is having on the objects or persons involved and re directing or correcting to account for these effects? What was the outcome and how has the child reacted to the outcome? What is the child learning from the whole experience and its outcome? How can I assist the child in learning to use, trust, and develop his/her own intentional processes, particularly judgment? How is the child going to store this final assessment and revision for future reference?

Parent/Teacher Intuiting and Bonding with the Child’s Intentional Processes


A. WHEN THE FOCUS IS ON THE ADULT’S JUDGMENT

ADULT HAS:SUPERIOR KNOWLEDGE

AND JUDGMENT

CHILD HAS AND RETAINS:IMMATURE JUDGMENT

Parent says: I know better. I have more experience and knowledge. So, do what I say. Take my advice and orders. Stop talking to me about what you think because you don’t know anything!

Child says: You don’t know what you are talking about. When you are out of sight, I’m going to do my own thing. You make me feel inferior and inadequate and afraid to grow up. I am very anxious and resentful, and afraid of the future. I hate you. You have no confidence in me. I’ll make you sorry.

ADULT HAS: SUPERIOR KNOWLEDGE

AND JUDGMENTParent says: Yes, I have more experience and knowledge, but I want you to develop your own. So, think your alternatives and decision over, use your own judgment, and then deal with and learn from the consequences. I can listen to you and discuss it with you, but you have to learn to use your own judgment.

CHILD DEVELOPS: MATURE KNOWLEDGE AND

JUDGMENT Child says: It is hard and scary to use my own judgment and accept the consequences. I can’t blame anyone else. If I make mistakes, I will try to learn to not make the same mistakes again. Actually, the more I try it, the better I get at it, the more confident and responsible I get, the better I feel about myself and you too.

B. WHEN THE FOCUS IS ON DEVELOPING THE CHILD’S JUDGMENT

DEVELOPING GOOD JUDGMENT IN THE CHILDDEVELOPING GOOD JUDGMENT IN THE CHILD


Enlisting the Aid of Third Parties in Facilitating Your Child’s

Social and Emotional Maturation

copyright ed young, ph.d. 1 section 4 lesson 5 dynamic interactions: parenting styles and conflicts;...

Documents