Just curious to how others handle this, particularly with HG kiddos that give off that eerily "knowing" or a little-too-adult vibe, which can rub adult authority figures the VERY wrong way sometimes.

There are instances in which such assumptions really, really matter-- for example, if your child is involved in disciplinary or criminal proceedings, or interacting with first respondiers or law enforcement, they may be viewed with suspicion, even if they are (legitimately) just trying very much to do the right thing (reporting a crime, telling what they saw or heard, exercising their own civil liberties, etc).

HG+ children may see consequences and outcomes far better than many adults in those situations, and may express very adult insights into the behavior, thinking, and motivations of others. In other words, they simply know things that most people can't/won't-- and worse, they often (being children) don't HIDE that they know them. Rather than being child-like, they may be knowing/solemn or express emotions that are not typical-- for example, pity for a classmate that has assaulted them, or concern for a child who has stolen an item... that kind of thing.

Some adults have never encountered a child like this before-- and may assume sociopathy or another pathology rather than the truth (which is profound asynchrony and high level logical thinking and emotional regulation).



What have others found to be particularly effective? What do you teach your CHILDREN about interacting with strangers as legitimate authority figures (such as a police officer or college dean, for example)?

As another facet of this, how do you help your CHILD in this situation to understand that being branded a pathological liar/manipulative snot isn't about themselves so much as the person/institution that they are interacting with not understanding how to 'take' their innate nature as asynchronous children?

This is very analogous to the early childhood manifestation of a teacher who loathes the mistake-correcting, justice-oriented, and highly assertive/verbal child in his/her classroom, if that makes sense.

In tweens/teens, though, the consequences are far more damaging in both the real-world consequences and also in terms of the emotional damage.

Adolescents have surprising fragility when adults and authority figures label or judge them-- and HG kids may also have an unerring sense of what people are actually THINKING, meaning that any mitigation of this phenomenon either needs to be genuinely persuasive/educational to the individual who is making the judgment, or it needs to be aimed at changing how the child interacts to produce that judgment in the first place.

Obviously, being "right" doesn't always lead to good outcomes-- and nowhere is that more true than in dealing with police when one finds one's self in the wrong place at the wrong time. What are some ways to coach our gifted kids to defuse such situations, rather than inadvertently escalating them?

"Legitimate authority figure" is the crux of the matter for my kiddo (DS7). Authority figures in general feel they don't have to prove themselves to be "legitimate"- and this is especially true when they are dealing with kids. Many adults and most kids will simply comply when confronted by authority.

DS responds well to working with a legitimate authority figure. The problem is that legitimacy can be easily damaged or destroyed by irrational actions or statements. As I've grown up, I've learned how to operate in this icky setting. But DS certainly has not, and his fury at being subjected to "illegitimate" authority is manifest.

Sooooo - I try to move him along the path of diplomacy. Using words that acknowledge THE JOB the authority figure has to do, and trying to HELP, not conquer.

DS has heard me say, softly, "I'm sorry - I don't think I made myself clear." Then go on to make my point. Later he asked - "Why did you apologize? You were clear. That guy was just not listening to you." I try to explain that the soothing words and tone are meant to defuse, and allow the person to hear me. And I gently point out that most adults aren't used to having this sort of discussion with kids. So, even if it's unfair, he has to be especially diplomatic. I use Piper's charmspeak as the template, if you are familiar with the second Percy Jackson series.

Work in progress, since our family is chock full of sensitive thinkers who take offense rather easily ....

I'd say that this is a process...

When DD was little, it was "no these other kids don't get you, but it's not your fault and it's not theirs -- try to find common ground and also others you connect with better."

As she got older, it was "not everyone is going to like you and yes, that means grownups too, and that's OK." And then on to the more nuanced "you have to evaluate the authority that the person holds over you and respond in a way that makes sense for the situation you're in" and "the adult probably thinks they are hiding their thoughts and opinions of you... maybe you should just let them think that."

I have to say that as she enters adolescence the messaging around civil authority figures is by necessity somewhat politically charged, and not just by me, but by DD -- who's well aware of what goes on in the news and has strong opinions. She's not particularly compliant and has a strong anti-authoritarian streak as well.

I don't want to politicize this thread, but I'll say that we are approaching it with message of situational behavior and awareness. That in the moment, she should focus on putting others at ease (a skill she is usually very good at) and staying safe and save complaints or questions of authority or fairness or process for a later time.

This sort of thing hasn't come up much yet, but neither has she been tempted by smoking, drinking, or drugs... yet we've been messaging around those situations to her for years too.

I have more to say, but am short on time at the moment...

But some quick thoughts:

1. We've emphasized the distinction between authority as vested in a role, and authority as vested in a person.

2. Communication is not only about how well I express myself, but also about how the other person receives it. One can be gracious and diplomatic, and truthful at the same time, by reframing charmspeak (I like that term!) as an aid to effective communication. Do I convey greater truth by expressing myself in a way that feels more honest to myself, but is heard less accurately by the other person, or by adapting my presentation so that the message received by the other person better reflects my communicative intent?

This is really good advice. I like it. I have a question though... How about if your child has to go to the principal office during school ? My child had to go to the principals office this past week for misbehaving ... It was fine, my son apologized and was in the wrong (and he awknowledged it and it wasn't a big deal) would you kiddos ask for you to be called in that situation ? Just curious how that works.

One truly bizarre experience that my DD has run into is that the BETTER she seems to handle herself, (that is, the less "child-like" and irrational/unpredictable/emotional she is), the more she seems to wind some adults up.

Not sure how to coach her out of that one.

Here, honey-- study your agemates, and let's role play how a typical 16yo girl would handle being called into the dean's office (just an example).

Here's how a typical 15yo would respond when a TSA agent tells them to do something that isn't technically required by law...



That's the kind of thing that I'm getting at. Spaghetti's advice is very very good in situations like that-- the child HAS to remind the adult somehow that in spite of their gut instincts, they ARE still dealing with a person who is very much a child.

But I will definitely make sure my kids know to ask this if ever question by a police officer! For sure... Never even thought about it before!

You could be right, but I'm wondering if it isn't so much her age and maturity as some particular cue or step she's making that is leading to this issue. Figure that out, then she can be coached on how to work around it in such situations. In other words, is there something other than her "age inappropriate behavior" that is like a red flag in front of a bull for certain types of authority figures? Not placing blame on her at all, just thinking from experience (mine!) that sometimes there are ways we come across that we need to tone down or phrase differently if we want to get through situations with minimal ill effects.

That said, I am fully aware that some people are just jerks.

As a simple matter of courtesy, I instruct my children to keep their opinions to themselves in those types of situations. Stick to the facts. After all, most adults, and particularly authority figures won't have the time or inclination to listen to speculation, especially coming from a child.

As a matter of self-preservation (ask any attorney), it is safer to say less and stick to facts; opinions and speculations can be misconstrued.

I have explained to my kids why shining the spotlight on their "savviness" can be annoying at a minimum and incriminating if misconstrued. Not every parent would be comfortable approaching it this way, but my kids are used to not having their feelings spared at home.

I sat down with my DS when he was learning to drive and went over this in detail. We practiced what he would say if he was pulled over or in an accident. My son does the opposite of what Howler is saying and will turn mute when pushed to talk by an authority figure. He then gets in more trouble because he won't talk with them. I made it VERY clear that if he wasn't mature enough to have a civil conversation with a police officer he wasn't mature enough to drive.

I also do one of the things that spaghetti(?) mentioned. We talk about situations that we see in the news and discuss how the the people behaved and if that the best response and what he should do if he was in a similar situation.

But I don't have a clue how to teach a teen who is annoying the adults because she is behaving too adult.

Yeah-- it can be problematic because as she ramps up their "you're behaving suspiciously," and "different! Different is BAD! Why are you being DIFFERENT??"


her innate reactions tend to make her get MORE controlled, more polite, and more careful still-- in other words, more "adult," and meanwhile, this is (at least on occasion) the very behavior that led to the problem in the first place. It's very scary to her when she is trying to defuse the situation with an adult who is losing their cool, and the more rational she gets, the more emotionally out of control the adult becomes.

"Can you please call my mom/dad" is a really good idea for younger kids-- and not a bad one for teens, either.

I think that maybe coaching emotional statements is a good idea:

"I'm really feeling confused right now."

"Please stop yelling at me-- you're frightening me."

Anything that reminds the adult that she IS still, really, a child-- and has a child's emotional responses, no matter how well she controls them.

DD's response to law enforcement isn't worrisome to us on the one hand-- she's VERY compliant, not at all belligerent. If anything, she tends to be too supercilious and one step ahead of where most adults are-- which, again, can drive suspicion. For example, if you get pulled over, most people would wait to get their auto registration, but I can see DD reaching for it before being asked-- maybe even before the patrolman got out of his own car, she might already have both license and registration out and ready to hand over. KWIM? That kind of Dudley Do-Right attitude isn't always a good thing with authority figures that are suspicious of why you're being THAT cooperative.


The TSA agent thing, well-- that one I made up. She managed that one just fine, and was more than able to zip it with the snark in security lines all over N. America and Europe-- though she later teased me plenty about getting strip-searched over my magnetic socks in British Columbia after being up for 24 hours. (Long story).

But suffice it to say that bending the truth often needs to be worked out ahead of time with her-- that is, telling customs that we hadn't been on any farms when we had DRIVEN through one... wasn't a lie that mattered according to the reason behind the law (agricultural importation of invasives and pathogens), and it did save everyone the trouble of them rooting through our luggage before our connecting (also international) flight.


She's quite SCRUPULOUSLY honest with authority figures. Sometimes too much so-- her verbal precision goes to "Spock" under those conditions, and it can drive gut level suspicion, because she is quite clearly NOT impaired in terms of communication or social cues. She just gives off this "too-knowing" kind of vibe, and it makes gaurdian/enforcer authority figures a bit uneasy.

She's also very afraid of every running so far afoul of an authority figure that they separate her from her rescue meds. That fear drives a certain amount of overly supercilious behavior.

Wandering, for a moment, slightly off the original topic: if only I could teach my spouse not to scrupulously report every dime to customs--one hour later, floor manager demonstrates to half-a-dozen customs agents how to calculate customs duty (which none of them have ever had to do before), because we went over the duty-free allowance, ending with the grand total of $2 of duty, which she promptly waived, because it costs more to process it than to let it go.

On-topic: one of the realizations I've come to in recent years is that, as most of the world is not rational (I expect you all figured that out much earlier!), one cannot rely on reason to communicate with/persuade most people. This is where those with empathetic gifts may need to employ them to determine the actual basis of the communicative partners decision-making, and address that in both verbal and nonverbal communication. For example, run through Maslow's hierarchy and try to zero in on the need most powerfully motivating the other party. Or contemplate some of the most common and powerful emotional motivators, e.g., fear, anger, need for affection/to be liked, insecurity/need for affirmation or respect, need for approval.

And these reflect my much earlier thought, that it may help to reframe honest communication as that expression which most accurately effects one's communicative intent. Which requires code-switching, or internal translation, into the language of the recipient. One is not being dishonest; one is communicating in a language that is comprehensible to the other party. "When you say -this-, the other person hears -that-."

As to being "unnaturally" calm and self-controlled: I suspect that authority figures find this threatening, especially in emotionally-laden situations, as the person who is not overwhelmed by emotion is the one in charge of the situation. (Except, of course, when he/she is not really.) I hesitate to discourage adolescents from managing their emotions in time of crisis, but I do think it may help to recognize that this is experienced by some authority figures as undermining their authority. Therefore, it may be more effective when accompanied by overt gestures of respect and deference.

Do not mean to hijack but we're experiencing this (not at school since DD is still on a honeymoon stage there) and the stress/headache this creates is not trivial.

I was hoping that the problems will lessen with age.

Some off topic levity in response to spaghetti's TSA comment:

Are TSA secret police? I guess something to do with airport security but sounds like secret police.

This hits the nail on the head. In our case, DS is not savvy/socially gifted but he is also scrupulously honest and Spock-like, which drives the adults-in-charge bananas, and results in much ill-will.

For him, it's a matter of appearing not to "care" which translates to lacking a conscience, which is far from the truth. He does, however, reserve his remorse for situations in which he's made a clear moral error and he easily compartmentalizes other situations (if he's broken an unwritten social rule) into the does-not-compute-don't-fret box.

I agree that most people are not rational, to the degree that when one encounters an actual rational, non-emotional, non-reactive person in authority, it feels like an oasis in the desert. Since your DD is able to read others' nonverbals--perhaps aeh's code-switching advice can be assimilated into her Jane Goodall bag of tricks.

Not sure I agree with the threat perception. My take is that law enforcement are specifically trained to look for "suspicious" behavior, which can basically be anything that isn't expected and normal. They have a generalized notion of how a child of a certain age should behave in a certain situation, based on training and personal experience. Because our children are statistical outliers by nature, their behavior will not match. Ergo, suspicious.

Point taken. That nuance on law enforcement has validity. But the strategy of explicitly employing some conventional signals appropriate to the setting remains.

Oh dear oh dear oh dear.

Your kid is my kid. And me.