Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Violence & the YSP

Okay, I'm thinking that if you can point out just two incidences, one of which was justified (toddler's rarely stop and say, "Excuse me, would you mind taking your finger out of my mouth?") and one of which is standard little-kid behavior that she precociously apologized for on her own, I'm thinking that these behaviors are so rare for her that you certainly don't need to check the box. If this issue is a problem for her, you probably wouldn't be able to pick out just two instances. And, you don't need to feel guilty about telling a half-truth. I think we gifties sometimes feel the need to explain things in depth with all the caveats and exceptions, when really people just want a general overview. And the general overview for your DD is that she is well-behaved and not violent and is not acting out in anger. Her actions may be "grossly inappropriate" for an adult, but not "grossly inappropriate" for a 4 year old.

But there's no place to tell it like it is. It's a yes/no sort of situation. Or, really only a yes situation. The implication is that you won't even apply if you can't affirm that your child has practiced nonviolence for her entire life. I mean, that is sort of a moot point for us personally anyway, since it'll be years before we are ready to apply, if ever.


Thanks. Actually, I do know how to stop her from doing it. In the past, we had a rule that she couldn't use the computer for 24 hours after an incident, and that wiped it out almost entirely (to less than once a month). Eventually, I convinced myself that we didn't need that rule anymore...and we didn't, for a while. Since our recent cross-country move, the hitting is back. And I do understand that she is very homesick, and angry at us for taking her away from home, and she misses her friends, etc., etc. Anyway, I re-instituted the rule today, and I predict that she'll be controlling herself much better from now on.

I'm sad about it. I believe that teaching children not to be violent because they will suffer consequences can impair their ability to develop empathy. I know the kid has great empathy for other children, but I do wish she had more where her parents are concerned.

Well, yeah, those two incidents are literally it for her misbehaving with other kids. She is very well behaved with other kids, even to a fault. That is not the case with respect to her behavior at home with her parents. I believe that she hits us when she gets angry because it is literally the only thing she can do that will get a rise out of us. She can make huge messes, break things, etc., and we just calmly talk about it & clean it up. I believe that if we had done the same thing wrt violence from the beginning she'd never have developed this problem. We overreacted, and we are still paying for it.

It'll take a while, but a withdrawal of energy and attention - including the talk (she gets the rule by now) will, eventually, do the trick. I would keep the 'no-computer' rule in place, and I would strongly recommend adding praise for every time she controls her hands while she is feeling strong feelings that should help build that inner strength.

Hugs
Grinity

Well, I have a different take.

When Mr W hits us, we cry out in pain. When he hurts others we show great sadness. We try to induce in him the empathy his great sensitivity predisposes him too. It is training him to take the perspective of others before he acts.

Empathy is an emotional reaction to others' situation. I do not see how cutting off access to material things teaches empathy. Self control due to loss of privileges is not the same as empathy nor do I see how it induces empathy.

Empathy is a far greater and deeper and stronger value than access to material things or the desire for material things. Nor are people material things.

I do not think nonviolence is a goal in itself. I don't want to insult anyone, but you cannot have empathy and be nonviolent. A person with empathy cannot stand by and see the innocent abused or hurt. Anger is the appropriate emotion in the face of injustice or immoral behavior. Nonviolence as a goal squashes empathy as does emotional control. Empathy must be the goal.

Another point is that kids read faces and you cannot give mixed signals. There needs to be emotional context so that they can understand what they have done and learn to see it in others as well as how to project it. Your face and body language need to be consistent with the subject.

Really? When we did the app there was a "if yes, please attach explanation" thing.

This is precisely my concern. Still, whatever I said before, DD does have a great deal of empathy. Today she told me that if she ever got very sick (we were watching a program about surgeons, which is a career she is fascinated by) she would run away and hide from me so that I wouldn't have to see how sick she was (i.e., so that I wouldn't feel sad like the family members in the program). When she sees that someone is hurt or upset, she immediately tries to help or comfort them. In fact, I think sometimes that the intensity of her empathy is part of the problem: she feels deeply guilty for hurting others, but she also feels angry about feeling guilty, and it turns into a vicious cycle.

Regardless, DD is no longer a toddler who needs to be taught that others feel pain. She is very aware of that, and has been for years.

Also, I'm not at all sure I understand or agree with your point about nonviolence, but it seems pretty OT, so I guess there's no point in arguing.

No, this is part of the signature section. You are supposed to initial next to the statement, "I/We attest that my/our child/adolescent has never demonstrated or threatened violence [...]". There is no way to even say "yes" or "no." You just have to attest it. The implication is that children who have ever been violent aren't welcome to join the YSP, IMO.

As far as the application goes, I think what makes most sense is to consider WHY they include that statement and see if in that context your daughter has a problem. My guess is the statements is included would be for two reasons. 1. to protect the safety of other children in the program. Participants should know they are able to attend events and have their children be safe. 2. To protect the reputation of the program as no program would want to be associated with violent children.

Of course these are just logical guesses on my part, but pretending for a minute that they are correct. Would you say your daughter has problems with violence in these ways? Do you think if she attended a get together that other gifted children would be in peril? Do you think she's got the sort of violence problems that would potentially ruin the good name of a program? If either of those things are true, I think downloading the DYS application for sport would not be the first thing on your mind. So, I'm guessing what you are describing is within the realm of age typical misbehavior that is upsetting, but will resolve with work and not what the application is asking about.

I'm late to the conversation and by now it's hard to tell if this is a quiestion about how to answer the quiestion on the application or how to best convince a pre-schooler to "use your words" when they're angry. �My guy usually hits me at the end of a very busy day when he has been told what to do all day long and he has had to keep up. �Usually when he hits me he'll say �"I told you to stop bothering me.". I get it, really I do, it's been a long day. �We've been over this. �If he hits or talks ugly I walk away and tell him "nobody wants to be around you if you're going to act like that.". �I've always responded to hitting �this way rather than slapping his hand because of all the reading about "natural consequences" I did when he was younger. �Hurting people has a very obvious natural consequence. �And he's taken the next step by himself recently. �Last time he said, "you're mad.". I said, "yes, when you hit somebody they get mad.". He said, "be happy Mamma.". I said, "when you hit someone it makes them mad, it doesn't make them happy.". I didn't give him the closure he was asking for, I left it unresolved as always. �These things can not be neatly wrapped up with an apology (which he hasn't figured out to try to offer yet in this situation). �I don't get a lot of the theory about "natural consequences" since it mostly has to be imposed by the parent the way I've seen it described, but this one I could be my all natural self. �If you hit/talk ugly people don't want to be around you. �I can walk away.�

I don't know about the application. �I read that the average starting age for the school is nine years old then haven't looked any deeper since. �I would assume they are asking the most reasonable interpretation of the question which no one is saying as "do you have the only living Buddah left on earth?". �So probably "grossly inappropriate" describes violence and harm as well as other behavior in this sentence. �
�
Also I'm sure your kid is a sweetie. �As much love as you pour into her the child's probably pure love.