delaying the consequence is for the parent, not the child. It gives the
parent time to think and plan.Here’s how Lisa uses these rules to send her five-year-old son, Blake,
to his room:
BLAKE: “Mom, come here right now!”
LISA: “Hey, kiddo, I don’t like it when you talk to me that way. I’d
like you to scoot up to your room and give it some thought.”
BLAKE: “No! I’m not going!”
LISA: “Blake, I would like you to go to your room.”
BLAKE: “No!”
LISA: “Blake, I think you are making a poor choice.”
BLAKE: “You can’t make me go.”
LISA: “I don’t want to make you. You are making a poor choice. It
would be wise for you to go to your room now.”
BLAKE: “No!”
LISA: “Well, I’m disappointed. I wish you had given it more careful
thought. I will have to do something else about this, but not right
now. I will get back to you on it. Try not to worry.”Lisa failed, right? Wrong. She merely handled what she could handle.
She refrained from spanking. She didn’t carry the boy to his room, as he
was too big. She also didn’t issue an order she couldn’t enforce. All of
her comments were “I messages” — things she could do, not telling the
child what he should do. Correct moves. But she didn’t get results. So
later she enlisted the support of her husband, Eric. Lisa talked the
situation over with him when he returned home from work, and then they
engaged Blake in the following discussion at the dinner table:
ERIC: “How did the day go, honey?”
LISA: “Oh, pretty good. But Blake had trouble going to his room.”
ERIC: “You’re kidding?”
LISA: “No, it’s a fact, dear.”