Oh Crap! Potty Training

interested in real-world potty training, not theory. Consequences will
get you your answer the fastest.
Some parents say, “Isn’t a consequence just the opposite of a
reward? I’d rather reward the behavior I want rather than give a
consequence for what I don’t want.” I understand the theory behind
this and, yes, in general, positive reinforcement works best with
children. However, we go back to that notion of expected behavior.
The problem with rewards and potty training is that they get sticky.
The stakes need to be raised constantly in order for them to be
effective. If you are going to reward for peeing, where else will that
lead? This, of course, is your parenting call. Personally, I would rather
curb undesired behavior than reward the hell out of good behavior.
Else, you end up with a kid who expects to be rewarded for
everything.
Though I homeschool now, my son did go to school for
kindergarten and part of first grade. His school has a system of
rewards, called Kennedy Kash. Basically, when you are “good,” you
get a Kennedy Kash, which you collect and can use to “buy”
something at the school store. This is all based on positive
reinforcement, you follow? If you are “bad,” you don’t get a
consequence, they just amp up everyone else’s Kennedy Kash. So
now, my son gets this Kennedy Kash for breathing or paying
attention. And the kids who are misbehaving have stopped caring
about the damn Kennedy Kash and still misbehave. It’s a total
disaster of a social experiment. I don’t want my child getting rewards
for breathing. Or paying attention. That’s what I mean when I say
that the stakes have to be raised constantly in order for a reward to be
effective. You have to keep amping up the rewards. So no; a