CHILDREN NEVER NAUGHTY

Evening Post, Volume CXI, Issue 44, 21 February 1931, Page 20

CHILDREN NEVER NAUGHTY

• Mothers who bring up their children Jsy "modern" methods have to meet a good deal of criticism. They do not, las is often imagined, allow children an Entirely free hand without restraint or discipline, but they do make an effort !to find out why a child is being j&aughty. For naughtiness in children there is blways a. reason, 4 as surely as there 5s a reason why a.motor will not start. Put in the latter case the reason is jiisually easier to discover, says a writer jn. an overseas journal. Apparent naughtiness —refusing to fcjo to bed; for example—may be due to some inexplicable fear. Children's •fears are often irrational from the grown-up point of view, but are none ■the less real to the child, who may siot be able to explain them. Children need help, not impatience, if we [would have them outgrow this phase. [A. change of circumstances, such as ioccurs on a holiday, will often have igood results. Or the cause of naughtiness may be too much "hush" and *'don't," leaving the child with' inhuffieient outlet for mental or physical activity. It is natural for children to .demand interest and occupation; itbddlers need to be allowed to make itheir own discoveries about the room tor garden and try to feed unaided, as 'older children need to climb trees or play with hammer and chisels'^ 'or dabble in chemistry, even with occasional minor casualties. The clash with authority may be over some primitive impulse. Small children are highly _ curious, not aesthetic, and love mud, water, and noise, all of which tend to get them into trouble. We need to afford them outlet for these impulses. Modern methods accept the primitive instincts and aim

THERE IS ALWAYS A. REASON

at leading them forward.to something more socially useful or aesthetic. ' Apart from these very usual cases, however, there are children whose naughtiness is plainly wilful. They seem to have a genius for devising mischief to irritate the adult. Here, suioly, is the case for punishment. It "may be, but it should make us a little thoughtful, that often the children upon whose backs the rod has by no means been spared are the very ones to-behave in this way. Such children have found that punishment is not the consequence of thei:l actions,' but the measure of grown-up wrath. The child can sense his' power to annoy the adult by the punishment received. If he feels that the parent has unfair power over him, it may be worth "even a whipping to have the power of irritating' that parent. The child feels acutely the desire of the adult for personal and complete authority over him. We may gauge this attitude of possession in ourselves as grown-ups by our annoyance at being thwarted by the child. At moments of annoyance this thought may be very illuminating! Give the child an increased sense of freedom, plus some responsibility, and his desire to1 annoy will be greatly decreased. For his .misdeeds let the punishment as far as possible be the direct result of his actions. If he bullies, he must play alone. If he shows off, he should Be given no attention. If ho is destructive, make him tidy up, or have a distraint upon1 his pocket-money for the repairs. Cause and effect, action and direct consequence, are the t essentials of modern discipline. We need fewer and better punishments, and for naughty youngsters a hobby of their own choosing. :