Blog

Last week I wrote about the challenges of figuring out one’s personal philosophy  for parenting, when there are so many perspectives offered from many different professionals.  This week I will be discussing how I embed my behaviour training within an Adlerian/Democratic parenting framework.

The ABC’s of Behaviour

From my behaviour training, I find the ABC chart very helpful.  A = Antecedent (what happened right before the behaviour – the trigger)   B = Behaviour (what did the behaviour look like in observable, measurable terms) C = Consequence (this doesn’t mean “punishment”, it means what happened immediately after the behaviour took place and it could be what we would think of as a negative consequence or a positive consequence).  While looking at the pattern of certain behaviours, it is also important to consider the “setting events”.  The setting events are the factors which make the individual more likely to engage in the troublesome behaviour.  For example, a parent is away, a recent move, hunger, tiredness, sickness, a diagnosis, the individual’s temperament etc.  After tracking behaviours for a while, a consistent pattern often emerges.

The Function of the Behaviour

From a behaviourist perspective, one analyzes the data to see if the strongest function of the behaviour is attention, escape or sensory.  From an Adlerian perspective, one looks to see if the mistaken goal of the behaviour is attention, power, revenge or assumed inadequacy.  Personally, I look to see if the behaviour seems to be attention, power, revenge, assumed inadequacy (escape) or sensory.

Reinforcement

I truly believe that we do modify behaviours with our responses, but I am also acutely aware of maintaining the attachment relationship.  I am very conscious of making consequences as logical as possible in order that they are not viewed as unfair punishment which creates revenge, hostility and a defended child.  If you ground a teenager for not doing his/her homework, you end up with a defended child who still refuses to complete homework and now refuses to talk to you, and you punish harder.  As this pattern continues over months, one starts to wonder if there’s a different way?  (Next week I’ll discuss the alternatives.)  When a child is engaging in negative attention seeking behaviours, I do believe in ignoring the negative behaviour but not the child.  I recognize that the child is needing attention, distract him/her while ignoring the negative behaviour, and fill up his/her attention cup in a positive way.  If the behaviour is harmful then limit setting is very important but in a strategic way.

In behavioursim, there is a lot of literature about praising the “good” behaviours.  In my article on Praise vs. Encouragement I discuss the subtle but very important differences in detail.  (I also provide a printable handout with suggested examples of encouraging phrases).  We all like to receive positive attention, but it needs to be in-line with our own agenda.  If one feels as though he/she is being praised as a way of being externally controlled or coerced, then it can completely backfire.  I’ve worked with teens who grew up with lots of praise and very proud parents, but then felt inadequate in the teenage years because they felt as though their accomplishments and “good” behaviour had all been for their parents and that they weren’t really loved for being themselves.  In turn, they rejected their role of straight A student or top athlete, and assumed they were inadequate.  When parents praise they have good intentions but it can have a reverse outcome.  Encouragement is more authentic and in-line with the child’s goals.

Extrinsic Motivation vs. Intrinsic Motivation

My belief is that we are all intrinsically motivated, but we are not all motivated by the same goals.  According to world-renowned psychiatrist, William Glasser:

We must realize that if we coerce anyone too long, there may be a point of no return.  We and they may never be close again.  Lacking this closeness, some children begin to give up on relationships and, eventually, embark on a lifelong destructive search for pleasure.  To achieve and maintain the relationships we need, we must stop choosing to coerce, force, compel, punish, reward, manipulate, boss, motivate, criticize, blame, complain…We must replace these destructive behaviours with choosing to care, listen, support, negotiate, encourage, love, befriend, trust, accept, welcome and esteem.  These words define the difference between external control psychology and choice theory.

Choice Theory, William Glasser, M.D. p.21

Although it is much easier to externally motivate, and it does usually appear to work in the short-term, there is a lot of research (as mentioned in last week’s article) which shows that the effects are not sustainable for all, in the long term.

According to Dr. William Glasser,

“As infants, once we get a taste of power through seeing our parents or others jump to attention to give us what we want, our need for more power starts to take over.  By the time we are teenagers, power pushes us far beyond what we would do if our only motivation was to survive and get loving attention.” (Choice Theory, p. 38)

If we feel that we are being pushed by someone to act a certain way, it is instinctual to resist or find a way to be more powerful than this other person.  For example, flat-out refusal or demanding a bigger or different reward.

Personally, I find it works best to come up with plan that is in-line with everyone’s goals.  When I am engaged in the psycho-educational part of my sessions (for example teaching cognitive behavioural therapy), I know that I need to make it fun for the younger ones to stay engaged and motivated, and interesting and challenging for the older ones to stay engaged.  I am not coercing them, rather, trying to find a common ground that keeps us both engaged.

Next week, I’ll summarize William Glasser’s Choice Theory and Quality Worlds.

Have a wonderful week noticing what intrinsically motivates your child,

Warmly,