Last week, for instance, I had my first bike race of the cyclo-cross season. The whole family was going to go out and watch the race, have dinner, and play in the dirt. However, it was not meant to be. I was roused from bed a little before 6 a.m. to screaming from the boys' room. I walked in to find The Boy (3-year-old) had taken the lamp out of another room, and plugged it in on the floor in the room he shares with his brothers. This went over like a Snickers bar in a pool, and the Twinkies were both screaming bloody murder. (They apparently have the same reaction as their mother if they are forced to get up earlier than they would prefer.) Trying to quiet the screaming horde, The Boy decided the next best course of action would be to throw the changing pad in on top of his brother. Needless to say, that didn't work!

This forced me to do something that may have hurt me more than him. I knew The Boy really wanted to go to the bike race, but his actions that morning needed a serious consequence. Sitting in timeout wasn't going to cut it for a day full of grumpy boys. In the calmest voice I have, I sat The Boy down and told him that what he did that morning was wrong, and now his brothers, mother, and father were all crabby and out of sorts. Because of that, he would not be able to go to the bike race with me. He seemed disappointed, but not as disappointed as the sleep-deprived, angry version of me would have preferred.

As the day wore on he did show more understanding about what had happened and by the time I returned after work he asked if he could come along with me. The answer had not changed over the course of the day. I was as disappointed as everybody else because they wouldn't be joining me, but going back on the consequence would only reinforce the notion that I would only administer penalties that were convenient for me. Sometimes losing convenience is more painful for the parent than the kid, but the long-term results are worth the cost.

blog comments powered by Disqus