Seatbelts for Safety

[Catherine Woodgold]

(a further reply to the post on aps re 3yr old who didn't
want to use a seatbelt)

Possible problems with the watermelon experiment
I suggested earlier:

(1) The watermelon might not break, and then
the child would be even more convinced not to
use the seatbelt.

(2) If it did break, it might make the car messy.

Alternatives: Use empty eggshells instead,
perhaps in toy cars. Could be lots of fun.
The eggshells could have faces painted on
them and cloth bodies added. After the crash
they could be treated with sympathy and
placed in a hospital.

You can get a stroller with a seat belt -- maybe
a toy one -- and put a doll in it with no seat
belt. You can have the doll fall, then make
a big fuss in which you apologize to the doll
for "forgetting" or neglecting to put the
seat belt on, treat the doll with great sympathy
and promise the doll you'll always put on
the seatbelt from now on.

This sort of talk implies that the seatbelt
is for the doll's own good. IMO it can be
very effective to talk in a way that implies
that something is for the child's benefit.
In contrast, saying directly "This is for
your own good" actually tends to communicate
the opposite: the idea is that if you need
to say it, then it must not be obvious, it
must be something some people don't believe.

Another way to do this, if you do ever drive
with a child with no seatbelt (which I don't
recommend), is to say to the child with great
feeling at the end of the trip: "Oh, my goodness!
You were without a seatbelt for that whole trip!
Oh, my poor child! I'm so sorry I forgot to
put your seatbelt on! I'm so glad there
was no accident on this trip! My goodness--
there was a red car back there that I almost
crashed into. Oh, I would have felt so bad
if you had gotten a big bop on the head from
that! I really should have made sure you had
your seatbelt on. (Hug the child) Oh, my
dear child, I'm so glad you didn't get a big
bop! I promise I'll make sure your seatbelt
is on next time, so you'll be safe."

If the parents strongly believe that it's not
safe enough without a seatbelt, then they won't
drive with a passenger with no seatbelt in
the car (unless they're driving a dying
person to the hospital or something).
It's a matter of personal conviction, and habit.

A friend can come over and talk about seatbelts
and accidents, and the parents can make it clear
to the child that they've made a decision, based
on this conversation, never to drive without
everyone wearing a seatbelt. This can become
a turning point for the family as far as
seatbelts are concerned.

.... but if they give in "just once" after that
time and let the child ride without a seatbelt,
then it will be much harder to ever establish
the rule. The point is to get the message
across, "I really mean it. I'm not going
to drive unless everyone has a seatbelt on."
If you give in, the child learns that you
don't mean what you say and can be
persuaded.

It might also help if, for about a week or more
before bringing in a new seatbelt rule, they
avoid giving in on any other issues.
I don't mean becoming very strict or punishing.
I just mean not giving in.

To avoid giving in:
Before making any command, suggestion or
ultimatum, I suggest stopping and thinking.
If it's not worth a big fuss (listening to the
child whine and cry for an hour, or whatever),
then I suggest making it clear from the first
word that it is a choice: for example, "You don't
have to, but if you want, you can help me dry
the dishes."

If it's a command or ultimatum, then I suggest
thinking through ahead of time a plan for not
giving in. This might include a punishment.
Or it might just be an announcement: "No,
I'm sorry, I'm not taking you to the playground
today." Here, no punishment is needed: just
steadfastness in not changing your mind in
response to whining and crying.

Normally, it's fine to change your mind
from time to time. But if you give in a lot,
and then you want to teach a child to follow
a new rule like wearing a seatbelt, it may be
useful to avoid giving in for a week or so,
until the child is used to seeing that you
mean what you say, so that when you say
"I've decided from now on, if I'm the
driver, then everyone in the car has
to wear a seatbelt." then the child will
know you mean it. Just a calm, quiet, firm
voice is fine. No need to repeat it. No
need to say it loudly. No need to say
"I mean what I say!" or (worse!) "This
time I really mean it!". Those ways of
saying it actually detract from the
message.

It might be useful to install something in
the car to make a loud beeping sound whenever
the child's seatbelt is not done up.
It might be useful to have some authority
figure, such as a police officer or car
salesperson, talk to the child or talk to
the parents in front of the child about the
importance of seatbelts. Problems: this might
scare the child; the authority figure might
actually decide to say the seatbelts aren't
all that important.

A key tactic, though, is really listening
to the child and finding out why the child
doesn't like the seatbelt. I'm just
reading "Parent Effectiveness Training" by
Thomas Gordon and it's excellent for
learning "active listening," getting children
to open up and explain their feelings and
what's bothering them. All other techniques
for getting the child to use the seatbelt
might be both useless and unnecessary if there's
something significant about the situation
that can be resolved if you only get the
child to tell you what the real problem is.

--
Cathy

[Leah Adezio]

Catherine, why do you make things so frellin' *complicated*?

Seat belt use isn't something for 'feel good, let's be rational' discussion,
period. IMO, this is *not* something that should be negotiated, discussed
or anything, period.

Be simple. When my kids were young and would unbuckle, I would pull the car
over to the side of the road as soon as it was safe to do so, turn off the
engine and *wait*.

I told my children that if they unbuckled their seatbelts, the car would not
work. It would stop and then we would not be able to go where we wanted to
go.

And I did it. *Every single time.*

It only took about 4 times, if that, for them to get the message....and
after that, they *never* unbuckled their belts, and if one of their friends
went somewhere with us, the boys told them the 'rule'. One boy tried to
test it, and I again pulled over and turned off the engine. My eldest, who
was about 4 at the time, turned and said, 'See? Told you so.'

Eggshells, strollers and allowing a child to ride without a seatbelt and
then trying to guilt them *afterwards*? What claptrap.

Leah

"Catherine Woodgold" > wrote in message
...
> (a further reply to the post on aps re 3yr old who didn't
> want to use a seatbelt)
>
> Possible problems with the watermelon experiment
> I suggested earlier:
>
> (1) The watermelon might not break, and then
> the child would be even more convinced not to
> use the seatbelt.
>
> (2) If it did break, it might make the car messy.
>
> Alternatives: Use empty eggshells instead,
> perhaps in toy cars. Could be lots of fun.
> The eggshells could have faces painted on
> them and cloth bodies added. After the crash
> they could be treated with sympathy and
> placed in a hospital.
>
> You can get a stroller with a seat belt -- maybe
> a toy one -- and put a doll in it with no seat
> belt. You can have the doll fall, then make
> a big fuss in which you apologize to the doll
> for "forgetting" or neglecting to put the
> seat belt on, treat the doll with great sympathy
> and promise the doll you'll always put on
> the seatbelt from now on.
>
> This sort of talk implies that the seatbelt
> is for the doll's own good. IMO it can be
> very effective to talk in a way that implies
> that something is for the child's benefit.
> In contrast, saying directly "This is for
> your own good" actually tends to communicate
> the opposite: the idea is that if you need
> to say it, then it must not be obvious, it
> must be something some people don't believe.
>
> Another way to do this, if you do ever drive
> with a child with no seatbelt (which I don't
> recommend), is to say to the child with great
> feeling at the end of the trip: "Oh, my goodness!
> You were without a seatbelt for that whole trip!
> Oh, my poor child! I'm so sorry I forgot to
> put your seatbelt on! I'm so glad there
> was no accident on this trip! My goodness--
> there was a red car back there that I almost
> crashed into. Oh, I would have felt so bad
> if you had gotten a big bop on the head from
> that! I really should have made sure you had
> your seatbelt on. (Hug the child) Oh, my
> dear child, I'm so glad you didn't get a big
> bop! I promise I'll make sure your seatbelt
> is on next time, so you'll be safe."
>
> If the parents strongly believe that it's not
> safe enough without a seatbelt, then they won't
> drive with a passenger with no seatbelt in
> the car (unless they're driving a dying
> person to the hospital or something).
> It's a matter of personal conviction, and habit.
>
> A friend can come over and talk about seatbelts
> and accidents, and the parents can make it clear
> to the child that they've made a decision, based
> on this conversation, never to drive without
> everyone wearing a seatbelt. This can become
> a turning point for the family as far as
> seatbelts are concerned.
>
> ... but if they give in "just once" after that
> time and let the child ride without a seatbelt,
> then it will be much harder to ever establish
> the rule. The point is to get the message
> across, "I really mean it. I'm not going
> to drive unless everyone has a seatbelt on."
> If you give in, the child learns that you
> don't mean what you say and can be
> persuaded.
>
> It might also help if, for about a week or more
> before bringing in a new seatbelt rule, they
> avoid giving in on any other issues.
> I don't mean becoming very strict or punishing.
> I just mean not giving in.
>
> To avoid giving in:
> Before making any command, suggestion or
> ultimatum, I suggest stopping and thinking.
> If it's not worth a big fuss (listening to the
> child whine and cry for an hour, or whatever),
> then I suggest making it clear from the first
> word that it is a choice: for example, "You don't
> have to, but if you want, you can help me dry
> the dishes."
>
> If it's a command or ultimatum, then I suggest
> thinking through ahead of time a plan for not
> giving in. This might include a punishment.
> Or it might just be an announcement: "No,
> I'm sorry, I'm not taking you to the playground
> today." Here, no punishment is needed: just
> steadfastness in not changing your mind in
> response to whining and crying.
>
> Normally, it's fine to change your mind
> from time to time. But if you give in a lot,
> and then you want to teach a child to follow
> a new rule like wearing a seatbelt, it may be
> useful to avoid giving in for a week or so,
> until the child is used to seeing that you
> mean what you say, so that when you say
> "I've decided from now on, if I'm the
> driver, then everyone in the car has
> to wear a seatbelt." then the child will
> know you mean it. Just a calm, quiet, firm
> voice is fine. No need to repeat it. No
> need to say it loudly. No need to say
> "I mean what I say!" or (worse!) "This
> time I really mean it!". Those ways of
> saying it actually detract from the
> message.
>
> It might be useful to install something in
> the car to make a loud beeping sound whenever
> the child's seatbelt is not done up.
> It might be useful to have some authority
> figure, such as a police officer or car
> salesperson, talk to the child or talk to
> the parents in front of the child about the
> importance of seatbelts. Problems: this might
> scare the child; the authority figure might
> actually decide to say the seatbelts aren't
> all that important.
>
> A key tactic, though, is really listening
> to the child and finding out why the child
> doesn't like the seatbelt. I'm just
> reading "Parent Effectiveness Training" by
> Thomas Gordon and it's excellent for
> learning "active listening," getting children
> to open up and explain their feelings and
> what's bothering them. All other techniques
> for getting the child to use the seatbelt
> might be both useless and unnecessary if there's
> something significant about the situation
> that can be resolved if you only get the
> child to tell you what the real problem is.
>
> --
> Cathy

[Barbara Bomberger]

On 6 Sep 2003 23:40:54 GMT, (Catherine
Woodgold) wrote:

>(a further reply to the post on aps re 3yr old who didn't
>want to use a seatbelt)

Okay, I apparently missed the original post and discussion.

That said.

The seatbelt issue is not one over which I would spend time on the
following.

In our house, seatbelts are something you do. If the child doesnt
want to wear a seatbelt, the car stops. If said child actually
managed to get seatbelt off once on, the car pulls over to the side of
the road.

In my case, my child did not sit behind me, but katycorner, even
though I had to go around the car to get him or her out, specifically
so that I could see in the mirror this or other issues.

This might be an invovenience to me for a week or so (I might have to
leave for work earlier to be on time while enforcing this rule, for
example). However I suspect a week or so would do the trick.

Seat belts are not in my opinion a "feel good" issue. It would be nice
if the child understood the reasoning, but Im not sure how much of
this a three year old would grasp, and I for one, am NOT willing to
have a discussion on seatbelts when we get in and out of the car.

I can count on my hand probably the number of absolute rules for
everyone in my house, including adults. This is one.

Barb

[Martin McGowan]

"Catherine Woodgold" > wrote in message
...
> (a further reply to the post on aps re 3yr old who didn't
> want to use a seatbelt)
>
snip
I missed the original post. My son's seatbelt had a loud click, If he undid
it I quickly checked the mirror and switched off the engine and pulled over.
I would then look round to see what had caused the car to stop and would
discover the undone seat belt. I would tell him to do it up and start the
engine.
Before it became a legal requirement for all people to use a seat belt in
the car (I live in England) any adults who didn't want to wear a seat belt
sat in the middle of the rear seat. When they asked why I simply told them
so that they would pass through the car and out the windscreen without
hurting me on the way. The alternative was they walked. Martin

[LaVonne Carlson]

Cathy,

I really liked this post, especially your last paragraph, where you
state: "A key tactic, though, is really listening
to the child and finding out why the child doesn't like the
seatbelt....."

I think a key tactic in parenting that is often overlooked is listening
to children. Once we understand things from a child's perspective we
can often solve problems in ways that meets everyone's needs. However,
this does not mean that the original "rule" changes -- seatbelts are
worn in cars, period. Children too small for seatbelts are transported
in car seats.

I personally think we sometimes go to far with the "experiments" to
convince children we are correct in our expectations. My rule of thumb
was "If you ride in the car, you wear a seatbelt." This is
non-negotiable. No seatbelt, no riding in the car, regardless of the
protests. I found it took a little active listening, and very clear and
consistent expectations, and missing out on a few "fun" things, and
suddenly the seatbelt protests were nearly a thing of the past.

LaVonne

Catherine Woodgold wrote:

> (a further reply to the post on aps re 3yr old who didn't
> want to use a seatbelt)
>
> Possible problems with the watermelon experiment
> I suggested earlier:
>
> (1) The watermelon might not break, and then
> the child would be even more convinced not to
> use the seatbelt.
>
> (2) If it did break, it might make the car messy.
>
> Alternatives: Use empty eggshells instead,
> perhaps in toy cars. Could be lots of fun.
> The eggshells could have faces painted on
> them and cloth bodies added. After the crash
> they could be treated with sympathy and
> placed in a hospital.
>
> You can get a stroller with a seat belt -- maybe
> a toy one -- and put a doll in it with no seat
> belt. You can have the doll fall, then make
> a big fuss in which you apologize to the doll
> for "forgetting" or neglecting to put the
> seat belt on, treat the doll with great sympathy
> and promise the doll you'll always put on
> the seatbelt from now on.
>
> This sort of talk implies that the seatbelt
> is for the doll's own good. IMO it can be
> very effective to talk in a way that implies
> that something is for the child's benefit.
> In contrast, saying directly "This is for
> your own good" actually tends to communicate
> the opposite: the idea is that if you need
> to say it, then it must not be obvious, it
> must be something some people don't believe.
>
> Another way to do this, if you do ever drive
> with a child with no seatbelt (which I don't
> recommend), is to say to the child with great
> feeling at the end of the trip: "Oh, my goodness!
> You were without a seatbelt for that whole trip!
> Oh, my poor child! I'm so sorry I forgot to
> put your seatbelt on! I'm so glad there
> was no accident on this trip! My goodness--
> there was a red car back there that I almost
> crashed into. Oh, I would have felt so bad
> if you had gotten a big bop on the head from
> that! I really should have made sure you had
> your seatbelt on. (Hug the child) Oh, my
> dear child, I'm so glad you didn't get a big
> bop! I promise I'll make sure your seatbelt
> is on next time, so you'll be safe."
>
> If the parents strongly believe that it's not
> safe enough without a seatbelt, then they won't
> drive with a passenger with no seatbelt in
> the car (unless they're driving a dying
> person to the hospital or something).
> It's a matter of personal conviction, and habit.
>
> A friend can come over and talk about seatbelts
> and accidents, and the parents can make it clear
> to the child that they've made a decision, based
> on this conversation, never to drive without
> everyone wearing a seatbelt. This can become
> a turning point for the family as far as
> seatbelts are concerned.
>
> ... but if they give in "just once" after that
> time and let the child ride without a seatbelt,
> then it will be much harder to ever establish
> the rule. The point is to get the message
> across, "I really mean it. I'm not going
> to drive unless everyone has a seatbelt on."
> If you give in, the child learns that you
> don't mean what you say and can be
> persuaded.
>
> It might also help if, for about a week or more
> before bringing in a new seatbelt rule, they
> avoid giving in on any other issues.
> I don't mean becoming very strict or punishing.
> I just mean not giving in.
>
> To avoid giving in:
> Before making any command, suggestion or
> ultimatum, I suggest stopping and thinking.
> If it's not worth a big fuss (listening to the
> child whine and cry for an hour, or whatever),
> then I suggest making it clear from the first
> word that it is a choice: for example, "You don't
> have to, but if you want, you can help me dry
> the dishes."
>
> If it's a command or ultimatum, then I suggest
> thinking through ahead of time a plan for not
> giving in. This might include a punishment.
> Or it might just be an announcement: "No,
> I'm sorry, I'm not taking you to the playground
> today." Here, no punishment is needed: just
> steadfastness in not changing your mind in
> response to whining and crying.
>
> Normally, it's fine to change your mind
> from time to time. But if you give in a lot,
> and then you want to teach a child to follow
> a new rule like wearing a seatbelt, it may be
> useful to avoid giving in for a week or so,
> until the child is used to seeing that you
> mean what you say, so that when you say
> "I've decided from now on, if I'm the
> driver, then everyone in the car has
> to wear a seatbelt." then the child will
> know you mean it. Just a calm, quiet, firm
> voice is fine. No need to repeat it. No
> need to say it loudly. No need to say
> "I mean what I say!" or (worse!) "This
> time I really mean it!". Those ways of
> saying it actually detract from the
> message.
>
> It might be useful to install something in
> the car to make a loud beeping sound whenever
> the child's seatbelt is not done up.
> It might be useful to have some authority
> figure, such as a police officer or car
> salesperson, talk to the child or talk to
> the parents in front of the child about the
> importance of seatbelts. Problems: this might
> scare the child; the authority figure might
> actually decide to say the seatbelts aren't
> all that important.
>
> A key tactic, though, is really listening
> to the child and finding out why the child
> doesn't like the seatbelt. I'm just
> reading "Parent Effectiveness Training" by
> Thomas Gordon and it's excellent for
> learning "active listening," getting children
> to open up and explain their feelings and
> what's bothering them. All other techniques
> for getting the child to use the seatbelt
> might be both useless and unnecessary if there's
> something significant about the situation
> that can be resolved if you only get the
> child to tell you what the real problem is.
>
> --
> Cathy

[LaVonne Carlson]

Leah Adezio wrote:

> Seat belt use isn't something for 'feel good, let's be rational' discussion,
> period. IMO, this is *not* something that should be negotiated, discussed
> or anything, period.

Personally, I don't believe that discussion logically leads to negotiation.
One can attempt to understand a child's point of view and provide rational and
logical reasons for the expectation without making the expectation open for
negotiation.

> I told my children that if they unbuckled their seatbelts, the car would not
> work. It would stop and then we would not be able to go where we wanted to
> go.

I have a problem with lying to children, Leah. Cars "work" whether or not
children are wearing seatbelts. However, I have pulled over, told my children
that not wearing seatbelts was unsafe, and I don't drive when children are not
safe. When they put their seatbelts back on, I thanked them, told them that we
could now drive safely, and that was the end of the issue.

Be honest with children, even tiny children in carseats. No carseat/or
seatbelt, no riding in the car. It is not safe. Put the seatbelt on, get back
in the carseat, and we can continue with where we were going and what were were
going to do.

Didn't take long for my children to get the message, and like you, they let
their friends know that I don't drive anywhere with people not in seatbelts,
adults included.

LaVonne

>
>
> And I did it. *Every single time.*
>
> It only took about 4 times, if that, for them to get the message....and
> after that, they *never* unbuckled their belts, and if one of their friends
> went somewhere with us, the boys told them the 'rule'. One boy tried to
> test it, and I again pulled over and turned off the engine. My eldest, who
> was about 4 at the time, turned and said, 'See? Told you so.'
>
> Eggshells, strollers and allowing a child to ride without a seatbelt and
> then trying to guilt them *afterwards*? What claptrap.
>
> Leah
>
> "Catherine Woodgold" > wrote in message
> ...
> > (a further reply to the post on aps re 3yr old who didn't
> > want to use a seatbelt)
> >
> > Possible problems with the watermelon experiment
> > I suggested earlier:
> >
> > (1) The watermelon might not break, and then
> > the child would be even more convinced not to
> > use the seatbelt.
> >
> > (2) If it did break, it might make the car messy.
> >
> > Alternatives: Use empty eggshells instead,
> > perhaps in toy cars. Could be lots of fun.
> > The eggshells could have faces painted on
> > them and cloth bodies added. After the crash
> > they could be treated with sympathy and
> > placed in a hospital.
> >
> > You can get a stroller with a seat belt -- maybe
> > a toy one -- and put a doll in it with no seat
> > belt. You can have the doll fall, then make
> > a big fuss in which you apologize to the doll
> > for "forgetting" or neglecting to put the
> > seat belt on, treat the doll with great sympathy
> > and promise the doll you'll always put on
> > the seatbelt from now on.
> >
> > This sort of talk implies that the seatbelt
> > is for the doll's own good. IMO it can be
> > very effective to talk in a way that implies
> > that something is for the child's benefit.
> > In contrast, saying directly "This is for
> > your own good" actually tends to communicate
> > the opposite: the idea is that if you need
> > to say it, then it must not be obvious, it
> > must be something some people don't believe.
> >
> > Another way to do this, if you do ever drive
> > with a child with no seatbelt (which I don't
> > recommend), is to say to the child with great
> > feeling at the end of the trip: "Oh, my goodness!
> > You were without a seatbelt for that whole trip!
> > Oh, my poor child! I'm so sorry I forgot to
> > put your seatbelt on! I'm so glad there
> > was no accident on this trip! My goodness--
> > there was a red car back there that I almost
> > crashed into. Oh, I would have felt so bad
> > if you had gotten a big bop on the head from
> > that! I really should have made sure you had
> > your seatbelt on. (Hug the child) Oh, my
> > dear child, I'm so glad you didn't get a big
> > bop! I promise I'll make sure your seatbelt
> > is on next time, so you'll be safe."
> >
> > If the parents strongly believe that it's not
> > safe enough without a seatbelt, then they won't
> > drive with a passenger with no seatbelt in
> > the car (unless they're driving a dying
> > person to the hospital or something).
> > It's a matter of personal conviction, and habit.
> >
> > A friend can come over and talk about seatbelts
> > and accidents, and the parents can make it clear
> > to the child that they've made a decision, based
> > on this conversation, never to drive without
> > everyone wearing a seatbelt. This can become
> > a turning point for the family as far as
> > seatbelts are concerned.
> >
> > ... but if they give in "just once" after that
> > time and let the child ride without a seatbelt,
> > then it will be much harder to ever establish
> > the rule. The point is to get the message
> > across, "I really mean it. I'm not going
> > to drive unless everyone has a seatbelt on."
> > If you give in, the child learns that you
> > don't mean what you say and can be
> > persuaded.
> >
> > It might also help if, for about a week or more
> > before bringing in a new seatbelt rule, they
> > avoid giving in on any other issues.
> > I don't mean becoming very strict or punishing.
> > I just mean not giving in.
> >
> > To avoid giving in:
> > Before making any command, suggestion or
> > ultimatum, I suggest stopping and thinking.
> > If it's not worth a big fuss (listening to the
> > child whine and cry for an hour, or whatever),
> > then I suggest making it clear from the first
> > word that it is a choice: for example, "You don't
> > have to, but if you want, you can help me dry
> > the dishes."
> >
> > If it's a command or ultimatum, then I suggest
> > thinking through ahead of time a plan for not
> > giving in. This might include a punishment.
> > Or it might just be an announcement: "No,
> > I'm sorry, I'm not taking you to the playground
> > today." Here, no punishment is needed: just
> > steadfastness in not changing your mind in
> > response to whining and crying.
> >
> > Normally, it's fine to change your mind
> > from time to time. But if you give in a lot,
> > and then you want to teach a child to follow
> > a new rule like wearing a seatbelt, it may be
> > useful to avoid giving in for a week or so,
> > until the child is used to seeing that you
> > mean what you say, so that when you say
> > "I've decided from now on, if I'm the
> > driver, then everyone in the car has
> > to wear a seatbelt." then the child will
> > know you mean it. Just a calm, quiet, firm
> > voice is fine. No need to repeat it. No
> > need to say it loudly. No need to say
> > "I mean what I say!" or (worse!) "This
> > time I really mean it!". Those ways of
> > saying it actually detract from the
> > message.
> >
> > It might be useful to install something in
> > the car to make a loud beeping sound whenever
> > the child's seatbelt is not done up.
> > It might be useful to have some authority
> > figure, such as a police officer or car
> > salesperson, talk to the child or talk to
> > the parents in front of the child about the
> > importance of seatbelts. Problems: this might
> > scare the child; the authority figure might
> > actually decide to say the seatbelts aren't
> > all that important.
> >
> > A key tactic, though, is really listening
> > to the child and finding out why the child
> > doesn't like the seatbelt. I'm just
> > reading "Parent Effectiveness Training" by
> > Thomas Gordon and it's excellent for
> > learning "active listening," getting children
> > to open up and explain their feelings and
> > what's bothering them. All other techniques
> > for getting the child to use the seatbelt
> > might be both useless and unnecessary if there's
> > something significant about the situation
> > that can be resolved if you only get the
> > child to tell you what the real problem is.
> >
> > --
> > Cathy

[LaVonne Carlson]

One of my best friends, a very educated middle-aged woman, hates seat belts.
My rule -- you ride with me, you wear a seat belt or I do not drive. It's not
so very different with little children.

LaVonne

Martin McGowan wrote:

> "Catherine Woodgold" > wrote in message
> ...
> > (a further reply to the post on aps re 3yr old who didn't
> > want to use a seatbelt)
> >
> snip
> I missed the original post. My son's seatbelt had a loud click, If he undid
> it I quickly checked the mirror and switched off the engine and pulled over.
> I would then look round to see what had caused the car to stop and would
> discover the undone seat belt. I would tell him to do it up and start the
> engine.
> Before it became a legal requirement for all people to use a seat belt in
> the car (I live in England) any adults who didn't want to wear a seat belt
> sat in the middle of the rear seat. When they asked why I simply told them
> so that they would pass through the car and out the windscreen without
> hurting me on the way. The alternative was they walked. Martin

[Fern5827]

Seatbelts are necessary. I would simply pull over until fastened.

Much better not to make a federal case out of explaining to a child ad nauseum
while belts are necessary.

It always worked for me.

[LaVonne Carlson]

Fern5827 wrote:

> Seatbelts are necessary. I would simply pull over until fastened.

That's what I did. And I also repeated the explanation of why seat belts were
necessary.

> Much better not to make a federal case out of explaining to a child ad nauseum
> while belts are necessary.

Explaining to anyone "ad nauseum" is counter-productive. Providing an
explanation to children is crucial for children to develop an understanding of
why certain expectations exist, and is crucial for children internalizing rather
than simply complying with expectations.

Explanations should match the child's age and level of understanding. For the
seat belt issue, a simple "it is not safe" should suffice when children are very
young, and are climbing out of car seats. This is how children learn about what
is safe and unsafe. If done at a very young age, there should be few problems as
the child gets older.

If the issue surfaces again when the child is older and more able to verbally
articulate his/her objections to the seat belt, it is important to listen and try
to understand why the child is objecting. This doesn't change the seat belt
rule, but it helps parents understand the issue from the child's point of view.

> It always worked for me.

This is an interesting statement. I've always been more concerned with what
works for my children that what works for me. Regarding seat belts, one can have
a rule and force the child into submission and it will work -- as long as the
child is in your presence. My seat belt rule has several goals. I want to keep
children safe when being transported with me. I also want children to wear seat
belts when they are teenagers and not in my presence, and I want them to become
adults that make safe choices, which includes wearing seat belts, and requiring
everyone in the car to either be in a seat belt or a car seat. This can only
happen when one combines expectations with reasons for the expectations.

LaVonne