Driving speed child seatbelt violation $430 ??

On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 16:23:57 -0600, toto
wrote:

Positive parenting doesn't need punishment and punishment generally
doesn't work well in conjunction with it because the attitudes are
antithetical.

Bull****. Kids require punishment. There are no qualified child
behaviorists or child psychologists who would say otherwise.

Saying it doesn't work with positive parenting is bull**** also. I
have far more experience in this area than you do, given your claims
below. I have seen kids who were never parented because their parents
refused to set guidelines or direct children who did behave poorly. I
have also seen kids who were punished too severely, and who have
issues due to this. The proper method is in the middle.

When a child misbehaves, the first time you need to point out the bad
behavior and instruct them on proper behavior. The next time you need
to explain that further poor behavior will result in punishment. The
next time they get punished.

At the same time you are doing this, you need to reward good behavior.
This means actually being a parent - which most Americans have no clue
how to do. You need to watch your children and notice good things as
often as bad things. Hug them, kiss them, sing to them, pray with
them, read to them - and do those things every time you witness good
behavior. Granted you may need to group the good behavior and reward
groups instead of single incidents, assuming the child behaves well
often. But in the case of a child who misbehaves often, rewards must
come far more often.

Take this parenting style and use it from the day the child is born.
Adapt it for age. A baby does not misbehave. A toddler generally
does not misbehave. A 2-year old does misbehave, and must be directed
in good behavior. Telling little Johnny to stop hitting the window
may work for some kids, but for others it takes much more.

Now, you can criticize my views all you want, but at 6 months my
children started receiving punishment when they did things that were
dangerous such as hitting a window. That punishment may have been
redirecting their attention (taking away that which they want IS
punishment). Sometimes it was a slap on the hand. By 8 months my son
would put himself in time out when told to. By 18 months he was able
to say he was sorry for misbehaving. By 3 years he would be warned
that further misbehaving would mean we would have to discuss
punishment. His desire to please us meant he would generally not want
to talk about punishment. I rarely had to punish him, because he had
both positive and negative reinforcement.

In addition to my children, I have more than 30 nieces and nephews. I
have seen their parents fail, and succeed. Believe me, the ones who
fail were not the ones who punished, it was the opposite.

Punishment and Rewards work *only* to change behavior in the short
term.

Bull****. Changing long term behavior starts with changing short term
behavior. Once short term behavior is changed, long term behavior can
begin to be modeled.

baby on the way. I have taught high school math, been involved with

Now I know why you are such a poor parent. High school teachers
generally are. Wait, let me rephrase that - all teachers generally
are bad parents. Their inability to control the classroom and teach
is as apparent at home as it is in school.

toto wrote in message . ..
On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 20:58:02 GMT, DTJ wrote:

Neither the research nor the anecdotal evidence from my 30 years
of contact with children supports you in that. The people in jail
were more likely abused than brought up with positive parenting.

True, but positive parenting does not in any way state that you should
not punish bad behavior.

Positive parenting doesn't need punishment and punishment generally
doesn't work well in conjunction with it because the attitudes are
antithetical.

Punishment and Rewards work *only* to change behavior in the short
term.

Dorothy, I don't think this is true, and it certainly isn't verifiable
in any case. Since *punishment* and *rewards* in the sense you are
referring to them cannot be used in isolation, there's no way to
reliably separate out their effects from all the confounding factors
that also impact long term behavior changes.

They don't work to produce self-disciplined adults which is
what most parents are after. While used *very sparingly,* they may
not have a huge negative effect,

As close to an admission that *punishment* need not be detrimental as
I'm likely to ever see from you. Thank you.

they are unnecessary and insufficient to the task at hand.

This statement *may* be true in regards to the task of raising
children to be self-sufficient self-motivated adults. I'm not sure.
But it in no way invalidates the use of punishment in order to
optimize other needs. Sometimes short term behavorial changes are
necessary due to contraints on certain resources - like parental
patience and the need to pay attention to other matters such as
putting food on the table, changing diapers, getting adequate rest,
etc.

I'm not saying that punishment is a *good thing*, only that sometimes,
when used sparingly, mild punishment can be the optimum approach to
balancing the many conflicting needs and demands on our time that all
parents face.

For example, one day last week it was late and I was quite tired when
my son started acting up. He didn't want to go upstairs and get ready
for bed. Now, under other circumstances, I might have managed a more
'positive parenting' approach, but that night I just didn't have the
physical energy to pick him up and carry him nor the mental energy to
devise a cute ploy that would work.

I let him know what I wanted him to do and started counting. He knows
if I get to 5, he gets a time-out. He went upstairs without further
argument. Now, I agree that isn't going to produce long term
self-motiving behavioral change, but that will come with time and
other efforts. I won't be putting him to bed forever. But for now,
sometimes I just want him to behave and I find the minor detrimental
effects of using punishment occasionally to achieve that when I need
it to be well worth it.

Positive parenting is NOT the opposite side of the behaviorist coin -
that is, using rewards.

Try Parent Effectiveness Training and see. Try reading Adele Faber
and Elaine Mazlish who changed their attitude through PET and then
and eventually wrote How To Talk So Kids Will Listen and Listen So
Kids Will Talk.

I have read Parent Effectiveness Training. I was unimpressed. I
wouldn't recommend the book myself. I did not agree with their basic
concept of the democratic family.

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 20:00:20 GMT, DTJ wrote:

On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 16:23:57 -0600, toto
wrote:

Positive parenting doesn't need punishment and punishment generally
doesn't work well in conjunction with it because the attitudes are
antithetical.

Bull****. Kids require punishment. There are no qualified child
behaviorists or child psychologists who would say otherwise.

Saying it doesn't work with positive parenting is bull**** also. I
have far more experience in this area than you do, given your claims
below. I have seen kids who were never parented because their parents
refused to set guidelines or direct children who did behave poorly. I
have also seen kids who were punished too severely, and who have
issues due to this. The proper method is in the middle.

Positive parenting doesn't mean no discipline. The root of the word
discipline is teaching, not punishment though we have confused the
word with this in popular psychology.

I have seen children who were undisciplined because they have been
neglected and because the parents have basically allowed the children
to abuse the family and the adults feelings. But that is not positive
parenting either.

When a child misbehaves, the first time you need to point out the bad
behavior and instruct them on proper behavior. The next time you need
to explain that further poor behavior will result in punishment. The
next time they get punished.

When a child *misbehaves* especially a very young child, you first
must find out what need the child is meeting by the misbehavior.

Once you find this out, you can redirect the child into behavior that
meets that need and also meets your need for the child to not
*misbehave.* You also need to understand child development
well enough so that your expectations are not beyond the child's
developmental stage. Sometimes what parents define as *misbehavior*
is really not misbehavior at all, but the child exploring his world as
he should.

Also, you have to be specific about any behavior you wish to change.
It is much easier to change the behavior when you are. The best
way to change that behavior is to listen to the child and to see the
child as wanting to be good even when s/he is doing something you
don't like. You acknowledge it when the child is doing the right
thing rather than focussing on the negative. Believe me it works.

At the same time you are doing this, you need to reward good behavior.
This means actually being a parent - which most Americans have no clue
how to do. You need to watch your children and notice good things as
often as bad things. Hug them, kiss them, sing to them, pray with
them, read to them - and do those things every time you witness good
behavior. Granted you may need to group the good behavior and reward
groups instead of single incidents, assuming the child behaves well
often. But in the case of a child who misbehaves often, rewards must
come far more often.

Take this parenting style and use it from the day the child is born.
Adapt it for age. A baby does not misbehave. A toddler generally
does not misbehave. A 2-year old does misbehave, and must be directed
in good behavior. Telling little Johnny to stop hitting the window
may work for some kids, but for others it takes much more.

Telling a child to stop almost never works in the long term. Kids
will go back to things and test your reaction over and over. Better
to tell them what they *can* do. Come and hit the drum works much
better than *don't hit the window.*

Now, you can criticize my views all you want, but at 6 months my
children started receiving punishment when they did things that were
dangerous such as hitting a window. That punishment may have been
redirecting their attention (taking away that which they want IS
punishment).

Redirecting to something they can do is not punishment. I agree
that children need to be redirected away from dangerous things when
they are infants and toddlers to be sure.


Sometimes it was a slap on the hand. By 8 months my son
would put himself in time out when told to. By 18 months he was able
to say he was sorry for misbehaving. By 3 years he would be warned
that further misbehaving would mean we would have to discuss
punishment. His desire to please us meant he would generally not want
to talk about punishment. I rarely had to punish him, because he had
both positive and negative reinforcement.

I didn't have to punish my children to get them to behave. They both
wanted to please me.

When my son was 18 months old, he didn't really understand why other
children didn't share their toys. He shared willingly because we as
parents played sharing games with him.

My dd and ds both learned from various ways the adults around them
behaved. Children learn what they live.

If you want to see how a child views such punishments, watch them
with their dolls and puppets. They will do what you do to them to
the dolls. And their language will tell you what they think. *Bad
doll. Go to time-out now.* *Bad doll.* Spanking the doll as they
say it. The expression on the child's face is most often one of
anger.

In addition to my children, I have more than 30 nieces and nephews. I
have seen their parents fail, and succeed. Believe me, the ones who
fail were not the ones who punished, it was the opposite.

Positive parenting doesn't mean *no* discipline. It's a change in
attitude toward the child.

Positive parents listen to their children and teach more by example.
When your words don't match your actions (and they don't when you
punish a child - *Don't hit.. but I can hit you cause I am your dad.*
*Don't yell... but I can yell at you to stop because I am your mom.*)
the child learns that a lot of things are ok, that you don't want to
teach.

Punishment and Rewards work *only* to change behavior in the short
term.

Bull****. Changing long term behavior starts with changing short term
behavior. Once short term behavior is changed, long term behavior can
begin to be modeled.

No, actually it doesn't.

Often changing behavior in the short term with punishment simply
leads to a child who will sneak the behavior when s/he believes that
s/he won't be caught.

baby on the way. I have taught high school math, been involved with

Now I know why you are such a poor parent. High school teachers
generally are. Wait, let me rephrase that - all teachers generally
are bad parents. Their inability to control the classroom and teach
is as apparent at home as it is in school.

LOL. My children are grown and quite successful.

My son and daughter both graduated college and are in careers they
like. My dd is married, but has no children, my son is married and
has one now and one on the way. Exactly how would you call that
unsuccessful.

My children were even good as teenagers. They had their problems,
like any kids, but they were not rebellious or difficult.

My son played soccer and chess and finished a year of college
by his senior year of high school. My daughter was still in girl
scouts in high school, went to Europe with scouts, was involved
with theater productions and went on to a carreer as a scenic
artist.


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

(Beth Kevles) wrote in message ...

About the speeding part, just pay.

--Beth Kevles

http://web.mit.edu/kevles/www/nomilk.html -- a page for the milk-allergic
Disclaimer: Nothing in this message should be construed as medical
advice. Please consult with your own medical practicioner.

I find it intriguing that someone who apparently knows a lot about
milk allergies but is not a doctor has no hesitation in offering legal
advice here ...
--
C.R. Krieger
Attorney at Law (Yeah, really. You can look it up.)

"ColoradoSkiBum" wrote in message ...
"Garth Almgren" wrote in message
...
: Around 11/25/2003 8:11 PM, ColoradoSkiBum wrote:
:
: : I believe that yellow lights have to be at least one-tenth second for
: : each MPH of the prima facie speed limit in order to substantiate a red
: : light conviction.
:
: What are you saying? That if the speed limit is 50 mph, then the yellow
: light only has to be 0.5 seconds long???
:
: 50 * 0.1 = 5 seconds.
:
:

Ahhh, right, I gotcha, I did misread the post. So I guess if I ever get a
ticket in such a situation, I should probably get a stopwatch and time the
yellow before I go to traffic court.


It worked in Brookpark (?) Ohio, where a similar 'long' intersection
and an impossibly 'short' yellow light was used to produce regular
revenue for the city. They had to change the light timing and try to
give back a bunch of money.
--
C.R. Krieger
"Never drink anything stronger than gin before breakfast." - W.C.
Fields

(chiam margalit) wrote in message . com...

I TOTALLY agree. We spend a couple of weeks *every* summer inside 128
in Boston, and every year I think I'm taking my life in my hands the
second I get into a car. Not only is Boston the most insane place to
drive other then Italy that I've ever been in, but the roads suck, the
signage is worse, and people have absolutely no patience.

Hey! Leave Italy out of it! Even in Rome, I feel safer driving than
almost anywhere in that Godforsaken BoNYWash corridor. While it may
*seem* insane in Italy, my own opinion is that they are quite a bit
*more* competent than your average Boston driver. Their attitude is
different, too. While a Boston driver just doesn't give a **** (at
best; more commonly, they entertain an active hatred of other
drivers), Italians have a friendlier composure. IOW, when *they* chop
you off in traffic with six inches to spare, they give you a smile and
wave with *all* of their fingers.
--
C.R. Krieger
"Never drink anything stronger than gin before breakfast." - W.C.
Fields

(nilanjan) wrote in message om...

BTW ... I think I am the best parent one can be !!!

At least the kids'll learn how to have overinflated egos ...
--
C.R. Krieger
"Never drink anything stronger than gin before breakfast." - W.C. Fields

chiam margalit wrote:

"Arthur L. Rubin" wrote in message ...
chiam margalit wrote:

When I returned to CA I got a
ticket for going through a yellow light, and got that minimum fine
ticket.

Actually, I know someone else who CLAIMED she got a ticket
for going throught a yellow light. She had other mental
problems, also.

Seriously, there is only one ACTUAL violation that might be
considered going through a yellow light -- that's the
anti-gridlock law which specifies that if you enter an
intersection, there must be room to clear it by the
time your light becomes red.

Uh DUH. That's exactly what I said, maroon!

Wrong. You said you must clear the intersection by the
time the light becomes red. I said there must be room
for the intersection to clear -- in fact, before you
enter the intersection, rather than "before the light
becomes red", as I stated -- but there is no requirement
that you be able to clear the intersection before the
light becomes red.

Maroon!

--
This account is subject to a persistent MS Blaster and SWEN attack.
I think I've got the problem resolved, but, if you E-mail me
and it bounces, a second try might work.
However, please reply in newsgroup.

In article , Arthur L. Rubin says...

chiam margalit wrote:

"Arthur L. Rubin" wrote in message
...
chiam margalit wrote:

When I returned to CA I got a
ticket for going through a yellow light, and got that minimum fine
ticket.

Actually, I know someone else who CLAIMED she got a ticket
for going throught a yellow light. She had other mental
problems, also.

Seriously, there is only one ACTUAL violation that might be
considered going through a yellow light -- that's the
anti-gridlock law which specifies that if you enter an
intersection, there must be room to clear it by the
time your light becomes red.

Uh DUH. That's exactly what I said, maroon!

Wrong. You said you must clear the intersection by the
time the light becomes red. I said there must be room
for the intersection to clear -- in fact, before you
enter the intersection, rather than "before the light
becomes red", as I stated -- but there is no requirement
that you be able to clear the intersection before the
light becomes red.

Maroon!

Cardinal! The color is Cardinal!

Oh, never mind...

Banty (just thinking of the location of Marjorie's intersection ;-)