Communication between folks and kids will typically be an influence and control dynamic. Folks especially get caught in this kind of state of affairs where the child or adolescent is saying things to that any response by the parent is not effective. For instance, the parent may tell the child to scrub up her space and he or she might respond with “no, I don't must, you'll be able to't make me.” Any response, even a firm threat of punishment, would solely escalate the conflict; the child may respond “go ahead, I don't care.” And whether or not the parent does enforce the punishment, it's been a no win situation. The area was not cleaned up, the kid forced the hand of the parent into the punishment and zilch was very accomplished.
There is another approach to those verbal sparring matches which can yield a a lot of positive result. I call it the Ping Pong Analogy or the Ping Pong Strategy. It works like this: initial you would like to perceive how the sport of ping pong is played, which you almost certainly do. I hit a ball to you, you hit the ball back to me, I then hit it back to you, then you back to me and we have a tendency to strive to stay this backwards and forwards volley going.
Within the analogy, the ping pong ball represents the spoken word – and therefore the spoken word is that the power. Therefore, when a parent says to a kid or a teenager “clean your area” or perhaps it it's stated nicely like “please clean your room” – that is the ping pong ball being served. It represents the parent's power. When the kid responds “no, I don't need to, you'll't make me” – that is the ping pong ball being hit back and it represents the kid's power. The kid totally expects the parent to hit the ping pong ball back to them with an announcement like “if you don't you'll be punished” or “you'd higher or else” or “did you hear what I said!” It doesn't really matter what's being said as long as one thing is being said because by saying one thing the ping pong ball, which represents power, has been sent back to the kid who is currently in a very position to say one thing else, to hit the ball back again, that feels sensible as a result of it's using power.
Therefore, what would happen if the parent instead of hitting the ping pong ball back nonetheless again held it? For instance, once the kid or adolescent says “no, I don't need to, you'll't create me” the parent says nothing, does nothing. This is often not as straightforward as it sounds as a result of there's tremendous momentum and pressure to respond. But, if the parent does stay silent and shows no visual signs of response, that is, no smiling, frowning, smirking, but simply looks at the child while not saying something, the game is unexpectedly changed. The parent is now holding a ping-pong ball that should be sent back. Bear in mind, the ping-pong ball represents words that represent power. So, the parent is currently holding the power. And the kid wants it back!
As the parent remains silent merely trying at the child, the kid will possible say something. The kid (or adolescent – or anybody in this position) will send another ping-pong ball over to the parent by saying something like “well!?” or “WHAT!” or “What's wrong with you” or “Cat got your tongue?” It doesn't very matter what's said however, once more, the parent again says nothing, will not send a ping-pong ball back. Currently the parent is holding two ping pong balls! Additional power. And the kid is even additional frustrated as a result of they are not getting the response they need, which is for the parent to send back some words, some power, therefore they can then exert their power by sending another few words back to the parent.
As the parent remains silent and simply observing, the kid may say a lot of, sending additional words and additional of their power over to the parent who again merely remains silent. Soon the child realizes that nothing goes to happen and there is an extended silence. During that period the whole exchange hangs within the air like a mist and it is not uncommon for the child to acquiesce to the first request and say something like “ok! I'll go clean the space!” and storm off.
Whether or not the kid does not acquiesce, the parent has not solely avoided a power struggle but has maintained the higher hand by doing nothing. Following is a transcript section for a real life scenario:
Parent: John, It's time to flip off the TV and go finish your homework.
John: I'll do it later
Parent: No, John, you'll do it now. Flip off the TV.
John: Ah, return on…
John: You're such an SOB!
John: (when an instant turns far from the TV and appearance at the parent)
Parent: (remains silent but watchful of John)
Parent: (remains silent and looking at John)
John: I'll do it later, I will
Parent: (remains silent and wanting at John)
John: (an extended moment of silence – John appearance back to the TV and watches for a few moments. He then turns the TV off and goes to his space)
Parent: (remains silent and observing till John is in his area and then returns to the kitchen to complete cleaning up from dinner.)
The issue of name calling is secondary in this scenario. If the parent addressed that issue, the conflict would have escalated and therefore the homework would have been forgotten. Typically oldsters want to decide on their battles.
This approach may appear simple however it is often quite troublesome for the parent to simply stay silent and watchful without responding to what's being said to them. But, it's a very powerful methodology of holding the facility and actually value some practice. Good luck.