OK, so now you can see what Michele and I cooked up. Michele is standing on a kitchen chair. She has used this chair for near on 2 years. It wont be long and she wont need it. Cathy shared our meal. She had a bit of sausage and a bit of other vegetable as well.
I want to share something here which I think is important.
I first posted this on the Godly Tomato message board. And no, it is not open to the general public.
I want to share a conversation that happened in this home a little while ago. It's a long-ish story so make a cuppa and sit back for the ride.
We have two children, Michele is 3.75 and Catherine is just now nine months old. Michele is called "possum" and I call Cathy "Hot water bottle" or "Grumble Bum". They are both terms of endearment and in no way meant to be mean. Some of you may disagree.
From the time Cathy first came home, diaper changes have always been an interesting affair. Stephanie is all business like. Take old diaper off, clean up daughter, new diaper on. From start to finish all done in 5 minutes flat. Me? Minimum time for diaper change 10 minutes, and that's when I am in a hurry. And I change lots of diapers. Wet ones, dirty one, who cares, they are all diapers and some one has to do them. Besides, it's a chance for dad and daughter to have fun time. Lots of giggling, tickling raspberry blowing and so on. The sort of nonsense that only males are capable. After all, aren't all males just little boys in a man's body?
However, I also use the time for training. Cathy has always been expert at kicking her legs around. She can kick a diaper clear across the room if she puts her mind to it. So, from the time she was 8 weeks old, I would say to her "Legs down" then place her legs down. No force involved at all. I just gently place her legs down and wait for her to comply. It took her about 4 weeks to catch on to what I was on about and then when I would say "Legs down" she started doing it for her self without me having to do it. She was very hit and miss about it all, but she was doing it and would at least stop kicking her legs frantically about. Stephanie would get cranky every time I did it. She said I was expecting more of the child than she was capable of at that young age. I said nothing and kept at it. At least once a day Stephanie would tell me, sometimes very firmly, that my expectations were too high. I kept thinking to myself, I am not expecting anything of her at all. I am just training her, getting her use to the sound of the word and the action which followed. And over a period of time, I hoped she would 'catch on'. Which is exactly what did happen. Then, one day Stephanie again said I was expecting too much of Cathy and what did I expect of the child..... and well you know how the conversation goes. I informed Stephanie that I wasn't expecting anything of Catherine at all. We then sat down and had this talk about training versus expectation. Now if your child knows what is required then it is reasonable for you to "expect" them to comply with your wish. However, if they have no idea what is required then one can't expect it of them. Then you are training. Training and expectations need to be sorted. One must train before one can expect anything of a child. Training comes first, followed by compliance followed by expecting a child to do.
In a recent post on this board, which caused some angst, a mother had a problems with a child who responded incorrectly when she spoke to him. Clearly the child's response was incorrect. One would "expect" the child to respond in a cheerful manner. That’s the expectation. My question would then be, "does the child know how to respond correctly?". Maybe we would need to demonstrate (train) the child in the correct way to respond, in order that the child can then meet our expectations. Back to Cathy, it would be totally unreasonable of me to expect her to comply with my request in the first place if I had not trained her.
Now after I had explained this to the bestest women in the whole wide world (that's my wife in case you haven't guessed by now) she fully understood and we progressed from there. Now she has started in other things. Like "don't touch". That's the one that got Eve into trouble in the first place. By the way guys, don't get too smug. Eve was deceived, Adam did it willingly. Back again to Cathy. Now Stephanie's training has been so successful, that not only does Cathy stop touching what ever it was that she was touching, she will back away from it.
Some terms I would think about:
1) Expectation - what I would expect a child to be able to do.
2) Training - teaching, verbal and by demonstrating or modelling a task or behaviour.
3) Training needs analysis - assessing where the child/person is and where they ought to be.
We have two children, Michele is 3.75 and Catherine is just now nine months old. Michele is called "possum" and I call Cathy "Hot water bottle" or "Grumble Bum". They are both terms of endearment and in no way meant to be mean. Some of you may disagree.
From the time Cathy first came home, diaper changes have always been an interesting affair. Stephanie is all business like. Take old diaper off, clean up daughter, new diaper on. From start to finish all done in 5 minutes flat. Me? Minimum time for diaper change 10 minutes, and that's when I am in a hurry. And I change lots of diapers. Wet ones, dirty one, who cares, they are all diapers and some one has to do them. Besides, it's a chance for dad and daughter to have fun time. Lots of giggling, tickling raspberry blowing and so on. The sort of nonsense that only males are capable. After all, aren't all males just little boys in a man's body?
However, I also use the time for training. Cathy has always been expert at kicking her legs around. She can kick a diaper clear across the room if she puts her mind to it. So, from the time she was 8 weeks old, I would say to her "Legs down" then place her legs down. No force involved at all. I just gently place her legs down and wait for her to comply. It took her about 4 weeks to catch on to what I was on about and then when I would say "Legs down" she started doing it for her self without me having to do it. She was very hit and miss about it all, but she was doing it and would at least stop kicking her legs frantically about. Stephanie would get cranky every time I did it. She said I was expecting more of the child than she was capable of at that young age. I said nothing and kept at it. At least once a day Stephanie would tell me, sometimes very firmly, that my expectations were too high. I kept thinking to myself, I am not expecting anything of her at all. I am just training her, getting her use to the sound of the word and the action which followed. And over a period of time, I hoped she would 'catch on'. Which is exactly what did happen. Then, one day Stephanie again said I was expecting too much of Cathy and what did I expect of the child..... and well you know how the conversation goes. I informed Stephanie that I wasn't expecting anything of Catherine at all. We then sat down and had this talk about training versus expectation. Now if your child knows what is required then it is reasonable for you to "expect" them to comply with your wish. However, if they have no idea what is required then one can't expect it of them. Then you are training. Training and expectations need to be sorted. One must train before one can expect anything of a child. Training comes first, followed by compliance followed by expecting a child to do.
In a recent post on this board, which caused some angst, a mother had a problems with a child who responded incorrectly when she spoke to him. Clearly the child's response was incorrect. One would "expect" the child to respond in a cheerful manner. That’s the expectation. My question would then be, "does the child know how to respond correctly?". Maybe we would need to demonstrate (train) the child in the correct way to respond, in order that the child can then meet our expectations. Back to Cathy, it would be totally unreasonable of me to expect her to comply with my request in the first place if I had not trained her.
Now after I had explained this to the bestest women in the whole wide world (that's my wife in case you haven't guessed by now) she fully understood and we progressed from there. Now she has started in other things. Like "don't touch". That's the one that got Eve into trouble in the first place. By the way guys, don't get too smug. Eve was deceived, Adam did it willingly. Back again to Cathy. Now Stephanie's training has been so successful, that not only does Cathy stop touching what ever it was that she was touching, she will back away from it.
Some terms I would think about:
1) Expectation - what I would expect a child to be able to do.
2) Training - teaching, verbal and by demonstrating or modelling a task or behaviour.
3) Training needs analysis - assessing where the child/person is and where they ought to be.
And that is the end of that.
Now, this brings to mind another issue. This whole saga of Adam and Eve in the garden of Eden has caused more trouble than women than I care to talk about. I think I have stated this before. I don't think us men can talk at all. For one, what was Adam doing whilst Satan was having his cozy fireside chat with Eve? And let's be fair, Eve was deceived. If Adam had been following the guide lines laid down, he would have been watching Eve like a hawk. Second, Adam was not deceived. He partook of the fruit with his eyes wide open. And none of that situation ethics rubbish if you please. Yes, maybe he was besotted by Eve. So what, he still should have been vigilant.
Now whilst we are on Adam and Eve and the whole rib thing. Why do you think God formed Eve from a rib? By the way, who was the first anesthetist? Back to the first question. Eve was formed from the head lest she be lorded over by Adam, nor from his foot, lest he use her as his foot stool. No, Eve was form from his rib in order that they may walk side by side.
And another thing for you to chew on. You know how man is supposed to get down on bended knee as propose to his dearly beloved? Well, some one forgot to tell Ruth. Who is Ruth? Why I am glad you asked. Open your Bible. Oh? You don't have one. Go here. Wont cost you a cracker. Any way read the Book of Ruth. Ruth proposed to Boaz. Boaz did not propose to Ruth! That book is loaded with goodies. Ruth is the bride. Boaz the groom. Who is Christ's bride? Who is the Churches groom? Who introduced Ruth to Boaz and what is his name? Did you know the Holy Spirit never draws attention to Himself. He always and without exception points us to Christ. The Fathers Glory is in the Son. Now for another curly one. Ruth was a Moabite. She wasn't an Hebrew. Guess what, neither was Boaz. He was part Amorite. Don't believe me? Go read Joshua. It's all there.
Your still here? I haven't completely shock you into leaving? That might be about to change. You know Hosea? You don't. Oh, then it's back to the Bible for you. It's a short story with a huge message for us today. Poor Hosea, God tells him to marry a prostitute! Ouch! That hurt. You know they tell me the Northern kingdom enjoyed immense wealth and prosperity. Bit like us today. We are rich and increased with goods and have no need of God! Three children and one he names "No love" another he calls "Not My People". Ouch and ouch and double ouch. Fancy going to school with names like that. No wonder they home schooled!
Noe it is time to get into trouble. Yes, we here in Australia have had a change of government. Bonsai is no longer our leader. Now we have Elma Fudd. Oops, sorry I mean Kevin Rudd. And he is going to do what Mr Howard should have done a long time ago. If he sticks to his word, he will have all Australian troupes home by the middle of next year. And that is a good thing. We should never have been there in the first place. No country has the right to invade a sovereign nation. None. If you can find a precedence for it in God's word show me. Defend yourself, yes! Invasion, no. God will judge the USA and Australia for this. Other nations have already seen the light. And it seems so have we. Oh, just for the record, Mr Fudd, oops Rudd, attends and Anglican Church in Brisbane. Don't that beat all. And did I read some where that he once was a card carrying Liberal? Wow!
No comments:
Post a Comment