To discipline vs. ONLY doing natural consequences? UPDATE!!!!
(((( For those who don't know....Natural Consequences (one way) is giving advice to the child and allowing them to use it or not. If they don't they suffer whatever happens. EXAMPLE: Its cold, you suggest a coat to wear, but if they decide to go out without one, when they get cold in a few seconds, they can come back in and get it. They learned something didn't they.,, to follow what you said. BUT you didn't make them.
DONT confuse this with logical consequences which is a "disciplinary action that fits the crime" )))))))
Every choice your child makes is a positive or a negative consequence that will impact their lives forever. It may not seem that way, but even the smallest thing as sitting with the family to eat breakfast or sitting alone on the stairs while they munch on donuts that morning, will be a decision to better or worsen themselves. (Example The Butterfly Effect... the movie not really the theory).
One parenting expert said "Many teens reach their adult years having no clue on how to make decisions. They "know better" ,but still make bad choices.The reason is many of those foolish chooses are the real first choices they had ever made!"
With that said, I want my kids to make the stupid mistakes now when the "price is cheap" rather then when they are adults with no true guide and " when the price is a lot".
However, how far is too far? At what age do you start this 100% discovery?
Once again, we are only talking about Natural consequences ONLY !
UPDATE!!!!!!!! The Psychology Theories, like Eric Erickson and Lawrence Kohlrabies, are only based on the children that are not solo doing Radical Parenting ( only natural consequences). Since the 70's, the parents who did do ONLY Radical Parenting notice that their children were not the norm of those psychological theorist. They reached mild-stones far quicker and easier ( like stage 4 in kohlrabies theory of moral development) For this conversation go to page 13!