Education has its limits. The kid needs to want to learn, to change.
Our MO is talking, education, conversation, non-restrictive and non-retributive. On my desk today I have:
15 yo that hasn’t been to school in 3 years. No amount of talking has had any effect.
16 yo that spread pics of his then gf among his classmates. And recently of his current gf as well, after he’s done the talking and education and supposedly gained the insight that it was wrong.
A 16 yo with boundary issues. Oh wait, no not this one. He’s been incarcerated. For stabbing a girl.
A 15 yo that loves the german army. The '38-'45 era more specifically. Today we’re gonna talk about him cheering during the holocaust museum visit.
A 16 yo that has been beating up his mom. We had to cut our talks with abuse survivor counselors short, as he was taunting them.
A 15 yo that was pushed by his friends and made a mistake. He shouldn’t be here, but it won’t hurt talking to him.
In my experience, which spans 2 decades, the softhand approach as we call it, doesn’t work as well as people like you want it to work. Sure, the other extreme doesn’t work any better and we don’t use it. But sometimes it is necessary in combination with re-education. There needs to be solid consequences, else they’ll just shrug it off.
This is one long strawmen: you’re generalizing my argument for this single situation to every situation.
You’re basically accusing me of doing what you’re doing: thinking in black and white. In my case if I think that ruining his life here with severe punishment is wrong, it must always be wrong.
Ask yourself this. Is there anyone who did something very stupid in HS that turned out to be a good adult without facing severe consequences for their actions? I can think of a few.
So we’re gonna gamble? See who turns out ok and who doesn’t? Or not even that? We’re not gonna do anything and hope they all turn out great like your few examples? Sure, go for it.
Education has its limits. The kid needs to want to learn, to change.
Our MO is talking, education, conversation, non-restrictive and non-retributive. On my desk today I have:
15 yo that hasn’t been to school in 3 years. No amount of talking has had any effect.
16 yo that spread pics of his then gf among his classmates. And recently of his current gf as well, after he’s done the talking and education and supposedly gained the insight that it was wrong.
A 16 yo with boundary issues. Oh wait, no not this one. He’s been incarcerated. For stabbing a girl.
A 15 yo that loves the german army. The '38-'45 era more specifically. Today we’re gonna talk about him cheering during the holocaust museum visit.
A 16 yo that has been beating up his mom. We had to cut our talks with abuse survivor counselors short, as he was taunting them.
A 15 yo that was pushed by his friends and made a mistake. He shouldn’t be here, but it won’t hurt talking to him.
In my experience, which spans 2 decades, the softhand approach as we call it, doesn’t work as well as people like you want it to work. Sure, the other extreme doesn’t work any better and we don’t use it. But sometimes it is necessary in combination with re-education. There needs to be solid consequences, else they’ll just shrug it off.
This is one long strawmen: you’re generalizing my argument for this single situation to every situation.
You’re basically accusing me of doing what you’re doing: thinking in black and white. In my case if I think that ruining his life here with severe punishment is wrong, it must always be wrong.
Ask yourself this. Is there anyone who did something very stupid in HS that turned out to be a good adult without facing severe consequences for their actions? I can think of a few.
So we’re gonna gamble? See who turns out ok and who doesn’t? Or not even that? We’re not gonna do anything and hope they all turn out great like your few examples? Sure, go for it.