One of the dynamics I find at play in older children is not understanding the connection between freedom and responsibilities.  As children grow up they naturally want more freedom. To not have to hold your hand when you go out and about, to play in the next door neighbor’s yard and not just yours, to stay up a little later, or watch different shows, etc.   This is normal, and good.

As our children age we, as parents, need to remember to give them more responsibility.  Working around the house and in the yard, helping with siblings, caring for their own things and helping with the family and household responsibilities gives them a sense of confidence and self respect.

The healthy progression for a child involves more responsibility in the family and home leading to them earning more freedom in their personal sphere of life.  Showing mom and dad how responsible you are becoming is how mom and dad know they can trust you with more freedom.  Growing up precedes growing out.

Too often freedom is seen as a right of getting older instead of an earned privilege for taking on more responsibility. When this happens, children feel the lack of balance and generally respond with bad attitudes, poor behavior, typical acts of rebellion.  This is often, at least in part, a sign that they have more freedom than they have earned.  The response in many homes comes with the parent resenting the attitude and punishing the child by taking away the freedoms.  This is an adversarial approach and not only doesn’t address the real underlying issue but often pushes the problem in the wrong direction altogether–the child demands the freedom even more, focus is on the lost privilege, and a sense of entitlement takes over in the young person while a growing need to control is the trap for the parent.

The best way I’ve found to handle these situations is to remove the freedoms as part of a “do over” process.  I sit my child down and explain to them that I see they are wanting more freedom and that makes sense because they are X years old and children at their age want to do certain things they didn’t get to do before.  I validate this desire on their part.  Then I explain (or remind) that freedom is earned.   It is earned by taking on more responsibility.  Taking freedom without earning it first is stealing.

When we steal something it does not actually belong to us and we don’t have the authority to handle it properly. We may not be ready for it.  We won’t take care of it, and we can’t value it the way it deserves because when we have something we don’t value we are careless with it. When we know we’ve stolen something we feel guilty. Since people who feel bad act bad I encourage my children to respond appropriately to guilt and fix whatever situation they have wronged.

They give back the stolen freedom.

I also apologize for not having given them enough opportunity to earn that freedom. We talk about responsibilities they can take on around the house to show they are ready for the freedom they want. I make an effort to give them more chances to help around the house, to take on this or that job, to be even more involved in the family dynamic.  As they throw themselves into this new responsibility I restore the freedom (or appropriate levels of that freedom depending on what I believe they are ready for). The natural response in children to ever increasing amounts of work around the house is increased capabilities and skills and growing confidence.  Everyone benefits!

This is more than a way I react to situations, though. I try to remember this order to things as part of the dynamic of parenting overall.  Too often people read different GBD tools and evaluate them from a punitive perspective and don’t believe they can work.  For instance, if my children are behaving inappropriately in a public place we leave.  The objection to that I hear most often is, “That will teach the child to just behave badly if they want to leave somewhere.”  That is not an issue I deal with at all.  The reason being that staying and being successful is always presented as the goal.  It is the evidence of growing up and getting bigger.  We do not leave with, “Because you are misbehaving we have to leave” or “I wish I could go here but I can’t because you are misbehaving.”  We leave with, “You’re not ready to be here. Someday you will grow up more and be ready and then you can stay. Today we need to leave. We’ll try again next time.”

The goal put before them is not “more freedom” because that would encourage them to work for selfish gain. In our home we don’t “work” to earn money, privileges, absence of punishment, etc.  That is instilling a life of works.

The goal put before them is always more responsibility–and with that comes more freedom.  This encourages interdependence, maturity, self respect, and all sorts of things I strive to instill in my children.   Because we are part of a family we focus on our responsibility to the family, our responsibility to one another, our responsibility to godly living. With that comes amazing reward, often times tangible, more often intangible.

This is the essence of internal motivation, maturity, responsibility, and developing the character that is vital for earning our trust as they get older.  These things are important for us to see in our children as they grow up, they are even more important for them to become aware of in themselves as they move towards adulthood.

What do you want to be the line that lets your children know you mean business?

The point behind say it then make it happen/step 1 followed immediately by step 4/GOYBP is that YOU are responsible for making your words have meaning. Once your children realize that your words have meaning AND they have the maturity to do it without help they will. Like I say, resistance is futile

When people’s words don’t have meaning to their child or they are not creating that reality (best done while the child is developing maturity) they will find a perceived *need* of spankings or time outs or threats or punishment of some sort. But even then . . . the spanking or the time out or the threat or the punishment is when the child believes you mean what you say.

which means . . . you’ve created a line farther away than your words. Your words don’t actually have meaning–the spanking or the threat or whatever is what has meaning. I want my WORDS to have meaning! THAT is obedience.

Doing what you say out of fear of a punishment is NOT obedience. It’s fear of pain/punishment. Perfect love casts out all fear because it’s based on trusting the person issuing the instruction–trusting that they have your best interest at heart, trusting that you need to listen to what they are telling you.

I’ve learned that resistance is futile with the Lord because when I resist His instructions I fall and scrape my knee, or I bump my head, or I suffer something else because of my stubbornness–not because He is angry that I haven’t listened. But because HIS instructions are for MY benefit! My good. His plans for me are to prosper me and bless me, not to bring me harm

And when my children do not listen to me they are at risk for harm–from themselves and others. NEVER from me. But it’s important that my words have meaning–so that they can get to them, embrace them, learn from them and be blessed by them. I do not want a line where they know I mean what I say that is farther away from my heart than my words

How about you? If your child doesn’t understand that your words have meaning are you willing to put in the effort to teach this in the new year? When they get it and can, they WILL obey. If they aren’t obeying it’s because either 1) your words don’t have meaning yet so keep teaching it and be consistent and/or 2) they lack the maturity to consistently do it which means . . . keep teaching so when they do, they will

I am not even sitting here with a list of what all didn’t get done because surviving it is the biggest praise report!

So let me share some changes that have happened this year . . . Bill is unable to work due to disability. His ulcerative colitis caused a second auto-immune condition to develop and he now has rheumatoid arthritis as well. I don’t want to say too much as we have an attorney and a pending Social Security Disability case. I will say this has made for some huge shifts is how things are done around our house as well as our perspectives on what is important.

One thing we have done as this year closed out is follow the Lord’s leading to start Shema Congregation www.hearunderstandobey.com. This is a Nazarene Messianic Congregation in our town and we are so thrilled with the core group of families and individuals who are studying with us. We go through the Torah/HafTorah and NT portions in order to see how they all fit together and seek a deeper understanding of the message of all of Scripture.

One new thing to watch for in 2010 is the Lutton Family website which will be a hub for all of our existing endeavors as well as some new ones. Another thing to watch for is online seminars I’ll be leading on topics related to parenting (theory and practical tools) and theology and personal development. We had hoped to have it all ready to start in January but now our goal is the end of January to have it all together. Much more realistic.

Realistic is a big word going forward. But not as big as integrated. So much of my life has felt fractured this last year and I have struggled with finding the balance in it all. As we go into the new year I feel more integrated. It’s a good feeling.

I wish you all a Happy New Year. May you leave 2009 with no regrets and may you enter 2010 with hope and dreams and enough practical know how to move towards accomplishing them.

I was recently asked to explain the difference between the two and I thought I’d share it here so I won’t have to retype it another time (this wasn’t the first time I’ve typed it out and not saved it )
Okay . . . the two scenarios you want to avoid in a relationship are You win/I lose and I win/You lose. When someone digs in and demands their way you might occasionally give in and not make a scene, but you can’t build a strong foundation on this. Traditional female-only submission is supposed to *always* fall into “he wins/she loses” but she’s not supposed to feel like she’s losing because when he wins, she wins And then the woman’s spiritual maturity is judged by how well she embraces “she loses” as “she wins”.

The “better” solution, and what many marriages strive for, is compromise. Both win BUT both also lose. You give a little to get a little. You both come to the negotiation table in the hopes that you will get your most important things and you are willing to give up the least important. So everyone leaves “accepting” the answer. This is often mistaken for “mutual submission” based on the idea that “submitting” means “losing” and in this case you both lose

BUT mutual submission is actually rooted in the idea of resolution. In resolution there is NO agenda anyone comes to the table with EXCEPT the best for everyone–and, ideally, what God wants (Though this can be done without being Christians if you both want what is best for everyone involved). Once you come together to find a solution you *together* define the problem. What became an issue as “how do we get the baby out of our bed” may be redefined as “how do we all sleep best?” You don’t just have one person redefine things–you sit down and talk about the issue until you see it from the angle of everyone involved. It might start with “I would love to go to San Diego on vacation, and someone responding, I was thinking Mississippi so you realize we have a problem–let’s solve it. And you REdefine the problem as “Where can we go on vacation that we can do X and Y” as the two things you realize you’re expecting from both places. Then you may find that one meets both hopes or you may pick an entirely different place

So once you redefine the problem to take EVERYONE’s needs into account, you brainstorm. NOTHING is off the table in brainstorming and you don’t evaluate at this time. The reason is that silly ideas often poke someone’s creativity and you can end up with some better ideas than what you thought was *the* answer before you brainstormed. The idea is to think outside the box and get creative and crazy.

THEN you evaluate the brainstorming session. Cross off the ludicrous; cross off the crazy, dangerous, would never work. Then really look at what you have left. Narrow it down not to what he wants or she wants–but what meets the needs of solving the problem. “Would everyone sleep well?” then keep it on the list.

THEN you evaluate the possible solutions–everything you have to choose from will meet everyone’s needs. And through the process you’ve learned about other concerns and desires that each person has. Maybe the real concern is that he wants to snuggle his wife and so cosleeping isn’t a concern if there’s a way to move the bed or add something that will allow baby to not sleep between them, just for example.

What *I* add to this process is specific criteria that *I* believe to be Biblical.

1) Does the Bible specifically address this issue? If so, regardless of personal feelings you do that.
2) Are there Biblical principles at play? If so, how does that play into your solution?
3) If neither of the above is yes, then you are free to do what you want and be okay

The reality is, where there is disunity, there is chaos. God is not in chaos until we surrender it to him to bring order to it. THAT is the point of mutual submission–it’s the PURPOSE of mutual submission. When you are in disagreement it makes little sense to go with one person *or the other*’s ideas. That’s just deciding which human plan you’re going to go along with. Why not seek the greater good? The God plan! THAT should be what you’re looking for. So start this process in prayer asking God to stand in the midst of your chaos and bring order

IME the resolution process exposes a few things.

1) the condition of the hearts involved and how submitted to the Lord each person is
2) the real problem which quite often has an obvious answer once you identify the actual problem
and
3) how united you both really are once you dig through the muck that becomes the focus when you are trying to compromise or win.

Derek was standing in the midst of chaos and bringing order–in the circumstances of the show he was a messiah figure.  Of course contrast that with the whole doctor-god complex which I won’t go off on a tangent of, but that was there in his proclamation of himself as neuro god as well.

He didn’t become a surgeon because of the high–but because of the quiet. The peace. The order.

He came from a home with 4 sisters–lots of noise and chaos and excitement. And he was drawn to the quiet, the peace, the order.

And this is in contrast to last week.

EVERYONE, under Derek’s watch, was working TOGETHER. The competition was put aside. People had each other’s backs–and last week, it was chaos. Everyone was cutthroat–and someone’s throat constricted and choked the life out of them.

Chaos versus Order

The hospital under the Chief vs. under Derek.

The irony–is that Derek had to violate orders in order to do this.

but Isaac–what an awesome character. Pushing Derek to not stand back and do nothing, pushing Derek to pursue his vision. To find the answer. To figure it out.

and the Chief’s answer was to cut the cord–to paralyze the patient

Derek’s answer was to wait it out, figure it out, make the hard call–that ONLY he could make–and remove the tumor, leaving the patient walking and alive

and Derek knows the Chief can’t afford to lose him. Firing him was an act of chaos–it was pride and retribution. Firing him was cutting the cord and leaving the patient paralyzed. And Derek isn’t accepting it. Derek is going to wait it out–to figure it out. To insist order be brought to the situation

Christina–learned she has things to learn from Hunt and he realizes what she needs–finally.

Kerev I felt so bad for him. And what’s her name from Mercy West–that was nice to see.