The Stubborn Child, 1934 – Ursula Wise clarifies the fine distinction between ‘ignoring’ a child and ‘taking no notice’ of specific behaviour

                       

June 13,1934 in The Nursery World

The Stubborn Child

An unusually stubborn little boy of three years old is the subject of one of this week’s letters

"Kidder” writes: “I wonder if you could help me re the management of my little charge, aged three years. I really am quite at a loss to know how to deal with him. He has the most violent temper and is terribly stubborn; simply will not do anything he doesn’t want to do. I coax him, change the subject and try all manner of means to get him to do things, but all to no purpose. He will sit at the meal table, continually repeating ‘I’m hungry: but I won’t eat!’ until I am heartily sick of hearing him speak. I have tried just ignoring him but if I do that he just yells, ‘Nanny I want you to take some notice of me,’ until I am forced to do so. I have appealed to him, treated him as a big boy, let him do things for himself, thinking that might help; but in no way can I break down his terrible stubbornness. Every day in everything he wants to go in opposition, and I really find it very tiring. I might add that he has a brother, aged four, who is very sweet and good. Timothy often bites, kicks, and pushes him down for no reason at all. I have honestly never lost my patience with him, but I do feel I can’t go on forever especially as we are expecting a third baby in October, and I shall need all my energy to cope with the three single-handed.”

Your little charge is quite unusually stubborn. As you probably know, a fair amount of obstinacy is quite common and normal at his age, but this boy is remarkably determined to assert his power over you. Now there must be some reason for such a marked attitude of stubbornness. I cannot tell from your letter what that reason may be, but there always is some cause for such a situation. One thing seems extremely probable, namely, that he feels a tremendous sense of rivalry with the brother who is older but so close to him in age, and who has such a formidable temperament. This rivalry must have been there from a very early age with the younger boy, and it must partly be because the elder one is so successfully good that the younger one feels he can only assert himself by being difficult and stubborn. You say that you let him do things for himself, but I wonder very much whether you go far enough in that direction, whether you give him enough independence of choice? It is very important with such a child to avoid situations that give rise to the obstinacy, by never asking the child to do anything that isn’t important enough to insist upon even in spite of his defiance. Wherever you can possibly give the child hid head, I should do so; and do it not merely in form but in reality, not minding what he chooses to do. But where there is something that has to be done, then I should insist upon it in spite of his shouts and storms. For example, with regard to his saying, “I am hungry, but I won’t eat,” I certainly would leave him to be quite hungry. That is quite a different problem from the child who doesn’t feel hungry. I should leave him perfectly free to eat or not and take the food away if he doesn’t. You need not fear that he would starve himself. I would, of course, assume at the next mealtime that he would want to eat, and I would not show any reproach or contempt for his not eating, but be entirely matter-of-fact and good-humoured about it. 

I think his demand that you should take notice of him comes from his feeling that your ‘ignoring’ him is a reproach. There are so many different ways in which one can apparently ‘ignore’ another person. It can be done in a way that implies the utmost contempt and anger! I do not ever believe in ignoring the child, but only in taking no notice of the specific piece of behaviour – which is quite a different matter. I would let him feel that I was still perfectly friendly, and ready to talk about interesting things. If he feels that you are ignoring him in a hostile way, he is sure to get more angry and stubborn. I have the feeling that you might appeal more than you do to his sense and reason, not by way of trying to persuade him to do something that you think is right (except where this is really necessary), but more by way of letting him choose what is reasonable, and letting him carry it out himself. If you could give him opportunities for really free choice, and at other times let him feel that you have not merely a negative patience towards him, but a real friendliness, I think you would find the stubbornness would grow less. It is in any case sure to lessen within the next year. But you could help it along in the ways I have suggested.

Sex education, September 1939. Susan Isaacs talks about the "silliness" of approaching this through a sickly and sentimental account of pollination and germination in flowers. - it is the wrong way to cope with the doubts and anxieties of youth. This is her lengthiest and one of her strongest replies to a correspondent.

September 1939 In Home and School "Readers Questions" 

Susan Isaacs rejects any notion of this being primarily about anatomy and physiology - it is a sensitive part of growing up and requires wisdom to steer between the rocks of dishonesty and the whirlpool of sentimentality. 

“Mervyn” writes:-

“Would you write something about the vexed question of sex education? It’s a thing I’ve thought about for years, and I’ve read all the books about it, and never been able to make up my mind as to what was the best way of dealing with the subject. And a lot of people are saying just now that we ought to teach all the facts about sex education to young people before they get themselves into difficulty and disease. It’s certainly awful to think that out of sheer ignorance anybody’s boy or girl can make a fatal mistake, but it is as simple as all that? Is there really nothing to it but giving information which has been withheld because of silly prejudice? What do the young people themselves feel about it? My own daughter of sixteen years has never (as far as I’ve seen) shown the slightest wish to learn anything about these things. Indeed, whenever I tried to lead the way to it (having in mind all I had read about the desirability of such teaching), she changed the subject. I should say that she definitely does not want to know about the facts of sex - or at any rate does not want me to talk about them. And we are very good friends. I don’t think it is only that she doesn’t want to discuss these matters with me - I have watched her and listened to her talk about life in general, and I should say that she has a genuine and all-round reserve about sex, which goes quite deep. Ought I to try to break that down? Should I get someone else to introduce her to the facts of life deliberately, perhaps by giving her a book on human anatomy and physiology? Is it wrong, or dangerous, to leave her ignorant and shy about such things? I do not want her to make mistakes out of an exaggerated innocence; but is there nothing of any value in her reserve? Is it not natural at her age? Is it not itself a safeguard - a safeguard, not only against bodily harm, but against too early a stirring of the deepest feelings? Isn’t her shyness about sex nature’s way of keeping the tremendous emotions connected with it out of reach until body and mind are more mature and equal to the demands it makes? I’ve pondered so long about these things, and have not been able to make up my mind. So I’ve been going slowly, and trying to watch and learn. I would like to hear what you think about this problem. 

            This is indeed a vexed and difficult problem. Certainly not “as simple as all that”. It is true that human beings are animals - and that all our lives are bound up with that fact. We are subject to the laws of biology, like any other animal. But we are very complex animals. Our feelings and imaginings, out personal history and our social relationships, are as “real”, as determining in our lives, as organic processes or infectious diseases. Not more real, or more important; but as real and as important - for human survival and human happiness. And far more difficult to deal with. That is why so many people with their eyes on the biological goal try to ride roughshod over feelings and purely personal considerations - they do present such knotty problems, which are not readily solved by experiment, do not easily lend themselves to the control of the scientist.

            “Sex education” is so much more than the giving of sound knowledge about the facts of mating and reproducing, about venereal diseases and their prevention.

Imaginative expression is vital for the young child and must not be overlooked, October 1938 - Susan Isaacs replies to a parent's concerns out her dawdling child by emphasising the need for expressiveness and imagination, especially if the curriculum is too formal and narrow .

October 1938 in Home and School "Readers' Questions"

Dawdling and dreaminess can by thought about by considering at the bigger question of the child's imaginative expression.

“A.S.H." writes: -

“In a recent “HOME AND SCHOOL” there was an article on “Dawdling Children”. My elder daughter is of this type. Briefly, I understand the mother is advised not to wear herself out by hustling the child but leave the child to exert herself. I have tried this. The result is that the child (aged six) – of Celtic temperament – still dawdles, is completely lost in a world of make-believe, and is quite unperturbed by the fact that she will be late for school – or anything else. It is absolutely essential that she be ready to leave in the morning at the correct time, as her father takes her to school and by car, and he cannot be delayed. Therefore, I have to hustle! and sympathise with the hypothetical “Harold’s “mother! She has a long day – living some miles from the school- and she must have her breakfast and she must be properly dressed. I could write articles on children - but how is a busy mother to deal with them? I shall be most grateful for practical help. The child is not selfish, is above average intelligence (this is a report from school and not a maternal delusion) but has a dreamy, thoughtful nature, which simply will not hurry. She is completely uninterested in food and sweets, is not particularly interested in games; she is insatiable for stories – like all children – but loathes anything unkind or ugly. Her greatest punishment would be to stop her playing the piano. I threatened this: she replied, “Well I can sing”. She is sensitive to scolding, but this becomes “nagging”. Please how am I to stop her dawdling?”

It is very difficult for the busy mother when a child seems unable to co-operate in getting through routine at a necessary speed. It seems so perverse and irrational, and it is natural to feel that the child won’t hurry, won’t give up her dreaming and attend to what has to be done.

It is natural to see things in this way, and hence equally natural to urge and remind and plead and scold and to wonder what punishment would make the child sensible. But doesn’t your own experience show that this short cut, of urging and scolding and threatening, is in fact a very long way round? It doesn’t get the result you want, does it? I have never known a dreamy child made more practical and cooperative by hustling and scolding. It usuallyseems to have the opposite effect, to make her even more exasperatingly slow and unresponsive. Urging and scolding relieves mother’s feelings, but does nothing to change the source of the annoyance.

So, the apparently longer way round, of taking time to consider what the dreaminess and dawdling might mean, may in fact be the shortest way home. 

Cooking, or reading, writing and sums? June 1938 - Susan Isaacs says if she had her way could let children cook when they wanted to - it is invaluable.

June 1938 in Home and School "Readers' Questions"

Should they be cooking rather than doing school things? 

“Enquirer” writes: “ I have a little daughter of six years who goes to the infant school just nearby. She came home the other day and told me that they had been doing some cooking in their class and had made cakes, with real flour and milk and butter, etc. I was surprised that such little children should be doing this sort of thing, because they certainly can’t do it properly. And he has not learnt to read and write and do her sums yet. Don’t you think it better to keep this sort of thing until they have learnt to read and write, and until they can do it properly in cookery classes when they are older. if she wants to play with cooking she can help me at home. I don’t see that it is what school is for.”

Quite a number of infant schools are nowadays beginning to allow children of five and a half and six to try to make real things, and surely this is a very good plan. Children of this age adore cooking. Both boys and girls seem to take an immense amount of pleasure in it. 

If I had my way I would let every child cook, make cakes and pies and bread, sweets, etc., not merely at this age but when they wanted to do it. It is not only a very useful art, but from it they can learn so many other things. 

A little girl who will not make friends, 1932 – Ursula Wise talks about a little girl’s "inferiority complex" and suggests a ‘self-denying ordinance in the way of not asking questions about what happens in school’ in order to develop her independence.

June 22^nd, 1932 in Nursery World

A little girl who will not make friends

“Worried” (Blackheath)writes: “Will you please help me to deal with my little girl, aged five years one month, who is very timid and shy with other children. With most grown-ups she is very friendly. We came from India last November, and on the boat we had great difficulty in getting her to play with the other children or to take part in the games or fun. She would just stand apart and watch. We had awful ‘scenes.’ Now the great difficulty is ‘going to school.’ I took her the first two mornings, but now my husband does so. She is supposed to be taken to the school gates and then left to go into school alone, as all the other kindergarten children do. Each morning she says, ‘can’t,’ and wants me to take her, and this morning she went off weeping. It is most distressing. She also tells her teacher that she can’t do anything, whereas she can write letters and figures.

How can I encourage her to take part in things? We are weary of trying to do so. She has an awful habit of saying, ‘I can’t do it,’ when actually she is normally bright and intelligent. I feel we ‘nag’ at her too much, and yet it is difficult not to say, for instance, ‘But Christine, you must try. Now, next time you will do it, won’t you? ‘etc., etc. I took her to a dancing class. The first time she was pleased to go, but the second time she burst into tears when I was leaving the class. It is all very trying. I’ve never met a child quite so nervous (or whatever it is). In fact, I see nothing but happy little things who seem to have no qualms over anything. 

I have from babyhood brought her up to be independent, and yet she seems to cling more to me than most children do to their mothers. Christine is an only child, and has no little playmates. I am anxious to find some for her, but I know she won’t make any friends at school nor be asked out to tea. She is such a ‘bad mixer.’ I am sorry for her, and yet she does ‘play me up’ and has got into a bad habit of arguing and finding fault with anything new (clothes for instance) or anything I tell her to do. I did mention to the kindergarten mistress that Christine has what I think is an ‘inferiority complex’ when other children are about., especially if they can do things better than she can, but I do not want to worry her again. I have a dread of being a ‘worrying mamma’, as one always feels teachers have enough children in school. 

This seems a terrible ramble, but sometimes I feel so weary over this ‘nervousness’ of my little girl’s. We’ve had it for five years, and she seems to be no better. Must we help her a lot with games and lessons so as to give her complete confidence? Must I tell her she must try and do things at school and talk to the other children and make friends? I suppose not the latter, but I hope you will help me.” 

I wonder whether you have not always worried too much about your little girl’s shyness and pressed her too hard to play with other children? You don’t say whether she had other children to play with in India, and I suppose it is likely she had not as many little friends there as most children in England have. You will perhaps have seen from other letters in these columns how common it is for children of three, or four and five years of age to be very shy of other children and cling to grown-ups instead of playing with others. Now, if when this attitude appears in a child we immediately start pressing the child to join in with the others, either urging the child in a friendly way or reproaching her and saying she must, this invariably ends in making the child ten times more frightened of the other children. It is always a mistake to fuss over a shy or nervous child and try to compel her to be sociable. If one leaves her quite alone about it, just lets her watch the other children playing happily, ninety-nine times out of a hundred the child will, before long, be playing just as happily as the others. By standing in a corner and watching the other children and seeing what happens they learn spontaneously that there is nothing to be frightened of and that the other children all look happy and jolly and will not bite or fight. And thus, they are gradually drawn in, today a little, tomorrow more, until they are as friendly and unselfconscious as the majority. But if we press them when they are in the grip of their first fear of strange children or if we make them feel our disapproval as well as this normal fear of other children, then we make their emotional burden overwhelming, and they can do nothing but cling and to us all the more.