As I've been browsing books and blogs on diffusing toddler tantrums, I've come to the conclusion that most people (or at least most of the people I've encountered) have the same basic idea: get your child to a location where he can take some time to calm down, and when he's calm, talk through the issue.
That's great and all, but what about for a child like mine, that doesn't talk? While Levi does an amazing job of communicating with official "baby signs" and his own special brand of gestures, at this point, he's definitely not going to verbalize for me that he's angry because I made him hold my hand in the parking lot or sign "please" before he got a snack. I can talk to him, certainly, providing the words he doesn't yet have -- "I understand that you are feeling hungry/angry/frustrated/sad" -- but I have no way of knowing how much he's processing.
Yesterday I allowed Levi to play at the kitchen sink while I made dinner, and he had a great time. So much so, in fact, that when it came time to be done and sit down for dinner, he had quite the meltdown. I took my usual course of action, plopping him in the papasan until he stopped flailing and screaming, quietly reassuring him as he ranted. Much later, thinking it over in bed, I grew frustrated yet again that I feel unable to adequately process these tantrums with my non-speaking child. If only he could talk to me, I kept thinking. How long will this go on before we can follow all the steps that the book(s) recommend?
And then it hit me: it doesn't really matter. Levi would internalize the same amount of what I say whether he could repeat it back or not. This is the stage we're in right now. If it lasts another six months, so what? Eventually, he will talk, and we will talk through the issues surrounding his tantrums, and he will learn to control his temper. (I hope.) In the meantime, I need to parent the child I have now as best I can (and books and blogs are not parents). If that means simply holding him tight until he calms down, does that really do either one of us any harm?
That's great and all, but what about for a child like mine, that doesn't talk? While Levi does an amazing job of communicating with official "baby signs" and his own special brand of gestures, at this point, he's definitely not going to verbalize for me that he's angry because I made him hold my hand in the parking lot or sign "please" before he got a snack. I can talk to him, certainly, providing the words he doesn't yet have -- "I understand that you are feeling hungry/angry/frustrated/sad" -- but I have no way of knowing how much he's processing.
Yesterday I allowed Levi to play at the kitchen sink while I made dinner, and he had a great time. So much so, in fact, that when it came time to be done and sit down for dinner, he had quite the meltdown. I took my usual course of action, plopping him in the papasan until he stopped flailing and screaming, quietly reassuring him as he ranted. Much later, thinking it over in bed, I grew frustrated yet again that I feel unable to adequately process these tantrums with my non-speaking child. If only he could talk to me, I kept thinking. How long will this go on before we can follow all the steps that the book(s) recommend?
And then it hit me: it doesn't really matter. Levi would internalize the same amount of what I say whether he could repeat it back or not. This is the stage we're in right now. If it lasts another six months, so what? Eventually, he will talk, and we will talk through the issues surrounding his tantrums, and he will learn to control his temper. (I hope.) In the meantime, I need to parent the child I have now as best I can (and books and blogs are not parents). If that means simply holding him tight until he calms down, does that really do either one of us any harm?
What you are doing is providing homeostasis for his little emotional center in his brain. You are doing the most important thing you can do.
ReplyDelete