Evening Republican, Volume 21, Number 16, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 20 January 1917 — TRAINING TODAY'S BOYS AND GIRLS [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

TRAINING TODAY'S BOYS AND GIRLS

Concerning Your Child’s Promises and Their Value. USED TO AVOID PUNISHMENT ~ ,When He Discovers That They Mean Quick Release From Unpleasant / Interviews, Then They WiO Become Worthless. By SIOONIE M. GRUENBERG. 44 ui ELL, I won : t do it again.” _ W Whut is there to say after that? You kiss andmake up, and in a few minutes the disagreeable interview is forgotten. You do your best to impress your child with the unwisdom or the wickedness of what lie has done. You try to be impress! vfe, but. you do not fee! sure that you have altogether purged the, little soul of temptation. , You wish, however, to make sure that the offense is not repeated, and you exact a promise. Another time it is something else —assuming authority to punisli the younger brother or taking something from the pantry without permission. And again there is an unpleasant conference and again it ends with the promise that the evil de.ed would not be repeated. In the course of time your child — who is quite -as intelligent as others of his years—learns that the last word tn a disagreeable interview has to do with, “prom isi ng’’—not to repeatthe offense. And as he is anxious to terminate these conversations he applies - hjs knowledge by offering his promise even before you get around to asking it. Not that the child reasons out the connection between the promise and the return of sunshine —there is no more reasoning involved here than in the case of the kitten that learns to come to the saucer of milk, A dozen times —yes, twenty —your child has promised “not to do it again.” And has he kept his promise? Alas, no; for he is just like other children. Up to the present “promise” has meant to him only the ritual that people perfbnh'‘whehapHsdnerißabouttoW restored to freedom or when parental displeasure is about to yield to forgiveness and reconciliation. The child has been too young, too inexperienced, to divine your more remote, your more subtle, thought. But you have been patient. And every broken promise has been forgiven. Until one day it comes upon you suddenly that your child has acquired the habit of making perfunctory promises which neither he nor you expect to be kept. And the fault has been entirely yours. The futility of asking a child to promise “not to be naughty again,” or “to go to sleep atjonce," or “to come straight home from school” must be apparent to any 'one who has given the matter a little thought. Is it not sufficient to request the child’s immediate return from school? Is it not enough to urge the child to go to sleep at once? Is It n<Jt enough to arouse the child’s desire to avoid naughtiness? It would seem that we resort to promises In our desire to impress the child with the seriousness bt what Is expected of him. but in most cases we succeed only in impressing him with our own discomfiture. If the child is too young to attach any meaning to “promising,” there is, of course, nothing wrong in his failure

to keep his promises. But In the course of his mental development you expect him to know what a promise is. When this stage is reached the word and the associations should not have cheapened the performance for him. For this reason neither the word nor the act should be forced upon the young child. We should neither exact promises from him as a condition for restoring him to grace or as the cost of favors, nor should we label our promises to him. It goes without saying that the parent’s promises to the child should always be kept. But the temptation to yield "to importunities or to distract the child’s attention from immediate desires often makes us prophesy favors and Indulgences that we do not fully intend to have realized. And It Is so easy to concoct a plausible evasion! But it is a dangerous advantage that the parent takes when he thus Imposes upon the ignorance and the Ingenuousness of the child. For, however plausible your excuses may be. each experience with a parental promise that ends in disappointment drives home the thought that are intended oply for immediate advantage and ndt for future obligations. As the child grows older and comes to understand that “promise" does carry with it an obligation, we should be careful not to burden him with prom-

Isps that are too difficult to kee» Have him promise less and keep bl* Word up to 100 per cent, rather than get a larger total performance at the cost of a few broken promises. The ability to look forward, to gauge his strength and resources, to plan his time, must not be too heavily strained. It is only gradually, that the > child learns what he may undertake with a reasonable probability of accomplishment. | And in the meanwhile it is unfair to urge the making of promises that must be broken, tn whole, or in part. The danger, of course. is not that tin- chilil ivlll fail in bis undyftakings, but that he will become in-_. different to the sacredness of ’ bis promises. Not only in,the gradation of bls ability and foresight but also In the evolution of the child’s temptations should limits be found for the promises nacted. Don’t ask Mabel to promise “never to chew gum it Is enough to get a promise for a .day at a time — never is too long a period, and «»r----rles more temptations than the child can anticipate. So with promising to "behave mannerly at table” or to hang up the outer wraps on coming Into tinhoyse —fix the attention on a single unit of performance, anfi slowly in-

crease the length of time to be covered by a promise until promises are made unnecessary by Suitable habits. Promises may be helpful instruments in the training of children, but they should not be mere convenient coins with which to bargain for advantages.

A Dozen Times Your Child Has Promised “Not to Do It Again."

Promising to Hang Up the Outer Wraps When Coming Into the House.