My son's behaviour

Now the controversy has abated, lets return to the issue at hand, which clearly must be facilitating better communication and understanding between parent and child.

In a previous post, I refered to the necessity of reducing the childs perception of tyrrany. This is not to say that the parent is behaving like a tyrant. It is likely that a NT child would see no suggestion of excessive authority in the situation. But NTs see the world differently to persons with a spectrum variance. Specifically, with an NTs greater ability to exchange empathy, the excersise of parental authority causes them to feel comfortably secure, whereas with a lesser degree of perception of empathy the identical excersise of authority can seem overbearing and provoke rebellion.

Other authors on this thread have advised stepping back from a developing conflict, and while this is sound advice, it can be taken further. Conflict can be avoided entirely by practicing a non-confrontational communication style. Whereas the child is not actively endangering his life (by trying to drink bleach, play with lighter fluid and matches etc) in which case you naturally do as you must, you should endeavour to make the child aware of the wisest course of action then allow them to chose to take it or to learn from the consequences of willful foolishness. In this way, a conversation that could have run: "Dinner's done. Come to the table!"/"No I'm busy"/"Come here right now!"/"I don't want to!"/"Come to the table or go to your room!"/"I don't have to do what you say! I hate you!"*Stomps to room*Slams door*Goes to bed hungry can instead go: "Dinner's done, are you hungry?"/"No, I'll eat later"/"OK, but dont complain if your gravy goes lumpy"/"Huff! Fine."*Skulks to table*Eats a good meal.

Strive to remember always that it takes two parties taking strongly opposed stances to argue and where you can responsibly allow him to live his own way you can deny him any oppertunity to engage in argument.

Sometimes however you will need to enact parental authority, and formats for doing so can be found that will work for you and your child. You should seek a method that relies as little as possible on personal presence, as such can cause unanticipated distress or invite a contest of presence (shouting match.) Might I suggest that you use a full and formal recitation of the childs name (including any middle names) exclusively when weilding parental authority so he can be clear that you are speaking with a parents authority and require his attention. Having gained your childs attention, you should return immediately to a normal speaking voice, and appealing to reason, explain what is required of the child and why compliance is in the childs best interests.

Hopefully some of this can be applied to your situation with beneficial result.

Now the controversy has abated, lets return to the issue at hand, which clearly must be facilitating better communication and understanding between parent and child.

In a previous post, I refered to the necessity of reducing the childs perception of tyrrany. This is not to say that the parent is behaving like a tyrant. It is likely that a NT child would see no suggestion of excessive authority in the situation. But NTs see the world differently to persons with a spectrum variance. Specifically, with an NTs greater ability to exchange empathy, the excersise of parental authority causes them to feel comfortably secure, whereas with a lesser degree of perception of empathy the identical excersise of authority can seem overbearing and provoke rebellion.

Other authors on this thread have advised stepping back from a developing conflict, and while this is sound advice, it can be taken further. Conflict can be avoided entirely by practicing a non-confrontational communication style. Whereas the child is not actively endangering his life (by trying to drink bleach, play with lighter fluid and matches etc) in which case you naturally do as you must, you should endeavour to make the child aware of the wisest course of action then allow them to chose to take it or to learn from the consequences of willful foolishness. In this way, a conversation that could have run: "Dinner's done. Come to the table!"/"No I'm busy"/"Come here right now!"/"I don't want to!"/"Come to the table or go to your room!"/"I don't have to do what you say! I hate you!"*Stomps to room*Slams door*Goes to bed hungry can instead go: "Dinner's done, are you hungry?"/"No, I'll eat later"/"OK, but dont complain if your gravy goes lumpy"/"Huff! Fine."*Skulks to table*Eats a good meal.

Strive to remember always that it takes two parties taking strongly opposed stances to argue and where you can responsibly allow him to live his own way you can deny him any oppertunity to engage in argument.

Sometimes however you will need to enact parental authority, and formats for doing so can be found that will work for you and your child. You should seek a method that relies as little as possible on personal presence, as such can cause unanticipated distress or invite a contest of presence (shouting match.) Might I suggest that you use a full and formal recitation of the childs name (including any middle names) exclusively when weilding parental authority so he can be clear that you are speaking with a parents authority and require his attention. Having gained your childs attention, you should return immediately to a normal speaking voice, and appealing to reason, explain what is required of the child and why compliance is in the childs best interests.

Hopefully some of this can be applied to your situation with beneficial result.