Confirm they heard you with "Got it" instead of "OK"

Mary pointed out a semantic trap I've fallen into several times, even with older kids:

When explaining things to my two year-old, I often find myself wanting to say, "OK?" at the end, so he can respond.  That way I know he's listening and he agrees to it.  The problem with "OK?" is that it opens the door for him to say, "no."  It sounds like I'm asking him what he thinks and if he agrees.  And that's just not the case.

So I thought about it, and now I ask, "got it?" which works a lot better.  Gives him the opportunity to confirm and agree, but it's not like I'm asking for his ok on it.

They just sound different:

"After this, we're going to the store, ok?"
"After this, we're going to the store.  Got it?"

I've also found that "Did you hear me?" as a confirmation doesn't work. Because while they may hear the words you're saying, they may not be "hearing" you. (The old Far Side cartoon comes to mind: "blah blah blah Ginger blah blah.")

When I find myself talking to a brick wall, I try (TRY! I don't always succeed.) to deliberately lower my voice, walk over to my child and place a friendly hand on him and repeat what I've said firmly...but softly. When I yell or get into "tough" mode over mundane stuff, I find my kids get stuck on the fact that I'm mad and ignore what I'm actually saying. It also helps when they are with friends, as they don't have to suffer the humiliation of being yelled at by Mom in front of their peers.

Lately, I've been giving my kids points for following my directions the first time I ask. Some agreed-upon number of points earns a small prize.

Related: Tell strong-willed toddlers what they should DO

Comments

[Jim]

Excellent hack. I especially like the friendly hand on the shoulder to gain attention. It does work. I used to do this with kids that I babysat. Talking in a quiet but firm voice telling them what is expected can do wonders (sometimes). I do fall into the "okay trap" though.

I guess I have time to work on it now.

Thanks.

[Ruth]

This definitely works! I do the same thing, but say, "Do you understand?" and it really does emphasize that I'm not asking my child's approval or permission; I'm checking in to make sure she gets what's about to happen.

[Jennifer]

On a similar note, when I ask my two-year old a yes/no question, we've taught her to respond either, "Yes, please" or "No, thank you." Not only does it sound incredibly polite and sweet, but the "please" and "thank you" are distinct enough that we can figure it out through her (sometimes) garbled responses. ('Yuh' and 'Nuh' sound awfully similar when coming from a toddler!)

[Jen]

I have also found that if I make my two-year look at me when I am talking to him, it focuses him more on what I am saying. Because at two, it is often like talking to a brick wall!

[Stu Mark]

When I am in a similar situation, I ask two questions:

Does what I'm saying make sense?

Does what I'm saying seem fair?

While I, as parent, am charged with the duty of enforcing rules, I'm also charged with acting as a judiciary - that is, I feel a sacred duty to my kids to make sure they feel that justice prevails. This means that they get to say their peace. So if they say that it doesn't sound fair, I give them a chance to convince me of their way, and then, regardless of my ruling, they feel validated.

[brook]

"It sounds like I'm asking him what he thinks and if he agrees. And that's just not the case. "

You make this sound like a bad thing.

"walk over to my child and place a friendly hand on him"

So, dominant physicality and semantic tricks as an excuse to not actually listen to a child's opinions about a decision you've made on their behalf. Seems counter-productive in the long term.

[christy]

One thing I have found that works pretty well is saying "I am telling you to 'X'. What are you going to do?" It seems to really make my son think about his response and as a result, almost always do what I need him to do.

[hedra]

Brook, I think you missed the point, or interpreted it differently than I did.

There are some things that are not negotiable in life. There are many that are. We discuss a lot, and get opinions, and make plans together. But when those plans are made, and we're transitioning to the next thing, 'ok' tends to make it sound like we're about to RE-discuss the plans. 'It's time to go, ok' sounds like, 'is it time to go, unless you want to not go'... which isn't what was already agreed.

My kids are totally able to speak up if they'd like to stay/change plans, and then we can renegotiate. I don't have to prompt them for it. If I prompt them for it with an 'okay?' ending, it is as if I'm directly asking them to change the plans, instead of allowing them to speak up if needed.

I don't use 'got it?' because my step-dad used that as 'threat words' - you'll be in trouble if you don't go along, GOT IT? type stuff - I tend to use 'remember?' or 'as we agreed' or 'look at the clock', or just end the sentence without a tag-on ending. IMHO, the most powerful version is to just make the statement and NOT add a tag-on ending. It tends to force a more neutral-but-direct/clear/firm tone that way, for me - try it. If we aren't sure they understood, we usually use a whole other sentence to get to that, instead of shortcutting it. "B, did you understand me?" or "G, look up. Please answer so I know you understood the schedule." etc.

AFAIK, the hand on the shoulder is recommended by psychologists and child development experts. It is used in our kids' Montessori school as well - it is a gentle way of asking them for their attention, and for children who have difficulty switching focus (any age under 12, at least!), it is gentle and USEFUL. We're not talking 'grab them' but rest a hand on the shoulder, and wait for them to pause and look up from what they're engaged in. If possible, get down to eye level with them before putting the hand on the shoulder (that is, it is intended to be specifically NOT dominating, but instead functions as a simple physical cue, instead of relying on 'distant auditory cues' - like yelling their name from across the room).

We use the hand-on-shoulder cue for me, as well - when my kids want my totally undivided attention, they have only to put a hand on my shoulder (or as close as they can reach), and I'll interrupt anything from a phone call to conversation to chopping veggies to focus - I could be in the middle of ANYTHING and I'd stop for that. Especially useful for me, since I have a hearing loss that makes it hard for me to hear the 'MO-om' voice (and whining, too). Very useful for them, too - they use it judiciously, which proves to me that they know the difference between 'NEED your attention NOW' and 'hey mom mom mom mom' general natter. It also helps me filter what is important to them - sometimes it is hard to tell if the 'look at my drawing' is 'I'd kinda like you to look' or if it is 'mom this is *really* important to me' - the hand on shoulder signals the degree of importance, so I don't put them off because something seems less important to ME, but instead allow them to indicate in a clear way what is the most important to THEM.

If you were thinking it was "HEY, you GOT IT? (OR ELSE!)", and grabbing them while standing over them, that'd be bad. But there's nothing here that to me implied that. And trust me, once there are a bunch of kids in the picture, there's not as much 'option freedom', especially when schedules come into play - I'm sorry, but we DO have to leave by X time to get to B's riding lessons in time. (Period.) It is time to leave. You need to give that toy back to your sister. (Period.) You need to handle the problem you caused when you pushed him. (Period.) No 'okays' there. They'll indicate if they have an issue with it all by themselves. I trust them to do so (heck, try to stop them, LOL!).

[Annette]

Hedra is so very wise...

[jim]

Thanks for your comment, Hedra. I was contemplating and hashing out an explanation of my understanding and then I looked at this thread again and found that you covered it quite well.

The hand on the shoulder technique was taught to our family by social workers when we had very troubled foster children. It is a gentle cue for the child to focus their attentions to the matter at hand, nothing more and highly effective. My parents used it on us as well. I never felt anything other than love when it happened. To me they were indicating that they were focusing their attention on me and I needed to focus mine on them.

[Stu Mark]

We practice the hand on the shoulder, but we add in a few extras (at least on the important stuff) - In addition to the physical contact, we lower our bodies by kneeling or sitting, to keep ourselves at the same head level (so we're not perceived as patronizing them or intimidating them), and we also, if necessary, say "please look at me." This works if the kid is attempting to avoid responsibility or culpability.

[Sandy]

When we talk to our 3 yo, we set the rules like: "you have to take a shower before picking your clothes, OK?" If he says "no" or argues, if it is relaxed day, we ask him what he wants. If we are on a tight schedule like most days, we say: "We have to go. I want you to take a shower before picking your outfit." No "OK" or anything to get his confirmation.

If there is an argument, we reinforce with: "What did Mom/Dad say?" He then has to repeat what we told him and in doing so, he realizes what he has to do. When trying to cut off all arguments we use: "The rule is... You know it, so no whining."

There are times when none of this works, which is when, we get down to his eye level and then repeat, or pick him up and place him on our lap --in doing so, it makes us get down to his level or get him up to ours, and that is a physical task we have to do that gives us a couple moments to calm down as well as to make sure there is non-threatening posture and touch but keep our voice firm.

And yes, there are certainly times when we all lose it.

[Scott Horvath]

We actually have started saying "Capice" which is Italian for "Do you understand?" or "Do you get it?" It's actually worked really well, and my 3 year old just repeats it back to me as a confirmation. Same sort of thing but it's fun for him to say the word (kuh-peesch)

[Zed]

Scott Horvath, I love you!

I never thought of using a fun little key word, and yours is perfect. In northern Italy, where I lived for a year and a half, they say "capito" instead of "capisce." It means "understood" and they use it in the same way. "Capito?" or "Hai capito?" and the listener repeats "Capito." What a great and fun way to check for understanding than the traditional "yah" and "nah" that sound completely the same. NICE! The kids are going to love it (at 5 years and 3 years, they are very eager to learn words in Italian and Spanish). Thanks for posting, because I wouldn't have thought of this without your contribution!

[Parent Hacks Editor]

As usual, all of your comments are incredible. Thank you.

Also, please excuse the horrible typos in the original post -- I've just fixed them. "Editor," indeed.

[brook]

Hedra's explanation was very useful. I think the "Got it?" resonated badly with me.

[kritikalmass1@gmail.com]

How does saying "Got It?" close the door on his disagreeing? He can still say "No" just as was the case when you asked "Ok?". I think you should start using "Kapeesh" because it sounds mobsterish and cooler than either ok or got it. Also as you pointed out, they just sound different:
"After this, we're going to the store, ok?"
"After this, we're going to the store. Got it?"
"After this we're going to the store, kapeesh?"
Not only do they sound different, but kapeesh actually looks better in a sentence!

[Daniel Sroka]

We found that we'd often get into the habit of talking in questions to our 3 year old, so even when we said something non-negotiable, it had the intonation of a question. No good. So we now just try to be sure that we say non-negotiable things as a statement: so instead of "why don't you put on your shoes, ok?" it's "put on your shoes please." This has worked well. He'll still often say no, but he's beginning to understand the difference.

[wdskmom]

As mentioned, I don't see the difference in using 'ok' or 'got it' in terms of whether it gives them leeway. I tend to communicate with the kids, as opposed to giving them orders. I find I get more buy in. But if it is something that isn't negotiable & I don't want/have time to discuss, I just say simply "It's time to go to the store." That way it's a statement, not a question. And as toddlers, it's very important to get down to their level to communicate. That's a given.

[wdskmom]

As mentioned, I don't see the difference in using 'ok' or 'got it' in terms of whether it gives them leeway. I tend to communicate with the kids, as opposed to giving them orders. I find I get more buy in. But if it is something that isn't negotiable & I don't want/have time to discuss, I just say simply "It's time to go to the store." That way it's a statement, not a question. And as toddlers, it's very important to get down to their level to communicate. That's a given.

[Jasi]

Ditto to Scott and Zed. We're doing that here, only in Chinese. "Understand?", "Please (I'm serious now)", and "Let's go (move it)" (I'm very serious now). The rest is pretty much in English, although we use Chinese for cues between parents, too. Like when we're done at a social event or excessively hungry/tired/grumpy. It's good stuff.

[kittenpie]

If I'm explaining something, I use "Do you understand?"