126: Problem Solving with Dr. Ross Greene

Hi, I’m Jen and I host the Your Parenting Mojo podcast. We all want our children to lead fulfilling lives. But it can be so hard to keep up with the latest scientific research on child development and figure out whether and how to incorporate it into our own approach to parenting. Here at Your Parenting Mojo, I do the work for you by critically examining strategies and tools related to parenting and child development that are grounded in scientific research and principles of respectful parenting. If you’d like to be notified when new episodes are released, and get a free guide to seven parenting myths that we can safely leave behind seven fewer things to worry about, subscribe to the show at YourParentingMojo.com. You can also continue the conversation about the show with other listeners in the Your Parenting Mojo Facebook group. I do hope you’ll join us

Jen Lumanlan  00:59

Hello, and welcome to the Your Parenting Mojo Podcast. I’m really excited to do a deep dive today on the topic of problem solving with none other than Dr. Ross Green. Dr. Green is the author of the books The Explosive Child and Raising Human Beings, which describe interactions between parents and children. And the books Lost at School and Lost and Found, which look at children’s experiences in school. And in this episode, we’re going to do a deep dive into the collaborative and proactive solutions, or CPS, method that Dr. Greene developed. And if you’re a longtime listener, you’ll probably notice some parallels between this and the episode we did on nonviolent communication a year or so ago. These approaches really are key to moving beyond a power-over kind of relationship with your child to a place where you can comfortably share the power in your family and with your child. I’m not saying your child gets to rule the roost and walk all over you. But sharing some of your power with them can go an enormous way to resolving so many of the struggles you’re having right now with your child. The key is to know how to do it so your child engages with you in the process. Because if you can do this, you can move beyond needing to set limits on your child’s behavior and engage in a truly collaborative relationship with them. If you’d like to learn more about doing this, then I would love it if you would join me for a free workshop that I’m running starting Monday, December 7. It’s called the Setting Loving and Effective Limits Workshop. Mostly because I think most folks think that what they need is more limits or better ways of setting limits. And in the workshop, we will help you to set limits that are effective. But we’ll also show you how to set way fewer limits than you’re setting right now. And at the same time, feel as though you’re actually getting to a more cooperative place than you’re in at the moment where your child wants to work with you to solve problems. So if you try problem solving as well, and it’s fallen flat, we’ll also have lots of support to help you work through those challenges. So you can find more confidence, peace and calm in your family. You can find more information and sign up for the free workshop at YourParentingMojo.com/limits. If you’re catching this episode a little bit late, we’ll actually have a webinar on Saturday, December 12 at 11 a.m. And we’ll cover as many of the ideas from the workshop as we can in that time. You can sign up for that at YourParentingMojo.com/limitswebinar. And if you happened to miss both of those, but you know your family needs a lot of help with setting limits and the kinds of problem solving we’re going to do today. And a whole host of other things as well. Then I hope you’ll consider joining my parenting membership where we do all of this and so much more. You can find information on that at YourParentingMojo.com/parentingmembership. So Dr. Green is here today to start this process by talking through the research on collaborative and corrective solutions. And also talk us through some of the problems that parents in the free Your Parenting Mojo Facebook group told me about when I mentioned that I was doing an episode on this topic. So to formally introduce him, Dr. Green was on the faculty at Harvard Medical School for over 20 years. And he’s the founding director of the nonprofit lives in the balance. He’s been featured everywhere in the popular press, and he lectures and consults throughout the world when he’s not confined to his home in Portland, Maine. Welcome, Dr. Grenee.

Dr. Ross Greene  04:10

Thanks for having me on.

Jen Lumanlan  04:12

And so I wonder if we can kind of dive in at the deep end here a little bit, talking about power and relationships. I’m wondering if you can tell me how do you see power in traditional parent-child relationships? And what about in the relationships between parents and children after they read your books or after you’ve worked with them?

Dr. Ross Greene  04:30

Well, you know, power has been a big deal in relationships for a long time and particularly between parents and kids. I think that what many people refer to as old school or traditional parenting relies a lot on power. Power, meaning adults telling kids what to do. In other words, I say jump, and you say how high. Unfortunately, somebody very important has their voice lost in that equation. The kid. And if we continue to simply parent that way, then we perpetuate the cycle of power. And I am one who extends my work beyond parents and kids to society at large. I think that in our society, we see many populations that have felt that they have been oppressed with power as the main ingredient. Many populations, many groups of people who have felt like their voices have not been heard, and they have not been included. And so I think that we are reaping what we have sown in the power department, and it ain’t good. And I think that at this point in society, a lot of those groups, rightfully so, are saying, “We won’t be quiet anymore, we demand to be heard.” And I personally think that that is a very good thing. But I especially think it’s a good thing as a relates to kids, who in some ways are demanding that not as powerfully as other populations are when it’s adults. But the good news is, there’s really no downside to hearing kids and to involving them in solving the problems that affect their lives. It’s actually, quite frankly, all upside. So what I hope happens after people read my books is that they begin listening to kids better. I think of listening as the purest form of empathy. And that we involve kids in solving the problems that affect their lives and recognize that that actually prepares them for the real world in ways that are a whole lot better than simply imposing solutions on them.

Jen Lumanlan  06:46

Yeah, and it seems a big part of that vision that you have is this reframing of problems from being well, you have a problem with your behavior. And that’s what needs to change to this idea of compatibility and incompatibility. Can you tell us how you see that?

Dr. Ross Greene  07:01

Sure. Well, the incompatibility and compatibility language is not original that comes from some very brilliant thinkers who were writing way before I was writing, people whose last names are Thomas and shamisen, Berg, Bell and Gottlieb and Samer off, people who set forth what might best be thought of as what’s called Goodness of Fit theory, which was originally a statistical model, but it was then applied to kids and temperament. But it’s actually is kind of simple. It basically says that outcome, a person’s outcome is the product of the degree of fit or match between characteristics of the individual and the characteristics of their environment. Now, I’m a little bit reductionistic when it comes to that when it comes to characteristics of the individual. I’m talking mostly about skills. When it comes to characteristics of the environment, I’m talking about the expectations the environment is placing on a particular individual. When kids have the skills to meet our expectations, there is compatibility. And we would expect an adaptive outcome. When kids do not have the skills to meet our expectations, there is incompatibility. And then there is what I call incompatibility episodes, otherwise known as challenging behavior, otherwise known as the signal. By my way of viewing things, behavior is just the signal, just the fever, just the means by which a kid is communicating something fairly straightforward. I’m stuck. There is an expectation I’m having difficulty meeting. So if we power through that, and if we only focus on the kids’ behavior, once again, the kids’ voice is lost, we may improve compatibility that way, but not forever, I can assure you of that. When we are willing to listen to what the kid has to say, involve the kid in the solutions. We are doing nothing less than improving compatibility. But we are also improving our understanding of this kid, improving communication with the kid, and improving our relationship with the kid once again. All good.

Jen Lumanlan  09:23

Yeah, and I think that’s so important. And immediately, when I started thinking about that, it reminded me of the zero to three parents survey that they ran in 2015. And they uncovered an expectation gap for parents of young children. And I went back to it and pulled out some stats and it said 50% to 60% of parents believe that children have the impulse control to resist a desire to do something forbidden before the age of 3. 36% think kids under two can do that. 42% believe two-year-olds should be able to control themselves instead of having a tantrum. 24% believe that a one-year-old should be able to do this. So how does this expectation gap kind of interact with intersect with the theory that you’re talking us through?

Dr. Ross Greene  10:05

Well, once again, when our expectations are out of whack based on what a kid can actually do, we’re going to get challenging behavior, because that’s the signal that things are out of whack. And that really is the best way to think of challenging behavior. It’s the kids’ way of communicating, something is out of whack. Now, here’s what’s interesting, those are aggregate statistics. But I want to add another layer. Those are statistics about all parents in general, which suggest to us that our expectations for our kids may be unrealistic. But there’s another layer to that. And that is the individual kid. Because the individual kid is bringing unique characteristics to the mix as well. There may actually be some one-year olds who are able to control their impulses. I haven’t come across many, but maybe there are some. If that kid can do that and the parents are expecting that, then even though the parents’ expectations are out of whack as it relates to most kids, their expectations are in line for their kid. And that’s really what it comes down to. Yes. The data that you cited tells us that our expectations may be out of whack in general, but what really life comes down to is your kid, your expectations, and whether your kid can meet them, not whether the neighbor across the street, the kid of the same age, and same gender, or same anything can meet them. We’re talking about your kid here. And if your kid is exhibiting challenging behavior, your kid is communicating that something is out of whack. Now, the reason that’s important is because for a long time, we have viewed tantrums in toddlers as simply them trying to get their own way, trying to exert their will. It changes the color of things quite a bit. When we recognize that challenging behavior is the kid’s way of communicating that things are out of whack, and that we have to take a deeper dive into what we are asking of the kid, our expectations, and what the kid can actually deliver the goods on.

Jen Lumanlan  12:24

Yeah, I think there are two ideas that you’re getting out here. One is parenting the child that’s in front of you, not parenting the average of children or the child you wish you had. And you know, you wish that your two-year-old could not have a tantrum when they’re feeling like something’s not right. And then, secondly, the view that this behavior needs to “change” is not the child’s problem. It indicates a problem in the relationship, a problem that the two of you are having.

Dr. Ross Greene  12:51

So yes, but I needed more specifics than relationship. The behavior communicates that our expectations and the kids’ capacity to meet them are out of whack with each other.

Jen Lumanlan  13:04

Yeah, Okay.

Dr. Ross Greene  13:05

And by the way, that’s why I’ve always said, I think this is in the explosive child, probably in raising human beings too. I can’t remember what I wrote in what book, but my definition of good parenting is being responsive to the hand you’ve been dealt. Yeah, as you said, not being responsive to the hand you wish you’d been dealt, but dealing with the child who’s right in front of you.

Jen Lumanlan  13:26

Yeah, okay. And so now we’re going to get kind of into the meat of the CPS approach. And so we’re going to talk through what is Plan A. What is Plan B? What is Plan C? And then I’m going to want to, because I’m super curious in the people who listen to the show are super curious. We’re going to spend a bit of time in the theory here. And then we’re going to get into some questions that listeners have submitted on ways that this is not working in their families and how we can problem solve that. So firstly, can you please help us understand what is Plan A, Plan B, and Plan C?

Dr. Ross Greene  13:53

Sure. Well, what I have parents do, as part of the CPS model, is proactively identify the expectations that their child was having difficulty meeting reliably. And I call those unsolved problems, also known as problems that have yet to be solved, also known as problems that are waiting to be solved. And that’s why those problems are still causing challenging behavior because they’re not solved yet. So the first thing I have parents do is make a list of unsolved problems. And that is an indispensable first step. The reason it’s indispensable is because we want parents solving those problems proactively, not reactively. Without the list, we’re still stuck in the heat of the moment whenever a problem pops up. The list is also important for another reason, and that is that we’re going to have to prioritize if our kid has a meaningful number of unsolved problems, problems that have been long standing. You know, many of these problems are three, four, or five years old. We are not talking about the chronological age as a kid, we are talking about how long the kid has been having difficulty meeting this expectation. We don’t want to deal with it in the heat of the moment. Again, we want to do it proactively. But also, we don’t want to work on them all at once. If we try working on them all at once, none of them are going to get solved. And in one way or another, that’s what often happens is parents end up working on all of them at once in the heat of the moment when they pop up. And none of them gets solved. And I have a funny feeling that some of the questions people are going to be asking up later about things that are not working for them may trace back, at least in part, to what I’m saying right now. We need a list, we need to prioritize, we want to be solving problems proactively. It is very difficult to do that if you don’t have your list. And if you haven’t prioritized, then there’s basically three approaches to those problems. And I’ve called them for a long time, Plan A, Plan B, and Plan C. And what I’ve done with the plans is I’ve identified basically the three ways in which parents try to deal with problems with their kids. It really does come down to A, B, or C. In the CPS model, you’re really only using B and C. You’re not really using plan A very often, if at all, when you’re implementing this model. I’ll explain what each plan is in a second. But I also want to make an important point before I explain the plans. Notice these are unsolved problems. If a kid is meeting a particular expectation reliably, you don’t need one of the plans because it’s not an unsolved problem, it’s a met expectation. So, if a kid is brushing his or her teeth as well and as often as we’d like him or her to, before going to bed at night, you don’t need one of the three plans. It’s not an unsolved problem, it’s a met expectation. No plan needed. If a kid is doing homework as well and as often as we’d like him or her to, you don’t need a plan. It’s not an unsolved problem, it’s a met expectation. The only thing you need the plans for are for the expectations the kid is having difficulty meeting reliably. So Plan A is where you’re solving the problem unilaterally. Plan B is where you’re solving the problem collaboratively. Plan C is where you’re setting the problem aside, at least for now. Plan C is important because it is the prioritizing plan. It ensures that we are not working on everything at once. It ensures that we have prioritized. It’s a saying, “We’re not working on that unsolved problem right now, because we have bigger fish to fry.” Prioritizing is a very important part of the model. But on any problem that we are not working on with the kid right now, because we have removed that expectation, it won’t cause a challenging episode, because we’ve moved that expectation, at least for now. Not forever. But for now, that’s brilliant.

Jen Lumanlan  18:08

And I’m extrapolating, the reason for doing this is because if you’re trying to work on everything at once, I mean, it’s like a nag fest for your child, right? So you know, we need to do this, we need to do that. You’re not meeting my expectations here. And it just becomes overwhelming, I would imagine, from both the parents’ and the child’s perspective.

Dr. Ross Greene  18:24

Correct. And here’s the interesting thing. A lot of the overwhelming parts get taken care of just by helping caregivers identify unsolved problems. First of all, it moves them away from behavior which feels unpredictable to them, but it also organizes the effort. I’ve had many parents look at me and say, “That’s it? Those are all the problems that are causing challenging behavior in my household.” And I’ll say, “Well, unless there’s some you haven’t thought of yet, those are the problems causing challenging behavior in your household.” And after we prioritize them, we’re going to solve them incrementally. And then you’re going to see a dramatic decrease in challenging behavior in your household, not because of stickers, not because of timeouts, because those don’t solve problems. Those just modify behavior. But because solved problems don’t cause challenging behavior, only unsolved problems do. That’s why you’re in the problem-solving business in this model, not the behavior modification business. Plan C is important because you can’t work on everything at once. That leaves us with only two other plans. A and B. Both represent a way to solve a problem with a kid, but as you’ve already heard, with Plan A, you’re solving the problem unilaterally. With Plan B, you’re solving the problem collaboratively. What I spend most of my waking hours helping people learn how to do is solve problems collaboratively.

Jen Lumanlan  19:59

We kind of seem to default into this plan A, right? If we don’t make a conscious effort to plan B, then plan A is probably what’s just going to happen.

Dr. Ross Greene  20:06

We do. But there’s another important point to be made there. And that is, if we find ourselves in the heat of the moment, we greatly increase the likelihood that we’re going to head for plan A, because it’s already hot. We’re under , we’re in a rush. So in the heat of the moment, people toward plan A more than anything else. The rest is habit.

Jen Lumanlan  20:31

Okay, so let’s break this habit. How are we going to do plan B? What are the steps involved?

Dr. Ross Greene  20:36

There are three steps for solving a problem collaboratively. They are called the “Empathy Step.” They define it as all the concern step and the invitation step. As I always say, the names of the steps don’t matter so much, but the ingredients matter a lot. The main ingredient of the empathy step is information gathering. Gathering information from your child about what’s making it hard for your child to meet a particular expectation. I think the empathy step is the most fun, but I also think it is the hardest. The reason I think it is the most fun is because I’m always fascinated when parents hear things from their kids that were completely unanticipated. A good example of that I was doing a podcast with a father who does podcast. Must have been a year ago. And he was telling me about his three-year-old daughter, who was having difficulty brushing her teeth before going to bed at night, and he thought he knew what was making it hard for her to brush her teeth before going to bed at night. He was positive that it was the taste of the toothpaste. So, like 10 or 12 flavors later, she was still having difficulty brushing her teeth before she went to bed at night, so finally he did the empathy step. “I’ve noticed you’re having difficulty brushing your teeth before going to bed at night. What’s up?” And it turned out what he learned from her is that when he used the electric toothbrush on her, it got water all over her face, and she hated it. And I said to him, “Well, now there’s a concern that 12 different flavors of toothpaste would never address.” The reason the empathy step is hard is because we adults frequently don’t know how to do it with you are accustomed to simply telling your kid what to do. And your kid is accustomed to simply being told what to do, then early on, especially many empathy steps, can get off to a bit of a ragged start, because your kid is just waiting for you to lower the boom. And you’re not sure what strategy to use to extract information from your kid. And we can go through all of that if we want to. But the definable concern step is where the adult is entering his or her concern into consideration. What are we adults concerned about why it’s important that this expectation be met? Why is it important that this expectation be met? And what I’m always telling adults is, if you’re not sure why it’s important that this expectation be met, then I’m not sure why it is that you have this expectation.

Jen Lumanlan  23:19

Yeah, that’s a critical step that often gets forgotten that we don’t examine ourselves, whether the thing is worth setting an expectation over in the first place.

Dr. Ross Greene  23:28

Well, and what’s interesting is, sometimes we get to define about concern step. And the parents had just heard what the kid had to say in the empathy step. And I say to the parent, “Okay, okay, Mr. Thompson or Mrs. Thompson, what’s your concern about that?” And they say, “You know what, I don’t think I even care about this anymore.” But I’m not relying on that, because most of the time, they do care about it. But they’ve got to say why they care about it. And why do they care about it? Because of how the unsolved problems are affecting the kid and how the unsolved problem is affecting other people. Now, both parties have had voice. Now that both parties have agency, we need that agency thing to work a little bit further for us in the invitation. That’s where we are putting our heads together collaborating on a solution, but the solution must meet two criteria. Number one, it’s got to be mutually satisfactory, meaning it truly addresses the concerns of both parties. Number two, it’s got to be realistic. Both parties gotta be able to do what they’re agreeing to do. Here’s what I’ve been saying a lot lately. And world history bears me out on it. If the solution is not realistic and mutually satisfactory, I promise you, this problem is still unsolved. But it’s not going to be mutually satisfactory unless we know what the concerns of both parties are, which is what we’re accomplishing in the first two steps of planning.

Jen Lumanlan  24:57

Yeah, And I actually like this invitation step the best. It’s so much fun to see my daughter come up with ideas for ways that we can get both of our needs. We’ve been practicing this for three years, three and a half years. And yeah, it’s almost like she’ll ask for something. And sometimes I’ll just say, “I don’t think I can do that.” “You know, Mom, I want to be with you.” “Well, I’m working right now.” “Well, could you work upstairs? Could I bring my snack down here?” She immediately starts, “You know, how can I meet my needs for being close to you?” And how can you meet your needs to get work done, and it’s amazing to watch.

Dr. Ross Greene  25:34

Just make sure. And I’m a stickler about this. That sounds like a plan B that took place in the heat of the moment, spur of the moment. But if your daughter is frequently looking for your attention when you’re engaged with something else, and that’s not an uncommon issue, then your best bet is to try solving that proactively. Because if you’re engaged in something else when she’s raising that issue, that would be poor timing on trying to get it solved.

Jen Lumanlan  26:07

Yeah, point taken. And I’d love to maybe dive into it just because it’s so pertinent to what we’re talking about right here. And a listener question. A listener is saying something like, “You know, we stopped at the park on our way home from school, and my child doesn’t want to leave. And I’ve tried all the, you know, we’ve agreed in advance, maybe even that we’re going to set a timer for five minutes, we’re going to give certain number of warnings and all the rest of it.” And I can see to an extent why this is not working, because the child wants to keep playing. A child’s need is not being met by the action of leaving the park. And maybe there are some days when we can be spontaneous, and we can stay an extra half hour, and we can grab a pizza on the way home. And that will be a fun evening to have. But there are many, many other times when that’s not going to be the case. And the option of leaving the park is never going to be appealing to the child, how do we go about doing it the CPS method when the thing that seems like it needs to happen is not something that’s going to be appealing in any way to the child?

Dr. Ross Greene  27:10

Well, a few points here. There are many things we ask kids to do that are not appealing. And a good percentage of the time, they do in many ways. I’m not sure that teeth brushing is particularly appealing. But they do it. Right. I’m not sure that homework is particularly appealing, but they do it. I’m not sure that taking up the garbage on Tuesday mornings is appealing, but they do it. I’m not sure that getting off the Xbox to come in for dinner is appealing. But a lot of kids do it. We’re using plan B for the ones who are not doing it. But just because a kid is struggling to do something doesn’t mean it’s not appealing. Many kids do things that are not appealing. So the fact that it’s not appealing is not a deal breaker, because kids do things that are not appealing to them all the time. But now let’s get into the nitty gritty. First of all, I heard a solution. I’m going to give you five minute warnings. This is one of the most common solutions and also one that works least frequently. I’m going to give you a five-minute warning. Now that solution, now working backwards, would only work if what we heard from the kid in the empathy step was that they always got surprised when it was time to leave and that a five-minute warning would be very helpful.

Jen Lumanlan  28:35

Which always happens.

Dr. Ross Greene  28:37

That’s the only condition under which that solution would work. But I’m missing something. What I’m missing here is the empathy step. I’m missing what’s making it hard for the kid to leave the park in the first place. And here’s what I frequently find. Once we do the empathy step, and we find out what was really getting in the kids’ way, we find that the solution we had come up with before we knew what was getting in the kids’ way could not possibly have worked, because it didn’t address what was really getting in the kids’ way. But there’s another piece to the story that was interesting. And that is that I can’t quite tell if the kid actually ever knows when it’s actually time to leave the park because sometimes we get to stay longer. And sometimes this is one of those days when we do have to leave when mom says it’s time to leave. If that’s unpredictable, if the kid doesn’t know that as we’re entering the park, then we actually don’t have an expectation because we’re deciding that the kid needs to respond to the fact that this is random. The kid needs to respond to the randomness really well. And if this kid is having difficulty responding to randomness really well, then dealing with the randomness in our solution is going to have to be in play as well. And now the whole thing about this not being particularly appealing in the first place has taken very much of a back seat. Yeah, I get it. The kid would stay at the park forever. But most kids leave the park, right? and a high percentage of them leave with just a little bit of extra pushing. I’m here talking about the kid who isn’t. There are many things about that situation that I’d want to hear a lot more about before we’d be able to come up with a solution. Most importantly, what is the kid telling us about what’s hard about leaving the park?

Jen Lumanlan  30:36

And what if, I mean, it’s just, you know, I like playing, I like being at the park.

Dr. Ross Greene  30:41

That’s not going to be enough in the empathy step. That would be the kids’ initial stab at what’s hard about leaving. We are then going to have to probe for more information so that we understand it way better than I really liked the park.

Jen Lumanlan  30:56

Okay, so this seems like a good opportunity to talk through drilling. Is that where we’re going with this? Okay, do you want to walk us through that?

Dr. Ross Greene  31:02

Certainly, where we’ve ended up, there are eight drilling strategies. And the reason there are eight drilling strategies is because I found that a lot of adults weren’t exactly sure what to say to extract high-quality information from their kid. And in the case of this example, to move us beyond, I just really liked the park, or it’s just really hard to leave, right. And those are legitimate things for the kid to say, it’s just that they don’t take us far enough in terms of understanding what’s hard about leaving the park. So I’m not going to go through all eight drilling strategies, but I’ll go through a few of them, including the most important one. The most important one is reflective listening. Some people would call it mirroring. Simply saying back to the kid whatever the kid just said to you and adding a clarifying question or statement, like “how so?” or “I don’t quite understand,” or “I’m confused,” or “Can you say more about that?” Here’s how it would sound so far. I’ve noticed you’re having difficulty. Now Its interesting. What I would do with the parents first is I would say, “Can you please tell me when it is time to leave the park?” “Whenever we say so.” Whenever we say so as to be random. “How long do we have at the park?” “It varies.” Then we actually don’t have an expectation right here, except that the kid will leave the park when we say so. This will go a lot better if we actually have an expectation. Give me the average amount of time you spend at the park 30 minutes. For the time being, let’s say that your expectation is that the time at the park will be 30 minutes. Sounds okay? Just for practice? Yes. You’re now ready to do the empathy step because now I actually have an expectation. Notice thats it’s difficult for you to leave the park after 30 minutes. What’s up? That’s what the empathy step sounds like when you’re introduced to turn the sound off. That’s your introduction to the empathy step. I just really liked the park. Reflective listening “You really like the park?” “I know,” “How so?” “Well, there’s lots of fun games. And there’s kids who I’d like to play with there.” Still reflective listening, “Got it. There’s lots of fun games. And those kids who like to play with them.” Not going to go with a different drilling strategy. Asking W questions: Who, What, Where? When? But I still don’t understand what makes it hard for you to leave the park. What makes that part hard? Well, first of all, I never know how much time I have. Interesting. Secondly, I’m always hoping that this is one of the days, although you really haven’t told me whether it is or not, that I could stay longer. And third, I’m just really having a lot of fun. And fourth, I know that when we leave the park, I’m going to have to go home and do my homework. Goodness, stoke reflective listening again, those are a lot of reasons to not want to leave the park. But notice we are now getting into the meat of it. And we’ve moved well beyond I just really liked the park. I’m then going to explore all of those things. And then, as part of the other two steps, but here’s what it might sound like Would it help if you did know how much time we were going to have at the park? Yes, we can do that. When could I tell you that? Like right when we get there or like on the way there? Good because, you know, I think you’re right. It’s different on different times and I am now recognizing that that made it really hard for you, not easier. I thought I was doing me a favor. But I’m now starting to recognize that that actually may have made it harder for you. Tell me is there anything about the going home to do homework that is making it hard to leave the park? Tell me more about that one. Well, the park is a lot more fun than the homework. But sometimes there’s homework that I really, really don’t want to do. Tell me more about that. Oh, there’s just homework. That’s really hard. Goodness, we are starting to get some traction here. And I know that I’m making a little bit more complicated, but these are the things that we need to know. And if we’re simply just to make the point really clear, for dragging the kid out of the park, kicking and screaming, because we are the authority figure. We’re missing all of this information. And the kid is coming to recognize that we aren’t listening. We are not being responsive to the hand we’ve been dealt. I frequently say to people, the number one complaint I get from parents is that their kid won’t talk to them. And the number one complaint I get from kids is that their parents don’t listen.

Jen Lumanlan  36:05

I remember saying that in the book. Yeah, so true, isn’t it?

Dr. Ross Greene  36:11

So we would come together on a solution. We would see if that solution worked. The parents and the definable concern step would have to articulate why it’s important that expectation being met. Maybe it’s that we have to get home to make dinner. Otherwise, we’re going to be hungry. We have to get home for whatever reason, right? And then we’re putting our heads together to try to address the kids’ concerns and our concerns in a way that’s realistic. And now we’re rolling. And now we’re not dragging the kid out of the park anymore. And now we’re not using power to accomplish anything. We have replaced power with collaboration and taught some really important life lessons in the process.

Jen Lumanlan  36:59

And so the kinds of solutions that you would be looking to generate in that specific example would include, I mean, they have a child having difficulty with the homework, or the timing of the homework, that can be something that’s addressed. What about some of the other issues related to, you know, I really love spending time with my friends, and those kinds of things that are less maybe easy to find a thing that parents can fix?

Dr. Ross Greene  37:23

Well, depending on what we heard further, and that’s still slightly surface, right. But depending on what we heard further, here’s what we might hear further. Sometimes we’re in the middle of a game, and I want to see the game through to the end. And you’re trying to make me leave when the game is not done yet. And I really want to know who won. All right. Now I can sink my teeth into this. Because, and I’ve seen this with video games as well, this doesn’t have to be the park because video games are a game as well, right? And just as an example, if the kid was more aware of how long a time we were going to be at the park and more aware of how much time was left, and if those things were a little bit more concrete based on our agreement with the kid, and the kid knew that there was only five minutes left. I’ve actually had kids agree to not start playing a 15-minute game with only five minutes left.Right. I’ve had kids agree that there’s a way to finish the game the next day. So you know, it’s interesting that there’s this universe of solutions that are out there. We limit ourselves and our kids tremendously when we don’t engage our kids in this process. So the problem is, I don’t know what the solution is going to be. Because I’ve probably worked on that unsolved problem four or 500 times. And while there are some common solutions, I don’t like to mess up all the fun of having people stumble upon solutions themselves. I agree with you that invitation step can be pretty fun, too. Because it’s always amazing to see what kids can come up with.

Jen Lumanlan  39:09

Yeah, that really is. Okay, so I have about 15 more questions about the research. But I’m going to take one for the team here. I’m going to ask one question about the research that is really bugging me. And then I’d love to spend a bit more time on the questions that parents submitted. So one thing that I’m super curious about is the idea that were you’ve explored a number of times in your peer reviewed research comparing the effectiveness of collaborative and proactive solutions with parent management training, which focuses more on changing children’s behaviors using tools like direct and clear commands one-on-one to reinforce pro-social behaviors and timeout from reinforces negative behaviors. And over and over again, it seems that you find these two very different approaches are about comparatively effective at reducing problematic behaviors. And of course, there’s a whole discussion about there about how we use problematic behaviors as the measure of success. And I’m wondering why this is that this method that is so reliant on behaviorism and particularly on creating these clear expectations, which to me, it seems like well, that’s just another thing I can defy with a child who’s already feeling as though they’re not being heard. Why is this method as effective at reducing problematic behaviors as the CPS method? And I mean, I’m on board with CPS, but why should I tell parents to use this method rather than training their children? Because, see, I knew I needed to do this, I needed to get to that.

Dr. Ross Greene  40:45

This is good. The reason that in research we have focused on behavior as an important outcome is because that’s what researchers focus on. And that’s what researchers have historically focused on. And when you are trying to achieve the gold standard for your model, and collaborative and proactive solutions has now achieved the gold standard and is now considered what is called evidence-based, which means that there are enough studies comparing it to the more traditional approach, which focuses on behavior, and showing that it is basically the equivalent in improving behavior of approaches that focus on behavior. It is now considered evidence-based. You’ve got to go with the raw material that the others have gone with in trying to show that you’re evidence-based. Otherwise, you’re not evidence-based. Here’s why that’s important. It is really good. There is another way of doing things that achieves the equivalent results as it relates to behavior. As the models that have focused almost exclusively on behavior, that is a very positive development even though the outcome is focused on behavior, there’s really no choice about that when you’re trying to be evidence-based, because that’s what the models you’re comparing yourself to have focused on before you. Now, if you said to me, do you think that behavior is the most important outcome to focus on? My answer would be, for some folks, “Yes.” But relationship is an important thing to focus on too. And communication is an important thing to focus on too. And the kid feeling a sense of agency and a kid feeling that his or her voice is being heard is an important thing to focus on, too. But in these early studies of collaborative and proactive solutions, what I was primarily focused on, and what other researchers were primarily focused on is seeing how CPS matches up against approaches that have been primarily focused on behavior. So that’s the boat that you’re in when you are trying to establish your model as evidence-based. Having now done that, am I freed up to focus on other things that may, in many people’s views, be even more important than behavior? Yes.

Jen Lumanlan  43:20

Okay, and so then, I want to take that one step further. Maybe we shouldn’t be surprised that models that focus on changing behavior end up changing behavior. And that, even though changing behavior isn’t our explicit goal here, this is as effective as a model that focuses on changing behavior. And it also has these other benefits that are not being captured in this particular study that we can now go and explore. Is it right to say that?

Dr. Ross Greene  43:47

It is right to say that. And by the way, in our studies we have looked at other variables besides behavior. We have looked at parent-child communication. We have looked at parent-child relationships. And those things did improve significantly more with collaborative and practiced solutions than they did with rewarding and punishing. It hasn’t been our primary focal point, but they are things that we have not completely neglected. But here’s what’s interesting. The literature on behavioral approaches to challenging behavior in kids has established rewarding and punishing as evidence-based, but there are some, as many of the adherence and some of the key voices of that way of doing things have stated. It’s not pure. It’s not like a lot of parents drop out of that treatment before it’s even completed. The older a kid gets and the more aggressive a kid gets, the less likely that treatment is to work. But reward and punishment programs especially have the achilles heel when it comes to durability of treatment effects. And you get a big bang for your buck early on with rewarding and punishing, but I’m sure as many of the parents who are listening to this will agree. Those effects either tend not to be durable, or parents’ sticking with the program tends not to be durable, or both. I’m actually not interested in short-term gains. I’m interested in durability of gains. And when it comes to durability of gains, there is at least some evidence to suggest that when you’re solving problems collaboratively and proactively, the improvements are more durable.

Jen Lumanlan  45:30

Yeah, okay, awesome. Thank you for digging into that a little bit for us. Okay, so let’s go to some of the questions that listeners submitted and kind of starting at the younger end of the spectrum. I’ve read in your books that you can problem solve with an infant. And I agree that that’s possible to an extent. It does to me seem easier when the infant’s needs are probably related to food or being hot or cold or missing a parent or being tired. And you know, there’s a smaller spectrum of potential issues. And so one parent said that, you know, when a child’s about two, they have a few words, but not a lot. And maybe we’re asking them to help tidy up. We’re not saying go tidy your room, we’re saying, you know, can we tidy this thing up together. They just say I don’t want to, and they either won’t or can’t say anything at all about how they feel. And the parent just feels like, “Well, I’m at a dead end here. I don’t know where to go.” Where can we go with that?

Dr. Ross Greene  46:18

Well, it depends on the verbal skills of the two-year-old. My now 23-year-old daughter was very verbal at two. And so I would have been able to extract some information from her, but I’m not looking so much for how she feels. And I’m not allergic to asking kids how they feel, it’s just not the information that I’m looking for. At that moment, I’m looking for what’s hard about meeting that expectation. I just got stuck in the heat of the moment. Again, I’ve asked her to clean up and she won’t. If she’s chronically having difficulty cleaning up, then we can have this conversation proactively outside the heat of the moment. I cannot emphasize that point enough. So let’s put it outside the heat of the moment, because that’s preferable. I’ve noticed that sometimes it’s hard for you to clean up your toys. What’s up? Now, if it’s a verbal two-year-old, there’s a good chance you’ll get something. If it’s not a verbal two-year-old, you can guess and see if the non-verbal two-year-old can verify for you. And by the way, that’s not a real far cry from what you’re doing with infants. But I was making a face as you were saying that the number of things that infants could be concerned about is actually rather limited. You know, when it comes to difficulty cleaning up, there’s not going to be that many possibilities for a two-year-old.

Jen Lumanlan  47:36

Okay, so maybe the child finds it boring. They’re not willing to tell you they find It boring, but they find it boring.

Dr. Ross Greene  47:42

We could guess that yeah, and if we verified that, I suppose you could problem solve ways to make it more interesting. We could put music on and march around the room. We could sing. There are things we can do to make it less boring. We could go as fast as we can. So it doesn’t last as long as it frequently does. This is the interesting thing. What I’m going to bet on is that two-year-old probably has some ideas. I’m going to bet that the parent has some ideas. I’m going to bet that it’s not just boring. Often, when kids are having difficulty cleaning up, it’s because the tasks, not always—because I don’t like to say anything’s always. Is because the task at hand feels very overwhelming to them. They have made quite a mess. And they do not feel capable of tackling this all on their own. And so they feel that they need some help. So it all depends on what we hear. But if it’s a nonverbal two-year-old, if it’s a nonverbal 17-year-old, We do this with nonverbal kids all the time, right? So that’s why I actually don’t see that much difference between problem solving with an infant who has no words, but we’re still trying to figure it out. A two-year-old who has no words, a 17-year-old who has no words. Clearly, it’s preferable if the kid can tell us in words, because words are our preferred modality for communicating. But nonverbal kids, like infants, do communicate. And so, even though it’s not going to be in the way that we prefer, boy, can you get a lot of information out of a kid who’s nonverbal, even if it’s not through the spoken word.

Jen Lumanlan  49:30

Okay, and so you’re doing that by hypothesizing Oh, my goodness, that there are a lot of toys on the floor. Does it just kind of seem like it’s too much, and you’re looking for a sign that yes, this is it? Or tell us more about what that looks like practically in the moment?

Dr. Ross Greene  49:43

We could guess that. And if we verified that, I suppose you could problem solve ways to make it more interesting. We could put music on and march around the room. We could sing. There are things we can do to make it less boring. We could go as fast as we can. So it doesn’t last as long as it frequently does. This is the interesting thing. What I’m going to bet on is that a two-year-old probably has some ideas. I’m going to bet that the parent has some ideas. I’m going to bet that it’s not just boring. Often, when kids are having difficulty cleaning up, it’s because the tasks, not always—because I don’t like to say anything’s always. It’s because the task at hand feels very overwhelming to them. They have made quite a mess. And they do not feel capable of tackling this all on their own. And so they feel that they need some help. So it all depends on what we hear. But if it’s a nonverbal two-year-old, if it’s a nonverbal 17-year-old, we do this with nonverbal kids all the time, right? So that’s why I actually don’t see that much difference between problem solving with an infant who has no words, but we’re still trying to figure it out. A two-year-old who has no words, a 17-year-old who has no words, clearly, it’s preferable if the kid can tell us in words, because words are our preferred modality for communicating. But nonverbal kids, like infants, do communicate. And so, even though it’s not going to be in the way that we prefer, boy, can you get a lot of information out of a kid who’s nonverbal, even if it’s not through the spoken word.

Jen Lumanlan  50:46

Yeah, okay. So sticking with that idea that we know we need to not do this in the heat of the moment, maybe there’s an issue that has continually been challenging. And the most common issue I hear when this comes up is hitting a younger sibling. But I’m also thinking of an example where the child, when they eat breakfast, they have a great morning. When they don’t eat breakfast, the whole morning just turns into a disaster for the entire family. And we both know if a child would just eat and things would get better. And they would have a great morning together. And so we’re having to wait for later in the day when we’re fed or rested. We’re having this conversation with the child. You know, what can we do here? We could maybe.

Dr. Ross Greene  51:28

Remember, we’re not jumping to what do we do here yet. I don’t know why the kids have. Here’s the interesting thing. I’m going to reduce this to a simple unsolved problem. We may have all kinds of good reasons for wanting the kids to eat breakfast. But the bottom line is that the kid is having difficulty eating breakfast in the morning. That’s our expectation, whatever reason we have for expecting the kid to eat breakfast in the morning. But I cannot jump to the invitation step. Until I’ve done the first two steps, right? I’m going to come up with solutions that are just like that father, who bought 12 different flavors of toothpaste. Unless I know what’s getting in the kids’ way. I’m taking shots in the dark. When the person who could actually tell me what’s difficult about eating breakfast is sitting right in front of me, not eating breakfast. I wonder what’s going on here. So now, I love that you said we’re outside the heat of the moment. That’s perfect, right? I just don’t want us jumping to solutions too quickly. Until we know what’s making it hard for the kid to meet the expectations, I already know why we think it’s important that the expectations be met. I got to know what’s hard about meeting that expectation. It could be six to eight things. It could be the texture of the food. It could be that this kid has a very limited range of things that the kid wants to eat. And the parent is absolutely bound and determined that the kid eats spinach for breakfast. So there are all kinds of things that could be done to come up with a solution together. But we can’t do that until we’ve heard the concerns of both parties.

Jen Lumanlan  53:10

Yeah, And so what we’re going to do is to use the drilling approach again to try to understand what’s going on here. And even if the child is not saying anything, is refusing to say something, and another person wrote and said, “Well, though, she’ll try a problem-solving conversation, she’ll try the empathy step.” And the child will say, “Well, it doesn’t matter, or I don’t know, or that I don’t care.” And so, if the child is just trying to extract themselves from that conversation as fast as possible, no matter what the issue is.

Dr. Ross Greene  53:45

Well, I don’t know if the kid is trying to extract themselves from the conversation. I don’t know mean can mean like, I don’t know can mean like 20 different things. I don’t know can mean you sprung this on me. I don’t know can mean you’re doing this in the heat of the moment. And I want to get back to what I was doing. I don’t know can mean I think you’re going to lower the boom the minute I say anything, so why should I talk? I don’t care can mean many of the same things, all the more reason to do this proactively. But we can’t get put off by these very common things that kids say, especially when they are new to the process. I don’t know it’s very common. In fact, I expect, I don’t know, in every empathy step that I do. Every empathy step has, I don’t know, or a shrug of the shoulders. Some empathy steps I would say this happens less often has I don’t care. It is a less good sign when the kid says there’s no point in talking about this. That can be a sign that the kid has lost faith that this problem will ever get solved, and may even have lost faith that their concerns are actually going to be listened to. So here’s the interesting thing. All of those things have meaning beyond just what the kids said. So if we get put off by those things and don’t explore them further, we miss additional information. Pity, those things are not showstoppers. Those are very common things that we move past with good drilling.

Jen Lumanlan  55:20

Yeah, okay. So I just want to clarify. Dr. Ross Green said on video and audio that he hears, I don’t know, from a child on a regular basis in a problem-solving conversation. And there are ways to move beyond it that we shouldn’t accept. “I don’t know,” as okay, well, that’s the end of it, then this problem is not solvable.

Dr. Ross Greene  55:40

That’s so not the end of it. Words can’t say.

Jen Lumanlan  55:44

Okay, And so I know we need to finish on time. And I just want to squeeze in one more question about issues related to impulsivity. And the idea that a child might just, you know, they may be on board with the idea that we’ve all come up with in this, we’ve gone through the steps, we’ve come up with an idea that we both believe will work. And then in the moment, the child just cannot regulate themselves well enough to be able to implement it. What do we do in those kinds of situations?

Dr. Ross Greene  56:11

We say to ourselves, given this kid that this solution did not work for this kid, did we come up with a solution that really wasn’t very realistic? Given who this kid is, I mean, solutions that don’t work are very informative. They tell us that we missed something. They tell us that we came up with a solution that there wasn’t a snowball’s chance this kid was going to be able to do. It tells us a lot, right? And so, I don’t freak out over solutions that didn’t worked in real life. Solutions that work usually come after the ones that didn’t, and come from what we learned from them. So if we’ve agreed to a solution with an impulsive kid, and the kid’s impulsiveness makes it so that solution is not going to work, then we’ve agreed on a solution that isn’t realistic for that kid. And we got to go back to the drawing board and figure out something that would be more realistic, given that kid. This is not pie in the sky. This is not wishful thinking, or not agreeing on a solution saying, “You know, if my kid wasn’t impulsive, this solution would work beautifully. So let’s roll with it.” Your kid is your kid, you’re being responsive to the hand you’ve been dealt, you are not agreeing on solutions that you know, in your mind’s eye, this is not going to fly. But if in your mind’s eye, you thought it was going to fly, and then it didn’t, that’s information back to Plan B to get it sorted out.

Jen Lumanlan  57:49

Yeah, all right. Well, I know we’re out of time. Thank you so much. I hope one day we get to meet, maybe at a conference or something. And I will get to drill into all of my questions about the research and all the rest of it. But I’m so glad that we were able to help so many parents today with all of this information. So thank you so much for spending time with us.

Dr. Ross Greene  58:06

Thank you for inviting me to do this. And I have to tell you, you asked the highest level questions. There’s a bunch that you sent to me that we couldn’t quite get to. Higher level questions than any interviewer, so I hope we do cross paths and we have an hour or two to go through all those questions because it’d be fun to talk about them.

Jen Lumanlan  58:27

That would be lovely. Well, thank you so much again, and so listeners can find the links to all of Dr. Greene’s books as well as references for the show at YourParentingMojo.com/CPS. And don’t forget, if you’d like to join the setting loving and effective limits workshop that starts Monday, December 7, you can do that at yourYourParentingMojo.com/limits. Or if you miss that, or if you just want the content in 90 minutes. Rather than getting support from me through a series of emails and short videos over five days. You can find that at YourParentingMojo.com/imitswebinar and all of the information on the memberships that you might need is at YourParentingMojo.com/memberships doors closed on those on December 31. Hope to see you inside. Thanks for joining us for this episode of Your Parenting Mojo. Don’t forget to subscribe to the show at YourParentingMojo.com to receive new episode notifications and the free guide to seven parenting myths that we can leave behind, and join the Your Parenting Mojo Facebook group for more respectful research-based ideas to help kids thrive and make parenting easier for you. I’ll see you next time on Your Parenting Mojo.