The Rules Of Engagement - Part II: Compliance

The Rules Of Engagement - Part II: Compliance

Sam Goldstein, Ph.D.
This is a SamGoldstein.com Monthly Article - January, 2005
Copyright ? 2005 Dr. Sam Goldstein - All Rights Reserved

In this month's web article I return to the Rules of Engagement and offer Part II of the four part model I discussed last year. In the model I introduced last year, I proposed that rules were represented as four points of a pyramid. Each point intrinsically connected to the others; each dependent upon the others. I proposed that these four points related to four broad categories: compliance, routines, respect and self.

Rules provide order. They offer a common ground upon which individuals interact. They create a fair framework. Yet, as I noted, some human activities, such as a parent child relationship are so complex and diverse as to seemingly deny the creation of a finite fixed set of rules. I proposed that this phenomena made parenting, even for children absent significant emotional behavior or developmental problems, a complicated process. In this month's article I will address the first of these four points, compliance.

Rules related to compliance consist of those involving children "doing as they are told." Compliance rules are critical to allow things to get done within families. When children violate compliance rules, parents are often distracted, finding themselves "butting heads" with the request and typically losing sight of the task at hand. The basic necessity for compliance rules from parents' perspective is for children to do what they are asked to do, when they are asked to do it so long as those requests and directives are fair and reasonable. Yet compliance rules are often at the core of many parent/child problems. What should be our guidelines for enforcement as well as consequences for success or failure? Why do children fail to comply? Why don't children always do what they are told or for that matter why is it so difficult for some children to do nearly anything they are told?

Over the past fifty years this problem has been referred to as "non-compliance." Researchers have consistently disagreed as to exactly what constitutes non-compliance. For example, some researchers suggest that when a child does not perform a given behavior within ten seconds of a command or immediately following that ten second period they are non-compliant. Most mental health professionals and researchers have now adopted the view that non-compliance occurs when a child does not perform the requested action or behavior (or make a substantial effort to begin or perform that behavior) within thirty seconds after the command has been given. Thus, this initial thirty second period when a command is given is critical in determining whether or not a child will comply.

Some researchers have suggested that children become non-compliant as the result of a failure to adequately identify with parents and interject parental requests in order to make them their own and consequently comply. Others believe that non-compliance in childhood results from failure to form an early bond with parents or caretakers. Most current researchers, however, believe that non-compliance is primarily due to a combination of behavioral and biological factors. Biological phenomena, either genetic or traumatic, which lead children to act in impulsive, hyperactive and inattentive ways increase the likelihood of non-compliance. These qualities of temperament or neurological function make it difficult for even well meaning children to follow through consistently with adult commands.

On a behavioral level, non-compliance is generally viewed as the result of an inadequate reward for compliance and/or lack of appropriate negative consequence for non-compliance. Over twenty years ago, Dr. Gerald Patterson identified a course of family interaction through which disruptive and non-compliant behavior developed as the result of specific child-parent interactions. After a parent issued a command the child was not only non-compliant but concurrently displayed negative behaviors such as yelling or crying. That in turn led the parent to remove the initial command. Patterson demonstrated that interventions that address the above sequence of events as well as the lack of proper consequences for compliance and non-compliance significantly reduced non-compliant childhood behavior. Even a simple strategy such as making eye contact has been found to be effective. A recent study in the Journal of Attention Disorders (August, 2004) by psychologist George Kapalka, Ph.D., found that when parents made eye contact when giving a command and maintained the eye contact for a period of time after the command was given, compliance increased.

Obstacles to Obtaining Compliance

When children are non-compliant we are often quick to question aspects of their mindset, temperament and psyche. Yet, we often fail to identify the obstacles in our mindsets that may lead to non-compliance. There are a number worth mentioning. These include:

• Failing to accept that it is your responsibility to change and instead assuming that children must change to fit your needs as a parent, educator or professionals. It is important for you to reflect on what you can do differently when problems present. It is important to examine what you can do to change before expecting children to change. Thus, a first step towards improving compliance is for a parent or educator to question what they have been doing or not doing that may have contributed to a lack of compliance and what they can begin to do to lessen the problem. The emphasis is on accepting responsibility for change and beginning to explore what you can do different.
• My colleague, Dr. Robert Brooks and I refer to repeated negative episodes of non-compliance as in part being maintained by negative scripts. To increase compliance, you must acknowledge that a negative script has to change. You must begin by asking yourself what you can say or do differently. Do you understand the reasons the script developed and the obstacles that thus far prevented you from realizing the need or finding the means to change?
• Many adults hold the misconception that all children are the same at birth and what works for one child will work for all others. As we have written a number of times, the one size fits all myth is played out in multiple ways between children, their caretakers and educators. Variations include lack of understanding on the part of parents or professionals as to the impact that age, developmental level, learning style and temperament have in shaping how children respond when requests are made.
• Some parents and educators assume that once they have proceeded down a certain road, changing their strategy equates with giving in. For example avoiding repetition or making more consistent eye contact, may be perceived as giving in. Parents may assume that if they change their usual way of operation, even if that method has been ineffective, this will be interpreted as a sign of weakness by children.
• Some adults assume that children should be more appreciative and responsive to their hard work and efforts. This presents a further obstacle leading adults to resist changing, again feeling that children should change first. Sometimes even when the adult makes an initial effort, extinguishing the negative pattern takes time. Failure to obtain quick change is interpreted sometimes as lack of effectiveness and what is an effective strategy will be abandoned.

Strategies to Increase Compliance

To instill compliance parents, educators and other adults must accept their responsibility to change, understand the problem and the goal, recognize that what they have done so far has not been effective, have the courage to seek alternative solutions and try to find them and finally, be willing to keep trying even if an initial effort or strategy seems ineffective. To instill compliance, parents should:

1. Listen and learn first before attempting to influence.
2. Set limits for children within their capabilities and even when seeking compliance allow choices.
3. Allow consequences from those choices but don't assume that those consequences will magically change behavior.
4. Pick their battles carefully.
5. Punish within reason because it teaches children about limits not necessarily because it changes behavior.

Compliance is also facilitated when parents provide reinforcement immediately, frequently, enthusiastically, with eye contact, describing the behavior they seek compliance for and offering a variety of consequences for both compliance and non-compliance. Parents should offer one direction rather than many questions (e.g., say "I need you to stop teasing" rather than "would you please stop teasing?"). Requests for compliance should be made in a soft but firm voice with a start rather than stop request (e.g., say "please start your math" rather than "stop arguing"). The request should be unemotional, absent yelling or name calling. Remember that guilt is not an effective means of consistently obtaining children's compliance.

In future articles, I will return to the other components of the rules of engagement. Parents, educators or other professionals struggling with compliance issues can find a variety of excellent resources, including texts by Tom Phelan, 1-2-3 Magic (Child Management Press, 1998), Russell Barkley, Your Defiant Child (Guilford Press, 1998), Sam Goldstein, Robert Brooks and Sharon Weiss, Angry Children/Worried Parents (Specialty Press, 2002) and Lynn Clark, SOS: Help for Parents (Parents Press, 1998).