Why Do We Insist on Consequences for Our Own Kids but Not Others?

Should a kid get detention for forgetting to bring a pen or a pencil to class?

I saw this discussion over on Twitter today, and it really struck me that some people seem to think that consequences are like a mean thing that we do to kids that's bad for them.

And of course, if consequences were a bad thing, then our natural compassion should prompt us to stop and think, wait a minute, why am I doing this?

I shouldn't do this.

And certainly if we have students who are already facing a lot of challenges in life if they are coming from a background of poverty if they've dealt with a lot of trauma if they're just not doing well in school or in life then we would want to withhold that consequence if it's a bad thing for them but what if consequences are a good thing like isn't the idea of consequences that they teach something that can't really be taught any other way right like we can explain what to do we can explain our expectations and the rationale for them why you should do this why you should do that that kind of thing but consequences play a role in reinforcing those lessons that nothing else can, right?

No other explanation or way of communicating with students can really get the message across the way that, say, a detention can, right?

And like, nobody wants detention.

You might have not so fond memories of getting detention as a student.

But the way people think about consequences like that today in our society is really just mind-boggling to me.

People act like detention is like being exiled to Siberia or something.

Like, never mind the fact that you're in the same classroom as you're in for your classes.

Never mind that it's probably one of the same teachers you already work with.

Detention is not that bad, but it does get kids attention and help them pay attention to things that otherwise they might not be as conscientious about.

Helps them realize when they have done something they shouldn't in a way that us just repeating ourselves, repeating our same old expectations can't accomplish.

So let me know what you think about this.

And I'm especially concerned about double standards here because I have not met very many parents my age who say, you know what, I don't think my kids should ever face consequences.

I think they should just get away with whatever they want to do.

Like, we don't think that for our own kids.

And yet sometimes I hear people who work with kids who are not like their own kids demographically.

You know, they're from lower income backgrounds, again, or, you know, dealing with more trauma, things like that.

And they seem to want something different for those kids than they want for their own kids out of the misguided idea that that would be better for them.

And my question would be, what is it that is good about consequences for your own kids that you like, that you think they need consequences?

but not for other kids?

What is it about, especially students from poverty, that you think they don't need consequences the same way your own kids do?

I think we have this double standard all wrong, thinking that we're being more compassionate when what we're really doing is prioritizing our short-term comfort over the student's long-term benefit, right?

Like the pencil in class thing.

If a student does not bring a pencil to class, it's not really a big deal, right?

Like you can give them a pencil, pencils aren't that expensive.

We can afford to give out lots and lots of pencils.

It's not that big a deal.

But what we want students to take with them from school is the habit and the ability to keep track of their stuff, right?

Because if you lose a pencil, 10 cents, whatever, not a big deal.

If you lose your wallet and keys and you can't get to work, You could get fired from your job.

You could lose your house.

Like there are big long-term consequences to not developing that habit and that self-discipline of keeping up with your stuff.

So like when we give students a consequence, even if it's a tiny consequence, even if it's not a detention, detention might be a little much for not having a pencil, but you know, there are schools that take that approach.

And I want you to understand that they take that approach, not because they're sadistic, but because they see the value of inculcating that sense of responsibility, right?

And they're like, Granted, there are probably some schools that take that too far, that are a little bit too aggressive with the consequences.

But if you see those consequences not as a way of harming students, but as a way of protecting students from much more dangerous and serious situations that they'll face later in life, it doesn't look so bad.

Let me know what you think about that.