No hard feelings, but seriously, like I said, "If you know of a way to teach a child not to touch an electric fence, without them getting shocked, do let me know." It's not like I pushed him into the fence on purpose or anything. Once he got to an age where I was sure that he could associate the shock with the fence and respond to it appropriately (by moving away), I only warned him about it, let's say, three times in a row, before I let him touch it. Then I comforted him while he cried. That happened, perhaps three times total, and ever since then, he has not touched the fence once. I call that a win. It broke my heart to hear him sobbing like that, but I'm not going to chase him around saying, "That's the electric fence, Dylan! Move away from the fence, Dylan!" I think that my job is to protect him from some parts of life until he's ready, but also to let him experience parts of life for himself when he's ready.
Oh, and as a bonus, he wants to stick things into electric outlets now too. When he got shocked by the fence, we said, "zap zap!" so he could have a verbal cue that he associated with the shock, so we could clearly warn him in the future that he was near an electric fence. So, now, when he starts eyeballing an electrical outlet and we want to communicate that it will shock him, we say "zap zap!" and point to it, and he understands what we mean. So he got a small shock from the fence and that taught him the concept of "electric shock" that he can apply to other, more dangerous things.
I guess my point is that, until he gets the actual experience of the shock, it's all conceptual. It's all us (his parents) pushing him around and hollering at him, and on some level, he trusts that we know what we're talking about and listens, but he's also a toddler, so lots of the time he ignores us and charges ahead. At that point, I think there comes a time when it's appropriate to say, "Okay. Go for it. See if you think I was right." And when I turn out to be right, maybe he listens a little better next time, or maybe at the very least, he doesn't repeat that specific thing. If I don't let him experience the negative outcomes of some things, then I have to become the negative outcome instead. When he gets too close to the fence, I have to punish him so that he doesn't get shocked. But why? The fence isn't going to really hurt him. I said my piece. He wants to touch it, okay. Now he touched it. Does he want to touch it again? I'm there to give him a warning (and because he's only 17 months old, several warnings, including physical redirection) but if he ignores the warning, then I'm content to let him and the fence work it out for themselves. Unless and until there is the potential for actual harm, of course. I don't let him stick things into electrical outlets, for example, because that can be a much worse shock. I point to knives and say, "That's sharp! Don't touch!" but at the same time, I physically prevent him from touching them. With the fence, I was right there, arm's length away, so that if he didn't know to let go after the first jolt, I could snatch him away. And I tell you all that so you don't get the idea that I am totally abdicating my parental responsibility to provide basic care for him.
I hope that nobody reads this and decides to report me to DFCS. I have heard some horror stories about them. But I also don't want to feel like I have to hide in a hole because I'm not coddling my child. I have seen parents run all over a playground after their kid: "Be careful! Don't fall! Watch out!" and even if I had the energy for that, I don't think it's a good way to raise a child into a confident, independent, competent person. The exact kind of person who frequents TBN, come to think of it.
