The leash creates a distant relationship between parent and child, it also limits the freedom of the latter and hinders the education process
The title might seem like a provocation so much The idea of putting the leash to children is absurdbut unfortunately the truth is that they are back in fashion. Just type on Google “Guinzaglio for children” to understand it.
Try you
I invite each to reflect on what would try to be retained, pulled, torn, to feel on their body the pressure dictated by movements not decided independently, but suffered without understanding its causes and let alone be able to predict them, because this happens when led to a leash: They undergo other people’s choices that have a negative impact on their bodymainly in terms of self -determination and balance.
It is useless to turn around, the leash becomes necessary where The child is perceived as an indomitable being or impossible to safeguard from a jungle of dangers, if not giving any expression of autonomy in relation to mobility. The limitation in the movement imposed by the leash is to prefer adequate language to age, and to imperative expressions an empathic approach.
Motor development of the child
What idea of the child does the adult who keep him on a leash? And what idea of relationship can assimilate and make the child his own who is treated so important for him? Perhaps the idea will be made that if the people who take care of him behave like this, This is the best possible way to show love and respect To the loved one?
Privating children of the possibility of moving freely, from the first days of life, means stealing them the opportunity to learn to know their body and safe positions. The decades of the pediatrician Emmi Pikler and the studies of the French psychologist and pedagogist Henri Wallon show meticulously how thehinder the natural motor development of the child makes him clumsy and unable to evaluate the danger.
Some indication
Here, in summary, are some indications of Dr. Pikler to allow the child to build a profound and rewarding self -knowledge in the name of pleasure and safety:
- As long as the child is not able to change his position himself, it is appropriate Place the baby on the backon a flat surface, so that it can have maximum freedom of movement; In this condition the conquest of the side and then of the prone position become the result of a spontaneous progression
- the adult must take out of the temptation to sit the childuntil he has conquered by himself the competence of achieving this position, in order not to hinder the exercise of spontaneous micro -novaments, through which he learns to know the body in a serious situation, after being subject to different physical rules in the maternal uterus (when the adult alters this process he puts the child in situation of instability or forced immobility, to the detriment of his personal pleasure and his freedom of movement)
- A child does not help to complete a moved movement (It is not held by the hands, there is no help to stand up) since in an all devoted phase to the search for balance and the knowledge of one’s body this implies a disturbing factor that does not add anything and takes away much to the experience of the child. We do not intervene even when he takes the first attempts to pull himself up alone, take his first steps, clinging
- The child is not binding
- It is not stressed or encourage the child to take any position If he has not already learned to conquer it: you do not tend to finger that the child clinging to you pull up, does not attract him with stratagems to make him take his first steps
- No spontaneous attempt is not prohibited or censors: The child is left free to exercise the movements he also wants when this means exercising simpler skills than others already acquired: a child who can walk must be left free to crawl or crawl if he wishes.
