Fathers, don’t exasperate your children, but raise them up with loving discipline and counsel that brings the revelation of our Lord.

Ephesians 6:4, TPT

Anyone who has watched me parent or has asked me about parenting has heard the phrase “natural consequences.” It’s a huge part of the way we raise our kids. I believe that it’s one of the most effective ways to not exasperate our children. I also believe that it is the way God overwhelmingly disciplines us. When we sin, God does not often immediately intervene to force us to make the best choice, as we sometimes do as parents. God allows us to have free will and then live the consequences of that free will. If we make righteous choices, the consequences will be different than if we make unrighteous choices. And God allows us to live our lives accordingly. As parents, there are two main benefits that we have found to using natural consequences. 

1. Kids learn fastest this way.

The best example I have children learning quickly is regarding outdoor clothing. Let’s say the weather is chilly, and it makes sense to wear a jacket. My child does not want to put a jacket on. We have come to a crossroads. I can force my child to wear the jacket, which likely ends up with tears and anger for both of us and a ruined trip. The other option is that I can allow her to go without a jacket even though I think it is cold enough to need one. In this option, I also need to decide if I am going to bring her coat with me or leave it at home. If this is the first time we have been through this conversation or if it is dangerously cold, I probably grab the jacket. If we have done this a few times and it is only uncomfortably cold, I likely say “I think it’s too cold to leave without a jacket, but I’m going to leave that up to you. I am not taking your jacket, so you will need to make your own choice.”

 When we leave, one of two things will happen. First, she could be comfortable without a jacket because maybe she actually doesn’t need one. It is important to remember that my children are human, and there is a lot of variation in the human population. Just because I am uncomfortable without a jacket does not necessarily mean my child will be. Now she and I have both learned that she has a higher tolerance for cold than I do. The second option is that she is that she realizes that it is too cold to be without one. If I brought the jacket, I would give it to her. And here is a beautiful moment – I haven’t gotten angry or yelled, I simply give her the jacket. The next time we are walking out the door and I say she needs a jacket, she will possibly remember this and be more willing to listen because I have not made it a moment of battling her pride, just a moment of information.

Or, based on the previous decision tree, we have had this conversation a few times and she still refuses to wear her jacket, I don’t bring it. When she gets uncomfortably cold, I say without anger or judgment, “I mentioned it was too cold to come without a jacket and that I was not going to bring it. You made that decision and there are consequences for our choices.” If she has to be cold for a while because she made that choice, the next time I say “It’s cold outside; you may want to take your jacket,” she probably gets her jacket. 

If I originally chose to force her to wear a jacket, I then have to force her to wear a jacket repeatedly instead of her making the choice on her own based on what she needs.

2. It removes so many unnecessary arguments.

One day we went to a park, and on one side there were some prickly bushes. Eliam was three at the time and very curious about these bushes. I told him not to play in the bushes, they were ouchie; then I picked him up and took him back to the play structure. As one might imagine, he walked immediately back to the bushes, and I told him a second time not to touch those bushes because it would hurt. Here again we have come to our crossroads, and perhaps option 1 sounds familiar: I pick him up again and return him to the play structure. This time over his verbal protests. Then he goes back to the bush, and I return him to the play structure over his physical protests. It has now become a battle of wills that I feel like I have to “win” because I am the adult. He may receive specific discipline for disobeying, and the entire trip to the park is awful.

Or we can go back to the crossroads after my first warning and his first return to the playground. When he walks back to the bushes, I warn him a second time and then let him touch them, maybe even grab a branch. It’s going to hurt, and there will be tears. However, in this scenario instead of becoming the adversary in battle with my son, I have become the kind voice of warning and the source of comfort from pain rather than the cause of it. The tears will be over quickly, and chances are that he is not going back to the bushes. He learned that they hurt, and we have a great time at the park. Better lesson. Better ending.

I use a lot of scripts with my kids to help me navigate unfamiliar or challenging situations, and my script for when they are doing something that has potentially negative consequences sounds something like this, “I see that you are (insert less than desirable activity here). Because you are doing that, it’s likely that (insert natural consequence here). It is your decision whether or not you continue doing it, but I want you to know the consequences of that choice.” The most important part of the sequence though is actually letting them fail, get hurt, break/lose their toy, or fall off the fence. They won’t be able to learn if we protect them from the consequences. And then be there to acknowledge their pain and guide them through it afterwards.

When NOT to use natural consequences

I believe strongly in natural consequences and use them as part of my parenting tool kit every day, but there are times when they are not the appropriate response to the situation, and I have detailed two of those times below, although this list is certainly not exhaustive or conclusive.

1. When kids are hurting one another

If the children are arguing, I try to give them tools to settle the argument between them. If it appears to be escalating or someone has hit/shoved/bitten or in some other way harmed another child, I intervene immediately. All actions have natural consequences, but the natural consequences of hurting one another is that the strongest wins and over time learns that bullying other children (and eventually adults) is the best way to get what she wants. We recite Matthew 7:12 when they are hurting one another, and we recite Ephesians 4:29 when they use words that tear one another down rather than build one another up.

2. When there is risk of serious injury

I know that “serious” is a subjective term, and in our house the standard is relatively high. One example of a non-negotiable is shoes while riding bikes. The kids all learned to ride on a Strider bike, so they routinely use their feet to brake instead of the actual brakes. Going down the hills with no shoes has a high probability of serious injury to their feet if they put their toes on the asphalt. A second one is staying within eyesight when we go on walks. There are great benefits to letting you children out of eyesight as they grow more independent, so I will let my five year old go to the mailbox or other small trips to demonstrate that I trust her and understand she is growing up. But we walk over lots of driveways on our walks, and people are not always looking for small children on bikes when backing out of their driveways. Therefore, the kids have to stay in my line of sight so I can be watching for cars.

In conclusion, we love natural consequences. Using them regularly brings peace to our house and fosters independence and decision-making in our children. There are times where we have to intervene with other consequences, but whenever possible, we allow the children to experience the consequences of their choices – both positive and negative ones.