A New Parenting Paradigm: Connection Over Control
As a parent coach with over 10 years experience helping parents, it often feels expected that I advocate for setting boundaries. It’s something that’s typically considered a core pillar of modern parenting, right alongside connection and staying calm.
Be firm, while being empathetic, is the general idea. Hold the limit, while holding space for the big feelings that come.
It’s a compelling rationalization. Early on as a dad, I went along with it. I thought my job was to be firm with limits, like some kind of empathetic gatekeeper. In other words, I was still the one in complete control, just empathizing with the young one I was exerting control over.
Why I Now Reject the Language of Limits
I’ve always found the boundary model problematic. Today, I don’t use “boundaries” or “limits,” and I don’t advise the parents I work with to use them either.
Of course you keep your kids safe, but that’s different.
I’m talking about the arbitrary boundaries and limits that parents dole out that inevitably creates a battle of wills, chipping away at the trust and connection that are the true foundation of your relationship.
Examples of Arbitrary Boundaries and Limits
Arbitrary Boundaries
- Emotional Boundary: “Stop crying, you’re overreacting. It’s not a big deal.” This type of boundary is used to protect the parent from their own discomfort with big emotions. It sends the message that the child’s feelings are inconvenient and are not valid.
- Forced Apology Boundary: “You need to go say you’re sorry to your brother right now.” This boundary enforces a social rule without regard for the child’s actual feelings. It prioritizes the appearance of harmony over the development of genuine empathy and remorse.
- The “Because I Said So” Boundary: “You can’t go outside. Why? Because I’m the parent, and I said so.” This boundary relies purely on the parent’s authority. It teaches that power, not reason or collaboration, is what governs the relationship.
Arbitrary Limits
- Mealtime Limit: “You can’t have dessert until you’ve eaten three more bites of the pasta.” This limit uses a desired item (dessert) as leverage to control a child’s eating. It overrides their internal cues of hunger and fullness, turning mealtimes into a negotiation.
- Screen Time Limit: “Your hour is up. If you don’t turn it off this second, you lose it for the rest of the week.” This limit is about rigid adherence to a rule. The threat is often disproportionate and turns the transition into a high-stakes conflict rather than a collaborative process.
- Playtime Limit: “You can’t dump the LEGOs on the floor because it makes a mess.” This limit prioritizes the parent’s desire for tidiness over the child’s need for creative, unstructured play. It restricts a natural and healthy behavior because it’s inconvenient for the adult.
The problem with all of these is that parents inevitably place themselves in opposition to their child by all the limit setting they do.
Not only that, but the very language of ‘boundaries,’ ‘limits,’ and ‘consequences’ itself that keeps parents stuck in a controlling mindset and frames the relationship as a battle of wills.
Therefore, what I am calling for is a rejection of the entire parent-as-enforcer paradigm.
The Unseen Cost of a “Boundary” Mindset
Before we explore what to do instead, it’s important to understand why this shift away from “limits” and “boundaries” is important. While they seem harmless, these words carry a hidden cost and reinforce a mindset that works against our goal of true connection.
We need to understand something very clearly. Any term that places the parent in opposition to the child is inherently flawed and damaging to the relationship. Also, how children learn respect and disrespect is largely modeled by the adult’s stance and language being chosen.
Why Language Matters
When we use the language of limits and boundaries with our children, we are unintentionally doing three things:
- Reinforcing a power hierarchy. The very act of a parent “setting a limit” on a child positions one person as the controller and the other as the one who must be controlled. It’s a subtle power-over dynamic that undermines the partnership we want to build.
- Fostering external motivation. A life governed by external rules teaches a child to look outside themselves for what’s acceptable. Our goal is to help them build their own internal compass, not to simply avoid a consequence.
- Teaching that safety is conditional. To a child, a “boundary” can feel like a wall. It can quietly communicate: “My love and connection are available to you, but only up to this line. If you cross it, you risk disconnection.” This creates anxiety, which is the opposite of the unconditional safety we want them to feel with us.
It’s Not About Setting Limits, It’s About Creating Possibilities
The problem starts when we see a behavior and our first thought is, “How do I stop this?” That is the boundary model, which is about building a wall to halt an unwanted action
The boundary model is about building a wall to halt an unwanted action.
Boundaries and limits place us on the opposite side of our children. My approach is essentially about joining alongside our children instead, and then navigating the world together to help them see what may lie ahead.
Instead of setting limits and giving boundaries, I say: focus on allowing for as much freedom and autonomy as possible. Which is really about creating possibilities.
When a child’s behavior feels challenging, it is not a call for a stricter boundary. That urge we feel to “lay down the law” is almost always a sign of our own dysregulation, which is a crucial recognition for any parent on this path. Instead of seeing a behavior that needs a limit, we must train ourselves to see an unmet need or an overflowing energy. Our job isn’t to block that energy with a “no” rather, it’s to partner with our child to find a healthy “yes.”
The language of ‘limits’ and ‘consequences’ is a trap. It keeps us locked in an oppositional mindset, where the parent’s role is essentially to manage and control the child’s behavior. In peaceful parenting, we want to abandon that framework entirely.
If you’re ready to break free from old patterns and explore connection-driven parenting in depth, I invite you to check out my book, Peaceful Parenting Basics, for practical guidance and fundamentals of this approach.
It all comes down to this: What happens when we stop standing against our children? And instead choose to stand with them, anchored in deep, unwavering connection?
A Practical Example: When a Child Hits
A child hitting their parent or others is a good practical example to examine. Hitting is an expression of saying: “I have a big, overwhelming feeling inside that I don’t know what to do with!”
Helping children through tantrums the peaceful parenting way offers more support on this process.
What the traditional boundary model says is: “Stop hitting. We don’t hit,” which focuses on stopping the action but misses the feeling underneath.
A truly connection-based model looks different. Rather than fixating on the behavior itself, it sees and responds to the whole child, seeking opportunities to reconnect, even when things get messy. Over time, repeated co-regulation and empathetic validation helps guide problematic behavior back on track. In essence, positive change comes not from enforcing boundaries, but from consistent, caring connection.
The challenge for parents is in trusting the process.
Active Co-Regulation in Practice
Actively co-regulating with empathy and validation is the peaceful parenting approach.
In our hitting example, we prioritize safety in the moment by gently blocking the hit. This is not a punishment or a boundary. It is an act of protective guardianship. Just as I would pull my child from a busy street without a word, I will keep everyone safe from a flailing hand. The goal is safety, not control.
While our hands doing the blocking are ensuring safety, our words and attitude are doing the connecting: “You are so angry right now! I see that.” You can restate this validation with other simple phrases such as “I hear you” and “I see how upset you are.” The idea is to lend them your calm until they begin to soften and their nervous system can settle.
Once some connection is re-established and you sense that a door to emotional understanding has opened, you can begin to get curious together. Guessing feelings is a great approach: “Were you very annoyed when ______”? (Fill in the blank about what happened). Or: “That was really upsetting for you, wasn’t it?” or “You were really angry at me!” (Or your brother or whoever).
Continue to validate and establish an understanding about the hurt feelings without minimizing or suggesting that the feelings are wrong. Then our job is to listen to our child talk and express themselves about what happened. Maybe a sibling took away a toy, or a desire to go to the park was not able to be met, or the wrong sippy cup was offered, whatever it is, let them fully express and say what happened that was so upsetting. No judging, no denying, no correcting. Just listening. The goal is to help the child feel fully heard.
This isn’t teaching that hitting is acceptable. It isn’t coddling and it isn’t being permissive either. It’s both helping and teaching in a way that isn’t oppositional by working with our child through their overwhelming experience instead of against them.
The Goal is to Be a Guiding Compass, Not a Rigid Map
I want to offer a peaceful parenting reframe that I think can be very helpful, and that is deciding to act as a compass, not a map.
A map has rigid roads and defined boundaries. It tells you where you must go, implying there is only one correct way. The idea as a parent is to enforce the rules of the road.
A compass, on the other hand, points you in a healthy direction. It empowers you to find your own path. As a parent, I am not here to draw my son’s map for him. I am here to act as his trusted compass. In this way I am able to honor his full autonomy and freedom to explore the world, while also keeping him safe. As he learns to trust in me as a guide, the need for imposing limits and boundaries dissolves away.
This philosophy isn’t about shielding children from the world. It’s about empowering them to navigate it. My son will experience the natural outcomes of his choices, because that is how we all learn. The defining question is not if he will face these moments, but how. Will he face them with a trusted ally by his side, or with a referee waiting to say, “I told you so.”?
Of course having a map can be a very practical tool for getting from point A to point B, and I’m not saying to completely disregard it’s usefulness. But we’re talking about real life here, which is often messy and complicated and sometimes we all get lost. And when that happens, then what? We need to be able to have a sense of feeling self-assured, and of having confidence in ourselves that we can find our way.
That’s why I suggest the idea of acting as a compass as parents. We want to act more as a trusted guide, so that our children learn to navigate their own lives with the confidence and belief in themselves that they’ll need in their own journeys.
Are you The Coach? Or Are you The Referee?
Another way of looking at it is as seeing ourselves as either coaches or referees. The peaceful parenting approach in general is all about transforming our role as parents. It’s the difference between being a referee who enforces rules against a player, and a coach who strategizes with them on the same team.
A referee stands apart, whistle in hand, watching for infractions. Their job is to stop play and issue penalties. This creates an oppositional dynamic.
A coach, however, is on the sideline, deeply invested in their player’s success. They pull them aside, offer guidance, and work together to figure out an optimal way to approach the game.
When we see ourselves as our child’s ally, not their enforcer, the need to build walls and impose rules fades. We move from opposition to partnership. When we choose to be the coach, the goal ceases to be control, and becomes what it was always meant to be: unconditional connection.
(These are ideas that I explore in more detail in my book, Peaceful Parenting Basics. If this way of thinking resonates with you, I invite you to find a whole new perspective on the parent-child relationship inside.)
