One of many things I love about my work is that I’m regularly challenged on ideas that I’ve held close for years. Sometimes this results in a recommitment to the foundational philosophy of Relational-Cultural Theory. Other times something we’ve used for years gets changed.
A few months ago, we were consulting at a school and I mentioned Ross Greene‘s idea of assumption-free living, described in his new book, Raising Human Beings.
“How does that work,” one of the teachers pushed back, “if we are assuming positive intent?”
We’ve been offering various forms of positive discipline workshops for parents for over 15 years, and one of the cornerstones of all of them is the idea of assuming positive intent. It means that whatever the child is doing, we assume there is a positive intent underneath it. This helps calm the caregiver’s response to unfortunate behavior, and it bolsters the connection with the child. It allows for learning and growth without disconnection and punishment because it assumes that the child doesn’t have the skills necessary to get their needs met using better behavior.
It makes sense, especially with younger tots– a two-year old does not understand the work you put into making dinner, and is certainly not messing with you when they toss it off their tray. A toddler who flails and hits isn’t deliberately setting out to hurt their parents, and an infant who bites down while nursing isn’t paying back mom for picking them up late. They are all learning about cause and effect, exploring how to use their bodies and trying to connect. Knowing it isn’t a personal attack helps caregivers respond with love.
Could there be a downside to assuming positive intent? Like any good tool, it depends on how it’s used. It could be used to silence marginalized voices through tone policing. It could be used to avoid facing the consequences of actions– as in, “I’m sure they meant well,” instead of “that hurt me.” It could even make it harder to figure out the root of the problem you’re trying to solve because you might be sold on your own positive interpretation.
We may improve connection through assuming positive intent, but at the cost of authenticity. Authenticity is an essential ingredient in mutual connection, so in essence, our efforts at maintaining good will wind up sabotaging our chances at meaningful relationships.
Is there an approach that nurtures both connection and authenticity? Something that releases us from believing the worst about people, but also allows us to honor our own reactions? We can remember our shared humanity, knowing that we all long to feel connected, and that anything resulting in our feeling disconnection causes some degree of pain. We can remain curious about the causes of the behavior, wondering what need it might be communicating. We could approach our interactions with a compassionate curiosity.
There you have it– from assuming positive intent to compassionate curiosity. There is still a lot of thinking to do about how we connect both lovingly and authentically with each other– I’m eager to hear your thoughts!
