Charlie D. Appelstein is an independent childcare trainer and consultant, working with residential treatment, foster care and special educational programs throughout New England. He has worked in residential treatment for 17 years. From 1987 to 1993, Mr. Appelstein served at the Residential Children's Association, a mid-sized residential facility for abused and neglected children and their families, located in Nashua, New Hampshire.

In 1991, he won first place honors in the bi-annual Albert E. Trieshman Child Care Literature Competition &endash; essay category. His current professional interests include helping child welfare programs to become more family centered, teaching therapeutic behavior management and promoting duo therapy as an important new modality in addressing damaged peer relations in children and teens. His latest book is titled "No Such Thing As A Bad Kid." The following is an excerpt from a recent interview conducted by Paradigm.

Paradigm: Tell us a little about your new book.

Appelstein: Writing this book was the hardest thing I have ever done. But the two-and-one-half year process forced me to organize and commit to paper a way of relating to troubled kids that is now easier to teach and practice. Writing "No Such Thing As A Bad Kid" helped me to become a better training specialist and consultant. As a result, I have been able to reach more people and help more kids. When all is said and done, there is no greater satisfaction in the world than helping a troubled kid to believe in himself and turn the corner toward a better life. I don't always like what I do, but I certainly love that I can do it...and I want others to share these feelings. Kids only come through once. We've got to make sure they get their bricks and are strong enough to build a life for themselves.

Paradigm: What was your driving passion for writing "No Such Thing As A Bad Kid"?

Appelstein: Kids with emotional baggage who push adult buttons are often misunderstood, negatively labeled and improperly cared for. My driving passion for writing this book was to help adults who deal with such kids to better understand and respond to them, and to feel better about the incredibly important work that they do. I think the job of working with troubled youngsters is one of the hardest in our society. The burnout rate among childcare professionals is alarmingly high, and teacher morale in many schools is growing worse every day due to the increasing number of challenging students. This book aims to validate, teach and inspire all those who are on the front lines trying to reach emotionally wounded kids. It is written without jargon and contains a plethora of real-life anecdotes and easy-to-use tools. I was very committed to writing this book in a manner that engages the reader. Although it was written specifically for professionals, we are hopeful that it will help parents as well.

Paradigm: Could you explain what you mean in Part I, Understanding Challenging Behavior, by a "coded message" and "responding versus reacting to misbehavior"?

Appelstein: Misbehavior is nothing more than a message -- a neon light flashing above a kid's head signaling: "I need help!" The role of an adult is to decode this message and address the root issue(s). Misbehavior is, after all, a symptom of an underlying problem. If adults respond calmly, firmly if necessary, and with compassion to these messages (symptoms), the probability for getting at the problem and not belaboring the symptom increases dramatically. Conversely, if an adult reacts angrily to a symptom (a message for help), the child's defensive shield rises, and the underlying problem remains and will most likely continue to manifest itself in even more troublesome ways. For example:

1. "Take a time-out!" If this directive is said angrily, there is a high probability that the child will protest and resist the limit, and the adult and child will likely remain focused on the symptom.
2. "Billy, would you please take a short time-out. I asked you nicely not to tease the other kids." If this directive is said in a calm and caring manner, the probability rises for the adult and child to get to the underlying issue(s) related to the misbehavior.

Example one illustrates reacting; example two demonstrates responding. When troubled kids push our buttons, we should always coach ourselves to respond rather than react.

Paradigm: In the section on Development Considerations you discuss laying bricks on shaky foundations. Could you elaborate?

Appelstein: The brick analogy was created primarily to help adults develop more appropriate expectations for troubled kids and themselves. After years of working in the field, it is clear that a major factor related to adult burnout and discontent is faulty expectations leading to self-esteem injury.

During workshops, I see and feel the problem every time I ask the following series of questions:

Question 1: "How many of you have had a great talk with a challenging kid and felt really good about the interaction, only to experience great frustration and anger when hours or minutes later the kid is behaving as if the talk never occurred?"

Ninety percent of the participants will raise their hands.

And then I ask Question 2. "And when you're feeling frustrated and angry because that great talk had little affect, what's the likelihood that you will be at your best in responding to that kid or others?"

"Not good," is what I hear.

Question 3: "And how often does this scenario occur in your setting?" (i.e., a great talk followed by no improvement or a regression in behavior, which negatively influences your mode of relating).

"All the time," people chime in unison.

"So," I respond, "what you're saying is that every day you are not at your best when dealing with the kids in your care?"

People nod incredulously.

Is it any wonder adults burnout or make mistakes with kids when on a daily basis they experience such discordant feelings? What we're really talking about here is self-esteem injury. When troubled kids fail to respond accordingly to our wonderful interventions, many of us take it personally. We suffer a narcissistic injury, and the feeling is often debilitating. Most of us enter the field or become parents with positive identities rooted in being good "kid people." However, too many of us grow highly disappointed in ourselves, and guilty as well, for interacting with kids in ways that may be too punitive and unjust.

Paradigm: So how do you help parents and professionals to redefine their roles and feel more gratified in their work?

Appelstein: During workshops on development psychology, participants are asked the questions listed above regarding the "results" of a meaningful talk. The answers are always the same: adults typically feel angry, ineffective and frustrated when their "talks" have little impact. Switching gears, I comment that it is abundantly clear that the first three years are the most important in a child's life; if a child doesn't receive "good enough" care during those critical years he/she is at-risk for a lifetime of emotional upheaval.

The first three years are labeled as the foundation years. It is noted that a house built on a weak foundation may look good for a while but will eventually crumble. Participants are then asked the following questions:

If the foundation of a house needs 3,000 bricks to stand strong for many years, and if a kid needs the same amount (3,000) for his/her foundation (bricks they get from being loved, nurtured, fed, read to, kept safe, etc.), how many bricks do you think the typical "difficult" kid got in his/her first three years?

Most professionals look dejected and respond, "One-hundred," "Two," "None!"

I then respond: "So what does all of this have to do with the unsuccessful talks you have with kids, the drag on your self-esteem, and the ways we tend to react?"

The answer is: Everything!

I urge adults to visualize the foundation of a house and reframe their role with troubled kids as being: fillers versus talkers. I ask them to return to any one of the great talks they have had with a kid -- or any positive action -- and reframe the interaction as a wonderful moment that put a needed brick into a kid's foundation. This moment should be cherished -- and remember, one brick will not fill in an entire foundation.

Emotionally wounded kids require a lot of filling (i.e., a lot of bricks, and there are no quick fixes). The bricks go in and stay forever every time an adult replicates what the child missed (e.g. countless hours of one-to-one attention, appropriate limits, unconditional love and nurturance, provision of a safe and structured environment). When troubled kids receive long-term, on going filling from caring adults, the probability is that much greater for them to enter adulthood with stronger foundations in place and with more hope for a productive life.

Understanding the filling vs. talking role can ameliorate narcissistic injury, enabling parents and professionals to feel better about all that they do -- from setting difficult limits, to filling out charts, to making sure a kid's hair is combed.

Paradigm: Part II, Preventing Challenging Behavior, incorporates proactive exploration with humor and the six rules in using and developing a repertoire. Why is this important?

Appelstein: As I write in the book: "Humor ought to be taken more seriously." The benefits of using humor with children and youths are irrefutable, yet many adults misuse humor, diminish its importance or refrain from using it because they are either not naturally funny or they don't want to get the kids "going." ("Where the heck are they going?" I usually respond.)

All four responses are unacceptable. The premise of this section is that humor approaches can and should be taught to adults, similar to how limit-setting or any other behavior-management techniques are relayed. Clearly, one doesn't have to be born funny to read from a joke book, wear a funny hat, create a mad-lib, or organize a kazoo band; yet all of these shenanigans are curative to a hurting child. When adults use humor they facilitate relationship-building and brighten darkened souls.

Paradigm: Part III: Responding to Challenging Behavior -- the essence of communication is the key here. How do firm and predictable limits often motivate and improve conduct?

Appelstein: If adults don't set firm and predictable limits (i.e., provide logical consequences), then the message a troubled youth could receive is:

1. This environment and these people can't keep me safe. I will probably need to misbehave in order to gain some control of their actions.
2. The adults are afraid of me, which tells me that I am a very different and disturbed youth. Such a message eats away at my negligible self-esteem.
3. I'm so troubled that adults need to let me misbehave because I probably can't control my actions. Such a message will not encourage me to try harder because it is clear no one expects I can do much better...and I'm beginning to believe them!

When adults set firm and predictable limits -- and deliver limits in a calm and supportive manner -- a troubled child feels:

1. More in control of his environment, which in turn eases his anxieties relative to safety. An unsafe environment will stunt a child's emotional growth.
2. Better about herself, because limits set respectfully send the message that she has the capacity to make better choices and live a more fruitful life.
3. More receptive to learning alternative ways to respond and more likely to discuss underlying issues.

Paradigm: When is it best to use rewards with kids?

Appelstein: There is a great deal of controversy related to the use of behavior modification (i.e., rewards) with children. I agree with many of the concerns; however, based on context, there are numerous situations where behavior modification is a highly indicated intervention. For example, if a teacher uses "rewards" to motivate a resistant, learning-disabled student to learn how to read, the student will not unlearn his ability to read when the rewards are no longer offered, and the student's self-esteem will be perceptibly higher due to his new-found reading abilities. Yet, the same student might not benefit from having his mother "reward" improved behavior at home, because once the rewards are stopped there is no guarantee the child will continue to behave, and the relationship between this child and his mother may be compromised by the heavy use of artificial rewards.

Context truly determines when and if to use rewards. When it comes to academics and preserving safety and stability, I am a strong proponent of a structured reward system. In all other situations, using rewards may risk damaging adult-child relations and should be carefully administered. There is a great temptation for adults to "bribe" children in order to achieve short-term compliance. In many of these cases, the ramification is long-term tensions in the relationship.

Paradigm: What measures should parents take with misbehaving children?

Appelstein: I wrote 300 pages of answers to this question. In short, parents should respond (vs. react) to misbehavior in a calm and logical manner; seek out and address the underlying problems(s); don't take the behavior personally; and work hard to create a fair, loving and predictable living environment that will prevent such misbehavior from re-occurring.

Charlie D. Appelstein can be contacted at his business office: Appelstein Professional Services, 12 Martin Ave., Office B, Salem, NH 03079. He works for Child Care Training and Consultation, providing residential, foster care and educational programs. For more information about his services, visit his website: www.tiac.net/users/charliea or e-mail: charliea@tiac.net