to think that 'the naughty step' technique totally sucks?

[PipPipPip]

Making kids sit on a naughty step seems mean to me! Plus it also seems to reward the kid's bad behaviour with a whole load of attention.

Am I being unreasonable to think it just, basically, sucks?

Tread, your friend is not using technique sensibly at all and thats why it won't work.

She is giving her child attention by this method and that's counter productive.

Merrymouse. I dont understand the natural concequence theory at all.
Children are children and adults are adults we are there to decide and guide.

Belive me if u had to do my job, childmind 4 under 5 every day it would be extremely dangerous to use this method!

What next. No reins so child can actually feel it hurts as car hits it??

Sorry nonsense, if it's raining a child wears Wellies No discussion end of

Migsy then they are In charge of you.

Sorry but again and again as a cm and mum ( oldest 22) I see consequences of spoilt out of control children then becoming spoilt out of control adults.

And that's just not fair

thebody - Yes, and it's horrible to see but she is hell bent on her methods so there we go...

the body so how do you get them to sit on it?

naughty step didnt exist when mine were little suppernanny was probably still in nappies , but i do think putting a child somewhere to just calm the hell down is a positive thing , maybe the naughty step isnt for everybody but it does work for a lot of parents but you really need to do it positivley and properly sending a kids to the N S every time doesnt work imo ,

"Explaining things to them"? Yes, very nice in theory, but even once they start understanding why what they've done is wrong it will be years before they care that it's wrong!

I tried the ignore-bad-behaviour thing with DD1, but after she'd called her grandparents stupid, and the windowcleaner stupid, I decided action was a better course of action, IYSWIM!

Migsy1

You keep putting them back there until they realise that it's quicker to just stay there than to keep getting up.

It can take a few times but they learn.

Never used it, like thinking time and use time outs but dislike the whole Supper Nanny vibe and the constant putting back initially of the naughty step.

I think you can discuss much but then am obviously a woolly liberal as I always let mine choose their own shoes:)

I used to lock mine in their bedroom for 5 minutes. It wasn't so much of a punishment as they could play with their toys but it gave them time to calm down. It always worked.

I don't think any one has ever suggested that natural consequences are a great way to treat road safety! You let your child experience them when you think it is appropriate. You are right, they won't work in every situation. I can see why you as a child minder would insist on wellingtons. However as a parent I have found that the experience of wet socks can be more instructive than a naughty step. Clearly this tactic works better on children who are old enough to understand cause and effect. But then people who advocate the naughty step assume this level of comprehension from a very young age.

Sorry, teach road safety

If it works, use it. If it doesn't don't. Didn't work with DS, does work with DD. All's well.

If they are getting a lot of attention, it is being done wrongly! Also, a lot of parents make the mistake of continuing to scold the child or answer the child's moans/whimpers/whinges while the child is on the naughty step or in the naughty corner, which actually adds more fuel to the fire and makes a tantrum or discipline situation worse. If they run out you put them back on it without scolding, talking or eye contact.

The whole point of the step is to take the child away from the place where the conflict or misbehaviour is happening and to give the child a chance to calm down, without the stimuli of toys or other people around. You don't stay and watch them, smile, apologise (which some have done!) or look stern. NO eye contact. You stay just about near enough to supervise, that's all. Although I don't usually use tv as recommendation, this is beautifully demonstrated in the series Supernanny - you lose count of the number of parents who tell her the approach didn't work for them only for it to work once they had been taught how to do it correctly! Also, they stay there only the number of minutes for their age: 2 minutes for a two year old, 3 minutes for a 3 year old, etc. The time is remarkably effective. Often it can be the parents feeling bad about a whole two minutes without interacting, but it's actually a very short length of time - less than the time taken to finish making a cup of tea!

Once they reach 7 or 8 it isn't effective because older children think differently and can patiently sit in on a step for ages without changing their behaviour.

I know it works for some people and in fact it did work really well on my first two, but I don't use it anymore. They all think its great crack when someone gets put on it. The older ones go out and laugh at whoever is sittting on it and then they all end up giggling and I end up chasing them away.
I think I will be like my granny and just send them out to the hedge to pick a stick to beat them with.

What kipper said!

Well when I had just one dd I taught her by example. I was nice to her and she has been nice ever since. I think all this 'step' business is wrong. And actually now that I have two more, the example I set is what they learn from.

Be nice to your children and they will be nice to you and others! I trust my children.

Am I being unreasonable to think there are other alternatives? Like, uh, being really nice to your kid and explaining things to them? And kind of just ignoring bad behaviour and lavishly praising good behaviour? Am I totally bonkers???

I'm not being bitchy but I got to here and just lold. I vaguely remember thinking that...and then I had children old enough to be working their own agendas.

Personally we are a nice, explain, teach, guide household. We don't smack, we don't shout unless there are extreme circumstances depending on age 90-99% of the time they are kind, funny compassionate and listen. I really like them as little people as well as loving them of course.

But there will be times when explaining and teaching in calmness doesn't work on it's own. They could be frustratedly of limited verbalisation, they could be at the testing the boundaries point or overtired, over stimulated etc. It is not their fault that they don't have a better way to express themselves or cope than reacting by having a tantrum, dissolving into sobs or just repeatedly testing your patience. I do find that removing them from the situation is beneficial - there is no anger but there is no reasoning either - they may not understand or they may be too far gone and at the end of the day I am the parent and they have to do as they're told. End of. We can talk about it afterwards with the older ones but the littlies just move on. It is my job to use all the means at my disposal to help them learn how to deal with these feelings - not just decide I will only be nice to them and talk at them as they are collapsing into a heap with pissed off 'too many feeeeelings'.

IME there are many parents that say - we're just NICE to our children sniff the implication being that any form of pro-active parenting or discipline is you failing as a parent by just not having the ability to be wonderfully fluffy enough. I have found 2 things:

1. Their kids are just horrible. It isn't the child at fault but they are the ones that elicit a groan from the other parents. I'm sure everyone has experience of a child/children who are PFB types full of self importance and Mummy thinks her slap to the face when the kid said 'shut up, stupid cow' (I've heard this more than once! is just so wonderful - Little Jimmy is just such a free spirit and likes to express himself - we taught him to feel. They're the parents that get offended that you have delivered their child home after he punched the cat and upset your kids, won't eat anything but treat food, wont share or do anything the others want to do, is bossy and demanding and you 'have a quiet word' about it. They don't understand what discipline is and actually just let the kid get on with trying to work out how to be a person all by themselves because they??...god knows why. I always think it's lazy parenting, it's hard teaching a child so they don't. I'm critical though because I can't stand how it disadvantages the children.

2. They're lying. There has been no child ever (bar some LD/MD children obv) that does not go through the developmental stages that make them find communicating nicely far too overwhelmingly difficult. If you show me a parent that swears blind their child never: cried, tantrumed, threw something, challenged their boundaries, forgot themselves and did something silly etc, etc I will see somebody that either does not live with that child or actually has a dog...one that was never a puppy.

There is always need for discipline, correction whatever you want to call it, however minor, but it's not always what they get. None can be as differently detrimental as too much imo.

went on a bit of a ranty one there. Well if I haven't called anyone an arse by the end of the post I consider it ok!

Time out works with DD.

Ignoring bad behaviour very much depends on the behaviour so there is a risk of being inconsistent. Some behaviour just cannot and should not be ignored but for a young child, they will not know where you have drawn that line.

Come back in two years with your judgy pants not so firmly hoiked. You can't judge unless you've been there.

I've only had to use the time out approach a couple of times with DD.

We'll give her two warnings first to give her a chance to modify her behaviour, then if she ignores those she will go on the time out chair.

We only ever seem to get to "Warning number one", nowadays, but she's a good kid anyway so don't even have to do that very often.

I just hate it - the naughty step.

There is something really "you are bad" about it - putting them in a whole headspace of "being naughty", so much so that they have to be put in a whole invisible physical straitjacket, a kind of jail without bars.

I tried it once with my son and he was devastated and crying - I think for the above reasons.

There are lots of other more "normal" ways in my opinion to show children their behaviour is not acceptable, though sometimes its hard to get it right sometimes I know.

i have 4 1/2 yr. old daughter,
never used "naughty step"
Like yourself, didn't feel comfortable with the concept.
Cant stand supernanny and her self esteem smashing techniques.
I've disciplined by saying really firmly when enough is enough. thats the stick - stern voice. No treat / interaction.
Carrot - behave yourself - be specific (age appropriate) about what that means, and we will all be happy / you get treat / get to play with your toys / watch tv whatever .....
I wonder if I have found this works

1. because I have one child
2. she is a girl ??

Sorry isn't that bribing them to behave bumdrop?

To me, it's seems a but odd to say (for example) I don't want you to hit x in a stern voice. If you stop hitting x I will give you a treat.

If there are no actual consequences for behaviour then surely it will continue? If you have to bribe with a treat to not hit, or whatever the issue is, what is that teaching?

My DCs were born before super nanny was around but I certainley made sure there was consequences for behaviour, including time out, thinking time, having to apologise, losing a toy.

They have excellent self esteem thanks, all happy teenagers doing extremely well at school, good manners, and know in life you have to follow certain rules.

Being nice to your children IMHO does not mean they will grow up to be nice to everyone, it means they grow up thinking rules do not apply to them and they can do as they please.

These are the children who get a huge shock when they go to school and are expected to behave in a certain way, else there will be consequences.

IME these are also the children whos mothers are in and out of the school complaining how their PFB was treated, how terrible and heartbreaking it was for x to be punished.