Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To not let daughter attend?

286 replies

Mypoorboobs · 02/03/2019 11:54

Daughter has an event this evening, she’s been so naughty I told her she was on her last chance or wouldn’t be going.

She then pushed the baby over backwards and laughed so I said that was it and she’s not going.

DP got home and said she can go as she’s been looking forward to it and we’ve already paid for it. I’ve said no, her behaviour is never going to improve if she doesn’t understand her actions have consequences. Who is right?

She’s 4 and not attending wouldnt be letting anyone down. We were planning to get some things that desperately need doing done while she was gone. (She’s a huge handful and can’t do anything with her here)

WWYD?

OP posts:
Boobiliboobiliboo · 03/03/2019 18:57

Mine has genuinely never done anything worthy of what I would describe as punishment. (That doesn’t mean there isn’t discipline, but discipline means learning, which doesn’t necessarily mean punishment. Wink)

murmuration · 03/03/2019 18:58

Myboob - the "How to Talk" book has been recommended several times - there is also a new one in the series called "How to Talk so LITTLE Kids will Listen". I'm only part-way through it right now (starting the chapter on non-neurotypical kids), but it has a LOT of examples involving pushing/hitting/etc younger siblings. I recommend it.

Regarding not punsishing: It took me a seriously long time to understand this. I had a big thing about "how can she learn if she doesn't feel bad "? But apparently, the reality is in fact the opposite: it's harder to learn when you feel bad, because you just spend a bunch of time feeling sorry for yourself/getting angry with whoever punished you/instead of thinking about how to do things differently.

And, from an outside perspective, I'm not sure it always doesn't look like 'no punshinment' anyway. The 'HTT Little Kids' book has a section on this, talking about the difference between a punishment and a consequence: a punishment is provided to make someone feel bad, a consequence is provided to protect someone (little sib/parent's feelings/etc) or prevent something (repeat of the behaviour). It's also how to tell it to the child. So, you could take a toy away from your child and say "I'm taking this away for XYX time to punish you for hitting your little sister with it", or you could say "I'm taking this away because you hit your little sister with it and I cannot let that happen. You can have it back when I can see that you are playing gently with her." It's basically the same action, but the later provides the child a goal of future behaviour to achieve. I'm not sure I completely understand yet, but so far the non-punishment methods seem to work WAY better with my 6yo DD. I still get upset, though, when she's not upset and I think she should be. Yet I've been surprised several times to see her actually learn after not being upset!

speakout · 03/03/2019 18:59

Mine has genuinely never done anything worthy of what I would describe as punishment.

I agree. Same here.

Drogosnextwife · 03/03/2019 19:01

*speakout

I don't punish.

There are better ways of parenting.*

There's one not that far up the page.

murmuration · 03/03/2019 19:02

immediate punishments that are relevant to the misdemeanour. Eg make a mess deliberately when cross, clean it up when you've calmed down. Continually throw something, have it taken away until you've calmed down etc.

I think in the HTT books this would all be "consequences" not punishment - including the first being 'making ammends' - fix the thing created with bad behaviour!

Boobiliboobiliboo · 03/03/2019 19:02

Yes yes mumuration!

Original poster
Mypoorboobs · 03/03/2019 19:07

I’ve ordered the ‘how to talk so little kids will listen’ book.
But taking toys away is a punishment, is it just that you don’t call it a punishment, you call it a consequence? Is that what you mean?
Wow so have your kids have never done anything naughty? That’s really shocked me... i actually think I’d be a bit concerned if my child never misbehaved to be honest!

OP posts:
janetforpresident · 03/03/2019 19:09

I’ve seen the ‘never say no, fill with love’ parenting in action with friends of ours, it doesn’t sell me on the idea tbh

I do say no and I do raise my voice and have "stern words" with my children. I don't punish as such anymore (we used to) but instead allow there to be natural consequences now. For example yesterday I allowed my dd to play out with her friend, she is supposed to stay within view of the house. When I checked I realised she had gone round the corner out of sight I went out to get her, brought her in and told her that she had to play in sight and why (safety etc.) She went back out for a bit and remained in sight so no need for punishments however if she had gone out of sight again the natural consequence would be that she would be brought directly in and not allowed to play out again for a while until I could feel I could trust her. This would be a natural and fair consequence. It could be called grounding if you wanted to but it's not the same as confiscating her toys or sending her to bed early because it is the direct result of her actions.

Justonemorepancake · 03/03/2019 19:10

Ah yes, I see. But I'm using the word punish too freely, habit from my upbringing. Reading subsequent posts I don't actually 'punish' in that definition either. I discipline, I talk, I give relevant consequences for behaviour. DS is a really easy kid and never in 'trouble'. He gets rages sometimes (just at home) and does silly stuff, needs to be asked several times to put his shoes on etc, but it's all explainable and easy to deal with. I'm not going to take credit for that, he could just be naturally gentle and emotionally pretty smart and we're super lucky, but we've never shouted at him or 'punished' him with something not directly linked to his behaviour. I really feel for those with hard to manage behaviour and can only recommend 'how to talk to little kids will listen' and Janet Lansbury as a starting point to understanding how their brains work.

speakout · 03/03/2019 19:11

so have your kids have never done anything naughty?

My kids have been curious, made unwise decisions, but "naughty". No.

That's a good book OP btw- opened my eyes.

Justonemorepancake · 03/03/2019 19:12

Yes if he was trying to deliberately break a toy in a rage or throwing it I would take it away until he'd chilled out and explained why I was doing it and he could have it back when he was calmer. I call that a direct consequence.

Justonemorepancake · 03/03/2019 19:20

DS has done a few minor things but I'm careful to say it was 'naughty behaviour' or inappropriate behaviour and never call him naughty. Kids believe what you tell them and will behave accordingly.

Drogosnextwife · 03/03/2019 19:21

Ok all that's has happened is that the word has been changed from "punishment" to "direct consequence".

What is the direct consequence of a child pushing a baby over?

YourSarcasmIsDripping · 03/03/2019 19:22

Yes if he was trying to deliberately break a toy in a rage or throwing it I would take it away until he'd chilled out and explained why I was doing it and he could have it back when he was calmer. I call that a direct consequence.

Tbh it doesn't sound like much of a consequence to me.

More of a consequence would be him breaking it during said tantrum,so it goes in the bin and not replaced. Or he hurts himself or damaged something else (which he might have to pay for to replace).

By taking the toy away in the middle of his tantrum you're not giving hom a consequence, you're protecting him from the natural consequence that would happen if he kept going. And then he gets the toy back.

Drogosnextwife · 03/03/2019 19:23

By the way Justonemorepancake, I completely agree with never calling a child naughty and only telly them the action is naughty.

JaneEB · 03/03/2019 19:23

One thing I always did was make sure I kept my promises to the kids, whether good or bad. Yes, I smacked them, but only when necessary for safety, and they soon learned when I counted to 10 they needed to be behaving and out of my way.

One thing I would say is that I had a friend with a child the same age as my oldest, she did not believe in smacking, one time we were walking up to the park she repeatedly told her daughter that if she didn't stop doing "X" she would not go to the park. She didn't stop, but she still went to the park. The last thing I heard was that she had been arrested for shoplifting.

You need to make sure she knows who is boss, by whatever means you think will work. She has to learn that what you say goes, and you need to be consistent, and you need to make sure that you and your OH both do things the same, if you tell her X you need to inform him of that and vice-versa, our kids used to try to play us off against one another but it didn't work because we knew what the other was telling them.

Good luck.

murmuration · 03/03/2019 19:24

It's more what you tell the child, than what you call it to yourself. If you frame it as "You did X, so I'm doing Y to punish you", it turns it into a transaction, where the child can start thinking, hmm, I want to do X, am I willing to put up with Y? But if it's not transactional, and is also open-ended (I probably seem 'meaner' than other parents by not specifying when something will get returned), they understand that they can avoid such things by changing their behaviour.

speakout · 03/03/2019 19:25

Yes, I smacked them, but only when necessary for safety

Disgusting.

Vynalbob · 03/03/2019 19:26

You are right. 90% of kids at that age could connect when they've been repeatedly warned. Also learning isn't a miraculous event stop her going and she will remember next time. Give in and it will get worse.
My dd and ds's behaviour was good because they were parented we didn't wait for time to grow them automatically they are not sticks of rhubarb.
Soz too xtreme
Basically your right

Drogosnextwife · 03/03/2019 19:29

YourSarcasmIsDripping

That's a really good point actually, the natural consequence would be the end result of the bad behaviour, so by intervening they never get to the end result. So are they actually learning anything?

YourSarcasmIsDripping · 03/03/2019 19:30

Mine did. I binned her stuff Grin

Kaddm · 03/03/2019 19:30

Op this isn’t your fault.

Children are all different and have different challenges to face. People on here are holier than thou if their child never did this. FWIW neither of my kids did this sort of stuff so I have no idea for practical suggestions. But it’s obvious you have put maximum effort into solving this and it’s proving difficult. Don’t beat yourself up about it, you will get over these difficulties.

janetforpresident · 03/03/2019 19:31

Ok all that's has happened is that the word has been changed from "punishment" to "direct consequence"
No because anything could be a punishment. The child could be sent to bed early, grounded, have toys confiscated etc. Only some of these will actually be a true consequence and not a made up sanction.

What is the direct consequence of a child pushing a baby over?
I have outlined what I would do further up the thread. There is not a standard direct consequencefor each situation it's more about dealing with the particular situation and particular child with the aim of helping the child to behave more appropriately next time.

Original poster
Mypoorboobs · 03/03/2019 19:31

As drogo said, what would be the ‘direct consequense’ in this instance Of hurting a sibling after repeatedly asking not too?

Interesting perspectives, I never call her naughty or bad, I’ve only said ‘that was bad/naughty behaviour’ as I do believe if you label a child as naughty they’ll live up to it.

OP posts:
PtahNeith · 03/03/2019 19:32

Yes, I smacked them, but only when necessary for safety

That's something of a perversion of the word "safety".

"Yes, I assaulted them, but only when necessary for safety"

Hmm