To be cross with our childminder?

[ranging]

Name changed.

DD has been going to the same childminder since she was 8 months and she is now 2.5. She absolutely loves it there and she's very kind and friendly, I get lots of crafts home that DD does and they go out and do a lot.

DD is going through a challenging phase, not doing as she's told, very stubborn, sometimes hitting and biting.

When I picked her up on Friday, the childminder said that she had taken her shoes and socks off in the car and was refusing to put them back on, so she took her out the car and put him on the (wet and muddy) ground in her bare feet and told her basically that's what you get for not putting your shoes on. She apparently got upset by this and then finally allowed her to put her shoes back on.

I was a bit taken aback by this, AIBU to tell her I am not happy about this at all? I'm not sure if this is an ok tactic to use with a toddler but I never would and don't want anyone else to treat her like that either.

I can't get worked up about this, although I probably wouldn't do it with children that I look after. There are quite a few other tactics yoiu could choose; as someone said games are a good way or wait it out for a bit. They're usually over the strops fairly quickly and then you can distract. It is hard when you are under pressure with time and other kids though. I certainly don't think a child with barefeet is as horrific as some are making out. Barefoot walks and trails are a thing.

That’s not true though. They don’t learn: aha shoes on even when I don’t want to! They learn ‘punishment’ but they don’t know why they’re being punished. They can’t, at two. If you think the Op’s kid will do something different tomorrow because of this, you’re wrong.

At that age they absolutely learn correlation.

She now knows she doesn’t like bare feet on the ground. That’s a learning moment.

And a considerably more productive one that being restrained in her buggy as the OP suggested she should have been.

Oh dear Lord, please tell me this whole scenario and reaction to the CM’s handling is made up. I can’t believe any sensible adult would over react like this. I would imagine the CM can’t wait for her contract to mind this child to end,

@WaltzingBetty

Can you honestly not the the difference between say, being lifted onto the toilet and being lifted as a punishment? You must do. Not really - if the child doesn't want to be lifted then their experience is the same. It's only your reasoning that has changed. Surely you should just let them piss on the floor instead? At least that's what your reasoning suggests.

And never hold their hands when crossing rads, or restrain them in car seats or buggies. After all forcing them to do things they don't want is punishment isn't it?

That’s for safety, not for punishment. Do you see the difference?

@Chillychangchoo

Completely and utterly incomparable to a person with dementia.

Young children are sponges and learn new things every single day. How can you possibly compare cognitively between these two groups? Ridiculous. Beyond ridiculous.

I’ve explained why they’re not incomparable.

@JustLyra

They’re really not that different. One still has to develop the cognitive ability, one has lost it. Punishments to either won’t make them learn faster or remember easier.

They’re completely different. Developing and learning is completely different to lost ability.
It’s also not punishing to allow a child to learn, safely, from their choices. It’s learning in a natural way.

Learning through punishment isn’t learning. Again, I’d bet the OP’s 2.5 year old would do exactly the same thing tomorrow.

Natural consequences, I'm all for it. I wish more people would allow their child to feel some slight discomfort in order to learn a perfectly reasonable lesson. She sounds like a great childminder.

Learning through punishment isn’t learning. Again, I’d bet the OP’s 2.5 year old would do exactly the same thing tomorrow.

Learning through natural consequences is not punishment.
I’d bet she won’t.

What you are suggesting would only work with 1:1 care @Pumperthepumper.

They were going to play because OP says the child would not have liked to be sat in the buggy watching the others running around playing. So choices are everyone sit in the car until x decides to put her socks and shoes on or show x why she should put her socks and shoes on. Or wrestle (force) her into the buggy , whilst she bites and hits then let the others play. Meanwhile x is miserable in the buggy and still has cold feet. The CM is perfectly able to do her job and has indeed done her job. If OP wants a pandered child that childcare revolves solely around she should have a Nanny and make sure she only has 1 child.

@saraclara

One still has to develop the cognitive ability, one has lost it. Punishments to either won’t make them learn faster or remember easier.

The child was not punished. She was shown what the consequence of not wearing shoes would be, and learned within seconds that she would prefer to wear them. This was a perfect example of learning quickly.

She was lifted out of the car and put on the ground with no shoes on. There’s a million reasons a 2.5 year old wouldn’t make the connection between no shoes equals cold ground. Hot feet. An uncomfortable seam. Squashed toes. You’re expecting a lot of a 2.5 year old to articulate any of those things. Have you never taken your shoes off after a night out and been delighted to have them off? Imagine if someone much bigger had just lifted you up and plonked you somewhere else against your will - and you can’t reason with them because you don’t have the development for it yet. That’s what happened here.

OP you’d rather restrain your child in a buggy than let the CM let your child’s feet touch the ground momentarily to learn a genuine lesson. I don’t think you’ve understood natural consequences.

That’s for safety, not for punishment. Do you see the difference?

You're missing the point. Something is punishing if the child perceived it as such. Your reasoning is irrelevant.

If lifting/restraining is forceful and punishing as you suggest then the child would perceive it as such in all contexts. Ergo any lifting is forceful/punishing.

Or are you expecting a 2 year old to evaluate your motivation and make a judgement as to why you are lifting them?
That seems like rather high cognitive expectations for a 2 year old

Assuming the 2 year old child cannot appreciate the context and distinguish your motivation, then lifting them is either force as you have stated or a reasonable technique for managing a toddler. Which is it?

@WaltzingBetty

So put up with a childminder who doesn’t understand the cognitive development of the children she’s paid to look after because it might be tricky to find a better one? My suggestion is: find a better one who won’t punish the 2.5 year old for something she can’t control.

So you expect that childminders should never lift toddlers out of cars because that's punishing and forcing?

Good luck with that

Again, do you see the difference in lifting for punishment or lifting for assistance? Do you need help with this?

Again, do you see the difference in lifting for punishment or lifting for assistance? Do you need help with this?

No but I think most 2 year olds wouldn't appreciate the difference and so their experience is the same regardless of your reasoning

Again, do you see the difference in lifting for punishment or lifting for assistance? Do you need help with this?

Lifting a small child from a car is lifting for assistance. Just as it is every time the same childminder lifts the same child from the same car.

@JustLyra

That’s not true though. They don’t learn: aha shoes on even when I don’t want to! They learn ‘punishment’ but they don’t know why they’re being punished. They can’t, at two. If you think the Op’s kid will do something different tomorrow because of this, you’re wrong.

At that age they absolutely learn correlation.

She now knows she doesn’t like bare feet on the ground. That’s a learning moment.

And a considerably more productive one that being restrained in her buggy as the OP suggested she should have been.

They really don’t. The OP’s kid could do exactly the same tomorrow. She doesn’t have the development yet to understand why she’s being punished for something that makes perfect sense, to her very little, not-yet-developed-properly brain.

@JustLyra

Learning through punishment isn’t learning. Again, I’d bet the OP’s 2.5 year old would do exactly the same thing tomorrow.

Learning through natural consequences is not punishment.
I’d bet she won’t.

That’s not a natural consequence though - she was lifted out of the car. If she’d taken her shoes off at the park and ran through mud and didn’t like it, that’s learning. Being punished for not having your shoes on won’t make her learn faster.

They really don’t. The OP’s kid could do exactly the same tomorrow. She doesn’t have the development yet to understand why she’s being punished for something that makes perfect sense, to her very little, not-yet-developed-properly brain.

You keep mentioning punishment -what do you mean by this? I suspect from your application if the term you aren't applying it according to learning theory

Also you don't expect two year olds to be able to respond to operant conditioning techniques (they absolutely can, even insects can learn using applied learning theory) but do expect them to be able to distinguish whether lifting is forceful or not depending on the valuation of their caregivers motivation for doing so.

Do you not think that is a more cognitively sophisticated task than simple operant learning?

That’s not a natural consequence though - she was lifted out of the car. If she’d taken her shoes off at the park and ran through mud and didn’t like it, that’s learning. Being punished for not having your shoes on won’t make her learn faster.

It absolutely is natural consequences. She was lifted out the car because small children are always lifted out of cars.

She's learned that she doesn't like her feet on the ground without shoes. Next time she's coming out the car she'll want her shoes on.

@sweeneytoddsrazor

What you are suggesting would only work with 1:1 care *@Pumperthepumper*.

They were going to play because OP says the child would not have liked to be sat in the buggy watching the others running around playing. So choices are everyone sit in the car until x decides to put her socks and shoes on or show x why she should put her socks and shoes on. Or wrestle (force) her into the buggy , whilst she bites and hits then let the others play. Meanwhile x is miserable in the buggy and still has cold feet. The CM is perfectly able to do her job and has indeed done her job. If OP wants a pandered child that childcare revolves solely around she should have a Nanny and make sure she only has 1 child.

Again, if the childminder can meet the needs of this child, the OP should find one who can. The other children are irrelevant to the OP, and punishing a 2.5 year old for something she can’t control will make her miserable.

I think what you are struggling with (and I would too if I were in your shoes) is that as mothers we feel like we have the authority to decide how to discipline our children. Somehow when somebody else other than ourselves, does it. We feel some kind of way. It's not because we necessarily disagree with the method of discipline, it's just that it would have been nice to be asked first if that mode of discipline was ok to be used on your child before that person did it. Logically, the cm did well in the circumstances.

You have two options, you can either speak to cm and tell her not to discipline your child (in which case you might as well start looking for another cm) or let it go knowing her intentions were right to begin with and that your child is at least recognising that poor behaviour will not be tolerated by others.

That’s not a natural consequence though - she was lifted out of the car. If she’d taken her shoes off at the park and ran through mud and didn’t like it, that’s learning. Being punished for not having your shoes on won’t make her learn faster.

Well that's answered part of my question.

No you don't understand the science of learning.

@Pumperthepumper I'm really confused about how much you seem to be underestimating the cognitive ability of a 2.5 year old - you're talking as if it's a 12 month old with your insistence that they couldn't possibly learn anything from this. Of course most 2.5 year olds could see the cause/consequence here. But if you think they couldn't I can't imagine why you're suggesting reasoning with them?

@WaltzingBetty

That’s for safety, not for punishment. Do you see the difference?

You're missing the point. Something is punishing if the child perceived it as such. Your reasoning is irrelevant.

If lifting/restraining is forceful and punishing as you suggest then the child would perceive it as such in all contexts. Ergo any lifting is forceful/punishing.

Or are you expecting a 2 year old to evaluate your motivation and make a judgement as to why you are lifting them?
That seems like rather high cognitive expectations for a 2 year old

Assuming the 2 year old child cannot appreciate the context and distinguish your motivation, then lifting them is either force as you have stated or a reasonable technique for managing a toddler. Which is it?

I don’t know what this means. Lifting them willingly onto the toilet: fine. Lifting them out of the car to stand in mud with no shoes on: not fine. The onus here isn’t on the child, it’s on the adult.

@WaltzingBetty

Again, do you see the difference in lifting for punishment or lifting for assistance? Do you need help with this?

No but I think most 2 year olds wouldn't appreciate the difference and so their experience is the same regardless of your reasoning

Again; it’s on the adult.