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.

But what's the fuss over shoes & socks, I really don't get it.

The fuss is that the child doesn’t like being barefoot... as she discovered when she was allowed to chose to be.

There is zero punishment either by lifting or allowing the child the choice of not wearing the socks and shoes a punishment would be not letting the child go to the park.
There are some really warped minds on this thread.

@WaltzingBetty

Oh right.

Now we're imagining the OP has put her child in painful I'll-fitting shoes to make the argument work
This is like a creative writing exercise

No, we’re theorising the reasons a 2.5 year old might have taken her shoes off in the first place.

Good grief. Now you're going on about bloody bananas! The child didn't want to wear her shoes and socks. The childminder went along with her wishes. The child then realised that she prefers it when she wears shoes and socks outside. Job done, they all have a lovely time. There is no punishment in allowing a 2.5 year old to explore her environment in a multi-sensory way. Some experts (though obviously not you) believe it is even beneficial to a child's learning. Fancy that! Where is the learning involved in your suggestion of waiting, turning it into a game or leaving the child in the car? How does the child benefit from that? They learn that the world stops for them to decide to do what they have been asked. They learn that an adult can 'trick' them into doing something they didn't want to do but the adult did want them to do or they learn that they have to sit in a car for prolonged periods because they didn't do what the adult asked them to do. Hmm. I think I know which way I prefer my child to learn.

@Beseigedbykillersquirrels

Good grief. Now you're going on about bloody bananas! The child didn't want to wear her shoes and socks. The childminder went along with her wishes. The child then realised that she prefers it when she wears shoes and socks outside. Job done, they all have a lovely time. There is no punishment in allowing a 2.5 year old to explore her environment in a multi-sensory way. Some experts (though obviously not you) believe it is even beneficial to a child's learning. Fancy that! Where is the learning involved in your suggestion of waiting, turning it into a game or leaving the child in the car? How does the child benefit from that? They learn that the world stops for them to decide to do what they have been asked. They learn that an adult can 'trick' them into doing something they didn't want to do but the adult did want them to do or they learn that they have to sit in a car for prolonged periods because they didn't do what the adult asked them to do. Hmm. I think I know which way I prefer my child to learn.

Which experts?

Is it a personal attack to state that Pumping knows nothing about subjects that she's clearly admitted to knowing nothing about?

I don't know what you mean about 'knowing nothIng'? Didn't she say she'd professional & personal experience?

Personal attack means calling her a GF, mocking her viewpoint repeatedly and saying she is dim. All of which you did.

Unnecessary.

@Beseigedbykillersquirrels

Good grief. Now you're going on about bloody bananas! The child didn't want to wear her shoes and socks. The childminder went along with her wishes. The child then realised that she prefers it when she wears shoes and socks outside. Job done, they all have a lovely time. There is no punishment in allowing a 2.5 year old to explore her environment in a multi-sensory way. Some experts (though obviously not you) believe it is even beneficial to a child's learning. Fancy that! Where is the learning involved in your suggestion of waiting, turning it into a game or leaving the child in the car? How does the child benefit from that? They learn that the world stops for them to decide to do what they have been asked. They learn that an adult can 'trick' them into doing something they didn't want to do but the adult did want them to do or they learn that they have to sit in a car for prolonged periods because they didn't do what the adult asked them to do. Hmm. I think I know which way I prefer my child to learn.

Which experts believe punishing a child helps them learn faster? Which experts believe using your physical advantage to force a child to do something they don’t want to do is beneficial to a child’s learning?

From a basic understanding of the cognitive development of a child. And they can’t rationalise cause and effect in the same way an adult does. At best you can hope for a Pavlovian response to punishment but I think we can agree that’s not ideal.
Since a 'Pavlovian' response is classical conditioning that produces an autonomic response to a stimulus, it's not applicable in this situation
However operant conditioning is very applicable and doesn't require rationalisation - unlike your suggestion that a child can tell the difference whether an adult is motivated to lift them for reasons of safety or for reasons if punishment (they can't)

Weird how you try and justify your reasoning by attributing complex reassigning to toddlers whilst simultaneously stating they aren't capable of complex reasoning

The obsession with the lifting out of the car is utterly bizarre.

I’d be surprised if some people who’ve commented on this thread have ever dealt with a 2.5 year old.

Absolutely bonkers.

I'm sorry but I've been in similar experiences with my own children where I've known the shoes/clothes fit perfectly well and actually this type of strategy works.

If it's a pavlovian response I'll take it .

@JustLyra

But what's the fuss over shoes & socks, I really don't get it.

The fuss is that the child doesn’t like being barefoot... as she discovered when she was allowed to chose to be.

I meant, what's the fuss about the DC taking them off, in the car.

CM didn't need to do anything. Pops them back on when they arrive at destination.

Anyway, can't waste my Sunday evening on the pseudo-psychologist and the sock. I have playdough to make up

Waltzing as a parent can I just say I love operant conditioning. My favourite kind!
Over and out, I've given this enough of my neurons this evening.

Personal attack means calling her a GF, mocking her viewpoint repeatedly and saying she is dim. All of which you did.

I actually said either/or

I apologise

However I stand by the fact that she is unable to answer any questions on child development and has openly admitted to knowing nothing about the terms she keeps using.

I fear for the future with all these coddled children who won't have any resilience.

Reasonable natural consequences work.

Life does have some discomforts.

With your rationale about it, you would have never gotten pregnant or gave birth because of the physical discomfort!

CM didn't need to do anything. Pops them back on when they arrive at destination.

@EarringsandLipstick Yes, I’m sure a qualified professional childcarer wouldn’t have thought of doing that if it was that simple...

On that note I’m out. People are just at it now

Huh? My son is 2.5 and always takes his socks and shoes off in the car. I just put them back on. He is still so little and cannot put them back on himself anyway?? That seems cruel of the childminder

that a child can tell the difference whether an adult is motivated to lift them for reasons of safety or for reasons if punishment (they can't)

Of course they can!

Because the context makes it clear. And before you tell me I'm wrong, I'm a parent to 3 DC & can attest to them knowing the difference.

Tho I'm not sure I ever lifted them in 'punishment' per se but there were definitely moments where they had one opinion & I another!

CM didn't need to do anything. Pops them back on when they arrive at destination.

Back on the hitting biting resistant toddler

Or let's her have her own way for a few minutes til she changes her mind.

But apparently letting her have some autonomy is punishment

@WaltzingBetty

From a basic understanding of the cognitive development of a child. And they can’t rationalise cause and effect in the same way an adult does. At best you can hope for a Pavlovian response to punishment but I think we can agree that’s not ideal. Since a 'Pavlovian' response is classical conditioning that produces an autonomic response to a stimulus, it's not applicable in this situation However operant conditioning is very applicable and doesn't require rationalisation - unlike your suggestion that a child can tell the difference whether an adult is motivated to lift them for reasons of safety or for reasons if punishment (they can't)

Weird how you try and justify your reasoning by attributing complex reassigning to toddlers whilst simultaneously stating they aren't capable of complex reasoning

However operant conditioning is very applicable and doesn't require rationalisation - unlike your suggestion that a child can tell the difference whether an adult is motivated to lift them for reasons of safety or for reasons if punishment (they can't)

A child doesn’t know if they’re lifted in joy or in anger? Are you sure?

@JustLyra

CM didn't need to do anything. Pops them back on when they arrive at destination.

@EarringsandLipstick Yes, I’m sure a qualified professional childcarer wouldn’t have thought of doing that if it was that simple...

On that note I’m out. People are just at it now

But why wasn't it that simple? I've read OP's posts. She didn't say anything to indicate that it wasn't.

You're just speculating. I'm going on what OP has told us.

A child doesn’t know if they’re lifted in joy or in anger? Are you sure?

Exactly Pumper again, well-put! 😁

Because the context makes it clear. And before you tell me I'm wrong, I'm a parent to 3 DC & can attest to them knowing the difference.

Ok so they are capable of contextual reasoning and evaluating an adult's motivation as you and Pumpers say but incapable of very basic operant learning that has been shown to work in insects (and toddlers)

You and Pumpers should publish this.
It's groundbreaking science

@WaltzingBetty

Personal attack means calling her a GF, mocking her viewpoint repeatedly and saying she is dim. All of which you did.

I actually said either/or

I apologise

However I stand by the fact that she is unable to answer any questions on child development and has openly admitted to knowing nothing about the terms she keeps using.

What questions? What did I admit to knowing nothing about? It’s all garbage, it’s like when you repeatedly said I said the childminder should lock the kid in the car, it’s total nonsense.

I will answer any question you want me to answer, just post it.

A child doesn’t know if they’re lifted in joy or in anger? Are you sure?
You're the one that said lifting was forceful and a punishment
You're the one that has assumed the childminder is angry
You're the one that assumed the childminder was taking the child indoors
you're the one that assumed the child's shoes were painful

You clearly like assuming/creating a convenient narrative.