To think we shouldn't use the word "naughty" with a 2 year old?

[gollyimholly]

DD has just turned 2. DH describes her as naughty and has done for almost a year. He will tell her to stop being naughty or say something like "why are you so naughty?", "DDname is a naughty a girl".

Before having DD I read that you shouldn't call children naughty because using such a label can make you subconsciously interpret their behaviour and perceive what they're doing as naughty even if it is something that is just a developmental behaviour. And also the child might then act up to their label. I can relate to this because when I was younger I would get called dopey or a clown a lot by family and then I would feel like I needed to be a bit silly or dumb.

That said when I first learnt you shouldn't call a child "naughty" I also did think something along the lines of "ugh, what can we say, it feels like everything isn't allowed, or everything is too harsh". However, now I have DD I think I am more empathetic and understand better what the intention behind avoiding using labels such as naughty is.

AIBU to think DH is wrong to use the word naughty? I am very happy to be corrected as it would solve the problem for me.

I teach infants, labelling the behaviour not the child is important. No child is inherently naughty but they may exhbit naught behaviours, and it's best to state that a particular behaviour is unacceptable. ' We don't....'

The best theory, which is not always easy to do, is to focus on the behaviour you want not the behaviour you don't. 'Let's read the book' ratger than 'don't rip the book'. 'Eat your food nicely' rather than 'Don't throw food'. You see more of the behaviour you name.

The ' No thank you ' thing is something I sometimes say in school. You're basically saying thank you for stopping that behaviour. You're coming from the point of view of assuming they will stop the undesirable behaviour, whuch sometimes (not always) helps them to stop because you've already assumed they will stop.

I feel like using words like ‘mummy is disappointed’ or ‘that is unkind’ for bad behaviour eg biting, ripping books etc is too gentle. I’ve seen my peers do it and it was a disaster.

I'm disappointed when the kids didn’t put things away at first ask maybe,but anything more serious they were told that mum is very angry with their behaviour and there would be an age appropriate consequence.
Non of this kind hands malarkey!

I never hit my children but they knew when they were about to step out of line and quickly learned to correct themselves.
ok my kids weren’t perfect and I look back on things I could have done a bit different but I ended up with two boys who didn’t cause me problems as teens and are successful young adults.

Huh? I've never made a long speech to DD in my life?? Read my earlier posts 🙄

A child needs to be told no or don't do that. Or else how will they know it's wrong. If they understand and continue then they are naughty. Why are we shying away from the word. Fair enough to say the behaviour is naughty and not the child

.

Ah, a bit like ‘thank you for not smoking’.

Ughhh no. My neighbour is like this with her child. He's never told that he (or his behaviour) is naughty, just about choices. And to make better choices. Sometimes he chooses to rip pages out of books, because that day he doesn't want to read, so not being able to read the book isn't an issue to him. It's his choice to not read it by ripping pages out. Some days when he's in a situation he's finding difficult he instead chooses to scream non stop for a full hour and half. When he's given time out on his room he'll be punching walls, knocking everything off shelves and trashing the place. That's his choice, because he's annoyed (usually at himself) that he's in time out. Sometimes he's lovely and an angel. Sometimes he's very caring and sweet. But he's free to make his own choices, and sometimes he chooses stupidly, because at time he WANTS to show his anger so it's a reasonable choice to make.

As others have said, behaviour in schools has gone severely downhill in the past 20-30 years. Children not being told "No, That is naughty, I am NOT allowing you to do that" has been replaced by "Maybe choose differently next time".

I think there’s a real danger of overthinking this.

I don’t see any problem with saying “stop being naughty” so long as it’s clear, or you are able to make it clear, what it is that’s naughty that they need to stop.

Labelling the behaviour as naughty rather than the child risks the child not realising that they have done something wrong. If your child needs food you don’t say to them “that is hungry behaviour”!

So I think “you are being naughty” is fine in the moment, just as “you are being loud”, “you are hungry”, “you are funny”, “you are poorly”. No behaviour is permanent, all are fine to label in the moment.

I think "no" is probably the most important word to teach your child. That and "I love you."

Reminds me of the guy who posts different types of parenting from different generations. Guess which one is quick, straight to the point and probably got the result. (Hint it’s not bad choices, it’s not you it’s the behaviour or unkind hands)

I’ve gone for lots of love, firm boundaries and trying to make my kids resilient and accountable.

They are kind, hard working, brilliant and self sufficient now they’re older. We have a great relationship.

I did say they were naughty when they were naughty. I notice my younger siblings have been told never to say this with their children and I honestly find it quite odd.

can I add "stop!" to that.
I'm a childminder and I always drum this into them.
A loud "stop" and they stop immediately.
No names. no pleases or explanation; just "stop".
I practise it randomly when we're out and about

I think guidance is best at this age, no is useful in certain situations. We allowed the children to empty the cupboard and wander around. No stair gates, locks or plates for covering electrical sockets.

The amount of knife crime and teenagers stabbing each other would indicate something isn't working with regards to worrying about consequences and behaviour.

FFS 🙄

I don’t think I have ever used the word naughty in relation to my children. Not even in relation to their behaviour. They are not psychotic Andrew Taters. They are two of the nicest children in their school. You can have boundaries and well behaved children without calling them naughty.

The damage is using a negative child to describe the child. They are hearing their parents (the main source of security & comfort and where they get feedback on how to behave in the world) say they are a bad person. They are naughty. They are lazy. They are fat. They are stupid. They’re useless. They’re disappointing. They’re unlovable. They are not wanted.

You get your sense of worth from your parents. If your parents tell you you are bad, you’re going to believe it. Children completely accept their parents. They love them unconditionally. Parents are responsible for creating the blueprint for all the relationships your child will have when they’re adults. If they are brought up feeling they’re a disappointment then they may equate being in a loving relationship with being put down. We learn how to give and receive love from the relationships we have with our parents.

With children, they don’t always hear the exact words you say but can take a different meaning eg “I love you, but sometimes I get really frustrated when you XYZ”. They hear “I don’t love you all the time because you’re not nice”. Or if they’re complaining about something (and this is one I had to train myself out of!) “I don’t care who started it, it’s done” they will hear “I don’t care about you”. It’s like when you’ve got a toddler and you tell them not to touch something or not to climb on something, they never hear the “don’t”.

What you’re doing with specifically telling her what isn’t allowed is the best way to deal with it. “You’re naughty” is too specific for her to actually learn anything from. It doesn’t actually teach her how to behave, just that she’s something that isn’t wanted. Being negative the whole time really sucks.

I used "naughty" to describe something DS did rather than him. So tearing pages out of books was "a naughty thing to do".

But I used "not nice" more often. I felt like I was overall trying to encourage him to be "nice" so "not nice" was more appropriate.

I remember being at school aged 5. I was in the toilets with a friend. We went into each cubicle and locked the door then crawled out under the door so it was locked from the inside but no one could get in. We found it hilarious. We got shouted at by the teacher and it sticks in my mind because I was rarely in trouble and I got very upset that I was. But, it certainly stopped me doing it again!! I’m not sure just being told “next time choose not to do it” would have had the same effect!

Another toilet incident was with the paper towels once. They were all wedged in so tight you couldn’t get one out. So my friend started ripping the paper trying to pull it. I found it funny so started copying her. We were both laughing ripping these tiny pieces of paper towels and they were dropping all over the floor creating a mess. This one especially wasn’t done with malice. But we created a mess and were told off. I remember being told off by the teacher because I got a bit upset as I knew I hadn’t meant to be bad. But at the same time it wasn’t a good thing to do and I’m not sure if the teacher had just gently said “we only use the hand towels nicely” would have had the same effect! Do I think I deserved a huge telling off when I didn’t actually mean to be bad? No. But honestly I’m not sure just being told “choose better next time” would have stopped me doing it again. Because it was funny (to a 5 year old at the time). And there was no unpleasant consequences to it.

People seem to think that if a child remembers a telling off they are traumatised by it. I’m certainly not traumatised by being shouted at! But it certainly made me never do it again! Because I didn’t want to be told off again like that!

I teach infants, labelling the behaviour not the child is important. No child is inherently naughty but they may exhbit naught behaviours, and it's best to state that a particular behaviour is unacceptable. ' We don't....'

But why do you say it's important? Because you've been told or because you've noticed a definite difference in how children react to the different words?

I very much doubt I would notice if I was in the middle of a complaint from a manager them saying "you are wrong" v "you did this wrong". I'd probably notice if they said "you are always wrong" though.

I don't think children analyse the words as closely as this gives the impression.

That's a very catholic attitude; hate the sin, love the sinner.
Children are naughty.
It isn't a label, it's a descriptor of attitude and bahaviour.

In the case of mine, one was an academic high flyer and the other was doing GCSEs at home in online school. The schools they were able to attend at secondary level were more influential in this than whether they were called naughty at home. It also doesn't mean that they had no boundaries or discipline at home, it just means we didn't call them names and were kind and fair. And they were never "naughty" or disruptive at school. Unfortunately most state secondary schools now are not kind and fair. The best way parents could prepare them for the experience is to send their child to a young offenders instuition for a year. Obviously we were not prepared to do that.

You don’t call the child naughty, but the t’s fine to call out the untoward behaviour as naughty. Bit like not saying ‘I don’t like you’, but okay to say ‘I don’t like it when you do x.’.

Nit calling out naughty behaviour and giving it the label it should have contributed to all the ‘spirited’ children you get now. Never naughty. Just spirited. 🫤

Children are not by default naughty, they are learning, growing and developing and some are more boisterous and challenging than others. In any event I never said the word should never be used. I certainly did use it but to describe behaviour not the child.

I'm a teacher too, and although the 'Don't label the child, label the behaviour' idea is maybe part and parcel of a wider more indulgent attitude to how we deal with kids' behaviour, I really don't think there's anything wrong with this particular rule. Surely we can be strict about and punish bad behaviour without encouraging a child to cast themselves potentially permanently in the role of 'naughty child'?

One and two year olds are not naughty. They’re instinctive.

So you don't think there's such a thing as children who are largely good and well-behaved, but who very occasionally do something naughty? Would you say that such a child is inherently a naughty child? If not, why call them one?

If a child is being naughty then they are being naughty. All this kind hands bullshit is exactly why this generation is turning out to be completely out of control and unteachable at school.