genuine question about the naughty step/time out

[lucyellensmum]

OK - so it works? I guess it does because everyone seems to be doing it but i honestly don't get it. So its my perception that im questioning here instead of the concept itself. I don't disagree or agree with the naughty step, im genuinely interested.

Firstly, does a young child really understand this? If you stick a small toddler on the naughty step - do they REALLY understand why they are there? As in, do they spend that time reflecting and then behave better, or do they just sit there because angry mummy put them there so best they stay there - their little minds start to wander and they forget about being naughty/having the tantrum. (OK so that works but is that what the baby bible bashers want us to believe?)

Secondly: A tantruming, possibly older toddler, are they actually going to stay there? Seriously, if the child is being that bad, they are going to just keep getting off the step, no reflection in that - i guess if they sit compliantly on the step then i wonder if it is a game to them?

I have used the naughty step with DD, at first it sort of worked, but it genuinely upset her or she got bored and wandered off. I don't bother now.

I tend to parent instinctively and dont really use any techniques - i would say my DD is slightly spoilt (thats partly DPs fault and partly mine for different reasons), but generally a well behaved little girl.

Enlighten me?

[HonoriaGlossop]

but not having the naughty step and not using the word naughty does not mean that a child's actions are never judged and a child is never told no and does not experience consequences! There is more than one way of achieving this.

[boozybird]

surely part of responsible parenting is teaching your child what is and isnt' acceptable behaviour? they aren't born with an innate knowledge of what is and isn't socially expected of them. imo ASKING young children to do something is like giving them a choice in it, and i personally feel that that's often a huge responsibility for a youngster, to have to make the choice for themselves when the correct choice might not be the one they want to choose - you as the adult sometimes have to make the right choice for them, and explain the reasons why.

i hope i'm not rambling, but it's about helping them to learn to make the right decisions, and why. so the balance is neither totally dictatorial nor totally boudary-free.

my ds is not quite 2, and i feel that what works best for him is removing his from situation and letting him know i'm not happy about his behaviour (i.e. hit someone on the slide and you have to stop playing on the slide, because you hit when i told you not to). having him sit for 2 mins feels wrong to me, like punishment, rather than a direct consequence of an action.

i find the Dr Sears 'Good Behaviour' book (for birth to ten) really good - having said that he does advocate time-out, but i find the other stuff he says really helpful.

could be completely wrong of course, and i might find it more useful as he gets older and winds me up more.

[fordfiesta]

we use it purely for hitting/kicking, but leave the option up to ds to come back and say sorry when he was ready. he used to sit on it for 5 - 10 mins to start but now it takes him about 2 mins to come back and say sorry for hurting....... i like to think he has learnt a lesson, am not sure sometimes if that lesson is just that the sooner he says what he is meant to say the sooner he can get back to play!!! Am a single mum and disipline is sometimes a bit of a struggle and i find that sometimes just for me to have 2 mins timeout works best!!!

[kiskidee]

I don't think anyone here was proposing asking a child to do anything as an alternative.

I teach secondary and too often see kids who are used to being asked to follow instruction, etc.

I certainly don't ask teens or toddlers to follow instruction.

[boozybird]

hughjarsss mentioned 'asking' in her post.

because we/nursery have taught ds to say sorry if he has hurt someone by deliberate hitting or kicking, i find that as soon as he's done it, he is immediately saying Sorry, Sorry, because he knows it's wrong. then i am confused about how you would then do time out, because surely one cant' send them off after saying sorry?

[kiskidee]

yes boozy, suddenly 'asking' was brought up and no earlier post suggested that asking a toddler to follow the rules was a behaviour management strategy instead of using the naughty step.

[hughjarssss]

Oh sorry I didn't realise there were rules regarding what what we could discuss. I'll make sure I put my hand up next time and ask permission to add my thoughts.

I brought up 'asking' as a response to theGermanparison post where he said he would prefer to be firm with his dc.
I then added my thoughts that 'asking' children is a load of nonsense as well IMO.
This was also a response to the earlier post which mentioned liberal parenting.

I can't believe I have to justify this.

[kiskidee]

course you can bring up anything you like in a discussion. However, be ready to accept that it can be rebutted for any variety of reasons.

[VictorianSqualor]

We 'time out' but it's not a punishment, it's more 'what you just did was very wrong and X happened/could've happened so I want you to go and think about what you did/why you did it whilst I calm down' not 'you're a naughty boy go and sit out there'.

Also I don't like to force children to apologise, I prefer to explain what there behaviour has caused and want them to actually feel sorry rather than just say sorry.

[kiskidee]

yeah the liberal parenting post is a pile of tosh too, i agree.

just because you choose not to use the naughty step doesn't make anyone on here a liberal parent.

I have seen so called 'no nonsense' or strict old fashioned parents have some v. badly behaved children and there are lots of reasons this is so and better left for another thread.

[VictorianSqualor]

Oh, re: apologising, I try to lead by example, I'm only human and sometimes don't behave as perfectly as I'd like so I will apologise to the DC's if I feel it is warranted.

[hughjarssss]

I didn't once say or imply that parenting was divided into two camps, those who liberal or those who use the naughty step.

And I have no problem with people rebutting what I say, but I have a problem with people questioning my right to have my say.
I, like everyone else, has the right to post my opinion without having to justify it.

You are not in the classroom now.

[boozybird]

VictorianSqualor - i know what you mean re the sorry thing as it certainly doesn't represent actual regret when forced out of a toddler, but i'm quite confused about it. what do you do instead? allow them to walk away without making amends when they've whacked another nipper over the head for no reason? that doesn't feel right either.

[hughjarssss]

And if you don't think we should be discussing liberal parenting on this thread, maybe you should direct your post to the person who first raised it.

[kiskidee]

hughj.... go away and breathe....

it ain't that important.

[VictorianSqualor]

I tell them it's wrong, it's not nice, that it is perfectly fine to feel anger and frustration but not fine to deal with it by using violence.

I ask them how they'd feel if that child had hurt them, how they think that child must now be feeling and ask if there is anything they want to say to the child. 9 times out of ten once they realise what they've done they feel bad and apologise.

[hughjarssss]

How nice and patronising kis

[VictorianSqualor]

Oh, and I would apologise. If one of the DC's (likely to be DS1 as he is at that age) hit another child I would apologise to the child, and their parent if they were around and check they were ok. I would do that before having any conversation with my child because the injured party is more important at the point.

[Mercy]

Ime, time out doesn't work at all with toddlers. It's beyond their comprehension.

dd is 7 and get sent to her room for very bad behaviour and ds (who is 4) has to sit on the stairs for a bit (it's not called naughty step btw)

But I only do this when they have been physically fighting each other and need to be separated, very occasionally for ohter reasons.

(haven't read the thread, will do do now)

[kiskidee]

call it patronising if that makes you feel better.

you are taking this way too personally. this is only a msg board. get a grip.

my response that you can say whatever you like, err, your opinions, is fine but just take it on the chin if someone rebuts it, seems to have gone well past your radar.

sorry you have gotten your knickers in a twist but if you can't see that I was not attacking you or your ideas then your twisty knickers is all your own doing.

[hughjarssss]

No twsited knickers here, probably because I'm wearing a thong and that would just be painful.

[Slubberdegullion]

My dds asked to have a Simmer Down Chair last week after watching an episode of Charlie and Lola.

If things are getting all het up I say

"do you want to go and sit on your Simmer Down Chairs?"

"Oh yes please" they say, and scuttle off to sit on them

They think it's hilarious.

I don't think the novelty will last.

[HonoriaGlossop]

cor, hughjarsss and a thong DOES sound as if it would smart a bit

[kiskidee]

a thong in a twist would cut off all circulation to ones legs, wouldn't it.

I'm petrified of thongs. I fear that any friction when walking around in one will saw me in half.

[wulfstan]

we use the naughty step. It certainly isn't beyond the comprehension of my 2.8yr toddler. Three things make you go directly to the naughty step: aggression (hitting / biting / kicking), spitting, and throwing or deliberately smearing food. The rest of toddlerdom, we live with generally. If there's sustained disobedience that hasn't stopped with asking / explaining etc then that might land him on the naughty step as well, but only after a warning.

I say no to my kids. They understand that there are certain behaviours that will get a "no" every time. They understand that it's not okay to hurt other people physically or emotionally (e.g. breaking toys). In due course, they'll develop a bit more empathy about why they shouldn't do things to others that they wouldn't like themselves. On the other hand, there are some really irritating things we do tolerate or ignore, and we make a conscious effort to say "yes" whenever possible, so they don't live in a prison state.