At what age do punishments mean anything?

[weeblueberry]

My DD1 had just turned two and I know this is obviously a very difficult time. We've also just added a new baby into the mix so nothing is easy and we're aware she's pushing boundaries.

She's doing things she never used to and we're not sure whether 'punishments' work at this age. I'm obviously not talking about smacking or taking things away but how do we explain to her (other than actually explaining to her...) that things are wrong? She's throwing things and acting out and we're not quite sure how to stop it. She used to easily go to sleep for naps but now stands screaming in her cot for us. Not upset. Just shouting for us.

Do you just leave it? It seems as though then when we do nice things or get her gifts she might think we're rewarding her bad behaviour. She's been hellish this morning but we're due to go to soft play with a friend. At what point would not going to show her what she was doing this morning was naughty behaviour?

I'm consious she's very young and none of this means much to her and this behaviour is expected. But when do punishments actually mean something to them? Other than a momentary tantrum and then forgetting about it ten minutes later?

Any book suggestions maybe?

[TeacupTravels]

We aim not to "punish" and find other ways of reconnecting with the child. Can't say we're always successful.

Behaviour is all communication - they're trying to express frustration/sadness so ideally you want to help them manage that so they don't do it again rather than add to their frustration.

I really like the "how to talk so kids will listen, and listen so kids will talk." I've also got sibling rivalry which I think is by the same people. That's really changed some of the ways I speak to my children.

[CultureSucksDownWords]

Gamerchick, it is possible to not "punish" whilst also dealing effectively with poor behaviour. If my DS was kicking another child there would be more done than simply glaring I can assure you.

Lax parenting is not the same thing as not using punishment methods. It's just lax parenting!

[squizita]

Mariposa gently saying "no" and taking the child off the breast for a while (a few minutes at the start of the feed or ending the feed if it's at the end ... biting tends to occur at the start or end) is precisely what every breastfeeding/natural parenting blog/real life advisor/book I've come across suggests.
Reapeated biting with teeth is not only agonising but can damage the nipple, leading to feeding problems more frustrating and upsetting than 5 min off the boob. Plus with natural term breastfeeding the child does need to understand that mummy can be hurt, or might be looking after another child etc so waiting and not pulling/biting etc are reasonable expectations.

[BoobsandLoubs]

CultureSucks please can you give me some suggestions/examples on how to deal with poor behaviour without "punishing". Sometimes I am at my wits end and I really don't know what alternative method to use that would be effective as the threat of removal of treats etc.

[CultureSucksDownWords]

It's not so much of a quick fix so I don't know if anything I could say would be helpful in the immediate instance, BoobsandLoubs.

My starting point was a book called Toddler Calm, as well as "how to talk so kids will listen and how to listen so kids will talk". I don't know if you've read either of those, but they might be helpful.

[UngratefulMoo]

My DD is 22 months and we do warnings and immediate consequences - eg, if you do [x] again then I will take it away. I wouldn't call it punishment, just understanding that her behaviour has consequences. I explain but don't dwell on it and just move on to something else. It doesn't always work but she definitely understands. I wouldn't try delayed consequences at this age (eg trips being cancelled) as she wouldn't understand and it would just upset her.

[weeblueberry]

Ungrateful we've been doing that too. It results in many a tantrum... I wasn't sure whether removing something would make a difference at this age but suppose it's a good foundation for co sequences like you said.

[Midorichan]

I think it's very much a case of horses for courses - what will work for one child, will not work for another. It's all down to the child as an individual. I'm also intrigued how one is supposed to "punish" without punishing, no one seems to be answering this question.

[Midorichan]

There's nothing wrong with teaching that actions have consequences. That's not punishment, just sensible parenting.

[CultureSucksDownWords]

The answer to how you punish without punishing... is that you don't punish, in the traditional sense. So, natural consequences that make sense, removal, distraction etc. instead of time out, delayed unrelated consequence etc.

[Midorichan]

I guess for people with normal (placid, easy going) kids no punishment must work really well. Definitely wouldn't for my high needs toddler, but that's why naughty corner has worked so well for him as well as consequential punishment i.e. if you do that again then we're going home.

[TeacupTravels]

I see it the other way personally. Maybe an easy going child would respond to a punishment so you only have to do it once? My high needs child would just keep doing what she's doing if you threaten to see if you do it, and then spiral into emotional overload, getting more upset at being punished than whatever the issue was.

I really found the, "how to talk" book helpful and would recommend especially for non placid kids! However if you've found you've only need to punish occasionally and it works for your child/they learn from it what you want them to learn that's ace too!

[undoubtedly]

DS is almost three and I haven't started yet.

I don't think he really understands and any naughty step or similar would just turn into a separate battle to keep him on the step.

The few times he's done something very obviously "naughty" as opposed to silly (and I don't mean I was shouting, just that he knows he's done wrong) he's SO upset anyway that any further punishment would just be cruel.

So I stick to saying NO, removing from temptation and distraction. Anything else seems a bit scorched earth to me.

[undoubtedly]

Oh saying that I do use consequences, ie if you get down from the table then mummy will put your food in the bin because I will think you're finished.

That sort of thing tends to work and if he pushes it I'll do whatever I've threatened and just ride out the tantrum.

[CultureSucksDownWords]

My child is not easy going and placid at all. This is often the assumption when you mention that you don't do time out/naughty step, punishments etc.

[ThursdayLast]

Oh I deffo removed DS from my breast when he bit me during feeding!
No way was I martyring my nipples.

[Love51]

When people talk about not punishing, do they mean not humiliating? Eg My 3yo recently went through a stage of spilling her drinks lots at the table. So I stuck a lid on it (with a spout!). Natural consequence. If i had said she was having a baby cup because she was acting like a baby (i have a suspicion she was copying the toddler) then would this have moved it from consequence to punishment? Does the difference have something to do with the adults attitude?

[claraschu]

Yes, for me it does. It is the patronising attitude and the setting up of antagonism between adult and child which turns a natural response into a punishment.

[undoubtedly]

No I think a punishment is something which is done as a catch all in every situation.

So if you smack for a mixture of different transgressions, that's a punishment
If you sit on the naughty step whatever the bad behaviour, that's a punishment.
Removal of toys is a punishment.

I wouldn't say that putting a lid on a cup is a punishment as such, it's a natural consequence of behaviour. If DS is messing about on the street and I put reins on, that's not a punishment, it's a natural consequence to keep him safe.

I think you've got a point about humiliation though. If I put reins on an 8 year old then that would be punishment.