Parenting without punishment

[pinkliquorice]

In general mumsnet seems quite punishment happy and this approach seems to be heavily criticised.
Just wanted to start a thread for other parents to share their tips and experiences with not punishing.

Anyone else against punishments?
Anyone wanting to try it?

I'm a lucky mum,

I have high expectations and happy kids (Dds now 15 and 16). Punishment has not been needed - in my view.

However others might think I do punish - not ready, we won't go out then - seen by some as natural consequences others as punishment (not going out v. why can't we just go out a bit later when they are ready etc) - a lot of it is smoke and mirrors - different ways of putting it.

Everyone has their own trigger points and own ways of dealing with things when those buttons get pushed. Don't see the need to keep labelling parenting, most people do a mix, others like myself have been bloody lucky enough not to need to.

Dumbledore telling a 10 year old they've hurt their sister who might not want to play with them any more would not work.

I thought natural consequences meant those with no adult intervention at all. If a child breaks something of yours, the natural consequence is that that particular item is now unusable to them (as it's broken). But withdrawal of other items would actually be a punishment.

The natural consequence of pinching another child, is that the child who has been hurt may no longer want to play with them.

I agree that 'natural consequences' are generally more effective. But I'm not a fan of any ideological approach to rearing children. I find ideology inflexible and unnatural. It's normal for people - adults or children - to get ratty from time to time. It's not wrong to show the emotion of being cross to your children. It's wrong to be abusive but there is a long way from a cross 'for heaven's sake moomintroll' to being abusive.

I'm not big on punishment or shouting although as my children are older the removal of technology is the known result of a misdemeanour.

In my experience, and I'm sorry to say this, children brought up this way are difficult for other families to interact with. They seem to expect everyone else will tiptoe around them and never criticise.

We don't do punishments. I'd say the most natural consequence is one of us, DH, me, or DS, getting angry or upset. Generally resolved by crying, cuddling and chatting.

DS is highly sensitive and reacted horribly to the naughty step when he was little so we only did it about twice, once when he was 2, and once when he was 3.

Poor behaviour tends to be a result of an emotional need of some sort, so we try and address that, rather than inflicting punishments.

He's 9 now, so it's hard for me to remember the throwing/hitting/tantrums stage, but we always attempted to talk and reason while physically removing him from the object/person. This would have always been for safety rather than punishment.

He was always and still is a very compliant child so I don't know how our methods would work on a defiant child. He wants us to be connected and happy together.

I would imagine if you pinch someone they won’t want to play with them which would only be a consequence if if the pincher wanted to play with other child . If they don’t double win . I don’t confiscate as it doesn’t work for my Ds . He does get sent to his room though . He would be expected to pay for something he broke that wasn’t his . He does have adhd and so responds differently to things . We often have conversations about what else he could do next time . If he doesn’t do something I do the broken record he hates it but it works unlike shouting which sends him into a meltdown

I think if you show your children trust and respect then they will show it back. My children come to me with problems knowing I won’t shout or ground them and they don’t lie to me because they think they will be in trouble. If a child is too young to understand that something is wrong then they are too young to be punished for it. For children over toddler age I want them to be able to behave without me blackmailing or threatening them.
I want my 7 year old to not hit his sister because he doesn’t want to hurt her and he knows hitting is wrong not because he wants to keep his iPad or doesn’t want to be sent to bed early.
The natural consequence of hitting his sister would be she is upset and hurt and I am upset and disappointed in him and I would need to talk to him about how his behaviour is wrong, taking away his iPad does not teach him that he shouldn’t hit his sister because it’s wrong it teaches him that he shouldn’t hit his sister in front of me because I will take away his iPad.
I didn’t work in the long run, I really do think punishing is the easy option but that it leads to more bad behaviour.

The thing is with the expectation that one sibling may not play with the other if they hurt them, the onus us being put on the injured party to punish the offenders by refusing to play with them. It escalates the issue and encourages exclusion as a punishment. Also I don't think it's for fir my kids to punish each other that's the adult role. her sister would pinch her back or slap her, she would not refuse to play with her because she's then got nobody to play with! 'no WiFi' is guarantor stop it. Explanation of why urs wrong, they already know it's wrong so that counts fir nothing

@2014newme I completely agree! I wouldn't do it. A 10 year old child pinching in my house would get told off, and likely 'punished' in some way. But that's an example I've recently read about this kind of parenting style.

My dc are 2 and 3. My 3 year old is eager to please, motivated by stars, rarely naughty so wedon't really need to punish him. Dd is 2 and can be very.......erm challenging?? She knows full well not to throw certain toys but will sometimes do it anyway. First throw I might explain not to throw it because it might break/hurt someone etc. Second throw I would say that if she throws it again I will take it away. Third throw I tale it away, so punish her. If you have a dc who will always stop after the first throw then great (ds is like this),if you have one that will carry on then you need to punish imho. Dd is slowly coming to realise that she can't throw things!

My friend will not punish her son. He once dragged my ds across the floor by his hair. She told him all about 'gentle hands' and so on but a year later the boy still kicks, spits and hits other children. I would certainly punish him if he were my son. He does indeed have the natural consequence of other kids not wanting to play with him (I stopped inviting them over eventually)butit doesn't seem to be immediate enough for him to connect the two IYSWIM.

@BoredOnMatLeave how old is the child doing the scratching and was seems to trigger it? Are they perhaps reacting to the presence of a new sibling? IME the best way to deal with this sort of persistent issue is to not let them get to a point when it's likely to happen.

I can't see how natural consequences could work all the time either, especially with negotiating between siblings. One of mine was a horrible, aggressive bully to me; I just kept coming back for more. Thirty years on, she's still horrible!

@2014newme

No WiFi stops pinching because they want WiFi not because the know not to pinch.
Have you tried getting your 10 year old to stop pinching without taking away WiFi, later on in life they are going to need to know that you don’t punch because it’s mean and can hurt someone not because you will get the WiFi taken away, that won’t happen when they are adults.

Could the naughty step be a natural consequence though? You keep snatching your sister's toys, so I am going to sit you over here, so she can play in peace.

Good thread!

I think removing an item CAN be a natural consequence. Ds is told that him playing with the iPad is dependent on him being gentle with it. If he’s not gentle with it, I take it away and explain that the iPad is fragile and we need to be gentle with it. Just exactly the same as say, at the petting farm. Any not being gentle with the bunnies=no playing with the bunnies.

It’s a lesson he only needed once - he genuinely seemed to get that the bunnies could be hurt, which was my goal (understanding not punishment.)

We don’t shout (only in emergencies for example a yelled STOP! If about to run into a road.) we certainly don’t physically punish, it’s illegal here and even if it wasn’t we wouldn’t.

I think the stopping of a fun activity or cancelling one can be a consequence IF it’s immediate AND relevant. So I think ‘we won’t go to the beach next week’ is very different from ‘you keep hitting me, and if you can’t be gentle we can’t go see the bunnies this afternoon, because you must be gentle with them.’

For one twin hitting another? Stop whatever activity is ongoing. Separate if possible. Short ‘we don’t do x because x hurts and that’s wrong, we are going to stop doing y now because y needs us to be gentle,’

Really interesting discussion thank you.

I've got a couple of friends who don't 'punish' their children. It's not much fun spending time with children who are never corrected.

InDubiousBattle, it is annoying when parents are wet and clearly have no authority or respect from their children, such as the example of your wet friend and her obnoxious son. However, that is where a child has got completely out of hand and you probably would need to impose some fairly strong consequences to get respect again.

I'm not sure I used natural consequences (as I'm not totally sure what they are), but I like to think I used fair consequences, where a warning had been given and the opportunity had been given to behave well, or behave in a way that would come with a consequence that would be negative. If my DC chose the behaviour that came with the negative consequence, then I followed through. It was their choice though & therefore I didn't see it as me punishing them, but them punishing themselves IYSWIM.

need to know that you don’t punch because it’s mean and can hurt someone not because you will get the WiFi taken away, that won’t happen when they are adults.

Yes it doesn't, they go to prison and have all liberty taken away

Natural consequence of pinching in my house would be that the pinched child pinches or hits back. I therefore intervene with an "unnatural" punchment, such as removing instigator to quiet space (i.e. time out) or telling off before it decends into Lord of the Flies.

Pink licorice, pinching was an example, they don't actually pinch each other but they can lash out at each other and yes of course they know it's wrong but siblings do frustrate each other sometimes. No WiFi does work it stout immediately. Of course we explain why clearly as well. It happens probably once every couple of months. They don't lash out at anyone else, probably because they know their sister will still play with them even if they lose their temper occasionally.

I'm intrigued about the personality types of children who will behave without being punished for misbehaving. I only have one child, age 2.4, who so far shows little inclination to be a people pleaser! If I need her to put her coat on, and she doesn't want to, she will just say that, and often kick off if I grab her to do it. The only thing that seems to work to get her to do what I need her to do is to either bribe or threaten a consequence. Me being disappointed does not bother her in the slightest! Plus I want her to behave without me shaming her when she doesn't.

She is a particularly strong-willed child (though an angel at nursery, apparently ).

How would the type of parenting you describe, OP, deal with a toddler who constantly shouts 'I don't want to!!!' when asked to do anything? I don't want to always have to threaten or bribe, but it is often the only way to get her out the house/in her highchair/nappy changed etc.

I’d also say that the ability of children to understand that others can be hurt and that it’s wrong in and of itself is dependent on both age and the child.

Dealing with a ten year old who drags a child by the hair is going to require different approaches to dealing with an 18 m old who is biting, because they have different capabilities to understand the very concept of ‘others’ and how other people can be hurt.

But saying your sister won't play with you they know is nonsense. Their sister will play with them because she wants to play! and it's not for children to do the consequences in my opinion it's the adults.

I think the point is that children are very different . What works for one won’t work for another . Some children will think on naughty step , some will simply not want to go on the naughty step . My own Ds would simply play with his feet and didn’t care. Some kids are deep thinkers some aren’t . The reason there are different appproaches is because one size doesn’t fit all.

@pinkliquorice I think in an ideal world (using the pinching scenario that @2014newme describes) in an ideal world of course parents want their children not to pinch just because it's not a nice thing to do. However children are immature, they aren't always good decision makers on the whole they often don't think this way and as parents it's our job to actively teach them right from wrong.

Treating children with respect, not roaring at them constantly or hitting them and recognising and praising good behaviour are all good common sense general tactics in my opinion. I don't want my child to behave because she fears me, I want her to behave because it's the right thing to do. It's my job to teach her that. However when the time comes where a child is hurting someone - so they clearly haven't made that 'it's not nice' distinction by themselves or they wouldn't have done it - then I think an appropriate punishment is the way to go. Telling them 'that's unkind' after the event seems a bit wishy washy to me, especially by the time they are 9/10.