When can you tell a baby "no"?

[Sbena]

Baby is 9 and a half months now and crawling into all sorts of mischief. Obviously we have removed lots of hazards from reach, but unfortunately due to gravity the floor can't be completely cleared. I've read that babies at this age understand the word "no", but when I use it with my best mum voice he just stops, looks at me, and does the thing again. We've been following this pattern for a few weeks and he doesn't seem to get it.

What have your experiences been? Is there a better way to teach them "no"?

Definitely say no, but at the same time remove the 'thing', remove the baby, or distract with another thing.

Pick one thing, and be completely consistent about it. I had a step in my kitchen, and I had a ‘only go down backwards’ rule with crawling babies. So every single time, I would say ‘backwards’ and physically turn the baby around. And shut the door so the baby couldn’t be in there alone and try it head first!

It did work, but it’s time consuming. So I would only do it for things that I really couldn’t deal with any other way.

At that age I think redirection is better. I would say "it's dangerous over here" or "ooo too messy" and move him onto something more interesting

I guess the problem with “no” is that it’s not very specific. It effectively translates as “stop” or “pause” - which is exactly what your baby does when you use it, if you think about it. He stops and looks at you. Because it contains no further instruction, baby has nothing more to go on so will just revert back to whatever he was doing.
The other issue is that the more you use it with no context/real urgency is that it dilutes it for those times when you really need it to work. I found “not that, have/do this” quite useful as a structure. PP’s example of “backwards” is another fantastic tip - so you’re positively instructing them on what you want them to do rather than just going on about what you don’t want. It takes a while to train your brain into a positive framing but after a while it becomes second nature. Then you find that “no” and “stop” are reserved for hurting others/going for majorly dangerous objects/running towards cars etc etc (all the things that you think would never happen to you but subsequently do…).

I'd say at that age you need to say no but also physically move him away. DD definitely understood no at about 8/9 months - but that didn't mean she always listened to it.

@LabradorFiasco said exactly what I came on to say, but better. Do that.

Agree with this. Use the word but alongside the physical action (normally moving the baby away from the situation). They can probably understand the word but don't have any self restraint at that age so they actually can't stop themselves doing it again.

Thanks for all the tips!! I do say no and move him away, but the little monster instantly starts crawling back! I know he's not being naughty: he's just exploring.

I think at about 3 years old they start to get it.

This...

They soon learn what it means. Doesn't mean they will listen though!

Little kids largely want to please their parents, and especially as babies don't have the computing power to think of alternative actions once you've said no. If you say no and then also include what you'd like them to do instead (e.g. "No, not the plug socket, let's look at this toy instead"), you make it easier for them to comply and please. Worked for my daughter anyway, your child may vary!

Expand on 'no' with an explanation e.g. we used to just say 'hot' about the oven door, the wood burner etc. And 'get down safe' for the stairs/ off a chair.
It's much easier to frame and model the positive

Say no but dont punish- my adventurous 18month old likes climbing onto the dining table and scares the life out of me, we say no, we bring her down but ultimately we have been putting our dining chairs in another room so she cant climb. I still say no, even though it doesnt mean anything yet.

My son does the same.

When he’s about to do something naughty he first looks at me with a cheeky smile, then he crawls at breakneck pace towards the forbidden object. Once he’s about two feet from the forbidden object he stops and the edges slowly towards it, taking glances at me to check my reaction. When I say no he freezes for a second or two and then he either laughs or goes into a crying fit. When I pull him away he cries blue murder. If I put him down again some distance from the object he crawls towards it as fast as he can whilst giggling away. He then repeats the same procedure. If I put an obstacle in the way or move the object out of reach he throws a tantrum.

Natural consequences is the only thing that works. He’ll stop going after hot pans once he’s burned a finger.

Wtf I'm not going to let him hurt himself in order to learn why he's not allowed something!

At which point they deliberately ignore it to provoke you

I've often wondered what one's meant to do as a natural consequence for behaviour which is really dangerous - it strikes me as a limit of "natural consequences" (which I'm in favour of, in many cases, but think they have limitations.)

I never thought I'd see someone suggest you should just let your baby burn themselves as a natural consequence though! Do you let them run into the road too? They'll learn it was a bad idea while they recuperate from the broken bones, I guess.

"No", remove, distract.

You can't expect them actually to listen to you when you say no at that age. Babies and young toddlers have zero self-control, very limited reasoning ability or understanding of consequences and often they really, really want to do what they want to do (like crawl on stuff or leg it out the corridor at baby group or eat dirt). So they're like lemmings.

I know it's frowned upon nowadays, but I used to stick mine in the playpen when I'd had enough of hovering and saying 'no' and I wanted a cup of tea in peace.

You can say no from any age. Give an alternative or an explanation when your child is ready.
Explanation depends on comprehension skills obviously so that varies greatly and obviously some ND children need a different pathway, but saying 'no' is important in my opinion, especially when it comes to the non negotiable safety lessons. Saying a loud 'no' like you mean it is not being unkind, it's teaching a child to associate certain situations with danger. Hot water, fire, walking safely along the road, being careful near a steep drop.
You can allow your child more freedom if you are stricter in this than if you follow them around distracting them or offering alternatives without a clear no.
I remember a teacher from years back who took my eldest on all sort of amazing trips with school. She told me that if you are super strict at the beginning and the children learn how to do as they are told, then you can let them explore and play and be adventurous because she trusted them to listen and stop when necessary. She took them all over, really great teacher!

You total weirdo

OP give him a simple language lesson on ‘no’

eg

baby in high chair, you put empty plate on table and say “plate”. You take the plate away and say “no plate”. Repeat a few times then do with other objects. Then progress to actions. “Jumping” (you jump) “no jumping” you stand still.

etc etc

It isn’t the case that ‘babies know the word no by 9 months’ it depends what you’ve been saying and how you’ve said it…