Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Parenting

For free parenting resources please check out the Early Years Alliance's Family Corner.

Flip

Original poster

Any disadvantage to leaving it late?

24 replies

Tinkjon · 08/06/2009 14:36

We left DD fairly late before we bothered with potty training (she was about 3.5) and it was a piece of cake, she did it in a weekend and was dry at night within a week - easiest parenting thing we've ever done! So I was intending to do the same with DS (currently 20 months) but I'm suddenly wondering if there is any disadvantage to leaving them late, aside from environmental reasons. I can't think why there would be, but it's been a few years since I've done this!

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

SusieDerkins · 08/06/2009 14:38

We left both of ours until they were 3 (boys) and they both got it in less than a week. Wish the rest of parenting was such a breeze!!

HaventSleptForAYear · 08/06/2009 14:46

I'm surprised your DD was dry straight away at night, IME, the "late" trainers are still bedwetting or wearing nappies at night at 4+.

That was enough to make me go for it early and we are happy with that.

Environmental is a big issue for me too, as well as letting children soil themselves later than they really have to!

But if you can face another 2 years of nappies go for it !

yomellamoHelly · 08/06/2009 14:52

We "trained" ds1 at 3.8 after a week's practise of weeing on demand in exchange for a biscuit. Got day and night straightaway. Easy peasy.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about these subjects:

Families General parenting

PuppyMonkey · 08/06/2009 14:55

Having tried dd2 (aged 2.2years) for the past two weeks with arse all success, your method sounds like a bleddy good idea to me!

cluelessnchaos · 08/06/2009 14:58

dd1 aged 2.5 took about 1 month
dd2 aged 2.5 took about 1 year
ds aged 3.5 took 1 week

sundew · 08/06/2009 15:01

Both of my dds were trained at just over 2.5yrs (and dd1 had been ready looking back at the signs for a while). I strongly believe that you leave it until they are ready - I don't think you can 'train' them - and some children are easier than others. I know plenty of people who have tried with younger children who spend their whole life washing.

procrastinatingparent · 08/06/2009 15:02

DS2 was the latest to train so far at 3.5, but the first to be dry at night (almost straight away while the others were 6 and 5).

Environmental issues, aside, I think it is more stressful to train a child who is not quite ready than to stay in nappies until you are confident they understand what is involved a bit better.

SusieDerkins · 08/06/2009 15:10

Incidentally, both of mine were dry at night within 2 weeks.

usernametaken · 08/06/2009 17:15

Why not wait until he tells you he is ready? DD woke up one morning at 24mths and declared she was not wearing a nappy again...we ran out, bought a potty and some pants and went with her demands. 3 days later she was done, a month later she was dry at night.
Wait until your son says he is ready and then go for it...just be more prepared than we were!

ches · 09/06/2009 03:47

All children are different. Some don't care about being wet/dirty, others hate it. Some are very adaptive to sudden changes, others get very stressed out by them. If you have a child who hates being wet and is very adaptive to change, potty training late could be easy. If you have a child who doesn't notice if they're wet/dirty and and does not respond well to change, you could have a 4yo in nappies or a 6yo begging for a nappy to poo.

piprabbit · 09/06/2009 09:33

As a daughter of a reception year teacher - I've heard many instances of 4 year olds starting school still not toilet trained. It means that the teacher's first job is trying to getting one or two children toilet trained at the expense of time with the rest of the class. If your child is going to be only just 4 when starting school, I'd be tempted to try toilet training a little sooner just in case it takes longer than you hope.

seeker · 09/06/2009 09:37

None whatsever - apart from the sideways looks from RL and MN control freaks!

piprabbit · 09/06/2009 09:39

p.s. It seems that very few parents take the option of sending their semi-trained children to school in nappies (possibly becasue they think the other other children will laugh). Poor child is left having accidents, staff are left clearing up and (this actually happend to my poor DD a couple of months ago she was horrifed and didn't understand why the little boy was still having accidents - she took it personally) other children end up being poohed on - lovely.....

crokky · 09/06/2009 09:42

I trained DS in 3 weeks at 2.7. For DD (14m) I plan to see how she is and what she wants to do.

If I was you, I would just see how your DS goes - if he wants to do it and is showing signs then I would do it, if not, then wait.

I have no fixed ideas about what I am going to do with my DD - all children are different.

crokky · 09/06/2009 09:44

meant to add that a potential problem might occur with some nurseries/preschools/whatever wanting to take 3yos that are trained. I think they have to take the child regardless, but some places can be quite annoying if the child is not trained.

Didylicious · 09/06/2009 12:12

A child cannot potty learn until they are developmentally advanced enough to cope with the tasks involved. (feeling the need to go and recognising this feeling prior to leakage being a big part of it!)
All children are different and obviously some will be ready to potty learn before others of the same age.
If you start your child potty learning at 2y - you may well be clearing up accidents for a whole year (If having started you are going to persist despite the child not yet being ready - you have to see if your child is ready yet - you will know by the amount of success - or lack of!). It's up to you how you like to spend your time....
Some children are able to use the toilet at home, but when they start at school but take time to adjust to the new people and environment - this can lead to some regression in the toileting department (the child may be distracted from acting on the "need to go" signals from the bladder - or may be too scared or shy to request the toilet when they need to go amongst other reasons). It would be nice if the teachers could sympathise with these children and I'm sure many of them do.

HaventSleptForAYear · 09/06/2009 16:51

But if you never ask them to recognise the feeling, how can they?

They are "trained" to wee and poo in their pants (nappy).

It is entirely possible to start at 2 and NOT be cleaning up for a year.

And entirely possible to start at 3.5 and STILL be clearing up for a year or more.

Yes children obviously are disoriented and scared at school, but surely only just having potty-trained makes it even harder for them to control themselves or remember to go?

procrastinatingparent · 09/06/2009 17:46

I'm really not in favour of 'early' or 'late' training; having four kids has taught me that every child is different and can articulate their need to go and control themselves enough to go at different ages.

Leave it 'too late' and you will have a different set of problems from if you do it 'too early'. It is one of those things that some kids will get quicker than others. There are things you can do to help them and yourself and things you can do that may make your job harder (eg inconsistent messages, disruptive environment) but you are not a bad parent if you give it a go earlier on or wait a bit.

'Yes children obviously are disoriented and scared at school, but surely only just having potty-trained makes it even harder for them to control themselves or remember to go?': not necessarily, Haven'tSlept. An awful lot depends on personality, confidence, distractability and the neurological ability to receive signals from the bladder - those are all variables.

BonsoirAnna · 09/06/2009 17:48

Same as OP - DD was loo-trained (by passed potty completely) at 3.3 (I think) in one afternoon. She had been dry at night for ages at that point, so we just abandoned nappies at that point.

Original poster

Tinkjon · 10/06/2009 09:22

Thanks everyone! Sorry, been away from PC for few days. I should've said that I obviously wouldn't train him until he is ready - what I meant was that DD was probably ready before we did it, I just left it later out of sheer laziness! We only trained DD because school preferred her to be trained, but they would've been ok if she wasn't. I suppose I will just wait and see. I hadn't really thought that he might choose to train himself - DD was never fussed about being wet at all and he's the same so far so I assumed he'd be the same, but I guess that could change.

OP posts:

vesela · 11/06/2009 22:54

I thought it was worth giving it a go on the early side just in case I had problems later on and regretted not having tried earlier. DD was showing signs of being ready, and was also at a fairly amenable stage, so I decided to go for it.

She was 23 months and took a week to get it. It's totally possible that it would have been just as easy if I'd left it until later, but at least now it's behind us. (She's now 2.3 and not nearly as biddable!)

Also DD had a bad kidney infection when she was just over a year old, and after that I always got a bit worried when the poo in her nappy got inside her vulva. She hasn't had another UTI since, and of course she can still get them now, esp. once she starts wiping herself, but it's a weight off my mind not having to clean poo out from everywhere.

plonker · 11/06/2009 23:17

I agree with HaventSleptForAYear.

The biggest disadvantage that I can see (beside cost, obviously) is children learning to ignore the sensations that tell them that they need to go. If they learn to ignore those signals, then I firmly believe that potty training will be delayed.

I also don't believe age has anything to do with it. It's (IMHO) more about watching for signs that they're ready regardless of the age of the child. Children need to know that they're about to wee/poo before they do it, if they don't know this, then it's going to be very difficult for them and you.

vesela · 12/06/2009 12:16

I agree, plonker. I think it was partly that that feeling - although I couldn't have put it into word at the time - that made me think it was a good idea to seize the moment.

In our case, I took a bit of a gamble on whether she knew she was about to wee (her signs of readiness were more talking about people sitting on the potty/loo and talking about knickers). She wasn't saying that she was about to wee, but it occurred to me that she had no real need to say so while in a nappy. She learnt to recognise it ahead of time and say so over the course of a week, though - had she not got the hang of it, I would have given it a rest.

Bouncyminky · 13/06/2009 18:29

apart from the cost i would be happy to wait for longer, however dd, 2.3 is doing big wees that her nappy doesn't seem to be able to hold. She will sit on the potty but nothing happens until she comes off. She is not keen on nappies but i'm not sure on way forward. Getting a bit confused on best course!

Flip