# Time outs



## Jasmyn's Mum (May 24, 2004)

Do they work? Are they cruel? Is it gentle? DH has started to use it as a method to get dd to stop hitting or spitting out food. She's going to be 3 in January. Is she too young to understand? He puts her in her room and closes the door for 5 minutes. She cries and yells and it rips me apart. Any advice please? Are there better methods?


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

My opinion is that most punitive time outs can easily be just as bad as spanking.
Time outs kinda use our kids attachment to us against them- it's forced isolation, in the hopes that the isolation is bad enough to convince them to not misbehave again.
Also, time outs (and punishments in general) *at best* cause kids to "behave" for self-centered reasons. They behave because of how their behavior affects them (if I hit the dog, I get a time out) not because of how their actions affect others (the dog doesn't like to be hit. It hurts her. If I want her to move I can say "move!")
Yes, there are definitely better methods. My method for dealing with anything that ds does that is unacceptable is basically this:
1. *Give Information*- don't just assume that kids know what you know. Tell them how their actions affect you and/or other people. "I don't like to be hit. It can hurt!" Express your feelings, honestly without being judgmental.
2. Empathize- Let kids know that you understand/try to understand how they feel. "It's frustrating when you want me to read to you, and I don't right away." The child's needs/desires/feelings/opinions matter just as much as anyone elses. (a lot of the time, I find that empathizing happens in the process of honoring the impulse, so I don't generally specifically try to empathize)
3. *Honor the Impulse*- The IMPULSE behind the action is legitimate, its just the action that is unacceptable. - "He is hitting me with that book because he wants me to read it." (The hitting is unacceptable, but the *impulse* is a legitimate impulse. He wants me to read to him, he just doesn't know a better way to express that impulse) The impulse behind the action won't just go away. The child will continue to use the best way they know how, to express that impulse (which can mean continued hitting, etc). The best thing to do is to find a better way for the child to express that particular impulse.
4. Find *Acceptable alternatives*/ Mutually agreeable solutions - "If you want me to read to you, put the book in my hand." Be specific! (I've had many times where "acceptable alternatives" aren't seeming to work. But I realize that I was not being specific enough!)


----------



## rmzbm (Jul 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jasmyn's Mum* 
Do they work? Are they cruel? Is it gentle?


They CAN work. They ARE cruel & most definatly NOT gentle. It is, in essence, love withdrawl. My child could never do anything to deserve that.


----------



## nonconformnmom (May 24, 2005)

I think that timeouts are a useful tool along the GD continuum. In other words, it's somewhere between spanking and whatever the other extreme on the continuum is. I used it with my 2.5 yo for about a year, and now we have learned other means of disciplining. Do I think timeouts are cruel (or as some here say "a withdrawal of love")? No. Spanking is cruel. Timeouts, if used approriately and judiciously (pick your battles), are a perfectly viable GD tool, IMO.

A suggestion. Do not put your child in her room for timeouts. I say this for two reasons: 1) you want her room to be a pleasant place for her, it should be her refuge, her happy place. Do not use it as a focus of discipline. and 2) my preference for timeouts is to not isolate the child. We did timeouts at the top of the stairs with the door open. She was able to see us and we could interact with her if necessary, though she understood that she was to sit quietly until the timer went off.

Personally, I feel that my attachment to my child is strong enough to withstand 3 minutes of enforced sit-down time. My child would never think I was withdrawing my love simply because I expected her to sit in one place for 3 minutes.


----------



## rmzbm (Jul 8, 2005)

When a child acts out, basically telling you they are out of control & need you - sending them away to sit alone can most certainly be seen (especially by the child) as withdrawl of parental love. Weather it IS or not...well, that depends on the parent. But I think it's pretty easy to see why a child would feel abandoned!


----------



## ShaggyDaddy (Jul 5, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jasmyn's Mum* 
She cries and yells and it rips me apart.

Trust your own instincts mama!

I don't know of any problem that would be made better by a child crying and yelling.


----------



## nonconformnmom (May 24, 2005)

Quote:

*rmzbm* wrote: When a child acts out, basically telling you they are out of control & need you - sending them away to sit alone can most certainly be seen (especially by the child) as withdrawl of parental love.
Children act out and lose control because they are at a developmental phase in which they are unable to rein themselves in and regain composure. Yes, at those times they need us, their parents, to teach them how to calm down, center themselves, and start anew on firmer footing. Gently guiding a child to a comfortable, visible location within view of the parent and teaching them how to calmly sit for a minute or two is a very loving response to a child who needs to be shown how to control their own behavior.

Quote:

But I think it's pretty easy to see why a child would feel abandoned!
I think using the word "abandoned" is a bit drastic, don't you? Assuming the child can see the parent, which was my suggestion. Maybe if the parent refused to look at the child, left that part of the house and went and played with the neighbor children during the timeout, yes, I might say the child would feel abandoned in those circumstances.


----------



## karlin (Apr 8, 2004)

Here's a great article explaining why punishment (including time outs) does not work:

http://www.parentingwithdignity.com/...s_not_work.htm

In general, tineouts will work in the short term, but not in the long run. The child only learns to do the behavior behind your back, and you end up constantly threatening your child with a time out.


----------



## Godaime (Feb 1, 2006)

IMO Time outs do work. Are they cruel? No. Is it gentle? Yes, I don't feel that its comparable to spanking and yelling. I would not use time outs for children under 2 but at 3 She definitely seems to understand your directions. If you asked her to not hit and not spit, she should know how to do as told. She is probably doing it for attention, but you do not want her to learn that spitting and hitting is a way of getting your attention. I do not feel time out is scaring children by isolating them or love withdraw. It's teaching them that bad behavior is not the way to your attention. It is best to explain to them first why their behavior is not acceptable and how you feel about it. For example...If my dd starts hitting. I would first say Please stop, hitting hurts me and if she does not stop I would then warn her that she will be getting a time out. If she still keeps hitting I would send her to time out and tell her why she is in time out. I would not just throw in her a room and close the door without an explanation. She might cry or yell, but in this situation its completely different from CIO. I would never use CIO.


----------



## Delacroix (Aug 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nonconformnmom* 
I think that timeouts are a useful tool along the GD continuum. In other words, it's somewhere between spanking and whatever the other extreme on the continuum is. I used it with my 2.5 yo for about a year, and now we have learned other means of disciplining. Do I think timeouts are cruel (or as some here say "a withdrawal of love")? No. Spanking is cruel. Timeouts, if used approriately and judiciously (pick your battles), are a perfectly viable GD tool, IMO.

A suggestion. Do not put your child in her room for timeouts. I say this for two reasons: 1) you want her room to be a pleasant place for her, it should be her refuge, her happy place. Do not use it as a focus of discipline. and 2) my preference for timeouts is to not isolate the child. We did timeouts at the top of the stairs with the door open. She was able to see us and we could interact with her if necessary, though she understood that she was to sit quietly until the timer went off.

Personally, I feel that my attachment to my child is strong enough to withstand 3 minutes of enforced sit-down time. My child would never think I was withdrawing my love simply because I expected her to sit in one place for 3 minutes.









:







:







:


----------



## becoming (Apr 11, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ShaggyDaddy* 
Trust your own instincts mama!

I don't know of any problem that would be made better by a child crying and yelling.









:

If you feel you have to do time-outs, I would get a special little chair so that she can sit in the same room with you guys. Isolation as punishment is so, so harmful, in my opinion.


----------



## nonconformnmom (May 24, 2005)

Quote:

*karlin* wrote:
In general, tineouts will work in the short term, but not in the long run. The child only learns to do the behavior behind your back, and you end up constantly threatening your child with a time out.
This is absolutely not true in our case; and I find it difficult to believe it is true in general either. We used timeouts when our dd was 2.5 to 3.5 years old and since then have not had to use them at all. Her behavior is much improved, she is certainly not doing the behavior behind our backs, she simply has moved on to more sophisticated ways of conducting herself. I suspect that is due more to her increased maturity/ developmental stage than it is anything to do with how we utilized timeouts or any other form of discipline (we considered timeout to be one tool in our toolbox but we always had a number of tools we would use depending on the context).

Personally, I would be cautious about expecting any discipline tool to work "in the long run". Children's cognitive abilities and developmental stages are constantly changing; applying the same tool for years and years and expecting it to work all that time is unrealistic, IMO.


----------



## katallen (Jan 4, 2005)

I am not for time outs that are timed, as in "you are in time out for five minutes and then you are going to come out and feel all better because you are five and need five minutes exactly to cool down" that is just silly to me. I use a less formal type of sitting when dd is out of control. I tell her what behavior is inappropriate and demand a stop to it and if she doesn't listen I tell her she needs to sit down(or if we are at home go into another room) until she can control her body and use her listening ears. For her it may be a second or it may be half an hour but she is in charge of determining when she is ready to follow the rules. It doesn't feel the same as a punitive method where the child is angry, feels hurt, or is resentful when they are sent to time out, I did formal timeout in one of the daycares I worked in and it left me and the children feeling very frustrated and resentful this has a totally different feel to me and I prefer it to formal time out and to total chaos.


----------



## rmzbm (Jul 8, 2005)

Sending a child away from you, which IS what the OP describes, AND CLOSING THEM IN A ROOM when they need you is WRONG. Period. Helping them calm down together with you is not, but I don't see that as "time out."


----------



## zeldamomma (Jan 5, 2006)

I think timeouts can beneficial for an over-stimulated child who needs a break, but perhaps cruel for an extrovert.

ZM


----------



## nonconformnmom (May 24, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rmzbm* 
Sending a child away from you, which IS what the OP describes, AND CLOSING THEM IN A ROOM when they need you is WRONG. Period. Helping them calm down together with you is not, but I don't see that as "time out."

I agree.







Like with any tool, it's not the tool itself that is gentle or ungentle, but the way it is used (and I would even perhaps add, how _often_ it is used). The term "timeout" means different things depending on whom you ask. I also like the idea suggested above about not having a specific amount of time for the timeout.


----------



## rmzbm (Jul 8, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nonconformnmom* 
I agree.







Like with any tool, it's not the tool itself that is gentle or ungentle, but the way it is used (and I would even perhaps add, how _often_ it is used). The term "timeout" means different things depending on whom you ask. I also like the idea suggested above about not having a specific amount of time for the timeout.

Agreed.

When I hear "time out" I do think of the stereotypical "go to your room & think about what you've done & don't come out!" Not a good idea. If it can be handled in a way that doesn't banish the child or make them feel bad, have at it!


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Are they cruel? I can't really answer. But if it rips you apart, think of how it must make HER feel.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rmzbm* 
Sending a child away from you, which IS what the OP describes, AND CLOSING THEM IN A ROOM when they need you is WRONG. Period. Helping them calm down together with you is not, but I don't see that as "time out."

I agree. That's why I specified "punitive time outs." All punitive timeouts take advantage negatively of our children's attachment to us. That attachment is there so we can HELP them behave in a socially acceptable manner. Somehow our society has perversed that into believing that by forcibly separating our dc from ourselves, that's somehow a good way of HELPING them behave.

To all the other pp's- I don't know what happens in your homes. But I stand by my statement that all punitive time-outs can easily *become* just as bad as spanking. (I added the *become* to clarify my thoughts a bit). I personally don't think they are any better/more gentle of an option than spanking.

To the OP- if you give some specifics, we can help you brainstorm some effective ways to stop the unacceptable behavior. If you know WHY she is spitting out food and hitting, it's not hard to find a more acceptable way for her to express those impulses. Kids WANT to behave in a socially acceptable manner- when they don't do so, it's up to us to find out what is hindering them, and fix it.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

I don't think putting a 3 year old in a room with the door closed is useful unless it is in order to keep the child from seeing you kick the wall in frustration. However, I don't believe that putting a child in a time out is giving them a sense of "love withdrawal" unless you indicate that to them. Time outs can be used in a loving and instructive way.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nonconformnmom* 
I think that timeouts are a useful tool along the GD continuum. In other words, it's somewhere between spanking and whatever the other extreme on the continuum is. I used it with my 2.5 yo for about a year, and now we have learned other means of disciplining. Do I think timeouts are cruel (or as some here say "a withdrawal of love")? No. Spanking is cruel. Timeouts, if used approriately and judiciously (pick your battles), are a perfectly viable GD tool, IMO.

To each their own. I was spanked occasionally as a child, and also had time-outs (different authority figure). Personally, I'd have rather had a hundred spankings than a single time-out, and on my personal continuum, timeouts were farther away from GD than spanking was. Like anything else, the child's personality has to be taken into account. If the OP's child is spending five minutes screaming and crying, the punishment is cruel.

OP: DH uses a modified sort of time out with dd. It's not punishment-based, but "quiet time" based. When she gets really wound up and is yelling and crying over something every 15 seconds, he'll talk to her about needing some quiet time in her room. Then, she has the choice of going up by herself - and coming down whenever she feels like it - or having me or dh go with her. If we go with her, it's either snuggle time, or we'll read to her. When she goes by herself, she'll stay anywhere from about two minutes to half an hour...depends what she does when she gets to her room. Would something like that work with your dd?


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
However, I don't believe that putting a child in a time out is giving them a sense of "love withdrawal" unless you indicate that to them.

But, what are the indicators? My sister didn't seem to mind time-outs at all. I hated them with a passion (interestingly, I'm the introvert - she's the extrovert). They were handled exactly the same way for both of us. My sister took it as "I've just got to sit her for five minutes", and I took it as "she doesn't want me around". We don't always know what our actions indicate to our children.


----------



## Wugmama (Feb 10, 2005)

Quote:

originally posted by Deva33mommy
My opinion is that most punitive time outs can easily be just as bad as spanking.
Time outs kinda use our kids attachment to us against them- it's forced isolation, in the hopes that the isolation is bad enough to convince them to not misbehave again.
Also, time outs (and punishments in general) *at best* cause kids to "behave" for self-centered reasons. They behave because of how their behavior affects them (if I hit the dog, I get a time out) not because of how their actions affect others (the dog doesn't like to be hit. It hurts her. If I want her to move I can say "move!")
Yes, there are definitely better methods. My method for dealing with anything that ds does that is unacceptable is basically this:
1. Give Information- don't just assume that kids know what you know. Tell them how their actions affect you and/or other people. "I don't like to be hit. It can hurt!" Express your feelings, honestly without being judgmental.
2. Empathize- Let kids know that you understand/try to understand how they feel. "It's frustrating when you want me to read to you, and I don't right away." The child's needs/desires/feelings/opinions matter just as much as anyone elses. (a lot of the time, I find that empathizing happens in the process of honoring the impulse, so I don't generally specifically try to empathize)
3. Honor the Impulse- The IMPULSE behind the action is legitimate, its just the action that is unacceptable. - "He is hitting me with that book because he wants me to read it." (The hitting is unacceptable, but the *impulse* is a legitimate impulse. He wants me to read to him, he just doesn't know a better way to express that impulse) The impulse behind the action won't just go away. The child will continue to use the best way they know how, to express that impulse (which can mean continued hitting, etc). The best thing to do is to find a better way for the child to express that particular impulse.
4. Find Acceptable alternatives/ Mutually agreeable solutions - "If you want me to read to you, put the book in my hand." Be specific! (I've had many times where "acceptable alternatives" aren't seeming to work. But I realize that I was not being specific enough!)
Well put!









~Tracy


----------



## CaraboosMama (Mar 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Deva33mommy* 
My opinion is that most punitive time outs can easily be just as bad as spanking.
Time outs kinda use our kids attachment to us against them- it's forced isolation, in the hopes that the isolation is bad enough to convince them to not misbehave again.
Also, time outs (and punishments in general) *at best* cause kids to "behave" for self-centered reasons. They behave because of how their behavior affects them (if I hit the dog, I get a time out) not because of how their actions affect others (the dog doesn't like to be hit. It hurts her. If I want her to move I can say "move!")
Yes, there are definitely better methods. My method for dealing with anything that ds does that is unacceptable is basically this:
1. *Give Information*- don't just assume that kids know what you know. Tell them how their actions affect you and/or other people. "I don't like to be hit. It can hurt!" Express your feelings, honestly without being judgmental.
2. Empathize- Let kids know that you understand/try to understand how they feel. "It's frustrating when you want me to read to you, and I don't right away." The child's needs/desires/feelings/opinions matter just as much as anyone elses. (a lot of the time, I find that empathizing happens in the process of honoring the impulse, so I don't generally specifically try to empathize)
3. *Honor the Impulse*- The IMPULSE behind the action is legitimate, its just the action that is unacceptable. - "He is hitting me with that book because he wants me to read it." (The hitting is unacceptable, but the *impulse* is a legitimate impulse. He wants me to read to him, he just doesn't know a better way to express that impulse) The impulse behind the action won't just go away. The child will continue to use the best way they know how, to express that impulse (which can mean continued hitting, etc). The best thing to do is to find a better way for the child to express that particular impulse.
4. Find *Acceptable alternatives*/ Mutually agreeable solutions - "If you want me to read to you, put the book in my hand." Be specific! (I've had many times where "acceptable alternatives" aren't seeming to work. But I realize that I was not being specific enough!)









I totally agree as far as punitive time outs go. But I would add that many children (and adults) sometimes benefit from taking a break from a stressful situation. When my 2 1/2 year old dd is getting overwhelmed, frustrated, et al & starting to act out because of it - I ask her if she wants to take a break. Then we go sit on her bed or on a blanket on the floor (somewhere snuggly/comfortable) and read or tell stories. It's a non-punitive way to teach her how to take a break and de-stress when she is feeling frustrated.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride* 
I was spanked occasionally as a child, and also had time-outs (different authority figure). Personally, I'd have rather had a hundred spankings than a single time-out, and on my personal continuum, timeouts were farther away from GD than spanking was. Like anything else, the child's personality has to be taken into account. If the OP's child is spending five minutes screaming and crying, the punishment is cruel.

I was spanked as a child (or so I was told) rarely. I don't remember any, and I can guarantee that none of them were so traumatic that I forgot. I DO remember being "put in the corner" (yesteryear's equivalent of time outs) and I hated it. It was mean and humiliating.

And yes, there is a HUGE difference between punitive time-outs and non-punitive "chill out" time outs, where the child has the say.


----------



## blsilva (Jul 31, 2006)

In general, I don't use time outs- i think they take away from actually teaching the child what they have done that is inappropriate, and learning alternatives.
However, I do use time outs for things that my ds is doing that he knows are inappropriate, but still does- over an over...
Ex: the other day, ds (4) was pushing his brother. We discussed (several times) that pushing was not an option, how frustrating it was to have his brother grab a toy, tear down a building, etc. We talked about alternatives. For whatever reason, he was not using those alternatives. He was pushing. After several times of this happening, I asked him to sit down in a chair, explained to him that he seemed to be having a hard time controlling himself around his brother, and told him that he needed a break. I left it up to him when he was done- as long as he had gained enough control over himself to play again.
I think that this, rather than being punitive, gives him a chance to get control and think, and that is necessary.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

"Time out" has several definitions.

Some forms of "time out" fit within GD, and are very helpful tools for a GD parents. Please see Peggy O'Mara's list of GD idea's stickied at the top of the forum.

Other definitions are punitive and shaming, and are not gentle approaches to discipline.

It really depends on the behavior, age and understanding of the child, and the intention and approach of the parent.

OP it sounds like there is an element of "showing who's boss" with your dh and these times outs. Your instincts are telling you this is reaction is punitive and not meeting your child's needs. I would listen to that.


----------



## blessed (Jan 28, 2006)

I tried a time out once with dd about a year ago. I'll never forget the shocked look of betrayal and despair on her face when I forced her to stay in her chair while I walked away. I'm absolutely convinced that if I continued to use time outs, our bond would be irreversibly injured.

Dd is a great kid, extremely pleasant, well mannered, without a lot of vices for a two year old. But did she hit? Yeah, for a while. Did she spit out her food? Like crazy. Once in a while still does, in fact. Those are phases for kids and they pass with time, regardless of how you deal with them.

For me, it didn't feel right undermining our precious relationship and her hard won trust in me with maneuvers that didn't make much difference in her behavior anyway. If anything, I think that her special closeness with her parents is a big part of what guides her toward her good behaviors, ya know?

Anyway, tme outs DO feel like cruelty and unnecessary unhappiness to me, and are definitely not right for our family.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

For the OP again~could you share the behaviors your dh feels warrant time out?

If you use time outs, I think a "gd" approach would generally be to use them when separation could be seen as a logical or natural consequence to the behavior. If 4 year old ds repeatedly kicked me and refused to accept verbal redirection, separating from each other for a few minutes would give me the space to calm down, while reinforcing to him that hurting somebody doesn't make them want to stand right next to you. By comparison, separating from him because he refused to eat brussel sprouts has no logical or natural connection to the behavior at all. It's not meeting anybody's needs in the moment. It's just meant to punish a behavior.

Also, "separation" means separation from the behavior. It is not about "isolation", which is what you described in your original post. Isolation feels scary and intimidating and lonely. Separating can happen just a few feet from your child...it can even happen while you hold them! Think of "Separation" as a "parent imposed breather" from the behavior. Your child might feel safer separating from the behavior in your arms. Or, they might really prefer to be in their room for a few minutes. Either way, when the goal is to take a break from the behavior, not to impose an isolating fright into your child, it is MUCH easier to find the distance needed for all involved to get a better view of the problem, and work on a solution.


----------



## Jasmyn's Mum (May 24, 2004)

It's happened twice and both times, it was because dd hit dh. We've tried to explain to her that it hurts and it makes us sad when she hits. We've said "Mommy and Daddy don't hit you. You don't hit Mommy and Daddy". We acknowledge her feelings of frustration, anger, etc. These are things we've tried.

I like the idea of giving her a timeout where we can be in the same room. I like the idea of calling it a "break". I like the idea of letting her choose when to get up (pretty sure she'll get up right away though).

I just want to explore all of our options. I don't want to hurt her. I want to do this in an honouring and healthy way.


----------



## Honeybee'smama (Mar 26, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *katallen* 
I am not for time outs that are timed, as in "you are in time out for five minutes and then you are going to come out and feel all better because you are five and need five minutes exactly to cool down" that is just silly to me. I use a less formal type of sitting when dd is out of control. I tell her what behavior is inappropriate and demand a stop to it and if she doesn't listen I tell her she needs to sit down(or if we are at home go into another room) until she can control her body and use her listening ears. For her it may be a second or it may be half an hour but she is in charge of determining when she is ready to follow the rules. It doesn't feel the same as a punitive method where the child is angry, feels hurt, or is resentful when they are sent to time out, I did formal timeout in one of the daycares I worked in and it left me and the children feeling very frustrated and resentful this has a totally different feel to me and I prefer it to formal time out and to total chaos.


This is similar to what we do. It is more of cool off time until she is ready to stop a behavior and talk to me. She chooses the place usually my bed or hers and she dictates the time. I am also carefull to not call it a time out, but rather cool off time, moving her to keep ds safe etc. It works well for dd, she has even said on her own "I am going to your room to cool off"


----------



## canadiangranola (Oct 1, 2004)

If she is hitting, she is probably doing s as a way of expressing frustration/anger. Those emotions are strong and scary for us to deal with as adults.How much scarier must they be when a child is two and unable to express themselves fully, or understand why they are feeling what they are feeling. To give an isolation time out to a child for hitting seems to me to be cruel...she is already upset and scared, safe enough with mom and dad to let it out in whatever way she knows how, and then to be punished for that? Seems to me that would just teach her it's not okay to feel mad, rather than teaching her not to hit.

I would sit down with ds (if he was acting in a similar way), and I would cuddle the snot out of him. Tell him I love him, that big feelings can be scary, and that hitting is not an okay way to tell about our big feelings. I would read him books, and then cuddle him some more, gently reminding him that hitting hurts. "in our house, we don't hit."

For spitting....totally age appropriate, and probably a developmental need. DS likes to spit. I ask him not to do it with food (ours is milk...) and tell him when he is done eating, he can sit on the steps outside and spit water to his heart's content. He will sit out there for 15 minutes spitting water, and you know what? He doesn't spit milk anymore. Now he just blows bubbles in it









Time outs don't work for us. I've tried once, and DS got so upset, and I ended up trying to hold the door closed so he couldn't come out...horrible idea. I would much rather have a time in. A time to reconnect.

Gentle Christian Parenting (I think that's the name of the website) had a great thread a while back on time ins.- very inspiring.

Good luck


----------



## PatchyMama (Dec 6, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jasmyn's Mum* 
It's happened twice and both times, it was because dd hit dh. We've tried to explain to her that it hurts and it makes us sad when she hits. We've said "Mommy and Daddy don't hit you. You don't hit Mommy and Daddy". We acknowledge her feelings of frustration, anger, etc. These are things we've tried.

I like the idea of giving her a timeout where we can be in the same room. I like the idea of calling it a "break". I like the idea of letting her choose when to get up (pretty sure she'll get up right away though).

I just want to explore all of our options. I don't want to hurt her. I want to do this in an honouring and healthy way.

Instead of punishing her I would help her find the words to express her frustration/anger. At 3 she is old enough to talk to. Maybe something along the lines of:

"Hitting hurts, we do not hit. It seems like maybe you are angry? Would you like to talk about other ways to tell us you are angry? "

Then you can give her phrases/things to do to express it. You need to help her find the appropriate way to express what she needs to. Hitting is the impulsive reaction.


----------



## warriorprincess (Nov 19, 2001)

I don't think giving your child a time out in the same room is cruel, or love withdrawel. I think they have limited usefulness and I would only use them for things like hitting, biting.


----------



## roisin84 (Sep 7, 2006)

I use time-outs with my 3 and 5 year olds, and find they work great - we just have them sit on the bottom step of the stairs rather than send the to their room. I find it gives everyone space to calm down, and can diffuse tense/circular situations.


----------



## Blu Razzberri (Sep 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jasmyn's Mum* 
Do they work? Are they cruel? Is it gentle? DH has started to use it as a method to get dd to stop hitting or spitting out food. She's going to be 3 in January. Is she too young to understand? He puts her in her room and closes the door for 5 minutes. She cries and yells and it rips me apart. Any advice please? Are there better methods?

I use time outs. They're not "punishment" per say, but more a chance for my boy to calm down (and me too) and to reflect on his actions. I was spanked growing up, and I try not to do that; and this is my way of breaking the cycle (guess you can say). I do time-outs on his bed at home or on a couch or chair when away, he gets one minute for every year (so, 3 minutes). After time's up I come and ask him if he's ready to talk about it. If he says no, I tell him to call me when he's ready to talk. If he says yes; I ask why he's in a timeout...goes a bit like this:

*me*: (I try to remember to get down to his level) Why are you in timeout?
*him*: I didn't listen..and points in the direction of what he's done (he can't talk very well yet, so we leave it at that)
*me*: that's right, you didn't listen when mommy told you not to play with the computer. That's not good behavior. (he usually shakes his head very seriously). If you want to play computer, you have to ask; because mommy's work is on the computer and you could mess it up. When mommy asks you to do something, I expect you to listen, understand?
*him*: ya
*me*: sorry mommy?
*him*: sorry mommy ...hugs (and sometimes "love you mommy")

I will say this though: the part where your DH closes the door; that's more cutting her off from your family, which is where the problems with time-outs begin to cause controversy. Time-out is a chance for child and all other parties involved to gather their thoughts and feelings and then you talk the problem through. If you feel like she's feeling neglected; give her a hug and say "you take a few minutes to think about why you're upset, and we'll talk about it. I'll be back in a few minutes" and don't ..DON'T... forget to come back...set a timer if you have to!

Good luck!


----------



## Blu Razzberri (Sep 27, 2006)

Oh, and you probably shouldn't time-out new rules. It is something I decided to put in place for rules he's known for awhile. I also try to limit rules in general, instead teaching him to use things properly; and what he shouldn't touch and why (ie: stove, hot).


----------



## Blu Razzberri (Sep 27, 2006)

One more thing (sorry!)

I use his bed for timeout despite everyone saying "you'll associate his bed with bad feelings!"...I disagree'd. I use time-out as a positive learning experience. The biggest upside to this was that, if he was acting out because he was tired, he usually falls asleep in those three minutes; and then when he wakes up, I don't bring up the problem again, because I know it was a result of being tired.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jasmyn's Mum* 
It's happened twice and both times, it was because dd hit dh. We've tried to explain to her that it hurts and it makes us sad when she hits. We've said "Mommy and Daddy don't hit you. You don't hit Mommy and Daddy". We acknowledge her feelings of frustration, anger, etc. These are things we've tried.

In addition to what you are already doing, giver you dd ways to express herself without hitting. Figure out WHY she's hitting- what she's trying to express- and find an acceptable way for her to express that.
Telling a child "touch gently" doesn't help them know what *to do* when they are angry/frustrated/etc. Giving information is good, but "hitting hurts" doesn't give them an acceptable outlet for the impulse.
Ds went through a phase where he'd hit me with books. I'd get mad, tell him "hitting hurts." etc. I even walked out of the room a time or two! I realized that he was trying to tell me, in the best way he knew how, that he wanted me to read to him. The solution, that ended it completely was telling him "If you want me to read to you, you can put the book in my hand."


----------



## hipumpkins (Jul 25, 2003)

Blu razzberri...Sometimes kids don';t have the words to tell us they need attention. So if your son is playing with computer when he isn't supposed to could it be he is looking for your attention? Or could it be that he lacks the ability to control his impulses.

That line of, "You didn't listen to mommy" could easily be met with..."but you weren't listenning to me" if he had those words.

I don't think it is a good idea to punish or time out our kids for simply not listenning/obeying. We cetainly don't want to raise kids who blindly follow rules simply b/c they fear being punished or timed out.

Time outs work to stop a behavior but so do a lot of things...The message, in your opinion when you give a time out is probably not the same message your child is receiving in thier perception.


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

There is a book called Positive Time Out by the same author as the positive discipline series. I think that kind of time out can be useful. It is a voluntary time out.

For those who don't think that a forced time-out is love withdrawal, Alfie Kohn does a good job of explaining the history of time-out. The full term is "time out from positive reinforcement." It is a behaviorist idea that if you take away whatever stuff the subject enjoys, this is going to have the same effect as, for example, an electric shock. (Remember most of the original behaviorism research was on rats and pidgeons.) Your attention/love/presence is exactly what you are removing from the equation if your time-out separates you from your child. (ie a closed door.) Being in your room isn't a punishment, being away from your parent's love is.

I'm going to have to put "Read Unconditional Parenting" in my signature because I've been typing it too much lately


----------



## Jasmyn's Mum (May 24, 2004)

A little update: today, she was upset about something and throwing things and having a fit. I told her that I thought it was time to cool down and asked if she would like to go to her room by herself or if she wanted to come with me. She wanted me to come so we sat on her bed and cuddled and I said that her words were as strong at throwing things so I needed her to talk to me. I don't know how much she understood but a light went off it seemed. We read books. I gave her a tickle and she shifted her energy after that.

Thank you soooo much for your input. I feel like I don't know what I'm doing half of the time. That's why it's so nice to come here. Thank you for not flaming me and being gentle and honest.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Sounds like it definitely made more of the right kind of impact than anything else you could have done.
I love that phrase- words are as strong as throwing things. Nice!


----------



## Jasmyn's Mum (May 24, 2004)

Deva, you were so helpful. Thank you.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momileigh* 
There is a book called Positive Time Out by the same author as the positive discipline series. I think that kind of time out can be useful. It is a voluntary time out.

For those who don't think that a forced time-out is love withdrawal, Alfie Kohn does a good job of explaining the history of time-out. The full term is "time out from positive reinforcement." It is a behaviorist idea that if you take away whatever stuff the subject enjoys, this is going to have the same effect as, for example, an electric shock. (Remember most of the original behaviorism research was on rats and pidgeons.) Your attention/love/presence is exactly what you are removing from the equation if your time-out separates you from your child. (ie a closed door.) Being in your room isn't a punishment, being away from your parent's love is.

I'm going to have to put "Read Unconditional Parenting" in my signature because I've been typing it too much lately









Here is my problem with teaching a child that a time out or any non-attention is love withdrawl. It simply isn't true and highly unfair to the child because the rest of the world and life doesn't work that way.

First if you give your first child the idea that any time you take your attention way from them that you are withdrawing your love then when a second child enters the picture you have a major problem on your hands with a toddler or older child feeling like the younger sibling is taking away mommy or daddy's love. It builds resentment. They need to learn early on that just because you are not giving them attention when ever they want it (and want is not always a need even for attention) then you are in for big problems as a parent unless you plan on that child being your only child. I have actually read a mother complain that her toddler was demanding so much from her that she couldn't stand nursing the newborn. How awful for that newborn that the mom hadn't learn to say no to the toddler's attention?

Second, temper tantrum are inappropriate ways of expressing emotion and a child needs to learn that in a proper context. In the real world of life a temper tantrum is going to get that child ridiculed and shunned by siblings and friends. If in the world of mommy and daddy, the child is taught that a tantrum gets results, especially for attention then they are going to learn about life the hard way - not in a loving way.

Third if you have more than one young child and one is a tantrum thrower and the other children see that the tantrums get loving attention from mom or dad then as a parent you are setting yourself up for lots of tantrums from all your children.

My sister was notorious for doing whatever it took to get attention. And NO, she didn't need the attention just because she wanted it. And she especially didn't need that attention at the expense of me getting attention from my parents. I would come home from kindergarten and sit on my mothers lap to tell her about my day. My 2 year old sister would go into the living room and pick leaves off my mother's favorite plants and come back and hand them to her knowing that even negative attention for her was no attention for me. Guess what I battled resentment with my mother over that type of thing for my entire childhood.

My second son was a tantrum thrower when something didn't go his way or he wanted attention away from his brother. He was exclusively breastfed for 2 1/2 years and slept only with me so I know he didn't need attention more than his brother did. My "no love withdrawl" time outs were a means of showing that his behavior and mod of expression was inappropriate. I would set him on a couch in the same room but slightly out of direct eye contact. He was told that he could get up when he chose to stop the tantrum. I was still close by and I was not forcing him to stay on the chair his behaviour was. Allowing him to stay close by or have me sit with him and talk during the tantrum would give him what he wanted but didn't need anymore than his brother - my attention.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

The op sounds like she's got a GREAT handle on things at this point, but I have to respond to this.

First, there is obviously a big difference between punitive forced isolation, and not being able to pay attention to a child because there are other very important tasks at the moment. My 2yo understands that concept well. Sure, it upsets him sometimes (but sometimes he's ok with it) when I really CAN'T nurse him because dinner will burn if I leave it, but it is obvious that he understands that I'm not intentionally "isolating" him.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
Second, temper tantrum are inappropriate ways of expressing emotion and a child needs to learn that in a proper context. In the real world of life a temper tantrum is going to get that child ridiculed and shunned by siblings and friends. If in the world of mommy and daddy, the child is taught that a tantrum gets results, especially for attention then they are going to learn about life the hard way - not in a loving way.

Sure, I'll go along that temper tantrums are an inappropriate way to express emotions (they can definitely be age appropriate, but...). But how in the heck does isolating them teach them APPROPRIATE ways to express emotions? I don't think you can teach anyone through isolating them. They might learn something, but it definitely isn't YOU who are doing the teaching.
Mom and Dad aren't "the real world". The "real world's" job isn't to teach the child and love him unconditionally. That's the parents' job.


----------



## georgia (Jan 12, 2003)

Quote:

Mom and Dad aren't "the real world". The "real world's" job isn't to teach the child and love him unconditionally. That's the parents' job.
I really think this is an important concept for everyone to consider, Becky. Thanks for making it in a clear and gentle way


----------



## karlin (Apr 8, 2004)

Why are tantrums inappropriate for a 2 or 3 year old?

Even a small child knows the difference between forced isolation and mom and dad being busy with some other task.

IMHO, the reason many people give time outs is because they are mad at their child and really fell like they "need to do something" about the behavior. It isn't because they are thinking about teaching the child a better way to behave.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

If your read my post though I didn't force isolation. His timeouts where always in very close proximity. Also tantrums are inappropriate expression but expected expression in the 1 and 2 set. Actually 3 is a little too old because most children by that time should have enough language skills to be taught to express themselves other ways. Most popular phrase in our house during the 2s was "use your words." Also choices were very important. When I saw a tantrum threatening I would give him choices in his behavior. That gave back to him control of the situation.

You can also love your child unconditionally without aproving of the behaviour. It is dangerous to teach a child that all behaviour is equal even as a parent. And if a child is old enough to understand the difference between forced isolation and busyness then they should be old enough to understand the difference between appropriate and inappropriate behavior.

No I did not put him in time outs out of anger. I did it because I refuse to take attention away from a behaved child for a misbehaving child. DS#1 does not have the same strong-willed personality of DS#2 and he is only 15 months older. It was unfair to him to allow his younger complete control of all situations.

I think maybe we are possibly talking about different types of tantrums also. If you could see the number of pictures that I have of DS#2 screaming and crying his head off while I held him and or just watched until it passed (MIL is notorious for taking pictures of everything) you might understand that I didn't use the time outs as a means of controlling his tantrums. I admit that I also laughed (where he couldn't see) at the absurdness of some.

He had two types of tantrums that I felt needed time outs. One was when his tantrum of frustration ballooned into one that included anger at me talking to him or even trying to touch him in a loving way. He was angry and needed a place to get control. As adults we find it easier to gain control of extreme emotions away from others. We need time to be alone. Toddlers and children are no different. The second, as I have said before, was to control my attention away from his brother.

He will be 3 this month and has not had a temper tantrum of any sort in almost 6 months. All I have to say is "use your words" when he starts to get frustrated.


----------



## Scarlet's Mom (Aug 3, 2006)

That's what I call the time-outs that I have practiced in my preschool room and may practice with dd, depending on her constitution. What I mean by self-directed is, I first reflect back to the child what I perceive to be happening. "It looks like you're upset b/c Jimmy took your toy. Is that why you hit him?" Give them a chance to respond if they want. Then state the rule that may exist that does not permit this behavior (if applicable). Then I invite them to take some space where they feel safe and comfortable. I will even offer to sit with them if they want. I encourage them to pay attention to their bodies--when do they feel calm again? when do they feel like they could play with their peers again. When they feel calm again I review what happened and restate what the family/classroom rule may be. "Please remember that we don't hit at school." Finally I invite them to check up on the friend they hit. See if they are ok or if they need anything. (I am personally adverse to forced apologies...)

Having a two year sit in a totally different room for a time-out does not sound ok. I have also heard that time-outs should last as may minutes as the child is in years. So, a two year old would have a two minute time-out according to that. That's if you're going the punitive route.


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 

You can also love your child unconditionally without aproving of the behaviour. It is dangerous to teach a child that all behaviour is equal even as a parent.

No one is advocating approving of all possible behavior. The question is, how do you "teach" what is appropriate and what is not? Many people believe that punishment is the way to "teach" a child. I disagree, as do many gders and Kohn.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mahrphkjh* 
No I did not put him in time outs out of anger. I did it because I refuse to take attention away from a behaved child for a misbehaving child.


Here is another example of behaviorist thinking. You feel like your attention is a "reward" that is "earned" by "behaving"? Unconditional Parenting challenges us that the MISBEHAVING child might be the one who needs MORE, not less, attention. And when you use your attention (ie love) as a reward, you reduce your love to something that is given to manipulate behavior. Just like a sticker chart, or a cookie, love when used to manipulate is just a reward. If you manipulate your child through your attention, they learn to fear that "misbehavior" is going to cause you to cease loving them. Such insecurity leads to more misbehavior and becomes a viscious cycle. It doesn't always manifest itself as "misbehavior," but it does have some scary potential.

Kohn's work is high-level stuff. Before I read it, I had NO CLUE about this stuff, so if you haven't read it, it is no wonder this discussion is going in circles. But most of the people that I know who have read it, their attitude is, "Wow, this stuff is crazy different from anything I've read, its right on, its serious, and I need to figure out how to parent based on this." All your ideas about parenting interactions stand to be challenged if you're up for it. If not, there's only so much amateurs like me can say about it to convince anyone.


----------



## mahrphkjh (Mar 31, 2006)

I see what your are saying about the behaviorist thinking. That does make sense. But I will disagree strongly that a child demanding more attention through a tantrum does not mean a child in need of more attention. We would not assume that a child demanding arsenic is in need of it. A want is not always a need. And the want/need should not come at the expense of another person especially a sibling.

The case of my sister vs. me is a good one in that my sister has a very strong personality. As a teenager we would say that she shouldn't get married just get a small country to dictate. Thirty years later her husband observed that during disagrements between us I will almost always give in. I prefer that everyone be happy and even if I feel strongly about something I don't want her to feel bad about not getting her way. She has no such hangups. That same feeling was the same as children. Some personalities are stronger but that doesn't mean that the need is greater just the attempts to get it are more expressive and demanding.


----------



## Jasmyn's Mum (May 24, 2004)

Momileigh, do you have any favourite books by Kohn? I've never heard of him/her. What's the full name?


----------



## hipumpkins (Jul 25, 2003)

I am reading Alfie Kohn, Unconditional parenting as recommended by mommileigh. I am barely 50 pages inot it and it is wonderful. you can't even begin to discuss timeouts after reading it.


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

I would never equate a parent's love to arsenic! (I know, no one would, but that is pretty much what came out Mahr.) Love is a need. I know when I'm misbehaving, I need more love, not less. A misbehaving child needs more teaching and a feeling of security, not less attention.

Alfie Kohn's books are Punished by Rewards, which is approx 1/3 about parenting and 2/3 about schools and corporate life, and then his latest Unconditional Parenting, which is focused exclusively on parenting. I'd say start w/ UP, and if you're hungry for more, go for PbR. He's written some other stuff, but I haven't read them, and I haven't had anyone tell me I ought to either. There's a UP DVD that's a great intro or for someone who won't read.


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

hipumpkins I'm so glad you're reading it! You must let me know when you're done and what you think along the way. I need to re-read it myself, its been like a year since I read it, and there have been a lot of changes in my life since... I need a refresher...


----------



## georgia (Jan 12, 2003)

Quote:

But I will disagree strongly that a child demanding more attention through a tantrum does not mean a child in need of more attention.
But what if the tantrum isn't about "attention"? Why do we consider a tantrum a demand? What if it's about frustration about an inability to express a very real and strong emotion? What if we looked at the tantrum as a healthy expression or outlet of emotion instead of a "demand"? If we only see tantrums as something to avoid or punish--where does this leave us? The child? Emotions are neither right nor wrong. They just are.

I would love for every parent to read this Mothering Magazine article on tantrums--I really think it could change the world









Quote:

Thirty years later her husband observed that during disagrements between us I will almost always give in. I prefer that everyone be happy and even if I feel strongly about something I don't want her to feel bad about not getting her way.
But why does someone have to _win_? Is it possible you both could have valid points of view? Can we agree that everyone isn't always going to _be_ happy? I can understand your need to protect your sister's feelings, but at what expense to _your own feelings_? It sounds as if your need to express how you *really* feel has fallen by the wayside. It wasn't until I was in my mid-30's that I realized that I wasn't responsible for how anyone else felt. It was a very liberating realization









I spent a good portion of my life trying to please others, act in ways I knew would keep me from getting yelled at, shamed, etc. When I read your post above, I get the strong sense that your relationship w/your sister is coloring your opinions, which is perfectly normal...but perhaps it might be helpful to look at this closer. I know that once I started reading about needs/feelings/etc. my whole world view changed









YMMV


----------



## ejsmama (Jun 20, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *canadiangranola* 
If she is hitting, she is probably doing s as a way of expressing frustration/anger. Those emotions are strong and scary for us to deal with as adults.How much scarier must they be when a child is two and unable to express themselves fully, or understand why they are feeling what they are feeling. To give an isolation time out to a child for hitting seems to me to be cruel...she is already upset and scared, safe enough with mom and dad to let it out in whatever way she knows how, and then to be punished for that? Seems to me that would just teach her it's not okay to feel mad, rather than teaching her not to hit.

I would sit down with ds (if he was acting in a similar way), and I would cuddle the snot out of him. Tell him I love him, that big feelings can be scary, and that hitting is not an okay way to tell about our big feelings. I would read him books, and then cuddle him some more, gently reminding him that hitting hurts. "in our house, we don't hit."

Wow, to me that seems like giving a child a lot of positive reinforcement for being violent. Wouldn't that just teach a child that if you want some positive attention from mom, hit her or kick her? I just posted another thread about being in a play group where that is pretty much what happened when a child shoved my child - he got a lot of cuddles from mom, a reminder that he shouldn't grab and shove, and got to play with the toy he took from my son.

Hitting and kicking may be a way of expressing scary big emotions, but that doesn't make them ok, or behaviors that should be positively reinforced. I guess I do believe in consequences for behavior - the question how can they be gentle and loving, but still protect people (ourselves, other children, etc) from violence which should never be ok?


----------



## Dal (Feb 26, 2005)

I recently read some advice about time-outs by an allegedly authoritative source. They advocated time-outs even though most of the rationale they gave against spanking applied to time-outs as well. Sigh. Anyway... they mentioned that the reason time-outs often don't work is that the child typically reacts in such a strong way to them at first that the parents do not follow through. Instead of commending the parents for listening to their children, the suggestion here is that it is problematic for parents to discount what the "experts" say when it is plain that the method they are advocating is devastating to the child. No, rather, keep at it and break the child's will. Then you can proceed with your time-outs without feeling so guilty and without such a huge "scene", but be consistent. The child must know that your threats are credible. Though obviously of different degrees, this is not unlike obvious forms of brainwashing and abuse (I have in mind, in particular, instances in which a person is made to be utterly dependent on a captor and required to bow to that person's wishes on the threat of some harm if s/he does not comply).


----------



## Dal (Feb 26, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ejsmama* 
Wow, to me that seems like giving a child a lot of positive reinforcement for being violent. Wouldn't that just teach a child that if you want some positive attention from mom, hit her or kick her? I just posted another thread about being in a play group where that is pretty much what happened when a child shoved my child - he got a lot of cuddles from mom, a reminder that he shouldn't grab and shove, and got to play with the toy he took from my son.

Hitting and kicking may be a way of expressing scary big emotions, but that doesn't make them ok, or behaviors that should be positively reinforced. I guess I do believe in consequences for behavior - the question how can they be gentle and loving, but still protect people (ourselves, other children, etc) from violence which should never be ok?

Children do not need their parents to be cold with them whenever we disapprove of their actions. People learn best when they feel happy. Getting a child as close to a state of comfort and of mental health as possible increases the chances that the message will be learned. It also assumes the best of the child. Given the power that our labels and expectations of others have, this increases the odds that the child will live up to her own best potential. Since we don't know what is going on in a child's head, it is best to assume the best unless their is a huge weight of evidence to the contrary, in which case we can still assume the best that is consistent with the facts that we have.

How well would you learn something if you posted a thread about how your daughter shaped right up after you gave her a "good spanking" (because you had no idea this might be problematic) and everyone lashed out at you? If you are like most people, you might become even more apt to continue spanking and start off an internal missile attack of cuss words to describe the people who are being so cold to you. I see a "let's lash out with clueless newbies" approach as the equivalent of using some sort of negative reinforcement with a child who hits. You'd be more apt to hear what others are saying if they were gentle with you while conveying the facts against spanking. (I'm not so great with this at times as passion often gets in the way and since the internet is not at all face-to-face, I can forget the people who are reading). If they went out of the way to be nice to you even after you clearly did something that they feel strongly against... I can only see that as endearing you to them and increasing the chances that you'll consider what they have to say. When a child is angry or feeling threatened by a parents' response, the child is not in a good position to learn anything positive. Rather, the child is more apt to stew about how unfair things are or about how they are angy with mom/dad/whoever. When a child is still crying over a dispute with another child... that is not a particularly helpful time to teach moral lessons either. I often discuss things with Simon more after we've left the scene, when we play-act various scenarios and whatnot (assuming he wants to do this). He's learning extremely well. He's 2.5. I don't expect him to act as though he has a great deal of control over his emotions and actions.

Perhaps you could see how well this type of parenting works, or at least that it is not at all inferior to a more punitive/cold/scolding approach, by spending more time in real life with parents who use these methods? Watch that same child over time. Nonviolent parenting worked pretty well for Gandhi, who talks about how his mother would hold him close and love on him with all her might whenever he acted in inappropriate ways.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

Children do not need their parents to be cold with them whenever we disapprove of their actions. People learn best when they feel happy. Getting a child as close to a state of comfort and of mental health as possible increases the chances that the message will be learned. It also assumes the best of the child. Given the power that our labels and expectations of others have, this increases the odds that the child will live up to her own best potential. Since we don't know what is going on in a child's head, it is best to assume the best unless their is a huge weight of evidence to the contrary, in which case we can still assume the best that is consistent with the facts that we have.
I think it does come down to knowing your child. While you can't fully know what's happening in a person's head, an attached aware parent can make distinctions, and I think that is important.

Ds was always showered with attention and affection. As an only child he was constantly in my arms and at my side when he was small. I was intuitively certain he wasn't aggressive in order to get more attention. That wasn't his issue. There were times that removing my conscious attention was the response he needed to better check his own behavior. It would have felt detached and inauthentic to respond to *him* by hugging and snuggling during an aggressive moment.

I can imagine a different child being aggressive in order to gain attention. I have no doubt ignoring a child who needs attention will backfire.

It's an oversimplification of children's emotions to say aggression always = this or tantrums always = that.

I have a clear memory of throwing a tantrum around the age of 3 or 4. I was called in from riding my Powder Puff (remember those pink versions of Big Wheels?). I wasn't particularly unhappy, just mildly disappointed playtime was over. I wanted to try out a new response, something I'd seen a character do on TV. I walked in the door and threw myself on the floor. I beat the floor with fists while kicking my legs and wailing like a banshee. I was perfectly aware through the entire act that it WAS an act. I was a little scientist. Detached but overcome with curiosity to find out how this would affect my mother. I did not need extra attention, nor did I need cuddling, or more playtime. The best response for *me* would have been for my mother to say "Impressive! But probably tiring". Only that type of response would have confirmed she understood I just "wanted to know".

I think it's a mistake to assume only children who are unfilfilled or have unmet needs "act out". In my observation, a healthy childhood includes curiosity and experimenting for the sake of learning authentic and honest truths about life, their place in the world, and their relationship to other people.

When that is the motive, children cannot learn unless others "get real". If it's always hugs and snuggles and "therapeutic" responses, mommy trying to make them happy... no matter what...egads that would drive a healthy child up the wall. It would certainly have driven me up the wall as a child, and drive ds to utter distraction.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama* 
Ds was always showered with attention and affection. As an only child he was constantly in my arms and at my side when he was small. I was intuitively certain he wasn't aggressive in order to get more attention. That wasn't his issue. There were times that removing my conscious attention was the response he needed to better check his own behavior. It would have felt detached and inauthentic to respond to *him* by hugging and snuggling during an aggressive moment.

I can get on board with that. It doesn't sound like you gave ds a punitive time-out. It sounds like you just didn't specifically GIVE him attention. (You didn't really specify if you intentionally witheld attention that he was asking for- as in coming up to you and trying to communicate. I'd guess no)

I don't go out of my way to give ds attention for all "fits" (because I can't remember many tantrums). I give what the situation warrants, depending on how he feels.

I don't think that everyone who is against punitive time-outs are suggesting that the only other option is smothering your child with attention and affection at the sign of a fit or tantrum. My opinion is just that behaviorism has no place in raising kids.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

I can get on board with that. It doesn't sound like you gave ds a punitive time-out. It sounds like you just didn't specifically GIVE him attention. (You didn't really specify if you intentionally witheld attention that he was asking for- as in coming up to you and trying to communicate. I'd guess no)
I have withheld attention when he was directing a behavior at me, but never when he was trying to communicate with me. Those are very different situations.


----------



## Mizelenius (Mar 22, 2003)

In theory, I don't like time-outs. But some days, that is what I do. Sometimes DD just screams and it hurts my head. I tell her that it's causing me pain and I need to get away from the noise. So she follows me. At moments like that she is in no position to discuss feelings or options (I've tried). So, I send her elsewhere and she can come back when she is done being SO loud. The whole "honor the impulse" idea is OK as long as it does not hurt anyone or anything . . .in this case the impulse does hurt, so I don't allow it done around me.

Or sometimes, she is overtired but won't nap. She is explosive on those days. So, I tell her that she is going to have quiet time in her room-- she can do anything she wants in there, but hopefully take some time to lie down. I try not to make it sound like a punishment because in my mind, it isn't . . .it's the closest thing I can do to helping her get what she needs (rest). She is usually happy to go.

In summary, I put her in time out just to keep the noise away from me and in order to help her rest. When I've done it as punishment (I've tried that) it just makes matters worse. But sometimes, when I am really mad, I would rather put her in time out vs say or do something I will regret. Some people are able to manage parenting very close to their ideals most of the time, but I am not. I have to choose the lesser of 2 evils sometimes. That's just life.


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *ejsmama* 
Wow, to me that seems like giving a child a lot of positive reinforcement for being violent. Wouldn't that just teach a child that if you want some positive attention from mom, hit her or kick her?

What you are saying makes perfect sense FROM A BEHAVIORIST STANDPOINT. If you give the rat a cookie for pressing the lever, he keeps pressing it. If you shock the rat for pressing the lever, he stops pressing it.

But people are not rats, and love is not a cookie. A child who hits may be feeling insecure, threatened, angry, etc. Demonstrating to them that you love them regardless of their feelings and actions, and modeling gentleness to them, teaches them that they are valued and that gentleness feels good. If you ignore them/punish them/isolate them/scold them, it may make them think many things, including, 1. I really am bad. I'm a bad person. 2. She thinks that's bad? Wait till she sees THIS. 3. I don't care what she says, she's mean. 4. She doesn't even love me. 5. She might stop loving me. 6. I hate my brother because mom loves him more. 6. Next time she won't catch me.

I'm trying to think of a good analogy.

OK, lets try this. I'm having a crappy day, dh comes home, and I say something rude and hurtful to him. If he comes over to me, says, "Hey babe, you seem stressed out" and give me a hug, what is going to happen? I'm probably going to start crying, hug him back, apologize for whatever thing I said, tell him about my crappy day, and then after the whole interaction I will feel better and I will make an extra effort to be nice to him. Flip side of the coin. I make my totally rude comment, and he storms off. What happens then? I stew about how I was totally justified making my comment. I think about all the little nitpicky things that he has done to annoy me for the past several months. I storm around totally pissy and probably say rude things to whomever else is unlucky enough to be around me.

Am I right? Doesn't a loving response actually lead to better behavior and healing interactions? It does for me! Am I going to make another rude comment tomorrow just so he'll come over and hug me and we can make up? No! I'm far LESS likely to make a rude comment to him the next day. Human nature is complicated and doesn't seem to make much sense sometimes, but it is more or less universal. Kids and adults alike.


----------



## aywilkes (Sep 2, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *nonconformnmom* 
Children act out and lose control because they are at a developmental phase in which they are unable to rein themselves in and regain composure. Yes, at those times they need us, their parents, to teach them how to calm down, center themselves, and start anew on firmer footing. Gently guiding a child to a comfortable, visible location within view of the parent and teaching them how to calmly sit for a minute or two is a very loving response to a child who needs to be shown how to control their own behavior.

I think using the word "abandoned" is a bit drastic, don't you? Assuming the child can see the parent, which was my suggestion. Maybe if the parent refused to look at the child, left that part of the house and went and played with the neighbor children during the timeout, yes, I might say the child would feel abandoned in those circumstances.

ITA. Also, as adults/young adults we are often encouraged to learn to take a breather. When things are getting hectic, we're feeling stressed out, etc. take a breather. It depends on HOW a time-out is implemented. If a child is told to sit down somewhere and take a break, I don't think that speaks abandonment. My DS is 8 almost 9 and VERY expressive about how he feels, how I make him feel, etc. VERY VERY expressive. Unbelievable sometimes. Never has he felt abandoned and I have most certainly made him sit down for a few minutes.


----------



## aywilkes (Sep 2, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Deva33mommy* 
Mom and Dad aren't "the real world". The "real world's" job isn't to teach the child and love him unconditionally. That's the parents' job.

Mom and Dad's job is to teach the child and love him unconditionally AND teach him coping skills/ prepare him for the "real world". Yes, I am a safe haven for my DS who is 8 and he knows that I love him always. However, there are certain things that my DS had to learn - and unfortunately learned the hard way once he started school 4 years ago. There are behaviors that are socially unacceptable in certain circles and although it is okay with me it is not okay with the teacher, peers, others.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

Am I right? Doesn't a loving response actually lead to better behavior and healing interactions? It does for me! Am I going to make another rude comment tomorrow just so he'll come over and hug me and we can make up? No! I'm far LESS likely to make a rude comment to him the next day. Human nature is complicated and doesn't seem to make much sense sometimes, but it is more or less universal. Kids and adults alike.
I agree that is a healthy pattern, and one that repeats frequently in
a successful relationship.

Also, I have witnessed relationships in which one person always responded with a hug, empathy, concern and "gee you seem really unhappy" to a partner's cranky hurtful behavior...and that response did not bring harmony.

I agree that human behavior is complicated. Hurtful behavior has so many motives. Empathy is the groundwork from which I would build my response. Empathy has many expressions beyond sympathy and commiseration.

I can think of maaaany situations from my life that were permanently improved when somebody "cut the bull" and gave it to me straight.

Honestly to me the trickiest part of parenting is knowing when and how to interact authentically with ds, while still supporting his process of learning.

My personal belief is that growing into an awareness of limitations is *especially* difficult for a baby that retains his birthright of intrinsic self worth. Then they toddle out into this world... with it's gravity, electric sockets, speeding cars, taxes, and mortgage payments, and germs that make us sick. The evidence that ds was not all powerful was immediately and passionately rejected by him. How he struggled as a toddler to face the proof that all was not as he insisted it should be. He no sooner sensed a limit than he went for it full tilt to see if it was maleable by sheer force of will. Taking those fledgling steps in facing limits eventually showed him that he was so powerful, he could cope with limits. It was going to be okay. I think he was about 3 when it all clicked. It seemed like an eternity but in hindsight I was lucky it only took 3 and a half years of emotional and sometimes violent resistance to everything, before he came to terms with the world.

As it relates to this thread....an abstract time out would have been inauthentic.
Isolation with a timer would have terrified and bewildered ds. But, an intuitive spontaneous decision that said "That's enough. If you hit again I will say "ds go to another room". If you don't go, I will go to another room. If you want us both to stay here, I can give you a pillow to hit instead" was exactly what he wanted. It was like a relief for the space around him to take form and shape. Vague, nonspecific affectionate patience, and wordy explainations that hitting hurt, only confused and irritated him. He was genuinely upset if he hit me...he would cry and seem truly alarmed... but he had no clue how to find the limit in that response. He needed much more specific, spatial, tangible, authentic limits that were real to him. And, he needed time to process that. Once he finally accepted the existence of limits, he became an active player in creating and changing them. He is a million times more creative and flexible than me when it comes to finding agreeable solutions.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Mizelenius* 
The whole "honor the impulse" idea is OK as long as it does not hurt anyone or anything . . .in this case the impulse does hurt, so I don't allow it done around me.

The whole phrase ought to be "honor the impulse, in a way that is mutually agreeable." As you've noted, it can be quite negative if we don't factor in the second part!


----------



## hipcoolmama (Oct 2, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jasmyn's Mum* 
Do they work? Are they cruel? Is it gentle? DH has started to use it as a method to get dd to stop hitting or spitting out food. She's going to be 3 in January. Is she too young to understand? He puts her in her room and closes the door for 5 minutes. She cries and yells and it rips me apart. Any advice please? Are there better methods?

As someone who is trying to examine different approaches and theories of gentle discipline and AP, I have come up with this idea for time outs.

I will use time outs as a means of last resort. If distraction, redirection, or explanation do not work, then I will try a time out where the child and either me or DH take a time out together to talk about what happened and what my child could try to instead do in the future.

If we don't have the time to take the child with us for a time out (like if we're visiting people or something), then I would do a time out where I remove my child from the situation and give him/her some quiet space alone to reflect or read a book for a short time.

If none of those things work, then the time out becomes going home. Obviously if my kid is still not behaving, his other needs like sleep, food, mama love or something else need to be met at home.


----------



## hipcoolmama (Oct 2, 2006)

I wanted to add that my use of time outs is after redirection, distraction, or explanation attempts only if the behavior is threatening or violent.

If my child is hitting another child or biting or something like that, then the time out happens right away where we remove the child from the situation for some kid/parent one on one discussion of what happened and why.

Also, if it's a safety issue where the child is endangering themselves AND it's a repeat problem (like touching fireplace tools after having it explained and explained) then we do the same kind of time out as above.


----------



## Jasmyn's Mum (May 24, 2004)

I guess what I've realized the most in the last week is that the key is to try to work it out together instead of leaving them to work it out on their own.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Wow Jasmyn's Mum- how come I couldn't ever put it as consisely as you just did! ITA!


----------



## MtBikeLover (Jun 30, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *hipumpkins* 
I am reading Alfie Kohn, Unconditional parenting as recommended by mommileigh. I am barely 50 pages inot it and it is wonderful. *you can't even begin to discuss timeouts after reading it.*

I totally agree with the bolded statement. I needed something to convince DH to stop doing timouts with our DS because I detest time-out. He read the section on time outs from Kohn's book and immediately stopped doing them. And he felt so guilty for ever having done them.

We never sent our son to his room. His timeout spot was on the stairs and he could see us. But it still made him extremely angry, sad, frustrated, emotional, etc. My heart would break every time DH would put him in timeout.

After stopping timeouts, my son has undergone a complete change. He is happier, deals with his anger better, uses his words more, etc.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Gotta add something that someone said on the boards a few months ago-
Do you want them to learn to learn that there are consequences to hitting/throwing/etc or do you want them to learn not to do it?

Just wanted to add that because I just remembered that phrase and I loved it!


----------



## zeldamomma (Jan 5, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momileigh* 
OK, lets try this. I'm having a crappy day, dh comes home, and I say something rude and hurtful to him. If he comes over to me, says, "Hey babe, you seem stressed out" and give me a hug, what is going to happen? I'm probably going to start crying, hug him back, apologize for whatever thing I said, tell him about my crappy day, and then after the whole interaction I will feel better and I will make an extra effort to be nice to him. Flip side of the coin. I make my totally rude comment, and he storms off. What happens then? I stew about how I was totally justified making my comment. I think about all the little nitpicky things that he has done to annoy me for the past several months. I storm around totally pissy and probably say rude things to whomever else is unlucky enough to be around me.

Am I right? Doesn't a loving response actually lead to better behavior and healing interactions? It does for me! Am I going to make another rude comment tomorrow just so he'll come over and hug me and we can make up? No! I'm far LESS likely to make a rude comment to him the next day. Human nature is complicated and doesn't seem to make much sense sometimes, but it is more or less universal. Kids and adults alike.

Here's my problem with your analogy: it's not ok to say something rude and hurtful to someone because you're having a bad day, and apologizing is never as good as not having done it in the first place. So perhaps the interaction you described is good for you, but it sounds like it kind of stinks for your dh (I know that this is an analogy, not an actual description of your relationship-- I don't mean to attack you personally). It's important to me that my kids learn as children that the people around them are not there to act as targets for their moods.

ZM


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *zeldamomma* 
Here's my problem with your analogy: it's not ok to say something rude and hurtful to someone because you're having a bad day, and apologizing is never as good as not having done it in the first place. So perhaps the interaction you described is good for you, but it sounds like it kind of stinks for your dh (I know that this is an analogy, not an actual description of your relationship-- I don't mean to attack you personally). It's important to me that my kids learn as children that the people around them are not there to act as targets for their moods.

ZM

I agree, its not OK, as a matter of fact its rather immature and quite unacceptable. BUT, everyone does something unacceptable now and then. When it does happen, how should it be handled? What is likely to cause it to happen more often, and what will make it happen less often? What kind of reaction to misbehavior is most productive? I stand by my analogy. For now.









BTW, it is an analogy, nothing more. I would NEVER do something that immature, never in my life, not even once, not on my worst day, no way...







But if I ever did, I would hope that I would make up for it!


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Deva33mommy* 
Do you want them to learn to learn that there are consequences to hitting/throwing/etc or do you want them to learn not to do it?


On first reading, I loved that. But when I think about it, I'm not so sure. Kids would learn "not to do it" if they received an electric shock every time they did it. That's hardly the kind of learning I'd advocate. I'd like my dd's to not hit because of an understanding that it hurts people, which is a consequence. But certainly NOT because the consequence is that if you hit, you get time-out! That would be very self-centered thinking.

I think I know what you're getting at, though. For example, I want my dd not to steal cars, but not because if you steal cars you could go to jail. I want her to not steal cars because it is unfair to the owner of the car and therefore morally wrong.

You could probably rephrase it to say, "Do you want them to learn to learn that there are punishments for hitting/throwing/etc or do you want them to decide not to do it based on their own developing moral reasoning?" Doesn't have a ring to it, does it? Oh well.


----------



## zeldamomma (Jan 5, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momileigh* 
I agree, its not OK, as a matter of fact its rather immature and quite unacceptable. BUT, everyone does something unacceptable now and then. When it does happen, how should it be handled? What is likely to cause it to happen more often, and what will make it happen less often? What kind of reaction to misbehavior is most productive? I stand by my analogy. For now.









I think that coupled with whatever understanding is shown needs to be the message that acting out is not an acceptable way to express emotions. With a child, I would suggest alternatives. With an adult, I believe I would throw it back in their court to come up with their own alternatives, unless they wanted help. But either way, I believe there needs to be a conscious effort to prevent the behavior in the future. Otherwise, there's a message being sent that the misbehavior _was_ acceptable; the emotions justified it.

ZM


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

I'm with you on discussing alternatives with children. With adults, I think it could come across as patronizing, and I think it might only be useful if it is an ongoing issue. (Like if I regularly/semiregularly insulted dh when he came home, as opposed to once in a blue moon, in which case he might just choose to forgive me without making a big deal out of it.) You are right, often you do need to address the behavior as unacceptable, but the point is you don't have to make the child feel bad/isolated first. It is better to make them feel better first, so they will react better when you do discuss the alternatives to what they did.

Also, emotions don't justify bad behavior. But IRL, when an adult "misbehaves," and then apologizes and tells me their dog died that morning, or they just found out they have cancer, or they were fired last week and just spent the last of their meager savings, etc... well, honestly, I'm going to use my empathy and forgive them much easier, and I'm not about to call them on the carpet for whatever they said/did to me. My sense of justice can be overridden by my sense of compassion. I hope most people, and my own children, feel the same way when dealing with others.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momileigh* 
On first reading, I loved that. But when I think about it, I'm not so sure. Kids would learn "not to do it" if they received an electric shock every time they did it.

But the electric shock would be a consequence to hitting. Honestly learning "not to do it" would be (in my head anyways) learning it for the right reasons- because of the moral implications.
Learning that there was a consequence would be learning not to do it *because* they didn't want the consequence that it resulted in.
See what I'm saying?
(Iow, punishment and teaching are not one and the same







)


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Deva33mommy* 
Learning that there was a consequence would be learning not to do it *because* they didn't want the consequence that it resulted in.
See what I'm saying?
(Iow, punishment and teaching are not one and the same







)

Yes and no. The natural consequence of hitting is that it hurts someone. Therefore, it is true, I don't want them hitting *because of the consequence.* The consequence IS the reason not to hit.

I think we are talking in circles due to the misnomer that consequence=punishment. A natural consequence (as opposed to a logical or imposed consequence) is exactly what they need to learn about in order not to have antisocial behavior. That is actually what makes it antisocial: the natural consequence.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Yeah, when I talk about "consequences" I'm talking about imposed consequences (like time outs or electric shocks).
Natural consequences just ARE, so they don't even seem in my head like they need to be labeled, kwim? lol
Either way, I think we agree on the basic jist of it


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

Agreed


----------



## Jasmyn's Mum (May 24, 2004)

I'm not sure about you all, but I know that I was a very well-behaved child. I would never even dream of hitting or talking back to or yelling at my parents BUT...

I did it out of fear of the consequences and not out of respect for my parents (esp. my father).

I would like for my dd to feel it in her heart that she shouldn't hit anyone because it hurts them and makes them sad. Empathy and compassion is something that comes with time. Dd is still developing hers.

I feel like I've learned so much this last week. I'm AMAZED at what this little girl keeps teaching me


----------



## zeldamomma (Jan 5, 2006)

Coming out of the closet here: I have a LOT of trouble visualizing how to, for example, convince a 2 year old to not hit _for the right reasons_. My oldest is 5 (and my middle child was briefly a biter), so I have firsthand experience with parenting preschoolers, and to me, a 2 year old doesn't seem to be intellectually capable of empathy. To deal with aggressive behavior, my goal was to 1) avoid the situations where my kids would act out (make sure they're well-rested, well-fed, and generally comfortable), 2) give them alternative ways to express themselves and 3) make it clear that the aggressive behavior is unacceptable.

I guess I see two lessons here-- the first is learning to control the impulse, and the second is the reason why. I'd hate for a kid to suffer all the social consequences of being a "hitter" until he's old enough to empathize.

ZM


----------



## ~Nikki~ (Aug 4, 2004)

We only use time-outs when it's ME that needs a time-out (as in, I'm at the end of my rope and need to gather my thoughts to be able to deal with the situation). I hate doing it, but sometimes it's necessary, so that I can gain enough composure to discipline her gently.

I don't do time-outs to punish her. And I make that clear to her. I'll tell her I'm putting her in her room for a minute because I'm very angry. And then I'll go in and we'll chat about whatever it was that she did wrong. It doesn't happen often, thankfully. I'm getting better and better at keeping my patience, and we've all but eliminated the "time-outs" over the past year.

Quote:

Coming out of the closet here: I have a LOT of trouble visualizing how to, for example, convince a 2 year old to not hit for the right reasons.
Our method - even with our 1.5 year old - is to remove the child from the situation immediatly, and quickly tell them "We don't hit, hitting hurts." They still both hit out of anger, occasionally. But my daughter will quickly remedy the situation by apologzing to her brother and saying "I'm sorry for hurting you." She gets it. She knows it's wrong. She knows how to "fix" the situation when she slips. It takes a long time for a lesson to stick for good.


----------



## Jasmyn's Mum (May 24, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *zeldamomma* 
Coming out of the closet here: I have a LOT of trouble visualizing how to, for example, convince a 2 year old to not hit _for the right reasons_.

zeldamomma, I hear what you're saying. I don't expect that at age 2 , she will totally understand the concept but I think that to know that it is a process helps.


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *zeldamomma* 
Coming out of the closet here: I have a LOT of trouble visualizing how to, for example, convince a 2 year old to not hit _for the right reasons_.

I've never punished ds. For anything. All hitting and other issues have been dealt with by
1. giving information "I don't like to be hit, it hurts"
2. Honor the impulse (figuring out WHY he was hitting- was he playing? angry? frustrated? experimenting?)
3. Giving acceptable alternatives "If you want me to read to you, put the book in my hand." (instead of hitting me with it)

My ds is 26 mos, and these steps have worked since he was about 15 mos or so. It's not so much that he could empathize (though I think he can to an extent), or that he could really understand the *right reasons.* But he knew that hitting was not acceptable. (because I told him, and because of how it affected me and how I reacted. Just saying "I don't like it"). And (very very importantly) I gave him a socially acceptable way to express the impulse.
So even if he didn't _really_ understand the personal reasons, he did understand that hitting was not socially acceptable. He knew 1. don't hit and 2. what I can do instead.


----------



## Fuamami (Mar 16, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momileigh* 
You are right, often you do need to address the behavior as unacceptable, but the point is you don't have to make the child feel bad/isolated first. It is better to make them feel better first, so they will react better when you do discuss the alternatives to what they did.

I'm jumping in here to put in my two cents. I agree with half of the above. I don't think it's necessary to make a child feel worse when they do something unacceptable. I think punishing them distracts them from their own feelings of remorse and guilt.

However, I think it's very important to let them feel those feelings, so I would disagree that you need to try to make them feel better. It is unfair to them to try to comfort away any feelings of shame and guilt they may have after hurting someone, for example. They have the right to feel those, and learn from them (because I do think people learn to avoid certain uncomfortable feelings), and this is also why I think we should be authentic in our reactions when they hurt us. They have the right to know how others are affected by their actions, we have the obligation to provide them with honest information.

And, I've seen lots of relationships where one partner is regularly snippy with the other, the other patiently and lovingly tolerates it, and the snippy partner continues to take advantage of them. I've been in this dynamic myself. Human nature IS complex, it's just all so tricky.


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momileigh* 
You are right, often you do need to address the behavior as unacceptable, but the point is you don't have to make the child feel bad/isolated first. It is better to make them feel better first, so they will react better when you do discuss the alternatives to what they did.

I agree with this, It's never necessary to cause a child (or anyone, for that matter) to feel bad or isolated in order to address a problematic behavior. However, I think I would replace the phrase "make them feel better first" with the phrase "give them the empathy they need and help them calm down first" or "give them empathy and time to calm down first." I think it is true that when a person is upset, that person is not as able to listen and learn as they would be when calm. I also think that often children need to know that they've been heard before they can hear us-they need to know their feelings matter and that they have our support. Sometimes a little empathy is what helps a person calm down. And sometimes empathy does help one feel better.
But there's nothing wrong with "bad" feelings, it's okay for kids to have them, I don't think it's my job to make my kids feel better but to be there to support them when they have bad feelings-and ultimately to help them learn not only how to handle their bad feelings, but also that they will survive those very normal feelings and that they don't need to fear them but to listen to them because they're just signals that something needs attention.

As to addressing the fact that the behavior is unacceptable/hurtful/whatever, I agree that often that is very important. However I also think there are times when it isn't necessary or helpful to bring up how a person's "misbehavior" affected someone else: the event may be very minor in impact (yk, it just didn't really bother me/whomever) and needs no discussion in order to come to resolution (b/c the affected person has moved on and forgiven already), or the event is so out of character for the person being hurtful or that person is so distraught that we choose to focus on that person's pain and difficulty (at least initially, if need be bringing up how we felt about their behavior later), or when the person is a child who knows (through repeated communication about it) that the behavior is hurtful and knows parents disapprove but who is having difficulty handling conflict in other ways and appears discouraged at always hearing how unacceptable their behavior is (here it can be helpful to just stick to helping them solve the problem and communicate their feelings).

Quote:


Originally Posted by *momileigh* 
Also, emotions don't justify bad behavior. But IRL, when an adult "misbehaves," and then apologizes and tells me their dog died that morning, or they just found out they have cancer, or they were fired last week and just spent the last of their meager savings, etc... well, honestly, I'm going to use my empathy and forgive them much easier, and I'm not about to call them on the carpet for whatever they said/did to me. My sense of justice can be overridden by my sense of compassion. I hope most people, and my own children, feel the same way when dealing with others.

I agree.

As to the discussion of time-out, I am not a fan of time-out as imposed consequence for "misbehavior." IME (with my own children), time-out as an imposed consequence distracts from learning how one's actions affect others and places the focus on how one's actions affect oneself (so the risk is that the child will learn "I won't hit because I don't want to go to time-out" rather than "I won't hit because I know it hurts others"). IME (with my own children), it also creates more conflict.

However, taking time out to relax, as a way of learning to calm down so that problem-solving or communication can begin, can be very valuable. This is "let's go sit down and relax, when we're both calm we can talk about this more" or "how about you sit down here and read a book, and when you feel more calm we can talk, I can sit with you if you like." As a parent, I myself take this kind of time out (when possible): "I'm feeling very frustrated/angry right now, and I need to calm down a little before we talk about this anymore, so I'm going to sit here for a few minutes. I'd like to be by myself so I can relax, I need some quiet/space" Learning to calm down (or remain calm) in order to handle a problem well is an important skill.

I guess I think that the real keys to discipline are communicating well, helping our kids learn communication and problem-solving skills, modeling those very skills and other behaviors we value--and trusting that our kids will learn, understanding that it takes time for them to do so, and being willing to be patient.


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sledg* 
I think I would replace the phrase "make them feel better first" with the phrase "give them the empathy they need and help them calm down first" or "give them empathy and time to calm down first."

Totally agree. On retrospect it wasn't the best choice of phrases. I certainly didn't mean to imply we should be adjusting the lighting, turning on the relaxation music, and giving a nice massage to make the child "feel better" before we talk.


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

momileigh, actually dimming the lights and giving a backrub is sometimes what it takes to help one of my kids calm down.

Now in retrospect I think "make them feel better" can have multiple meanings-and one certainly would be simply to help them calm down. I think I read it as more like "take responsibility for my child's feelings and do all I can to make them happy right away." Interesting to see my own perceptions. Not a poor choice of words on your part, just different ways of perceiving.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

I think, as it relates to time outs and hitting...the question I see that presses the issue is not "how do I teach my child the right reason not to hit"...but "What do I do when my child will not stop hitting me~even after I say it hurts, offer alternatives, etc".

I realize there is no single clear answer to this. It may depend on many factors that differ in every situation. I have seen many posts over the years that address a kind of "hitting spree" phase some children experience between 2 and 4 years old. So, it does seem to be a phase particularly kinethsetic children pass through.

It also strikes me as "the" situation where I see (and have experienced) parents desperately needing space in response to a behavior. Not as a punishment, but in response to the parents needs.


----------



## ZeldasMom (Sep 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dal* 
Children do not need their parents to be cold with them whenever we disapprove of their actions. People learn best when they feel happy. Getting a child as close to a state of comfort and of mental health as possible increases the chances that the message will be learned. It also assumes the best of the child. Given the power that our labels and expectations of others have, this increases the odds that the child will live up to her own best potential. Since we don't know what is going on in a child's head, it is best to assume the best unless their is a huge weight of evidence to the contrary, in which case we can still assume the best that is consistent with the facts that we have.

How well would you learn something if you posted a thread about how your daughter shaped right up after you gave her a "good spanking" (because you had no idea this might be problematic) and everyone lashed out at you? If you are like most people, you might become even more apt to continue spanking and start off an internal missile attack of cuss words to describe the people who are being so cold to you. I see a "let's lash out with clueless newbies" approach as the equivalent of using some sort of negative reinforcement with a child who hits. You'd be more apt to hear what others are saying if they were gentle with you while conveying the facts against spanking. (I'm not so great with this at times as passion often gets in the way and since the internet is not at all face-to-face, I can forget the people who are reading). If they went out of the way to be nice to you even after you clearly did something that they feel strongly against... I can only see that as endearing you to them and increasing the chances that you'll consider what they have to say. When a child is angry or feeling threatened by a parents' response, the child is not in a good position to learn anything positive. Rather, the child is more apt to stew about how unfair things are or about how they are angy with mom/dad/whoever. When a child is still crying over a dispute with another child... that is not a particularly helpful time to teach moral lessons either. I often discuss things with Simon more after we've left the scene, when we play-act various scenarios and whatnot (assuming he wants to do this). He's learning extremely well. He's 2.5. I don't expect him to act as though he has a great deal of control over his emotions and actions.

Perhaps you could see how well this type of parenting works, or at least that it is not at all inferior to a more punitive/cold/scolding approach, by spending more time in real life with parents who use these methods? Watch that same child over time. Nonviolent parenting worked pretty well for Gandhi, who talks about how his mother would hold him close and love on him with all her might whenever he acted in inappropriate ways.

Excellent post.

I don't do classic time-out where the chld has to go someplace away from me for a certain amount of time. Though we do do the kind of time-out where the child has to physically stop what he is doing and sit down for a minute with me. For example, when my almost 3yo DS gets overstimulated and is gleefully repeatedly jumping off the back of the couch onto the harwood floor, he and I sit down on the floor together and I hold him if need be. I quietly talk to him about how he needs to calm his body down. We do this for 30 seconds to 2 mintues or so. Then I help him find somthing else to do. When he gets really hyped up like that I pick something like reading a book.

Today there was a 2.5 yo boy at indoor playground through the community rec department who was doing the hitting spree thing. When he went for my 12mo DD I asked if he wanted to touch my baby and said the feet are a good place to touch a baby and held them so he could reach (I always offer the feet to kids who want to touch my baby). He kind of did this, and then he went for her face again. I am not sure if he was overstimulated or what the issue was. They were playing some loud, high-energy music, which I thought was a bad idea. This little boy has a new 10 week old brother, so maybe that is a factor and he needs reassurance that he is still loved. My 3yo still has issues of this sort and my baby is a year old now.

I helped his mom take him out to their car (we each held a hand) and it seemed to help to distract him (he was interested in showing me which car was theirs and reading out loud the letters on their license plate. And when I aksed him to put his hands on the car while his mom got things ready, he did that).

His mom is thinking maybe this activity is too much for him. I was encouraging her to give it another shot. I hope they can find a way to make it work out. I think when you have a new baby and a 2yo getting trapped in the house can be the worst. Plus, I have selfish motivations. I found out she is a fellow homebirther so she is a good person for me to chat with.









I think parenting is hard and sometimes you go through a particularly rough patch and you just find your way through it the best way you can. I will be thinking about this hitting spree issue. I had never really seen that before.

Sorry for rambling a bit--I am overtired an need to get to bed!


----------



## Magella (Apr 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama* 
I think, as it relates to time outs and hitting...the question I see that presses the issue is not "how do I teach my child the right reason not to hit"...but "What do I do when my child will not stop hitting me~even after I say it hurts, offer alternatives, etc".

I realize there is no single clear answer to this. It may depend on many factors that differ in every situation. I have seen many posts over the years that address a kind of "hitting spree" phase some children experience between 2 and 4 years old. So, it does seem to be a phase particularly kinethsetic children pass through.

It also strikes me as "the" situation where I see (and have experienced) parents desperately needing space in response to a behavior. Not as a punishment, but in response to the parents needs.

I am wondering if you're talking about a single situation in which the child has become non-redirectable, and on this one specific occasion keeps hitting? I agree that during this kind of episode, a parent will likely need space. I know I've been there, and I have walked away, disengaged, tried to take a time-out for myself to get some space (I say tried, because typically I would be followed--and certain actions, like locking myself in the bathroom, tend to lead to an escalation even if I am no longer being hit, which isn't helpful). When I've done this, I have done my best to make it clear that I simply do not want to sit there and allow myself to be hit, that I need a break from being hit. Walking away from someone who refuses to stop hitting you is basic self-defense, a way of taking care of oneself, and something that I think is valuable for my children to learn.

I think there are so many variations on the definition of time-out. I don't think all forms of time-out in all situations lead to children feeling withdrawal of love or to feel that they're being punished/isolated/treated cruelly. Not all children learn the same thing from all forms of time-out. I think maybe whether or not a child perceives time-out as withdrawal of love, and what a child learns from time-out, has more to do with how the parent approaches it and what reasons/explanations the parent gives, and the parent's own verbal and non-verbal (body language, tone) reactions. As well as on the temperment, thoughts, feelings, needs of the child.


----------



## WuWei (Oct 16, 2005)

Bumping.

Pat


----------

