Mothering › Forums › Parenting › Gentle Discipline › One-year-old time outs
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

One-year-old time outs

post #1 of 26
Thread Starter 
My pediatrician was talking discipline at our 1 year appt. I agreed with the redirection advice and the part about watching how hungry/tired/etc. your LO is when going on outings or doing different thing b/c it affects their behavior. But he said for serious offensives like safety violations a firm no should be used and if it continues, a time-out. He said one minute per year of age.

Am I right in thinking that my one-year-old is not going to link the time-out consequence to the offense, and even if she did... it won't be what stops her from doing it again.

How do you teach a child so young not to "touch" certain things? I guess I believed they didn't really have the self control, etc. to stay away from things that are dangerous and it is my job to redirect, stop them or keep them away from those situations altogether... hence the babyproofing and the gates. What do you think?
post #2 of 26
Well, it's better than having the ped advise you to spank.

But you're right. I don't beleive in "time out" at all, but certainly not at 12mo! I could see a 3 or 4yo understanding why theyr'e being "punished" but not a baby!
post #3 of 26
12 months old is way too young to understand time-outs, you're right. Redirection is the key!
post #4 of 26
We don't do time-outs or punishment at all, so I can't even imagine a directive or punitive time-out for a one year old. They are so compelled by curiosity that I really don't think that whether or not they are 'allowed' is even considered at that age. They might learn that every time they touch a certain something, this happens to them, but I'm not sure what good that would do given that it is isolated and not reflective of the supposed reason you'd be inflicting punishment anyway- safety for instance.

They are babies. They are babies. They are babies!!!

Infants of every species that is raised by parent(s) are redirected from danger, not punished. Not that I've ever seen.

And what if the time-out doesn't 'work'? Then what?

I guess I shouldn't be surprised though since there are people who punish newborns and very young infants as well. It's just absurd to me.
post #5 of 26
ok Im gonna be the odd one out but thought I would give a different perspective. I do time outs. I prefer it to spankings obviously. DS is almost 16 months and I dont have a problem with him touching things. I have told him from a very young age what things he cannot touch and he just knows now. Time outs are for when he deliberately disobeys (looks right at me as he knows he is doing something he is not supposed to) or when he throws tantrums (which is not often, its only ever happened 3 times). I dont have a set time frame for how long he sits in his spot... its usually until he stops crying, which isnt long at all...maybe a couple min. He stays in his time out rug until I tell him to get up. and id like to note that he doesnt look at that rug and cringe or not want to go near it for fear he will have a time out. on the other hand, he likes that spot (outside of being in timeout) that he sits there to watch his movies. He knows when he is there for time out and when its ok to sit there for play. it works for us.
post #6 of 26
I think the advice pedis give that falls outside of medicine is generally what their wives did and I would listen to it no more than advice random strangers on the street give. I'd smile and nod and forget every word.

I don't use time out, nor do I plan to but I definitely don't see it working with a 1 yo BABY. My method, at that age was telling DD "not for babies" (calmly, no interesting stern tone) and redirecting.

I agree with you said
post #7 of 26
Yeah, I think it's kinda funny a ped is giving out discipline advice, but they do like to think they are experts all-around don't they?

We don't do time-outs at all, but I really don't get how a 12 mos old would stay in one anyway!

Anything I really don't want the kids to touch, I put away and out of sight. Stuff I would prefer they don't touch but I'm OK with losing should it accidentally get broken or something, I just keep redirecting them away from, trying to distract them with something they can do. I don't do punishment, but I also don't see how punishment is warranted for natural curiousity anyway. Babies have no idea why they aren't always allowed to touch and explore, why would we punish them for not knowing our arbitrary rules? Even when they "know" they aren't supposed to do something, they don't necessarily know "why", so again, I don't see it as being "disobedient" at such a young age.

If it's a case of safety, like the stove, with DS1 I was able to supervise him closely and move him away, but he also wasn't very adventurous, and I only had him! With DS2, I was too worried (he was and is a climber) that I might be momentarily distracted by his brother or something, so I got a gate to close when the oven was on (and also one at the bottom of the stairs, which never interested his brother much). His safety is more important to me than his ability to come and go in the kitchen or climb the stairs as he pleases
post #8 of 26
There's an elderly (now retired) local pediatrician whose advice on discipline I do like. To parents who asked about slapping little hands when their babies/toddlers tried to touch what they shouldn't, she said they could do that if they wanted, but that it wouldn't help. Not that time out is equivalent to that, but I liked her alternative suggestion. She said to just move them away from danger with a brief explanation why. Not "Don't touch the stove! No!" but something more like "If you touch the stove, you will get burned."

She also said that wouldn't help, either, but by the time they were old enough to understand an explanantion, the parent would already be conditioned to provide one.
post #9 of 26
First of all, pediatricians are medical doctors, not child development experts. It's annoying when they try to pass themselves off as such.

I will say that I don't believe in time-outs, period. But even for those who do, 1 year old is far to young to implement them. 1 year olds aren't being "bad" so they should not be punished. Re-directing is fine, telling them very clearly things that you don't like "it hurts me when you pull my hair, i don't like that" will help them begin to learn to cease undesirable behaviors. But a timeout? That's a punishment. Why would anyone punish a 1 year old for touching something hot or running into the street? At that age, keeping them away from those dangers are the PARENT'S responsibility, not the child's. It's our job to hold their hand when near a busy street and never take our eyes off them at the park or other places where a street is nearby. And they should never be in the kitchen by a hot stove, without us right there. It makes no sense for us to be derelict in our duty to keep them safe from danger, and then punish them for exercising what is just a natural curiosty to explore their world. Also, there is no way a timeout or any punishment would be effective at that age anyway, so why do it?

As they get a little older you can talk to them about these dangers. I told my DS (when he was about 2) the importance of the word "STOP" and that I promised only to use it in very serious situations where he might get hurt. We even role-played it a few times and tried to make it fun - where he would jump up and down or run around the house and then i would yell stop. It's certainly not full-proof and I still consider it my job to keep my eyes on him at all times when we're in public, but that word has sunk in as important to him. Once he started running away at the park and a street was near. I yelled his name but that didn't work. I ran after him and yelled STOP, and he stopped. And now that he's 3.5 I talk to him about other things as well - that no one should ask him to keep secrets from me, that adults shouldn't ask children for help or ask them to go somewhere with them/get in their car, etc. And if that happened, he should come tell me immediately. I've also told him that if he ever got lost or couldn't find me that he should ask another mommy for help. It's important to arm them with information and tools, but again, it's still my job to watch over him and keep these dangers away. He's to young to be expected to protect himself.
post #10 of 26
For touching stuff we just rearranged things... we have boxes, laundry baskets, etc. in front of some items she is not allowed to touch. We moved some items that could be moved out of sight or up higher.

: I have used time outs on my 14 month old but she acts more like a toddler than a baby. She seems to be aware of her actions, consequences, seems to understand things well, has advanced motor skills, etc.

I only use it when she is hitting people. I give her 2 warnings and try to redirect her. The second time I tell her she will get a time out if she does it again. If she does it a third time she gets a short time out in a pack and play.

I had tried everything I could think of including ignoring her (assuming it was for attention), redirecting her, etc. This is the only thing that has helped the issue.

I think my dd has associated it because now when I say next time she will get a time out she stops hitting. The couple of times I have given her a time out she just sat in there and I was relieved there was no crying or anything. I think she just doesn't like being excluded from the family life from her parents, the pets, toys, etc.
post #11 of 26
I am not personally opposed to time-outs, although that probably isn't the board's opinion. But I don't think it works at all until well after two. My DS just turned 2 and could maybe understand it now. Redirection seems to still work best. We don't do time-outs.

I've known people who do it with younger children, have it work for a bit, and then have it stop working by 2.

Why is that m.d.s think they are child development experts? I suppose if I asked my ped she would have an opinion but I am glad she doesn't offer. I certainly don't ask.
post #12 of 26
there is no way a time-out would have worked when my DD was 12 months....or 18 months... Now at 2 I could see her being able to make the connection, but I don't really like the concept...if her behavior becomes out of control and I feel like it's appropriate I'm not totally opposed. But, kids are different. I witness my IRL friend "threaten" her 18 month with timeouts - usually the behavior changed before it got to that point, but when the timeout occured the little girl did sit still in the designated spot. My daughter would have never done that - i would have had to hold her there screaming...and to me that's totally not teaching the lesson I want.
post #13 of 26
I went with what you might call a "natural consequence time-out," and that's still the only kind of time-out we do with our four-year-old. There's an example in this article I wrote when my kid was 13 months old, which is short and might be generally useful to you, so I'll just paste the whole thing here:

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Toddler Discipline in Three Easy Steps!

I feel there are three basic steps to handling objectionable toddler behavior, two of which are optional depending on the situation:

1. The firm objection. Optional; use if behavior needs to stop immediately.
Example: "OWWW!! Let go of my hair!!"

2. The redirection to a positive behavior.
Example: "Touch gently."

3. The consequence. Optional; use if behavior is persistent or if consequence is unavoidable.
Example: "When you pull my hair, I don't feel like holding you."
Another example: "Because you broke the jar, you'll have to stay in here alone while I go sweep up."

The other big thing I'm working on is checking my urge to say no. Often things I think are going to be problematic are not if I give Nicholas a chance to show me what he's actually going to do, which may be different from what I think he's going to do. For example, I kept stopping him from grabbing the phone cord near where it attaches to the wall because I was afraid he'd yank it and damage the flimsy plastic thing that holds it in. When I finally let him handle it without interference, I found that what he wanted to do was to hold the slightly slack cord about 6 inches from the outlet and shake it up and down in a joyful manner. That doesn't hurt anything. The yanking I'd seen him do before was all caused by my attempts to make him let go!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To elaborate on that example: The reason we don't pull hair is because people don't like it. The way we learn that people don't like it is by seeing their reaction and discovering that if we keep it up nobody will want to be within reach of our sticky little fingers.

Now, of course I'm not saying that when my 1-year-old pulled my hair, I shut him in a room alone and left him there for hours! Nor am I saying I placed him in a specific corner and set a timer. What I did was set him on the floor and stand up. As he waved his arms and said, "UP!!" I repeated, in a sad but calm tone, "When you pull my hair, I don't feel like holding you." It was most effective at re-setting the situation when I went on to do something else (like, now that I'm standing up, I'm going to clear the table) rather than stand there waiting for the baby to make it better.

Either HE would go on to something else, or he'd persist in wanting to do what he'd been doing. If he persisted, there were two stages:
1. "I WANT TO DO IT!! NO FAIR!!"
2. "Mama, let me try again. I will be nice this time."
Even before he could say words like that, there was a clear transition from the angry shrieking and struggling to the sweet, slightly embarrassed fresh start. When this transition happens, it's time to end the time-out and give the kid a second chance at good behavior.

THAT kind of time-out, I think a toddler can link to the offense. "One minute per year of age," not so much.

For not touching things, sometimes it turned out to be okay to touch them and I needed to calm down, as mentioned above. Redirection is the #1 tool, as everyone's said. But toddlers do develop a sense of rules, and you might be surprised how much your daughter already knows. Over time, she is internalizing that redirecting and learning which objects or behaviors are undesirable. The things that aren't all that appealing to her, she'll quickly learn to leave alone. The more exciting things will be harder and take longer. But she IS learning to "control her impulses" and "understand consequences" and all that good stuff; she is capable of that right now, just at a lower level than she will be later. So don't think of self-control as something that's in her future; think of it as something she's learning a little bit every day, with your help.

As for babies not having the sense to stay away from DANGEROUS things specifically (as opposed to things you don't want them to mess up), different babies have different amounts of sense and interest in sneaking away vs. sticking to Mama like glue, and my kid is the sensible and nearby type...but I think it was helpful to assume he had a vested interest in staying safe and therefore to help him understand what was up. For example, we have a gas range, and when the oven's on, the outside becomes quite hot. I said, "Be careful of the stove because it's hot!" and I put my finger on it and quickly pulled back. My baby tried this. Forever after, he understood that the stove could be hot and treated it with caution. If he wanted to get near the stove, he'd reach from arm's length to tap it with a fingertip to make sure it wasn't too hot. Instead of teaching, "Stay away from the stove or you'll get in trouble," I taught, "This is how you test whether something is too hot."
post #14 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doodadsmom View Post
There's an elderly (now retired) local pediatrician whose advice on discipline I do like. To parents who asked about slapping little hands when their babies/toddlers tried to touch what they shouldn't, she said they could do that if they wanted, but that it wouldn't help. Not that time out is equivalent to that, but I liked her alternative suggestion. She said to just move them away from danger with a brief explanation why. Not "Don't touch the stove! No!" but something more like "If you touch the stove, you will get burned."

She also said that wouldn't help, either, but by the time they were old enough to understand an explanantion, the parent would already be conditioned to provide one.
I do something similar to this but just say "danger" or "hurts" and I try to add the sign language for it.
post #15 of 26
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EnviroBecca View Post
I went with what you might call a "natural consequence time-out," and that's still the only kind of time-out we do with our four-year-old. There's an example in this article I wrote when my kid was 13 months old, which is short and might be generally useful to you, so I'll just paste the whole thing here:

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Toddler Discipline in Three Easy Steps!

I feel there are three basic steps to handling objectionable toddler behavior, two of which are optional depending on the situation:

1. The firm objection. Optional; use if behavior needs to stop immediately.
Example: "OWWW!! Let go of my hair!!"

2. The redirection to a positive behavior.
Example: "Touch gently."

3. The consequence. Optional; use if behavior is persistent or if consequence is unavoidable.
Example: "When you pull my hair, I don't feel like holding you."
Another example: "Because you broke the jar, you'll have to stay in here alone while I go sweep up."

The other big thing I'm working on is checking my urge to say no. Often things I think are going to be problematic are not if I give Nicholas a chance to show me what he's actually going to do, which may be different from what I think he's going to do. For example, I kept stopping him from grabbing the phone cord near where it attaches to the wall because I was afraid he'd yank it and damage the flimsy plastic thing that holds it in. When I finally let him handle it without interference, I found that what he wanted to do was to hold the slightly slack cord about 6 inches from the outlet and shake it up and down in a joyful manner. That doesn't hurt anything. The yanking I'd seen him do before was all caused by my attempts to make him let go!
----------------------------------------------------------------------

To elaborate on that example: The reason we don't pull hair is because people don't like it. The way we learn that people don't like it is by seeing their reaction and discovering that if we keep it up nobody will want to be within reach of our sticky little fingers.

Now, of course I'm not saying that when my 1-year-old pulled my hair, I shut him in a room alone and left him there for hours! Nor am I saying I placed him in a specific corner and set a timer. What I did was set him on the floor and stand up. As he waved his arms and said, "UP!!" I repeated, in a sad but calm tone, "When you pull my hair, I don't feel like holding you." It was most effective at re-setting the situation when I went on to do something else (like, now that I'm standing up, I'm going to clear the table) rather than stand there waiting for the baby to make it better.

Either HE would go on to something else, or he'd persist in wanting to do what he'd been doing. If he persisted, there were two stages:
1. "I WANT TO DO IT!! NO FAIR!!"
2. "Mama, let me try again. I will be nice this time."
Even before he could say words like that, there was a clear transition from the angry shrieking and struggling to the sweet, slightly embarrassed fresh start. When this transition happens, it's time to end the time-out and give the kid a second chance at good behavior.

THAT kind of time-out, I think a toddler can link to the offense. "One minute per year of age," not so much.

For not touching things, sometimes it turned out to be okay to touch them and I needed to calm down, as mentioned above. Redirection is the #1 tool, as everyone's said. But toddlers do develop a sense of rules, and you might be surprised how much your daughter already knows. Over time, she is internalizing that redirecting and learning which objects or behaviors are undesirable. The things that aren't all that appealing to her, she'll quickly learn to leave alone. The more exciting things will be harder and take longer. But she IS learning to "control her impulses" and "understand consequences" and all that good stuff; she is capable of that right now, just at a lower level than she will be later. So don't think of self-control as something that's in her future; think of it as something she's learning a little bit every day, with your help.

As for babies not having the sense to stay away from DANGEROUS things specifically (as opposed to things you don't want them to mess up), different babies have different amounts of sense and interest in sneaking away vs. sticking to Mama like glue, and my kid is the sensible and nearby type...but I think it was helpful to assume he had a vested interest in staying safe and therefore to help him understand what was up. For example, we have a gas range, and when the oven's on, the outside becomes quite hot. I said, "Be careful of the stove because it's hot!" and I put my finger on it and quickly pulled back. My baby tried this. Forever after, he understood that the stove could be hot and treated it with caution. If he wanted to get near the stove, he'd reach from arm's length to tap it with a fingertip to make sure it wasn't too hot. Instead of teaching, "Stay away from the stove or you'll get in trouble," I taught, "This is how you test whether something is too hot."
Thanks for the detailed info.
post #16 of 26
For not touching things, I taught my ds appropriate words like 'hot', 'sharp', etc. He knows the ASL for them as well.
Now if I need to get something out of the oven or something I'll just say ' hot' and he will back way up out of the way. I've taught him to just assume that all ovens are hot at all times, so he doesnt go near it.

Electric outlets are also 'hot' as well because I cant figure out how else to explain that he will get zapped if he touches!

He loves spray bottles tho, so I put all of those in a babyproof place. If Im using one to clean, I'll let him have one with just water or vinigar/water, (he has his own bottle with his name on it so he knows which one he can use), and act like it still has something dangerous in it, so he is really careful with handling it - if he starts spraying the dog or something I redirect and he gets a rag to wipe instead or something.

I use redirection for almost everything and it works!

Oh and I've also taught him the ASL for differnt emotions - if he is mad I remind him to tell me 'mommy Im mad' or sad or scared or whatever, so that way I can figure out what his issue is and help him find a solution much faster.
post #17 of 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by chipper26 View Post
My pediatrician was talking discipline at our 1 year appt. I agreed with the redirection advice and the part about watching how hungry/tired/etc. your LO is when going on outings or doing different thing b/c it affects their behavior. But he said for serious offensives like safety violations a firm no should be used and if it continues, a time-out. He said one minute per year of age.

Am I right in thinking that my one-year-old is not going to link the time-out consequence to the offense, and even if she did... it won't be what stops her from doing it again.

How do you teach a child so young not to "touch" certain things? I guess I believed they didn't really have the self control, etc. to stay away from things that are dangerous and it is my job to redirect, stop them or keep them away from those situations altogether... hence the babyproofing and the gates. What do you think?
I completely agree with you.

I have a 2.5, my sister's kid is 1.5, and I have a newborn. We have a lot of young children in our family now (15 cousins altogether under the age of five!!!) and I've never heard of anyone using time-outs with a one-year-old. It's far, far too young.

We had to use time-outs to help my two-year-old calm down. That started about six months ago, when she could speak in sentences and could understand simple explanations and if-then constructions.
post #18 of 26
Time-outs for a one-year-old?!? My youngest will be 2 next month and there's no way he would "get it". Ugh, this reminds me of when my mom put my then-10mo in time-out while she was babysitting . . . at that age it's just punishment for the sake of punishment. The baby won't learn anything.
post #19 of 26
Yikes. No way would I do that.

I love how PEDIATRICIANS think they can give a professional opinion on DISCIPLINE. Interesting how they think that way. I think they abuse the respect some parents have for them.
post #20 of 26
I'm surprised that a doctor would suggest a time out, since babies cannot come to logical reasoning. Shouldn't a doctor, of all people, know this? It is proven that babies cannot come to a logical reason, such as, "I'm in time out because I can't stop touching that thing right there." Wow! Do they really expect a baby will sit perfectly still in a time out chair? Un, no. The baby will more than like get up, as it does not register with them. IMO, I do not believe that time outs are effective anyhow. It might teach the child that the parent does not want them to do something, but it only teaches them that. It does not tell them why it should not be done or make them understand why they should not behave in the way that they do.

If you want them to stop touching things, you can give the firm no. It is effective. And, it may have to happen a gazillion times, as babies need repetition, and a lot of it. The doctor should know that a baby is not just going to willfully obey every command. Babies explore, as we all know.

Also, make the house as baby proof as much as possible. A baby cannot be tempted to touch something that does not exist.

I hope this helps.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Gentle Discipline
Mothering › Forums › Parenting › Gentle Discipline › One-year-old time outs