Confused about time outs

[Partaria]

Hi everyone,

I'm very new to the idea of "gentle discipline." We had our first babe in May, and I'm suddenly realizing this child will one day be a toddler that we might have to actually discipline! :) So I'm trying to read up on approaches now. I grew up in an abusive home so I feel that I cannot draw on my own upbringing for anything other than what NOT to do.

Anyway, in starting to read a bit on the topic of gentle discipline, I was surprised to see so much of the literature is against timeouts. I'd thought this would sort of be the way to go with a kiddo, and now I'm not so sure. I'm curious to know why timeouts are thought to be damaging to a little one? Totally not arguing for them here, just really curious to know what the thinking is.

I've babysat for nieces and nephews whose parents regularly use timeouts as a means of discipline and it honestly seemed like a good system to me. Whenever one of them would kind of "lose" it in that way that children can (totally getting overwhelmed with their own frustration, etc), we would just sit them down on a step or a mat. We would sit nearby and just kind of make sure things were quiet for however many minutes, and then try to start a conversation on what was really going on with the child's feelings, thoughts, etc. Depending on the age and the situation, we would try to discuss why hitting or ripping a toy out of someone's hands wasn't the best way to deal with those feelings. Kind of seemed like a good system to me?

Again, I'm totally not criticizing the anti-timeout idea, just really looking for more info on why this might be a poor approach.

[peainthepod]

I'm no GD guru but I think the idea is that time outs are punitive instead of a natural consequence for the naughty behavior. Giving your child a time out because he intentionally spilled his drink all over the floor to see what would happen isn't a natural consequence; having him help you clean it up is. Does that make sense?

We give time outs when our son is being physically violent, but that's the only time. If he can't control his hands, he obviously needs to be in a place where his hands won't hurt anyone else. Other than those very specific instances, we try to always use logical consequences instead of an arbitrary punishment. If he jumps on the bed, he can't be on the bed anymore for a while or in the bedroom unsupervised. If he touches something he's not supposed to touch, he can't be near that thing alone for a while. If he makes a mess on purpose, he's going to clean it up. If he abuses or tries to break a toy or other object, he can't play with it anymore for a while.

If he pinches or bites someone, he gets some time away from other people so he can calm down and deal with his big feelings. We also redirect and try to honor the impulse. He's more than welcome to beat up his stuffed animals, or a pillow, or the couch cushion when he's mad.

I hope that made sense; this is much easier to do than to explain for some reason.

[Cyllya]

There's a wide variety of definitions of "time out." Many GD'ers use time out in an entirely non-punitive manner, while in my family growing up, it was just another form of corporal punishment. My DP thinks it means sending kids to their toy-filled room. And various steps in between.

Here's an article about time-outs...

http://www.naturalchild.org/guest/peter_haiman.html

I have almost no child care experience, so all my knowledge comes from reading, but here's my understanding...

The anti-time-out info you hear is more specifically anti-punitive-time-out. Anti-punishment. Not to say you should necessarily never punish your kid ever, but it's just one of many tools in the toolbox, ya know? There is a lot of downsides to punishment in general, even when they aren't physical painful (which some kinds of time out are). The main one is that you want your kid to act correctly because that's the correct way to act, not because he's afraid of the punishment. Punishment inherently avoids addressing the actual cause of the misbehavior. Punishments usually cause the child stress, and stress is not conducive to learning. Plus you punishing your child makes your child angry toward you, and no one's incline to take advice from someone they're pissed off at. Punishment makes your child feel like your love is conditional (which it shouldn't be). Etc etc.

For non-punitive time-outs, I think parents usually don't require the kid to stay in time-out for a certain amount of time, but rather "until you -calm down," "until you feel better," whatever. They may be sent to their room even though it's full of toys. Parents may sometimes put themselves in time-out. Parents may go to time-out with the child, in which case it's normally called a "time in." Basically, time-out isn't used to scare the child out of misbehaving again, but is used as short-term damage-control for someone's temper flaring up.

[Just1More]

My kids have "time-outs" all the time.  But they don't have a clue that's what they are doing.  I've never, ever called it that.  Too much of a negative connotation.

The pp's are right.  The are two ways of doing it.  One is following a punishment/rewards based system.  And the other is just a cool down, refocus, redirect system. 

I do not believe in punishment for younger than school age children.  I might not believe in it for them either, I'm still working on that (my oldest is 6). 

Here's why:  The idea of punishment is to provide a sufficient deterrant to a behavior.  This prevents its recurrance.  Right.  So, how is a kid who doesn't remember what he had for breakfast supposed to remember a punishment AND connect it to the offense every time?  In the heat of the moment?  Unless the punishment is severe enough to cause a lasting impression...and I don't think any of us here are okay with that...then it is futile, and only damages the relationship.  It is only punishing them for being children, and that's not reasonable.  And...it's not going to work.  It just causes frustration for both the parent and the child.

[Imakcerka]

I also grew up in an abusive home, I tend to stay away from anything that appears I have power over my kids. Originally I tried time outs. and it was a joke. DD would literally get up and run and I'd have to physically put her back. No fun for any of us. We found ways to communicate with her that allowed her to see that what she did wasn't nice and didn't work well in our family. I promise it took a lot of time and you don't always get the response you hope for. But it's better than what my parents did. They forced everything and we got hit a lot. Time outs were pure joy for them and they could last minutes to hours. And we still acted out, they didn't teach us one damn lesson with all their BS.

Def look into GD, it's a very helpful tool, kids need to know they matter otherwise it becomes an us against them situation. Not fun. However there are other ways, you just have to find what you're comfortable with and what works for your family. Also I deal with frustration and anger issues, it take a lot for me to see clearly and choose the best approach. There are so many times I've visualized severely punishing my kids. I get that though from my situation growing up.

[Partaria]

This is all great info. I totally see the issue with timeouts that some of you have brought up- the punitive aspect, etc. Makes sense to me. I also like the idea that there are positive ways to do a "timeout." My sister in law will often do one with her little girl, but she always sits with her, and tells her, "you've lost your peace and we're going to sit here until we can find it again." She only does this kind of think when her daughter has a tantrum or just kind of meltsdown over something. I agree it doesn't make sense to do it if it your kiddo pours milk on the floor or something like that.

[Thing1Thing2]

We call it "quiet time" here. Our 3 year old DS gets very wild at times and pinches, bites, throws and hits. That is basically the only time he gets quiet time.

He can decide when to come out of quiet time, as long as he has calmed down. He can also decide where he will sit for quiet time, whether it be alone, on my lap or with toys.

I think like pp said, it's less of a punishment and more of a time for them to learn how to cool down. I try to make it more of a learning experience, so that he will know how to deal with the overwhelming emotions he faces every day.

[Just1More]

Another thought about the cool down idea:  My hope is that I can teach my children life lessons, and not just things that apply to them when they are small.  So, if they are stressed out, etc, what is the appropriate action for an adult to take?  To be punished by another adult?  (okay, okay, sometimes, but the idea is not to get to that point...).  No, the appropriate action is to take a break until they have calmed down and can approach the conflict reasonably.

That's a lesson that will ALWAYS be beneficial to them, and not an arbitrary thing imposed on them because they are little.

[Imakcerka]

Yes we do the cool down time outs, if thats what they are called. And it's usually with a parent. Where we hug them or physically calm them like holding their hand, rubbing their back or just laying down with them alone and talking about random things. Usually a game of I spy is involved. Most times kids get into a situation where you feel as a parent that something needs to be done other things are involved. They're overwhelmed, tired, bored, missing time with you maybe there is a just because but I tend to think something else is going on.

[coffeegirl]

Originally Posted by Partaria 

Anyway, in starting to read a bit on the topic of gentle discipline, I was surprised to see so much of the literature is against timeouts. I'd thought this would sort of be the way to go with a kiddo, and now I'm not so sure. I'm curious to know why timeouts are thought to be damaging to a little one? Totally not arguing for them here, just really curious to know what the thinking is.

I've babysat for nieces and nephews whose parents regularly use timeouts as a means of discipline and it honestly seemed like a good system to me.

Since you asked, I think you should just go with your instincts and with what you've learned through experience about time-outs. When your child is older, try it a couple times when/if you ever feel it's necessary. If it works, keep doing it. If it doesn't, stop.
 

[incorrigible]

Around here, time outs are when mom says "Go to your room until I calm down!" lol (I laugh, but that's a direct quote)

I've never been violent or insulting or anything typically considered abusive with them, but I'm just a very intense person. I'm horribly intimidating....and if I get mad enough to yell, I am downright terrifying. Full grown adults are intimidated by me when I'm not even upset. When the kids were toddlers, just being angry in their direction bordered on emotional abuse. =( When I saw how they, and others, reacted to my simply FEELING angry...we started time outs. Sometimes they were sent to their rooms until I was calm, sometimes I went to my room and they would be just perfectly silent because they wanted me to be calm when I came back out!

It applies if one of the kids is so emotional that they can't think straight too. Now that they're older, they'll say "I need some alone time before we talk about this." Sometimes, I tell them to have some alone time until they can hold an honest/calm/etc conversation.

So, for us, time outs aren't a punishment but a coping technique. We take our time outs when we are too emotional to address each other with respect or handle problems rationally. ALWAYS treating each other with respect is possibly the #1 most important rule in our family.

[Mizelenius]

The way you've described time-outs to me does not seem punitive.  The language and its connotations are adult-based . . .unless a child is in school and time-outs (named as such) are used punitively, a child won't think a "time out" is inherently negative, if you've used it in a positive way.  The phrase is used in sports, no?  Call it whatever you want that works for you and helps you remember its purpose.  Discipline = teaching so if you find a way to use it so that a child can effectively learn to understand and then cope with their emotions (sounds like you are there at some point to work through them), then why not?

I have used time outs (I call it nothing, no reason why) when my kids are screaming without any sign of stopping.  When the screaming is going on and on, I feel like we are all being held hostage by the screamer . . .it's not fair to everyone else and is disturbing.  99% of the time the person is tired, and they end up falling asleep.  (I'm thinking of one child of mine in particular, who has always been a restless sleeper/early riser and never seems to sleep enough.)  But, the other option is that once the person stops screaming, she can rejoin us.  So, I don't use a time limit or anything.  I'd never do this with a very young child.  Seems to happen around the age of 4-5 around here.

If someone is in an especially bad mood (I'm thinking of an older child), and is taking it out on everyone, I redirect them and tell them to do X or y (something fun) in their room.  Sometimes living in a small house with 3 (soon to be 4) other siblings can be too much.

Like the pp said, I've also used time outs for myself.  Sometimes when I feel I'm going to get really mad, I'd rather just walk away from everyone.  It doesn't work when people insist on following me-- that happened once . . .one child followed me and banged horribly on my door.  That was bad!  Thankfully, only happened once.

For other issues like hitting, I do not use separation.  I have the person did the hitting talk to the person who was hit, and ask how the action can be fixed . . .what does the "victim" (I don't use that word with them) want or need to make things right?  This gives the victim the voice and the person who made the mistake a chance to make things right, since it's not like they can take back the action.

[mamazee]

I think one of the problems with sending a kid to time out for hitting or something along those lines is that they then aren't around for the aftermath of the issue, tears or whatever else is involved, and rather than seeing their sibling cry and having to deal with the emotions involved in that, they are separated and given an opportunity to make THEMSELVES feel like the victim (How dare she send me to my room!) I like keeping the "offender" in the room and have that person be a part of the solution.

[foreverinbluejeans]

Time outs make kids resent the adult. They learn to sneak and have worse behavior. They are disruptive to the flow of what people are doing. 

There are ways you can use things that may look like a time out that can be effective. I have a grandson that will be 3 Sunday and I live with him. He and I were alone and he tried crying to get what he wanted. I picked him up and put him in the doorway of my room where he could still see me doing stuff in the kitchen. I said that I didn't like crying and that that was the crying room and he could come out when he was done crying. He tried it one more time and I did the same thing. He hasn't cried again. Why cry when it doesn't work? It only took 2 times because he has experience with me. If it was our first time it would take longer.

[LynnS6]

Originally Posted by Partaria 

This is all great info. I totally see the issue with timeouts that some of you have brought up- the punitive aspect, etc. Makes sense to me. I also like the idea that there are positive ways to do a "timeout." My sister in law will often do one with her little girl, but she always sits with her, and tells her, "you've lost your peace and we're going to sit here until we can find it again." She only does this kind of think when her daughter has a tantrum or just kind of meltsdown over something. I agree it doesn't make sense to do it if it your kiddo pours milk on the floor or something like that.

Some people call what your SIL is doing 'time in' where they get a time to regather, but also connect with the parent when she's done. The sitting close is a good idea. Also, she's not sending the child away to a different room to be alone. Depending on your child, you may or may not be able to interact while they're in tantrum mode. With one of my kids, I needed to leave him alone. With the other, she needed to be in my arms, talking to me.

We do mostly "you're screaming so loudly it's not fair to the family, please go to your room and calm down, and when you're calmer, you can come down." Dd, especially, is a screamer. She needs to learn to get her reactions under control, and asking her to take some time for herself is a way to teach her that.

We tried the "go to your room for X minutes" for about a week or two. I hated it. It simply ramped my kids up, made them feel worse and didn't teach them anything. My bottom line for discipline (when I'm on my game, and I'll fully admit to NOT being on my game many a time) is "what is this helping my child learn"? Sitting down until you are calm enough to not hurt people or scream so loudly no one can think is a good thing to learn by being by yourself. Sitting in your room because you refused to pick up your puzzle makes no sense to me.