Timeouts? In the Corner? - Page 3

[Gwen2]

Originally Posted by mamazee

People not wanting to be around you might be a natural consequence, but being sent away, or being forced to sit in a corner aren't natural consequences. Someone has to tell you to do something - it doesn't happen automatically with no interference.

Since other kids can't necessarily accomplish this (especially younger ones), i see nothing un-natural about asking the child who is really acting in a negative way to go to their room.

it does not have to be backed up by force. in our house, my 2.5 yo has to go to his room to 'cool down' if he is hitting, chasing the dog (not when playing but in a harassing way- because the dog has rights too) or otherwise harming others. when he comes out, he can try using his words and/or apologizing if necessary. going to his room, where he usually calms down within less than a minute and starts playing with toys, teaches him to get out of situations of conflict. Similarly, when the dog has his toy and won't give it back, i teach him to let go and not to get in a power struggle. within moments, the dog will drop it and the problem is solved without much interference. But i don't think it is right to let the natural consequence of might is right rule the day.

i think time out will teach him that he is responsible for his behavior, for the way he deals with his anger, and that it is not acceptable to resort to violence. he is a pretty happy and mellow kid most of the time and so i feel this works for him. time out may not work for the second one- we'll see.

[octobermom]

Being seperated from others by force (gently or not) is a logical conquence its not a natural one.
A natural conquence is just that one that occurs with out intervention from "man" a logical conquence is one that is fitting to the situation but is enforced by another.. So
Running wild through the kitchen and slipping on the tile is a natural conquence ..touching a hot stove is a natural conquence standing out in the rain and getting sick a natural conquence...

As a parent I choose to decide if my child is mature and able to experience these natural conquences and block the ones I feel shes not ready for. So the logical conquence for a 14 month old running through the kitchen might be to put up a gate because at 14 months her impluse controll is too great and shes not ready to accept the natural conquence. However say its a 5 year old I'm willing to lay down the rules (not running) but let her experience the natural conquence (a fall) if needed. I wont set her up for one.

Being sent from a room can be a logical conquence. A result of not behaving in front of guests means a choice to spend some time alone, this can also be done respectivly and non punitivly. (not sending to a corner) the natural conquence to a child being desrespectfull to others is loosing the others respect.


Deanna

[MsMoMpls]

Ok- so this seems to be getting into splitting hairs. If I get frustrated with my kids and lock myself in the bathroom... that is a natural consequence... right? Human reaction is a natural consequence. "I don't want to play with you if you are hitting me" is natural. I agree that putting your child in his room is imposing a consequence but not so sure that separation isn't natural although like the PP said, not all natural consequences are age appropriate.

[octobermom]

Ok- so this seems to be getting into splitting hairs. If I get frustrated with my kids and lock myself in the bathroom... that is a natural consequence... right? Human reaction is a natural consequence. "I don't want to play with you if you are hitting me" is natural. I agree that putting your child in his room is imposing a consequence but not so sure that separation isn't natural although like the PP said, not all natural consequences are age appropriate.

Its might seem like splitting hairs but I think understanding the diffrence is important to making a complete shift from a punitve mind set..
The reason why seperating the child isn't natural (though appropiate) is that YOU had to remove them again a natural conquence occurs with no interaction. By sepperating an out of controll child your actually blocking the natural conquence of having others not wanting to play with your child.
Its the same with locking your self up your using a "logical" conquence to block the natural conquence of letting your anger get the best and lashing out.
Its hard to define human reaction some is logical ebecause we have controll, I can decide if my childs tantrum is going to get to me or am I going to not take it personally It can be difficult and sometimes a locked door is the best solution when our inner selfs battle that man over "feelings" senerio. Hman reaction thats natural.. Having an unpleasent feeling when touching a hot surface shivvering when out in the cold feeling wet when in the rains.
Does this make any sense?

deanna

[Piglet68]

I agree with what deanna is saying because I think that so much of GD really IS the mindset you have going into it.

Some mamas here have described children who do well when given some alone time when things get "out of hand". There are many ways to do this, but I think the attitude of the parent will go a long way towards making the situation one of helpfulness and guidance (i.e. parent and child working together) as opposed to a punitive situation (i.e. parent forces child, child has no input to the situation).

To the mama with the spirited child: I think it's wrong to suggest that if a child doesn't need time out then he isn't spirited enough. I don't think of punitive responses as something that rests on the "extreme" of an "effective GD tools" spectrum, something that needs to be brought out only when the situation becomes hard enough, or the child is "spirited enough". Instead, I consider punishment to the be last resort of a parent who is plain and simple out of ideas. But the limits of our own ignorance does not represent some absolute Truth that non-coercive parenting "doesn't work for all children". When we don't know what else to do, we fall back on what is comfortable. For many of us, that means getting punitive (especially if you were raised that way yourself).

I often find myself in a situation where my usual bag of GD tricks isn't working. Redirection, talking, etc - none of these are having the desired effect. And I do get tempted sometimes to "get harsher" and be punitive. But I have "disallowed" myself that option. So instead, I have to look harder for a solution. I come to this forum and ask for advice, or read some threads where parents are dealing with similar situations. I may go back and read some of my GD books for inspiration, or get some new book from the library. If you rule out punishment completely, you aren't left "empty handed". On the contrary, it forces you to go out and LEARN MORE to find the answers you are looking for. My philosophy is that there is ALWAYS a gentle and supportive way to help the child; it's just that sometimes I don't know what that is!

There are kids who need their own space to calm down. To me, the difference is whether the parent is IMPOSING that on the child by using their power as a bigger, psychologically more powerful, human being or is the parent acting as an "emotion coach" to the child, helping the child to find that quiet space, asking the child how they would like to spend that time (within limits, perhaps) such as reading a book or drawing. Maybe the child needs to be held, or maybe the child needs to be left to tantrum and get it out of their system with the parent making themselves available to the child when/if the child asks for them. Timeout can just be so many things.

Like deanna said, it is hairsplitting, but I agree that the attitude going into it can make all the difference.