Opposed to time-outs? Tell me more.

[momma_unlimited]

I've noticed several negative references to time outs on this board... can someone who doesn't agree with time-out tell me why?

I guess I'm just curious.

I am trying to implement gd with ds2 (16 mos) after trial and ERROR with ds1. Setting him in the playpen when he disregards instructions (getting too close to woodstove, trying to touch woodstove tools, trying to stick parts of his body into the toilet, refusing to have a poopy diaper changed, etc) or throws himself on the floor, arches his back, and screeches like a banshee- works. It is like his "safe" place; he settles down and then when he's ready to cooperate he kinda calls me to come get him. I'm just curious how non time-outers would handle it.

[jennert]

: (but without the popcorn--i'm allergic to corn )

[alegna]

Time outs are not an appropriate tool until a child is old enough to understand them.

In many cases they are simply a punishment. I try to avoid punishments (not always successful, but I try....) as I don't feel they are the most effective parenting tool.

Personally I only am comfortable with non-punishment time-outs, usually taken because the child chooses to take a break and get some space on their own.

-Angela

[SquishyKitty]

We used a combination of time outs and redirection when DS was that young. Mostly redirection, because he was too young to get the concept of time out.

The idea of a safe place during a tantrum is good though, there is nothing wrong with that. Sometimes the child is just so overstimulated, there's nothing they need except a few minutes to themselves.

Time outs once worked better for us when DS was 3 or older, because then he was kind of able to understand the concept of why he was removed from a situation. We still limited them to 1 minute per year, so his time outs were only 3, 4, or 5 minutes. He's 7 now and we don't use them anymore.

[rabbitmum]

I'm completely opposed to time-outs. I didn't grow up with them (or any other form of punishment) so I know they are not necessary. The "naughty corner" was something horrible and scary they had in the old days, like having to swallow a lunch box lid full of cod liver oil if you had forgotten to bring your spoon to school, or spanking (which has been illegal in Norway for many years).

Unfortunately time-outs are becoming more common in Norwegian homes now, due to nanny TV programs imported from the US and UK. But kindergartens and schools are not allowed to use time-outs in my town. In "GD circles" in Norway time-outs are not considered GD.

When my eldest was little, around four years old, I read a parenting book that advocated time-outs, and I tried using them. Never again! She was really, really hurt and humiliated, and it didn't help the situation one bit - it only moved the focus away from what was currently the issue and over to the humiliation and hurt she felt from being excluded and pushed away from me (not literally speaking, I didn't push her, I carried her to her room and closed the door). After this had happened a few times she said one day: "Mummy, do you know what? Sometimes it almost feels like you don't love me anymore." She still remembers it.

It didn't feel like a useful and appropriate thing to do even to me, I just felt completely defeated and didn't know what to do. I never tried it with my two boys.

I have seen other parents (in the UK) use time-outs where they force the child to sit on a chair for some minutes, and from the child's reaction it was obvious to me that this is not right. They cry "I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I won't do it again, I didn't mean it" while being carried to the chair, obviously genuinely fearing the humiliation and exclusion, even if they know that the parent is going to be sitting only a couple of meters away from them.

I can see that using time-outs is one step better than hitting the child, which is the alternative in many families in the US and UK, I suppose. But it's still punishment, humiliation, exclusion, and disrespect.

As for the situations you describe:

Originally Posted by momma_unlimited

he disregards instructions (getting too close to woodstove, trying to touch woodstove tools, trying to stick parts of his body into the toilet, refusing to have a poopy diaper changed, etc) or throws himself on the floor, arches his back, and screeches like a banshee

16 months old is to young to expect him to really follow instructions on a regular basis.

Too close to the woodstove: Block his access with something, I would have used an overturned chair. If he gets too close, I would move him away and distract him with a toy.

Woodstove tools: I would put them somewhere out of his reach, along with the toilet brush and my camera.

Sticking body parts in the toilet: Lift him away, distract.

Refusing to change a poopy diaper: I would just change the diaper. It's not optional, as my youngest have so sensitive skin that he gets a rash unless it's changed immediately.

Throwing himself on the floor, arcing his back, etc.: This is behaviour that has to be expected from a child this age. On his way to developing self-determination and independance he is experiencing a lot of frustration and strong emotions that he doesn't yet have the maturity to handle by himself. I would comfort him if possible, be available and understanding. He needs my help to learn how to go trough these strong emotions, understand them, knowing that he is loved and accepted no matter what, so that he can learn to accept his anger and frustration and eventually express them in a different way, with words.

As for whether time-outs "work" or not, I'm suspecting that putting him in the playpen works for you right now BECAUSE he is too young to understand. He is being moved away from the situation and distracted. I think you would get a different response from him in a couple of years when he is old enough to understand that he is being punished.

[alegna]

Originally Posted by rabbitmum

But kindergartens and schools are not allowed to use time-outs in my town.

cool... I am in total awe. What do they use? especially with younger kids?

You would be hard pressed here to find a single school that doesn't use time outs of some form.

-Angela

[GuildJenn]

I'm not opposed to all forms of time out, so it kind of depends on your definition. First, when I would put my son in a confined space when he was a baby (under 2) it wasn't to "teach" him anything but to keep him safe. So I don't know if that really counts.

Second, we have a "you hit, you sit" rule, but the sitting is generally with a grownup and it's to calm down. We also might invite my son to go to a cosy spot and take deep breaths, or we might take him outside at a store or restaurant if he is melting down. So we do sometimes have the concept of a "time to calm down."

Third, we put toys that have been thrown up on the piano. So that's a time out for the toys.

Other than that, we don't use time out and don't intend to.

The way I see it implemented on television or with friends is that it is a "negative consequence" – that is, a punishment.

The whole concept of punishment comes out of a behaviourist point of view: you use positive and negative reinforcement to get the behaviour you want. I understand why in certain situations (one adult + 30 kids, etc.) you would need to resort to those methods – they are undeniably effective in many cases.

But for my husband and I, with the situation we have (one very affable, plugged-in child) we just don't feel that it really is in line with how we want our family to operate, and most importantly how we want our son to become self-disciplined.

For our home: we want it to be a space where we all respect each other, for sure. Our expectations are pretty high: no name calling, hitting, that we work together to prepare meals, clean up the house, and generally work as a team. When people fall short of those expectations I just don't see the point of putting them in time out.

I really like the Secret of Parenting's insight that giving a punishment sort of sets up a "trade" situation – I won't clean up, or I mouth off, so I am punished (time out), and then we're "even." Well if my son doesn't clean up or mouths off I don't actually WANT him to feel like we're even! I want him to experience whatever feelings he might have (appropriate guilt) so that he learns to do these things to avoid the bad feelings he naturally as a social animal has.

Of course to implement that I also have to be clear: I am QUITE ANNOYED that you spoke to me that way. But that's it. I also dispense hugs after a few minutes of feeling the feelings, so I don't abandon him to wallow in guilt and despair. But I am quite comfortable letting him, even at 3 and change, experience the bad feelings we get when we do something wrong. To my mind punishment short-circuits that process.

Which kind of leads into my son and his own self-discipline. Yes, we all experience reward and punishment in adult life – but again as a default. Sure, I work to get paid. But I also do a good job not out of fear of being fired but as a part of being a profession and having pride in myself. I have worked for companies where my professional ethics were higher by far than the company's requirements.

I want my son also to grow up with a strong INNER moral compass. And I don't believe time outs (or any other behaviourist system) work to build that compass very well. They reinforce an outer moral compass. They definitely impact on behaviour. But I think what the child learns is "I do something displeasing to my parents, so something unpleasant happens to me." I don't think they really learn "hitting is wrong because it hurts the other person" or "talking back is a disrespectful way to interact."

So for me it really just isn't the right tool for my parenting. I totally get that there are kids and situations where the behaviour is so much in the way that perhaps it's needed. But my family, so far, is not in that situation.

[rabbitmum]

Originally Posted by alegna

cool... I am in total awe. What do they use? especially with younger kids?

You would be hard pressed here to find a single school that doesn't use time outs of some form.

-Angela

You know what, I think it's even difficult to answer the question, as I can't imagine in which situations they would think "Oh, I can't give him a time-out, what can I do instead?" And that you add "especially with younger kids" I also find interesting, as time-out is even less relevant with smaller than with bigger kids. Behaviourist techniques are not generally seen as good pedagogics in kindergartens here.

I know that a form of "time-ins" is often used, where an adult will remove the child from the situation - for instance if he or she is hitting someone and doesn't stop when asked - i.e. lift them up and sit with them and talk about it for a bit. If things get really out of hand they will perhaps take them to a different room to sit there and talk with them until they calm down. They are not supposed to do it in a punitive way or shame the child in front of the others, and they are not allowed to leave a child alone in a separate room. I can't say that it never happens, but the official regulations for kindergartens (in my town, at least) are against (negative) behavioural techniques and have been so for many years, and I have never seen it happen.

In schools they are not allowed to send a child out of the classroom, for instance. When I was little children could be sent out to sit in the corridor if they were noisy, but this isn't done anymore. If a child disturbs the others so much that it is necessary that he or she is removed from the classroom, there must always be a teacher there with them.

I don't know if you consider these to be some form of time-out?

The typical reaction to disruptive behaviour at school is to send a notice home to the parents, who are then asked to talk to their kids about it. I have had two notices sent home with my eldest son, they were: "Can you please explain to B. why we don't want any whistling during classes" and "Can you explain to B. that we don't wish to have jumpers thrown around in the classroom".

Also in the case of young kids who are not paying attention but talking to their desk mate instead, it is normal to move them to the front, closer to the teacher, or if it persists, split desk mates apart.

My two eldest kids went to a Waldorf school where they used to take very "disruptive" children to the teacher's common room to sit there and work by themselves with a different teacher supervising them. Many children thought this was a bit nice, as they got a teacher all to themselves.

Lately Waldorf schools have been criticised and have had to discontinue two discipline metods that they have traditionally used, those of detention (keeping children behind for an extra class after school) and "parade", which meant to turn up for school an hour early and for instance help the janitor sweep, or do schoolwork. Both were metods that were commonly used in schools in "my days", and that Waldorf schools held on to longer than "normal" public schools.

[alegna]

Okay- that sounds like the "time outs" used in preschools I've seen here....

-Angela

[lillymonster]

I don't like time outs, because personally what I have seen is the parents spend more time fighting with the kid to stay in time out, so they kids doesn't learn what they did was wrong, they just learn they have to listen because mommy wants them sit in one spot. I have 9 nieces and nephews, and that was just my experience watching them. Then it escalates and becomes a power struggle and it's just not how I want to teach my child not to do something. Plus, some kids, they may sit there quietly, but after they leave, you realize they were quiet because they were pulling up the carpet or peeling the wallpaper or some other destructive behavior and then you have to deal with that.

I think removing a child that is a hazard to himself or others, or removing a child to calm down is not time-out. I think I heard the term "time-in" from somewhere. It's a time to connect and calm down, but not a time to bring up punishment.

The things you mentioned "getting too close to woodstove, trying to touch woodstove tools, trying to stick parts of his body into the toilet, refusing to have a poopy diaper changed, etc" I think are normal behaviors for a 16 month old child. I don't think he is disregarding your instructions (that implies choice - you think he is choosing to listen you and then deciding not to) I think he just can't comprehend he shouldn't be doing those things yet.

My DD is 19 months and throws things at the cat, no matter how much I tell her not to. But I either have to remove her or take the thing she is throwing away or teach her something else to play with that is better because I don't expect her to not to do something just because I said for her to do it. She just doesn't know any better yet, so I have to teach her.

[nancy926]

At 16 months, he is not going to stay away from the woodstove. Get a stove fence and gate. Put the woodstove tools on the other side of the fence.

You can get locks for toilet seats. Diapers, you can try different strategies - some people use a toy that the DC can have ONLY while getting his/her diaper changed. A cell phone in "Key lock" mode often works.

I guess I'm saying it's up to the parent to problem-solve solutions - it's not up to the kid to try to figure out what is being asked of him/her and remember it.

[momma_unlimited]

From the time my son was 6 months old, he has responded to no and don't touch- I taught him too. 99% of the time from 6-7 mos til just recently, if I said "Don't touch" he would remove his hand; if I said "Come to mama" he would run to me; if I said "No!" He would stop what he was doing and look to me for guidance.

Now that he is coming into his own will, and separating from the extension of me he perceived himself as, he is testing the limits; he is struggling to determine more about his individuality. So, whereas, before he would meander over to the woodstove or tools (which, btw, there is absolutely nowhere to put them as we live in a wide open house with little furniture and without a single closet!), I would say "Don't touch" and it would be a rather mute point, now he has more determination to match his ability and is less distractable... but he also has not lost his understanding of what "don't touch" means, he is just choosing to follow his own inclinations instead. He looks at me with full understanding, and makes a conscious decision to do it anyways. I get it that he might be truly overwhelmed with curiosity; and that this curiosity is good. I don't want to punish him; but my perception of just trying to remove anything that could possibly cause conflict, rather than consistently helping him to follow through when I guide him, is that it would be... permissive... child-centered rather than family-centered? Obviously I do some things to make our house more toddler friendly. No valuables within reach, no cleaning products in low places... But if I just removed anything that could cause a conflict, how will he ever learn to develop his will when it is contrary to his desires (self-control I guess) and accept guidance from those who know better than him?

I am not trying to argue- I love to see everyone's point of view to develop a more well-rounded one for myself.

[alegna]

The thing is that it's not an age appropriate expectation for him to stop himself. It's not fair to ask that of him at this age.

-Angela

[mommabear207]

so lets say he is older and does understand-what then?

[mollusk]

Originally Posted by alegna

The thing is that it's not an age appropriate expectation for him to stop himself. It's not fair to ask that of him at this age.

-Angela

I agree.

We've always tried to make it very clear by communicating how pleased, proud, disappointed, etc we are. Ds (3.11 yrs) seems very affected by it. [When he was having trouble listening to an after-school teacher, we talked about it at home, spoke with his teacher (without ds present) about it, and spoke with ds + teacher about when he showed he was listening and when he struggled, how important his listening ears are....it took about a week but his behavior turned around and I haven't heard anything different since... But children--infants, toddlers, and older are learning, growing, and TESTING. Its what its all about, no?]

And as for time outs, we use them with ds strictly as a time for him to take a break and be removed from whatever is causing the overstim. It has never been used as a punishment, I don't think that is as an appropriate use. And they end with talking about what happened and hugs.

Ds's school uses "time outs" when someone has been physical with another child. It is considered a big deal and used only on occasion.

[alegna]

Originally Posted by mommabear207

so lets say he is older and does understand-what then?

Then you can discuss it with him and explore the natural consequences of whatever the action is.

Pick an example and I'll try to come up with more concrete examples

-Angela

[GuildJenn]

Originally Posted by momma_unlimited

... I would say "Don't touch" and it would be a rather mute point, now he has more determination to match his ability and is less distractable... but he also has not lost his understanding of what "don't touch" means, he is just choosing to follow his own inclinations instead. He looks at me with full understanding, and makes a conscious decision to do it anyways. I get it that he might be truly overwhelmed with curiosity; and that this curiosity is good. I don't want to punish him; but my perception of just trying to remove anything that could possibly cause conflict, rather than consistently helping him to follow through when I guide him, is that it would be... permissive... child-centered rather than family-centered? Obviously I do some things to make our house more toddler friendly. No valuables within reach, no cleaning products in low places... But if I just removed anything that could cause a conflict, how will he ever learn to develop his will when it is contrary to his desires (self-control I guess) and accept guidance from those who know better than him?

I'm not arguing either; if you want to use TOs go for it.

Just to address things specifically though -

I think the testing is true at some ages. But at 17 months I think there is a whole other component in addition to the testing which is that comprehension does not equate to self-control or impulse control. So even if he were not wanting to test the limits around him, he might know that he should not do something... but not have the impulse control to keep that thought ahead of the desire.

For the question of removing things... I have never found a world where there is never ever a limit. Car seat belts, smearing poo, gravity... something. I myself don't worry too much that my child will never learn that there are limits. If you count in a day the number of things a child has no control over - when diapers are changed, food comes, which food comes, clothing, room he is placed in, etc. etc. etc. - I think it becomes pretty clear that limits are not really the issue, as an overriding thing.

I think the question really is that given your limits (whatever they are) how will you present them? Will you say "stoves are not for touching" and... redirect? place in time out? smack on the hand?

I am not suggesting any of these are equivalent to each other. I'm just saying that time out is not a magic bullet limit. (Except on TV where there are no alternatives presented between "chaos" and "naughty spots.") You can have expectations and limits without having artificial negative consequences.

[kristinseto]

I will just briefly state what has happened in our home:
I started time-outs with my son at 18 months.
It works. At this young age (almost 3 yrs) he needs to know that someone is in charge and quite frankly, it is not him. We are the parents and we have his best interest in mind. The best interest of the family as a whole.
An example of why he would go to time out is if he throws something and will not pick it up and put it in it's proper place, or if he threw it at someone and would not say (or be) sorry. It is not okay to do these misbehaviors, even if it is him expressiving himself.
After time out, he then corrects the behavior that got him there and we have a talk about why he went to time out and we give hugs and kisses always.
He is at a point now where he goes to time out, maybe, once a week.
Oh, and one proven way that it works for a "break" and not always (but sometimes) a punishment, is that often when he is throwing a fit or in the process of melting down, he will go sit in timeout by himself, then comes out when he is ready.
I just wanted to share my experience. Don't knock it

[shoes]

hmm... I didn't know that time outs were controversial.
I only use them right now for my almost 4 year old when she hurts someone (usually little sis). It's the one thing that I will not tolerate and it's an automatic time out. I always ask her "what's the #1 rule in our house?" and she answers "Never hurt anyone ever." Her time out chair is in the kitchen and I usually talk with her about it for the full 3 mins if I'm not busy with something else at the moment. After time out she apologizes and we get on with the day.

Originally Posted by alegna

Then you can discuss it with him and explore the natural consequences of whatever the action is.

Pick an example and I'll try to come up with more concrete examples

-Angela

What would you do if you don't use time outs when your preschooler is violent with their younger sibling? This happens to be a reoccuring issue that doesn't seem to be getting better. I almost think that the time outs aren't harsh ENOUGH because it doesn't seem to be changing anything.

[jmmom]

I don't use time-outs, never could, never will. My mother never used them or any other form of punishment, and all 4 of us were obedient through a fault, through highschool and college, still are even though she's dead and gone! Some of it is personality - my ds is also incredibly inclined to follow my direction. But I also think this is because I try very hard never to ask him to do anything unreasonable, and I also have gotten good results from saying, "Momma says no to this (i.e., the street), yes yes yes to this (i.e., the sidewalk)." He's quite verbal, and we have two rules that he knows - he gets carried across streets and parking lots, and he has to wear clothes. When he seems like he's testing something, I usually ignore it, and he stops. He's the kind of kid who thinks some no's are games - like putting his feet on the table - insofar as he likes to tell us that he understands that this is a "no," but does this by showing. I don't punish him for that kind of communicative behavior. I also always read the best motivation possible into his behavior.

In short, I haven't done time-out, and I have a kid who listens really, really well. I think a lot of this is because I respect him, his needs, and communicate clearly what my own expectations are.

BTW, when people are super opposed to time-out, they're often referring to something very specific - a deliberate ignoring of the child for some set of time, face turned away, in a way that has been shown to inflict more emotional pain than even a spanking. I think it's a bad idea. I think it introduces negativity, as opposed to respect, into your relationship. I have never seen a time-out administered in a way that I thought was ok. In short, I think it's mean - and in the end, kids usually do as they're shown, not as they're told. Helping a child find a safe place to calm down and teaching them techniques like breathing, etc, is not a time-out.

That's my 2cents. Good luck! My ds is almost 20 months - this 18-24 months time is SUPER challenging.