Do nothing parents and horribly misbehaved kids

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would think they aren't punishing in front of others because they think it will cause a more disruptive meltdown and that would make others uncomfortable.

Yeah, my normally well-behaved kid had a meltdown the other day at a coffee shop patio. I had warned him not to do something, he did it, and the (previously communicated) consequence was that we had to leave. I had to strap him into the stroller and walk out while he was kicking and screaming. I got some dirty looks from people and it was frustrating.

I'm sorry you got dirty looks. My 3 year old started screaming in the pizza restaurant and I immediately took him out. People told me what a great mom I was. That's what they should have said to you. Discipline is hard on parents too, but immediately removing kids is always the best.

Kids have tantrums, I would not discipline a kid having a tantrum their nervous system is in overdrive, discipline is pointless during a tantrum, they need to be comforted. I have a problem with kids who have developed zero emotional regulation due to lax parenting. The 6 year old that punches, bites, screams, cusses out the majority of the time they don’t get what they want. There are a lot of little Napoleons out there.

My high needs baby turned into a high needs 7 year old. We are trying so fing hard to help. Can the peanut gallery. Really. It makes it so much harder to stay calm when kids with regulation issues are being judged by adults that know better. I’m already focusing on my child but I can feel your glares and accusations as I try to safely extricate us from a cafe. Our waitstaff is running the card, take a breath, we’ll be out if there soon and we’ll all be calm and breathing better within 10 mins.

Ours takes 20+ mins to wind down once revved. Getting to a safer less public space isn’t a finger snap. Sometimes we have to jump through a few hoops. Like paying our bill or going to the restroom. None of these things are fun or easy. If it looks like I’m not doing enough it’s because you aren’t the one dealing with it. We minimize visits to busy places and time means carefully but sometimes things happen.

Why does it take 10 minutes to leave? You don’t need to leave permanently. Leave your Dh at the table and you take the kid to the sidewalk.

My kids know when I say “last chance or we’re leaving now” that I mean it. Because my words mean something. One of my kids is special needs too. It’s not an excuse. It just means you as a parent have a harder job.

By seven if your kid struggles out in public you don’t set them up to fail and go to those places. If there are two adults, one leaves with the child and the other pays. Kids often go through spurts where they act up. We stopped eating out for a year and worked with ours. Lots of kids have sn. It’s harder but that’s life.

+2. I have a high needs 10 year old. We are rarely in public places because of course those places stress him out? Why are these parents torturing their kids this way.

Genuinely curious—how do you work on these behaviors if you avoid things like public places?

This was my nephew. My SIL was amazing. She put a lot of structure and routine around his day, lots of physical activity, then involvement in sports, then BoyScouts. With age and structure he started getting better emotional control. It took years and so much work, but now at 15 he is doing great. So no, you don’t need to go to restaurants and museums to teach them self regulations.

But you don’t hide a kid away either just because they might have a meltdown. What if you’re travelling and have to eat out? Want to have some normal fun like a baseball game or a movie? Yes you do have Plan Bs but “never let the kid be in public” is a frankly abusive and non-therepeutic way to live.

He was not hidden, they did plenty of things he could handle, for the duration he could handle. He knew he was learning a skill and was not ready yet for some things. When you set your kid up for failure, you also set them up for the shame they feel afterwards. And yes, at 10 they feel ashamed. That’s a terrible emotion to experience frequently.

I’m not sure why you equate “going to s restaurant” with “setting a kid up for failure.” You’re moving the goalposts too - the original posts were suggesting “never go out in public where there is a possibility of a meltdown.”

At 10 as well, my kid can handle things going poorly from time to time. That’s a key part of building resiliance. It’s OK to fail and we don’t have to set up our lives to avoid it.

To be clear I take steps to prevent melt-downs; I just don’t shape our lives around avoiding them.

YES

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this, too. I saw a three year old bite her little sister, hard, and get nothing more than a casual "we don't bite." I was shocked.

This new "time outs are cruel" school of thought is a nightmare. Yes, sometimes there are natural consequences that can work, and that's great, but Jesus, if you take a chunk out of your sisters arm, you can go sit by yourself for a hot minute.

I have basically done this as a parent. The older one had been egging the younger one on all day (who is basically never violent) and got what was coming to them. I still wanted the younger one to hear it wasn't ok but it served as a natural consequence for the older one's behavior.

No in this story the younger was an (older) infant in a carrier who was doing nothing to anybody. What you're saying is totally different.

You're right the other age direction/innocence is much worse. That being said, an onlooker may have judged me for not reprimanding the biter more harshly but wouldn't have had the full context.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this, too. I saw a three year old bite her little sister, hard, and get nothing more than a casual "we don't bite." I was shocked.

This new "time outs are cruel" school of thought is a nightmare. Yes, sometimes there are natural consequences that can work, and that's great, but Jesus, if you take a chunk out of your sisters arm, you can go sit by yourself for a hot minute.

Time outs are cruel because they leave kids alone at the point where they probably most need connection. Removing the child from the situation and staying with your child as you explain what they need to do better is ideal. And you need to balance that with giving your child positive attention when they are behaving well so they don't misbehave in order to get attention. Isolation should only be a punishment if you really cannot be with your kid at that moment.

PP here. Yeah, you're the problem. Sorry, I think this is crazy. You're teaching your kid that if they want some quiet time with mom they should bite someone. You don't give positive attention/connection when a kid just did something BAD. There's no amount of other positive attention when they are behaving well that will weaken that crappy message you're sending.

And to call time outs "cruel" is just absolutely absurd. They don't need "connection" in that moment, they need to LEARN that biting is UNACCEPTABLE.

DP. You have no idea what you are talking about. To a young child, the possibility of losing the connection to their caregiver is as TERRIFYING as death. They are vulnerable and totally dependent. You pick them up, calm
them down and then correct. Most laissez faire parents fail in the correction phase, it’s not enough to just talk about it, there has to be skin in the game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this, too. I saw a three year old bite her little sister, hard, and get nothing more than a casual "we don't bite." I was shocked.

This new "time outs are cruel" school of thought is a nightmare. Yes, sometimes there are natural consequences that can work, and that's great, but Jesus, if you take a chunk out of your sisters arm, you can go sit by yourself for a hot minute.

Time outs are cruel because they leave kids alone at the point where they probably most need connection. Removing the child from the situation and staying with your child as you explain what they need to do better is ideal. And you need to balance that with giving your child positive attention when they are behaving well so they don't misbehave in order to get attention. Isolation should only be a punishment if you really cannot be with your kid at that moment.

Kids who are having a meltdown or are really upset or angry cannot process anything you're saying to them in the moment. Having them take a time out gives them space to calm down. THEN you talk to them about their behavior, what they should do instead, etc. The purpose of the time out isn't isolation for isolation's sake--it's to give them time and space to regulate their emotions.

They can’t regulate such a high emotional activation on their own, they need co regulation. Their hardware isn’t even set up to do that, the neo cortex in undeveloped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this, too. I saw a three year old bite her little sister, hard, and get nothing more than a casual "we don't bite." I was shocked.

This new "time outs are cruel" school of thought is a nightmare. Yes, sometimes there are natural consequences that can work, and that's great, but Jesus, if you take a chunk out of your sisters arm, you can go sit by yourself for a hot minute.

Time outs are cruel because they leave kids alone at the point where they probably most need connection. Removing the child from the situation and staying with your child as you explain what they need to do better is ideal. And you need to balance that with giving your child positive attention when they are behaving well so they don't misbehave in order to get attention. Isolation should only be a punishment if you really cannot be with your kid at that moment.

PP here. Yeah, you're the problem. Sorry, I think this is crazy. You're teaching your kid that if they want some quiet time with mom they should bite someone. You don't give positive attention/connection when a kid just did something BAD. There's no amount of other positive attention when they are behaving well that will weaken that crappy message you're sending.

And to call time outs "cruel" is just absolutely absurd. They don't need "connection" in that moment, they need to LEARN that biting is UNACCEPTABLE.

DP. You have no idea what you are talking about. To a young child, the possibility of losing the connection to their caregiver is as TERRIFYING as death. They are vulnerable and totally dependent. You pick them up, calm
them down and then correct. Most laissez faire parents fail in the correction phase, it’s not enough to just talk about it, there has to be skin in the game.

PP here. I stand by my comment. Being 20 feet away from me in a safe spot in our home is not "as TERRIFYING as death" to my three year old. Come on. It's uncomfortable and they don't like it. Yeah, life's like that sometimes, and that's how we learn. You really have such little faith in your kids and their resilience that they can't handle being on the other side of the room by themselves for three minutes? Sheesh.

When they cried on the first day of preschool did you insist on staying all day? Kids learn that they can be apart from you and you come back.

Work on your connection at other times, not when they just did something bad!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this, too. I saw a three year old bite her little sister, hard, and get nothing more than a casual "we don't bite." I was shocked.

This new "time outs are cruel" school of thought is a nightmare. Yes, sometimes there are natural consequences that can work, and that's great, but Jesus, if you take a chunk out of your sisters arm, you can go sit by yourself for a hot minute.

Time outs are cruel because they leave kids alone at the point where they probably most need connection. Removing the child from the situation and staying with your child as you explain what they need to do better is ideal. And you need to balance that with giving your child positive attention when they are behaving well so they don't misbehave in order to get attention. Isolation should only be a punishment if you really cannot be with your kid at that moment.

PP here. Yeah, you're the problem. Sorry, I think this is crazy. You're teaching your kid that if they want some quiet time with mom they should bite someone. You don't give positive attention/connection when a kid just did something BAD. There's no amount of other positive attention when they are behaving well that will weaken that crappy message you're sending.

And to call time outs "cruel" is just absolutely absurd. They don't need "connection" in that moment, they need to LEARN that biting is UNACCEPTABLE.

DP. You have no idea what you are talking about. To a young child, the possibility of losing the connection to their caregiver is as TERRIFYING as death. They are vulnerable and totally dependent. You pick them up, calm
them down and then correct. Most laissez faire parents fail in the correction phase, it’s not enough to just talk about it, there has to be skin in the game.

What do you do in the correction phase if it's not just talking? How do you get skin in the game?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this, too. I saw a three year old bite her little sister, hard, and get nothing more than a casual "we don't bite." I was shocked.

This new "time outs are cruel" school of thought is a nightmare. Yes, sometimes there are natural consequences that can work, and that's great, but Jesus, if you take a chunk out of your sisters arm, you can go sit by yourself for a hot minute.

Time outs are cruel because they leave kids alone at the point where they probably most need connection. Removing the child from the situation and staying with your child as you explain what they need to do better is ideal. And you need to balance that with giving your child positive attention when they are behaving well so they don't misbehave in order to get attention. Isolation should only be a punishment if you really cannot be with your kid at that moment.

Kids who are having a meltdown or are really upset or angry cannot process anything you're saying to them in the moment. Having them take a time out gives them space to calm down. THEN you talk to them about their behavior, what they should do instead, etc. The purpose of the time out isn't isolation for isolation's sake--it's to give them time and space to regulate their emotions.

They can’t regulate such a high emotional activation on their own, they need co regulation. Their hardware isn’t even set up to do that, the neo cortex in undeveloped.

I never said they were left to fend for themselves. But teaching them how to calm down isn't the same "connection" or "explaining to them what they need to do better." The age of the child matters a lot, too. The point is that they first need to be calm before you start talking to them about what happened and what they need to do differently for next time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this, too. I saw a three year old bite her little sister, hard, and get nothing more than a casual "we don't bite." I was shocked.

This new "time outs are cruel" school of thought is a nightmare. Yes, sometimes there are natural consequences that can work, and that's great, but Jesus, if you take a chunk out of your sisters arm, you can go sit by yourself for a hot minute.

Time outs are cruel because they leave kids alone at the point where they probably most need connection. Removing the child from the situation and staying with your child as you explain what they need to do better is ideal. And you need to balance that with giving your child positive attention when they are behaving well so they don't misbehave in order to get attention. Isolation should only be a punishment if you really cannot be with your kid at that moment.

PP here. Yeah, you're the problem. Sorry, I think this is crazy. You're teaching your kid that if they want some quiet time with mom they should bite someone. You don't give positive attention/connection when a kid just did something BAD. There's no amount of other positive attention when they are behaving well that will weaken that crappy message you're sending.

And to call time outs "cruel" is just absolutely absurd. They don't need "connection" in that moment, they need to LEARN that biting is UNACCEPTABLE.

Ha trust me, my kids much prefer the time we get together when they are behaving well! They are getting in *trouble* for misbehaving. That's uncomfortable for them and is definitely not a reward. When they have to leave the playground and get a stern talking to from their mom they are definitely not leaving with the impression that it's okay to bite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this, too. I saw a three year old bite her little sister, hard, and get nothing more than a casual "we don't bite." I was shocked.

This new "time outs are cruel" school of thought is a nightmare. Yes, sometimes there are natural consequences that can work, and that's great, but Jesus, if you take a chunk out of your sisters arm, you can go sit by yourself for a hot minute.

Time outs are cruel because they leave kids alone at the point where they probably most need connection. Removing the child from the situation and staying with your child as you explain what they need to do better is ideal. And you need to balance that with giving your child positive attention when they are behaving well so they don't misbehave in order to get attention. Isolation should only be a punishment if you really cannot be with your kid at that moment.

Kids who are having a meltdown or are really upset or angry cannot process anything you're saying to them in the moment. Having them take a time out gives them space to calm down. THEN you talk to them about their behavior, what they should do instead, etc. The purpose of the time out isn't isolation for isolation's sake--it's to give them time and space to regulate their emotions.

They can’t regulate such a high emotional activation on their own, they need co regulation. Their hardware isn’t even set up to do that, the neo cortex in undeveloped.

I never said they were left to fend for themselves. But teaching them how to calm down isn't the same "connection" or "explaining to them what they need to do better." The age of the child matters a lot, too. The point is that they first need to be calm before you start talking to them about what happened and what they need to do differently for next time.

I think you are confused. If a child does something unacceptable (like hit someone or break something on purpose) the primary goal is immediate consequences- not helping them calm down. For some kids this may be a time out, others a loss of a privilege.

If the child is having a tantrum then yes, you wait it out until they are calm.

As for didactically teaching “how to calm down” - I am actually skeptical that any of what is advised actually helps. It seems more geared towards adults than kids. I’ve seen my son grow in ability to self-regulate with maturity. I also do a lot of positive reinforcement when I see him stay calm. But “take a deep breath Larla!!” has never seemed to work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this, too. I saw a three year old bite her little sister, hard, and get nothing more than a casual "we don't bite." I was shocked.

This new "time outs are cruel" school of thought is a nightmare. Yes, sometimes there are natural consequences that can work, and that's great, but Jesus, if you take a chunk out of your sisters arm, you can go sit by yourself for a hot minute.

Time outs are cruel because they leave kids alone at the point where they probably most need connection. Removing the child from the situation and staying with your child as you explain what they need to do better is ideal. And you need to balance that with giving your child positive attention when they are behaving well so they don't misbehave in order to get attention. Isolation should only be a punishment if you really cannot be with your kid at that moment.

PP here. Yeah, you're the problem. Sorry, I think this is crazy. You're teaching your kid that if they want some quiet time with mom they should bite someone. You don't give positive attention/connection when a kid just did something BAD. There's no amount of other positive attention when they are behaving well that will weaken that crappy message you're sending.

And to call time outs "cruel" is just absolutely absurd. They don't need "connection" in that moment, they need to LEARN that biting is UNACCEPTABLE.

Ha trust me, my kids much prefer the time we get together when they are behaving well! They are getting in *trouble* for misbehaving. That's uncomfortable for them and is definitely not a reward. When they have to leave the playground and get a stern talking to from their mom they are definitely not leaving with the impression that it's okay to bite.

Oh and I saw the above comment about co-regulation. That's really important too and yes the 'stern talking to" will do nothing for them if they are freaking out. But even when they aren't regulated they can understand "No biting!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this, too. I saw a three year old bite her little sister, hard, and get nothing more than a casual "we don't bite." I was shocked.

This new "time outs are cruel" school of thought is a nightmare. Yes, sometimes there are natural consequences that can work, and that's great, but Jesus, if you take a chunk out of your sisters arm, you can go sit by yourself for a hot minute.

Time outs are cruel because they leave kids alone at the point where they probably most need connection. Removing the child from the situation and staying with your child as you explain what they need to do better is ideal. And you need to balance that with giving your child positive attention when they are behaving well so they don't misbehave in order to get attention. Isolation should only be a punishment if you really cannot be with your kid at that moment.

Kids who are having a meltdown or are really upset or angry cannot process anything you're saying to them in the moment. Having them take a time out gives them space to calm down. THEN you talk to them about their behavior, what they should do instead, etc. The purpose of the time out isn't isolation for isolation's sake--it's to give them time and space to regulate their emotions.

They can’t regulate such a high emotional activation on their own, they need co regulation. Their hardware isn’t even set up to do that, the neo cortex in undeveloped.

NP. I have a DC with autism that was highly dysregulated when he was younger. This talk of "co-regulation" is bs. They need to grow and mature so that they can regulate themselves - but having calm parents aiming calm at them doesn't do it, anymore than having uncalm parents yelling at them does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this, too. I saw a three year old bite her little sister, hard, and get nothing more than a casual "we don't bite." I was shocked.

This new "time outs are cruel" school of thought is a nightmare. Yes, sometimes there are natural consequences that can work, and that's great, but Jesus, if you take a chunk out of your sisters arm, you can go sit by yourself for a hot minute.

Time outs are cruel because they leave kids alone at the point where they probably most need connection. Removing the child from the situation and staying with your child as you explain what they need to do better is ideal. And you need to balance that with giving your child positive attention when they are behaving well so they don't misbehave in order to get attention. Isolation should only be a punishment if you really cannot be with your kid at that moment.

Kids who are having a meltdown or are really upset or angry cannot process anything you're saying to them in the moment. Having them take a time out gives them space to calm down. THEN you talk to them about their behavior, what they should do instead, etc. The purpose of the time out isn't isolation for isolation's sake--it's to give them time and space to regulate their emotions.

They can’t regulate such a high emotional activation on their own, they need co regulation. Their hardware isn’t even set up to do that, the neo cortex in undeveloped.

I never said they were left to fend for themselves. But teaching them how to calm down isn't the same "connection" or "explaining to them what they need to do better." The age of the child matters a lot, too. The point is that they first need to be calm before you start talking to them about what happened and what they need to do differently for next time.

I think you are confused. If a child does something unacceptable (like hit someone or break something on purpose) the primary goal is immediate consequences- not helping them calm down. For some kids this may be a time out, others a loss of a privilege.

If the child is having a tantrum then yes, you wait it out until they are calm.

As for didactically teaching “how to calm down” - I am actually skeptical that any of what is advised actually helps. It seems more geared towards adults than kids. I’ve seen my son grow in ability to self-regulate with maturity. I also do a lot of positive reinforcement when I see him stay calm. But “take a deep breath Larla!!” has never seemed to work.

You have to teach them to do it when they aren't disregulated, and then remind them (and even do it with them) when they are. You're right, "take a deep breath Larla" when they are freaking out won't work. DD was an extremely, extremely difficult child and it wasn't until after I learned to do this and then actually did it that we could make it through the day without meltdowns. Obviously not every kid needs this kind of intensive parenting but it really does work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this, too. I saw a three year old bite her little sister, hard, and get nothing more than a casual "we don't bite." I was shocked.

This new "time outs are cruel" school of thought is a nightmare. Yes, sometimes there are natural consequences that can work, and that's great, but Jesus, if you take a chunk out of your sisters arm, you can go sit by yourself for a hot minute.

Time outs are cruel because they leave kids alone at the point where they probably most need connection. Removing the child from the situation and staying with your child as you explain what they need to do better is ideal. And you need to balance that with giving your child positive attention when they are behaving well so they don't misbehave in order to get attention. Isolation should only be a punishment if you really cannot be with your kid at that moment.

Kids who are having a meltdown or are really upset or angry cannot process anything you're saying to them in the moment. Having them take a time out gives them space to calm down. THEN you talk to them about their behavior, what they should do instead, etc. The purpose of the time out isn't isolation for isolation's sake--it's to give them time and space to regulate their emotions.

They can’t regulate such a high emotional activation on their own, they need co regulation. Their hardware isn’t even set up to do that, the neo cortex in undeveloped.

NP. I have a DC with autism that was highly dysregulated when he was younger. This talk of "co-regulation" is bs. They need to grow and mature so that they can regulate themselves - but having calm parents aiming calm at them doesn't do it, anymore than having uncalm parents yelling at them does.

I am the 10:49 poster, and I also have a DC with autism who was highly disregulated when she was younger. Co-regulation absolutely helped. I had to learn to regulate myself (which as I'm sure you know is incredibly difficult with a kid having constant melt-downs), then I had to learn to teach DC ways to do it when she was disregulated, and then I had to remind her to use those skills when she was starting to freak out. It didn't always work, especially not when she was past the point where it would work. I had to give myself a lot of time outs. But teaching them emotional regulation skills was really helpful. And it has been even more helpful for my other kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this, too. I saw a three year old bite her little sister, hard, and get nothing more than a casual "we don't bite." I was shocked.

This new "time outs are cruel" school of thought is a nightmare. Yes, sometimes there are natural consequences that can work, and that's great, but Jesus, if you take a chunk out of your sisters arm, you can go sit by yourself for a hot minute.

Time outs are cruel because they leave kids alone at the point where they probably most need connection. Removing the child from the situation and staying with your child as you explain what they need to do better is ideal. And you need to balance that with giving your child positive attention when they are behaving well so they don't misbehave in order to get attention. Isolation should only be a punishment if you really cannot be with your kid at that moment.

Kids who are having a meltdown or are really upset or angry cannot process anything you're saying to them in the moment. Having them take a time out gives them space to calm down. THEN you talk to them about their behavior, what they should do instead, etc. The purpose of the time out isn't isolation for isolation's sake--it's to give them time and space to regulate their emotions.

They can’t regulate such a high emotional activation on their own, they need co regulation. Their hardware isn’t even set up to do that, the neo cortex in undeveloped.

NP. I have a DC with autism that was highly dysregulated when he was younger. This talk of "co-regulation" is bs. They need to grow and mature so that they can regulate themselves - but having calm parents aiming calm at them doesn't do it, anymore than having uncalm parents yelling at them does.

I am the 10:49 poster, and I also have a DC with autism who was highly disregulated when she was younger. Co-regulation absolutely helped. I had to learn to regulate myself (which as I'm sure you know is incredibly difficult with a kid having constant melt-downs), then I had to learn to teach DC ways to do it when she was disregulated, and then I had to remind her to use those skills when she was starting to freak out. It didn't always work, especially not when she was past the point where it would work. I had to give myself a lot of time outs. But teaching them emotional regulation skills was really helpful. And it has been even more helpful for my other kid.

Sorry, I mean I had to teach her to do it when she was not disregulated so that she could use her skills in the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've seen this, too. I saw a three year old bite her little sister, hard, and get nothing more than a casual "we don't bite." I was shocked.

This new "time outs are cruel" school of thought is a nightmare. Yes, sometimes there are natural consequences that can work, and that's great, but Jesus, if you take a chunk out of your sisters arm, you can go sit by yourself for a hot minute.

Time outs are cruel because they leave kids alone at the point where they probably most need connection. Removing the child from the situation and staying with your child as you explain what they need to do better is ideal. And you need to balance that with giving your child positive attention when they are behaving well so they don't misbehave in order to get attention. Isolation should only be a punishment if you really cannot be with your kid at that moment.

PP here. Yeah, you're the problem. Sorry, I think this is crazy. You're teaching your kid that if they want some quiet time with mom they should bite someone. You don't give positive attention/connection when a kid just did something BAD. There's no amount of other positive attention when they are behaving well that will weaken that crappy message you're sending.

And to call time outs "cruel" is just absolutely absurd. They don't need "connection" in that moment, they need to LEARN that biting is UNACCEPTABLE.

DP. You have no idea what you are talking about. To a young child, the possibility of losing the connection to their caregiver is as TERRIFYING as death. They are vulnerable and totally dependent. You pick them up, calm
them down and then correct. Most laissez faire parents fail in the correction phase, it’s not enough to just talk about it, there has to be skin in the game.

What do you do in the correction phase if it's not just talking? How do you get skin in the game?

Depends on age and circumstances. They do the time out with you, meaning they are not allowed to engage with other kids or toys they want, or you leave the setting temporarily, or you leave the setting, or you take away a privilege or something they really want. They need to understand two things 1) there is an impact to them and 2) you mean it.

I also want to say that so many kids get reprimanded for things that are not their fault and out of their control. Parents get frustrated with kids who are hungry, tired, been out too long, in settings that are not kid friendly etc. A 3 year old has a 10 minute attention span, they don't have the capacity to stay quietly in line while you get your coffee and croissant. They are not adults. Correct your kids judiciously, like when they are being aggressive, not when they are having a meltdown due to no fault of their own.