is nose-to-wall timeout too harsh?

[Anonymous]

I was an earlier poster who already said that I think OP’s approach is fine.

However, if it’s an older home where there might be lead paint, I would avoid the nose touch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I saw you doing this I would assume you had extremely limited parenting skills.

really? because I think the prototypical “gentle parenting” approach I see out in public seems more like limited skills. “Now Larlo, we don’t hit! Larlo mommy is really feeling upset! Larlo take a deep breath … Larlo no that is not nice!! LARLO BE KIND!!”

If I saw a dad give a swift, authoritative time out in response to hitting - I would think that was good parenting.

I didn't say good or bad. I said "limited".

That isnt gentle parenting. Thats permissive. Kind IS not a word kids/toddlers can understand because they have no sense of anyone elses desires/needs/thoughts. Also Larlo isnt responsible for how mommy feels- but thats a whole other issue.

This is the elementary age thread so I would assume we are talking about 5/6 and up. No one speaks like the bolded to a 5 year old unless they have no idea what they are doing but that doesnt mean gentle parenting is the issue it means the parent is the issue.
By that point the boundary of hitting should have already been accomplished. No hitting. I see that you are angry or frustrated. You can stomp when you are angry/frustrated- thats 2-4 year olds. then you move onto STAR/calming practices because youve already worked with them on identifying the emotion and what they can do. Then you scaffold.

I practice gentle parenting and if my 6 year old was hitting at the park we would leave. It is unacceptable behavior at that age. They are obviously dealing with something else to regress back to use hitting as a way to communicate.

Again, you are fortunate to have an easy child. Using buzzwords like "STAR" and "gentle parenting" doesn't convince me that you actually know what may be appropriate for a broader range of children. "Gentle parenting" is your personal values (based on your limited experience turned into a just-so story). It's not an evidence-based practice.

You cannot just say "well your child is easy" to any parent who says they use gentle parenting successfully. If the parenting technique works, THAT is what makes the child easier to deal with. It's not that parents who do gentle parenting all just magically have easy kids.

I have seen this approach work well with calm, quiet children, with children with ASD, with children who are very active and often oppositional. The one unifying factor is that the family experience tends to be calmer with less conflict, not only between parents and children but between parents and between children. Even when kids struggle, there is a calmness and a sense that the problem is approachable. These are life lessons.

I do not have an "easy" child -- I've had numerous parents comment to me on how intense my kid is and how much more work she seems to require compared to their kids. Same with teachers. But I adopted gentle parenting styles after taking a PEP class and doing some reading (and based on recommendations from friends and from DCUM) and I absolutely feel this is something that can work with even very high needs kids. More importantly, I think it has provided ME with some emotional regulation that I didn't get from my much more rigid, disciplinarian upbringing. I tried that because it's what I knew growing up -- it made everything worse and made everyone feel terrible all the time.

huh, so you, based on blogs, have a better answer for child behavioral issues (including SN!) than all the child psychologists. Interesting!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I saw you doing this I would assume you had extremely limited parenting skills.

really? because I think the prototypical “gentle parenting” approach I see out in public seems more like limited skills. “Now Larlo, we don’t hit! Larlo mommy is really feeling upset! Larlo take a deep breath … Larlo no that is not nice!! LARLO BE KIND!!”

If I saw a dad give a swift, authoritative time out in response to hitting - I would think that was good parenting.

I didn't say good or bad. I said "limited".

That isnt gentle parenting. Thats permissive. Kind IS not a word kids/toddlers can understand because they have no sense of anyone elses desires/needs/thoughts. Also Larlo isnt responsible for how mommy feels- but thats a whole other issue.

This is the elementary age thread so I would assume we are talking about 5/6 and up. No one speaks like the bolded to a 5 year old unless they have no idea what they are doing but that doesnt mean gentle parenting is the issue it means the parent is the issue.
By that point the boundary of hitting should have already been accomplished. No hitting. I see that you are angry or frustrated. You can stomp when you are angry/frustrated- thats 2-4 year olds. then you move onto STAR/calming practices because youve already worked with them on identifying the emotion and what they can do. Then you scaffold.

I practice gentle parenting and if my 6 year old was hitting at the park we would leave. It is unacceptable behavior at that age. They are obviously dealing with something else to regress back to use hitting as a way to communicate.

Again, you are fortunate to have an easy child. Using buzzwords like "STAR" and "gentle parenting" doesn't convince me that you actually know what may be appropriate for a broader range of children. "Gentle parenting" is your personal values (based on your limited experience turned into a just-so story). It's not an evidence-based practice.

STAR is a breathing technique that is part of an overall "Conscious Discipline" approach that is not permissive. I find all of these curricula kind of hokey as constituted, but our kid's day care used it with all kids (roughly 35 of them in the center) with great results--and it was a wide range of temperaments, ability to communicate, experiences of trauma, etc. And he is 6 and still uses what he learned.

sure, I don’t think it’s harmful. But to claim it substitutes for evidence based approaches like PCIT and PMT, or means that all negative reinforcement is bad, is silly. and some kids don’t have the verbal or social skills to access things like breathing techniques, especially when very young.