Parenting With NO Punishment?

[Jamesican]

Now, don't get me wrong: I do NOT believe that any abuse towards a child is okay.

 

However, I don't see anything wrong with a time-out or something like that. I understand that you need to communicate with a child and make sure they understand why what they did was wrong, but some kids will continue to do bad things with no bad consequences. The only reason I'm saying so is because I know that Stef doesn't have any negative consequences with his daughter.

Thanks and feedback would be appreciated!

[Anuojat]

Now, don't get me wrong: I do NOT believe that any abuse towards a child is okay.

 

However, I don't see anything wrong with a time-out or something like that. The only reason I'm saying so is because I know that Stef doesn't have any negative consequences with his daughter.

Thanks and feedback would be appreciated!

Time out is not explaining or negotiation. As kid i have them several times and every single time i felt negative guilt and shame for my personality and feelings about what i did, NOT about the fact that i had done soemthing wrong. Nothign was explained, nothing was made clear.

 

Time out to me seems like a copout of the parents (pardon the pun) first find out the values you had placed upon the child. Why did he/she do it? Does he know it was wrong? If he did then why would he do it if he cared about such things? Why doesnt he care about wahts good and bad if he didnt? Were there alleviating circumstance? Does the timeout benefit your feelings or does it in anyway make the situation better?

[AMR]

I think there are enough natural consequences in life.  I think taking a time out and talk to your kids about their behavior, or teaching your kid to take timeouts of their own to cool down when feeling strong emotions is great.  Being present for your kids allows them to learn correct behavior with out the power struggle and manipulation. 

[neeeel]

Now, don't get me wrong: I do NOT believe that any abuse towards a child is okay.

 

However, I don't see anything wrong with a time-out or something like that. The only reason I'm saying so is because I know that Stef doesn't have any negative consequences with his daughter.

Thanks and feedback would be appreciated!

 

What are you trying to achieve with a time out? What I mean is, what is the aim, the goal of it? eg, I want X to happen. X will happen when I give a time out, because of reasons Y, and Z.

[J. D. Stembal]

It may be helpful, if as a parent, that you consider whether or not your parenting is more like an authoritarian or punitive government or a voluntary and peaceful one.

 

Time outs do not seem like a voluntary solution unless your child wants to go sit alone and think about life in his bedroom.

 

Too many parents, including my own, are used to using the idle threat to shut their kids down, "Do you want to go to your room?" Of course, they know that the child does not want to go and are using the threat of isolation to leverage against the behavior they are attempting to adjust. Of course, this type of external motivation through threat of force is extremely toxic, and it is the reason why everyone pays their taxes on time.

[TheRobin]

Not being a parent here, but my general thoughts about punishment: Punishment is a clever way of saying revenge, without it sounding that bad. It's the idea of "You did something to hurt me (or someone else), so I (or someone else) will now do something to hurt you". I think the whole principle is rather uncivilized frankly.
What I'd rather go with is restitution (i.e. you caused some hurt, now you have to make up for it by providing something positive to the hurt party).

 

Parenting ofc has that added difficulty that the child comes into being completely unaware of a lot of things. Including what reactions his or her actions elicit in others. But generally, without understanding of why something he/she did was wrong or hurtful to the other person nothing is learned from either punishment or restitution, I think.

 

But ofc, how the details look like in terms of what to do in what situation I can't really say.

[Better Future]

I don't see how punishments such as time out are any different from putting an electric shock collar on a child and pushing the button each time he or she does something you don't like.

 

I don't like this behaviour, you need to stop it. Here, have some pain, hopefully you wont do it again because you don't like pain do you. It is control through fear. Sure, it may change behaviour, but you are just turning the child into your own personal unthinking puppet.

[Jamesican]

I don't see how punishments such as time out are any different from putting an electric shock collar on a child and pushing the button each time he or she does something you don't like.

 

I don't like this behaviour, you need to stop it. Here, have some pain, hopefully you wont do it again because you don't like pain do you. It is control through fear. Sure, it may change behaviour, but you are just turning the child into your own personal unthinking puppet.

 

 

Not being a parent here, but my general thoughts about punishment: Punishment is a clever way of saying revenge, without it sounding that bad. It's the idea of "You did something to hurt me (or someone else), so I (or someone else) will now do something to hurt you". I think the whole principle is rather uncivilized frankly.

What I'd rather go with is restitution (i.e. you caused some hurt, now you have to make up for it by providing something positive to the hurt party).

 

Parenting ofc has that added difficulty that the child comes into being completely unaware of a lot of things. Including what reactions his or her actions elicit in others. But generally, without understanding of why something he/she did was wrong or hurtful to the other person nothing is learned from either punishment or restitution, I think.

 

But ofc, how the details look like in terms of what to do in what situation I can't really say.

 

 

It may be helpful, if as a parent, that you consider whether or not your parenting is more like an authoritarian or punitive government or a voluntary and peaceful one.

 

Time outs do not seem like a voluntary solution unless your child wants to go sit alone and think about life in his bedroom.

 

Too many parents, including my own, are used to using the idle threat to shut their kids down, "Do you want to go to your room?" Of course, they know that the child does not want to go and are using the threat of isolation to leverage against the behavior they are attempting to adjust. Of course, this type of external motivation through threat of force is extremely toxic, and it is the reason why everyone pays their taxes on time.

 

 

What are you trying to achieve with a time out? What I mean is, what is the aim, the goal of it? eg, I want X to happen. X will happen when I give a time out, because of reasons Y, and Z.

 

 

I think there are enough natural consequences in life.  I think taking a time out and talk to your kids about their behavior, or teaching your kid to take timeouts of their own to cool down when feeling strong emotions is great.  Being present for your kids allows them to learn correct behavior with out the power struggle and manipulation. 

 

 

Time out is not explaining or negotiation. As kid i have them several times and every single time i felt negative guilt and shame for my personality and feelings about what i did, NOT about the fact that i had done soemthing wrong. Nothign was explained, nothing was made clear.

 

Time out to me seems like a copout of the parents (pardon the pun) first find out the values you had placed upon the child. Why did he/she do it? Does he know it was wrong? If he did then why would he do it if he cared about such things? Why doesnt he care about wahts good and bad if he didnt? Were there alleviating circumstance? Does the timeout benefit your feelings or does it in anyway make the situation better?

Okay, here's a situation:

Let's say your kid breaks something of someone else's. You sit them down and explain why they shouldn't have done it. You ask them why they did it and ask them not to do it again. On top of that, I think an appropriate punishment would be for them to pay for what they broke.

 

What's wrong with that?

[AMR]

Okay, here's a situation:

Let's say your kid breaks something of someone else's. You sit them down and explain why they shouldn't have done it. You ask them why they did it and ask them not to do it again. On top of that, I think an appropriate punishment would be for them to pay for what they broke.

 

What's wrong with that?

I don't think that it is a punishment. That is just what you do in that situation when you break something, you pay to fix it. A kid with developed empathy would want to.

[Better Future]

Okay, here's a situation:

Let's say your kid breaks something of someone else's. You sit them down and explain why they shouldn't have done it. You ask them why they did it and ask them not to do it again. On top of that, I think an appropriate punishment would be for them to pay for what they broke.

 

What's wrong with that?

 

Ideally your child wouldn't be running wild, intentionally breaking things. If that is occurring regularly then you are not doing your job properly. Such events do occur though, even if you are doing your job properly. 

 

Sit them down and explain why they should not have done it. (correct)

Ask them why they did it. (correct)

Ask them not to do it again. (incorrect)

I think an appropriate punishment. (incorrect)

Pay for what they broke. (correct)

 

Don't just ask the child not to do it again. The child needs to understand why they should not behave in that manner. Paying for what they broke is not punishment, it is just rational morality, something that all children should understand. Also, don't just do this once and hope it doesn't happen again. This is red flag behaviour and you need to address it every day to ensure that it does not occur again.

[TheRobin]

Depends all on how old your kid is and the situation. Like, I don't think you can reasonably expect a two year old to pay for something they broke, but you probably can if it's a ten year old. 
Plus also depends a bit on what made them break it to begin with. If it was an accident or just exploration or something I don't think it makes sense to have them pay for it. As adults we'd have insurance for accidents, but as kids we rely on our parents far that I think.

Could you give some more details?

[J-William]

Okay, here's a situation:

Let's say your kid breaks something of someone else's. You sit them down and explain why they shouldn't have done it. You ask them why they did it and ask them not to do it again. On top of that, I think an appropriate punishment would be for them to pay for what they broke.

 

What's wrong with that?

Not really a punishment... But also I think you're on the right track with your question.

My daughter is very young and she does not have money to pay for anything. So should I punish her? I think not.

That doesn't mean I won't do anything, I would talk to her about breaking it and work out some way for her to make up for what she broke, whether that's doing a little work around the house so she can "pay" for what she broke, or maybe if it's another kid we can give that kid one of our toys to make them happy.

 

This way she will learn that you need to work to repair harm that you've done and she won't learn that if she does something "bad" that I will get angry and punish her. That sort of thing will make her keep secrets. I want her to come to me and ask "I've done something bad, how can I make it better?" Because that's how adults should handle their problems.

punishment is all about the person in power making the powerless person behave in the manner they dictate. If you're child is in a punishment paradigm they will seek to avoid punishment instead of seeking your help to do the right thing.

[LovePrevails]

Now, don't get me wrong: I do NOT believe that any abuse towards a child is okay.

 

However, I don't see anything wrong with a time-out or something like that. I understand that you need to communicate with a child and make sure they understand why what they did was wrong, but some kids will continue to do bad things with no bad consequences. The only reason I'm saying so is because I know that Stef doesn't have any negative consequences with his daughter.

Thanks and feedback would be appreciated!

 

negative consequences are like giving a child's part in a play to another child because they wouldn't learn their lines after repeated requests

punishment is giving them a detention as well

 

punishment is any action that is chosen specifically because it is unpleasant, and there is no evidence that it is effective

read your Alfie Kohn.

[regevdl]

The only thing close to a 'time out' that I use with my children is if I see that the undesirable behavior is not related to them being hungry, tired or other perceivable reaction to frustration then I simply suggest they sit in their room with peace and quiet, they are allowed to play and come out whenever they like.  Or, I run a warm or cool bath (if they are hot from playing outside and get a bit crabby) and let them soak for as long as they want.  I don't present it as a punishment but as a solution to calm down so we can discuss the problem together.  I suggest to them rather than demand they go sit in their room or take a bath or whatever.  If we are in a public space/event, I calmly walk them to a space away from a crowd and just sit and breathe with them or talk or sit quietly.  Sometimes, kids just get overwhelmed or tired or pissy and lash out...just like any adult.  And for me, as an adult, when I feel frazzled and pissy I just like to be alone or retreat to a quite place if possible.  So I just try to give the kids the same solution.  From time to time I ask them when they are already calm...not when they are in a tizzy... if there is any other ideas they have that will help them the next time they might feel frustrated or naughty.  Then they can be part of their own self-care which will help them as they grow up and more independent.  When they are calm, then we talk about it.

Ideally your child wouldn't be running wild, intentionally breaking things. If that is occurring regularly then you are not doing your job properly. Such events do occur though, even if you are doing your job properly. 

 

Sit them down and explain why they should not have done it. (correct)

Ask them why they did it. (correct)

Ask them not to do it again. (incorrect)

I think an appropriate punishment. (incorrect)

Pay for what they broke. (correct)

 

Don't just ask the child not to do it again. The child needs to understand why they should not behave in that manner. Paying for what they broke is not punishment, it is just rational morality, something that all children should understand. Also, don't just do this once and hope it doesn't happen again. This is red flag behaviour and you need to address it every day to ensure that it does not occur again.

  I think first verify that it wasn't a complete accident.  If you watch kids often you will see much of what they do is not to intentionally destroy things but they are genuinely trying to play.  As parents, they need to remember to teach their kids to play at a young age.  Tickling to get your baby to laugh is not playing and is actually not healthy  but I digress.  I work in a day care and you will be surprised how many kids at the age of 3 don't know how to play so their type of play is destructive and they don't deserve to be punished for it.  Now, I DO redirect them, teach them and explain but much of their destructive play is a symptom of parents never or rarely sitting down with them and showing them how games and toys work.  Many adults thinks it obvious for kids but it's not and it never hurts to introduce new toys to kids and show them how it works and play with them with the game/toy for awhile.  Even if it's things that aren't toys or theirs, if they are old enough to understand language, then you can explain what it is, how it works, etc and if we are allowed to touch or not.  Many adults try to make fragile things invisible for off limits for kids and that doesn't give the kids any context OR when the kids finally do see the 'forbidden or hidden' item they become curious, not fully understanding it might be fragile, etc.  I never baby proofed my house and my kids never bumped a corner, ever.  quite astonishing since I stub my toe or thigh on a corner almost daily!  lol  But I would watch how they behave and what they naturally took notice of and then used that information to add to it things they might not notice like sharp corners or fragile lamps, etc.  But in your situation, i don't know if you mean the child intentionally broke something or if it was an accident.  Paying for it doesn't teach them about the value of property rights and empathy.  such as..... we shouldn't handle things that don't belong to us without asking or knowing how to handle it/use it.  The owner values this item just as you value your (stuffed animal/toy, etc) and if you allowed someone to use your valuable you would want them to be very careful, etc.  

[J. D. Stembal]

Okay, here's a situation:

Let's say your kid breaks something of someone else's. You sit them down and explain why they shouldn't have done it. You ask them why they did it and ask them not to do it again. On top of that, I think an appropriate punishment would be for them to pay for what they broke.

 

What's wrong with that?

 

This actually happened when I was young, about age five or six. Another child in neighborhood and I were throwing rocks on top of his garage roof, trying to get them caught in the gutter, but some of the rocks fell and cracked the windshield of a car. We didn't notice the damage, or understand that what we were doing was destructive. We were playing a game of skill as far as we were concerned.

 

Later on that night, my father was informed that I was responsible for cracking the neighbor's windshield. I may have had to think about it in my room after the lecture. I don't recall if he spanked me or not as he may have waited until I was older for punitive ass-striking, but he told me why what I was doing was wrong. I remember being extremely puzzled about it. Why were adults so concerned about cars? Why did they not care that I was playing a game? He did not make me pay for it, but he paid for the damage on my behalf. I may have paid the costs back in chores, but I'm not certain.

 

If the lesson had been less about shaming me for my normal human curiosity and more focused on avoiding purposeful or accidental destruction of private property, the "punishment" would have more constructive in the long run.

[Jamesican]

Not really a punishment... But also I think you're on the right track with your question.

My daughter is very young and she does not have money to pay for anything. So should I punish her? I think not.

That doesn't mean I won't do anything, I would talk to her about breaking it and work out some way for her to make up for what she broke, whether that's doing a little work around the house so she can "pay" for what she broke, or maybe if it's another kid we can give that kid one of our toys to make them happy.

 

This way she will learn that you need to work to repair harm that you've done and she won't learn that if she does something "bad" that I will get angry and punish her. That sort of thing will make her keep secrets. I want her to come to me and ask "I've done something bad, how can I make it better?" Because that's how adults should handle their problems.

punishment is all about the person in power making the powerless person behave in the manner they dictate. If you're child is in a punishment paradigm they will seek to avoid punishment instead of seeking your help to do the right thing.

This is what I mean! It's not necessarily a punishment, but it is a negative consequence for a child's actions. I see nothing wrong with doing this.

[regevdl]

This actually happened when I was young, about age five or six. Another child in neighborhood and I were throwing rocks on top of his garage roof, trying to get them caught in the gutter, but some of the rocks fell and cracked the windshield of a car. We didn't notice the damage, or understand that what we were doing was destructive. We were playing a game of skill as far as we were concerned.

 

Later on that night, my father was informed that I was responsible for cracking the neighbor's windshield. I may have had to think about it in my room after the lecture. I don't recall if he spanked me or not as he may have waited until I was older for punitive ass-striking, but he told me why what I was doing was wrong. I remember being extremely puzzled about it. Why were adults so concerned about cars? Why did they not care that I was playing a game? He did not make me pay for it, but he paid for the damage on my behalf. I may have paid the costs back in chores, but I'm not certain.

 

If the lesson had been less about shaming me for my normal human curiosity and more focused on avoiding purposeful or accidental destruction of private property, the "punishment" would have more constructive in the long run.

 

 

J.D. Thanks for sharing and your experience ties in to the point I was making on the parents' responsibility to teach kids how to play and invent games.  I'm not juding your parents, I don't know them from 'Adam' but to use a loose example, if I may. I agree with you, as a parent, they should be been aware of your game choice and could have easily redirected you to another game OR given you a safer way to play with the rocks.  (throw them against a tree in the yard or empty lot, etc)  

 

Long before my kids were considering to throw rocks, I remember as a kids we too would throw rocks.  As a parent I see nothing wrong with it but, as I said, long before my kids even considered it, I knew the time would come where they would want to do it.  When they were babies, I did not allow them to throw toys/rocks.  I redirected them because at that age they didn't understand the broad repurcussions.  I would still let them play with rocks as babies but more about squeezing a handful or sifting them through fingers to help motor-skills, etc and if they tried to throw Iw ould gently put their hand down and do something else with the rocks in my hand so they would copy me rather than make rocks a forbidden or punishable device.

 

 As they got older I suggested that throwing rocks is ok as long as they first check to make sure there isn't glass, people or cars around.  ANd they can throw at 'targets' such as trees etc but not at people or property that someone owns. I suggest that if they aren't sure, just come and ask me or any adult that's around (a close friend/family) And if they aren't sure and no adult is around, then it's best to not do it and find another game to play completely.

 

This at least gave them a 'checklist' before they started to play and I added in some ideas such as  'it's fun to throw rocks in water to see the ripples'...as long as people or pets aren't around.  Then, when they got to the age of rock-throwing, they already had those ideas to use rather than make up their own without pre-determined boundaries and warnings.  My neighbor always threw rocks growing up and always caused destruction and always got whipped for it.  Looking back it was stupid to punish him because he never had context or the sense or direction/education to simply be aware of your surroundings.  This is key and has to be taught young.  So extrapolate the idea to other forms of play.  When I played with simple toys /games with my kdis we played the 'correct' and conventional way and then we try to 'mix it up'  and play with the same game but different ways.  I always point out less obvious things while playing or even while watching TV.  If they are watching their favorite cartoon, I will occassionally (not to be annoying) point out subtle things so they get experience looking for the less obvious.  it's a GREAT way to help your kids avoid future programming with media manipulation.  We know how those tactics work.  If they are always paying attention to the obvious but simultaneously searching for the less obvious they will be shileded from manipulation from all forms.  I hope that makes sense and helps.  

 

I know we can't always predict what games kids will come up with and want them to use their imagination and why at least the method I use can be universalized.  With anything they do they know to check to ensure it's not putting them, anyone else or property at risk, to ask if they are unsure and to use things as they are intended to be used and if they don't know how to use something, don't or ask to be shown.  That's pretty much it.   lol

This is what I mean! It's not necessarily a punishment, but it is a negative consequence for a child's actions. I see nothing wrong with doing this.

It may work and help in the short term but if it doesn't teach the kids exactly the start-to-finish play of events and why it was wrong or destructive, it's bound to be repeated.  The parent will perceive the repetition as it being done against their will.  Meaning, if you do it once...it's an honest mistake.  If  I make you aware and you do it again, then you can't claim ignorance and most parents are more harsh the second, third, time etc.  

 

So the fact that the behavior keeps repeating shows the sign of ineffective parenting on the issue, not bad, naughty, rebellious child.  Sometimes explaining the same thing 3 different ways helps children.  As parents we can see the whole picture, predict future, assess situations far better than children and thus we take a lot of that for granted when we explain things to them.  What seems obvious and rational to us may not always click thesame with a child and learning which form of communication works for each child is the best way to resolve undesirable behavior.  

 

So just merely a negative repurcussion in the long run doesn't teach empathy.  It only makes the child worried about themselves.  So in the example, it was about breaking property that belongs to someone else...yet the focus is around the child of the wrong doing rather than the person negatively effected by the child's actions.  The BEST first step is to explain to the child the wrong doing or carelessness, take responsibilyt as a parent of any gaps in parenting that might have led the child to do the wrong/destruction AND AND AND go with the child to make a formal apology to the person effected.  Without this, then everything evolves around your child rather than giving the respect to the person who had their property destroyed.  They deserve an apology.  Sticking the child in the room not only is a missed learning opportunity for the child but is disrespectful to the person who now has damanged property.

 

 If you want to prevent those accidents or behaviors, the child needs to be taught empathy and how caring for others' property actually helps them protect their own.  it's the UPB at work.  If the child understands other people's property is just as valuable and important, then those people will have the same attitude towards my property.  

 

but spanking or time out doesn't touch that.  It's a mini prision which only teaches.  If I damage someone else, bad things happen to me.  So I won't do it or I will try to get away with it next time so nothing bad happens to me.  their possible 'deterrance' of that behavior for the future is about self preservation.  It may have the same desired outcome....prevention of destruction of property, but it comes from a selfish intention and non-empathetic motive.  And a selfish motivation only provides inconsistent outcomes of desirable behavior. And for some, might cause them to be more tricky in covering their mistake/'crime'/wrongdoing.  For the non-empathetic people, it's more about not getting caught rather than it's immoral/unethical repurcussions.  

 An empathetic respect for people's property provides a more long lasting and consistent outcome of not destroying people's property.  Becuase their deterrence comes from the motivation of, if I respect other property, they will respect mine and we all win.

 

The time out/prison method might have some successes but when kids learn to deter destructive behavior by being taught proper and more careful play (accidents DO happen but many can be prevented) it will lesson opportunities for 'punishment', enrich the child and move society forward MUCH faster.  Prisons and probations have existed for too long and look where we stand.  Are we better off with grown children (adults) in crime and murder and property theft/damage?  not really, so this can go a long way when people really understand the impact each individual child can have by teaching 'repurcussions' with empathy of all property rather than only self preservation. 

And I'm sorry for going through some lengthy responses, I appreciate anyone's time in reading and considering my perspective.  But I learned another tactic a long time ago and was very skeptical.  I tried it with my kids AND at the daycare.

 

The method is when a child harms another person or property to first FIRST respond to the 'victim'.

 

The tendancy in most people is if my child hits your child, I, as the parent will immediately yell or get angry/punish my child and the parent of the other child might also yell at my child or hug their child to protect/comfort them.  All very natural and reasonable reactions.

 

What I learned later is that if my child hits another, my FIRST reaction should be to go to the 'victim' and comfort them, and encourage my child to do the same.  But the approach is make the incident all about the victim first and foremost.  When the victim is calm, then I can try to bring my child over to make a formal apology (I will not apologize FOR my child's action but will take responsibility as the parent and apologize to the victim that I will teach my child better to control anger, etc)

 

It was weird and hard to do at first but it works very well.  At the daycare, since I am not the parent of those kids, if I see a child snatch a toy, hit, bite or whatever I will immediately run with genuine concern to the victimized child and hug and kiss and ask if they are ok, ask how I can help.  The 'naughty' child is then moderately 'ostrecized' which into itself is a negative repurcussion at the same time teaching them empathy and the actions of empathy by witnessing how I respond to the victim. (hugging, etc).  

Later I will talk to the naughty child about the behavior either alone or next to the victim and start a dialogue.  I work with kids ages 2-3 and you will be amazed how well they connect to this method.  

 

The purpose comes from the fact that some children do naughty things either because of boredom or lack of direction OR for attention.  Sometimes we never know in a particular incident BUT, to avoid giving them what they want (if it's because of attention) then the best thing is to shower the victim with genuine attention. 

 

Because when a child is destructive to gain attention, even negative attention, they are still getting what they want.  Showering the victim first, solves this problem.  

 

Even with my kids and the kids at the daycare, if they do something I feel they should know

better, then sometimes I just ask them, "Do you need a hug?"  My son, who is 8 will often times say, "yes....I feel like I need a hug".  Later he has told me "mom, i realized that sometimes if I miss you or we don't have a lot of time together, I feel like doing naughty things and I will try to remember to tell you that I need a hug."!!  So sometimes I remind him and he has, on occassions told me he feels like he needs a hug because he had thoughts of bothering his sister!  

 

It showed me that with practice, they can 'catch themselves' in the act or before they have the desire to be naughty.  It's quite profound!