On one of my parenting forums a few of the parents can spend up to 45 minutes forcing their children to stay on a "naughty step" for up to 2 minutes. The "wisdom" from Supernanny and her ilk is that a child spends as many minutes on the step as they are old, so 2 minutes for 2 years old, 3 minutes for 3 years old etc. Every time they get up, you put them back. To me this is restraint, and if you did it on an adult say with learning disabilities you could be prosecuted!
I do think there is a role for "time out" but not naughty steps and spots and chairs. I take Joseph out of situations. The picture above was taken in Germany at Christmas time. Joseph was over stimulated, over tired and generally grumpy. His grandparents were inadvertantly making things worse by making things confrontational, so I scooped him up into his pram and took him to the park to blow off steam. I have been known to open the door into the garden and give him a football if he is in a rage. Far better to kick a football than me. Redirection is key.
I am reassured that I am not the only person who feels the way I do about the naughty step, you can read more here and here.
Here are my reasons:
Labelling - If you label a child enough times, they will end up reacting to type. If you put a child on a "naughty" step or chair or spot they will start thinking that are naughty and will behave to type thus making their behaviour worse.
Attention giving - children love attention and quite rightly too. If they are not given enough attention they will behave badly to ensure this attention is given, even if its to spend 45 minutes battling over a step. Why not put a stop to this and give loads of positive attention? To me 45 minutes is a waste of everyone's energy.
Objectifying behaviour - If you label a certain activitiy as naughty, say throwing food, the child may then throw food just to get on the naughty step to watch mum and/or dad getting increasingly stressed over trying to control that behaviour.
Withdrawal of love is just wrong - Like it or not, the "naughty step" is a withdrawal of love technique, and I think sends a deeper message. "I don't love you unconditionally, I only love you when you do the right thing. I have seen a key point of the naughty step is to get the child to then apologise and give you a hug. I just think this is wrong. You've forced the child out of the situation, enforced your will to make them sit on a step for 2-4 minutes, and now you want a hug?
There are oodles of positive parenting techniques that work with toddlers. Joseph is, for the most part, a very lovely, well behaved little boy. But he's a toddler. His understanding of the world is limited and at times he rages against it. We learn, as adults, to control our rage, but toddlers act on wild, pure emotion.
Getting to a child's level, speaking gently, redirecting them to a more positive activity, to me is a far more worthwhile process than battling over a naughty step.
I love this quote from Alfie Kohn
I discovered some disconcerting research on the damaging effects of techniques like the “naughty corner” (better known as time-out), which are basically forms of love withdrawal. I also found quite a bit of evidence that parents who refrain from excessive control and rely instead on warmth and reason are more likely to have children who do what they’re asked – and who grow into responsible, compassionate, healthy people.I don't want a child who is frightened of me, living in fear of being placed on a naughty step. I want a child who is happy, confident and knows right from wrong. My method may not bring spectacular, immediate results that look good on television, but I am confident I am doing the right thing for Joseph by eschewing this horrible method.
