Hellobee Boards

I use time outs. It seems like nothing is an ideal PC perfect tender loving punishment anymore. You can't raise your voice -- I certainly don't spank etc. There is only so much redirecting you can do. At some point my kid is going to have to learn that throwing a heavy wooden puzzle board at the dog's face is not OK. Sitting in the corner for 30 seconds while I explain why seems to do the trick. I'm cool with that.

These researchers seem to assume that parents put kids in the timeout without any explanation, follow-up, etc. Like it's a "go to your room!" or "go to your timeout spot!" I don't think timeouts are a bad thing, as long as you have talk about it and they understand why they are in a timeout.

ETA: I don't use timeouts with LO because it doesn't work with her personality. We do something similar to what the article refers to as "time-ins" - didn't realize it was a thing.

It depends on the kid and the age. I would say before 2.5/3 they are not effective.

The most important piece of discipline is the teaching of correct behavior. I think it can be helpful for a cooling off period, but i am a bigger fan of natural consequences that match the misbehavior.

we've put LO in time outs for 1 minute (she's 20 months) with hitting/biting or other unsafe behaviors. we always explain why and sit close. it gives her a minute to calm down. i don't think she fully understands yet, but we wanted to start something that we could be consistent with.

The interesting thing about time-outs is this: it teaches what the world really does when someone acts in an unsafe or inappropriate way. What is the consequence as an adult for stealing? Hitting someone? Destroying someone else's property? You go to jail - basically a giant time-out.

As a trauma specialist in the world of correctional institutions, I have heard this argument before, and while I understand how important positive regard and attachment are (and daily see the effects of a lack of it!), I also feel strongly that the best thing to teach a child is that there are limits to what is appropriate behavior. If a parent doesn't teach their child those limits, the community will - through both social ostracization and eventually the penal system. While no system is perfect, time-outs are in fact proven to allow most children the time they need to cool off, recharge and restart their responses to a situation. Combined with positive interaction with a caregiver after the event, the brain learns how to self soothe and reconnect appropriately with a loving caregiver and/or authority figure. And that is also something that the brain learns through it's capacity for neuroplasticity. Obviously nothing works for every child, but I just don't agree with all the article's conclusions.

Whoa...jumping off my soapbox now!

So far, we have removed LO from the room and talked to her until she calmed down. It has seemed to be fairly effective. I am not sure about sending a kid to their room by themself because I have a hard time believing that they are truly going to understand what they should or should not be doing.

My son is almost 2.5 and we use them for truly bad behavior like hitting or biting or direct defiance (ie please don't throw your plate of food and then he throws it anyways) and frankly in coming around to the idea that they don't work. We keep using them but I want to explore other options.

We don't use them a whole lot here yet as LO is still pretty little but I'm a fan. As long as there is some kind of discussion after the time out, I don't see the problem. I haven't had a chance with LO to use this yet but with the twins I used to nanny and the single child family I was with, I used a "cool down spot" & whenever a massive fit was about to happen I would say "it's okay to be angry, but not to yell at me, would you like to go cool down?" Then I would take them to the spot with a book or toy & their cup of water & they stayed there until the fit was over. After the first few times they would go there on their own when I would ask & they learned how to separate themselves from their intense emtions. I think a time-out as punishment & as a cool down tool are both good as long as there is always communication after.

at almost 23 months i have not found the need to use a time out. I can't speak for what i will do as LO grows, but I've never liked the idea of the time outs and feel there are likely other ways to teach and discipline. I also tend to do more of what the article refers to as time ins.

I didn't read all the comments so someone may have said this, but they say a time out is "punishment' that is essentially isolation. Not only is time out not always a punishment, sometimes knowing that a behavior will get you isolated is appropriate. I think biting or hitting for a child who is old enough to know better should be met with a time out. Now a child who is uncontrollably sobbing or emotionally distraught should be dealt with differently. Also, as a behavior specialist, not every child responds well to being spoken with, sat with, or reassured. Sometimes kids really do need space alone. And sometimes, it's appropriate to ask the child which they prefer or what they need. I think time outs can be improved upon, but I don't think they're a lost cause.

My LO is 22 months and too young for time outs now (we think), but I imagine we will end up doing them. I won't put her in another room for them, and will make sure I talk to her about her actions and provide a teaching moment too. Honestly, I have no idea how she will respond to any of it, as right now getting me riled is pretty hilarious to her. We actually put her stuffed animals in time out now to get her used to the idea, as if I tell her not to do something she will get her toys to do it instead, so her bears etc get a two minute reflection on their actions

Time outs are a very effective form of discipline for my daughter. We have a location in our house that we call the "thinking spot". That's where DD goes when she is being bad or just when she's freaking out. She uses her time in the thinking spot to calm down and pull herself together. She'll often even ask if she can go to the thinking spot, or just put herself there when she's having a tantrum. After a minute or two in the thinking spot, she is usually ready to talk with me. I'll ask her if she knows why she was sent to the thinking spot, and she'll usually say "yes" and even ask to apologize for her bad behavior.

So yes, time outs work great for us. For our daughter, I really think they're a good thing.

No time outs here. We plan to spank. I would like to point out to those equating spanking with yelling that spanking should not be done in anger. We do not want to yell at our kids--in fact, we believe in actually lowering ones voice when giving a direction--and spanking should never be done as a last resort because the parent has lost their temper. If you do believe in spanking as a discipline, you do it in a calm and matter of fact way.

Kind of off topic but I just wanted to address the assumption that time out is inherently superior because spanking involves yelling, etc.

@Boheme: Ha. Okay then. I could talk about how most of those so-called studies were deeply flawed, but let's just agree to disagree. Surely you can at least admit that just as there is a difference between a parent who yells, "GO TO YOUR ROOM!" when they've reached the end of their rope (making time-outs a kind of segregation born of frustration on the part of the parent) there is also a big difference between a parent who spanks their kid out of anger vs. as a logical, calm consequence to misbehavior.

@Skadi: but what's the point of calmly hitting someone? I was spanked and it doesn't hurt enough to deter, well at least for me it didn't, so it was just like whatever suckers and I hate you a little for hitting me. They didn't use it much thankfully because it took my anger from 10 to 10000.

@Rocker2014: While no system is perfect, time-outs are in fact proven to allow most children the time they need to cool off, recharge and restart their responses to a situation.

Yep, that pretty much perfectly sums up how I feel about it!

@Snowdrop: most definitely! If you cant play nicely, you can sit by yourself. Totally a natural consequence in that circumstance.

I think the key to any consequence is that it is actually a consequence. If your child doesnt seem phased by time out, then there is no point. You have to know your child, and know what will help them learn the lesson that needs to be learned. For some kids, time out works. For some, it is a waste of time, especially if it isnt followed up with a teaching moment at the end.

The reason i think that time out works better with older kids is that they have the ability for thinking more abstractly. For my son, who is 18 months, he is not capable yet of understanding that he is sitting by himself because he tried to touch the stove. For him, firm direction (NO, Thats HOT!) and then redirecting him to something else is what works best. By the time he is 2.5, and i have spent a year redirecting, he has the memory to know it is wrong, and should he try to touch it anyway he is choosing to do something that is against the rules and is unsafe. That warrants a more serious consequence, like time out. (If you cant play safely, you need to take time away from playing at all).

I think the key to any discipline is to remember it is about teaching, not just punishing. You have to know your kid, and it is helpful to understand why they are doing what they are doing. You also have to tie the consequence directly to the behavior in some way, so that they see cause and effect and not just "mommy is mean", which is what happens when time out isnt done correctly. He can think i am mean, but i dont want him to think the cause of him being in time out is that i am mean...the cause was the misbehavior.