I really don't like these, but we don't do time outs either. I think there are other ways to deal with your children than forcing them to sit on a mat. It amazes me the way our society thinks it is O.K. to humilate children.
"Most of us are tactful enough with other adults not to point out their errors but not many of us are ready to extend this courtesy to children." ~ John Holt

Reply

We don't use time out as a punishment. We use time out the way it is used in sports. Time to stop, think, talk to the coach and make a better plan. I think the time out mat technique is degrading so no, I would never buy one of these.

Reply

I'm not trying to be picky or anything, but the title of your post is surprising. A child is not naughty their behavior is. As for the time out spots--another example of junk you just don't need.

Reply

We also use time-outs more for calming down than for punishment. When she calms down, she always apologizes. This item just seems a little degrading.

Side note: why is everything either pink or blue (with one neutral thrown in)? With my twins, I don't like things being the exact same, but why not a couple colors for each gender?

Reply

This is another case of, "people will buy anything if it's packaged right."

Reply

We use time outs and they are effective (so far) for getting Morgan to calm down enough to fix and/or apologize for whatever she did wrong. But we don't have a special spot for it. She just has to sit against the wall in whatever room we are in. A cute little mat (or a specially decorated chair like I saw in a store today) seems to kind of defeat the purpose. I want my kid to take discipline seriously - it shouldn't be something cutesy and light hearted.

Reply

While this specific item may not be 'necessary' - time-outs do NOT humiliate a child. It is merely a consequence for actions that are deemed inappropriate and the child has *already had a chance to NOT act in such a way*.

While I am not at the point with my child-rearing (age-wise), I certainly plan on not only using time-outs if necessary, but a swat on the bum isn't out of the question either.

Reply

I had the exact same thought as Tara about the way the title was worded. I went away to eat dinner and think about it. It did still bother me when I came back.

The child's ACTIONS may be naughty, but I think we really should never call a person naughty. When we label the child like that then we are most certainly shaming them and possibly harming their self-esteem. Children's self-identity is shaped around the things they hear about themselves.

Reply

Erin -

It depends on how you use time outs. If they are used in the traditional, punitive manner, in the way that Supernanny does it, then YES...IMO they are degrading, humilitating, etc.

Negative time out (punitive) is based on the ridiculous idea that in order to get children to do better, first we have to make them feel worse. Punitive time outs are certainly NOT effective if they perpetuate a child's discouraging beliefs about herself or increase her need for revenge or rebellion. (Because many times, what the child is thinking in time out is NOT about what they did being wrong, but about 1. how not to get caught next time or 2. how mad they are at the person who put them there.)

Positive, non-punitive, time out is based on the understanding that children behave better when they feel better about themselves. A positive time out can help children learn many important life skills, such as the importance of taking time to calm down so that they can think more clearly and act more thoughtfully. Positive time out allows both the child and parent enough time and space to calm down so they can problem-solve and learn. (Because that's what discipline is about...TEACHING.) Positive time out encourages children to form positive beliefs about themselves, their world, and their behavior. In this state of mind, they can learn from their mistakes and/or problem solve on how to make amends for any hurt or damage their behavior might have caused.

IMO, putting a child in isolation or in a "naughty spot" is shameful and isn't using time out in a positive manner. When time out is used in a positive way, the parent is often right there with the child helping them work through whatever happened. Helping them calm down. Helping them to figure out what to do next. Teaching them...NOT punishing them.

Reply

One important thing to keep in mind also is that all children are different and what works for one child may not work for another.

Reply

This falls into the same category as the nursing bracelet for me--a useless frill that will just end up as clutter.


In reference to the Time Out debate, the AAP (NOT generally my most trusted organization) just came out against Time Out. Based on what is for them well researched and credible data. Seems that psychologists have learned that timeouts don't actually have any substantial effect on changing behaviour. Yes, they stop it in the moment, but it doesn't encourage the intrinsic shift of a genuine understanding and acceptance of behavioural norms.

Reply

I've tried not to jump in on this debate because I am a little emotional right now, I am 39 weeks pregnant. But I just have to dispute some of the the above after seeing much of it on the post about how grandma is on board after watching Supernanny.

1) Sitting off to the side on a mat/chair/stairs/whatever is not shaming. Shaming is wearing a dunce cap. Shaming is calling your child naughty or other worse names. Supernanny may call it a naughty mat, but never does she call the child naughty. She always clearly explains what BEHAVIOUR is unacceptable and that if you continue the behaviour you will sit over there and then you will apolgize.

2) (momma2mingbu) Time outs in sports are punative. In hockey if you incur a penalty you go and sit in the penalty box. You do not discuss with the coach, you sit there alone. Not only that but your team is punished for your behaviour, they are forced to play short a player. Do I think that NHL players feel shame when they are sent to the box, no. Do I think the teams really care they are short a player (Not unless they are continually incurring dumb penalties)

3) (Julia) We point out mistakes of other adults all the time. If a clerk at a store makes a mistake you point it out. And often, even if the mistake is corrected, if the customer does not feel apologized to they will say something, report it to management, scream, or sometimes exhibit even worse behaviour. We will yell at bad drivers, and dangerous pedestrians. We will berate dog owners whose dogs behave badly, etc, etc. And as a retail clerk let me tell you the skill of taking a moment to step back is very useful, which is the other skill the time out teaches. Step back and then look at your behaviour.

5) Bribery is a ridiculous form of child rearing. When I help someone in need, act politely, etc I do not do it because I think I will be rewarded. I do it because it is the right thing to do. The only reward good behaviour needs is that feeling inside that you have done something right. And really the only punishment we should need is that feeling that we have done something wrong. If that means we need to go sit on a mat until we can see what we did is wrong, so be it.

Reply

There are so many things to take into consideration when deciding appropriate discipline--discipline not meaning punishment but it means "to teach." Things like age, temperament/personality, what the child did, and much more. Each child is very very unique. Families have to choose what works best for their family and that particular child at that time. I don't believe there is one form of discipline that applies to every single child. I'm sure the ultimate goal of every parent is to have their child have the "inner controls" necessary to make the right decisions. How each child reaches that point may vary and parents may have to use different techniques at different stages and for different reasons.

Reply

I think the original question was would I buy one of these mats? No, I can think of better places to put $22., thanks. If I needed a special spot, a chair would work.

The girls are older now and lose privileges, usually on a three strikes basis depending on the
behavior. If it's serious and they know better, one strike is all they get.

I've read through all the comments. Not only does what works for one family not work for another, what works for one child in a family may not work for another. Kids aren't robots and a one size fits all theory of child rearing is fine in the how-to manuals but not so great in real life.

A stern look usually does it for Rochelle. I have yet to figure out what will work consistently for Rebecca but we're getting there. With her the objective is to deescalate quickly which means having her sit quietly without an audience. Only then can we talk. Not until then and not unless she's in charge of controlling herself. Trying to help her is like throwing lighter fluid on a fire.

She's improved over the years. The spells are fewer, shorter, and she's become capable of calming herself and coming to me ready to talk. There was a time when she couldn't. I'd rather not live through that again.

If they're fighting, I remind them one time to settle it and then settle it myself with "separate corners" which aren't corners at all, just different parts of the same room with the music, the t.v., and their mouths turned off. They decide when they're ready to get up and come and tell me so.

Again, it's not punishment or humiliation; just a way to calm them down when they can't do it on their own. One warning from me is usually all it takes and they settle their differences.

I've called it "time out". Since that expression seems to have fallen out of favor, perhaps I should find something else to call it while continuing to do what works for us.

Reply

Brenda -

I haven't watched a lot of hockey, but I believe what you are referring to is actually called a PENALTY, not a time out.

Yes, a PENALTY is "punishment" for the player/team. (Much like receiving a "foul" in basketball and eventually being ejected if one fouls too often.) Do players feel shame if they get a penalty or a foul? NO...I doubt it...because in sports most of the time players CHOOSE to be assessed the penalty or foul in order to win the game. If the player is any good, it is usually part of their STRATEGY to win. (In basketball, for example, you may foul a player who isn't a good free-throw shooter in order to stop him from getting an easy layup and move him back to the line.)

However, I think hockey does have "time outs" just like in basketball and football, which are NOT punitive, but are in fact a chance to talk with the coach, just as I've described. I did some searching for hockey rules online and found:

penalty
A punishment levied against a player, coach, or team official for a rules violation. See bench minor penalty; game misconduct penalty; major penalty; match penalty; minor penalty; misconduct penalty.

time out
A 30-second stoppage of play during which a team and coach can discuss strategy. Each team is allowed one time out per game.

http://www.hickoksports.com/glossary/gicehockey.shtml#ttop

"Time out" in sports is NOT punitive. It is a time to regroup and discuss strategy and make a plan to succeed. This is how OUR family uses "time out" and is how I really believe it works best. It is not punitive or shameful when used in this way.

Reply

Agree to momma2mingbu This is not a punishment is the usual sense of the word. It's more subltle way to make it clear for the child that they need to think of their behaviour.

Reply

I think maybe I wasn't quite clear last night. The AAP tidbit was more a "Hey, interesting thing in the news" than "Look what my personal childrearing bible says!"

I certainly agree with everyone who has pointed out that childrearing is not a one size fits all proposition. My Diva Girl is very much like Ann's Rebecca. When she's in the moment, she is an emotional firestorm and engaging with her will only postpone the tantrum. So I don't. We don't call it Time Out so much as "I'm ignoring you until you can behave like a human being." Traditional "I don't like that you did that, go sit there quietly" time outs never worked for her, in fact they made her junior kindergarten year a living hell. She wasn't capable of disengaging and settling down into timeout--it only changed the unpleasant behaviour. So I found other things that worked.

Zen Baby is a pretty mellow kid, but again, engaging in a tantrum with her in any way, either punitive or soothing, only amps it up. So again, it's not a timeout, it's waiting it out.

Ann, if it's simply a matter of semantics, use "thinking time." It seems to be in vogue right now.

Reply