Time Outs: Naughty Spot vs Comfort Corner

In our recent discussion about disciplining children [blog entry lost], my Big Sis (e) directed me to this site.

The question is how to discipline a child when we don’t use smacking.  There are lots of different options, and one approach is to use time outs.  I personally don’t use time outs, but I thought I would have a quick look at how it might be done.

Crystal, the writer of the site my Big Sis mentioned, labels her approach “Grace-Based Discipline”.  Her version of the time out is called a “comfort corner”.

Crystal explicitly contrasts her approach with Supernanny’s “naughty spot” style of time out.  So, I thought I should first have a look to see what Supernanny does.  A quick Google search sent me here, here, and here.  This and this are good, too.

(This last site also suggests five other non-smackingdiscipline approaches, besides time outs.  These are redirection, distraction, ignoring, natural consequences and not-so-natural consequences.  I typically use a mix of these five strategies.)

Summarising Supernanny’s naughty spot approach:

·         It is just one tool in the parenting toolbox.  Supernanny is well-known for using it, but she makes it clear that it should be used in combination with other strategies, too.

·         It is for two to six year olds.  She suggests a “chill out zone” or “reflection room” for older children.

·         The naughty spot should be a boring, empty place without distractions—no toys, no TV, etc.  It is a place where the child is not getting any attention from the parent.  It is intentionally a place where the external stimuli are reduced.

·         The child should be in the naughty spot for one minute per year of age.

·         It is a place for quiet reflection.  Or, if there is no reflection happening, at least it is a place where there is potential for reflection.

·         While disciplining the child, the parent should speak in a low-toned voice, using eye contact.  It should be done calmly and confidently, without showing emotion.

·         The child should apologise at the end.

·         Afterwards big cuddles and lots of affection are really important.

Crystal and Supernanny say the same thing when it comes to the build-up to the time out.  They both talk about parenting positively, making a fuss about what the child does right, and rewarding good behaviour.  They both talk about love and lots of cuddles.  They both reject smacking.

But Crystal goes a step further.  She doesn’t like the “naughty” part of the naughty spot.  She doesn’t think that children should be viewed as naughty.  The key part is that she doesn’t think it is necessary for a child to feel bad to learn.  She thinks that by making the naughty spot in an area away from the rest of the family, it is telling a child that they are only acceptable to the family if they behave well.

This means that instead of a naughty spot, she would rather have a comfort corner for the child to go to when a time out is needed.  Just like Supernanny, she does enforce going to the time out spot.  But unlike Supernanny, she doesn’t think the time out spot should be unpleasant.  Supernanny’s time out spot is not painful, but it is unpleasant, because the pleasurable stimuli (attention, toys, etc) have been removed.  Crystal’s time out spot is intentionally pleasurable.  It may have books, toys, blankets, comfy chairs, etc.  The children can help design it, if they wish.

In this sense, Crystal’s approach has elements of redirection, distraction or ignoring, rather than consequences.

Crystal doesn’t think that her approach spoils the child.  She says that it is a healthier way to change a child’s behaviour for the better.  She tells us that it works.

But then Supernanny tells us that her approach works, too.

That is the basics of the difference.  Crystal also picks faults in a few of the details of Supernanny-style time outs.  I think that with most of these points Crystal shows that she misunderstands the intent of Supernanny.  She sees Supernanny as much tougher, colder and more legalistic than what she really is.  On many of these things, I see her as arguing against a straw-person.  For example:

(1)   She questions the one minute per year of age idea.  But it is clear from the Supernanny sites that the exact timing is no big deal.  It is just a rule of thumb.

(2)   She thinks the apology at the end is too forced and not a true indicator of a child’s remorse.  She prefers “will you forgive me” instead of “I’m sorry”.  But the Supernanny sites discuss this exact same thing.  Supernanny also talks of genuineness, context, and so forth.

As I say, I don’t use time outs.  I find it too troublesome to set up.  And reading up on these two versions doesn’t change my opinion here.  I think I get results just as well using other strategies.  But if Supernanny and Crystal say time outs work for them, and each prefers their own version, then good on them.  In my quick look at the ideas, I can’t see that either approach would be harmful for the children (unlike smacking).  So which version a parent chooses will just be personal style and family circumstance.