Welcome to From Insults to Respect.
Recently I came upon an article in the October 2019 edition of the American Psychologist about using timeouts with children from 2 to 8 years of age. As a grandfather, it caught my attention.
According to the authors, Mark R. Dadds and Lucy A. Tully, the use of this technique is quite controversial. Well, it just so happens I love dealing with controversial issues. Though it often leads to some nasty insults flying my way, it gives me the opportunity to practice avoiding throwing insults back, and modeling a more respectful style.
The Controversy
What does this controversy look like? Well, let’s begin by looking at an article published in Time magazine titled, “Time Outs Are Hurting Your Child.” Here we learn from the authors, Daniel J. Siegel and Tina Payne Bryson, that:
“The problem is, children have a profound need for connection. Decades of research in attachment demonstrate that particularly in times of distress, we need to be near and be soothed by the people who care for us. But when children lose emotional control, parents often put them in their room or by themselves in the “naughty chair,” meaning that in this moment of emotional distress they have to suffer alone.”
Contrast this position with one expressed in an article published in the Washington Post titled, “Timeouts Get a Bad Rap, But They Work — When Used Correctly.” Its author, Camilo Ortiz wrote, in part:
“The effectiveness of timeouts has been proven through decades of research, including work in the field of “behavioral parent training,” in which professionals teach parents a set of effective techniques. These techniques — a combination of reinforcement of appropriate behavior, effective commands, timeouts and other consequences — are usually used with children who exhibit moderate to severe disruptive behavior, but they have also been shown to be effective with children demonstrating less severe behavior.
And a number of smaller, focused studies have specifically tested timeout and found it to be effective at reducing misbehavior in young children, typically ages 2 to 6. It also has been shown to be a more effective way of modifying behavior than physical discipline techniques, such as spanking. In fact, using timeouts as a tool to help parents set limits reduces the incidence of physical abuse by caregivers. And any alternative to physical discipline is a good thing. The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention both support timeout as a best practice for behavior management in young children.”
Apparently, part of the controversy is due to the timeout technique being employed in different ways. Consider a parent who says she uses time out with her 5-year-old daughter. Then, when we watch her using the technique, we discover that whenever her daughter acts in any way that is annoying her, she begins to scream, shoves her into her room, while shouting, “You better shut-up you little brat!” She keeps her alone in her room for an hour.
Now consider another mother who says she uses timeouts with her 5-year-old son. This time, when we watch what she actually does, we see that she uses it along with a much larger set of discipline techniques that she learned from reading the manualized and evidence-based parenting program titled, The Incredible Years. 
Because she has a number of tools to teach her child to learn how to behave in effective ways, she only uses timeouts on rare occasions, lasting only 5 minutes, and targeting just one behavior during a period of a few weeks until her child has learned a new positive behavior pattern to replace the negative behavior pattern. Then, slowly, she incorporates the technique for teaching another behavior pattern. She never tells her child to stop doing the negative behavior pattern, but instead, she explains, as best that she can, what behavior pattern would be better, and explains why it would be better. 
When she sends her child to timeout, she does so in a calm, supportive voice, and remains in the same room with him. Prior to carrying out this approach, she has discussed with her child this technique, explaining that learning a new skill takes time, and timeout will help him to learn to act in a manner people will respect. She emphasizes throughout the process that she loves him, and expresses confidence that he will master the new skill soon.
So, here we see two parents believing they use timeouts with their child, but both use dramatically different approaches. I used timeouts with my two sons when they were very young in an even different way. I’ll describe this other approach shortly, but, for now, my main point in this section is that part of the controversy has to do with the fact that when people say they use timeouts, without finding out more details about how they use it, a great deal of misunderstanding can ensue.
Back to the American Psychology Article
Dadds and Tully, the authors of the American Psychologist article I mentioned at the beginning of this post, say that for them the definition of timeout is, “…a parenting strategy in which a child’s access to rewards, usually parental attention, is temporarily removed contingent upon a problem behavior and reinstated following a specified period of nonproblem behavior.”
Removing access to rewards is a type of punishment, and research on punishment indicates it leads to variable results, sometimes good, sometimes bad. Dadds and Tully appear to hope to mitigate any bad results by advocating that rather than using timeout as a stand alone strategy, its use “must be part of a broader behavior program that promotes a warm and rewarding relationship, and explicitly teaches alternative positive child behaviors to replace the problem behavior to improve the child’s self-efficacy in meeting their own needs.”
These authors, reviewing the research evidence, conclude that timeout, when used as they describe, can promote a child’s mental health and that there is an absence of evidence showing it is harmful after five decades of research. Meanwhile, inappropriate parental discipline strategies have been, and continue to be implemented in the name of “timeout,” and these are potentially harmful.
Now, before moving on, let me be clear that I am not disputing the research findings presented by Dadds and Tully. That said, my wife and I nevertheless used with our two sons when they were young a strategy that I viewed as timeout, but it differed in important ways from their approach. I think that difference is worth considering.
How I Used Timeouts
Like the authors in the American Psychologist article, I used timeouts as part of a broader child rearing strategy. However, unlike them, when I did use it, I did not seek to remove my child’s access to rewards, or any other type of punishment.
I have described my broader child rearing strategy in earlier posts (see HERE and HERE) Very briefly, it involved identifying what I wanted each of my two sons to do better and explaining to each of them why it would be better. If one or the other, did not succeed immediately in doing it just right, and began to resist, sometimes he would flare up in anger. When a situation of this kind occurred and he was all tense and excited, I would drop the subject and direct his attention to something else. Then, a little later on, I would bring it up again when he was in a calm mood. As likely as not, he would go over it now without any difficulty.
Another part of my strategy was, whenever possible, to teach my sons to improve their behaviors by focussing on the notion of a good. 
As William James, the great psychologist and philosopher, described using this approach with children:
Get them habitually to tell the truth, not so much through showing them the wickedness of lying as by arousing their enthusiasm for honor and veracity. Wean them from their native cruelty by imparting to them some of your own positive sympathy with an animal’s inner springs of joy.
We would celebrate success, rather than punish less than ideal behavior. And we had family meetings to discuss how we could improve how things were going in our home. My wife and I would first ask our sons what plan they suggest to solve a problem. Even if we thought the plan was less than perfect, we would often support giving it a try for a week. Then, if problems of the plan did occur, it would be discussed at the next meeting.
By using our sons’ plans as much as possible, they would be so intent on proving it can work, they would make it work despite flaws. As parents, our goals were to encourage our kids to understand that we were willing to listen to them, and we valued what they had to say. It was also important to us to foster in our boys sufficient self-efficacy in coming up with solutions that they could successfully implement, rather than always relying on authorities.
Finally, I am a big believer in teaching through stories. When an issue came up, I would either rely on a story I had heard, or make one up, designed to help them to consider better approaches to resolve certain problems. And I had both my boys read my three novels that have, embedded in their relatable narrative, a variety of issues regarding kindness and acting in ways that foster respect from others.
Now, because of these approaches, my wife does not recall using timeouts, and I rarely used it. When I would, it was not designed to teach them to improve their behavior. It occurred when someone nearby was having a hard time tolerating something one or both of my sons was doing.
For example, I might come home from work and my wife would say, “Jeff, could you get the kids away from me, I’m preparing dinner and they keep screaming.” So I would take them outside if it was nice out, or up to their room, while explaining, “Mom needs some quiet time.” Then when we would get to the quiet place, I would ask if they wanted some “quiet time” themselves, or did they want me to stay. They always said they wanted me to stay. We would then do something fun.
Note that in contrast to the American Psychologist article I discussed earlier, my use of this type of timeout was not intended to take away some valued reward. Rather, I would seek to do something pleasant with them. At some point, when all was calm, I would ask gently, “When you were making all that noise near Mom, had she asked you to quiet down?” I would then listen to their responses and gently ask what they could do better if a similar situation comes up in the future? When they were very young, sometimes they blamed someone other than themselves for what happened, and I would frown. Sometimes they responded in a manner that took responsibility for their actions, and I would say how much I appreciated what they had said.
As another example, when we were in a restaurant, if one of my boys began to make too much noise, I would take him outside, and explain that people who go to restaurants typically prefer to eat in a pleasantly quiet atmosphere. I would then explain that when he was ready to go back and speak softly we could enjoy a nice family meal together. Typically, in less than five minutes, we would be back at our table.
Now, what I just described, was the general discipline plan. That said, neither I, nor my wife always stuck perfectly to it. We did pretty good, but we both did lose our temper from time to time. When calm returned, I would say at a family meeting that I wished I had handled the situation better. I would also explain that sometimes even adults are not always perfect, and when I raised my voice in anger, if they thought it meant I don’t love them, actually I love them a whole lot.
Let me be crystal clear, I do not have any research evidence that suggests my approach is distinctly better than any of the others that uses timeout along with a broader discipline approach. All I can say for it is that it felt more right to me as I went through the period of my life when I parented on a daily basis, and though I’m obviously biased, as far as I’m concerned, both my boys, now in their thirties, turned out to be fine young men.
Well, there you have it, some thoughts on the controversy surrounding timeouts. I hope you find something helpful in some of the ideas that I shared, and please feel free to share your ideas with me and all of the followers of this blog.
Jeff
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
It’s a Sunday night. Eight-year-old Carl is playing a computer game. Suddenly, his mom cries out, “Time to head up to bed, tomorrow’s school.”
“Don’t ‘but mom’ me, let’s go,” and she takes Carl firmly by his arm and begins to guide him to his bedroom. Carl’s eyes tear up, which infuriates his mother, and she cries out, don’t you start with this crap or I’ll give you a real reason to cry! You’re acting like an infant!!! Now you stop this instant and get to bed!!!”
“I see you are feeling sad. That’s understandable. You were enjoying the game so much, and you’re disappointed about having to stop. You know, when we feel sad, it’s to help us figure out how to better handle what we do in the future. I wonder how we can better handle the going to bed situation in the future. Any ideas, Carl?”
We could also go to the library and pick out some books that have pleasant short stories, and you can read one right before bed. Short stories come to an end in a reasonable period of time, and the reader feels a sense of completion when it’s over, without making you feel like you have to read the next chapter to see what happens next. That might work also. So, in the future, why don’t we try having you each night choose one of these ideas. I’ll let you decide each night which approach feels right to you.”
Suppose a guy named Fred tends to be sad more than the average person. This might be due to some natural born tendency to experience life in a more sensitive manner than most, or because of some rough stuff going on in his life, or some trauma in the past has been leading to recurring anguishing memories. For whatever reason, Fred regularly comes to work expressing his sadness from the look on his face as he goes around doing his job. Co-workers often stop what they are doing to ask what is wrong, and offer help by taking time to listen to Fred in a caring way. This would be nice in some ways, but let’s say it happens so often, coworkers begin to find that their work at the end of the day doesn’t always get done on time and they end up having to stay late. 
Some resentment begins to arise. Moreover, in this scenario, the boss begins to dislike what has been going on partly because of the time being taken from the tasks that have to get done with top-notch efficiency in a competitive business environment, and she was brought up by parents who taught that there is something wrong with people who are sad more than average. In the end, Fred loses his job.
Perhaps Fred, if he could afford it, would be better off hiring a professionally trained personal counselor to help him work through his sad experiences in a positive manner so that he doesn’t put too much on the shoulders of friends and family members. There are, in most communities, some counselors available, and at the top of any of my blog post there is a link titled “Counseling Services” that when clicked on provides descriptions and contact information for two excellent personal counselors that I personally can recommend who conveniently provide services through Skype, Zoom, or your phone.
However, counseling services do cost money, and if it is too expensive for someone’s budget, an alternative is to set up via such internet resources like meetup.com, a support group that meets regularly for the specific purpose of sharing challenging emotional experiences. Of course, the members will be unlikely to have the expertise of a trained personal counselor, but with trial and error it is often very possible to find the right mix of caring, empathic participants.
We’re here to emotionally support one another.
The Provigil made it hard for Laura to sleep, so her pharmacologist prescribed Ambien, which she took every night. In the course of a year, her doctors had created what’s known as “a prescription cascade”: the side effects of one medication are diagnosed as symptoms of another condition, leading to a succession of new prescriptions.
It was at this point that Laura decided to see what would happen if she stopped taking the drugs, and found that the process was an excruciating experience because of the medication withdrawal reactions. It took her many extremely rough months before her goal was achieved.
Prior to coming off the psychiatric drugs, Laura had been unable to have stable relationships. “I honestly thought that, because I was mentally ill, the numbness was just part of me.” Now she wondered about the other effects of the many medications she had been taking. “On this very sensory, somatic level, I couldn’t bond with another human being,” she said. “It never felt real. It felt synthetic.”
From today’s post, I hope that you will consider the value of giving up any belief that you may have that feeling sad means you are bad. If, when you experience sadness, you find yourself saying such words like, “I can’t believe I’m feeling sad again, what an idiot I am,” consider how it may be far more helpful to view your sadness as a useful tool for helping us to better plan our future. If you are a parent, consider the value of teaching your children this “sadness is a helpful tool” idea.
William James explained that certain children, if they do not succeed immediately in doing something just right and are then criticized, flare up in anger and refuse to cooperate. Such children are oftentimes treated as sinful and are punished; or else the parent pits his or her will against the child’s will.
“It is in no other way that we overcome balkiness in a horse,” said James. “We divert his attention, do something to his nose or ear, lead him around in a circle, and thus get him over a place where flogging would only have made him more invincible.”
Well, it just so happens that if you use the William James approach consistently, you really don’t reinforce balkiness because children soon realize that they have not won. They simply come to the understanding that “dropping the subject” does not mean that anyone has won. Instead, they soon connect the “dropping the subject” fact with the “bringing the topic up again later” fact. Dropping the subject, comes to mean their parents will be returning to the subject after they and their parents have some time to calm down and think about the issues in a more calm state.
See to it now, I beg you, that you make freemen of your pupils by habituating them to act, whenever possible, under the notion of a good. Get them habitually to tell the truth, not so much through showing them the wickedness of lying as by arousing their enthusiasm for honor and veracity. Wean them from their native cruelty by imparting to them some of your own positive sympathy with an animal’s inner springs of joy. And, in the lessons which you may be legally obliged to conduct upon the bad effects of alcohol, lay less stress than the books on the drunkard’s stomach, kidneys, nerves, and social miseries, and more on the blessings of having an organism kept in lifelong possession of its full youthful elasticity by a sweet, sound blood, to which stimulants and narcotics are unknown, and to which the morning sun and air and dew comes as sufficiently powerful intoxicants. 
The general idea here is that in the arena of the moral life, whenever a positive ideal is aroused, it is as if the whole scale of values change its equilibrium. As James makes this point, he declares that at such times, “The force of old temptations vanishes, and what a moment ago was impossible is now not only possible, but easy.”
Middle school students can read A Hero Grows in Brooklyn on their own, and it can be downloaded on a computer or any of the popular electronic readers for free 
“Be patient, then, and sympathetic with the type of mind that cuts a poor figure in examinations. It may, in the long examination which life sets us, come out in the end in better shape than the glib and ready reproducer, its passions being deeper, its purposes more worthy, its combining powers less commonplace, and its total mental output consequently more important.” 
And yet, parents who undeniably care about their children, regularly expose their children to the side effects of these drugs, as well as potential long term risks. Why? Because they are convinced that the helpfulness of the drugs outweigh those negatives.
As I entered into my twenties, I began to notice that in the morning before I got my first cup, I was irritable and struggling with sleepiness. With the first sips, ahhhh, relief.
By the time I was forty, the headaches became so bad that I went to a physician who prescribed some pills. I don’t like taking pills, but the headaches were so bad that I thought maybe I should give them a try.
4. Level 4 individuals listen to the criticizer in a supportive, warm, friendly style, and then make it clear that they fully understand what was said. Moreover, they put the criticizer at ease by making statements that indicate that the wise learn from criticism. Some time is spent on showing that they are thinking about the criticism. If, after thinking about the criticism the criticism is deemed to be correct, they make a statement frankly indicating, “I can see your ideas have merit and I intend to use them in the future.” If they are not sure if they agree, they make a statement indicating that they are very interested in what was said, plan to think a little more about this over the next few days and then they will be ready to discuss this further. If, after thinking about the criticism, the criticism is deemed to be incorrect, a statement is made designed to disagree without being disagreeable. More specifically, a sense of humor, some listening in a caring way and a few smiles help to traverse rough terrain. As the episode winds down, the criticizer is encouraged to feel comfortable communicating suggestions in the future.
