Child discipline

Nicholas Orme of the University of Exeter argues that children in medieval times were treated differently from adults in legal matters, and the authorities were as troubled about violence to children as they were to adults. In his article, Childhood in Medieval England, he states, "Corporal punishment was in use throughout society and probably also in homes, although social commentators criticized parents for indulgence towards children rather than for harsh discipline." Salvation was the main goal of discipline, and parents were driven to ensure their children a place in heaven.[7] In one incident in early 14th-century London, neighbors intervened when a cook and clerk were beating a boy carrying water. A scuffle ensued and the child's tormentors were subdued. The neighbors didn't even know the boy, but they firmly stood up for him even when they were physically attacked, and they stood by their actions when the cook and clerk later sued for damages.[8]

During colonial times in the United States, parents were able to provide enjoyments for their children in the form of toys, according to David Robinson, writer for the Colonial Williamsburg Journal. Robinson notes that even the Puritans permitted their young children to play freely. Older children were expected to swiftly adopt adult chores and accountabilities, to meet the strict necessities of daily life.[7] Harsh punishments for minor infractions were common. Beatings and other forms of corporal punishment occurred regularly; one legislator even suggested capital punishment for children's misbehavior.[9]

According to Stacey Patton, corporal punishment in African American families has its roots in punishment meted out by parents and family members during the era of slavery in the United States.[10] Europeans would use physical discipline on their children, whereas she states that it was uncommon in West African and Indigenous North American societies and only became more prevalent as their lives grew more difficult due to slavery and genocide. As such, Patton argues that traditional parenting styles were not preserved due to the "violent suppression of West African cultural practices".[10] Parents were expected and pressured to teach their children to behave in a certain way in front of white people, as well as to expect the physical, sexual, and emotional violence and dehumanizing actions that typically came with slavery.[10] While the Emancipation Proclamation ended the institution of slavery, in the south many expected former slaves to conform to the prior expectations of deference and demeanor. Patton states that black parents continued to use corporal punishment with their children out of fear that doing otherwise would put them and their family at risk of violence and discrimination, a form of parenting that she argues is still common today.[10]

The Book of Proverbs mentions the importance of disciplining children, as opposed to leaving them neglected or unruly, in several verses. Interpretation of these verses varies, as do many passages from the Bible, from literal to metaphorical. The most often paraphrased is from Proverbs 13:24, "He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes." (King James Version.) Other passages that mention the 'rod' are Proverbs 23:14, "Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell," and Proverbs 29:15, "The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame."[11]

Although the Bible's lessons have been paraphrased for hundreds of years, the modern phrase, "Spare the rod and spoil the child," was coined by Samuel Butler, in Hudibras, a mock heroic narrative poem published in 1663. The Contemporary English Version of Proverbs 13:24 is: 'If you love your children you will correct them; if you don't love them, you won't correct them'.

Medieval schoolboy birched on the bare buttocks

The primary guidelines followed by medieval parents in training their children were from the Bible. Scolding was considered ineffectual, and cursing a child was a terrible thing.[12] In general, the use of corporal punishment was as a disciplinary action taken to shape behavior, not a pervasive dispensing of beatings for no reason. Corporal punishment was undoubtedly the norm. The medieval world was a dangerous place, and it could take harsh measures to prepare a child to live in it. Pain was the medieval way of illustrating that actions had consequences.[13]

In his 1690 Essay Concerning Human Understanding English physician and philosopher John Locke argued that the child resembled a blank tablet (tabula rasa) at birth, and was not inherently full of sin. In his 1693 Some Thoughts Concerning Education he suggested that the task of the parent was to build in the child the strong body and habits of mind that would allow the capacity of reason to develop, and that parents could reward good behavior with their esteem and punish bad behavior with disgrace – the withdrawal of parental approval and affection - as opposed to beatings.[14]

In the early twentieth century, child-rearing experts abandoned a romantic view of childhood and advocated formation of proper habits to discipline children. A 1914 U.S. Children's Bureau pamphlet, Infant Care, urged a strict schedule and admonished parents not to play with their babies. John B. Watson's 1924 Behaviorism argued that parents could train malleable children by rewarding good behavior and punishing bad, and by following precise schedules for food, sleep, and other bodily functions.

Although such principles began to be rejected as early as the 1930s, they were firmly renounced in the 1946 best-seller Baby and Child Care, by pediatrician Benjamin Spock, which told parents to trust their own instincts and to view the child as a reasonable, friendly human being. Dr. Spock revised his first edition to urge more parent-centered discipline in 1957, but critics blamed his popular book for its permissive attitude during the youth rebellions of the 1960s and 1970s.[14]

In the last half of the century, Parent Management Training was developed and found to be effective in reducing child disruptive behavior in randomized controlled trials.

Following the permissive trend of the 1960s and early 1970s, American evangelical Christian James Dobson sought the return of a more conservative society and advocated spanking of children up to age eight.[15] Dobson's position is controversial. As early as 1985, The New York Times stated that "most child-care experts today disapprove of physical punishment."[16]

A common method of child discipline is sending the child away from the family or group after misbehavior. Children may be told to stand in the corner ("corner time") or may be sent to their rooms for a period of time (room time). A time-out involves isolating or separating a child for a few minutes and is intended to give an over-excited child time to calm down.

Time-out, painting by Carl Larsson

Alternatively, time-outs have been recommended as a time for parents to separate feelings of anger toward the child for their behavior and to develop a plan for discipline.

If an individual decides to use the time-out with a child as a discipline strategy, the individual must be unemotional and consistent with the undesired behavior. Along with taking into consideration the child's temperament, professionals have recommended that the length of the time-out also should depend on the age of the child. For example, the time-out should last one minute per year of the child's age, so if the child is five years old, the time-out should go no longer than five minutes.[29] However, research results have suggested that this does not improve its effectiveness.[30]

Time-outs have been recommended by researchers and professional organizations on the basis of a large body of research.[31][32][33] However, several anti-discipline experts do not recommend the use of any form of punishment, including time-outs. These authors include Thomas Gordon, Alfie Kohn, and Aletha Solter.[34][35][36][37]

Another common method of discipline used for, usually, preteens and teenagers, is restricting the child's freedom of movement, optionally compounded by restricting activities. Examples of restriction of movement would be confinement to the yard, to the house, or to just the bedroom and restroom, excepting for required activities, such as attending school or religious services, going to work, obtaining healthcare, performing chores, etc. Examples of restriction of activities would be disallowing visits by friends, forbidding use of a telephone and other means of communications, prohibiting games and electronic entertainment, taking away books and toys, and forbidding watching television and listening to music.

"Hotsaucing", or "Hot saucing", is the practice of putting hot sauce in the child's mouth, which can be considered a form of child abuse. Some pediatricians, psychologists and experts on childcare strongly recommend against this practice.[38]

Former child star Lisa Whelchel advocates hot saucing in her parenting book Creative Correction.[39] In the book, Whelchel claims the practice is more effective and humane than traditional corporal punishments, such as spanking; she repeated this opinion when promoting her book on Good Morning America,[40] where she said in raising her own child she found the technique successful where other measures had failed. Whelchel's book recommends using only "tiny" amounts of hot sauce, and lists alternatives such as lemon juice or vinegar.[38][41]

The practice had also been suggested in a 2001 article in Today's Christian Woman magazine,[42][43] where only "a drop" is suggested, and alternative substances are listed.

While these publications are credited with popularizing hot saucing, the practice is believed by some to come from Southern United States culture.[38] It is well known among pediatricians, psychologists and child welfare professionals.[38] If a child is allergic to any of the ingredients in a hot sauce, it can cause swelling of the child's tongue and esophagus, presenting a choking hazard.[38] [44]

Scolding involves reproving or criticizing a child's negative behavior and/or actions.

Some research suggests that scolding is counter-productive because parental attention (including negative attention) tends to reinforce behavior.[45]

In the past, harsh discipline was the norm for families in society. However, research by psychologists has brought about new forms of effective discipline. Positive discipline is based on minimizing the child's frustrations and misbehavior rather than giving punishments. The main focus in this method is the "Golden Rule", treat others the way you want to be treated. Parents follow this when disciplining their children because they believe that their point will reach the children more effectively rather than traditional discipline. The foundation of this style of discipline is encouraging children to feel good about themselves and building the parent's relationship with the child so the child wants to please the parent. In traditional discipline, parents would instill fear in their child by using shame and humiliation to get their point across. In positive discipline the parents avoid negative treatment and focus on the importance of communication and showing unconditional love. Feeling loved, important and well liked has positive and negative effects on how a child perceives themselves. The child will feel important if the child feels well liked and loved by a person.[50] Other important aspects are reasonable and age-appropriate expectations, feeding healthy foods and providing enough rest, giving clear instructions which may need to be repeated, looking for the causes of any misbehavior and making adjustments, and building routines. Children are helped by knowing what is happening in their lives. Having some predictability about their day without necessarily being regimental may help reduce frustration and misbehavior.[51]

B. F. Skinner argued that simply giving the child spontaneous expressions of appreciation or acknowledgement when they are not misbehaving will act as a reinforcer for good behavior. Focusing on good behavior versus bad behavior will encourage appropriate behavior in the given situation. According to Skinner, past behavior that is reinforced with praise is likely to repeat in the same or similar situation.[52]

In operant conditioning, schedules of reinforcement are an important component of the learning process. When and how often we reinforce a behavior can have a dramatic impact on the strength and rate of the response. A schedule of reinforcement is basically a rule stating which instances of a behavior will be reinforced. In some case, a behavior might be reinforced every time it occurs. Sometimes, a behavior might not be reinforced at all. Either positive reinforcement or negative reinforcement might be used, depending on the situation. In both cases, the goal of reinforcement is always to strengthen the behavior and increase the likelihood that it will occur again in the future. In real-world settings, behaviors are probably not going to be reinforced each and every time they occur. For situations where you are purposely trying to train and reinforce an action, such as in the classroom, in sports or in animal training, you might opt to follow a specific reinforcement schedule. As you'll see below, some schedules are best suited to certain types of training situations. In some cases, training might call for starting out with one schedule and switching to another once the desired behavior has been taught.[53]

Example of operant conditioning

Positive reinforcement: Whenever they are being cooperative, solves things non-aggressively, immediately reward those behaviors with praise, attention, goodies.

Punishment: If acting aggressively, give immediate, undesired consequence (send to corner; say "NO!" and couple with response cost).

Response cost: Most common would be "time-out". Removing sources of attention by placing in an environment without other people.

Negative reinforcement: One example would be to couple negative reinforcement with response cost—after some period of time in which he has acted cooperatively or calmly while in the absence of others, can bring him back with others. Thus, taking away the isolation should reinforce the desired behavior (being cooperative).

Extinction: Simply ignoring behaviors should lead to extinction. Note: that initially when ignored, can expect an initial increase in the behavior—a very trying time in situations such as a child that is acting out.[54]

It is common for children who are otherwise ignored by their parents to turn to disruptive behaviour as a way of seeking attention.[55] An example is a child screaming for attention. Parents often inadvertently reward the bad behavior by immediately giving them the attention, thereby reinforcing it. On the other hand, parents may wait until the child calms down and speaks politely, then reward the more polite behavior with the attention.

Natural consequences involve children learning from their own mistakes. In this method, the parent's job is to teach the child which behaviors are inappropriate. In order to do this, parents should allow the child to make a mistake and let them experience the natural results from their behavior. For instance, if a child forgets to bring his lunch to school, he will find himself hungry later. Using natural consequences would be indicative of the theory of accomplishment of natural growth, which is the parenting style of the working class and poor. The accomplishment of natural growth focuses on separation between children and family. Children are given directives and expected to carry them out without complaint or delay. Children are responsible for themselves during their free time, and the parent's main concern is caring for the children's physical needs.[56]

A systematic overview of evidence on non-violent discipline options conducted by Karen Quail and Catherine Ward[57] was published in 2020.This meta study reviewed 223 systematic reviews covering data from 3,921 primary studies, and available research evidence was summarized for over 50 discipline tools.

Non-violent parenting tools were defined as any skills "which can be used to address a child's resistance, lack of cooperation, problem behavior or dysregulation, or to teach and support appropriate behavior".[57] This is distinguished from a coercive approach, "in which the adult tries to force a certain reaction from the child using threats, intimidation and punishment."[57] Coercive approaches have been found to increase child aggression and conduct problems.[58][59][60]

Quail and Ward observed that information on discipline skills on the internet and in parenting books is limited and often inaccurate and misleading.[61][62][63] "There is advice against time-outs[64][65][66] or praise and rewards,[67] when in fact these are evidence-supported skills which, used appropriately, have positive effects on behavior.".[68][69][70][71][57] They highlight the need for an evidence-based toolkit of individual skills from which parents and teachers can choose techniques that best suit the situation and fit with their cultural norms. The meta-study found a wide range of evidence-supported nonviolent discipline tools, many of which have been found effective with severe problem behavior. Quail organized these into a Peace Discipline model supported by a toolkit of techniques.[72]

A few of the specific tools showing positive effects include the following.

• Good, warm, open communication between parent and child, especially the kind that encourages child disclosure. This could imply the use of skills such as active listening and open-ended questions, and the absence of judgment, criticism or other reactions on the part of the parent that would shut child disclosure down.
• Time-in. Time with parents during which there is physical touch and ample expressions of care, compassion and praise.
• Parental monitoring. It has been shown that aside from supervision or surveillance, child disclosure is an important part of monitoring. This underlines the importance of a good parent-child relationship, with warm, open communication and good listening skills.
• Setting expectations (rules).
• Distracting a child with an acceptable toy, object, or activity.
• Modelling the behavior parents wish to see.
• Prompting or reminding a child to do something.
• Feedback on behavior.
• Praise.
• Rewards.
• Goal-setting with the child.
• Promoting self-management.
• Promoting problem-solving skills. This can be done by collaborating with children to find solutions for discipline problems e.g. having a meeting with children to discuss the problem of them getting to school late every morning, brainstorming possible solutions with them, and together choosing the solution that would work best
• Giving appropriate choices.
• Time-out. There are two kinds, exclusionary (e.g. the child must stay in their room for a few minutes if they lash out and hurt someone) and non-exclusionary (e.g. a time-out from a toy or cell phone if they are fighting over the toy or abusing phone privileges). Time-outs are most often used for aggression or non-compliance. Exclusionary timeouts may be necessary in the case of aggression, but in other situations either kind has been shown to work. The wide variation in timeouts that work suggests that parents can tailor timeouts according to what feels right for them and what best suits their child's needs. Some examples are: time-out in a room, timeout from a toy, screen time, attention, or from playing in a game they are disrupting. Timeouts in the studies reviewed were implemented calmly, not in a harsh or rejecting manner, and work better in a context where interaction between parent and child is usually of good quality (see time-in).
• Emotion Coaching or teaching children emotional communication skills. This involves the parents developing an emotional vocabulary for themselves and their children, and learning to become comfortable using emotional experiences as teaching and connection opportunities.

Other, more technical tools include behavior contracts, utilizing cost, group contingencies, and restorative justice interventions.

Quail and Ward suggest that parental attunement is a key parent-skill to effectively use positive parenting tools. Attunement involves giving focused attention to the child's needs behavioral signals, and matching an appropriate choice of discipline tool. They use this example as an illustration: "rewards undermined intrinsic motivation for children who were already motivated, but had positive effects where motivation was low,[73] and were found to be particularly important for children with ADHD."[74][75] From this perspective, reward should not be considered a good or bad tool in itself, but rather evaluated according to its fit with the needs and signals of the child.

Beyond their effectiveness and usefulness as alternatives to corporal punishment, reviewed skills also showed important and often long-term positive effects. Examples included "improved school engagement, academic achievement, participation, communication and social relationships, better self-regulation, higher self-esteem and independence, and lower rates of depression, suicide, substance abuse, sexual risk behavior, conduct disorders, aggression and crime.".[57] Quail and Ward concluded that the "important positive outcomes shown suggest that use of these tools should be promoted not only for prevention of violence, but for optimum child development."[57]