How do you discipline your 11 month old?

[BellaBoo0512]

My LO turns one next week and he keeps doing things that he knows he isn't meant to do. He is obsessed with the wires behind the tv and under the PC desk despite my best efforts to hide them. His new one is touching the tv. I've tried telling him 'we don't touch the tv, we don't touch wires' but he just laughs and carries on. I try not to use to word no but on the odd occasion I have done he just laughs at me. I keep moving him away from them and distracting him with toys but he soon ends up going back to them.

Is there any other methods I can try? I asked my friend this morning and she told me I need to start smacking him! Erm no!!

 

[HKateH]

My LO is the same age and does the same. He knows what 'no' means but I tend to use 'no' and then distract him as if he wants something, he really won't take much notice!

 

[BellaBoo0512]

My LO is the same! He knows exactly when he's not meant to go near certain things but does it anyway and gives me a cheeky grin! Little monkey lol!

 

[nicksi27]

My LO knows that hes not allowed to do certain things but he does them anyway. He knows hes not allowed my phone but will pick it up and come and find me in his walker with a cheeky look on his face!! When i say the word no to him now he shouts ''aarrrrhhhh'' at me whilst frowning. I have to turn away laughing its so funny.

No real advice, im going through the same thing but im just planning on keeping up with the telling him no. No way would i ever smack him but im sure we will be using the naughty step routine when hes older!

 

[// arcadia]

My lo is 11 months and likes to go in certain draws and touch stuff she shouldnt .. i do say no .. but at the same time i think she's 11 months old so doesn't really understand just yet. I just get up and move her.

Certainly wouldn't ever smack or start forcing discipline right now.

I think best thing is to just move them away from the dangerous situation x

 

[CordeliaJ]

There's nothing wrong with saying no, because at this age it's just a simple word, and they learn quickly what it means (even if they still ignore it). As they become toddlers, you can change the 'no' into more of an explanation as to why. I know how you feel though, my LO is a few months younger but does the same thing, and it's tough when you can't explain it to them. I generally say 'no' very firmly, then try to distract him with something else. It's natural for them to 'test' you because they are learning about boundaries and people's reactions to what they're doing.

 

[Amygdala]

I've never understood not saying "no". How else are they meant to learn what is allowed/safe/appropriate and what isn't? A firm but kind "no" isn't going to harm a child, it just communicates where the boundaries are. At this age, they don't understand "hitting hurts people" but they quickly pick up on "no, we don't hit". The trick is to do it right I think. Go down to their level, say it in a serious, firm voice while looking them in the eyes but don't sound or look angry or threatening. A quick "no, we don't do that" followed by redirection to some other activity usually did the trick with my first.
The key is to show them boundaries without scaring them (by hitting or shouting) or making them feel guilty, unworthy or unloved (by telling them they're a naughty child, by appearing angry or disappointed in them, by ignoring them or isolating them). As far as I can see, a firm, quick "no" followed by business-as-usual is a great way of letting them know the rules without shaking their confidence in the fact that they're loved.

 

[hiladun]

Disagree with pps - 'no' quickly loses it's power if you are saying it all the time (and if you use it every time they touch or do something they shouldn't then you will be lol).

None of the previous suggestions show/tell LO what you *want* them to do. So for the tv example "hands off" and personally I'd add a "please" since I'm leading by example plus I'd physically gently move just LO's hands off the tv to show what hands off means. (Like how you would show them what gentle hands are if they are too rough with pets or other children). I think at that age it does take quite a few repetitions before they get it tho it's not a quick fix.

And what is it with behind the tv and wires?!

I do agree about keeping it short - "hands off" or "gentle hands" is pretty short!

I try to save "no" for about-to-drown-or-be-run-over!!

 

[girlinyork]

I say "no" firmly to my DD and she stops what she is doing. Cries about it and screams at me but she does stop. If she moves towards doing the naughty thing again I say no and physically move her away from it and then she gives up. She has understood "no" for a couple of months now and is pretty good at stopping what she is doing when I say "no". I'm very grateful as it has been the only thing standing between me and chewed up nipples

 

[Amygdala]

I try to save "no" for about-to-drown-or-be-run-over!!

But how will your child know how to react to "no" when they're about-to-drown-or-be-run-over? And why would it lose it's meaning when used in less urgent contexts? I think we agree on a lot of things. I'd also always give specific instructions and redirect but I do say "no" (ie "no, don't touch the tv please" or "no, we don't hit"). I don't really understand the fear of "no" unless you're talking screeching NOOO at your child every three seconds with no further explanation? I don't see how the word itself is a problem.

 

[girlinyork]

I try to save "no" for about-to-drown-or-be-run-over!!

But how will your child know how to react to "no" when they're about-to-drown-or-be-run-over? And why would it lose it's meaning when used in less urgent contexts? I think we agree on a lot of things. I'd also always give specific instructions and redirect but I do say "no" (ie "no, don't touch the tv please" or "no, we don't hit"). I don't really understand the fear of "no" unless you're talking screeching NOOO at your child every three seconds with no further explanation? I don't see how the word itself is a problem.

I certainly knew what "no" meant as a child. I also knew that if I carried on anyway, I'd be sitting on a step or up in my bedroom.

My daughter, as I was typing this, grabbed a packet of wet wipes and tried to open them (she loves to pull them out). I firmly told her no and she has stopped. Not happy about it though LOL

 

[sun]

If I said no to everything I didn't want my kids doing, I would literally be saying no all day long. I try and offer alternatives as much as possible, and I STILL feel like all I say is no sometimes. But at only 11mo, the only discipline I do is distraction and redirection. It's just too young IMO to really understand discipline and consequences.

 

[girlinyork]

They can understand cause and effect i.e. If I bite mummy's nipple I have to sit on the floor for a few minutes. They may not understand something is bad or naughty but they can understand that actions have effects

 

[staralfur]

At 11 months I would say just continue with distraction.

I started explaining things to my LO at a very young age (like as soon as she could crawl and get into things) and she's clearly understood since she was about 18 months. If I say "that's not something that Abby should be playing with" she says "okay" and finds a toy (sometimes accompanied by some tears).

I don't think that never saying "no" is necessary, but I save it for situations that require an urgent response. A firm "no" will stop her dead in her tracks and it has since she was about 1. She knows that when I say "no" I am very serious about her stopping what she's doing immediately.

 

[Noodlebear]

If I reacted to every single thing Lucas does that I don't want him doing I'd be saying 'no' all day long. Rather than trying to avoid the word I just pick my battles. Babies and toddlers don't constantly need to be told not to do something or even 'let's do this instead' often just redirecting him without drawing attention to it works better. It's win win, I can use 'no' whenever I want, it's still effective for the more serious situations and I'm not constantly going on at him.