The Forbidden Word: Naughty.

[bunyip]

The OP asked what was our opinion on using the word naughty.
I have given my personal opinion on why I do not use it...whether the list is impressive or otherwise...or my faulty logic... it is my choice not to use it....yes I consider it a label.

Others can use it if they wish and if they believe it addresses what is usually a behavioural matter.

And no Bunyip...it is not a label because others use it...it is what I believe in
If parents wish to use the word....I would not stop them...their choice.

and I never referred or alluded to the racist word....nor did I refer to good practice.

British Values= respect for others opinions too....I differ from others involved in this discussion but accept your reasoning behind it ...plenty of people share my view.

To tell a child his action is dangerous is factual if he throws toys ...and it has consequences...does naughty have a consequence?

I suspect I've just been told off for being naughty.

Tbf, I don't think any member here has suggested anybody used any racist word (but isn't "racist" some kind of label? ) I only suggested that "naughty" is fast becoming a word that's regarded with a similar degree of horror. I've heard of mums being issued with 'warnings' for using the word at children s centres.

I've never been keen on British values either.

My personal opinion.....................of course.

[Simona]

Bunyip...I'll do a Fleetstreetfox on you...read the comments and you will see clearly why the racist word has been mentioned in one comment...when...actually ...no one mentioned it in the first place!!...deary me!

This thread reminds me when cms used to debate 'smacking' before it was banned...some were very keen, others would rather cut their hands than hit a child....history repeats itself!

I don't think we caused a 'who-haa' we just disagreed but in this forum sometimes that is not allowed ...as we soon get the 'personal' involved!!...so I will continue to not say naughty while others will.

Mouse...yes many do more or less what you do....think of an alternative to tell the children rather than use the naughty word...a good way to enlarge their vocabulary, why restrict it to naughty?
Glad you didn't get the same response for saying so.
POSH...love to hear it used in the appropriate circumstances...such an English word! The Queen is POSH!! ...although she does not travel on Britannia much these days ....Port Out Starboard Home!

Mumofone.....I think you have spoken about this particular child before.
I don't know the child so would not judge but hazard a guess she needs a good dose of 'discipline' and set boundaries

I would bet you a few pounds if you were to share her behaviour with her teacher you would be told the child is not allowed to 'bulldoze' in her class
Maybe the child needs not to be 'criticised' but to be told the truth about her behaviour and gain some control over it?

If her parents constantly tell her she is 'wonderful' the child is suffering from an acute case of 'mixed messages'...no reason why she should be allowed to behave in such manner in your home...your setting = your rules and she needs to comply.
She is misbehaving and then rewarded with lavish praise by her parents? and she has 3 different people expecting different behaviour from her.

I used to ask my older children why they behaved well at school...the answer was always the same: the teacher is strict...well not really, they did not understand that the school had strict boundaries/discipline even at 8 years of age.

Have a good weekend everyone.

[HTSMumma]

[QUOTE="Simona;1403681"]Bunyip...I'll do a Fleetstreetfox on you...read the comments and you will see clearly why the racist word has been mentioned in one comment...when...actually ...no one mentioned it in the first place!!...deary me! /QUOTE]

This is what I said:

"I replied to this thread for a reason though, and that is people referring to the word naughty as 'the N-word'. I find this rude and "unacceptable". The 'N-word' is used to describe a horrendously racist word and giving the term a new meaning minimises its original use and infers that the actual n-word is on a par with naughty. It's not. It's not even on the same planet of unacceptable use. Please stop referring to naughty as the n-word."

My comment wasn't directed at you personally, so I'm not sure what you are taking it so.
Neither did I infer that anyone used a racist word.
If you re-read my comment (as you've asked the other poster to do) you will see that my issue was that people were referring to the word naughty as "the N-word". This term is widely used to describe a racist word and using it for another meaning, "naughty", is suggesting that naughty and the actual n-word are on a par. They are most definitely not.
A couple of people have used the term "the n-word" to describe the word naughty in this thread.

[bunyip]

[QUOTE=HTSMumma;1403693]

Bunyip...I'll do a Fleetstreetfox on you...read the comments and you will see clearly why the racist word has been mentioned in one comment...when...actually ...no one mentioned it in the first place!!...deary me! /QUOTE]

This is what I said:

"I replied to this thread for a reason though, and that is people referring to the word naughty as 'the N-word'. I find this rude and "unacceptable". The 'N-word' is used to describe a horrendously racist word and giving the term a new meaning minimises its original use and infers that the actual n-word is on a par with naughty. It's not. It's not even on the same planet of unacceptable use. Please stop referring to naughty as the n-word."

My comment wasn't directed at you personally, so I'm not sure what you are taking it so.
Neither did I infer that anyone used a racist word.
If you re-read my comment (as you've asked the other poster to do) you will see that my issue was that people were referring to the word naughty as "the N-word". This term is widely used to describe a racist word and using it for another meaning, "naughty", is suggesting that naughty and the actual n-word are on a par. They are most definitely not.
A couple of people have used the term "the n-word" to describe the word naughty in this thread.

HTSMumma's comments make perfect sense.

I used the term to signify how the word use of the "naughty" is rapidly coming to be seen as equally unacceptable with racism: which it most definitely is not. The words are not on a par, but some people seem to be moving the debate in that direction, which is very unfortunate. I do hope that point was understood and not taken out of context. It seems that even reference to certain language can provoke knee-jerk reactions all too easy.

The fact that saying "naughty" is now been compared with smacking does however imply that sort of 'mission creep' thinking is already well advanced.

[bunyip]

Moving the debate on, what should we say if "naughty" is not allowed?

I've already highlighted [my post#10] how children - even school children - are generally unable to 'get' what we may be trying to say, however well-intentioned.

So if the CM says, "that wasn't a nice thing to do" there is every likelihood of the child interpreting this as "you're not very nice". A child's understanding is just not that finely tuned - which is probably why The Moral Maze is broadcast after their bedtime. They lack the sophistication to separate "action" from "self". So if you describe their action, you are almost certainly (albeit inadvertently) doing exactly what Simoana likes to refer to as "labelling" them.

....and other children present just know that so-and-so child "got told off" - hence they are 'naughty', 'bad', whatever you want to call it QED.

Conversely, the flip-side of this is why they smile when you like their painting: they identify 'action' with 'self' - so liking their picture means you like them.

Let's assume for a moment that "naughty" should not be used. Then what we say could be far worse. Tell a child their "behaviour is unacceptable" and they probably interpret that as if they are not acceptable. Is that not a lot more potentially 'damaging' than being called "naughty"?

I also fear we're going to be setting out on a long journey of 'word replacement'. This is what happens when we replace one taboo word with another, whichthen takes on the same meaning and connotations as the first, and so another new replacement word has to be found..............and so on and so on, ad infinitum.

Hang around a playground across a few years and you'll hear this evidenced by those most brutal and unsentimental proponents of language: children themselves. So whereas in my day, I was called a "puff" or "queer" (simply because I disliked soccer), a child of similar tastes will now be called "gay" (which was supposed to be the acceptable replacement word for those previously mentioned. Likewise, in my day, you might get name-called as "mental" or a "nutter", now the playground insult will be "LD" or "special needs kid".

We are constantly being told that children, especially EY children, need consistency. So what do we do with those who are told "naughty" at home? Do we offer them consistency? Do we say, "no - bad parents - we don't like that word here"? Or do we refuse care and send them running into the arms of an unregistered carer who will give the parents what they want - and coincidentally the very consistency the child needs?

Genuine questions................I'd be genuinely interested to hear everyone's views.

[FloraDora]

Moving the debate on, what should we say if "naughty" is not allowed?

I've already highlighted [my post#10] how children - even school children - are generally unable to 'get' what we may be trying to say, however well-intentioned.

So if the CM says, "that wasn't a nice thing to do" there is every likelihood of the child interpreting this as "you're not very nice". A child's understanding is just not that finely tuned - which is probably why The Moral Maze is broadcast after their bedtime. They lack the sophistication to separate "action" from "self". So if you describe their action, you are almost certainly (albeit inadvertently) doing exactly what Simoana likes to refer to as "labelling" them.

....and other children present just know that so-and-so child "got told off" - hence they are 'naughty', 'bad', whatever you want to call it QED.

Conversely, the flip-side of this is why they smile when you like their painting: they identify 'action' with 'self' - so liking their picture means you like them.

Let's assume for a moment that "naughty" should not be used. Then what we say could be far worse. Tell a child their "behaviour is unacceptable" and they probably interpret that as if they are not acceptable. Is that not a lot more potentially 'damaging' than being called "naughty"?

I also fear we're going to be setting out on a long journey of 'word replacement'. This is what happens when we replace one taboo word with another, whichthen takes on the same meaning and connotations as the first, and so another new replacement word has to be found..............and so on and so on, ad infinitum.

Hang around a playground across a few years and you'll hear this evidenced by those most brutal and unsentimental proponents of language: children themselves. So whereas in my day, I was called a "puff" or "queer" (simply because I disliked soccer), a child of similar tastes will now be called "gay" (which was supposed to be the acceptable replacement word for those previously mentioned. Likewise, in my day, you might get name-called as "mental" or a "nutter", now the playground insult will be "LD" or "special needs kid".

We are constantly being told that children, especially EY children, need consistency. So what do we do with those who are told "naughty" at home? Do we offer them consistency? Do we say, "no - bad parents - we don't like that word here"? Or do we refuse care and send them running into the arms of an unregistered carer who will give the parents what they want - and coincidentally the very consistency the child needs?

Genuine questions................I'd be genuinely interested to hear everyone's views.

Need to put some thought into a real reply but too late to think ! Years ago when the 'naughty word being banned by some folk 'agenda was sneaking in, I used the word obstreperous instead - lots of stories to tell about this!

[Simona]

[QUOTE=HTSMumma;1403693]

Bunyip...I'll do a Fleetstreetfox on you...read the comments and you will see clearly why the racist word has been mentioned in one comment...when...actually ...no one mentioned it in the first place!!...deary me! /QUOTE]

This is what I said:

"I replied to this thread for a reason though, and that is people referring to the word naughty as 'the N-word'. I find this rude and "unacceptable". The 'N-word' is used to describe a horrendously racist word and giving the term a new meaning minimises its original use and infers that the actual n-word is on a par with naughty. It's not. It's not even on the same planet of unacceptable use. Please stop referring to naughty as the n-word."

My comment wasn't directed at you personally, so I'm not sure what you are taking it so.
Neither did I infer that anyone used a racist word.
If you re-read my comment (as you've asked the other poster to do) you will see that my issue was that people were referring to the word naughty as "the N-word". This term is widely used to describe a racist word and using it for another meaning, "naughty", is suggesting that naughty and the actual n-word are on a par. They are most definitely not.
A couple of people have used the term "the n-word" to describe the word naughty in this thread.

YES...and those who did mention the 'N-Word' were the ones I was referring to...although it was meant to say Naughty...nothing at all to do with the racist one....will they come back and comment?
Read my comments too....and I am not upset by the remarks....just defending my point of view!

Sad that it seems we have lost the thread and meaning of this discussion....and missed the whole point.

Bunyip...there is no fighting you when it comes to your criticism...but I will not let you put me down as you seem to do with almost every reply

NO ONE HAS SAID NAUGHTY NEEDS TO BE BANNED
Read my comments...I said it is our choice whether we use it or NOT...but I feel it is a label....I can't believe that others have misunderstood this too?

why did you not comment on Mouse's comments who does not feel like using the word either?
What one replaces naughty with is up to us...how long we have to sit a child down to discuss behaviour is also our choice
I totally disagree with you that children are unable to grasp what we say to them! we constantly undervalue their intellect.
If you want to deal with parents using different parenting methods of discipline then ask them...discuss 'mixed messages' ...point them to the National Strategies, do a research on parenting styles...I did for my degree and ...oh boy...did it make a difference? not just to the parents but children too and to behaviour.

The whole point IS that we need to tell children it is their behaviour we find unacceptable not them!!..I have heard that ad infinitum in training
Is it a word replacement game?...or teaching children more words to enlarge their lexicon and understanding
look up Thesaurus...there are many meanings to naughty.

Flora Dora...the word naughty is NOT banned...but I would find it very difficult to see it printed in any behaviour management book, hear it endorsed at any behaviour training or...even used in front of an inspector!
Just imagine teachers and providers calling a child naughty during an inspection ...

it is in my opinion that it is a label that does not explain to any child why WE FIND their behaviour unacceptable, not nice, not kind not appropriate and so on...it is my choice to use what I feel are more effective methods of guiding children to understand their behaviour..
Whatever my opinion it does not affect what others do.

We seem to be operating the Prevent Duty very well in this discussion!

[bunyip]

Bunyip...there is no fighting you when it comes to your criticism...but I will not let you put me down as you seem to do with almost every reply

I will also say: ....just defending my point of view!

NO ONE HAS SAID NAUGHTY NEEDS TO BE BANNED

My misunderstanding, for which I apologise unreservedly, I thought this was what you were suggesting.

But in defence of those members who have understood similarly, do please read the title of this thread: the entire premise of the OP's opening for this discussion is that "naughty" is a "forbidden word". So my understanding was this is what we were invited to discuss. I'm happy to be corrected if this is not what the title means, but if a child-carer can misinterpret a 4-word title, what chance does a 3yo have of understanding a thorough explanation of thier actions, morals and consequences?

why did you not comment on Mouse's comments who does not feel like using the word either?

I'd respectfully suggest this is because Mouse doesn't go off on one, and stated a reasonable and consistent argument (from a much shorter horse) and does not think herself immune to her own judgments.

The whole point IS that we need to tell children it is their behaviour we find unacceptable not them!!..I have heard that ad infinitum in training...........................

....................I totally disagree with you that children are unable to grasp what we say to them! we constantly undervalue their intellect.

The whole point IS that you can say whatever the trainers think is smart and right until the next time they change their tiny minds, but the important thing is: do children hear what we're saying and how do they interpret it? I'm reminded of a member stating quite categorically how her degree course had taught her how EY children will frequently only hear and successfully process as few as two words from every sentence spoken to them.

Hence, our explanation "... to any child why WE FIND their behaviour unacceptable, not nice, not kind not appropriate and so on..." may well be heard and understood by that child as something along the lines of "...blah blah blah you blah blah blah blah blah not nice blah blah blah". Am I the only one who is concerned about the potential effect of that on a child?

I'm utterly astonished that one can have all the training, qualifications, and certificates in the world, and still have trainers and practitioners believing that a child's brain functions in exactly the same way as an adult's, with the same understanding and functionality. No matter what the weird world of childcare would like to believe, the scientific world knows that the entire upper frontal lobe, which deals with thinking ahead and controlling behaviour, is pretty much 'off-line' from any practical point of view in a young child. This takes the discussion way beyond the words we use or do not use: it makes us reconsider whether it is even worth addressing many 'unwanted behaviours' in many children until they reach the appropriate age /stage of development.

but I feel it is a label....I can't believe that others have misunderstood this too?

Am I the only one who struggles to understand your view on labels? The professed view of disliking labels does not sit well with the practice. I refer to the "you are................" comments that you regularly dispense, such as: sarcastic, arrogant, negative, unprofessional, condescending, ignorant, disrespectful, rude, offensive, inconsistent, critical, hypocritical.......

Sticks and stones...............

Whatever my opinion it does not affect what others do.

Small mercies, eh? It would be interesting to hear some other views on the genuine points I raised. It would be nice to hear some practical alternatives; views on alternatives; anything more than an assertion of superiority, really.

[Edited for my atroshuss spellign................. and a bit I forgot the first time.]

[Simona]

I will also say: ....just defending my point of view!



My misunderstanding, for which I apologise unreservedly, I thought this was what you were suggesting.

But in defence of those members who have understood similarly, do please read the title of this thread: the entire premise of the OP's opening for this discussion is that "naughty" is a "forbidden word". So my understanding was this is what we were invited to discuss. I'm happy to be corrected if this is not what the title means, but if a child-carer can misinterpret a 4-word title, what chance does a 3yo have of understanding a thorough explanation of thier actions, morals and consequences?



I'd respectfully suggest this is because Mouse doesn't go off on one, and stated a reasonable and consistent argument (from a much shorter horse) and does not think herself immune to her own judgments.



The whole point IS that you can say whatever the trainers think is smart and right until the next time they change their tiny minds, but the important thing is: do children hear what we're saying and how do they interpret it? I'm reminded of a member stating quite categorically how her degree course had taught her how EY children will frequently only hear and successfully process as few as two words from every sentence spoken to them.

Hence, our explanation "... to any child why WE FIND their behaviour unacceptable, not nice, not kind not appropriate and so on..." may well be heard and understood by that child as something along the lines of "...blah blah blah you blah blah blah blah blah not nice blah blah blah". Am I the only one who is concerned about the potential effect of that on a child?

I'm utterly astonished that one can have all the training, qualifications, and certificates in the world, and still have trainers and practitioners believing that a child's brain functions in exactly the same way as an adult's, with the same understanding and functionality. No matter what the weird world of childcare would like to believe, the scientific world knows that the entire upper frontal lobe, which deals with thinking ahead and controlling behaviour, is pretty much 'off-line' from any practical point of view in a young child. This takes the discussion way beyond the words we use or do not use: it makes us reconsider whether it is even worth addressing many 'unwanted behaviours' in many children until they reach the appropriate age /stage of development.



Am I the only one who struggles to understand your view on labels? The professed view of disliking labels does not sit well with the practice. I refer to the "you are................" comments that you regularly dispense, such as: sarcastic, arrogant, negative, unprofessional, condescending, ignorant, disrespectful, rude, offensive, inconsistent, critical, hypocritical.......

Sticks and stones...............


Small mercies, eh? It would be interesting to hear some other views on the genuine points I raised. It would be nice to hear some practical alternatives; views on alternatives; anything more than an assertion of superiority, really.

[Edited for my atroshuss spellign................. and a bit I forgot the first time.]

Yes....your point of view is that naughty can be used...it is not forbidden
Your points are genuine but mine are not...and nothing to do with trainers...it is my practice.

I was unaware that we needed to keep our replies short and 'not go off on one'

You not only wish to make a point, which I respect as your opinion, but you choose to humiliate with your choice of words.
Have a good day.

[bunyip]

Sad that my attempt to move the discussion on has been crushed before it had a chance to begin. It's an important subject and could've been interesting.

Small point, but is there any need for another of your tirades and drawing personal attention to those who have the temerity to disagree with you? (whilst simultaneously accusing anyone but yourself of "personalising" the argument?) I mean, have a go at me by all means - I'm big enough and ugly enough to take it, and quite used to facing the broken end of the odd bottle - but having a pop at FloraDora before she's even had chance to think of the reply she clearly wishes to compose is a bit cheap by anyone's standards.

Does the only way to have a "sensible discussion" involve total agreement with you? Or else face being flattened by the weight of the omniscience which flows naturally from your equally weighty training portfolio?

I agree with the majority of what you post on most threads I read, something you singularly fail to acknowledge, but woe betide when I disagree.

I suspect a lot of members are put off by this.

[Simona]

Sad that my attempt to move the discussion on has been crushed before it had a chance to begin. It's an important subject and could've been interesting.

Small point, but is there any need for another of your tirades and drawing personal attention to those who have the temerity to disagree with you? (whilst simultaneously accusing anyone but yourself of "personalising" the argument?) I mean, have a go at me by all means - I'm big enough and ugly enough to take it, and quite used to facing the broken end of the odd bottle - but having a pop at FloraDora before she's even had chance to think of the reply she clearly wishes to compose is a bit cheap by anyone's standards.

Does the only way to have a "sensible discussion" involve total agreement with you? Or else face being flattened by the weight of the omniscience which flows naturally from your equally weighty training portfolio?

I agree with the majority of what you post on most threads I read, something you singularly fail to acknowledge, but woe betide when I disagree.

I suspect a lot of members are put off by this.

Oh my goodness...so much attention given to my opinion Bunyip....I am honoured
I was enjoying Wimbledon!!"

So now I am drawing attention to myself and launching a tirade...no, I am defending my point of view

If you look at several thread you will find that you mostly disagree with my opinion ...in fact I would say you are rather 'prejudiced'...you do not use the same terminology or offensive tone with any of the other members

You have disagreed with me...I don't mind ...we all have a view...but so far apart from misinterpreting what I am saying you have offered no alternative or clear explanation just offensive remarks.
I disagree with many of your opinion ...I read them and move on.
I disagree with my LA and their ways but I do not use foul language against them
You have offered a false apology then continued with your offensive language and insinuations....are all members fed up with this?
many members are really fed up with the antagonism and aggression...PM are really revealing..


As said not using the word naughty is 'my choice'...it works for me, my setting and children...no one has actually said why using naughty works for them.
You have gone on about 'professionals' and experts and degrees and the same things you really do not like such as qualifications and LAs and Ofsted and DfE and so on....no one has ever offended you for that or used sarcastic language

ok...lets all stop reading those books on behaviour, or attend training and take tips from the 'experts'


The debate is open as long as someone comes along with a good reason to say using the word naughty works for them and why am I wrong in considering it a label

I would assume this thread will end up in the 'delete' section too

[bunyip]

Moving on......................................

(ahem.)

[KatieFS]

Well I use the word on occasions, perhaps in this context 'that is naughty behaviour', as said previously most of my mindees say this. They also say 'bad girl/boy' so I find myself taking through these phrases and adding feelings in to balance the negative and (hopefully) add meaning and emotion for the child; eg sad, unkind etc.

Of course we have to be careful of labelling; I try to help the lo understand what this means and how it feels for others when bad things happen

[shortstuff]

I also use the word naughty. I don't use it as a label of any individual but as a label of actions.

I don't see the harm. It is a word which has been found in the dictionary for decades and can be looked up when older. It's much nicer than the choice words I've heard shouted at children by parents in my previous life. Also much better than some I've been on the receiving end of. Bear in mind the last time my mother spent any time alone with DS she smacked him. Then took delight in telling me no matter what my view she would do so again.

[AliceK]

I also use the word naughty. I don't use it as a label of any individual but as a label of actions.

I don't see the harm. It is a word which has been found in the dictionary for decades and can be looked up when older. It's much nicer than the choice words I've heard shouted at children by parents in my previous life. Also much better than some I've been on the receiving end of. Bear in mind the last time my mother spent any time alone with DS she smacked him. Then took delight in telling me no matter what my view she would do so again.

wow, that's so out of order. I am speechless.
I guess your DS hasn't been left alone with her again.

xx

[Mummits]

I too have been told that the word "naughty" should never be heard in a childcare setting or from a professional practitioner.

I often hear the term "best practice" used on occasions when those passing judgement lack more concrete evidence to back up whatever opinion they are asserting. That is not an observation aimed at anyone on this forum - I just have a little smile every time I hear it bandied about at a live event or course. The other old favorite that gets used is "unprofessional", which I take it means "your view/practice is different to mine".

But I digress. I do not use the word naughty, partly because it is frowned upon in "professional circles", but also because I fear it has become rather devalued as a valid criticism of behavior. I hear parents use the word all the time in comments such as "ooh, that was a bit naughty ha ha", often with a humorous expression or indulgent look. So if I mean to say "That was dangerous" "That was unkind" "That was rude" then that is what I say. If what the child in question takes from that is that they are dangerous, unkind and rude, I think that is better than them not getting any sort of feedback on their behaviour. I would rather they occasionally and deservedly felt that they had fallen from favour as long as they are clear that this is in the context of a generally loving and supportive environment, or how will they learn to behave well in the wider world?

[shortstuff]

wow, that's so out of order. I am speechless.
I guess your DS hasn't been left alone with her again.

xx

No he hasn't. Thong for me was he was only 2 and she smacked him for knocking her coffee over. Which imo should never have been left where a 2yr old could get it either.

I haven't spoken to her for 3 yrs now. I just don't need the stress.

[shortstuff]

I too have been told that the word "naughty" should never be heard in a childcare setting or from a professional practitioner.

I often hear the term "best practice" used on occasions when those passing judgement lack more concrete evidence to back up whatever opinion they are asserting. That is not an observation aimed at anyone on this forum - I just have a little smile every time I hear it bandied about at a live event or course. The other old favorite that gets used is "unprofessional", which I take it means "your view/practice is different to mine".

But I digress. I do not use the word naughty, partly because it is frowned upon in "professional circles", but also because I fear it has become rather devalued as a valid criticism of behavior. I hear parents use the word all the time in comments such as "ooh, that was a bit naughty ha ha", often with a humorous expression or indulgent look. So if I mean to say "That was dangerous" "That was unkind" "That was rude" then that is what I say. If what the child in question takes from that is that they are dangerous, unkind and rude, I think that is better than them not getting any sort of feedback on their behaviour. I would rather they occasionally and deservedly felt that they had fallen from favour as long as they are clear that this is in the context of a generally loving and supportive environment, or how will they learn to behave well in the wider world?

I like your thinking Mummits.

[bunyip]

Interesting views and food for thought.

As Shortstuff says (post#34) you can choose to use the word "naughty" to describe the child or the behaviour. The OP was about whether the word is forbidden in either context.

I find myself using the word, partly because I'm old-fashioned, and partly to be consistent with what some parents use at home. Again, a training thing, trainers bang into us how important consistency is. So if we make "naughty" a forbidden word we smash that consistency to bits and maybe confuse the child. Obviously there are limits: we don't smack a child to be consistent with home, so the question is how far do we take consistency in this dilemma of (ahem) "best practice" (yes, I hate that one as well.) But I find this presents its own dilemma: different children from different homes used to different things. So we are constantly torn between providing the individual child with an experience which is consistent with what they get at home, or providing consistency for every child in terms of treating them all the same here. I wish I knew the answer.

I think a lot comes down to the age/stage of the child, because there are wide differences in their levels of communication, understanding, cognitive processing ability, and so on. Also the circumstances of 'unwanted behaviour'. Dealing with a child about to step into a road can be very different from dealing with a child who won't let another have a go on the only available swing.

I also wonder about what we as adults class as 'unwanted behaviour' or 'naughtiness'. Few children under the age of 4 can deal with the concept of sharing f'rinstance. And, in fact, it's not even something they'll be expected to practice much as an adult. Be honest, if your neighbour came round and pointed out it was his turn with your car...................?.................."you've got to share"........... ?............. "it's not nice to keep it all to yourself"..............? Just a thought.

And finally.................... Mummits, I'm in total agreement with you on "best practice". Another one for The Childminder's Dictionary, if it ever gets published.

[catswhiskers]

I grew up with the word Naughty and used it with my own children when I thought they pushed the boundaries!

Took a break from childminding in 2006 in a reception class to find words I'd never heard off being used quite often to control the children.

Fast forward to a couple of weeks ago and I've just started recording 'The Clangers' on Cbeebies, along with Mr Tumble. Up until a couple of years ago I didn't have the telly on at all for the children, but gradually got used to hearing about what they have watched on TV etc. at home.

Just before an episode of The Clangers there's a story about a dog and children. The children call the dog Naughty so I wonder if Cbeebies have got it wrong!