Abstract
Background
Discipline is a crucial aspect of parenting, shaping child development and behaviour. Time-out, a widely used disciplinary strategy with a strong evidence-base, has recently come under scrutiny with concerns about potential adverse effects on children’s emotional development and attachment, particularly for those with a history of adversity.
Aims
To contribute critical empirical insights to the current controversy surrounding time-out by exploring the associations among time-out implementation, parent–child attachment and child mental health, and whether adversity exposure moderated these associations.
Method
This cross-sectional study utilised a nationally representative sample of 474 primary caregivers in Australia, with children aged 6–8 years, who completed an online survey. Measures included the Implementation of Time-out Scale, Adverse Life Experiences Scale, Primary Attachment Style Questionnaire, Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire and Spence Child Anxiety Scale.
Results
Appropriately implemented time-out was associated with enhanced mental health and attachment, while inappropriate time-out correlated with adverse child outcomes. Exposure to adversity moderated the relationship between time-out implementation and child well-being, such that children exposed to adversity were most likely to experience attachment enhancement from appropriately implemented time-out.
Conclusions
Despite recent concerns of harm caused by time-out, particularly for children with a history of adversity, findings support the beneficial impact of time-out on child well-being and attachment when implemented in accordance with evidence-based parameters. Combatting misinformation and disseminating evidence-based time-out guidelines is crucial for promoting child well-being and attachment, especially for children who have experienced adversity.
Discipline is a fundamental component of parenting that teaches children appropriate behaviour and emotion regulation skills, thereby reducing their vulnerability to future societal rejection and mental health disorders.Reference Dadds and Tully1 Among the myriad of disciplinary strategies employed by parents and caregivers, time-out has emerged as one of the most utilised and effective evidence-based approaches.Reference Kaminski, Valle, Filene and Boyle2–Reference Sanders, Markie-Dadds, Rinaldis, Firman and Baig6 However, recent years have witnessed a growing rejection of time-out as a disciplinary tool,Reference Canning, Jugovac and Pasalich7 driven by concerns related to implementation driftReference Riley, Wagner, Tudor, Zuckerman and Freeman8 and a wave of misinformation surrounding its efficacy and potential adverse effects.Reference Siegel and Bryson9,Reference Lapointe10 The use of time-out with children who have a history of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) has become particularly contentious.Reference Dadds and Tully1,Reference Quetsch, Wallace, Herschell and McNeil11 Such children are at an increased risk of exhibiting behavioural issuesReference Hawes, Lechowicz, Roach, Fisher, Doyle and Noble12 and are especially in need of effective parenting strategies for optimal recovery. In the trauma context, there are concerns that time-out may adversely affect attachment bonds, hinder emotional development and even result in re-traumatisation.Reference Dadds and Tully1,Reference Quetsch, Wallace, Herschell and McNeil11
While proponents of time-out emphasise that the discipline strategy has potential to enhance child well-being and attachment when implemented appropriately,Reference Dadds and Tully1,Reference Morawska and Sanders13,Reference Xu, Tully and Dadds14 opponents argue that regardless of implementation, time-out may have detrimental consequences on children’s emotional and psychological well-being.Reference Siegel and Bryson9 Research on the implementation of time-out in the community has primarily centred on parents’ perspectives towards the disciplinary strategy and their adherence to evidence-based parameters.Reference Drayton, Byrd, Albright, Nelson, Andersen and Morris3,Reference Canning, Jugovac and Pasalich7,Reference Riley, Wagner, Tudor, Zuckerman and Freeman8 However, there has been a notable gap in assessing the impact of variations in implementation on child well-being and attachment bonds. This cross-sectional study aims to address this gap, by investigating the associations among time-out implementation, parent–child attachment and child mental health, and test the appropriateness of time-out for children with a history of adversity.
