The Importance of Saying "No" to Babies and Young Children
The foundation of "no" is a great big "yes."
In everyday life with a baby or young child, it's very easy to run into moments where you need to say "no" — whether to protect them from some danger, to keep them from damaging something, or to stop them from behaving in a socially undesired way.
But what is the real importance of this word? Why do we say so many "no's," and how is this beneficial to babies' and children's development?
In the book Conversando com os pais ("Talking to Parents"), by D. W. Winnicott, in radio interviews, the author examines a conversation among mothers who share with one another situations in which they need to say "no" to their children. One account in particular reveals a piece of hard-won wisdom. One mother says:
"That was a good lesson I learned. I mean, if you let the child do something when it won't be much of a bother to you, then she won't do it when you explain there's a reason not to this time." (p. 29)
And also:
"I think it all depends on you not having too many things you have to say 'no' about. I mean, when our first baby was very small, there were two things we said 'no' to." (p. 30)
We see here something quite simple, which many perhaps do without even noticing: being clear and more assertive with "no's" works better than using the word broadly and without restriction — in a way that leaves the child unable to tell what they really can and can't do. The word ends up losing its meaning and its effectiveness.
What's more, the mother, quite sensitively, understands that when a baby is very small, the world needs to be roughly their size — that is, small too. We can't present too much complexity and expect the baby to understand, since everything is still rudimentary. It's necessary to move from the simple to the complex.
Winnicott also points out, from the mothers' accounts, that the way of acting and saying "no" varies and adjusts to the child's age. A 1-year-old and a 2-year-old have different capacities to understand the word. Winnicott describes three stages of "saying no," which can overlap.
First stage: "no" to the world, a great big "yes" to the child
Here, given the tender age, it has nothing to do with words, and caregivers are absolutely responsible at all times. The baby is still too small to understand certain noises around them, or that what they're feeling is hunger and not a "pack of wolves." The mother or primary caregiver is so identified with the baby that they don't grossly fail them, meeting their needs almost immediately.
So, in the beginning, the mother, and soon both parents, take on the task of preventing unexpected things from happening. (…) Throughout this whole time the parents are saying 'no,' they're saying 'no' to the world, they say 'no, don't come near, stay outside our circle'; inside our circle is the thing that is the object of our care, and we don't allow anything to cross that boundary.
p. 44
Isn't it true that the first stage, as a whole, is one great 'yes'? It's 'yes' because you never fail the baby, never let them down. You never really get it wrong in your overall task. That is a great, tacit 'yes,' and it gives a solid foundation to the baby's life in the world.
p. 45
Second stage: saying "no" to the child
Instead of saying "no" to the world, "no" is now said to the child: "you impose, and impose your view of the world, onto the child" (p. 35). The mother or the reference figures begin to convey "no" to the baby, because now there is the dawning of intelligence and the first signs of the baby's capacity to tell apart what you allow from what you don't.
You're not trying to deal with right and wrong from a moral standpoint — you're simply making the baby aware of the dangers you're protecting them from. I think mothers' 'no's' are based on the idea of concrete dangers.
p. 34
Third stage: the stage of explanations and cooperation
In the third stage, it's already possible to count on the child's cooperation once the reason for the "no" is explained. This involves language: "no, because you'll get hurt," "no, because…". And something quite interesting comes up, which for some parents and families is challenging: the child may begin to question and disagree with the explanations.
They can then begin to gather wisdom from the repertoire of our knowledge; they can learn what we think we know, and best of all, they are now very close to being able to disagree with the reasons we give.
p. 47
Vigilance is not eternal
It's important to recognize that this task wears down whoever is on the front line, since it's a state of constant vigilance and alertness. And no matter how much we try to anticipate the dangers, it's impossible to think of everything in advance — but "it is in the moment-to-moment living that all the important work gets done" (p. 40). Winnicott offers us relief and hope:
Fortunately, constant vigilance is not eternal, even though it may seem so. It lasts only for a limited time for each child. Soon they start taking their first steps, they're already off to school, and vigilance then comes to be shared with the teachers. Even so, 'no' remains an important word in parents' vocabulary, and forbidding remains something mothers and fathers find themselves constantly doing, until each child, in their own way, breaks free of parental control and establishes a personal way of living and being.
p. 42-43
The foundation of "no" is "yes"
Finally, it's worth remembering that the foundation of "no" is "yes." Yes is the foundation for a child's development, allowing them to take risks in the world, exploring their possibilities, trusting — while also knowing the dangers they might encounter.
Her expanding world is related to the growing number of objects, and kinds of objects, about which the mother can say 'yes.' A child's development, in this sense, has much more to do with what the mother allows than with what she forbids. 'Yes' forms the background onto which 'no' is added.
p. 45-46
There is, without a doubt, a very beneficial side to the "no" said to babies and children: it gives them ground and firmness to walk their own path in life.
Young children like being told 'no.' They don't like dealing only with things that are mild and soft; they also like stones, sticks, and hard ground, and they like being told when they've gone too far, just as much as being spoiled. (p. 48)
p. 48
Reference: D. W. Winnicott (1896-1971), Conversando com os pais ("Talking to Parents"). Chapter: "Saying No"