In a notable moment of self-reflection and professional introspection, parenting expert Janet Lansbury has revisited a piece of advice she offered regarding toilet training, acknowledging it as ultimately unhelpful to a family seeking guidance. This reconsideration stems from an update received from a parent whose four-year struggle with her daughter’s toilet learning finally concluded not by following Lansbury’s original recommendations, but by adopting a diametrically opposed approach. The situation highlights the complex and often individualized nature of child development and the challenges inherent in offering universally applicable parenting advice.
A Case of Conflicting Guidance
The original advice was disseminated approximately a year prior in an episode of Lansbury’s podcast, "Unruffled," titled "When Kids Don’t Seem Motivated (to Potty, Crawl, or Create)." Lansbury, a proponent of child-led approaches to developmental milestones, advocated for trusting a child’s innate abilities and natural pace, emphasizing the importance of allowing children to autonomously achieve skills like toilet learning. Her methodology typically involves three core tenets: unwavering trust in the child’s capabilities, the establishment of reasonable boundaries, and the welcoming of a child’s emotions, even uncomfortable ones.
In the case that prompted this re-evaluation, a parent described her three-and-a-half-year-old daughter as being "absolutely set on being in diapers ‘forever.’" Despite exhibiting signs of readiness—such as hating diaper changes, demonstrating body awareness, and vocalizing her needs—the child showed extreme aversion to the potty, refusing even to approach it. The parent, while having “completely backed off” and adopted a “no pressure at all” stance, expressed significant doubt about her daughter ever initiating the process independently. She articulated a struggle to reconcile the "let-her-lead" philosophy with her perception of her daughter’s avoidant and fearful tendencies, which in other contexts required parental guidance and gentle insistence.
The Parent’s Journey and Lansbury’s Initial Response
The parent’s detailed account revealed a history of attempts to introduce toilet training. Initially, at age two, after observing signs of readiness, the family attempted a more structured approach based on popular methods. This proved distressing for the child, who exhibited physical resistance and distress. Consequently, the parents shifted to a "waiting until she was ready" strategy, offering the potty as a low-pressure option. Over the subsequent year, the topic resurfaced intermittently through casual mentions and the child’s own role-playing with stuffed animals, but without any compulsion.
As the daughter approached her third birthday, the parent’s doubts intensified. Influenced by advice from their pediatrician and a child therapist, who suggested a more directive approach, the family attempted to transition to underwear. The child initially participated willingly, selecting a potty and underwear. However, the moment she felt the urge to urinate, she became anxious, hid, and refused to use the potty, ultimately having accidents. After two days, the parents reverted to pull-ups, conveying that the choice was hers when she was ready.
Six months later, the issue remained unresolved. Despite friends her age being toilet trained, the daughter continued to insist she would "never" use the potty, though she still engaged in potty-related play. The parent, describing herself as an "anxious overthinker" and her daughter as "fearful and avoidant," felt a dissonance between the child’s demonstrated capabilities in other areas and her resistance to toilet learning. She questioned whether a purely child-led approach was enabling a phobia.
In response to the parent’s query, Lansbury’s initial advice in the "Unruffled" episode focused on addressing potential "mixed messaging" and the impact of parental anxiety. She suggested that the child’s strong resistance might stem from perceiving an agenda from her parents, even amidst attempts at a relaxed approach. Lansbury emphasized the importance of the parent making a "clear choice one way or the other" and, in this specific instance, leaned towards advocating for a full embrace of the child-led trust approach. She recommended ceasing reminders and trusting the child’s self-directed process, including her play with stuffed animals as a sign of working through her anxieties. Lansbury also touched upon the concept of "Velcro children" and the potential for parents to struggle with setting boundaries, which could inadvertently contribute to mixed messaging and a child’s anxiety.
The Unexpected Outcome and Lansbury’s Re-evaluation
The crucial turning point came with the parent’s update to Lansbury. As the daughter neared her fourth birthday, the parents, unwilling to have a child with developmental disabilities in diapers past that age, decided to make a firm decision: it was time. This led to a period of intense "grueling" days, characterized by significant fear and resistance from the child. However, the parents persevered, and the breakthrough occurred. Within a week, the daughter was accident-free and willingly using the toilet.
The parent expressed surprise and regret, stating, "I honestly feel regretful that I didn’t listen to myself as I look back at my previous email and push it earlier." She concluded that her daughter was a "scared kid who needed help doing something she was fully capable of," and that toilet training, for her child, was not an innate developmental milestone to be achieved when ready, but rather a phobia that required a "strong and firm push," akin to getting vaccinated rather than learning to walk. She emphasized the importance of their "hundred percent certainty" that it was time, regardless of the child’s interest, and that this conviction allowed their daughter to feel proud and act more in line with her age.
This update prompted Lansbury to re-examine her own advice. In a subsequent podcast episode, "The Bad Advice I Gave About Toilet Training," she candidly acknowledged that her guidance, while well-intentioned, had been unhelpful in this specific instance. She expressed sincere apologies to the parent if her advice had led her astray from her own instincts.
Analysis of the Discrepancy
Lansbury’s re-evaluation highlights a critical nuance in parenting advice: the importance of aligning recommendations with a parent’s fundamental beliefs and emotional state. While Lansbury’s philosophy centers on child autonomy and innate motivation, she recognized that pushing this approach onto a parent who harbored underlying doubts and anxieties was counterproductive.
"The reason I believe I gave her the wrong advice, I gave her unhelpful advice clearly," Lansbury stated, "is that even though I said all I believed was that she should go fully either way and believe in it fully, which is what she eventually did, I was really kind of promoting that she should go the trust direction. And when I look back on all of this, that didn’t fit what this parent actually was feeling at all, and there was no way she was going to make this giant shift into that."
The parent’s own words underscore this point: "I know what worked. It was us having a hundred percent certainty that it was time despite no interest on her part and that she could do it, but we needed to force the issue." This certainty, coupled with her instinct that her daughter was not merely unmotivated but potentially phobic and needing intervention, proved to be the key. Lansbury noted that children are highly attuned to their parents’ underlying feelings, and mixed messaging—stemming from a parent conveying a belief they don’t fully hold—can indeed create or exacerbate anxiety and resistance in a child.
Broader Implications for Parenting Advice
This situation offers valuable lessons for both parents seeking guidance and experts providing it:
- Instinct and Resonance: Lansbury strongly advocates for the principle that effective parenting advice must resonate with a parent’s core instincts. If advice feels forced or incongruent with a parent’s deeply held beliefs or emotional state, it is unlikely to be successful and may even be detrimental. "Whatever parenting advice you’re getting from anywhere, it’s got to resonate with your instincts," she emphasized.
- Individualized Approaches: Child development is not a monolithic process. While general principles and developmental milestones exist, individual children and families present unique challenges and require tailored strategies. What works for one child may not work for another, and what works for one parent may not align with another’s temperament or belief system.
- The Role of Parental Certainty: In certain developmental stages, particularly those involving a child’s potential resistance or fear, a parent’s unwavering conviction can be a powerful catalyst. This certainty, when rooted in genuine belief and not in anxiety, can provide the necessary framework for a child to navigate challenges.
- Self-Reflection in Expert Advice: The willingness of an expert like Lansbury to publicly acknowledge past advice as flawed is a testament to the importance of ongoing learning and adaptation in the field of child development. It underscores that even experienced professionals can misjudge a situation and must be open to re-evaluating their perspectives based on real-world outcomes.
The parent’s successful resolution of her daughter’s toilet training saga, achieved by ultimately trusting her own instincts and adopting a firm, directive approach, serves as a powerful reminder that while expert guidance is valuable, it should serve as a tool to empower parents, not to override their own understanding of their child and their family’s dynamics. As Lansbury concluded, the most effective parenting is that which is authentic to the individual parent, grounded in their own beliefs and instincts.