In a significant re-evaluation of established parenting advice, child development expert Janet Lansbury has publicly addressed what she now identifies as "bad advice" she provided regarding toilet training. This introspection stems from an update received from a parent whose child’s prolonged four-year toilet training journey finally concluded not through Lansbury’s recommended child-led approach, but by adopting a decidedly more directive parenting strategy. Lansbury, known for her "Unruffled" podcast and emphasis on respectful, child-centered parenting, used a recent episode to dissect her previous counsel, acknowledging its ineffectiveness for this specific family and exploring the nuances of parental guidance in developmental milestones.
The Initial Consultation and Lansbury’s Philosophy
The situation arose from a previous "Unruffled" episode where a parent sought guidance on her then three-and-a-half-year-old daughter’s apparent resistance to toilet training. Lansbury, a proponent of "toilet learning," advocates for allowing children to lead the process. Her rationale is rooted in the belief that this approach fosters autonomy and allows children to achieve a significant developmental milestone independently, with parental support rather than parental direction.
"My recommendation for child-led potty learning is because this is something that kids can autonomously achieve, with our support," Lansbury explained in the original episode. "There are so many things in life that kids need us for. In my view, anything that they could possibly do themselves is a precious opportunity that I believe in trying to give to children when possible."
She posited that children are born with an innate motivation to learn and acquire skills, a concept supported by extensive research into infant development and learning. When children appear "stuck," Lansbury suggests three primary remedies: genuine trust in their abilities and inner direction, establishing reasonable boundaries, and crucially, welcoming and allowing children to express their uncomfortable feelings without attempting to immediately fix them.
A Parent’s Struggle and Lansbury’s Initial Response
The parent in question described her daughter’s intense aversion to the potty, stating, "My three-and-a-half-year-old is absolutely set on being in diapers ‘forever.’ She will not so much as get near a potty and don’t even think about talking about it." Despite the child demonstrating clear physical and cognitive readiness for over a year and a half, she remained firmly entrenched in diapers. The parent expressed concern that a purely "let-her-lead" approach might be enabling avoidance, particularly given the child’s generally fearful and avoidant nature in other contexts.
The parent’s detailed account revealed a history of attempting a child-led approach after an initial, unsuccessful attempt at a more structured method around the child’s second birthday. This initial structured approach, involving a popular book and method, resulted in significant distress and physical resistance from the child, leading the parents to "back off" and wait for readiness. Over the subsequent year, they made low-pressure mentions of the potty, allowing the child to observe and even engage in role-play with stuffed animals. However, despite consistent signs of readiness and a generally supportive environment, the child showed no initiative.
As the child approached age three, doubt began to surface. Pediatricians and child therapists suggested a more direct approach, framing it as a developmental expectation for a three-year-old. This led to a brief attempt at introducing underwear and the potty, which resulted in intense anxiety and accidents. The parents again retreated, reverting to pull-ups and reiterating that the child could do it "when she’s ready." Six months later, the situation remained unchanged, with the child continuing to resist, despite her peers being toilet trained.
Lansbury’s initial advice, as recounted in the podcast, focused on the potential for mixed messaging from parents. She suggested that the child might be sensing the parents’ underlying desire for her to use the potty, despite their efforts to appear purely hands-off. Lansbury recommended that the parent make a "clear choice one way or the other" and strongly leaned towards advocating for a full embrace of the child-led approach, emphasizing trust in the child’s inherent capabilities and developmental timeline. She also advised against "reminders" and encouraged the parent to trust the child’s process, even if it involved imaginative play with stuffed animals, viewing this as a healthy way for the child to work through her anxieties. Furthermore, she touched upon the concept of "Velcro children" and the importance of clear boundaries around separation, suggesting that a parent’s discomfort with their child’s need for closeness could contribute to mixed messaging.
The Update: A Shift in Approach and Unexpected Success
The crucial turning point came when the parent provided an update to Lansbury, revealing that her daughter, nearing her fourth birthday, had successfully transitioned out of diapers. This achievement, however, was not a result of adhering to Lansbury’s advice. Instead, the parents made a firm decision that by age four, diapers would no longer be an option.
"As she approached her fourth birthday… we decided that even though she was not interested whatsoever in taking the steps to get out of diapers, four would be the limit," the parent wrote. "I was unwilling to have a four-year-old without developmental disabilities in diapers, and so there was simply going to be no choice anymore."
This decision led to a challenging period. "The first couple days were grueling. Her fear and resistance was intense, and we had to push really hard through that. It felt hopeless at first, but then we broke through. Long story short, she hasn’t had an accident in a week and she willingly uses the toilet now and it’s not a problem."
The parent expressed a mix of surprise and reflection, stating, "I honestly feel regretful that I didn’t listen to myself as I look back at my previous email and push it earlier. What I saw was a scared kid who needed help doing something she was fully capable of. She was stuck and needed us to see through that." She contrasted her experience with the notion of potty training as an innate developmental milestone, suggesting for her child, it was more akin to overcoming a phobia that required direct intervention, drawing a parallel to receiving vaccinations rather than learning to walk. The parent concluded that the key 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."
Lansbury’s Reflection and Analysis of "Bad Advice"
Lansbury, upon receiving this update, expressed genuine pleasure for the family’s success while acknowledging the critical lesson learned. She recognized that her previous advice, while rooted in her core philosophy, had been misapplied or was fundamentally incompatible with this particular parent’s emotional state and understanding of her child.
"I feel bad that then I recommended her to trust her child," Lansbury admitted. "Because, as I said in the beginning of this episode today, I believe that’s preferable if we can do it. I believe it gives our child this tremendous opportunity to have one of the first big autonomous achievements in their development." She conceded that her advice had implicitly promoted the child-led approach, which, in this case, failed to resonate with the parent’s underlying instincts and beliefs.
Lansbury identified the core issue as the mismatch between her advice and the parent’s genuine feelings and convictions. The parent, described as an "anxious overthinker," harbored doubts about her daughter’s ability to self-initiate toilet training, a feeling that likely communicated mixed messages to the child. Lansbury realized that her insistence on "full-on trust" was asking the parent to adopt a belief system she did not genuinely possess.
"The reason I believe I gave her the wrong advice, I gave her unhelpful advice clearly, 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," Lansbury stated. "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."
She further elaborated on the concept of "resistance," noting that the parent’s description of her daughter’s behavior as resistance implied that there was indeed something to resist, suggesting that subtle pressures might have still been present. The parent’s own realization that her daughter had a "phobia" that required help, rather than simply waiting for developmental readiness, underscored Lansbury’s point.
Broader Implications for Parenting Advice
This experience has led Lansbury to emphasize a crucial principle: parenting advice, regardless of its source or theoretical backing, must resonate with a parent’s instincts and deeply held beliefs. She argued that forcing oneself to adopt advice that feels fundamentally wrong will likely lead to ineffective implementation and can create the very "mixed messaging" she had initially identified as a potential pitfall.
"Whatever parenting advice you’re getting from anywhere, it’s got to resonate with your instincts," Lansbury urged. "If parenting advice from anybody about any aspect of parenting doesn’t feel like that to us, it’s never going to work because it’s not right for us."
She highlighted that while research and expert opinions can offer valuable perspectives, they should serve to affirm or gently challenge one’s existing framework, not to impose an entirely alien one. The parent’s eventual success stemmed from her unwavering certainty – a conviction that, while developed through a different path than initially advised, ultimately empowered her to guide her child through a challenging developmental hurdle.
Lansbury concluded by reiterating her thrill for the family’s success and her commitment to learning from such experiences. The episode serves as a potent reminder that effective parenting is not about adhering rigidly to a single philosophy, but about finding a path that aligns with one’s own inner compass and is authentically implemented, leading to genuine and lasting results for both parent and child. The case underscores the complexity of developmental milestones and the critical role of parental conviction, even when it diverges from widely accepted expert recommendations.