Stealing Behaviour in Children

When something that does not belong to their child comes out of their pocket, a family's first reaction is usually fear: "Is my child becoming a thief?"

That question comes from a frame that makes the behaviour harder to understand. The meaning of taking things in childhood changes entirely with age, and it is usually not a moral problem but a developmental or emotional one.

This article sets out what is expected at which age, the reasons behind the behaviour, and what families should do and, particularly, should not do.

Key Points

• In a child under six, taking things is not stealing; the concept of ownership is not yet established.
• What matters is not the behaviour itself but the reason beneath it.
• Labelling a child a "thief" does not reduce the behaviour; it embeds it in their identity.
• Turning something you already know into a question forces the child into lying.
• Making amends is more effective than punishment.
• Behaviour that recurs despite consequences and goes together with lying, aggression and rule-breaking requires assessment.

The Meaning by Age

Preschool (2-5)

At this age the child has not yet fully established the distinction between "mine" and "yours". Taking something they want is not a moral violation but a developmental stage.

Impulse control is also not yet mature: the child cannot postpone what they want. Reaching onto a shelf in a shop and taking something, or putting a friend's toy in their pocket, is expected at this age.

What is needed in this period is not punishment but teaching: returning the object to its owner and explaining the concept of ownership calmly.

Primary School (6-11)

At this age the child knows that taking is wrong. The behaviour therefore no longer arises from not knowing but from some other reason.

The most common reasons are impulsivity, an attempt to enter a peer relationship, or an unmet emotional need. A single episode at this age is usually not a cause for concern; a recurring pattern should be investigated.

Adolescence

In adolescence the meaning of the behaviour is more complex. Peer pressure, sensation-seeking, an effort to gain acceptance in a group, defiance of authority and sometimes material need all play a part.

At this age, regularly taking money, particularly from within the home and secretly, should also be assessed in relation to substance use.

How Does Moral Development Proceed?

To understand taking behaviour it helps to know how a child grasps rules. Moral development does not happen all at once; it deepens in stages with age.

At the first stage a rule consists of its consequence: the child knows something is wrong because it brings punishment. The thought "if I don't get caught it's fine" is therefore ordinary in a young child and is not a sign of moral deficiency.

At the next stage reciprocity develops: the child grasps that they should not do to others what they would not want done to them. This proceeds alongside empathy and becomes pronounced at school age.

At the final stage the rule is internalised: the child does not do it because it is wrong, even if nobody sees. This stage continues to mature throughout adolescence.

The family's role here is to explain the rule not only through punishment but together with its effect. "If you take it you'll be punished" and "when you took it your friend felt bad" address different stages; the second supports internalisation.

This framework also explains why single episodes should not be magnified. The child is in the process of learning the rule, and learning does not proceed without error.

The Underlying Reasons

Impulsivity. In children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, taking things arises as being caught by a momentary impulse rather than as a planned act. The child is usually remorseful afterwards and cannot explain why they did it.

Seeking belonging. A child who struggles to make friends may try to build relationships by giving away what they have taken. In this pattern the object taken does not stay with the child; it is given to others.

An unmet emotional need. In a child experiencing a lack of attention, taking things can be an attempt to fill a gap with a concrete object. This possibility comes to the fore where the behaviour began after a change such as the birth of a sibling, a divorce or a house move.

Anger and retaliation. Taking something from a person one is angry with is a form of expressing anger seen at school age and in adolescence.

Testing limits. Testing whether a rule genuinely exists is seen particularly in households with inconsistent limits.

Genuine need. A child whose basic needs are not met may take food or school materials. Here the real issue is not the behaviour but neglect.

Conduct disorder. Where taking things goes together with lying, aggression, rule-breaking and violating the rights of others, the picture may be part of a broader behavioural problem.

What Is Kleptomania, and Does It Occur in Children?

Kleptomania is a rare condition involving an inability to resist the impulse to steal. It is very rare in children and is a term often used incorrectly.

Its distinguishing feature is that the object taken has no value or function for the person. They do not need the object, often do not use it, and hide or discard it. Increasing tension beforehand, relief during, and guilt afterwards are reported.

The great majority of taking behaviour seen in children is not kleptomania; it is explained by impulsivity, emotional need or peer influence.

What Families Should Do

Stay Calm

The first reaction is often decisive. Anger and panic push the child into defensiveness and lying, and remove the possibility of learning the reason for the behaviour.

Do Not Turn What You Know Into a Question

The question "did you take it?", where you already know the answer, forces the child into lying. The lie is then punished too, and the child ends up doubly guilty.

What works better is to state calmly what is known: "I saw the pen in your bag. We're going to give it back together."

Ensure Restitution

Repair rather than punishment. What was taken is returned to its owner; if it has been broken or spent, the child makes amends from their own means. A small household task or a deduction from pocket money serves this purpose.

Making amends together with the child makes the moment of return bearable. Giving something back is an extremely difficult moment for a young child; they should not be left alone with it.

Do Not Label

The word "thief" does not reduce the behaviour. The child may internalise that description as part of their identity and the behaviour becomes entrenched.

Behaviour and person must be separated: there is a large difference between "what you did was not right" and "you are a thief".

Do Not Shame Them in Front of Others

Recounting the event to relatives, siblings or a teacher does not teach the child a lesson; it creates shame. Shame, rather than reducing the behaviour, teaches concealment.

Investigate the Reason

The context in which the behaviour arose matters. When did it start, what was taken, from whom, and what happened to what was taken? These questions usually make the underlying reason visible.

Giving away what was taken suggests a search for belonging; hiding it suggests an emotional need; taking from a particular person suggests anger.

Review the Structure at Home

The absence of a pocket money arrangement, or an inconsistent one, is among the factors that increase taking behaviour at primary school age. Regular, age-appropriate pocket money gives a child experience of both possession and postponement.

Not leaving money and valuables lying about is not a precaution against the child but a way of not putting a child with impulsivity in a difficult position.

How Is a Pocket Money Arrangement Set Up?

One of the most concrete arrangements that reduces taking behaviour at primary school age is regular, age-appropriate pocket money.

The function of pocket money is not to give money but to provide experience: possession, postponement, saving and making choices. A child who does not experience these skills looks for other ways of obtaining what they want.

A few principles work in practice. Pocket money should be regular and predictable and should not become a reward tied to behaviour; withholding it as a punishment removes its instructive function. Keeping the amount not too far from that of peers prevents the child struggling within the group.

In referrals in Ankara it is frequently observed that taking behaviour at primary school age decreases markedly once a pocket money arrangement is established.

Taking from Siblings and Within the Home

Taking things within the home carries a different meaning from taking things outside and should be handled differently.

Taking a Sibling's Belongings

Taking each other's things without permission is very common between siblings and usually arises not from a problem with ownership but from the balance in the relationship. A child angry with their sibling expresses that anger by taking their most valued possession.

Punishment alone does not work here; the tension in the sibling relationship needs to be addressed. Each child having a few belongings considered untouchable, and that boundary being protected by the family, markedly reduces conflict.

Taking Money from Home

Money taken from a parent's wallet is the situation that shakes families most. Here too the question should be "why".

In a young child this behaviour usually relates to not grasping the value of money. At primary school age the absence of a pocket money arrangement, or one markedly smaller than that of peers, plays a part. In adolescence, taking money regularly and concealing it should also be assessed in relation to substance use.

Not leaving money lying about at home is not a sign of mistrust but a way of not putting a child with impulsivity in a difficult position.

When Lying and Taking Go Together

Taking things often comes together with lying, because the child fears the consequences. The two occurring together is not in itself a cause for concern.

Two patterns need to be distinguished. In the first the child denies out of fear, feels ashamed when found out and shows remorse. This is an expected response.

In the second, the lying does not serve only to cover up; the child lies easily and often, shows no remorse when caught, and blames others. Where this pattern combines with aggression and rule-breaking it suggests a broader behavioural problem and requires assessment.

The most useful thing a family can do here is to create conditions that make telling the truth possible, rather than punishing the lie as a separate offence. Knowing that the consequence will be lighter when they tell the truth reduces the likelihood of a child resorting to lying.

The Relationship with School

Where the behaviour occurred at school, a shared framework needs to be established with the school.

What needs to be discussed: not addressing the event in front of the class, how the process of making amends will be conducted, preventing a label being attached to the child, and how the family will be informed if it recurs.

A punishment-focused approach at school is ineffective, particularly in children with impulsivity. What matters is the teacher treating the behaviour not as a character trait but as a problem that can be solved.

When Is Assessment Needed?

Consulting a child and adolescent psychiatrist is advised in the following situations:

• The behaviour recurring despite consequences
• It going together with lying, aggression, rule-breaking and truancy
• It continuing and becoming more frequent after the age of six
• It starting suddenly and its timing coinciding with a change in the family
• What was taken having no function at all for the child
• Regularly taking money in an adolescent, and concealing it
• No remorse or guilt being seen at all
• Deterioration in peer relationships, loss of friends

What Happens in the Assessment?

In Assoc. Prof. Mehtap Eroglu's approach, assessment begins with mapping the behaviour: when it started, how often, in what context, what is taken and what becomes of it.

Accompanying conditions are then screened for: attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, learning disorder, oppositional defiant disorder, anxiety and depression. Changes within the family, the structure of limits and consistency, and peer relationships are also examined.

Understanding the function of the behaviour directly determines the treatment plan; a pattern arising from a search for belonging and one arising from impulsivity require different interventions.

Treatment

Parent counselling is at the centre of treatment: consistent limits, an approach based on making amends, and avoiding labelling.

Where impulsivity is prominent, treating the attention deficit has a direct effect on the behaviour. Where peer relationships are weak, social skills work is added. Where there is an emotional need or a loss, individual therapy is planned.

Where the behaviour is part of a broader behavioural problem, the approach has multiple components and includes cooperation with the school. On this subject, see our article on oppositional defiant disorder.

Expert Opinion

According to Assoc. Prof. Mehtap Eroglu, the mistake families make most often is treating the behaviour as a moral matter. That frame prevents investigation of the reason and reduces the intervention to punishment. Yet the great majority of taking behaviour in childhood is not a moral disorder but a developmental or emotional situation.

The second common mistake is trying to extract a confession. A parent who turns something they already know into a question has forced the child into lying; when the lie is then punished as well, the relationship of trust is damaged.

Assoc. Prof. Mehtap Eroglu also emphasises that what becomes of the object taken carries diagnostic value. Giving it away suggests a search for belonging; hiding it and not using it suggests an emotional gap; taking it from a particular person suggests anger. This detail is often not asked about and is missed.

Assoc. Prof. Mehtap Eroglu further draws attention to the drawback of treating lying as a separate offence. A child who receives the same weight of punishment when they tell the truth learns that lying is a rational option. The consequence being lighter when they tell the truth is a simple but effective principle that preserves trust.

The fourth point is that single episodes should not be magnified. A single episode at primary school age occurs in most children and closes with an appropriate process of making amends; an excessive response can perpetuate the behaviour.

Assessment and Appointment Process in Ankara

There is a notable pattern in referrals for taking behaviour in Ankara: families mostly come after the behaviour has been seen at school and reported by a teacher. Episodes that occur and are noticed within the home are frequently "sorted out within the family" and referral is delayed.

In the assessment conducted by Assoc. Prof. Mehtap Eroglu in Ankara, the history is therefore taken from two sources, home and school. Behaviour seen in only one setting suggests a response specific to that environment; behaviour persisting in both suggests a more general difficulty with regulation.

A subject families in Ankara often raise is whether taking the child to a police station or a security guard to frighten them works. This method may stop the behaviour in the short term but does not address the reason; it also creates intense shame and loss of trust in the child.

Another matter families in Ankara raise is how conflicts between siblings over belongings wear the family down. Identifying a few belongings for each child that are considered untouchable, and protecting that boundary consistently, is the most practical arrangement for reducing tension at home.

What families in Ankara find useful to bring: a simple record of when and in what context the behaviour occurred, school observations, and any previous assessment reports.

If you would like to arrange an assessment for your child's behavioural problems in Ankara, you can find information about the child psychiatry service and request an appointment.

In Summary

In a child under six, taking things is not stealing; the concept of ownership is not yet established. What is needed at this age is teaching, not punishment.

At school age the meaning of the behaviour depends on the reason beneath it: impulsivity, a search for belonging, an unmet emotional need, anger or testing limits. What becomes of the object taken usually makes that reason visible.

Labelling and shaming in front of others do not reduce the behaviour; they teach concealment. Making amends is more effective than punishment.

Behaviour that recurs despite consequences and goes together with lying, aggression and rule-breaking requires assessment. For anger and behaviour management, see our article on behavioural disorders and anger management.