Spanking/Hitting Intervention

[direct-x]

I was at the mall this weekend and was pretty appauled to see a mother jostle her kid (probably about 5-6 years old) and proceed to slap her really hard on the arm 2-3 times. I went to get mall security to intervene.

This was the second time I had to do something like this.

I never physically discipline my two boys, so I don't take well to seeing others doing it.

Some of these parents hit hard, not just little taps, I am talking potential damage hard.

Have you or would you ever intervene if someone was hitting a child?

[mrcantrell]

I was at the mall this weekend and was pretty appauled to see a mother jostle her kid (probably about 5-6 years old) and proceed to slap her really hard on the arm 2-3 times. I went to get mall security to intervene.

This was the second time I had to do something like this.

I never physically discipline my two boys, so I don't take well to seeing others doing it.

Some of these parents hit hard, not just little taps, I am talking potential damage hard.

Have you or would you ever intervene if someone was hitting a child?

HELL YES!! It is completely unacceptable to punish anyone or anything with physical violence. Creating fear (in any way) is not a good thing in the development of animals, and I would naturally assume children.

I'd like to go hit that parent and see if that teaches them not to hit their kid. :mad:

I've seen, on a few occasions, the results of abuse and nothing good could ever come of it. If this parent thinks this is anything other than abuse they need to have their kids taken away from them.

[bionicbadger]

Just because you don't do it doesn't make it wrong. The law allows spanking, it has been challenged in the courts and upheld.

If someone tried to interfere with how I raised my kids, I would be angry.

Are you a doctor? Can you asertain the "potential damage" from a brief a look?

Did mall security laugh at you when you reported someone smacking their kids?

Worry about your own kids.

[direct-x]

Just because you don't do it doesn't make it wrong. The law allows spanking, it has been challenged in the courts and upheld.

If someone tried to interfere with how I raised my kids, I would be angry.

Are you a doctor? Can you asertain the "potential damage" from a brief a look?

Did mall security laugh at you when you reported someone smacking their kids?

Worry about your own kids.

Like I said, these were very firm smacks, not the type to get the kids attention, but the type that will easily turn skid red and bruise. They echoed for how hard the kid was hit. Not too mention the jostling which could not be healthy for the child. If you jostled an infant like that, you could cause sever trauma to the head and even death.

Why would you be angry? Because someone with common sense knows that hitting a child is wrong? Because they are intervening and disrupting the abusive behaviour?

Mall security did not laugh, and actually took the matter very seriously as I was not the only one too step up. Others who witnessed the act also gave details to the mall official.

[mrcantrell]

Just because you don't do it doesn't make it wrong. The law allows spanking, it has been challenged in the courts and upheld.

If someone tried to interfere with how I raised my kids, I would be angry.

Are you a doctor? Can you asertain the "potential damage" from a brief a look?

Did mall security laugh at you when you reported someone smacking their kids?

Worry about your own kids.

I agree, however if you reread the OP you'll see that he said "really hard". We're not talking about spanking, we're talking about hitting, and a child cannot defend themselves from that.

And I do worry about my own kids.

[Diamondog]

No one should hit kids period.. If I see it, I'll let you know and chances are when you see me you'll not have anything to say, they won't let me hit an adult so why should I be able to hit a kid?.. It's absolutely the laziest way of teaching and punishing a child.

[canadiankorean]

I remember one time I was at camp when I was a young teenager.
I saw a mom hitting her 3 -5 year old son along a dirt road.
I believe she was hitting him for falling on the ground and getting dirty.
Now the hitting wasn't extremely hard but it wasn't light either.
It was the type that was a solid hit to the back. Enough to make the child cry.
Being a young teen, I said, "Hey stop that! You don't have to hit him you know. If you didn't like what he did, why don't you tell him?!"
Then suddenly, the mom's fury that her kid changes towards me.
She started yelling and screaming and swearing at me like I wronged and offended her.
At least I distracted her from continuing to hit the kid, but I swore I would never interfere again.

[Diamondog]

I remember one time I was at camp when I was a young teenager.
I saw a mom hitting her 3 -5 year old son along a dirt road.
I believe she was hitting him for falling on the ground and getting dirty.
Now the hitting wasn't extremely hard but it wasn't light either.
It was the type that was a solid hit to the back. Enough to make the child cry.
Being a young teen, I said, "Hey stop that! You don't have to hit him you know. If you didn't like what he did, why don't you tell him?!"
Then suddenly, the mom's fury that her kid changes towards me.
She started yelling and screaming and swearing at me like I wronged and offended her.
At least I distracted her from continuing to hit the kid, but I swore I would never interfere again.

Great parent...hitting a KID for getting dirty..."Oh yes mommy I purposely fell down just to get dirty and piss you off"....and the screaming and swearing in front of the kid...lovely environment the child is in! IMO anyone who didn't say anything deserves a smack themselves!

[Jonavin]

I think there's a fine line between discipline and abuse. A lap on the hands or the tush is ok, but anywhere on the head or torso I would consider abuse. I cringe at people beating their kids in public.

My wife and I both grow up with our own assigned "wipping sticks". I guess that's just a first generation immigrant thing: http://youtube.com/watch?v=xzKHQX59Wso

[mrcantrell]

I cringe at people beating their kids in public.

Yes, save the beatings for private. It doesn't matter where abuse takes place, or what kind of abuse it is, until we as a society make it completely unacceptable and stand up for those who can't stand up for themselves, it will keep happening.

[Jonavin]

Yes, save the beatings for private. It doesn't matter where abuse takes place, or what kind of abuse it is, until we as a society make it completely unacceptable and stand up for those who can't stand up for themselves, it will keep happening.

Don't twist my quote out of context. I was not suggesting that people beat their kids in private. There are ways to control your kids without resorting to violence. My original point is that kid beating is more of a first generation immigrant thing.

[Impala]

No one should hit kids period.. If I see it, I'll let you know and chances are when you see me you'll not have anything to say, they won't let me hit an adult so why should I be able to hit a kid?.. It's absolutely the laziest way of teaching and punishing a child.


This whole issue seems to have turned into a witch hunt. Obviously, consistently beating a child will have a detrimental effect on their development. But humans are fairly resilient and the occasional physical punishment of a healthy child is to be expected. Child education and assessment are issues that I would consider to have a much greater effect on the healthy development of children in our society. But no one is out confronting parents when they don’t read to their children before they go to bed.

Spanking/hitting children has been proven to be effective between the ages of 2-5, when and a child’s ability to understand complex ideas are limited. The spanking represents a quick clear message that what the child has just done is wrong. This of course must be accompanied by an explanation to the child if this is a new offence. But when the child has repeated a wrong doing and gets spanked they will immediately recognize that they were punished in this matter last time for doing something similar.

“Laziest way of teaching a child”? Maybe. I would say that doing something that is quick and effective is smart. There are situation where people simply do not have the time to sit down with the kids pull them away from what is distracting them and give them a ten minute lesson.

An adult is a fully grown individual who should know the consequences of his/her actions. If they don’t we have a police system to hit-punish them for you. While a child is developing they don’t have these same skills and rely on adults manly parents to guide and teach them as they continue to grow.

[Xax]

I've decided that I will spank in serious cases, am very conscientious of the fine line between discipline and abuse, and am accustomed to there being a lot of people who disagree with my point of view and would vilify me for it (no matter; I will do what I believe is best for my children). On the other hand, I know that there are parents who abuse their children in the name of discipline, and I would absolutely notify the authorities if I witnessed abuse. It makes me uneasy to consider how that woman might "discipline" her children in private.

When parents are abusive, that overrides the "let me parent the way I want to" plea, and I won't lose any sleep if I assist in having the custodial rights of abusive parents taken away from them.

[terribly]

I agree with Impala on this one.

At times, a smack (certainly not excessive or near "important" areas) may be a reasonable approach to discipline.

You can't explain everything to children. If a "We don't do that, it's wrong" suffices, great. Your child respects you and what you say and won't do it on account of you saying not to.

If that doesn't work I think a "Do that again and I'll spank your bottom" is justified. Say it's wrong, but add that extra incentive not to.

If that still doesn't work, I think I would tempt my child.

While certainly difficult to decipher and draw the line for others, I would never hit my child out of anger for them doing something, rather as a last resort to teach them what things are unacceptable.

Disclaimer: I am not a parent ;p

[bubble.tea]

no comment.

[duckdown]

gimme a break

i got spanked and the wooden spoon across the ass when i was growing up, and i sure never did the same thing wrong twice.

heres an idea, next time mind your own business.

[Bullseye]

Spanking/hitting children has been proven to be effective between the ages of 2-5, when and a child’s ability to understand complex ideas are limited.

Got a credible source for that? I'd like to see it.

[toujours]

For me spanking or hitting is a sign that the parents probably don't know how to control their kids any other way. I can't imagine anyone systematically resorting to physical punishment if some other control method works.

So when I see a parent spanking or hitting I feel especially sad for the child, but also for the parent. They must be feeling a lot of frustration if they are resorting to violence on their child.

However, escalating the situation by calling security isn't going to change anything. The root of the the problem is still there, and all the child has learned is "If I annoy my parents in the Mall, there's nothing they can do about it because the security guy will come stop my parents". Yeah, you helped both parent and child a lot by doing that.

Parenting is a very important life skill, but sadly is one that is not taught at school... A lot of parents just don't know how to cope.

[Toronto]

gimme a break

i got spanked and the wooden spoon across the ass when i was growing up, and i sure never did the same thing wrong twice.

heres an idea, next time mind your own business.

Same here, but in my case it was a wooden backscratcher. But people you have to be sensitive to cultural differences here. When I was a child, it was normal and routine... that is until one day my mom hit me with her slipper and I laughed at her. She never hit me again after that LOL. But being spanked as a child does not make me want to discipline my child the same way but some children don't learn when you just talk to them. What child will stay out of trouble because he doesn't want to get a "stern talking to".

[lizard]

Same here, but in my case it was a wooden backscratcher. But people you have to be sensitive to cultural differences here. When I was a child, it was normal and routine... that is until one day my mom hit me with her slipper and I laughed at her. She never hit me again after that LOL. But being spanked as a child does not make me want to discipline my child the same way but some children don't learn when you just talk to them. What child will stay out of trouble because he doesn't want to get a "stern talking to".

LOL :)

[lizard]

gimme a break

i got spanked and the wooden spoon across the ass when i was growing up, and i sure never did the same thing wrong twice.

heres an idea, next time mind your own business.

We got the belt when we were kids. The odd time it happened you would have a welt on the leg from the line of the belt, that was it -- but I'll tell you, it's not the belt that did the disciplining, it was the THREAT of the belt. Don't kid yourself, kids know when they are doing something wrong. And when we were, and the hand reached for the drawer, we stopped. The THOUGHT of it kept us in line and that's all it took.

And I'm still laughing about Toronto's post about the slipper :)

I feel I was not harmed in any way from that experience. My friends and I have discussed the same topic and they all feel the same way.

That's not to say I will use a belt with my children. Will I even use spanking? I don't know, that time hasn't come for me yet. But as for the OP and the original spank that sparked this debate, remember, it doesn't take a hard impact to hear a very loud sound when skin hits skin flat.

A spank is one thing, a hit is another. Unless the kid is getting beat, best to leave people to their own devices. Next thing you know, people will be up in arms about someone who is overweight eating at McDonalds, which not only harms them but puts strain on our medical system. But that's a whole other discussion ;)

[bubble.tea]

For me spanking or hitting is a sign that the parents probably don't know how to control their kids any other way. I can't imagine anyone systematically resorting to physical punishment if some other control method works......

Now THIS I have a comment about.

This statement could NOT be any more true. It is 100% certifiably EQUALLY applicable to school-yard bullies. When their INTELLECT fails to get them what they want, they resort to flexing their physical dominance to get their way. It's sad. Parenting is NOT an easy one., and requires the most intelligent, mature, composed tactics. If you are one to quickly LOSE your cool, and lack strategy in handling all kinds of misbehaving scenarios-yes...you will find conveying your wishes PHYSICALLY will get you ahead...in the short term. Quite sad really.

[teknoluv]

Yes, it's really sad that people raised IN THE WRONG WAY would continue that "tradition" and pass on the abuse or ignorance to say the least.

Assorting to ANY form of PHYSICAL violence is wrong. Want effectiveness? Let's chop off the head of everyone who commits the slightest offence (like jaywalking or whispering curses), and our world will be a "perfect" place. ;p

EDIT: spellcheck

[tenchi]

Interesting discussion.

I guess the "stern talking to" is always the first option. I don't think any normal person gets any pleasure in beating their kids.
If it fails, bring out the cane. The end goal is to have a way to control the kids when they get out of line.
Also, kids have a good memory. You don't have to always beat them. Once or twice in their lifetime is probably good enough... after that, just remind them of that first or second beating and they'll usually fall in line.

Adding to it... at young age, kids cannot differentiate between right & wrong. So they usually differentiate actions as "this will get me a beating" and "this is probably okay to do". When they grow up they will understand & appreciate the guidance from the parents.... regardless of the method.

[feet_]

I've decided that I will spank in serious cases, am very conscientious of the fine line between discipline and abuse, and am accustomed to there being a lot of people who disagree with my point of view and would vilify me for it (no matter; I will do what I believe is best for my children). On the other hand, I know that there are parents who abuse their children in the name of discipline, and I would absolutely notify the authorities if I witnessed abuse. It makes me uneasy to consider how that woman might "discipline" her children in private.

When parents are abusive, that overrides the "let me parent the way I want to" plea, and I won't lose any sleep if I assist in having the custodial rights of abusive parents taken away from them.


+1!
im gonna get lynched for say this but,

timeout is for surburan parents that dont have the balls to hit thier child.
but i only hit, when it is necessary. then make eye contact(important!) with my child and explain why i spanked his butt.

[Xax]

If you are one to quickly LOSE your cool, and lack strategy in handling all kinds of misbehaving scenarios-yes...you will find conveying your wishes PHYSICALLY will get you ahead...in the short term. Quite sad really.
When I spank my children, it won't be because I'm angry and want to hit some them to get my frustration out. Don't assume that all parents who spank do so out of anger.

[Spidey]

I was at the mall this weekend and was pretty appauled to see a mother jostle her kid (probably about 5-6 years old) and proceed to slap her really hard on the arm 2-3 times. I went to get mall security to intervene.

This was the second time I had to do something like this.

I never physically discipline my two boys, so I don't take well to seeing others doing it.

Some of these parents hit hard, not just little taps, I am talking potential damage hard.

Have you or would you ever intervene if someone was hitting a child?

Myself being a parent I say stay out of it. Non of your business and every parent has different parenting styles. If someone came up to me telling me how to parent Im pretty sure I wouldnt take it very well

Case in point 2 weeks ago I lost it on my 3 kids in Zellers. No physical abuse but Im sure everyone in the mall heard me. They just would not listen and I reached the end of my rope.

After that they started to listen, sometimes kids need to know who is the boss. I got some bad stares, but whats worse, that or letting a parent have their kids walk all over them

[NorthYorker]

"Oh yes mommy I purposely fell down just to get dirty and piss you off" Once you grow up to have your own kids you'll learn that this is not unheard of behaviour.

Yes, save the beatings for private. Generally pretty useless recommendation, as kids in age which requires parents' physical intervention most often (2-5) don't remember their deeds for long, so punishment an hours ago will not be linked with bad behaviour in their minds.

I'll tell you, it's not the belt that did the disciplining, it was the THREAT of the belt. Don't kid yourself, kids know when they are doing something wrong. And when we were, and the hand reached for the drawer, we stopped. The THOUGHT of it kept us in line and that's all it took. + 1
I'd like to say that hitting in most cases can be successfully replaced with blackmailing kid once they reach 5 years. Not buying toys, not taking them to resto or to movies etc. But it is more effort to keep track of sins and punishments :)

[Bullseye]

timeout is for surburan parents that dont have the balls to hit thier child.
but i only hit, when it is necessary. then make eye contact(important!) with my child and explain why i spanked his butt.

What does suburban have to do with it? Or balls, for that matter? You think hitting a child takes bravery or something?

[Impossibles]

Open hand slaps (except to the face) is not going to do any damage.

I was spanked as a child and I know it made me a lot more respectful growing up. If that's how people choose to raise their kids, thats up to them.

[smilodon]

I like to say that growing up, I had my daily physical correction time. Yep, it was like lunch time, bath time, dinner time, bed time, etc. But this was the physical correction time. There'd still be certain rules my mom would go by:

Never let my dad correct me > men don't know their own strength
Only hit in the legs or buttocks
Never hit with objects > her hands would sting as much as my butts and it'd be both a mutual punishment and a gauge of her intensity
etc.


I gotta agree that I was quite a turbulent kid, but aren't most little boys? We all laugh about it now (my parents & siblings), and my mom agrees that it was absolutely the wrong way to raise me, but at the time, she didn't know better as a parent and now fervently hopes that I'll raise my kids differently.

I think I still turned out ok for the most part. I do have my vices, but they can difficultly be linked to my physical corrections... I don't plan to raise my own kids this way though. There are better ways to raise a kid, and with the benefit of education and higher understanding, I don't think I'd have any excuse raising my kids the way I was raised. Anyway, I'll be a father in less than two months, so I'll come again then.

[feet_]

What does suburban have to do with it? Or balls, for that matter? You think hitting a child takes bravery or something?

haha
no im being sarcastic, cuz this thread is like , "how to make kraft dinner"
theres alot of ways to make it. but it all turns out the same.

basically raise your kid, the way you think is best.
only the extreme beatings , extreme timeouts are bad for your kid.

[Diamondog]

We got the belt when we were kids. The odd time it happened you would have a welt on the leg from the line of the belt, that was it -- but I'll tell you, it's not the belt that did the disciplining, it was the THREAT of the belt. Don't kid yourself, kids know when they are doing something wrong. And when we were, and the hand reached for the drawer, we stopped. The THOUGHT of it kept us in line and that's all it took.

And I'm still laughing about Toronto's post about the slipper :)

I feel I was not harmed in any way from that experience. My friends and I have discussed the same topic and they all feel the same way.

That's not to say I will use a belt with my children. Will I even use spanking? I don't know, that time hasn't come for me yet. But as for the OP and the original spank that sparked this debate, remember, it doesn't take a hard impact to hear a very loud sound when skin hits skin flat.

A spank is one thing, a hit is another. Unless the kid is getting beat, best to leave people to their own devices. Next thing you know, people will be up in arms about someone who is overweight eating at McDonalds, which not only harms them but puts strain on our medical system. But that's a whole other discussion ;)

"and when the hand reached for the drawer, we stopped" Living in fear is great isn't it.

[Spidey]

"and when the hand reached for the drawer, we stopped" Living in fear is great isn't it.

Of course discipline and fear work together. Even when your older at a job and you get called into the bosses office. Theres fear there, just a different sort.

If kids didnt fear discipline, how would they learn right from wrong.

kids are getting worse with attitude, etc as the world progresses. Look at each generation and see the things kids do know compared to 20 years ago.

Im a strict but fair parent. Ive got friends who let their kids walk all over them, and I tell you this, they are little shits. Time outs, count to 3, what a joke. Time out to their room with their toys, ouch that hurts.

I time out to the utility room. Now that they are older we also take things away, including they pay us for doing stuff wrong.

[gilboman]

"and when the hand reached for the drawer, we stopped" Living in fear is great isn't it.

this is how our entire society is based. without fear, there would be no authority figure. People dont drive too crazy because they fear the police and fear insurance cost. People don't do most illegal things (short of murder or harming of other individuals) because of fear of the justice system or getting caught. people dont pick their nose/butt in public because of fear of somebody seeing them do it.

everything in society and its structure is predicated and depends on fear

[teknoluv]

If kids didnt fear discipline, how would they learn right from wrong.
OMG! You don't tell the right from wrong JUST BECAUSE there are repercussions.

this is how our entire society is based. without fear, there would be no authority figure. People dont drive too crazy because they fear the police and fear insurance cost. People don't do most illegal things (short of murder or harming of other individuals) because of fear of the justice system or getting caught. people dont pick their nose/butt in public because of fear of somebody seeing them do it.

everything in society and its structure is predicated and depends on fear
No, OUR society doesn't work like that. No society should work like that. Only totalitarian states like the old time Soviet Union or China 30 years ago built their control based on fear.

[Spidey]

OMG! You don't tell the right from wrong JUST BECAUSE there are repercussions.

So your telling me if kids were just allowed to do whatever they wanted, or if parents wouldnt discipline them, they would grow up and know the difference between right and wrong. Who teaches them, tv, movies, their friends.

My son has friends that do things that he would never do, but his parents let him so it must be right. :confused:

[mrcantrell]

Yes, save the beatings for private.

Generally pretty useless recommendation, as kids in age which requires parents' physical intervention most often (2-5) don't remember their deeds for long, so punishment an hours ago will not be linked with bad behaviour in their minds.

LOL, a comment twisted out of context based on a comment twisted out of context. :lol: :cheesygri

[robattoronto]

Culture clash happening here:

At one end, you see parents hitting their kids silly. I see that this side is very well represented here so I won't add more.

But at the other end, instead of hitting the child you'd like to have a chat instead you say? And grounding the kid: no video games, no tv, no internet. Ha! Maybe in some cultures its ok to call their dad or mom by their first name. Maybe its ok for a kid to throw a terrible tantrum in public when the mom doesn't buy him something he wants. And the parent freezes up, red faced, too embarassed and out of ideas except to give in. Kids are very preceptive and they know when they have you by the balls.

I've seen parents do an absolute terrible job of raising their kids. They are spineless pushovers being bashed left and right by their kids. And when they hit their teens, these kids have no work ethics, they are not conscientious, they have no structure or direction. They have always got what they want by throwing a tantrum. Their only sole purpose in life is to fiercely defend their so called freedom and independence. But they don't have know a rat's ass what it really means. So they move out, and a flood of independence comes over them, hurrah they say, but along with it comes responsibility. But guess what, try as they may, they decide to ignore it just for a little longer. Cuz guess what, their freedom is too precious to give up.

Lets experiment they say, ha! cuz its freedom time. Let stick this needle in, pop this pill and snort this up and see how it feels. Consequences, what the hell is that? And accountability? Lets junk it in the same pile as the other stuff which infringes upon freedom. Oooo sex sounds fun, lets experiment the hell out of that one too. Aha! And teen pregnancy? Oh the irony. And the crash course in reality and responsibility which follows: For the girl, as admirable as that may be that she wants to keep the kid, I'd say its just too soon. And for the guy, so much easier to bail. Cuz thats the theme and lets go with the flow ma man!

So you say I'm exaggerating, well I know I am. Kids and teens handle this crash course differently. Most of the time they have settle into a life of mediocrity because thats the best they can do. Or sometimes it ends badly. It does not have to be a crash course!

I didn't grow up in this country, but as a late teen, I did go to high school here. I'm priviledged enough to have seen both sides. My best friend from high school went with me to the same university. Its a long story, but here's the short version. He was promised a Ford mustang covertible if he stayed in univ, cuz first year was wasted on fun. And the only way for his parents was to bribe him to stay for the second year. Life in a halfway house was new to him years later. Life changed after he robbed the shoppersdrug mart. His family is rich and has a big house in Ajax. He's the only son. You would'nt know that by looking at his complexion now or the needle tracks on his arm.

Now I'm wondering if I should actually post this. Cuz it beginning to sound loopy and out of topic. I don't believe in hitting the kid silly, but a spank on the butt and some stern talking to I don't think would hurt anyone. I was personally hit many times with a feather cane with my mom. Asian style. Went to an all boys school run by Irish brothers with forearms as big as my thigh and they walloped me many times with rulers and canes. Emotional scars you say??! I have none. I think with the help of Dr. Phil we're raising a nation of pansies. I was a brat, I knew it, i know i deserved it. As a kid I also knew responsibility for my actions and that there would reprecussions if I was an a-hole. My mom was no pushover and till today, I have more respect for her than ever.

Meh, I'm done.

[Whiplash7828]

I've decided that I will spank in serious cases, am very conscientious of the fine line between discipline and abuse, and am accustomed to there being a lot of people who disagree with my point of view and would vilify me for it (no matter; I will do what I believe is best for my children). On the other hand, I know that there are parents who abuse their children in the name of discipline, and I would absolutely notify the authorities if I witnessed abuse. It makes me uneasy to consider how that woman might "discipline" her children in private.

When parents are abusive, that overrides the "let me parent the way I want to" plea, and I won't lose any sleep if I assist in having the custodial rights of abusive parents taken away from them.

+1
same opinion here. I trust my judgment enough to tell the difference between discipline and abuse.

[Spray]

A couple thing's I'd like to add here.

I was raised in a household where spankings were used as discipline by my father, my mother was the more verbal disciplinarian. I look back on the spankings, and to be honest I'm glad for them. I grew up straight as an arrow, and never misbehaved and always learned my lessons. As was previously said, it was more the threat of the spankings than the spankings themselves.

I was dealt with physically, as was my older sister. My younger sister, my parents decided they would "turn a new leaf" so to speak, and she was never dealt physically. What happened? She dropped out of school, rebelled, in trouble with substances/law/curfew's...broke every single rule my mother made. You can argue if theres any correlation with this, but in my mind there definately is. My mom will scream at the top of her lungs at my sister...and what will she do? Just laugh at her..you need that option of being physical, at least the threat of it looming above the child can help.

[bubble.tea]

.... I don't think any normal person gets any pleasure in beating their kids. ......
I should hope not.

When I spank my children, it won't be because I'm angry and want to hit some them to get my frustration out. Don't assume that all parents who spank do so out of anger.
I'm struggling to find any OTHER premise for physical brutality that would even REMOTELY be justified instead of anger??? WHY ...WHY would you want to physically beat your children? Your flesh and blood. The whole purpose of your being?

[Bullseye]

I suppose if I'm commenting here, I should give my own opinion, but to be honest, I don't really feel I'm firmly in either camp. On one hand, I get turned off by the zealots who say things like controlled spanking is 'brutality', or a 'beating'. On the other, I feel that physically disciplining your child is a last resort option, and essentially a failing on your part as a parent. If you can't control your childs behaviour with your words and actions, and have to resort to putting your hands on them, you have just admitted that you are not in control of the situation, and that force is required to maintain control.

So I guess my position is that I'm theoretically against it, but also that I wouldn't rule it out if it really came down to it. I would certainly feel bad about it afterwards, though, and I would strive to review the incident and see how the spanking could have been avoided by better parenting.

[Xax]

"and when the hand reached for the drawer, we stopped" Living in fear is great isn't it.
Is it bad for children to feel fear when they choose to do something they know is wrong?

[Spidey]

Is it bad for children to feel fear when they choose to do something they know is wrong?


if they know nothings gonna happen, they will just do it. If they know they will get punished, either via spanking, a lecture, something taken away, etc they will think twice before doing it

[gemstone]

I'm struggling to find any OTHER premise for physical brutality that would even REMOTELY be justified instead of anger??? WHY ...WHY would you want to physically beat your children? Your flesh and blood. The whole purpose of your being?

I think a definition needs be established here because some people seem to think a spanking is the same as a beating. For me, a beating leaves physical marks and a spanking is a couple of open hand swats on the butt.

Fear is the only time I ever spanked my kids. Fear for their safety or others. Immediate fear, like running towards the road prompted a swat right away and never happened again. Other fear, like climbing up on counters as an example, were given a few warnings first but if it continued to be attempted, then they were spanked and it would never happened again. They did not get spanked for getting dirty or spilling something or not making their bed. Once they reach 6 or 7, taking things away or grounding was used but it never seemed to work the first time like a spanking.

Spankings alone are not going to make or break them as adults. It is everything we do as parents combined that will affect how they turn out.

My kids, as adults, all seem happy, outgoing, emotionly secure, responsible, etc. They don't even remember being spanked themselves although the older ones remember the younger ones being spanked. They would even comment that they were never spanked and I would correct them. I can only post about my kids but obviously spanking did not scar my kids for life in any way.

I think many of the parents responding to this thread have young kids and are raising their kids the way they think is best but until your kids are adults, no one can be sure whether they did it right. Even siblings can turn out completely different even though they were raised the exact same way. What works for one child may not work for the other. They have to be raised as individuals. One child may need the occasional spanking, the other may not.

[danfromwaterloo]

First of all, I think we can all appreciate the difference between spanking a child, and publically abusing a child. Some people (such as the OP) disagree with spanking - some do not. There is no right or wrong opinion on that - any more than having a child baptized/circumsized/pierced. They are simply personal choices that the parent is entitled to make on how their own child is raised - and I feel very strongly that it is their god-given right to ensure that they can raise their child as they see fit.

It is a very different story, however, when people witness abuse of a child. The distinction I think this thread suffers from is the definition and distinction between abuse and spankings. My $0.02:

Spanking: Hitting a small number of times to either the rear or hand of a child under 12. This may or may not use an implement to perform the task (ie. paddle, belt, or slipper).

Abuse: Any form of physical contact outside of the above.

When I have children, I fully intend to spank them when they stray out of line. The embarassment and "pain" of it ensures they listen to you - I remember what it was like as a child, and it hurt like hell. But when your dad said "You're going to get a spanking if you do that again." - you didn't do it again. It teaches your kids to fear you a little too, which is a powerful and useful tool in ensuring they listen.

There's too many hippie parents now who think that all the new age bullsh*t works on kids. Old school hard@ss parenting is the way to go.

[chococrazy]

I would spank my kids, only if it was necessary and (I hope) never out of frustration or anger. Some of the posters above have hit it spot on.. when their actions are dangerous to themselves, or others.

Then I would hug them, tell them that I loved them, and the reason why they got the spanking.

[Impala]

Got a credible source for that? I'd like to see it.

"Concerning the use of corporal punishment by parents, the panel could not find sufficient data to proscribe the use of spanking with children between the ages of 24 months and preadolescence. A literature review presented at the conference actually found stronger evidence for beneficial than detrimental effects of spanking with 2- to 6-year-old children. The co-chairs of the conference concluded, "Given a relatively "healthy' family life in a supportive environment, spanking in and of itself is not detrimental to a child or predictive of later problems.

Bornstein MH, Lamb ME, eds. Developmental Psychology: An Advanced Textbook. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1988;475-478, 524-527

This info I googled but I remember hearing this recently on news radio, a new report has found that… or something to that effect.

I should hope not.


I'm struggling to find any OTHER premise for physical brutality that would even REMOTELY be justified instead of anger??? WHY ...WHY would you want to physically beat your children? Your flesh and blood. The whole purpose of your being?

Beating is such a harsh word. You would want to physically punish your children, as it has been said, to teach them what they just did is wrong. Simple. The type of punishment I am refereeing to has nothing to do with anger. You still love them and they still love you. How many five year olds do you know that constantly live in fear and hide from their parents? Sure, they doing wrong and they will be scared of the consequences but this isn’t business as usual. If they weren’t my own flesh and blood, the whole purpose of my being, I might not care as much.

[Toronto]

I'm struggling to find any OTHER premise for physical brutality that would even REMOTELY be justified instead of anger??? WHY ...WHY would you want to physically beat your children? Your flesh and blood. The whole purpose of your being?

Many people are confusing spanking with beating. Spanking is a way to teach your child consequences of poor decisions, cause and effect. Beating is out of anger, which we are not referring to.

Now if you saw a parent verbally abusing their child, calling them fat, stupid and whatever else you know will cause low self esteem, is that reason to seek a security guard? I bet no one here would. If a child ran out into the street and a mother said "Come back here you f'in idiot, you have to be the stupidest kid alive" I believe that is much more abusive than a spank on the bottom but of course no one would report that, would they.

Sure, they doing wrong and they will be scared of the consequences but this isn’t business as usual. If they weren’t my own flesh and blood, the whole purpose of my being, I might not care as much.

Well said.

[Impala]

Well said.


LOL… Thanks :lol:

I know my writing needs improvement. The ability to organize and present ideas in a clear manner like Robattoronto and others is something I am working on.

[teknoluv]

FYI: Corporal punishment at home is actually illegal in quite a number of countries. Corporal pinishment at school is prohibited in most countries. I remember FORMALLY warning (in black and white) at least 2 teachers for corporal punishment when I was a high school administrator back in Hong Kong. To put it simply, those parents or teachers who resort to physical violence know NOTHING about child development (and how to teach their kids).

[Spidey]

What about the days of the strap in school. When they took that away kids can know get away with murder, pulling the abuse crap all the time.

I got the strap once in school. Never did what I did again.

[Diamondog]

What about the days of the strap in school. When they took that away kids can know get away with murder, pulling the abuse crap all the time.

I got the strap once in school. Never did what I did again.

So lets pound them into submission and compliance!

[Spidey]

So lets pound them into submission and compliance!


Why do people get spanking confused with beatings.

Was the strap pounding them into the ground. Or picking them up and pushing them against the wall.

I see kids now a days and the way they act and treat their parents. I wonder why they do that

Have I ever hit my kids, no. have I ever spanked them on the butt or hand, yes

I would tell anyone this that would ever come up to me if I spanked my kids in public.

FCUK OFF!!!!

[alysomji]

Spanking:

(a) A last resort.
(b) Don't touch sensitive areas (head, crotch, chest/breasts, etc.).
(c) Be careful not to do it so as to bruise your child. Don't hit with excessive force.

Let's face it: if history has proven one thing, it's that not every situation can be solved peacefully and without any physical force whatsoever.

As a last resort, and with proper conditions, I don't see any problem. If you care about your child, you do what's best for them - even if you don't like it.

[pollox]

I guess I just don't understand what seems to be the prevailing attitude on this issue. I have a 3 year old daughter that I have never, nor would ever spank/slap/hit etc. It just doesn't make sense to me. I know it would be an effective tool in conditioning my child in whatever I wanted them to do, but is it really something you should do to your loved ones?

I'd be more comfortable slapping the useless lump that can't seem to come into work on time. Any thoughts on why we don't do this if its such an effective way to teach people? I'm pretty sure if managers were able to spank/slap/hit their employees, most people would be far more productive than they are now. Imagine getting slapped in the head if your report wasn't up to par, or you weren't fast enough in serving that customer...I guarantee general customer service would go way up (not to mention how much fun it would be to "voice" our disaproval to the politicians and government employees who work for us:razz: )

Conditioning through physical pain has always been and will always be a very effective training method. I personally find it to be a pretty barbaric and lazy way to raise children.

[bubble.tea]

*unsubscribes from this thread.

[poedua]

Spanking:

(a) A last resort.
(b) Don't touch sensitive areas (head, crotch, chest/breasts, etc.).
(c) Be careful not to do it so as to bruise your child. Don't hit with excessive force.

Let's face it: if history has proven one thing, it's that not every situation can be solved peacefully and without any physical force whatsoever.

As a last resort, and with proper conditions, I don't see any problem. If you care about your child, you do what's best for them - even if you don't like it.


I disagree. I find the whole argument that you can't teach obedience to your kids without eventually " resorting " to corporal punishment a weak one at best.

I have 4 kids and we never struck our kids. We never used " any physical force whatsoever " and can testify to the fact that - in reality - " every situation can be solved peacefully and without any physical force whatsoever ". Striking a child simply teaches them to accept violence over reason IMO.

The " last resort "argument is a bogus one as well IMO, and it simply speaks to the shortcomings of the person dishing out the physical punishment - not to the conditions at hand. Parents strike kids because parents feel " they can't take it anymore ", or they are seething with anger ( or fear ) and strike out in a ( preventable IMO ) knee jerk reaction IMO. Striking a child is a concious rational choice IMO - there is no in inevitability in it. I also don't buy the argument " If you care about your child, you do what's best for them " - in other words, you will strike them pysically as it is " best for them ".

But, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt...can you provide me some examples of scenarios which you think represent the " proper conditions " for a parent to strike a child ?

[Akash]

Go ahead and hit your children
And let them end up like me >:( :mad: :(

:cry:

[alysomji]

can you provide me some examples of scenarios which you think represent the " proper conditions " for a parent to strike a child ?

A kid who, no matter how much you try to convince him, refuses time and time again to get dressed and go to school - thereby missing school and hurting his future potential. Why? Because he considers school to be too hard and would prefer to remain as a lazy slob.

I disagree. I find the whole argument that you can't teach obedience to your kids without eventually " resorting " to corporal punishment a weak one at best.

I have 4 kids and we never struck our kids. We never used " any physical force whatsoever " and can testify to the fact that - in reality - " every situation can be solved peacefully and without any physical force whatsoever ". Striking a child simply teaches them to accept violence over reason IMO.

The " last resort "argument is a bogus one as well IMO, and it simply speaks to the shortcomings of the person dishing out the physical punishment - not to the conditions at hand. Parents strike kids because parents feel " they can't take it anymore ", or they are seething with anger ( or fear ) and strike out in a ( preventable IMO ) knee jerk reaction IMO. Striking a child is a concious rational choice IMO - there is no in inevitability in it. I also don't buy the argument " If you care about your child, you do what's best for them " - in other words, you will strike them pysically as it is " best for them ".

It doesn't speak to any shortcomings - you do it when nothing else is working, and it's come down to something that's very important for your child (such as not doing drugs, not drinking underage, etc).

Where you come across as ignorant is in not showing why there is anything wrong with a parent spanking his/her child under the conditions I mentioned. You have demonstrated nothing against the policy if used as I mentioned.

You perfectly well know what "last resort" means. If not, maybe you shouldn't be such a big backer of Israel's war on Palestine.

Again, if history has taught us anything, it's that physicality is rarely required - but is required under exceptional circumstances, nevertheless.

[boyoflondon]

As a kid, I used to get spanked when I did wrong and I am glad I did because I grew up in the right direction.
Having that 'fear' of my dad made me think twice about my actions.

I dont hate my dad for spanking me ... I am glad my parents raised me the way that they did.


However, as someone mentioned, its all based on the culture.
Where I come from, spanking children is common and many kids grow up in the right direction. In the Canada and US, for whatever reason, spanking your child is thought of as some sort of a crime. Maybe that is why we have so many corrupted kids that end up on the street, drop out of school and turn to drugs and crime.

[Jonavin]

As a kid, I used to get spanked when I did wrong and I am glad I did because I grew up in the right direction.
Having that 'fear' of my dad made me think twice about my actions.

I dont hate my dad for spanking me ... I am glad my parents raised me the way that they did.


However, as someone mentioned, its all based on the culture.
Where I come from, spanking children is common and many kids grow up in the right direction. In the Canada and US, for whatever reason, spanking your child is thought of as some sort of a crime. Maybe that is why we have so many corrupted kids that end up on the street, drop out of school and turn to drugs and crime.

Unfortunately too many people go too far spanking and it becomes physical abuse. And when done it public you add public humiliation to it. I think that is more damaging even when its a lit spank in public.

It's a fine line you have to balance. You can't let then go unpunished, but there's no need for violence.

In many ways our society are babying our kids too much. I started noticing it with report cards that report "satisfy" and "need improvement" instead of a letter grade. And in some places, kid sports aren't allow to have scores or a winner/loser. It's getting pathetic. It's worst in the US than it is in Canada, but we're all breeding a society of kids that cannot take failures and constructive criticism.

[Macross_Freek]

growing up in an asian household, i am also for the physical discipline. I was physically disciplined numerous times throughout my childhood both with my mother's hands and feathercane. I think one actually broke on me. Regardless of that i very much respect my mother for doing it because I've grown up to be a better person because of it. It definitely was not physical abuse.

This however was after I was out of my infant stages and between the ages of 6-10 or so.

I think also with spanking or hitting, you have to look at the age of the child as well as the situation. Basically it depends. The answer to everything :D

[alysomji]

It's a fine line you have to balance. You can't let then go unpunished, but there's no need for violence.

No doubt about it. I think we should give parents we see the benefit of the doubt when we see them spanking their child - and assume its for all the right reasons and not excessive unless it absolutely appears to be.

At the end of the day, the honus is on us to prove that the parents are not doing what's best for their child - not the other way around.

What's interesting is I have yet to meet people who didn't think they deserved to be spanked at least once when they were growing up. Yet, there are many (including a few in this thread) who have no qualms asserting that they benefited from the spanking they received.

Again, let's draw a line between spanking and excessive physical force - there is a critical difference, from where I stand.

[Ngo_35]

too all you that are against spanking etc...

Im sure there are some who grow up perfectly fine without spanking. Also there are some who grow up perfectly fine WITH spanking. It all depends on the parents right? Either way both parents did a guy job raising you seeing how your not fukced up.

On the other side there are kids who are moron's whom were disciplined with time out and or spanking.

Case in point? What may work for you may not work for others. I know for sure If I had time out I would be a troubled $hit right now. But god damn, thank you chicken duster for setting my ass straight.

For those who say spanking is bad and what not, what's your cultural background? Perhaps it's different from mine because the way I see it, if a child is on time out usually thats not enough. But hey, thats how I grew up.

And for the op dont call mall security damn it. Next time you put your kids in time out, I'll call security because the length of your sentence was too long. You know what i mean?

Crap happens, I'd say use a combination of both techniques. Beat the kid and send his ass off to the corner. That way you get the best of both worlds.

Cheers.

[pollox]

I'm still confused as to why the spanking advocates fail to use such an effective technique with others in their lives. Don't like what your wife made for dinner? A smack in the head should set her straight. Boss giving you a hard time? A sharp rap on the ass should straighten him out.

The fact that physical punishment is only used on the most defensless and weak is a pretty telling point. I'm guessing the spanking will stop when the kid is big enough to hit back.

[teknoluv]

A kid who, no matter how much you try to convince him, refuses time and time again to get dressed and go to school - thereby missing school and hurting his future potential. Why? Because he considers school to be too hard and would prefer to remain as a lazy slob.
OMG! So a kid refuses to get dressed and go to school, and you think it's serious enough to use physical force?! :eek: That is why parents should be licensed. ;p

[poedua]

A kid who, no matter how much you try to convince him, refuses time and time again to get dressed and go to school - thereby missing school and hurting his future potential. Why? Because he considers school to be too hard and would prefer to remain as a lazy slob..

I'm assuming this is a joke.

Are you going to sit there and tell me that you would actually strike a child - strike a child simply because they get in a power struggle with you about going to school ?

You're kidding ...right ? Please tell me you're kidding. You'd actually strike a child over something as simple as a child giving you a hard time going to school ?

How old is this kid you are referring to anyway ?

Where do you most often strike them...in the back of the head, across their face, on an arm or leg, or on the behind ? And, how often would you strike them...once twice ...four of five...a dozen times ? What do you strike them with ? If they defy you for a couple of weeks about going to school, would you hit them every day to get them to go to school ?

It doesn't speak to any shortcomings - you do it when nothing else is working, and it's come down to something that's very important for your child (such as not doing drugs, not drinking underage, etc).

You discover your child is " doing drugs " - so, hitting them - hitting a teenager - will set them straight when " nothing else is working " ?

You discover your child is " drinking underage " - so, hitting them - hitting a teenager - will set them straight when " " nothing else is working " ?

It does speak to shortcomings. You have allowed violence to become an option when it needn't be. You have made a false conslusion that violence is a measure of last resort. You opt for violence simply because you don't know how to achieve the behavior you want without it.

There is a saying that " failure is not an option "........." violence is not an option " applies equally as well when parenting.

Where you come across as ignorant is in not showing why there is anything wrong with a parent spanking his/her child under the conditions I mentioned. You have demonstrated nothing against the policy if used as I mentioned.

I could say the same. You are " ignorant in not showing why there is anything wrong with a parent spanking his/her child ". It's violence against another defenceless human. If it were an adult you were hitting in such a manner it would be deemed assault. And we both know you would never strike your spouse - now would you. You could strrke your spouse - but you choose not to. You choose to strike your children.


You perfectly well know what "last resort" means..

Interesting term " last resort "

Well, if violence is such a sure fire way of getting the behavior you want, why not start with violence as option #1 instead of leaving it as a " last resort " ? What is it about violence that you have to call it a means of last "resort " ? Why is it the last option if it works so well ?

If not, maybe you shouldn't be such a big backer of Israel's war on Palestine.

Too funny.

You want to debate the pro's and con's of corporal punishment to show you have mature and reasoned rationale for your approach. How do you defend your position on this issue ? .......You introduce the Israel / Palestine conflict as being relevant to parenting and discipline :rolleyes: Briliant.

That's as logical as saying that my preference for organic food or passion for chess or gardening is relevant to parenting and discipline.

So much for your credibility.

Again, if history has taught us anything, it's that physicality is rarely required - but is required under exceptional circumstances, nevertheless.

No, that's utterly ridiculous.

It seems it's only " required under exceptional circumstances " in YOUR WORLD of parenting.

[poedua]

OMG! So a kid refuses to get dressed and go to school, and you think it's serious enough to use physical force?! :eek: That is why parents should be licensed. ;p

Exactly.

I was stunned when that parent said they hit their kid over something as simple as a power struggle about getting off to school.

Sad...very sad.

[poedua]

I'm still confused as to why the spanking advocates fail to use such an effective technique with others in their lives. Don't like what your wife made for dinner? A smack in the head should set her straight. Boss giving you a hard time? A sharp rap on the ass should straighten him out.

The fact that physical punishment is only used on the most defensless and weak is a pretty telling point. I'm guessing the spanking will stop when the kid is big enough to hit back.

Good post. Agree 100%.

[aidzhsiah]

I'm still confused as to why the spanking advocates fail to use such an effective technique with others in their lives. Don't like what your wife made for dinner? A smack in the head should set her straight. Boss giving you a hard time? A sharp rap on the ass should straighten him out.

The fact that physical punishment is only used on the most defensless and weak is a pretty telling point. I'm guessing the spanking will stop when the kid is big enough to hit back.

That's not exactly the same thing, is it? You can't just treat children like small adults.

As adults, we're supposed to be able to understand logic and common sense. But common sense is something that's developed over time and through experience, it's not like we instinctively learn from the womb that we shouldn't wear the awesome plastic bag hat or take fun rides in the dryer drum. Looking back to when I was a kid, I believed some really dumb crap. As I grew older, now I know why the concepts my parents stressed were important... but it's taken me life experience to understand why.

Besides, dinner ? Even spanking advocates would never smack a child because, say, he drew an ugly crayon drawing or kept complaining about their cooking.

[D-Roc]

That's not exactly the same thing, is it? You can't just treat children like small adults.

As adults, we're supposed to be able to understand logic and common sense. But common sense is something that's developed over time and through experience, it's not like we instinctively learn from the womb that we shouldn't wear the awesome plastic bag hat or take fun rides in the dryer drum. Looking back to when I was a kid, I believed some really dumb crap. As I grew older, now I know why the concepts my parents stressed were important... but it's taken me life experience to understand why.

Besides, dinner ? Even spanking advocates would never smack a child because, say, he drew an ugly crayon drawing or kept complaining about their cooking.

Actually it is the same thing.

By the time a child is considered a toddler/preschooler they are quite capable of understanding logic and common sense as well as consequences. You should be able to talk to them (not down to them) about their behaviour and why it is undesired, what is wrong with it and if it continues what the result will be. To say kids would not or do not understand common sense is a lame excuse for your inability to talk to your child and help them understand that their actions or words were wrong.

There has been many a time I have talked to adults that just do not seem to have common sense or are able to understand the consequences to their actions/words. Would I resort to violence to make them understand? Of course not.

Regardless of the situation, there is never a reason to strike a child in public or private. What the main problem is that parents tend ot be more a friend than a parent to their kids and they do not floow through with their "threats". The child learns that if they push enough they can usually get what they want. If the parent puts their foot down then the child becomes confused as the messages that they are receiving are mixed. Hence why a child acts out.

[rfdrfd]

100% agree. I still remember that chicken feather duster hehe..

Then my mom learned a new punishment from the Tae Kwan Do teacher. Kneel facing a wall, hold your ears with your fingers. Stay there for 30min or 1 hr.

Its all culture based. And depends if your child reacts to it or not.



too all you that are against spanking etc...

Im sure there are some who grow up perfectly fine without spanking. Also there are some who grow up perfectly fine WITH spanking. It all depends on the parents right? Either way both parents did a guy job raising you seeing how your not fukced up.

On the other side there are kids who are moron's whom were disciplined with time out and or spanking.

Case in point? What may work for you may not work for others. I know for sure If I had time out I would be a troubled $hit right now. But god damn, thank you chicken duster for setting my ass straight.

For those who say spanking is bad and what not, what's your cultural background? Perhaps it's different from mine because the way I see it, if a child is on time out usually thats not enough. But hey, thats how I grew up.

And for the op dont call mall security damn it. Next time you put your kids in time out, I'll call security because the length of your sentence was too long. You know what i mean?

Crap happens, I'd say use a combination of both techniques. Beat the kid and send his ass off to the corner. That way you get the best of both worlds.

Cheers.

[alysomji]

Exactly.

I was stunned when that parent said they hit their kid over something as simple as a power struggle about getting off to school.

Sad...very sad.

What a joke. You don't even read people's posts. Nowhere did I say I have hit my child even once.

I'm sure you've seen situations where a child is doing something that's harming him/her, and you've tried every possible route to stop him/her from doing this (including being extremely patient). So, what are your options?

Spanking:

(a) A last resort.
(b) Don't touch sensitive areas (head, crotch, chest/breasts, etc.).
(c) Be careful not to do it so as to bruise your child. Don't hit with excessive force.

Let's face it: if history has proven one thing, it's that not every situation can be solved peacefully and without any physical force whatsoever.

As a last resort, and with proper conditions, I don't see any problem. If you care about your child, you do what's best for them - even if you don't like it.

What's the problem?

And, yes, your support for the war on Palestine shows that you believe non-violence doesn't always work. The women and children of Palestine are just as defenseless as your children.

[alysomji]

OMG! So a kid refuses to get dressed and go to school, and you think it's serious enough to use physical force?! :eek: That is why parents should be licensed. ;p

Let's assume that this kid has not gone to school for months because of this, and your patience is wearing thin. You've tried everything from convincing your child about the benefits of school to offering to go with them to school. You've grounded them, taken away their allowance, favourite foods, etc.

[teknoluv]

Let's assume that this kid has not gone to school for months ...
First off, this kid would NOT have skipped school for more than a few days. If that happens, the problem DEFINITELY lies with the parent(s).

[alysomji]

First off, this kid would NOT have skipped school for more than a few days. If that happens, the problem DEFINITELY lies with the parent(s).

That doesn't answer the question. You avoiding the question only makes it appear as though you don't have a non-violent solution to offer. Here's the situation again:

A kid who, no matter how much you try to convince him, refuses time and time again to get dressed and go to school - thereby missing school and hurting his future potential. Why? Because he considers school to be too hard and would prefer to remain as a lazy slob. Let's assume that this kid has not gone to school for months because of this, and your patience is wearing thin. You've tried everything from convincing your child about the benefits of school to offering to go with them to school to offering to help "make school easy." You've grounded them, taken away their allowance, favourite foods, etc. The kid won't budge.

What to do?

[JAC]

That doesn't answer the question. You avoiding the question only makes it appear as though you don't have a non-violent solution to offer. Here's the situation again:

A kid who, no matter how much you try to convince him, refuses time and time again to get dressed and go to school - thereby missing school and hurting his future potential. Why? Because he considers school to be too hard and would prefer to remain as a lazy slob. Let's assume that this kid has not gone to school for months because of this, and your patience is wearing thin. You've tried everything from convincing your child about the benefits of school to offering to go with them to school to offering to help "make school easy." You've grounded them, taken away their allowance, favourite foods, etc. The kid won't budge.

What to do?

Kick his ass out. Or boarding school.

http://www.robertlandacademy.com/

[Diamondog]

A kid who, no matter how much you try to convince him, refuses time and time again to get dressed and go to school - thereby missing school and hurting his future potential. Why? Because he considers school to be too hard and would prefer to remain as a lazy slob.



It doesn't speak to any shortcomings - you do it when nothing else is working, and it's come down to something that's very important for your child (such as not doing drugs, not drinking underage, etc).

Where you come across as ignorant is in not showing why there is anything wrong with a parent spanking his/her child under the conditions I mentioned. You have demonstrated nothing against the policy if used as I mentioned.

You perfectly well know what "last resort" means. If not, maybe you shouldn't be such a big backer of Israel's war on Palestine.

Again, if history has taught us anything, it's that physicality is rarely required - but is required under exceptional circumstances, nevertheless.

You're out to lunch! How did the kid ever get that way in the first place? That is directly related to parenting.

[alysomji]

Kick his ass out. Or boarding school.

http://www.robertlandacademy.com/

1. Kicking his ass out is much worse than anything bad that could come out of spanking. Why would I send a kid out to live out on his own? Do I want him to never come back? Who knows where he/she could end up...

2. How the hell would I get the kid to go to boarding school if I can't even get him to go to regular school - even if I offer to go with him or send him to a school of choice.

FYI, this is not my kid I'm talking about. It's someone else's.

Sure, it's easy to blame the parents - but none of you are offering any real solutions. Those of us who were little buggers when we were young know perfectly well that there are many cases like what I've stated that have nothing to do with bad parenting.

[alysomji]

You're out to lunch! How did the kid ever get that way in the first place? That is directly related to parenting.

You should visit your local juvenile jail and talk to some of those kids and ask them if they're there because of bad parenting.

[teknoluv]

That doesn't answer the question. You avoiding the question only makes it appear as though you don't have a non-violent solution to offer.
I'm not exactly *fully* qualified, but with a post-graduate degree in education and years of frontline work with "band 5" (a.k.a. worst) students in Hong Kong, I can tell you that there ARE (yes, plural) more a handful of non-violence solutions for your hypothetically oversimplified situation. To make it simple, if there is really such a child who has not been to school for MONTHS, EVERY professional would first target the PARENTS. There will VERY LIKELY be some CRIMINAL investigation against them, and the child placed under foster care.

For other parents who have kids who are less than happy to go to school FOR A FEW DAYS, the first thing you should do is NOT to *presume" that he or she "prefers to remain as a lazy slob".

Those of us who were little buggers when we were young know perfectly well that there are many cases like what I've stated that have nothing to do with bad parenting.
It has EVERYTHING to do with bad parenting.

[Diamondog]

You should visit your local juvenile jail and talk to some of those kids and ask them if they're there because of bad parenting.

If the kids are in a home with a parent(s) and they end up there, something has gone wrong somewhere in the home (probably from very early on) and the parent being the adult is ultimately responsible, kids don't just end up going bad for no reason.

[D-Roc]

Kick his ass out. Or boarding school.

http://www.robertlandacademy.com/

Exactly. Non-violent and gets the message across pretty quick.

[D-Roc]

1. Kicking his ass out is much worse than anything bad that could come out of spanking. Why would I send a kid out to live out on his own? Do I want him to never come back? Who knows where he/she could end up...

2. How the hell would I get the kid to go to boarding school if I can't even get him to go to regular school - even if I offer to go with him or send him to a school of choice.

FYI, this is not my kid I'm talking about. It's someone else's.

Sure, it's easy to blame the parents - but none of you are offering any real solutions. Those of us who were little buggers when we were young know perfectly well that there are many cases like what I've stated that have nothing to do with bad parenting.

1) How is it worse? If the kid can will not go to school they ar sure as hell not going to live in my house if they can not follow the rules. A dose of reality will quickly sober them up.

2) You tell them we are going on a family trip. When you get you deposite their butt in the school say I love and good bye. Also tell them that you will only be getting the clothes they need (from their room back home). Nothing more.

Theses are real solutions. You just fail to recognize them as such, as you feel that since they will not go to school that a good slap will solve the problem when it does not. it only makes the situation worse.

Of course it is easy to blame the parents in this case as it is their fault that it has escalated to this. They have done something wrong to allow the kid to think this behaviour is appropriate.

[don242]

Disciplining children is important. The manner in which we discipline or help our children can vary but physical punishment does not seem to be necessary.

Children shouldn't be taught to fear, but to respect. Respect is taught by explanations (and yes consequences of actions) and being sure your child understands what he/she did was wrong AND why. Do we choose not to rob someone's home because of fear of getting caught and punishment or because of respect for our neighbours property?

Raising a child is difficult and sometimes more telling than others. There are times when parents get frustrated and times when the child gets frustarted. Both of these times are often the times when anger and physical threatening occurs by either parent or child and obviously this is the time when it is probably most important to not respond in that manner. This is the time when both child and parent need the hug or a moment of some sort to calm down and comprehend what the real problem is. This is not the time to spank or yell as it accomplishes nothing.

Talk to your children and explain the reasons for things. If they do something inappropriate, tell them why, don't just tell them to stop. If they continue acting out after they understand it is wrong, they do need consequences and there should be consequences. But it is the additional responsibility of the parent to find out why the child continues to act out and help the child. I find that many parents tend to tell their children NO but rarely follow up with an explanation as to why (or if they do it is a poor reason). Of course the child is going to respond by repeating the action because the child is trying to understand why.

My conclusion is that spanking rarely improves the situation and rarely resolves the real problem. It is a reaction that does little for a child other than teach them when things go wrong, they should consider hitting.

[paullyn59]

I can tell you that there ARE (yes, plural) more a handful of non-violence solutions for your hypothetically oversimplified situation. To make it simple, if there is really such a child who has not been to school for MONTHS, EVERY professional would first target the PARENTS. There will VERY LIKELY be some CRIMINAL investigation against them, and the child placed under foster care.

Maybe you could share the non-violent solutions. alysomji has stated that they think spanking should be a last resort and has asked for another way.

The only way there should be a criminal investigation against the parents is if it is the parents who are keeping their kids home. Certainly not if it the kids choice as in alysomji's example where the parent is doing what they can to get the kid to go.



For other parents who have kids who are less than happy to go to school FOR A FEW DAYS, the first thing you should do is NOT to *presume" that he or she "prefers to remain as a lazy slob".

This I agree with. I would think a child who wants to stay home, feels safe at home.


alysomji: Is this the only real negative behavior that this kid has shown or is it part of a long list? Started recently or been going on for a while?

[alysomji]

1) How is it worse? If the kid can will not go to school they ar sure as hell not going to live in my house if they can not follow the rules. A dose of reality will quickly sober them up.

Are you crazy? Have you seen what happens to KIDS who are sent to live on their own? What do they do for food? How do they protect themselves from predators? Many kids who ran away when they were young end up being part of major screw-ups that they regret for the rest of their lives. Kicking your kid out is probably the worst thing you could do to him/her. Maybe you should go and visit some of the street kids downtown and see what they've done with their lives. How the hell is a kid supposed to live on his own.

2) You tell them we are going on a family trip. When you get you deposite their butt in the school say I love and good bye. Also tell them that you will only be getting the clothes they need (from their room back home). Nothing more.

There's nothing stopping him from running out of the school or running away while there. You'd need a straight jacket to keep him there - and the school teachers / admins would certainly not resort to such methods to prevent the kid from leaving. Not to mention the cost of boarding school which is prohibitive to many parents.

Theses are real solutions. You just fail to recognize them as such, as you feel that since they will not go to school that a good slap will solve the problem when it does not. it only makes the situation worse.

As I pointed, out those aren't real solutions at all. In both cases, the problems are actually made worse than resolved.

Of course it is easy to blame the parents in this case as it is their fault that it has escalated to this. They have done something wrong to allow the kid to think this behaviour is appropriate.

Parents are not the reason for all of the bad behaviour of a child. A parent can only try their very best to raise their child as best as possible - anything bad the kid does cannot be completely attributed to them. There are some influences on your kid's life that you've got no control over (take when you send them to school, for instance - you've got no idea what kind of bad kids they could meet there).

[Spidey]

Parents are not the reason for all of the bad behaviour of a child. A parent can only try their very best to raise their child as best as possible - anything bad the kid does cannot be completely attributed to them. There are some influences on your kid's life that you've got no control over (take when you send them to school, for instance - you've got no idea what kind of bad kids they could meet there).


I agree with this. We saw a change in each of our kids when they started school, Im not saying there are perfect, but they sure came home learning new words and things. Part of growing up as we had it happen to us all. Little Johnny or Susy taught you this word or this thing.

As my kids are older now we dont spank. We still do occasionaly with our 5 year old, but mostly hand smacking now. But as they get older, the 2 oldest we dont do it at all, because they know consequences now (taking away things, groundings, etc)

But small small children kinda benefit from a hand smack. Say sticking something into an electrical outlet or touching a hot stove. They associate pain with that, and pain they dont like. Plus Id rather smack my childs hand then see they suffer burns and blisters.

[D-Roc]

Are you crazy? Have you seen what happens to KIDS who are sent to live on their own? What do they do for food? How do they protect themselves from predators? Many kids who ran away when they were young end up being part of major screw-ups that they regret for the rest of their lives. Kicking your kid out is probably the worst thing you could do to him/her. Maybe you should go and visit some of the street kids downtown and see what they've done with their lives. How the hell is a kid supposed to live on his own.

Nope not crazy. Kicking them out can be the best thing for them. They get the idea living at home that their parents will bail them out of anything, give them money, food and shelter to survive and yet they still do not want to follow the rules. When they do not want to follow the rules it is time for them to live on their own and live by the rules they want. Sheltering them will not help them grow and understand which appears may be the problem with your friends kid.
If I went and visited the street kids I would see that alot (not all) came from a home where they thought the rules were unreasonable. You are right in asking how is a kid suppose to live on their own. If they can not then they need to follow the rules of the home they can live in. However your idea of setting them straight is smacking them around. Sounds like a neanderthal (sp?) solution. Very barberic.



There's nothing stopping him from running out of the school or running away while there. You'd need a straight jacket to keep him there - and the school teachers / admins would certainly not resort to such methods to prevent the kid from leaving. Not to mention the cost of boarding school which is prohibitive to many parents.

True. See above for the answer to your question. Living on thier own.



As I pointed, out those aren't real solutions at all. In both cases, the problems are actually made worse than resolved.

As I pointed out these are very real soultions. You just feel that smacking someone around as a last resort works when it does not.


Parents are not the reason for all of the bad behaviour of a child. A parent can only try their very best to raise their child as best as possible - anything bad the kid does cannot be completely attributed to them. There are some influences on your kid's life that you've got no control over (take when you send them to school, for instance - you've got no idea what kind of bad kids they could meet there).

Parents are for the most part the biggest influence in a kids life. If some other kids at school have more of an influence over them then the parents have failed.

[D-Roc]

But small small children kinda benefit from a hand smack. Say sticking something into an electrical outlet or touching a hot stove. They associate pain with that, and pain they dont like. Plus Id rather smack my childs hand then see they suffer burns and blisters.


What??? I am sorry but this is stupid. I and my wife have never onced needed to resort to hand slapping or any other kind of pain in order for my child to understand that the stove is hot and not to touch outlets, or other dangerous things.

We showed her the stove (as an example) and explained that things get very hot. We would ask her what she thought would happen if she touched something hot. At first she said I do not know. We then explained that touching things on the stove can hurt her. Cause pain. We would then realte it to an experience that happened where she experienced pain. Such as falling while running and hurting her hands, knees, etc. We ask her if she remembers how that hurt and how she cried. She would say yes and then we would explain that by touching something hot will cause her to cry as it really hurts.

The key is to talk to the child, not down to the child. We would never talk to her as a baby but as a person.

[gemstone]

Nope not crazy. Kicking them out can be the best thing for them. They get the idea living at home that their parents will bail them out of anything, give them money, food and shelter to survive and yet they still do not want to follow the rules. When they do not want to follow the rules it is time for them to live on their own and live by the rules they want. Sheltering them will not help them grow and understand which appears may be the problem with your friends kid.
If I went and visited the street kids I would see that alot (not all) came from a home where they thought the rules were unreasonable. You are right in asking how is a kid suppose to live on their own. If they can not then they need to follow the rules of the home they can live in. However your idea of setting them straight is smacking them around. Sounds like a neanderthal (sp?) solution. Very barberic.


As I pointed out these are very real soultions. You just feel that smacking someone around as a last resort works when it does not.

Parents are for the most part the biggest influence in a kids life. If some other kids at school have more of an influence over them then the parents have failed.


Throwing them out on the streets to who knows what may happen to them is better then trying to help them at home? That is neanderthal and barbaric. Not throwing them out is being a responsible parent. Throwing them out should be the last resort like if they become a danger to the people living in the house but if the kid has gotten to that point then they need serious help and throwing them out onto the street is not going to help them. By the time the kid learns that life in the streets away from your rules is not so great, they will probably have bigger problems to deal with that they may never get over. Kicking them out is the worse thing any parent can do if they really want to help their child.

Biggest influence meaning if things get too tough, get rid of it? That will really teach them. As for influence over them, there would not even be a term "peer pressure" if it were that easy.

I don't think hitting a teenager will help either. Cutting off the money, car, TV, computer, phone, friends, etc. will eventually unless the kid has a real phsyc problem and then the parent can get outside help.

[Spidey]

What??? I am sorry but this is stupid. I and my wife have never onced needed to resort to hand slapping or any other kind of pain in order for my child to understand that the stove is hot and not to touch outlets, or other dangerous things.

We showed her the stove (as an example) and explained that things get very hot. We would ask her what she thought would happen if she touched something hot. At first she said I do not know. We then explained that touching things on the stove can hurt her. Cause pain. We would then realte it to an experience that happened where she experienced pain. Such as falling while running and hurting her hands, knees, etc. We ask her if she remembers how that hurt and how she cried. She would say yes and then we would explain that by touching something hot will cause her to cry as it really hurts.

The key is to talk to the child, not down to the child. We would never talk to her as a baby but as a person.


Everyone has a different way of parenting. yours is no better than mine and vice versa

So your telling me your talking to kids when they are crawling say at 6-8 months, and they understand.

And if you come back saying your parenting skills are better than mine, Id like to get the manual that came with your kids

[D-Roc]

I said kicking them out not kicking them to the streets. They would have to find shelter, a job, etc.

It is called hard love.

Edited to say this was in regards to being a last resoprt. Taking things away as you stated should always be done first.
You are putting words into my mouth now in regards to my comment of parents being teh biggest influence in a kids life. Go back and re-read what I posted and what it was in regards to. You have taken it out of context.

[D-Roc]

Everyone has a different way of parenting. yours is no better than mine and vice versa

So your telling me your talking to kids when they are crawling say at 6-8 months, and they understand.

And if you come back saying your parenting skills are better than mine, Id like to get the manual that came with your kids


LMAO.... 6-8 month olds are generally only crawling and baby gates should be used to retricted them from entering dangerous areas of the home. Besides your home should be baby proofed (sp?).

Hitting a 6-8 month old to teach them something is nto the answer. You just remove them from the situation and say no.

My manual is simple. First rule....Never hit.

[Spidey]

LMAO.... 6-8 month olds are generally only crawling and baby gates should be used to retricted them from entering dangerous areas of the home. Besides your home should be baby proofed (sp?).

Hitting a 6-8 month old to teach them something is nto the answer. You just remove them from the situation and say no.

My manual is simple. First rule....Never hit.

Exactly, they are only crawling, and your saying your talking to them like an adult when they dont understand you yet.

And we had our house baby proofed. But people you visit dont.

And slapping their hand and saying a stern no is wrong?? When they dont understand anything verbal yet, how do you teach them

I think many people here are getting spanking confused with beating your child.

I dont care what u think, I spanked my kids occasionaly and smacked their hands. They grew up great, they love and respect me, and not out of fear either. But they know their parents are in charge.

[gemstone]

I said kicking them out not kicking them to the streets. They would have to find shelter, a job, etc.

It is called hard love.

Edited to say this was in regards to being a last resoprt. Taking things away as you stated should always be done first.
You are putting words into my mouth now in regards to my comment of parents being teh biggest influence in a kids life. Go back and re-read what I posted and what it was in regards to. You have taken it out of context.

Key words being, "They would have to find shelter, a job, etc." What if they don't or can't. How long do you give them to find this job, shelter, etc.? What age do you suggest they be thrown out? Where are you kicking them out to if not the streets?

You said if kids at school have more influence than a parent does then the parents have failed. What don't I understand? There is a whole world out there that is going to influence your child as much or even more than you are especially as they get older and their circle gets bigger. A good parent will hopefully catch it before it gets out of hand and try to correct it or if they don't catch it, be there to pick up the pieces, not throw them away.

[Diamondog]

Exactly, they are only crawling, and your saying your talking to them like an adult when they dont understand you yet.

And we had our house baby proofed. But people you visit dont.

And slapping their hand and saying a stern no is wrong?? When they dont understand anything verbal yet, how do you teach them

I think many people here are getting spanking confused with beating your child.

I dont care what u think, I spanked my kids occasionaly and smacked their hands. They grew up great, they love and respect me, and not out of fear either. But they know their parents are in charge.

I couldn't imagine slapping my childs hand, she is 8 months old and a handful but I just couldn't imagine slapping her anywhere and no matter what she was getting into or doing at this age she is pure and not doing anything other than exploring...

[Spidey]

I don't advocate hitting/spanking/slapping a child at any age but if you're doing this at this age sounds like you have some problems!



Thats the stupiest thing Ive ever heard. Better call child welfare, Im beating my kids :mad:

[Diamondog]

Thats the stupiest thing Ive ever heard. Better call child welfare, Im beating my kids :mad:

Ya that's great slapping an 8 month old....good for you! I can see how someone who would slap and 8 month old would think thats the stupidest thing they've ever heard. Keep up the good work. ;)

[Spidey]

Ya that's great slapping an 8 month old....good for you! Keep up the good work.

yes I did slap my kids on the hands to protect them. What do you just let them wander around and get into whatever they want. Or do you follow them around with a catcher mitt in case they get hurt.

Everyone parents different, but what pisses me off is the "holier than thou" attitude that the parents have that dont spank their kids.

I know lots of parents that dont, and their kids are little shits. Id it because they didnt spank them, dont know. But the 1,2,3 crap sure aint working for them.

U dont like the fact I slapped my kids hands 5-9 years ago, thats fine. But ive been raising my kids for 10 plus years now, no manual. And I think I did a pretty good job in todays world

[poedua]

yes I did slap my kids on the hands to protect them.

How does hitting your " protect " them exacty ?

Got some examples of when a " real good smack " to a kid is a good thing to do to " protect " them ?


What do you just let them wander around and get into whatever they want. Or do you follow them around with a catcher mitt in case they get hurt.

No, you parent as best you can. But violence needn't ever be an option - it's uncalled for, regardless of the situation.

Everyone parents different, but what pisses me off is the "holier than thou" attitude that the parents have that dont spank their kids.

That's funny...." what pisses me off is the "holier than thou" attitude that the parents have that DO spank their kids. "

I know lots of parents that dont, and their kids are little shits. Id it because they didnt spank them, dont know. But the 1,2,3 crap sure aint working for them.

That's funny ...another coincidence......." I know lots of parents that DID/ DO and their kids are little shits..........But the " here's a smack " sure aint working for them "


U dont like the fact I slapped my kids hands 5-9 years ago, thats fine. But ive been raising my kids for 10 plus years now, no manual. And I think I did a pretty good job in todays world

Again, I have 4 kids, almost all in high school now...never laid a finger on them - not once. Never had to....or wanted to.

[teknoluv]

There may be more than a dozen ways to get from point A to point B, but there are also WRONG ways which either delay your arrival or don't lead you to the destination at all; worst still, chances are you may arrive there APPARENTLY safe and sound, without knowing that you have knocked down somebody along the way. For parenting, the worst case scenario is not to realize one's fault (or even brag about it), and help raise kids that later become abusive to their own kids. What a pity!

Oh by the way, using physical force against a kid who is old enough for reasoning simply implies your failure; using physical force against one who is too young for reasoning IS CLEARLY AN ABUSE.

[Diamondog]

There may be more than a dozen ways to get from point A to point B, but there are also WRONG ways which either delay your arrival or don't lead you to the destination at all; worst still, chances are you may arrive there APPARENTLY safe and sound, without knowing that you have knocked down somebody along the way. For parenting, the worst case scenario is not to realize one's fault (or even brag about it), and help raise kids that later become abusive to their own kids. What a pity!

Oh by the way, using physical force against a kid who is old enough for reasoning simply implies your failure; using physical force against one who is too young for reasoning IS CLEARLY AN ABUSE.

Nuff said!

[Spidey]

Well then I better admit the other bad things I do.

I spanked my kids, guess that made me an abusive mean father

I drink beer in front of my kids, I guess that makes me an alcoholic father

Ive swore in front of my kids, guess that makes me an unrespectable father

My kids have seen me lose my temper, guess that make me a weak father.

My kids have also seen me laugh, cry, scream and yell.

Guess they have seen me as human.


You dont want to spank your kids, I dont care. But just because you dont doesnt make you a better father or person than I am

[Spidey]

How does hitting your " protect " them exacty ?

Got some examples of when a " real good smack " to a kid is a good thing to do to " protect " them ?


Hmm lets see, accidently running into the street, grabbing something that will cause them physical harm, standing on something where they can fall and injure themselves. Tons of other examples Im sure

These things happen no matter how good of a parent you are.

[paullyn59]

How does hitting your " protect " them exacty ?

Got some examples of when a " real good smack " to a kid is a good thing to do to " protect " them ?

No, you parent as best you can. But violence needn't ever be an option - it's uncalled for, regardless of the situation.

That's funny...." what pisses me off is the "holier than thou" attitude that the parents have that DO spank their kids. "

That's funny ...another coincidence......." I know lots of parents that DID/ DO and their kids are little shits..........But the " here's a smack " sure aint working for them "

I would rather smack (NOT BEAT) my kid's bottom a couple of times to prevent him from hurting himself in the future than to hope he understood what I was saying when I got down to his level and talked to him about it and not do it again. That is too big of risk for me to take. He is more likely to remember the smack than the words. Once the child is old enough to communicate and ask questions about why they are being told no which means they are capable of understanding, then spankings should stop.

Example:
A small child decides to go for walk, just as he has everyday with mom. Just as he sees older siblings do everyday. Mom says she can't go now. Mom takes eyes off him for 10 seconds but he was only 6 ft away. He decides he will go anyway. Where's the danger? If he even understands what danger is.

No spanking: Mom calls child back, gets down and talks to child. Did he learn not to do this again? Guess we'll wait and see and hope for the best. If he gets hit by a car, abducted, whatever, at least mom can say but I talked to him and told him not to go for a walk by himself.

Spanking: Mom smacks (NOT BEAT) the child a couple of times on the bottom while telling him it is wrong and dangerous. Child never does it again because he will remember and associate the road with the spanking. He didn't like the spanking. He still may not understand why he could not go for the walk but at least he knows mom doesn't want him to.

Spanking cannot be given for any little reason. It needs to be saved for only the most critical times or it will lose all affect.

You are right, neither works all the time. That is why as many kid's who get smacked turn out just as well/bad as kid's who don't get smacked. There is alot more to parenting besides spanking vs no spanking.

I see alot more holier than thou attitude from parents that claim they won't hit their children than from parents who do. Reread this thread.



There may be more than a dozen ways to get from point A to point B, but there are also WRONG ways which either delay your arrival or don't lead you to the destination at all; worst still, chances are you may arrive there APPARENTLY safe and sound, without knowing that you have knocked down somebody along the way. For parenting, the worst case scenario is not to realize one's fault (or even brag about it), and help raise kids that later become abusive to their own kids. What a pity![/b].

And who decides which are the wrong ways? Spanking is not abuse. Beatings and leaving physical marks is abuse. For parenting, the worst case is thinking you are right all the time because then you are going to raise paranoid, screwed up kids who are trying to be perfect for their parents and failing.

I asked you this in an earlier post. >Maybe you could share the non-violent solutions. alysomji has stated that they think spanking should be a last resort and has asked for another way.< Perhaps you missed it.

You are preaching yet you offer no advice from someone who has asked for it especially since you consider yourself to be not exactly *fully* qualified, but with a post-graduate degree in education and years of frontline work.

[JAC]

1. Kicking his ass out is much worse than anything bad that could come out of spanking. Why would I send a kid out to live out on his own? Do I want him to never come back? Who knows where he/she could end up...

The same place he'll end up anyway when he drops out of high school...the street.

2. How the hell would I get the kid to go to boarding school if I can't even get him to go to regular school - even if I offer to go with him or send him to a school of choice.

Military school, boot camp, whatever you want to call it. Someplace where they're not afraid to discipline problem teens.

[paullyn59]

The same place he'll end up anyway when he drops out of high school...the street.

Military school, boot camp, whatever you want to call it. Someplace where they're not afraid to discipline problem teens.

Only end up in the street if the parents throw them out. And how do they discipline problem teens? Throw them in "hole". Scream and yell and degrade them? Stand out in the yard for hours?.........?

[alysomji]

Only end up in the street if the parents throw them out. And how do they discipline problem teens? Throw them in "hole". Scream and yell and degrade them? Stand out in the yard for hours?.........?

Exactly. If I even asked a kid what he would prefer: a spanking that wasn't excessive (no sensitive areas, no bruising) or going to military school or being sent out in the streets to fend for himself/herself, what kid would choose the latter two?

What sick-minded parent would choose the latter two?

No way I'm sending my kid to live on the street. I would probably never see him again. He would probably die somewhere and I would not even know about it. And, forget military/boot camp. Those kids go through physical and mental torment far worse than a reasonable parent's spanking.

Wow. Some of you guys are twisted. The whole point you punish your child is because you love them - not hate them. If it was anyone else, sure, maybe who cares. But it's your child - and that's why you see the need to teach them and make sure they grow up right.

[D-Roc]

Exactly, they are only crawling, and your saying your talking to them like an adult when they dont understand you yet.

And we had our house baby proofed. But people you visit dont.

And slapping their hand and saying a stern no is wrong?? When they dont understand anything verbal yet, how do you teach them

I think many people here are getting spanking confused with beating your child.

I dont care what u think, I spanked my kids occasionaly and smacked their hands. They grew up great, they love and respect me, and not out of fear either. But they know their parents are in charge.

When I said you talk to them like a person (not an adult. Big difference) I was referring to a toddler / preschooler.

Yes slapping their hand is wrong. A firm/stern no and removing the baby from the area that you do not want them to be in is enough for you to get the point across. A baby at that age can not understand why you, as their mother/father are causing them pain and may even make them cry.
You may think they grew up without fear but by spanking them does cause feer in a child. Fear of experiencing pain from a parent who is suppose to not hurt them. It may have been acceptable in your day and age but not in the present.

[D-Roc]

Key words being, "They would have to find shelter, a job, etc." What if they don't or can't. How long do you give them to find this job, shelter, etc.? What age do you suggest they be thrown out? Where are you kicking them out to if not the streets?

You said if kids at school have more influence than a parent does then the parents have failed. What don't I understand? There is a whole world out there that is going to influence your child as much or even more than you are especially as they get older and their circle gets bigger. A good parent will hopefully catch it before it gets out of hand and try to correct it or if they don't catch it, be there to pick up the pieces, not throw them away.

Well if they can't they have the option to live at home by the rules of the parent. Simple. If they can't well they better find a place to live and a job because I sure as hell would not support them if he/she did not want to go to school.

If you think that other people would have as much an influence if not more then you as a parent then there is something wrong. A parent IS suppose to be (if the job is done right) THE biggest influence in any child's life regardless of their age.

[Spidey]

When I said you talk to them like a person (not an adult. Big difference) I was referring to a toddler / preschooler.

Yes slapping their hand is wrong. A firm/stern no and removing the baby from the area that you do not want them to be in is enough for you to get the point across. A baby at that age can not understand why you, as their mother/father are causing them pain and may even make them cry.
You may think they grew up without fear but by spanking them does cause feer in a child. Fear of experiencing pain from a parent who is suppose to not hurt them. It may have been acceptable in your day and age but not in the present.


Well you can think that then. Doesnt make you right or wrong. Have your beliefs and Ill have mine.

And what right do you have to say that my kids fear me. Sitting on your pedastal looking down and condensending me for the way I raise my kids. You can take that attitude and shove it up your ass :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

My day and age, how old do u think I am anyways

[D-Roc]

yes I did slap my kids on the hands to protect them. What do you just let them wander around and get into whatever they want. Or do you follow them around with a catcher mitt in case they get hurt.

Everyone parents different, but what pisses me off is the "holier than thou" attitude that the parents have that dont spank their kids.

I know lots of parents that dont, and their kids are little shits. Id it because they didnt spank them, dont know. But the 1,2,3 crap sure aint working for them.

U dont like the fact I slapped my kids hands 5-9 years ago, thats fine. But ive been raising my kids for 10 plus years now, no manual. And I think I did a pretty good job in todays world

So you have caused your kids pain in order to protect them?? That is just backwards thinking.

Yes there are parents who have kids that do not hit and they are out of control. Those parents are also the ones that always given in to their kids demands, never follow through with punishment or are more worried about beig their best friend rather than a parent, but that STILL does not excuse anyone resorting to hitting a child especailly an 8 year old.

You do not have to follow them around all the time, but that is when you create a safe enviroment that is baby proof (as much as possible) and let them explore imstead of smacking them all day and say "No. Don't touch that."

[D-Roc]

Well then I better admit the other bad things I do.

I spanked my kids, guess that made me an abusive mean father

I drink beer in front of my kids, I guess that makes me an alcoholic father

Ive swore in front of my kids, guess that makes me an unrespectable father

My kids have seen me lose my temper, guess that make me a weak father.

My kids have also seen me laugh, cry, scream and yell.

Guess they have seen me as human.


You dont want to spank your kids, I dont care. But just because you dont doesnt make you a better father or person than I am


1) I agree
2) I agree
3) I agree whole heartedly
4) I disagree

[D-Roc]

Well you can think that then. Doesnt make you right or wrong. Have your beliefs and Ill have mine.

And what right do you have to say that my kids fear me. Sitting on your pedastal looking down and condensending me for the way I raise my kids. You can take that attitude and shove it up your ass :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

My day and age, how old do u think I am anyways


Since I am on that pedastal and you are looking up at me I think it would be much easier for you to kiss my ass my violent friend.

Hitting a child does casue them to fear you and what actions you would take in the future. If you think that violence equates to respect then you are really delusional.

[Spidey]

1) I agree
2) I agree
3) I agree whole heartedly
4) I disagree


I am literally crying from laughing so hard. I guess it was you that was on Leave it to Beaver or the Cosby show. Lifes all perfect and problems solved in half an hour.

Must be great to be so perfect. Your kids will be disappointed when they get older and actually see what "real" people are like

Hope everyone on RFD can forgive me, Im human

Drinking a beer in front of my kids makes me an alcoholic father, thats a freaking joke

[Spidey]

Since I am on that pedastal and you are looking up at me I think it would be much easier for you to kiss my ass my violent friend.

Hitting a child does casue them to fear you and what actions you would take in the future. If you think that violence equates to respect then you are really delusional.

Well you can be on that pedastal all you want. Id rather be down here with the regular people that have flaws.

Suppose you think its wrong to look at porn too.

I wonder if u know what real violence is

[D-Roc]

I am literally crying from laughing so hard. I guess it was you that was on Leave it to Beaver or the Cosby show. Lifes all perfect and problems solved in half an hour.

Must be great to be so perfect. Your kids will be disappointed when they get older and actually see what "real" people are like

Hope everyone on RFD can forgive me, Im human

Drinking a beer in front of my kids makes me an alcoholic father, thats a freaking joke


I must correct myself. I meant to agree with drinking in front of young children and that does not equate to you being an alcoholic. And on second thought I must also correct myself that I am wrong about the drinking aspect. It is getting drunk in front of under age kids I disagree with. That is what I was referring to. My mistake for not being clear.

So just because I have the decency and the ability not to swear in front of my child, not resort to violence in administering discipline I am not showing them what "real" people are like? I am showing my child that they can solve problems without resorting to violence and teaching them how to also not resort to foul language when they are angry, upset, etc. That is what REAL people should be like. Not violent, vulgure people.

I am curious what you are referring to when you ask me if I know what "real" violence is. And I would like some examples of "unreal" violence.

[poedua]

Hmm lets see, accidently running into the street, grabbing something that will cause them physical harm, standing on something where they can fall and injure themselves. Tons of other examples Im sure

None of which is an excuse to smack a child.

These things happen no matter how good of a parent you are.

Or, how often you hit them.

[poedua]

So just because I have the decency and the ability not to swear in front of my child, not resort to violence in administering discipline I am not showing them what "real" people are like? I am showing my child that they can solve problems without resorting to violence and teaching them how to also not resort to foul language when they are angry, upset, etc. That is what REAL people should be like. Not violent, vulgure people.

I am curious what you are referring to when you ask me if I know what "real" violence is. And I would like some examples of "unreal" violence.

You're not alone...I've never sworn in front of my 4 kids...or laid a finger on them.

Violence and profanity is a choice........pure and simple.

[Spidey]

I must correct myself. I meant to agree with drinking in front of young children and that does not equate to you being an alcoholic. And on second thought I must also correct myself that I am wrong about the drinking aspect. It is getting drunk in front of under age kids I disagree with. That is what I was referring to. My mistake for not being clear.

So just because I have the decency and the ability not to swear in front of my child, not resort to violence in administering discipline I am not showing them what "real" people are like? I am showing my child that they can solve problems without resorting to violence and teaching them how to also not resort to foul language when they are angry, upset, etc. That is what REAL people should be like. Not violent, vulgure people.

I am curious what you are referring to when you ask me if I know what "real" violence is. And I would like some examples of "unreal" violence.


So your telling me you have never swore by accident in front of your kids. Youve never missed a nail hamering and hit your thumb, or had something fall on you, etc

I see your back tracking the drinking answer now. Maybe you read my thread to fast and just wanted to judge me.

as for this quote "That is what REAL people should be like. Not violent, vulgure people."

Real people have faults, they make mistakes, they are human. And Id rather have my kids see me as human. If you think doing what I do makes me a bad parent, then get on the horn and call child services

[D-Roc]

So your telling me you have never swore by accident in front of your kids. Youve never missed a nail hamering and hit your thumb, or had something fall on you, etc

I see your back tracking the drinking answer now. Maybe you read my thread to fast and just wanted to judge me.

as for this quote "That is what REAL people should be like. Not violent, vulgure people."

Real people have faults, they make mistakes, they are human. And Id rather have my kids see me as human. If you think doing what I do makes me a bad parent, then get on the horn and call child services


No I have not used foul language even when I have hurt myself by accident. I would use other words to express myself.

I am not backtracking on my drinking answer. I failed to be clear and corrected myself in what I referring to.

Yes real people have faults as I have many and I have made mistakes, but that we are not discussing all faults and mistakes. We are talking about violence against defensless children. And if I saw you strike your child in public you damn right I would call child services and the police. If I knew who you were and I knew you hit your kids I would call in a heart beat.

[poedua]

No I have not used foul language even when I have hurt myself by accident. I would use other words to express myself.

I am not backtracking on my drinking answer. I failed to be clear and corrected myself in what I referring to.

Yes real people have faults as I have many and I have made mistakes, but that we are not discussing all faults and mistakes. We are talking about violence against defensless children. And if I saw you strike your child in public you damn right I would call child services and the police. If I knew who you were and I knew you hit your kids I would call in a heart beat.

Well said.

The only thing '" violence against defensless children " teaches children is that this sort of violence & intimidation is the way you gain power & control & respect - which, of course, is a complete joke.

[Spidey]

You're not alone...I've never sworn in front of my 4 kids...or laid a finger on them.

Violence and profanity is a choice........pure and simple.


So have you did anything wrong ever with your kids. Even once

[Spidey]

No I have not used foul language even when I have hurt myself by accident. I would use other words to express myself.

I am not backtracking on my drinking answer. I failed to be clear and corrected myself in what I referring to.

Yes real people have faults as I have many and I have made mistakes, but that we are not discussing all faults and mistakes. We are talking about violence against defensless children. And if I saw you strike your child in public you damn right I would call child services and the police. If I knew who you were and I knew you hit your kids I would call in a heart beat.

Damn, I wish I was as perfect as you.

And you better call them now, because you never know when I will go on a mad spanking spree.

I also wrestle with them and flip them around, arrest me please.

And for the record, I dont ssmack my kids hands anymore, they are older know and can understand consequences.

But I do drink beer in front of them. And I do occasionly let a swear word come out here and there.

I am the worst person in the world.

[Spidey]

Here is a direct quote from my kids on MSN. My wife was chatting to me becaue Im at work, and she let them talk to me while she was there.

"this is brody and payden now and your the best dad in the world Good Night we love you"


I must be a terrible father. They send me that while Im at work on my 13 hour shift supporting my family.

Im a complete bastard I tell you :twisted:

[paullyn59]

Well if they can't they have the option to live at home by the rules of the parent. Simple. If they can't well they better find a place to live and a job because I sure as hell would not support them if he/she did not want to go to school.

If you think that other people would have as much an influence if not more then you as a parent then there is something wrong. A parent IS suppose to be (if the job is done right) THE biggest influence in any child's life regardless of their age.

That's right ship them off to be someone or everyone else's problem. Good parenting there. Never give up on your child!

What world are you living in? Maybe back when people were isolated and no TV, magazines, movies, etc. parents were their kids main influence but not any more especially once they start school. Unless you are going to lock your kid up, forget that line of thinking. Teachers, friends, friends parents all there as a big part of your kid's lives.

Yes slapping their hand is wrong. A firm/stern no and removing the baby from the area that you do not want them to be in is enough for you to get the point across. A baby at that age can not understand why you, as their mother/father are causing them pain and may even make them cry.You may think they grew up without fear but by spanking them does cause feer in a child. Fear of experiencing pain from a parent who is suppose to not hurt them. It may have been acceptable in your day and age but not in the present.

If a baby cannot understand why the parent is causing them pain then they certainly cannot understand a no and being removed from the area. (and there is no real pain, it is the shock of it and sound that affects them. If you leave a mark then you have gone to far and have caused pain, IMO, but others may not agree) I think anyone who was spanked would know if they grew up in fear or not so they are the best judges whether their kids will grow up with fear. They may have grown up in fear of being spanked which deterred them from whatever they were thinking of doing but not from their parents.

Who says it is wrong or unacceptable - you? Or the so called experts? How many times have they been wrong and changed their opinions? Judging from this thread it is about 50/50 whether spanking is wrong or not. Look around you, ask your parents how safe they felt 25 years ago compared to today. Ask teachers who taught 25 years ago whether the kids in their class were more respectful back then before this no spanking crap came to be. The world today is not the result of a few smacked bottoms. It is a result of parents trying to "talk" to their kids and giving up in frustration when it didn't work. That's when the kid starts getting out of hand and in trouble.

When your child is an adult, whether he turns out well adjusted or not, then you can claim a little expertise on the matter. Until then you are just giving your opinion which is fine. You shouldn't be spouting off like it is fact and no one else's opinion matters. That's another thing you can make sure you teach your kids, they are always right and everyone else is always wrong. Wonder how that will work out for them.

[poedua]

So have you did anything wrong ever with your kids. Even once

What do you mean by " anything wrong " exactly ?

If you mean did I hit my kids repeatedly or swear at them - then no, I never did.

[Spidey]

What do you mean by " anything wrong " exactly ?

If you mean did I hit my kids repeatedly or swear at them - then no, I never did.

Well by the sounds of it you never swear, whcih is fine.

But have you ever let your kids see u as a person that makes mistakes

if you make mistakes then why am I not allowed. Because your mistakes are better.

[patrob]

I would rather smack (NOT BEAT) my kid's bottom a couple of times to prevent him from hurting himself in the future than to hope he understood what I was saying when I got down to his level and talked to him about it and not do it again. That is too big of risk for me to take. He is more likely to remember the smack than the words. Once the child is old enough to communicate and ask questions about why they are being told no which means they are capable of understanding, then spankings should stop.

Example:
A small child decides to go for walk, just as he has everyday with mom. Just as he sees older siblings do everyday. Mom says she can't go now. Mom takes eyes off him for 10 seconds but he was only 6 ft away. He decides he will go anyway. Where's the danger? If he even understands what danger is.

No spanking: Mom calls child back, gets down and talks to child. Did he learn not to do this again? Guess we'll wait and see and hope for the best. If he gets hit by a car, abducted, whatever, at least mom can say but I talked to him and told him not to go for a walk by himself.

Spanking: Mom smacks (NOT BEAT) the child a couple of times on the bottom while telling him it is wrong and dangerous. Child never does it again because he will remember and associate the road with the spanking. He didn't like the spanking. He still may not understand why he could not go for the walk but at least he knows mom doesn't want him to.

Spanking cannot be given for any little reason. It needs to be saved for only the most critical times or it will lose all affect.

You are right, neither works all the time. That is why as many kid's who get smacked turn out just as well/bad as kid's who don't get smacked. There is alot more to parenting besides spanking vs no spanking...

I must agree with you.

[poedua]

If a baby cannot understand why the parent is causing them pain then they certainly cannot understand a no and being removed from the area. (and there is no real pain, it is the shock of it and sound that affects them. If you leave a mark then you have gone to far and have caused pain, IMO, but others may not agree)

No real pain ? Good one.

If you " leave a mark " is that called " child abuse " in your opinion - because marks on a child can get a parent reported to Children's Aid - or what would else would you call it when you " leave a mark " exactly ? " Uber spanking " ? The " Super Size " version of learning a painful lesson ?

I think anyone who was spanked would know if they grew up in fear or not so they are the best judges whether their kids will grow up with fear. They may have grown up in fear of being spanked which deterred them from whatever they were thinking of doing but not from their parents. Who says it is wrong or unacceptable - you? Or the so called experts?

Simple common sense would suggest it is wrong.

If you strike an adult, it’s called assault; if you strike an animal it’s called cruelty; if you strike a child, it’s called discipline.

Agree ? Disagree ?

How many times have they been wrong and changed their opinions? Judging from this thread it is about 50/50 whether spanking is wrong or not. Look around you, ask your parents how safe they felt 25 years ago compared to today. Ask teachers who taught 25 years ago whether the kids in their class were more respectful back then before this no spanking crap came to be. The world today is not the result of a few smacked bottoms. It is a result of parents trying to "talk" to their kids and giving up in frustration when it didn't work. That's when the kid starts getting out of hand and in trouble.

Unbelievable.

This is the sort of caveman thinking that simply speaks for tiself.

When your child is an adult, whether he turns out well adjusted or not, then you can claim a little expertise on the matter. Until then you are just giving your opinion which is fine. You shouldn't be spouting off like it is fact and no one else's opinion matters. That's another thing you can make sure you teach your kids, they are always right and everyone else is always wrong. Wonder how that will work out for them.

The problem is what parents like you think you are " teaching " your kids when to opt to repeatedly hit them and force them to endure violence in your atempts to control their behavior.

I think parents like these have a " violence " skill sets more suited to a canine obedience school....than raising kids.

[paullyn59]

No real pain ? Good one.

If you " leave a mark " is that called " child abuse " in your opinion - because marks on a child can get a parent reported to Children's Aid - or what would else would you call it when you " leave a mark " exactly ? " Uber spanking " ? The " Super Size " version of learning a painful lesson ?

Simple common sense would suggest it is wrong.

If you strike an adult, it’s called assault; if you strike an animal it’s called cruelty; if you strike a child, it’s called discipline.

Agree ? Disagree ?

Unbelievable.

This is the sort of caveman thinking that simply speaks for tiself.

The problem is what parents like you think you are " teaching " your kids when to opt to repeatedly hit them and force them to endure violence in your atempts to control their behavior.

I think parents like these have a " violence " skill sets more suited to a canine obedience school....than raising kids.



IMO, marks are abuse but doesn't mean in other people's opinion it is. Bruises, I think most would think is abuse. Slap your own hand, it does not hurt. My kids never cried when they were smacked. They were startled and wide-eyed and pouted but never cried.

If you strike an adult you are doing it out of anger so yes it is an assault because two adults should be able to communicate plus you are probably punching with a closed fist intending to cause injury. There is no lesson being taught. If I strike an animal, is not cruelty unless you do it hard enough to cause injury or without good reason. Dogs like young children cannot communicate fully. If my dog runs towards the road he will get smacked too. If my dog bites someone, he will get smacked.

Common sense? Who's common sense? I can say that you need to use common sense to realize what is violent abuse and what is not. I smacked to keep them alive and safe. There was no power trip. There was no anger. And it did control their behaviour.

I taught them (5 boys & 1 girl) I loved them and would do what I thought was necessary to keep them safe. They knew when they got smacked, it was important and they should remember and not do it again. They are wonderful, happy, responsible, independent, outgoing adults who have gone to school and on to careers except for my youngest who is still a teenager. None have ever had any broken bones. Or been in any kind of trouble at school or with the law. All had jobs when they were 16 by choice. None have even had any speeding tickets or accidents. They come home on all holidays and we talk several times a week. Don't think that would happen if they hated or feared me for being hit. Hitting them is not what made them this way, it was everything I did as a parent. It did help keep them safe to become adults.

What is so unbelievable about it? What is your explanation for the way kid's are today? When your kids are adults, then you can give advice and not just opinions. If your kids are adults and they turned out well then good for you because I'm sure it was because of all your parenting combined and not because you didn't spank them.

Unless you can give me clear proof that spanking (NOT BEATING) is detrimental to a child compared to no spanking, then I will stick with my opinion. My proof that it isn't detrimental is in my kids. 10-15 years from now spanking will probably be back in all the "experts" books.

[gemstone]

Who says it is wrong or unacceptable - you? Or the so called experts? How many times have they been wrong and changed their opinions? Judging from this thread it is about 50/50 whether spanking is wrong or not.


Surprisingly this thread is about 3 to 1 in favour of spankings. I also noticed that the posters for spanking tend to be calm and rational, sometimes even humourous when posting as opposed to the ones against spanking who tend to resort to personal attacks and almost hysteria and sometimes are even incoherant.

I'm curious to know whether these non-spankers were raised by non-spankers? I think it is safe to assume that most spankers were raised by spankers. Telling?

[D-Roc]

No real pain ? Good one.

If you " leave a mark " is that called " child abuse " in your opinion - because marks on a child can get a parent reported to Children's Aid - or what would else would you call it when you " leave a mark " exactly ? " Uber spanking " ? The " Super Size " version of learning a painful lesson ?



Simple common sense would suggest it is wrong.

If you strike an adult, it’s called assault; if you strike an animal it’s called cruelty; if you strike a child, it’s called discipline.

Agree ? Disagree ?



Unbelievable.

This is the sort of caveman thinking that simply speaks for tiself.



The problem is what parents like you think you are " teaching " your kids when to opt to repeatedly hit them and force them to endure violence in your atempts to control their behavior.

I think parents like these have a " violence " skill sets more suited to a canine obedience school....than raising kids.


I agree with you. Excelent post.


And I am still waiting Spidey for you to explain to me what the difference between "real" viloence and and "unreal" violence.

And spidey. I anever said I was perfect. You are taking this debate out of context. We are talking about violence against a child (what you call spanking). You asked about swearing I and this poster said we do not swear in front of our children. How does that equate to being perfect?? It does not. All it proves is that I can raise my child to be well behaved, polite, respectable and can solve problems without the use of violence or spewing off profanities where you and other can not. You become so frustrated you resort to causing a child pain.

I child (6-8 months old) does understand the word no as it is a simple straight forward command, but they do not understand why their mommy or daddy would cause them pain since when they are hurt they are usually comforted by their parent(s).

[D-Roc]

Surprisingly this thread is about 3 to 1 in favour of spankings. I also noticed that the posters for spanking tend to be calm and rational, sometimes even humourous when posting as opposed to the ones against spanking who tend to resort to personal attacks and almost hysteria and sometimes are even incoherant.

I'm curious to know whether these non-spankers were raised by non-spankers? I think it is safe to assume that most spankers were raised by spankers. Telling?

First just because the ratio as you have calculated it is in favour of spanking does not make it right.
Second, I am not sure which thread you are reading but I have seen most of the personal attacks coming from those who advocate hitting a child. Incoherant??? LOL. The ones who have been showing the "spankers" here how to dicsipline without resorting to violence have been very clear and percise.

I was raised with violence for discipline. I rememeber it vividly and they are not fond memories. My mother who watches our child occasionaly and her other grandchildren has never once resorted to violence. She has seen that there are better ways to raise a child.

[teknoluv]

Surprisingly this thread is about 3 to 1 in favour of spankings. I also noticed that the posters for spanking tend to be calm and rational, sometimes even humourous when posting as opposed to the ones against spanking who tend to resort to personal attacks and almost hysteria and sometimes are even incoherant.
Wow! Good observation and scientific calculation. ;p

[Diamondog]

Surprisingly this thread is about 3 to 1 in favour of spankings. I also noticed that the posters for spanking tend to be calm and rational, sometimes even humourous when posting as opposed to the ones against spanking who tend to resort to personal attacks and almost hysteria and sometimes are even incoherant.

I'm curious to know whether these non-spankers were raised by non-spankers? I think it is safe to assume that most spankers were raised by spankers. Telling?

3 to 1 in favor of spanking and look at the state of our children today....it's just sad....

[paullyn59]

I agree with you. Excelent post.

And I am still waiting Spidey for you to explain to me what the difference between "real" viloence and and "unreal" violence.

And spidey. I anever said I was perfect. You are taking this debate out of context. We are talking about violence against a child (what you call spanking). You asked about swearing I and this poster said we do not swear in front of our children. How does that equate to being perfect?? It does not. All it proves is that I can raise my child to be well behaved, polite, respectable and can solve problems without the use of violence or spewing off profanities where you and other can not. You become so frustrated you resort to causing a child pain.

I child (6-8 months old) does understand the word no as it is a simple straight forward command, but they do not understand why their mommy or daddy would cause them pain since when they are hurt they are usually comforted by their parent(s).

Spanking has been defined many times in this thread and only the non-spankers consider it violent while using exaggerated terms for it, which doesn't make you right. My simplified definition of violence is uncontrolled rage or hatred directed towards someone with the intent to cause pain or physical damage. Spankings are a controlled action with the sole purpose to teach a child things they cannot do and to keep them safe.

"out of context" seems to be a common phrase for you. Perhaps you should be more clear in your posts. We are not talking about violence against a child. We are talking about spanking vs. non-spanking.

How do you know his children are not well behaved, polite, respectable and again spanking is not violence. Spankers do not spank out of frustration. If you would read, you will see this stated over and over.

So has your infant been told no and then went back to what it got told no for? Did it nod it's head indicating that it understood you? How old is your child? If it is still quite young, then you have no idea whether it will be well behaved, polite, respectable.... Only time will tell. I hope you are right but that doesn't mean your methods are better than mine.

First just because the ratio as you have calculated it is in favour of spanking does not make it right.
Second, I am not sure which thread you are reading but I have seen most of the personal attacks coming from those who advocate hitting a child. Incoherant??? LOL. The ones who have been showing the "spankers" here how to dicsipline without resorting to violence have been very clear and percise.

I was raised with violence for discipline. I rememeber it vividly and they are not fond memories. My mother who watches our child occasionaly and her other grandchildren has never once resorted to violence. She has seen that there are better ways to raise a child.

Doesn't make it wrong either. Reread the thread. I think you will be surprised. Examples just above by the two posters. One claims to be an expert yet gives no concrete advice to a poster who asked for help several times, instead just attacks and belittles.

When you say you were raised by violence, do you mean spankings or beatings? Oh that's right you are incapable of distinguishing between the two. But you say you are the perfect parent, she must have done a good job. How do you know you would have turned out the same had she not "raised you with violence"?


3 to 1 in favor of spanking and look at the state of our children today....it's just sad....

But is it the spankers or non-spankers who caused it? Looking at history for proof may help decide.

[D-Roc]

When you say you were raised by violence, do you mean spankings or beatings? Oh that's right you are incapable of distinguishing between the two. But you say you are the perfect parent, she must have done a good job. How do you know you would have turned out the same had she not "raised you with violence"?


OK. I will say this again. I never said I was a perfect parent. We are talking about spanking. That is it. Period. We are not talking about all aspects of parenting. Maybe you and the others that keep inferring that I am a perfect parent (while I am flattered you would call me one) need a smack to understand that. :rolleyes:

When did I say I was not able to distinguish bewtween the two?? You are being ridiculous by just making that statement.

I grew up not really understanding how to solve problems without feeling the urge to inflict pain and that I do blame on my parents. I make every effort to ensure I do not make the same mistake and it has worked amazingly well. That along with other parenting techniques has made me and my wife very successful parents.

[Spidey]

I like the fact that everytime I say something that D-Roc doesnt like, he calls me down. So far he called me a:

1. Weak person
2. Irrepsonsible parent
3. Stupid parent

There are some other, but i cant remeber unless I go through the entire thread.

So he is teaching his kids to call people down that dont see your point of view, or to prove you are always right.

Doesnt look like humility will be one of those traits he passes on

[D-Roc]

What I have posted is far better than telling someone to "Shove it up your ass." as you have done. I can only imagine what you have taught your kids.

I called one of your statements stupid not you. I never called you weak and I never called you irresponsible.
And a piece of advice. I wouldn't throw stones when you have posted some of the comments that you have.

[Spidey]

What I have posted is far better than telling someone to "Shove it up your ass." as you have done. I can only imagine what you have taught your kids.

I called one of your statements stupid not you. I never called you weak and I never called you irresponsible.
And a piece of advice. I wouldn't throw stones when you have posted some of the comments that you have.

here we go again. I dont see your point of view and i get "I can only imagine what you have taught your kids"

You have no idea what I have taught my kids. You have no right to judge me on my parenting skills.

and as for your advice, I wouldnt take directions from you , let alone advice

[Ryan]

Chill out everybody.

[D-Roc]

You are right. I have no idea what you have taught them but the content of your posts gives some insight into that. If you do not want to be judged then do not post your parenting style. By posting you are opening yourself up to be judged.

I never said you should take my advice. I am posting what I see as wrong with the thought process around spanking and how it is affective by backing up with examples of what I and my wife do to accomplish the same thing in a non-violent way.

[D-Roc]

Chill out everybody.


The above will be my last post on this issue Ryan.

[paullyn59]

OK. I will say this again. I never said I was a perfect parent. We are talking about spanking. That is it. Period. We are not talking about all aspects of parenting. Maybe you and the others that keep inferring that I am a perfect parent (while I am flattered you would call me one) need a smack to understand that. :rolleyes:

When did I say I was not able to distinguish bewtween the two?? You are being ridiculous by just making that statement.

I grew up not really understanding how to solve problems without feeling the urge to inflict pain and that I do blame on my parents. I make every effort to ensure I do not make the same mistake and it has worked amazingly well. That along with other parenting techniques has made me and my wife very successful parents.

You blame other parents for everything. They are always wrong and you are always right. I will not allow this and that. That infers that you believe you are the perfect parent if you haven't actually come out and said in those exact words. I am not the only one who got this impression from you.

When you cannot leave the word violent out when referring to spankings especially this far into the thread, then you cannot distinguish between the two. Sounds like you got more than just spankings.


I never said you should take my advice. I am posting what I see as wrong with the thought process around spanking and how it is affective by backing up with examples of what I and my wife do to accomplish the same thing in a non-violent way.

That has yet to be determined. Again how old are your kid(s)? You cannot claim to be successful parents until the kids are adults and then you have proof. Things can change very quickly. Even if your kids turn into wonderful adults, it is not because you did not spank your kids.

[Chr1s]

You know what... everyone has a different parenting style.

Spidey, I'm sure you are a great Dad! So are D-Roc and Poedua. You all LOVE your kids very much and mean no harm to them. Isn't that what unites you? How can anyone honestly say there is only ONE right approach?

I came from a family that only spanked as a last resort. I recall only being spanked 3 times in my life (once publicly)... and that instilled a healthy respect for my parents and laws of the house/society. It worked for me, and that is the system I would use if/when I become a parent.

I think parents have a really tough time raising kids these days. There are too many outside influences. So to all the parents... God Bless you and yours. :)

[alysomji]

You know what... everyone has a different parenting style.

Spidey, I'm sure you are a great Dad! So are D-Roc and Poedua. You all LOVE your kids very much and mean no harm to them. Isn't that what unites you? How can anyone honestly say there is only ONE right approach?

I came from a family that only spanked as a last resort. I recall only being spanked 3 times in my life (once publicly)... and that instilled a healthy respect for my parents and laws of the house/society. It worked for me, and that is the system I would use if/when I become a parent.

I think parents have a really tough time raising kids these days. There are too many outside influences. So to all the parents... God Bless you and yours. :)

Same here.

[Spidey]

You know what... everyone has a different parenting style.

Spidey, I'm sure you are a great Dad! So are D-Roc and Poedua. You all LOVE your kids very much and mean no harm to them. Isn't that what unites you? How can anyone honestly say there is only ONE right approach?

I came from a family that only spanked as a last resort. I recall only being spanked 3 times in my life (once publicly)... and that instilled a healthy respect for my parents and laws of the house/society. It worked for me, and that is the system I would use if/when I become a parent.

I think parents have a really tough time raising kids these days. There are too many outside influences. So to all the parents... God Bless you and yours. :)


Thank you. The way the other two made me sound like I was the worst parent ever because of the things Ive done and do now. Name calling is something Im definitly not teaching my kids, yet they were calling me things like stupid and irresponsible.

Raising kids is hard and harder then ever before. No manuls are given, and there is no warranty. All you have to rely on is the way you were raised, and any research or reading you care to do.

I beleive in the respect thing. My kids give it to me, and not out of fear. They know when they do soemthing wrong now. and since there older I dont spank, we talk, they lose things, priviledges.

Id rather have a child respect me out of my mistakes I make as a father, than walk all over me as they get older.

[poedua]

I would rather smack (NOT BEAT) my kid's bottom a couple of times to prevent him from hurting himself in the future than to hope he understood what I was saying when I got down to his level and talked to him about it and not do it again.

Wrong. You're working under a false assumption.

Hitting a kid repeatedly as a means of disicpline does not prevent a kid from repeating a behavior any more than using non-violent means of discipline.

That is too big of risk for me to take.

Hitting does not reduce that risk any better than non-violent means of discipline.

He is more likely to remember the smack than the words.

False assumption - yet again. Nice try though.

Once the child is old enough to communicate and ask questions about why they are being told no which means they are capable of understanding, then spankings should stop.

Oh I get it.

So an infant or small toddler - neither, old enough to communicate - is OK to be repeatedly smacked. Smack them to make them " understand ". When they ARE " old enough to communicate ", you think spanking is wrong - is that it ? If you can't talk - it's OK to smack ? If you can talk it's not OK to smack ?

Example:
A small child decides to go for walk, just as he has everyday with mom. Just as he sees older siblings do everyday. Mom says she can't go now. Mom takes eyes off him for 10 seconds but he was only 6 ft away. He decides he will go anyway. Where's the danger? If he even understands what danger is.

No spanking: Mom calls child back, gets down and talks to child. Did he learn not to do this again? Guess we'll wait and see and hope for the best. If he gets hit by a car, abducted, whatever, at least mom can say but I talked to him and told him not to go for a walk by himself.

Spanking: Mom smacks (NOT BEAT) the child a couple of times on the bottom while telling him it is wrong and dangerous. Child never does it again because he will remember and associate the road with the spanking. He didn't like the spanking. He still may not understand why he could not go for the walk but at least he knows mom doesn't want him to.

LOL. I couldn't stop laughing when I read this.

That's a nice cute fictional little story written by someone such as yourself who is an advocate of corporal punishment - any wonder the story ended up as it did ...in this little story, miraculously.....SPANKING WORKS ? Really. Please...that story is simply an example of " pro-hitting " propaganda. I could have wrtiten the exact same scenario - except that showing that spanking does not work. The example is as biased as biased can be. :rolleyes:

Spanking cannot be given for any little reason. It needs to be saved for only the most critical times or it will lose all affect.

Now, that's very interesting.

It seems you claim that hitting can only be used for " for only the most critical times ". How often do they occur - maybe 5% of the time ? That must mean you use a host of non-violent means to control behavior for the non-critical - i.e 95% - of times. So - non-violent means to control behavior must work. Which of those non-violent means do you use ?

Also - regarding those critical times in which hitting is mandatory in your view...what would you say are the " Top 5 " times in which hitting your child is warranted ?

You are right, neither works all the time. That is why as many kid's who get smacked turn out just as well/bad as kid's who don't get smacked. There is alot more to parenting besides spanking vs no spanking.

Agreed.


I see alot more holier than thou attitude from parents that claim they won't hit their children than from parents who do. Reread this thread.

And who decides which are the wrong ways? Spanking is not abuse. Beatings and leaving physical marks is abuse.

So, if you spank and as a result you end up " leaving physical marks " its abuse - agreed ? Just need as YES or NO from you.

For parenting, the worst case is thinking you are right all the time because then you are going to raise paranoid, screwed up kids who are trying to be perfect for their parents and failing.

Which is exactly what happens with parents who think hitting is " right " IMO.

I can't imagine how much less screwed up kids would be if they weren't hit.

I asked you this in an earlier post. >Maybe you could share the non-violent solutions. alysomji has stated that they think spanking should be a last resort and has asked for another way.< Perhaps you missed it.

I think that fact that any other parent is at a total loss as to what constitues an alternative to violence against your child speaks for itself. You are a parent - as am I . You and I BOTH know non-violent solutions. Are you going to tell me that in this day and age you aren't as well versed as i am in non-violent methods such as the reward, the natural consequence and the positive discipline methods ? Every parent knows those non-violent methods - c'mon.:rolleyes:

You are preaching yet you offer no advice from someone who has asked for it especially since you consider yourself to be not exactly *fully* qualified, but with a post-graduate degree in education and years of frontline work.

Sure ...see the methods I noted above ...but to put it simply...as a parent, I renounce any methods that inflict violence against any child of mine. My 4 kids are teens now and have turned out great.....and they were never hit once or ever put it harm's way by not being hit.

Violence simply isn't an option for me ...for you, it seems it is.

[Spidey]

So you ask where the person gets there assumptions on spanking.

Where do you get your assumptions on not spanking

[poedua]

So you ask where the person gets there assumptions on spanking.

Where do you get your assumptions on not spanking

I didn't ask them where the assumptions came from, I simply said they were false assumptions with which to form a conclusion. To say " [ by hitting your child, they're ] more likely to remember the smack than the words " and [ by hitting your child, it will ] prevent him from hurting himself in the future " - is simply begging the question.

[poedua]

3 to 1 in favor of spanking and look at the state of our children today....it's just sad....

Not to worry.

If anyone posts a 9/11 topic on the Off topic " forum, 75% of posters actually believe it was a U.S. based conspiracy. On topics of supplements ( i.e protein ) in the fitness forum, 75% of posters actually believe consuming boatloads of these things will build muscle.

Both cases illustrate that - a times - " the majority - 75% " of posts may easily represent myths, non-sensical beliefs and irrational thinking - and it appears, the Parent Forum is no different.:)

[Spidey]

I didn't ask them where the assumptions came from, I simply said they were false assumptions with which to form a conclusion. To say " [ by hitting your child, they're ] more likely to remember the smack than the words " and [ by hitting your child, it will ] prevent him from hurting himself in the future " - that's simply begging the question.

Then the same thing can be said about just talking to a child as well. False assumptions to form a conclusion.

Basically this has turned into, I disagree with you so your wrong.

Its funny though, the ones that are saying things are being done wrong are the ones against spanking.

I havent read anything on here about the people that spank saying that the way you are doing it is wrong.

Seems they want to push the non-spanking theory on it. Doesnt make it better or worse, its just a different way

[teknoluv]

You know what... everyone has a different parenting style.
...
How can anyone honestly say there is only ONE right approach?
True. There is more one right approach; but at the same time, there are also as many wrong approaches. Some people like to say "there's no right or wrong", but that's not true in this case, because there ARE RIGHT AND WRONG when it comes to using physical force against children.

[Diamondog]

So you ask where the person gets there assumptions on spanking.

Where do you get your assumptions on not spanking

I think your going to "HIT" 10,000 posts in this thread! :D

[rfdrfd]

Then the same thing can be said about just talking to a child as well. False assumptions to form a conclusion.

Basically this has turned into, I disagree with you so your wrong.

Its funny though, the ones that are saying things are being done wrong are the ones against spanking.

I havent read anything on here about the people that spank saying that the way you are doing it is wrong.

Seems they want to push the non-spanking theory on it. Doesnt make it better or worse, its just a different way


I agree with your analysis. Let's just face it, different people have different views on spanking. Neither side will be convinced (nor willing) to change to the other side.

For every example given that "talking" to a child is just as good as "spanking", there is an equal and oppposite example that can be given that "Spanking" is the only way that worked for THAT particular child.

For myself, I have seen at least 10 kids amongst my friends/relatives that do not touch the child, just talking to them, doesn't work, then it eventually turns into yelling at them to stop doing something bad (hitting or biting people). It still hasn't worked. So I'm not 100% convinced. I hope those kids grow up to be "good" people. But so far, they aren't behaving "good" yet.

[Spidey]

I think your going to "HIT" 10,000 posts in this thread! :D

Well thanks. I like to "HIT" it

[poedua]

Then the same thing can be said about just talking to a child as well.

The claim from many of the " slap happy ' crowd on this thread is that hitting your child repeatedly is a means of " last resort " - i.e nothing else works - you " have to " hit your child. The other point I hear from the " slap happy ' crowd here is that violence is better than a non-violent approach... " He is more likely to remember the smack than the words ". The claim is also made that is also " better " from a prevention point of view " [ hitting isntead of talking will ] prevent him from hurting himself in the future " These are false conclusions.

Those of us who advocate a non-violent approach to discipline, use it 24/7. Those who advocate hitting your child repeatedly - a violent approach to discipline - DO NOT advocate it 24/7 as an approach to discipline. Why- I don't know.

False assumptions to form a conclusion. Basically this has turned into, I disagree with you so your wrong.

Well that does seem to be the view of the " slap happy " crowd on the thread - now doesn't it.

Its funny though, the ones that are saying things are being done wrong are the ones against spanking.

Well, that is the sort of interpretation I'd expect to hear from a " hitting is OK " proponent. Fact is, those are the " being done wrong " views you'd expect to hear from the " slap happy " crowd.

I havent read anything on here about the people that spank saying that the way you are doing it is wrong.

Too funny. Coming from a " hitting is OK " proponent...why am I not surpised.

Seems they want to push the non-spanking theory on it.

No different than 3 in 1 posters on the thread either embracing the notion or advocating the repeated hitting of a child IMO.

Doesnt make it better or worse, its just a different way

Finally....you finally agree that you can get the same behavior results from non-violence as you can from violence ...." Doesnt make it better or worse, its just a different ". You just made my point.

Violence vs non-violence ......no difference " better or worse" ...... in your view.

Guess I simply choose never to accept violence as an option - you will.

[paullyn59]

LOL. I couldn't stop laughing when I read this.
That's a nice cute fictional little story written by someone such as yourself who is an advocate of corporal punishment - any wonder the story ended up as it did ...in this little story, miraculously.....SPANKING WORKS ? Really. Please...that story is simply an example of " pro-hitting " propaganda. I could have wrtiten the exact same scenario - except that showing that spanking does not work. The example is as biased as biased can be. :rolleyes:

True story and I find it hard to believe you can't even consider it as such. It did work, he never went to the road again without someone with him. I am sure something similar has happened to every parent out there except they may not have spanked.


It seems you claim that hitting can only be used for " for only the most critical times ". How often do they occur - maybe 5% of the time ? That must mean you use a host of non-violent means to control behavior for the non-critical - i.e 95% - of times. So - non-violent means to control behavior must work. Which of those non-violent means do you use ?

Also - regarding those critical times in which hitting is mandatory in your view...what would you say are the " Top 5 " times in which hitting your child is warranted ?

Different for every child. No top 5 reasons. Just 1 reason, for safety. When it is important that they learn the first time. I would not risk my child's life on what ifs. Others may have other reasons.


Which is exactly what happens with parents who think hitting is " right " IMO. I can't imagine how much less screwed up kids would be if they weren't hit.

Uh, no. No one has ever told a non-spanker to spank, EVER in this thread. It has always been the other way around suggesting you are right and we are wrong and there are no doubt about it at all. All without facts to back it up. My kids are not screwed up and since they are adults, I back up my claims from personal experience that is complete.


I think that fact that any other parent is at a total loss as to what constitues an alternative to violence against your child speaks for itself. You are a parent - as am I . You and I BOTH know non-violent solutions. Are you going to tell me that in this day and age you aren't as well versed as i am in non-violent methods such as the reward, the natural consequence and the positive discipline methods ? Every parent knows those non-violent methods - c'mon.:rolleyes:

Sure ...see the methods I noted above ...but to put it simply...as a parent, I renounce any methods that inflict violence against any child of mine. My 4 kids are teens now and have turned out great.....and they were never hit once or ever put it harm's way by not being hit.

The poster said they tried non-violent methods and it didn't work and was asking for help. The other poster claimed to be an expert yet failed to offer any AT ALL and still hasn't even though being asked repeatedly. You can discipline your children the way you want and so can I and everyone else. That is what we spankers are saying.


Violence simply isn't an option for me ...for you, it seems it is.

I have never been violent with my kids. You have a different opinion on the difference between violent and non-violent apparently but that doesn't make you right. No one is telling you, you are wrong or to spank your kids. That is your choice. You ARE wrong, especially with nothing to back it up, to tell us not to spank our kids .

I hope you do sail right through their teen years but I hope you are prepared for them not to. But whether they do or not, it will not be because they were not spanked.

This is really getting repetitive.

Edited to add: No one is pushing anything on you. Read.

[Spidey]

The claim from many of the " slap happy ' crowd on this thread is that hitting your child repeatedly is a means of " last resort " - i.e nothing else works - you " have to " hit your child. The other point I hear from the " slap happy ' crowd here is that violence is better than a non-violent approach... " He is more likely to remember the smack than the words ". The claim is also made that is also " better " from a prevention point of view " [ hitting isntead of talking will ] prevent him from hurting himself in the future " These are false conclusions.

Those of us who advocate a non-violent approach to discipline, use it 24/7. Those who advocate hitting your child repeatedly - a violent approach to discipline - DO NOT advocate it 24/7 as an approach to discipline. Why- I don't know.



Well that does seem to be the view of the " slap happy " crowd on the thread - now doesn't it.



Well, that is the sort of interpretation I'd expect to hear from a " hitting is OK " proponent. Fact is, those are the " being done wrong " views you'd expect to hear from the " slap happy " crowd.



Too funny. Coming from a " hitting is OK " proponent...why am I not surpised.



No different than 3 in 1 posters on the thread either embracing the notion or advocating the repeated hitting of a child IMO.



Finally....you finally agree that you can get the same behavior results from non-violence as you can from violence ...." Doesnt make it better or worse, its just a different ". You just made my point.

Violence vs non-violence ......no difference " better or worse" ...... in your view.

Guess I simply choose never to accept violence as an option - you will.



Fine your view are different than mine, I dont care. But your not changing my point of view as Im not changing yours.

But you sure are pushing our way is wrong and your way is right on everyone.

I dont see the other pushing it on you, just giving examples and things that have happened to them

[gemstone]

Those of us who advocate a non-violent approach to discipline, use it 24/7. Those who advocate hitting your child repeatedly - a violent approach to discipline - DO NOT advocate it 24/7 as an approach to discipline. Why- I don't know.

Guess I simply choose never to accept violence as an option - you will.


But you have different levels to that discipline, do you not? First time, 1 day without TV or whatever. Next time 1 week, etc, Spanking is just another level. That is all. No different.

There you go again with the "violence". Simple spanking is not violent. I choose to accept spanking as an option, not violence. How soon spanking is used and for what is up to the parent. Not to spank ever is also up the parent.

[teknoluv]

I have seen at least 10 kids amongst my friends/relatives that do not touch the child, just talking to them, doesn't work, then it eventually turns into yelling at them to stop doing something bad (hitting or biting people). It still hasn't worked.
This is another commonly seen mistake made by a lot of parents: they keep using tricks that were proven ineffective in the last round.

The other poster claimed to be an expert yet failed to offer any AT ALL and still hasn't even though being asked repeatedly.
This is EXACTLY the best part of forums like RFD, if you don't get it.

Fine your view are different than mine, I dont care. But your not changing my point of view as Im not changing yours.
To be honest, I am more concerned about any justification of using violence against children, which may affect OTHER newbie parents AND THEIR KIDS.

[gemstone]

This is EXACTLY the best part of forums like RFD, if you don't get it.


What? I don't get it.

[poedua]

But you have different levels to that discipline, do you not? First time, 1 day without TV or whatever. Next time 1 week, etc, Spanking is just another level. That is all. No different.

Wow.

This is the sort of thinking - " Spanking is just another level...No different " - that, sadly, speaks for itself.

There you go again with the "violence". Simple spanking is not violent.

earth to gemstone..............earth to gemstone.

Yes...it is.

I choose to accept spanking as an option, not violence.

If that definition helps you live with it - do what you have to do.

Correct - given a choice to vow never to strike your child repeatedly or to embrace the prospect that you are open and willing to strike your child repeatedly...you choose the latter.

Good for you.:rolleyes:

How soon spanking is used and for what is up to the parent.

That's the scary part IMO.


Not to spank ever is also up the parent.

Correct.

[poedua]

True. There is more one right approach; but at the same time, there are also as many wrong approaches. Some people like to say "there's no right or wrong", but that's not true in this case, because there ARE RIGHT AND WRONG when it comes to using physical force against children.

I suspect any responsible parent already knows that IMO.

[Spidey]

To be honest, I am more concerned about any justification of using violence against children, which may affect OTHER newbie parents AND THEIR KIDS.

Its the parents decision plain and simple. They can read on hear and post, but its finally up to them. How they parent is their business.

Does it make it right or wrong how they parent, thats your opinion Opinions are just that opinions, they are neither right or wrong

[poedua]

True story and I find it hard to believe you can't even consider it as such. It did work, he never went to the road again without someone with him. I am sure something similar has happened to every parent out there except they may not have spanked..

Exactly my point.

Non-violence can and has dealt with this sort of thing many times.

So, even when given a choice between knowing there are equally effective violent and non-violent remedies - as you now admit - there are, parents like you, would opt for violence. Your choice. I choose not to.

Different for every child. No top 5 reasons. Just 1 reason, for safety. When it is important that they learn the first time. I would not risk my child's life on what ifs. Others may have other reasons.

Just as I suspected. A dodge.

You say there are clear situations when spanking is valid . But when I ask you to name the top 5 situations - you refuse. You know full well of 5 different situations you either have or " would spank " your children....but, for some inexplicable reason, you have conveniently forgotten what they are - or choose to forget...or have no clue what those situations might be . I suspect I know the reason why.

Uh, no. No one has ever told a non-spanker to spank, EVER in this thread. It has always been the other way around suggesting you are right and we are wrong and there are no doubt about it at all. All without facts to back it up. My kids are not screwed up and since they are adults, I back up my claims from personal experience that is complete.

The poster said they tried non-violent methods and it didn't work and was asking for help. The other poster claimed to be an expert yet failed to offer any AT ALL and still hasn't even though being asked repeatedly. You can discipline your children the way you want and so can I and everyone else. That is what we spankers are saying.

Fair enough.

I have never been violent with my kids. You have a different opinion on the difference between violent and non-violent apparently but that doesn't make you right.

Nor does it make you right.


No one is telling you, you are wrong or to spank your kids. That is your choice. You ARE wrong, especially with nothing to back it up, to tell us not to spank our kids .

You can spank your kids all you want.

I am not wrong, as you claim I am. I simply detest violence. I view the hitting of children as a form of violence. I simply have no respect for any parent who strikes their child in an effort to scare or " teach " them anything.


I hope you do sail right through their teen years but I hope you are prepared for them not to. But whether they do or not, it will not be because they were not spanked.

No one claimed it was. Good teens are a result - in part - due to good parenting IMO. And for me, good parenting never involved repeatedly striking my kids to " teach " them something.

[Diamondog]

Wonder if she spanked her kids? http://www.cnn.com/2007/EDUCATION/04/05/clothespins.punishment.ap/index.html

[mrfrostyman]

I am not a parent, and am pretty young still (almost 20) but i was spanked as a child, and so were my 3 siblings (27, 34, 37) I also got lectured multiple times. I will say that when i was spanked my parents faces always looked sad. Im 100% positive that my parents took no joy in discipline, but it had to be done. Im 4 gen canadian to. I think i turned out pretty well, but it was everything else my parents did in addition to discipline. I was spanked when i was younger(never beaten) and got more lectures as i got older, and boy did the lectures go on (2 hours for getting a 58 mid term in english grade 10) but i got my grades up because of it. When i was younger however lectures and words didnt mean as much, but getting spanked and seeing that face of dissapointment when doing so was devestating enough that i never did it again.

Now however, all it takes is the good old, im not mad im just dissapointed.

Also i know family's while i was growing up who never spanked their kids, and now they are spoiled and what not(the majority) while the majority who got spanked turned out more behavied. But then again it also depends on what else the parents do. Me, i am probably going to spank my kids. About the op, if it was a more of a beating i would have done the same thing, if it was discipline with a firm spanking i would have done nothing and probably not have had a second thought. Not dont get this out of context, like a firm spanking on the butt or on the hand.

Some might disagree, but from first hand experience it worked out, and i will try to raise my kids the same way my parents did.

[paullyn59]

Exactly my point.

Non-violence can and has dealt with this sort of thing many times.

So, even when given a choice between knowing there are equally effective violent and non-violent remedies - as you now admit - there are, parents like you, would opt for violence. Your choice. I choose not to.

No, there are parents like me who will opt for spankings. You may want to risk your child but I will not risk mine on some unproven theory. You don't know how many kids have been hit by a car because they were not fearful enough of the road because their parents "talked" to them instead of giving them a spanking. I don't know how many have been hit by a car even after they have been giving a spanking but I believe a spanking is more convincing and it has worked for me so I will stick with it. Better safe than sorry.


Just as I suspected. A dodge.

You say there are clear situations when spanking is valid . But when I ask you to name the top 5 situations - you refuse. You know full well of 5 different situations you either have or " would spank " your children....but, for some inexplicable reason, you have conveniently forgotten what they are - or choose to forget...or have no clue what those situations might be . I suspect I know the reason why.


Where have I ever said I spanked my kids for any other reason but to keep them safe? That is one reason. Keep up!

I have suggested that the difference between the way kids are today compared to 25 years ago could be the result of this no spanking attitude. Some kids may need to spanked for more than just safety reasons. That's why several posters have placed it as a last resort form of discipline. It is no different than some kids only needing their video games taken away for one day while others need two weeks and still others need to be spanked. Others may have several different reasons and I will not tell them they shouldn't because it is their decision. I have compromised between the two methods and it worked for me. I can honestly say I don't know whether I would have spanked as a last resort which is why I can accept parents who do and not judge them for it.


Nor does it make you right.

I have never said my way is the only way and that everyone should do as I say. You have. If not directly, then indirectly. That is where you are wrong, not because you do not spank.


You can spank your kids all you want.

I am not wrong, as you claim I am. I simply detest violence. I view the hitting of children as a form of violence. I simply have no respect for any parent who strikes their child in an effort to scare or " teach " them anything.

Thank you for allowing me to parent the way I see fit. Finally.

Ahh, that breaks my heart. Boo hoo. After reading your posts. You are way low on my list of people that I need respect from.


No one claimed it was. Good teens are a result - in part - due to good parenting IMO. And for me, good parenting never involved repeatedly striking my kids to " teach " them something.

If you haven't said it, you've come darn close. Parents who spank can be good parents just like parents who don't spank can be bad parents. There is alot more to parenting than spanking or not spanking. Good for you if your parenting style turns out to be successful. I know mine has been extemely successful and I would raise my kids the exact same way again.

Now, I am sure this thread has been entertaining to some forum members but it is getting too repetitive for me. If you have any more comments or questions, reread my previous posts. I'm sure you'll find my answers in them several times.

[poedua]

I am not a parent, and am pretty young still (almost 20) but i was spanked as a child, and so were my 3 siblings (27, 34, 37) I also got lectured multiple times. I will say that when i was spanked my parents faces always looked sad. Im 100% positive that my parents took no joy in discipline, but it had to be done. Im 4 gen canadian to. I think i turned out pretty well, but it was everything else my parents did in addition to discipline. I was spanked when i was younger(never beaten) and got more lectures as i got older, and boy did the lectures go on (2 hours for getting a 58 mid term in english grade 10) but i got my grades up because of it. When i was younger however lectures and words didnt mean as much, but getting spanked and seeing that face of dissapointment when doing so was devestating enough that i never did it again.

Now however, all it takes is the good old, im not mad im just dissapointed.

Also i know family's while i was growing up who never spanked their kids, and now they are spoiled and what not(the majority) while the majority who got spanked turned out more behavied. But then again it also depends on what else the parents do. Me, i am probably going to spank my kids. About the op, if it was a more of a beating i would have done the same thing, if it was discipline with a firm spanking i would have done nothing and probably not have had a second thought. Not dont get this out of context, like a firm spanking on the butt or on the hand.

Some might disagree, but from first hand experience it worked out, and i will try to raise my kids the same way my parents did.

Actually, I think this is the reason a lot of new parents will embrace a policy of using hitting to discipline their own kids - becuase their parents did it to them.

Speaking for myself, I feel attitudes have evolved a great deal from the time of my parents - be it about the role of women in a marriage and in society, when women should marry, how late to wait to have kids, issues of child & spousal abuse, health concerns pertianing to diet, smoking , exercise etc- and of course, parenting.

taht said, doing something simply because my parents did it isn't a good enough reason to embrace any practice - at least for me.

I try to teach my kids morals. I try to teach them to conduct themselves with a moral compass. That is why I have such an issue with spanking. Spanking simply teaches kids that hitting other people is a morally correct thing to do - it's their " moral " parents that are hitting them after all. And the morality is associated with the pain being experienced rather than behavior that's trying to be modified. In other words, a spanked child focuses more on the pain and not their behavior - their behavior being the reason for the spanking in the firt place. Beyond that, the more often you spank a child, the less effect I think it has ( otherwise you wouldn't have to spank so often in the first place ) on a child over time IMO. So to bump it's " effect " you have to hit with more intensity - and we all know where that may lead.

I tend to agree with the American Academy of Pediatrics - " I strongly oppose striking a child "....

" Spanking may relieve a parent's frustration for the moment and extinguish the undesirable behavior for a brief time. But it is the least effective way to discipline.......WHERE WE STAND......The American Academy of Pediatrics strongly opposes striking a child......."

....but that's just me.

http://www.aap.org/advocacy/childhealthmonth/spank.htm

[mrfrostyman]

Good point, i do still intend to raise my kids the same way my parents raised me, and my bro and sisters. I will probably make changes(possibly including spanking), but i am always watching for good parenting skills and try to learn from that. Discipline was a part of growing up for me, but its one of the smaller things i remember (but i still do remember it hahaha). I just dont think you can make rash comments on a parents ability to raise their kids on this one point, since it has been clearly shown that you can do a fine job either way. I think just discipline in general is far to lax, just something i have noticed over the last couple of years.

Anyways the attacks on the participants in the topic were uncalled for. Interesting as a topic this is, i just dont have enough experience to try to presuade someone as to how they should raise their kids.

Im sure Spidey and Poedua will raise great kids using their own methods. But again anyone who beats their kids should get beaten themselves. Ive used up just about any argument i had on this topic so im just gona curl up and take the blows on this one lol.(Edit: dont try to relate this to anything!! just sarcasm :))

[poedua]

No, there are parents like me who will opt for spankings. You may want to risk your child but I will not risk mine on some unproven theory.

It's no more " unproven " than spanking. This is where all this " you need spanking for safety " to address some bogus " risk " propaganda comes from.


You don't know how many kids have been hit by a car because they were not fearful enough of the road because their parents "talked" to them instead of giving them a spanking. I don't know how many have been hit by a car even after they have been giving a spanking but I believe a spanking is more convincing and it has worked for me so I will stick with it. Better safe than sorry.

At best, spanking vs non spanking will have the same outcome as to how many kids will be hit by cars. You can't claim one method of safeproofing - violent vs non-violent - is better or worse than the other. That is my point - spanking is not some " safety panacea " above all other methods as you claim it is.

Of course you believe spanking is more effective " spanking is more convincing ".But, it is not a fact in any way - it is simply an unsubstantiated " belief " of yours - nothing more. It's your belief, nothing more, - it can't be proven - leave it at that. At best, spanking vs non spanking will have the same outcome on behavior.

Where have I ever said I spanked my kids for any other reason but to keep them safe? That is one reason. Keep up!

Fine, give me the other 4 reasons i asked for


I have suggested that the difference between the way kids are today compared to 25 years ago could be the result of this no spanking attitude.[/QUOTE]

That's ridiculous and I highly doubt it - kids are kids. Any " percieved " differences has nothing to do with spanking or not spanking in any significant way IMO. Your projecting again.


[QUOTE=paullyn59;4913683] Some kids may need to spanked for more than just safety reasons.

They don't NEED to be spanked, you CHOOSE to spank them based on a perceived need - nothing more.

That's why several posters have placed it as a last resort form of discipline. It is no different than some kids only needing their video games taken away for one day while others need two weeks and still others need to be spanked. Others may have several different reasons and I will not tell them they shouldn't because it is their decision. I have compromised between the two methods and it worked for me. I can honestly say I don't know whether I would have spanked as a last resort which is why I can accept parents who do and not judge them for it..

Sorry, I don't buy " last resort " arguments to validate the need to hit a child - that is more of a parent problem being expressed, not a behavior problem. If you like the " last resort " term then simply resort to non-violent means of " last resort ".


I have never said my way is the only way and that everyone should do as I say. You have. If not directly, then indirectly. That is where you are wrong, not because you do not spank.

No, I haven't.


Thank you for allowing me to parent the way I see fit. Finally. .

There are always going to be parents in this world more than willing to strike their child to get their way....if you want to parent with spanking ...go right ahead.

Ahh, that breaks my heart. Boo hoo. After reading your posts. You are way low on my list of people that I need respect from.

I don't respect parents that willingly choose to hit their kids. You do.




If you haven't said it, you've come darn close. Parents who spank can be good parents just like parents who don't spank can be bad parents. There is alot more to parenting than spanking or not spanking. Good for you if your parenting style turns out to be successful. I know mine has been extemely successful and I would raise my kids the exact same way again.

Good for you.

Now, I am sure this thread has been entertaining to some forum members but it is getting too repetitive for me. If you have any more comments or questions, reread my previous posts. I'm sure you'll find my answers in them several times.

Promises , promises.

[mrfrostyman]

Actually im curious, anyone that has never been spanked in the teenager range car to chime in with their thoughts or parents who have teenagers (i mean 14-18) that have never spanked their kids. Just wondering since spanking has been around for a long time, but i dont know about the no spanking outcomes.

[poedua]

Good point, i do still intend to raise my kids the same way my parents raised me, and my bro and sisters. I will probably make changes(possibly including spanking), but i am always watching for good parenting skills and try to learn from that. Discipline was a part of growing up for me, but its one of the smaller things i remember (but i still do remember it hahaha). I just dont think you can make rash comments on a parents ability to raise their kids on this one point, since it has been clearly shown that you can do a fine job either way. I think just discipline in general is far to lax, just something i have noticed over the last couple of years.

Al I would say, is that I agree with the need for discipline as much as you do - if not more.

My kids consider me a very strict disciplinarian ( so I've heard from the grapevine of friends and family ). Frankly I don't care - I have and always had strict rules and they have to follow them. The problem some people have is that they equate discipline with spanking - i.e you can't have one without the other. That is garbage IMO. You can have an extremely disciplined children and or household and never to have had to lay a finger on any child.

As for " always watching for good parenting skills and try to learn from that " - that's a good thing. I'd also suggest you read as much as you can on child development and parenting and communication when you have kids. I did that and it paid huge dividends - I must have over 100 paperbacks covering those 3 topics alone in my library. Good parenting is a skill that must be learned - both " on the job " and by reading as much about it as you can about it IMO.

[gemstone]

Actually, I think this is the reason a lot of new parents will embrace a policy of using hitting to discipline their own kids - becuase their parents did it to them.

taht said, doing something simply because my parents did it isn't a good enough reason to embrace any practice - at least for me.

I tend to agree with the American Academy of Pediatrics - " I strongly oppose striking a child "........but that's just me.


This is another commonly seen mistake made by a lot of parents: they keep using tricks that were proven ineffective in the last round.


New parents embrace it because they feel they turned into healthy adults. Why should they change if it worked? You keep saying it is unproven or proven ineffective but it has been proven in this thread alone from several posters. This thread is full of posts from people who say they were spanked and are happy. They also say they know people who were not and see the negative side of them. It has been proven that spanking has not harmed them. Overall parenting skills raise healthy adults whether spanking is apart of that or not.

Experts years ago stated spanking was OK so you have to take experts advice with a grain of salt. Their advice changes all the time. You shouldn't take their advice without taking personal experience into consideration. A few years from now spanking may be back to being recommended by these experts.

mrfrostyman has a good point about not knowing about the no spanking outcomes. There hasn't been any posts from them as far as I remember. Maybe they can post and tell us how they feel they turned out and what they may do as parents now.

[poedua]

New parents embrace it because they feel they turned into healthy adults. Why should they change if it worked?

Depends on who you are asking and who's making the claim now doesn't it ? Some very sick people can claim they are healthy.

" Healthy " is a matter of definition, degree...and a matter of opinion.



You keep saying it is unproven or proven ineffective but it has been proven in this thread alone from several posters.

That's a crock. Nothing has been " proven " either way. People are simply giving opinions.

If spanking worked so unequivocally well these past few decades, I suspect that after decades of research into this topic the American Academy of Pediatrics would have either heartily endorsed spanking or even recommended it. Instead ( from my earlier post ) they said...

" [ spanking ] is the least effective way to discipline "


..agree ? disagree ?

This thread is full of posts from people who say they were spanked and are happy.

Brilliant.

You have an amazing grasp of the obvious. What else would you expect ? They have to rationalize the fact they think it's OK to hit their kids as well.

They also say they know people who were not and see the negative side of them

Nice try.

I and my friends and family have known many family's kids over the years who were smacked on a regular basis - in public - with similar results. So, I could make the same argument.


It has been proven that spanking has not harmed them.

That's a stupid comment . No it hasn't...nothing - either way- has been proven.

Experts years ago stated spanking was OK so you have to take experts advice with a grain of salt. Their advice changes all the time.

Correct - we know more today than we did 50 years ago. The consensus of facts and best practice in all form of science changes as more research is done. It evolves as a result of rigorous study. When thing like longitudinal studies / statistical correlations can be made of family issues such as divorce, spousal abuse, alcoholism, depression, sexual abuse etc. - and their impact on the well-being of children ( where families has these issues ) - then I think any research on the effects of spanking - or not spanking - on kids is equally valid.


You shouldn't take their advice without taking personal experience into consideration.

And you shouldn't keep your head in the sand with respect to what those who study these issues have to say either.


A few years from now spanking may be back to being recommended by these experts.

Why ?

And why do you think they DON'T RECOMMEND it today ?

[Spidey]

The claim from many of the " slap happy ' crowd on this thread is that hitting your child repeatedly is a means of " last resort " - i.e nothing else works - you " have to " hit your child. The other point I hear from the " slap happy ' crowd here is that violence is better than a non-violent approach... " He is more likely to remember the smack than the words ". The claim is also made that is also " better " from a prevention point of view " [ hitting isntead of talking will ] prevent him from hurting himself in the future " These are false conclusions.

Those of us who advocate a non-violent approach to discipline, use it 24/7. Those who advocate hitting your child repeatedly - a violent approach to discipline - DO NOT advocate it 24/7 as an approach to discipline. Why- I don't know.



Well that does seem to be the view of the " slap happy " crowd on the thread - now doesn't it.



Well, that is the sort of interpretation I'd expect to hear from a " hitting is OK " proponent. Fact is, those are the " being done wrong " views you'd expect to hear from the " slap happy " crowd.



Too funny. Coming from a " hitting is OK " proponent...why am I not surpised.



No different than 3 in 1 posters on the thread either embracing the notion or advocating the repeated hitting of a child IMO.



Finally....you finally agree that you can get the same behavior results from non-violence as you can from violence ...." Doesnt make it better or worse, its just a different ". You just made my point.

Violence vs non-violence ......no difference " better or worse" ...... in your view.

Guess I simply choose never to accept violence as an option - you will.

But do you see that every person that replies that they spank, you are basically saying how wrong it is and trying to show that your way is best.

Your pushing your theories and opinions on us, while the other side we are just putting down examples, etc

[Spidey]

Well me, being the bad father that D-roc claims I am and a bunch of others, has the day off today from work

So me being the bad father am going to spend the day with my kids. After my morning coffee and checking my emails, we are either going sliding or just do some outside stuff they like

Yes, the bad father that spanks is going to spend the entire day with his kids.

Go out for a nice supper to and watch a family movie to wrap the day up

JUst because I spanked my kids doesnt make me love them any less or more than someone that didnt.

Plus I know a ton of fathers that dont spank their kids either. And you knwo why, because they work 60 hours a week and never see their kids.

Id rather be the type I father and see my kids every night and sleep in my own bed, then be on the road or at work all the time and miss seeing them grow up

[radeonboy]

If my parents did not spank me hard on my bum when I was a child with a coat hanger, I wouldn't be the person I am today. I would be literally a problem child. But thankfully I'm not. I'm just a good guy :)

But if I saw a parent punching a child in the face, that takes it too far. There are places where parents can spank a child. But the face area is a no no.

[radeonboy]

I am not a parent, and am pretty young still (almost 20) but i was spanked as a child, and so were my 3 siblings (27, 34, 37) I also got lectured multiple times. I will say that when i was spanked my parents faces always looked sad. Im 100% positive that my parents took no joy in discipline, but it had to be done. Im 4 gen canadian to. I think i turned out pretty well, but it was everything else my parents did in addition to discipline. I was spanked when i was younger(never beaten) and got more lectures as i got older, and boy did the lectures go on (2 hours for getting a 58 mid term in english grade 10) but i got my grades up because of it. When i was younger however lectures and words didnt mean as much, but getting spanked and seeing that face of dissapointment when doing so was devestating enough that i never did it again.

Now however, all it takes is the good old, im not mad im just dissapointed.

Also i know family's while i was growing up who never spanked their kids, and now they are spoiled and what not(the majority) while the majority who got spanked turned out more behavied. But then again it also depends on what else the parents do. Me, i am probably going to spank my kids. About the op, if it was a more of a beating i would have done the same thing, if it was discipline with a firm spanking i would have done nothing and probably not have had a second thought. Not dont get this out of context, like a firm spanking on the butt or on the hand.

Some might disagree, but from first hand experience it worked out, and i will try to raise my kids the same way my parents did.

You are right. My parents had no happiness in spanking me/siblings. Obviously. If the parent loves spanking a child, then something else is up with the parent.

[radeonboy]

3 to 1 in favor of spanking and look at the state of our children today....it's just sad....

spanking is not the result of why we have bad kids today. you couldn't be further away from the truth.

[curtis]

Fear is something that is sorely lacking nowadays.

At least it weeds out the idiots who have no fear.

HELL YES!! It is completely unacceptable to punish anyone or anything with physical violence. Creating fear (in any way) is not a good thing in the development of animals, and I would naturally assume children.

I'd like to go hit that parent and see if that teaches them not to hit their kid. :mad:

I've seen, on a few occasions, the results of abuse and nothing good could ever come of it. If this parent thinks this is anything other than abuse they need to have their kids taken away from them.

[mrfrostyman]

Most kids in my high school i would guess did stupid stuff like smoking, vandalising(sp?) because of

1. Lack of respect for authority
2. Respect usually comes with fear, the fear of that that authority and what they can do to you.

Me i had the fear of dissapointing my parents. That was a part of why i did not do the stuff i did. (also fear of God and his disappointment, but not everyone believes in god, so i wont use that as an example). I would guess that the fear of being caught by the police is a huge chunk of why people dont do the things they want to. Speeding for example. Some people dont speed in areas where there are speed traps(they know beforehand) But if they did not they would almost for sure be speeding. My example might not be the best, but hopefully it conveys that fear is not always bad.(sometimes it is but i dont think its applicable to this topic, fear of bullies etc...).

Edit: there were other reasons of course, but that is there as well. Just going on the fear part at the moment. The parents are also to blame sometimes(im sure you knew kids who acted all prim and proper at home but when they left, they were completely different). Again, not to experienced, just going on observations.

This is my opinion.

[teknoluv]

Fear is something that is sorely lacking nowadays.

Most kids in my high school i would guess did stupid stuff like smoking, vandalising(sp?) because of

1. Lack of respect for authority
2. Respect usually comes with fear, the fear of that that authority and what they can do to you.
It's REALLY VERY sad that people who live in Canada would look to FEAR as the pillar of a free society, as if the harsh lessons of the former Soviet Union and old timer Communist China are not enough.

By the way, RESPECT has NOTHING to do with fear. And in a democracy, authority is built upon consensus.

[D-Roc]

Man give it up spidey. I did not call you a bad father. All I have ever said is that spanking is uncalled for violence against children.

Someone asked this before I do nto not remember if anyone asnwered this.

If spanking is so effective in help kids learn and respect the parenst and help them relate an undesired behaviour such as tounching something hot or running out into the street then why is it only used as a last resort? If it is so effective why not use it all the tie and as the primary form of discipline?

[Spidey]

Man give it up spidey. I did not call you a bad father. All I have ever said is that spanking is uncalled for violence against children.

Someone asked this before I do nto not remember if anyone asnwered this.

If spanking is so effective in help kids learn and respect the parenst and help them relate an undesired behaviour such as tounching something hot or running out into the street then why is it only used as a last resort? If it is so effective why not use it all the tie and as the primary form of discipline?

Oh you didnt did you, here let me quote you directly from soemthign I posted.

Originally Posted by Spidey Well then I better admit the other bad things I do.

I spanked my kids, guess that made me an abusive mean father

I drink beer in front of my kids, I guess that makes me an alcoholic father

Ive swore in front of my kids, guess that makes me an unrespectable father

My kids have seen me lose my temper, guess that make me a weak father.

My kids have also seen me laugh, cry, scream and yell.

Guess they have seen me as human.


You dont want to spank your kids, I dont care. But just because you dont doesnt make you a better father or person than I am


Originally Posted by D-roc
1) I agree
2) I agree
3) I agree whole heartedly
4) I disagree


I never heard my kids complain once yesterday about a spanking I gave them years ago. Couldnt hear it over the laughing :cheesygri

[poedua]

I never heard my kids complain once yesterday about a spanking I gave them years ago. Couldnt hear it over the laughing :cheesygri

Wonderful logic ...kids didn't complain ( to you ) .....so spanking must be OK.

Too funny !

Who knew ...maybe if they'd had the guts to stand up to you and complain...you would've stopped hitting them !

Then again...maybe they enjoyed being hit ...yet another possible reason they never complained.:rolleyes:

[gemstone]

Someone asked this before I do nto not remember if anyone asnwered this.

If spanking is so effective in help kids learn and respect the parenst and help them relate an undesired behaviour such as tounching something hot or running out into the street then why is it only used as a last resort? If it is so effective why not use it all the tie and as the primary form of discipline?


You have got to be kidding with that first sentence.

If throwing your kid out onto the street is so effective as YOUR last resort, why not do that all the time and as your primary form of discipline?

[Whiplash7828]

So each person has different life experiences which developed into different values and different opinions...

This thread very effectively highlights why the world is such a violent place...(and I don't mean this due to the spanking...)

enough said.





Carry on....

[poedua]

So each person has different life experiences which developed into different values and different opinions...

This thread very effectively highlights why the world is such a violent place...(and I don't mean this due to the spanking...)

enough said.

Carry on....

So true....

" violence begets violence "

" excuses beget excuses "

enough said. :)

[curtis]

Freedom is a joke that only idealists believe in. There's them, and then there's reality.

There really is little realistic difference between fear and respect. The immediate consequences are similar.

A major problem with respect is that the vast majority of kids 'respect' stupidity. They respect the idiot on the street who's daring enough to saw off part of a shotgun to hide down their pants. They respect abuse of authority. They never get to the point where they learn to respect reasoning or respect their parents or anything which is forward.

When kids dismiss anything that requires any thought as, '********'...
How do you teach kids to stop respecting stupidity and to start thinking?

There is no harm with a little fear. It's a natural instinct and an important one - don't be dumb@ss and think jaywalking across a street with roadraging drivers is a good idea.
Fear of cars? or respect for cars? A little of both are in order.

It's REALLY VERY sad that people who live in Canada would look to FEAR as the pillar of a free society, as if the harsh lessons of the former Soviet Union and old timer Communist China are not enough.

By the way, RESPECT has NOTHING to do with fear. And in a democracy, authority is built upon consensus.

[Impala]

Agreed, fear is sometimes necessary.

Sometimes consensus is simply not possible between parent and child.
To relate it to government politics, democracy is a farce (off topic), dictatorships get things done quickly and effectively. I am the parent and I am in charge until I the child is old enough to argue rationally for what they believe in. “I don’t want to go school” is not a rational argument. Many parents don’t have time for that nonsense and if you let the child carry on they realize they can argue anything just because they don’t like it. This is why some parents get walked all over by their children.

It boils down to power. Weather or not you use spanking is fine. But once the authority figure in a child’s life (the parents) looses power, then all future authorities such as teachers, babysitters and police Etc. are approached with the same “I know what’s best for me” attitude. I use spanking sometimes simply because it sends a much faster, clearer message. I don’t have time to deliberate over nonsense like not going to school, or not brushing your teeth. It’s the right thing to do. Democracy has no place in these trivial matters. Spanking is also not a last resort it is an effective tool to use when deemed fit in different situations.

[Spidey]

Wonderful logic ...kids didn't complain ( to you ) .....so spanking must be OK.

Too funny !

Who knew ...maybe if they'd had the guts to stand up to you and complain...you would've stopped hitting them !

Then again...maybe they enjoyed being hit ...yet another possible reason they never complained.:rolleyes:


Just cant stand the fact that kids that were spanked are happy, can you

Talk about calling people down all the time. All ypuve gone is crap on people with opinions different than yours

And if you mention anything else about my kids, as in "enjoying it" Ill make sure your banned from this forum. I dont need to take your crap at all

[poedua]

Agreed fear is sometimes necessary.

Sometimes consensus is simply not possible between parent and child.

True. But that - the need for consensus - has no bearing of the validity or preference of spanking as a form of discipline over other non-violent options...or for effective parenting for that matter.

To relate it to government politics, democracy is a farce (off topic), dictatorships get things done quickly and effectively. I am the parent and I am in charge until I the child is old enough to argue rationally for what they believe in. “I don’t want to go chool” is not a rational argument. Many parents don’t have time for that nonsense and if you let the child carry on they realize they can argue anything just because they don’t like it. This is why some parents get walked all over by their children.

Parenting is not democracy - agreed. But this is irrelevant to the issue of the efficacy spanking of spanking as a form of discipline over other non-violent options.

It boils down to power

And the possible abuse of power.

Weather or not you use spanking is fine

Depends on who you ask.


. But once the authority figure in a child’s life (the parents) looses power, then all future authorities such as teachers, babysitters and police Etc. are approached with the same “I know what’s best for me” attitude. I use spanking sometimes simply because it sends a much faster, clearer message. ....I don’t have time to deliberate over nonsense like not going to school,

or not brushing your teeth.



No time ? Faster ? Clearer ? - for YOU or your child ?

Spanking for not brushing your teeth ? over brushing your teeth ?????? Please tell me you're joking.

So much for the " spanking only as a last resort " or " spanking in emergency situations ( i.e safety ) " arguments.

Striking a child over the brushing of teeth - now I've heard it all. :rolleyes:


. It’s the right thing to do.

Not according to the American Academy of Pediatrics - but what do they know.


Democracy has no place in these trivial matters.

The issue of striking a child is a " trivial " matter is it ?

Boy, that really speaks for itself doesn't it. :rolleyes:


Spanking is also not a last resort it is an effective tool to use when deemed fit in different situations.

No kidding !!! ...spanking just for a struggle over the bushing of teeth.

I know I'm going to regret asking, BUT, what other " different situations " are good for a smack in your view ?

- poor grades ?
- not eating vegetables ?
- having a messy room ?
- striking a friend or sibling ?
- straying from home ?
- wandering off in a public place ?
- saying naughty words ?

[poedua]

Just cant stand the fact that kids that were spanked are happy, can you

No...I can't stand the fact parents think it is OK to hit kids.

You claim they're happy...but you also claim spanking makes sense. You see my dilemma.:)

Talk about calling people down all the time. All ypuve gone is crap on people with opinions different than yours

I disagree with people that think it's OK to hit kids. And, after they go to great lengths to explain why they think there is nothing wrong with spanking, if I think their arguments make no sense from a logic or rationale point of view or if they are mis-representing those of us who choose to not make violence an option, then I'll tell them why i think that is the case. Some people think it's OK to hit kids, and they tell me why. It's a forum- remember.

And if you mention anything else about my kids, as in "enjoying it" Ill make sure your banned from this forum. I dont need to take your crap at all

A little common sense is relevant..... it was the illogic of your argument " spanking - happy kids " that is what I was pointing out. No kid on the face of the earth enjoys ...nor deserves for that matter ....being hit.

That's why I am anti-spanking.

[weedb0y]

I am pro spanking! I got spanked twice and that set me straight!

lol

[poedua]

I am pro spanking! I got spanked twice and that set me straight!

lol

Makes sense.

I think most people who got spanked themselves are more likely to be " pro-spanking "

[curtis]

No kids deserve or want to be born in poverty, so we should ban poverty and if that's not realistic (it's not), people in poverty shouldn't be allowed to have kids.

Some kids don't like to goto school, so they shouldn't have to go.

Some kids like being hit, so some should be hit.

That's a great arguement.

No...I can't stand the fact parents think it is OK to hit kids.

You claim they're happy...but you also claim spanking makes sense. You see my dilemma.:)



I disagree with people that think it's OK to hit kids. And, after they go to great lengths to explain why they think there is nothing wrong with spanking, if I think their arguments make no sense from a logic or rationale point of view or if they are mis-representing those of us who choose to not make violence an option, then I'll tell them why i think that is the case. Some people think it's OK to hit kids, and they tell me why. It's a forum- remember.



A little common sense is relevant..... it was the illogic of your argument " spanking - happy kids " that is what I was pointing out. No kid on the face of the earth enjoys ...nor deserves for that matter ....being hit.

That's why I am anti-spanking.

[Impala]

So much for the " spanking only as a last resort " or " spanking in emergency situations ( i.e safety ) " arguments.

Striking a child over the brushing of teeth - now I've heard it all. :rolleyes:


.

Not according to the American Academy of Pediatrics - but what do they know.




The issue of striking a child is a " trivial " matter is it ?

Boy, that really speaks for itself doesn't it. :rolleyes:




No kidding !!! ...spanking just for a struggle over the bushing of teeth.

I know I'm going to regret asking, BUT, what other " different situations " for a good smack in your view ?

- poor grades ?
- not eating vegetables ?
- having a messy room ?
- striking a friend or sibling ?
- straying from home ?
- wandering off in a public place ?
- saying naughty words ?


You have missed my point the situation is irrelevant, as I said it all has to do with power. If you let the little things slide, the child begins to question and argue everything because they know they have to power to get what they want.

So, you repeatedly tell a child to brush his/her teeth and they refuse, and you don’t resort to spanking and just let it slide, the child learns that if they refuse and fuse long enough parents will just give in.

The key is to be consistent. If you say you are going to slap the child if they do it again make sure if they do it again they get slapped. If you say you are going to remove this privilege if they do something again, make sure that privilege gets removed if they do it again


Also, I was referring to going to school and brushing your teeth as the right thing to do. This is why there is no place for democracy because going to school is the right thing to do no matter how the child feels otherwise. Sorry for the confusion.

[curtis]

Actually, I think it is a good thing for kids to be able to question and argue everything as long as they argue with reasonable logic.

You should never do things 'just because'.

In your case, consistently provide reasonable logic, and maybe your kid will pickup on that and think things through instead of asking you all the time.

If not, then your kids, not unlike a lot of people out there, are just stupid.

You have missed my point the situation is irrelevant, as I said it all has to do with power. If you let the little things slide, the child begins to question and argue everything because they know they have to power to get what they want.

So, you repeatedly tell a child to brush his/her teeth and they refuse, and you don’t resort to spanking and just let it slide, the child learns that if they refuse and fuse long enough parents will just give in.

The key is to be consistent. If you say you are going to slap the child if they do it again make sure if they do it again they get slapped. If you say you are going to remove this privilege if they do something again, make sure that privilege gets removed if they do it again

[Impala]

Actually, I think it is a good thing for kids to be able to question and argue everything as long as they argue with reasonable logic.

You should never do things 'just because'.

In your case, consistently provide reasonable logic, and maybe your kid will pickup on that and think things through instead of asking you all the time.

If not, then your kids, not unlike a lot of people out there, are just stupid.

I said this in one of my previous posts. I am the parent and I am in charge until I the child is old enough to argue rationally for what they believe in. “I don’t want to go school” is not a rational argument. So, "i don't want to brush my teeth" is not using reasonable logic. But i do agree you should exlplain as much as possible to children and answer their questions but something are simply to complex for them and you cannot be answering the same question over and over just because they don't get it at their young age.

How do you explain to a three year old the importance of brushing their teeth? You do it to be in the habit of explaining things but they don’t have any sort of concept of cavities no matter how much you verbally explain it to them. So, it has to be, do this because I say so because even though you don’t understand I am the parent and I know what’s best for you.

Also, this is not my case just a hypothetical one. My daughter may not understand why she has to brush her teeth, she may say because it’s fights cavities but that would only be because I have told her that, she has no real concept of what a cavity is. She does it because first of all, it has become routine and second, she knows if she refuses there will be consequence. She knows this because in the past she remembers that when she continues to refuse whatever, she will get slapped.

[D-Roc]

You have got to be kidding with that first sentence.

If throwing your kid out onto the street is so effective as YOUR last resort, why not do that all the time and as your primary form of discipline?

I never said that kicking a kid out on their own was effective, but it may be necessary. It is a wake up call if they choose to not live by the rules.

Now answer the question I posted.

[teknoluv]

don't be dumb@ss and think jaywalking across a street with roadraging drivers is a good idea.
Fear of cars? or respect for cars? A little of both are in order.
Since when did we start to "respect cars"?? :confused:

[alysomji]

I never said that kicking a kid out on their own was effective, but it may be necessary. It is a wake up call if they choose to not live by the rules.

Now answer the question I posted.

If only you knew how many kids who've been kicked out have ended up dead and/or missing. So sad that a parent could ever think about kicking out the person they love most. You might never see him/her again.

[D-Roc]

I said this in one of my previous posts. I am the parent and I am in charge until I the child is old enough to argue rationally for what they believe in. “I don’t want to go school” is not a rational argument. So, "i don't want to brush my teeth" is not using reasonable logic. But i do agree you should exlplain as much as possible to children and answer their questions but something are simply to complex for them and you cannot be answering the same question over and over just because they don't get it at their young age.

How do you explain to a three year old the importance of brushing their teeth? You do it to be in the habit of explaining things but they don’t have any sort of concept of cavities no matter how much you verbally explain it to them. So, it has to be, do this because I say so because even though you don’t understand I am the parent and I know what’s best for you.

Also, this is not my case just a hypothetical one. My daughter may not understand why she has to brush her teeth, she may say because it’s fights cavities but that would only be because I have told her that, she has no real concept of what a cavity is. She does it because first of all, it has become routine and second, she knows if she refuses there will be consequence. She knows this because in the past she remembers that when she continues to refuse whatever, she will get slapped.

Kids at the age of three should be able to understand many concepts as long as it is explained to them in a way they can understand. My kids at that age understood why they needed to brush their teeth. I never had to force them or threaten them with violence in order for them to comply. So your 3 year old probably still does not understnad why it is important just that if she doesn't do it she gets hit. Not a great way to get the message across.

[Impala]

Not according to the American Academy of Pediatrics - but what do they know.




IMO this is a better play is safe than sorry approach on their part, with a little nudge from modern popular opinion. They are against spanking but they have a huge responsibility with millions of families looking to them for guidance and they don’t have resources to teach every family how to properly use physical force with children. So if they say spanking is a good thing if done in the right way they open the door for all those parents who spank for the wrong reasons. Like anger and frustration.

[Impala]

Kids at the age of three should be able to understand many concepts as long as it is explained to them in a way they can understand. My kids at that age understood why they needed to brush their teeth. I never had to force them or threaten them with violence in order for them to comply. So your 3 year old probably still does not understnad why it is important just that if she doesn't do it she gets hit. Not a great way to get the message across.

Really? That’s ridiculous
You think when your kids were three years old they really understood why they had to brush their teeth. Just because a child can repeat what you have told them doesn’t mean they understand it.

that why parents still tell their five and six and seven year olds to brush their teeth b4 they go to bed, kids aren’t dumb but they do many things out of habit. Do you think a child that is a seven and under actually fears getting a cavity. Nope. They do many things because they are reinforced habits taught by parents. That’s why unlike animals human babies stay with their parent for so many years. If they could grasp and understand all of life's curve balls we would be done with them by the age of ten

Did you ever go to camp when you were like ten or eleven and not brush your teeth for a weekend? I did and so did all of my fellow campers. It’s not that we didn’t know what a cavity was but the idea so abstract and un-tabgible that it didn’t really matter at that age.

Do you think if you left a three year old up watching TV or whatever would they go out of their way to make sure they brushed their teeth or would doze off and not even think about it. My daughter wouldn’t (turns three in mid April) and if yours would IMO they are very sharp.

In any situation she understands that if she continues and continues to refuse and protest that she will get hit. This for me has proven to be an excellent way to get the message across that she can make her point and argue it but once the final decision is made by me that’s it.

[curtis]

Grasping at threads.

I guess you were one of those who needed the spanking because reasonable and thinking wasn't in your vocabulary.

Since when did we start to "respect cars"?? :confused:

[curtis]

"I don't want to brush my teeth" is a statement, not an arguement.

Perhaps you need to think a little deeper - ever think to ask your kid, "why don't you want to brush your teeth?"

Why don't you show your kid a picture of decayed teeth? Don't think you'll need to explain that one multiple times.

Another key problem area with parents is highlighted by your post. Many parents out there like to think, 'I know what's best for you'. Despite the best intentions in the world, more often than not, this is not the case. You can learn just as much from your child as you are teaching them.

Think of it this way, you're like a teacher teaching a child about life. I would consider measured spanking the equivalent of jail.

I said this in one of my previous posts. I am the parent and I am in charge until I the child is old enough to argue rationally for what they believe in. “I don’t want to go school” is not a rational argument. So, "i don't want to brush my teeth" is not using reasonable logic. But i do agree you should exlplain as much as possible to children and answer their questions but something are simply to complex for them and you cannot be answering the same question over and over just because they don't get it at their young age.

How do you explain to a three year old the importance of brushing their teeth? You do it to be in the habit of explaining things but they don’t have any sort of concept of cavities no matter how much you verbally explain it to them. So, it has to be, do this because I say so because even though you don’t understand I am the parent and I know what’s best for you.

Also, this is not my case just a hypothetical one. My daughter may not understand why she has to brush her teeth, she may say because it’s fights cavities but that would only be because I have told her that, she has no real concept of what a cavity is. She does it because first of all, it has become routine and second, she knows if she refuses there will be consequence. She knows this because in the past she remembers that when she continues to refuse whatever, she will get slapped.

[Impala]

"I don't want to brush my teeth" is a statement, not an arguement.

Perhaps you need to think a little deeper - ever think to ask your kid, "why don't you want to brush your teeth?"

Why don't you show your kid a picture of decayed teeth? Don't think you'll need to explain that one multiple times.

Another key problem area with parents is highlighted by your post. Many parents out there like to think, 'I know what's best for you'. Despite the best intentions in the world, more often than not, this is not the case. You can learn just as much from your child as you are teaching them.

Think of it this way, you're like a teacher teaching a child about life. I would consider measured spanking the equivalent of jail.

“I don’t want to brush my teeth” is an argument of a toddler they aren’t about to lay it all out for use. But I know why she doesn’t want to brush her teeth because she knows that that means it time for bed. No rational argument against bed right? I don’t know why kids don’t want to go to bed I think this is a common thing correct me if I am wrong. So as the parent I have to step in a say it’s time for bed.

The picture idea is a good one and would be effective to some extent in the long run. But you would have to use the cards often to continue to reinforce the images. A one time showing would be forgotten in no time. But think about how effective those nasty pictures on cigarette packages are.

How many people eat healthy or don’t smoke out of the fear of an early death. Un-tangibles like this are even harder for children to grasp.

I think you are really off here. Give me some example of when a child knows what’s best for them more so then the parent.

I agree with you that I can learn a lot from my child but we are talking about her development not mine. No matter how much I learn from her if I don’t do my teaching job well she looses out.

[Spidey]

No...I can't stand the fact parents think it is OK to hit kids.

You claim they're happy...but you also claim spanking makes sense. You see my dilemma.:)



I disagree with people that think it's OK to hit kids. And, after they go to great lengths to explain why they think there is nothing wrong with spanking, if I think their arguments make no sense from a logic or rationale point of view or if they are mis-representing those of us who choose to not make violence an option, then I'll tell them why i think that is the case. Some people think it's OK to hit kids, and they tell me why. It's a forum- remember.



A little common sense is relevant..... it was the illogic of your argument " spanking - happy kids " that is what I was pointing out. No kid on the face of the earth enjoys ...nor deserves for that matter ....being hit.

That's why I am anti-spanking.

You also seem to be attacking everyone on a personal level thats beyond just people not agreeing with you.

[poedua]

IMO this is a better play is safe than sorry approach on their part, with a little nudge from modern popular opinion.

You mean the same " better safe than sorry approach " the medical community takes when it advises people against smoking due to cancer risks ? " My dad smoked all his life and he's happy, nothing happened to him, so why should I stop smoking ? " - this " stupid " argument ring a bell ?

That's right, the medical community is just a mouthpiece for " popular opinion ". That's ridiculous. Sorry, the nudge comes from decades of study and what is in the best interest of kids rather than " popular opinion ".

The medical community doesn't usually take a position on an issue unless it has some basis on which to back it up - usually it is based on some form of research or other " findings " because they have to be able to back up and defend their position.

They are against spanking but they have a huge responsibility with millions of families looking to them for guidance and they don’t have resources to teach every family how to properly use physical force with children.

Wrong. They are against spanking for all the reasons they cite on their various web-sites to back up their position ...the primary reason being it is " the least effective method of discipline ".

LOL. Nice try


So if they say spanking is a good thing if done in the right way they open the door for all those parents who spank for the wrong reasons. Like anger and frustration.

No, then they would say " we recommend " spanking under certain conditions - but , they don't . It is " the least effective " 100% of the time ..that is the very point they are trying to get across to parents.

[curtis]

Ok, I don't have kids, but I suspect the easiest way to put them to bed is to physically wear them out. I've heard that's darned near impossible though. Maybe warm milk or something will help. Perhaps they're scared of the boogie monster! Who know?

I'm not saying the kids know more than the parents, but rather that people draw many conclusions without thinking them through.

Explaining it will make you think them through, and I'm sure you'll find that often enough, you've missed something.

“I don’t want to brush my teeth” is an argument of a toddler they aren’t about to lay it all out for use. But I know why she doesn’t want to brush her teeth because she knows that that means it time for bed. No rational argument against bed right? I don’t know why kids don’t want to go to bed I think this is a common thing correct me if I am wrong. So as the parent I have to step in a say it’s time for bed.

The picture idea is a good one and would be effective to some extent in the long run. But you would have to use the cards often to continue to reinforce the images. A one time showing would be forgotten in no time. But think about how effective those nasty pictures on cigarette packages are.

How many people eat healthy or don’t smoke out of the fear of an early death. Un-tangibles like this are even harder for children to grasp.

I think you are really off here. Give me some example of when a child knows what’s best for them more so then the parent.

I agree with you that I can learn a lot from my child but we are talking about her development not mine. No matter how much I learn from her if I don’t do my teaching job well she looses out.

[poedua]

You also seem to be attacking everyone on a personal level thats beyond just people not agreeing with you.

No ...I'm attacking the assumptions, claims, statements, conclusions & the arguments people in support of hitting children have put in their posts.

It's the debating of violence / spanking against children - as a topic - that is done at a very "personal level ". Most posters here have kids after all - so, being parents, when it comes to kids, " personal level " is the nature of the beast.

.

[gemstone]

I never said that kicking a kid out on their own was effective, but it may be necessary. It is a wake up call if they choose to not live by the rules.

In other words, kicking them out is YOUR last resort.


Now answer the question I posted.

YES it has. Spanking as a last resort is a "wake up call if they choose to not live by the rules" as you put it.



That's right, the medical community is just a mouthpiece for " popular opinion ". That's ridiculous. Sorry, the nudge comes from decades of study and what is in the best interest of kids rather than " popular opinion ".

The medical community doesn't usually take a position on an issue unless it has some basis on which to back it up - usually it is based on some form of research or other " findings " because they have to be able to back up and defend their position.

Wrong. They are against spanking for all the reasons they cite on their various web-sites to back up their position ...the primary reason being it is " the least effective method of discipline ".

No, then they would say " we recommend " spanking under certain conditions - but , they don't . It is " the least effective " 100% of the time ..that is the very point they are trying to get across to parents.


How many decades? In 1988 the experts had a different opinion. How do they do these studies anyway? Do they send out questionaires because I have never received one. Has anybody else? Since, as recent as 1988, they said spanking up to age 6 is acceptable then they can't know for sure no spanking is better until all these kids in the last few years become adults. So I guess they are just stating their opinion right now.


1988
"Given a relatively "healthy' family life in a supportive environment, spanking in and of itself is not detrimental to a child or predictive of later problems."

The above is exactly what all us spankers have been repeatedly posting in this thread. Thank You Impala.

[patrob]

You also seem to be attacking everyone on a personal level thats beyond just people not agreeing with you.

I have noticed that too...

[teknoluv]

I guess you were one of those who needed the spanking because reasonable and thinking wasn't in your vocabulary.
When reasoning runs dry, personal attacks kick in? :shake head:

Seems that some people are trying to JUSTIFY their spanking HERE, which I think is neither necessary nor useful. So you spank your kids; you should be glad that it's not illegal to do so in Canada, at least for now and in the near future. But please don't brag about it. It's not something that ANYBODY should be proud of. Guess what? People you know (friends or relatives) are NOT going to say that you're wrong, EVEN WHEN they are truly disgusted. Just make sure you play this VERY carefully; you cross the line, you go to jail. Amen.

[D-Roc]

If only you knew how many kids who've been kicked out have ended up dead and/or missing. So sad that a parent could ever think about kicking out the person they love most. You might never see him/her again.

And there are many who end up dead and missing even if they were not kicked out of their home for not respecting the rules. Many of those also ended up in jail. Many of those who were hit as a form of discipline end up being abusive parents or criminals.

[D-Roc]

Really? That’s ridiculous
You think when your kids were three years old they really understood why they had to brush their teeth. Just because a child can repeat what you have told them doesn’t mean they understand it.

that why parents still tell their five and six and seven year olds to brush their teeth b4 they go to bed, kids aren’t dumb but they do many things out of habit. Do you think a child that is a seven and under actually fears getting a cavity. Nope. They do many things because they are reinforced habits taught by parents. That’s why unlike animals human babies stay with their parent for so many years. If they could grasp and understand all of life's curve balls we would be done with them by the age of ten

Did you ever go to camp when you were like ten or eleven and not brush your teeth for a weekend? I did and so did all of my fellow campers. It’s not that we didn’t know what a cavity was but the idea so abstract and un-tabgible that it didn’t really matter at that age.

Do you think if you left a three year old up watching TV or whatever would they go out of their way to make sure they brushed their teeth or would doze off and not even think about it. My daughter wouldn’t (turns three in mid April) and if yours would IMO they are very sharp.

In any situation she understands that if she continues and continues to refuse and protest that she will get hit. This for me has proven to be an excellent way to get the message across that she can make her point and argue it but once the final decision is made by me that’s it.


If you think it is ridiculous then obviously do not know how to talk to a child. I know mine fully understand why and the consequences if they did/do not clean their teeth. It is all how you talk to them and the way you explain it.

As for your tv example. I did not say they did not need to be reminded of it. I said that they can understand the reaosns why it needs to be done. Big difference. Even as adults, we sometimes need to be reminded to do something. Does that mean you do not understand and that a good smack to your butt is warranted??

Your last statements about how hitting a child is the nly way for you to get the message across clearly shows that you are unable to speak to a child in a way they can understand.

If it is such an "excellent" way of getting her to understand why wait to hit her as a last resort?? Do it the first time she says no and it would save you time.

[D-Roc]

“I don’t want to brush my teeth” is an argument of a toddler they aren’t about to lay it all out for use. But I know why she doesn’t want to brush her teeth because she knows that that means it time for bed.

“I don’t want to brush my teeth” is a statement.
“I don’t want to brush my teeth, because I do not want to go to bed." is an arguement. Until you ask the child why they do not want to brush their teeth instead of assuming you do nto really know.

[D-Roc]

In other words, kicking them out is YOUR last resort.




YES it has. Spanking as a last resort is a "wake up call if they choose to not live by the rules" as you put it.








Fine. Instead of splitting hairs here I will sat it is a last resort tactic but at least I can say mine are 100% non-violent where you can not.

[Impala]

If you think it is ridiculous then obviously do not know how to talk to a child. I know mine fully understand why and the consequences if they did/do not clean their teeth. It is all how you talk to them and the way you explain it.

As for your tv example. I did not say they did not need to be reminded of it. I said that they can understand the reaosns why it needs to be done. Big difference. Even as adults, we sometimes need to be reminded to do something. Does that mean you do not understand and that a good smack to your butt is warranted??

Your last statements about how hitting a child is the nly way for you to get the message across clearly shows that you are unable to speak to a child in a way they can understand.

If it is such an "excellent" way of getting her to understand why wait to hit her as a last resort?? Do it the first time she says no and it would save you time.

Whatever… If it because the kids are super geniuses and really know why they should brush their teeth and not just know as in they can tell you why by regurgitating information that was given to them or because it is due to repetition and because the parents are constantly reinforcing the good habit.

We disagree on that fine. So, you agree that from time to time they need reminding.

So what if when reminding your genius kids that they have to brush their teeth and if they don’t their teeth will fall out and they still refuse? Then what? Give up let the kids go to sleep without brushing there teeth and the notion that they can get away stuff by simply refusing?

No where have I said hitting a child is the only way to get the message across. But at times is can be the most effective.

Kids don’t understand everything instantly if this were the case we would have no need for fourteen years of public education.

If you hit the child the first time without and explanation the child would be completely lost. They wouldn’t know what they have done wrong. Also, the first time they say no you want to give them the opportunity to vocalize their opinions and develope their language and reasoning skills, even if they are wrong. The explanation is a crucial component of hitting as a punishment. I don’t think I have given the impression otherwise.

Back to your low-blow comment about not being able to talk to children, I have explained it to her and she can explain it back to me why she needs to brush her teeth. That doesn’t mean she fully understands it to the extent that if she were left to her own devices that should brush her teeth as often as she should.

“I don’t want to brush my teeth” is a statement.
“I don’t want to brush my teeth, because I do not want to go to bed." is an arguement. Until you ask the child why they do not want to brush their teeth instead of assuming you do nto really know.

I have noticed many children who do not want to go to bed. Has this ever happened to you? What kind of answers do you get when you ask them why they don’t want to go to bed? After getting the answer and being the good communicating parent that you are, explaining to them why after all that they still have to go to bed, have you changed their minds? After talking it through with them do they say “oh okay dad I’m sorry I don’t know what I was thinking let me go get my pajamas on?

I don’t think that would represent the norm.

[gemstone]

Fine. Instead of splitting hairs here I will sat it is a last resort tactic but at least I can say mine are 100% non-violent where you can not.

Really, what if the child refuses to leave? How are you going to get them out the door? Yours is also the lazy way. You give up.


So what if when reminding your genius kids that they have to brush their teeth and if they don’t their teeth will fall out and they still refuse? Then what? Give up let the kids go to sleep without brushing there teeth and the notion that they can get away stuff by simply refusing?

No he'll throw them out.

[poedua]

How many decades? In 1988 the experts had a different opinion. How do they do these studies anyway? Do they send out questionaires because I have never received one. Has anybody else? Since, as recent as 1988, they said spanking up to age 6 is acceptable then they can't know for sure no spanking is better until all these kids in the last few years become adults. So I guess they are just stating their opinion right now.


1988
"Given a relatively "healthy' family life in a supportive environment, spanking in nd of itself is not detrimental to a child or predictive of later problems."

The above is exactly what all us spankers have been repeatedly posting in this thread. Thank You Impala.


Well, I'm glad to see you're citing experts you feel are qualified to comment on this topic. These same " experts " you're citing above - who reaffirmed their position on spanking as recently as of 2004 - also said ( and I am quoting ).......


- spanking is a less effective strategy than time-out or removal of privileges for reducing undesired behavior in children

- corporal punishment is of limited effectiveness and has potentially deleterious side effects

- the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that parents be encouraged and assisted in developing methods other than spanking in response to undesired behavior.

- because of the negative consequences of spanking and because it has been demonstrated to be no more effective than other approaches for managing undesired behavior in children...spanking is no more effective as a long-term strategy than other approaches

- parents who spank their children are more likely to use other unacceptable forms of corporal punishment

- the more children are spanked, the more anger they report as adults

- the more children are spanked, the more likely they are to spank their own children

- the more children are spanked, the more likely they are to approve of hitting a spouse

- the more children are spanked, the more marital conflict they experience as adults

- spanking has been associated with higher rates of physical aggression, more substance abuse, and increased risk of crime and violence

- spanking children <18 months of age increases the chance of physical injury

- spanking models aggressive behavior as a solution to conflict and has been associated with increased aggression in preschool and school children

- even controlling for baseline antisocial behavior, the more 3- to 6-year-old children were hit, the worse their behavior when assessed 2 years later

- spanking of young children is highly correlated with continued spanking of school and adolescent children

- findings challenge most the notion that parents can spank in a calm, planned manner....parents are more likely to use aversive techniques of discipline when they are angry or irritable, depressed, fatigued, and stressed




The cumulative consequences noted above represent exactly what all us " non-spankers " have been repeatedly posting about in this thread.

Thank You - Poedua :)

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics%3B101/4/723

[Diamondog]

Well, I'm glad to see you're citing experts you feel are qualified to comment on this topic. These same " experts " you're citing above - who reaffirmed their position on spanking as recently as of 2004 - also said ( and I am quoting ).......


- spanking is a less effective strategy than time-out or removal of privileges for reducing undesired behavior in children

- corporal punishment is of limited effectiveness and has potentially deleterious side effects

- the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that parents be encouraged and assisted in developing methods other than spanking in response to undesired behavior.

- because of the negative consequences of spanking and because it has been demonstrated to be no more effective than other approaches for managing undesired behavior in children...spanking is no more effective as a long-term strategy than other approaches

- parents who spank their children are more likely to use other unacceptable forms of corporal punishment

- the more children are spanked, the more anger they report as adults

- the more children are spanked, the more likely they are to spank their own children

- the more children are spanked, the more likely they are to approve of hitting a spouse

- the more children are spanked, the more marital conflict they experience as adults

- spanking has been associated with higher rates of physical aggression, more substance abuse, and increased risk of crime and violence

- spanking children <18 months of age increases the chance of physical injury

- spanking models aggressive behavior as a solution to conflict and has been associated with increased aggression in preschool and school children

- even controlling for baseline antisocial behavior, the more 3- to 6-year-old children were hit, the worse their behavior when assessed 2 years later

- spanking of young children is highly correlated with continued spanking of school and adolescent children

- findings challenge most the notion that parents can spank in a calm, planned manner....parents are more likely to use aversive techniques of discipline when they are angry or irritable, depressed, fatigued, and stressed




The cumulative consequences noted above represent exactly what all us " non-spankers " have been repeatedly posting about in this thread.

Thank You - Poedua :)

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics%3B101/4/723

Excellent post! Now lets hope thats the end of it and there isn't an effort to twist further.

[gemstone]

Well, I'm glad to see you're citing experts you feel are qualified to comment on this topic. These same " experts " you're citing above - who reaffirmed their position on spanking as recently as of 2004 - also said ( and I am quoting ).......

The cumulative consequences noted above represent exactly what all us " non-spankers " have been repeatedly posting about in this thread.

Thank You - Poedua :)

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics%3B101/4/723

Apparently you didn't get the point of my post. I guess they are just stating their opinion right now as well as back then because I am sure they did their studies back then too. 1988 and changed it in 1998. That is only 10 years, not decades of study as you said. And since according to the article, 90% still spank, they have a very small sampling to decide whether no spanking works. The percentage of parents (the 90%) who do not follow the quote below is probably larger than the total no spanking percentage. Maybe they just interviewed or studied the wrong people to come to their no spanking conclusions.

1988
"Given a relatively "healthy' family life in a supportive environment, spanking in nd of itself is not detrimental to a child or predictive of later problems."

The above is exactly what all us spankers have been repeatedly posting in this thread. It is backed up by ourselves and our kids.


BTW, their description of what time-outs are sounds alot worse than a couple of swats on the butt. That is not the way I did time-outs.

>>Time-out and removal of privileges are approaches that involve removing positive reinforcement for unacceptable behavior. For young children, time-out usually involves removing parental attention and praise (ignoring) or being placed in a chair for a specified time with no adult interaction. For older children and adolescents, this strategy usually involves removing privileges or denying participation in activities (eg, grounding for an evening with no TV or loss of driving privileges). To be effective, this strategy requires that a valued privilege or reinforcer is removed. In preschool children, time-out (removal of positive parental attention) has been shown to increase compliance with parental expectations from ~25% to 80%, and similar effectiveness is seen when used appropriately with older children. To be effective, however, time-out must be used consistently, for an appropriate duration, not excessively, and with strategies for managing escape behavior in place before the time-out is imposed.<<

So what are you supposed to do the other 20% of the time?

Time out = Force your child to stand or sit in a corner or chair or whatever and then ignore them when they cry and plead with you. If they escape, put them back and ignore them again. Repeat until child stays until his time is done. Secure them if necessary to prevent escape. What do they mean by secure? Images of strapping them to a chair come to mind.

This escaping could happen 20 times before the child finally stays. Are you telling me by the 5, 10, 15, 20th time that parent is not getting angrier and angrier and getting more and more forceful when they are putting the child back? All the while ignoring the childs pleas. The parent has just bullied the child into submission. The same thing you accuse spankers of doing.

How long has this whole process taken? A lot longer to wonder why their parent is treating them that way when they are supposed to love them as many of you have related this thinking to a child who has been spanked. I would think this is more likely to have negative effects on the child doing time-outs than a couple of quick swats and then it is overwith. Sure the child eventually will sit his time-out without escaping but the child that was spanked will stop doing what they got spanked for too and the threat of being spanked will help prevent future misbehavings. The parent is more likely to lose control while doing a time out than they are when they spank, IMO. No twisting, just fact. If spankers can lose control so can parents who do these time-outs the way the experts describe.

I used time-out all the time but the threat of a spanking encouraged them not to "escape" which made the punishment proceed smoother and with a lot less stress and emotional trauma for both me and my child. And I certainly never ignored my child while they were in time out.

[Impala]

Apparently you didn't get the point of my post. I guess they are just stating their opinion right now as well as back then because I am sure they did their studies back then too. 1988 and changed it in 1998. That is only 10 years, not decades of study as you said. And since according to the article, 90% still spank, they have a very small sampling to decide whether no spanking works. The percentage of parents (the 90%) who do not follow the quote below is probably larger than the total no spanking percentage. Maybe they just interviewed or studied the wrong people to come to their no spanking conclusions.

Agreed

As I have said before unfortunately many parents who use spanking as a form of punishment go about doing it in the wrong way and for the wrong reasons.

I doubt the American Association of Pediatrics had someone supervising every parent and every incident of spanking they are basing their research on.

“parents who spank their children are more likely to use other unacceptable forms of corporal punishment”

This goes to show which parents they are monitoring. If the parents are using other forms of unacceptable corporal punishment they are clearly not good example of parents who are using spanking correctly in a healthy supportive environment.

[poedua]

Apparently you didn't get the point of my post. I guess they are just stating their opinion right now as well as back then because I am sure they did their studies back then too. 1988 and changed it in 1998. That is only 10 years, not decades of study as you said. And since according to the article, 90% still spank, they have a very small sampling to decide whether no spanking works. The percentage of parents (the 90%) who do not follow the quote below is probably larger than the total no spanking percentage. Maybe they just interviewed or studied the wrong people to come to their no spanking conclusions.

1988
"Given a relatively "healthy' family life in a supportive environment, spanking in nd of itself is not detrimental to a child or predictive of later problems."

The above is exactly what all us spankers have been repeatedly posting in this thread. It is backed up by ourselves and our kids.


BTW, their description of what time-outs are sounds alot worse than a couple of swats on the butt. That is not the way I did time-outs.

>>Time-out and removal of privileges are approaches that involve removing positive reinforcement for unacceptable behavior. For young children, time-out usually involves removing parental attention and praise (ignoring) or being placed in a chair for a specified time with no adult interaction. For older children and adolescents, this strategy usually involves removing privileges or denying participation in activities (eg, grounding for an evening with no TV or loss of driving privileges). To be effective, this strategy requires that a valued privilege or reinforcer is removed. In preschool children, time-out (removal of positive parental attention) has been shown to increase compliance with parental expectations from ~25% to 80%, and similar effectiveness is seen when used appropriately with older children. To be effective, however, time-out must be used consistently, for an appropriate duration, not excessively, and with strategies for managing escape behavior in place before the time-out is imposed.<<

So what are you supposed to do the other 20% of the time?

Time out = Force your child to stand or sit in a corner or chair or whatever and then ignore them when they cry and plead with you. If they escape, put them back and ignore them again. Repeat until child stays until his time is done. Secure them if necessary to prevent escape. What do they mean by secure? Images of strapping them to a chair come to mind.

This escaping could happen 20 times before the child finally stays. Are you telling me by the 5, 10, 15, 20th time that parent is not getting angrier and angrier and getting more and more forceful when they are putting the child back? All the while ignoring the childs pleas. The parent has just bullied the child into submission. The same thing you accuse spankers of doing.

How long has this whole process taken? A lot longer to wonder why their parent is treating them that way when they are supposed to love them as many of you have related this thinking to a child who has been spanked. I would think this is more likely to have negative effects on the child doing time-outs than a couple of quick swats and then it is overwith. Sure the child eventually will sit his time-out without escaping but the child that was spanked will stop doing what they got spanked for too and the threat of being spanked will help prevent future misbehavings. The parent is more likely to lose control while doing a time out than they are when they spank, IMO. No twisting, just fact. If spankers can lose control so can parents who do these time-outs the way the experts describe.

I used time-out all the time but the threat of a spanking encouraged them not to "escape" which made the punishment proceed smoother and with a lot less stress and emotional trauma for both me and my child. And I certainly never ignored my child while they were in time out.

Before I reply, why don't you show some integrity in your posts and supply the link that contains the the text of your " 1988 " quote.

[D-Roc]

Whatever… If it because the kids are super geniuses and really know why they should brush their teeth and not just know as in they can tell you why by regurgitating information that was given to them or because it is due to repetition and because the parents are constantly reinforcing the good habit.


I can say that my wife and make it a point that our kids understand and not only repeat what was said to them.

If my genuis kids (thanks for the compliment btw) did not brush their teeth after being reminded, there would be a consequence (non-violent). And don't say if that doesn't work then what. There is absolutely no situation that would warrant a smack as a reminder.


No where have I said hitting a child is the only way to get the message across. But at times is can be the most effective.

So if hitting a child is so effective in getting the message across why not do it all the time?

You are correct that kids do not understand everything instantly. That is why it is the parents job to help them understand and to do so without resorting to hitting.


If you hit the child the first time without and explanation the child would be completely lost. They wouldn’t know what they have done wrong. Also, the first time they say no you want to give them the opportunity to vocalize their opinions and develope their language and reasoning skills, even if they are wrong. The explanation is a crucial component of hitting as a punishment. I don’t think I have given the impression otherwise.

That is true and should be practiced by every parent. If the explainantion is so crucial (which I agree with) a smack should never be needed if the explaination is done in a way the child understands.


Back to your low-blow comment about not being able to talk to children, I have explained it to her and she can explain it back to me why she needs to brush her teeth. That doesn’t mean she fully understands it to the extent that if she were left to her own devices that should brush her teeth as often as she should.

Low blow?? Nope. If you need to smack a child to help them understand then you are not able to communicate with them well enough so that they do understand.


I have noticed many children who do not want to go to bed. Has this ever happened to you? What kind of answers do you get when you ask them why they don’t want to go to bed? After getting the answer and being the good communicating parent that you are, explaining to them why after all that they still have to go to bed, have you changed their minds? After talking it through with them do they say “oh okay dad I’m sorry I don’t know what I was thinking let me go get my pajamas on?


If my kids did refuse (and they have early on) we did explain it to them We also explained that we are their parents and that if they continue to fight going to bed they will loose toys, tv, etc.
We have a great system for bed time. They go to their rrom after going to the bathroom, brushing their teeth and reading a book to them. They muct be in their room by a certain time. This does not mean they must fall asleep. They can play quietly in bed or read or whatever else they want. Usually it only lasts for about 30 mins (max 45 mins) and off to sleep they go.

[D-Roc]

Really, what if the child refuses to leave? How are you going to get them out the door? Yours is also the lazy way. You give up.






So you would be willing to provide shelter for a kid who has dropped out of school, will not work, not listen to you?
Oh that is rigth. You would beat them. I forgot. That is a very effective way to get your point across.

This is not a lazy way. It is called tough love. Unfortunately sometimes it comes to that.

[poedua]

Agreed

As I have said before unfortunately many parents who use spanking as a form of punishment go about doing it in the wrong way and for the wrong reasons.

The AAP says spanking is the " least effective " of all methods - so you seem to be saying , in your view, the AAP is wrong and that spanking is " more effective " - as you say, depending on " the reason " ?

If so, re " Wrong reasons " ? What is the " right reason(s) " to spank in your view.

Give me 5 if you can ....or is there only 1, 2 or 3 reasons ?

I doubt the American Association of Pediatrics had someone supervising every parent and every incident of spanking they are basing their research on.

“parents who spank their children are more likely to use other unacceptable forms of corporal punishment”

This goes to show which parents they are monitoring.

That makes no sense . Which parents are the montoring then ?

If the parents are using other forms of unacceptable corporal punishment they are clearly not good example of parents who are using spanking correctly in a healthy environment.

Too funny.

[D-Roc]

Before I reply, why don't you show some integrity in your posts and supply the link that contains the the text of your " 1988 " quote.

I love the fact it was from 1988 LMAO.

BTW great post poedua.

[gemstone]

Agreed

As I have said before unfortunately many parents who use spanking as a form of punishment go about doing it in the wrong way and for the wrong reasons.

I doubt the American Association of Pediatrics had someone supervising every parent and every incident of spanking they are basing their research on.

“parents who spank their children are more likely to use other unacceptable forms of corporal punishment”

This goes to show which parents they are monitoring. If the parents are using other forms of unacceptable corporal punishment they are clearly not good example of parents who are using spanking correctly in a healthy supportive environment.

What happened to supply a link before posting?

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/103/3/696

I haven't even read the whole thing but this stood out. right away.

>>to support its antispanking position, the policy relies on weak, nonfocused research and ignores solid data to the contrary. For example, the policy claims that spanking leads to aggression, though the best studies indicate a neutral to positive effect of spanking on childhood aggression.4 Two years ago, Gunnoe published a study finding that the use of spanking with 4- to 7-year-olds was associated with reduced antisocial behavior, and noted that "for most children, claims that spanking teaches aggression seem unfounded."5 By contrast, the policy relies on sociological studies by Graziano and Straus which did not muster sufficient approval of the consensus panel to influence the final consensus statement<<

[gemstone]

So you would be willing to provide shelter for a kid who has dropped out of school, will not work, not listen to you?
Oh that is rigth. You would beat them. I forgot. That is a very effective way to get your point across.

This is not a lazy way. It is called tough love. Unfortunately sometimes it comes to that.

Yes because obviously I must have did something wrong while raising him or he has some kind of psycological problem. He is my responsibility. No I would not beat him. I would not even spank him if he were a teenager. It would never come to throwing him away for me. I would never throw my child away like garbage even though as you say it would be a very effective way to get your point across.


I love the fact it was from 1988 LMAO.

BTW great post poedua.

March 1999

[poedua]

Yes because obviously I must have did something wrong while raising him or he has some kind of psycological problem. He is my responsibility. No I would not beat him. I would not even spank him if he were a teenager. It would never come to throwing him away for me. I would never throw my child away like garbage even though as you say it would be a very effective way to get your point across.




March 1999

Can you please paste in the link that conains the quote you provided earlier ( below )....I assumed it was the AAP...just want to confirm.

" 1988
"Given a relatively "healthy' family life in a supportive environment, spanking in nd of itself is not detrimental to a child or predictive of later problems."

[poedua]

What happened to supply a link before posting?

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/103/3/696

I haven't even read the whole thing but this stood out. right away.

>>to support its antispanking position, the policy relies on weak, nonfocused research and ignores solid data to the contrary. For example, the policy claims that spanking leads to aggression, though the best studies indicate a neutral to positive effect of spanking on childhood aggression.4 Two years ago, Gunnoe published a study finding that the use of spanking with 4- to 7-year-olds was associated with reduced antisocial behavior, and noted that "for most children, claims that spanking teaches aggression seem unfounded."5 By contrast, the policy relies on sociological studies by Graziano and Straus which did not muster sufficient approval of the consensus panel to influence the final consensus statement<<

Obviously, those views aren't the views of the AAP....the APP has a " antispanking position " ...and relies on more than just one or 2 studies from which to form it's policy.

But, if you think the AAP is wrong after reafirrming it's " antispanking position " in 2004 - even after 6 years of fielding any and all challenges to the validity of it's cited research supporting it's initial ( and same ) position in 1988 - you're entitled to your opinion.

[D-Roc]

Yes because obviously I must have did something wrong while raising him or he has some kind of psycological problem.


March 1999


Truer words have never been posted.

[Impala]

The AAP says spanking is the " least effective " of all methods - so you seem to be saying , in your view, the AAP is wrong and that spanking is " more effective " - as you say, depending on " the reason " ?

If so, re " Wrong reasons " ? What is the " right reason(s) " to spank in your view.

Give me 5 if you can ....or is there only 1, 2 or 3 reasons ?



That makes no sense . Which parents are the montoring then ?



Too funny.


Look at the statement as a whole and don’t pick out single words like “reason” to argue

Many parent use spanking in aa incorrect way.


The right reason to spank is when you have thoroughly explained something to a child and they still refuse to listen, even if it is because I am poor communicator or my child is stupid. At this point communication has failed the child has bunkered down and refuses to listen to rational reason.

What I am saying is that in the AAP’s study there was probably more than a handful of parent who did a poor job when spanking their kids.

And I don’t see how saying something is funny disproves it. The first thing that your quote listed was that “parents who spank their children are more likely to use other unacceptable forms of corporal punishment” If that is the case the tests do not represent parents like me who don’t use unacceptable forms of corporal punishment. I would expect that if parent did use unacceptable forms of corporal punishment that the subsequent problems listed have a higher possibility of occurring.

[gemstone]

Can you please paste in the link that conains the quote you provided earlier ( below )....I assumed it was the AAP...just want to confirm.

" 1988
"Given a relatively "healthy' family life in a supportive environment, spanking in nd of itself is not detrimental to a child or predictive of later problems."

I read the 1988 date in one of Impala's posts. When I searched it came up 1999 which makes it even more valid. Experts themselves disagree.


Obviously, those views aren't the views of the AAP....the APP has a " antispanking position " ...and relies on more than just one or 2 studies from which to form it's policy.

But, if you think the AAP is wrong after reafirrming it's " antispanking position " in 2004 - even after 6 years of fielding any and all challenges to the validity of it's cited research supporting it's initial ( and same ) position in 1988 - you're entitled to your opinion.



>>The new discipline policy, "Guidance for Effective Discipline,"1 of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is seriously flawed. Despite an excellent discussion of parental nurturance and positive reinforcement strategies, the policy statement is ill-founded and unrealistic in its account of corrective strategies, especially in its critique of disciplinary spanking.

To develop an unbiased, scientific analysis of the current research on corporal punishment, [B]the AAP co-sponsored a consensus conference 3 years ago in which I participated. A 13-point consensus statement was drafted by the conference panel of experts. Concerning the use of corporal punishment by parents, the panel could not find sufficient data to proscribe the use of spanking with children between the ages of 24 months and preadolescence. A literature review presented at the conference actually found stronger evidence for beneficial than detrimental effects of spanking with 2- to 6-year-old children.2 The co-chairs of the conference concluded, "Given a relatively "healthy' family life in a supportive environment, spanking in and of itself is not detrimental to a child or predictive of later problems."

The new AAP discipline policy statement largely ignores the consensus conference statement and, instead, selectively plucks from the conference proceedings several allegations of the avowed spanking opponents, without acknowledging the presentations of other participants. Eleven of the 13 citations in the policy statement to support its unconditional antispanking position in the "supplemental information" section concern presentations of antispanking participants at the consensus conference, not original research.<<


They have a conference and then don't even listen to the panels conclusions.

>>It is troubling that our Academy would espouse an "all or none" blanket condemnation of spanking founded on selective and biased citations of the research. Making this the primary theme of the policy statement cripples the effectiveness of the policy as a whole. Such Academy positions purportedly based on science will in the long run harm the credibility of the Academy. We need to do a better job building on the review of the consensus panel published in Pediatrics in October 1996, rather than ignoring it.<<

Got that right. If they won't listen to their own experts, why should we listen to them?

[gemstone]

Truer words have never been posted.

Oh that's right, if my kid turns out not so perfect, at least I will admit it and take responsibilities for my actions unlike you who will blame everyone else and toss him away.



That makes no sense . Which parents are the montoring then ?

That is what I asked. Maybe they are only interviewing prisoners. If it is from a small sample of parents then maybe they chose the wrong families because 90% of parents can't be wrong as far as I am concerned. I relate it to the Nielson families. There have been a lot of TV shows I really liked cancelled over the years because of them. Ask every household to participate and then post the results. It may change the “experts” opinions again.

[Ryan]

OK, this thread is overheated. Lock.