Spanking/smacking children

[quiet roar]

i think smacking is acceptable as long as its merely to punish the child rarther than out of anger....ie if the parent loses his/her temper with the child n smacks him/her....i think think this is wrong. but if the child does something wrong and has already been asked not to behave in this way (ie the child already knows that what he/she is doing is unacceptable behaviour)then it is okay to smack the child.

good point, but as a father of three rambunctious boys, I can tell you it isn't easy.

 

[Aishas Star]

Both me and my brother were smacked as well as all of my cousins and close friends, theres not way in hell we think violence is okay! None of us would ever hit a partner or family member, i don't even think any of us have ever been in a fight either.
Proof it doesnt teach violence is okay.
Its more likely TV, movies and video games are a bigger cause for violent children then smacking them.

 

[Belisarius]

I'm sure that using Datura on a kid would only leave them permanently fucked in the head, thus doubling the behavioral problem--as well as being illegal. Nah!

 

[Worried_Sick]

I think kids can only learn to behave if you beat some sense into them.

 

[randycaver]

Would that work on you?

 

[rm-rf]

i'm not in full support of the puss-ification of america

right on

there is nothing more revolting than a child that doesn't know its place, save for maybe a parent that doesn't let a child know its place.


this is in reference to rearing a child, not a parent displacing its own faults on a child. abuse is wrong. negative reinforcement is necessary. liberals suck.

like i said, some kids are immune to pain. I know me and several of my cousins would run into the kitchen and find the biggest wooden spoon and hand it to our parents in defiance at ages as young as 2. my parents had to come up with some extremely clever ways of providing necessary negative reinforcement, to let me know that there are indeed rules in the world, and that following them is not a choice.

for some kids, a quick paddle on the butt is all they need. however, there is a huge difference in making a child feel like a piece of shit, and raising them to be self respecting individuals.

Datura has been used traditionally by the Mapuche-Huilliche and the Jívaro tribes of South America as a last-resort punishment for unruly children.

GEE, I WONDER WHY THEIR SOCIETY HAS NOT ADVANCED IN THE LAST 10,000 YEARS...

jk

 

[ebola?]

>>this is in reference to rearing a child, not a parent displacing its own faults on a child. abuse is wrong. negative reinforcement is necessary. liberals suck.>>

I could be mistaken, but I believe the term you are looking for is "positive punishment", and positive punishment is not restricted to violence.

ebola

 

[ebola?]

>>I think kids can only learn to behave if you beat some sense into them.>>

You are mistaken.

>>Both me and my brother were smacked as well as all of my cousins and close friends, theres not way in hell we think violence is okay! None of us would ever hit a partner or family member, i don't even think any of us have ever been in a fight either.
Proof it doesnt teach violence is okay.>>

A single anecdote does not constitute proof of a trend.

ebola

 

[MynameisnotDeja]

I was never hit as a child. I was a well behaved child.
My parents respected me and so I respected them. As an adult, I have never been in a fight and hate the thought of violence.

 

[Limpet Chicken]

I think that smacking a child is utterly reprihensible, you don't see parents that have 18-19 year old teenagers, built like brick shithouses, smacking them, physical punishment is only used against those too small or too young to retaliate in kind, if, say, a person was mentally retarded, with the mental age of a four year old, but physically older, and strong, parents wouldn't smack.

I think it is cowardly, and instills the attitude that violence is ok to use as a matter of common resort in the child, I can think of only two reasons that I would smack a child if I had one (I do, I think actually, a girl, but have never met her)

The SINGLE reason I would threaten a smack (and even then, I would hesitate to do so) is if the child picked up one of my dangerous chemicals, if I had a three year old, and they picked up something like a bottle of fuming perchloric acid or white phosphorus, or similar very dangerous chemicals (I keep all my chemicals securely padlocked up in a cupboard actually), or was playing with one of my guns or waving about one of my swords, then I might threaten a smack if I absloutely had to, but not under any other circumstances other than to take the child out of extreme danger.

If I did actually cerrry out the threat and hit a kid under those circumstances, I would still hate myself for it afterwards.

 

[chrissie]

Datura has been used traditionally by the Mapuche-Huilliche and the Jívaro tribes of South America as a last-resort punishment for unruly children.

That may be true, but that doesn't mean one should do it. I wouldn't recommend that to anyone.

 

[vibr8tor]

I think it is cowardly, and instills the attitude that violence is ok to use as a matter of common resort in the child, I can think of only two reasons that I would smack a child if I had one (I do, I think actually, a girl, but have never met her)

The SINGLE reason I would threaten a smack (and even then, I would hesitate to do so) is if the child picked up one of my dangerous chemicals, if I had a three year old, and they picked up something like a bottle of fuming perchloric acid or white phosphorus, or similar very dangerous chemicals (I keep all my chemicals securely padlocked up in a cupboard actually), or was playing with one of my guns or waving about one of my swords, then I might threaten a smack if I absloutely had to, but not under any other circumstances other than to take the child out of extreme danger.

I agree completely. And your example of an acceptable exception is right on. The child psychiatrist I used to work with said something similar- that the *ONLY* time spanking is beneficial is when the child is doing something that places him/her in extreme danger, and it is necessary to make an immediate, shocking, lasting impression. The example he used was if you're walking in a parking lot or across the street, holding your childs hand, and he pulls it free and runs away. In a situation like that, lecturing a 3 year old on the danger of getting hit by a car wouldn't get the full attention needed to really set the point home, and an immediate on-the-spot spanking would be more effective.

 

[rm-rf]

I could be mistaken, but I believe the term you are looking for is "positive punishment", and positive punishment is not restricted to violence.

doh i always get my operant conditioning terms mixed up. and yes this is true, but sometimes kids need to understand their role in the child vs parent relationship. by nature a child can not possibly understand all its parent does to take care of it, and thus acts as tho its parent is its servant. this often needs to be corrected. also a spaking is not voilence dude, where the heck are u from lol.

 

[ebola?]

>> also a spaking is not voilence dude, where the heck are u from lol.>>

If a spanking is not violence, how should we operationally define violence then?

 

[Mean Girl]

I would concur with the idea that the physical hitting of a child isn't truly necessary. I believe the child in question usually reacts more to their self manifested fear of the hit than the slap itself. In my own case, my mother would consistently threaten to hit me when I was misbehaving, and the threat was there and it was real in my eyes, she would raise her hand and I would tremble in my shoes. Funny thing is that she never hit me, she just had me well convinced of the potential consequence I awaited each time I was bad.

 

[rollinginecstasy]

violence is the most unefficient, unintelligent "attempt" at a solution to any problem. next time you think about hitting your child smack yourself for being such an idiot.

 

[doofqueen]

^^ yeah that's my thoughts on it. Your just teaching you child that you solve your problems with your fists and if you don't like what someone is doing to hit them. When you think about it , it's really stupid *shrugs*

The only time i believe in smacking (and i mean a light quick smack) is when the child is at an age that they can not really communicate with you (under 2) and they are about to touch something that will hurt them like the oven or something and you can give them a quick smack, point to the oven and say "hot! no!" just to warn them about danger and so they don't burn their hand etc

There are many other forms of disipline other than just hitting your child. Think about it....

 

[MynameisnotDeja]

violence is the most unefficient, unintelligent "attempt" at a solution to any problem. next time you think about hitting your child smack yourself for being such an idiot.

 

[smileyfish]

I agree completely. And your example of an acceptable exception is right on. The child psychiatrist I used to work with said something similar- that the *ONLY* time spanking is beneficial is when the child is doing something that places him/her in extreme danger, and it is necessary to make an immediate, shocking, lasting impression. The example he used was if you're walking in a parking lot or across the street, holding your childs hand, and he pulls it free and runs away. In a situation like that, lecturing a 3 year old on the danger of getting hit by a car wouldn't get the full attention needed to really set the point home, and an immediate on-the-spot spanking would be more effective.

Yup, I agree. What some people don't seem to realise is that small children often can't understand the reasons we have for limiting their behaviour. Some of the concepts, such as the danger of traffic, teasing dogs, ingesting chemicals, sticking things into electrical sockets, etc are too complex for small children. You can explain it 'til you're blue in the face and they still won't understand until they taste the consequences for themsleves. Now which would you prefer: to have to give your child a mild smack once or twice to teach them to stay away from the danger, or to let them experience the true consequences which will be more severe than a mere smack? Either way, the child learns the consequence for the action, you just choose the consequence

I was smacked as a child, often inapproriately. My parents had a tendency to hit out of anger and when I was younger extreme anger/frustration would also provoke a physical response from me. I do not think this is good and I do think being smacked inappropriately as a child influenced me. I don't think smacking should be a regular form of punishment or ever used out of anger/frustration. It should solely be used when the situation is beyond the comprehension of the child or when time (imminence of danger) does not allow for a lengthy explanation. When all parties have had time to calm down the situation should then be discussed and the reason for smacking explained.

Other forms of discipline should be used in the majority of circumstances. Time-outs, witholding of priveledges, additional chores, etc are all useful, but again should be served up alongside an explanation of why the behaviour is unacceptable.

In response to the original poster, Aisha's Star, I know where you're coming from - I too worked in a suburban Australian shopping centre for a while and saw a lot of undisciplined children running rings around their parents. The big question is, why are parents so reluctant to discipline their children? Is it simply beause they don't want to hit and don't know any other ways? This tolerance of bratty children is a big problem, creating havoc in schools where teachers can't control kids who have no respect, and eventually it's going to spill over into other areas of society. I agree with the WOOD, this "pussification" approach to children is a load of shit. We are bringing social problems upon ourselves.

 

[MazDan]

When I was a kid I got spanked, slapped, had shit chucked at me and copped the wooden spoon across a bare ass along with 3 foot rulers etc.............Yeah I think I have turned out ok.............

And no I guess there probably isnt any long term damage and yes I probably did learn that this would get me spanked and that wouldnt.


But and its a big BUT................ I was so bloody scared of doing anything wrong for fear of being hit that I did lie to my parents, I rarely if ever asked them for advice and certainly never talked to them about my problems.

Why..............because I was either scared, didnt have the right sort of relationship or knew already that they just wouldnt understand.

That was the result of the spankings etc.............Its not the crap you think you can see............its whats going on that you cant see.

All the kids that have come through my life have been able to have a 100% open and honest and non judgemental relationship with me and those relationships have flourished and those kids have been able to openly discuss drugs, sexual problems, girl problems, school problems detention problems and the list goes on and on..............stuff I could never discuss with my parents.

Hitting a child is wrong.........pure and simple.

Everyone is different and difdferent things will work differently for different people but dont ever kid yourself that there is nothing wrong with spanking and the other crap that goes with it.............youir only fooling yourself or trying to make excuses for your own methods or for the methods of your parents or loved ones.


Bottom line.............yep spanking WILL work........it worked on me.............but at what cost????????

Hence............does it really work????