Is smacking a child wrong?

I say yes, because for me its one step closer to abuse, and if you smack a child they very rarely learn anything from it, a smack is over and done with in seconds, other constructive methods of punishments are not,

i know people who smack they're kids and they're kids, are withdrawn and are very quiet, and not like young children at all, they walk around with they're heads to the ground, and will not dare to look at anyone in the face!

If a child is doing somthing really wrong is it ok, to smack that child?
also, if a child is smacked a lot by the mum and dad, then would that turn the kids into bullies, if its wrong to hit someone then its wrong in either case?

also, what would you smack a child with? a hand? cane? rolled up newspaper? slipper?

Violence begets violence.

The idea that we're teaching children by striking them, while popular, is a bit shaky. What we're actually teaching them is to use violence to get what they want.

I used to think it didn't do much harm - then I saw the "supernanny" series on TV.

Using nothing but positive reinforcement, I've seen this woman transform the most sickening little bastard brats into wonderful well adjusted kids in a matter of weeks.

Her view - "If you hit a kid, it means you've lost it, YOU'RE supposed to be the adult, YOU'RE supposed to be in control, not them."


Should be compulsary viewing for all parents

I was spanked everyday and I deserved every one of them..I truley think it saved me from the real beatings life can dish out by making me stop and think about my actions..Timeouts and treats would've never worked on a child like myself.

Striking children should be done without inflicting allot of pain that would cause bruising or welts. A firm strike is a very good idea to do as long as you don't hit with violence but with love. To many times people actually beat their kids that causes black and blue marks and that's not what hitting a kid is for. It is only meant to teach them not to do something. That being said you can only hit kids so much and if they don't learn by the hits then you aren't going to solve anything. You should ALWAYS start by trying to talk to kids BEFORE you start to hit them. Talking to them should stop many of the problems but if that doesn't work that a gentle reminder on the butt would be very useful.;)

I was spanked everyday and I deserved every one of them.

I often derserve one too - I just can't afford them that often now I have to pay for them ;)

The mistake most parents make, is to only pay attention to their kids when they misbehave - think about it - how many parents do you know / or see who will completely ignore their kids when they are playing nicely and only get involved when they start throwing their toys around.

They inadvertently teach their kids that the way to get attention from their parents (which is what all kids crave) is to be a little shit.
Now you can lose control and belt them when it gets to this stage, or you can take control and avoid the situation arising by interacting with your kids in a positive way when they are behaving well - and by ignoring them completely when they misbehave.
If you had asked me about this approach a few years ago I would have told you it was bleeding heart liberal bullshit - having seen how astonishingly well it performs compared to a traditional disciplinarian approach I'm 100% converted.

Godly Tips on How to Punish and Beat Your Christian Child (http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0303/spanking.html)
...and by ignoring them completely when they misbehave.
That works for you with your kids? I doubt you have any...

Spank those children

Letting kids do what they want and paying no notice could likely lead to them doing worse things to get your attention. This may not be the case for you but, how far are kids willing to push boundaries? Will it get to the stage were a 13 yr old can throw some one on to a bonfire and not be punished by their parents.......before anyone says that is way to extreme and may not happen, it did last bonfire night. It's crazy.

I'm all for discipline but I don't know how far I'd go. Speaking from experience it's not nice to be hit.....and i didn't get spanked I got caned.....damn bamboo sticks. My hands were red for ages. But I don't think it stopped me from doing whatever it was I'd done again.

its interesting, i am of the opinion that if you teach a child that because you have the strength you can do anything you want that is a bad message to send where as my partner is of the opinion that anything to control the child goes. We will probably still be having this debate when we actually DO have kids:p

I've seen it with my own eyes, some kids need spankings, if your try to raise a kid and non-corporal punishment is not working, for the love of god beat the brat! Its all about the kid, some kids never need to be spanked, other need military school. In short like adults children are individuals that need specific guidance that is adapted to that specific child's needs, all those 'how to raise a child' guide books are pure BS, raising a child is not some recipe you can follow out of a guide book! One child may be raise with kind warning being all that is needed, while the other may need well delivered smacks 'upside the head... after calling s/he mother a "bitch" for example, the other child by the way would never even think of using profanity, let alone on s/he parents! See what I mean by every child is a individual?

EF who ever said profanity was so wrong anyway?

How many adults here use it?
I know i do so it would be hypocritical in the extreem if i disiplened my child for doing it, its like that McCains ad. The girl gets in the car and sticks her tongue out at this boy and the mother asks "wasnt that your friend". The kid responds "no hes a bloody idiot" and the mother responds "how dare you use such filth, where do you pick it up" only to then be cut off by another driver. The mother then windes the window down and shouts "bloody idiot, cant you see i have a kid in the car" and then looks shocked at her daughter.

Its ridiculas that we impose strictures on our childnren that we dont impose on ourselves, if there was less "do as i say not as i do" then kids might actually grow up more the way we expect rather than picking up our OWN bad habits

Who ever said it was right? May argument was not really about profanity, the example was about grossly disrespecting your mother, "That bitch made you and she can unmake you!"

By your logic If you smoke crack your in no position to tell your child not to.

We usually want our children to come out better then we are, not the same or worse.

actually no, my argument is that if your SMOKING crack how can you tell your kid not to. Like those parents who take the smoke out of there mouth long enough to say "dont you dare smoke"
"why"
*puft* "because i said so"

Yes there are reasons why you might be hooked and not want your kids to start (i defininitly wouldnt want MY kids to start smoking even though i do) yet you have to explaine WHY you still smoke when you dont want your kids to

actually no, my argument is that if your SMOKING crack how can you tell your kid not to. Like those parents who take the smoke out of there mouth long enough to say "don't you dare smoke"
"why"
*puft* "because i said so"

Yes there are reasons why you might be hooked and not want your kids to start (i definitely wouldn't want MY kids to start smoking even though i do) yet you have to explain WHY you still smoke when you don't want your kids to

I never said you can't explain why.

Don't smoke.

Why?

Look what it did to me.

...OH shit! Why do you keep smoking?!?

Because the cigarettes won't let me stop.. what that my little cancer stick... you want me to smoke another pack of you? No problem! It's not like I need that money for my kids college or something.

HEY! YOU NEED TO STOP SMOKING

EF that isnt how most parents work though. Mostly it goes this way

Parent "dont do this"
kid "but why mummy"
Parent "because i told you to and if you do i will knock your block off"

and people wonder why kids do the exact oposite.

EF that isnt how most parents work though. Mostly it goes this way

Parent "dont do this"
kid "but why mummy"
Parent "because i told you to and if you do i will knock your block off"

and people wonder why kids do the exact oposite.

Well that has nothing to do with corporal punishment and everything to do with lazy parents. If you tell a child not to do something, like "throw rocks at other people" and even explain why "it could hurt them, they could hurt you, etc" and the child does it anyways, you need to punish, and up the punishment each time.

I often derserve one too - I just can't afford them that often now I have to pay for them ;)

The mistake most parents make, is to only pay attention to their kids when they misbehave - think about it - how many parents do you know / or see who will completely ignore their kids when they are playing nicely and only get involved when they start throwing their toys around.

They inadvertently teach their kids that the way to get attention from their parents (which is what all kids crave) is to be a little shit.
Now you can lose control and belt them when it gets to this stage, or you can take control and avoid the situation arising by interacting with your kids in a positive way when they are behaving well - and by ignoring them completely when they misbehave.
If you had asked me about this approach a few years ago I would have told you it was bleeding heart liberal bullshit - having seen how astonishingly well it performs compared to a traditional disciplinarian approach I'm 100% converted.

That show is also highly edited.

I have a two and a half year old and you have no idea how hard it is to sometimes not hit. When he is awake, he has our attention 100% of the time. And even then, he will misbehave. He'll throw a car at his little brother's head, at our heads, throw a tantrum.. he'll act like a two year old. When he acts like a brat, we lock him in his room, because by that point, we're (his parents) are both so angry that the temptation to hit him is strong. The only time he has ever been spanked was when he bit his father so hard on the shoulder that he drew blood.. he wouldn't let go and any attempts to remove him only made him bite down harder.. don't ask me why he did it.. they were playing with their dad and he wanted a hug and he just chomped down hard. He was given a light tap on his well padded backside and roundly told off for having done so, then sent to his room. He had been sent to his room on previous occasions for biting and he repeated the behaviour. That was a couple of months ago and he has not repeated the behaviour again since that last time when he was smacked. We are just thankful it was not his baby brother that he bit.

We don't advocate hitting. Far from it. I would rather not hit. When the temptation to give him a smack is there, he is sent to his room. The one time he was smacked was for good cause. He barely felt it, I think it was just the shock of being put over his father's knee and feeling the light smack through his nappy was enough to send a strong message. He didn't like it one bit. And thus, he has not bitten again. If he does do so, we will deal with it as the situation warrants. I can't say now he will not be smacked in the future. As I said before, we deal with each situation as it arises. At present, it is avoided, but if all else fails, then that light little tap on his backside will be seen as the last resort.

Bells

Why the butt? My grandfather nello stile di vecchi paesi would smack you on the bottom of the feet. It makes good sense as children feet lack callus, the feet are more sensitive then the butt (especially the toes), its not kinky, and it leaves a real aching pain for some time.

Bells

Why the butt? My grandfather nello stile di vecchi paesi would smack you on the bottom of the feet. It makes good sense as children feet lack callus, the feet are more sensitive then the butt (especially the toes), its not kinky, and it leaves a real aching pain for some time.

Why would I want to inflict that kind of pain (or any other type of pain) on my kids?:bugeye:

The "smack" was not meant to inflict pain. If it is, it is no longer a "smack" but would classify as a beating.

Why would I want to inflict that kind of pain (or any other type of pain) on my kids?:bugeye:

The "smack" was not meant to inflict pain. If it is, it is no longer a "smack" but would classify as a beating.

Your too worried about inflicting pain and not worried enough about your child repeating what they did, for example (true story) if you tell your child repeatedly not to leave the gate to the stirs open because a younger sibling could roll down the sirs, your child does it anyways and a younger child rolls down the stirs and knocks out a few teeth, best once you jam the teeth back in and call an ambulance, to take off your belt and administer it, that mistake will never be done again. Of course you could just give a stern talking to and than next time the gate is left open the younger child dies.

I'm not advocating corporal punishment for everything, only when all else fails or the importance on not repeating that mistake cannot be stressed more.

EF that isnt how most parents work though. Mostly it goes this way

Parent "dont do this"
kid "but why mummy"
Parent "because i told you to and if you do i will knock your block off"

and people wonder why kids do the exact oposite.
Parents who threaten to "knock your block off" never do it, that's why the kids do the opposite.

The most important thing is consistency. The children must know that there will be consequences to bad actions. Spanking is, by far, the most effective method for small children. It's simple, it's quick, and they all do not like it. I've seen children in time out dancing around thinking it's playtime.

You need to teach them to obey when they're young, and they won't give you much trouble as they get older. Let a small child get away with stuff, and you'll have a monster on your hands when he/she gets older.

Spank them when they're young, take away priviledges as they get older.

As far as spanking teaching them to use violence, I say it's crap. It just teaches them the real life lesson that if you act like a jackass, you're liable to get smacked.

Well I would not smack a child for everything on the first error, but Anthony is right about consistency, you must be as consistent as humanly possible. I know that elevating punishment level per offense and scale of offense is affective and specific to the child, some children may never need the higher punishment levels, others are genetic assholes, and the only way to cure genetic assholitry is through nurture and a belt. But most of all you need to be consistent, if you warn them that the next time they do that your going the spank them, you better not go back on that promise. If you put them in time out and tell them to stay their for 10 minutes, you better make sure they stay their for 10 minutes!

Also not only punish the bad with negative reinforcement, but reward the good with positive reinforcement. Only using one form of reinforcement will not be as affective as both.

Your too worried about inflicting pain and not worried enough about your child repeating what they did, for example (true story) if you tell your child repeatedly not to leave the gate to the stirs open because a younger sibling could roll down the sirs, your child does it anyways and a younger child rolls down the stirs and knocks out a few teeth, best once you jam the teeth back in and call an ambulance, to take off your belt and administer it, that mistake will never be done again. Of course you could just give a stern talking to and than next time the gate is left open the younger child dies.

I'm not advocating corporal punishment for everything, only when all else fails or the importance on not repeating that mistake cannot be stressed more.

Err if either of my kids hurt themselves to the point where an ambulance had to be called, the ambulance would take precedence over any form of punishment. Call me weird, but my children's health and wellbeing takes precedence over a spanking or anything else for that matter. I would imagine the fear of seeing a younger sibling hurt to the extent where an ambulance had to be called and the child rushed to hospital would be punishment enough. If my eldest hurt his younger brother to such an extent, the injuries to my youngest child would come first and any discipline would come after we were assured that the younger child was safe and well. I would hardly smack my child as my youngest lay at the bottom of the stairs and then call an ambulance. Priorities and all that.

As I said, smacking is seen as the last resort in our household. Extreme and bad behaviour that is repeated and the lesson that has not been learned in the past is evaluated and if a light smack on the backside is deemed necessary, it is given. So far it has worked. Biting is something all children do and he was testing his boundaries and he found out he had gone too far. Again, hitting him was the last resort and will remain as such. He usually listens when we tell him not to do something or to do something (eg, putting his toys away). He is generally a well behaved child. Sometimes he gets over excited (usually when over tired) and that's when he has the tendency to misbehave. We counter that by making sure he gets the sleep he needs. Kids also tend to misbehave when they are bored, so we do what we can to make sure he's not bored. So we take each incident as it comes and deal with it as necessary. I'd said before that I can't say he won't be smacked again.. it's on a case by case basis. If it warrants it, then he'll get that light smack on his backside, told off and then sent to his room. To be honest, he finds getting told off and sent to his room and his toys removed from said room more upsetting than the one smack he did get.

Inflicting pain on a child is not teaching them any lessons. If you're hitting a child hard enough (like on the bottom of their feet ..?..) that it causes them long lasting pain or scarring, that's no longer a smack but is outright child abuse. I mean for goodness sake, he's two and a half. I'm not going to lie him down, and smack him with it on the soles of his bare feet. The pain he would feel would be excruciating. That wouldn't teach him anything. That would just inflict pain and there's no way I would do that to my kids.

My parents always kept "the smack" as the last resort and it worked for me. I wasn't just smacked for anything. It was only for when I did something really bad a third time (after being warned the first two times) that I got a smack on my backside. And I was not spanked after the age of like 6 or something because I knew what my boundaries were.

In our household, if he throws a car or toy at someone, as one example, he gets to watch us as we throw said car or toy in the rubbish bin. And he doesn't get it back. If he does it again, he loses that toy as well. And he's learning that if he likes a toy, he throws it, he loses it instantly. It's working so far. If he hits someone else, he gets sent to his room and his toys removed. I really don't see the value in hitting a child to teach him not to hit for example. As I said, each case is different and is dealt with differently. If he needs a smack, he'll get one. But not to inflict pain. That's just wrong in my opinion.

Parents who threaten to "knock your block off" never do it, that's why the kids do the opposite.

Are you suggesting that if the parent follows through on the threat, the kids will obey?

I suppose you're right. I have a friend who is trying to raise his kids without violence. It's a mighty task, all things considered; he's conditioned by his own father to parental violence. And you're right. It worked. He finally got the message and quit using meth and heroin sometime in his thirties. That was before I knew him. And since he hit forty, he quit drinking, changed his diet, and started exercising. All those thrashings from his father finally paid off, eh?

Maybe he'll quit smoking pot and cigarettes, and make his father proud.

As far as spanking teaching them to use violence, I say it's crap. It just teaches them the real life lesson that if you act like a jackass, you're liable to get smacked.

You might have a point, depending on how broadly we define "jackass". For instance, if we take it to mean, "Acting in any manner that irritates or annoys another person, whether or not you know it or understand why," then maybe you're onto something.

However, in the same vein, you are teaching the child to smack people they think are jackasses.

Violence is merely a cruel convenience. No matter how much the politicians and civic leaders extol the virtues of "family", the reality is that people don't believe they have the time to train and condition children in other ways.

My daughter broke one of her toys the other day despite her mother's repeated warnings that if she kept using it that way, she would break it. In my day, that was the kind of thing that got a kid smacked for being a jackass. We don't use violence, though. Apparently, she waited patiently until her mother finished picking all the broken glass off her and said, "I shouldn't have dropped it."

And I admit, when you have a kid that's just that damn cool, you do have some extra time to wonder about the merits of a toy cel-phone that opens up to reveal lip gloss and a mirror.

One of the problems is that too many people think in simple dualisms: either you beat the child or you're coddling and spoiling her. There is a middle ground. It's just not always so easy to see. But then again, children are important to us, and most parents would say they would "do anything" for their kids. Great; let's try to prove it.

Yeah, smack the little sods, that'll teach 'em! I can't abide these lefties who talk about guiding their children into good and decent people by the use of non-violence and patience. It's all a load of bleeding heart liberalism. A "good smack" never hurt no one. In fact why stop there? Get the cane back in school, that's what I say! Let other people do your dirty work for you. Heck, we could even bring back capital punishment too. [Although some right-thinking places still do] Ahh, "Spare the rod, spoil the child" now where did I see that... Oh yes, well... um.

smacking is the avinue of the lasy, there are better means of punishment avilalable. Lets look at what most kids are after when the "play up"

What is it they are trying to achive?
Atention from there parents or others.

So then if what they want is atention then smacking them is giving them exactly what they want

Whats the alternitive?
Withdraw atention when they do something you DONT want them to do and restoring atention when they do what you DO want them to do. If a kid throws a tantrum in a supermarket WALK AWAY. The kid wont sit on the floor crying for long if they know it wont get them anywhere. The problem with this is it takes time and effort and other people screw it up by trying to comfert the child.

The same goes at home or anywhere else. Put them in a room with 4 walls (and nothing they can break) and nothing to do until they apologise and eventually they will get the message.

I can compleatly understand bells case though because i had the same problem with a dog that was biting my cat and the only way to get it to let go was violonce but under normal circumstances seclusion works WAY better than physical abuse. Hell if you want to get creative put a driping tap outside the door so that all they can hear is time going by. As for teenages negotiation is going to work better than punishement because by that time you have little physical control over them anyway. Hell most 15 year olds could probably hit there parents back as hard as they hit them. Parenting by that stage is more about guidance than enforcement anyway (or should be) so show them WHY certian activities are a bad idea and expect them to fuck up. Let them come to you when they do and understand there mestakes.

Oh and for those who advocate vilonce a lesson on the law. If you leave a red mark or use ANYTHING other than your hands then you have comited criminal assult and YOUR the ones who will be punished.

Err if either of my kids hurt themselves to the point where an ambulance had to be called, the ambulance would take precedence over any form of punishment. Call me weird, but my children's health and wellbeing takes precedence over a spanking or anything else for that matter. I would imagine the fear of seeing a younger sibling hurt to the extent where an ambulance had to be called and the child rushed to hospital would be punishment enough. If my eldest hurt his younger brother to such an extent, the injuries to my youngest child would come first and any discipline would come after we were assured that the younger child was safe and well. I would hardly smack my child as my youngest lay at the bottom of the stairs and then call an ambulance. Priorities and all that.

You miss understood the situation: all assistance to the younger child was completed (in fact the younger child never went to the hospital, the teeth re-grafted) but while the younger child was sitting there with bags of ice on its teeth and the dentist grandfather saying "this should work" it was time to commence epic punishment.

As I said, smacking is seen as the last resort in our household. Extreme and bad behaviour that is repeated and the lesson that has not been learned in the past is evaluated and if a light smack on the backside is deemed necessary, it is given. So far it has worked. Biting is something all children do and he was testing his boundaries and he found out he had gone too far. Again, hitting him was the last resort and will remain as such. He usually listens when we tell him not to do something or to do something (eg, putting his toys away). He is generally a well behaved child. Sometimes he gets over excited (usually when over tired) and that's when he has the tendency to misbehave. We counter that by making sure he gets the sleep he needs. Kids also tend to misbehave when they are bored, so we do what we can to make sure he's not bored. So we take each incident as it comes and deal with it as necessary. I'd said before that I can't say he won't be smacked again.. it's on a case by case basis. If it warrants it, then he'll get that light smack on his backside, told off and then sent to his room. To be honest, he finds getting told off and sent to his room and his toys removed from said room more upsetting than the one smack he did get.

I don't disagree with this, elevating level of punishment, etc, but do note ever child is different, your child is not the universal standard of children! There are children that never need a "last resort" and their and children were "the last resort" is not enough and the child still repeats. I've seen them both, the angel, the demon, and all thing in between, and each needed to be raised differently and adaptively as they grew.

Inflicting pain on a child is not teaching them any lessons. If you're hitting a child hard enough (like on the bottom of their feet with a cane..?..) that it causes them long lasting pain or scarring, that's no longer a smack but is outright child abuse. I mean for goodness sake, he's two and a half. I'm not going to lie him down, get a cane and smack him with it on the soles of his bare feet. The pain he would feel would be excruciating. That wouldn't teach him anything. That would just inflict pain and there's no way I would do that to my kids.

First of all, you don't know what will teach them until you need to try. How to classify child abuse is a whole different issue for a different thread. Third your incapable of tough love, I hope your child never needs it or your going to end up with a died child.

My parents always kept "the smack" as the last resort and it worked for me. I wasn't just smacked for anything. It was only for when I did something really bad a third time (after being warned the first two times) that I got a smack on my backside. And I was not spanked after the age of like 6 or something because I knew what my boundaries were.

In our household, if he throws a car or toy at someone, as one example, he gets to watch us as we throw said car or toy in the rubbish bin. And he doesn't get it back. If he does it again, he loses that toy as well. And he's learning that if he likes a toy, he throws it, he loses it instantly. It's working so far. If he hits someone else, he gets sent to his room and his toys removed. I really don't see the value in hitting a child to teach him not to hit for example. As I said, each case is different and is dealt with differently. If he needs a smack, he'll get one. But not to inflict pain. That's just wrong in my opinion.

Again each child is different and is dealt with differently. What wrong for you may not be legally wrong or may not even be the be a universally applicable position to take in any specific situation, for example you my find it wrong to lie, but you may need to lie to the gestapo to save another's life ("The jew ran *point in opposite direction* that way!). All things being relative.

Tiassa

Your example is antidotel, nor does it prove cause and affect, the child may have became a drug addict no matter the parenting. Likewise the columbine kids were never spanked, should I blame non-violent punishment?

Does violence make children violent? Surely some child equate it that way, other children equate it as "If I do X, I get pain, better not do X" or "If I hit, I'll get hit back", as the child get older the though process gets more advance but for starts 'pain from doing X' may just be what is needed to start the thought process off. Some children even equate it oppositely eventually: never would they do what their parents did to them... and then the grandchildren are fucking awful monsters.

Asguard,

Some children may want attention, some may just want to throw rocks at other children, etc, to each their own punishment strategy.

Ever heard of the punishment closet, I think the last time was had one of these corporeal punishment thread many years ago, genius idea! Just gut a closet, put the child into it, lock the door.

You miss understood the situation: all assistance to the younger child was completed (in fact the younger child never went to the hospital, the teeth re-grafted) but while the younger child was sitting there with bags of ice on its teeth and the dentist grandfather saying "this should work" it was time to commence epic punishment.


By which time, the young child will have forgotten what the punishment is for. The problem with small children is that they are simply unable to assign the punishment given at a later time to the incident they are being punished for. For example, lets say a child does something bad and another child is hurt as a result and needs medical care. A couple of hours down the track when you are able to punish the small child, that child won't be able to connect the punishment and the 'crime' together to understand that is what they are being punished for. Any punishment, when needed, needs to be given immediately after the bad behaviour, so they can connect the two.

I don't disagree with this, elevating level of punishment, etc, but do note ever child is different, your child is not the universal standard of children! There are children that never need a "last resort" and their and children were "the last resort" is not enough and the child still repeats. I've seen them both, the angel, the demon, and all thing in between, and each needed to be raised differently and adaptively as they grew.
Of course every child is different. My eldest son, for example, is vastly different to what I was like as a child. I was a horror if my memory serves me well. And yes, there are probably children for who the "last resort" is not a viable option. But again, it takes trial and error.. it mostly takes time. Our second child is already displaying a lot more assertiveness and looks like the trouble maker compared to his older brother. He is only 1 and the child already looks like he's going to be a little devil. But so far, he does generally listen when we tell him no. If he stands up in his bath for example, we say "sit down", he sits down immediately. If he goes to hit his brother or pull his brother's hair, we say stop and he stops immediately. But there will come a time when he will test his boundaries and we'll deal with it as it comes. He may end up being a child who listens, or he may not. I can't say now how we'll handle each situation, because we can't know what situations may arise.

First of all, you don't know what will teach them until you need to try. How to classify child abuse is a whole different issue for a different thread. Third your incapable of tough love, I hope your child never needs it or your going to end up with a died child.
You don't know what I am and am not capable of.

If my child needs "tough love", he'll get it regardless. Just because I don't see the need to hit my child's bare soles until it stings, does not mean I am incapable of disciplining my child as the situation warrants. And yes, I view causing a child pain and suffering (even under the guise of discipline) as being abusive. Marking a child and causing so much pain that they aren't able to walk properly is child abuse.

My father was a strict parent and he was the one who generally smacked me.. he was my primary caregiver for a greater part of my childhood while my mother worked. And not once did he ever leave a mark on me. I've seen him jump his best friend after he saw his friend pound into his son to the point where the child peed and poo'ed his pants, leaving great welts on his body.. my father tackled the child's father to the ground to get him off the child. There is discipline and there is child abuse. If you're inflicting so much pain on a child that they lose control of their bodily functions or they aren't able to walk, sit or stand, then yes, that is child abuse. If I ever did that to either of my children, my parents would probably have me locked up, not to mention my husband and other family members.

There is a vast difference between abusive behaviour and discipline. But that divide can also be quite small, depending on how one decides to discipline one's child.

You may consider me to be a bad parent because I won't hit my son's bare feet so that it stings and hurt and causes him pain.. so be it... your prerogative. And seeing that one usually disciplines a child after the act, not before, your advice of my killing my child by not hitting him hard enough or with a cane is kind of pointless.

Again each child is different and is dealt with differently. What wrong for you may not be legally wrong or may not even be the be a universally applicable position to take in any specific situation, for example you my find it wrong to lie, but you may need to lie to the gestapo to save another's life ("The jew ran *point in opposite direction* that way!). All things being relative.
I agree. Each child and situation is different and one cannot apply a blanket rule of discipline to cover each child and situation.

ElectricFetus there is a slight problem with using a closert and thats clostriphobia and lack of ventilation. The punishment is MENT to be bordum and emotional rather than sufercating the child or making them piss themselves with fear (wether imidiatly or in the future when they get into small area's)

ElectricFetus there is a slight problem with using a closert and thats clostriphobia and lack of ventilation. The punishment is MENT to be bordum and emotional rather than sufercating the child or making them piss themselves with fear (wether imidiatly or in the future when they get into small area's)

the closet was meant to be a exaggeration, but you can using a grated door and also there is no better cure for a phobia then forced exposure.

actually there is no better CAUSE of clostrophobia than being locked in a small confined space for an indefinit peroid of time when. For instance people who get trapped in elivators tend to end up with clostrophobia. Its only when the person can reexert some control over the situation that they lose there phobia.

Empty bedroom is a MUCH better solution

By which time, the young child will have forgotten what the punishment is for. The problem with small children is that they are simply unable to assign the punishment given at a later time to the incident they are being punished for. For example, lets say a child does something bad and another child is hurt as a result and needs medical care. A couple of hours down the track when you are able to punish the small child, that child won't be able to connect the punishment and the 'crime' together to understand that is what they are being punished for. Any punishment, when needed, needs to be given immediately after the bad behaviour, so they can connect the two.

Again you assume the age and nature of the child. The child is not that young and this is not long enough after the offense. Stop making excuses, your basically stating never is never, never say never when raising a child!

Of course every child is different. My eldest son, for example, is vastly different to what I was like as a child. I was a horror if my memory serves me well. And yes, there are probably children for who the "last resort" is not a viable option. But again, it takes trial and error.. it mostly takes time. Our second child is already displaying a lot more assertiveness and looks like the trouble maker compared to his older brother. He is only 1 and the child already looks like he's going to be a little devil. But so far, he does generally listen when we tell him no. If he stands up in his bath for example, we say "sit down", he sits down immediately. If he goes to hit his brother or pull his brother's hair, we say stop and he stops immediately. But there will come a time when he will test his boundaries and we'll deal with it as it comes. He may end up being a child who listens, or he may not. I can't say now how we'll handle each situation, because we can't know what situations may arise.

We aren't disagreeing, perhaps we are nitpicking?


You don't know what I am and am not capable of.


You stated what you would not do, but if you will do it if the time comes... well can't say you won't only that you claim you won't.

If my child needs "tough love", he'll get it regardless. Just because I don't see the need to hit my child's bare soles with a cane until it stings, does not mean I am incapable of disciplining my child as the situation warrants. And yes, I view causing a child pain and suffering (even under the guise of discipline) as being abusive. Marking a child and causing so much pain that they aren't able to walk properly is child abuse.

I never said you need to hit your "hit your child's bare soles with a cane until it stings". Only "tough love" may very well be something like that or something you at present regard as abusive, but you would do it regardless so I think my point is taken.

My father was a strict parent and he was the one who generally smacked me.. he was my primary caregiver for a greater part of my childhood while my mother worked. And not once did he ever leave a mark on me. I've seen him jump his best friend after he saw his friend pound into his son to the point where the child peed and poo'ed his pants, leaving great welts on his body.. my father tackled the child's father to the ground to get him off the child. There is discipline and there is child abuse. If you're inflicting so much pain on a child that they lose control of their bodily functions or they aren't able to walk, sit or stand, then yes, that is child abuse. If I ever did that to either of my children, my parents would probably have me locked up, not to mention my husband and other family members.

I don't think what your describe is valid to this thread, this thread is about corporal punishment, which may need not involve "marking" the child, or causing lasting damage, or cause "lose of bodily functions" or any other red harring your presented. A simple spanking does none of those things.

There is a vast difference between abusive behaviour and discipline. But that divide can also be quite small, depending on how one decides to discipline one's child.

You may consider me to be a bad parent because I won't hit my son's bare feet with a cane so that it stings and hurt and causes him pain.. so be it... your prerogative. And seeing that one usually disciplines a child after the act, not before, your advice of my killing my child by not hitting him hard enough or with a cane is kind of pointless.

I never said your a bad parent, I was simply giving alternative options to spanking the butt, I never said "cane" either, you have been consistently distorting the argument into one that you can win, no arguments need not be competitions nor is a fallacy a winning argument (except in politics).

I agree. Each child and situation is different and one cannot apply a blanket rule of discipline to cover each child and situation.

Then we argee, and even if we were not no reason to put words in my mouth.

actually there is no better CAUSE of clostrophobia than being locked in a small confined space for an indefinit peroid of time when. For instance people who get trapped in elivators tend to end up with clostrophobia. Its only when the person can reexert some control over the situation that they lose there phobia.

Empty bedroom is a MUCH better solution

How big does the bedroom need to be to prevent claustrophobia? By your argument if consent exposure to darkness every night leads to nyctohylophobia, yet millions of children out grow a fear of the dark. A child locked in a closet will not fear it over time. Alternatively a light on the top of the closet and a slated door would provide some visibility or resemblance of the outside world.

Is smacking a child wrong?

I say yes, because for me its one step closer to abuse, and if you smack a child they very rarely learn anything from it, a smack is over and done with in seconds, other constructive methods of punishments are not,

i know people who smack they're kids and they're kids, are withdrawn and are very quiet, and not like young children at all, they walk around with they're heads to the ground, and will not dare to look at anyone in the face!

If a child is doing somthing really wrong is it ok, to smack that child?
also, if a child is smacked a lot by the mum and dad, then would that turn the kids into bullies, if its wrong to hit someone then its wrong in either case?

also, what would you smack a child with? a hand? cane? rolled up newspaper? slipper?

So how's the no physical discipline worked out for you? As you tell it, your children sound like brats.

EF who ever said profanity was so wrong anyway?

How many adults here use it?
I know i do so it would be hypocritical in the extreem if i disiplened my child for doing it, its like that McCains ad. The girl gets in the car and sticks her tongue out at this boy and the mother asks "wasnt that your friend". The kid responds "no hes a bloody idiot" and the mother responds "how dare you use such filth, where do you pick it up" only to then be cut off by another driver. The mother then windes the window down and shouts "bloody idiot, cant you see i have a kid in the car" and then looks shocked at her daughter.

Its ridiculas that we impose strictures on our childnren that we dont impose on ourselves, if there was less "do as i say not as i do" then kids might actually grow up more the way we expect rather than picking up our OWN bad habits

It's the level of disrespect a child shows his mother in calling her bitch.

Bells

Why the butt? My grandfather nello stile di vecchi paesi would smack you on the bottom of the feet. It makes good sense as children feet lack callus, the feet are more sensitive then the butt (especially the toes), its not kinky, and it leaves a real aching pain for some time.

Humiliation, more than pain. Demonstrating to the little one that you are his superior.

respect is earned not expected. To many parents dont EARN the respect of there children and then complain they dont get any.

respect is earned not expected. To many parents dont EARN the respect of there children and then complain they dont get any.

Uhhh, no.

respect is earned not expected. To many parents dont EARN the respect of there children and then complain they dont get any.

How do you earn that respect? To those parents that don't earn respect, it is sad: they never really punished their children.

really

How do you get the respect of your boss? How does your boss earn your respect? by physical violence?

How do you earn the respect of your wife?
By hitting her?

What about your peers and friends?

hitting someone makes there respect for you go DOWN not up. I herd this comment on the radio made in relation to the state goverment but it aplies here. An army general puts up a notice "beatings will continue until moral improves".

"Do you repect me now you little shit?"
"No"
*wack*
"how about now?"

Your kids will fear you, they wont respect you because you betray there trust. Your the one who is ment to be there to PROTECT them not the one who is ment to hurt them

Again you assume the age and nature of the child. The child is not that young and this is not long enough after the offense. Stop making excuses, your basically stating never is never, never say never when raising a child!


You're the one saying "never".

As I said, I am speaking from personal experience. My 2 year old won't remember what he is being smacked for if he is smacked for it 3 hours later, as one example. He won't be able to connect the two. I mean for goodness sake, you are attempting to place me into this box that you think I need to fit into. I'll discipline my child as the situation warrants. I am not going to start going into stereotypes about what I'd do in whatever situation for whatever age my child might be. You agree that each child is different and each situation needs to be assessed individually, but then you basically start saying that smacking is good. No, smacking is only one form of punishment. For us it is the last resort. When you have a child you can do as you see fit with it. But do not assume that you know me well enough to take it upon yourself to tell me that my not smacking my kid for every little thing or whacking the underside of his bare feet somehow makes me a bad parent.

You stated what you would not do, but if you will do it if the time comes... well can't say you won't only that you claim you won't.
What I have said is that I will never inflict pain on my child and then call it punishment or discipline. And yes, hitting a child's bare feet, as you say, where it is free of callouses at such a young age, is causing pain. Or as you put it:

Why the butt? My grandfather nello stile di vecchi paesi would smack you on the bottom of the feet. It makes good sense as children feet lack callus, the feet are more sensitive then the butt (especially the toes), its not kinky, and it leaves a real aching pain for some time.

Nothing on this planet would make me want to leave "real aching pain for some time" on my children's body. Nothing. Nor would I ever even consider finding the most sensitive part on my child's body, deciding that a lack of callouses, for example, would intensify the pain, and then take to hitting him there.

And no, it does not "make good sense" to make a child feel pain like that. It's no different to hitting a child and/or scaring to the point where he loses control of his body and he wets himself.

I never said you need to hit your "hit your child's bare soles with a cane until it stings". Only "tough love" may very well be something like that or something you at present regard as abusive, but you would do it regardless so I think my point is taken.
"Tough love"? What exactly is that?

Love is love. For a child, it should be unconditional. "Tough love"? That's like beating up on someone and then telling them that you're doing it because you "love" them.

I don't think what your describe is valid to this thread, this thread is about corporal punishment, which may need not involve "marking" the child, or causing lasting damage, or cause "lose of bodily functions" or any other red harring your presented. A simple spanking does none of those things.
And for a parent who does hit their child in such a fashion and call it "discipline", they might scoff at the thought that the law would consider it to be child abuse. To that individual, that is what he or she might consider to be a "simple spanking". That's the issue with corporal punishment. There is a fine line between child abuse and what we all consider to be a "simple spanking" as you put it.

I never said your a bad parent, I was simply giving alternative options to spanking the butt, I never said "cane" either, you have been consistently distorting the argument into one that you can win, no arguments need not be competitions nor is a fallacy a winning argument (except in politics).
Yeah, sorry about that. I was sure you'd said hitting the feet with a cane. I retract that and will correct previous posts on the matter when I get the chance.

really

How do you get the respect of your boss? How does your boss earn your respect? by physical violence?

How do you earn the respect of your wife?
By hitting her?

What about your peers and friends?

hitting someone makes there respect for you go DOWN not up. I herd this comment on the radio made in relation to the state goverment but it aplies here. An army general puts up a notice "beatings will continue until moral improves".

"Do you repect me now you little shit?"
"No"
*wack*
"how about now?"

Your kids will fear you, they wont respect you because you betray there trust. Your the one who is ment to be there to PROTECT them not the one who is ment to hurt them

How do you earn the respect of your dog? By letting it jump all over everything? Nonrational creatures need physical punishment because it's the only thing they really understand.

There's a difference between beating something out of anger and asserting physical dominance over something. Children, until they're old enough to be raional, operate outside of a social contract (dogs too). Because of that, sometimes, when they get too bossy, need to be reminded who is in charge.

I find giving a little yank on the leash works.:)

I find giving a little yank on the leash works.:)

You've always struck me as the type to walk her children on a leash.

How do you get the respect of your boss? How does your boss earn your respect? by physical violence?

How do you earn the respect of your wife?
By hitting her?

What about your peers and friends?

hitting someone makes there respect for you go DOWN not up. I herd this comment on the radio made in relation to the state goverment but it aplies here. An army general puts up a notice "beatings will continue until moral improves".

"Do you repect me now you little shit?"
"No"
*wack*
"how about now?"

Asguard,

Spanking is most useful when children are very young. When they don't really understand other forms of punishment. And you don't go around smacking them for every mistake. You spank them for outright disobedience or engaging in activities that are dangerous.

I certainly don't spank my 18 year old son. I take away his car/computer/xbox etc.

But 2 year olds don't have any privileges to take away. And it takes a minimal swat to get the point across that they've done something wrong.

Asguard,

Spanking is most useful when children are very young. When they don't really understand other forms of punishment. And you don't go around smacking them for every mistake. You spank them for outright disobedience or engaging in activities that are dangerous.

I certainly don't spank my 18 year old son. I take away his car/computer/xbox etc.

But 2 year olds don't have any privileges to take away. And it takes a minimal swat to get the point across that they've done something wrong.

Exactly.

and how do you train a dog?

The ONLY times i have EVER hit a dog is when one atacked my cat (i did have to inflict real pain then to get her away from the dog) and the one time my dog bit me. In the second she got a smack across the nose. The way i have trained my dogs is by REWARD not by abuse.

When my patner was young her parents bought her a dog. It was a pure breed german shephered and when she went to pat the dog it went nuts and bit her. Her parents took it straight back and latter found out that the reason it atacked was it had been beaten.

The only thing pain teaches an animal (or a child) is fear not love.

and how do you train a dog?

The ONLY times i have EVER hit a dog is when one atacked my cat (i did have to inflict real pain then to get her away from the dog) and the one time my dog bit me. In the second she got a smack across the nose. The way i have trained my dogs is by REWARD not by abuse.

When my patner was young her parents bought her a dog. It was a pure breed german shephered and when she went to pat the dog it went nuts and bit her. Her parents took it straight back and latter found out that the reason it atacked was it had been beaten.

The only thing pain teaches an animal (or a child) is fear not love.

It's not about pain.
Try reading with comprehension this time.

You've always struck me as the type to walk her children on a leash.

No sweets. I save the leash for my husband.

But all jokes aside, I have considered getting one of those toddler tethers for my 2 year old for when we go shopping.:bawl:

And you don't go around smacking them for every mistake. You spank them for outright disobedience or engaging in activities that are dangerous.
Ugh.. I'm agreeing with you again.:bawl:

That's kind of the tack we are taking with our kids. So far the only thing that our eldest has simply refused to obey has been the biting thing and he was smacked for it. He hasn't done it since. So far we've been lucky in that he listens to us when we tell him not to do something or to do it. It might take us having to repeat ourselves once or twice, but he generally listens.

The only thing pain teaches an animal (or a child) is fear not love.
You don't smack them so they feel pain. It's not about teaching them about pain. It's about making them understand that there are some things they are not allowed to do under any circumstance.. eg.. biting.

And a puppy works off reward system when trained. A child does to a certain extent (praising them when they do something good), but not for everything. For example, I wouldn't stand there with a chocolate in my hand and tell my son who's hitting his younger brother, that he'll get the chocolate if he stops... as I would give a puppy a treat if I order him to sit and he sits.

as a kid, all spanking did was make me more cautious in doing naughty stuff, as well as making me heaps scared of my parents when i screwed up. rewarding kids makes them repeat the right behaviour, instead of trying to scare them away from doing the wrong thing. Where others have said you need to ignore bad behaviour, of course you pull them aside when its heaps bad. they do it for attention, and if they're that desperate for attention then maybe you need to give them more attention. i know from having little brothers and sisters, you treat them right and they'll learn to consider your feelings when they do stuff. as the parent, they'll perceive your idea of the right behaviour as just ur opinion, and when you spank them and punish them they'll lose respect for you.

another thing, getting smacked doesn't make you reflect. talk to a child if you want them to reflect and think. getting smacked makes you scared.

feel i should mention, smacks can stop kids doing the wrong thing. dealing with it in a way that doesn't damage ur child can be a lot harder.

So how's the no physical discipline worked out for you? As you tell it, your children sound like brats.

ok actually, they're not brats they are just "kids", we have ahd a breakthrough the last week or so, they are so well behaved, i love my kids to much to smack them, i have smacked them and i felt so guilty afterwards! i don't think hitting a child for hitting anouther kid is right its just promoting violence

bells, i was hit by my mother when i was younger, the only thing it taught me was to punch back harder.

My mother "taught" me using explosive, surprise-attack violence, both hands or fists swinging. It was never just what was necessary. She started screaming matches that I couldn't help but respond to, then when she decided she'd had enough of screaming, that hand would pop up and strike me across the face with all of her adult strength behind it. Then she would work over my body with hands and sometimes fists. I remember her using the fists on me when I weight about 30 pounds. I still physically hurt from that treatment.

This is what she thought of as "smacking" me.

My mother "taught" me using explosive, surprise-attack violence, both hands or fists swinging. It was never just what was necessary. She started screaming matches that I couldn't help but respond to, then when she decided she'd had enough of screaming, that hand would pop up and strike me across the face with all of her adult strength behind it. Then she would work over my body with hands and sometimes fists. I remember her using the fists on me when I weight about 30 pounds. I still physically hurt from that treatment.

This is what she thought of as "smacking" me.

:eek:

Meta!

That's physical abuse. Good grief, wasn't there anyone to help you get out of there?:bawl:

My mother used to smack me around all the time. I dont think I became violent. Well, my little sister might disagree, but then again my mother smacked her around too. I dont think it taught me to use violence to solve my problems, butI think I grew up thinking there will always be someone stronger than you around so you better STFU and do what you're told, lest you desire another ass-whooping. Of course in growing up I became stronger than others, including my stupid mother. I dont use violence on them. Then again I dont see my mother anymore.

I have the theory that most parents that refuse to hit their kids or use violence were hit to much as kids, the generalize all corporal punishment as causing the same emotional and physical trauma that the abuse on them caused, a simple failure of logic.

Asguard,

True you don't earn respect by hitting someone, but then again you don't raise your boss, wife or co-worker, child are not adults. A child may not respect you if the child knows that it won't receive consequences for it actions, it has tested you to your limit and surpassed it, once that happens the child may not respect you, or at least it won't respect you any more then a vending machine that spits out toys, food, and money when ever you ask it. The only thing lack of pain teaches an animals is that they can walk all over. If you want your child to love you, cuddle it, if you want your child to respect you, show it your the authority, you can do both, neither restricts the other.

Bells,

Once again your distorting my argument, I never said smack them for every little thing, nor did I say it was right to do that, smacking is simply a level of punishment administered when the lower levels fail. We seem to agree on this but for some reason you want to argue with me. Tough love is doing things to your child you really rather you didn't have to, like beating it for having done something horribly wrong. Yes there is a fine line between spanking and abuse, it easy not to cross though, spanking is legal, at least were I live.

My mother "taught" me using explosive, surprise-attack violence, both hands or fists swinging. It was never just what was necessary. She started screaming matches that I couldn't help but respond to, then when she decided she'd had enough of screaming, that hand would pop up and strike me across the face with all of her adult strength behind it. Then she would work over my body with hands and sometimes fists. I remember her using the fists on me when I weight about 30 pounds. I still physically hurt from that treatment.

This is what she thought of as "smacking" me.

yeah, my mum used to smack me about whenever she felt the need to, one night i was five minutes late coming home and we had just finsihed decorating the house and we broke up furniture, so she pikced up a leg of a chair with a nail in it, and she hit me about with it, i can remember screaming and the blood afterwards, i don't see my mum anymore, she doesnt even know where i live, and she will not ever has access to my kids!

Wow you sound just like my sister.

My Dad never smacked me. He didn't need to, I had enough respect to know when he said "no" he meant business. He was beaten cruelly when he was a kid, so he felt any violence was unnecessary.

Someone just said something about beating dogs to teach them how to behave. How on earth will that teach the dog aggression isn't correct behaviour? All that does, as with children, is assert that physical retaliation is a correct method of asserting your authority. And we all know what happens to violent dictators in the end. I'm not saying children don't need clear rules and boundaries set, obviously they do. If you have to resort to violence to convey that, then one's communication skills need a huge overhaul. If corporal punishment is needed in those "emergency situations" then something went wrong with your parenting skills up to, and at, that moment. Animals use violence against each other because they don't have our communication skills, we have that advantage. We are intelligent, capable human beings, using physical dominance over others shows a huge lack of intellectual ability to solve problems with one's mind, not one's hands.

Bells,

Once again your distorting my argument, I never said smack them for every little thing, nor did I say it was right to do that, smacking is simply a level of punishment administered when the lower levels fail. We seem to agree on this but for some reason you want to argue with me. Tough love is doing things to your child you really rather you didn't have to, like beating it for having done something horribly wrong. Yes there is a fine line between spanking and abuse, it easy not to cross though, spanking is legal, at least were I live.

Was in an argumentative mood. Been a bad couple of days.:bawl:

But yeah, smacking is the ultimate last resort when all else fails. So far we've been lucky I guess. He's only needed to be smacked once and it worked. But it's not something we relish doing and we'd never hit him to cause him pain. More the action of restraining him and the noise of the tap on his backside probably did more than anything else.

Was in an argumentative mood. Been a bad couple of days.:bawl:

But yeah, smacking is the ultimate last resort when all else fails. So far we've been lucky I guess. He's only needed to be smacked once and it worked. But it's not something we relish doing and we'd never hit him to cause him pain. More the action of restraining him and the noise of the tap on his backside probably did more than anything else.

No military school is the ultimate last resort. For some kids their parents just can't fix them, a staff of drill sargent that they know does not love them on the other hand can work wonders! Turns them into highly respectable adults, one of my grandfather blamed military school for his unwavering use of manners, his PhD and status as a geochemist and his ability to sleep while marching.

Spanking is not about causing pain, pain is simply the consequence, spanking is about teaching a child that they "just cross the line", and that they will seriously regret doing it again. Many parents send their kids to military and boarding schools, and the kids are going to be in a lot of pain, but the parents aren't doing it to cause their kids pain.

Bells, no, no one seemed to be around to rescue me. How do you explain that kind of thing to your grandmother? I was even convinced for a long time that I was wrong.

No military school is the ultimate last resort. For some kids their parents just can't fix them, a staff of drill sargent that they know does not love them on the other hand can work wonders! Turns them into highly respectable adults, one of my grandfather blamed military school for his unwavering use of manners, his PhD and status as a geochemist and his ability to sleep while marching.

Spanking is not about causing pain, pain is simply the consequence, spanking is about teaching a child that they "just cross the line", and that they will seriously regret doing it again. Many parents send their kids to military and boarding schools, and the kids are going to be in a lot of pain, but the parents aren't doing it to cause their kids pain.
I agree. Thankfully my kids are young and have yet to display the kind of behaviour that would make military school or boarding school something we would consider for them.:p

Bells, no, no one seemed to be around to rescue me. How do you explain that kind of thing to your grandmother? I was even convinced for a long time that I was wrong.
Abusive parents often manage to make their children think that they, the children, are wrong. That they somehow deserved it. And no one could blame you for not having spoken out to your grandmother. You were a child and others should have spoken up for you. The adults around you failed you because they did nothing to help you. And that is the tragedy that happens in a lot of abuse cases. People often turn a blind eye or look away altogether.

I don't assault my children. If its illegal to do it to an adult, why isn't it illegal to do it to a child, who is half the size or smaller than an adult? If you start with other forms of punishment when they are young, you won't be seeing them on Maury.

I have smacked my daughter, but it was a reflex.

I don't assault my children. If its illegal to do it to an adult, why isn't it illegal to do it to a child, who is half the size or smaller than an adult? If you start with other forms of punishment when they are young, you won't be seeing them on Maury.

I have smacked my daughter, but it was a reflex.

Not all child respond well to non-violent punishment. It legal because its a child: children are different under the law then adults, children can't drink alcohol, but adults can, children can't vote, but adults can, children can't be protected from a parent that gives them a mild whack now and then, but adults can.

But adults decide to drink and vote. A child doesn't decide to get a spanking. Its done to them.

But adults decide to drink and vote. A child doesn't decide to get a spanking. Its done to them.

An adult does not decide to pay taxes either, nor does an adult decide to be drafted. But usually adults are given choices, child aren't because they are children.

depends if your mum is hot or not.
i personally think its bad. for no other reason then i can't be bothered arguing with you guys

Godly Tips on How to Punish and Beat Your Christian Child (http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0303/spanking.html)



I just looked at that. My autonomic nervous system is messed up now from the sheer amount of rage it caused me.

I agree with Asguard:

smacking is the avinue of the lasy, there are better means of punishment avilalable. Lets look at what most kids are after when the "play up"

What is it they are trying to achive?
Atention from there parents or others.

So then if what they want is atention then smacking them is giving them exactly what they want

Whats the alternitive?
Withdraw atention when they do something you DONT want them to do and restoring atention when they do what you DO want them to do. If a kid throws a tantrum in a supermarket WALK AWAY. The kid wont sit on the floor crying for long if they know it wont get them anywhere. The problem with this is it takes time and effort and other people screw it up by trying to comfert the child.

The same goes at home or anywhere else. Put them in a room with 4 walls (and nothing they can break) and nothing to do until they apologise and eventually they will get the message.

I can compleatly understand bells case though because i had the same problem with a dog that was biting my cat and the only way to get it to let go was violonce but under normal circumstances seclusion works WAY better than physical abuse. Hell if you want to get creative put a driping tap outside the door so that all they can hear is time going by. As for teenages negotiation is going to work better than punishement because by that time you have little physical control over them anyway. Hell most 15 year olds could probably hit there parents back as hard as they hit them. Parenting by that stage is more about guidance than enforcement anyway (or should be) so show them WHY certian activities are a bad idea and expect them to fuck up. Let them come to you when they do and understand there mestakes.

I just looked at that. My autonomic nervous system is messed up now from the sheer amount of rage it caused me.

I agree with Asguard:

You do know that Landover Baptist is a joke site?

But I do like the idea of advance pain research, for example a shock collar for kids.

No, I didn't know it was a joke site.

Fuck, I'm such an ASD moron.

No, I didn't know it was a joke site.

Fuck, I'm such an ASD moron.

Come on? Serious? Landover baptist has been around for years, they even made a spoof of the white houses web page.

It SO isn't fake. How the Hell do you think Sister Mary feels about you besmirching her good name?

Listen, if I hadn't have heard this useful tip Recently, Judy discovered that her son was an evil, perverted, filthy homosexural. She did just as any True Christian® should--she called the police! Then, after much prayer, she made the following statements. and followed the link my son might still be buggering other men as we speak!

I think it depends on the child. You can't generalize what is the best way to raise a child, when you don't know the child. Some children don't respond to punishment regardless of what kind it is. It may have nothing to do with the parents, but it is the child's own personality. In cases like that "grounding" or "spanking" won't be all that effective. Some children respond very well to punishment and don't work well off the rewards system (such as myself). And for some kids you can use both techniques. Spanking reminds them not to do things that are "wrong" and praise reminds them to do things that are "good". There's no reason that you can't do both. I work with kids and I can tell you first hand that they are all very different and don't respond to the same techniques. Time outs work for some kids and for some kids it makes them worse. Handing out candy for being good works for some kids and for some kids it makes them act worse, so it really depends on the child. I can't condemn spanking because I know that dealing with some kids out there is beyond human comprehension.

I think it depends on the child. You can't generalize what is the best way to raise a child, when you don't know the child. Some children don't respond to punishment regardless of what kind it is. It may have nothing to do with the parents, but it is the child's own personality. In cases like that "grounding" or "spanking" won't be all that effective. Some children respond very well to punishment and don't work well off the rewards system (such as myself). And for some kids you can use both techniques. Spanking reminds them not to do things that are "wrong" and praise reminds them to do things that are "good". There's no reason that you can't do both. I work with kids and I can tell you first hand that they are all very different and don't respond to the same techniques. Time outs work for some kids and for some kids it makes them worse. Handing out candy for being good works for some kids and for some kids it makes them act worse, so it really depends on the child. I can't condemn spanking because I know that dealing with some kids out there is beyond human comprehension.

HAHA, See I'm not the only one with this CRAZY notion that every child is different, perhaps those of us who have had to work with a wide range of children aren't CRAZY, perhaps we are enlightened, and its the parents with their handful of usually genetically similar kids who are ignorant thinking that all kids think alike or that all kids are like their little rugrats and thus that have a god given right to give out advice on how to raise kids and that one form of punishment is superior and another can be made total taboo, perhaps...

HAHA, See I'm not the only one with this CRAZY notion that every child is different, perhaps those of us who have had to work with a wide range of children aren't CRAZY, perhaps we are enlightened, and its the parents with their handful of usually genetically similar kids who are ignorant thinking that all kids think alike or that all kids are like their little rugrats and thus that have a god given right to give out advice on how to raise kids and that one form of punishment is superior and another can be made total taboo, perhaps...

Yes, I know people forget that their kids are not all kids. Your childhood is not all childhoods. We are different in our personalities and behaviors. I want to tie up some of the kids that I take care of and lock them in the closet (I did do that once. He was so bad). I really sympathize with their parents. Some people say ignoring your child when they are crying is neglectful and bad parenting, but I do it all of the time with some kids because they are criers and there isn't anything wrong with them they are just crying.

Yes, I know people forget that their kids are not all kids. Your childhood is not all childhoods. We are different in our personalities and behaviors. I want to tie up some of the kids that I take care of and lock them in the closet (I did do that once. He was so bad). I really sympathize with their parents. Some people say ignoring your child when they are crying is neglectful and bad parenting, but I do it all of the time with some kids because they are criers and there isn't anything wrong with them they are just crying.

Exactly, see some parents think it wrong, other right, what they both don't understand is some kids are crying because they are hurt, others are crying because they want attention and the latter need to be taught that is not acceptable behavior.

cutsie. Assuming thats true how do YOU deal with having your range of punishments limited?

After all you work in child care so would have alot more kids than a parent to deal with AND if you touch the child at all thats assult. So how do you control those kids?