Anders we should speak of this some years later when you will have child, my great theory abouts education that i have before been a father were worthless.
I must also precise what is spank for me, it's nothing like a ceromony, just direct without taking away any close, and something symbolic without any intention to hurt them. i prefer dialog but with youngs kids it did not work always, so you have to prove who is the leader.
<strong>I agree that age is a big factor. But 8-9 months seems too early to me. You can easily hurt a baby. The way I see it, at that age, it's OUR fault as parents if the baby gets into something they're not supposed to get into. You've got to put stuff away and baby-proof the house. Later they'll grow out of getting into stuff like that, and you can put it back.
I'm not flaming you, just giving my opinion on it.
Lots of babies are shaken and killed or very seriously injured because parents don't realize how easy it is to hurt a baby. I'd rather just draw the line at not physical punishment at all, than try to figure out how much is OK.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, I'll repeat... if you wait, it will be too late. I'm not taking offense here, but isn't it obvious that a big adult could easily hurt a child or a baby? You'll note the severity of what I did with my infant son in my post. We're not talking about violence here, we're talking about discipline administered by an intelligent, rational adult. Those who say spanking teaches violence leave out a crucial qualifyer. It can, but doesn't necessarily teach that. There are millions of us around who were spanked and grew up "well-adjusted".
And yes, you try to "baby-proof" the house. The more mobile the kid becomes, the more impossible is the task.
I've seen parents try to use the "time out" method with their toddlers with little success. My approach was to remove the child from the room, and administer the spanking in a more private setting, thus not humiliating him. You have figured out how much spanking is OK if you never do it: none. You can't avoid the decision, but you can put yourself in the position of avoiding to administer effective discipline.
not only do you advocate using violence but you lodge in their minds that if they are bad, they get pain. ...punishment is not necessary. any form of punishment.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Pain is good. Learning to avoid it is even better. Having parents who understand that they must teach you this: priceless.
No form of punishment? Not even a disapproving frown? Punishment is frequently appropriate for kids, but an emphasis on training the child makes it discipline, not punishment.
lol, i remember one of the last times i got spanked was in church. i was kicking the pew in front of use over and over again. my dad told me to knock it off twice, and i just kept going. finally he tells me that if i do it again, i'll get spanked.
i thought he was bluffing, we were at church in one of the front rows, with everyone he knew. i never thought he'd do it, so i kept kicking. he pick me up, put me over his shoulder, spanked me in the other room, then brought me back.
let me tell you, that lesson stayed with me for a long time. when i realized that my parents wouldn't be afraid to punish me in front of others, that cut down on a lot of goofing off.
you can't tell me that a time-out, an hour after church is over would have had nearly the same effect.
I think spanking although a last resort is neccessary in some cases. there are two probs that I see. In the uk we now have a serious problem with individuals and gangs of kids who terrorise people for no reason other than the fact that they can. They'll stone buses, cars, set fire to houses, abuse people in the street etc. Even at the college where I work a students can do practically anything (assault someone, attack someone, hurl daily racial abuse) and know that no one will touch them. This has bred a generation of very young kids for whom there is no limit on the pain they can and are willing to inflict on others.
Added to this is is the ludicrous amount of time, effort and money spent on them with the view that it is not their fault and they are not responsible for their actions. Again here in the uk, if you steal a car, beat someone to paralysis, set fire to someone's house or steal the lifelong possesions of a 70 year old living alone you will be given counselling, paid for courses, financial help for equipment etc because the do gooders believe that poevrty, boredom etc leads these kids to behave this way.
Thus those kids who are bored from poor families who commit no crime are seriously disadvatntaged. I teach kids that come from some very poor background. None of them has a bad bone in their bodies, they're all polite and firendly and would never dream of hurting anyone. They get no help from any quarter even though they're trying their best to study.
The kids fresh out of police cells get their courses paid for, their equipment and transport paid for and they get priority over my kids in using the equipment. They've just trashed 2 classrooms (which have now been condemned - that's how bad they damaged them) and as a result, not one of them was punished - instead the regular users of those rooms (some elderly dressmaking students) have been told they must now move 1 mile away to continue studies. The violent kids however, have been allocated 2 more new rooms in the college.
what kind of message are we sending out to those kids who do not set out to behave like animals?
There is a very big difference between a do-gooder and a good-doer.
How many people here have kids? Of that amount, how many said they would never spank their kids, ever? Of that amount, how many found out that spanking was necessary to properly direct your child from becoming a spoiled brat?
Anyone without kids can feel very wise and talk about how evil parents are that spnk children. They can say how it is a brutal method of punishment. They can say how it teaches violence. They can even say how you could kill a child doing it. (What are you spanking kids with? A baseball bat?) But they have NO IDEA whether or not spanking is necessary until the time comes and the kid has decided that he/she is going to prove once and for all who is in charge. When you get into an argument with a 2-3 year old, you just lost that battle. Parents don't argue with kids. That is why they are the parents.
<strong>How many people here have kids? Of that amount, how many said they would never spank their kids, ever? Of that amount, how many found out that spanking was necessary to properly direct your child from becoming a spoiled brat?</strong><hr></blockquote>I'm the father of an almost-3-year-old, and I've never spanked. She's probably pretty easy compared to some kids I've seen. But she's been developing more, um, personality in the past month or so.
Kids definitely test boundaries, and you have to win - they're the private and you're the sergeant, and they have to lose rank sometimes. But I don't think you need to use spanking to do that. You can have discipline without spanking. You can always take something away or remove some privilege that really gets to them. You just have to be a little creative - it's psychological warfare.
Although I admit to not having any experience with any child over 3, so I don't know what I'll do when my daughter is smarter than me, which could happen any day now.
I just think spanking is one of those things that we all accept and do because its the way it's always been done - we don't think about it that much, but maybe we should.
Fact is, parenting is really, really hard. Kids are difficult, and there's just no getting around that. There's no magic technique for making their behavior better, or your life easier. And we're competing against a culture that just plain sucks.
Whaddaya yappin about? No magic technique? There most certainly is: Ritalin. Discipline in a pill. Possible the most over prescribed psycho-active drug used for children. But you know, if it makes life easier for the teachers and the parents, then it must be good.
<strong>Kids need someone to lead them, to tell them what's what. They don't need a violent despot, but they sure as hell don't need some pseudo-psychologist following them around asking them their motivations every 5 minutes.
If you, as the parent, don't provide authority and stability, who will? A group of friends?
That may be good enough for you, but I might think a little Different (sic).</strong><hr></blockquote>
no, you seem to be thinking the general trend that its okay to physically punish children, there is nothing different about it.
Pain is good. Learning to avoid it is even better. Having parents who understand that they must teach you this: priceless.
No form of punishment? Not even a disapproving frown? Punishment is frequently appropriate for kids, but an emphasis on training the child makes it discipline, not punishment.</strong><hr></blockquote>
thats right...I correct myself...no forms of PHYSICAL punishment...I think a disapproving frown is perfectly dandny, cause then it shows the kid that you are displeased and if you never hit your kid in the first place and are extra nice to them they will respond to seeing you unhappy(I've seen this happen dozens of times)
[quote]no, you seem to be thinking the general trend that its okay to physically punish children, there is nothing different about it.<hr></blockquote>
I am not following what you are saying in relation to what you quoted me as saying.
I think physical punishment (within reason) is acceptable. People that beat the crap out of their kids are not doing anything useful. A hard slap on the hand or butt conveys a message quite clearly and far more efficiently than "Junior, if you're not too busy could we go in the corner and have a little chat about why we don't use ink pens all over daddy's clothes?"
A stern looking at might phase a kid the first two times, but a raised eyebrow will only get you so far.
99 times out of 100 I don't need to physically punish my nephews, but sometimes that's all they'll listen to.
I am not following what you are saying in relation to what you quoted me as saying.
I think physical punishment (within reason) is acceptable. People that beat the crap out of their kids are not doing anything useful. A hard slap on the hand or butt conveys a message quite clearly and far more efficiently than "Junior, if you're not too busy could we go in the corner and have a little chat about why we don't use ink pens all over daddy's clothes?"
A stern looking at might phase a kid the first two times, but a raised eyebrow will only get you so far.
99 times out of 100 I don't need to physically punish my nephews, but sometimes that's all they'll listen to.</strong><hr></blockquote>
[quote] Originally posted by groverat:
That may be good enough for you, but I might think a little Different <hr></blockquote>
thats what I was relating it to...you think pyshical punishment is okay....I don't...the general consensus of this thread was that it is okay in some circumstance....which is what you just said to be the case for you, so how are you thinking differently than everyone else? In your wording you imply I am thinking similarly to the rest of the folks in this thread which I most clearly am not.
You obviously are not open to any other methods rather than physical punishment and I am rather tired and don't feel like even trying to get you to open up a bit. so I'll leave you to your ways.
<strong>Kids definitely test boundaries, and you have to win - they're the private and you're the sergeant, and they have to lose rank sometimes. But I don't think you need to use spanking to do that. You can have discipline without spanking. You can always take something away or remove some privilege that really gets to them. You just have to be a little creative - it's psychological warfare.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Reality check: the kid has more time to devote to thinking about winning than you do. Removing a privelege won't get to 'em as much as a hand to the rear.
<strong>I think a disapproving frown is perfectly dandny, cause then it shows the kid that you are displeased and if you never hit your kid in the first place and are extra nice to them they will respond to seeing you unhappy(I've seen this happen dozens of times)</strong><hr></blockquote>
This will be like taking candy from a baby...
I'd be willing to bet you a million bucks that this method fails 10 times as often as it succeeeds. I've seen it fail hundreds of times, often a dozen in the space of ten minutes between the same "parent" and child. Hello? Who's in charge here? The kid!
<strong>Whaddaya yappin about? No magic technique? There most certainly is: Ritalin. Discipline in a pill. Possible the most over prescribed psycho-active drug used for children. But you know, if it makes life easier for the teachers and the parents, then it must be good.</strong><hr></blockquote>Oh yeah, I forgot about that one. A coupla Prozac and a polo mallet sometimes work, too.
I have two wee scuds and - on the odd occasion - I am wont tae administer 'the ten commandments, five at a time', but no' very hard and only when the morays and manners o' domestic legality hae been severly breached. However, the wee-est one - Rebekah - although 5 is tiny and aboot the size o' a modest 3 year auld - and when I see her wee face crumple intae tears after a wee slap on the legs I feel that bad that I shower her wi' sweeties and cuddles, thus negating the effects o' the disciplinary medicine.
I think I am right in saying also that slapping a wee child (under 4) is actually illegal here, punishable wi' an assault charge.
When I mysel' was a wee laddie I used tae get a first class, thorough chastising from my ain father (who had developed a guid strong set o' arms and a healthy sense o' discipline after spending the war years in the Army as an RSM) when the occasion demanded. However, Corporal Punishment at its best happened at the school where teachers excercised their authority wi' The Strap (a heavy 2 or 3 thonged belt) adminstered tae the hands o' the miscreant wi' the unmistakle, michty KERRSLAPPP o' leather upon flesh. The secret glow o' pleasure in seeing one's unfortunate peers getting six o' the best in front o' the class remains a cherished memory lit by the roseate glow o' flickering nostalgia. A lost pleasure, much like scones roond the fire after sunday school. The strap - alas - is nae mare in Scottish schools.
<strong>thats right...I correct myself...no forms of PHYSICAL punishment...I think a disapproving frown is perfectly dandny, cause then it shows the kid that you are displeased and if you never hit your kid in the first place and are extra nice to them they will respond to seeing you unhappy(I've seen this happen dozens of times)</strong><hr></blockquote>
You've seen this work dozens of times? And? were these your kids? Were they realted to you. Do their parents spank them or not?
I am betting that the kid has been spanked before and is aware that the disapproving stare will mean the paddle is coming next if they don't straighten up.
Comments
<strong>
Only for you.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Anders we should speak of this some years later when you will have child, my great theory abouts education that i have before been a father were worthless.
I must also precise what is spank for me, it's nothing like a ceromony, just direct without taking away any close, and something symbolic without any intention to hurt them. i prefer dialog but with youngs kids it did not work always, so you have to prove who is the leader.
<strong>I agree that age is a big factor. But 8-9 months seems too early to me. You can easily hurt a baby. The way I see it, at that age, it's OUR fault as parents if the baby gets into something they're not supposed to get into. You've got to put stuff away and baby-proof the house. Later they'll grow out of getting into stuff like that, and you can put it back.
I'm not flaming you, just giving my opinion on it.
Lots of babies are shaken and killed or very seriously injured because parents don't realize how easy it is to hurt a baby. I'd rather just draw the line at not physical punishment at all, than try to figure out how much is OK.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Well, I'll repeat... if you wait, it will be too late. I'm not taking offense here, but isn't it obvious that a big adult could easily hurt a child or a baby? You'll note the severity of what I did with my infant son in my post. We're not talking about violence here, we're talking about discipline administered by an intelligent, rational adult. Those who say spanking teaches violence leave out a crucial qualifyer. It can, but doesn't necessarily teach that. There are millions of us around who were spanked and grew up "well-adjusted".
And yes, you try to "baby-proof" the house. The more mobile the kid becomes, the more impossible is the task.
I've seen parents try to use the "time out" method with their toddlers with little success. My approach was to remove the child from the room, and administer the spanking in a more private setting, thus not humiliating him. You have figured out how much spanking is OK if you never do it: none. You can't avoid the decision, but you can put yourself in the position of avoiding to administer effective discipline.
<strong>I think its not okay to spank your kids.
not only do you advocate using violence but you lodge in their minds that if they are bad, they get pain. ...punishment is not necessary. any form of punishment.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Pain is good. Learning to avoid it is even better. Having parents who understand that they must teach you this: priceless.
No form of punishment? Not even a disapproving frown? Punishment is frequently appropriate for kids, but an emphasis on training the child makes it discipline, not punishment.
i thought he was bluffing, we were at church in one of the front rows, with everyone he knew. i never thought he'd do it, so i kept kicking. he pick me up, put me over his shoulder, spanked me in the other room, then brought me back.
let me tell you, that lesson stayed with me for a long time. when i realized that my parents wouldn't be afraid to punish me in front of others, that cut down on a lot of goofing off.
you can't tell me that a time-out, an hour after church is over would have had nearly the same effect.
Added to this is is the ludicrous amount of time, effort and money spent on them with the view that it is not their fault and they are not responsible for their actions. Again here in the uk, if you steal a car, beat someone to paralysis, set fire to someone's house or steal the lifelong possesions of a 70 year old living alone you will be given counselling, paid for courses, financial help for equipment etc because the do gooders believe that poevrty, boredom etc leads these kids to behave this way.
Thus those kids who are bored from poor families who commit no crime are seriously disadvatntaged. I teach kids that come from some very poor background. None of them has a bad bone in their bodies, they're all polite and firendly and would never dream of hurting anyone. They get no help from any quarter even though they're trying their best to study.
The kids fresh out of police cells get their courses paid for, their equipment and transport paid for and they get priority over my kids in using the equipment. They've just trashed 2 classrooms (which have now been condemned - that's how bad they damaged them) and as a result, not one of them was punished - instead the regular users of those rooms (some elderly dressmaking students) have been told they must now move 1 mile away to continue studies. The violent kids however, have been allocated 2 more new rooms in the college.
what kind of message are we sending out to those kids who do not set out to behave like animals?
There is a very big difference between a do-gooder and a good-doer.
<strong>
I wouldn't spank my kids when I do have them.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The key word here is when
If you already had kids this opinion might change! <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
Anyone without kids can feel very wise and talk about how evil parents are that spnk children. They can say how it is a brutal method of punishment. They can say how it teaches violence. They can even say how you could kill a child doing it. (What are you spanking kids with? A baseball bat?) But they have NO IDEA whether or not spanking is necessary until the time comes and the kid has decided that he/she is going to prove once and for all who is in charge. When you get into an argument with a 2-3 year old, you just lost that battle. Parents don't argue with kids. That is why they are the parents.
<strong>How many people here have kids? Of that amount, how many said they would never spank their kids, ever? Of that amount, how many found out that spanking was necessary to properly direct your child from becoming a spoiled brat?</strong><hr></blockquote>I'm the father of an almost-3-year-old, and I've never spanked. She's probably pretty easy compared to some kids I've seen. But she's been developing more, um, personality in the past month or so.
Kids definitely test boundaries, and you have to win - they're the private and you're the sergeant, and they have to lose rank sometimes. But I don't think you need to use spanking to do that. You can have discipline without spanking. You can always take something away or remove some privilege that really gets to them. You just have to be a little creative - it's psychological warfare.
Although I admit to not having any experience with any child over 3, so I don't know what I'll do when my daughter is smarter than me, which could happen any day now.
I just think spanking is one of those things that we all accept and do because its the way it's always been done - we don't think about it that much, but maybe we should.
Fact is, parenting is really, really hard. Kids are difficult, and there's just no getting around that. There's no magic technique for making their behavior better, or your life easier. And we're competing against a culture that just plain sucks.
<strong>Kids need someone to lead them, to tell them what's what. They don't need a violent despot, but they sure as hell don't need some pseudo-psychologist following them around asking them their motivations every 5 minutes.
If you, as the parent, don't provide authority and stability, who will? A group of friends?
That may be good enough for you, but I might think a little Different (sic).</strong><hr></blockquote>
no, you seem to be thinking the general trend that its okay to physically punish children, there is nothing different about it.
<strong>
Pain is good. Learning to avoid it is even better. Having parents who understand that they must teach you this: priceless.
No form of punishment? Not even a disapproving frown? Punishment is frequently appropriate for kids, but an emphasis on training the child makes it discipline, not punishment.</strong><hr></blockquote>
thats right...I correct myself...no forms of PHYSICAL punishment...I think a disapproving frown is perfectly dandny, cause then it shows the kid that you are displeased and if you never hit your kid in the first place and are extra nice to them they will respond to seeing you unhappy(I've seen this happen dozens of times)
I am not following what you are saying in relation to what you quoted me as saying.
I think physical punishment (within reason) is acceptable. People that beat the crap out of their kids are not doing anything useful. A hard slap on the hand or butt conveys a message quite clearly and far more efficiently than "Junior, if you're not too busy could we go in the corner and have a little chat about why we don't use ink pens all over daddy's clothes?"
A stern looking at might phase a kid the first two times, but a raised eyebrow will only get you so far.
99 times out of 100 I don't need to physically punish my nephews, but sometimes that's all they'll listen to.
<strong>
I am not following what you are saying in relation to what you quoted me as saying.
I think physical punishment (within reason) is acceptable. People that beat the crap out of their kids are not doing anything useful. A hard slap on the hand or butt conveys a message quite clearly and far more efficiently than "Junior, if you're not too busy could we go in the corner and have a little chat about why we don't use ink pens all over daddy's clothes?"
A stern looking at might phase a kid the first two times, but a raised eyebrow will only get you so far.
99 times out of 100 I don't need to physically punish my nephews, but sometimes that's all they'll listen to.</strong><hr></blockquote>
[quote] Originally posted by groverat:
That may be good enough for you, but I might think a little Different <hr></blockquote>
thats what I was relating it to...you think pyshical punishment is okay....I don't...the general consensus of this thread was that it is okay in some circumstance....which is what you just said to be the case for you, so how are you thinking differently than everyone else? In your wording you imply I am thinking similarly to the rest of the folks in this thread which I most clearly am not.
You obviously are not open to any other methods rather than physical punishment and I am rather tired and don't feel like even trying to get you to open up a bit. so I'll leave you to your ways.
[ 02-28-2002: Message edited by: Wrong Robot ]</p>
<strong>Kids definitely test boundaries, and you have to win - they're the private and you're the sergeant, and they have to lose rank sometimes. But I don't think you need to use spanking to do that. You can have discipline without spanking. You can always take something away or remove some privilege that really gets to them. You just have to be a little creative - it's psychological warfare.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Reality check: the kid has more time to devote to thinking about winning than you do. Removing a privelege won't get to 'em as much as a hand to the rear.
<strong>I think a disapproving frown is perfectly dandny, cause then it shows the kid that you are displeased and if you never hit your kid in the first place and are extra nice to them they will respond to seeing you unhappy(I've seen this happen dozens of times)</strong><hr></blockquote>
This will be like taking candy from a baby...
I'd be willing to bet you a million bucks that this method fails 10 times as often as it succeeeds. I've seen it fail hundreds of times, often a dozen in the space of ten minutes between the same "parent" and child. Hello? Who's in charge here? The kid!
<strong>Whaddaya yappin about? No magic technique? There most certainly is: Ritalin. Discipline in a pill. Possible the most over prescribed psycho-active drug used for children. But you know, if it makes life easier for the teachers and the parents, then it must be good.</strong><hr></blockquote>Oh yeah, I forgot about that one. A coupla Prozac and a polo mallet sometimes work, too.
I think I am right in saying also that slapping a wee child (under 4) is actually illegal here, punishable wi' an assault charge.
When I mysel' was a wee laddie I used tae get a first class, thorough chastising from my ain father (who had developed a guid strong set o' arms and a healthy sense o' discipline after spending the war years in the Army as an RSM) when the occasion demanded. However, Corporal Punishment at its best happened at the school where teachers excercised their authority wi' The Strap (a heavy 2 or 3 thonged belt) adminstered tae the hands o' the miscreant wi' the unmistakle, michty KERRSLAPPP o' leather upon flesh. The secret glow o' pleasure in seeing one's unfortunate peers getting six o' the best in front o' the class remains a cherished memory lit by the roseate glow o' flickering nostalgia. A lost pleasure, much like scones roond the fire after sunday school. The strap - alas - is nae mare in Scottish schools.
<strong>thats right...I correct myself...no forms of PHYSICAL punishment...I think a disapproving frown is perfectly dandny, cause then it shows the kid that you are displeased and if you never hit your kid in the first place and are extra nice to them they will respond to seeing you unhappy(I've seen this happen dozens of times)</strong><hr></blockquote>
You've seen this work dozens of times? And? were these your kids? Were they realted to you. Do their parents spank them or not?
I am betting that the kid has been spanked before and is aware that the disapproving stare will mean the paddle is coming next if they don't straighten up.