I do support spanking, especially in very young children. They don't always have the reasoning skills or self-control to think about a situation at that age. Nick
If that's true, why do you think that they'll 'understand' spanking?
I have seen two terribles examples of education in my life. The mothers where MD psychiatrist.
No spanking or no punishment was their golden laws. When the fathers tried to have some form of authorities upon their kids, the mothers told them, that they were wrong, and that they have to follow the light, aka the golden laws of modern psychology. Always explain never punish.
I witness personally one scene, where the father just wanted to get back his bag : the boy refused and starting crying. The mother told her husband, to let the boy take the bag.
The result of all this was : terrible childs crying and raging whenever they disliked something, husbands totally frustrated.
I don't know for the childs, but at least, one of the husband divorced.
I thanks god to not have marry a MD psychiatrist. For me education does not live in a book : we have to be naturals. If I am angry, then I am angry. I don't pretend to be perfect, and I will not pretend this in front of my childs. I don't follow guidelines from books, wether this guidelines are coming from Dolto, or from the old school.
If that's true, why do you think that they'll 'understand' spanking?
No they just stop. And this is the only purpose of the spanking (or the fear to be spanked).
My younger daughter is five. Here is a typical sequences with her :
- me Stop doing this
- her : she did not listen and continue
- me : stop doing this
- her : she stop for five seconds and continue
- me louder : stop it
- her : she stops for five seconds and seems to do not have listened
- me : if you continue I will spank you
- her : it works she stop.
It's that simple. With my elder daughter, there is no need to do this kind of threats. Others punitions are more effective. For youngs kids it's not. At least not in my personal experience.
If that's true, why do you think that they'll 'understand' spanking?
I didn't claim they would "understand" the spanking. I even fully admitted that it may have been nothing more than fear of the spanking that brought about compliance with regard to the pool. However the point is that he couldn't/didn't understand the consequences of his actions and so more reasoning and explanation would not have solved the problem. The alternative to the spanking, his likely death, was not acceptable.
"Spanking" your children is like an admission of failure for parents. "Hey-- we can't raise our kids right. Let's hit them!" And then your child goes to school the next day and wacks the kid who was always an inch or two shorter than most of his classmates. Thanks guys, I really enjoyed recess all those years.
"Spanking" your children is like an admission of failure for parents. "Hey-- we can't raise our kids right. Let's hit them!" And then your child goes to school the next day and wacks the kid who was always an inch or two shorter than most of his classmates. Thanks guys, I really enjoyed recess all those years.
The day you accept to be a parent, you accept to fail.
Again, you could also divorce your wife for refusing to do the dishes. You could not divorce or leave your child for refusing to do your bidding. Different tools for different roles.
I doubt that the only reason you don't hit your wife is because you could divorce her instead. You don't hit her because you know it's wrong to physically hurt another person to get them to do what you want.
But hitting does work - it gets their attention. For the past 5 years I've been a part time stay-at-home dad because my wife works part time and we don't do daycare. Parenting is really, really hard. And it can be very frustrating, because the fact is you can't control other people, including your kids. But you want something that works, and works now. Hitting fills that role. I just think that what happens is that you teach your child a lesson that you really don't want them to learn. You know how much kids copy their parents. They learn much more from copying what you do than from the lessons you try to directly teach them. They say everything you say, which is why you don't use bad language around them. You use good manner at the dinner table. You clean up after yourself so they learn to clean up after themselves. And guess what? If you hit them, they hit you back, and they hit other kids. They've learned a lesson from you.
If you're a spanker, how do you deal with that problem? Do you tell them it's wrong to hit others? Do you spank them if they hit someone? Do you tell them you're going to hit them but you don't want them to ever hit someone else? Do they listen?
I have no kids of my own, being too young for that.
I firmly believe there are situations where the best 'educational' option is physical punishment. (A light one, I may add.) It's not necessary for every kid, and not for every situation. Trumptman and Powerdoc outline pretty well the situations where the method is best applied.
You know how much kids copy their parents. They learn much more from copying what you do than from the lessons you try to directly teach them. ... And guess what? If you hit them, they hit you back, and they hit other kids. They've learned a lesson from you.
You're talking like there is no difference between a spanking and hitting. That's not true. Other one is rare punishment that is announced in advance, performed in a ritual fashion, after exhausting other options, and connected with a clearly forbidden action or inaction. The other is personal, surprising, uncontrolled, fear-inducing violence. The kid doesn't know it's coming and can't prevent it by acting the right way.
I doubt that the only reason you don't hit your wife is because you could divorce her instead. You don't hit her because you know it's wrong to physically hurt another person to get them to do what you want.
I understand your point, however the reality is that the roles of parent, child and spouse are not equal. If I left my wife in the car while I went into the store and she somehow died from heat exposure, they wouldn't claim it was neglect on my part. If my wife runs into a street, sticks her finger in an electric socket or jumps into a pool, the results of her actions are not tossed onto my shoulders.
Spouses are supposed to be partners and consider each other. They need to fulfill the needs of one another. If they cannot fulfill this role, then divorce can occur. Basically you don't have to resort to violence because you aren't responsible for the person and can choose to live apart from them if they desire to act in a manner or make choices you cannot live with. This simply is not true with a child.
Quote:
But hitting does work - it gets their attention. For the past 5 years I've been a part time stay-at-home dad because my wife works part time and we don't do daycare. Parenting is really, really hard. And it can be very frustrating, because the fact is you can't control other people, including your kids. But you want something that works, and works now. Hitting fills that role. I just think that what happens is that you teach your child a lesson that you really don't want them to learn. You know how much kids copy their parents. They learn much more from copying what you do than from the lessons you try to directly teach them. They say everything you say, which is why you don't use bad language around them. You use good manner at the dinner table. You clean up after yourself so they learn to clean up after themselves. And guess what? If you hit them, they hit you back, and they hit other kids. They've learned a lesson from you.
Actually what they learn is that if someone cannot be reasoned with, and can cause you and themselves harm, escalating action to level that goes beyond the end of their nose is acceptable. I find this a totally valid lesson.
Quote:
If you're a spanker, how do you deal with that problem? Do you tell them it's wrong to hit others? Do you spank them if they hit someone? Do you tell them you're going to hit them but you don't want them to ever hit someone else? Do they listen?
You deal with it just as you do all forms of aggression. You attempt to teach them context and hope it is well applied. Aggression isn't just spanking or hitting. Aggression can be snatching away a toy, refusal to share, yelling inappropriately, using certain verbal tones, pushing, etc.
One thing I find curious about folks who claim spanking causes hitting is that I never see children attempt to spank other children. I have seen children from both spanking and non-spanking parents bite, pinch, slap, hit, push other children and snatch items inappropriately. Yet I never see a child take another child and attempt to take them over the knee or even smack their butt in an attempt to provoke an action.
Of course the most interesting of these has to be biting because I've never seen a parent bite a child to bring about an action, yet I don't think I've ever encountered a child that hasn't resorted to biting when confronted with enough aggression from another child. (taking a snack, favorite toy, etc.)
For some empirical research on the effects of corporal punishment, here's probably the best and most up-to-date review of all the research. The link also includes links to commentary by other psychologists who criticize the findings in one way or another. There's a psychologist named Baumrind in particular that has defended spanking, and she has a commentary. Here's a press summary with a decent summary of the findings.
It's a really good review of the issues. I teach a graduate learning and behavior course and assigned this paper just to get a good discussion about this going.
First, she does find that spanking works. It produces immediate compliance better than not spanking. But she also finds that a bunch of negative things are associated with it. One thing that I think is interesting is that spanking produces lower-levels of "internalization." In other words, kids who are spanked learn their lesson less well than kids who aren't. They're more likely to behave badly when they know they can't get caught than kids who aren't spanked.
Another interesting finding is that spanking is associated with child abuse. In other words, parents who spank are more likely to cross over into abusing their children than parents who don't spank. That's a good reason for drawing the line at "no hitting" period.
One more thing about kids who bully other kids using physical force. Most of them are cowards at heart. The absolute best thing to stop that behavior is that the other kid retaliates immediately and decisively. That could turn into a fight, and the non-aggressor could lose, but very rarely there will be a second fight no matter how the first goes. The general message from teachers at the schools I have been in is that "it takes two to fight" and "it's wrong to hit back". If good kids believe that and act accordingly, that cultivates bullies from the rest.
I have a history of being harassed at school. That stopped when I was taught to fight. To date I never had to threaten with, much less use violence after that. My increased self confidence turned potential bullies away, and my increased understanding of the damage I could do stopped myself from being the aggressor. I also immediately got more friends, I could be more open and friendly with everyone in normal setting when I felt I was physically safe and in control no matter what the situation. It would have saved me a lot of grief if I would have learned to hold my own earlier.
This is an utterly fascinating discussion on a number of levels, but I think it's important to note that, if I'm reading them correctly, Nick and Powerdoc are not suggesting that children be beaten black and blue until the desired behavior is accomplished. A sharp, stinging slap on the butt or the thighs is more than not enough to get the point across, and as Powerdoc rightly pointed out, once that is associated properly in the child's mind, the threat itself is plenty.
The problem is not spanking as a method of discipline. The problem is that idiots can breed. Hell, we don't let people drive cars without a license and yet any horny 15 year olds can have a kid.
I love all the touchy feely people. Enjoy your kids that run all over you as they get older. My guess is Trump believes a certain way not only because he feels that way, but because daily he deals with these touchy feely parents kids that are a complete nightmare at school.
He can't take away their xbox or tv, he just has to deal with the lamer kids and honestly 9x out of 10 the lamer parents. Being able to breathe is a gift that I'd be happy to take away from some of these touchy feely kids I'm not saying you need to spank your kids, but they need real punishment other than a hug and please johnny be good and mama will get you cookies. I have a feeling some of you have cookie monsters...enjoy
This is an utterly fascinating discussion on a number of levels, but I think it's important to note that, if I'm reading them correctly, Nick and Powerdoc are not suggesting that children be beaten black and blue until the desired behavior is accomplished. A sharp, stinging slap on the butt or the thighs is more than not enough to get the point across, and as Powerdoc rightly pointed out, once that is associated properly in the child's mind, the threat itself is plenty.
The problem is not spanking as a method of discipline. The problem is that idiots can breed. Hell, we don't let people drive cars without a license and yet any horny 15 year olds can have a kid.
Thanks. I think you resumed it well. It's the threat who work, more than the spanking. Sometimes, one or two times per year, my child recieved a slap on the butt, and it's sufficiant for her to know, that I am able to keep my promises.
With my elder daughter spanking is useless or even the threat to spank, but others forms of punishments works way better, like interdiction of visiting friends.
The important point is that the kids respect your authority. The threat of a spank is a good one for little childs, because it's an immediate one. Small childs have no great skills of anticipation, the punishment has to bee immediate, otherwise the little childs do not understand, and simply think that you don't love them anymore, because they will not connect anymore the punition and the reason of that punition.
Comments
Put em on the block with that failure of a dirty-dish washing wife.
Do it.. Do it..
Originally posted by trumptman
commit sodomy
Interesting turn of phrase you've got there.
Got a dog, trumpt? Do you (would you) hit it in order to train it?
Originally posted by trumptman
I do support spanking, especially in very young children. They don't always have the reasoning skills or self-control to think about a situation at that age. Nick
If that's true, why do you think that they'll 'understand' spanking?
No spanking or no punishment was their golden laws. When the fathers tried to have some form of authorities upon their kids, the mothers told them, that they were wrong, and that they have to follow the light, aka the golden laws of modern psychology. Always explain never punish.
I witness personally one scene, where the father just wanted to get back his bag : the boy refused and starting crying. The mother told her husband, to let the boy take the bag.
The result of all this was : terrible childs crying and raging whenever they disliked something, husbands totally frustrated.
I don't know for the childs, but at least, one of the husband divorced.
I thanks god to not have marry a MD psychiatrist. For me education does not live in a book : we have to be naturals. If I am angry, then I am angry. I don't pretend to be perfect, and I will not pretend this in front of my childs. I don't follow guidelines from books, wether this guidelines are coming from Dolto, or from the old school.
Originally posted by Placebo
If that's true, why do you think that they'll 'understand' spanking?
No they just stop. And this is the only purpose of the spanking (or the fear to be spanked).
My younger daughter is five. Here is a typical sequences with her :
- me Stop doing this
- her : she did not listen and continue
- me : stop doing this
- her : she stop for five seconds and continue
- me louder : stop it
- her : she stops for five seconds and seems to do not have listened
- me : if you continue I will spank you
- her : it works she stop.
It's that simple. With my elder daughter, there is no need to do this kind of threats. Others punitions are more effective. For youngs kids it's not. At least not in my personal experience.
Originally posted by Placebo
I think that most of behavioral trouble goes away by the time the child is grown enough to be taught with words and explanations.
It's true, but my childs will be dead or seriously hurted, if I was not there to make them obey (don't put your fingers in plugs ...).
Originally posted by Placebo
If that's true, why do you think that they'll 'understand' spanking?
I didn't claim they would "understand" the spanking. I even fully admitted that it may have been nothing more than fear of the spanking that brought about compliance with regard to the pool. However the point is that he couldn't/didn't understand the consequences of his actions and so more reasoning and explanation would not have solved the problem. The alternative to the spanking, his likely death, was not acceptable.
Nick
* not shared, by all psychiastrist luckily.
"Spanking" your children is like an admission of failure for parents. "Hey-- we can't raise our kids right. Let's hit them!" And then your child goes to school the next day and wacks the kid who was always an inch or two shorter than most of his classmates. Thanks guys, I really enjoyed recess all those years.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
BRussell's got my vote.
"Spanking" your children is like an admission of failure for parents. "Hey-- we can't raise our kids right. Let's hit them!" And then your child goes to school the next day and wacks the kid who was always an inch or two shorter than most of his classmates. Thanks guys, I really enjoyed recess all those years.
The day you accept to be a parent, you accept to fail.
Originally posted by trumptman
Again, you could also divorce your wife for refusing to do the dishes. You could not divorce or leave your child for refusing to do your bidding. Different tools for different roles.
I doubt that the only reason you don't hit your wife is because you could divorce her instead. You don't hit her because you know it's wrong to physically hurt another person to get them to do what you want.
But hitting does work - it gets their attention. For the past 5 years I've been a part time stay-at-home dad because my wife works part time and we don't do daycare. Parenting is really, really hard. And it can be very frustrating, because the fact is you can't control other people, including your kids. But you want something that works, and works now. Hitting fills that role. I just think that what happens is that you teach your child a lesson that you really don't want them to learn. You know how much kids copy their parents. They learn much more from copying what you do than from the lessons you try to directly teach them. They say everything you say, which is why you don't use bad language around them. You use good manner at the dinner table. You clean up after yourself so they learn to clean up after themselves. And guess what? If you hit them, they hit you back, and they hit other kids. They've learned a lesson from you.
If you're a spanker, how do you deal with that problem? Do you tell them it's wrong to hit others? Do you spank them if they hit someone? Do you tell them you're going to hit them but you don't want them to ever hit someone else? Do they listen?
I firmly believe there are situations where the best 'educational' option is physical punishment. (A light one, I may add.) It's not necessary for every kid, and not for every situation. Trumptman and Powerdoc outline pretty well the situations where the method is best applied.
Originally posted by BRussell
You know how much kids copy their parents. They learn much more from copying what you do than from the lessons you try to directly teach them. ... And guess what? If you hit them, they hit you back, and they hit other kids. They've learned a lesson from you.
You're talking like there is no difference between a spanking and hitting. That's not true. Other one is rare punishment that is announced in advance, performed in a ritual fashion, after exhausting other options, and connected with a clearly forbidden action or inaction. The other is personal, surprising, uncontrolled, fear-inducing violence. The kid doesn't know it's coming and can't prevent it by acting the right way.
Originally posted by BRussell
I doubt that the only reason you don't hit your wife is because you could divorce her instead. You don't hit her because you know it's wrong to physically hurt another person to get them to do what you want.
I understand your point, however the reality is that the roles of parent, child and spouse are not equal. If I left my wife in the car while I went into the store and she somehow died from heat exposure, they wouldn't claim it was neglect on my part. If my wife runs into a street, sticks her finger in an electric socket or jumps into a pool, the results of her actions are not tossed onto my shoulders.
Spouses are supposed to be partners and consider each other. They need to fulfill the needs of one another. If they cannot fulfill this role, then divorce can occur. Basically you don't have to resort to violence because you aren't responsible for the person and can choose to live apart from them if they desire to act in a manner or make choices you cannot live with. This simply is not true with a child.
But hitting does work - it gets their attention. For the past 5 years I've been a part time stay-at-home dad because my wife works part time and we don't do daycare. Parenting is really, really hard. And it can be very frustrating, because the fact is you can't control other people, including your kids. But you want something that works, and works now. Hitting fills that role. I just think that what happens is that you teach your child a lesson that you really don't want them to learn. You know how much kids copy their parents. They learn much more from copying what you do than from the lessons you try to directly teach them. They say everything you say, which is why you don't use bad language around them. You use good manner at the dinner table. You clean up after yourself so they learn to clean up after themselves. And guess what? If you hit them, they hit you back, and they hit other kids. They've learned a lesson from you.
Actually what they learn is that if someone cannot be reasoned with, and can cause you and themselves harm, escalating action to level that goes beyond the end of their nose is acceptable. I find this a totally valid lesson.
If you're a spanker, how do you deal with that problem? Do you tell them it's wrong to hit others? Do you spank them if they hit someone? Do you tell them you're going to hit them but you don't want them to ever hit someone else? Do they listen?
You deal with it just as you do all forms of aggression. You attempt to teach them context and hope it is well applied. Aggression isn't just spanking or hitting. Aggression can be snatching away a toy, refusal to share, yelling inappropriately, using certain verbal tones, pushing, etc.
One thing I find curious about folks who claim spanking causes hitting is that I never see children attempt to spank other children. I have seen children from both spanking and non-spanking parents bite, pinch, slap, hit, push other children and snatch items inappropriately. Yet I never see a child take another child and attempt to take them over the knee or even smack their butt in an attempt to provoke an action.
Of course the most interesting of these has to be biting because I've never seen a parent bite a child to bring about an action, yet I don't think I've ever encountered a child that hasn't resorted to biting when confronted with enough aggression from another child. (taking a snack, favorite toy, etc.)
Good discussion...
Nick
It's a really good review of the issues. I teach a graduate learning and behavior course and assigned this paper just to get a good discussion about this going.
First, she does find that spanking works. It produces immediate compliance better than not spanking. But she also finds that a bunch of negative things are associated with it. One thing that I think is interesting is that spanking produces lower-levels of "internalization." In other words, kids who are spanked learn their lesson less well than kids who aren't. They're more likely to behave badly when they know they can't get caught than kids who aren't spanked.
Another interesting finding is that spanking is associated with child abuse. In other words, parents who spank are more likely to cross over into abusing their children than parents who don't spank. That's a good reason for drawing the line at "no hitting" period.
Anyway, Happy Thanksgiving all.
I have a history of being harassed at school. That stopped when I was taught to fight. To date I never had to threaten with, much less use violence after that. My increased self confidence turned potential bullies away, and my increased understanding of the damage I could do stopped myself from being the aggressor. I also immediately got more friends, I could be more open and friendly with everyone in normal setting when I felt I was physically safe and in control no matter what the situation. It would have saved me a lot of grief if I would have learned to hold my own earlier.
The problem is not spanking as a method of discipline. The problem is that idiots can breed. Hell, we don't let people drive cars without a license and yet any horny 15 year olds can have a kid.
He can't take away their xbox or tv, he just has to deal with the lamer kids and honestly 9x out of 10 the lamer parents. Being able to breathe is a gift that I'd be happy to take away from some of these touchy feely kids
Originally posted by midwinter
This is an utterly fascinating discussion on a number of levels, but I think it's important to note that, if I'm reading them correctly, Nick and Powerdoc are not suggesting that children be beaten black and blue until the desired behavior is accomplished. A sharp, stinging slap on the butt or the thighs is more than not enough to get the point across, and as Powerdoc rightly pointed out, once that is associated properly in the child's mind, the threat itself is plenty.
The problem is not spanking as a method of discipline. The problem is that idiots can breed. Hell, we don't let people drive cars without a license and yet any horny 15 year olds can have a kid.
Thanks. I think you resumed it well. It's the threat who work, more than the spanking. Sometimes, one or two times per year, my child recieved a slap on the butt, and it's sufficiant for her to know, that I am able to keep my promises.
With my elder daughter spanking is useless or even the threat to spank, but others forms of punishments works way better, like interdiction of visiting friends.
The important point is that the kids respect your authority. The threat of a spank is a good one for little childs, because it's an immediate one. Small childs have no great skills of anticipation, the punishment has to bee immediate, otherwise the little childs do not understand, and simply think that you don't love them anymore, because they will not connect anymore the punition and the reason of that punition.