Now, we will see how will work your big principles at the light of the reality.
You make it sound like not hitting your kids requires some big sacrifice-- like being a vegan or something. I don't really look at it that way. It really is as simple as just deciding not to discipline children using violence, for all its problems: low-levels of internalization, legitimating violence to solve problems, etc. And since I was raised in a non-violent home, where my father didn't smack around my mother or me, it's an even easier choice. I guess the temptation will be there if the child refuses to obey since it's difficult to completely socialize out violent tendencies. But it shouldn't be hard to come up with non-violent solutions like taking away privileges or whatnot. The challenge of course is applying punishments consistently and being able to enforce them, admittedly a challenge in the busy lives of Americans. The French have no excuses!
You make it sound like not hitting your kids requires some big sacrifice-- like being a vegan or something. I don't really look at it that way. It really is as simple as just deciding not to discipline children using violence, for all its problems: low-levels of internalization, legitimating violence to solve problems, etc. And since I was raised in a non-violent home, where my father didn't smack around my mother or me, it's an even easier choice. I guess the temptation will be there if the child refuses to obey since it's difficult to completely socialize out violent tendencies. But it shouldn't be hard to come up with non-violent solutions like taking away privileges or whatnot. The challenge of course is applying punishments consistently and being able to enforce them, admittedly a challenge in the busy lives of Americans. The French have no excuses!
Good for you, I respect your ideals. I just say that with little childs, that do not seem to listen to you, the great ideals tend to vanish.
Anyway you will discover this by yourself. But don't be hurried, childs can wait, have fun, you just turned 21 ...
You make it sound like not hitting your kids requires some big sacrifice-- like being a vegan or something. I don't really look at it that way. It really is as simple as just deciding not to discipline children using violence, for all its problems: low-levels of internalization, legitimating violence to solve problems, etc. And since I was raised in a non-violent home, where my father didn't smack around my mother or me, it's an even easier choice. I guess the temptation will be there if the child refuses to obey since it's difficult to completely socialize out violent tendencies. But it shouldn't be hard to come up with non-violent solutions like taking away privileges or whatnot. The challenge of course is applying punishments consistently and being able to enforce them, admittedly a challenge in the busy lives of Americans. The French have no excuses!
You make it sound like smacking a kid is the first resort.
Oh look, someone on the internet is breaking up a sentence into individual words and separating them with periods. I've never seen that before, that's really cool.
It's true that the severity of punishment increases the learning of an avoidance response. Take some rats, shock them when they go near one side of the cage, and the rats that get the most painful shock will show the greatest behavioral change. Yup.
A couple of problems though:
1. You can't use high-pain punishment with a child, because you might injure them. Or if you can, you're sick. And if you don't use high-intensity pain, then what's the point? You might as well just use time out or take away their favorite toy. If, like most people, you say you draw the line at mild hitting, why not draw it at no hitting? Isn't that a clearer line? Or barring that, how do you justify not going all out and just torturing the child with lit cigarettes? If it's not about morality, but rather effectiveness, then the more pain, the more effectiveness. IMO people only use mild hitting because they instinctually know it's wrong in the first place.
2. The goal of parenting is internalization. You want the kid to act appropriately not only when you can catch and smack them, but also when you're not there, and also when they grow up. You want them to learn a lesson, not just be controlled by you. And the way to get internalization is to let them learn lessons on their own, and to use the least amount of coercion possible.
3. Kids do internalize one lesson from hitting: That the use of physical violence to get someone to do what you want is appropriate. How come we don't allow a husband to hit a wife? Or a boss to hit an employee? It's because we believe it's immoral. And yet most parents hit their kids. It's inconsistent, and sends inconsistent messages to kids.
Lets play the same then. Yeah, believe me, looking cool in front of 'cyber peers' is high on my list. Let me straighten your Uber-dorkness out, flake.
1) Nowhere was I arguing that by increasing punishment beyond reasonable levels was acceptable.
2) Your goals of parenting are none of my business, and you haven' a clue what MY goals are.
3) If you wanna play the anti-violent modern hippie that's fine. Your non confrontational ass will be the one in my rear view mirror getting flipped off. No one here is arguing that husbands should hit wives, bosses hit employees etc. And morallity doesn't even factor into the discussion. You can't leap from 'discipline' to abuse. The research and facts aren't there. Just your ego.
So in returrn Mr. right, why don't you go put your kids in time out for growing up backwards. After all, alone in time out is going to be good practice for how alone they will be in the real world.
Discipline. The only real discipline is self-discipline. Self-discipline is key to civilized society, and self discipline can NEVER, EVER be achieved when physical violence is used as a first resort. Sorry, all you dysfunctional bible-belters, but you're wrong, so 100% wrong. Get out of the darkness.
Where I'm from. You know, Norway. That top of the world, scandinavian, best-place-on-earth-and-we've-got-oil-too... Corporal punishment is ofcourse outlawed. Spanking your child is behavior associated with previous generations.
I'm father of a four year old, and step father of a twelve year old, and it has never occured to me to "spank" any of them. If I did, I'd consider myself a failure as a parent. I'm an adult for christ sake.
Parenting is hard. I've had to hold my step-son firmly on occasions to prevent him from using force, or break things in anger. Although breaking things in anger can be a good lesson in itself. Kids test out limits. that's how they learn. The reactions they receive influence how they will test out other limits in the future.
My children know we would never hurt them. There is no element of fear in how we bring them up. They are both well balanced, fine kids. With strong opinions and good self-esteem. The twelve year old is top of his class in almost everything.
My experience is that kids learn best by example. Try to count how many times you applaud your kid for doing something right in comparison to how often you point out that they do something wrong. Statistics show that an average kid gets four times as much negative as postive attention by their parents. And we wonder why kids end up with low self-esteem...?
Where I'm from. You know, Norway. That top of the world, scandinavian, best-place-on-earth-and-we've-got-oil-too... Corporal punishment is ofcourse outlawed. Spanking your child is behavior associated with previous generations.
Yeah but because your kids aren't disciplined like ours, that's why you have much higher rates of social problems like violence and unwanted pregnancies, etc., compared to the US.
I'm father of a four year old, and step father of a twelve year old, and it has never occured to me to "spank" any of them. If I did, I'd consider myself a failure as a parent. I'm an adult for christ sake.
Is anyone here suggesting spanking a 12 year-old? My sense of this discussion--and I may be wrong about this--is that those here who are advocating spanking are only really talking about young children, say toddlers through about 4 or 5. And no one here is advocating the walloping of children.
Doesn't US law already deal with what is child abuse and what is not? If my 3 year-old kid were to, say, climb up into my china cabinet and throw all the plates on the floor, if I give her a single slap on the thigh or butt, is that abuse? What if, when I was sixteen and was physically larger, stronger, and faster than my father, we got into a fist-fight that I started? Was he abusing me?
For me, it boils down to this: for me to discipline my own young child in more or less the same way I might discipline a pet (a sharp slap that makes a worse noise than anything else) is not abuse of either.
I think regardless of spanking or not. Good parents are good parents, and bad parents are bad parents. I believe you'd find the amount of bad children are in direct relation to the bad parents, whether they spank or not. I'm not sure the spanking i see these people referring to, which i incurred as a child changed me one way or another.
I still enjoy a good spanking once and awhile
The one thing i hate more than anything is people trying to say their way is better than others. As a parent it's a choice of how you choose to raise your children, and no one in these posts is talking about spankings like child abuse. i find it offensive people even refer to it as that. I never felt abused once when i was spanked, as a matter a fact i probably deserved worse most the time. many times i felt like i got off easy.
At issue -- and the source of headlines and jaw-flapping across Canada -- was the case of an American tourist, David Peterson, who was caught red-handed in a Canadian parking lot last fall as he gave a spanking to his 5-year-old daughter.
An outraged Canadian witness called 911 and confronted the overwrought father with the news that it is against the law to spank in Canada.
It isn't, exactly. But London, Ontario, police charged Peterson with assault, and he spent a night in jail. He returned voluntarily this week, according to news reports, to stand trial and clear his name. In a not-guilty verdict rendered today, Ontario provincial Judge John Menzies agreed that the father's punishment fit the daughter's crime and therefore met Canada's legal tests of appropriate discipline.
Quote:
As Peterson rummaged in the front of the car, Rachel and William began fighting in the back seat, and Rachel pushed her little brother out the rear door onto the asphalt. As she began to close the door on her smaller sibling, Peterson testified, he warned her to watch for William's fingers. She ignored the warning, he said, and proceeded to do exactly what her father had feared.
William wailed in pain, the testimony continued, as his father struggled with an automatic door to free his son's trapped digits.
Peterson testified that he first attempted to spank Rachel inside the car, but that she resisted. So he took her outside, where--upping the punishment to a bare-bottomed thrashing because of her defiance--he pulled down her pants and underwear and spanked her "very hard" four to six times, he said; the witness put the number at eight or more times.
Yeah but because your kids aren't disciplined like ours, that's why you have much higher rates of social problems like violence and unwanted pregnancies, etc., compared to the US.
To answer the question in the thread title, discipline to me means self-control, so self-discipline is the first thing I think of when hearing the word.
Where I'm from. You know, Norway. That top of the world, scandinavian, best-place-on-earth-and-we've-got-oil-too... Corporal punishment is ofcourse outlawed. Spanking your child is behavior associated with previous generations.
Actually Norway has had rising levels of immigration, the xenophobia associated with it and ever higher levels of violent crime for several years now. Considering you are talking about a country that isn't as large as some cities in the United States, it doesn't do to bad.
Quote:
I'm father of a four year old, and step father of a twelve year old, and it has never occured to me to "spank" any of them. If I did, I'd consider myself a failure as a parent. I'm an adult for christ sake.
You still have time to be considered a failure, I assure you.
Quote:
Parenting is hard. I've had to hold my step-son firmly on occasions to prevent him from using force, or break things in anger. Although breaking things in anger can be a good lesson in itself. Kids test out limits. that's how they learn. The reactions they receive influence how they will test out other limits in the future.
My children know we would never hurt them. There is no element of fear in how we bring them up. They are both well balanced, fine kids. With strong opinions and good self-esteem. The twelve year old is top of his class in almost everything.
So you admit to having to physically handle your child when they have gotten too out of control, a grown child at that. I wouldn't be boasting that a 12 year old, one who can easily reason why they should exert control of themselves, still needs to be physically controlled. If this lack of control is also exhibited in front of you, I would find the trend and implications quite troubling.
Quote:
My experience is that kids learn best by example. Try to count how many times you applaud your kid for doing something right in comparison to how often you point out that they do something wrong. Statistics show that an average kid gets four times as much negative as postive attention by their parents. And we wonder why kids end up with low self-esteem...?
Perhaps they end up with low self-esteem because like you believe they are born perfect and corrupted by society. I know I would be depressed if I had that view about myself.
Actually Norway has had rising levels of immigration, the xenophobia associated with it and ever higher levels of violent crime for several years now. Considering you are talking about a country that isn't as large as some cities in the United States, it doesn't do to bad.
Do you know something about Norway or did you just google this up? Why are you bringing immigration into this? If you actually have some knowledge here, I'd love to discusse these issues with you.
I also hope you recognized the "humorous/ironic" tone in that first paragraph.
Quote:
You still have time to be considered a failure, I assure you.
I'm not sure I like your tone.
Quote:
So you admit to having to physically handle your child when they have gotten too out of control, a grown child at that. I wouldn't be boasting that a 12 year old, one who can easily reason why they should exert control of themselves, still needs to be physically controlled. If this lack of control is also exhibited in front of you, I would find the trend and implications quite troubling.
I'm a bit shocked by you post this, but I'll let it pass.
Firstly, all children have to be "physically handled". As in "touched" you know. Unless You've come up with a way to change diapers by telekinesis.
Secondly, without getting in to details, you clearly missunderstood my post. The physical holding I was talking about did not occure ate the age of twelve, but goes a few years back. this is as I said my step-child, and filling in for a missing father is not the easiest thing. That's all I will say about it.
Quote:
Perhaps they end up with low self-esteem because like you believe they are born perfect and corrupted by society. I know I would be depressed if I had that view about myself.
I don't believe children are corrupted by society. Where the hell did you get that idea?
But what do you believe? What builds and breaks down self-esteem? Any thoughts?
Do you know something about Norway or did you just google this up? Why are you bringing immigration into this? If you actually have some knowledge here, I'd love to discusse these issues with you.
I also hope you recognized the "humorous/ironic" tone in that first paragraph.
I thought I returned that tone a bit with the city-size comparison. I did look up the information about Norway and violent crime in comparison with other countries. Of course the U.S. compares pretty badly, especially the crime ridden urban centers. However the United States is a profoundly diverse country as well. I mention that because Europe has started having some immigration issues as well lately and amazingly enough, the utopian ideals that are in place before it don't seem to work quite so well. It is very easy to arrive at and enforce consensus when everyone is similar and has shared attributes. Japan and Europe toss around comments and ideals regarding race that would often be considered profoundly racist here in the United States. So while Norway is going somewhat well for now, it will be interesting to see how it holds up over the long run. Especially with record numbers of Eastern Europeans, and Islamic immigrants coming into the country.
Quote:
I'm not sure I like your tone.
I added a smiley. It is pretty hard to judge a job half done wouldn't you say? My oldest child is in kindergarten. His teacher has been teaching over 20 years and gave our son the compliment at report card conferences of noting that he was "the brightest child she had ever taught." But the reality is that he is only five. I also cannot assume that can insure any sort of long term results. It is a promising start though.
Quote:
I'm a bit shocked by you post this, but I'll let it pass.
Firstly, all children have to be "physically handled". As in "touched" you know. Unless You've come up with a way to change diapers by telekinesis.
Secondly, without getting in to details, you clearly missunderstood my post. The physical holding I was talking about did not occure ate the age of twelve, but goes a few years back. this is as I said my step-child, and filling in for a missing father is not the easiest thing. That's all I will say about it.
Please understand that all I attempted to do in the slightest way was reflect back a bit of the rather harsh judgement that you reserved for others. I pictured you doing no more than basically hugging the child tight so they would regain control of themselves and stop attempting to break whatever it was they were trying to break. I have no doubt that filling in for the missing father is very demanding. However again, if I wanted to be judgemental like yourself, I could simply ask about the missing father, why the mother would choose such a man, what does it say that she choose him and then you, what can I claim about the son who desires to break things out of anger, etc. It's pretty easy to starting judging others is my point.
As the saying goes about rocks and glass houses...
Quote:
I don't believe children are corrupted by society. Where the hell did you get that idea?
The ideal is the foundation of much of the thinking that claims things like spanking is wrong. Think about the claims made here. The belief is that humans are in no way violent, and that spanking teaches them to be so. I just ran that thread back into the spool as it were. The thinking being shown here is that left to their own devices, children would basically show little or no violence. Violence is a behavior they imitate, not something that is innate. That is the claim here.
As both a parent and teacher, I've yet to encounter a parent that claims to teach their child to be selfish, lie, etc. Yet most children have trouble with accepting responsibility for their actions, and telling the truth regarding them. Children are not born perfect.
There are also children who require different levels and types of involvement and action. Some are more willing to assume risk. How can one hold that the same methods should work for all people in all circumstances. If you never have to hug your younger child tight does that mean you were more successful with them than with the older one?
Some children are so responsive to verbal cues that the simple act of sharpening your verbal tone or withholding approval to them is as mentally crushing as if you slugged them in the mouth. Would you suggest that we pass laws against witholding approval or sharp tones?
There are other children that you could yell right in their face and watch them think it a tremendous game. They enjoy aggression, heightened emotion, and the rushes associated with them. They might think that your unwillingness to engage them in this manner means that you really don't care about them.
Different strokes for different folks as they say.
Comments
Originally posted by Powerdoc
Now, we will see how will work your big principles at the light of the reality.
You make it sound like not hitting your kids requires some big sacrifice-- like being a vegan or something. I don't really look at it that way. It really is as simple as just deciding not to discipline children using violence, for all its problems: low-levels of internalization, legitimating violence to solve problems, etc. And since I was raised in a non-violent home, where my father didn't smack around my mother or me, it's an even easier choice. I guess the temptation will be there if the child refuses to obey since it's difficult to completely socialize out violent tendencies. But it shouldn't be hard to come up with non-violent solutions like taking away privileges or whatnot. The challenge of course is applying punishments consistently and being able to enforce them, admittedly a challenge in the busy lives of Americans. The French have no excuses!
Originally posted by ShawnJ
You make it sound like not hitting your kids requires some big sacrifice-- like being a vegan or something. I don't really look at it that way. It really is as simple as just deciding not to discipline children using violence, for all its problems: low-levels of internalization, legitimating violence to solve problems, etc. And since I was raised in a non-violent home, where my father didn't smack around my mother or me, it's an even easier choice. I guess the temptation will be there if the child refuses to obey since it's difficult to completely socialize out violent tendencies. But it shouldn't be hard to come up with non-violent solutions like taking away privileges or whatnot. The challenge of course is applying punishments consistently and being able to enforce them, admittedly a challenge in the busy lives of Americans. The French have no excuses!
Good for you, I respect your ideals. I just say that with little childs, that do not seem to listen to you, the great ideals tend to vanish.
Anyway you will discover this by yourself. But don't be hurried, childs can wait, have fun, you just turned 21 ...
Originally posted by ShawnJ
You make it sound like not hitting your kids requires some big sacrifice-- like being a vegan or something. I don't really look at it that way. It really is as simple as just deciding not to discipline children using violence, for all its problems: low-levels of internalization, legitimating violence to solve problems, etc. And since I was raised in a non-violent home, where my father didn't smack around my mother or me, it's an even easier choice. I guess the temptation will be there if the child refuses to obey since it's difficult to completely socialize out violent tendencies. But it shouldn't be hard to come up with non-violent solutions like taking away privileges or whatnot. The challenge of course is applying punishments consistently and being able to enforce them, admittedly a challenge in the busy lives of Americans. The French have no excuses!
You make it sound like smacking a kid is the first resort.
Originally posted by BRussell
Oh look, someone on the internet is breaking up a sentence into individual words and separating them with periods. I've never seen that before, that's really cool.
It's true that the severity of punishment increases the learning of an avoidance response. Take some rats, shock them when they go near one side of the cage, and the rats that get the most painful shock will show the greatest behavioral change. Yup.
A couple of problems though:
1. You can't use high-pain punishment with a child, because you might injure them. Or if you can, you're sick. And if you don't use high-intensity pain, then what's the point? You might as well just use time out or take away their favorite toy. If, like most people, you say you draw the line at mild hitting, why not draw it at no hitting? Isn't that a clearer line? Or barring that, how do you justify not going all out and just torturing the child with lit cigarettes? If it's not about morality, but rather effectiveness, then the more pain, the more effectiveness. IMO people only use mild hitting because they instinctually know it's wrong in the first place.
2. The goal of parenting is internalization. You want the kid to act appropriately not only when you can catch and smack them, but also when you're not there, and also when they grow up. You want them to learn a lesson, not just be controlled by you. And the way to get internalization is to let them learn lessons on their own, and to use the least amount of coercion possible.
3. Kids do internalize one lesson from hitting: That the use of physical violence to get someone to do what you want is appropriate. How come we don't allow a husband to hit a wife? Or a boss to hit an employee? It's because we believe it's immoral. And yet most parents hit their kids. It's inconsistent, and sends inconsistent messages to kids.
Lets play the same then. Yeah, believe me, looking cool in front of 'cyber peers' is high on my list. Let me straighten your Uber-dorkness out, flake.
1) Nowhere was I arguing that by increasing punishment beyond reasonable levels was acceptable.
2) Your goals of parenting are none of my business, and you haven' a clue what MY goals are.
3) If you wanna play the anti-violent modern hippie that's fine. Your non confrontational ass will be the one in my rear view mirror getting flipped off. No one here is arguing that husbands should hit wives, bosses hit employees etc. And morallity doesn't even factor into the discussion. You can't leap from 'discipline' to abuse. The research and facts aren't there. Just your ego.
So in returrn Mr. right, why don't you go put your kids in time out for growing up backwards. After all, alone in time out is going to be good practice for how alone they will be in the real world.
Where I'm from. You know, Norway. That top of the world, scandinavian, best-place-on-earth-and-we've-got-oil-too... Corporal punishment is ofcourse outlawed. Spanking your child is behavior associated with previous generations.
I'm father of a four year old, and step father of a twelve year old, and it has never occured to me to "spank" any of them. If I did, I'd consider myself a failure as a parent. I'm an adult for christ sake.
Parenting is hard. I've had to hold my step-son firmly on occasions to prevent him from using force, or break things in anger. Although breaking things in anger can be a good lesson in itself. Kids test out limits. that's how they learn. The reactions they receive influence how they will test out other limits in the future.
My children know we would never hurt them. There is no element of fear in how we bring them up. They are both well balanced, fine kids. With strong opinions and good self-esteem. The twelve year old is top of his class in almost everything.
My experience is that kids learn best by example. Try to count how many times you applaud your kid for doing something right in comparison to how often you point out that they do something wrong. Statistics show that an average kid gets four times as much negative as postive attention by their parents. And we wonder why kids end up with low self-esteem...?
Originally posted by New
Where I'm from. You know, Norway. That top of the world, scandinavian, best-place-on-earth-and-we've-got-oil-too... Corporal punishment is ofcourse outlawed. Spanking your child is behavior associated with previous generations.
Yeah but because your kids aren't disciplined like ours, that's why you have much higher rates of social problems like violence and unwanted pregnancies, etc., compared to the US.
Originally posted by New
I'm father of a four year old, and step father of a twelve year old, and it has never occured to me to "spank" any of them. If I did, I'd consider myself a failure as a parent. I'm an adult for christ sake.
Is anyone here suggesting spanking a 12 year-old? My sense of this discussion--and I may be wrong about this--is that those here who are advocating spanking are only really talking about young children, say toddlers through about 4 or 5. And no one here is advocating the walloping of children.
Originally posted by tonton
But how do you define exactly when to stop?
Doesn't US law already deal with what is child abuse and what is not? If my 3 year-old kid were to, say, climb up into my china cabinet and throw all the plates on the floor, if I give her a single slap on the thigh or butt, is that abuse? What if, when I was sixteen and was physically larger, stronger, and faster than my father, we got into a fist-fight that I started? Was he abusing me?
For me, it boils down to this: for me to discipline my own young child in more or less the same way I might discipline a pet (a sharp slap that makes a worse noise than anything else) is not abuse of either.
I still enjoy a good spanking once and awhile
The one thing i hate more than anything is people trying to say their way is better than others. As a parent it's a choice of how you choose to raise your children, and no one in these posts is talking about spankings like child abuse. i find it offensive people even refer to it as that. I never felt abused once when i was spanked, as a matter a fact i probably deserved worse most the time. many times i felt like i got off easy.
At issue -- and the source of headlines and jaw-flapping across Canada -- was the case of an American tourist, David Peterson, who was caught red-handed in a Canadian parking lot last fall as he gave a spanking to his 5-year-old daughter.
An outraged Canadian witness called 911 and confronted the overwrought father with the news that it is against the law to spank in Canada.
It isn't, exactly. But London, Ontario, police charged Peterson with assault, and he spent a night in jail. He returned voluntarily this week, according to news reports, to stand trial and clear his name. In a not-guilty verdict rendered today, Ontario provincial Judge John Menzies agreed that the father's punishment fit the daughter's crime and therefore met Canada's legal tests of appropriate discipline.
As Peterson rummaged in the front of the car, Rachel and William began fighting in the back seat, and Rachel pushed her little brother out the rear door onto the asphalt. As she began to close the door on her smaller sibling, Peterson testified, he warned her to watch for William's fingers. She ignored the warning, he said, and proceeded to do exactly what her father had feared.
William wailed in pain, the testimony continued, as his father struggled with an automatic door to free his son's trapped digits.
Peterson testified that he first attempted to spank Rachel inside the car, but that she resisted. So he took her outside, where--upping the punishment to a bare-bottomed thrashing because of her defiance--he pulled down her pants and underwear and spanked her "very hard" four to six times, he said; the witness put the number at eight or more times.
The fact that he was detained for this is disturbing though.
Originally posted by BRussell
Yeah but because your kids aren't disciplined like ours, that's why you have much higher rates of social problems like violence and unwanted pregnancies, etc., compared to the US.
Originally posted by Not Unlike Myself
Not sure about giving a bear bottom spanking, but all in all that doesn't seem too disturbing. (at least the spanking part)
The fact that he was detained for this is disturbing though.
He would be in Norway as well. He would probably even be fined.
To answer the question in the thread title, discipline to me means self-control, so self-discipline is the first thing I think of when hearing the word.
Originally posted by New
wow, I only saw this thread now...
Where I'm from. You know, Norway. That top of the world, scandinavian, best-place-on-earth-and-we've-got-oil-too... Corporal punishment is ofcourse outlawed. Spanking your child is behavior associated with previous generations.
Actually Norway has had rising levels of immigration, the xenophobia associated with it and ever higher levels of violent crime for several years now. Considering you are talking about a country that isn't as large as some cities in the United States, it doesn't do to bad.
I'm father of a four year old, and step father of a twelve year old, and it has never occured to me to "spank" any of them. If I did, I'd consider myself a failure as a parent. I'm an adult for christ sake.
You still have time to be considered a failure, I assure you.
Parenting is hard. I've had to hold my step-son firmly on occasions to prevent him from using force, or break things in anger. Although breaking things in anger can be a good lesson in itself. Kids test out limits. that's how they learn. The reactions they receive influence how they will test out other limits in the future.
My children know we would never hurt them. There is no element of fear in how we bring them up. They are both well balanced, fine kids. With strong opinions and good self-esteem. The twelve year old is top of his class in almost everything.
So you admit to having to physically handle your child when they have gotten too out of control, a grown child at that. I wouldn't be boasting that a 12 year old, one who can easily reason why they should exert control of themselves, still needs to be physically controlled. If this lack of control is also exhibited in front of you, I would find the trend and implications quite troubling.
My experience is that kids learn best by example. Try to count how many times you applaud your kid for doing something right in comparison to how often you point out that they do something wrong. Statistics show that an average kid gets four times as much negative as postive attention by their parents. And we wonder why kids end up with low self-esteem...?
Perhaps they end up with low self-esteem because like you believe they are born perfect and corrupted by society. I know I would be depressed if I had that view about myself.
Nick
Originally posted by trumptman
Actually Norway has had rising levels of immigration, the xenophobia associated with it and ever higher levels of violent crime for several years now. Considering you are talking about a country that isn't as large as some cities in the United States, it doesn't do to bad.
Do you know something about Norway or did you just google this up? Why are you bringing immigration into this? If you actually have some knowledge here, I'd love to discusse these issues with you.
I also hope you recognized the "humorous/ironic" tone in that first paragraph.
You still have time to be considered a failure, I assure you.
I'm not sure I like your tone.
So you admit to having to physically handle your child when they have gotten too out of control, a grown child at that. I wouldn't be boasting that a 12 year old, one who can easily reason why they should exert control of themselves, still needs to be physically controlled. If this lack of control is also exhibited in front of you, I would find the trend and implications quite troubling.
I'm a bit shocked by you post this, but I'll let it pass.
Firstly, all children have to be "physically handled". As in "touched" you know. Unless You've come up with a way to change diapers by telekinesis.
Secondly, without getting in to details, you clearly missunderstood my post. The physical holding I was talking about did not occure ate the age of twelve, but goes a few years back. this is as I said my step-child, and filling in for a missing father is not the easiest thing. That's all I will say about it.
Perhaps they end up with low self-esteem because like you believe they are born perfect and corrupted by society. I know I would be depressed if I had that view about myself.
I don't believe children are corrupted by society. Where the hell did you get that idea?
But what do you believe? What builds and breaks down self-esteem? Any thoughts?
Originally posted by New
Do you know something about Norway or did you just google this up? Why are you bringing immigration into this? If you actually have some knowledge here, I'd love to discusse these issues with you.
I also hope you recognized the "humorous/ironic" tone in that first paragraph.
I thought I returned that tone a bit with the city-size comparison. I did look up the information about Norway and violent crime in comparison with other countries. Of course the U.S. compares pretty badly, especially the crime ridden urban centers. However the United States is a profoundly diverse country as well. I mention that because Europe has started having some immigration issues as well lately and amazingly enough, the utopian ideals that are in place before it don't seem to work quite so well. It is very easy to arrive at and enforce consensus when everyone is similar and has shared attributes. Japan and Europe toss around comments and ideals regarding race that would often be considered profoundly racist here in the United States. So while Norway is going somewhat well for now, it will be interesting to see how it holds up over the long run. Especially with record numbers of Eastern Europeans, and Islamic immigrants coming into the country.
I'm not sure I like your tone.
I added a smiley. It is pretty hard to judge a job half done wouldn't you say? My oldest child is in kindergarten. His teacher has been teaching over 20 years and gave our son the compliment at report card conferences of noting that he was "the brightest child she had ever taught." But the reality is that he is only five. I also cannot assume that can insure any sort of long term results. It is a promising start though.
I'm a bit shocked by you post this, but I'll let it pass.
Firstly, all children have to be "physically handled". As in "touched" you know. Unless You've come up with a way to change diapers by telekinesis.
Secondly, without getting in to details, you clearly missunderstood my post. The physical holding I was talking about did not occure ate the age of twelve, but goes a few years back. this is as I said my step-child, and filling in for a missing father is not the easiest thing. That's all I will say about it.
Please understand that all I attempted to do in the slightest way was reflect back a bit of the rather harsh judgement that you reserved for others. I pictured you doing no more than basically hugging the child tight so they would regain control of themselves and stop attempting to break whatever it was they were trying to break. I have no doubt that filling in for the missing father is very demanding. However again, if I wanted to be judgemental like yourself, I could simply ask about the missing father, why the mother would choose such a man, what does it say that she choose him and then you, what can I claim about the son who desires to break things out of anger, etc. It's pretty easy to starting judging others is my point.
As the saying goes about rocks and glass houses...
I don't believe children are corrupted by society. Where the hell did you get that idea?
The ideal is the foundation of much of the thinking that claims things like spanking is wrong. Think about the claims made here. The belief is that humans are in no way violent, and that spanking teaches them to be so. I just ran that thread back into the spool as it were. The thinking being shown here is that left to their own devices, children would basically show little or no violence. Violence is a behavior they imitate, not something that is innate. That is the claim here.
As both a parent and teacher, I've yet to encounter a parent that claims to teach their child to be selfish, lie, etc. Yet most children have trouble with accepting responsibility for their actions, and telling the truth regarding them. Children are not born perfect.
There are also children who require different levels and types of involvement and action. Some are more willing to assume risk. How can one hold that the same methods should work for all people in all circumstances. If you never have to hug your younger child tight does that mean you were more successful with them than with the older one?
Some children are so responsive to verbal cues that the simple act of sharpening your verbal tone or withholding approval to them is as mentally crushing as if you slugged them in the mouth. Would you suggest that we pass laws against witholding approval or sharp tones?
There are other children that you could yell right in their face and watch them think it a tremendous game. They enjoy aggression, heightened emotion, and the rushes associated with them. They might think that your unwillingness to engage them in this manner means that you really don't care about them.
Different strokes for different folks as they say.
Nick