Child discipline

How do you feel about disciplining a child? Do you prefer spanking? (If so by hand or belt?) Restriction/Grounding?

Well through various age groups I'd have to say I'd probably raise my child like my parents raised me.

When I was very young. Toddler size my parents never hit me. Not even a simple palm slap because a child cannot possibly comprehend pain as "no." When I grew up a little more, around the age where I knew right from wrong I was spanked with a belt. Not excessive beating, but across my tail where I got the point. :B And finally when I reached my early teenage years my parents would place me on restriction. Taking away games and what not.

So I figured that was quite fair and I've suffered some rather beasty beatings in my early youth. ): But then again I was never injured. I fail really to see how spanking a child is considered by most of the public's means "child abuse." Sure it can be if it's excessive and extremely harsh in nature. But when I describe a spanking I mean across the tail. Without monster truck force. But enough to inflict a sore tail. :P

Anyway what is your view??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LyingEyes

How do you feel about disciplining a child? Do you prefer spanking? (If so by hand or belt?) Restriction/Grounding?

Well through various age groups I'd have to say I'd probably raise my child like my parents raised me.

When I was very young. Toddler size my parents never hit me. Not even a simple palm slap because a child cannot possibly comprehend pain as "no." When I grew up a little more, around the age where I knew right from wrong I was spanked with a belt. Not excessive beating, but across my tail where I got the point. :B And finally when I reached my early teenage years my parents would place me on restriction. Taking away games and what not.

So I figured that was quite fair and I've suffered some rather beasty beatings in my early youth. ): But then again I was never injured. I fail really to see how spanking a child is considered by most of the public's means "child abuse." Sure it can be if it's excessive and extremely harsh in nature. But when I describe a spanking I mean across the tail. Without monster truck force. But enough to inflict a sore tail. :P

Anyway what is your view??

---

I can agree with a lot of that. Spanking with a belt or other implement (read: weapon) is something I would declare off-limits, but by hand it shouldn't be too bad as long as excessive force is not used.

I disagree with your statement that a child cannot interpret pain as "no", however. Pain is the only thing a child intereprets as "no". A child who touches a hot stove quickly learns not to do it again. As long as the pain follows the incorrect activity closely enough that the child associates the pain with the activity, it is sometimes the only way to get a child who is too young to understand punishments like parental disapproval to understand that what he did was wrong. Not that I'm advocating beating children for every infraction, or even beating them at all. But a swift swat across the hands to a child playing around an electrical plug (though any plug near a child that young should be blocked, it's just an example to demonstrate my point) may save that child's life, while the child might not associate having its favorite toy taken away with the incorrect activity.

I really worded that bad. I do understand children interpret pain as "no" but at such a young age a slap is literally useless. I'd rather communicate with the child then slap the wrist. For which slapping is the only way I can get a reasonable response? I don't want to have to slap my childs hand for every major trouble. I don't feel that's necessary. And in most cases, including my own I was never rebellious or destructive in nature. I learned to listen to my parents rather than have to be tagged for most infractions just to pay attention. Though I guess every child is different.

In regards to that, I now believe I was thinking of much younger children than you were. If a child is old enough that you can talk to them, then trying to communicate with them and tell them what they did wrong and why is the preferable course of action. My post was in regards to children too young to understand what you are telling them when you explain things.

Actually, LyingEyes, in the realm of child psychology, a thwap on the butt is considered acceptable by most people for children aged one and two, and not acceptable for older children who are old enough to have mastered language and can be spoken to.

I'd go into it more, but my dinner's ready. This is my area of expertise though so I'm sure I'll be back... >_>

Well discipline doesn't exactly to relate to every child. It really depends on the environment and parenting progressed. I was never spanked at a very extremely premature age of 1 or 2. Though I was never destructive or unruly in nature. So not many disciplines were needed, and in that age what was done was not anything of physical discipline. That is why I said I believe it's different for most children. Though by my own discrepency I wouldn't physically tap my child at that age. To me it's pointless and only gets temporary results.

Sometimes it's better to let children learn the hard way. I had to touch the stove, step on the furnace grate, and touch an iron before I learned not to touch hot things. :P

One thing I totally despise in parenting is the "not-my-child" syndrome. This prevelent innocense thought absolutely drives me insane.

Hitting isn't discipline, it's punishment. A swat on the butt isn't meant to be either; it's a means to get a very young child's attention and should be immediatly followed by a firm "no." Physical punishment teaches children "If you misbehave, the people you love and trust will hurt you," and that's wrong. Obviously children are very resilient and spanking isn't going to destroy anybody, but it's just an inferior method for disciplining your child, and is rightfully looked down upon.

Children want attention. If they're not getting positive attention, they'll seek negative attention. Any attention is better than no attention. Children want to be good. They want to be loved and praised, and they want to do the right thing. If you explain to a child why what theyre doing is wrong, they're very likely to stop.

And yes it's true that sometimes it's better to let children learn things on their own. Fortunatly most of them don't take that long to learn not to touch hot things. xD

Well,you all know my attitude towards kids nowadays... but I say,never strike a child.I think the parent should be ready to swing with the situation.

I'll slap a youg child in a safe area if it gets the message through. Only if he was my kid though. Other than that Ill tell then "NO" and make simple threats they understand and repeat if necessary.

Simply put I would probably raise a child like I raise my dog. And don't tell me to talk them out of it. I have tried on children ranging from 2-6/7 and it has no effect(maybe I have just ran into some really rebelious kids). It don't matter what they are doing. They hurt your dogs, you tell them no and make them leave your property for a while.. next thing you know they are back and hurting the dogs again.. this kid is four but it took forever for it to get accross.. it finally got accross when we slapped him(with his gaurdians permision of course) every time he did some thing to hurt the dog. He stopped soon after.. even when those doing the slapping weren't around.

It depends on the situation... sometiems that sort of punishment is the most effective/only effective. It doesn't work on many teens too well due to the fact that you have to use so much force on many of them. Which means it should never be the central means of punishment, but as with everything this has its good and can be used as a trump when all else you have tried fails. Or just do what my dad did.. say no grab the wrist and don't let them do anything for a bit. Course my dad had the added edition of being able to leave bruises even on grown men and women just by grabbing thier wrist.. so I did get a black and blue wrist from it as well. Thing is he was never trying to do it(mom says that) it was just that when he was upset about something he did not know how to properly control his strength.. one reason why he never spanked I think.

When I was little I used to get smacked when I was very naughty, only one day my Dad hit me too hard and promised never to hit me ever again, so I was sent to my room when I was naughty. I would not hit a child of my own, because there are better ways to punish children I believe.

I think creating a stong hold on a child is better done with out hitting. It is known that violence leads to violence. My wife and I have spanked our daughter, but now she is into her terrible twos. We find that when other kids are naughty, she finds it her right to spank them. So I developed a glare. If she is naughty, I can glare at her, and she will go into her room and on her bed untill i come in and get her. It doesn't work 100% some times I do have to speak, but it seems to get the authority point across better.

It seems to work. As far as actually hitting a child hard (or to inflict pain) I would NEVER WANT to wish that on ANY child.

Bipper

If you ever want to know how to deal with children, just watch Super Nanny. Other than her overuse of the word "naughty" she's 100% right on the best ways to deal with children, and she deals with some nasty, angry children without ever having to hit them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LyingEyes

How do you feel about disciplining a child? Do you prefer spanking? (If so by hand or belt?) Restriction/Grounding?

Well through various age groups I'd have to say I'd probably raise my child like my parents raised me.

When I was very young. Toddler size my parents never hit me. Not even a simple palm slap because a child cannot possibly comprehend pain as "no." When I grew up a little more, around the age where I knew right from wrong I was spanked with a belt. Not excessive beating, but across my tail where I got the point. :B And finally when I reached my early teenage years my parents would place me on restriction. Taking away games and what not.

So I figured that was quite fair and I've suffered some rather beasty beatings in my early youth. ): But then again I was never injured. I fail really to see how spanking a child is considered by most of the public's means "child abuse." Sure it can be if it's excessive and extremely harsh in nature. But when I describe a spanking I mean across the tail. Without monster truck force. But enough to inflict a sore tail. :P

Anyway what is your view??

---

Put the belt to them . Especially if they do something that's life threatening. I use to get whoopings all the time. You can always tlell if a person received a lot of spankings during his or her's childhoood.

These people who has received those spankings. Have ended up really a lot better than people who hadn't.

When i say spanking also. Please put in mind also a lot of discipline. . The badest kids end up being the greatest people in their adulthood.

You obviously don't know a thing about what you're talking about, lordblazer. What you just said goes against pretty much everything that anyone who has formally studied child development for as little as an hour knows.

Well I'm sorry you think that, but spankings are better than yelling. Groundings work when they get to the age of 5. Before then they will do some stuff that will get them killed due to the fact that they are exploring there enviroments. You don't weant that exploration to be their last. So you whoop them(not hard but enough for them to get the message of not doing that
.

Simply put though. there is no book to parenting. If you think there is then your a fool. Who cares what experts said. Have they had kids. if so? How do they know a complete stranger's childs attitude and personality. Only the parents know. I just said what worked for me. thats it. Everyone has there own way of raising kids. Which shouldn't be frowned upon. The worse thing you can do as a parent is neglect a child.


Anyway to tell me that i don't know what I'm talking aobut because a bunch of people who study the area says so. Whateva. Then mos tof my fmaily must be smurfed up even though most of hte ones who received the whoopings when little broke the poverty line of their family. But hey like I said. That worked for our family.

You asked for an opinion you got it and you have some damn nerves to condemn it. Whateva. I never said anything in disagreement with yall until the post above me.

Lordblazer has some points there. Many of my freinds with the strictest parents who paddle you when you are truely bad are some of the best behaved and dillegent, last I saw them. Whereas the parents who only talk and don't paddle.. have some of the most ill behaved children I have seen. However, some paddling parents also have ill behaved kids and some talking parents have some very well behaved kids.

It couldn't possibly have something to do with the childs personality now could it? Well that came out somewhat sarcastic. However, it does get my point out. A childs personality will help determine what works.

Like I said before, children aren't so easily damaged and a bit of physical punishment isn't going to destroy them, but it's far from the best way to discipline your child. Why should you care what experts say? Because they dedicate their lives to finding out how children develop and grow under what circumstances. It's what they do, and most people in the field are parents themselves.

Physical punishment deprives children of the opportunity to develop an internal set of moral standards. Instead of "I shouldn't do this because __________" they learn "I shouldn't do this because someone will hurt me." Obviously this isn't an all-or-nothing thing and there are many degrees of it, but it's a fact nonetheless. When children grow into adults where no one's going to spank them they're more likely to do things based on the fact that they can rather than thinking of whether or not they really should.

Physical punishment also teaches children that violence is an acceptable way to control people. Some people think that's fine; that it's manly or acceptable to pop someone in the nose if they piss you off. Most people don't.

If you want to toss facts and loads of research right out the window that's on you, but I just think it's an ignorant thing to do. You're taking your subjective experience which you have nothing to compare to unless you've lived two seperate lives, and some superficial examples of people you know over tons and tons of research.

I probably seem angrier than I am, and for that I apologise, but to refuse to educate youself on a topic based on some notion that you're more of an expert than experts? That's just silly.

I found an article that is, admittedly, on the extreme side, but not inaccurate, if anyone wants to read it. I'm personally really frustrated with how people don't think they need to learn anything about children before attempting to raise them, so if you plan on having children someday I recommend you at least skim it: *link*

Today, in this world, the governments and child agencies have taken all rights away from parents. There is nothing wrong with smacking you child if he/she does something wrong. It's not abusing your child, it is teaching your child. Parents shouldn't abuse there children, no.

You look at the world today, parents can hardly slap their own child on the hand without worrying if someone is going to call the police on them and report 'child abuse'.

I get sick of hearing on the news about parents disciplining their children and people jumping down their throats about it.

I understand that child abuse is wrong - on all levels, physically, emotionally and mentally. I know, I went through it myself.

I realise that yes, there are other methods of disciplining a child, but don't condemn a parent for choosing smacking over a 'naughty mat'.

Stop taking away parents rights. I may not be extremely educated in child psychology as some of the people who have posted in this thread, but that's my opinion. Don't mistake my opinion for me agreeing with beliting a child till he/she has marks and bruises on his/her body. But a smack on the bum is not going to do any harm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShlupQuack

Like I said before, children aren't so easily damaged and a bit of physical punishment isn't going to destroy them, but it's far from the best way to discipline your child. Why should you care what experts say? Because they dedicate their lives to finding out how children develop and grow under what circumstances. It's what they do, and most people in the field are parents themselves.

Physical punishment deprives children of the opportunity to develop an internal set of moral standards. Instead of "I shouldn't do this because __________" they learn "I shouldn't do this because someone will hurt me." Obviously this isn't an all-or-nothing thing and there are many degrees of it, but it's a fact nonetheless. When children grow into adults where no one's going to spank them they're more likely to do things based on the fact that they can rather than thinking of whether or not they really should.

Physical punishment also teaches children that violence is an acceptable way to control people. Some people think that's fine; that it's manly or acceptable to pop someone in the nose if they piss you off. Most people don't.

If you want to toss facts and loads of research right out the window that's on you, but I just think it's an ignorant thing to do. You're taking your subjective experience which you have nothing to compare to unless you've lived two seperate lives, and some superficial examples of people you know over tons and tons of research.

I probably seem angrier than I am, and for that I apologise, but to refuse to educate youself on a topic based on some notion that you're more of an expert than experts? That's just silly.

I found an article that is, admittedly, on the extreme side, but not inaccurate, if anyone wants to read it. I'm personally really frustrated with how people don't think they need to learn anything about children before attempting to raise them, so if you plan on having children someday I recommend you at least skim it: *link*

---

Maybe because parenting is a sacred right of trial and error thats passed down through the generations. Which each passing generation it betters or worsens and most of hte time parenting betters as the next generation has kids..

When the phrase. "There is no book on parenting." Its quite true. A lot of these methods might work, but man a lot of poeple who do it just ends up having a dysfunctional family.(Now being crazy and wild doesnt defeine dysfunctional.)

Anyway parenting is a trial and error basis and I see what your trying to say. It wouldn;t hurt for people to read those articles. I agree with you on that. But those articles only contribute about 1% of parenting.

The 99% comes from the parent itself.

That article is quite wacked.. I mean yes the facts may be there.. but my brain informs me that something has been twisted.


Anyways When/if I have a child I will probably raise it like I do my dogs. Dogs can easily have an equivilant IQ to a young human child. They aren't stupid.. but they aren't exactly smart. And postive reinforcement(no hitting) works best in most instances.. however some pooches just won't learn like that. They on average are put down for being "snippy". Mine was snippy.. she ain't no more.. not even when I ain't around. Why? If she snipped.. she would get hit(not hard just enough to get the point accross). If she didn't snip at an instance where she used to, I would praise her and give her a treat. When she displeased it wasn't just a spanking.. but spanking followed by me no longer being nice(no treats, no petting.. I lock her out.. I don't let others pet or play with her etc.).

Now this snippy dog who had drawn blood from people before, is one of the best behaved dogs that we have at our club. She cuddles with people.. if someone picks her up by her ears she wimpers but no snappy.. And she does the same thing whether I am there or not.(the pulling part comes from the fact that she visits nursing homes and the such).

Dog and children aren't the same... but the early learning process of both(from what I have read of children and my actually experience plus reading of dogs) are quite similar. I have seen people with similar strategy as mine have very nasty dogs. And I won't even attempt my above strategy on some dogs.. It doesn't work for them.

Basically all I am saying is that it depends on the personality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rusty

It's not abusing your child, it is teaching your child.

---

Teaching them what, exactly?

Thinking of parenting as a fun time for "trial and error" is... interesting. I mean, yeah, it is a lot of trial and error, but that doesn't mean we should be proud to plow into this "sacred" think blindly. There may be no all-inclusive parenting manual, but to say there is no book on parenting is just untrue. No one's expected to read all of them, but I'd like to see just one written during recent years (child development wasn't an area of study at all until freud brought it up) that says smacking your child will accomplish anything other than maybe temporary results.

I'm not even going to comment on the "I'm going to raise my child like I raise my dogs" thing. xP

I wouldnt know how to go about cause all these fancy pants guides say yelling can damage a kid forever or that spanking is another form of abuse....i think i would rather just talk to my kid rather than do either options

Yelling can damage anyone. :p Is it fun to yell? Does it really accomplish anything? Does spanking? To both of these people tend to say "It gets the job done," when it doesn't in fact do anything really constructive.

Talking is actually pretty affective. Obviously when a child is doing something "bad" you can't break out into conversation, and you have to be firm, but yelling and spanking only serve and immediate purpose followed by negative consequences.

Okay I promise to shut up for at least a couple of posts. No, I don't have anything better to do right now than spout child psychology junk. :p

As far as the dog tihng goes, you can communicate with your children a lot better than you can your dog. Trust me. My 22 month old unerstands most of the words that come out of my mouth. Communication is key.

I do think that a spaking here or there is ok. Children tend to push the limits, and spanking should be reserved for a severe punishment. I don't really thinnk that this would cause emotional damage, as when the kid chills out, and you talk over why they got that punishment; they will recover, and learn a lesseson... Hopfully :)

Yelling is a called for at times. If your child was doing somthing stupid, and you need to grab thier attention before they get in trouble, you yell. I will guess that is not what is ment by yelling though :) I would agree that yelling your point, is not a good way to do things.

Basicly I do believe in spanking, but spanking can be abused. Whenever I punish my daughter, or yell at her - when she recovers, I tell her what she did, and why she got punished. It works very well for me.

I think it breaks down to one simple thing... communication.
Bipper

ShlupQuack, could you be my parents?:cry:

And raise my kids if the condom ever breaks?:)

Bipper it is a scientific fact(I learned it due to the fact that I am with dogs and such alot and research them often) that a dog can easily have the vocabulary of an average 3 year old human child. So you can communicate with a dog quite easily. Goodness I got to have about 6 different commands for anyone thing I want my dog to do. She nows them all.. and if I am sick and being incoherent she can still figure out what I am trying to get accross and go do it.

I talk with my dog all the time she'll sit their and look at me. If I ask if she wants some water.. up and bark when thirsty .. give me sullen look if not. If I ask if she is thirsty the same thing. If I ask do you want a drink.. same thing. And mine isn't the only one up there that does this. All of them understand a variety of words and phrases, more then many young kids(3 and under) I know.

Oh weird. I have never heard that. Well, none the less I still think its easier to communicate with my daughter than a dog. My family seems to get blessed with some of the dumbest over energetic dogs. The one good one we had lost a split second epic right against a speeding car. :cry:

I guess it just goes against my experiences to say that Dogs are as smart as a three year old. My daughter is very smart, and has quite a big vocabulary. She is working on small sentances, and posessives. I would just wonder what she will be capable of at three, and I cannot honestley see a dog being that smart. While I agree they will recognise several words, I belive that is simply part of thier survival drive. Who knows though, if you have any links to any good resources or evidence for your claim, I would like to read it. Not that I don't belive you, I am just a little skeptical to belive that.

I would have to see some credible thing saying a dog can easily have the vocabulary of an average three-year-old. That's a fairly broad statement, considering that a three-year-old's speaking vocabularly is only a fraction of their comprehension, and hard to believe in anycase. I'm not saying you're lying or anything, but I just cannot bring myself to believe that without some credible source.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShlupQuack

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rusty

It's not abusing your child, it is teaching your child.

---

Teaching them what, exactly?

Thinking of parenting as a fun time for "trial and error" is... interesting. I mean, yeah, it is a lot of trial and error, but that doesn't mean we should be proud to plow into this "sacred" think blindly. There may be no all-inclusive parenting manual, but to say there is no book on parenting is just untrue. No one's expected to read all of them, but I'd like to see just one written during recent years (child development wasn't an area of study at all until freud brought it up) that says smacking your child will accomplish anything other than maybe temporary results.

I'm not even going to comment on the "I'm going to raise my child like I raise my dogs" thing. xP

---

No one thinks that parenting is a fun time of trial and error, but relaly parenting is trial and error.

I might have ot deal with some situations I caught my kid doing that my dad has never dealt with. How do I deal with it?

You just go by instinct and hope its the best. In the end a lot of parents set a goal.

"Keep my kids alive until they're off to college."

Now it sounds harsh, but a lot of unsure parents say that.

Also another tip of advice. When you have a baby. Move to your parent's place. Yes this is important for they know how to keep the baby alive for the first 3 months of its life. They will also teach you the basics of raising a child.
My cousin was in Japan when she got pregnant. She came back to oklahoma and moved back in with her mom. Was able to get a good paying job. Stayed there for a 1. Then move back to Japan.

Most kids should do this. Mainly because most parents who have their first child. The ones that don't call on the advice of a parent or a child carer. Or a midwife. Then yeah that baby is pretty much screwed unless the parents know what they're doing.

I did agree that parenting is mostly trial and error, but it should be an educated trial and error, not some stab in the dark based on some notion that it's your "sacred right" to refuse to educate yourself. You're right, there is no required classes for becoming a parent, but that doesn't mean they're anything but a great idea.

When I grow up I want to be a mother. That's it. That's all I ever wanted to be. All my friends are going to college and getting degrees for jobs they want to get, and so am I. I'm going to school to do my very best to prepare myself to be a parent. I know how to take care of babies; I took care of eight at once everyday at my last job, along with children up to the age of twelve. Someone could make a point that "you can never be prepared to be a parent," and I wouldn't dream of arguing against that, but it doesn't mean I'm not going to do my best to prepare myself to do more than just "keep my kids alive until they're off to college."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShlupQuack

I would have to see some credible thing saying a dog can easily have the vocabulary of an average three-year-old. That's a fairly broad statement, considering that a three-year-old's speaking vocabularly is only a fraction of their comprehension, and hard to believe in anycase. I'm not saying you're lying or anything, but I just cannot bring myself to believe that without some credible source.

---

Heh no problem.. when I first saw it I didn't believe it either. Though I may have been a bit liberal with the use of the word "easily". I wasn't trying to imply the majority could have it.. only that it isn't super hard to teach them to have it. You just have to raise them that way. You reap what you sow afterall. I originally saw it on animal planet years ago.. they were demonstrating the dog's vocabulary. At the time I think it had 300-500 words that it knew and understood. They could even ask it questions and get it to respond with a serious of barks(one for yes, two for no or some such). I did some research at the time(I will try to refind it for ya) and the research at least implied that this wasn't an overly uncommon occurance.

hmm.. I wonder if I got the number of words wrong. I don't remember the exact number I just recall them anouncing that it was the same as an average 3 year old human child.. that is all I am 100% sure off.. I may be mixing up some articles I read.. the bark answer may have been a wolf or something.... grr. Well here goes my research train.


Edit- I think have found what I saw.. looks like I even got the channel wrong.. heh my memory must be bad... looks like it was about 200 words. Though this still doesn't seem right.. I don't think what I saw was a border collie. .. ah well. This will do till I get the energy and pain resistance to look some more.

anyways Here is the link. Be warned you need a .pdf reader.

Alright first off I didn't read all the thread cause I got impatient to respond.

I don't think that spanking should be used because with a kid (yes this is based on how I've been brought up and how friends have been brought up) the objective in my eyes is to create an atmosphere where people want to be kind to eachother. And I think spanking sets up the image that violence (admittedly people aren't talking about abuse but it still is using violence) is the way to respond to a problem. I'm not to sure about kids from 0-4 but after that they can definitely understand what you're talking about. Kids are very impressionable and if you bring them up in an atmosphere where they can have fun but really try to be nice, really care about others. Then when they see a problem they'll try to fix it by seeing people's point of view not hitting them. Hitting a kid makes them angry not understanding, they won't do it because of the punishment not because the thing itself is bad. People think of kids as not thinking much, but the way imo to get them to not do bad things is to make them understand through discussion, that what they're doing is wrong and why. Now there are bad cases btu nurture means a lot, most people I know like that get practically no respect from parents and have very little respect for them in return. Now I live in liberal massachusetts but every time I watch kids getting hit I see one of a few immediate results. They rebel in one of two ways (there are lots of other cases but these are the ones I see most commonly):
1.They fight back and get hit more than maybe stop angrily- this clearly just creates anger and doesn't do much else.
2.They stop but are really pissed at their parents.
Something I have strangely never ever seen is:
3. The kid saying sorry with a thankful expression towards the parents goodness in showing him what is right.
Oh yeah one last thing to mention:
4.They cry and are called a wimp.

Violence leads to violence and anger in most cases.

The most common argument I hear usually (thank goodness I haven't heard it here) is that it toughens them up. Which I utterly disagree with as it leads to anger not strength. This sounds utopian but kids should grow up happy, snit-fits happen but they should enjoy themselves and grow up in an environment where there are guidelines but they can learn for themselves, think and speak for themselves.

That's what I think. And I don't think it's caused by pain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShlupQuack

I did agree that parenting is mostly trial and error, but it should be an educated trial and error, not some stab in the dark based on some notion that it's your "sacred right" to refuse to educate yourself. You're right, there is no required classes for becoming a parent, but that doesn't mean they're anything but a great idea.

When I grow up I want to be a mother. That's it. That's all I ever wanted to be. All my friends are going to college and getting degrees for jobs they want to get, and so am I. I'm going to school to do my very best to prepare myself to be a parent. I know how to take care of babies; I took care of eight at once everyday at my last job, along with children up to the age of twelve. Someone could make a point that "you can never be prepared to be a parent," and I wouldn't dream of arguing against that, but it doesn't mean I'm not going to do my best to prepare myself to do more than just "keep my kids alive until they're off to college."

---

Yeah parenting should always be passed down through the generations.

Though it's impressive how many words a dog can learn, that article did serve to emphasize that a dog's language capacity is hugely different from a child's, especially the fourth page. So, please, don't raise your children like a dog. xP

Well I never did mean exactly.. I do realize that we are different. What I was trying to get accross was that I would use many of the same startegies(though modified) for when the child is still very young.

when i was 6 years old, I threw a fit in a store because I couldnt get the toy I wanted. My mom, took me out to the car, took off her slipper and spanked me really hard. I never, EVER threw a fit again. When I was a teenager my punishment was raking the leaves outside from literally sunup to sundown during the summer. That is worst than any beating I ever got LOL! I didn't mind that, when I was a little kid I desreved every spanking I ever got.
What I didn't like was getting hit in grade school in Louisiana back in the 70's. When I was in 3rd grade in 1975 I got hit with a yardstick from writing in print instead of cursive. And nothing like getting spankings in the principals office for talking too much! Getting hit and spanked in grade school served no purpose in my opinion.

I have a theory that kids that would get disciplined by teachers would have no affect on them what so ever but it would affect them if it is from there parents, because when kids get disciplined from there parents they see it as if they failed or betrayed there parents somehow but when they get disciplined by a teacher it has no affect on them because they feel nothing for the teachers. Ofcourse this would only count for kids of a certain age and above, something like 10-11+.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ISRviper

I have a theory that kids that would get disciplined by teachers would have no affect on them what so ever but it would affect them if it is from there parents, because when kids get disciplined from there parents they see it as if they failed or betrayed there parents somehow but when they get disciplined by a teacher it has no affect on them because they feel nothing for the teachers. Ofcourse this would only count for kids of a certain age and above, something like 10-11+.

---

Or they would feel like their parents betrayed them, if they were brought up being hit not told and taught why they shouldn't do it then why whould they see fault in what they did (I'm not talking about really obviously stupid things) hitting them in a lot of cases would make them feel betrayed by the parent not the other way round.

And...

Quote:

---

If I had a kid(kinda creepy cuz I AM A KID ROFL)
I would have a no bs rule
No whineing
annoying me
no begging for stuff
if you scream you get a bandana around your mouth

As you can tell im easily annoyed.It's hard enough having a small dog.If i heard a child crying I would go insane.

---

Never ever ever have a kid in that case.

I just thought about one thing I would have to change in my child raising plan. My dog is spoiled rotten. Definately should avoid that. Dang the fine line.

Be firm yet giving. That is an oxymoron!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FFX_fanatiq

If I had a kid(kinda creepy cuz I AM A KID ROFL)
I would have a no bs rule
No whineing
annoying me
no begging for stuff
if you scream you get a bandana around your mouth

As you can tell im easily annoyed.It's hard enough having a small dog.If i heard a child crying I would go insane.

---

I'm sure you parents said that to when they were kids... and they still had you.

I honestly think that children and parents have an unspoken bond. When you punish your child, keep that bond in mind. I know its hard to think of other people than yourself all the time, but do what you need to to raise the kid.

I think its rude that some people are judging the parental compantencies of others. To me, most of psycology is VERY loose guidelines. There may be a norm, but I have known plenty of people who got the kicked outta them as kids, and they are amoung some of the most decent people to be around. I also know others who should have been kicked a few times.
It all verries by individuals; which children are. Every rule, every punishment should vary from child to child. Consistancy would be great if we really were just psycoogical robots, but we are each unique - and we would grow differenly in different upbringings.

Bipper

Yes, you can grow up to be a good person if you've have the crap beat out of you. But I wouldn't say that's a reflection of the parenting technique (or lack thereof), but a reflection of the resiliency of the child. A lot of data has been collected in this area, and there are few shades of grey (not none, but few): hitting your child is bad.

Now I'll probably give my one or two year old a swat on the butt to get their attention, followed by a firm "no" or whatever's appropriate, but that's as far as I think physical punishment should ever go.

And when I say "consistancy" I mean towards that one child; not towards all children. You should vary your parenting based on the child, but that doesn't mean you should bring hitting into the mix. Maybe the child will grow up just fine; that happens. But you can't predict that. If it works at the time, you can say "Well, it's working," but you can't predict how that will affect them in the long run. You could say that about anything in parenting, but the long-term affects of physical punishment are almost invariably negative.

Lots of good points shlup, I must say I agree with what you have said. i do think that sometimes a swat on the but was not enough. Children are capable of some awful things, and sometimes it comes down to a good old spanking.

I have been spanked only a few times, but when I remember what they were for, I am sure i deserved it :D (My wife can be mean :love: ) But I do agree it very much vomes down to the individual child.

I personally think that more issues come from other types of dicipline than physical spanking/slapping/beating. I think sticking a child in timeout in a public place is bad, or yelling at the child and calling them naughty repeatedly. I would say that sticking a kid in the corner, leads other kids to harrass them while they are there, and no offence to super nanny/nanny 911 but I don't put much stock in that show.

I honestley think the best thing you can do for your kids is simply set a good example. I let a swear word fly out of my mouth when I stepped on a thumb tack a few months back, Kylie said I was naughty so I appologized; ever since - she has been quick to appologize to most of her wrong doings! :)

Bipper

It's true that there are bad things you can do as a parent other than hit your child, but I don't think that makes spankings an acceptable thing. I think that, after what I feel is a sufficient amount of time studying the data on the topic, it's just not okay. And if you disagree I trust that you, personally, don't disagree to an extent I would find disturbing or anything, so I we'll just have to agree to disagree. :)

And, yeah, the best thing you can do is set a good example. "Do as I say not as I do" does not ever, ever work. Just ask my dad. xP

I don't see a problem with spanking in very small amounts. However, I believe that spanking with an implement such as a belt or paddle should not only be frowned upon, it should be illegal. Ask yourself this: What is the goal of spanking children? Unless the answer that you come up with is "To inflict as much pain as possible" then you probably shouldn't be focusing on how much you hurt a kid.

Also, you all focus on the "behavior" of a child during the now. Nobody seems to be thinking past the current moment. As far as I can tell, what is important is what the child becomes, not how he/she is acting right now. I understand that they shouldnt be allowed to be complete dicks, but think past the now and give a little thought to what you want your child to be later in life.


Also, I think that spanking causes submissiveness in people. The last thing any society needs is a submissive one, so I am opposed to anything that turns people into submissive morons.

Spanking or other uses of physical force dont teach the child anything. Telling the child why what he did is wrong and making him feel to blame is more afective in the long run than hitting them. Any punishment that gets the child to say: "this is wrong because..." and not: "my parents dont like it so i'll do it behind behind their back" is preferable.

You should not have to hit your child to get them to behave if you both understand each other. If you know your child as you should you should know ways to punish them without violence. And once your understanding of each other goes so deep you probably won't ever need to punish them.

I used to get hit quite bad, if i'd done like anything wrong. But that stopped around the age of 10 because it stopped working. I think that it CAN be the only option, but it's definately not the best punishment.

Every child is different. Sometimes spanking works, sometimes it doesn't, and sometimes it's not even necessary to consider it. You can't just generalize kids when it comes to this.

I have been never hit, not once, well, my mum would slap my thigh to move away, or slap my hand if im say reaching out for something I shouldnt. But these were very light.
Im not having children, so I aint got none of this to worry about, If i do have kids ( accident ), I would never hit them, but call them names and make them feel worthless.....

I recently watched an episode of Super Nanny where she became involved with the worst-behaved children I've seen on that show. They spit in their mothers face, they fight violently, they scream; when one boy was put on time out he got pissed off so he just pulled down his pants and peed on the time out spot.

Super Nanny employed several techniques and the children quickly emproved. With no hitting, no spanking, no yelling, no "well it's not good but sometimes you just have to" parenting techniques. And don't give me that "Super Nanny is stoopid 'cause she's on TV!" crap; just because a professional allows cameras to show what they do as an in-home parenting coach does not make what they're doing bunk. No child care specialist is perfect but anyone who dismisses Super Nanny doesn't know a thing about appropriate parenting so nyar.

I've been thinking about this one a bit lately so it's kind of nice to find it on a chat board I've just joined.

I was never really that badly punished as a child. Yes, I got the odd clip if I did something soundly shocking (my only firm memory of ever being hit was a sound slap to the leg when I flicked my fathers ear... which I have to say I felt he was justified in even then), but never was I beaten with the intent of teaching me a lesson in my opinion.

As far as I've been able to determin in my own head the simple fact is this. If an adult - be they stranger, friend, relation, what-have-you - went to hit another adult they wouldn't expect to get away with it. They'd expect to be hit back, sued, hit by the persons friends whatever. If you hit a someone much smaller than you infront of your friends it likely wouldn't get you credit either. So why on Earth should hitting a being that's usually around 3 foot shorter than you (at least), masses about half your own body weight, and who relies on no one in the world as they do you... ever be right?

If you were looking after an elderly relative who went a bit senile and started acted up you would not be able to get away with telling people that you hit them for their own good and education. So why should it ever be okay with children?

Yeah... the odd strike from adults never did me any harm... But I don't think I'll ever find hitting a child laudible or excusible.