Happy Birthday to our Members!!!

1.yes

2.never they are 22 and 19 and bigger then i am.
no seriously ---there was no set amount that i remember --when they needed it. usualyy it was no more the one swat though on occassions they got four to seven maybe.

3. this ties into question 2. spanking --more then once should be for something serious like running into the road. swats were for a fianl resort after repeated verbal warning had been ignored. example--don t touch that. dont touch that ! i said don t touch that !. swat

Yes, it can be.

My daughter is six...I rarely have to spank her...I think the last time was a few months ago.

I only spank if she is openly defiant or disobediant...and I do give her a warning first...something like "you need to obey me now" in a very firm voice. Though some things do not get a warning...but she knows what those are, and doesn't do/say them.

I can only speak from my experience as a child as my little one is only 6 months old so;

1) Yes as a last resort after many verbal warnings.

2) I wasn't spanked very often, the last was when I was 7. After that I knew better

3) The reasons was usually ignoring personal safety warnings (like when I tried to set fire to the rug when I was 4) or blatant rudeness to either parent or other adults (my mom always spanked me whilst my dad would only spank my brother).

1. It depends on your goals, and how you define the word "effective." If define "effective" as successfully teaching obedience -- then yes. If you define "effective" as teaching your children constructive life skills, then no.

2. My children are 2 and 6 and I do not spank them.

3. There is not a situation under which I would consider it appropriate to spank them.

I have seven children and all of them were different.
A couple of them needed spanking on a "regular" basis some only needed the evil eye. One of them got the first spanking in the seventh grade. I think that it becomes obvious when spanking is needed. (Only when other forms of dicipline are ineffective)

well, i'll let Miyus answer go for both of us cause shes my fiance, so its the same kid

i'll just add a comment about what i thought as a kid. the idea of being spanked was much much more effective of a punishment than the actual spanking, because...well, a spanking just happens and then its over, they dont really hurt because its not like youre going to literally beat your kid up [at least i certainly hope not]...so it happens, its over and things move on. that wasnt really a very effective punishment for me and i think my parents knew that because i VERY rarely was spanked...instead i was sent to my room for rather long periods of time, like all day or all evening and night, i would miss out on things that my siblings got to do...stuff like that...i think that was a more effective punishment for me anyway.

1. Yes

2. Rarely - because I don't give a lot of warnings - two if I'm not on top of it. One usually does it. They know the rules. My kids are 15, 12, and 10

The last time I spanked my 15yo was about 5 years ago. My 12 yo at least a year, my 10yo a month or so ago. (I could be off on my 10yo son but it's been awhile - he's a great kid!)

3. Outright disobedience or a lie of any kind. That's it. It works.

I don't preach at them because then God seems like a punishment, and I don't send them to their room - it encourages bitterness to take root. I hate the 'if you do that again, I'll ....' because it is totally ineffective and *I* suffer as well as the other kids when we can't do something or have to change plans because of continued disobedience. I think my kids would rebel if I started with restrictions. I have no problem restricting others from coming over though - when they encourage disobedience.