Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Go to any professional who works with kids and tell them that... watch their reaction. Good luck.I support corporal punishment and will use it on my children
I support corporal punishment and will use it on my children
In 90% of all cases spanking is useless teaches nothing ingenders anger and further rebellion ..In 90% of all cases there are better ways to discipline
However there are situations that spanking is a better choice and can provide some much needed intervention ,,A case would be that you told your 9 year old son to stop playing in the street with his friends he refuses to listen then by all means spank him .. the pain would not be what causes him to reconsider it would be the embarassment ..
If spanking is done it should never be done to a child who does not have some sense of right or wrong yet If at all possible other punishments should be used first spanking should not be a first resort nor a last resort
I believe that as a general rule spanking should stop at the age of 13 teens should not normally be spanked only in certain extraordinary situations would i advocate the spanking of a teenager and then it would be done in an appropriate manner .
Um... you're not going to study the effects of spanking in a group of people who rarely spank (upper-middle class), because you're not going to get good results. So no, the research is not biased or framed.Interesting article. I do agree that children under the age of 2 shouldn't be spanked. I found it very intriguing that they picked lower income families to study because "prior research suggested that spanking is more common among them, Berlin said. This may be because of the added stresses of parenting in a low-income situation, or because of a "cultural contagion" of behaviors among people. For example, in some families this study examined, a grandmother would spank a child, or neighbors would encourage physical discipline, she said."
Because of this, I view this research as contaminated. It seems as though they are showcasing parents who are spanking their children because they're fussy...which is not anywhere near a 'valid' reason for spanking.
It's also contaminated (I can't think of a better word...although I know there's a technical term for it. Someone help me, please) because they used lower-income families and they are basing part of the results on a test measuring thinking skills. There are SO many factors that can affect how a THREE year old scores on a test like that. I'm not sure you can really put together an argument that they did poorly because they were spanked.
At any rate, I still encourage spanking for the proper offensives, and at the proper age. One expert in the article maintains 2-6 to be the ideal years, and that sounds about right to me. The article didn't touch upon the reasons why these younger children were getting spankings, though, and that would've been good information to know.
89% of statistics are made up (I just made that stat up) so could you give us citations for these stats?
I wouldn't spank a 9 year old. When my oldest was nine, he'd get grounded or privileges removed for something like that.
If it works, wouldn't then that be the last resort? I guess I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Just throw spanking in there with the rest of the punishments until you find something that works?
Most experts, like THIS one, agree that spanking much past 9 or 10 is ineffective.
Um... you're not going to study the effects of spanking in a group of people who rarely spank (upper-middle class), because you're not going to get good results. So no, the research is not biased or framed.
Um... you're not going to study the effects of spanking in a group of people who rarely spank (upper-middle class), because you're not going to get good results. So no, the research is not biased or framed.
Well Preachers Wife i am expressing my views based on experience and personal observation perhaps you overlooked the subject heading which says ''my views ''?. I am not asking you or anyone to accept them i believe that people should think for themselves do their own research pray and then trust God and themselves to do what is right ..
Please do not take me unkind but i am extremely ill i am suffering from migraine and i am not really in the mood to answer questions but when i feel better ill be happy to ...
Nikolas
.
Then you need to qualify and say that 90% in your experience. That makes a huge difference.I was not offering statistics, i was saying that in my view 90% are useless that is based on my experience and personal observation i have no citations and i did make that figure up which i have a perfect right to do seeing that i am expressing an opinion and not an objectively verifiable fact ..
That's great and good for you.I would without reservation .
If removing a privilege stops the offending behavior, then I wouldn't call it acting irresponsibly. Spanking should be reserved for offenses that deserve it, not just the everyday nuances of a kid being a kid. Understand that me saying I don't spank =/= I don't punish.Then i think you would be acting irresponsibly but again that is my opinion ,, And this a hypothetical situation so please refrain from taking offense when none is intended .
Yeah, I'm still confused. You said spanking shouldn't be used as a first resort or a last resort. So it should be used as a middle resort? Let me ask you this, what would you consider to be spankable offenses? And who said anything about tyranny?I dont see it that way Becky I dont think that any form of punishment is a solution .. That means tyranny not loving correction .
What i have said is rather plain I cannot help you further .
No, I'm not trying to bait you into an argument. Asking questions to try to clarify what you are saying is not baiting. I was trying to make sense of what you said. I still haven't been able to. You said spanking shouldn't be used as a first resort or a last resort, but yet in the same post you said you would spank a 9 year old without reservation. That's a bit confusing.I did not say that Becky you are trying to bait me for an argument here and it isnt going to work .
This I can understand because there are time that I disagree with the experts.I disagree with the experts then .. I dont think will loose sleep over it and neither will i .
Well, except for the "first resort/last resort" part. That's still throwing me for a loop. Maybe someone else can explain what you meant.I think i have answered your questions
That is an excellent point! And so true. It's mostly the poor and working class that "spank". Less and less so the further up the socioeconomic scale you go.
Why do you think that is?
Possibly because they are misinformed about how effective behavioral approaches to parenting are.That is an excellent point! And so true. It's mostly the poor and working class that "spank". Less and less so the further up the socioeconomic scale you go.
Why do you think that is?
Re-read your paragraph and tell me the research isn't biased again. What if I asked the question "what's your approval rating for Obama" but I only asked republicans? The stats would be skewed.
when you use numbers like 90%, it usually indicates there's empirical evidence to follow. How can you know that 90% it fails? Maybe with you and your system of punishment it might fail, but doesn't necessarily mean it's that way for the rest of us...
Then you need to qualify and say that 90% in your experience. That makes a huge difference.
That's great and good for you.
If removing a privilege stops the offending behavior, then I wouldn't call it acting irresponsibly. Spanking should be reserved for offenses that deserve it, not just the everyday nuances of a kid being a kid. Understand that me saying I don't spank =/= I don't punish.
Yeah, I'm still confused. You said spanking shouldn't be used as a first resort or a last resort. So it should be used as a middle resort? Let me ask you this, what would you consider to be spankable offenses? And who said anything about tyranny?
No, I'm not trying to bait you into an argument. Asking questions to try to clarify what you are saying is not baiting. I was trying to make sense of what you said. I still haven't been able to. You said spanking shouldn't be used as a first resort or a last resort, but yet in the same post you said you would spank a 9 year old without reservation. That's a bit confusing.
This I can understand because there are time that I disagree with the experts.
Well, except for the "first resort/last resort" part. That's still throwing me for a loop. Maybe someone else can explain what you meant.
Well, when you think about kids like the Kardashians, the Richies, the Hiltons, it's fairly obvious to see that their kids aren't punished at all.
Excuse me, if you're going to benefit from the terms I provide I would prefer it if you put them in their context. As in, the results of the study aren't skewed because of the strong correlation between lower-middle class and spanking. Haven't you ever taken stats? Using other samples would skew the results and make the study unreliable.Re-read your paragraph and tell me the research isn't biased again. What if I asked the question "what's your approval rating for Obama" but I only asked republicans? The stats would be skewed.
Excuse me, if you're going to benefit from the terms I provide I would prefer it if you put them in their context. As in, the results of the study aren't skewed because of the strong correlation between lower-middle class and spanking. Haven't you ever taken stats? Using other samples would skew the results and make the study unreliable.
peace, when I was nine, I was playing tee-ball and kickball in the streets. There wasn't a "don't play in the street" rule when I was at the age, there wasn't one for my oldest when he was 9.
we might be talking about two different things when i say street i mean streets that are used by automobiles i mean playing in the line of danger now i live in a rural area and our roads are not as populated but at least every hour or so a car or truck zooms down it like there is no tomorrow You cant expect a driver to stop on a dime even if they were driving at the speed limit for a child to get out of the way its not going to happen
even if you live in a suburban area where the traffic is slow the real likelihood of death by motor vehicle is there.. if you are careless ..it would take little for a child to end up under a car or large truck ...
my question for you is when you speak of streets at your house do you mean those that are closed to all traffic ?
I dont want to misunderstand you but are you saying that you would allow your children to run free in a street used by automobiles ?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?