Smacking Children

[Leanna]

That's where bullies come from!


If this is the case, can you please explain why,when spanking is a much less common occurance, there is a much higher instance of bullying on children, violent attacks on teachers, and a general lack of respect for authority in the schools of today?

As I mentioned in my post with the study reference, studies show that bullying aggression is HIGHER in children that were spanked only, and not beaten.

 

[rosalind110]

So as long as your husband just gives you a light slap now and then and doesn't make a habit of it, then that would be OK? Inflicting physical violence on others to get them to do things your way is OK, if done in moderation?

I am old enough to know the difference between right and wrong and to take responsibilty for my own actions and their consequences therefore it is not for my husband or anyone else to teach me these things through spanking or anything else. In the case of my young child, it is for me to teach him/her these things, and it is for me to take responsibilty for them until such time as my child can do this for his/herself. As to getting him to 'do it my way' that isn't what it's about in any case. It's about instilling and maintaining a sense of right and wrong and of the acceptable and unacceptable.

 

[Leanna]

I am old enough to know the difference between right and wrong and to take responsibilty for my own actions and their consequences therefore it is not for my husband or anyone else to teach me these things through spanking or anything else. In the case of my young child, it is for me to teach him/her these things, and it is for me to take responsibilty for them until such time as my child can do this for his/herself. As to getting him to 'do it my way' that isn't what it's about in any case. It's about instilling and maintaining a sense of right and wrong and of the acceptable and unacceptable.

This can be done without spanking. Self discipline can be taught without physical punishment.

 

[rosalind110]

Among my friends, those who were spanked behave roughly the same as those who weren't. Granted, my friends constitute a very small facet of the population, and I don't tend to hang out with troublemakers.. but if you look at my friends who weren't physically disciplined, they turned out just fine.[/quote]

Exactly! So, in fact, among your friends, just as there isn't conclusive evidence that spanking works, there isn't any evidence that it doesn't work either? This also bears out my point that a great deal has to do with the personality of the individual child and you cannot generalise by saying that 'this works for all children' or 'does not work for all children'. As always, if you can avoid this 'ultimate' form of discipline then it should be avoided, but it isn't necessarily going to blight a child for life if you do.

 

[rosalind110]

I think you too realize that something else is wrong here

besides "not spanking." It wasn't the fact that you weren't spanked that didn't teach you discipline, it was the fact that you weren't taught discipline. Does that make sense? People can raise well behaved kids without spanking them.

Leanna,

I would agree with you completely here. One of the main issues has been that some people on the thread seem to believe that you can teach a child the right way to behave without the use of any form of discipline whatsoever. As far as I am concerned, you are absolutely correct that the discipline need not be in the form of spanking, and, in fact, I hardly ever smacked my children at all. I also tried to teach them through positive reinforcement whenever possible, and when they persisted in a negative behaviour, I never told them. 'You are bad' but tried to explain that it was the behaviour that was bad and why this was. There were times, however, when, even though they clearly understood that a behaviour wasn't comsiderate or or appropriate, they still persisted in it. This was when I applied consequences, (not spanking) in the form of the temporary removal of a favourite toy, or a withdrawn treat, time out etc. to reinforce my explanation that inappropriate behaviour has consequences.

Apart from the fact that I did occasionally apply a light smack, never a formal spanking, I honestly don't think that your ideas on parenting are so different from mine.

 

[rosalind110]

Thank you. I did an entire research paper on physical forms of disciplining for that class, and that was the short version. I like to include the references so no one accuses me of making these things up. Anyone who chooses to research this topic will find that virtually no psychologist of repute believes that spanking is a preferred method of discipline teaching.(I can think of one exception, and as he is older he is naturally attached to the old way) So I find that interesting.

Leanna,

I don't pretend to have researched this in the depth that you have and I certainly can't come up with valid references to prove otherwise (if indeed these exist at all), but, at the end of the day, the fact that today's pyshologists believe one thing while similar experts of the past believed another doesn't nessarily prove anything. The fact is that opinions (and opinions is all they are) are constantly changing and are greatly influenced by the social and political conventions of the day and what psychologists believe today may be completely different from what they will believe tomorrow.

 

[quatona]

Exactly! So, in fact, among your friends, just as there isn't conclusive evidence that spanking works, there isn't any evidence that it doesn't work either?

I have asked it before, but noone seemed to have answered:
What exactly do you mean when saying "it works/it doesn´t work"?
Excuse the gross example, but depending on what someone thinks "it works" means, he could also argumentate that beating the kids to death "works".
I feel that before we start discussing which methods work, we better clarify what the goals are, in regards to which they are supposed to "work".

 

[rosalind110]

As for the difference between smacking and abuse, I believe that people who want to harm their children will continue to do so whether or not they are advised not to spank and whether or not there is a law against spanking and there is therefore no comparison between people like this and parents who utilise the odd smack when they feel it is absolutely necessary.

Actually several people equated spanking directly with violence, abuse and overdoing things

 

[rosalind110]

Not really no. Yes, one has to learn to abide by rules, but so much better to learn right from wrong (part of which is abiding by the rules that society uses to operate effectively). Even children follow rules much more effectively when they understand the purpose behind them, and are much more willing to follow rules where they can't immediately see the reason if they know that rules in general are not arbitrary and enforced with violence but practical and they have to restore the harm caused by breaking them. Blind obedience is for robots, not people.

Ah, but I never said that you shouldn't explain the reasons for a 'rule' to the child, or that you you should discipline when they have no understanding of what they have done wrong, so this is, in fact, one of your proverbial "straw men".

 

[rosalind110]

The parent who is raising their child....


And that's the bottom line. We can debate this till the cows come home, but it's not going to affect the way I raise my child (no form of physical punishment) or the way the next person raises theirs. If or when you have children you will raise them the way you want to.

Precisely and, in my case, I say this from personal experience.

 

[rosalind110]

Well, they can say whatever they like but that doesn't make it so. Unless the statement comes from someone with some credibility...

Very valid point - and who would that 'credible' person be? An 'expert' who has spent years 'studying' the paper effects of different forms of upbringing perhaps? Or a school teacher or carer? Or maybe a parent who has experienced these things?

 

[rosalind110]

Why not? Is no-one in the world open to fresh ideas? Can what is considered acceptable in society not be changed by discussion? Can training in effective parenting not be implemented and supported? Ultimately, can laws not be changed?

If not, why does this forum (or any other) exist - to vent hot air? Are people so irrational that discussion of such an important topic as how to teach children how to behave is a waste of time? If so, the world is toast.

This is true, but it seems to me that, more often than not, people who advocate acceptance of change only do so if that change suits their own views. This, unfortunately is human nature, because we all want to be 'right'.

 

[rosalind110]

I'm sure the author and some of those who follow his advice consider theirselves responsible, loving parents.

But that's not really the point - in its extreamism it highlights many of the fallacies and incorrect thinking shown by the more moderate advocates of spanking.

Really? How do you come to this conclusion? Personally I haven't seen anything remotely like it anywhere on this thread and cannot see the slightest connection between this and what has been discussed here. As an advocate of moderate and occasional spanking, I personally think that the whole article is reprehensible and that these people should be prosecuted for promoting child endangerment and abuse. As far as I am concerned it is the direct oppsite of my views and 'highlights' nothing about them at all. Nor do I think it 'highlights' or proves anything about the expressed views of anyone in the discussion.

 

[rosalind110]

I suspect that you are right, although abuse in lower class families may well be more obvious rather than more common. However, saying something can be substantiated is worthless unless you actually provide the evidence that does. A lot of other claims in this thread could be substantiated if anyone asks for them to be and someone can be bothered. Someone has called on that one - it's up to those who back the claim to substantiate it, not just wave their hands in the air and say they could if they felt like it.

I may be wrong in this, and please feel free to say so if I am. but I'm afraid I that I cannot recall having seen any specific references to back up any of your views either. On the other hand, you have a point, so I'll spend a little time trying to find the appropriate references.

 

[rosalind110]

I have asked it before, but noone seemed to have answered:
What exactly do you mean when saying "it works/it doesn´t work"?
Excuse the gross example, but depending on what someone thinks "it works" means, he could also argumentate that beating the kids to death "works".
I feel that before we start discussing which methods work, we better clarify what the goals are, in regards to which they are supposed to "work".

If you read back through this thread, you will see that one of the posters remarked that, among his circle of friends, around half were spanked and half were not and he had drawn the conclusion that there wasn't any perceptible difference in behaviour between the two groups. My post was in direct response to this and replied to the definition of 'worked' and 'did not work' in that context. Other than that, since success or failure is clearly in the eye of the beholder, I wouldn't like to attempt to define it.

 

[rosalind110]

As I mentioned in my post with the study reference, studies show that bullying aggression is HIGHER in children that were spanked only, and not beaten.

I missed this, and will go back and take a better look at your post/report.

Apologies.

 

[quatona]

If you read back through this thread, you will see that one of the posters remarked that, among his circle of friends, around half were spanked and half were not and he had drawn the conclusion that there wasn't any perceptible difference in behaviour between the two groups. My post was in direct response to this and replied to the definition of 'worked' and 'did not work' in that context. Other than that, since success or failure is clearly in the eye of the beholder, I wouldn't like to attempt to define it.

Thus, if you work from the assumption, that it makes no difference, it is unnecessary, redundant. I see no reason to physically threatening or harming someone, the more if it makes no difference, anyways.

Maybe I am missing something, but if you don´t want to define the desired effect of a method, there seems to be no basis to even consider using this method.

 

[KarateCowboy]

Thus, if you work from the assumption, that it makes no difference, it is unnecessary, redundant. I see no reason to physically threatening or harming someone, the more if it makes no difference, anyways.

Maybe I am missing something, but if you don´t want to define the desired effect of a method, there seems to be no basis to even consider using this method.

Just a point: I've done martial arts for almost all my life, and it's 100% true that just because you're hit doesn't mean you're harmed, and just because you feel pain doesn't mean you're damaged

 

[chipmunk]

The problem is that children are not adults and do not have the developed powers of reasoning that an adult has.

I think many people underestimate the reasoning powers of young children. I'm not saying they are ready for quantum mechanics, but they can understand things. A child as young as 4 months old can learn some very basic sign language. They are young and growing, not stupid. You just have to explain things in simpler terms. I hope people aren't spanking very young children (under 2 really). I would hope that by the time people are normally talking about spanking, they are talking about a child mature enough to be speaking.

Children have a lot of reasoning that I think goes unnoticed by parents. Children must be taught these things and since we don't think they are capable we don't teach them. My neice at 2 was able to speak rather clearly and most people didn't have to ask what she was rattling on about. Everyone was so impressed with her speech, but really it was because my sister forbid people to speak to her in those distorted baby voices. I don't think she was doing anything other 2 year olds couldn't. I know one of my friends was so impressed with my neice that she's done the same thing with her son and has the same results.

There are times when a child is in the process of an out and out tantrum, that a firm smack on the bottom (I would NEVER hit a child's face because you can do serious damage that way) is the only thing that snaps them out of this hysterical state.

Perhaps, I'm not as embarassed by a child who has a tantrum. I just see these outbursts as them being children. It is a way to test their limits. If others want to look to me in annoyance or whatever they may. I am no stranger to the stares or even glares at odd behavior--being the older sibling of a child with mental retardation did that. She can do the oddest things. If people want to look in as if it's some freak show that is more their problem than mine.

I ignore my neice's tantrums. She can scream, yell, and do anything non-destructive she wants, but when she sees all she's done is waste her energy she'll stop. I am trying to teach her a breathing/counting technique that I use when I'm angered by something. That has been helping. My neice was watched by her other grandma most of the day until she was 5 (my sister was working). Now that my sister is watching her more she's trying to cure the "if I cry I get what I want." Her grandma can't stand to let a child cry and just gives in to the childs demands. She'd even yell at my sister and her husband for not giving my neice whatever she wanted. Of course, my sister couldn't turn down free babysitting at the time.

Personally, in my time, I have seen what I would consider much more harmful methods of 'discipline' in the form of shouting, (sometimes even swearing) putting a child down verbally, and withdrawing love and attention than could ever be caused by the odd smack.

There is also the fact that, if a child learns that he or she can control and manipulate you by exhibiting a certain type of behaviour which he or she knows you cannot handle, then, in many cases, this is what the child will do.

I would agree verbal abuse is bad and that people shouldn't let children control or manipulate them.

Having said that, I agree with the posters who have said that every child is different and that some children do not need this kind of discipline, while it wouldn't work positively for others. Only the parents of the child concerned can know whayt is right for that child. Also, if you can find an alternative method like the time-out syatem that works so well for many of TV's Supernanny's families, then obviously this should be your first choice.

As for the difference between smacking and abuse, I believe that people who want to harm their children will continue to do so whether or not they are advised not to spank and whether or not there is a law against spanking and there is therefore no comparison between people like this and parents who utilise the odd smack when they feel it is absolutely necessary.

Of course all children are different. Maybe it's just my naivette---I really don't believe spanking is a necessary method of teaching children. I have seen not spanking work for other parents, and I have seen it work for foster parents (which by the way aren't allowed to spank) who turn the behaviors of a child around. I know it can work. I just haven't had much of an opportunity to use it.

Despite my un-motherness I do have an extremely tiny bit of experience in dealing with problem children and I have never found an occasion to raise my hand to a child. Creativity, patience, and desire and usually I can have the child listening to me.

 

[suzybeezy]

MOD HAT ON

Please refrain from any flaming comments.

1.1 You may discuss another individual's beliefs or religious organization but you will not harass, insult, belittle, threaten, defame or flame the individual (member or non-member) as this is considered personal (ad hominem) attacks in posts, PMs and any other communication within the site.

MOD HAT OFF