Smacking Children

[miss_liz]

^I would disagree with you because of my experience. I do agree that some parents don't know how to utilize discipline without using spankings. But you can't generalize and say all parents are that way. Sometimes there really is no other way to get the child to listen and obey you.

 

[policy4ev]

Does the parent not have to change the way they punish kids to make sure the kids get it. It's not only the parents that are different. If one punishment does not work on a kid, then the parents have the responsability to try something else. If they don't they might as well give up on the kid!

 

[ebia]

Proverbs 13:24 "He who spares his rod hates his son, But he who loves him disciplines him promptly."

The OT also tells you to stone rebellious children to death!

The wisest man, Jesus, never said anything contrary.

"Do unto others as you would have others do unto you".

"Anyone who causes one of my little ones to stumble..."

etc, etc.

Id rather smack my children on the hand then let them touch the hot stove top.

False dichotomy. The choice under question is stop them through violence or stop them through other means.

 

[miss_liz]

The OT also tells you to stone rebellious children to death!

Proverbs is not commandments.

 

[policy4ev]

so we should just let them burn themselves? Or when they are older to do drugs? If we don't teach them now someone else will. If we teach them the stove is hot by slapping their hand, then the will learn that that is wrong. If we let them burn themselves it is our fault.

 

[ebia]

^I would disagree with you because of my experience. I do agree that some parents don't know how to utilize discipline without using spankings. But you can't generalize and say all parents are that way.

I haven't said that all parents are that way. I do contend that the vast majority of parents are, because effective discipline is not something that is instinctive and very few parents have been trained in it. Good discipline is difficult and hard work, but laziness is not an excuse for abuse.

Sometimes there really is no other way to get the child to listen and obey you.

Incorrect. If it were true, schools would have stopped functioning when their right to use physical punishment was removed. They didn't, what they had to do was invest hugely more time and effort into supporting teachers with better classroom managment techniques and implement better discipline plans.

As a relatively new teacher I am aware of the vast difference good training in managing children makes.

 

[policy4ev]

So, in a school setting, if a kid repeatedly beats up anothor kid; just getting him suspended is okay. The parents should not do anything?
Or should the parents have the right to ground him and if they believe it is appropriate, dare I say spank him.

 

[ebia]

Does the parent not have to change the way they punish kids to make sure the kids get it. It's not only the parents that are different. If one punishment does not work on a kid, then the parents have the responsability to try something else. If they don't they might as well give up on the kid!

I'm not sure what your point was, but if it was supposed to address mine it doesn't.

I contend that most parents either use physical punishment with all their children or with none (possibly with some difference between how boys and girls are treated). That points to its use being an inadquacy in the parents, not a function of the children.

Similarly, I suggest it is more common for one parent to use physical punshiment on both children while the other does not, than for both parents to use it but only on one of their children. Again, that points to its use being a function of parent not of child.

 

[miss_liz]

I haven't said that all parents are that way. I do contend that the vast majority of parents are, because effective discipline is not something that is instinctive and very few parents have been trained in it. Good discipline is difficult and hard work, but laziness is not an excuse for abuse.

Ok. But a parent who spanks does not mean the parent is lazy. My parents were not lazy. They tried different methods with me, but they just didn't always work.

Incorrect. If it were true, schools would have stopped functioning when their right to use physical punishment was removed. They didn't, what they had to do was invest hugely more time and effort into supporting teachers with better classroom managment techniques and implement better discipline plans.

As a relatively new teacher I am aware of the vast difference good training in managing children makes.

I personally haven't seen these techniques, which is unfortunate. I really wish our school could find a more effective way of discipline.

 

[policy4ev]

I'm not sure what your point was, but if it was supposed to address mine it doesn't.

I contend that most parents either use physical punishment with all their children or with none (possibly with some difference between how boys and girls are treated). That points to its use being an inadquacy in the parents, not a function of the children.

Similarly, I suggest it is more common for one parent to use physical punshiment on both children while the other does not, than for both parents to use it but only on one of their children. Again, that points to its use being a function of parent not of child.

So, if the child gets worse, the parents should not change the punishment to suit the child. Or should they continue something that is obviously not working?

 

[ebia]

Proverbs is not commandments.

eh?

Are you suggesting that we have to follow advice but not commandments?

so we should just let them burn themselves? Or when they are older to do drugs? If we don't teach them now someone else will. If we teach them the stove is hot by slapping their hand, then the will learn that that is wrong. If we let them burn themselves it is our fault.

No. How many times does it need to be repeated - the alternative is not "do nothing". Stop repeatedly attacking this rather pathetic straw-man.

 

[miss_liz]

eh?

Are you suggesting that we have to follow advice but not commandments?

The stoning was more a law than just a wise saying. There is a difference. Solomon was making a statement/wise saying, not making a law.

 

[ebia]

So, if the child gets worse, the parents should not change the punishment to suit the child. Or should they continue something that is obviously not working?

If what you are doing is not working, then yes you need to change something. That something does not need to be violence.

And punishment is not the same as discipline. Using the words synonomously is an indicator that your concept of discipline is much too limited.

 

[ebia]

The stoning was more a law than just a wise saying. There is a difference. Solomon was making a statement/wise saying, not making a law.

So Laws are more fallible than wise sayings, or we should be stoning kids to death but using a rod is optional?

A rule is stronger than a suggestion, not weaker.

 

[policy4ev]

So what is violence by your standards? Spanking a child, slapping their hand, or saying "NO" loudly?

 

[miss_liz]

So Laws are more fallible than wise sayings, or we should be stoning kids to death but using a rod is optional?

A rule is stronger than a suggestion, not weaker.

Yes a rule is stronger (much more). But (let me see if I can explain this), OT does not apply to us living in post Jesus crucifixion times. But a wise saying is not a requirement, it is just a piece of wisdom. He is stating something that really is true. If the parent does not discipline the child, the parent does not love the child. But as I said earlier, we do not follow OT laws---we are part of the new covenant.

 

[ebia]

Yes a rule is stronger (much more). But (let me see if I can explain this), OT does not apply to us living in post Jesus crucifixion times. But a wise saying is not a requirement, it is just a piece of wisdom. He is stating something that really is true.

Ok - I wasn't sure what you were saying. It's probably best if I avoid starting a theological sidetrack over that.

If the parent does not discipline the child, the parent does not love the child.

No problem with that, but Solomon (or whoever wrote that proverb) is a bit out of date on the best means of doing so. The proverb is a good one, providing one is happy to read it liberally; it's key point is the need for discipline, not the specifics of how.

 

[ebia]

So what is violence by your standards? Spanking a child, slapping their hand, or saying "NO" loudly?

Hitting someone with the intention to cause pain or harm.

 

[quatona]

^But that isn't the attitude most parents take. My parents would have loved it if they could have used methods other than spanking.

I have problems following that argumentation. If I would love not to do something, and I feel I "can not" do without it, there must be higher priorities for me that prevent me from doing what I actually would love to do.
Which are those priorities? Maybe that´s the keyquestion for this discussion.

But most of the time, that didn't work.

You never mention what this "that" was. They may have missed quite a few options.

Spanking a child is not beating a child! Beating is done with malice; spanking is not.

I don´t agree with this distinction. Both can be done with or without "malice".
But the intention of the parent is not what I am talking about, anyways.
The effect in both cases is humiliation, something that to avoid by all means has a high priority for me, in the interaction of humans.

 

[quatona]

^I agree totally!
ebia--not all children are alike...not all children learn alike...why would we assume the same methods work on all children?

I don´t assume that. I just know that particular methods won´t help me getting my messages across, because they directly and factually contradict the message I intend to get across.