The World We Live In...

Remove all ads!

In my experience, this IS an effective form of discipline (but of course, I cannot speak for every child in the whole world). Darkwolf's point about 1 minute for every year of the child's age is the rule of thumb that I adopt and helps address your point about attention spans. I personally find that it works like a charm (and is vastly more effective than "scolding a cat"). I hope this doesn't mean that I am being delusional!

I will stress again that this form of discipline only works if the child also receives positive attention when he is exhibiting the behaviours you wish to encourage. If you also ignore or nag at a kid when he's being good, then timeout will be useless because he'll have no idea what the difference between being good and being naughty is.

 

From my experience, today my girfriend and I were talking about just this, she has a kid, he's 15, and as he's a little problematic in some aspects; he got this way because, as I told her, she gave him everything he ever wanted without asking him something in return, let's say, good notes at school, etc,; every 3 or 4 days she gets upset with him because this or that and everytime is the same so I told her that this is no solution nor spanking; from my experience, I know one thing: since the moment we are babies and cry to have our milk (we got it), we are used to this kind of behaviour, so, if I know that my kid likes to play playstation all the afternoon, and he doesn't do what I ask him to do or behaves wrongly, I take the playstation from him and I don't care if he cries; is simply: you want respect, give respect; the kid had to clean out his room but he didn't, he went out to see some of his friends, so when his mother started to argue I stoped her, he wouldn't learn anything with another 'speech' so I took him out the internet connection and the playstation, two days later he started to do the things he has to do.
For me is just a matter of priorities, nobody learns anything by a beating or by boring speechs, as long I give everything to my kid, I also can take away those things and I know that that is what they want the most.

 

This is actually very topical. From today's news: http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3359383a11,00.html

A bill is being read in New Zealand parliament at the moment, which if passed, would remove the legal defence of "reasonable force" for parents punishing their children. This would, I understand, effectively make it illegal to smack your kids (although I'm sure the police aren't going to knock your door down if you give your kid a rap over the knuckles for trying to touch the oven).

 

I see spanking as any other kind of physical abuse, it is basically assault in my opinion. As has been stated, bosses dont go around spanking unruly employees and it isnt very acceptable (nowadays) for a spouses to smack each other around to get points across.

That said, it is my theoritical position. A normal parent smacking a kid on the bottocks when they have been nasty isnt going to scar the child any more than a good telling to or some time in a corner. The problem is by allowing spanking in the law you are opening up for Mr Brute and his son with a broken nose and cracked ribs and Mr Brute claiming he was disciplining his naughty child.

I do also wonder what kind of mind is able to in a cold and cool manner systematically spank a child after the ire caused by the childs offence has cooled down.

I honestly dont buy the "it hurts you more than it hurts me".

 

Chev I hope a kid never has to suffer you as a father. I'd guess it was your father that beat all that Catholicism into you. If you have to hit a child, you are a useless parent and have failed. Hurting the child because it has done something wrong will do no good whatsoever, it teaches them nothing, and it is counter productive.

 

I can't believe anyone would want to hurt their own children, spanking, or whatever you want to call it, will hurt the child, and all it does is instil fear.

 

So, you've never had to hit your kids, yet you think it's necessary to hit them, in order for them to grow up to be the kind of people that you expect them to be?

 

I don't think dmc meant that he thought he had to hit his kids. Discipline is necessary, and it sounds like dmc is doing a damn good job raising his kids without having to resort to desperate measures.

But even as I disagree with the idea of spanking, in certain extreme situations, when all other attempts have failed, it must at least be considered. You can still reject it after due consideration, but to discard an idea out of hand is foolish. It's better that your kids grow up normal, and hate you for what you did, than for them to grow up as a psychopath and be a drain (or worse) on society.

 

I really agree with most of what you are saying here. But I don't think that many parents who choose the brutal, "old fashion method," want to hurt their children. I don't raise my hand to either of my two girls and hopefully, will never consider it. Timeout works in my household. I don't want to teach my kids that violence is a solution for problem solving.

 

Oh, parents don't have to do that; school/government/media all take care of teaching kids that violence is an effective means of problem solving.

*ducks*

 

Sorry joacqin, I know this is going to sound flippant, but you can't fire your kids, you can't demote your kids, and you can't suspend your kids without pay.

I was spanked as a child as it was the only form of discipline that worked on me. My parents tried everything. They bought books on child rearing, and tried every idea presented, and after a few months I was a terror, so out came the belt.

There is this fear of incrementalism that is rampant in the world. The NRA doesn't want any laws on guns because they are afraid that it will lead to a slow erosion of their ability to own guns, the pro-choice bunch won't hear of restrictions on late term abortions or parental notification because they are afraid that it will lead to further erosion of a woman's choices. Placing reasonable laws on what is called abuse and what is called spanking should be acceptable to all. Then, if you don't want to spank your child, you don't have to, but if someone else believes that they need to, they can.

Spanking is not about pain; it is about teaching children that there are consequences to actions. Most children don't understand the complexity of subtle consequences, and they certainly won't understand that actions that are inconsequential as a child can be devastating as an adult. For example, back-talking (sorry, I really don't know how to explain that one for those of you who don't know this regional colloquial, other than to give an extreme example such as when a parent tells a child to clean up his room and he replies back "why should I?", I guess it could also be described as being disrespectful) as a child only incurs the ire of parents, but in the business world it can cost a company money, and can cost a person a job. A spanking gives a child a sense of understanding that their actions have consequences.

I am not saying that spanking is an appropriate punishment for being disrespectful. Punishments should be based upon the level of the misbehavior. I agree with most here when they state that in general only significantly bad behavior is worthy of a spanking, and that it should be a last resort.

It should also be noted that spankings should not be about pain, they are about fear. Children fear losing a toy, the privilege of watching TV (though my kids seem to believe that this is actually a right ), and of a spanking. The actual pain of the spanking is irrelevant, and should be minimized. I do not agree with using hard or narrow objects for spanking (e.g. wooden paddles, switches or rods). A wide smooth strap creates more noise and spreads the contact over a greater area, diminishing the force of the impact. Children should not have more that a hint of pink on their skin at the very worst after a spanking. It is psychological, and as such parents should realize that spanking a child leaves them with a definite feeling of vulnerability and lack of control over themselves, as does most forms of punishment. Parents must reinforce the fact to the child that their punishments are fully within their control. The must be made to understand that the punishment is a result of their behavior, and that all the have to do is change their behavior, and the punishments will cease to occur.

IMO, that is what is wrong with a large part of today's youth. Many parents have decided that punishment in harmful to children, and many of those who do punish their children do not enforce that it is a consequence of the child’s action or are not consistent in enforcement, so the child thinks that it is just their parents taking their frustrations out on them (which does occur ). Either way they don't realize that their actions have consequences.

 

Darkwolf, very well said! Let me re-emphasize the most significant point, for those who may have missed it:

That applies, to spankings, time-outs, loss of privileges... whatever punishments the parents have decided are appropriate within that family. This is how children will develop the sense of responsibility that's so crucial to being a productive member of society as an adult.

 

First off, we all agree on the basic, consistency and showing that there are consequences of bad actions. A child is a child and should bloody well do what the proper authority figure tells them because the only thing we can be sure of is that the child is immature and ignorant and really dont have a clue in the world..

I also feel kinda hypocritical because even though I would never spank a child my "favoured" means of punishment is to grab the child and look deeply into their eyes while my owne eyes express the feeling that what I would really want to do is to snap the childs scrawny neck but I wont, now, because it would upset my sister (or whoever "owns" the child) and calmly tell them what they did wrong and that it isnt accepted. Either that or I show that I find it so irrelevent when it behaves like that that I completely ignore it.

Spanking to me both seems horribly barbaric and desensitizing and on the other hand too mild and pointless. What does a child learn from laying on a lap and getting their bottocks gently slapped? The very idea is just comical to me.

I reckon I wont be a very good parent and god knows my mother raising me like I described ****ed me up good but I never ever did anything that society deemed seriously wrong.

 

joacqin,

I think you have the potential to be a very good parent. You recognize the importance of this issue, and you have the correct core beliefs. The only hurdle that you have to get over is the same one we all face, remembering that you are dealing with a child, and keeping that child's future in the front of your mind. All parents sometimes fall short of this mark. I have realized a couple of times that I spanked my children for an action that really probably wasn't worthy of the spanking. We are all human, and we make mistakes. The key is to keep the child in your mind, and to realize that the goal it to mold the child into a positive member of society. The goal of too many parents is only to get them raised and out of the house so they can get on with the lives that the child so rudely interrupted.

If you do not feel that your mother did the best job of raising you, and you want to do a better job when you have kids, make conscious decisions as to what you are going to do to raise them better than your mother did you before you have them. When you get to the point in your life where you start thinking about having children, do a lot of reading on behavior and childcare. You will get a lot of ideas, and you will read a lot of things that seem crazy. Use the ones you agree with. I would not say that it is impossible to raise good children without spanking them, but it does take a tool away, so you will have to be more flexible and imaginative.

One last thing to remember, there is no one punishment that works every time, or for the child's entire childhood. Children change, and they respond differently to punishment as they change. For example, my oldest child used to feel terrible if he lost an opportunity to do something, even little things like stopping to get a soda on the way home from school, and I could use that as a punishment. Now that he is older, if I say to him, "Well, I was going to stop on the way home and buy us a treat, but your behavior is such that you don't deserve it" he will just say something like "that's ok dad, I wasn't expecting anything, so I really didn't lose anything".

A lot of who we are determined in our childhood, but we are also who we chose to be. What makes us more than animals is the fact that we can make the decision to change, and then we can actually do it. Our weakness is that it is difficult change, we cannot do it without a strong commitment, and that no one can make us change if we don't want to (of course this last one is a strength as well). Our childhood forms who we are, but thankfully as adults we have the ability to overcome that which we dislike about ourselves.

 

DW, I agree with your philosophy of child rearing, but I believe you must draw the line at using any implement for punishment.

The only 'crime' worthy of a spanking for my children was lying -- if they did something wrong and lied about it, there was a double punishment (for the thing they did, and the lying). Spankings were very formal punishments, never to be done at the time of the offense (mainly because I will not lay a hand on my children when I'm angry). Only two or three swats with a hand on a fully clothed butt, it wasn't even as hard as they would hit each other when arguing. I think the thing that made it a severe punishment for them is because I thought it was severe.

At around eight or nine, the spanking becomes pointless -- in order to get the same reaction significant pain must be induced. Resentment is learned from the pain (or shame) at that point, not responsibility or discipline. If the point of the punishment is to cause pain, then it's probably being done for the wrong reason. Although fear is a great motivator, it is not a good long term motivator.

A broad strap, as you described, will remove flesh from a bare back. A slight twist in the strap at impact is all it takes. The edges of the strap with cause some damage (even with a perfectly flat hit) when only slightly too much force is used. My stepfather used a two inch wide belt and there were many mornings I had to peel my night clothes off by ripping scabs away with my shirt. His goal was to cause fear and terror which ultimately led to me and my sisters hating him (we won't have anything to do with the man). A parent walks a slippery slope when they decide pain is the way to go.

 

I had a few clips around the earhole when I was a nipper and it never did me any harm!

I'll try not to smack my kids when I have them, but I think I will end up giving them a little slap when they cross the line and I lose my rag. Then I know for sure I'd end up feeling really bad about it later..

I believe there are much better ways to discipline a child than physical violence.