Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
Disciplining your child is one of the hardest parts of being a parent. Of course you want to correct negative behaviors in the most productive way possible, but sometimes the words “military school” can sound pretty tempting. How can you be sure the way you discipline your child will produce a happy and healthy adult?
'Spare the rod and spoil the child' is an adage.Yet, punishment is not the only way to discipline a child, in fact, at best it could be only one of the many many ways of handling undesirable behavior in the child. Punishment only suppresses the unwanted behavior, does not eradicate it. Even that suppression depends on presence of external control, moment the the controlling agent/authority is absent behavior surfaces! Because, the control is not internalized as value. Internalization takes place when the reason for eliminating unwanted behavior is explained and made understood by the child, then the cognitive restructuring occurs. Parents need to have little patience, empathy and skills of relating to child for this but that is worth the task in the long range in disciplining the child.
There may be a place for physical punishment too in extreme cases when no other control mechanism succeed. But then, we must follow the following three to avoid ill effects of physical punishment or any punishment in fact: 1.Punish immediately after the negative behavior occur, punishing after a gap does not get related to behavior and results in several other implications. 2 At the same time look for a positive behavior in the child to occur(I am sure there will be one positive behavior even in a worse child!) and immediately reward it(kissing, hugging, patting, praising and even material rewards) so that child will discover that the parent are not against him because they punished but can offer love to if only he does such and such behavior. 3. Practice both, simultaneously punishing the 'bad' and praising the 'good' , immediately after they occur.By this, we communicate to the child not only what he should not do(punished ones) but also what he should(praised ones). A new 'culture' of behavior emerge for the good of self and others.
- Thimmappa M S
January 12, 2009 12:26AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Timeouts
I agree with much of what Thimappa says except for the advice to use physical punishment in extreme cases. I do not believe there is ever a time when physical punishment is okay.
I would also like to address No. 1. When we understand the brain, it may not make sense to deal with a misbehavior at the time of conflict when involved parties are coming from their mid-brains (fight or flight). This is why I advocate POSITIVE time-out (as opposed to punitive time-out) for both adults and children to cool off until they can access their rations brains and focus on solutions that help for the future instead of punishment that "pays" for the past.
- Jane Nelsen
January 12, 2009 4:03PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(3)
Side: Uncommitted
I dont believe you even have children ....there are times when a slight swat on the behind is the only way to get a childs attention and times it is warranted...my children were very well treated and never abused but a couple of times in their lives i gave them little taps on the behind to show them who was the boss...once in particular i remember they decided to leave my home while i was cooking dinner and thought they were in their rooms playing and they were only 3 and 4.. they were going to grandmas who only lived up the lane and when i missed them i could see them out the window...they hadnt gotten far but they had pulled this particular trick before and had been told several times no ..not to go without permission so i could watch them ....this time.. i caught up with them and gave them just a slight swat ( i call love pat) on the bottom...they never did that again..until they were grown they would not go anywhere without asking me or even when older telling me....i figure they could have come up missing or anything could have happened to them and if this stopped that behavior I did nothing wrong..i did not beat them or even leave a mark so lady dont tell me there is never a time that warrents physical punishment...The Love Pats are given with love and sometimes one needs tough love...
- cbooh November 21, 2009 3:44PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Physical
I've been shopping in grocery stores for decades, thousands of times, and NEVER seen the supposed typical toddler having a meltdown tantrum because she couldn't have sugar bomb cereal or something. Sorry, but these "tantrums" just don't exist. They're a figment of angry adult's minds who need to lash out at someone who can't hit back.
Tantrums do happen however. Any person who is so upset that they are screaming and/or throwing things is not pleasant to witness but get over it. Even adults act that way sometimes and nobody comes over and clobbers them to get them to stop. Back up, and you will undoubtedly find that some adult really pissed off the upset kid by refusing to let them out of the shopping cart or snatched something away from the child or wouldn't listen to the child. What I see in stores is adults on power trips forcing their children to do boring things, to sit still when they should know children NEED to move, to not touch things when it is children's INSTINCTUAL NATURE to touch interesting objects, to not complain when they're tired, or hungry, or have to pee, etc. etc. Parents are incredibly insensitive to their children in stores. If you can't have patience with a child's needs and desires while you're shopping then LEAVE THE CHILDREN AT HOME WITH YOUR SPOUSE OR A BABYSITTER WHEN YOU SHOP. Everyone benefits.
- SojournerTruth
January 12, 2009 8:18PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Good points. Planning ahead, understanding children's needs, teaching good behavior, and intentionally making shopping excursions into safe, fun learning experiences can prevent most tantrums.
- Betty Bardige January 13, 2009 3:13PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
I'm a little confused as to the point you're trying to make. In the beginning of your comment you say "Sorry, but these "tantrums" just don't exist." Then later you say "Tantrums do happen however." Could you clarify how the difference between these imaginary tantrums and real ones.
For example, I have a two year old son who's obsessed with Thomas the Tank Engine. We were recently in a toy store and despite giving him repeated reminders that we would have to go soon, he proceeded to have a full on meltdown when we had to exit the store and his beloved trains. Nothing short of staying in that store forever would have appeased him, which clearly wasn't an option. I had no choice but to grab him and haul him out of the store.
If this is what you mean when you write, "these "tantrums" just don't exist. They're a figment of angry adult's minds who need to lash out at someone who can't hit back"? If it is then i have to disagree. They're very real, and happen to even the best parents.
- Langston Burroughs January 13, 2009 5:25PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Right off the batt--no one is perfect on this issue. From small children to teen agers. I have been active on both. Sometimes a swat on the bottom is appropiate--to mainly get their attention mostly. There is a difference between a swat and a beating folks. At other times a long talk at the kitchen is very good--with teen agers especially. They hate that. As long as the parents are responsable with their punnishment's--I don't have a problem with that--as long as they punish and not beat the child. There are many ways to punish--and all kids are different. The one thing I do not like is for the goverment to tell me how to raise my children and how to correct them. The common people are too triger happy to tell on one another to the sherriff or cops. Gets very ugly when they step in. Now if the parents are beating the child--then by all means report them. The basic thing these days is----the fact that the parents do not have any time with their kids. So the kids entertain theirselves either with the gamers-----or mischief they do not need--Its all for attention folks. Your kids need attention from you--sawmill king.
- flying eagle January 13, 2009 10:11PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
I know for a fact that those horrible loud meltdowns do in fact happen, fairly regularly. Hell I remember doing it. I wanted a "Moosel Toy" (I have no idea what the real name was, but they were hanging from the ceiling of the toy and I had to have it. Screamed the entire time we were in the store "I WANT MY MOOSEL TOY!" Full hissy fit. Crying, throwing myself to the floor. Being a general nuisance.
My son tried a tantrum once, I picked him, walked out of the store and had him sit in the car till he was done crying and told him he would get nothing for his behavior. Hasn't tried it since.
On Saturday I was in a store, and there were Yoshi dolls (dinosaur thing from Super Mario brothers). The kid wanted the biggest one (For like $50 bucks) and his mom said he could have the smallest one. Threw himself to the floor, and cried and screamed. Kicked too.
As for the article.
I believe a child needs to learn that there are consequences to his actions. An older child will do better with being spoken to, a 2 year old will look at you blankly (as a general thing).
We (my husband and I) have a glass coffee table.At around 1 1/2 my son liked to climb on it, even though he was told repeatedly that it was dangerous and we didn't want him climbing on it.
We believe in physical punishment, as a rare thing to do. Not as a first line of defense.
So after several times of taking him off the table, telling him we didn't want him climbing on it, and putting him in a corner for it. My husband smacked him, one time, firmly on the butt, and told him not to go on it again. Guess what, he never climbed on the table again.
I do not believe in spanking , because then it is allowing you to lose control and take your anger out on the child instead of it being a discipline . 1 firm swat. Make that one hit count, and that's it. But also to be used rarely.
In the case of the glass table, I'd rather my son be afraid of what I or my husband might do to him, as opposed to him falling through it and suffering greater harm.
Every child is different. We're told this over and over again. Why is it then that all these "experts" seem to think there is only 1 way to do so? My generation was as a whole lacking in the discipline department. The next generation is even worse. Perhaps, maybe, just maybe, things aren't being handled very well.
And that the "experts"should stop telling people what is the right way and the wrong way.
- Uzma April 15, 2009 12:36PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
I am not a parent,therefore, i haven't received the huge shock of attaining such a responsibility. My parents, however, we're good parents. I know what a real family should be like,and to say that getting the old belt didn't get my attention and teach me the basic right from wrongs would make me a liar. My parents both suffered throughout their childhood, one from lack of parenting (to the point of outright neglect), and the other from too strict a parent (though nonabusive). They grew up knowing what bad parents we're like, and they didn't adopt many of their parents attributes when considering me and my siblings. That did not stop them from making the right decision when considering discipline . Discipline taught me respect. Respect taught me right from wrong. I am a happy adult, I am a law -abiding citizen. What I am not is a typical kid today. I don't control my household, I don't talk back (all the time), I'm grateful for my house, my family, my life. I've had great times, and i've been amazingly pissed for not being allowed to have great times. best believe my dad has saved my ass more than once by doing so. Correct discipline is how parents control their kids ,and that saves kids from themselves.
- kidpatriot90 July 6, 2009 11:25AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Yes, let's use your method with adults then, if it is so perfect. From now on, no one will be punished, because they do not learn anything from it. The next time we prosecute a murderer, we won't punish them, we will find a way to help them develop good social skills and character. You have to be kidding.
- moby clarke July 21, 2009 1:38AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
This style of " parenting ", if it can be labeled as such, is quite probably one of the least ineffective out there. Since when does involving a child in decisions that he cannot yet comprehend help him grow to be a fully-functioning, well-principled, contributing member of society ? Is this even what this approach aims for? Or have you changed the entire purpose of parenting? For decades (centuries! millenia even!) the entire point of parents was to raise an adult. A good adult. What they did during their childrens' youths was all so as to ensure that that child would be a contributing member of society (and any relevant religious goals)... This method never corrects inappropriate behavior by the child, it only ensures in-the-moment happiness for the children and guarantees that the child will never actually grow up, will never actually become accustomed to the real world. The real world will not ask for input from the child before making a decision. The real world consists of consequences for decisions made-- if the child does not pay rent, for example, (providing he ever moves out, which is not likely, as the parents will "consider what he wants" and he will not likely inflict responsibility upon himself) then he will be kicked out. The landlords will not consult with him first, allowing him to take a moment to be in his self-soothing place and come up with a response that he'd favor... they will evict him, because the only consequence for not paying rent is eviction. How do you really expect this to work? It may sound nice and good and happy to those reading it, but take the time to examine how it ends in the long run... How the children actually turn out... better yet, examine the downturn that America has taken since such "parenting" has become the norm, using schooling, test scores, average age at which a child moves out and gets a job, how often those children move back, how much more those children cost their parents than a generation previously... You'll find plenty of proof that this approach is nothing but a failure.
- etomaria September 21, 2009 4:16PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
I agree with Jane's parenting philosophy wholeheartedly.
- paulachristison January 12, 2009 11:59AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Timeouts
I host a website, www.nopaddle.com , and a related Yahoo group, also called "nopaddle." It is about school paddling, or " spanking " with a board in school, as physical abuse, sexual abuse and sexual harassment.
As we begin 2009 school paddling is practiced in public schools in 21 US states, and in private schools in many others. The heaviest hitters are Mississippi, Arkansas, Alabama.
These issues are also inherent in "home spanking." If you doubt a child's buttocks is a sexual area, at what age do you allow him or her to show it in public? Even when children are too young to understand sexuality, they sense it in many ways which spanking violates.
The New Testament, contrary to myth, does not contain one example or teaching instructing anyone to hit anyone, including a parent to a child.
This is a pretty smart site with smart people it seems, and I doubt these points need to be dwelled on here.
- Jeff Charles January 13, 2009 5:02PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
My parents scandalized all the other American officers and their wives because they let their toddlers - me and my brother - run around naked outside with the other Japanese children on Okinawa. This was in the late fifties and while I may not run to the Japanese for advice on military matters first, they obviously had a better handle on what's appropriate for children. Under the age of about six, you're wiser to treat children as non-sexual (I know, some people can't, you're the ones who missed the words "wiser" in this sentence).
I've never had to discipline a child psychologist, so maybe spanking wouldn't be most appropriate for them in any situations. But your average six-year-old is quite able to distinguish a spanking he deserves from a beating he doesn't deserve. The reason I am leaving my mark as 'uncommitted' is because mostly six-year olds won't be reading this blog, and a lot of the adults around here can't read 'physical' without seeing the words 'always' and 'abuse' attached to it.
Those of you who think a child can't understand a spanking seem to put a lot of stock in his ability to understand a well-reasoned explanation of the rights and wrongs of the situation instead. You may understand explanations, but you don't understand children.
- thefederalist January 13, 2009 6:25PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
In NZ smacking was made illegal last year. We believe in consequences where possible rather than punishment. For example if one of our children causes a mess, then he or she is expected to (and does) clean it up to the best of his or her ability.
- jolabouroflove
January 12, 2009 12:06AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
"Because those organisations believe that a child should have the same rights as an adult,"
This is no argument at all but simply an opinion shared by some. I don't agree. Children have limited rights compared to an adult. They do have the right to be protected from overly abusive parents however.
The best way to discipline a child varies from child to child. Most of the time spanking (on the bottom only) is unnecessary but some children (like myself when I was a child) will respond to nothing else. I was extremely hyperactive and undisciplined as a child. Reasoning with me didn't work. On rare occasions I was spanked. Somehow I managed to grow up into a loving, caring assertive and nonviolent adult. I have never been a fight in my life. There is no one size fits all solution. The so called "experts" don't know as much as the individual parent who deals with the child every day.
- tbcass January 12, 2009 5:21AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Timeouts
Alfred Adler (whose philosopy is the foundation for Positive Discipline) taught that all people have equal rights to dignity and respect--including children. This does not mean they have the same experience and maturity. Children still need lots of guidance and learning. However, spanking violates their rights to dignity and respect.
- Jane Nelsen January 12, 2009 4:12PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(3)
Side: Uncommitted
With all due respect to Alfred Aldler and you, I disagree. Children certainly have the right to be treated kindly and properly cared for but for some children over about 6 years old spanking is necessary to teach them discipline (as a last resort of course). I was one of those children and thank God my parents spanked me when necessary. The Idea that children have the same rights as adults is IMO wrong. They don't have the maturity or experience necessary. Full equal rights comes only when they become independent of their parents. If you are going to use that as an argument against spanking you will get nowhere. When it comes to child rearing there are no experts.
- tbcass January 13, 2009 10:53AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Timeouts
I don't claim to be an expert. I have opinions--just as you do.
As a parent, I didn't feel good about spanking , so I looked for methods that worked better. I'm not saying that spanking doesn't stop misbehavior. I just don't like the other results of spanking. One mother shared that she spanked her three-year-old and sent him to time-out in his room. In a few minutes she peeked in and saw him sitting on the bed hitting himself in the face and saying, "I'm a bad boy." It broke her heart and she decided she would never spank again. Spanking creates a sense of doubt and shame that is not healthy. So, I found ways to be kind and firm at the same time--methods that got my children involved in thinking skills and problem-solving skills. I don't think any parent would spank if they had more respectful methods to help their children improve their behavior--and their sense of self-worth.
- Jane Nelsen January 13, 2009 10:47PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
3 years old is too young to spank IMO. Children don't understand the concept of personnel consequences until about 5 +/-. My experiences are different than yours that's why we disagree. That is also why I said all other methods should be tried first, but for some children only spanking seems to work. There is no one size fits all solution. It is also why I believe you are wrong when you say no parent should spank. Absolute statements are rarely correct.
- tbcass January 14, 2009 5:35AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Timeouts
I have always used spanking (on the bottom only with your hand only) only after using up all other available avenues. However, when it was done I made sure it was done in a loving way and not with anger. It doesn't have to be hard but firm. Each time it took place I then took time to embrace the child and talk to them about the consequences of their actions. They knew that I did it not because I was big and bad, but because I loved them and wanted what was best for them. They understood that those type of actions were not acceptable. Today both my children are grown adults, one married with her own child and one graduatin from high school on the "A" honor roll. Whether you are using verbal correction, assertive actions or spanking, it must ALL be done in love with right motives. I believe that is why a majority of children today grow up undisciplined and feeling unloved. A vast number of parents simply let the child raise themselves and let them "work out" their anger on their own. After all "they're just children" they say. The problem is that they grow up not knowing that they are responsible for their actions and have no sense of respect for lifes authorities. They key is to temper any correction with heart felt love and out of concern for the childs future.
- livelystone January 12, 2009 8:24AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Physical
Many of us were spanked as children (including me) and we turned out "fine." My argument is that something other than spanking (helpfing me focus on solutions) might have given me even more skills. I think that most parents would prefer not to spank if they had other options (other than permissiveness)that not only dealt with the behavior problem, but also taught children valuable social and life skills such and focusing on solutions to correct the "misbehavior."
- Jane Nelsen January 12, 2009 4:09PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(3)
Side: Uncommitted
I checked uncommitted because the "best way to discipline is a combination of many methods; physical is just one and timeouts is another, and both have their place. Why is most everything I read is one side or the other? Let me preface this with, "I do not believe "smacking" is ever the proper method and it is not included in my definition of Corporal Punishment". Corporal punishment is an adequate swat to the posterior with a paddle that will not cause bruising or other bodily harm. It will, however, produce enough pain to cause the young child to realize the specific behavior or action on their part is wrong. Corporal punishment is usually followed up with appropriate timeout and reflection time on their part and further explanation by parent as to what was wrong with their behavior or action. This is basic parenting 101 and my wife and I used it successfully, most of the time (we are not perfect as our kids are not either, and we all made mistakes; but, I am very pleased with my adult children - all of them.
Corporal punishment done properly is neither humiliating nor unfair. What is humiliating and unfair is when an elementary age child talks to an adult, school kitchen worker like she is a "piece of dirt" and demands her to comply with their demands. That, my friend, is the impact when corporal punishment is "never" administered when it is required. The total absence of proper corporal punishment has produced a whole generation of undisciplined, disrespectful people. I drive by them in the neighborhood streets and walk by them in malls, schools, churches, etc. My wife and I raised 4 boys and 1 girl who are respectful, hardworking members of society. Go ahead and ask them if the "spankings" they received on the 'behind' with the "paddle" (not the hand), caused them psychological harm and other bad effects. They will tell you, NO.
Parents, the first ten years are the easy ones when you start "early". I found the teen years to be the most difficult, even when the early years of discipline worked then. The methods definitely change during the teen years through high school, and that is a whole other subject.
Parents, corporal punishment is appropriate and it does work when done properly and when it is called for. Their is a difference between "childish" behavior and "disobedience" and it is the "disobedience" that sometimes requires corporal punishment.
- StratMan January 12, 2009 9:16AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Punishing a child by hitting, shaming, forcing to sit in a chair, etc. etc. is wrong. It stifles communication. It belittles the child.
Children know adults have more experience with life and they will listen and learn if you sound serious and caring. I totally disagree with this whole "choose a side" poll because timeouts and physical punishment are both bad and have been proven to be harmful. "Uncommitted" isn't a choice either! I'm a very committed, decisive parent who never punishes. I have the most sensitive and respectful children who show more affection and trust than any other children I've seen. Ever. It's because I take the time to understand and communicate and listen and instruct and work out problems.
Children are people so treat them like people. They're not possessions. They're human beings. It seems most adults are completely blind to the fact that children become adults and all adults were children once! We're all one continuum. Good grief, wake up and start acting like intelligent human beings instead of slave masters.
- SojournerTruth January 12, 2009 8:04PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
i'm sure you know that. you don't a shit though. you just want to seem right. seem good. you need to be punched in the head. then you will know someone somewhere goin to call you on your shit. You can learn something there. maybe you will learn to take boxing lessons. maybe you will learn to vote for nazi socialists. but something will be learned.
i don't really believe in smacking kids . i think it's more impactful to smack them intellectually or emotionally. you're flithy kind will not understand the similiarity or essential sameness. punishment. discipline . a illogical brain dead, feel good shallow supperfical selfish malignacy is what you people are.
- jxzac April 2, 2009 4:12AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
As a father of 5 boys ages 10 to 30 I would have to say Betty is right!
No child is the same,so no discipline should be the same.what ever the discipline is it needs to be positive.
- zman May 22, 2009 7:14PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
Whereas several of the suggestions seem to be good for developing communication in toddlers, I fail to see how that deals with disciplining them. I also would object to the idea that positive discipline makes the child feel in control-- what is the justification in a toddler feeling like they're in control? How is it a good thing that a toddler feel in control of their upbringing? When did the idea of parents raising a contributing member of society with sound morals turn into a way by which a child who is in the earliest stages of development (mental, physical, emotional, etc) can feel in control? Is it really desirable (leaving alone whether it's even achievable) that we try and make it so that our children are only exposed to positive emotions? Is the point of raising a child not to end up with an independantly functioning adult? Also, regarding the idea that positive discipline is the answer to displine problems-- what would you suggest as a way to fix existing problems? Perhaps positive discipline will reinforce good behaviors, but what does it do about existing bad behaviors?
- etomaria September 21, 2009 4:05PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
That wasn't IT at all. What they did wrong was to leave us alone to much. We got off the bus by ourselves, and let ourselves into the house. We cooked some cheap frozen pizza and watched Gilligan's island. They chased the American dream, and acted as though we were obstacles to their materialism.
It was never their talking to us or failing to 'order us around' that was the problem.
- skullaria January 22, 2009 6:21AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Yes, that was a big problem as well. In fact that's the subject of my first book, 7 Myths of Working Mothers. If you like, you can find out more about it at www.suzannevenker.com
- Suzanne Venker January 22, 2009 12:52PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Timeouts
i remember cooking my mac n cheese outside in the back yard with a candle. I don't think most kid were taught to 'do anything'. they were taught not to do anything. they were taught kids can't do anything except kid things. they were'nt left alone to do things. they were given nanny's and told not to play in the dirt. never explore, ect. maybe i'm wrong. i'mnot sure what was the widespread norm but in any case, it's the exploreing, and doing things for one self that exercised the mind. I didn't really get toys, so i had fun mixing up potions and exploreing nature. it helped me become a resourceful thinker. playing with he-man or tinkering withthe lawnmower,.. it was the lawnmover that was more fun and memorable. at 10 i built my own go cart. which is something i think today's generation doesn't conceive. a go cart must come in a plastic box. back in the day, they were built from scraps. the idea of gears and tork, these are real concepts that interrelate to other things. Today everything is pre-packaged. Not too many people in my generation can cook. dinner has to come in a box.
- jxzac February 20, 2009 3:11PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
I don't know if I would blame the Boomers, but I will have to agree that parenting is much different from when I grew up...and I don't think that I am THAT old yet (Gen X). I work with these 20-somethings who think they should be rewarded for doing what they are supposed to (like showing up for work), and grew up in this fantasy-land of receiving "participation awards". It's really kind of unfair to these kids to raise them this way...because the real world is MUCH different from how they are being raised. Ugh.
- Lucky13 January 22, 2009 7:41PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
It's certainly best to speak with children and not at them. I saw a mother with her 2 year explain to her complex things honestly and with clarity. This child was brilliant. It was the funniest thing to see her ask quests and her mother confidently and clearly explain them in steady detail where the child understood. 2 years old. not three, 1 and 11 months. I saw a four year old similiar. That's how to raise children. The problem is there's so many stupid adults. There is no way they could explain things with clarity. These kids would be like,'you make no sense i have no idea what you mean'.
let the stupid adults raise stupid children. LEt them fail in society. What we need to do is make sure not give them social hand out. we should not let them vote either.
- jxzac February 20, 2009 2:42PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
I agree that parents need to definitely be in charge with very young children . Children much before age ten just don't know what's what. With the advent of the teen years comes the time for becoming less of an authority figure and more of an advisor.
- silverfang838 September 1, 2009 10:02PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Children crave boundaries? I very seriously doubt that. As an expert, shouldn't you be able and more than willing to provide evidence to back up your claims--something you don't seem to be very keen on, I've noticed.
- Blue Linchpin June 3, 2009 5:51PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Timeouts
I am failry sure that those Americans who admit to spanking their kids here and there have done so when they were just too angry to think straight.
How does one come to spank when calm and collected? What purpose does it serve? A "difficult" child (not really a helpful label wouldn't you agree?) like any child needs limits and consistency and structure (maybe more than others) like any other child. The only difficult thing about "difficult" children is that it requires better and more pareting skills.
Ima
- Ima January 22, 2009 9:05AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Uncommitted
Of all my arguments, I knew the spanking one would get people riled up -- for nothing, really. My point was not that spanking is preferable or okay as a regular form of discipline; it was simply to point out that a swat on the behind is not the same as abuse. There are many more constructive ways to discipline a child than spanking, and I list some of them in my last argument.
The term "difficult" is precisely what some children are. I was one myself, which served me well in understanding my own "difficult" child -- who is all the more loveable because of his strength. Yes, handling difficult children does require better and more parenting skills. And if the boundaries are clear, and your love and respect for him obvious, he will curtail his natural tendancy to be in charge.
- Suzanne Venker January 22, 2009 1:03PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Timeouts
I agree with you that spanking should be a rare event. I also think that part of the problem lies in the fact that todays parents are less well equipped to deal with problems of child raising than previous generations. The sources they tend to turn to (TV, Internet, Print Media) tend to give conflicting and confusing advice.
When I watch my 3 year old nephew I am loathe to spank him because I know that my own mother and sister use it far too often. He just doesn't respond to it. Me personally I prefer to use revoking of privileges (changing the TV from his show or taking his toys away). My sister once used the old fashioned soap in the mouth to correct him from swearing which in a way didnt sit well with me but on the up side it was only needed to be used once, now if something is serious enough all I have to do is tell him I'm going to get the soap to get him to stop (never actually have to follow through).
- Concerned Citizen February 19, 2009 1:38PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Hi, Citizen. Problam with soap in the mouth is the health issue. I remember a doctor once commented that this is VERY risky to child's health. As a teen, I watched a parent (neighbor friend of mine) do that with his 7 year old, the boy threw up all over, and was sick for days. Sorry, maybe it worked the one time, but it is far too much of a risk to do. Thanks.
- Seattledad February 21, 2009 11:23PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Timeouts
Like I said I was not too happy to hear it had been done...
Like all things its about how much you give. The small tiny dab on the pinky or maybe just the residue from washing your hands is more than enough to do what needs to be done and that is leave a 'yucky' taste in the mouth (which naturally they will spit out). If you try to stuff a bar of soap in their mouth then yeah you'll get a result similar to what you witnessed.
The whole 'bar of soap' bit is often witnessed in popular culture media. Like that Christmas movie where the kid wants a BB Gun and possibly partly from what their parents did to themselves growing up.
Like I said, its all about the individual kid. Maybe the kid had some sort of allergy to some additive in the soap used. Just because one doctor said something also does not mean all doctors would necessarily agree and if they do agree if they do such for the same reasons (IE. If a doctor said it was perfectly fine and what happened to the parent you seen happening they'd probably end up getting sued even if thats like 1 in 1000+ rarity). I dont really support it but I can see why a parent may utilize it on rare occasion.
- Concerned Citizen February 22, 2009 8:27AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
On a pinkie? Ok, I'd really like to know when you have ever heard of or witnessed some parent just putting a "little dab" on a pinkie. Sorry, but as a parent, and as a counselor to many abused children, using soap is just not a good idea. Forcing a child to take in something like that is the same as force feeding. Might does not make right. Communication without hitting and utilizing other methods of discipline that are non physical do work. You need to be consistent about it, you can't threaten and not do it. But it works! Soaping is a bad idea period, sorry, but doing something like that "once in awhile" is just not worth the rist. Your comment, too, "just because one doctor said something also does not mean all doctors would." I challenge you again on that. Find me ANY doctor that thinks "soaping" is a good idea or healthy for a child. Sorry, but you missed the point. By the way, if you "don't really support it" then stick to your guns! Don't back off and just throw something like that out there, stand tall and say I DON'T SUPPORT IT.
- Seattledad February 22, 2009 10:28AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Timeouts
You're right, while I may not agree with the no physical punishment in its entirety. I will stick to my guns on the soap issue.
Besides physical punishment is best used when the alternative would be worse like spanking a child who was going to try to touch a burning hot stove not as something you do because the kid isnt listening.
- Concerned Citizen February 22, 2009 6:06PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
So you think that hitting a 3 year old who is about to touch a burning stove is wise because you THINK the child is not listening? And how do you know that? How do you know that he is not listening, perhaps it's the way you communicate to him. Little ones can be, with consistency, distracted and directed elsewhere. Most parents do that rather than smack their little ones. That is not going to teach them anything, except associate pain with something they think you are displeased with. I can GUARANTEE that when you hit, the child will cry, and likely do it again. I've seen it time and time again, and have seen it in action with other parents and little ones. Simply put, hitting teaches NOTHING positive. Sorry, but you are very sadly mistaken to think hitting children will do ANYTHING to teach a child something positive.
- Seattledad February 22, 2009 6:46PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Timeouts
I read your comments, Suzanne, and I am saddened by your thoughts that spanking is ok. It is never ok to hit a child, period. One swat? Let me ask you how many times that is necessary to "spank" a child? What I have found is that too often, spankings escalate. 1 swat to a 3 year old, becomes 2-3 swats to a 5 year old. It then escalates to using an instrument on a 7-10 year old like a wooden board (weighing a few pounds) or a belt (most common) a wooden spoon against bare legs. Then some parents escalate that to a 12-14 year old teen by hitting more times and harder. I've seen this personally in my research. I think there is NOTHING positive about hitting a defenseless child. I agree, it is not child abuse with one swat, but if you cannnot learn better, more positive and non physical consequences raising your children, you have no business being a parent. Sorry,Suzanne, but shame on you!
- Seattledad February 21, 2009 11:20PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Timeouts
What exactly separates spanking from physical abuse? You made a claim, with nothing to back it up. Spanking is using physical and painful force in order to get your way. Physical abuse is violent--anything that causes physical pain. Whether you are the parent or not does not excuse it nor does it change what it is. If you are advocating child abuse, be honest about it and make your case.
Furthermore, what good does spanking do in the longterm but give the parent some feeling of vengeance? Violence has been the standard method of "disciplining" children for all of human history, and what good has it done? It only serves to show children that violence is a method of getting what you want and teaches them no moral guidelines, only fear.
- Blue Linchpin June 3, 2009 5:41PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Timeouts
Child buttock-battering for the purpose of gaining compliance is nothing more than an inherited bad habit.
Its a good idea for people to take a look at what they are doing, and learn how to DISCIPLINE instead of hit.
I think the reason why television shows like "Supernanny" and "Dr. Phil" are so popular is because that is precisely what many (not all) people are trying to do.
There are several reasons why child bottom-slapping isn't a good idea. Here are some good, quick reads recommended by professionals:
Plain Talk About Spanking
by Jordan Riak,
The Sexual Dangers of Spanking Children
by Tom Johnson,
NO VITAL ORGANS THERE, So They Say
by Lesli Taylor M.D. and Adah Maurer Ph.D.
Most compelling of all reasons to abandon this worst of all bad habits is the fact that buttock-battering can be unintentional sexual abuse for some children . There is an abundance of educational resources, testimony, documentation, etc available on the subject that can easily be found by doing a little research on " spanking ".
Just a handful of those helping to raise awareness of why child bottom-slapping isn't a good idea:
American Academy of Pediatrics,
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,
Center For Effective Discipline,
PsycHealth Ltd Behavioral Health Professionals,
Churches' Network For Non-Violence,
Nobel Peace Prize recipient Archbishop Desmond Tutu,
Parenting In Jesus' Footsteps,
Global Initiative To End All Corporal Punishment of Children,
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
In 26 countries, this practice is prohibited by law (with more in process). In fact, the US was the only UN member that did not ratify the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
- PDeverit September 22, 2009 12:21AM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Timeouts
..i'm glad you pointed out these simple steps, which should be obvious but they're not. people really fail to do these things. it needs to be mentioned. It's completely dangerous and distructive to our planet to raise children the way that people are being taught to do. It seems nearly everyone raises their children with dishonest encrouagement and over flown praise. What we have is a new generation of deciety selfish irrational unsaitable demons. That's not good. These parents should be held responsible for the civil crime their children will commit.
- jxzac February 20, 2009 1:29PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
29 state legislatures have abolished physical (corporal) punishment (paddling or spanking with weapons/wooden boards by educators to deliberately inflict physical pain and suffering intended to punish schoolchildren). Ohio Governor Ted Strickland has proposed a school paddling ban, if approved, Ohio will be the 30th state to abolish corporal punishment of children in schools making it illegal. Government leaders must take immediate action to ensure Equal Civil Rights treatment and educational access to safe, healthy and supportive learning environments by establishing and enforcing Nationwide Uniform Standards regarding school safety and student discipline for ALL Children. The very important issue of children's safety at school is not a Local Issue to be left up to local school boards. Educators who hit children with wooden paddles powerfully model physical assault/violence as the acceptable way to solve problems. The cost to eliminate educators' right to hit schoolchildren is $0.
- Mom of 3 February 25, 2009 12:07PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Timeouts
1. Never spank when angry
2. The child must be able to walk.
3. The child must be legally your own child--not a student, not a foster kid or other relative or neighbor or daycare client or non-adopted stepchild.
4. The infraction must either be dangerous or defiant.
5. If you are going to spank, it should be within one to five minutes of the infraction.
A spanking administered by a parent who is not angry to a defiant 2 year-old can have a salutary effect on the child.
If spanking is used only when the parent is out of control, it can be counterproductive. Deciding you will never spank leaves you open to spanking when you are out of control.
It was amazing to me that I began to develop much calmer responses generally to my child when I decided that I had to be calm in order to spank. My yelling decreased along with my spanking. I was able to discipline much more effectively when I decided there were circumstances when spanking was appropriate than when I thought that spanking was always abuse.
- acitizen October 22, 2009 1:49PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008-2010 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
How Should You Discipline Your Child?
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Are these really opposing views?
Strikes me that your collection of experts are all on the same side. If all the experts agree, why are we debating?
- MHays
January 12, 2009 11:05AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
On the contrary
Suzanne Venker is old-school punishment under false pretenses of "fixing" parenting. OK to occasionally spank a "difficult" child? Wow, that's wrong on so many levels. Rewards and charts? Gimme a break - they only work until the child realizes they don't care about the reward, and then you've got nothing to motivate them and they never learned internal motivation.
- Truly Scrumptious
January 20, 2009 11:01AM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Age-appropriate discipline
Internal motivation is learned over time, as children get older. When they're very young, rewards are concrete and understandable. As they age, they will develop the concept of internal motivation. You wouldn't use a chart with a 7 or 8-year-old, for example -- but you might with a four or five-year-old.
- Suzanne Venker January 22, 2009 2:42PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Timeouts
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
No, actually, I wouldn't.
I wouldn't use a chart at any age, I wouldn't use rewards at any age, and I would never, never spank at any age for any reason. I'd rather work with them as they learn internal motivation over time, using Positive Discipline that respects their developing self. I use my authority as Mom to set boundaries, and see myself as a coach whose job it is to set children up for success.
- Truly Scrumptious
January 22, 2009 7:12PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
case and point
a friend of mine's sister's son was this unruly fat little kid. a total jackass. We were together and this kid kept jumping on me wanting to 'play' I ask the mother to control her kid. she wouldn't. She like you people, let the kid do what it wants. "IT" it's not a person. The kid grabbed my arms and jumped arround trying to twist it. This how outrageous the parent was. This kid was still attached to my arm when i lifted my arm, and the kid hurt himself.I had asked him and his mother to stop. the mother thought it was funny. I didn't find it funny at all. when he hurt himself, the mother became very angry at me. I resent that. I believe both the mother and child should be spanked, with a fat lawsuit. My friends kids are all very well behaved and she has 7 kids. They got spanked. The unrully kid, never spanked. I think the parents of those kids need to be spanked. We need laws quickly to hold these parents responsible for their children's actions. nearly the whole country has raised these children incorrectly. We need laws written now because in 10 years, it's going to be very bad. These parents need to be sent to jails.
- jxzac February 20, 2009 2:10PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Re: case and point
No offense meant, but I have encountered a reverse situation. My sister is not exactly 100% anti- spanking (she keeps trying to tell me I'll change my mind one day), and my brother-in-law has tried to have arguments with me over his belief that using a belt is acceptable. They do spank their kids occasionally - at least he does (jury's still out on my sister, but I imagine she would under certain circumstances). They are more wild than children I have encountered who are never spanked.
Also, in response to your comment "She like you people, let the kid do what it wants." - exactly what do you mean by "you people", anyway? Doesn't sound to me like you're uncommitted at all, and downright hate us. And not everybody who opposes physical disciplinary tactics such as spanking believes in "let kids do what they want". You can have discipline without spanking and you can have spanking without discipline. And it's not exactly like everybody who opposes physical disciipline believes in no discipline at all. Some do, granted, and they are problematic. But in fact, kids who are spanked tend to cause more trouble than kids who aren't. The shooter at Jonesboro, Arkansas was paddled at school the day before the school shooting incident there. Sure stopped him! Also, there's the kid in Arizona who vowed a 1,000 spanking limit, and when his father had spanked him for the 1,000th time, he shot and killed him. So if anybody really thinks that spanking absolutely stops crime, take a good hard look at the facts.
As a kid, I was beaten on (not spanking either, things that would be illegal even in Ohio where I grew up) by a father who was pretty much managed by "TV and spanking", and ridiculed and beaten by bullies who were all spanked besides him. Half of them are in prison today.
So here's a thought. Don't spank. Give the kid enough attention so they won't need to act out, but don't be afraid to be firm when necessary and set non-physical consequences for bad behavior. There are so many things to take away these days that kids don't think they can live without for a few days that spanking is really unnecessary. Perhaps no TV for a few days, or no video games.
By the way, whoever made this ballot, timeouts are not the only non-physical disciplinary measure. Indicating they are only adds to the fire of those who think physical is the only way to go.
And for you Bible-thumpers out there who want to try to claim the Bible says "spare the rod, spoil the child", yes, Solomon said something similar to that in Proverbs 13:24. But he also violated the first, second and seventh commandments in that he worshipped at the temple of Baal, where there were idols of other gods (direct violation of first two commandments), fornication, etc. He also had 300 wives and 700 concubines (direct violation of seventh commandment). I'm agnostic, and don't really care about the Bible, I just find it amusing that people cherry-pick it whenever it seems to tell them whatever they want to hear.
- sansevieria
February 24, 2009 2:52PM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Timeouts
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Spare the spoil and use the rod
I believe kids need tough love. Look at how most kids act today, parents nowadays want to be the kids friends. A parent and a child should never be friends. I know what you are saying about that incident with that kid and mother . Kids have no respect fo anyone anymore. There is a fine-line between abuse and tough-love, and all these Child welfare ppl need to distinguish between the two as well. I had a co-worker that almost had to do jail-time cause she grabbed her granddaughters hair and pulled her back b-4 a car hit her. Anyways I'm alll for spankins, or as I call em whoopins, it teaches kids respect and puts a little fear in them. Unlike timeouts- yeah lets send little Amy or Himmy to his room with T.V., Xbox, or a P.C.- that'll teach em some respect
- Sumbodi
November 17, 2009 7:38PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Physical
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Get Real
Most of the problems created with children today are from a lack of discipline in the household. Spanking a child is and acceptable and needed form of discipline. I don not think it should be used as a primary form of discipline,however if the behavior will cause the child or someone else harm then spanking should be considered. You say that rewards and charts do not work,yet timeout instead of spanking definately does not work. I have yet to see a child learn anything from timeout.
- cope65
May 4, 2009 2:38PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Physical
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
I couldnt agree more............
I grew up knowing that if I misbehaved there would actually be a price to pay. My parents did not abuse me, but I got my butt whipped more than once. And I thank God that they used good judgement but got my attention as to what was acceptable and what was not.
Parents today are so afraid of their children that they let them do anything they want. Sometimes I think the parents need a few whacks more that the children.
If nothing else life teaches you that there rewards and punishment depending on your behavior.
- bhall
September 21, 2009 12:17PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Physical
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Why don't you
carry this philosophy into adulthood? If your husband or wife does something you don't like, why not give them a good whack? Co-worker screwed up your work? Bring him into your office and smack him or her in the face.
- quantummechanik
September 21, 2009 12:25PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Timeouts
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Oh come on, you usually have a better
thought process than this dribble. The point is to make men and women know the difference between right and wrong as they reach adulthood. The consequences change when you are an adult and hopefully by fair means. I am surprised at you!!!!!!!
- bhall
September 21, 2009 12:50PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Physical
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
So why would you
physically punish someone who, as you say, doesn't know the difference, and let the person who SHOULD know the difference off?
- quantummechanik
September 21, 2009 8:38PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Timeouts
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
A Basic Lesson
The arguments against the use of physical force to punish children for behavioral problems is precisely the same argument against the use of physical force in all human relationships. The value of civilization that most of us claim to hold necessarily precludes physical violence in human relationships. Civilization is a hope of something better than the brutal savageries of the wild. The first step in escaping savagery is to eliminate the default to physical violence and instead default to the use of reason as one's primary method of dealing with the rest of nature, with oneself and with other human beings. Civilization requires an agreement among its members that, in the least, reason will remain the only acceptable method of human being relating with human being. In the interest of civilization, the use of force whether offensively or defensively is always the failure of reason and, thus, a failure of civilization. So too is resorting to physical force in the raising of our children. There is no doubt there will be situations when one must restrain a child from harming themselves and others, however, physical violence is not to be a method of instructions - merely a method of restraint - if one, in fact, values civilization.
If one does not value civilization and reason primarily, one is likely to eat one's own children before one wastes time with beating them into submission.
Civilization is a choice, however, the consequences of rejecting civilization are likely to be beyond your control.
- Naumadd
January 13, 2009 2:44AM
Reply to this Recommend
(2)
Side: Timeouts
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Use reason?
Are you kidding me? Reason? Reason with a five year old. They don't reason, they only care about themselves. I have 3 younger siblings, not a parent yet. But I know how children are. They do not, I repeat do not reason. I work in a grocery store and have for about 2 years. The children I see that behave the worst are the ones who's parents say they will get a "timeout". If all I got was a timeout for doing something I wanted to do, or miss out on a reward, I'll be bad as hell too. When I was coming up, I was fairly well-behaved(kids will always be kids) and if I did something wrong, I got a spanking . There is a difference between that and abuse. No child should ever run over any adult. Physical.
- GettinGwap
January 28, 2009 12:13AM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Physical
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
nomad, you're not reasonable.
"the use of force whether offensively or defensively is always the failure of reason.."
not true, a pretentious fantasy. if there's a fire and you force the door open to escape, you used force in a reasonable way. I hope that points out your outlandish perspective. i want to mention again how unreasonable your perspective was. how do you reason with the uncivil? civilization used force to protect prosperity. Do not forget that or you are returned to the mud. I believe that is where people are heading. with their arrogance, they shall force their ignorance. that's what's going on today. the most unreasonable people ignorantly and arrogantly contaminate civility. It's the biggest problem we as a people face. These people need mirrors. History books. They need humility.
- jxzac February 20, 2009 1:45PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Results you can measure
I have three wonderful daughters, the youngest is 21 and in her third year of college, just receive a congratulatory letter from the school’s dean for her academic achievements; the second to the oldest, a college graduate, just received the teacher of the year award in her second year of teaching; and the oldest, also a college graduate, she is the team lead of a marketing communication group at a very large corporation. Still early on, but not nearly enough not to savor my parenting success and the feelling of reaping what I have been sawing for the last 28 years.
I believe in corporal punishment as it was the way I raised them. There was never counting “1,2 …”; there was never a threat that wasn’t carried out and there was never a broken promise. There was plenty of expectation and consequence setting at front and delivery of spanking or praising at the end; depending on the outcome. Today I hear from them how glad they are of the way I brought them up.
Children need boundaries and consequences for stepping out of boundaries, early on they need guidance and hand holding until they learn, around middle school, what’s expected of them and they need to know that they are the only ones responsible for their mistakes they make and that they will live the rest of their lives with those mistakes; and all of this must be cemented with corporal punishment. I have taught them that what it does not cost them it is not valued and appreciated.
Every time they step outside the boundaries they knew there was the consequence of corporal punishment, it was never a surprised to them it was part of setting expectations; their success today has proven to me that I was right and corporal punishment is one of the ingredients to their successful future.
- Joaquin Aviles
January 13, 2009 10:12AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Physical
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Times are changing
You are obviously a loving and successful parent who used a variety of techniques to help your children learn important values, habits, and life lessons. Parents who use only or primarily spanking tend to be far less successful. Spanking was the norm when I was growing up, too, but today many more families are choosing other alternatives. I'm assuming, too, that your spankings were mild ones -- inteded to make a point without really hurting. Unfortunately, some parents lose control and hit hard enough to cause not only physical harm but long-lasting emotional damage. Today we know that harsh and unpredictable discipline can interfere with learning and brain development and can set a child's response system on hair-trigger alert, making it difficult for them to control anger and tantrumming.
- Betty Bardige
January 13, 2009 3:03PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Where's the third choice?
I don't use physical punishment OR timeouts. I use positive reinforcement and respect.
Why isn't there another choice?
- LLLovingMom
January 13, 2009 1:32PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
You are right!!!
Yes. Most child development experts would agree with you. The research is on your side. Physical discipline is inefffective. Time-outs can be useful in certain circumstances if used very carefully and not exclusively. Positive reinforcement and respect teach children to respect and value themselves and others -- which is the whole point of discipline.
- Betty Bardige
January 13, 2009 3:07PM
Reply to this Recommend
(1)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Personally
When I become a parent I will not only use spanking . Most parents don't only use 1 thing. I know these so-called psychology experts say that spanking increases aggression, fear, blah, blah blah. Maybe it's different for me because I'm a man(i doubt it) but I do not like confrontation at all. But if I am forced to be involved in one, I will not cower away. My fear and aggression isn't high and trust me, I got all kinds of physical punishment which may be considered abuse. Belts were mostly used on me(never the buckle). But I've had cordless phones and high heels thrown at me, hit with a broom handle that hollow and made of metal. Either I'm part of an exceptional minority, or the experts are wrong.
- GettinGwap
January 28, 2009 12:32AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Physical
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
?
We all click on the link knowing what the controversy is. However while all the experts chosen for this forum have valuable contributions all three chosen agree on the controversial issue. So how is this a debate?
To smack or not to smack that is the question. Yep it can be very nuanced. Someone who supports smacking might believe that positive discipline is better when possible or that corporal punishment should be part of a collection of discipline strategies or that the most important thing is working on giving a suitable environment for the child to mature in so that they will want to behave rather than seeing the actual behaviour as an issue. But at the end of the day surveys consistently show that most people support smacking in its place, different experts have different views, and it is a hot topic. I resent wasting my time with the bait question when it avoids the significant relevant opposing views entirely.
The discussion has spontaneously evolved around the obvious issue but there is no expert debate leading it off as we are entitled to expect.
For the record I am really negative about time outs and believe that they damage the relationship between parent and child. They only work by holding to ransom the natural attachment relationship but weaken it in the process.
- Michael Bates
January 13, 2009 10:44PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Physical
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Poll question is misleading, inaccurate!
The question, as people have said below is whether ANY type of punishment is beneficial (time out is a punishment) or if non-humiliating methods of communication and parenting are better.
Personally I strive for a No-Punishment, No-Rewards type of parenting (ala Alfie Kohn phD, Haim Ginott, Naomi Aldort, Taking Children Seriously, etc.)
Timeouts really no different than Corporal punishment in my book. So it's not a good poll option, at all.
- lioralourie
January 16, 2009 1:48AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The most important aspect to focus on..
.is the level of friendship. it's the breach in trust and display of responsibility and consequence.
I'm very good with kids because i respect them as people and they enjoy this. To punish them, i revoke my friendship and it works. i could get kids to behave. i can teach them. i can make them want to learn, want to behave ect.
- jxzac February 20, 2009 2:28PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Really
This is the funniest piece of drivel I have read in this debate. It is clear you do not have children of your own. Please try to have some relevant experience when commenting on issues. Otherwise, you are just bloviating.
- moby clarke
November 23, 2009 1:47AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
thank you!
i completely agree. even though i don't have kids of my own, i was raised with quite a few spankings under my belt, so to speak. my parents never took it too far, and so i learned that some things were simply not done. there is NO POSSIBLE WAY a child of 5 will understand reason. and for parents who try to be friends with their kids, wait till they're teens . jxzac, how old are those children you mentioned?
oh, and i know many children who aren't ever physically punished because they're adopted. they don't obey. i would know, i babysit them. they've come to realize that i mean business, and they are finally starting to listen to me, however it wasn't easy. and about the 'timeout debate', i was sent to a timeout stair or corner, never my room. i know too many children who are just sent to their rooms, when they have toys in their rooms that they just play with and don't learn anything. they realize that when they do something wrong, they can play in their room. there is no lesson learned. i understand that many people will not take my comments seriously, since i don't have children, but i personally believe that a light swat to the behind will help a child grow. it won't lead to "aggression, fear", etc. so when i'm a parent, i will follow what my parents did and discipline my children. spanking is not abuse, it is discipline. there is a difference. so, as a conclusion, spanking is NOT a bad thing, in MODERATION. i won't hold to spanking a child multiple times just so they say sorry "correctly", but i will make them realize that doing something they know is wrong will lead to discomfort.
- debator101
December 16, 2009 6:03PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Only timeout or physical to choose from...
No middle ground, eh?
We must remember that one of the rather large figures of the 1960's "free love" movement was a Dr. Spock. It was his books on parenting that taught mothers in the 50's to give their children what they want, never "punish" (strict punishments) them, teach them that they are unique, and good. However, though this may be kind and great, the world will not uphold these values that are being passed on. Now, I am not saying that parents should begin beating their children for spilling milk. But punishment that does its job (getting the message through) should be present.
No more passive, overly kind parents. Yes, have children feel good, but also allow them to truly grow up.
- ckidwell7098
March 5, 2009 4:18PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
What about a "difficult" inmate, military officer, employee...
For those who argue in favor of child buttock-battering for "difficult" children , why only children? Why not difficult death-row inmates, military officers, citizens, employees, etc? These were all legal once. Why are persons 18 yrs and younger today the only people who can be hit for any reason other than self-defense?
- PDeverit
July 31, 2009 7:41AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Timeouts
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Child buttock-battering vs. DISCIPLINE
Child buttock-battering for the purpose of gaining compliance is nothing more than an inherited bad habit.
Its a good idea for people to take a look at what they are doing and learn how to DISCIPLINE instead of hit.
I think the reason why television shows like "Supernanny" and "Dr. Phil" are so popular is because that is precisely what many (not all) people are trying to do.
There are several reasons why child buttock-battering isn't a good idea. Here are some good, quick reads recommended by professionals:
Plain Talk About Spanking
by Jordan Riak
The Sexual Dangers of Spanking Children
by Tom Johnson
NO VITAL ORGANS THERE, So They Say
by Leslie Taylor M.D. and Adah Maurer Ph.D.
- PDeverit
July 31, 2009 4:03PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Timeouts
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Child buttock-battering vs. DISCIPLINE
Most compelling of all reasons to discontinue this worst of all bad habits is the fact that buttock-battering can be unintentional sexual abuse for some children . There is an abundance of educational literature, testimonies, documentation, etc available on the subject that can easily be found by doing a little research on the topic.
Just a handful of those educating the public about why child buttock-battering isn't a good idea:
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
Center For Effective Discipline
PsycHealth Ltd, Behavioral Health Professionals
Churches' Network For Non-Violence
Nobel Peace Prize recipient Archbishop Desmond Tutu (supports Global Initiative)
Parenting In Jesus' Footsteps
Global Initiative To End All Corporal Punishment of Children
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child
Countries where child buttock-battering is prohibited by law :
Sweden, Finland, Norway, Austria, Cyprus, Italy, Denmark, Latvia, Croatia, Bulgaria, Germany, Israel, Iceland, Ukraine, Romania, Hungary, Greece, Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal Uruguay, Venezuela, Chile, Spain, Costa Rica, Republic of Moldova, and more in progress.
In fact, the US was the only UN member who did not sign the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
- PDeverit
July 31, 2009 4:13PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Timeouts
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Physical
When I was a child, it was the fear of a slap on the face that kept me in line. If my mother hadn't been able to back up her discipline with that, I wouldn't have listened to a word she said. Even now, if I don't face some kind of consequences, I go out of control.
If I were a parent, there would be no way I would waste my time arguing, pleading or rationalizing with a three-year-old. When a kid is that young, it's the parent's way or the highway. You can do the rationalizing when the child gets older, but little kids only understand concrete concepts, ie, if I act up, I get a whack on the bum.
- silverfang838 August 5, 2009 7:42PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
nothing wrong with spanking
i believe spanking is just fine but not in all situations but ya all yall that say spanking is totally unacceptable your kids are the ones that normally grow up to be the worst try it a couple of times i bet your kids will straighten up after just a couple of spankings ...... believe me i used to be anti spanking until one day i just couldnt stand it anymore and it definitely works.
- spanker
October 14, 2009 8:02PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Physical
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
agree
spanking shows that you mean business. I dont mean beating but a little tap shows that you will put up with no more. time out is no punishment. And trying to talk to kids who dont listen dont work either..my parents gave us light spankings and we grew up just fine. Soon learned what mom and dad would take and would not. I dont feel i was ever beat or abused just got my attention which is what kids need.
- cbooh
October 29, 2009 12:50AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Physical
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
basically level of punishment
children should be disciplined in a way where they understand what is expected of them, if they do something wrong they should know its wrong and why it's wrong. Children should not feel neglected if they get punished or if they don't get punished. By looking at the choices, there's only 2...which is quite not the range of punishments a child could receive and we always associate "physical" as something bad. Timeouts doesn't work because like I said children need to know what they're doing wrong, why they're doing wrong, and what they should be doing.
Timeout is like telling them they're wrong but not even letting them know what they did was wrong, so out of the thousands of thing a child do in a day, how would he possibly know what they did was wrong?
- hsclubber
October 25, 2009 8:09PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Physical
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.