http://www.time.com/time/magaz...9171,1983895,00.html

I do realize that no amount of research will change some of your minds Roll Eyes; just wanted to enlighten you.

Some points from the article:

The odds of a child being more aggressive at age 5 increased by 50% if he had been spanked more than twice in the month.

...her team accounted for varying levels of natural aggression in children, suggesting, she says, that "it's not just that children who are more aggressive are more likely to be spanked."

...spanking sets up a loop of bad behavior. Corporal punishment instills fear rather than understanding. Even if children stop tantrums when spanked, that doesn't mean they get why they shouldn't have been acting up in the first place. What's more, spanking sets a bad example, teaching children that aggressive behavior is a solution to their parents' problems.

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) does not endorse spanking under any circumstance.
Original Post
The long term effects of spanking (when used properly)are happy, responsible,law abiding adults!
On the other hand there are parents that spank their children because they are angry, want revenge. Spanking should only be a tool to correct unacceptable behavior and even then should only be done for the more serious offenses because if it is used to often it can begin to loose its effectiveness. For the minor stuff a time out, grounding, taking their cell phone, etc can also be effective tools.
quote:
Originally posted by BFred07:
The long term effects of spanking (when used properly)are happy, responsible,law abiding adults!
On the other hand there are parents that spank their children because they are angry, want revenge. Spanking should only be a tool to correct unacceptable behavior and even then should only be done for the more serious offenses because if it is used to often it can begin to loose its effectiveness. For the minor stuff a time out, grounding, taking their cell phone, etc can also be effective tools.


Hey there, Fred. Long time no argue, huh? Big Grin I'm sorry but you totally missed the point of the study's findings. It does not say that spanking is okay, as long as it's used sparingly; it says that ALL spanking makes children more aggressive. Period.
Personal experience and observation clearly indicates this was another study with preconceived results. Lack of discipline (corporal) has resulted in and continues to result in the mindless, unmotivated, uncaring and free-spirits we see daily. No one is responsible for anything. It just happens. Also, Time magazine represents nothing and is a waste of paper.
quote:
Originally posted by BFred07:
The long term effects of spanking (when used properly)are happy, responsible,law abiding adults!
On the other hand there are parents that spank their children because they are angry, want revenge. Spanking should only be a tool to correct unacceptable behavior and even then should only be done for the more serious offenses because if it is used to often it can begin to loose its effectiveness. For the minor stuff a time out, grounding, taking their cell phone, etc can also be effective tools.



taking their cell phone?

Thats the major reason spankings are needed...SPOILED children.
OK, I have to say something. Every single person I went to school with and every single friend I have was "paddled" or "spanked" as a child. I have two children, both were spanked as needed. NONE of these people I am still in contact with are aggressive or abusive. We spanked only when necessary, and as the children grew it became less frequent. I can't remember spanking our kids after they got around 9-10 or so. At that point they began to pay attention and LISTEN to us better. We have friends who refuse to spank and to be honest, nobody wants their kids around because they are rude pushy little jerks. Of course it's partly that they have been too lazy or ignorant to properly discipline in any way. Point is, all of us who grew up in the '50s and '60s were spanked. I have no doubt if you look at percentages from each decade, there is more physical violence and misbehavior now than ever before. And don't forget the impact of video games and other forms of "entertainment" that promote violence. It's not all due to spanking. I shouldn't need to add this, but, I'm not supporting child abuse and beating. There IS a difference.
quote:
Originally posted by longawaiting:
Personal experience and observation clearly indicates this was another study with preconceived results. Lack of discipline (corporal) has resulted in and continues to result in the mindless, unmotivated, uncaring and free-spirits we see daily. No one is responsible for anything. It just happens. Also, Time magazine represents nothing and is a waste of paper.


How could the results be preconceived when they were studying children? You think someone tipped the kids off to the study? LOL!

So being spanked somehow makes you a responsible adult, but being put in timeout and other measures does not? Care to explain? Chances are excellent that you can't. Spanking is the only discipline, huh? Comical.

Yeah, Time magazine is a waste of paper just like the folks on Fox News are a waste of air space.
quote:
Originally posted by JaneYIS:
OK, I have to say something. Every single person I went to school with and every single friend I have was "paddled" or "spanked" as a child. I have two children, both were spanked as needed. NONE of these people I am still in contact with are aggressive or abusive. We spanked only when necessary, and as the children grew it became less frequent. I can't remember spanking our kids after they got around 9-10 or so. At that point they began to pay attention and LISTEN to us better. We have friends who refuse to spank and to be honest, nobody wants their kids around because they are rude pushy little jerks. Of course it's partly that they have been too lazy or ignorant to properly discipline in any way. Point is, all of us who grew up in the '50s and '60s were spanked. I have no doubt if you look at percentages from each decade, there is more physical violence and misbehavior now than ever before. And don't forget the impact of video games and other forms of "entertainment" that promote violence. It's not all due to spanking. I shouldn't need to add this, but, I'm not supporting child abuse and beating. There IS a difference.


What's in bold is BS. I know too many parents, including myself, that did not spank and have happy, healthy, productive, non-aggressive, non-violent children. Typical response.
I agree and disagree! My parents used all manner of discipline from grounding, time-outs, loss of privileges and an a occasional spanking when the infraction warranted one. I am extremely responsible, employed, have never been arrested, or never showed up on my parent's doorstep pregnant. I think they did a fairly good job, no arrogance intended. AND they spanked me.
quote:
quote:
Originally posted by CageTheElephant:
What B.S.
Not even worth rebuttal.


Yes, Tulane University - a world renowned research university - is known for their many bunk studies.


No, I don't need some "renowned research"...I have the "experience based FACTS"...
Got my azz "lit" several times as a kid. AND, yes! I "avoided" future similar acts...
if i cared enough to spend the time, i'm sure i could find a study that 'proved' the exact opposite.

there are few 'studies' done any more that aren't preconcieved before they start.

a groupe of people said ' hey .. i hate spanking.. lets go do and publish a study that shows how bad it is'

the same type of scientific studies have 'proven' plain old vanilla male+female porn movies leads directly to child molestation.

i understand you're point, buttercup... but i don't buy the study. you believe it because it's something you already believe in.

i know kids that were never spanked who are absolout horrors, and we aren't friends with those parents anymore because we didn't want to be around those spoiled obnoxious brats.
to be fair i also know a couple kids who weren't spanked and are ok normal kids.
i don't know any kids that were spanked properly, (not abused, not mistreated, not spanked in anger) that are as obnoxious as the kids who run roughshod over their parents because they know there are no consqunces.
they had their cells phones taken away. the kids went into the parents bedroom and ransaked it until they found them. the driving privlidges were revoked. they took the car anyway. because they knew, from years of experiance, that nothing would ever happen except a little more yelling and fussing.

i do know one child that wasn't spanked... was a horrible horrible child.. rotten little brat.. didn't want to be around her.
now, she's starting college, and is a phenomenal human being.

all i know for sure is this.
i know more rotten children, personally, that wern't spanked, than good ones, and know more good spankees that are good kids than rotten ones.
call it a 'Study' based on personal experiance and now sitting and watching and waiting for evidence that proved my point.

BUT.. after all that, i still say /Cheers!.. the world needs all of us.. if everyone was alike, this would be a bloody boring place to live Smiler
Vive la Differance!
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:


Hey there, Fred. Long time no argue, huh? Big Grin I'm sorry but you totally missed the point of the study's findings. It does not say that spanking is okay, as long as it's used sparingly; it says that ALL spanking makes children more aggressive. Period.


I was not agreeing with the article, I was just stating my own humble opinion.

Spanking is not bad for kids, when my older kids were younger they were spanked for things like playing with an electrical socket, jumping on the couch, climbing on the counters, and other crap that could get them hurt. Those were the things that I wanted/needed to quickly get across to them that they were not going to do again because I did not want them to be injured. I have a younger one now that occasionally gets a spanking for the same type things and for the most part spanking offenses for my kids fell into the perimeter of things that could get them hurt. Other things have been like once my 2nd oldest son was told to go to time out, he didn't think he should have to and argued and straight out said he wasn't going to time out, so I whipped his little tail into time out and there was no more argument about it! Well anyway, so far so good. My older kids have turned out pretty well and my smaller ones are well behaved. My kids do not seem to be overly aggressive, they are well adjusted,made good grades through school, had plenty of friends, and the older ones are in college and holding jobs...now if I could just get them to handle their money a bit more responsibly, wonder if spanking an 18 & 21 year old might help that problem?
quote:
Originally posted by BFred07:
The long term effects of spanking (when used properly)are happy, responsible,law abiding adults!
On the other hand there are parents that spank their children because they are angry, want revenge. Spanking should only be a tool to correct unacceptable behavior and even then should only be done for the more serious offenses because if it is used to often it can begin to loose its effectiveness. For the minor stuff a time out, grounding, taking their cell phone, etc can also be effective tools.


+1 No sense in arguing this one. One either agrees with PROPER application of corporal punishment or one doesn't. But to come out and say that ALL corporal punishment is 'wrong' is liberal closedmindedness at its best.
1st came lecture of why a whoopin was called for ,then the question what was I thinking, then the lecture of thinking before acting next time. Alot of thought process before the stimulation. There has always been parents with no common sense, there is just alot more nowadays.
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
No amount of evidence will ever change a true believer's mind, Buttercup.

Yeah, you have all the facts and research that soundly proves your point but the stupid runs deep in this area.

Nice try, though.


LOL, the supposed facts of the "study" are a bit biased. Corporal punishment has been used for thousands of years, the reason it has stayed around is because it works!
The people doing this "research" are the ones that seem to think if time out doesn't work the kid must have ADD and just give them pills like Ritalin or Adderall to "fix" them.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to just observe how things work, I can see how my grandparents, parents, siblings, and children turned out and I can see how the kids that didn't get whippings turned out. I think I'll stick with whippings when needed as it seems to be working out pretty well.
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
No amount of evidence will ever change a true believer's mind, Buttercup.

Yeah, you have all the facts and research that soundly proves your point but the stupid runs deep in this area.

Nice try, though.


I know. I'm actually sitting here laughing at the responses because they're all so predictable.

Over and over, the spankers say kids who aren't spanked are brats and end up in jail. LOL! It's still beyond me (for some reason) how a person can't deduce that discipline means to train.

Parents that don't set any limits will in fact have a brat on their hands, but smart parents set limits and boundaries and do use timeouts, etc.; that is discipline and - if it's used consistently - it works. Every time.
Buttercup - I spanked my daughter ONCE during her younger years: ONCE. IIRC, she was 3 years old. It indeed HURT...me. Future punishment was 'time out' in a corner, which she absolutely HATED...MORE than the spanking. She was THE BEST kid a parent/teacher could ever hope for. She is now mother to my grandson.

Me? I received spankings, whippings, etc...ALL FOR GOOD REASON. I even had my ears boxed by my dad a couple of times. Again, all deserved. Sometimes I was paddled, spanked, whipped, etc 3-4X for the one incident.

As a teacher I paddled numerous students: all for good reasons. BUT....I honestly believe that there is an AGE LIMIT at which corporal punishment ceases to work and other measures should be selected. But to say it is ALL bad ALL the time shows a gross misunderstanding of child psychology.
quote:
But to say it is ALL bad ALL the time shows a gross misunderstanding of child psychology.


You didn't even read the article, did you?

Yes, it IS bad all the time. Especially when there are other methods that work just as well or better but [i]without the abuse factor.[i].

This newest research combined with many decades of older research confirms this beyond any reasonable doubt!

If I could show you some alternatives that have been proven to work better, would you continue to spank or would you stick to your old ways?
quote:
Me? I received spankings, whippings, etc...ALL FOR GOOD REASON.


And so did I. Your evidently resulted in a continuation and acceptance of old methods that have been proven to be harmful in the long run.

Me? I was beaten by my teacher in the 1st grade and that set the mood for the rest of my school years. It DID NO motivate me to come to school ready to learn. I bred resentment.

Psychology and research reveals that these kinds of events have long term negative consequences that present themselves in ways that you cannot imagine unless you study the evidence. Please educate yourself. There is hope for you, too, but only if you choose to open your mind to the possibility that committing violence upon children might, jut might, ultimately be a bad thing.
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
No amount of evidence will ever change a true believer's mind, Buttercup.

Yeah, you have all the facts and research that soundly proves your point but the stupid runs deep in this area.

Nice try, though.


I know. I'm actually sitting here laughing at the responses because they're all so predictable.

Over and over, the spankers say kids who aren't spanked are brats and end up in jail. LOL! It's still beyond me (for some reason) how a person can't deduce that discipline means to train.

Parents that don't set any limits will in fact have a brat on their hands, but smart parents set limits and boundaries and do use timeouts, etc.; that is discipline and - if it's used consistently - it works. Every time.


You do realize your responses have been pretty preditable as well?

How many kids do you have buttercup?
To each his own, thats my motto. I will not hesitate to swat the rear of my toddler when needed, very seldomly is it needed (usually lowering my voice gets her attention.) You know what is worse than swatting her rear? Having someone force their opinion on you about whether or not you should spank. Not that Buttercup is doing that here, there is nothing wrong with debating your side of the arguement and providing facts to support it. What I am talking about are the people that belittle you as a parent because you 'lowered' yourself to spank. What those folks need to recognize is that it is not 'abuse' as far as any law is concerned, and that, as long as it is not illegal, it is my right to choose that method of punishment. Agree to disagree and move on. This arguement has been going on for years and years, and the vast majority of children have grown up to be normal adults.

What never ceases to amaze me is, for all the studys that are done, no one ever discusses how things are now as compared to the past. While you cant contribute it to one thing (like spanking or not spanking), there is an obvious difference in todays and yesterdays (20+ years ago) children. I dont remember growing up with police at school, worrys about school shootings, 11 year olds being charged with murder and rape, large numbers of children being on mood altering drugs (prescribed by doctors, anyway), etc.

So tell me, what is different today? Lots of things have changed, spanking is frowned on, national news reports on crimes more frequently and in deeper detail, TV shows are less family friendly, children are 'drugged' into compliance (ADD and ADHA - while it is a real problem, IMHO it is WAY OVERDIAGNOSED). Children are not raised to accept failure and move on, now everyone is a winner and no one accepts defeat anymore. The list goes on and on.

One thing I know of, from experience, is that an occasional spanking will correct the action without negative long term affects. I think I will stick with what I know works. All these studies regarding all these different things that have been done wrong in previous generations child raising don't seem to be improving the quality of children maturing into adulthood each day. If anything, todays young adults (as a whole) are less prepared for adulthood than any previous generation.....

Jeepin'
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
No amount of evidence will ever change a true believer's mind, Buttercup.

Yeah, you have all the facts and research that soundly proves your point but the stupid runs deep in this area.

Nice try, though.


I know. I'm actually sitting here laughing at the responses because they're all so predictable.

Over and over, the spankers say kids who aren't spanked are brats and end up in jail. LOL! It's still beyond me (for some reason) how a person can't deduce that discipline means to train.

Parents that don't set any limits will in fact have a brat on their hands, but smart parents set limits and boundaries and do use timeouts, etc.; that is discipline and - if it's used consistently - it works. Every time.


Of course the response is predictable, that would be because the correct answers are simple. If someone referenced a study that "found" 2 plus 2 is 500 it is fairly predictable that someone might say that 2 plus 2 is actually 4 and someone might even explain their reasoning by holding up two fingers on each hand and saying "count the total".
Many of your responses come from real world experience, not a clinical study conducted by someone looking to find something wrong with spanking. Whether or not spanking is used as a form of discipline there is a correct way to approach discipline and a wrong way. Any punishment that is overused will not be very effective, discipline without caring does not work out well either. As for limits, setting limits has nothing to do with to spank or not to spank. It's just what approach a parent chooses to use when a child crosses the line.
I would think for most parents that it is gut wrenching to spank their children, additionally is quite a horrible feeling to have to ground my kids. Discipline is not a fun part of being a parent and whether you choose to spank your child for discipline problems or send them to time out with an extra dose of Ritalin I think it is important for kids to know just how much it really bothers us to have to punish them.
quote:
Originally posted by Lets Go Jeepin':
What never ceases to amaze me is, for all the studys that are done, no one ever discusses how things are now as compared to the past. While you cant contribute it to one thing (like spanking or not spanking), there is an obvious difference in todays and yesterdays (20+ years ago) children. I dont remember growing up with police at school, worrys about school shootings, 11 year olds being charged with murder and rape, large numbers of children being on mood altering drugs (prescribed by doctors, anyway), etc.

So tell me, what is different today? Lots of things have changed, spanking is frowned on, national news reports on crimes more frequently and in deeper detail, TV shows are less family friendly, children are 'drugged' into compliance (ADD and ADHA - while it is a real problem, IMHO it is WAY OVERDIAGNOSED). Children are not raised to accept failure and move on, now everyone is a winner and no one accepts defeat anymore. The list goes on and on.

Jeepin'


Judging by the influx of pro-spankers that always chime in on spanking threads, spanking is still going on. That means the number of children being spanked in this generation probably is the same as the last generation. I say that, not only because of the overwhelming responses that are pro-spanking, but because parents usually use the same discipline methods as their own parents.

So the number of children being spanked has not changed from our parents' generation to ours, yet we do have more violence in our schools, kids on drugs, etc. So there must be something else to contribute to the increase, right?

What makes sense to me (and from everything I've read) is it is due to children being exposed - and early exposure at that - to incredible amounts of violence from t.v., Internet, video games, etc. I'm in my 30's and can only remember watching reruns of the Brady Bunch in the afternoons when I got home from school, and Bugs Bunny on Saturday mornings. (We didn't have cable and had about eight channels to choose from.) The rest of the time I was in my backyard building tree houses and making mud pies. You probably were too.

As for drugs, aside from Meth - which seems to be rampant everywhere - prescription drugs are abused far more than cocaine or any other recreational drug. Why is that? How are kids getting these drugs? It's because almost everyone is on a flippin' anti-depressant now. Xanax, Zoloft, etc., etc., are grossly overprescribed. People don't want to deal with the root causes of their depression and use effective methods like cognitive therapy; they want to pop a pill. So Johnny sees those pills (along with BP and heart medications) in the medicine cabinet and there you go....

Also, parents just aren't around for their children anymore. We've got far too many latchkey kids and that's just asking for trouble. In an ideal world, most moms I'm sure would love to stay home with their children, but because housing, automobiles, food, etc. cost so much in this damm country, moms have to work too. (Also, a woman can't afford to be away from the workforce a few years to raise her kids because if she does, she'll have to start over in her career when she goes back. Unfair but true.) So if twelve-year-old Johnny's at home by himself from 3:00 to 5:30 in the afternoons, he's much more likely to find and take these drugs or get creative and start huffing on air freshener (something that is, sadly, also becoming common.)

So I veered a bit with that, but it all comes back to the points in your post. People are still spanking their children; the evidence is clear (and all over this thread), so you can't attribute lack of spanking to unruly kids. Also, and I've pointed this out before, there are plenty of people in our prisons in their 50's and 60's that were from the so-called "spanked" generation. So lack of spanking has nothing to do with it, it's lack of parenting and lack of boundaries.

But thanks for your post. I always enjoy and respect your contributions.
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
Judging by the influx of pro-spankers that always chime in on spanking threads, spanking is still going on. That means the number of children being spanked in this generation probably is the same as the last generation. I say that, not only because of the overwhelming responses that are pro-spanking, but because parents usually use the same discipline methods as their own parents.

So the number of children being spanked has not changed from our parents' generation to ours, yet we do have more violence in our schools, kids on drugs, etc. So there must be something else to contribute to the increase, right?

What makes sense to me (and from everything I've read) it is due to children being exposed - and early exposure at that - to incredible amounts of violence from t.v., Internet, video games, etc. I'm in my 30's and can only remember watching reruns of the Brady Bunch in the afternoons when I got home, and Bugs Bunny on Saturday mornings. (We didn't have cable and had about eight channels to choose from.) The rest of the time I was in my backyard building tree houses and making mud pies. You probably were too.

As for drugs, aside from Meth - which seems to be rampant everywhere - prescription drugs are abused by far more than cocaine or any other recreational drug. Why is that? How are kids getting these drugs? It's because almost everyone is on a flippin' anti-depressant now. Xanax, Zoloft, etc., etc., are grossly overprescribed. People don't want to deal with the root causes of their depression and use effective methods like cognitive therapy; they want to pop a pill. So Johnny sees those pills in the medicine cabinet and there you go....

Also, parents just aren't around for their children anymore. We've got far too many latchkey kids and that's just asking for trouble. In and ideal world, most moms I'm sure would love to stay home with their children, but because housing, automobiles, food, etc. cost so much in this damm country, moms have to work too. So if twelve-year-old Johnny's at home by himself from 3:00 to 5:30 in the afternoons, he's much more likely to find and take these drugs or get creative and start huffing on air freshener (something that is, sadly, also becoming common.)

So I veered a bit with that, but it all comes back to the points in your post. People are still spanking their children; the evidence is clear (and all over this thread), so you can't attribute lack of spanking to unruly kids. Also, and I've pointed this out before, there are plenty of people in jail in their 50's and 60's that were from the so-called "spanked" generation. So lack of spanking has nothing to do with it, it's lack of parenting and lack of boundaries.

But thanks for your post. I always enjoy your contributions.


While I dont contribute any of this to spanking or not spanking exclusively, I have to disagree with you about the number of children spanked. There are parts of this country (I've lived all over it) where it is not acceptable to swat your child in public. Period. You will get a visit from DHR because someone will call in a complaint. Although most are cleared, DHR is still required to make the visit when a complaint is called. Because of this, all over the country, I feel there is much less spanking today than in the past. And children from about 6 or 7 up know this and use it against their parents. I see it all the time. Parents are spanking less out of fear of having to explain themselves more than out of not wanting to spank. As I said, this is not seen here as much as many other places in the US, this being the bible belt and all.

I was a latchkey kid back in the mid to late 80's and early 90's. Latchkey children have been around for a long time (my father was a latchkey kid as well). What kept me in line (most of the time) during those few hours? Fear of what would happen if I didn't. Where did that fear come from? Discipline. Mine was a mixture of spanking, grounding, write offs (Id rather had a spanking), and whatever other method my parents could think of. I was brought up to 'respect' my parents. They werent my friends or my buddies, they were my parents and they acted like it.

With all the things that are changing and all the things that are going wrong, I know from personal experience that spankings work if used correctly. Do the studies you posted show different? Yep. But there were also studies once upon a time that said cigarette smoking was safe and that limiting the speed to 55 would save lives. Both turned out the be incorrect. So, todays studies could be easily proven incorrect tomorrow, while past experience never changes.

The point of my post was that, just like I dont critisize folks that dont spank their children because they believe it is wrong, I dont expect to be critisized because I think it is right. This issue is not an issue that affects the public in general, it is an issue that deals with my personal realtionship with my child and, in all honesty, its not anyone elses concern if someone wants to spank or not spank. Like I said earlier, there is nothing wrong with a person trying to explain their beliefs (as you have here, besides, anyone who knows me knows I like a good debate), its those that believe that someone is less of a parent or a person because they choose to spank that bother me.

Jeepin'
Here is my study on spanking: I have two older children that have occasionally been spanked. I could probably count the times on 1 hand. I mainly use grounding or taking things away. They are well behaved and have never almost never been in trouble in school. Citizenship grades, most of the time, are 100's or 99's or 98's. I have a younger child who is harder to handle. Groundings don't work nor does taking things away nor time outs. Spankings are the only thing we've found to work at home. We have tried a multitude of other methods. This child is also well behaved in school. She is a kindergartner, but has only moved her clothes pin one time at school this year. From practical parenting experience, I would say try other things first. Use spanking as a last resort. Never spank in anger. The key to discpline is consistency. Find something that works and stick with it until it no longer works and then try something else. The main thing is to love them enough to discipline them. It may make them unhappy for the moment, but in the long run it will make them happy, well adjusted, law abiding citizens.
quote:
Originally posted by Lets Go Jeepin':

While I dont contribute any of this to spanking or not spanking exclusively, I have to disagree with you about the number of children spanked. There are parts of this country (I've lived all over it) where it is not acceptable to swat your child in public. Period. You will get a visit from DHR because someone will call in a complaint. Although most are cleared, DHR is still required to make the visit when a complaint is called. Because of this, all over the country, I feel there is much less spanking today than in the past. And children from about 6 or 7 up know this and use it against their parents. I see it all the time. Parents are spanking less out of fear of having to explain themselves more than out of not wanting to spank. As I said, this is not seen here as much as many other places in the US, this being the bible belt and all.

I was a latchkey kid back in the mid to late 80's and early 90's. Latchkey children have been around for a long time (my father was a latchkey kid as well). What kept me in line (most of the time) during those few hours? Fear of what would happen if I didn't. Where did that fear come from? Discipline. Mine was a mixture of spanking, grounding, write offs (Id rather had a spanking), and whatever other method my parents could think of. I was brought up to 'respect' my parents. They werent my friends or my buddies, they were my parents and they acted like it.

With all the things that are changing and all the things that are going wrong, I know from personal experience that spankings work if used correctly. Do the studies you posted show different? Yep. But there were also studies once upon a time that said cigarette smoking was safe and that limiting the speed to 55 would save lives. Both turned out the be incorrect. So, todays studies could be easily proven incorrect tomorrow, while past experience never changes.

The point of my post was that, just like I dont critisize folks that dont spank their children because they believe it is wrong, I dont expect to be critisized because I think it is right. This issue is not an issue that affects the public in general, it is an issue that deals with my personal realtionship with my child and, in all honesty, its not anyone elses concern if someone wants to spank or not spank. Like I said earlier, there is nothing wrong with a person trying to explain their beliefs (as you have here, besides, anyone who knows me knows I like a good debate), its those that believe that someone is less of a parent or a person because they choose to spank that bother me.

Jeepin'


It doesn't matter if there are parts of the country where swatting/spanking/whatever is unacceptable; people still do it. Smoking pot is illegal, but people still do it. And a 6 or 7 year old child won't just randomly accuse his parents of spanking him, just because. You say you see it all the time. Maybe it's happened here and there, but not all the time. If a child realizes he can be taken away from a loving home and loving parents, he will not make such an accusation unless he's non compos mentis.

So you were a latchkey kid and turned out fine. You were lucky. Are you honestly going to argue that there aren't latchkey kids out there who get themselves into trouble for the simple fact that they have no supervision several hours a day, day after day? I'm not a helicopter parent, but am sure not going to allow my child to be alone at home until I'm 100% certain he's mature enough and reliable enough to handle it.

And instilling fear of a spanking in my child for misbehaving is just wrong. Again, frightening and terrorizing children is not your job as a parent. You're not a state trooper; you're a parent - their first, and most important, teacher. You make them understand WHY the action is wrong. Spanking does not teach such a lesson.
Regardless of what anyone thinks, spanking, when done properly, IS a proven, effective and accepted way of disciplining a child for misbehavior. Is it 'appropriate' for all occassions? No. But as an adult you 'should' be able to differentiate between the times it is/isn't.
quote:
SEZ Buttercup:
It doesn't matter if there are parts of the country where swatting/spanking/whatever is unacceptable; people still do it. Smoking pot is illegal, but people still do it. And a 6 or 7 year old child won't just randomly accuse his parents of spanking him, just because. You say you see it all the time. Maybe it's happened here and there, but not all the time. If a child realizes he can be taken away from a loving home and loving parents, he will not make such an accusation unless he's non compos mentis.

So you were a latchkey kid and turned out fine. You were lucky. Are you honestly going to argue that there aren't latchkey kids out there who get themselves into trouble for the simple fact that they have no supervision several hours a day, day after day? I'm not a helicopter parent, but am sure not going to allow my child to be alone at home until I'm 100% certain he's mature enough and reliable enough to handle it.

And instilling fear of a spanking in my child for misbehaving is just wrong. Again, frightening and terrorizing children is not your job as a parent. You're not a state trooper; you're a parent - their first, and most important, teacher. You make them understand WHY the action is wrong. Spanking does not teach such a lesson.


Well...Good Luck on your PC "child raising" experience.
When they don't want a "TIME OUT"...what are ya' gonna do...then?
quote:
Originally posted by CageTheElephant:
quote:
SEZ Buttercup:
It doesn't matter if there are parts of the country where swatting/spanking/whatever is unacceptable; people still do it. Smoking pot is illegal, but people still do it. And a 6 or 7 year old child won't just randomly accuse his parents of spanking him, just because. You say you see it all the time. Maybe it's happened here and there, but not all the time. If a child realizes he can be taken away from a loving home and loving parents, he will not make such an accusation unless he's non compos mentis.

So you were a latchkey kid and turned out fine. You were lucky. Are you honestly going to argue that there aren't latchkey kids out there who get themselves into trouble for the simple fact that they have no supervision several hours a day, day after day? I'm not a helicopter parent, but am sure not going to allow my child to be alone at home until I'm 100% certain he's mature enough and reliable enough to handle it.

And instilling fear of a spanking in my child for misbehaving is just wrong. Again, frightening and terrorizing children is not your job as a parent. You're not a state trooper; you're a parent - their first, and most important, teacher. You make them understand WHY the action is wrong. Spanking does not teach such a lesson.


Well...Good Luck on your PC "child raising" experience.
When they don't want a "TIME OUT"...what are ya' gonna do...then?


He doesn't have a choice on the timeout. And there are other methods: taking away privileges, not allowing extra privileges, etc. that register with his behavior bank (i.e., Is the bad behavior worth it?).

For example, my little boy likes Star Wars. He can save up his own money to buy a toy he likes, but if he's misbehaved I take the privilege of buying it away. That means something to him because, again, Star Wars toys mean something to him.

When going out, we've always explained the consequences of misbehavior before walking out the door so that he'd know what to expect. Example: I'd tell him (when he was younger), "If you misbehave at the grocery store, no cartoons when you get home."

We were always consistent (key word) with the discipline (another key word) and our child has turned out respectful and courteous and very rarely needs privileges taken away or timeouts anymore, because he "got it" a long time ago.
I was fortunate with my daughter. God, I'm glad she's grown! Today's kids, courtesy of the PC crowd and ill-trained DHS/CPS workers, perpetuate what amounts to BLACKMAIL on many parents, saying 'I'll behave IF...'. And most parents choose NOT to fight what amounts to an 'uphill battle'.

Buttercup, I sincerely hope, and I really mean it, your child continues to behave. Good luck in his 'teen' years.

Like it or not, fear and respect often go hand in hand.

"Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man." Ecclesiastes 12:13
quote:
SK - You made MY argument for me: you state you were BEATEN. Proper corporal punishment DOES NOT entail 'beatings'.



At exactly what point does a spanking become a beating?

Teachers like you (I presume) used a large wooden board to "spank" the kids. If that were done outside of a classroom, most would consider it a beating but I'm open minded about it.

So define the difference between a spanking and beating, please?
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
quote:
SK - You made MY argument for me: you state you were BEATEN. Proper corporal punishment DOES NOT entail 'beatings'.



At exactly what point does a spanking become a beating?

Teachers like you (I presume) used a large wooden board to "spank" the kids. If that were done outside of a classroom, most would consider it a beating but I'm open minded about it.

So define the difference between a spanking and beating, please?


Spankings produce minor pain without serious physical injury.

Beatings produce extreme pain, and cause serious injury due to violent, forceful, repetitious strikes.

The Code of Alabama Title 13A-1-2 defines physical injury as "impairment of physical condition or substantial pain". Serious physical injury is defined as "Physical injury which creates a substantial risk of death, or which causes serious and protracted disfigurement, protracted impairment of health, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of any bodily organ".
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
I was fortunate with my daughter. God, I'm glad she's grown! Today's kids, courtesy of the PC crowd and ill-trained DHS/CPS workers, perpetuate what amounts to BLACKMAIL on many parents, saying 'I'll behave IF...'. And most parents choose NOT to fight what amounts to an 'uphill battle'.

Buttercup, I sincerely hope, and I really mean it, your child continues to behave. Good luck in his 'teen' years.

Like it or not, fear and respect often go hand in hand.

"Now all has been heard; here is the conclusion of the matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man." Ecclesiastes 12:13


You know I disagree with all of that, dogsoldier. But at least you (and BFred07) respond respectfully and thoughtfully and take emotion out of the debate. Smiler
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by CageTheElephant:
quote:
SEZ Buttercup:
It doesn't matter if there are parts of the country where swatting/spanking/whatever is unacceptable; people still do it. Smoking pot is illegal, but people still do it. And a 6 or 7 year old child won't just randomly accuse his parents of spanking him, just because. You say you see it all the time. Maybe it's happened here and there, but not all the time. If a child realizes he can be taken away from a loving home and loving parents, he will not make such an accusation unless he's non compos mentis.

So you were a latchkey kid and turned out fine. You were lucky. Are you honestly going to argue that there aren't latchkey kids out there who get themselves into trouble for the simple fact that they have no supervision several hours a day, day after day? I'm not a helicopter parent, but am sure not going to allow my child to be alone at home until I'm 100% certain he's mature enough and reliable enough to handle it.

And instilling fear of a spanking in my child for misbehaving is just wrong. Again, frightening and terrorizing children is not your job as a parent. You're not a state trooper; you're a parent - their first, and most important, teacher. You make them understand WHY the action is wrong. Spanking does not teach such a lesson.


Well...Good Luck on your PC "child raising" experience.
When they don't want a "TIME OUT"...what are ya' gonna do...then?


He doesn't have a choice on the timeout. And there are other methods: taking away privileges, not allowing extra privileges, etc. that register with his behavior bank (i.e., Is the bad behavior worth it?).

For example, my little boy likes Star Wars. He can save up his own money to buy a toy he likes, but if he's misbehaved I take the privilege of buying it away. That means something to him because, again, Star Wars toys mean something to him.

When going out, we've always explained the consequences of misbehavior before walking out the door so that he'd know what to expect. Example: I'd tell him (when he was younger), "If you misbehave at the grocery store, no cartoons when you get home."

We were always consistent (key word) with the discipline (another key word) and our child has turned out respectful and courteous and very rarely needs privileges taken away or timeouts anymore, because he "got it" a long time ago.


he doesn't have a choice in the time out? of course he does, unless you strap him into the chair.

when you have a child who decides he doesn't really care about that star wars toy, because he's more interested in getting out of the naughty chair and going down the street to see his friend, who has the same toy, and he just gets up and walks out the door?

'go to your room!'
"no."

"you can't play with that toy anymore, give it here"
"no."

"go sit in the time out chair for 30 minutes."
"no"

i said go, now
no
you heard me, you want me to make it 45 minutes? go now!
no.

maybe it didn't happen with your kids.
maybe it doesn't happen with most kids.
but just as spanking isn't appropriate in all situation, (and yes, as someone pointed out, spanking should be the last option, when all else has failed.) it isn't wrong in every situation.

so.. you've told your child to clean his room.
he persists in not cleaning his room. you've told him he's grounded, he gets tiem out, no tv, no ipods, no playstation, no anything for a week, and still he doesn't clean his room.

what's next?

you tell him to clean the room and he says no.

you tell him some more. he says no.
you tell him again, and you get no results.

regardless what you choose to believe, there are kids out there with enough stubbornness to resist anything you say.

my son is one of these. he would rather sit in tiem out and lose privledges that to do a chore he hates. he'd rather be grounded for a week than clean his room. 2 weeks. 3 weeks. he'd rather me clean his room with a shovel, straight into a garbage can than to clean it himself.

so what would you suggest? all privledges are revoked. he comes home from school, does his homework, and then sits in a chair in the kitchen by himself and daydreams until dinner. after dinner he helps clear the table and load the dishwasher, then sits back in the chair, daydreaming until bedtime.
because he prefers this to cleaning his room.
and the whole time he succeeds in defying us, and his room isn't cleaned.

solve this one. this happened to us, several years ago, because we liked the idea of not spanking once they were old enough to reason and understand what was going on.
we let it go on for about a month, determined to out stubborn him.

so, what's your answer to this non-hypothetical situation?
a child has had all pridleges remove, over time, sits in one chair for the rest of the time, and still refuses to do as he was asked.
we asked politely. we bargianed. we bribed. we threatened. we started with the passive punishments until there was nothing left.
what next? should i have let him sit there for the rest of his life before resorting to spanking him?
which i did. three good taps with the paddle on his bottom and sent him to bed.
the next day i walked into his room, carrying the paddle, and said ' you have 1 hour to clean this room. in one hour me and the paddle are coming back, except this time there will be 6 instead of 3."

i went back in an hour, and he was mostly done, he saw the paddle and told me ' can i have another 30 minutes? i'll even vaccum if i can have another 30 minute!"

i gave him the 30 minutes. he was done in 20, including the carpet.

so i took him out for ice cream, and praised him greatly for a job well done.

a couple weeks later i said, "hey kid, i think it's tiem for a few minutes cleaning your room, ok?"

he asked if he could wait till the weekend (2 days away) i said yes. when i went in sat. morning to tell him b'fast was ready he was cleaning diligently.

no more problems. he'll whine, because he hates it, but he does it without hesitation.

how would you have handled it? how would you make him do it when he's already refused to?
g'head, lets see your new agey feel-goody wisdom in action ....
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
quote:
SK - You made MY argument for me: you state you were BEATEN. Proper corporal punishment DOES NOT entail 'beatings'.



At exactly what point does a spanking become a beating?

Teachers like you (I presume) used a large wooden board to "spank" the kids. If that were done outside of a classroom, most would consider it a beating but I'm open minded about it.

So define the difference between a spanking and beating, please?


Actually, most were plexiglass.
thenagel,

Not trying to judge your parenting style, but if that's the case you didn't set limits early enough. You're telling me there's NOTHING that means anything to him, if it were to be taken away? I simply don't believe that.

With a young child it's toys and cartoons; with an older child it's cell phones, Internet, video games, cars, going out on weekends, etc. You're telling me your son has none of those things? Are you Amish? (kidding)

Seriously, he lives under your roof, so you can take his cell phone and car away, or his ability to go out Saturday night. Even if you have to take all of his "extras" away, he'll get the picture. Sorry, I just can't conceive of a young person with no "toys" of any kind that you can't control the use of.

But, again, sounds like the boundaries weren't set early enough. You can't wait until they're 10 or 12 to start setting them.
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
.. you've told your child to clean it's room.
he persists in not cleaning his room. you've told him he's grounded, he gets tiem out, no tv, no ipods, no playstation, no anything for a week, and still he doesn't clean his room.

what's next?

you tell him to clean the room and he says no.

you tell him some more. he says no.
you tell him again, and you get no results.

regardless what you choose to believe, there are kids out there with enough stubbornness to resist anything you say.


Great example, thenagel. If he won't clean his room, no matter what, I'd take the bed, t.v., everything but the floor out of there. I would be willing to bet that sleeping on the floor a few nights will change his mind. And, no, that's not abuse; it's winning the battle of wills.

If that still doesn't work, take all his clothes away and replace them with the most off-brand stuff you can find from Goodwill or Wal-Mart. You really think a teenager, who's all about vanity, won't do what you ask then? Again, he'll live. Chances are excellent that he won't want to suffer the embarrassment after you tell him what you're going to do.
quote:
Originally posted by Lets Go Jeepin':
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:

But at least you (and BFred07) respond respectfully and thoughtfully and take emotion out of the debate. Smiler


Confused


I edited a prior post to say (referring to one of your posts):

quote:

But thanks for your post. I always enjoy and respect your contributions.


Sorry. I thought you'd realize I already included you as a person who responds respectfully and thoughtfully, with that statement. Anyway, for what it's worth, I do. Smiler
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
thenagel,

Not trying to judge your parenting style, but if that's the case you didn't set limits early enough. You're telling me there's NOTHING that means anything to him, if it were to be taken away? I simply don't believe that.

With a young child it's toys and cartoons; with an older child it's cell phones, Internet, video games, cars, going out on weekends, etc. You're telling me your son has none of those things? Are you Amish? (kidding)

Seriously, he lives under your roof, so you can take his cell phone and car away, or his ability to go out Saturday night. Even if you have to take all of his "extras" away, he'll get the picture. Sorry, I just can't conceive of a young person with no "toys" of any kind that you can't control the use of.

But, again, sounds like the boundaries weren't set early enough. You can't wait until they're 10 or 12 to start setting them.


he was 5. and we'd had no trouble except when it came to cleaning his room. to him, that was a fate worse that death.
I rarely got spanked as a child, but if it did happen, I did not hate my parents for it.

My kids also rarely got a spanking, usually talking or time out worked, but not always.

Butter, look up studies of 'an only child' and then tell me if you agree with them.

Also when he turns 13, write another post about it.


theanel,
I know what you mean about stubborn.

As for wearing Walmart clothes, mine already do that. Who can afford anything else?
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
thenagel,

Not trying to judge your parenting style, but if that's the case you didn't set limits early enough. You're telling me there's NOTHING that means anything to him, if it were to be taken away? I simply don't believe that.

With a young child it's toys and cartoons; with an older child it's cell phones, Internet, video games, cars, going out on weekends, etc. You're telling me your son has none of those things? Are you Amish? (kidding)

Seriously, he lives under your roof, so you can take his cell phone and car away, or his ability to go out Saturday night. Even if you have to take all of his "extras" away, he'll get the picture. Sorry, I just can't conceive of a young person with no "toys" of any kind that you can't control the use of.

But, again, sounds like the boundaries weren't set early enough. You can't wait until they're 10 or 12 to start setting them.


he was 5. and we'd had no trouble except when it came to cleaning his room. to him, that was a fate worse that death.


Hahaha! Yes, I'm aware. I think all children, especially boys for some reason, hate to clean their room.

For me, that's a "choose your battles" kind of situation. I've never made my son clean his room to perfection, with bed made daily, etc. As long as I don't trip on something and hurt myself as I walk through his room and the clean clothes are put away and the dirty at least near the basket, I'm generally okay with it. A perfectly kept room is simply not important.
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
.. you've told your child to clean it's room.
he persists in not cleaning his room. you've told him he's grounded, he gets tiem out, no tv, no ipods, no playstation, no anything for a week, and still he doesn't clean his room.

what's next?

you tell him to clean the room and he says no.

you tell him some more. he says no.
you tell him again, and you get no results.

regardless what you choose to believe, there are kids out there with enough stubbornness to resist anything you say.


Great example, thenagel. If he won't clean his room, no matter what, I'd take the bed, t.v., everything but the floor out of there. I would be willing to bet that sleeping on the floor a few nights will change his mind. And, no, that's not abuse; it's winning the battle of wills.

If that still doesn't work, take all his clothes away and replace them with the most off-brand stuff you can find from Goodwill or Wal-Mart. You really think a teenager, who's all about vanity, won't do what you ask then? Again, he'll live. Chances are excellent that he won't want to suffer the embarrassment after you tell him what you're going to do.


well, 1st
we don't have money for designer stuff.. they are in wal mart and hand me downs already. and for that matter, why should it be embarassing? why should we care what other people think about our clothes? my kids have been taught the measure of a persons worth is what's in the heart and head, not what's on their bodies or what kinda car they drive.

no tv in the kids rooms. we have more money than we did then, and i still refuse to put a tv in their rooms. no cell phones until they go get a job and pay for it themselves.
i daughter does have an ipod, and the is a ps2 in the living room that my son lives on when he's allowed, and a computer in the livingroom that they share where they cna be watched occasionally.

i acctually didn't think about making him sleep in the floor, but i can honestly say i really think that it would have made no difference

and no.. i wouldnt call that child abuse at all.

and i'm very sorry for the lag between the original post, and then my final editing.. we had family over and there was much distraction so it took me a while, so there was stuff in the final version ( including mucho typos) that you didn't see.
sorry about that
quote:
Originally posted by btchpls50m:
I rarely got spanked as a child, but if it did happen, I did not hate my parents for it.

My kids also rarely got a spanking, usually talking or time out worked, but not always.

Butter, look up studies of 'an only child' and then tell me if you agree with them.

Also when he turns 13, write another post about it.


theanel,
I know what you mean about stubborn.

As for wearing Walmart clothes, mine already do that. Who can afford anything else?


Interesting. So "an only child" is destined to become a brat at 13, no matter what? Post the studies, please.

And your quote:

quote:

As for wearing Walmart clothes, mine already do that. Who can afford anything else?


You have two degrees. Shouldn't you have a good enough job to afford nicer clothes? Hahahaha!

Sorry, I'm truly over that little snot throw on the other thread, but I just couldn't resist. Wink Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
thenagel,

Not trying to judge your parenting style, but if that's the case you didn't set limits early enough. You're telling me there's NOTHING that means anything to him, if it were to be taken away? I simply don't believe that.

With a young child it's toys and cartoons; with an older child it's cell phones, Internet, video games, cars, going out on weekends, etc. You're telling me your son has none of those things? Are you Amish? (kidding)

Seriously, he lives under your roof, so you can take his cell phone and car away, or his ability to go out Saturday night. Even if you have to take all of his "extras" away, he'll get the picture. Sorry, I just can't conceive of a young person with no "toys" of any kind that you can't control the use of.

But, again, sounds like the boundaries weren't set early enough. You can't wait until they're 10 or 12 to start setting them.


he was 5. and we'd had no trouble except when it came to cleaning his room. to him, that was a fate worse that death.


Hahaha! Yes, I'm aware. I think all children, especially boys for some reason, hate to clean their room.

For me, that's a "choose your battles" kind of situation. I've never made my son clean his room to perfection, with bed made daily, etc. As long as I don't trip on something and hurt myself as I walk through his room and the clean clothes are put away and the dirty at least near the basket, I'm generally okay with it. A perfectly kept room is simply not important.


we're well aware that one must pick their battles, and ended up having this one picked for us.
we weren't looking for perfection, we were looking for a path clean enough so that we could hang up his clothes. we didn't insist, or even hint, for spotless. we just wanted not-godawful.
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:

I edited a prior post to say (referring to one of your posts):

quote:

But thanks for your post. I always enjoy and respect your contributions.


Sorry. I thought you'd realize I already included you as a person who responds respectfully and thoughtfully, with that statement. Anyway, for what it's worth, I do. Smiler


I was wondering about that, I was rereading my posts to make sure I didnt say something that you might have been able to take as me being mean Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
.. you've told your child to clean it's room.
he persists in not cleaning his room. you've told him he's grounded, he gets tiem out, no tv, no ipods, no playstation, no anything for a week, and still he doesn't clean his room.

what's next?

you tell him to clean the room and he says no.

you tell him some more. he says no.
you tell him again, and you get no results.

regardless what you choose to believe, there are kids out there with enough stubbornness to resist anything you say.


Great example, thenagel. If he won't clean his room, no matter what, I'd take the bed, t.v., everything but the floor out of there. I would be willing to bet that sleeping on the floor a few nights will change his mind. And, no, that's not abuse; it's winning the battle of wills.

If that still doesn't work, take all his clothes away and replace them with the most off-brand stuff you can find from Goodwill or Wal-Mart. You really think a teenager, who's all about vanity, won't do what you ask then? Again, he'll live. Chances are excellent that he won't want to suffer the embarrassment after you tell him what you're going to do.


well, 1st
we don't have money for designer stuff.. they are in wal mart and hand me downs already. and for that matter, why should it be embarassing? why should we care what other people think about our clothes? my kids have been taught the measure of a persons worth is what's in the heart and head, not what's on their bodies or what kinda car they drive.
no tv in the kids rooms. we have more money than we did then, and i still refuse to put a tv in their rooms. no cell phones until they go get a job and pay for it themselves.
i daughter does have an ipod, and the is a ps2 in the living room that my son lives on when he's allowed, and a computer in the livingroom that they share where they cna be watched occasionally.

i acctually didn't think about making him sleep in the floor, but i can honestly say i really think that it would have made no difference

and no.. i wouldnt call that child abuse at all.

and i'm very sorry for the lag between the original post, and then my final editing.. we had family over and there was much distraction so it took me a while, so there was stuff in the final version ( including mucho typos) that you didn't see.
sorry about that


I agree with what's in bold; we instill the same values in our child. But let's get real. Kids care about labels and name brands; we did when we were kids.

I buy most of our clothes from from Wal-Mart and Target because I simply can't swallow paying mall prices for things. I didn't mean to imply there was something wrong with it; just thinking from a kid's point-of-view. Trust me, I'm one of the least snobby people you'd ever meet. Smiler
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
.. you've told your child to clean it's room.
he persists in not cleaning his room. you've told him he's grounded, he gets tiem out, no tv, no ipods, no playstation, no anything for a week, and still he doesn't clean his room.

what's next?

you tell him to clean the room and he says no.

you tell him some more. he says no.
you tell him again, and you get no results.

regardless what you choose to believe, there are kids out there with enough stubbornness to resist anything you say.


Great example, thenagel. If he won't clean his room, no matter what, I'd take the bed, t.v., everything but the floor out of there. I would be willing to bet that sleeping on the floor a few nights will change his mind. And, no, that's not abuse; it's winning the battle of wills.

If that still doesn't work, take all his clothes away and replace them with the most off-brand stuff you can find from Goodwill or Wal-Mart. You really think a teenager, who's all about vanity, won't do what you ask then? Again, he'll live. Chances are excellent that he won't want to suffer the embarrassment after you tell him what you're going to do.


well, 1st
we don't have money for designer stuff.. they are in wal mart and hand me downs already. and for that matter, why should it be embarassing? why should we care what other people think about our clothes? my kids have been taught the measure of a persons worth is what's in the heart and head, not what's on their bodies or what kinda car they drive.
no tv in the kids rooms. we have more money than we did then, and i still refuse to put a tv in their rooms. no cell phones until they go get a job and pay for it themselves.
i daughter does have an ipod, and the is a ps2 in the living room that my son lives on when he's allowed, and a computer in the livingroom that they share where they cna be watched occasionally.

i acctually didn't think about making him sleep in the floor, but i can honestly say i really think that it would have made no difference

and no.. i wouldnt call that child abuse at all.

and i'm very sorry for the lag between the original post, and then my final editing.. we had family over and there was much distraction so it took me a while, so there was stuff in the final version ( including mucho typos) that you didn't see.
sorry about that


I agree with what's in bold; we instill the same values in our child. But let's get real. Kids care about labels and name brands; we did when we were kids.

I buy most of our clothes from from Wal-Mart and Target because I simply can't swallow paying mall prices for things. I didn't mean to imply there was something wrong with it; just thinking from a kid's point-of-view. Trust me, I'm one of the least snobby people you'd ever meet. Smiler


sorry.. i didn't care then, and i don't care now. my daughter told me a couple weeks ago that a girl she goes to school came up to her bragging " i got a new Prada purse! my aunt went to LA and got it for me, it's so awsome!"
to which my daughter replied " yeah.. so it's a purse. you put stuff in it. who cares who made it? i think you're aunt got ripped off."

because they've been taught that labels are pointless, designer stuff is just a way to suck money out of idiots.
no, they don't care about labels, even now that they are becoming teenagers.
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by btchpls50m:
I rarely got spanked as a child, but if it did happen, I did not hate my parents for it.

My kids also rarely got a spanking, usually talking or time out worked, but not always.

Butter, look up studies of 'an only child' and then tell me if you agree with them.

Also when he turns 13, write another post about it.


theanel,
I know what you mean about stubborn.

As for wearing Walmart clothes, mine already do that. Who can afford anything else?


Interesting. So "an only child" is destined to become a brat at 13, no matter what? Post the studies, please.

And your quote:

quote:

As for wearing Walmart clothes, mine already do that. Who can afford anything else?


You have two degrees. Shouldn't you have a good enough job to afford nicer clothes? Hahahaha!

Sorry, I'm truly over that little snot throw on the other thread, but I just couldn't resist. Wink Big Grin


Yes, I see where you find that amusing. No, I did not say an only child would grow up to be a brat, studies did. For personal experience I have a niece who is rude, selfish, and bratty, her parents see no wrong.
Now, of course you disagree, but you see that is the point. Studies may or may not be right.
Just like having two degrees did not guarantee me a good paying job.
As for clothes, I see no reason to pay for a 'name' when the same thing is made with out one. Kids can bow to peer pressure or you can teach them that the inner person is what matters. I only had one time when one of my kids asked for a name brand. I bought one shirt of it. He hated it.

End of peer pressure. Enjoy your son while small, they grow into different entities at puberty.
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Buttercup:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by CageTheElephant:
[QUOTE]
so.. you've told your child to clean his room.
he persists in not cleaning his room. you've told him he's grounded, he gets tiem out, no tv, no ipods, no playstation, no anything for a week, and still he doesn't clean his room.

what's next?

you tell him to clean the room and he says no.

you tell him some more. he says no.
you tell him again, and you get no results.

regardless what you choose to believe, there are kids out there with enough stubbornness to resist anything you say.

my son is one of these. he would rather sit in tiem out and lose privledges that to do a chore he hates. he'd rather be grounded for a week than clean his room. 2 weeks. 3 weeks. he'd rather me clean his room with a shovel, straight into a garbage can than to clean it himself.
....


Nice to hear I am not the only one, when my oldest child was around 6ish (don't recall his exact age at the time) We had trouble getting him to clean his room. I eventually told him he had two hours or I would be coming in with a garbage bag and throwing away all toys left on the floor. He went to his room, a few minutes later he came out, went into the kitchen, got a garbage bag and brought it to me!! Yes you read that right, he would rather me throw away all his toys than to have to clean up his room.
Anyway, I hated it but I had said I would so I bagged up all his toys and went out to put them in the garbage (actually put them in the storage building so he could have them back later but did not tell him that). Next time we had trouble I told him he had two hours or he was getting a whipping (strange that he did not just bring me a paddle) two hours passed and I gave him a whipping and told him he had another two hours till I would be back to give him another. After about 30 minutes or so his room was clean.
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:

Great example, thenagel. If he won't clean his room, no matter what, I'd take the bed, t.v., everything but the floor out of there. I would be willing to bet that sleeping on the floor a few nights will change his mind. And, no, that's not abuse; it's winning the battle of wills.

If that still doesn't work, take all his clothes away and replace them with the most off-brand stuff you can find from Goodwill or Wal-Mart. You really think a teenager, who's all about vanity, won't do what you ask then? Again, he'll live. Chances are excellent that he won't want to suffer the embarrassment after you tell him what you're going to do.


We try to be creative like that sometimes too in getting the kids to do what they are supposed to do but have found that more often than not it just prolongs the kids anguish over their punishment and not to sound lazy or anything but is also a lot of trouble for us to move all the stuff out of their room to the basement.
When disciplinary action becomes necessary I still try to get creative here and there, sometimes that works out well but most of the time grounding, time out, or a quick whipping to get it all over with seems to work out best.
Anyone still wash their kids mouth out with soap? I think it's a good idea when a kid says things that are unacceptable but my wife says no so we don't.
quote:
Spankings produce minor pain without serious physical injury.



Define "minor pain" for a child? Define "serious injury."

The spanking must be hard enough to cause pain. I've seen cases where a child's buttocks are bruised black and blue from the "spanking" and the child cannot sit for 2 to 3 days.

So when teachers leave black and blue marks and cannot sit, is that still just a "spanking" in your book?

As a LEO, if you saw a large man hitting a woman on the butt with a wooden boat paddle on the sidewalk of downtown Florence, would you arrest that man?

I sure hope you would because use you saw him beating beating a woman.

Now, what is the difference between that man beating his wife and a 250 pound principal whacking the little bottom of a 40 pound child?

For your viewing pleasure. This dad certainly beleives his sons were "beaten" not "paddled,": http://s88.photobucket.com/alb...¤t=vid0409.flv
The following is a TRUE story:

Both of my parents obtained Doctorate's from the University of Alabama. My dad was an officer in the U.S. Army and college professor. There were (2) children in our household...me (oldest) and my sister, who is 18 months younger.

I could have been considered an average child, getting into minor scrapes in school, receiving my share of corporal punishments at school, spankings at home, etc. My folks gave me (1) car at age 17...and it wasn't the one I picked out. I obtained a B.S. and Masters in Education and was a teacher, coach and administrator for almost a quarter of a century. I also graduated the police academy and served my communities as a law enforcement officer. I am now the Director of Security for a multi-million dollar corporation.

My sister, however, was coddled, babied and got her way in most things. There are no accounts of her ever receiving corporal punishment at school, spankings at home, etc. She wrecked every car given (Camaro, T-Bird, Cougar, etc) to her and received immediate replacements. She dropped out of college, had numerous run-ins with law enforcement and is presently a recovering heroin addict.

You tell me which form of discipline WORKED best.
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
quote:
Spankings produce minor pain without serious physical injury.



Define "minor pain" for a child? Define "serious injury."

The spanking must be hard enough to cause pain. I've seen cases where a child's buttocks are bruised black and blue from the "spanking" and the child cannot sit for 2 to 3 days.

So when teachers leave black and blue marks and cannot sit, is that still just a "spanking" in your book?

As a LEO, if you saw a large man hitting a woman on the butt with a wooden boat paddle on the sidewalk of downtown Florence, would you arrest that man?

I sure hope you would because use you saw him beating beating a woman.

Now, what is the difference between that man beating his wife and a 250 pound principal whacking the little bottom of a 40 pound child?

For your viewing pleasure. This dad certainly beleives his sons were "beaten" not "paddled,": http://s88.photobucket.com/alb...¤t=vid0409.flv


Corporal punishment for being tardy. Hmmmm. Well, better these kids learn now before they get in the "real world". After all, don't we all get hit on the behind with a board when we're late a few times in the working world? Hey, you gotta learn sometime. Excellent lesson!!!
quote:
Originally posted by BFred07:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:

Great example, thenagel. If he won't clean his room, no matter what, I'd take the bed, t.v., everything but the floor out of there. I would be willing to bet that sleeping on the floor a few nights will change his mind. And, no, that's not abuse; it's winning the battle of wills.

If that still doesn't work, take all his clothes away and replace them with the most off-brand stuff you can find from Goodwill or Wal-Mart. You really think a teenager, who's all about vanity, won't do what you ask then? Again, he'll live. Chances are excellent that he won't want to suffer the embarrassment after you tell him what you're going to do.


We try to be creative like that sometimes too in getting the kids to do what they are supposed to do but have found that more often than not it just prolongs the kids anguish over their punishment and not to sound lazy or anything but is also a lot of trouble for us to move all the stuff out of their room to the basement.
When disciplinary action becomes necessary I still try to get creative here and there, sometimes that works out well but most of the time grounding, time out, or a quick whipping to get it all over with seems to work out best.
Anyone still wash their kids mouth out with soap? I think it's a good idea when a kid says things that are unacceptable but my wife says no so we don't.


oh aye, done that.
very effective.
quote:
SEZS So FAKING STOOPID:
Define "minor pain" for a child? Define "serious injury."

The spanking must be hard enough to cause pain. I've seen cases where a child's buttocks are bruised black and blue from the "spanking" and the child cannot sit for 2 to 3 days.

So when teachers leave black and blue marks and cannot sit, is that still just a "spanking" in your book?

As a LEO, if you saw a large man hitting a woman on the butt with a wooden boat paddle on the sidewalk of downtown Florence, would you arrest that man?

I sure hope you would because use you saw him beating beating a woman.

Now, what is the difference between that man beating his wife and a 250 pound principal whacking the little bottom of a 40 pound child?

For your viewing pleasure. This dad certainly beleives his sons were "beaten" not "paddled,": http://s88.photobucket.com/alb...¤t=vid0409.flv


Yeah, you go with the "time outs" that's probably your little turds I see running around in stores needing their asses whipped...
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by BFred07:
The long term effects of spanking (when used properly)are happy, responsible,law abiding adults!
On the other hand there are parents that spank their children because they are angry, want revenge. Spanking should only be a tool to correct unacceptable behavior and even then should only be done for the more serious offenses because if it is used to often it can begin to loose its effectiveness. For the minor stuff a time out, grounding, taking their cell phone, etc can also be effective tools.


Hey there, Fred. Long time no argue, huh? Big Grin I'm sorry but you totally missed the point of the study's findings. It does not say that spanking is okay, as long as it's used sparingly; it says that ALL spanking makes children more aggressive. Period.


I've been doing my own study on this for about 9 years and have found that my 9 year old nephew, who is rarely spanked despite his usually horrible behavior, is at least 10 times more aggressive than my 6 year old son, who is spanked whenever he needs to be.
People who do studies on a subject with preferred results will usually get the results they're wanting, just like all of Al Bore's crooked "scientists."
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:

Corporal punishment for being tardy. Hmmmm. Well, better these kids learn now before they get in the "real world". After all, don't we all get hit on the behind with a board when we're late a few times in the working world? Hey, you gotta learn sometime. Excellent lesson!!!


In the real world, it'll be "corporate punishment" for being tardy.
quote:
My sister, however, was coddled, babied and got her way in most things. There are no accounts of her ever receiving corporal punishment at school, spankings at home, etc. She wrecked every car given (Camaro, T-Bird, Cougar, etc) to her and received immediate replacements. She dropped out of college, had numerous run-ins with law enforcement and is presently a recovering heroin addict.

You tell me which form of discipline WORKED best.


This is a non sequitur. Of No one here is arguing for an abolishment of all discipline. Of COURSE kids needs boundaries. She had none. You did.

This is an example of irresponsible parenting versus responsible parenting, nothing more.

You miserably failed to show that you getting spanked and her not directly resulted in the behaviors exhibited. Has her parents done their job by setting boundaries, her story would likely be much different. The research is quite clear on this.
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
Dog,

I'm curious: We used to use CP in our mental institutions and military. We outlawed those practices along ago. Would you be in favor of bringing those practices back?


I would have loved to have been able to use corporal punishment while I was in the military. That would have been awesome, to say the least. A good blanket party would have worked wonders for a couple of guys in boot camp, too.
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
quote:
My sister, however, was coddled, babied and got her way in most things. There are no accounts of her ever receiving corporal punishment at school, spankings at home, etc. She wrecked every car given (Camaro, T-Bird, Cougar, etc) to her and received immediate replacements. She dropped out of college, had numerous run-ins with law enforcement and is presently a recovering heroin addict.

You tell me which form of discipline WORKED best.


This is a non sequitur. Of No one here is arguing for an abolishment of all discipline. Of COURSE kids needs boundaries. She had none. You did.

This is an example of irresponsible parenting versus responsible parenting, nothing more.

You miserably failed to show that you getting spanked and her not directly resulted in the behaviors exhibited. Has her parents done their job by setting boundaries, her story would likely be much different. The research is quite clear on this.


Failed to prove anything? SAME parents. 2 siblings. Stern disciplinary approach towards one. Lax disciplinary approach towards the other. The kid with the stern discipline was an achiever and law-abiding citizen. The one with the lax discipline was a criminal and drug addict. It ISN'T 'rocket science'.

Personally, I think they (my parents) brought the wrong baby (my sis) home from the hospital.
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
Dog,

I'm curious: We used to use CP in our mental institutions and military. We outlawed those practices along ago. Would you be in favor of bringing those practices back?


No. As I have previously stated, there is an age at which I believe corporal punishment becomes ineffective.
quote:
Stern disciplinary approach towards one. Lax disciplinary approach towards the other.



No, you mentioned one with a profound lack of any discipline at all versus one who received some form of discipline - albeit primitive and outdated by today's standards.

Can it be successfully argued that corporal punishment is "better" for kids than no discipline at all? Probab . . . No, absolutely.

But that is comparing apples to giraffes. It's not even a ballpark comparison. It is meaningless. Of COURSE kids will do stupid things if left to their own desires with absolutely no repercussions.
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
Dog,

I'm curious: We used to use CP in our mental institutions and military. We outlawed those practices along ago. Would you be in favor of bringing those practices back?


No. As I have previously stated, there is an age at which I believe corporal punishment becomes ineffective.


So you seem to agree that there is a point where CP is no longer effective. Exactly what age is that?
Let's compare apples and giraffes:
They're both found in nature.
They both have skin.
If you cut them open, they're both wet inside.
Apples grow on trees that can be tall. Giraffes are tall.

There may be more similarities, but at least an apple doesn't have to be cooked to taste good.
quote:
Originally posted by Tomme73:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:

Corporal punishment for being tardy. Hmmmm. Well, better these kids learn now before they get in the "real world". After all, don't we all get hit on the behind with a board when we're late a few times in the working world? Hey, you gotta learn sometime. Excellent lesson!!!


In the real world, it'll be "corporate punishment" for being tardy.


So tell me, Tomme73, why is it that adults in the workplace aren't disciplined with a few smacks on the behind with a board? Why do you think this isn't acceptable in our (somewhat) civil, American workplace?

Should it be acceptable? If so, why? If not, then why is it acceptable to hit a child with a few smacks on the behind with a board to discipline?

And don't dodge this. Explain.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Sofa King:
No, you mentioned one with a profound lack of any discipline at all versus one who received some form of discipline - albeit primitive and outdated by today's standards.

I'm sorry but you are incorrect.

Corporal Punishment is not primitive and outdated. It has been abandoned by adults that prefer to be their child’s pal/buddy instead of their parent. As a parent it is your job to teach you children. It is not the job of the babysitter/daycare, teachers/principle or the DHR/Social worker. That is the problem with society today, no one is taking the responsibility to teach their children respect for themselves, respect for others, the difference between right and wrong but most of all that there is consequences for their actions. If we as parents do not teach these things to our children I’m sure the police officers and judges will.
So tell me, Tomme73, why is it that adults in the workplace aren't disciplined with a few smacks on the behind with a board? Why do you think this isn't acceptable in our (somewhat) civil, American workplace?

Should it be acceptable? If so, why? If not, then why is it acceptable to hit a child with a few smacks on the behind with a board to discipline?

And don't dodge this. Explain.[/QUOTE]

I'll explain. The work place too has become touchy feely. It just about takes a full board meeting with a unanimous vote to have someone that does not do their job or has poor performance written up. Now days they give you counseling and flex time to help out if you’re late or having a problem doing your job. Wow, used to they would just fire you and put a explanation in you file. So the next employer can ask you if you have worked out those problems and question you if they are going to have the same problem with you. No corporal punishment in the work place would probably be welcomed instead of being fired/docked pay and a write up placed in you file.
quote:
Originally posted by OpinionsVary2:
I'll explain. The work place too has become touchy feely. It just about takes a full board meeting with a unanimous vote to have someone that does not do their job or has poor performance written up. Now days they give you counseling and flex time to help out if you’re late or having a problem doing your job. Wow, used to they would just fire you and put a explanation in you file. So the next employer can ask you if you have worked out those problems and question you if they are going to have the same problem with you. No corporal punishment in the work place would probably be welcomed instead of being fired/docked pay and a write up placed in you file.


LOL!!!! OMG!!!!

So adults should be paddled at work? That's priceless.

quote:
Now days they give you counseling and flex time to help out


Yeah, those pansy, family friendly work policies like flex time are for the employees who just aren't "team players" (That's not an overused cliche, is it? Big Grin).

So what your five-year-old is throwing up and got a temperature of 104. Daycare won't take him if he's sick and you don't have any back-up options. How's that the employer's problem? The kid just needs to toughen up and either make himself well or stay home alone! Little Nancy boy! Hahahaha!

Need time off to go to a parent/teacher conference and the boss won't let you off to go? Stop being such a bellyacher! What do you need with a parent/teacher conference when the teachers and administrators already know what's best for you child, like hitting him hard on the bottom with a board?

Flex time, shmex time!

Hahahahaha! Thanks, OpinionsVary2. I haven't laughed this hard in a while. Post of the year so far!
Sofa King,

The word "obtuse" perfectly describes some of these posts.

OMG! How could so many people lack the ability to understand that discipline doesn't mean spanking, and lack of spanking doesn't equal bad behavior?

We've explained all we can. They simple don't possess the ability to comprehend.

It's incredible. It should be a controlled experiment for a research hospital or something.
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
Dog,

I'm curious: We used to use CP in our mental institutions and military. We outlawed those practices along ago. Would you be in favor of bringing those practices back?


No. As I have previously stated, there is an age at which I believe corporal punishment becomes ineffective.


So you seem to agree that there is a point where CP is no longer effective. Exactly what age is that?


i also agree that the child reaches a point where spanking is non productive.

exactly when depends on the child. my daughter, the youngest and more observant and a little more willing to learn form other's mistakes has seen her brother spanked and nade a note of what it was, and so avoided the situation. she was last paddled when she was maybe 5.. maybe even 4. she's 11 now.
my 13 year old son was paddled earlier this year for lying to us, the one unforgivable transgression. he'd gotten into trouble at school and lied about it. the next week, he got in trouble again (same thing, different situation) and came home and told us about it as soon as he walked in the door. to reinforce the ' Lying=Bad ' idea, we patted him on the head and told him not to do it again and then we made cookies.
he hasn't done it again.
(and just for my sons sake, i'll say that his misbehavior at school stemmed from frustration and anger at being bullied there. when he finally told us about it, we got in touch with the school and it's " being taken care of ". since then my son hasn't gotten into trouble at school at all.)

and i just want to make it perfectly clear - we didn't paddle him for what he did at school, we paddled him for lying to us about it.
he's reached the point now where spanking isn't useful in general, we only use it for that one thing. Lie to us, and we'll bust your butt. everything else can be worked out.
if he doesn't lie to us again, he won't be spanked again, but in compliance with a word that several people have used in this thread, we must be consistant. we told him that if he lies, he gets spanked, so as parents we must keep our word.
our daughter got that message early on.

some children never need to be spanked. you tell them NO, and they obey. some are told no over and over and over, and still see exactly how far they can push it before they cross the line. a smack on the butt shows them they need to quit testing.

anti-spankers think those of us who spank are poor parents that are borderline abusive who can't control their kids without beating them.
pro-spankers think that the anti-spankers are whimpy new-ager psychobabble nimrods who let their kids run roughshod over the house and can't keep discipline.

the truth is, in some cases, both of these *are* true.
in MOST cases, neither are true.
it's pretty much down to this - if it works for you, use it. if it doesn't, don't. but quit trying to tell other people how to raise their kids. i don't care if you spank your kids or not. if they come to my house and are rotten brats, i'll toss em out. (i've done this) if they come over and are well behaved, i'll tell you how wonderful they were while here. (done this as well) whether you spank em or not is none of my business, no matter how they behaved.

i won't tell you to beat your kids if you won't tell me i can't beat mine as needed Wink
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Tomme73:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:

Corporal punishment for being tardy. Hmmmm. Well, better these kids learn now before they get in the "real world". After all, don't we all get hit on the behind with a board when we're late a few times in the working world? Hey, you gotta learn sometime. Excellent lesson!!!


In the real world, it'll be "corporate punishment" for being tardy.


So tell me, Tomme73, why is it that adults in the workplace aren't disciplined with a few smacks on the behind with a board? Why do you think this isn't acceptable in our (somewhat) civil, American workplace?

Should it be acceptable? If so, why? If not, then why is it acceptable to hit a child with a few smacks on the behind with a board to discipline?

And don't dodge this. Explain.


Explaination -

you can fire an employee who behaves badly, you can't fire your child no matter how they behave.
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Tomme73:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:

Corporal punishment for being tardy. Hmmmm. Well, better these kids learn now before they get in the "real world". After all, don't we all get hit on the behind with a board when we're late a few times in the working world? Hey, you gotta learn sometime. Excellent lesson!!!


In the real world, it'll be "corporate punishment" for being tardy.


So tell me, Tomme73, why is it that adults in the workplace aren't disciplined with a few smacks on the behind with a board? Why do you think this isn't acceptable in our (somewhat) civil, American workplace?

Should it be acceptable? If so, why? If not, then why is it acceptable to hit a child with a few smacks on the behind with a board to discipline?

And don't dodge this. Explain.


Explaination -

you can fire an employee who behaves badly, you can't fire your child no matter how they behave.


I didn't say explain why firing someone is okay.

I said explain why employers don't discipline their employees by hitting them on the behind with a board.

If it's okay to do it to children, why isn't it okay to do it to adults?
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:

So tell me, Tomme73, why is it that adults in the workplace aren't disciplined with a few smacks on the behind with a board? Why do you think this isn't acceptable in our (somewhat) civil, American workplace?

Should it be acceptable? If so, why? If not, then why is it acceptable to hit a child with a few smacks on the behind with a board to discipline?

And don't dodge this. Explain.


Explaination -

you can fire an employee who behaves badly, you can't fire your child no matter how they behave.[/QUOTE]

I didn't say explain why firing someone is okay.

I said explain why employers don't discipline their employees by hitting them on the behind with a board.

If it's okay to do it to children, why isn't it okay to do it to adults?[/QUOTE]

i did explain why.
we have the option of geting rid of an uncooporative, unless annoying or disobedient.
we don't have to worry wether or not it is acceptable to spank our workforce to get them in line.

( i'm going to pause here a minute to apologize.. my space bar is messing up on me. clicking, clacking and sometimes not working.. so forgive it this comes out horrible)

in japan and china they DO 'spank' their employees. there, getting fired isworse than beating. often, the employee will thank theboss for allowing them to be beaten and therefore another chance instead of being fired. there have been, in the past, people fired who would go home and disembowl them selves to remove the stain of dishonor form their family.

we have no choice choice but to keep our kids, they are ours, we bear theresponsibility to teach them right from wrong, acceptable from unacceptable, so, ifthe parents feel it's thecorrect choice, they employ spanking to enforcethe lessons they are trying to teach.
wouldyou parentsnever spank thier kids, regardlessof the behavior, and ifthey get to the proverbial straw, they just takethe kids down to dhr andgive up?


ok.. i quit for now...i'mgonna go shoot my keyboard. will be back when i figure something out and maybewecan continuethis this wasaverygood question Smiler
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:

I didn't say explain why firing someone is okay.

I said explain why employers don't discipline their employees by hitting them on the behind with a board.

If it's okay to do it to children, why isn't it okay to do it to adults?


Because you cant 'fire' your children for acting a fool, yet an employer can 'fire' an employee for it.

I think I am with you on the fact that schools should not use corporal punishment, its not their place in my opinion. That is the parents job (as well as anyone the parents designate as having that right and responsibility). Just because you are a teacher or a principle, doesnt automatically give you that right.

Jeepin'
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
Dog,

I'm curious: We used to use CP in our mental institutions and military. We outlawed those practices along ago. Would you be in favor of bringing those practices back?


No. As I have previously stated, there is an age at which I believe corporal punishment becomes ineffective.


So you seem to agree that there is a point where CP is no longer effective. Exactly what age is that?


From personal experience, the age in which corporal punishment is usually no longer effective is around age 13.
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
Sofa King,

The word "obtuse" perfectly describes some of these posts.

OMG! How could so many people lack the ability to understand that discipline doesn't mean spanking, and lack of spanking doesn't equal bad behavior?

We've explained all we can. They simple don't possess the ability to comprehend.

It's incredible. It should be a controlled experiment for a research hospital or something.


Talk about the 'pot' calling the 'kettle' black. All that has been 'proven' in this exchange of beliefs is that we all agree to disagree.
quote:
Originally posted by Lets Go Jeepin':
Just because you are a teacher or a principle, doesnt automatically give you that right.

Jeepin'


I beg to differ. Check out the legal definition of loco in parentis: In loco parentis is a legal doctrine describing a relationship similar to that of a parent to a child. It refers to an individual who assumes parental status and responsibilities for another individual, usually a young person, without formally adopting that person. By far the most common usage of in loco parentis relates to teachers and students.
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Tomme73:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:

Corporal punishment for being tardy. Hmmmm. Well, better these kids learn now before they get in the "real world". After all, don't we all get hit on the behind with a board when we're late a few times in the working world? Hey, you gotta learn sometime. Excellent lesson!!!


In the real world, it'll be "corporate punishment" for being tardy.


So tell me, Tomme73, why is it that adults in the workplace aren't disciplined with a few smacks on the behind with a board? Why do you think this isn't acceptable in our (somewhat) civil, American workplace?

Should it be acceptable? If so, why? If not, then why is it acceptable to hit a child with a few smacks on the behind with a board to discipline?

And don't dodge this. Explain.



You obviously have the sense of humor of the board of which you speak. I've heard of a group of men who worked together and some of them got tired of the tardiness of others. All the men agreed to getting paddled for showing up late. Guess what. . . The tardiness stopped.
I never said this was appropriate workplace discipline. However, as a Christian, "spare the rod and spoil the child" was not a suggestion. It doesn't say to spare the rod from the child and do all you can to spoil the child. The verse implies that, without proper discipline, a child will go bad (spoil).
You can post references to all the studies you want. I can post references to personal life experiences. It has been my experience that the worst-behaved children I've seen in my nearly 40 years of existence are the ones who have been spared the rod. My 6 year old is the best-behaved of all his cousins and is the one who receives proper discipline. The rest get "Now, so-and-so, don't do that. That's not nice. If you do it again. . ." over and over and over, until the situation escalates to a point where I've felt it necessary to say something. Then, some parent gets his/her feelings hurt because I had the stones to tell their brat to knock it off immediately or suffer. Guess what. . . The poor behavior was culled that instant. You don't talk to kids like they're your friend when you're trying to enforce the rules. There's a time for being friends and there's a time for being a parent.
Did I dodge anything?

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post

×
×
×
×