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?
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]

AMEN Dogsoldier. I have 6 children and 4 of them are out on their own being well adjusted adults. They all have children of their own and work, pay taxes and stay out of trouble. Hum I wonder how Miss buttercups little Jonny will fair? Only time will tell.

Yes, we can agree to disagree.
quote:

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).


Here we go with the old "spare the rod and spoil the child" stuff. This is not a literal command - just like you can't take much of what the bible says literally - but that's a concept you don't comprehend. God meant for us to set boundaries and discipline our kids (discipline means "teach", not hit). You don't have to spank your kids and make them fear you to make them mind. I know this because I know way too many parents who have done it.

quote:

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.


Your six-year-old's cousins had no limits imposed on them, simple as that.

quote:

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.


LOL! Show me where I've said on this thread, or any thread, that parents should be friends with their kids. Don't take the conversation in a new direction just because you can't argue a point.
quote:
Originally posted by OpinionsVary2:
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.


AMEN Dogsoldier. I have 6 children and 4 of them are out on their own being well adjusted adults. They all have children of their own and work, pay taxes and stay out of trouble. Hum I wonder how Miss buttercups little Jonny will fair? Only time will tell.

Yes, we can agree to disagree.[/QUOTE]

And that's all because they were spanked, right? I'm glad your kids turned out well, but it's not because they were spanked.

Give us some more brilliant insight, will ya?
Another fine example of your extraordinary acumen:

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.
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
quote:
Originally posted by Lets Go Jeepin':

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'


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.


Now that I have competed my quote, as I stated at the beginning of that statement, it was my opinion. It is apparent that it is not illegal, or there would be numerous school officials in prison right now for assault. 'Owning' of another human being was legal at one time, that didnt make it right. It is not right for someone to 'assume' that they have the right to physically punish a child that is not legally theirs.

And that doctrine would be very questionable to me, which is probably why the US district courts are still trying to clarify the rights of students regarding corporal punishment.. Where does that right actually end? Does a teacher have the right to approve medical procedures on children that are in their care? Why is it that parents have to give permission for their children to go on field trips, does the teacher not bear enough responsibility for the child to grant that permission? So, the school administration has just enough responsibility to inflict physical punishment, but nothing else? Truth be told, from what I read, the application has been upheld mostly for reasons regarding the safety and security of the students. How does corporal punishment address students safety and security? It doesnt surprise me, however, that this issue has been argued back and forth since the 60's....

Jeepin'
Sorry, Jeepin'. I overlooked the word 'opinion' in your post.

One area in which school systems unnecessarily involve themselves in students' lives is with regards to disciplining students for behavior that occurs OFF-SITE and which did not involve a school-related function. Ex: Bobby and Tim get into an argument in the locker room after PE. One says 'I'll meet you after school and settle this!'. They meet 7 miles away from school in Farmer Tom's hay field and slug it out. becasue the argument which instigated the fight occured at school, the school administration claims 'jurisdiction' and suspends the two kids for fighting. THAT is really stretching things.

BTW...Buttercup: How were YOU disciplined as a child?
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:

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).


Here we go with the old "spare the rod and spoil the child" stuff. This is not a literal command - just like you can't take much of what the bible says literally - but that's a concept you don't comprehend. God meant for us to set boundaries and discipline our kids (discipline means "teach", not hit). You don't have to spank your kids and make them fear you to make them mind. I know this because I know way too many parents who have done it.

quote:

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.


Your six-year-old's cousins had no limits imposed on them, simple as that.

quote:

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.


LOL! Show me where I've said on this thread, or any thread, that parents should be friends with their kids. Don't take the conversation in a new direction just because you can't argue a point.


I can argue a point. You "know way too many parents who have done it." So, you're NOT a parent? If not, you're not qualified to add to the conversation. Finally, the use of the word "you" can sometimes be used generally, to imply all parents, not merely the person to whom I am replying. Your superior liberal intellect should have picked up on this.
My niece has a 3 year old that started biting other kids. She had never spanked her and instead had been using time out, taking toys away and talking. We suggested spanking her and she didn't want to. I completely understand not wanting to spank your child. I never enjoyed it or liked it. However after she bit a baby and left quite a large bruise my niece finally gave her a spanking. She started to bite her little brother a few days later and my niece reminded her of the spanking and said she would get another one if she did it again. That was 6 months ago and the biting has stopped.

She had never been spanked before but she was acting violently to other children....She was disciplined in many ways before the spanking. The spanking is what worked. Sometimes it is the answer.
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
Sorry, Jeepin'. I overlooked the word 'opinion' in your post.

One area in which school systems unnecessarily involve themselves in students' lives is with regards to disciplining students for behavior that occurs OFF-SITE and which did not involve a school-related function. Ex: Bobby and Tim get into an argument in the locker room after PE. One says 'I'll meet you after school and settle this!'. They meet 7 miles away from school in Farmer Tom's hay field and slug it out. becasue the argument which instigated the fight occured at school, the school administration claims 'jurisdiction' and suspends the two kids for fighting. THAT is really stretching things.

BTW...Buttercup: How were YOU disciplined as a child?


I would say that is definately stretching it.

BTW: Its all good ;o)

Jeepin'
I don't have to spank my son.. I just have to reach for the vacuum cleaner tube and he falls right into compliance Eeker

Oh, I know, I'm a bad father because, not often but from time to time I have to lay a couple onto my boys backside.. It's none of your business

The problems come in when we let these weirdo's condemn us for what we know is the right thing to do.. nothing gets the point across better than a couple of well placed smacks on them little duffs
I have been publicly reprimanded for swatting my child's behind in Target. A firm and swift swat. (He was prob. 6ish at the time). I was so mad that I was seething. Now, it's nobody's business how I discipline my child.
Having said that, I have witnessed a mom "whaling" on her child in a store, clearly out of control. There is an IMMENSE difference. A swift swat is sometimes what they need to keep in line. BUT in a controlled manner. Just my opinion.
Kids were much better behaved (in general) in the "Wait till your father gets home generation!"
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
I have been publicly reprimanded for swatting my child's behind in Target. A firm and swift swat. (He was prob. 6ish at the time). I was so mad that I was seething. Now, it's nobody's business how I discipline my child.
Having said that, I have witnessed a mom "whaling" on her child in a store, clearly out of control. There is an IMMENSE difference. A swift swat is sometimes what they need to keep in line. BUT in a controlled manner. Just my opinion.
Kids were much better behaved (in general) in the "Wait till your father gets home generation!"


I agree totally.
quote:
Originally posted by Jankinonya:
My niece has a 3 year old that started biting other kids. She had never spanked her and instead had been using time out, taking toys away and talking. We suggested spanking her and she didn't want to. I completely understand not wanting to spank your child. I never enjoyed it or liked it. However after she bit a baby and left quite a large bruise my niece finally gave her a spanking. She started to bite her little brother a few days later and my niece reminded her of the spanking and said she would get another one if she did it again. That was 6 months ago and the biting has stopped.

She had never been spanked before but she was acting violently to other children....She was disciplined in many ways before the spanking. The spanking is what worked. Sometimes it is the answer.


Jankin,

I'm sure you know three-year-olds bite and hit when they are frustrated or angry because they do not yet have the capability to fully express how they feel with words. How many three-year-olds do you know of that can articulate to a playmate, "Please don't take the toy I'm playing with out of my hands. That's unfair." They can't, so they hit or bite.

Pediatricians and child development experts will tell you to remove the child from the situation when this happens and explain to him/her, "We don't bite/hit our friends because biting/hitting hurts the friend." Yes, you'll have to do it a few times before it sinks in, but it will work. This also teaches empathy for others' pain - something that's crucial to learn during the early years (so that he's less likely to become a bully later on).

What I don't understand is why would you spank (and inflict pain on) a child who bit/hit (and inflicted pain on) another child? That sends mixed messages: It's okay for me to spank you but you can't hit or bite your friend.

Many times to discipline is to teach a better way. This is a great example of it because, again, removing the child and explaining it hurts a person when you bite or hit him, teaches empathy for others' feelings and it helps the child learn self-control - i.e., the more this method is reinforced, the more the child will learn how to manage his own anger without mom's intervention in the future.

And isn't that part of our jobs as parents - to prepare our children for the world?

Wouldn't you rather your child learn to control his actions using this method than to spank him and teach him nothing? He's going to have to learn how to control frustration and anger (on his own) sometime.

I know you don't agree. Got it. But this isn't coming from me, these are recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics - a group that is completely against spanking. Yes, I know, their views don't matter either.
quote:
American Academy of Pediatrics - a group that is completely against spanking. Yes, I know, their views don't matter either.


I daresay Pediatricians who are also parents will be divided on this debate as well.In fact, I **KNOW** some pediatricians that spank their children. Even use the "switch".
You are never going to get people to agree on this topic, I'm afraid. I will never stop spanking my kids when they deserve it, and a nonspanker will never suddenly bring out the switch/paddle....
this is an "agree to disagree" moment.
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
quote:
American Academy of Pediatrics - a group that is completely against spanking. Yes, I know, their views don't matter either.


I know plenty of Pediatricians that spank. Sometimes a good old fashioned paddle/hand/switch is in order..........to each his own.


You do, huh? Names?

If they endorse spanking, they are not members of the American Academy of Pediatrics or don't support the view of the vast majority of members.

The AAP has a membership of 60K pediatricians. If these "doctors" you know aren't members, they are seriously in the minority and one would have to wonder why they aren't affiliated with the AAP. Were they kicked out for some reason? Do they have valid licenses?

Yeah, Michael Jackson was under the care of a great physician too.
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
YES they are members, and NO I would not dare divulge names. That's not my place. But rest assured, it's true.
Spanking is a parenting issue, not a medical one.


Fair enough. Send me a PM then. I want to investigate this. Otherwise, I have no reason to believe you.
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:

What I don't understand is why would you spank (and inflict pain on) a child who bit/hit (and inflicted pain on) another child? That sends mixed messages: It's okay for me to spank you but you can't hit or bite your friend.

Many times to discipline is to teach a better way. This is a great example of it because, again, removing the child and explaining it hurts a person when you bite or hit him, teaches empathy for others' feelings and it helps the child learn self-control - i.e., the more this method is reinforced, the more the child will learn how to manage his own anger without mom's intervention in the future.



i think perhaps you misunderstand something.

useing this, and yes, i agree it's a good example, i, a pro spanking parent would have handled it this way:

we'll call the biter kate and the bitten will be tom.


Tom:WAHHHHHHHHHHH KATE BIT ME!

father: why did you bit tom?
kate: he tooked my toy.
Father: kate, you can't bite or hit people. it hurts them, and makes them feel bad. you wouldn't like it if someone bit you, would you? don't bite tom, or i'll have to spank you, and you won't like that either.
father: tom, kate shouldn't have bitten you, and you shouldn't have taken her toy. play nice together, or you'll be sent to your rooms and won't be allowed to play together at all.
<30 minutes later>
< CHOMP >
tom: WAHH AHH AHHH KATE BIT ME!
father: Kate, come here, NOW!

father: kate, i told you not to bite. i told you if you bit tim i'd have to spank you. this is your last warning - once more and i will get the paddle. you cannot go around biting people just because they do something that makes you upset. if he takes your toy or pushes you or bites you, you come tell me. did he take your toy again?
kate: no he tooked ta nother one, the geen tuck.
father: the green truck? that's his toy, katie, yours was the blue racecar.
kate: tommy tooked ta bu aceka too.
father: then you should have come and told me or your mother that tom wasn't shareing, and we'll take care of it. you do not bite people, ever. understand me? this is the last warning. next time you get spanked.

<30 minutes later>

tom: WHAAAAA KATIE BITTED ME SOME MORE!!!
father: kate, why did you bite him?
kate: i duno.
father: tom, why did kate bite you, did you take her toy again and wouldn't share?
tom: i duno. i hadda lello hacega, and was givin it to her and she bitted my hand.
father: the racecar is blue, the truck is green, the tractor is yellow.
tom nods : lello takta

father: what did i say katie?
kate: if i bited tom, i gets paddles.
father right. so, what happenes now?

kate: i gets paddles>
father: right. why do i have to paddle you?
kate: cause i bit tom and you told not don't and i bited him and so said don't or i get paddles, and i bited him again.



Buttercup, you seem to think that the situation would resemble this scene-


tom: WHAAAAAA KATE BIT ME


father: Don't bite people


now.. i cannot speak for other parents or how they handle it, but that's how we handle here.. baseball rules - three strikes, and your out, with spanking as the final option and making it clear that the they will be spanked, with the option up to them to take the non paddleing way out by not repeating whatever it was they did.

part of it was also an underlying lesson that their actions carry consequinces that they must accept responsibility for.
if you do (a), then (b) will happen. if you don't want to deal with (b), then don't do (a).

we don't just walk around willynilly whoping our kids without makeing sure that they understand why, and giving them the chance to correct their behavior themselves. spanking has always been the last resort, but we set that last resort with 3 strikes. i've seen parents threaten a spanking if the action was repeated... for time after time, never acctually getting around the spanking part, and leting the child get away with whatever it was over and over until, finally frustrated enough they said 'that's it, go to your room!" from the parent.
they must be taught that there are limits and boundries, and spanking, when used appoprietly, is an extremely effective tool to that end.
used incorrectly, it can make the situation worse, engender resentment and hate.

but like i said.. i won't tell you to beat yours as long as you don't tell me i can't beat mine. as long as the parent remembers that we aren't 'raiseing kids' but instead are 'raising tomorrows adults' then i don't care whether the parent spanks or not. if you raise children, then they're going to BE children, even when they hit 30.

i just wanted to make sure that pro-spankers.. well... that at least my wife and i use your methods at first... explain, try to engage empathy and understanding and get the child involved in the situation from more than just the offended and offender point of view, but that there will be clear, sharp, unhappy consequences if they continue to engage in the undesired behavior.
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:

What I don't understand is why would you spank (and inflict pain on) a child who bit/hit (and inflicted pain on) another child? That sends mixed messages: It's okay for me to spank you but you can't hit or bite your friend.

Many times to discipline is to teach a better way. This is a great example of it because, again, removing the child and explaining it hurts a person when you bite or hit him, teaches empathy for others' feelings and it helps the child learn self-control - i.e., the more this method is reinforced, the more the child will learn how to manage his own anger without mom's intervention in the future.



i think perhaps you misunderstand something.

useing this, and yes, i agree it's a good example, i, a pro spanking parent would have handled it this way:

we'll call the biter kate and the bitten will be tom.


Tom:WAHHHHHHHHHHH KATE BIT ME!

father: why did you bit tom?
kate: he tooked my toy.
Father: kate, you can't bite or hit people. it hurts them, and makes them feel bad. you wouldn't like it if someone bit you, would you? don't bite tom, or i'll have to spank you, and you won't like that either.
father: tom, kate shouldn't have bitten you, and you shouldn't have taken her toy. play nice together, or you'll be sent to your rooms and won't be allowed to play together at all.
<30 minutes later>
< CHOMP >
tom: WAHH AHH AHHH KATE BIT ME!
father: Kate, come here, NOW!

father: kate, i told you not to bite. i told you if you bit tim i'd have to spank you. this is your last warning - once more and i will get the paddle. you cannot go around biting people just because they do something that makes you upset. if he takes your toy or pushes you or bites you, you come tell me. did he take your toy again?
kate: no he tooked ta nother one, the geen tuck.
father: the green truck? that's his toy, katie, yours was the blue racecar.
kate: tommy tooked ta bu aceka too.
father: then you should have come and told me or your mother that tom wasn't shareing, and we'll take care of it. you do not bite people, ever. understand me? this is the last warning. next time you get spanked.

<30 minutes later>

tom: WHAAAAA KATIE BITTED ME SOME MORE!!!
father: kate, why did you bite him?
kate: i duno.
father: tom, why did kate bite you, did you take her toy again and wouldn't share?
tom: i duno. i hadda lello hacega, and was givin it to her and she bitted my hand.
father: the racecar is blue, the truck is green, the tractor is yellow.
tom nods : lello takta

father: what did i say katie?
kate: if i bited tom, i gets paddles.
father right. so, what happenes now?

kate: i gets paddles>
father: right. why do i have to paddle you?
kate: cause i bit tom and you told not don't and i bited him and so said don't or i get paddles, and i bited him again.



Buttercup, you seem to think that the situation would resemble this scene-


tom: WHAAAAAA KATE BIT ME


father: Don't bite people


now.. i cannot speak for other parents or how they handle it, but that's how we handle here.. baseball rules - three strikes, and your out, with spanking as the final option and making it clear that the they will be spanked, with the option up to them to take the non paddleing way out by not repeating whatever it was they did.

part of it was also an underlying lesson that their actions carry consequinces that they must accept responsibility for.
if you do (a), then (b) will happen. if you don't want to deal with (b), then don't do (a).

we don't just walk around willynilly whoping our kids without makeing sure that they understand why, and giving them the chance to correct their behavior themselves. spanking has always been the last resort, but we set that last resort with 3 strikes. i've seen parents threaten a spanking if the action was repeated... for time after time, never acctually getting around the spanking part, and leting the child get away with whatever it was over and over until, finally frustrated enough they said 'that's it, go to your room!" from the parent.
they must be taught that there are limits and boundries, and spanking, when used appoprietly, is an extremely effective tool to that end.
used incorrectly, it can make the situation worse, engender resentment and hate.

but like i said.. i won't tell you to beat yours as long as you don't tell me i can't beat mine. as long as the parent remembers that we aren't 'raiseing kids' but instead are 'raising tomorrows adults' then i don't care whether the parent spanks or not. if you raise children, then they're going to BE children, even when they hit 30.

i just wanted to make sure that pro-spankers.. well... that at least my wife and i use your methods at first... explain, try to engage empathy and understanding and get the child involved in the situation from more than just the offended and offender point of view, but that there will be clear, sharp, unhappy consequences if they continue to engage in the undesired behavior.


What I described works, thenagel, without the threat of spanking.

I did enjoy your story, though. Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
I have been publicly reprimanded for swatting my child's behind in Target. A firm and swift swat. (He was prob. 6ish at the time). I was so mad that I was seething. Now, it's nobody's business how I discipline my child.
Having said that, I have witnessed a mom "whaling" on her child in a store, clearly out of control. There is an IMMENSE difference. A swift swat is sometimes what they need to keep in line. BUT in a controlled manner. Just my opinion.
Kids were much better behaved (in general) in the "Wait till your father gets home generation!"


Your quote: "Now, it's nobody's business how I discipline my child."

Question: If a father was molesting his child would it be anyone's business? Your statement implies some sort of ownership over a human being - a child. I'm just wondering where you would draw the line.
Here's an interesting side to this. I'm sure most of you are familiar with the television show "Supernanny" with Jo Frost.

I've watched plenty of episodes and have seen the most out of control children - of all ages - you could possibly imagine. It's always the same: the parents' form of discipline is spanking and yelling, and it never works; hence, the call to the Supernanny.

Jo Frost has been a nanny for over 20 years and has come across every conceivable behavioral situation. AND NEVER, NOT ONCE, HAS SHE ENCOURAGED A PARENT TO SPANK as discipline.

Here's a great related article:

http://www.associatedcontent.c...spanking.html?cat=25
Here is an ABSOLUTELY FANTASTIC article from Parenting Magazine - a Q&A with Dr. William Sears.

Dr. Sears' background:

Author of over 30 books on childcare. Dr. Sears is an Associate Clinical Professor of Pediatrics at the University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine. Dr. Sears received his pediatric training at Harvard Medical School's Children's Hospital in Boston and The Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto -- the largest children’s hospital in the world, where he served as associate ward chief of the newborn nursery and associate professor of pediatrics. Dr. Sears is a fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and a fellow of the Royal College of Pediatricians (RCP). Dr. Sears is also a medical and parenting consultant for BabyTalk and Parenting magazines and the pediatrician on the website.

The article:

quote:

Q. My husband believes in spanking, but I don't. How can we come to an agreement on how best to discipline our kids?


A. I've practiced pediatrics for 35 years and raised eight children with my wife. Over the years, I've seen lots of children grow up, and I've become more and more convinced that spanking is not the best solution when it comes to child discipline. In my opinion, "sparing the rod" results in emotionally healthier and better disciplined children. In fact, based on increasing scientific evidence against spanking and anti-spanking opinions among child development researchers, most European and Scandinavian countries have enacted laws against spanking. In addition, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child declared spanking a form of violence and supports the creation of laws against physical punishment. Besides those facts, here is some other information you can share with your husband that might encourage him to rethink his position on spanking:

Spanking doesn't work. In my practice, I have had parents who spank and those who don't. With the ones who do, I've seen that it just doesn't work. Many times the parent will say, "The more we spank, the worse he behaves!" Spanking creates a distance between parent and child. It doesn't promote good behavior, and if it seems to discourage bad behavior, it does so more by force than desire.

As parents of a large family, my wife and I have had to run a well-disciplined household, so I believe in discipline that works. Since my wife and I are aware of the research against spanking and have rarely seen it work, we adapted a "no spanking" attitude in disciplining our children. Having decided that we would not spank our children -- but we would discipline them -- forced us to learn better discipline techniques. If you program yourself with "I will not hit my child," it forces you to stop and take the time to think, "Is there a better way I can handle this situation?"

Spanking models violence. When a big person hits a little person, especially out of anger, it can tell the child that it's okay to hit people. The mom of one of my patients once told me that she thought she had to spank her child to be a good disciplinarian -- until one day she observed her 3-year-old daughter hitting her younger brother. When the mom intervened, the daughter said, "I'm just playing mommy." Obviously, there was no more spanking in that house!

In a child's mind, if Mom or Dad does something, it's okay. If you vent your anger by hitting your child, then it's harder to rationalize to your child why he shouldn't hit someone when he's angry. Empathy -- the ability to think before you act and imagine how your actions will affect the other person -- is one of the main qualities that we want to instill in our children. Spanking sabotages empathy. A child is likely to haul off and hit another child without considering whether his actions are going to hurt the other person.

Research supports not spanking. Long-term studies have shown that children who were spanked tend to be more physically violent as teenagers and adults, are more likely to be bullies at school, and are generally more antisocial. In addition, children who were spanked excessively had a four times greater incidence of becoming spouse-abusers as adults. Spanking families plant the seed of violence in the next generation.

So how should you discipline your child? Getting behind the eyes of your child can do wonders for prompting you to click into a much more sensitive mode of disciplining than spanking. When he misbehaves, stop and think: "If I were my child, how would I want my parent to handle this?" Spanking is simply a force that gets a kid to stop the misbehavior at that particular time. Remember, discipline means teaching. You want your child to obey because he has learned to make his own choices of what is right or wrong, not out of fear of getting spanked.

If your husband wants to learn discipline techniques other than spanking, have him read our book, The Discipline Book, for many sensitive strategies that can replace spanking in your home.



Oh, I know, he doesn't know what he's talking about, right?
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:


What I described works, thenagel, without the threat of spanking.

I did enjoy your story, though. Big Grin[/QUOTE]

what i described works as well, generally faster and with less reapeted offense. i wonder how many times the kid got bit before your no no no took effect.

skip that... that was snotty....

lets do this... add a qualifer, and i'll agree with you Smiler

what you described CAN work.
if it worked in every case every time then my kids would have never been spanked. i suspect that spanking as a whole would have died out decades ago if a child did what they were told to every time and never disobeyed.

if spanking NEVER worked, why would anyone do it?
if spanking was ALWAYS required, hospitals would hand our Baby's First Paddle along with those overpriced crib photos.

spanking can work well, but should be used sparringly and only if required.
non spanking can work well, but i have met kids who would end up ruling the house if not physical consequinces.

what bothers me about this whole deal, is that you seem to be under the misconception that all children will respond positivly to words and little insignificant punishments alone. it's like, you just cannot accept the possibility that a child will learn that the worst thing that he'll ever get for outright rebellion will be a stern talking to and a time out. if the child knows that nothing will really be done, what's to stop him from walking out the door while your trying to engage his empathy. what if he doesn't have a sense of empathy? so you take away his car keys. and if he dumps your purse on the ground and takes your keys and leaves in the car? what then?
maybe your kid wouldn't. some would.

not every kid has an ipod or cell pohne or computer or xbox or such that can be taken away. my kids were around 8 or 9 before we finally allowed a playstation into the house, they will be at least 16 when they get a cell, because i'm not paying for one.

i freely admit that spanking isn't always required, if often used when it shouldn't be.
can you admit that sometimes there are kids that don't respond as desired to a no spanking ever style of parenting?
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
All right ,Buttercup, if you don't stop this arguing and back talk, you are going to get a spanking. Sorry, I couldn't resist that one. I respect your point of view and rather enjoy this argument.


Promise? Wink Big Grin

Yeah, I've noticed a couple of people asking whether or not I was spanked as a child/making comments like, "I'm guessing Buttercup was not spanked as a child."

I know what's going on. They're all implying that I'm in need of a spanking. Sadists! They can get their kicks on Route 66, not on Buttercup.
No, buttercup, sorry,but I won't PM you pediatricians names...there is no need for you to investigate- like I said it's a parenting style, not a public issue-
I mean,really. You expect me to tell you which peds I have seen spank on the soccer/baseball/school field?
Oh, and to answer your question, I draw the line at CHILD ABUSE. Not a spanking. Smiler
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
I have been publicly reprimanded for swatting my child's behind in Target. A firm and swift swat. (He was prob. 6ish at the time). I was so mad that I was seething. Now, it's nobody's business how I discipline my child.
Having said that, I have witnessed a mom "whaling" on her child in a store, clearly out of control. There is an IMMENSE difference. A swift swat is sometimes what they need to keep in line. BUT in a controlled manner. Just my opinion.
Kids were much better behaved (in general) in the "Wait till your father gets home generation!"


Your quote: "Now, it's nobody's business how I discipline my child."

Question: If a father was molesting his child would it be anyone's business? Your statement implies some sort of ownership over a human being - a child. I'm just wondering where you would draw the line.


oh good god.
this is on my 'top ten list of stupidest things ever said' list.

are you seriously trying to equate child molestation with spanking?

i was begining to respect you as an intellegent, thoughtful person who was merely on the opposite end of this issue from me.

now i'm begining to think you really are one of the free-ager, leftover-hippie wannabe nutjob types that think all the kids at the ball game need to get a trophy because it would be horrible if any one acctually lost, who thinks their kids would never ever misbehave only to find out that your 15 year old is now about to be a mother because they never learned right from wrong, good form bad, smart from stupid - because all they learned is to make sure they snuck around behind moms back and if they kept her clueless they could get away with whatever and your 17 year old son is the biggest drug deal at school, because mom really believed those weird looking plants mixed in with her begonias are just a project from science class last year... you know.. a simple, oblivious bimbo with blinders on who paints a coat of laquer over how she wants to see the world and calls it the truth, regardless of how many times she's presented with cold hard fact that the world isn't a pretty fluffy place liek she wants to believe it is.

i could be wrong. i hope i'm wrong. i was begining to like you, but to put me in the same company as a child molester? that's outragously insulting and makes me more than just a little angry -
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
Here is an ABSOLUTELY FANTASTIC article from Parenting Magazine - a Q&A with Dr. William Sears.

Dr. Sears' background:

Author of over 30 books on childcare. Dr. Sears is an Associate Clinical Professor of Pediatrics at the University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine. Dr. Sears received his pediatric training at Harvard Medical School's Children's Hospital in Boston and The Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto -- the largest children’s hospital in the world, where he served as associate ward chief of the newborn nursery and associate professor of pediatrics. Dr. Sears is a fellow of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and a fellow of the Royal College of Pediatricians (RCP). Dr. Sears is also a medical and parenting consultant for BabyTalk and Parenting magazines and the pediatrician on the website.


Oh, I know, he doesn't know what he's talking about, right?


dunno. maybe he does. but he isn't raiseing my kids, so i don't care much what he thinks.

should i start doing google search for quotes from people with ph'ds who think spanking IS necessary?

would it make you change your mind?

would you even read it?

i didn't read yours, there was no point. you pop up words form someone who already agrees with you, and it going to argue against my belief.. no.. my knowledge that useing a paddle worked quite well for my wife and i.
i *know* it worked for us. you cna spout theory and test and studies and quotes form all the limpwristed big-brains you can think of, but it won't change what i've seen in action.
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
All right ,Buttercup, if you don't stop this arguing and back talk, you are going to get a spanking. Sorry, I couldn't resist that one. I respect your point of view and rather enjoy this argument.


so did i, until she called me a child molester.
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
I have been publicly reprimanded for swatting my child's behind in Target. A firm and swift swat. (He was prob. 6ish at the time). I was so mad that I was seething. Now, it's nobody's business how I discipline my child.
Having said that, I have witnessed a mom "whaling" on her child in a store, clearly out of control. There is an IMMENSE difference. A swift swat is sometimes what they need to keep in line. BUT in a controlled manner. Just my opinion.
Kids were much better behaved (in general) in the "Wait till your father gets home generation!"


Your quote: "Now, it's nobody's business how I discipline my child."

Question: If a father was molesting his child would it be anyone's business? Your statement implies some sort of ownership over a human being - a child. I'm just wondering where you would draw the line.


oh good god.
this is on my 'top ten list of stupidest things ever said' list.

are you seriously trying to equate child molestation with spanking?

i was begining to respect you as an intellegent, thoughtful person who was merely on the opposite end of this issue from me.

now i'm begining to think you really are one of the free-ager, leftover-hippie wannabe nutjob types that think all the kids at the ball game need to get a trophy because it would be horrible if any one acctually lost, who thinks their kids would never ever misbehave only to find out that your 15 year old is now about to be a mother because they never learned right from wrong, good form bad, smart from stupid - because all they learned is to make sure they snuck around behind moms back and if they kept her clueless they could get away with whatever and your 17 year old son is the biggest drug deal at school, because mom really believed those weird looking plants mixed in with her begonias are just a project from science class last year... you know.. a simple, oblivious bimbo with blinders on who paints a coat of laquer over how she wants to see the world and calls it the truth, regardless of how many times she's presented with cold hard fact that the world isn't a pretty fluffy place liek she wants to believe it is.

i could be wrong. i hope i'm wrong. i was begining to like you, but to put me in the same company as a child molester? that's outragously insulting and makes me more than just a little angry -


thenagel,

Slow down. And why aren't you putting into use the period key on your keyboard? That's one heckuva run-on sentence.

Take a deep breath and read my post again. I did not in any way imply that parents who spank their children are child molesters; I asked a question. There's a difference between asking questions and making full-on assumptions.

You are not familiar with my modus operandi, so YOU don't make assumptions yet either, okay?

....and all the kids at the ballgame shouldn't get a trophy? Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by thenagel:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
All right ,Buttercup, if you don't stop this arguing and back talk, you are going to get a spanking. Sorry, I couldn't resist that one. I respect your point of view and rather enjoy this argument.


so did i, until she called me a child molester.


Good Lord! Show me where in my post I called you or vplee123 a child molester.

First of all, I thought vplee123 was a woman. Secondly, I asked, "IF A FATHER WAS MOLESTING HIS CHILD...", not "If vplee123 was molesting his child..."

The point of the question was to find out where vplee123 would draw the line. If it's nobody's business how you discipline your child, is it your business that YOUR NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR is molesting his child?

Again, you're implying some sort of ownership of the child. Couldn't a child-molesting father argue the same thing: It's no one's business?

thenagel, I'm asking this of vplee.
quote:
Again, you're implying some sort of ownership of the child. Couldn't a child-molesting father argue the same thing: It's no one's business?


The difference, buttercup is that one act is criminal, and the other is not.
Spanking is a method of discipline. Nothing more, nothing less. Child molestation is a criminal act. We as a society to have a moral obligation to report/protect those children.
Now, spanking does not fall into this category.
I cannot tell you how many times I have swatted my kids (4 of them) behinds. And when I do, it is NO FUN, but it is sometimes necessary. And I can also assure you that they are healthy, happy well adjusted children.
To equate spanking with child molestation is preposterous.
Anyway, like I've said, we're prolly not going to agree on this- I don't buy in to Dr. Sears philosophies. And I have read it all. I especially disagree with his theory on co-sleeping. Worst mistake we ever made! Smiler
I am more on the "Dr. Ferber" end of the spectrum. Smiler
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
I have been publicly reprimanded for swatting my child's behind in Target. A firm and swift swat. (He was prob. 6ish at the time). I was so mad that I was seething. Now, it's nobody's business how I discipline my child.
Having said that, I have witnessed a mom "whaling" on her child in a store, clearly out of control. There is an IMMENSE difference. A swift swat is sometimes what they need to keep in line. BUT in a controlled manner. Just my opinion.
Kids were much better behaved (in general) in the "Wait till your father gets home generation!"


Your quote: "Now, it's nobody's business how I discipline my child."

Question: If a father was molesting his child would it be anyone's business? Your statement implies some sort of ownership over a human being - a child. I'm just wondering where you would draw the line.


Okay, I just re-read my post and can see where you think that's what I was asking. Sorry. I should have been more thoughtful with how I posed the question.

What I meant by "a father" was anyone, a neighbor, a friend. If you as a neighbor or friend or whatever knew about it, would it be your business to call the authorities and report it?
We all have a moral obligation to protect our children. (and by "our" I mean as a society).
We are morally obligated to report suspected child abuse: molestation, physical assault, etc.
My point is, that spanking does not fall into this category.
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
quote:
American Academy of Pediatrics - a group that is completely against spanking. Yes, I know, their views don't matter either.


I know plenty of Pediatricians that spank. Sometimes a good old fashioned paddle/hand/switch is in order..........to each his own.


You do, huh? Names?

If they endorse spanking, they are not members of the American Academy of Pediatrics or don't support the view of the vast majority of members.

The AAP has a membership of 60K pediatricians. If these "doctors" you know aren't members, they are seriously in the minority and one would have to wonder why they aren't affiliated with the AAP. Were they kicked out for some reason? Do they have valid licenses?

Yeah, Michael Jackson was under the care of a great physician too.


I'm confused -- are you implying that a pediatrician that endorses spanking is not fit to be a peditrician or should be removed from being a pediatrician? They are entitled to their opinions as well as any researcher is -- so I don't understand why them agreeing that a swat might be just what the doctor ordered just as much as an apple a day will keep the doctor away? My pediatrician didn't have a sign on his wall telling me spanking was the best discipline, but he also wasn't big on "time out" either. He's retired now, but he was a great physician and while he gave great advice -- he never said spanking was a bad thing. Then again, there is a major difference between a spanking and a beating -- spanking and the fear of worked for me and my siblings.

I see all your research, but just like with statistics -- you can make some things bend and twist to say anything you want it to say. How I discipline my child is my business and how my neighbor disciplines his child is his business. If he were physically abusing and sexually abusing his child -- I would report him.
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
quote:
American Academy of Pediatrics - a group that is completely against spanking. Yes, I know, their views don't matter either.


I daresay Pediatricians who are also parents will be divided on this debate as well.In fact, I **KNOW** some pediatricians that spank their children. Even use the "switch".
You are never going to get people to agree on this topic, I'm afraid. I will never stop spanking my kids when they deserve it, and a nonspanker will never suddenly bring out the switch/paddle....
this is an "agree to disagree" moment.



When my daughter was 3, and in daycare, she would come home with bite marks, courtesy of a kid in her class. The aides at the daycare were of no help, citing all sorts of Dr. Spock crap. One visit to her pediatrician for an unrelated incident produced a solution: Her pediatrician said if she was bitten again, have her bite the kid back to show him how it felt. He bit her again, she bit back. End of story.
quote:
Originally posted by Eastside:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
quote:
American Academy of Pediatrics - a group that is completely against spanking. Yes, I know, their views don't matter either.


I know plenty of Pediatricians that spank. Sometimes a good old fashioned paddle/hand/switch is in order..........to each his own.


You do, huh? Names?

If they endorse spanking, they are not members of the American Academy of Pediatrics or don't support the view of the vast majority of members.

The AAP has a membership of 60K pediatricians. If these "doctors" you know aren't members, they are seriously in the minority and one would have to wonder why they aren't affiliated with the AAP. Were they kicked out for some reason? Do they have valid licenses?

Yeah, Michael Jackson was under the care of a great physician too.


I'm confused -- are you implying that a pediatrician that endorses spanking is not fit to be a peditrician or should be removed from being a pediatrician? They are entitled to their opinions as well as any researcher is -- so I don't understand why them agreeing that a swat might be just what the doctor ordered just as much as an apple a day will keep the doctor away? My pediatrician didn't have a sign on his wall telling me spanking was the best discipline, but he also wasn't big on "time out" either. He's retired now, but he was a great physician and while he gave great advice -- he never said spanking was a bad thing. Then again, there is a major difference between a spanking and a beating -- spanking and the fear of worked for me and my siblings.

I see all your research, but just like with statistics -- you can make some things bend and twist to say anything you want it to say. How I discipline my child is my business and how my neighbor disciplines his child is his business. If he were physically abusing and sexually abusing his child -- I would report him.


Yes, I know research means nothing to some people except when it concerns drug trials or cancer break-throughs. Then those people pay attention to it.

But none of you - especially in this part of the country - will admit that you only spank your children because momma-and-daddy did and it's the only way you know. There is tons and tons of information about the research available supporting my position (so this isn't coming from Buttercup). There are so many BETTER alternatives to spanking. But it doesn't matter, it's not what momma-and-daddy did.

God himself could appear before some of you and tell you he didn't mean for you to take "Spare the rod...." literally, but you'd still spank because that's what momma-and-daddy did.

So go ahead, switch their little legs, tan their little behinds, make that belt mean some business because discipline isn't at all about the child or the child learning anything or the child's future; it's about the parents and what their own momma-and-daddy did.

Turn out more kids who are more likely to become violent as teenagers and adults; who are more likely to abuse their own spouses; who are more likely to be bullies, alcoholics, socially withdrawn. Go ahead, because that's what momma-and-daddy did.
As has been previously pointed out, the whole 'spare the rod' thingy isn't actually IN the Bible. However, God DID say, in the Old Testament. unruly and disrespectful children should be 'stoned to death'. Today's kids are lucky that we don't live under Old Testament law, huh?
Buttercup, the whole debate on spanking can produce polls and studies on both sides. I was spanked as a kid and at the time hated it of course. But when my dad was dying 4 years ago in his last days I thanked him for those spankings. I can count on one hand the number of times I have used spanking as a method of discipline. I personally think this country needs more spaniking based on the behavior of kids today, but that's just my opinion. The main argument people on here have is personal freedom. Progressives want to take away our personal freedom because in their eyes we don't have enough sense to think for ourselves. I don't want government to tell me how to raise my child, what foods I can eat, what medical care I can use, what light bulbs I can burn, etc. I'm for limited government and states rights. You have a right to discipline your child in your manner. I want to keep the right to do the same.
quote:
Originally posted by dogsoldier0513:
As has been previously pointed out, the whole 'spare the rod' thingy isn't actually IN the Bible. However, God DID say, in the Old Testament. unruly and disrespectful children should be 'stoned to death'. Today's kids are lucky that we don't live under Old Testament law, huh?


This is one time I have to correct you, Dog. Spare the rod is in the Bible.
Proverbs 13:24 "He who spares his rod hates his son, but he who loves him disciplines him promptly."

While it might not be the exact wording most commonly used by proponents of spanking, it's pretty self-explanatory. This is where I depart from reprimanding you, Dog.

Buttercup should realize that not all spanking is carried out appropriately. This is how it should go:
1)Never spank your child when you're mad as a hornet. Emotion can sometimes stand in the way of reason.
2)Before the spanking, talk with your child about why their actions warrant spanking. Let them know that you love them.
3)Spank. A simple open palm on the rear will suffice. Don't make them pull their pants down. That's just strange.
4)Love on them.

It sometimes hurts MY feelings to have to spank my son, but I know he'll be a better person for it.
Buttercup, your whole arguement that "mommy and daddy did it" and current parents "don't know" any other methods is incorrect.

Spanking is not hereditary. Sure, maybe people that were spanked are more likely to do it, but that is not a hard fast rule.
I am a very educated person, having taken many psychology courses at the University Level, nursing school, etc.
I know more psychology and sociology than my parents ever did. But guess what? If my child(ren) backtalk or do something that warrants it, their bottoms will be swatted....
It has nothing to do with my parents' discipline of me, nor education. It just works for some kids.
AND implying that you need to "investigate" pediatricians who spank their own kids just really shows that you don't understand the difference between child abuse, and appropriate disciplinary spanking.
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by Eastside:
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
quote:
American Academy of Pediatrics - a group that is completely against spanking. Yes, I know, their views don't matter either.


I know plenty of Pediatricians that spank. Sometimes a good old fashioned paddle/hand/switch is in order..........to each his own.


You do, huh? Names?

If they endorse spanking, they are not members of the American Academy of Pediatrics or don't support the view of the vast majority of members.

The AAP has a membership of 60K pediatricians. If these "doctors" you know aren't members, they are seriously in the minority and one would have to wonder why they aren't affiliated with the AAP. Were they kicked out for some reason? Do they have valid licenses?

Yeah, Michael Jackson was under the care of a great physician too.


I'm confused -- are you implying that a pediatrician that endorses spanking is not fit to be a peditrician or should be removed from being a pediatrician? They are entitled to their opinions as well as any researcher is -- so I don't understand why them agreeing that a swat might be just what the doctor ordered just as much as an apple a day will keep the doctor away? My pediatrician didn't have a sign on his wall telling me spanking was the best discipline, but he also wasn't big on "time out" either. He's retired now, but he was a great physician and while he gave great advice -- he never said spanking was a bad thing. Then again, there is a major difference between a spanking and a beating -- spanking and the fear of worked for me and my siblings.

I see all your research, but just like with statistics -- you can make some things bend and twist to say anything you want it to say. How I discipline my child is my business and how my neighbor disciplines his child is his business. If he were physically abusing and sexually abusing his child -- I would report him.


Yes, I know research means nothing to some people except when it concerns drug trials or cancer break-throughs. Then those people pay attention to it.

But none of you - especially in this part of the country - will admit that you only spank your children because momma-and-daddy did and it's the only way you know. There is tons and tons of information about the research available supporting my position (so this isn't coming from Buttercup). There are so many BETTER alternatives to spanking. But it doesn't matter, it's not what momma-and-daddy did.

God himself could appear before some of you and tell you he didn't mean for you to take "Spare the rod...." literally, but you'd still spank because that's what momma-and-daddy did.

So go ahead, switch their little legs, tan their little behinds, make that belt mean some business because discipline isn't at all about the child or the child learning anything or the child's future; it's about the parents and what their own momma-and-daddy did.

Turn out more kids who are more likely to become violent as teenagers and adults; who are more likely to abuse their own spouses; who are more likely to be bullies, alcoholics, socially withdrawn. Go ahead, because that's what momma-and-daddy did.


You didn't respond to my question about the pediatrician -- I am curious if you truly think a ped that doesn't rail against the wrongs of spankings shouldn't be a ped?

I am curious though -- what alternatives would you recommend to spanking? What enlightening options are there that work every time so that I can never have to spank my child again, but I won't have to constantly be getting on to my child?

Two things: 1. I don't spank because Momma and Daddy did -- now you are the one making assumptions -- you are using "research" that has no "facts" to support it. 2. not every child that has been spanked is violent and truth be told that statistic is skewed, but since it is research -- whatever. I contract with a juvenile facility -- if you were to poll those kids -- yes you'd get a 100% violence rate to being spanked (40 kids violent and they will all say they were spanked), but if you poll my 7 year old's class room -- you'd get about a 5% violence rate (18 kids 1 kid is the violent one). Big difference in who you poll to get your statistics to fit the outcome of your research. These researchers go into this type of idea with preconceived conclusions and they use what benefits them and what doesn't is considered "insignificant" -- you that +/- 4% thing on most statistics. I pay attention to research but I know enough to know that it is not written in stone and that it has human hands in it so it cannot be taken as law. I give it its due if I don't know of something else in my life that contradicts it. But no one should ever take research as absolute and final. Period.


Yes, in some situations there are better alternatives, but one good swat stops most problems for a long time. No one spanks their child every day or even every week for that matter, but how many times a day do you have to put a child in time out? How many times a week do you have to send a child to their room? How many times a year do you have to take away that cell phone? How many times does your child have to "pull a red tab at school"? How long does it take for your child to "grow out" of their behavior when alternatives are used? How many more family arguments do you have to endure? I had a great childhood and I remember every spanking I got -- but I remember the loving family that I had right there with that. I was never spanked that I didn't know why I was spanked and I was never disciplined that I wasn't "talked to" before or after to make sure I understood.
Well said eastside. maybe what buttercup and researchers fail to realize is there's a wrong way and a right way to administer a spanking. Does everyone know the right way, of course not. Does everyone know the right way to administer alternative punishment, of course not. I don't mind the debate whether spanking is a good punishment or not. I do mind the government or anyone else telling me how to raise my child.
Another Buttercup said about people listening to research on cancer etc but not about this......Some research says that if you smoke you will get cancer -- that's not always true. Some research says if you get X kind of cancer you have less than 2 weeks to live -- that's not necessarily true. Everyone has to glean out the information for themselves and research should only be a guideline. Research may show A, but it does not mean that A is ALWAYS true. I have a friend that had brain cancer and was told it was a death sentence and she should get her affairs in order and that she had 2 weeks -- She lived another 3 years. Statistically, melanoma is another cancer I have a friend that has and she has beat the odds countless times -- so much so she is now the subject of others research because she is an anomaly. When you take research at face value you become a slave to what others tell you is true -- you have to experience -- not just read -- to discern good information from bad. Discernment is key and some people don't have that at all.
quote:
Originally posted by Tomme73:
quote:
Originally posted by lawguy07:
What about nosy bodies at the store telling you how to (not) discipline your child?


I'm all for butting in if the parent slaps the child in the face. Woe be unto that person if I ever see it.


Speaking of "back-handing" -- I was never backhanded by my parents, but I was abused by an ex-boyfriend in my teens. He had a history of abuse by his alcoholic father and his pill popping mother. Big difference in abuse and discipline. His background was of his mother never disciplining him out of guilt and his dad beating him up and him picking his dad up from the bars at age 15. He had major issues needless to say. I put up with his abuse for over 2 years and survived to tell the tale.
quote:
Originally posted by ferrellj:
Buttercup, the whole debate on spanking can produce polls and studies on both sides. I was spanked as a kid and at the time hated it of course. But when my dad was dying 4 years ago in his last days I thanked him for those spankings. I can count on one hand the number of times I have used spanking as a method of discipline. I personally think this country needs more spaniking based on the behavior of kids today, but that's just my opinion. The main argument people on here have is personal freedom. Progressives want to take away our personal freedom because in their eyes we don't have enough sense to think for ourselves. I don't want government to tell me how to raise my child, what foods I can eat, what medical care I can use, what light bulbs I can burn, etc. I'm for limited government and states rights. You have a right to discipline your child in your manner. I want to keep the right to do the same.


It's funny how some of you want gov't out of every aspect of your lives but at the same time are okay with the Supreme Court making decisions for people, like overturning Roe v Wade. Interesting.

The gov't has to regulate certain things. You can trust some things to privately-owned enterprise, but not everything, simply because businesses only care about profits, not people. At least I can have a reasonable expectation that gov't is looking out for me, if only slightly more than a business would.

You want to talk about the ability to think for yourself and make your own choices? You want to talk about the fear of gov't controlling your life?

Well, I don't want to be part of an insurance pool where other people on the plan are fat smokers because they run up my premiums and co-pays when they go to the doctor for their maladies over and over again. I don't want MY insurance company - who I pay monthly premiums to - telling me when I can and can't have procedures and surgeries when my doctor suggests otherwise. You say "gov't run" healthcare will do this when insurance companies ALREADY do it all the time.

The right-wingers don't seem to care very much about earth's limited resources, either (your light bulb comment). You think it's fine to buy and drive the biggest gas-guzzling SUVs and sneer at people who want to conserve. You think corporations should have the right to pollute all they want without gov't restrictions as long as they are making money. No thoughts about the cancers all this polluting causes. As long as there's a profit to be made, it's okay.

You've got me pegged as a progressive just because all my views don't fit into a neat little box like yours do. My political beliefs are actually complex and I would certainly not consider some of them "progressive" - in the way you mean the word.

For example:

I believe we should have done something about illegal immigration a long time ago, which doesn't include amnesty for those who broke the law to get here. Having said that, I don't blame the illegals who only want to find work - specifically, I am talking about illegals from Mexico; if I lived there, I'd try to come here too.

Their gov't is so corrupted by things like drug cartels that it's not possible at this time for them to take care of their own citizens. Is that our problem? No. I would suggest a revolution to the citizens of Mexico to change things and make their own country inhabitable.

I am not pro-union for the most part because the need for unions has come and gone, except for very dangerous industries like coal mining and oil refinery jobs. Why am I pro-union in those circumstances? Because if you work in these jobs and speak up about additional dangers, you are likely to be fired. Businesses understand money. The bottom line is their bottom line. Improvements cost and bosses don't like complainers. As an example, you need to look no further than the recent loss of life at the coal mine in W Virginia. These people need someone looking out for them.

Conversely, I know people who have worked in management positions in a union environment. I've seen how their hands are tied in terms of what disciplinary measures they can take; problems with absenteeism; having to fill out endless reports - on top of their already busy schedules.

I know someone in management, for example, who's had to deal with a nearly sixty-year-old, 400 pound, heavy smoker who (surprise!) had a heart attack. Not only did he try to file for workman's comp, but also hired an attorney. That's pretty ridiculous and it costs a business a lot of money to deal with it and, in turn, costs customers more.

This man's weight, eating and smoking habits were pretty ridiculous too. Do I want government telling me what I should eat? No. At the same time, people aren't getting the message that eating right and staying somewhat active is the only way to prevent health problems. So the gov't tries to do things like limit the salt added to processed foods, and Michelle Obama asks cereal makers to give parents a little help and limit the amount of sugar in cereals, and the right screams, "Get out of my personal business!" But we can't go on like this, it's too expensive and is costing too many lives.

I've made it pretty clear that I was not for the wars, but THAT DOESN'T MEAN I don't agree there are terrorists who are a threat to our freedom who need to be dealt with. I just believe there are less expensive ways to do it than these wars.

So, ferrellj, I actually see both sides of the issues.
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
Buttercup, your whole arguement that "mommy and daddy did it" and current parents "don't know" any other methods is incorrect.

Spanking is not hereditary. Sure, maybe people that were spanked are more likely to do it, but that is not a hard fast rule.
I am a very educated person, having taken many psychology courses at the University Level, nursing school, etc.
I know more psychology and sociology than my parents ever did. But guess what? If my child(ren) backtalk or do something that warrants it, their bottoms will be swatted....
It has nothing to do with my parents' discipline of me, nor education. It just works for some kids.
AND implying that you need to "investigate" pediatricians who spank their own kids just really shows that you don't understand the difference between child abuse, and appropriate disciplinary spanking.


What I meant by "investigate" is actually call the doctors' offices and ask why pro-spanking is their position.

I've know a few pediatricians myself and have never come across one who encourages spanking. I know this because it's one of the first questions I ask in the interview process.
To Eastside:

quote:
You didn't respond to my question about the pediatrician -- I am curious if you truly think a ped that doesn't rail against the wrongs of spankings shouldn't be a ped?


Yes. I say that because if she believes spanking is an acceptable and successful form of discipline - when there's so much evidence to the contrary - I would have to question her judgment on other issues. That's my opinion and, as a parent, I have a right to it. But, then again, not all physicians are the same. There are some excellent ones and there are the ones who have their licenses revoked for malpractice.

quote:
I contract with a juvenile facility -- if you were to poll those kids -- yes you'd get a 100% violence rate to being spanked (40 kids violent and they will all say they were spanked), but if you poll my 7 year old's class room -- you'd get about a 5% violence rate (18 kids 1 kid is the violent one). Big difference in who you poll to get your statistics to fit the outcome of your research.


Well, I don't know how much I can trust your poll or any of your research since you yourself said:

quote:
These researchers go into this type of idea with preconceived conclusions and they use what benefits them and what doesn't is considered "insignificant" -- you that +/- 4% thing on most statistics. I pay attention to research but I know enough to know that it is not written in stone and that it has human hands in it so it cannot be taken as law. I give it its due if I don't know of something else in my life that contradicts it. But no one should ever take research as absolute and final. Period.


But let's say your 5% violence rate (kids who were spanked) is correct. Aren't better alternatives to spanking - that we know exist in 2010 - worth using to squash that 5% violence rate? Wouldn't you want to do everything possible to ensure your child doesn't become a bully; isn't withdrawn; doesn't become and alcoholic; doesn't abuse his future wife?

Conversely, you will not find any research anywhere that concludes alternatives to spanking create future violent children. Lack of spanking DOES NOT set a child up for jail time in his future; however, spanking can. The key to the "alternatives to spanking" argument is consistency. The problem is parents make empty promises about consequences for actions and the child learns his parents aren't serious, then repeats the behavior.

quote:
No one spanks their child every day or even every week for that matter


Now you are the one making assumptions. How do you know that NO ONE spanks their child every day or even every week? You somehow have access to the goings on in every household in America?

quote:
but how many times a day do you have to put a child in time out? How many times a week do you have to send a child to their room?


quote:
How long does it take for your child to "grow out" of their behavior when alternatives are used?


Speaking for myself, very infrequently because my child(ren) "got it" a long time ago. How many times have you spanked your child? If it worked so well, why do parents have to repeat the action?
quote:
It's funny how some of you want gov't out of every aspect of your lives but at the same time are okay with the Supreme Court making decisions for people, like overturning Roe v Wade. Interesting.


Two completely COMPLETELY different issues, buttercup.
Abortion is murder, to "we" conservative Christians. Spanking is discipline. To equate the two is prepostorous.
I want the government to make murder (abortion) illegal. I believe it to be the downfall of our society.
I want the government to make Child abuse (Psychological, sexual and physical). illegal. which it is, and I hope perps are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
But if I swat my child's behind in Target, that's my business.
AND about your stance with the pediatrician? COME ON! You imply that peds that condone spanking are par with physicians that have been found guilty of malpractice?
For once and for all, this is a PARENTING ISSUE, not a criminal/medical one.
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
quote:
It's funny how some of you want gov't out of every aspect of your lives but at the same time are okay with the Supreme Court making decisions for people, like overturning Roe v Wade. Interesting.


Two completely COMPLETELY different issues, buttercup.
Abortion is murder, to "we" conservative Christians. Spanking is discipline. To equate the two is prepostorous.
I want the government to make murder (abortion) illegal. I believe it to be the downfall of our society.
I want the government to make Child abuse (Psychological, sexual and physical). illegal. which it is, and I hope perps are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
But if I swat my child's behind in Target, that's my business.
AND about your stance with the pediatrician? COME ON! You imply that peds that condone spanking are par with physicians that have been found guilty of malpractice?
For once and for all, this is a PARENTING ISSUE, not a criminal/medical one.


Wrong! If you don't want others making decisions for you then "others" means everyone. You can't have it both ways - others includes government AND the Supreme Court.

And not everyone is a Christian....and not everyone thinks abortion is the same as murder.
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:
To Eastside:

quote:
You didn't respond to my question about the pediatrician -- I am curious if you truly think a ped that doesn't rail against the wrongs of spankings shouldn't be a ped?


Yes. I say that because if she believes spanking is an acceptable and successful form of discipline - when there's so much evidence to the contrary - I would have to question her judgment on other issues. That's my opinion and, as a parent, I have a right to it. But, then again, not all physicians are the same. There are some excellent ones and there are the ones who have their licenses revoked for malpractice.

quote:
I contract with a juvenile facility -- if you were to poll those kids -- yes you'd get a 100% violence rate to being spanked (40 kids violent and they will all say they were spanked), but if you poll my 7 year old's class room -- you'd get about a 5% violence rate (18 kids 1 kid is the violent one). Big difference in who you poll to get your statistics to fit the outcome of your research.


Well, I don't know how much I can trust your poll or any of your research since you yourself said:

quote:
These researchers go into this type of idea with preconceived conclusions and they use what benefits them and what doesn't is considered "insignificant" -- you that +/- 4% thing on most statistics. I pay attention to research but I know enough to know that it is not written in stone and that it has human hands in it so it cannot be taken as law. I give it its due if I don't know of something else in my life that contradicts it. But no one should ever take research as absolute and final. Period.


But let's say your 5% violence rate (kids who were spanked) is correct. Aren't better alternatives to spanking - that we know exist in 2010 - worth using to squash that 5% violence rate? Wouldn't you want to do everything possible to ensure your child doesn't become a bully; isn't withdrawn; doesn't become and alcoholic; doesn't abuse his future wife?

Conversely, you will not find any research anywhere that concludes alternatives to spanking create future violent children. Lack of spanking DOES NOT set a child up for jail time in his future; however, spanking can. The key to the "alternatives to spanking" argument is consistency. The problem is parents make empty promises about consequences for actions and the child learns his parents aren't serious, then repeats the behavior.

quote:
No one spanks their child every day or even every week for that matter


Now you are the one making assumptions. How do you know that NO ONE spanks their child every day or even every week? You somehow have access to the goings on in every household in America?

quote:
but how many times a day do you have to put a child in time out? How many times a week do you have to send a child to their room?


quote:
How long does it take for your child to "grow out" of their behavior when alternatives are used?


Speaking for myself, very infrequently because my child(ren) "got it" a long time ago. How many times have you spanked your child? If it worked so well, why do parents have to repeat the action?



How to respond? You proved my point exactly with quoting me on the research – no research is absolute – there are always human touches – I’m glad you wouldn’t take my “research” as solid because that was a not a scientific research by any means – just what I know of the kids in the class. However, no I don’t want a Utopia that you want-- I wouldn’t want to quash that 5% at the outside chance that not spanking could increase that 5% and before you say it wouldn’t happen – you don’t know. You said there is no research that shows “not spanking” produces violent kids –um, probably because there aren’t many researchers that want to prove that spanking works. Why would they? There’s no money in that research. However, for many of us, there is history that proves it does in many cases. Not every kid in juvenile detention was spanked and there are many that are just like you – they did the best they could and tried not to show their child anger and violence and they still have a kid that is angry and violent. There is a mix of kids from upper class homes that had it all with the silver spoon and were never spanked or at least rarely spanked just as there are kids that grew up in hell like my ex that have serious issues.

As for the No one spanks every day. Anyone that spanks every day is most like abusing their child so therefore, I wouldn’t consider that discipline I would consider that abuse and that would not be what I’m discussing here. However, I will say that you are grasping at straws to poke holes in my opinion by picking out that line as your stomping point, but that’s ok. You are one of the few on this one. You are entitled to your opinion as am I, but to use research to call those of us that do believe it works pretty much ignorant – is as skewed as your research you use to back up your opinion. Just state it as your opinion and let it go.

As for how many times have I spanked my child? Not many because the fear works just fine and dandy. Most times the action is not repeated for the same offense – therefore, it (just like your time outs and your taking away privileges) happens when it needs too and not when it doesn’t.

Now to your comment about the government. I don’t want the government is my business whether that is insurance premiums or how I discipline my child. If they can do such a grand job at running things why are we in debt to China up to our ears and our prisons are overcrowded? They took corporal punishment out of the school and they took prayer out of the schools and yet we still have violent offenders entering the system every day – thousands more now than we had 20 and 30 years ago. Roe vs. Wade may never be overturned but that doesn’t mean the government knows what is best for us. They just realized that women were going to have abortions anyway – at least with law on their side they could get money from the political movements and they could make abortions safer for women that choose the option. It doesn’t make it righteous by any means. By the way, I am Pro-Life, but I think it should be the woman’s choice. Of course, I think women should have guts enough to consult the father to see what he would want too since it does take 2 to tango.
Eastside:

quote:
However, I will say that you are grasping at straws to poke holes in my opinion by picking out that line as your stomping point, but that’s ok. You are one of the few on this one. You are entitled to your opinion as am I, but to use research to call those of us that do believe it works pretty much ignorant – is as skewed as your research you use to back up your opinion. Just state it as your opinion and let it go.


Wait a minute! I never called you, Eastside, ignorant and that is far from what I think of you. I disagree with you on many issues, but have always respected your opinions. They are well thought-out and I've NEVER seen you attack someone personally.

I picked that out because I was accused by other posters of making assumptions with some of my statements, then you accused me of making assumptions in an earlier post. I was pointing out to you that you were making assumptions as well. Look, I'm quite sure there are parents who spank their kids weekly that would object to being thought of as abusers and would debate you forever about it - much like we're doing here.

quote:
If they can do such a grand job at running things why are we in debt to China up to our ears and our prisons are overcrowded?


I never said the government did a grand job. I've said I don't understand why everyone freaks about the fear of intrusion on certain things but not on others; Roe v Wade is a good example of that because I personally don't want some justices making decisions about my body. Apparently, the extreme right is okay with this, but cries the fastest and loudest when government control of anything is mentioned.

Also, all you've been hearing from the right this past year is how government will be approving or denying care and how there will be death panels - which, btw, is still quite funny (Thanks, Sarah!) - if a healthcare bill is passed. But none of you admit that private insurance companies already approve or deny as they wish right now. The right is not concerned about healthcare premiums continuing to go up year after year. I don't understand that.

quote:
They took corporal punishment out of the school and they took prayer out of the schools and yet we still have violent offenders entering the system every day – thousands more now than we had 20 and 30 years ago.


Okay, you're oversimplifying with that statement. So taking corporal punishment and prayer out of school leads to an increase in violent offenders? It is your position that there are no other factors that contribute to this? Sorry, but I don't buy that just because Bobby wasn't paddled and exposed to daily Bible verses over the intercom, he ended up in the system. Please.

quote:
Roe vs. Wade may never be overturned but that doesn’t mean the government knows what is best for us.


And, again, the Supreme Court doesn't know what's best for me either.

quote:
They just realized that women were going to have abortions anyway – at least with law on their side they could get money from the political movements and they could make abortions safer for women that choose the option. It doesn’t make it righteous by any means. By the way, I am Pro-Life, but I think it should be the woman’s choice. Of course, I think women should have guts enough to consult the father to see what he would want too since it does take 2 to tango


On this I agree with you. Having the law on their side meant women could finally have safe abortions, as opposed to dying from hemorrhaging or infection from the back alley kind.

Eastside, the bottom line for me is the vast majority of pediatricians, child psychologists, child development experts, psychiatrists, etc. discourage spanking. And from my own experience and the experiences of my friends who are parents, I know it is the right way to go.

Period.

You know we could go round and round on this one. Personally, I think the thread has outlived its usefulness since almost everyone who's posted on this thread seems to be of the same mind; there's no way to distinguish one of your opinions from the other. So I am outnumbered on this particular forum; I knew that before I posted the study.

I find a lack of diverse opinions boring. But if you all are content living in Stepford-ville, enjoy. Just realize there's a big world out there beyond the borders of Colbert and Lauderdale Counties.

(On a lighter note, Eastside, I have to wonder how many prayer lists I've made with all this "pro-choice" talk. LOL!)
quote:
Wrong! If you don't want others making decisions for you then "others" means everyone


Sorry, but I have to comment on this. There is a vast difference here.
In "choosing" an abortion, a woman is not exerting choice over her own body- she is making a "choice" on an unborn baby.
Just felt the need to clarify- I hate that "It's my body" arguement!
quote:
Originally posted by vplee123:
quote:
Wrong! If you don't want others making decisions for you then "others" means everyone


Sorry, but I have to comment on this. There is a vast difference here.
In "choosing" an abortion, a woman is not exerting choice over her own body- she is making a "choice" on an unborn baby.
Just felt the need to clarify- I hate that "It's my body" arguement!


A fetus is not viable outside mom's body until a few months into the pregnancy. So if the fetus depends on mom for life, she does indeed have the choice to abort. It's not like you could take the fetus out at 12 weeks and it would live on its own; it needs the mother's body.
Buttercup -- 2 things:

My point about corporal punishment and prayer in school was that government has already stepped into our lives and taken things that many feel were not bad things. One woman yelled loud enough to get prayer taken out of schools and made a decision for millions of people. Our government blows with the wind and the decisions they make are not always for our best. Letting them come into our homes and tell us how to raise our children is way overstepping boundaries. I don't them setting guidelines or monitoring me for me to make my own choices for me and my family.

The 2nd thing is letting the government dictate how we live our lives and no violence and everyone is happy and loving and perfect and getting a time out is the most you get for doing wrong -- that is a Stepford-ville......think about........

Yes, on this we will have to agree to disagree but I do appreciate you sticking with your fight. Have a great night!
quote:
I find a lack of diverse opinions boring. But if you all are content living in Stepford-ville, enjoy. Just realize there's a big world out there beyond the borders of Colbert and Lauderdale Counties.


You really have no idea how off you are on the subject. You took everyone who said spanking is a useful form of punishment, used sparingly and controlled, and rolled them all into a right wing religious Bible thumping mass of idiots.

If you found this so boring and expected, why did you start it?

Just for a few facts: I am conservative, I used spanking when my children were absolutely defiant and nothing else worked (2 or 3 times in their entire childhood), I don't want Roe vs Wade overturned because it allows women to get a legal safe abortion BUT I don't want it used as a form of lazy birth control. Adoption centers should be right next to abortion clinics. My doctor can overrule the insurance company on my behalf, that death panel won't be overruled. It's actually a good name for them. My insurance premium went down this year and with generic drugs at $15 for a 3 month supply, I don't need Obamacare nor do I want it. The government has decided we are all too stupid to be able to raise our families and take care of our own problems. They have decided to force onto us what cars to buy, what food to eat, where to shop, how to live and how to worship. (Hidden, mostly). I am a racist if I don't like the President and Un-American if I think we are going off a cliff.
So I find myself cussing at the TV everyday over something else idiotic.

Studies like this one with a predetermined answer make as much sense as poll numbers from a biased media outlet. Ever looked at Media Matters, Butter? They have a 24 hour watch on Fox News because its so evil!!!

So, butter, don't lump everyone together, and I won't assume you are a atheist liberal who expects the world to jump when you say jump.
quote:
Originally posted by Buttercup:

Jankin,

I'm sure you know three-year-olds bite and hit when they are frustrated or angry because they do not yet have the capability to fully express how they feel with words. How many three-year-olds do you know of that can articulate to a playmate, "Please don't take the toy I'm playing with out of my hands. That's unfair." They can't, so they hit or bite.


I'm not sure why you felt I needed that lesson in child behavior. I have raised 3 children and I am now a grandmother so I do have a little experience with 3 year olds. You had suggested that children who are spanked are more violent children....my point children can and will be violent regardless of having ever been spanked.

quote:
Pediatricians and child development experts will tell you to remove the child from the situation when this happens and explain to him/her, "We don't bite/hit our friends because biting/hitting hurts the friend." Yes, you'll have to do it a few times before it sinks in, but it will work. This also teaches empathy for others' pain - something that's crucial to learn during the early years (so that he's less likely to become a bully later on).


Maybe you missed the part of my post where I explained that my niece tried that method for quite a while to no avail. What are your thoughts on the children who were bitten by the 3 year old? What kind of psychological scars will this have on them?

quote:
What I don't understand is why would you spank (and inflict pain on) a child who bit/hit (and inflicted pain on) another child? That sends mixed messages: It's okay for me to spank you but you can't hit or bite your friend.


Would you allow your child to drink alcohol? As a grown up you understand how it can be taken in moderation and under the right circumstances. You are physically and emotionally capable of handling alcohol. There were many things that I did as a parent and adult that I would not have allowed my children to do. As to why you would use a spanking to discipline a child for a violent act is very simple...when you have tried to reason, talk and use time out with no result then you have to use the swiftest method possible to assure that your child does not seriously injure another child. After several weeks of biting other children, with her mother using the methods you suggested with no positive results she finally used something that her 3 year old could understand. If you do it again I will spank you. As I said it worked....no more biting.

quote:
Many times to discipline is to teach a better way. This is a great example of it because, again, removing the child and explaining it hurts a person when you bite or hit him, teaches empathy for others' feelings and it helps the child learn self-control - i.e., the more this method is reinforced, the more the child will learn how to manage his own anger without mom's intervention in the future.


For some children your method would work. I had one of those children. He had 2 spankings his whole life. He was my easy one. My second child was a completely different story. He had to learn everything the hard way. He learned to manage his anger by having consequences that at times included spankings
None of my children received a spanking past the age of 7. By that age they all could be reasoned with on a different level

quote:
And isn't that part of our jobs as parents - to prepare our children for the world?

Wouldn't you rather your child learn to control his actions using this method than to spank him and teach him nothing? He's going to have to learn how to control frustration and anger (on his own) sometime.


I agree that is a parents job to prepare your children for the real world. The real world will not be nearly as understanding and willing to give them multiple chances to learn the hard lesson in life. As far as learning to control frustration and anger on their own, that is something I believe spankings work really well on. If my child had a temper tantrum they were first told to stop, if that didn't work they were told a spanking was coming if they didn't get control of themselves....if that didn't work then they got a spanking. Only on one occasion that I can remember did I actually have to take one of my children to a public restroom for a spanking for having an angry outburst. It never happened again. I do believe you could say he learned to control his anger.

There are somethings that are just not acceptable and require very swift and immediate action. For example when my oldest son was 3 and my second child was only a few months old we were leaving Wal-Mart and the 3 year old yanked away from me in the parking lot and started running through the cars. When I finally caught him (with the baby in tow) I spanked him right there on the spot. A 3 year old doesn't really understand the consequences of being ran over by a car , dead doesn't really register with them. However getting a spanking is something that doesn't hurt nearly as bad and isn't as traumatic as a face full of bumper but highly effective. He never ran away from me in a parking lot again. I was not willing to take the chance that reasoning and time out would have the quick results needed to nip that kind of thing in the butt. Smiler

I don't know any parent that thinks spanking is the only way to discipline. However to completely leave it out as a tool is just a bad as using it exclusively.

If you have never had the need to spank your child then count your self lucky, not superior.
quote:
You really have no idea how off you are on the subject. You took everyone who said spanking is a useful form of punishment, used sparingly and controlled, and rolled them all into a right wing religious Bible thumping mass of idiots.


Exactly. Well said.
And.....Buttercup.....I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you don't mean that because a baby is not viable, abortion is totally up to the mom.....
You are right about one thing- she/he is not viable- but dependent on her mother for every beat of her heart, and every nutrient. These, the most vulnerable and defenseless are the ones we need to protect the most! Smiler
quote:
Originally posted by b50m:

You really have no idea how off you are on the subject. You took everyone who said spanking is a useful form of punishment, used sparingly and controlled, and rolled them all into a right wing religious Bible thumping mass of idiots.

If you found this so boring and expected, why did you start it?

Just for a few facts: I am conservative, I used spanking when my children were absolutely defiant and nothing else worked (2 or 3 times in their entire childhood), I don't want Roe vs Wade overturned because it allows women to get a legal safe abortion BUT I don't want it used as a form of lazy birth control. Adoption centers should be right next to abortion clinics. My doctor can overrule the insurance company on my behalf, that death panel won't be overruled. It's actually a good name for them. My insurance premium went down this year and with generic drugs at $15 for a 3 month supply, I don't need Obamacare nor do I want it. The government has decided we are all too stupid to be able to raise our families and take care of our own problems. They have decided to force onto us what cars to buy, what food to eat, where to shop, how to live and how to worship. (Hidden, mostly). I am a racist if I don't like the President and Un-American if I think we are going off a cliff.
So I find myself cussing at the TV everyday over something else idiotic.

Studies like this one with a predetermined answer make as much sense as poll numbers from a biased media outlet. Ever looked at Media Matters, Butter? They have a 24 hour watch on Fox News because its so evil!!!

So, butter, don't lump everyone together, and I won't assume you are a atheist liberal who expects the world to jump when you say jump.


That just needs to be repeated!!!! I feel the same way -- except my insurance didn't go down........Big Grin When Obama decides to have death camps I'll be the first in it because I refuse to drink the kool-aid! (No I don't mean that literally but it's not too far a stretch)
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
quote:
When Obama decides to have death camps



Seriously? No, seriously? Do people really believe this? . .. Given the propensity of those in this thread to completely ignore facts, I would not be surprised . . . .


Given your propensity to not read the rest of my post....I was being sarcastic. But thanks for taking the bait and doing exactly what I figured someone would do. Big Grin
quote:
Originally posted by Sofa King:
quote:
When Obama decides to have death camps



Seriously? No, seriously? Do people really believe this? . .. Given the propensity of those in this thread to completely ignore facts, I would not be surprised . . . .


Death camps? I didn't know about this. I thought it was just going to be death panels.

That's it! Since I didn't get that memo, I'm not sending my dues this month to those Progressives!

Oh well.

Where's Dr. Jack Kevorkian when you need him? He could be hired as a camp "counselor".

Wink

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post

×
×
×
×