It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is it fair to arbitrarily increase punishment to your child?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Is it fair to arbitrarily increase punishment to your child?

If you were to tell your child that if he or she did a certain sin or mistake, you would implement a certain punishment, and when that infraction took place, you added a number of extra punishment, would you think you were acting in a fair and just manner?

A scenario would go like this.
If you told your son, if you do not make your bed, I will ground you for 2 days.
That same day, he did not or refused to make his bed.
You confront him and say that he is grounded for 2 days. At the same time, you tell him that he is also grounded for a further week and also looses all T V privileges and must also do the dishes for a month.

Do you think you have dealt fairly with your child?

Regards
DL




posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 04:19 PM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Yes. It's an absolute dictatorship, not a democracy. In my house, it's easy to avoid sanctions - do what you're supposed to. Situational, of course. Things come up, and that's understandable and sometimes excusable.

However, if in the opinion of the Supreme Benevolent Dictator a dependent has deemed to willfully ignore a "request" and would prefer to have the sanction imposed, I reserve the right to arbitrarily increase the severity of said sanction.

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. The time may vary without prior warning. Tough noogies.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 04:20 PM
link   
Before I comment, clarification please...

Is this about Religion and are the "children" the people and the "father" God?

(or)

Is this about Parenting?



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   
For the most part, with our three, it is/always was a sort of 3 strike dealio.

e.g.:

in the morning: You need to clean your room.

come mid-afternoon, with no apparent effort nor intent to accomplish such: Clean your room or you're grounded, this that or the other thing.

come evening, if it still wasn't done: you're grounded, this that or the other thing, and if it's not done before you go to bed we'll add this, that or the other thing.

It got done, usually soon after the initial warning, once they'd had a privilege or three taken away for a while.



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 06:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by yeahright
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Yes. It's an absolute dictatorship, not a democracy. In my house, it's easy to avoid sanctions - do what you're supposed to. Situational, of course. Things come up, and that's understandable and sometimes excusable.

However, if in the opinion of the Supreme Benevolent Dictator a dependent has deemed to willfully ignore a "request" and would prefer to have the sanction imposed, I reserve the right to arbitrarily increase the severity of said sanction.

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. The time may vary without prior warning. Tough noogies.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


You are comfortable then with breaking your word and destroying any trust between you and your child?

You must be a theist. Most non believers have better morals and keep their word.

Regards
DL



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 06:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by LadySkadi
Before I comment, clarification please...

Is this about Religion and are the "children" the people and the "father" God?

(or)

Is this about Parenting?


I will tie it to religion but the scenario is just you and your child.
It is not a trick question.

Regards
DL



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 06:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by 12m8keall2c
For the most part, with our three, it is/always was a sort of 3 strike dealio.

e.g.:

in the morning: You need to clean your room.

come mid-afternoon, with no apparent effort nor intent to accomplish such: Clean your room or you're grounded, this that or the other thing.

come evening, if it still wasn't done: you're grounded, this that or the other thing, and if it's not done before you go to bed we'll add this, that or the other thing.

It got done, usually soon after the initial warning, once they'd had a privilege or three taken away for a while.




That is fine but you did not quite tell me if it was known punishments or not.
Did your child know what was due or did you just keep adding on.
The question speaks more to the child saying---- I am just not in the mood and will take the punishment you said I would get.
Would you let it go at that or would you just keep adding on punishment till the job is done?

Regards
DL



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 06:24 AM
link   
The whole point of the threatened punishment was to achieve a certain result. Clearly said child was willing to deal with said result with no concern over the punishment. So yes to modify the punishment to include not only the punishment stated but additional ones as well is quite appropriate. If the punishment is now unbearable to the child, they will think about if they wish to further risk non-compliance or not.

There is nothing word breaking here you not only gave them the punishment they thought they would have but increased it, you gave them more for the money than they bargained on. Your question is flawed to be quite honest, you wouldn't be calling those you disagreed with immoral and word breaking, if they told their child if you do this I am going to give you a new bicycle. The child does said thing and not only receives a bicycle, but a remote control car and new game for their playstation as well now would you?

Just because the punishment or reward is greater than that which is stated, you have not broken your word on it unless you have not given the stated punishment or reward.



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 06:40 AM
link   
I do it a bit different with my daughter
I simply say "your not going outside before your room is cleaned"

If she doesn't do it, then she stays in, simple as that... it's up to her to deside how long she wants to stay indoors.
At first this had the effect of lots of footstomping and throwing doors... but after a few weeks she learned.

Each sunday morning I repeat it "clean your room if you want to go outside"....

the key is to stay consequent, when you tell the child it can't go outside before he does this or that, then don't let it outside! When you give in before the child does, it's a waste effort.



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 08:49 AM
link   
I try to make the consequences 'fit' the crime. But sometimes my creativity doesn't kick in until the moment it's required.


Accordingly, no. There are times when the 'punishment' is not known in advance. But I also ALWAYS try to be fair.

For me, discipline is about instruction. I try my best to check my own personal emotional baggage at the door when dealing with my child's misbehavior.

edit on 8-10-2010 by loam because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by GypsK
 


I was raised in the 70s. I screwed up and sometimes tested my parents.
If I didn't do whatever- Punishment!
It started with spankings, then hangars, until they would just grab a hot wheel track out of my closet.

I learned quick and was a good son, until 16 or so when I would borrow the car for the night or miss school. That's when a belt was used.

It may be some type of parental reversal syndrome, but my kids never needed more than a short spanking.



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 09:38 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



Originally posted by Greatest I am
You are comfortable then with breaking your word and destroying any trust between you and your child?

You must be a theist. Most non believers have better morals and keep their word.


That's a skewed view. How is my word broken? That's a rather judgmental and offensive statement to make.

My kids trust me just fine. They trust me to impose whatever sanction I see fit in the event they cross the line. Fortunately, it happens very rarely. A household isn't a courtroom where you can plea bargain or cut a deal. If I say, "Don't think about going out tonight unless your room's cleaned up" and it doesn't happen, that doesn't mean one night in nullifies the infraction. My kids have enough common sense to know that, and I have absolutely no reservation about my morals.

Thanks for the rudeness. Now that I see you have no particular interest in discussion without insult, I'll leave you to whatever it is you're attempting to do.

Out.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Tribble
 


hm... I don't believe in spanking my kids. They don't learn anything from that except that disobeying equals physical pain, that's not the lesson I want to teach them.

What I do want them to learn is that there is a certain amount of hierarchy in life, where the highest rank sets the rules to be followed... they don't need to agree on those rules but they do have to follow them.
In my house, I'm the top of the hierarchy and they need to respect that. If they don't then there are concequences (which are not always punishment although they may see it as that)

I only ask them simple things like clean their room and keep their mess out of my livingroom, I'm not the slave of the house that will do anything for them, but they aren't my slaves either so I just ask them to keep their own things tidy

My parents spanked me as a kid and I have always disrespected them for that!
edit on 8/10/2010 by GypsK because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by GypsK
 


It seems we are basically in an accord.

No offense here, please, I am gathering facts.

Is ones parental punishment a reversal parenting syndrome?
2-are your kids grown?= this would amplify your parental actions.



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tribble
reply to post by GypsK
 


It seems we are basically in an accord.

No offense here, please, I am gathering facts.

Is ones parental punishment a reversal parenting syndrome?
2-are your kids grown?= this would amplify your parental actions.


I want to set one thing straight here, I notice that in my previous post I mention "kids" and "them", I have one kid, a daughter who is 12 and a half.... and then there are my nephews that stay with me more then they do with their own parents, that's why I say 'them', but only one kid is mine....

no offense taken btw.

as for the reversal parenting sydnrome,
my parents spanked me, their parents spanked them and so it goes generations before them... the further you go back, the harder the punishments.
I myself was born in the 70ies, so that makes me a child of the "babyboom generation" lol.
What I noticed is that a lot of parents from my generation desided never to spank or slap their kids, so maybe that is a reverse parenting syndrome in this generation of parents...

What I also have noticed in this new generation of pre-teens or teens, in my own child as well, is that they have a harder time taking punishments or dealing with concequences, and us parents have a harder time keeping them in control. It takes a lot of effort to stay consequent in their upbringing. They are mouthier (probably because we teach them to have an opinion, while in our days we weren't allowed to have one till we where 21), they argue a lot more (because we don't shut their mouths like our parents did with us) and they don't fear us like we feared our parents when we did something wrong (not that this is such a bad thing, I don't want my child to fear me, but it makes things harder for us parents)

About 6 months ago I was having an argument with my kid and she was really picking the blood from under my fingernails, more then an hour later she was still going at it. I jumped up, took her upper arm and shook her for a few seconds. She's not used to that and started crying and overreacting.... Imo that wasn't to harsh, but the next day she had a small bruse on her arm.
This generations' child that she is, she kept rubbing it in my face till the bruse was gone and to this day still brings it up whenever it fits her or supports her arguments. Of course I felt guilty over this for a while, but never let her notice that. I did appologize.
This one event had such an impact on her life

I'm just saying, we are raising children who will grow up with a different mindset then we had and that really scares me sometimes...

thoughts on that?



posted on Oct, 8 2010 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by GypsK
 





as for the reversal parenting sydnrome, my parents spanked me, their parents spanked them and so it goes generations before them... the further you go back, the harder the punishments. I myself was born in the 70ies, so that makes me a child of the "babyboom generation" lol. What I noticed is that a lot of parents from my generation desided never to spank or slap their kids, so maybe that is a reverse parenting syndrome in this generation of parents...


I am now digressing from the said- flip flop parenting theory.
When I was 8 years old in the inner city, and all of my friends were getting the same basic punishments for the same petty crimes. Then we moved away.

I found myself in a very rural community of 98% white. The punishments dealt to my friends and I did taper off to restriction instead of *&*&**&*&

I am thinking it was the empowerment of choice being instilled in us children that made our parents take heed.

We were allowed to participate in the family decisions. Actually giving an opinion was encouraged. I was one of six kids.

Today's 10 year old could voice an opinion (that has true validity) where as I at 10 years old would have not have had the knowledge to back up such claims.

So an even stance = mild punishment = restriction.
Therefore escalations in punishment would be redundant, in this progressive information culture.

I should have figured it would have turned out this way- you the experienced modern mother- me the theorizing kid from 35 years ago...



posted on Oct, 9 2010 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jovi1
The whole point of the threatened punishment was to achieve a certain result. Clearly said child was willing to deal with said result with no concern over the punishment. So yes to modify the punishment to include not only the punishment stated but additional ones as well is quite appropriate. If the punishment is now unbearable to the child, they will think about if they wish to further risk non-compliance or not.

There is nothing word breaking here you not only gave them the punishment they thought they would have but increased it, you gave them more for the money than they bargained on. Your question is flawed to be quite honest, you wouldn't be calling those you disagreed with immoral and word breaking, if they told their child if you do this I am going to give you a new bicycle. The child does said thing and not only receives a bicycle, but a remote control car and new game for their playstation as well now would you?

Just because the punishment or reward is greater than that which is stated, you have not broken your word on it unless you have not given the stated punishment or reward.


B S you have not broken your word. Yes you did. You added a consequence that you yourself say "So yes to modify the punishment to include not only the punishment stated but additional ones "



Regards
DL

edited to remove attack
gallopinghordes
forum mod
edit on 9-10-2010 by gallopinghordes because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2010 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by GypsK
I do it a bit different with my daughter
I simply say "your not going outside before your room is cleaned"

If she doesn't do it, then she stays in, simple as that... it's up to her to deside how long she wants to stay indoors.
At first this had the effect of lots of footstomping and throwing doors... but after a few weeks she learned.

Each sunday morning I repeat it "clean your room if you want to go outside"....

the key is to stay consequent, when you tell the child it can't go outside before he does this or that, then don't let it outside! When you give in before the child does, it's a waste effort.


It seems that you agree that to increase punishment arbitrarily would be wrong. Good.

I see a problem for you though if after three months, the room stinks and your child is always on the computer because you did not include any restrictions on it.
That is the problem when you get into a battle of wills with a child. Sometimes they just do not care for the standards you want to set. Would you let that situation continue for a few more months? I doubt it.
Something will give. Either you will have to change the punishment or just give in.

BTW, are you a theist?

Regards
DL



posted on Oct, 9 2010 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by loam
I try to make the consequences 'fit' the crime. But sometimes my creativity doesn't kick in until the moment it's required.


Accordingly, no. There are times when the 'punishment' is not known in advance. But I also ALWAYS try to be fair.

For me, discipline is about instruction. I try my best to check my own personal emotional baggage at the door when dealing with my child's misbehavior.

edit on 8-10-2010 by loam because: (no reason given)


I take this to mean that an arbitrary increase is wrong.

Are you a theist?

Regards
DL



posted on Oct, 9 2010 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tribble
reply to post by GypsK
 


I was raised in the 70s. I screwed up and sometimes tested my parents.
If I didn't do whatever- Punishment!
It started with spankings, then hangars, until they would just grab a hot wheel track out of my closet.

I learned quick and was a good son, until 16 or so when I would borrow the car for the night or miss school. That's when a belt was used.

It may be some type of parental reversal syndrome, but my kids never needed more than a short spanking.


But are they doing good for goodness sake or out of fear? Do you care which/

Regards
DL



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join