Spare the rod, spoil the child

reply to post by CaDreamer


I completely agree with your tactic. You let them know tantrums will not result in toys and presents, which are everything to a child. I did a similar move with my daughter. She straightened right up - no hitting involved.

Sorry...but I'm going to pipe in one more time on this. I think the behaviour problems some people have with their children is caused by the parents themselves. I have noticed people that have behaviour problems with their children usually have built the entire family dynamic around the children. If they get in the car to drive somehwere - the child always chooses the radio station. If the family goes out to dinner - the child chooses what restraunt they go to, etc. Those types of everyday decisions are not for the child to make.

My philosophy was always that I am in charge of the family, and the decision making, not kids. They will abide by my rules and do as I ask. For instance, if it's time to clean their bedroom, then that is what is going to happen. The child is not going to decide when they feel like cleaning their room. I'm not saying there isn't room for some negotiation. But generally, children dont make adult decisions in my family. You have to lay the ground work for children to respect your decisions from the get go. It is best for them, because children really do want their parent to lead them, not leave decisions up to them. Leading, married with routine will make happy children.

reply to post by amazed


It's not about a liscense to hit or not, it's about the vast majority of the kids who are in trouble now have parents that don't spank. Hitting in and of itself is not the only thing that determines whether or not you go to jail.

This is an isolated incident. I'm all for good old discipline, having spent some of my time on the receiving end of it. Kids today need discipline, they are disrespectful and out of control and they have no respect for their elders. When I was a kid, if I even said one swear word, my dad would belt me with the buckle end of his belt and send me to bed with nothing to eat for the rest of the day. My cousins had it even worse, their mother would bash them over the lower back with a iron poker. (ouch, it hurts just thinking about it, lol) and they all turned out ok. To this day, none of us including my cousins have a police record. We are too scared to even go there.

School wasn't any different, if you misbehaved, it was the cane, strap or bent over the desk in front of everyone while the teacher tanned your arse with his sandshoe.

Kids today are out of control. Time to bring back discipline at home and at school. Kids should fear & respect their teachers and parents, not the other way around.

Originally posted by CynicalDrivel
reply to post by amazed

 

It's not about a liscense to hit or not, it's about the vast majority of the kids who are in trouble now have parents that don't spank. Hitting in and of itself is not the only thing that determines whether or not you go to jail.

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that "the vast majority of the kids who are in trouble now have parents that don't discipline"? Isn't that the goal of hitting little ones? If your phrasing is more correct, I have to wonder if hitting is a little about discipline, and a little about mom or dad getting to let off some steam.

Originally posted by chasingbrahman

Originally posted by CynicalDrivel
reply to post by amazed

 

It's not about a liscense to hit or not, it's about the vast majority of the kids who are in trouble now have parents that don't spank. Hitting in and of itself is not the only thing that determines whether or not you go to jail.

Wouldn't it be more accurate to say that "the vast majority of the kids who are in trouble now have parents that don't discipline"? Isn't that the goal of hitting little ones? If your phrasing is more correct, I have to wonder if hitting is a little about discipline, and a little about mom or dad getting to let off some steam.

Some times it is. It certainly is by the time you get to the thought of, "I can't hit them hard enough to get them to mind me." Some kids can be disciplined without ever touching them. Others need not only boundaries, but fear as well--which is delicate. Too much can ruin them as well. Now that's a can of worms.

As for parents who don't discipline. Roughly half of them do attempt to discipline, yet never hit, and still have kids that they cannot control. Mostly I think it's about pack mentality. Many parents don't have enough "personality" to effectively lead their children without having to resort to a dominance display of some sort.

Sorry, when the parent is at the doctor's office holding her breath to get her way with the doctors, I'm not expecting little jimmy to behave for the other adults unless someone swats him on the rear. (Actual experience of my mum's at the place she works, btw.)

If it's administered within a certain fairly narrow context, personally I don't have any objection to the use of corporal punishment. However, there are a couple of criteria that I would consider need to be met.

a] It must be administered at the scene of the crime. Doing it later, or following the child for an excessive distance if the child has attempted to flee, are both inappropriate. My father made use of a car on at least one occasion to persue me in order to belt me, and that *has* caused long term psychological problems.

b] It must not be administered by parents who are themselves morally or developmentally inferior to the child. Again, this happened in my own case; as it did with virtually all Baby Boomer parents who had Generation X children. My father routinely did far worse things than what I was belted for doing.

I have virtually never encountered a practicing Christian in offline life, who I did not in at least some ways consider to be severely mentally ill. I consider the psychological health of the parents to be a critically important criterion, in determining the appropriateness of using corporal punishment with a child.

c] It must be applied judiciously, and there must not be excessive force applied. I would consider around six applications of a strap to the child's bare hands to be the upper limit, here; somewhat less if it is applied to the backside. Applying reasonably severe deterrent is the goal; literally bashing or hospitalising the child (or worse) should not be.

Originally posted by CaDreamer
yes the bible commands parents to beat their children if they dont listen. if they continue to not listen the bible commands them to kill thier disobedient children...gotta love that god of love...

edit on 16-8-2011 by CaDreamer because: (no reason given)

edit on 16-8-2011 by CaDreamer because: (no reason given)

I think we're going to need to see a chapter and verse reference for that latter statement.

Mosaic Law (Old Testament) *did* prescribe capital punishment for a number of offenses, although there wasn't a specific directive given to parents to kill their children. About the closest it comes, is in saying that anyone who engages in violence towards their parents, is to be put to death.

Originally posted by CynicalDrivel
Some times it is. It certainly is by the time you get to the thought of, "I can't hit them hard enough to get them to mind me." Some kids can be disciplined without ever touching them. Others need not only boundaries, but fear as well--which is delicate. Too much can ruin them as well. Now that's a can of worms.

I have a brother who I'm fairly certain was born with moderate sociopathy. He was a chronic bully when we were both younger, and engaged in what has been clinically referred to as moral insanity. I used to say that when we were growing up, he should have been administered severe corporal punishment on a routine, daily basis, irrespective of whether he had committed a specific act to warrant it on that particular day or not, purely in order to maintain an appropriately submissive psychological state.

He was given corporal punishment at times, and coupled with my own violence towards him on occasion, the end result is that he is now largely agoraphobic, lives with his mother, and very rarely goes outside.

As for parents who don't discipline. Roughly half of them do attempt to discipline, yet never hit, and still have kids that they cannot control.

Given the nature of my own childhood, I feel that I have a moral responsibility to abstain from parenthood; and I truthfully feel that the majority of Generation X in particular are probably in the same boat. In my opinion, the Baby Boomers (immediately post WW2, usually in their 60s/70s now) were one of the most psychologically sick, destructive, and generally morally degenerate generations that humanity has ever produced.

I am aware, however, that given my own role models where parenthood is concerned, if I had what I considered to be a sufficiently wayward child, I would probably not be violent, but I *would* routinely make use of alcohol, marijuana, and/or prescription substances to sedate an excessively loud or bad tempered child or toddler.

Sorry, when the parent is at the doctor's office holding her breath to get her way with the doctors, I'm not expecting little jimmy to behave for the other adults unless someone swats him on the rear. (Actual experience of my mum's at the place she works, btw.)

Well, this is the other issue, of course. The majority of adults today have been trained by a combination of the state and the corporate world to be severely infantile themselves. Given this, when it comes to effective parenting, they really have no hope.

reply to post by CaDreamer

"He who spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him correcteth him betimes" (Proverbs 13:24) and "Withhold not correction from a child: for if thou strike him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and deliver his soul from hell." (Proverbs 23:13-14) Deuteronomy 21:18-21 If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

Thank you, CaDreamer......

Clearly, a "God of love" would NOT state these things. However, I think most would have to agree that MAN would say these things in the NAME of God. Too bad more people don't understand this truth.

God has been given a bad rap to say the least, and humanity has based it's ideas and actions on these false beliefs about God for far too long.

Originally posted by nuttin4U
I would LOOOOOVE for you to give me a taste. AND, i'll even give you my address. Mr KEYBOARD WARRIOR! Come and pay me a visit....and i'll show YOU some discipline. U2U me, and i'll make that happen! Brave man!!!! You might want to bring back up...to make it a 'fair fight'. Then, i can show my daughters another lesson....how to beat your opponent to a pulp. Or at LEAST til they tap out! FEEL ME?

I don't consider myself a keyboard warrior, and I'm not going to go down to your own level by issuing threats against you.

I do, however, want you to know that I consider the above, to be the words of a deeply psychologically disturbed human being. Threatening to engage in violence, as well as displaying this type of bravado towards others, is indicative of extreme internal misery and instability on the part of the individual making said threats.

I'm also inclined to believe that the majority of Americans have been taught, not only by their government but by people close to them, to view violence as the only appropriate solution to almost any problem, and that anyone who displays any reluctance to engage in violence is themselves cowardly, deficient, a "wimp," etc.

In case you're thinking it, I would again like to emphasise that I am in no way interested in threatening you myself. I am overweight and in a general state of fairly extreme physical incapacity, and have virtually no effective ability to engage in violence. That, however, is my point; to express how inappropriate I consider violence to be, as a means of solving problems.

Originally posted by kindred
My cousins had it even worse, their mother would bash them over the lower back with a iron poker. (ouch, it hurts just thinking about it, lol) and they all turned out ok.

No, they didn't turn out ok. Trust me.

"Turning out ok," is not defined purely by the ability to hold down a job. I've read about a woman with 92 different personalities due to child abuse, who was able to do that.

A lot of contemporary Americans think they've "turned out ok," in which case, it is of course completely logical that the country is in many ways experiencing a re-enactment, of the early period of Nazi Germany.

Originally posted by petrus4No, they didn't turn out ok. Trust me.

"Turning out ok," is not defined purely by the ability to hold down a job. I've read about a woman with 92 different personalities due to child abuse, who was able to do that.

1. Turning out OK is vastly different from turning out perfectly. People can and do get over and rise above the most evil of atrocities. I find that when I was younger, some of the really negative things that happened to me were what I let consume my life--and believe me, that had absolutely nothing to do with spankings. Now, it's far different. There's no point in playing a victim for anything or anybody.

The difference? As long as I play the victim, I will be the victim. So I can either dwell on the fact that my father spanked my bottom as a small child or I can be relieved that he cared enough to swat me when I wanted to put my fingers in electrical sockets.

2. Find the woman with 92 different personalities for a swat on the bottom instead of being beaten down, and then you'd have the attention of your opponents.

reply to post by CynicalDrivel

It's not about a license to hit or not, it's about the vast majority of the kids who are in trouble now have parents that don't spank. Hitting in and of itself is not the only thing that determines whether or not you go to jail.

Cynical, are you kidding me with this? I venture to say it's more a reality that the vast majority of kids who are in trouble now have parents who used spanking excessively to the point of abuse! The kids in trouble today are angry.....angry at their parents because they take no interest in them, angry that they don't spend quality time with them, angry that they abuse them verbally and physically, and they watch their parents engage in unnecessary drama with people in their lives on a regular basis. The kids who are in trouble are looking for love outside of the home because they aren't getting it from their parents. They do things that generate negative attention because it's the only kind of attention they have been successful at getting.

Not only that, too many parents complain about their children failing to show them respect when the reality is, they have shown little respect for their children. They have failed to instill in their kids the importance of showing respect to others in a number of ways:

* By allowing their kids to watch them be verbally and physically abused by others and and doing nothing about it.

* By verbally abusing their kids and embarrassing them in public while cursing at them and threatening them with physical violence

* By promoting vengeful ideas with their words and actions when they have disputes with others.....

These are just a few examples......

This has nothing to do with lack of spanking, and everything to do with lack of ability to communicate effectively and respectfully....and to live by example.

reply to post by petrus4

No, they didn't turn out ok. Trust me. "Turning out ok," is not defined purely by the ability to hold down a job. I've read about a woman with 92 different personalities due to child abuse, who was able to do that. A lot of contemporary Americans think they've "turned out ok," in which case, it is of course completely logical that the country is in many ways experiencing a re-enactment, of the early period of Nazi Germany.

Good post, Petrus...

Originally posted by NightGypsy
reply to post by CynicalDrivel

 

It's not about a license to hit or not, it's about the vast majority of the kids who are in trouble now have parents that don't spank. Hitting in and of itself is not the only thing that determines whether or not you go to jail.

Cynical, are you kidding me with this? I venture to say it's more a reality that the vast majority of kids who are in trouble now have parents who used spanking excessively to the point of abuse! The kids in trouble today are angry.....angry at their parents because they take no interest in them, angry that they don't spend quality time with them, angry that they abuse them verbally and physically, and they watch their parents engage in unnecessary drama with people in their lives on a regular basis. The kids who are in trouble are looking for love outside of the home because they aren't getting it from their parents. They do things that generate negative attention because it's the only kind of attention they have been successful at getting.

Not only that, too many parents complain about their children failing to show them respect when the reality is, they have shown little respect for their children. They have failed to instill in their kids the importance of showing respect to others in a number of ways:

* By allowing their kids to watch them be verbally and physically abused by others and and doing nothing about it.

* By verbally abusing their kids and embarrassing them in public while cursing at them and threatening them with physical violence

* By promoting vengeful ideas with their words and actions when they have disputes with others.....

These are just a few examples......

This has nothing to do with lack of spanking, and everything to do with lack of ability to communicate effectively and respectfully....and to live by example.

edit on 2-9-2011 by NightGypsy because: (no reason given)

Do you know how many parents I know who are verbally abusive, but have never laid a hand on their kid?

I'm not taking away from the kids who are physically abused. I'm just pointing out that if you eradicate spankings, as a lot of parents have, you still get little hoodlums that are going to do serious jail time.

reply to post by CynicalDrivel

The difference? As long as I play the victim, I will be the victim. So I can either dwell on the fact that my father spanked my bottom as a small child or I can be relieved that he cared enough to swat me when I wanted to put my fingers in electrical sockets.

Cynical, while I'm not an advocate of spanking and have not used this practice in raising my own child, I also do not believe an occasional spanking is going to traumatize a child for life. What traumatizes a child and would cause them to "dwell" on the issue would more likely the kind of physical punishment one would categorize as abuse.

I have yet to meet a person in my lifetime who laments over the fact their parents swatted them on the butt when they were kids.

It's true that many people take childhood abuse and use it to shape their lives in a positive way, rather than dwell on it or use it as an excuse for their unhappiness. Unfortunately, every individual handles things differently and some don't have the psychological awareness to overcome childhood pain and suffering like others can. We can't expect that other people will have the ability to overcome life's problems the same way we do.

reply to post by CynicalDrivel

I'm not taking away from the kids who are physically abused. I'm just pointing out that if you eradicate spankings, as a lot of parents have, you still get little hoodlums that are going to do serious jail time.

Like I said, Cynical....it's not the lack of spankings that's the problem. It's much more complicated than that, and I cited some examples of what I mean in my previous post. I know life would be much simpler if we could blame bad behavior solely on failure to spank.....but that would be a very short-sighted approach and it would do little to solve the problem.

reply to post by CynicalDrivel

Do you know how many parents I know who are verbally abusive, but have never laid a hand on their kid?

I'm not sure I'm understanding your point here.

What are you saying? Are you saying if they would have utilized spanking in conjunction with their "verbal abuse" that their kids would have behaved better?

Please clarify.

Not at all! I'm saying that simply swatting your kid in and of itself is not the determining factor of how that hit affects the rest of that kid's life.

Verbal abuse happens without ever laying a hand on your kid. Inconsistency in parenting does not require as single ounce of physical pain. When we eliminate (the laws are going there, we will get there) addressing our children's behavior by physical means, then the jails will be filled with adults who never knew physical discipline. Some of that generation is just now starting to go to jail, so there is already a change in the jailed population.

Consistency is generally far more important than what you use as punishment. Can it be done without hitting your kid? For most people, yes. Some people simply cannot enforce rules without a physical component. Verbal abuse should NEVER happen. Physical abuse should NEVER happen. But to say that every single swat is THE SAME as physical abuse is THE SAME as saying that all verbal reprimands are THE SAME as verbal abuse. This is simply not the case.

Now, a parent that has control over their kid when it is necessary, but never spanks, do you honestly think I want them to start spanking their kid? People that are not used to spanking will not be consistent with something that they abhor.