Your Views On 'Smacking' children.

Originally posted by jed001

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by ALOSTSOUL

 

One thing I NEVER do, I never make idle threats. If I threaten a spanking, and they disobey, no matter how comical it is, or how much I don't want to, I ALWAYS follow through on my threats. For that reason, I rarely threaten them. It took a long time to get that rule through the heads of my wife and mother-in-law. They were constantly making serious threats, and then they didn't want to follow through,

i hear you on the idle threats, my wife is the same way. we went to Disney last year and for the three months before every time my daughter would do the slightest thing wrong all i would hear from my wife was " we are not going to Disney" finally i had to tell her enough is enough ; they are never going to believe you if keep doing this

Very true...you have to threaten with something within reason. Like take a favorite toy away or book. Something you can follow thru with.

Originally posted by Starwise
I remember a time when I was young, maybe 10 or 11, I flipped off a neighbor just to see his reaction....He told my mom...Oh gosh.... I begged for a whipping instead of what she did, and that was restriction to my room..FOR A MONTH. After that month, any time I got into trouble, it was restriction to my room. I used to beg for a beating just to get it over with I remember.....

My parents had one of those station wagons where the farthest seat back/3rd seat, faced backwards...anyone remember those? What a bad idea! Well me and one of my sisters were riding back there on the way home from a family dinner and were giving the finger to every car behind us without our parents seeing.

Finally some guy honked and then cut my dad off, making us swerve. The car slowed down...and stopped in front of us, my dad got out with the little bat he always had in the car and there was a whole lot of words exchanged I had never heard before! Thank goodness it didn't get physical. It wasn't until we were in our twenties until we fessed up and told our dad that we actually had caused that encounter. BTW - We never did that again...seeing our dad in the middle of a dark street shouting with a bat was enough enough to scare us straight on the whole mess with other cars bit Those station wagons where the parents couldn't see what the kids in back were doing? Seriously? Whose brilliant idea was that!

reply to post by Realtruth


You are right upto certain extent but thats the key which is to identify and understand the situation before opting for the physical punishment. Many parents in a fast paced lifestyle often use it as a venting mechanism.

No smacking just spanking. Spank them once, remind them of the spanking and you'll hardly have to do it again. I grew up getting whippings with the belt, sometimes I deserved it, sometimes I felt like I didn't. I'm alright and those people with daughters usually have it a bit easier than those with sons.

Originally posted by Starchildren

Originally posted by sdocpublishing
I agree 100% it is a Fathers right to smack the ass of his children, especially the boys.

I have never had a daughter, so I can't speak there but I smacked the ass of both my boys when they were young and with great results.

I didn't blacken their eyes, I didn't leave welts on their body, no bones were ever broken and blood was never shed.

I don't think that boys should be hit, as it could teach them to be violent with their wives. As a teen I was with a guy who was hit as a boy and he grew up and hit women. He also used to have a boat load of emotional problems and emotional pain from when his dad hit him.

Just because we cannot see bruises or welts on the outside, doesn't mean it's not affecting their soul, their emotions, or psyche.

What happens if your boys grow up and hit other people? What if they hit their wives?

edit on 1-2-2012 by Starchildren because: (no reason given)

This is like saying i can't have a beer because you took one years ago and became an alcoholic.

Originally posted by Starchildren

Originally posted by sdocpublishing
I agree 100% it is a Fathers right to smack the ass of his children, especially the boys.

I have never had a daughter, so I can't speak there but I smacked the ass of both my boys when they were young and with great results.

I didn't blacken their eyes, I didn't leave welts on their body, no bones were ever broken and blood was never shed.

I don't think that boys should be hit, as it could teach them to be violent with their wives. As a teen I was with a guy who was hit as a boy and he grew up and hit women. He also used to have a boat load of emotional problems and emotional pain from when his dad hit him.

Just because we cannot see bruises or welts on the outside, doesn't mean it's not affecting their soul, their emotions, or psyche.

What happens if your boys grow up and hit other people? What if they hit their wives?

edit on 1-2-2012 by Starchildren because: (no reason given)

I was spanked as a child... I'm perfectly respectful and have never laid a hand on my wife.

So... explain that to me.

And also maybe you and your grandma should mind your own business and raise your kids/grandkids how YOU see fit and stop meddling in other people's lives.

If you or anyone else got in the middle of my parenting of my own child you'd be catching more flack than you can handle.

Originally posted by yourignoranceisbliss

Originally posted by InfoKartel
Simple:

You do not lay your hands on a child. Do so and go to jail.

Simple enough yeh?

I'm willing to bet that virtually every single one of you that are against spanking children were spanked as children yourselves.

And you would be lying to claim otherwise.

Yet you all turned out great people, did you not?

There's a difference between spanking and abuse, knowing the difference is what makes you a good parent or an abusive one.

If you don't know the difference, I daresay you are an unfit parent, and questioning those who do know the difference makes you look incapable of raising disciplined children.

edit on 31-1-2012 by yourignoranceisbliss because: (no reason given)

I wasn't spanked actually...but it's clear (to me at least) that you don't know what the hell you're talking about.

What you seem to forget is, that the difference between abuse and spanking is inside the kids head when speaking about psychological effects, the feeling can turn into something like Stockholm syndrome(army types), or the complete opposite. I don't care that you are such an unfit parent that you have to resort to beating your children to be a "good" parent with "disciplined" children. My care goes more for the little youngling that can't defend her/himself against that big retarded parent beating his kids.

Originally posted by sarra1833
reply to post by InfoKartel

 

A swat on the rear is NOT a beating. A beating is with balled fists, a bat, a brick, a chair, repeatedly hitting the head against the floor or wall. Making the skin break and bleed. Rendering the person unrecognizable. Knocking them out. Putting them in a coma.

None of which a swat on a hand or rear will result in.

I'm very against child beating.
A child hand/rear swat is totally fine.

Good grief.

Good grief? You have a child beating etiquette!

Fun fact: You sound like an Imam talking about hitting women. "It's not a beating if you don't make her bleed or bruise her skin!"

Don't believe me? Observe excuses being made and maybe spot yourself in there:

reply to post by InfoKartel

You have never raised a kid have you?
Really.
If you have, please keep them the hell away from me.

reply to post by getreadyalready


I must've read your post wrong my apologies, Can't edit it now I would if I could but I agree, we're on the same page then.

The fact is...


If you currently discipline your child by hitting them, whether it's right or wrong, you WILL support it.


Why? Because you do it, and you have to justify yourself somehow... otherwise you will feel like a complete #


So who are you really trying to convince..... yourself?

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

I must've read your post wrong my apologies, Can't edit it now I would if I could but I agree, we're on the same page then.

edit on 1-2-2012 by NoJoker13 because: (no reason given)

No problem. I thought we were on the same page.

Originally posted by v1rtu0s0
The fact is...

If you currently discipline your child by hitting them, whether it's right or wrong, you WILL support it.

Why? Because you do it, and you have to justify yourself somehow... otherwise you will feel like a complete #

So who are you really trying to convince..... yourself?

I'm not trying to justify it at all, I'm trying to convince others to do it! I have no need to justify what I already do to my own kids, nobody has questioned my methods. The thread was about whether or not the UK law was appropriate, and we are debating that law, and in the process we are also trying to convince parents on the otherside of the argument to expand their horizons and try other disciplining techniques.

In fact, I think the thread has been very enlightening. Hopefully some people that are against beating will try it a little bit, and hopefully some that rely too heavily on it will try a lot of the other suggestions.

Remember, in this debate, the only winners or losers are the children. Nobody should be abusing the children, and that abuse can take the forms of physical, or mental, or emotional, or it can manifest as too little discipline and unrealistic expectations from the world that will bite them later on.

As long as people are using discipline, and it works for them, and as long as the discipline comes with reasoning, and lessons to be learned, and high expectations for the child to respond and adapt, then everyone can walk away happy!

reply to post by ALOSTSOUL


I believe you can discipline a kid without having to use "smacking" but I do also think that in some cases a swift smack on the bum can help add your point that what the child did was very wrong and could endanger/hurt themselves or others.

The problem is that people want to be "friends" with their kids so instead of disciplining their kids they do nothing or not enough to get the point across to the kid(s). Another problem is that there are a lot of broken homes, 1 parent families, both parents working, etc and it makes it hard to discipline a kid when your not around all the time to see anything or to enforce discipline.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by scratchmane

 

Should all those parents take a course in how to parent?

My wife took a parenting course when our first son was born, and it was so dam ridiculous that she, and two of the other fathers walked out halfway through the second meeting.

Most parents instinctively know what to do, and what not to do, and when they have done too much, or too little, and how to make amends if need be.

I think the problem arises when parents start taking too much outside advice from theorists that have no real world experience, or theorists that have bad kids of their own, but the PhD by their name is somehow more important than the fact that their kid is 35 years old, and living at home or in jail.

I completely disagree. Your premise is that we are in no need of improvement - in no need of gaining knowledge about ourselves and how we are raised, grow and mature. According to your anti-intellectual philosophy, one could also say that we should instinctively know the best ways to deliver every baby successfully, to combat sickness, to produce all of our own food and build the best shelter, among other basic human needs. Over centuries, we've found ways to do a lot of these things better and continue to do so.

While the road to improving and extending our lives has been filled with potholes, it is pathway that one has to take to continue to evolve. We know more about how a child develops today than ever before. While some people are blessed to have everything figured out, many have benefited from the science of studying our own species. It's been my experience that folks who denigrate knowledge are just afraid of showing their own lack of it.

reply to post by getreadyalready

When you're beating, you're not reasoning. By spanking you are basically saying that violence has a higher priority than reasoning. And yes, spanking is the initiation of violence. It's intended to cause physical pain without injuring. So what you're doing is trying to impose fear in your child, and hope that the fear will overcome the curiosity..

Originally posted by addygrace
Yeah, even putting your finger in a kids face should be illegal. Really yelling too loud should be illegal, you could scare them. Any form of punishment, should actually be outlawed. If kids don't know any better why should they be in trouble by another human that also makes mistakes. For example my oldest son punched my youngest son in the face, so I said, hey if you don't punch him anymore I'll give you money. He said, "Ok Dad." He stopped punching him all the way until the next day. Now, every time he punches him I just give em money and he stops.

Yeah, that's smart. So in life he will walk up to people smack them and say "I'll stop if you give me some money." Isn't that what the mafia did/does to instill fear in people?

I guess people have different views in raising their children. I take the approach to explain what they did wrong and if it continues I give them a good smack and explain it again. If it continues, I ground them from the things they like and remind them what a smack feels like.

Plain and simple, discipline is not abuse. Beating a child until they are black and blue is and should not be tolerated.

It is our responsibility as parents to raise our child to understand the difference between right and wrong and to respect others.

I believe in a slight back hand, a slap on the wrist, and spanking. I do not think this is abuse in the slightest, I see it as parenting. As with almost everything, there is an extreme. Obviously, no parents should ever purposely break skin, bruise their child, or cause them pain enough to cry. And before anyone says that many children cry during spankings, those tears are a product of fear and regret, not pain.

Originally posted by vasaga
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

When you're beating, you're not reasoning. By spanking you are basically saying that violence has a higher priority than reasoning. And yes, spanking is the initiation of violence. It's intended to cause physical pain without injuring. So what you're doing is trying to impose fear in your child, and hope that the fear will overcome the curiosity..

Just like "war is an expression of politics by other means", well, "smacking is an expression of reasoning by other means", and yes, a lot of times fear is better than curiosity, i prefer my nephew to be afraid of fire, not curious about it.

Originally posted by vasaga
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

When you're beating, you're not reasoning. By spanking you are basically saying that violence has a higher priority than reasoning. And yes, spanking is the initiation of violence. It's intended to cause physical pain without injuring. So what you're doing is trying to impose fear in your child, and hope that the fear will overcome the curiosity..

spanking isn't always used as a way to impose fear. Sometimes it used as a way to back what you said "Mommy said you can't run onto the road *swat bum*" That way you are hoping when they think back about it they will remember the out come and think that it's not worth running onto the road to get another swat on the bum, "maybe there's a reason mommy said not to run on the road"