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.

 

College Students More Likely to Be Lawbreakers If Spanked as Children

page: 4
9
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


It seems to be common sense. If you spank your kids, you shortcut the process of teaching them critical thinking skills and impulse control. Everyone wants to understand "whats in it for me", although the strategy is typically only applied in adult education.

Spanking in my house was only used to "grab attention" on an unruly child. The oldest never was spanked. The youngest was only spanked until around the age of 5. It was a rare occurance, happening only when he would not accept a time out, would not stop his behavior, and would not listen to words. It was a "reset button" that would get him into his room to stabilize his emotions and behaviors in a "change of environment". After awhile, we could then begin the lesson via verbal communication.

I did have the benefit of working in behavioral modification programs in mental health before I had my kids. And those same types of strategies (change of environment being the most important to use properly, with communication happening swiftly once a stable emotional level has been reached) have been used to help me contain poor behavior while we worked through remedy.




posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Scouse100
 



OK yes I do get what you mean, I guess it can be difficult to discuss actions like these which despite being within a persons rights (although I think our laws on this here in the UK differ from yours), on a personal level one may disagree with. I do still think it is healthy to discuss whether we agree with such laws and rights as they stand. I have a feeling we would disagree on that though


Not only are our laws different, but our cultures as well. Forgive me for assuming you were from the US!

But regardless of where we are from, freedom has a price! Sometimes we have to compromise against what we believe in to a point to be able to respect the freedoms of those whom do not fit into our own ideas of right and wrong...........

Until we can learn to do that as human beings, we have nothing more to look forward to other than more wars against those we can't learn to live and get along with as mere human beings......



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 04:07 PM
link   
Known this all my life without having studies. Violence in, crap out in later years. In the short run you have a good child by most authoritarians standards, compared to all the misbehaving spoilt brats who are being reasoned with and treated differently (we're not talking lack of discipline, just not physical, or abusive including cold neglectful parenting). Sloppy parenting or just giving in aside, because it can appear that normal kids who aren't being intimidated but treated with respect and humanity, are almost as bad and hard to deal with as kids who are given in to all the time...but then the streams separate in later years, by teens. There is a difference in kids first of all. What I will term average, or relatively well behaved, thrive in non abusive homes and tend to be pretty good most of the time, however there are learning disabled or various wirings in boys more than girls that can make a home without stern discipline seem to resemble, "welcome to my nightmare". But even then wouldn't give into short cuts. Who really cares what the Jone's think?

When you invest time, in continuing to communicate, not punish, but direct, share, and try to create teamwork, whether or not they become a willing and good team is less important because, by mid teens, they're pretty well behaved compared to the kids raised in more authoritarian families.

This doesnt mean parents need to be perfect, that occasionally being upset and too strong may not occur, but that one can always admit they are wrong, apologize, have a good talk.

Its not black and white. The occasional non excessive spanking isn't going to mar a child for life, if one is able to communicate with the child, own mistakes, and work for a better relationship. And use humor.

This is averages we're talking about, or overall philosophy one is striving to live by.

This is basic psychology too, easy to understand if you understand cores of people. Violence in, authorative hitting, and you have potential for ruination of a kid or real bad programming, including acceptance of fascism and corporal punishment.

I think there is probably a link between believing in a Smiting God and smiting kids.
edit on 24-11-2013 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by brandiwine14
 


Other than my abusive father beating me at a very young age, I was not spanked or physically reprimanded growing up. Today is my 41st birthday. My entire generation was not spanked, although it was not uncommon.

Punishment is not how to teach a kid to not do something. It may be a "marker" used to help them remember the lesson they learned, and to teach consequence. But a kid learns by being shown. By having guidance. By understanding the benefit to them for having the appropriate behavior.

If you do these things right, by the time you have a teenager you can simply guide their decisions by employing Socratic teaching methods, guiding them through the logic to the correct solution. It is enriching for you and them and makes both of you more mindful and aware.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


Exactly, taking short cuts, to make your life as a parent better and have your neighbors think more highly of you, doesn't enhance problem solving, real teamwork and generosity/compassion, and self control, and does not make them grow up to become good partners in marriages or sovereign aware citizens. Its a short cut that has consequences.
edit on 24-11-2013 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Scouse100

rickymouse
A parent cannot get an effective spanking to work if they themselves do what they are spanking their kids for doing, the kid will see this. If spanking is done too often it teaches nothing to the kid. The kid learns that spanking is a sort of affection so they fight with their friends. We got a mess in society, spanking should not be considered bad if used appropriately.


So how does this work when a parent is hitting their child as punishment for hitting another child for example?


When the kids are young they should be trained to respect others. I can't make a decision on something like that without knowing the whole situation and also the personality of the kid that is being spanked, I am not the father of that kid. I cannot say what to do.

I know parents who spanked their kids when they did wrong that inappropriately did it. You never spank the kid when you are mad.

I see no relationship of spanking a kid causing them to be a criminal in the future, I do see that the kids that were spanked got spanked for bad behavior which could lead to a life of crime.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Don't believe every survey that you here. I was spanked every day until I was about 12 years old. I did not become a law breaker and neither has any one that I know that was spanked as a child. If a child gets disciplined for doing things wrong, they will learn right from wrong and they will not grow up to be law breakers. When the Department of Human Resources started monitoring peoples lives, many years ago, they are the ones that said that you could not spank your children. They are the reason for all these people growing up without any discipline and becoming law breakers. If you do not get punished for doing wrong things, you will grow up thinking that you can do whatever you want, whenever you want and if someone gets in your way, you do whatever it takes to get them out of your way, even if it means hurting that person.People with no discipline are the law breakers, not the disciplined people.



posted on Nov, 24 2013 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Without consequences to bad behavior children (pets) will get worse not better.



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 05:00 AM
link   
reply to post by rickymouse
 


I don't think I was very clear in what I was asking as I included too much of your quote, sorry about that! The point I was trying to get at is that you had acknowledged a spanking can't be effective if the parent can be seen to be carrying out the same behaviour the child is being spanked for.

In that case how would hitting a child as punishment for hitting another child for example be effective in your opinion?
edit on 25-11-2013 by Scouse100 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 07:19 AM
link   
reply to post by UndercoverJoe
 

reply to post by VforVendettea
 


If a child gets disciplined for doing things wrong, they will learn right from wrong and they will not grow up to be law breakers.

Quite true, children need "discipline". But there are other ways to discipline kids than hitting them. I didn't hit my kids. They are not antisocial atheists; they learned to identify their emotions, rethink their behaviors, and use critical thinking.

Positive parenting is not new. It is possible, and preferable, for kids to be raised with guidance and talking, with practical consequences like losing household privileges, etc.

Also, I want to point out that the study delineated in the OP was directly measuring outcomes of a limited number of 'those who were spanked'. I absolutely agree that it may not be any more conclusive than studying death-row inmates and asking them if they ate french fries. If lots of them did, a "study" could conclude (and present) that "eating french fries as a child causes a person to become a murderer."

One would assume that for this paper to have been presented by established researchers, they accounted for other variables as well.

Also, college students are adolescents. Adolescents go through a NORMAL developmental phase of rebellion against 'cultural norms' (whether of family, group, or larger community). A young person who does NOT stretch beyond parental controls becomes stunted.

Finally, every person is unique. Two kids from the same family, having the same upbringing, will STILL turn out differently from each other, and respond to the 'discipline' meted out by their parents in INDIVIDUALIZED WAYS.

It has been long since proven that corporal punishment teaches "CORPORAL PUNISHMENT". It is, by its very nature, counterproductive in a modern society. Animals 'discipline' their young as well, and those without LANGUAGE (although ALL animals have a communication system in place - we are talking about using words to explain concepts, which animals lack as far as we know) use physical body-language.

This is UNNECESSARY for human beings in a family setting. Brutality teaches brutality.

Does that mean that ALL spanked kids rebel? No, it certainly does not. It DOES, however, when added up with other studies conducted over the decades, indicate that corporal punishment is NOT the 'optimal tool' for discipline. In my opinion, it is lazy.

If a toddler is grabbed up from running in front of a moving car and receives a swat to the padded bum just after mom lifts him off the ground, it isn't going to 'damage' the child. But the subjects of this study were spanked FREQUENTLY up until they were 10 years of age.

It's a connection. That's what psychology does - make connections. They might have done a study on whether kids who are handed cars without having to pay for them are given another every time they total the one provided. Stupid. It only teaches a child that he has NO consequences. But deliberately causing the child to be injured in a car wreck in order to show that wrecking cars is bad would be insane.

One must also consider these are college students; not juvenile delinquent high school dropouts.

I think the title of the article was poorly chosen, as it is stated in a way that is inflammatory.

But, the premise holds. Using violence to discipline children teaches that being violent to smaller people is a valid form of control.




edit on 11/25/13 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 07:32 AM
link   

Scouse100
reply to post by rickymouse
 


I don't think I was very clear in what I was asking as I included too much of your quote, sorry about that! The point I was trying to get at is that you had acknowledged a spanking can't be effective if the parent can be seen to be carrying out the same behaviour the child is being spanked for.

In that case how would hitting a child as punishment for hitting another child for example be effective in your opinion?
edit on 25-11-2013 by Scouse100 because: (no reason given)


That is very true, I guess I misunderstood the reply. If a kid needs punishing for hitting other kids, it is not the best choice to spank them. Making them apologize and explaining that hitting is not the right action in the case is what is needed. Protecting the actions of your kid is not right, I know people who would say that the other kid started it but to hit the other kid is not a good response unless there is a chance of getting hurt badly....self defense. Sometimes the truth of what happened is ignored by the parents though, getting to the root of the matter is necessary sometimes. People will often do the opposite of protecting their kids and punish them right away, believing that their kid was the problem, not the other kid. I see this often in parents who see that the parents of the other kid is high in society. Just because they are elite doesn't mean their kids are good, in fact, often they are bullyish and intimidate other kids. They provoke the action purposely because they know they can get away with it.

The problem is in the middle class, the kids are often spoiled, getting things without having to work for them. They begin thinking they are entitled to special treatment because of their parents influence. The elite have worked out these bugs already much of the time but when a family suddenly gains wealth or social recognition they mess up a lot, especially when both parents work. These people raise kids that think they deserve more than they usually do. When they reach adult hood, in their early twenties, they usually straighten out though.

This spoiling of the kids is no good, this is recorded in history very well. We are now on the second or third generation of this and the numbers of problems are growing, the kids think that they can steal or swindle from others because they deserve it. This is happening in many of the industrialized countries.



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 07:34 AM
link   
Just saw the responses from BFFT and Unity_99. Bravo to both of you.

And bfft: Happy birthday! Mine was last Sunday! I turned 55.


Both of you are correct, in my educated educator's opinion. Thanks for your contributions to the thread.

(same to everyone else who has participated with an open mind and thoughtful responses)



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 07:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Montana
 



That is fine, I don't require or even desire for you to follow my suggestions. I have SEEN the results over decades. I KNOW what works and what doesn't.

I'll see that, and raise you an advanced education in the subject of Children & Families, from a psychological and sociological perspective.

Yes, SOME kids receive NO discipline, and are spoiled. OTHER KIDS are beaten every day of their lives and become abusers. The science is valid.

Your "SEEN" results hold true for YOU - but I have decades behind me, too, and I also KNOW what works and what doesn't. In fact, I was a parent educator for YEARS, and worked with kids from dysfunctional, abusive or neglectful homes. They were a mess. Either way - ABUSIVE, VIOLENT DISCIPLINE or NO DISCIPLINE AT ALL - results in maladaptive skills for living in society. ABUSE is NOT PARENTING. HITTING is ABUSE.


What matters most is to make sure they know you love them no matter what.


This is true. How does hitting them "make them sure they are loved"? It means that if the person who loves you hits you, then it's okay for ANY one who says they love you to hit you.
= Domestic Abuse Victims who don't know they can get out, or how to manage it. They just accept the beatings.

I've SEEN it, over decades. I KNOW what works and what doesn't.

THERE IS NO REASON TO HIT CHILDREN; they can be taught self-control and discipline with other methods THAT ARE NOT AMBIGUOUS. Telling a kid you are hitting them "for their own good" is a mixed signal of insane proportion. Period.


edit on 11/25/13 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 25 2013 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by UndercoverJoe
 



Don't believe every survey that you here.

Yeah, thanks, I don't.

A "survey" is not a controlled research study, though, and I am trained to do controlled research studies.
Thanks, though, for trying. Certainly people should not "believe" every survey they hear. Especially in the 21st century.

I have enough education to be able to assess outcomes of these studies from an objective, sociological and psychological perspective, thankfully. Also, decades of experience as a parent.

Sorry you were hit every day until you were 12. Bummer, that, no matter how you look at it.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 12:04 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 



I'll see that, and raise you an advanced education in the subject of Children & Families, from a psychological and sociological perspective.



Your "SEEN" results hold true for YOU


You think because of your education or employment that nobody else can ‘know’ anything about parenting but you? And if they do ‘know’ something, it only applies to them? But they can ‘know’ something about parenting if they agree with your opinion, correct? That is a very narrow view and not a healthy perspective, to say the least.



I have enough education to be able to assess outcomes of these studies from an objective, sociological and psychological perspective, thankfully.


No one can truly be completely objective. No one. There is always some measure of bias within us. With your educational background, you should know this. You are strongly biased about this issue, and it is disingenuous for you to say that you are being objective in any way while discussing your strong bias.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 



One of the reasons I think ALL parents should be screened for knowledge of positive parenting skills.


Screened by who, you? The government?



HITTING is ABUSE.



It has been long since proven that corporal punishment teaches "CORPORAL PUNISHMENT". It is, by its very nature, counterproductive in a modern society.



Brutality teaches brutality.


So IF parents are abusing their children by spanking because it is a physical act, and parents should be screened by the government (with whatever that would lead to), will our government lead by example? Does this mean that law enforcement will also no longer be using physical force against lawbreakers? Will they have to put away their guns, clubs, dogs, pepper spray, handcuffs and tasers? Will they find more “loving and positive actions” against citizens’ “misbehavior”, resisting arrest, or otherwise not doing as they are told? Will our country’s involvement in wars now cease because “hitting is abuse” and ”brutality teaches brutality”? Will correctional officers in prisons no longer use physical force with inmates because “corporal punishment is counterproductive”?



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 12:15 AM
link   

wildtimes

I'll see that, and raise you an advanced education in the subject of Children & Families, from a psychological and sociological perspective.

Yes, SOME kids receive NO discipline, and are spoiled. OTHER KIDS are beaten every day of their lives and become abusers. The science is valid.

Your "SEEN" results hold true for YOU - but I have decades behind me, too, and I also KNOW what works and what doesn't. In fact, I was a parent educator for YEARS, and worked with kids from dysfunctional, abusive or neglectful homes. They were a mess. Either way - ABUSIVE, VIOLENT DISCIPLINE or NO DISCIPLINE AT ALL - results in maladaptive skills for living in society. ABUSE is NOT PARENTING. HITTING is ABUSE.


I have an advanced education as well, it's called being a parent for nearly 30 years!

I know what has worked for me and mine. I also know what has (and hasn't) worked for many other families in the society around me. I don't need or want your validation. Experience has already provided all I could want.

Good day!



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 03:50 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 

Must be that my country is an anomaly then-i grew up in the late 60's+70's-it was a given in those days,a naughty child who would not stop misbehaving after being sternly reprimanded,got a paddling.Also at school-and that was my country's last generation who produced well-adjusted,upstanding citizens.Since its become "child abuse" to spank a naughty child who won't listen to reprimands+guidance from their parents-we too are seeing a generation of youngsters+small children who are spoilt,inconsiderate,shallowminded,lackadaisical+lazy,rude,and absolutely devoid of respect for their elders-or anyone else.A generation that has not been brought up with discipline,a generation without backbone or much common sense.
People can say what they want about the Afrikaner nation,but most of us have not fallen for tha pc bullsheet that's turned this world into a bloody clownscape.And therefore you will find that the vast majority of children from Afrikaner homes still has respect and consideration,they are well-behaved for the most part,aside from youthful boisterousness,but not in a violent or socially unacceptable way.They tend to be sensible,because they have been taught from an early age that actions have consequences.They have an excellent work ethic,and do ususally better at school than the kids form the pc-correct yuppie homes-they are just more sensible,decent,dependable,considerate,polite,respectful young people with integrity and their "heads screwed on right"

May be an unpopular post and point of view-but it is the truth,from a person who has watched the world and the way things have changed,for almost 5 decades.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 06:18 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


Or maybe lawbreakers were more likely to NEED a spanking as children.

Correlation does not equal causation.



posted on Nov, 26 2013 @ 10:19 AM
link   
reply to post by wildtimes
 


I don't know of these factors being isolated out in such research. If anyone knows of research which isolates the following factors out, I'd love to see it.

1. The quality of the relationship between the parent and the child. e.g. particularly, did the child generally FEEL LOVED by the parent involved.

It is quite common to feel UNloved BECAUSE the parent didn't CARE ENOUGH to discipline in any way for any reason.

1.1 CERTAINLY, ANY SERIOUS DISCIPLINE WITHOUT SUFFICIENT RELATIONSHIP will tend to virtually always produce rebellion.

2. The ages of the children involved and the results per each age.

3. The type of spanking . . . i.e.

A) when the parent was angry, or not
B) the duration of the spanking in seconds
C) the implements of spanking--hand, belt, board, stick, switch
D) the physiological results of spanking--no marks, slight redness, lasting brusing etc.
E) the offenses for which spanking was applied



The research seems to blackwash all types of spanking totally. I'm not convinced that a few hand swats to get a young kid's attention would result in the kind of lawbreaking differences cited.

I am convinced that abusive angry spanking would readily increase the likelihood of rebellion and law breaking.




top topics



 
9
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join