smacking children.

Ayla

nesf wrote: »

What you said is exactly like if I said if it was ok to punch someone in self defence then it was ok to punch someone to start a fight. You're punching a person in both, so they have to be equivalent right? Etc.

Nope, wrong. Defending oneself is a human right. Starting a fight is not.

My argument is fully logical, but you may only see it if you think hitting anyone - under any pretext and for any reason - is a horrendous act of violence.

nesf

Ayla wrote: »

Nope, wrong. Defending oneself is a human right. Starting a fight is not.

My argument is fully logical, but you may only see it if you think hitting anyone - under any pretext and for any reason - is a horrendous act of violence.

And this is why I don't bother arguing about this stuff, you have to deal with people who confuse logic with whatever crap they pull out of the air to support their view.

cynder

RustyNut wrote: »

That's right sure isn't mount joy full of people who were hugged cuddled and talked to too much.....

Perhaps mount joy is full of people who came from one parent families!

Maybe the ones who did get hugged and talked to had mothers who were single and who didn't have a clue about discipline and let the kids do whatever they wanted!

cynder

Ayla wrote: »

So would corporal punishment be a more suitable punishment? "Cut off the arm that steals" kinda thing
.

YES!`

RedXIV

Ayla wrote: »

Nope, wrong. Defending oneself is a human right. Starting a fight is not.

My argument is fully logical, but you may only see it if you think hitting anyone - under any pretext and for any reason - is a horrendous act of violence.

Is this not a contradiction? On the latter you say hitting anyone is horrendous but on the former defending oneself is a human right?

So if someone starts a fight with me, i'm entitled to defend myself but not use violence?

Ayla

nesf wrote: »

And this is why I don't bother arguing about this stuff...

You've mentioned that you don't "argue" about this online several times on this thread...so why do you continue to comment? If you're not going to explain your points what are you contributing other than rants about how some of us are illogical?

grindelwald wrote: »

YES!`

I'd imagine several internationally recognized associations & millions of people may disagree with you, but sure, that's your opinion

Ayla

RedXIV wrote: »

Is this not a contradiction? On the latter you say hitting anyone is horrendous but on the former defending oneself is a human right?

I thought that when I wrote it as well, but I came to the conclusion that using violence to defend oneself doesn't make it less violent. It's still an act of violence, even if its legal & justifiable. And, imo, any violence is horrendous...doesn't mean I wouldn't bust anyone trying to hurt me though

nesf

Ayla wrote: »

You've mentioned that you don't "argue" about this online several times on this thread...so why do you continue to comment? If you're not going to explain your points what are you contributing other than rants about how some of us are illogical?

I'm showing my despair over what you've written and my despair about not being able to have a reasonable debate about this kind of thing. There are plenty of reasonable grounds from which to argue against smacking. But no, people always descend into tabloid style sensationalism about it.

cynder

Ayla wrote: »

But that's my point from my earlier posts:

If you condone a light smack to a misbehaving child, would you condone a light smack to a woman by her partner, or a light smack to a person with disabilities? You cannot seperate the instances, they are the exact same situation, yet so many people think the latter scenarios are appalling (a violation of human rights even) yet lightly smacking a child is ok???

Coming from a beaten child who saw her mothers head get smashed against a wall and a slapped face here and there i can tell you its very different.

In a husband and wife scenario : A woman does not belong to a man and does not have to answer to him, a woman should not get a slap because she burnt the toast or refuses marital sex! also with your analogy with a child getting smacked: adults and know what is right and wrong they do not have to be taught what is right or wrong. a child needs to learn right from wrong, an adult has to show them what is right and wrong, this is done in a number of ways, one being discipline (including smacking).

cynder

Nanazolie wrote: »

See? What did I say about a widespread belief that if a child is not smacked, he will not be taught respect, manners, etc... My kids, both under 5, know how to say please, thanks, not to interrupt, shout or break things, etc... They don't need to be smacked to learn that. I used the naughty step, but most importantly I remove something they like. And I stick to it, consistency being the most important thing when raising a child. If I say to my 3 years old: there will be no ice cream you are too bold, there is no ice cream and she understands why.
I also believe in experience, within reason: I told many many times my 18 months not to play with the kitchen drawers because he could hurt his fingers. But of course, he won't understand what "pinch your fingers" means until he has experienced it. Nor would he understand why he shouldn't play with the drawers if I simply gave him a smack (he would merely make a connection between the drawer and the smack). So I let him play until he finally stuck his fingers in. I had padded the top of the drawers to make sure there was no danger, so it was just a pinch. But he now knows that when I say "mind your fingers", it means that it can hurt.

Come back and tell me that when they are 18, its ok to say your 5 year old has respect but try the teenage years.... up until then you have no idea what your kids will turn out like........

Just because they have manners/respect at 5 does not mean they will have them at 12 or 15 or 18......could bite you in the butt big time!

cynder

Ayla wrote: »

I'd imagine several internationally recognized associations & millions of people may disagree with you, but sure, that's your opinion

Bet you millions agree with me too!

Nanazolie

grindelwald wrote: »

Come back and tell me that when they are 18, its ok to say your 5 year old has respect but try the teenage years.... up until then you have no idea what your kids will turn out like........

Just because they have manners/respect at 5 does not mean they will have them at 12 or 15 or 18......could bite you in the butt big time!

Obviously, you haven't read my earlier posts. My husband NEVER received a smack. Neither did his 3 sibblings. Guess what? They are all very respectful. I got smacks, they certainly didn't harm me and I won't ask apologies from my parents, they did what they thought was the right thing. But it's not the smacks which taught me respect, nor made me who I am today. Actually, the smacks didn't taught me anything but to lie about what I had done. Not a great lesson IMO

Plus no one will know what your kids will turn into either. Wishing that mine turn bad because I didn't smack them is mean. Above all because in ALL my posts on this subjects, I mentioned that if I don't hit my kids, it's MY choice, and I don't get into other people's business and tell them what to do

cynder

Nanazolie wrote: »

Obviously, you haven't read my earlier posts. My husband NEVER received a smack. Neither did his 3 sibblings. Guess what? They are all very respectful. I got smacks, they certainly didn't harm me and I won't ask apologies from my parents, they did what they thought was the right thing. But it's not the smacks which taught me respect, nor made me who I am today. Actually, the smacks didn't taught me anything but to lie about what I had done. Not a great lesson IMO

Plus no one will know what your kids will turn into either. Wishing that mine turn bad because I didn't smack them is mean. Above all because in ALL my posts on this subjects, I mentioned that if I don't hit my kids, it's MY choice, and I don't get into other people's business and tell them what to do

Where did i say that? (in no way do i wish your child turns out a little demon)

What im saying is a 5 year old is way different to a teen, they may be little angels at 5 but COULD be demons at 15....

There are loads of deluded parent out their who think their kids are perfect and they are far from it, im not saying your one but their are a few who do not see their kids faults either its because they are diffent people in front of their parents or the parents are blind to it.

I have a 4 year old who doesnt say please or thank you (or F*** *** either) as he has a severe speech and language disability.......... does that make him less respectful than your lad?

His actions speak louder than words..... as is the case with many kids/adults

Just a point on the lying bit, smacks didn't make you lie, ITS HUMAN NATURE all adults lie, all kids lie, kids who are smacked LIE, kids who dont get smacked LIE.................. everybody lies......FACT

The Big Red Button

grindelwald wrote: »

Come back and tell me that when they are 18, its ok to say your 5 year old has respect but try the teenage years.... up until then you have no idea what your kids will turn out like........

Just because they have manners/respect at 5 does not mean they will have them at 12 or 15 or 18......could bite you in the butt big time!

Are you actually seriously implying that she should start smacking her well-behaved young children, because if she doesn't use smacking as her disciplinary method of choice now, it could make the children go wild as teenagers?

Ayla

nesf wrote: »

I'm showing my despair over what you've written and my despair about not being able to have a reasonable debate about this kind of thing. There are plenty of reasonable grounds from which to argue against smacking. But no, people always descend into tabloid style sensationalism about it.

All I was trying to do by bringing other examples into it was show how people will frequently draw a very fine line b/w when/how smacking someone is ok & when/how it isn't. My thought on the matter is that it is *never* ok.

Justify it all you want. Even if you only do it once and it doesn't cause any "real" harm you've still hit your child. Don't pretty it up by quibbling over whether to call it a smack/slap/tap/spank/discipline, you've still used physical force to try to teach something that you've given up doing any other way.

I'm not being dramatic or tabloid here, just having my say.

Nanazolie

But how does smacking will garantee that your kids turn into respectful teenagers and adults? Or lack of will make wild adults? I just find the argument reductive because obviously it's not only what you teach your kids, but events, environment, encounters, etc... Yes, teaching respect is a huge part of the education that will mark later life, but how smacking is garanteed to teach respect? I don't blame anyone for using it, but I find the "kids who were not smacked lack respect" argument is not valid. I would prefer that people just acknowledge that there are times when their child seems beyond reasoning, that they don't know anymore what to say or what to do, and so a smack seems the best answer.

I used to believe in smacks. I would have happily smacked a few friends' children, the one who kept stepping on my foot no matter how many times I told him not to, for a start. And then, I smacked my eldest. It just didn't make sense, I just felt like I had taken the eeasiest way when I could have done otherwise. In fact, the smack I gave her didn't stop her from doing the same thing again (escaping on a busy carpark). She was too young to understand the danger so it was no use explaining it to her. So I bought a strap that you attach to your child's wrist, that way she wouldn't escape. Eventually, I felt she was old enough to understand why the road was dangerous. Yes, it took 2 years, but the end result is that she is not going on the road because she knows that it's dangerous. Not because she is afraid of a smack

The Big Red Button

Ayla wrote: »

Understandable that a parent in this situation would lose control & lash out at the kid. But imagine for one second that you could freeze time, take a deep breath & cool off for 2 minutes. When you unfroze time & re-entered the situation, would you still hit the child? Or would it then seem like a violent act? Would you still feel it necessary to teach the child a lesson, or do you think it'd be possible to address the issue differently?

This reminds me ... there was an interview on the radio earlier with some man who has written a novel based around a child being smacked by his parents and the parents getting in trouble for it, I'm not sure of the details, was tuning in and out between different stations at the time!

Anyways the guy was talking about his own son, who was, according to him, a "difficult" child. He talked about one time, when his wife was heavily pregnant, they were waiting in a queue and his toddler son was acting up. The son ended up giving his pregnant mother a kick in the stomach. The father was furious, and brought the son away into the bathrooms, into a cubicle, where he smacked him. And the door swung open and all the other men there were looking at him ... I think he said that this is where he got the idea for his novel.

The presenter was asking the man whether, looking back, this was the best way he could have dealt with the situation at the time. And the man was actually trying to defend his actions! He didn't really put forward any solid argument - just basically said that it was the right way to deal with it.

I was pretty shocked. If the kid had kicked the wife, and the father had smacked him there and then, sort of instinctively, I'd sort of understand it. (Not saying it was the right thing to do, but I can understand how it would happen.) But to actually take him away to do it privately ... a toddler isn't necessarily going to understand that him kicking someone leads to punishment a few minutes later. Dragging a child into a bathroom cubicle to smack him is just going to make him fear the parent in question, in my opinion. They're not going to associate the punishment with their action; they're just going to develop negative feelings towards the parent.

Khannie

Ayla wrote: »

I'm not being dramatic or tabloid here, just having my say.

I'd disagree that you're just having your say. I'm not being disrespectful, but your posts on the issue smack (no pun intended) of drama IMO. Now....I'm off to a sparring class where hopefully I'll be repeatedly kicked and punched engaging in my favourite sport. I'll come out of it feeling great and having learned a thing or two.

Ayla

chatterpillar wrote: »

... a toddler isn't necessarily going to understand that him kicking someone leads to punishment a few minutes later. Dragging a child into a bathroom cubicle to smack him is just going to make him fear the parent in question, in my opinion. They're not going to associate the punishment with their action; they're just going to develop negative feelings towards the parent.

+1

Khannie

chatterpillar wrote: »

a toddler isn't necessarily going to understand that him kicking someone leads to punishment a few minutes later.

Not to nitpick, but there's nothing in what you've written to suggest that minutes passed (edit: though I would agree that if minutes had passed, the lesson would be lost - it's a problem I face when out with my 4 year old when she acts up....I don't want to make a scene, but there's no point putting her on the bold step when we get home). They may have been right beside the toilet. Also, it's pretty logical to assume that when you've kicked someone and you're being dragged off, you've a good idea why you're being dragged off.

Personally, I would do whatever was necessary to protect the baby in my wifes womb. Infer from that what you like.

nesf

Ayla wrote: »

All I was trying to do by bringing other examples into it was show how people will frequently draw a very fine line b/w when/how smacking someone is ok & when/how it isn't. My thought on the matter is that it is *never* ok.

Justify it all you want. Even if you only do it once and it doesn't cause any "real" harm you've still hit your child. Don't pretty it up by quibbling over whether to call it a smack/slap/tap/spank/discipline, you've still used physical force to try to teach something that you've given up doing any other way.

I'm not being dramatic or tabloid here, just having my say.

And you're entitled to think that it's never ok. That doesn't mean that any argument you pull up against smacking will always make sense or be reasonable. That's my issue with your post, not that you're against smacking.

The issue is whether it's acceptable as a last resort method of discipline when other methods have failed. It's not whether you'd do it but whether it's acceptable in a general sense. The second issue is whether anyone has any business interfering in how a parent disciplines a child so long as the child is not harmed (i.e. bruised and whatnot). There are privacy issues here that are core to the debate, i.e. it's perfectly rational to think slapping is always wrong but also that no one has the right to interfere in a parent's disciplining of the child unless the child is bodily or mentally harmed.

e.g. I'm personally opposed to abortion but think the State has no right making these kinds of decisions for people and that other people don't have that right either.

cynder

chatterpillar wrote: »

Are you actually seriously implying that she should start smacking her well-behaved young children, because if she doesn't use smacking as her disciplinary method of choice now, it could make the children go wild as teenagers?

No im not implying anything.....

When the child is 18 they can come back and say if their methods worked!


I have a 12 year old and my 12 year old is way different from her 5 year old self. (thats my point by the way a 5 year old will be different to their adult self)


she is a bit mouthy and very very independent, has great respect for most adults, but can be very judgemental towards her peers, she is however well liked by her peers, she didnt like her teacher last year and was not respectful to him, always questioning him and his authority over her, she can sometimes have an attitude at home, she will not steel and does not get involved in physical fights..... i always get good feedback from other parents that she was well behaved and respectful to them and their house (she goes to loads of sleepovers) all round not a bad kid....


Go back to when she was 5 years old, she said her please and thank you, always obeyed her teacher, would not question any adult always did what they said, not cheeky at all, very independent, confident.


When she is 18 that will all change again. I cannot say she is going to be the best citizen ever or that she will be the worst. I will not put her up on a pedestal for others to say they should be more like her or that they should not be anything like her, or that i was a perfect parent (there is no such thing as perfect).

We only know we have done right when she is an adult, if she is a law abiding citizen thats good enough for me.


many on here do not have teens its easy to say a 5 year olds well behaved and respectful not so easy with a teen.......

nesf

chatterpillar wrote: »

a toddler isn't necessarily going to understand that him kicking someone leads to punishment a few minutes later.

Depends on the age of a toddler. In my experience any punishment for a child under the age of two is utterly pointless. You just won't get through to them. You can continuously admonish them and physically remove them from whatever they were doing and it eventually sinks in but actually punishing them is pointless. The only exception to this that I can think of is something like a toddler trying to touch a red hot stove or similar. In that instance smacking them may be reasonable because of the consequences of them touching the stove massively outweigh any potential upset from the smack but even then I'm sceptical that you'll get through to most toddlers with a smack. In this case it's worth a try because of the potential harm but only because of that.

Khannie

Nanazolie wrote: »

But how does smacking will garantee that your kids turn into respectful teenagers and adults?

I don't think anything will guarantee that. If there was such a thing, we'd all engage in whatever it was.

The Big Red Button

Khannie wrote: »

Not to nitpick, but there's nothing in what you've written to suggest that minutes passed (edit: though I would agree that if minutes had passed, the lesson would be lost - it's a problem I face when out with my 4 year old when she acts up....I don't want to make a scene, but there's no point putting her on the bold step when we get home). They may have been right beside the toilet. Also, it's pretty logical to assume that when you've kicked someone and you're being dragged off, you've a good idea why you're being dragged off.

I'm not a parent myself, but my youngest sister was born when I was fifteen, and I did almost all of the feeding, nappies, putting to bed, disciplining, etc, in the early years of her life (she was the last of a large family, my mother was more than happy to have me take over, and I was happy to do it!)

I had never read up on methods of discipline etc myself before she was born, but I can honestly say I never came close to slapping her (although I would've been slapped myself as a child.) It just didn't feel right, she was a defenceless little kid, to me it's not fair to hurt someone who isn't physically capable of hurting you back?

I remember at the time, I had a strategy where if she did something really bold, I would kneel down in front of her and have a very serious talk with her about exactly what she'd done wrong and exactly why it was wrong and why she must never do it again. And then I would take her hand in one of my hands, and very very lightly place my other hand on top of it, and I would refer to that as a "slap". And I would literally spell it out to her that the reason she was getting a "slap" was because of whatever she had done, and it would be two-way - she would need to let me know that she understood what she had done and why it was wrong. She would be upset and see it as a "punishment", and I suppose it suited me as I could do it immediately in public if necessary, so it worked for us at the time. (To me, it would not feel right to use any method of discipline on a child that I would not feel fully comfortable doing in public.) In my opinion, it's impossible trying to enforce discipline at that age unless it's done immediately.

Just to stress, it didn't hurt her in any way at all, I suppose I was used to slapping as punishment, and this was a symbolic way of doing it! It worked, but I don't think I'd even use it with my own children when the time comes.

If a child is old enough to link a parent slapping them with the child's actions, then they are old enough to be reasoned with, and therefore slapping should not be necessary. I know that, sometimes, it might be an instinctive or reflexive reaction by the parent, and I do understand how it could happen. But I just can't see how anyone could defend it as a way of disciplining their child.

Khannie wrote: »

Personally, I would do whatever was necessary to protect the baby in my wifes womb. Infer from that what you like.

But a toddler isn't going to understand that! If a toddler kicks a pregnant woman in the stomach, and is punished, they're probably not going to learn "it's wrong to kick a pregnant woman in the stomach as it may damage the baby." If anything, they may learn "it's wrong to kick people" or "it's wrong to hurt people" ... the kid was just lashing out, he probably wasn't trying to hurt his mother and he probably didn't even consider the unborn baby! In my opinion, it's a case where talking and reasoning and explaining would do a hell of a lot more than smacking the child.

Although, as I said above, I completely understand how a father's automatic reaction would be to defend his wife and unborn child. To be honest, I can sort of see how a man might automatically react by hitting the child away from the wife. But that doesn't make it right.

The Big Red Button

One thing I'm interested in in relation to this.

To those of you who think it's acceptable to slap your children as a method of discipline: Would you be OK with your child's childminder or creche worker slapping them? Their teacher? A babysitter? A relation? A priest (if you're Catholic)? A friend of yours? The parent of a classmate of theirs?

Where do you draw the line?

If slapping is an acceptable way of disciplining your child, surely you should be OK with any person with responsibility of your child being allowed to slap them?

If not, why not?

nesf

chatterpillar wrote: »

One thing I'm interested in in relation to this.

To those of you who think it's acceptable to slap your children as a method of discipline: Would you be OK with your child's childminder or creche worker slapping them? Their teacher? A babysitter? A relation? A priest (if you're Catholic)? A friend of yours? The parent of a classmate of theirs?

Where do you draw the line?

If slapping is an acceptable way of disciplining your child, surely you should be OK with any person with responsibility of your child being allowed to slap them?

If not, why not?

I don't think anyone but the parents should be allowed to escalate to that level of discipline. It's a trust issue, I may trust myself to not hurt my child but I can't necessarily trust a babysitter to be able to do that. I would on the other hand trust my mother to do it because I know from experience that she wouldn't take it too far.

cynder

chatterpillar wrote: »

One thing I'm interested in in relation to this.

To those of you who think it's acceptable to slap your children as a method of discipline: Would you be OK with your child's childminder or creche worker slapping them? Their teacher? A babysitter? A relation? A priest (if you're Catholic)? A friend of yours? The parent of a classmate of theirs?

Where do you draw the line?

If slapping is an acceptable way of disciplining your child, surely you should be OK with any person with responsibility of your child being allowed to slap them?

If not, why not?

Would you let a priest, teacher bath, kiss, cuddle and snuggle up in bed with your child?

i would let the babysitter / my mother/ my sister in laws but no one else! because i trust them.... 100%

The Big Red Button

grindelwald wrote: »

Would you let a priest, teacher bath, kiss, cuddle and snuggle up in bed with your child?

Not in a million years

grindelwald wrote: »

i would let the babysitter / my mother/ my sister in laws but no one else! because i trust them.... 100%

You're saying you'd let any of these people smack your child?

cynder

chatterpillar wrote: »

Not in a million years



You're saying you'd let any of these people smack your child?

Depends (i have never told them it is ok or not ok to smack my kids)


Anyone would think they are beaten day in day out ....... just because i may smack/tap my child doesnt mean its a daily or monthly occurrence, its a tap once in a blue moon... A threat these days will work 99% of the time, as they can be reasoned with. (that's why i could see where the other person was coming form when they said a child over 5 shouldn't be smacked but was ok with under 5s being smacked)

My one son 6 never gets disciplined at school, his an angel..... very quiet very very well behaved. So there would be no need for a teacher to smack him.

If the baby sitter / sister in laws /my mom did smack/tap one of my kids i would know it must have been pretty bad (it has to be pretty bad for me to do it), and i would be ok with that. They are now generally well behaved kids.....



i think most kids are better behaved for others, than they are for their parents..... they know what buttons to push with their parents and not for babysitters/teachers...... also to point out my mother lives in the and only sees the kids for a week every 2 years and im there 99% of the time, the sister inlaws only spend 3 - 7 hours on thier own with the kids every year as they dont live near by and the babysitter only babysits once every 2-3 months and the kids are in bed 99% of the time she is minding them....... 1