Did you get hit by your parents?

stimpson

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Freddie tends to prefer anecdotes and opinions to empirical studies.

I can do anecdotes too. My 2 year old has 3 buddies around the same age from play group. Only one of these children has ever been smacked. Only one of these children regularly hits the other boys. Guess which one.

Captain McDuck

stimpson wrote: »

I can do anecdotes too. My 2 year old has 3 buddies around the same age from play group. Only one of these children has ever been smacked. Only one of these children regularly hits the other boys. Guess which one.

Your son?

stimpson

Captain McDuck wrote: »

Your son?

Nope. Try again.

RussellTuring

philologos wrote: »

Apologies for missing it, but much of that has already been covered in other posts. I can't guarantee every post a response, I can just try.

To say briefly - that corporal punishment is one disciplinary method amongst many. It has its advantages in certain situations and that's when I advocate its usage when several other uses of non-verbal discipline have been used. I advocate a complementarian method of discipline.

Please provide a situation where slapping would be preferable in your opinion. All you're saying here is that it's necessary when it's necessary.

I never argued that ones child was ones property, what I said is that parents have authority over their children and they are the ones who discipline, guide, encourage and share values with their children over life until they reach the age by which they can be accountable in their own right. That's 18. Parents have authority over their children until that date, and that's for the children's benefit. You've argued that children don't need correction, but they do. They need to be shown what's right, and what's wrong. That's the parents responsibility. Depending on your belief system it may involve introducing your child to God as well.

Nobody I saw specifically claimed that a child was their property but that's how it sounds to me when people claim that another human being must not only do what they decide but deserve physical punishment when they don't do so. Parents have authority over children by virtue of their physical size and strength and their children's dependence on them. I can't see how you believe this is necessarily for the benefit of the child given the abuses of this power that can and do happen, nor do I believe that humans are inherently flawed and in need of "correction" from these authorities. This correction is merely forcing your beliefs onto another through violence.

Additionally, I don't believe in any god and would see the concept as unnecessary in raising a responsible, moral person. However, since you brought it up, would you feel justified in using corporal punishment as a last resort on a child who refused to pray, go to church or perform other religious activities, since religion is an important aspect of morality to you?

Your point about effective and optimal is again a lot of what the discussion has developed into.

So would you care to discuss it rather than repeat your previous claims and say that my opinion is hysterical?

As for the State, I don't even see what your point is here. This is regarding parents and their children. I don't see why you want to bring in this red-herring into the argument. I think for adoptive parents and foster parents the same rule should be OK, but honestly I don't even see your point for bringing this in.

Actually, this thread is regarding parents smacking their children and I wanted to see if you thought this was something only biological parents should reserve the right to do, since you brought up the state taking custody of children. You didn't answer my main question as to whether or not all adults should be allowed to slap children while supervising them.

Some of your points have been covered in extensive detail already.

Not by you.

Borat_Sagdiyev wrote: »

I am a father and I have previously smacked my daughter.

I don't feel that I should be told that I'm "f**king stupid" or a "lazy parent" because of this. I am neither stupid nor a lazy parent.

She was still in nappies. I was trying to get her to eat her dinner and she was openly testing my patience. I warned her several times that if she didn't eat her dinner that she would get a smack. I then said "last warning" and she pushed me again. I smacked her across the arse twice. She then started behaving and finished her dinner. She did not cry, I doubt it even hurt her to be honest ( she was wearing a nappy and I didn't put that much force into it ), but she realised the path that it was going down and that I would follow through with my threats.

Did you smack her for not eating or was she testing your patience in some other way you didn't mention?

She is 11 since last summer and we get on very well. She was once asked by a friend of mine "does Dad get mad?" and her answer was significant: "Yes, but only when I'm being bold". So, in other words, the link between her misbehaving and me getting angry are clear. Be good and you'll get hugs / compliments, otherwise you'll get given out to and if you continue, you'll get a slap.

Abused spouses say similar things.

Bipolar Joe

I had two teeth knocked outta my head by my Moms girlfriend when I was little.

margio

RussellTuring wrote: »

Please provide a situation where slapping would be preferable in your opinion. All you're saying here is that it's necessary when it's necessary.



Nobody I saw specifically claimed that a child was their property but that's how it sounds to me when people claim that another human being must not only do what they decide but deserve physical punishment when they don't do so. Parents have authority over children by virtue of their physical size and strength and their children's dependence on them. I can't see how you believe this is necessarily for the benefit of the child given the abuses of this power that can and do happen, nor do I believe that humans are inherently flawed and in need of "correction" from these authorities. This correction is merely forcing your beliefs onto another through violence.

Additionally, I don't believe in any god and would see the concept as unnecessary in raising a responsible, moral person. However, since you brought it up, would you feel justified in using corporal punishment as a last resort on a child who refused to pray, go to church or perform other religious activities, since religion is an important aspect of morality to you?



So would you care to discuss it rather than repeat your previous claims and say that my opinion is hysterical?



Actually, this thread is regarding parents smacking their children and I wanted to see if you thought this was something only biological parents should reserve the right to do, since you brought up the state taking custody of children. You didn't answer my main question as to whether or not all adults should be allowed to slap children while supervising them.



Not by you.



Did you smack her for not eating or was she testing your patience in some other way you didn't mention?



Abused spouses say similar things.

How dare you criticise any parent that goes to the trouble of smacking their children, and refer to them as being abusers. I Was smacked when I was a Kid and I love and respect them for bothering to instill discipline in me. i cas bring my kids anywhere from mcdonalds to any shop and they don't misbehave there, because they know the consequences if they do. But other kids whose PARENTS leave them run amuck shouting while the sit and watch and smile while other people are trying to eat. First and foremost there the ones that need a good hiding.

stimpson

margio wrote: »

How dare you criticise any parent that goes to the trouble of smacking their children, and refer to them as being abusers.

Pity such parents didn't go to the trouble of researching different ways of discipline.

But other kids whose PARENTS leave them run amuck shouting while the sit and watch and smile while other people are trying to eat. First and foremost there the ones that need a good hiding.

Many of us can discipline our kids without giving them "a good hiding" as you put it. I wonder what the difference is between a loving smack and a good hiding. I also wonder if some parents get a kick out of hitting children.

stovelid

stimpson wrote: »

I can do anecdotes too. My 2 year old has 3 buddies around the same age from play group. Only one of these children has ever been smacked. Only one of these children regularly hits the other boys. Guess which one.

I was smacked as a child and regularly punch people in work. It makes it hard to hold down a job.

margio

stimpson wrote: »

Pity such parents didn't go to the trouble of researching different ways of discipline.



Many of us can discipline our kids without giving them "a good hiding" as you put it. I wonder what the difference is between a loving smack and a good hiding. I also wonder if some parents get a kick out of hitting children.

I was talking about the parents need a good hiding, but it is about time that People distinguished the difference between smacking and child abuse. and for your information I Tried other methods aswell. ps a recent study has suggested that smacking benifits a child.

Liam Byrne

NewHillel wrote: »

Smacking children impedes learning - it also leads to a marked personal tendency to inflict violence on others. That tendency continues into adulthood. (I fixed your post for you.)

Really ? So I guess my level of learning and intelligence and my tendency not to inflict any violence on anyone are some sort of exception to your tidy prejudices and preconceptions ?

margio

NewHillel wrote: »

Smacking children impedes learning - it also leads to a marked personal tendency to inflict violence on others. That tendency continues into adulthood. (I fixed your post for you.)

You obviously think you are funny. Where is your proof ?. I know kids that are agressive little violent thugs, who never once got a slap. I never smack out of anger.

stimpson

margio wrote: »

ps a recent study has suggested that smacking benifits a child.

Can you provide a link to this study? I linked to a study earlier that showed smacking was no more effective than non violent methods of correction as long as it was consistently applied.

margio

don't know how to uload it, but it is a very recent study (within the last year or so ) so try googling it.

stimpson

margio wrote: »

don't know how to uload it, but it is a very recent study (within the last year or so ) so try googling it.

It's your argument. You can do your own research to backup your point.

You just need to select the web address, copy it and paste it into your post.

Liam Byrne

stimpson wrote: »

margio wrote: »

don't know how to uload it, but it is a very recent study (within the last year or so ) so try googling it.

It's your argument. You can do your own research to backup your point.

You just need to select the web address, copy it and paste it into your post.

Strange how people are demanding proof from others while no such issues are raised despite my being living, personal proof that NewHillel's stated opinion is a load of tripe!

How come you didn't ask them to back up their earlier falsehoods ?

NewHillel

margio wrote: »

You obviously think you are funny. Where is your proof ?. I know kids that are agressive little violent thugs, who never once got a slap. I never smack out of anger.

There's nothing funny about 'smacking' children, or suggesting that certain adults need a 'good hiding'. Violence begets violence.

Liam Byrne

NewHillel wrote: »

margio wrote: »

You obviously think you are funny. Where is your proof ?. I know kids that are agressive little violent thugs, who never once got a slap. I never smack out of anger.

There's nothing funny about 'smacking' children, or suggesting that certain adults need a 'good hiding'. Violence begets violence.

There's nothing funny about insulting other people's intelligence, learning abilities or resistance to violence either, but that's exactly what you did in order to reassure youself that your preconceptions were credible.

margio

A study found that youngsters smacked up to the age of six did better at school and were more optimistic about their lives than those never hit by their parents.
They were also more likely to undertake voluntary work and keener to attend university, experts discovered.

The research, conducted in the United States, is likely to anger children’s rights campaigners who have unsuccessfully fought to ban smacking in Britain.

Currently, parents are allowed by law to mete out "reasonable chastisement'' on their children, providing smacking does not leave a mark or bruise. These limits were clarified in the 2004 Children’s Act.

But children’s groups and MPs have argued that spanking is an outdated form of punishment that can cause long-term mental health problems.

Related Articles

• EU: Britain 'must ban smacking'
  26 Apr 2010
• Smacking children: the law
  28 Jul 2011
• Smacking children: the law
  03 Jan 2010

Marjorie Gunnoe, professor of psychology at Calvin College in Grand Rapids, Michigan, said her study showed there was insufficient evidence to deny parents the freedom to determine how their children should be punished.
She said: “The claims made for not spanking children fail to hold up. They are not consistent with the data.
“I think of spanking as a dangerous tool, but there are times when there is a job big enough for a dangerous tool. You just don’t use it for all your jobs.”
The research questioned 179 teenagers about how often they were smacked as children and how old they were when they were last spanked.
Their answers were then compared with information they gave about their behaviour that could have been affected by smacking. This included negative effects such as anti-social behaviour, early sexual activity, violence and depression, as well as positives such as academic success and ambitions.
Those who had been smacked up to the age of six performed better in almost all the positive categories and no worse in the negatives than those never punished physically.
Teenagers who had been hit by their parents from age seven to 11 were also found to be more successful at school than those not smacked but fared less well on some negative measures, such as getting involved in more fights.
However, youngsters who claimed they were still being smacked scored worse than every other group across all the categories.
Prof Gunnoe found little difference in the results between sexes and different racial groups.
The findings were rejected by the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, which has fought to ban smacking.
A spokesman for the charity said: "The NSPCC believes that children should have the same legal protection from assault as adults do.
“Other research has shown that smacking young children affects their behaviour and mental development, and makes them more likely to be anti-social.”
However, Parents Outloud, the pressure group, welcomed the research, saying parents should not be criminalised for mild smacking.
Its spokeswoman, Margaret Morrissey, said: “It is very difficult to explain verbally to a young child why something they have done is wrong.
“A light tap is often the most effective way of teaching them not to do something that is dangerous or hurtful to other people – it is a preventive measure.
“While anything more than a light tap is definitely wrong, parents should be allowed the freedom to discipline their children without the fear that they will be reported to police.”
Aric Sigman, a psychologist and author of The Spoilt Generation: Why Restoring Authority will Make our Children and Society Happier, told the Sunday Times: “The idea that smacking and violence are on a continuum is a bizarre and fetishised view of what punishment or smacking is for most parents.
“If it’s done judiciously by a parent who is normally affectionate and sensitive to their child, our society should not be up in arms about that. Parents should be trusted to distinguish this from a punch in the face.”
Previous studies have suggested that smacking children can lead them to develop behavioural problems such as being more aggressive.




.at15t_email {display:none !important;} ul li.email span.at300bs {display:none !important;} X Share & bookmark
DeliciousFacebookGoogleMessengerRedditTwitter
DiggFarkLinkedInGoogle BuzzStumbleUponY! Buzz
What are these?

• Share:Share [EMAIL="?subject=A Telegraph reader thought you would be interested in this article&body=Depending on your email program, you may be able to click on the link in the email. Alternatively, you may have to open a web browser, such as Firefox or Internet Explorer, and copy the link over into the address bar. %0A%0Ahttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6926823/Smacked-children-more-successful-later-in-life-study-finds.html %0A%0AFor the best content online, visit www.telegraph.co.uk"][/EMAIL][URL="javascript:print()"][/URL]

[URL="javascript:void(0);"]inShare[/URL]1

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6926823/Smacked-children-more-successful-later-in-life-study-finds.html
Telegraph

Health News

• News »
• UK News »
• Science News »
• Education News »
• Children's Health »

In Health News


Acting heavyweights




Hospital guide: compare your hospital





Obama: 6 million to get Aids treatment




Winter skincare with anti-ageing effects




Telegraph Guide to Long and Short-term care






X Share & bookmark
DeliciousFacebookGoogleMessengerRedditTwitter
DiggFarkLinkedInGoogle BuzzStumbleUponY! Buzz
What are these?

Share:
• [EMAIL="?subject=A Telegraph reader thought you would be interested in this article&body=Depending on your email program, you may be able to click on the link in the email. Alternatively, you may have to open a web browser, such as Firefox or Internet Explorer, and copy the link over into the address bar. %0A%0Ahttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6926823/Smacked-children-more-successful-later-in-life-study-finds.html %0A%0AFor the best content online, visit www.telegraph.co.uk"][/EMAIL]
• [URL="javascript:print()"][/URL]
• [URL="javascript:void(0);"]inShare[/URL]1

<IMG style="BORDER-BOTTOM: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-TOP: 0px; BORDER-RIGHT: 0px">

More from The Telegraph




You might like:

• What weight problem? Vast majority of the obese deny being unhealthy02 Jan 2012Telegraph Health
• Ruth Jones: Gavin and Stacey star tells of battle to shed weight02 Jan 2012Telegraph Health
• Government teams

stimpson

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Strange how people are demanding proof from others while no such issues are raised despite my being living, personal proof that NewHillel's stated opinion is a load of tripe!

How come you didn't ask them to back up their earlier falsehoods ?

Personal anecdotes do not count as research. If you want him to back up his point then ask him to do so. I think I'm the only one on this thread to actuall link to any research on the effectiveness of smacking.

Fuinseog

Chuck Stone wrote: »

I did.

I think it was unnecessary adult-on-child violence.

Hitting children is stupid.

What say y'all?

fear the wooden spoon!

Liam Byrne

stimpson wrote: »

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Strange how people are demanding proof from others while no such issues are raised despite my being living, personal proof that NewHillel's stated opinion is a load of tripe!

How come you didn't ask them to back up their earlier falsehoods ?

Personal anecdotes do not count as research. If you want him to back up his point then ask him to do so. I think I'm the only one on this thread to actuall link to any research on the effectiveness of smacking.

That "personal anecdote" is the only item on this thread that I know to be a fact.

That is all the "research" I need.

And considering I'm an average person and nothing extraordinary in any way.

If someone was bigoted enough to show how research indicated that all black people were violent or all Polish were alcoholics, then of course "personal factual anecdotes" would be a valid refute to a chronic generalisation extrapolated from the research.

So I'm perfectly entitled to use personal facts to refute a preconceived false statement.

lecker Hendl

Nothing wrong with a light slap on the hand or the arse. We need discipline growing up otherwise we think we can do what we want.

There's obviously different levels of discipline though. My parents were good at it I think. I was given out to first. If I didn't learn from the tone of their voice, I got a slap. Nothing bad.

However I'm sure there are some families where the slap might go to a head and this is clearly not right. This would also include excessive slapping.

stimpson

margio wrote: »

A study found that youngsters smacked up to the age of six did better at school and were more optimistic about their lives than those never hit by their parents.

It's actually based on a debunked 1997 study and here conclusions are based on a set of 70 subjects not 2600 as printed in the newspaper. Indeed the "new" paper hasn't been yet published or peer reviewed. That very bad science.

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/08/20/us/2-spanking-studies-indicate-parents-should-be-cautious.html

stimpson

Liam Byrne wrote: »

If someone was bigoted enough to show how research indicated that all black people were violent or all Polish were alcoholics, then of course "personal factual anecdotes" would be a valid refute to a chronic generalisation extrapolated from the research.

So I'm perfectly entitled to use personal facts to refute a preconceived false statement.

Have you any idea how science works?

Liam Byrne

stimpson wrote: »

Liam Byrne wrote: »

If someone was bigoted enough to show how research indicated that all black people were violent or all Polish were alcoholics, then of course "personal factual anecdotes" would be a valid refute to a chronic generalisation extrapolated from the research.

So I'm perfectly entitled to use personal facts to refute a preconceived false statement.

Have you any idea how science works?

I have.

And I know that as soon as even one exception is found to a theory that that theory is declared false.

If science found a single T-Rex in the morning would they still claim that they were extinct ?

Chuck Stone

Below is a well researched meta-analysis of the effects of corporal punishment which was posted earlier in the thread by myself.

Corporal Punishment by Parents and Associated Child Behaviors and Experiences: A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review

Elizabeth Thompson Gershoff
Columbia University

Psychological Bulletin
2002, Vol. 128, No. 4, 539–579

http://www.endcorporalpunishment.org/pages/pdfs/Gershoff-2002.pdf

Some excerpts.

Aggression

The association between corporal punishment and children’s aggression is one of the most studied and debated findings in the child-rearing literature (Coie & Dodge, 1998; Steinmetz, 1979). Over the years, several reviews of the literature have concluded that corporal punishment is associated with increases in children’s aggressive behaviors (Becker, 1964; Patterson, 1982; Radke-
Yarrow, Campbell, & Burton, 1968; Steinmetz, 1979).

Delinquent, Criminal, and Antisocial Behavior

Across decades of research, corporal punishment has been implicated in the etiology of criminal and antisocial behaviors by both children and adults (e.g., Burt, 1925; Glueck & Glueck, 1964; Hetherington, Stouwie, & Ridberg, 1971; W. McCord & McCord, 1959; Patterson & Stouthamer-Loeber, 1984; West & Farrington, 1973; Wilson & Herrnstein, 1985)

Quality of the Parent–Child Relationship

The potential for parental corporal punishment to disrupt the parent–child relationship is thought to be a main disadvantage of its use (Azrin, Hake, Holz, & Hutchinson, 1965; Azrin & Holz, 1966). The painful nature of corporal punishment can evoke feelings of fear, anxiety, and anger in children; if these emotions are generalized to the parent, they can interfere with a positive parent–child relationship by inciting children to be fearful of and to avoid the parent

Mental Health

Although little theoretical work has been done to identify the processes by which corporal punishment would lead to mental health problems, harsh punishment (including corporal punishment) has been associated significantly with adolescents’ depressive symptomatology and distress (McLoyd, Jayaratne, Ceballo, & Borquez, 1994), even after controlling for age, gender, family socioeconomic status (SES), and history of physical abuse (Turner & Finkelhor, 1996).

Adult Abuse of Own Child or Spouse

If corporal punishment is associated with a general aggressive tendency in adulthood, this aggression also may manifest in relationships with family members, particularly with a child or spouse. The same processes hypothesized to account for an association between corporal punishment and general aggression also are expected to account for a tendency toward violence against family members.

wexford awake

Hi, just came across this smacking debate. Some posters don't really know what they are on about. Let me tell you about my childhood. My parents were only like a pack of hippies who didn't believe in smacking. Thus I ran wild hurting people. I once broke my female cousins nose because we fought over a football match. I was a walking nightmare. I knew no boundaries. Yes they did ground me, but I would only sneak out. Grounding in 90's Ireland was nearly unheard of. My very well behaving buds never experienced it and they only saw it in home and away. My biggest and by far best lesson ever came when I was about 10. One day I was on my way home from school and I decided to let the air out of my Neighbours tyre that was parked outside of the pub. Well the local sargeant caught me and he tore in to me. He belte me across the ass, back, legs, you name it, and he finished it off with a well and truly deserved kick up my ass I was in tears and shock as I never experienced such discipline in my life. From that day on my outlook totally changed, because I knew if I acted the maggot around the place that sgt would give me another few smacks. You know what I thank him for it cuz if that moment never happened I would have ended up in prison, and I have no doubt about that. The saddest thing is that I had to get the discipline I needed from an adult outside the home instead of getting it from the two people whose job it was to give to me. I can tell all yee anti smackers, that when I have kids they will feel the back of my hand against their legs when they step out of line.

Chuck Stone

See post 777 and post 778 for the difference between a largely meaningless anecdote and a well researched, well referenced, meta-analysis of years of peer reviewed data.

Liam Byrne

Chuck Stone wrote: »

See post 777 and post 778 for the difference between a largely meaningless anecdote and a well researched, well referenced, meta-analysis of years of peer reviewed data.

Laughable.

Maybe we should do away with personal testimonies in court cases as well.

Millicent

wexford awake wrote: »

Hi, just came across this smacking debate. Some posters don't really know what they are on about. Let me tell you about my childhood. My parents were only like a pack of hippies who didn't believe in smacking. Thus I ran wild hurting people. I once broke my female cousins nose because we fought over a football match. I was a walking nightmare. I knew no boundaries. Yes they did ground me, but I would only sneak out. Grounding in 90's Ireland was nearly unheard of. My very well behaving buds never experienced it and they only saw it in home and away. My biggest and by far best lesson ever came when I was about 10. One day I was on my way home from school and I decided to let the air out of my Neighbours tyre that was parked outside of the pub. Well the local sargeant caught me and he tore in to me. He belte me across the ass, back, legs, you name it, and he finished it off with a well and truly deserved kick up my ass I was in tears and shock as I never experienced such discipline in my life. From that day on my outlook totally changed, because I knew if I acted the maggot around the place that sgt would give me another few smacks. You know what I thank him for it cuz if that moment never happened I would have ended up in prison, and I have no doubt about that. The saddest thing is that I had to get the discipline I needed from an adult outside the home instead of getting it from the two people whose job it was to give to me. I can tell all yee anti smackers, that when I have kids they will feel the back of my hand against their legs when they step out of line.

Not smacking does not mean no discipline.

wexford awake

Read my post. They tried to discipline me via grounding and other Americanised micky mouse ways. I just laughed at them. I used to sneak out at ony 8 years of age during a grounding. They meant nothing. I was a terror. The tyresand my cousin's nose are only half of it. I often as a young lad struck out at my parents. I always remember one Summer night my maternal grandarents were visiting and for 2 hours my parents were calling me to come in from the dark. I blatantly ignored them, and when I did eventually come in I could hear my Grandfather giving out to my Father, that he needed to take the old belt to me. I stood at the fridge giggling drinking my milk cuz I knew my Father wouldn't listen. I was the only one of my siblings and cousins that never stayed over with the grandparents, cuz they knew that gramps would teach me a few lessons :eek:. and do you know what it's a pity I wasn't closer to them or they didn't live next store.

Chuck Stone

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Laughable.

Maybe we should do away with personal testimonies in court cases as well.

This is not worth replying to in any substantive manner.

stimpson

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I have.

And I know that as soon as even one exception is found to a theory that that theory is declared false.

It's clear that you don't.

When a research has been conducted it is subject to peer review to see if it is suitable for publication. This involves scrutiny by a group of experts from the field to impartially decide if it's fit for purpose. Only then can it be considered fir publication in a reputable scientific journal. That has not been done with the research in question. Therefore the conclusions reported are far from sound.

Personal anecdotes on this thread have no scientific value.

stovelid

Millicent wrote: »

Not smacking does not mean no discipline.

Can you outline the disciplinary methods - and the success rate of each method - that you use with your children?

Feel free to go into detail.

Hitting children sucks and realistically all a parent is doing is venting there frustration guilt or whatever other issues they have on a defenceless child.
Ultimately all a parent does acheive is teach the child that if your really angry belt someone great life lesson

Paddy Cow

wexford awake wrote: »

Read my post. They tried to discipline me via grounding and other Americanised micky mouse ways. I just laughed at them. I used to sneak out at ony 8 years of age during a grounding. They meant nothing. I was a terror. The tyresand my cousin's nose are only half of it. I often as a young lad struck out at my parents. I always remember one Summer night my maternal grandarents were visiting and for 2 hours my parents were calling me to come in from the dark. I blatantly ignored them, and when I did eventually come in I could hear my Grandfather giving out to my Father, that he needed to take the old belt to me. I stood at the fridge giggling drinking my milk cuz I knew my Father wouldn't listen. I was the only one of my siblings and cousins that never stayed over with the grandparents, cuz they knew that gramps would teach me a few lessons :eek:. and do you know what it's a pity I wasn't closer to them or they didn't live next store.

So your siblings were well behaved then? Maybe you're just the black sheep of the family and would have been a little sh!t either way

Liam Byrne

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Laughable.

Maybe we should do away with personal testimonies in court cases as well.

This is not worth replying to in any substantive manner.

Agreed. Because it was a contrived example to show you how personal testimonies are valid.

You can't debate the difference (because there is none) so you cop out.

Millicent

wexford awake wrote: »

Read my post. They tried to discipline me via grounding and other Americanised micky mouse ways. I just laughed at them. I used to sneak out at ony 8 years of age during a grounding. They meant nothing. I was a terror. The tyresand my cousin's nose are only half of it. I often as a young lad struck out at my parents. I always remember one Summer night my maternal grandarents were visiting and for 2 hours my parents were calling me to come in from the dark. I blatantly ignored them, and when I did eventually come in I could hear my Grandfather giving out to my Father, that he needed to take the old belt to me. I stood at the fridge giggling drinking my milk cuz I knew my Father wouldn't listen. I was the only one of my siblings and cousins that never stayed over with the grandparents, cuz they knew that gramps would teach me a few lessons :eek:. and do you know what it's a pity I wasn't closer to them or they didn't live next store.

My point is, my little brother was smacked fairly often (as we all were) and he was a little terror. Some kids are just hell on wheels because they respond differently to different punishments. Grounding and other punishments are not "Americanised micky mouse ways"; they're just different methods of punishment on a whole spectrum of disciplines. No one method is the holy grail of behavioural control.

stovelid wrote: »

Can you outline the disciplinary methods that you use with your children?

Are we back to my opinion not being valid because I haven't given birth to a child, Stove, or are you genuinely asking me a question? I can tell you what discipline methods I use with my partner's child, if that will suffice?

Liam Byrne

stimpson wrote: »

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I have.

And I know that as soon as even one exception is found to a theory that that theory is declared false.

It's clear that you don't.

When a research has been conducted it is subject to peer review to see if it is suitable for publication. This involves scrutiny by a group of experts from the field to impartially decide if it's fit for purpose. Only then can it be considered fir publication in a reputable scientific journal. That has not been done with the research in question. Therefore the conclusions reported are far from sound.

Personal anecdotes on this thread have no scientific value.

Seriously ?

Someone is allowed to make a sweeping generalisation and despite me (and presumably others) being living proof that it is false you choose to argue that I have no basis to contribute to disprove the "science" ?

stovelid

Millicent wrote: »

I can tell you what discipline methods I use with my partner's child, if that will suffice?

Please do.

And also expand on how they are applicable to every other child in existence.

And also explain the contained conflation of light smacking with child abuse in light of the multitude of people on this thread -and all the other threads - that were lightly smacked in childhood (like me) that lead fulfilled, non-violent lives and still love and respect their parents and don't physically abuse their own children.

Or get off the pot, so to speak.

wexford awake

Paddy Cow wrote: »

So your siblings were well behaved then? Maybe you're just the black sheep of the family and would have been a little sh!t either way

ha ha, maybe. no seriously they were a good bit older than me. my sis was 7 yrs older and she was next to me. In the longrun though I turned out ok. My older bro was up in court several times for assualt and public order, non payment of maintainence etc. So I do think, especially the way I was behaving that copper did me a huge favour.:o

stimpson

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Seriously ?

Someone is allowed to make a sweeping generalisation and despite me (and presumably others) being living proof that it is false you choose to argue that I have no basis to contribute to disprove the "science" ?

I'm saying that an anecdote is not science. Your opinion By its very definition is subjective and only by looking at properly conducted research with a large sample size impartially reviewed can you draw any scientific conclusions.

Liam Byrne

stimpson wrote: »

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Seriously ?

Someone is allowed to make a sweeping generalisation and despite me (and presumably others) being living proof that it is false you choose to argue that I have no basis to contribute to disprove the "science" ?

I'm saying that an anecdote is not science. Your opinion By its very definition is subjective and only by looking at properly conducted research with a large sample size impartially reviewed can you draw any scientific conclusions.

It's not an "opinion"; it's a fact.

The poster claimed that I am more prone to violence when in FACT I am regularly "accused" of being a pacifist

The poster claimed that I am likely to have learning difficulties which is an opinion rendered moot by my turning my hand to lots of different things at different stages of my life and doing them well - ranging from training people to design to management to designing my own house to being trusted with control over stuff that I've barely been shown how to use due to a natural inclination to pick stuff up quickly and intuitively - and even train others following that minimal induction.

So that post is 100% bull****.

Logical Fallacy

Freddie59 wrote: »

Oh a study? That'll do it every time. Are you a parent yourself perchance? If so, how many children do you have?

Fairly default attempt to derail a line of posting with regard to threads on parenting.

stimpson wrote: »

Do I take it that you're not a big fan of science?

I am a parent. I've never had behavioural problems and I've never had to raise my hand. There are other ways to instill discipline and respect in children.

Always nice to see said attempt blow up in peoples face.

Millicent

stovelid wrote: »

Please do.

And also expand on how they are applicable to every other child in existence.

And also explain the contained conflation of light smacking with child abuse in light of the multitude of people on this thread -and all the other threads - that were lightly smacked in childhood (like me) that lead fulfilled, non-violent lives and still love and respect their parents and don't physically abuse their own children.

Or get off the pot, so to speak.

I don't why you're reacting so hostilely to a comment that says not smacking your children does not equate to not disciplining them. The poster said that his parents were hippies because they didn't smack him. "Hippies" to me conjures the image of Ned Flanders' parents in the Simpsons who let their kids run wild rather than use any sort of discipline. Just because a parent does not smack a child does not mean they do not discipline them. Why is that a reason to get so annoyed at me when there are others who are more fiercely against smacking than I in this very thread? Why have I to answer for others' conflations when I am not the one making them?

So you want a list? Here goes. This is not exhaustive by any means.

• Time outs
• Removal of privileges
• Removal of toys
• A stern voice and a certain look does the trick quite often
• A countdown that threatens a punishment but usually stops the behaviour in its tracks
• A serious conversation at his eye level
• A refusal to allow whining or tantrums to escalate with a very steady, firm assertion that they will not be tolerated

I'm sure there are others that I cannot think of right now. The stern but firm conversation and the countdown are the ones that usually do the trick, I find, especially if I catch him before he kicks off (I know his signs at this stage). I don't raise my voice to him or lose the rag because he is the sort of child who responds to aggression with aggression.

However, as I've already said before, if he was repeatedly trying to stick his hand in the fire (for example) and he was going to seriously injure himself because he refused to respond to any of those disciplines, I would say a smack to shock him would be warranted. Not that I would dole it because I am not his birth parent but I would not judge my partner for it.

Is that enough off the pot for you?

wexford awake

The poster said that his parents were hippies because they didn't smack him. "Hippies" to me conjures the image of Ned Flanders' parents in the Simpsons who let their kids run wild rather than use any sort of discipline. Just because a parent does not smack a child does not mean they do not discipline them. Why is that a reason to get so annoyed at me when there are others who are more fiercely against smacking than I in this very thread? Why have I to answer for others' conflations when I am not the one making them?

So you want a list? Here goes. This is not exhaustive by any means.

• Time outs
• Removal of privileges
• Removal of toys
• A stern voice and a certain look does the trick quite often
• A countdown that threatens a punishment but usually stops the behaviour in its tracks
• A serious conversation at his eye level
• A refusal to allow whining or tantrums to escalate with a very steady, firm assertion that they will not be tolerated

I'm sure there are others that I cannot think of right now. The stern but firm conversation and the countdown are the ones that usually do the trick, I find, especially if I catch him before he kicks off (I know his signs at this stage). I don't raise my voice to him or lose the rag because he is the sort of child who responds to aggression with aggression.

However, as I've already said before, if he was repeatedly trying to stick his hand in the fire (for example) and he was going to seriously injure himself because he refused to respond to any of those disciplines, I would say a smack to shock him would be warranted. Not that I would dole it because I am not his birth parent but I would not judge my partner for it.

Is that enough off the pot for you?[/QUOTE]
I just used the word hippies, they really are not. My Father workrd all his life, and hard at that. my mom was a stay at home parent. They did try to discipline me, ut hust not good enough. As I said they were before their time when it came to parenting methods. Ok maybe there was a reason for that, perhaps they suffered abuse at the hands of their parents, I dont know. Even though I resent them, I know they meant well.

stovelid

Millicent wrote: »

[*]Time outs
[*]Removal of privileges
[*]Removal of toys
[*]A stern voice and a certain look does the trick quite often
[*]A countdown that threatens a punishment but usually stops the behaviour in its tracks
[*]A serious conversation at his eye level
[*]A refusal to allow whining or tantrums to escalate with a very steady, firm assertion that they will not be tolerated
[/LIST]

I use these methods too - most of the time successfully.

Have you ever been in a very occasional situation where all of the above fail?

If not, do you think that your child is a perfect template for all other children, especially of both genders and temperaments?

Do you think that every parent on the thread that condones light smacking just beats up their kids at every possible opportunity?

I can count on two hands the number of times I've smacked (lightly on the bum or hand) my kids but I reserve the right exclusively to threaten it and occasionally to carry it through.

Millicent

wexford awake wrote: »

I just used the word hippies, they really are not. My Father workrd all his life, and hard at that. my mom was a stay at home parent. They did try to discipline me, ut hust not good enough. As I said they were before their time when it came to parenting methods. Ok maybe there was a reason for that, perhaps they suffered abuse at the hands of their parents, I dont know. Even though I resent them, I know they meant well.

Fair enough if that was your experience. Were they consistent with their discipline, if you don't mind me asking? And was there are reason for your behaviour (again, if you don't mind me asking)? Do you think there's a happy medium between your parents' discipline and smacking?

All just for my own curiosity.

Paddy Cow

Millicent wrote: »

So you want a list? Here goes. This is not exhaustive by any means.

• Time outs
• Removal of privileges
• Removal of toys
• A stern voice and a certain look does the trick quite often
• A countdown that threatens a punishment but usually stops the behaviour in its tracks
• A serious conversation at his eye level
• A refusal to allow whining or tantrums to escalate with a very steady, firm assertion that they will not be tolerated

The only problem with all these methods is that they require patience and perserverance from the parents. If you put a child in time out/remove toys, then you have to listen to them whining. Some parents simply give in and use a slap as it is instantaneous punishment.

Parents who give the odd slap are not monsters. As has been said on this thread by many people, they got a slap now and again but they have no scars from it as even at the time they knew they had crossed a line and deserved it. It's the parents who use slapping as the only means of punishment and who use it too often and for minor things that cause problems. Their kids only know slapping as a means of establishing boundaries and when they are outside the house they have absolutely no respect for authority as they know that other adults cannot slap them.

wexford awake

Millicent wrote: »

Fair enough if that was your experience. Were they consistent with their discipline, if you don't mind me asking? And was there are reason for your behaviour (again, if you don't mind me asking)? Do you think there's a happy medium between your parents' discipline and smacking?

All just for my own curiosity.

It's hard to explain. They were consistant, but there was no fear on my part, util I met that Sargeant. If I snook out during a grounding they would extend it, but did I take notice, not one bit. Now I look at my friend's parenting methods and they are nearly indentical to my parents. They were like a set of 21st century parents stuck in the 90's. All my friends were smacked as kids. I used to be over at their houses and Isee it with my own to eyes. No matter what punishment I was given it didn't matter.