Slapping/Smacking Children:Regional variations in practice and acceptability

9959

I Heart Internet wrote: »

What, pray tell, is a "disciplinary fountain"?????

bumper234 wrote: »

Think he/she means foundation lol

What's a foundation fountain???

bumper234

9959 wrote: »

What's a foundation fountain???

Hmmmm not sure if serious?

Maybe try disciplinary foundation? :rolleyes:

Czarcasm

cgh wrote: »

Firstly, I am a father of 3 kids all under 10, im not a fan of smacking, but there are times when the naughty step, bold corner, removing items (xbox, Nintendo ds, etc) just doesnt cut it.
there are a few very rare times that a smack for me is required. any one that has kids will probably agree with me on that.

I personally would say I agree with you on the above, but not necessarily because I now have a child. I always thought that way, before I ever had children.

those who dont have kids just wont understand.

I think that's more to do with the person than it is to do with the fact whether they're a parent or not.

As someone else in the thread said - "Violence begets violence". No it doesn't, that again is dependent on the person. There are numerous other factors that will affect a child's development, including being shown understanding and tolerance from people who themselves are not parents, but won't let a child rip the piss either.


EDIT: One thing I HAVE noticed since becoming a parent is there's never any shortage of people to tell you "you're doing it wrong" :pac:

jaffacakesyum

I don't have kids so I "don't understand" I'm sure. But smacking your kid is just lazy parenting.

Kids vary greatly, there are some very well behaved and some who I don't envy parents having to deal with.

Regardless, violence should never be the answer. What are you teaching your kids when you can just smack someone across the head when they do something bold? Fúcking ridiculous if you ask me.

Our parents never hit us but would be tough on us. Take away toys if we were bold, ground us from partys etc. It did the trick.

Czarcasm

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

I don't have kids so I "don't understand" I'm sure. But smacking your kid is just lazy parenting.

Kids vary greatly, there are some very well behaved and some who I don't envy parents having to deal with.

Regardless, violence should never be the answer. What are you teaching your kids when you can just smack someone across the head when they do something bold? Fúcking ridiculous if you ask me.

Our parents never hit us but would be tough on us. Take away toys if we were bold, ground us from partys etc. It did the trick.

See there's the thing, most people when they think "violence", will think of a parent beating a child. Giving a child a smack isn't violence, not to my mind anyway, but to your mind it would be, having never experienced violence as I would understand it.

There's a difference between beating a child within an inch of their life, which is violence, and a clip round the ear to shock them into copping on, which is discipline.

Mr Benevolent

Czarcasm wrote: »

One thing I HAVE noticed since becoming a parent is there's never any shortage of people to tell you "you're doing it wrong" :pac:

Everyone had their own opinion on parenting, and everyone is right/wrong.

darced

This post has been deleted.

jaffacakesyum

Czarcasm wrote: »

See there's the thing, most people when they think "violence", will think of a parent beating a child. Giving a child a smack isn't violence, not to my mind anyway, but to your mind it would be, having never experienced violence as I would understand it.

There's a difference between beating a child within an inch of their life, which is violence, and a clip round the ear to shock them into copping on, which is discipline.

But it is violence

Violence is a sliding scale. Beating the living daylights out of a child is obviously hugely different to giving them one smack around the head. Doesn't make the latter right at all.

This is the definition of violence I googled:

"Behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something."

I would say if you're smacking a child to punish them you're intending to hurt them enough so that it sticks in their mind what they did is wrong.

I actually don't get shocked if I see it, and I know parents who do it and friends my age who would've experienced it and it didn't traumatize them for life. I think it would be the rare number of cases that it would affect someone psychologically to get the odd smack at the back of the head.

But even still, I can't see how people think this is an acceptable form of behaviour. You wouldn't go around smacking your work colleagues for messing up, or your mate who you found out cheated on his girlfriend, you don't go and slap him across the face. It's not an acceptable method of teaching a child IMO and it certainly isn't necessary given the amount of people (myself as an example) who were disciplined in other ways that worked.

Czarcasm

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

But it is violence

Violence is a sliding scale. Beating the living daylights out of a child is obviously hugely different to giving them one smack around the head. Doesn't make the latter right at all.

This is the definition of violence I googled:

"Behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something."

That's the dictionary definition of violence though. If you also google the dictionary definition of a human being (I did -
a member of any of the races of Homo sapiens; person; man, woman, or child), it doesn't tell you much either, because it lacks context.

There will be people that will say there's no difference between a smack and belting a child, they're both as bad as each other. People's individual definitions are based on their own perceptions, which is based on a number of factors, the biggest one being their experience, experience influenced by their own childhood.

I would say if you're smacking a child to punish them you're intending to hurt them enough so that it sticks in their mind what they did is wrong.

I've never smacked my child thinking "You'll remember this the next time you think about acting up". I know you referred to it as lazy parenting, but I can only speak for myself when I say that in MY opinion, the lazier parent will find it easier to let the child have their own way. As someone earlier mentioned- some 3 year old children don't do rational debate very well, so rather than spend half an hour debating why they are being unreasonable in expecting that they should be entitled to a chocolate bar, and how throwing a tantrum isn't going to be rewarded, it takes a smack to bring them back to reality so to speak.

I actually don't get shocked if I see it, and I know parents who do it and friends my age who would've experienced it and it didn't traumatize them for life. I think it would be the rare number of cases that it would affect someone psychologically to get the odd smack at the back of the head.

But even still, I can't see how people think this is an acceptable form of behaviour. You wouldn't go around smacking your work colleagues for messing up, or your mate who you found out cheated on his girlfriend, you don't go and slap him across the face. It's not an acceptable method of teaching a child IMO and it certainly isn't necessary given the amount of people (myself as an example) who were disciplined in other ways that worked.

No, obviously you're not going to go around smacking adults because adults can be reasoned with (well, to some extent at least ), but you can walk away from an adult. You can't walk away from a child. I should point out that my child is eight now, and I haven't had to smack him in a number of years (can't remember the last time actually), but I don't have to, because he understands by now that when I say no, I'm immune to his manipulation. I don't have to smack him because he doesn't throw tantrums and knows how to behave himself. If he wants something, he earns it, he doesn't just get given it by virtue of his birthright.

Everyone is different obviously, each and every child is different, with personalities of their own, so one child may be more headstrong and stubborn than another generally more placid child. Both children require different methods of discipline because they're different people.

jaffacakesyum

Czarcasm wrote: »

That's the dictionary definition of violence though. If you also google the dictionary definition of a human being (I did -
a member of any of the races of Homo sapiens; person; man, woman, or child), it doesn't tell you much either, because it lacks context.

That's the definition of violence. Take it or leave it. I know people have different definitions of things but I don't really get how hitting a child isn't seen as violence.

There will be people that will say there's no difference between a smack and belting a child, they're both as bad as each other. People's individual definitions are based on their own perceptions, which is based on a number of factors, the biggest one being their experience, experience influenced by their own childhood.

Who?

There are sliding scales to a lot of crimes. Mass genocide by an individual is obviously a lot more extreme than one murder. A serial rapist would be quite different to a guy in a club who wouldn't say no and kept groping/trying to kiss a girl. Do you see what I mean?

I've never smacked my child thinking "You'll remember this the next time you think about acting up".

What were you aiming to achieve by smacking your child then? I thought the whole argument behind it was that it was more effective as a deterrent to children.

I know you referred to it as lazy parenting, but I can only speak for myself when I say that in MY opinion, the lazier parent will find it easier to let the child have their own way.

Because those are the only two options? Hit your child vs don't do anything? Absolutely not.

As someone earlier mentioned- some 3 year old children don't do rational debate very well, so rather than spend half an hour debating why they are being unreasonable in expecting that they should be entitled to a chocolate bar, and how throwing a tantrum isn't going to be rewarded, it takes a smack to bring them back to reality so to speak.

Wow, really??? :eek: You would smack your child over something as trivial as that?

No, obviously you're not going to go around smacking adults because adults can be reasoned with (well, to some extent at least ), but you can walk away from an adult. You can't walk away from a child. I should point out that my child is eight now, and I haven't had to smack him in a number of years (can't remember the last time actually), but I don't have to, because he understands by now that when I say no, I'm immune to his manipulation. I don't have to smack him because he doesn't throw tantrums and knows how to behave himself. If he wants something, he earns it, he doesn't just get given it by virtue of his birthright.

Everyone is different obviously, each and every child is different, with personalities of their own, so one child may be more headstrong and stubborn than another generally more placid child. Both children require different methods of discipline because they're different people.

Different methods absolutely. I don't think smacking is ever an appropriate method of discipline. There are tons of other options for you yet you choose the easy way out IMO. That is lazy parenting.

I know I'm going to get lambasted for it on here because I don't have children and "don't understand". I'm sure if/when I have kids I'll be on the end of my tether on many occasions that I would like to take that easy option as well but I'd like to think I'd restrain myself. It's a child, not a stray dog FFS.

darced

This post has been deleted.

anncoates

darced wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Suggested tabloid headline: Assault and Vinegar

jamesbondings

Look. I think we can all agree that beating a child is wrong. However I was slapped as a child (open hand on the backside as children, wooden spoon on our hands as a pre teen and a belt to the backside as a teen (this only happened the once as I learned Quick haha)) as we my two brothers.

I genuinly feel that this made us step in line we spoke when spoken to, done what was expected of us and in turn learned valuable life lessons. It has done none of us any harm. Some of the kids now a days are little brats. And the parents only seem to either a) smack them into submission regardless of where they are or b) do nothing and wonder why their kids are little fxxxers.

A slap now and then works nobody enjoys it but it can work once its not abused!

Czarcasm

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

That's the definition of violence. Take it or leave it. I know people have different definitions of things but I don't really get how hitting a child isn't seen as violence.

Who?

I'll take your definition jaffa because I understand where you're coming from, the sliding scale, but others more extreme than you will use language like "verbally abusing" a child is violence, because they know how the word abuse in relation to a child will conjure up all sorts, the way the word violence does.

There are sliding scales to a lot of crimes. Mass genocide by an individual is obviously a lot more extreme than one murder. A serial rapist would be quite different to a guy in a club who wouldn't say no and kept groping/trying to kiss a girl. Do you see what I mean?

I do, because I know where you're coming from (I'd have my own opinion on your examples too btw but that's a discussion for another thread).

What were you aiming to achieve by smacking your child then? I thought the whole argument behind it was that it was more effective as a deterrent to children.

Some people will make the deterrent argument as a justification, I won't, because I don't believe smacking him put him off throwing tantrums. I would smack him to shock him. I've also lifted him off the ground and thrown him over my shoulder and walked out of the shop when he kicked off.

Because those are the only two options? Hit your child vs don't do anything? Absolutely not.

Ok obviously they're not, but I was trying to make the point about what from MY perspective would be lazy parenting. I know well there's plenty of different approaches to disciplining children.

(Watching Supernanny isn't one of them, but it was as good an excuse as any to eyeball the nanny! )

Wow, really??? :eek: You would smack your child over something as trivial as that?

Nope, I wouldn't smack him just for wanting a chocolate bar, I'd smack him for pulling all the bars down off the rack, then refusing to pick them up.

Different methods absolutely. I don't think smacking is ever an appropriate method of discipline. There are tons of other options for you yet you choose the easy way out IMO. That is lazy parenting.

The most efficient method of disciplining him at the time, but we'll have to agree to differ on our definitions of lazy parenting. In the above example it would've been easier just to give him the chocolate bar and let him walk away from the mess he'd just created, and whatever he might not learn from a smack, he certainly wasn't going to learn anything from being allowed to walk away from a mess he'd just been responsible for creating. I'd consider a smack in that regard the lesser of two evils so to speak when he really wasn't open to negotiation.

I know I'm going to get lambasted for it on here because I don't have children and "don't understand". I'm sure if/when I have kids I'll be on the end of my tether on many occasions that I would like to take that easy option as well but I'd like to think I'd restrain myself. It's a child, not a stray dog FFS.

I certainly won't lambast anyone here who isn't a parent yet has an opinion, we were all children ourselves at one time and we're all human beings who interact with other human beings. IMO there's no skill in being a parent, you don't require any qualifications or study to be one, and I myself was practically raised by a woman who was never a parent herself, but she WAS a human being, and she treated me like a human being when my own parents would beat me like you wouldn't even beat a dog.


I think adults tend to forget sometimes that they weren't just raised in a bubble with their parents, and they tend to forget the other adults in their lives as they grew up that would've influenced the way they think, feel, and interact with other human beings.

Femme_Fatale

My mum gave me a slap on the arse or hand now and again (never the face, jaysus) as a last resort. I know people pour scorn on the following cliché, but it didn't harm me. My mother is a superb person. If anything, I had a better relationship with her, growing up, than I did with my dad, who didn't administer slaps.

I do hate though when people give their kids a slap in public and yell at them - if it really has to be done, it should only be done in private. And none of this awful verbal abuse stuff, and for good reason, not looking for a packet of crisps. Being out and about with kids is no doubt stressful but humiliating them is inexcusable.

Czarcasm

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

My mum gave me a slap on the arse or hand now and again (never the face, jaysus) as a last resort. I know people pour scorn on the following cliché, but it didn't harm me. My mother is a superb person. If anything, I had a better relationship with her, growing up, than I did with my dad, who didn't administer slaps.

I do hate though when people give their kids a slap in public and yell at them - if it really has to be done, it should only be done in private. And none of this awful verbal abuse stuff, and for good reason, not looking for a packet of crisps. Being out and about with kids is no doubt stressful but humiliating them is inexcusable.

It can be a difficult balancing act though at times FF, and that's the problem with a blanket image of children like they're just blank slates and if they're all treated the same they'll all act the same. In fairness I think we can all acknowledge that's far from true.

With that said, some children will have no such qualms about humiliating adults to get their way- the parent or guardian not wanting to be embarrassed by onlooking strangers will give in to the child, and the child learns then that any time they want something- humiliating the parent works.

I'll never forget the time I was frog marching my son out of a shopping centre when he looked up at me with a frustrated expression on his face and says "You can't do this to meee, I'm a chiiild"...


(I was taking him outside and out of the situation to indeed have that conversation with him about his behaviour).

camphor

There are certainly national variations with regard to punishment. In America the paddle is widely used. In England it is the cane and in Scotland it is the tawse. Ireland is a mix of sticks and straps. The paddle never really caught on here.
Nowadays most parents use a wet towel which does not leave a mark but is painful as there is not as much official toleration of punishment as there was years ago.

Cherry Blossom Girl

Precious flower wrote: »

even slapped across the face once. Damn, that is certainly one slap you never forget!

This really stood out at me. I can understand the old smack if a child is seriously misbehaving but I just can't imagine a scenario where a parent would need to smack their (I'm presuming you were young?) child across the face. Unless the parent was trying to physically protect themselves. It seems shocking to me.

I was never smacked as a child. I got threatened with the wooden spoon a few times but it was never used and I never had any impression that it would be used on me no matter how much I pushed it.

I'm not entirely sure where I personally stand on the issue. I don't agree with using physical violence and fear to discipline children as I don't think it achieves anything, but then again there are scenarios where you try everything and the child still misbehaves. In those situations or if a child was in danger of hurting themselves badly I can understand parents giving them a quick smack.

I don't have kids myself but if/when I do, I don't plan on smacking them. I can't actually imagine myself physically smacking a child. The thought makes me wince. Then again, you never really know how you'll react until you're actually in that situation. I think it also depends on where you smack them. A quick little smack on the hand or wherever as a last resort would be understandable but I still can't wrap my head around the above poster being slapped across the face by her mother... (no offence!)

Catari Jaguar

MugMugs wrote: »

I don't see the issue.

I was slapped as a child and through my early teens.

Didn't do me any harm and I mean that sincerely. In fact it taught me a few things !

Bullsh1t. What can a smack teach you apart from "next time don't get caught." It only teaches you that the consequence for your "bold" behaviour is a smack.

What's the point of the smack? To inflict pain? To instill fear?

How about teaching some empathy or compassion or problem solving skills.

"If you take his toys, I'll smack you!" When the parent isn't around to smack, or the kid is sneaky enough he'll avoid the consequences, a victimless crime.
You should teach that if you take his toys he'll be upset. Stealing is wrong. The rational solution would be to take their toys and see how they feel.

Smacking is the lowest and laziest form of discipline. Mostly from a parent who is feeling out of control, worked up & frustrated and takes it out on a defenseless child.

Catari Jaguar

Czarcasm wrote: »

some 3 year old children don't do rational debate very well, so rather than spend half an hour debating why they are being unreasonable in expecting that they should be entitled to a chocolate bar, and how throwing a tantrum isn't going to be rewarded, it takes a smack to bring them back to reality so to speak.


No, obviously you're not going to go around smacking adults because adults can be reasoned with (well, to some extent at least ), but you can walk away from an adult. You can't walk away from a child.

It's ok to smack a 3 year old? Would you be ok with putting your child in a creche/montessori that smacks some (your??) infants because you can't "reason" with them? However do they cope in there and actually TEACH social skills to children without smacking??? After all the uproar about the Giraffe childcare/creche I seriously doubt anyone would be ok with hearing they smack 3 year olds when they get out of line/throw tantrums/behave like 3 year olds do.

jjpep

It's crazy to me that any kind of hitting or slapping of kids is okay. There probably the only group in society that this is allowed happen to, if you hit a dog you'd get in more trouble. And what does hitting teach kids? **** all. Use reason, it's what makes us that little bit different from the apes. And if you find yourself getting all angry and whatever, take a breath, walk away for a minute. Because yes being a parent is stressful and **** some times but long term it's a better thing to do. Your kids will grow up to better people for it.

Mary28

I do occasionally slap my children - when I lose my temper. I don't slap them very hard but I still always regret it as it's me lashing out when losing my temper not me being a good example on how to behave when something goes wrong for me.

Sometimes a little slap does knock my 2yr old out of a tantrum though, he's a loon and my back could be broken trying to change his nappy, dress him or put cream on his eczema as he fights me, but it's not something I'd recommend obviously.

I haven't spent enough time in the North to notice anyone getting slapped. I think it looks horrible. Cursing at children too. My husband loses his temper and thinks it's ok to curse around/at the children cos he's lost his temper. It sounds terrible when they say stuff back to you.

I think there is no harm in the odd slap for effect, it can get their attention sometimes. Like sometimes I'll tell my 5 yr old he's being bold and give him a deliberate slap on his hand that wouldn't hurt a fly but it will upset him more than a hard slap would.

Beating a child and hard slapping when you lose your temper is a bad idea though. Anytime I do give them a hard slap cos I lost my temper I usually feel so guilty I'll give them attention or a treat out of guilt which is probably fecking with their head altogether.

In an ideal world I would say absolutely no slapping. But I think the reality is a little slapping isn't going to damage a child but a lot of slapping probably will.

Czarcasm

Catari Jaguar wrote: »

Bullsh1t. What can a smack teach you apart from "next time don't get caught." It only teaches you that the consequence for your "bold" behaviour is a smack.

It's not about teaching the child anything, it's about having them make an immediate adjustment to their behaviour.

What's the point of the smack? To inflict pain? To instill fear?

See above.

How about teaching some empathy or compassion or problem solving skills.

You can teach them all that too, as well as discipline.

"If you take his toys, I'll smack you!" When the parent isn't around to smack, or the kid is sneaky enough he'll avoid the consequences, a victimless crime.

The parent makes it their business to discipline the child so they don't learn to be sneaky little brats that know they can avoid the consequences of their actions. Discipline isn't just about punishment, it's also about reward for good behaviour and helping to contribute to the household by doing chores like tidying their bedroom.

You should teach that if you take his toys he'll be upset. Stealing is wrong. The rational solution would be to take their toys and see how they feel.

Children can come up with all sorts of interesting ways to amuse themselves even if you left them with only the four walls in their bedroom. They have great imaginations. If the parents didn't give in to the child's wishes for half the stock of Smyths toy stores, they wouldn't need to take anything away. That's when you should've said no to the child, it's a bit late when they know they're eventually going to get their tv, playstation and sky box back eventually. They're not stupid.

Smacking is the lowest and laziest form of discipline. Mostly from a parent who is feeling out of control, worked up & frustrated and takes it out on a defenseless child.

I can think of a lot lower forms of discipline tbh. I can't speak for any other parents but I use discipline to make sure my child knows who's in control, and that him getting worked up and frustrated about it isn't going to help his defence.

That way only one of us gets worked up and frustrated, and it isn't me. My child has since learned that throwing a tantrum gets him nowhere, and when I say no, I mean no. He has also learned that if he wants something he earns it with good behaviour and completing his chores.

Czarcasm

Catari Jaguar wrote: »

It's ok to smack a 3 year old? Would you be ok with putting your child in a creche/montessori that smacks some (your??) infants because you can't "reason" with them? However do they cope in there and actually TEACH social skills to children without smacking??? After all the uproar about the Giraffe childcare/creche I seriously doubt anyone would be ok with hearing they smack 3 year olds when they get out of line/throw tantrums/behave like 3 year olds do.

Children behave differently around other people than they behave around their parents. Second of all- no, I wouldn't consider it ok for anyone else to smack a child who isn't theirs. There are numerous child protection and discipline procedures in place in creches that are there to be followed. Being a parent doesn't even come with so much as a safety manual, so the two scenarios quite frankly are incomparable.

In saying that though, I didn't put my child in a creche to be raised by strangers who I didn't know absolutely inside out and upside down. That's why I'm also on the board of management in his school, because I take an interest in my child's education and in his social development. He's quite popular in school, has plenty of friends, gets on well with all the teachers, and is doing exceptionally well academically.

He hasn't missed out by not being reared in a child farm. Every parent has that option, it's just about whether they're willing to make the sacrifices to make it happen. That's going way off topic for this thread though, but hopefully it'll avoid me having to give further and further nit picky context.

Precious flower

Cherry Blossom Girl wrote: »

This really stood out at me. I can understand the old smack if a child is seriously misbehaving but I just can't imagine a scenario where a parent would need to smack their (I'm presuming you were young?) child across the face. Unless the parent was trying to physically protect themselves. It seems shocking to me.

I was never smacked as a child. I got threatened with the wooden spoon a few times but it was never used and I never had any impression that it would be used on me no matter how much I pushed it.

I'm not entirely sure where I personally stand on the issue. I don't agree with using physical violence and fear to discipline children as I don't think it achieves anything, but then again there are scenarios where you try everything and the child still misbehaves. In those situations or if a child was in danger of hurting themselves badly I can understand parents giving them a quick smack.

I don't have kids myself but if/when I do, I don't plan on smacking them. I can't actually imagine myself physically smacking a child. The thought makes me wince. Then again, you never really know how you'll react until you're actually in that situation. I think it also depends on where you smack them. A quick little smack on the hand or wherever as a last resort would be understandable but I still can't wrap my head around the above poster being slapped across the face by her mother... (no offence!)

Well I remember the slapping I must have been around 13/14 (teenage rebellion!:p) but I can't remember what I had actually done (although my mother claims I was being a 'right brat', personally I choose to believe that I wasn't ). Well, I got over it and I don't hold it against her (and she'd tell me she wasn't sorry she did it!:p) or anything and I certainly continued to act up after that! The wooden spoon featured commonly as well and we were slapped with that on occasion although the threat of it was usually enough!:p I suppose my mother was just from that era (and I'm only 20!) where that was acceptable, my father never slapped me that was left to my mother! It is certainly a lot more hurtful a slap it just feels more personal. If I had children I would be reluctant to slap them, but sometimes I say you just are driven to that edge where nothing will maker them stop. However, as I said earlier, parents who slap their child on a regular basis, often don't have the slightest control of their child. I feel that slapping should be a last resort, your authority should be in your voice not in your hand.

Femme_Fatale

Was in a hairdressers in a shopping centre earlier today and a guy outside screamed at his kid. I wasn't even near the door and jumped at the noise of it. The receptionist was quite shaken - and said the child looked utterly terrorised.
Horrible. Even if the kid deserved a telling-off, that's just an appalling way of doing it. And there was no reason for him not to take the kid somewhere less public to admonish them.

That to me is worse than a light slap on the arse in private when the child is being absolutely impossible.

NuckingFacker

jaffacakesyum wrote: »

I don't have kids so I "don't understand" I'm sure. But smacking your kid is just lazy parenting.

Kids vary greatly, there are some very well behaved and some who I don't envy parents having to deal with.

Regardless, violence should never be the answer. What are you teaching your kids when you can just smack someone across the head when they do something bold? Fúcking ridiculous if you ask me.

Our parents never hit us but would be tough on us. Take away toys if we were bold, ground us from partys etc. It did the trick.

I used to be there too. Now I have teenage boys and I'm on e-bay looking for used water cannons and tear gas guns. Other parents keep bidding the feckin things up..

MugMugs

Catari Jaguar wrote: »

Bullsh1t. What can a smack teach you apart from "next time don't get caught." It only teaches you that the consequence for your "bold" behaviour is a smack.

What's the point of the smack? To inflict pain? To instill fear?

How about teaching some empathy or compassion or problem solving skills.

"If you take his toys, I'll smack you!" When the parent isn't around to smack, or the kid is sneaky enough he'll avoid the consequences, a victimless crime.
You should teach that if you take his toys he'll be upset. Stealing is wrong. The rational solution would be to take their toys and see how they feel.

Smacking is the lowest and laziest form of discipline. Mostly from a parent who is feeling out of control, worked up & frustrated and takes it out on a defenseless child.

Aggressive soul, ain't ya?

In my opinion and from my experience, it instills respect and discipline.

What you're saying is to reason with a child that "Stealing is wrong"

Of course it's wrong. They're also breaking their holes laughing at you as you walk away.

Kettleson

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

Was in a hairdressers in a shopping centre earlier today and a guy outside screamed at his kid. I wasn't even near the door and jumped at the noise of it. The receptionist was quite shaken - and said the child looked utterly terrorised.
Horrible. Even if the kid deserved a telling-off, that's just an appalling way of doing it. And there was no reason for him not to take the kid somewhere less public to admonish them.

That to me is worse than a light slap on the arse in private when the child is being absolutely impossible.

Yes, the fear of the Slap is worse than the slap itself. Bullies love that feeling of control. That father is going to get pay back in bundles. Poor child.