The Slapping Debate.

hottstuff

tallaght01 wrote: »

It's interesting that you're so defensive when anybody has (in your mind) commented on your situation. However, you're willing to call Mairt a window shopper, whatever that is, without knowing a lot about his situation.

Perhaps he's tried to talk his mum into leaving. perhaps he's even tried to talk her into pressing charges. Do you know what he's tried?

You are aware, though, that you can't easily press charges on someone else's behalf?

Off topic and not related , only reason i mentioned it was as i have already said he used it as a reference to how domestic abuse and his father effected him.
When you start making people out to be bad tempered , aggresive & a bad parent at the end of it all , do you expect a civil (please dont offend me) reply? lol
And if you want to go down this route then , yes he could and should have done something about it, for his mothers sake than anything else.
Some rapists and paedophiles are protected by their families , should we think it is ok to allow them continue their life just because it happened many years ago.?
Just because some one goes through a sober period , doesn't mean they won't return to old ways.

*Page*

hottstuff wrote: »

Well thats an assumption , i love the way all of you assume you know every situation when its used and you believe there is a different way to do it.
Read my post above , i dont ever automatically smack , so speak for someone else.

you also like to asume that i grew up an emotionaly recluse child

you seem to assume everything.

Zulu

I'd suggest adding him to your "ignore" list *Page*

kleefarr

Shame you couldn't take a photo to prove what was happening.

Oh...wait. Not even parents are allowed to take pics of their own kids now!


Crazy world.

hottstuff

*Page* wrote: »

you also like to asume that i grew up an emotionaly recluse child

you seem to assume everything.

Well you did say you were smacked once by your father and you would never forget it.
Unless smack on the hand = Punch in your books.

hottstuff

Zulu wrote: »

I'd suggest adding him to your "ignore" list *Page*

Is she not an adult then no?

Nevyn

hottstuff have been given a time out for a week.

Can we please stop the sweeping generalizations that parents who do smack what so ever at any stage
are child abusers, bad people and bad parents who do not love their child.

This is unfair, untrue and against the charter of this forum.

Nevyn

Let's face it phyically disaplining and chastising a child has been used for hundreds of years and not smacking children is fairly recent and in this country is not even two generations old.

My grandmother would tell my mother to give me a good smack and she did.
Indeed being the eldest of five I bore the brunt of my mother's frustrations with the wooden spoon.

By the time I was 12 my parents decided that they didnt want to hit thier children any more and set about looking for a different way.
They read several of the new wave of parenting books and did classes and changed the way they parented thier children. None of my younger siblings remember ever been hit with the wooden spoon.

My parents evenualy went on to run parenting classes in the evenings for all the local primary schools in the 3 parishes.

So I have had both styles of parenting growing up and there were times that I would have prefered a slap to the 20 mins of emotional grilling about what i had done wrong.

I don't beat or hit my children as a punishment.
When they were small and unable to be reasoned with I did use a smack on the bum or the hand to re enforce what was not allowed.

Once they hit 3/4 then it was time for other methods, esp as teachers can not smack or hit in school children have to be used to other forums of disapline and punishment.

But not hitting and not smacking children is fairly new as a parenting method goes.

l3LoWnA

I smacked my little one on the hand last night for doing something extremely bold that she knew was both dangerous and not allowed. She did it in rage (she has an awful temper, passed on from her father I'd imagine who is a violent, suicidal, woman-beating, scumbag!)

Anyways, she almost broke the PC after me asking her to stop, and so I smacked her (in a controlled way and only once) on the back of the hand. Well, she roared crying, told me she hated me and the tears were coming in bucket loads. I felt so so guilty that I had just inflicted pain on a helpless 3 year old to be honest. I have rarely smacked her before, I think only once that I can recall.

I don't really know what my stance is on the whole thing anymore. When my daughter already has a pretty bad temper, she kicks or hits me when she doesn't get her own way (especially in the evenings when she's tired - I can't give her time-outs or discipline her at all to be honest, as we are now living in my family home, and anytime I've tried time-outs etc my mother over-rules me and goes and cuddles my daughter and tells me it's unfair?) I don't really know if teaching her that inflicting pain is necessary in life is a good idea! I think every child and situation is different though....I know a light smack on a rare occasion, and only because of extreme boldness in a child who knows right from wrong isn't always a bad thing though.

Nevyn

It sounds like you need a parenting plan l3LoWnA and to have your mother back you up rather then be undermining you.

l3LoWnA

Thaedydal wrote: »

It sounds like you need a parenting plan l3LoWnA and to have your mother back you up rather then be undermining you.

I have a plan! It worked like a dream befoer I moved home and now everything is gone ar$eways, my child is getting more and more spolied as the days roll on (living with four adults who all love her and want the best for her in their own way doesn't help) and doesn't understand who she should be respecting. It's an awful situation and it doesn't look like we'll be out of it for at least two years.

Oh, and talking to my mother is not an option. I've tried that, over and over and over again. She will never see me as a mother myself, but always as HER child who should do thing her way or no way. Trying to get her to view things differently is absolutely imposible!

My mother was a very bad mother. Only this morning, myself and my sister (who are both happy but could have achieved more in life so far with a little encouragement) discussed it. We both know we're adults now and what we acheive from here on in is down to ourselves and no-one else. But our mother never put any sort of emphasis on discipline, respect (for oneself) or achieving anything in life and it totally rubbed off on all of her offspring Now she is almost forcing me to raise my child her way and it's bloody impossible to get around it! We lived away from home for 2 years and everyone who knew my duaghter said she was an absolute credit to me, well mannered, polite, happy, bubbly, caring and sociable. Now (we're back in the fmaily home about 18 months) I'd imagine, people could view her as being a little bit spoiled which is a terrible thing for her personally

*Page*

hottstuff wrote: »

Well you did say you were smacked once by your father and you would never forget it.
Unless smack on the hand = Punch in your books.

No i was smacked on the legs not punched... there you go assuming again

Zulu

Thaedydal wrote: »

Let's face it phyically disaplining and chastising a child has been used for hundreds of years and not smacking children is fairly recent and in this country is not even two generations old.

By parents and the state - don't forget. It was also grand for a teacher to leather the bejeasus out of a child for not remembering a verb.

My grandmother would tell my mother to give me a good smack and she did.
Indeed being the eldest of five I bore the brunt of my mother's frustrations with the wooden spoon.

I too was slapped, and I personally believe I had two of the best parents a child could possibly wish for! I do not resent them for discipling me with a slap. However they were raised in a different time, with a different school of parenting - however, just like a teacher hitting a child - that doesn't make it right now. To be honest, it wasn't until recently that I felt this way. As I was slapped, and as I consider myself and my brothers and sisters to be a productive members of society, I felt that it was ok to slap in moderation. Perhaps it is. BUT i don't believe it's needed. I honestly believe now that you don't need to slap a child, and thus, if you don't need to, why would you?
I also believe the law should apply to EVERY member of our society and PROTECT every member of our society, not just some privileged ones.

None of my younger siblings remember ever been hit with the wooden spoon.My parents evenualy went on to run parenting classes in the evenings for all the local primary schools in the 3 parishes.

DO you believe that they were raised any worse than you? If not, then does that stand to defend against slapping a child?

I don't beat or hit my children as a punishment.

I wouldn't suggest you do, and I apologise if you felt I was chastising you personally.

But not hitting and not smacking children is fairly new as a parenting method goes.

True, but its also farily new that teachers couldn't hit, and we all agree that that was wrong.
I'd also point out as food for taught, that I'm sure some teachers at the time would have argued against removing corporal punishment, and would have feared classes getting out of control.

GreeBo

*Page* wrote: »

you also like to asume that i grew up an emotionaly recluse child

you seem to assume everything.

Its not much of an assumption, you cry at the end of every post!

GreeBo

Its not a Black and White situation though.
Sure it was wrong for a teacher to slap a child for not remembering a verb, but was it wrong for a teacher to slap a child for punching another child?
I dont think so.

In the same way that some adults are way out of line in their behaviour towards other adults, some are out of line in their behaviour towards children. These adults may be parents or teachers or not.

Because some people die during heart surgery we dont ban heart surgery.
We should be dealing with the people who beat children and "fixing" them, not covering up the situation by banning corporal punishment.

would have feared classes getting out of control.

Have you been in a school lately? They are out of control.

Zulu

GreeBo wrote: »

Its not much of an assumption, you cry at the end of every post!

Pointless.

Its not a Black and White situation though.

Well it would be if a law was introduced like in Sweden.

...but was it wrong for a teacher to slap a child for punching another child?

Absolutely. And this is where we won't ever agree.

In the same way that some adults are way out of line in their behaviour towards other adults, some are out of line in their behaviour towards children. These adults may be parents or teachers or not.

Sorry I kinda loose your point here.

Because some people die during heart surgery we dont ban heart surgery.

ok not really the same, but.... Of course we don't, but we don't opt for surgery unless it's the last option. And we don't ban the surgery but we may strike off the surgeon. Of course if the surgery is found to be irrelevant, like say female circumcision, then we do ban it.... But this is all opt-in by consenting adults, not inflicted upon someone to teach them a lesson.

We should be dealing with the people who beat children and "fixing" them, not covering up the situation by banning corporal punishment.

What? Sorry but that is preposterous. Whould you also apply that logic to murder? (ie: "fix" the murders but don't outlaw murder!) Look, you ban it to protect the victim first, then you go about treating the cause (education and rehabilitation). Would you not agree?

Have you been in a school lately? They are out of control.

I'm sorry but that is an unfounded sweeping generalisation. I do work with children in schools, and while I've come across some classes that are *ahem* rowdy, to be so sensationalist is unfair and disrespectful to the teachers who are doing an excellent job. Schools are not out of control.

GreeBo

Zulu wrote: »

Well it would be if a law was introduced like in Sweden.

Well obviously if you introduce a black and white law it will be a black and white situation.

Zulu wrote: »

Sorry I kinda loose your point here.

My point is that just because some people cant control themselves when it comes to corporal punishment doesnt mean it should be illegal.
Look at alcohol for an immediate comparison.

Zulu wrote: »

ok not really the same, but.... Of course we don't, but we don't opt for surgery unless it's the last option. And we don't ban the surgery but we may strike off the surgeon.

We use surgery when its the best, most effective option. Its most definitely not a last ditch option.

Zulu wrote: »

not inflicted upon someone to teach them a lesson.

like withholding a favourite toy for example? Im still waiting for your method of control that doesnt inflict *any* form of pain.

Zulu wrote: »

What? Sorry but that is preposterous. Whould you also apply that logic to murder? (ie: "fix" the murders but don't outlaw murder!) Look, you ban it to protect the victim first, then you go about treating the cause (education and rehabilitation). Would you not agree?

You compare corporal punishment to murder and Im the one being preposterous? Obviously murder is illegal, but if you are going to treat the murderer either way, what difference does it make if its illegal or not? Anyway, this is totally off the point.

Zulu wrote: »

I'm sorry but that is an unfounded sweeping generalisation. I do work with children in schools, and while I've come across some classes that are *ahem* rowdy, to be so sensationalist is unfair and disrespectful to the teachers who are doing an excellent job. Schools are not out of control.

So your unfounded sweeping generalization that they are ok is ok but mine is not? Explain why please.

Zulu

GreeBo wrote: »

Well obviously if you introduce a black and white law it will be a black and white situation.

True. I guess in this instance, it a case of: you either believe hitting someone else is ok, or you don't. I don't believe hitting someone else is ok.

My point is that just because some people cant control themselves when it comes to corporal punishment doesnt mean it should be illegal.
Look at alcohol for an immediate comparison.

Why dont we just deal with the topic at hand? It's not a valid example.

We use surgery when its the best, most effective option. Its most definitely not a last ditch option.

again, it's not really valid.

Im still waiting for your method of control that doesnt inflict *any* form of pain.

Well you can remain waiting. Discussing my method of control (whether intentional or not) is just creating a straw-man. It's not the issue.

You compare corporal punishment to murder and Im the one being preposterous?

Sorry, you appeared to have missed my point: I was pointing out how your logic was clearly flawed.

So your unfounded sweeping generalization that they are ok is ok but mine is not? Explain why please.

Well my statement wasn't unfounded. I have proof and facts to back my statement up:

http://www.amcham.ie/article.cfm?idarticle=312

"1) A Quality Education System that ensures that citizens are equipped to acquire, use, and share knowledge. The IMD World Competitiveness Yearbook 2004 ranks Ireland´s education system 5th from 60 countries surveyed for meeting the needs of a competitive economy. They also rank Ireland 2nd, behind Canada, for having the highest percentage of 25 - 34 year olds to have attained at least tertiary education."

http://www.rte.ie/business/2007/1031/competitiveness.html

"Ireland was also ranked fifth in the world for the quality of its primary education system, seventh for the quality of its higher level education system"


Have you?

StaffHead

nesf wrote: »

My point is that if you had two large dogs who were fighting and where one of them had locked their jaws around the other one's neck then you might have to resort to violence to get it to stop before one of them was killed/seriously hurt. Not a day to day thing, or a way to raise an animal but something that might just come up. Similar to how you might hurt a child pulling them away from a road etc. Occasionally you might need to hurt a child or animal for their own good, though this kind of situation would be very rare and wouldn't justify smacking as a regular part of discipline in either case.

Lock Jaw is a myth - Google it!

GreeBo

StaffHead wrote: »

Lock Jaw is a myth - Google it!

Im thinking "locked" is an adjective and not a noun in this case.
In any case, way to miss the point.

*Page*

GreeBo wrote: »

Its not much of an assumption, you cry at the end of every post!

ha just seen this...

Greebo dont worry they arent tears...

no no that is a laugh...

you are so emotionally confused you seemed to have mixed up laughing and crying...

interesting....

Zulu

Zulu wrote: »

Have you?

I didn't think so :rolleyes:

Vas_Guy

Yesterday I was in Tescos and just as i was leaving the store which is in a shopping centre there was a lady with 2 young children, teh children ran off as soon as they left the store and teh lady called them to return, they ignored her and kept running.

She then went after them and caught them and gave them 4 smacks on the backside, none of the children cried and did not run away after than and walked beside her.

While she was smacking them a man who was pasing said "you know you cannot do that any more" she just looked at him.

I think the man should have minded his own business as he did not see the children disobeying their mother, they did not cry and walked after that, do not get me wrong i'm against violence with children but a smack is sometimes needed, they were not hurt after the smack and it enforced the rule not to disobey your parents and she did not go OTT on the smacking.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Vas_Guy wrote: »

Yesterday I was in Tescos and just as i was leaving the store which is in a shopping centre there was a lady with 2 young children, teh children ran off as soon as they left the store and teh lady called them to return, they ignored her and kept running.

She then went after them and caught them and gave them 4 smacks on the backside, none of the children cried and did not run away after than and walked beside her.

While she was smacking them a man who was pasing said "you know you cannot do that any more" she just looked at him.

I think the man should have minded his own business as he did not see the children disobeying their mother, they did not cry and walked after that, do not get me wrong i'm against violence with children but a smack is sometimes needed, they were not hurt after the smack and it enforced the rule not to disobey your parents and she did not go OTT on the smacking.

We get a Yes vote and he'll soon be right: most of Europe frowns on it and Scandanavia fiens you for it.

BostonB

That implies hes not right now. I wasn't aware of that. There was a big thread on this before, which I can't find, and it seems all the research (dubious as some of it was on both sides) including in countries where its been banned, (abuse of kids on the rise etc) doesn't really have a definite answer for or against it, other than all things in moderation. I'm on the fence, really. Different punishments work differently with different kids. But kids copy what you do. So they might slap other kids. Also if you want to stop a kid from slapping other kids, slapping them doesn't seem to make a lot of sense in that situation does it. But theres know doubt a rare slap can be useful to get their immediate attention in a dangerous/difficult situation. Best to avoid.

redspider

Disciplining kids is difficult, and there is a big difference between 'gentle' smacking and beating, the latter which is what the laws were brought out for in terms of protecting children. However, many parents can deliver the same correction of behaviour with other means, with a sternly pointed finger, threats of other punishments (no treats, removal of toys, putting a kid in a corner, etc), so its all in terms of the delivery and sticking with the punishment and not 'caving in' when those eyes and faces flutter up at you later on. So most parents can get by without smacking and all can. At the same time, I dont think gentle smacking leaves any permanent mental scars on any kids.

Its true that parents can lose their temper and this is when smacking and unnecessary beatings can occur, and many parents actually need to learn how to parent properly, reading good books, etc. There are parents out there who are not fit to be parents. We dont have a parental education in this country which is mandatory and perhaps we should! It would be better than those "emergency booklets" being sent into every home.

Redspider

faceman

Vas_Guy wrote: »

I think the man should have minded his own business as he did not see the children disobeying their mother, they did not cry and walked after that, do not get me wrong i'm against violence with children but a smack is sometimes needed, they were not hurt after the smack and it enforced the rule not to disobey your parents and she did not go OTT on the smacking.

Fair play to him.

out of curiousity, at what point should someone not mind their own business in that situation?

Zulu

Vas_Guy wrote: »

do not get me wrong i'm against violence with children but a smack is sometimes needed

Do you not see the total contradiction?

Clearly you are not against violence. You just advocated limited violence.

bazwaldo

Well said Redspider. When I first became a parent I hadn't a clue. Very little experience of babies, never changed a nappy and definitely didn't know anything about disciplining a child. So a few years into parenting, my youngest has been given a couple of smacks to the bottom. Nothing hard, but you do lose your head with them sometimes and its snaps them out of whatever they should not be doing. You do feel guilty afterwards and in retrospect you generally feel you could have handled it differently. I've read many parenting books and some advocate a gentle smack and some say never. Whos to know?

However from experience, I have learned not to smack (not that I don't threaten the odd time) and my other children haven't received one yet. Now I try to use other methods as mentioned above (taking toys, removing child from area into a quiet spot/time out step, counting to five is a great one). A small smack to the bottom is harmless if thats all it is and can help protect the child from doing something they shouldn't, such as run away on a busy street etc., but its best avoided if possible. In supermarkets in particular I've seen awful behaviour from parents, smacking and 'f'-ing and 'b'-ing to the child when the child really hasn't done that much wrong. You'd worry for them when they actually do something very bold and when they are not in public.

So, I agree that some parenting education should be in schools. An hour a week isn't much and would be more useful then doing civics or the like.

Zulu

faceman wrote: »

out of curiosity, at what point should someone not mind their own business in that situation?

I wonder - does the speed they ran away at increase the use of permissible force? Or perhaps if they ran away swearing, can you leather the shit out of them??