Is this a step too far?

[CurtSibling]

Originally posted by thestonesfan
And a law will magically change this? Please.

Not magically change it, but what else to you have for child abusers...?

A blind eye?

Please.

Originally posted by thestonesfan
The difference between a beating and a spanking is very easy to discern, if that's what you're getting at.

The sentiment is the same.
An act of violence is an act of violence.

If you want to add extra levels to it, that's your call, but you are splitting the issue.

You can't change the truth of the matter.

Originally posted by thestonesfan
Obviously, the way you were raised is the only way possible if one hopes to produce a decent human being.

More or less.
Loving, non-violent parents.

Perhaps in your upbringing, getting a thrashing is all well and proper, but not in my family.

Originally posted by thestonesfan
If anyone saw a father or mother beating a child, I'd hope they would step in and stop it. I would do the same thing.

At least you have one point in your favour.

Originally posted by thestonesfan
Once again, you confuse beating and spanking.

Once again, you miss the point.

Violence is violence, a child beating hit at any level, causes hurt mentally.
There are better ways to teach right and wrong than the threat of an upraised hand.

Perhaps your defence of violence is borne from the violence you experienced as a child?

If so, that is sad.

 

[CurtSibling]

Originally posted by thestonesfan
No, not says me. I'm not speaking for anyone besides myself. I didn't say it was good for me or would be good for anyone else. I said I was not harmed by it.

Well goody for you, but there are several million other children affected here, and you cannot speak for all, stones.

You are bound to lose this argument. The high ground you aim for is unattainable.
By saying you approve of child hitting and that it did not phase you is irrelevant.
Children are small humans, and all react to violence differently.

Allow me to torpedo these statements you made:

Originally posted by thestonesfan
A) This is absolutely not a matter for any government and it's a sad thing that it even comes up

Boo hoo.
The nasty government tries to legislate to the people! Shock and awe!
Well tough luck, stones, guess what? the govt has the children's future at heart!
And horror! The UK government jails parents who neglect kids or do not send them to school!

The cheek of it!
(get real, dude)

Originally posted by thestonesfan
B) I don't think an occassional spanking effects a child in the least, aside from being perhaps a very mild deterrent.

Yes and children are indentical robots who roll out of factories, with all the same mind and feelings, eh?

Again...
(get real, dude)

 

[Double Barrel]

Originally posted by CurtSibling
There are better ways to teach right and wrong than the threat of an upraised hand.

Enemy Ace, this is my question. What are those other ways?

There are those children that appear to simply be incorrigible, and any amount of pleading, reasoning, demanding, etc., will not work. (I've got a 4-year-old niece that is a perfect example.)

I agree with most of the basic premise, although I think a butt spanking with a bare hand should be a last resort (i.e. the child is running out into the street and simply won't listen to words). My wife and I have talked about this, and, although it is clear that I will end up being the "disciplinarian" with our baby boy, I do not ever want to spank him and I'll leave that to her.

I would like to think that we are setting the example as parents, but, unfortunately, our boy has to eventually end up in a play-yard with a bunch of little inbred heathens. They can have as much (or more) influence on him as we can, simply because he will spend all day with them (five days in a row at that!).

So, for instance, should he come home biting one day, what do we do when words do not work and he has no fear? What if "time-out" doesn't work, rewards do not work, explanation sessions do not work?

I ask out of sincere concern and a desire to know my options before any of these events might occur.

 

[Gothmog]

@archer_007: I happen to have a three year old son and as I said he learns much more from what I do than what I say. I'll say it again: I can easilly make my kids cry without laying one finger on them. It is the emotion that counts, but you do have to have layed the groundwork by not getting overly angry at them for little things and treating them with respect. You can't bring your anger at the world home with you, even the way you look at your kid is important. Even if he wakes you up in the middle of the night, or poops on you or whatever. One has to judge motive.

@Double Barrel: This is a bit OT, but my kid did come home having bitten a kid at school. The teacher actually asked me if we were having problems at home. I made my son understand how dissapointed I was in him and how important it was not to bite other kids. This was much easier because I do not use violence against my kids, my wife, or anyone else. I spoke to him about it at length a number of times. While he couldn't understand everything I said - he did understand enough and definitely got the emotional input. I did a bit of investigation and it turned out the kid had taken a bike my son was riding - apparently they had conflicts in the past as well. But the biting was never repeated, never.

To all those who would have the government regulate spanking I would say this. I have experience with kids who have been taken from their parents. My mother trains court advocates for such children. What is amazing is that even a kid who is being borderline abused by an alcoholic parent or drug abusing mother is very often better off with that parent than in foster homes or as a ward of the state. One must consider the consequences of taking a kid from a home, it is a last resort, it rarely ends up as a good thing. If the parent goes into treatment and/or gets conceling then the kid is almost always better off with the parent - and I'm not talking about parents who spank here. I'm talking about parents who left their kids at home while on a bender, or who broke a tiny limb. The state is not a parent, not even a bad parent. If the worst thing a parent does is a little spanking there is no way I would advocate prosecution, it's too bad that the world isn't a better place for them but at least they have a home and parents who care about them.

 

[Mrogreturns]

Wow- so much generalisation from individual experience to "most" children.

One question for those who say that small children (lets say around 3 years and under) respond to reasoning- by what mechanism do they achieve this?

 

[Incarnatur Est]

Originally posted by phoenix_night

Oh, that's a great quote.

They aren't equal to us so lets just hit them.

Well, this is the basic tenet of the pro-choice movement. Strangly enough, most of the people who think it's ok to off children because they're aren't our equals get horrified at the notion of spanking as a disciplinary measure. Go figure.

 

[Bose]

Yet again, more evidence of the death of common sense. I believe the rationale behind this thinking is that if spanking is allowed, then somebody may get abused and injured. Therefore, society must legislate a removal of all potential threat to anyone, regardless of the idiocy.

In the "hands" of the right parents, spanking works. In the hands of an idiot parent, NOTHING will work. Society simply cannot legislate responsible parenting skills.

Someone told me a story once about a class exercise in a law school where the students were given an assignment to write instructions for the completely safe use of a hammer. Impossible. The thrust of that assignment was to bring the students back to reality and emphasize that perfect safety does not exist and functional living cannot be legislated.

 

[MummyMan]

Ok, haven't been to this topic in a bit but some points must be addressed.

Well for older children this may well be true. For younger children all it teaches them is to not to do it again- if there is anybody watching.

I disagree with this. It is violence at a young age which is the most harmful to a child, physically and emotionally. Violence is simply not the answer. I will never ever harm a child. People who were abused, hit, or smacked or whatever you want to call it as a child do not deal with stress well. Child abuse (any physical violence) almost always leads to a parent that abuses their children. It pains me to see children who are neglected or abused in any way, how can you harm something as defenseless as a child? Spanking never works. Humiliation and pain just makes for a shy and socially challenged child. It causes more problems than it may perhaps solve. Also, generalization about "most" kids, Mrog, is less discounting when it is clear that in many cases of violence, violence was prevalent in childhood.

 

[Mrogreturns]

Originally posted by MummyMan
Ok, haven't been to this topic in a bit but some points must be addressed.

I disagree with this. It is violence at a young age which is the most harmful to a child, physically and emotionally. Violence is simply not the answer. I will never ever harm a child. People who were abused, hit, or smacked or whatever you want to call it as a child do not deal with stress well. Child abuse (any physical violence) almost always leads to a parent that abuses their children. It pains me to see children who are neglected or abused in any way, how can you harm something as defenseless as a child? Spanking never works. Humiliation and pain just makes for a shy and socially challenged child. It causes more problems than it may perhaps solve. Also, generalization about "most" kids, Mrog, is less discounting when it is clear that in many cases of violence, violence was prevalent in childhood.

Is there a distinction between child abuse and legitimate physical discipline? Is frequent beatings on the flimsiest pretext the same as a slap on the wrist after the child has run towards a road? I aggree that the former situation is highly detrimental- I`m not aware of evidence that the latter is detrimental. If I see such evidence then I`ll weigh it.

Punishment is a form of learning- yes it most certainly can have adverse effects but this does not mean that it must have adverse effects. In general terms punishment is not the most efficient form of learning- but in some circumstances it is. Where the lesson must be taught quickly and the child lacks reasoning ability (the two often go together as working memory is poor is young children) then punshment is effective.


It should be noted (as Gothmog has alluded to) that punishment doesn`t necessarilly involve physical pain- a sharp rebuke may be effective in many cases, but some children are not sensitive to such measures. Some might argue that the style of upbringing will dertermine the child`s sensitivity, but this ignores issues of temperament.

I would agree that many, perhaps most, parents are not aware of the wider range of ways to discourage unwanted behaviour and consequently use physical punishment more than they need to.

 

[Archer 007]

Originally posted by Gothmog
@archer_007: I happen to have a three year old son and as I said he learns much more from what I do than what I say. I'll say it again: I can easilly make my kids cry without laying one finger on them. It is the emotion that counts, but you do have to have layed the groundwork by not getting overly angry at them for little things and treating them with respect. You can't bring your anger at the world home with you, even the way you look at your kid is important. Even if he wakes you up in the middle of the night, or poops on you or whatever. One has to judge motive.

Well, im not saying to spank the child if he moves, and i advocate trying any other means possible. The fact is that some children just dont understand anything else.

 

[MummyMan]

Simply put, i don't believe in any kind of physical disciplinary measures.

 

[Mrogreturns]

Originally posted by MummyMan
Simply put, i don't believe in any kind of physical disciplinary measures.

I respect your beliefs, but I would not agree that such beliefs should be the basis for a law governing the upbringing of children.

 

[MummyMan]

What proof is there that physical displine is beneficial to the child?

 

[Mrogreturns]

Originally posted by MummyMan
What proof is there that physical displine is beneficial to the child?

Well I could equally ask "what proof is there that any discipline is beneficial to the child?" The benefit arises from learning adaptive behaviours.

 

[Pongui]

Originally posted by Mrogreturns
I would agree that many, perhaps most, parents are not aware of the wider range of ways to discourage unwanted behaviour and consequently use physical punishment more than they need to.

An anecdote: Yojo is the name I gave a queer looking wide eyed little idol carved of exotic hardwood. I believe he came from Haiti. Yojo sits upon a high shelf, his woody back turned to the room. My wife and I made a big show of fearing Yojo, in front of our boy. Sometimes we'd spin Yojo around, with his googly eyes popping out, and shiver and shudder and carry on like this until our 2-year-old's face was buried in his mama's throat, one arm clenching her tight, the other waving frantically away away Yojo. The idea was to use Yojo as a sentinel, later, on occasion: "Now be good. Yojo is watching."

Last week, my son came gravely up to me, with something in his hands. He had Yojo! He presented this awful doll, and said, (Japanese) "Ee ko Yojo" which means I'm supposed to pet Yojo on the head. I hesitated, but did it. Next, I had to "Dakko Yojo", which means carry the freaky little idol and cuddle it. Everybody needs affection.

So much for my clever plan.

 

[funxus]

Originally posted by archer_007


Rose sharply

http://www.cin.org/archives/cinjub/200208/0106.html

Highest crime rates in Europe.

And where's the connection? I'm sure there are people who'd blame the crime rates on the high taxes too.

By the time a child is old enough to commit a crime (destroying something, shoplifting) they are old enough to be affected by other punishments than beatings/spanking. Also, here I think it's more common that a criminal was brought up in a family where he/she was hit and not the other way around, although I don't have any proof of this.

 

[Dralix]

All this anecdotal evidence is great, but what seems to be missed by most is that there is more than one effective way to raise a child. Also, children don't come with instruction manuals. They aren't all the same, with a "road map to peace" that every parent can follow to perfection. Parents figure things out as they go along, and different children respond differently to education, discipline, etc. Some parents spank, some don't. I'm not going to say that either one is wrong (even if the rest of the post may suggest otherwise). What is wrong, IMO, is parents who don't discipline at all. Who just let their children do whatever they damn well please with no regard for others.

Originally posted by Gothmog
I'll say it again: I can easilly make my kids cry without laying one finger on them.

Do you think this is any better than a little spank on the bum? The damage is the same. Some might say worse. Emotional scars run very deep.

Originally posted by CurtSibling
To all those people who expound beating children, remember this:

Can an adult always be relied on to stop themselves from losing control when hitting a child? Hmmmm?
What about stress, and other factors? Hmmmm?
What if a parent 'snaps'? Hmmmm?

None of the above have any place in discipline. But still, it doesn't matter if the parent believes in a spank on the bum or not. If a parent loses control while disciplining a child, it might result in abuse. It could mean a child with a broken rib, a child not fed for three days, or a child locked in a closet for a week. The problem isn't limited to parents who spank.

Originally posted by Gothmog
Hey, we're getting a bit off topic here. The question being discussed isn't whether people should hit their children, it's whether the government should outlaw spanking. This is more a question about the roll of government than the roll of a parent.

I think the two are intertwined. One of the government's jobs is to protect the citizens. There are two camps on the spanking issue (as related to parenting): one says that it is not harmful to the children, the other says it is. Surely if spanking is harmful, then the government should step in, under the guise of protecting the citizens.

Originally posted by phoenix_night


Oh, that's a great quote.

They aren't equal to us so lets just hit them.

Why don't we just go and beat up some disabled people, I mean, they aren't physically equal to us are they?

Or do you mean they aren't as intelligent? Lets just pick on some mentally ill people is it?

Comments like this show a total misunderstanding of discipline or spanking as compared to beating. It hardly merits a response.

Originally posted by CurtSibling
The sentiment is the same.
An act of violence is an act of violence.

A spank on the bum is not an act of violence. If it becomes violence, it is no longer discipline.

Originally posted by Gothmog
@Double Barrel - I have experience, being a father of two young boys. And as I said previously - they read your emotions and emotional responces very well. You are teaching them that the appropriate action to associate with anger is violence (i.e. when you get angry you take it out through violence)

If the spank is a response to anger, then it's not discipline. Any form of response from getting angry with a child is wrong. Discipline is about love, not anger.

@Sean Lindstrom: I don't know how old your children are, but you seem to me to be a fine parent. I hope that your children grow up to be the same. However, I think you have to realize that what works in your situation won't necessarily work for all.


Now, I know that a lot of that sounded like the ramblings of a spanker, and indeed I was spanked when I was a child. Contrary to what MummyMan may expect, I handle stress very well. It did not turn me into a shy and socially challenged kid. It did not make me violent. It also did not turn me into a child abuser or even one who would spank his own children. Of course I don't plan to have children, but if I did, I would like to raise them without spanking. With discipline, yes. But not spanking.

So what am I trying to say? There are different ways to raise a child. More than one successful method. I think that spanking and not spanking are equally valid. Abuse is always wrong, but spanking is not the same as abuse.

 

[Archer 007]

Originally posted by funxus


And where's the connection? I'm sure there are people who'd blame the crime rates on the high taxes too.

By the time a child is old enough to commit a crime (destroying something, shoplifting) they are old enough to be affected by other punishments than beatings/spanking. Also, here I think it's more common that a criminal was brought up in a family where he/she was hit and not the other way around, although I don't have any proof of this.

I was just answering FL2's question

 

[thestonesfan]

Originally posted by phoenix_night
Oh, that's a great quote.

They aren't equal to us so lets just hit them.

How in the hell do you get that out of what I said?

Why don't we just go and beat up some disabled people, I mean, they aren't physically equal to us are they?

Please, Einstein, point out where I said we should beat up anyone.

Or do you mean they aren't as intelligent? Lets just pick on some mentally ill people is it?

Like yourself?

And stop saying the government shouldn't have a say. They do. They are there to protect the people of the country they govern amongst other things, no matter how young they are. [/B]

The government should not have a say. I don't know why you would want another authority to instruct you on how to conduct this aspect of your life.

 

[thestonesfan]

Originally posted by phoenix_night
Are you suggesting the laws will simply be ignored? A new law would certainly reduce incidents of spanking and would certainly not encourage it.

What is it with you and twisting everything I say into something you can argue with? Child abuse is illegal already, but abusers don't care about the law, plain and simple.

It would reduce it in both the short and long term.

I imagine it would reduce spanking in public, something I have never seen in my life, but no doubt one of the major issues facing society today.

Now I actually think about it, the above quote sounds astonishingly stupid, are you suggesting we live in some sort of anarchic state where the government is just some sort of comedy side show and the laws are nothing more than recommendations?

Are you suggesting that everything you don't personally agree with be outlawed? Wait, of course you are.

Since you apparently lack the mental facilities to deduce what I actually am suggesting, I'll clarify it once again.

A) It is not the government's place to tell us how to raise children.

B) A swat on the rear is overrated both as a form of discipline and as something that damages a child, and is certainly not abuse.