Whats allowed as far as corporal punishment for your kids?

[Thiebear]

I personally don't believe in hitting your child...but that is my personal choice. I think you can discipline effectively in other ways' date=' as people in this thread have testified to. My son is only a little over 6 months old but I have already thought of non-physical ways in which to punish him if needed. I also plan on having him say, "yes sir", and "no sir". I want him to be very respectful to his parents and others.....I think this can be achieved without hitting him. :2cents:[/quote']

I found Mr. Craig or Ms. Lisa works really good also. Its first name that they know but still courteous...

[G-Prime]

As someone on this board that is relatively young and not too far away from the days when this kind of thing affected me, I'll tell you right now that hitting, spanking, beating, whatever, does not work. If anything, it just pissed me off. Sure, if my mom or dad ever spanked me, I'd behave. Then I'd hold it against them. I'd use it as justification to do more stupid ****. I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying it's what I did, and I have a feeling that many kids would have the similar mindset.

Now, when I got older (i.e. last 4-5 years), my parents obviously couldn't spank me. I was just a little smaller than my dad and ten times the size of my mom. Plus it'd be weird. But there were a couple times where since they couldn't spank me they tried to hit me. My mom has slapped me a couple of times, and I just laughed and walked away. My dad and I had a huge fight once and he pushed me through one of the kinds of closet doors that runs on a track. I knocked the door off the track and fell through into the closet. I jumped up, pinned him to the wall, and told him that if he ever touched me again I'd break every single bone in his body. He hasn't laid a finger on me since.

The moral is, when your kids are small, don't spank them. It'll just make them behave worse. When your kids are big, don't touch them. They'll beat your ass.

The moral is don't be a jerk off to your parents like you've obviously been. ;p

[G-Prime]

I was never hit or spanked as a child and I will never hit or spank my children. There are better and more effective ways to discipline. Taking away privileges will always work, you just have to figure out what the child values. To me, parenting is about love, support and guidance. Making your child physically afraid of you is the antithisis of those things.

Wheever someone posts this subject, I see a lot of responses saying: "Well, my Dad smacked me a ton but he did it because he loved me and I turned out all right, so it must be ok to spank." This is a psychologically interesting phenomenom. We love our parents, and no one wants to think ill of them, so it is very difficult to think that any of their parenting methods were more abusive than they needed to be. It is more comforting for us to think that the physical punishment must have been necessary for our development than it is to think that our parents either 1) kind of didn't know what they were doing, or 2) were (in any way) cruel to us. Unfortunately, this perpetuates the cycle to the next generation too.

PS - I do not beleive that any of the pro-spanking posters here are deliberately cruel and I think you all have the best motivations.

ok hippy

[G-Prime]

I personally believe in spankings.. In SOME circumstances. I'm not talking about violently ravaging a poor child with a belt or paddle. But a good lesson can be taught that there is consequences for your actions and removing a toy doesn't do that. I don't care what the hippies say. Didn't work for me, didn't work for my son, or my any of the other children in my family..

If a child does something that endangers himself and the others around him, especially if he knows better, then he needs to be spanked.

If your kid is doing something stupid and he's unaware of that well then no, you can't spank him.. Educate first. Explain why what they are doing is wrong, and let them know what you expect of them. If they do it anyway (whatever it is) then they must be made aware that they will face consequences..

It's like that out in the world.. Now with my method, I've only ever had to spank my son three times. He's a great confident young boy, who's respectful and considerate.

[Predicto]

I personally believe in spankings.. In SOME circumstances. I'm not talking about violently ravaging a poor child with a belt or paddle. But a good lesson can be taught that there is consequences for your actions and removing a toy doesn't do that. I don't care what the hippies say. Didn't work for me, didn't work for my son, or my any of the other children in my family..

If a child does something that endangers himself and the others around him, especially if he knows better, then he needs to be spanked.

If your kid is doing something stupid and he's unaware of that well then no, you can't spank him.. Educate first. Explain why what they are doing is wrong, and let them know what you expect of them. If they do it anyway (whatever it is) then they must be made aware that they will face consequences..

It's like that out in the world.. Now with my method, I've only ever had to spank my son three times. He's a great confident young boy, who's respectful and considerate.

Why is physical punishment the only "consequence" that can be effective? My children care about different things, but every child cares about something.

[DarkLadyRaven]

ok hippy

How is he a hippy if it works for him more power to him. I have friends that were never spanked ever, One goes to MIT, another is worker on her masters at age 21, another was a very bright kid who graduated from TJ. I see other kids however who were spanked moderatley at my church and they are Hells Angels little evil snotts. I think more goes into discipline than just spanking alone.But I dont have to worry about it for my childhood taught me I was not meant to have children so...

[DeanCollins]

ok hippy

whatever you say bubba

[zoony]

I'm not sure if I will spank my kids or not... all I hope is that I have happy and well-adjusted kids and that I make a good parent.

I see pros and cons to both methods. Hopefully I will know what to do when the time comes....

[Chopper Dave]

The moral is don't be a jerk off to your parents like you've obviously been. ;p

Please refrain from commenting if you don't know half a **** about what you're commenting on.

Thanks.

[zoony]

Please refrain from commenting if you don't know half a **** about what you're commenting on.

Thanks.

dude there would be like 1 post a day in the tailgate :laugh:

[DCNightHawk]

People need to discipline their children better. To many little kids are brats. Spanking should be used more often and not this Time-out stuff where kids go to their rooms and play with their huge selection of toys for a half an hour, somthing that is supposed to be a punishment!

[jpillian]

The problem is not "to spank, or not to spank."

The problem (IMHO) is parents not giving their children the attention they crave and deserve. It seems to me a lot of misbehaving is caused by a hunger for attention, and very rarely a desire to purely do wrong (especially at a younger age). If parents would start thinking a little bit less about what THEY want, and a little more about what Junior needs, I believe this would go a long ways towards shoring up the discipline problems we see today.

Towards the point of discipling children when they are actually acting in willful defiance -- a spanking can be a great attention getter. However, it's certainly not a cure-all. You shouldn't use it too early or too young -- because then (again, IMO) it educates them that hitting others is acceptable, before they are really able to discern what discipline is all about. If you use it when they're too old, it shows you are out of touch with them -- and will de-legitimize whatever forms of correction you proceed to use.

I don't think there is a "pat" answer to the question of spanking (pardon the pun). We use it with our 3 year old only in the rare case where he is in willful defiance to our authority as parents (i.e., he is not responding to other forms of discipline). If you're angry with the child, you need to wait until you've calmed down. Then you need to explain to the child what they've done, why it's wrong, and as a result you are going to have to spank. When the spanking is done, you need to comfort the child, assure him that he is forgiven, and put it behind both of you.

This is the model that was used by my parents -- and used correctly, only had to be used very rarely.

In the end, honestly, I believe it's "to each his own" as to how to discipline the child. I'm sure different methods work for different kids and different parents.

But if you don't give them the attention they deserve, whatever form of discipline you choose will be ineffective.

:2cents:

[Thinking Skins]

This thread has focused on the wrong thing. I'm not really concerned with the 'spanking' aspect of punishing children. Thats been debated over and over again, and we're just seeing the same few comments recycling.

THe question I have is about other forms of punishment that involve phyiscal pain, but not necessarily pain from being hit. A prime example is making the child lean against the wall for half an hour, or making them stand on one leg.

What are the opinions on parents who induce these types of punishments on children? Are they thrown into the same batch of parents who spank their children?

[DeanCollins]

http://www.drspock.com/article/0,1510,3927+AgeY1_2+cbx_behavior,00.html

What Spanking Accomplishes

by Dr. Benjamin Spock

reviewed and revised by Robert Needlman, M.D., F.A.A.P.

For many years now there has been a debate about whether spanking children is a good thing or a bad thing. Most parents report that they use spanking, at least some of the time.

Most--but not all--pediatricians and psychologists agree that spanking is not a desirable or particularly effective form of discipline. For example, the American Academy of Pediatrics' official policy says, in part:

"Despite its common acceptance, spanking is a less effective strategy than timeout or removal of privileges for reducing undesired behavior in children. Although spanking may immediately reduce or stop an undesired behavior, its effectiveness decreases with subsequent use. The only way to maintain the initial effect of spanking is to systematically increase the intensity with which it is delivered, which can quickly escalate into abuse. Thus, at best, spanking is only effective when used in selective infrequent situations."

(American Academy of Pediatrics, April 1998. For full text, go to http://www.aap.org/policy/re9740.html.)

Certainly, many perfectly healthy, well-adjusted people were spanked as children. It also seems clear that many children who are never spanked grow up fine as well. The research does not show a huge effect of spanking by itself.

The much more important issues are whether discipline is effective and whether the parent-child relationship is a healthy one. That said, we would agree with the Academy of Pediatrics in advising against spanking for several reasons:

Reasons to avoid physical punishment

Imagine that your six-year-old has taken a toy from a friend's house without asking. This form of stealing is not the sign of a future criminal career, but it is a sign that he has not yet learned an important lesson about property. When you tell your child that what he did was wrong, you would like him to feel a little sorry or a little guilty. These uncomfortable feelings can resurface, when needed, to remind him that stealing is wrong.

Suppose instead that you give your child a spanking. Afterward, he is more likely to feel resentful and angry at you. In the future, when tempted, his only thought will be to avoid being caught. If the spanking is hard enough, he might also feel afraid of you. None of these feelings will help him, in the long run, be the kind of person you want him to be.

What spanking really teaches

Spanking teaches children that the larger, stronger person has the power to get his way, whether or not he is in the right. Some spanked children then feel quite justified in beating up on smaller ones. The American tradition of spanking may be one reason that there is much more violence in our country than in any other comparable nation.

Physical force vs. reasoning

When an executive in an office or a foreman in a shop is dissatisfied with the work of an employee, he doesn't rush in shouting and whack him on the seat of his pants. He explains in a respectful manner what he would like, and in most cases this is enough. Children are not that different in their wish to be responsible and to please. They react well to praise and high expectations.

In the olden days, most children were spanked on the assumption that this was necessary to make them behave. In the 20th century, as parents and professionals have studied children here and in other countries, they have come to realize that children can be well behaved, cooperative, and polite without ever having been punished physically or in any other way.

I have known hundreds of such children myself, and there are countries in the world where physical punishment is unknown.

[Thinking Skins]

http://www.drspock.com/article/0,1510,3927+AgeY1_2+cbx_behavior,00.html

What Spanking Accomplishes

by Dr. Benjamin Spock

reviewed and revised by Robert Needlman, M.D., F.A.A.P.

For many years now there has been a debate about whether spanking children is a good thing or a bad thing. Most parents report that they use spanking, at least some of the time.

Most--but not all--pediatricians and psychologists agree that spanking is not a desirable or particularly effective form of discipline. For example, the American Academy of Pediatrics' official policy says, in part:

"Despite its common acceptance, spanking is a less effective strategy than timeout or removal of privileges for reducing undesired behavior in children. Although spanking may immediately reduce or stop an undesired behavior, its effectiveness decreases with subsequent use. The only way to maintain the initial effect of spanking is to systematically increase the intensity with which it is delivered, which can quickly escalate into abuse. Thus, at best, spanking is only effective when used in selective infrequent situations."

(American Academy of Pediatrics, April 1998. For full text, go to http://www.aap.org/policy/re9740.html.)

Certainly, many perfectly healthy, well-adjusted people were spanked as children. It also seems clear that many children who are never spanked grow up fine as well. The research does not show a huge effect of spanking by itself.

The much more important issues are whether discipline is effective and whether the parent-child relationship is a healthy one. That said, we would agree with the Academy of Pediatrics in advising against spanking for several reasons:

I'm very curious to see the kind of 'scientific test' that was done to show that timeout was a better form of punishment than spanking. As far as the reasons named, they all seem to be opinion, so just cause you found somebody to agree with you doesn't really show anything except that there are at least two people who disagree with me.

Reasons to avoid physical punishment

Imagine that your six-year-old has taken a toy from a friend's house without asking. This form of stealing is not the sign of a future criminal career, but it is a sign that he has not yet learned an important lesson about property. When you tell your child that what he did was wrong, you would like him to feel a little sorry or a little guilty. These uncomfortable feelings can resurface, when needed, to remind him that stealing is wrong.

Suppose instead that you give your child a spanking. Afterward, he is more likely to feel resentful and angry at you. In the future, when tempted, his only thought will be to avoid being caught. If the spanking is hard enough, he might also feel afraid of you. None of these feelings will help him, in the long run, be the kind of person you want him to be.

Well, if we're going to argue worse case scenario, what happens in a timeout? There are two possibilities, either the child is angry or he is not angry. If the child is angry, then we have a scenario similar to the spanking where if he is tempted again, he will not want to get caught because he will not want to get upset. The physical part of the punishment is not thing you're questioning here, you're questioning whether we should make our children feel upset when they do something wrong. And if you want to keep kids from getting upset with us, then that means that we've been removed of all power as parents.

The key to any kind of discipline is to make the offender, in this case your kid, feel remorse for what he/she has done and to make them understand that its not ok for them to do it again.

What spanking really teaches

Spanking teaches children that the larger, stronger person has the power to get his way, whether or not he is in the right. Some spanked children then feel quite justified in beating up on smaller ones. The American tradition of spanking may be one reason that there is much more violence in our country than in any other comparable nation.

NO! Spanking teaches children that their parents have power over them. If anybody and everybody was allowed to spank them, then it would teach that the stronger person had their way. But when your kid goes to his babysitter's house, she'd better not lay a hand on him or she's gonna have to deal with some pissed off parents.

Physical force vs. reasoning

When an executive in an office or a foreman in a shop is dissatisfied with the work of an employee, he doesn't rush in shouting and whack him on the seat of his pants. He explains in a respectful manner what he would like, and in most cases this is enough. Children are not that different in their wish to be responsible and to please. They react well to praise and high expectations.

In the olden days, most children were spanked on the assumption that this was necessary to make them behave. In the 20th century, as parents and professionals have studied children here and in other countries, they have come to realize that children can be well behaved, cooperative, and polite without ever having been punished physically or in any other way.

I have known hundreds of such children myself, and there are countries in the world where physical punishment is unknown.

I'll say this again, you cant deal with children the same way you can with adults. Adults know way more. And adults are expected to know right from wrong. As parents, its our job to teach right and wrong to our children, and so we can't reason with them about correctness if they don't know correctness.

What do you do when you're kid is acting up in public? Do you put them in Time Out in the store? Do you take away their GI Joe's while you shop at Target? What about when you've got guests over ? What about in a resteraunt?

These are all times that a parent doesn't have the ability to take time away and punish the child on the spot. Nor do they have the ability to pull off their belt and spank the child. But if the child understands that he has upset his parents and that he's gonna be in trouble when they get home, a simple stare can calm the kids down.

[Commander PK]

Shove their nose in it, and bop em on the nose with a newspaper.

n/m, that's for the dogs.

[DeanCollins]

I'm very curious to see the kind of 'scientific test' that was done to show that timeout was a better form of punishment than spanking. As far as the reasons named, they all seem to be opinion, so just cause you found somebody to agree with you doesn't really show anything except that there are at least two people who disagree with me.

The key to any kind of discipline is to make the offender feel remorse for what he/she has done and to make them understand that its not ok for them to do it again.

NO! Spanking teaches children that their parents have power over them. If anybody and everybody was allowed to spank them, then it would teach that the stronger person had their way. But when your kid goes to his babysitter's house, she'd better not lay a hand on him or she's gonna have to deal with some pissed off parents.

These are all times that a parent doesn't have the ability to take time away and punish the child on the spot. Nor do they have the ability to pull off their belt and spank the child..

Sounds like child abuse to me.

Ten Reasons Not to Hit Your Kids

by Jan Hunt, M.Sc.

In Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Croatia, Cyprus, Latvia, Italy, Israel, Germany and Austria, it is illegal for a parent, teacher, or anyone else to spank a child. In some states and provinces, it is only illegal for a teacher to spank. In all areas of North America, physical punishment by a parent, as long as it is not severe, is still seen by many as necessary discipline, and condoned, or sadly, even encouraged. For the past several years, many psychiatrists, sociological researchers, and parents have recommended that we seriously consider banning the physical punishment of children. The most important reason, according to Dr. Peter Newell, coordinator of the organization End Punishment of Children (EPOCH)1, is that "all people have the right to protection of their physical integrity, and children are people too."2

1. Hitting children teaches them to become hitters themselves. Extensive research data is now available to support a direct correlation between corporal punishment in childhood and aggressive or violent behavior in the teenage and adult years. Virtually all of the most dangerous criminals were regularly threatened and punished in childhood. It is nature's plan that children learn attitudes and behaviors through observation and imitation of their parents' actions, for good or ill. Thus it is the responsibility of parents to set an example of empathy and wisdom.

2. In many cases of so-called "bad behavior", the child is simply responding in the only way he can, given his age and experience, to neglect of basic needs. Among these needs are: proper sleep and nutrition, treatment of hidden allergy, fresh air, exercise, and sufficient freedom to explore the world around him. But his greatest need is for his parents' undivided attention. In these busy times, few children receive sufficient time and attention from their parents, who are often too distracted by their own problems and worries to treat their children with patience and empathy. It is surely wrong and unfair to punish a child for responding in a natural way to having important needs neglected. For this reason, punishment is not only ineffective in the long run, it is also clearly unjust.

3. Punishment distracts the child from learning how to resolve conflict in an effective and humane way. As the educator John Holt wrote, "When we make a child afraid, we stop learning dead in its tracks." A punished child becomes preoccupied with feelings of anger and fantasies of revenge, and is thus deprived of the opportunity to learn more effective methods of solving the problem at hand. Thus, a punished child learns little about how to handle or prevent similar situations in the future.

4. “Spare the rod and spoil the child”, though much quoted, is in fact a misinterpretation of Biblical teaching. While the “rod” is mentioned many times in the Bible, it is only in the Book of Proverbs that this word is used in connection with parenting. The book of Proverbs is attributed to Solomon, an extremely cruel man whose harsh methods of discipline led his own son, Rehoboam, to become a tyrannical and oppressive dictator who only narrowly escaped being stoned to death for his cruelty. In the Bible there is no support for harsh discipline outside of Solomon’s Proverbs. By contrast, the writings in the Gospels, the most important books in the Bible for Christians, contain the teachings of Jesus Christ, who urged mercy, forgiveness, humility, and non-violence. Jesus saw children as being close to God, and urged love, never punishment.3

5. Punishment interferes with the bond between parent and child, as it is not human nature to feel loving toward someone who hurts us. The true spirit of cooperation which every parent desires can arise only through a strong bond based on mutual feelings of love and respect. Punishment, even when it appears to work, can produce only superficially good behavior based on fear, which can only take place until the child is old enough to resist. In contrast, cooperation based on respect will last permanently, bringing many years of mutual happiness as the child and parent grow older.

6. Many parents never learned in their own childhood that there are positive ways of relating to children. When punishment does not accomplish the desired goals, and if the parent is unaware of alternative methods, punishment can escalate to more frequent and dangerous actions against the child.

7. Anger and frustration which cannot be safely expressed by a child become stored inside; angry teenagers do not fall from the sky. Anger that has been accumulating for many years can come as a shock to parents whose child now feels strong enough to express this rage. Punishment may appear to produce "good behavior" in the early years, but always at a high price, paid by parents and by society as a whole, as the child enters adolescence and early adulthood.

8. Spanking on the buttocks, an erogenous zone in childhood, can create in the child's mind an association between pain and sexual pleasure, and lead to difficulties in adulthood. "Spanking wanted" ads in alternative newspapers attest to the sad consequences of this confusion of pain and pleasure. If a child receives little parental attention except when being punished, this will further merge the concepts of pain and pleasure in the child's mind. A child in this situation will have little self-esteem, believing he deserves nothing better. For more on this topic, see "The Sexual Dangers of Spanking Children" (also in French).

Even relatively moderate spanking can be physically dangerous. Blows to the lower end of the spinal column send shock waves along the length of the spine, and may injure the child. The prevalence of lower back pain among adults in our society may well have its origins in childhood punishment. Some children have become paralyzed through nerve damage from spanking, and some have died after mild paddlings, due to undiagnosed medical complications.

9. Physical punishment gives the dangerous and unfair message that "might makes right", that it is permissible to hurt someone else, provided they are smaller and less powerful than you are. The child then concludes that it is permissible to mistreat younger or smaller children. When he becomes an adult, he can feel little compassion for those less fortunate than he is, and fears those who are more powerful. This will hinder the establishment of meaningful relationships so essential to an emotionally fulfilling life.

10. Because children learn through parental modeling, physical punishment gives the message that hitting is an appropriate way to express feelings and to solve problems. If a child does not observe a parent solving problems in a creative and humane way, it can be difficult for him to learn to do this himself. For this reason, unskilled parenting often continues into the next generation.

Gentle instruction, supported by a strong foundation of love and respect, is the only truly effective way to bring about commendable behavior based on strong inner values, instead of superficially "good" behavior based only on fear.