treading gently here...

[Tree House Academy]

Mine are too old to spank now and have absolutely no need anyway, but I'll freely admit to being a spanker in the past when it has been needed and I'd continue to do so in the future if I had any more kids. I honestly don't care what others think. It's not abuse. There's nothing at all mentally that I need to get over. I simply disagree with the current fad. To each our own. ;)

 

(Like you, I'm not talking about the type of spanking that is abuse.)

 

:iagree: 110%. I do still occasionally spank my youngest. I have never beaten a child. Ever.

 

Yes, this.

 

My sister spanks. I do not. We both have children who are fun to be around most of the time, have a desire to be obedient and helpful, are age-appropriately responsible, kind and compassioante, and enjoy the adults in their lives.

 

Spanking makes me cringe. I don't think I could spank one of my children. It feels too much to me like hitting. But that's my personal feeling. When we (general we) say spanking or non-spanking is sure to create children who are _____ (fill in the blank), we overlook and disregard all of the other factors that impact a child's development.

 

Cat

 

And this! Yes!

[eloquacious]

As far as I understand it, all the studies done on spanking have shown that it is not what is done, but how it is done that matters - at least to some extent.

 

If it is normal within the culture of the child (whether in the family, church, or society at large) to be spanked, and they are spanked and not abused, then I would argue there is no psychological harm. I know that there are those who hold that there is no spanking that is not abuse, but I would have to respectfully disagree.

 

Hitting a child immediately out of anger, is, I believe, both abusive and sinful. This is not the only way spanking can take place, though, and I would caution those who are 100% anti-spanking to refrain from passing judgment and assuming all those who spank do so in an abusive or vicious way. The media mentions of children who are beaten to death are not helpful in the slightest, because each time something horrible like this happens the old spanking debate comes out, and all spankers are equated to those families.

[Embassy]

I don't spank my kids. I guess I firmed that decision before I had kids when I witnessed a family member hitting a child's hands because the child had hit someone. As the person slapped the child's hands she said "don't hit." We are the only ones in my dh's family who have not spanked and I am always on top of my children's behavior when around said family because they would not hesitate to spank.

 

While my children have their moments, I do get positive comments from others about their behavior.

 

When my oldest was small and started biting while nursing I stopped nursing and held him in my lap firmly with his hands in my hands so he was pretty much immobile for a short time. I have used this with all my kids successfully throughout the toddler years. My youngest is three now and if she does something wrong or isn't listening I will hold her hands or hold her on my lap with her hands in my hands and usually in less than 10 seconds she is off doing what she is supposed to do. She is very strong willed which I view as a positive aspect of her personality. We did have a "battle" where she refused to do something for 30 minutes before she decided it would be wiser to listen to me.

 

For running in the road or putting things in sockets I use supervision or provide a baby-proof environment. While I do trust that my toddler would stop if requested to stop running toward the road, I'm not going to rely on that when life is at stake. My child is required to stay close or hold my hand until he/she is at the age where I have no doubts that they will run into the road. I keep socket covers on until I know my children understand the dangers.

 

For older children I have used various things like sending the child to his room, taking away a privilege, but I much prefer to use natural consequences and desire to get away from punishment especially as the child grows. I believe cultivating an intrinsic motivation for doing the right thing is important and I don't believe that is accomplished by punishment.

[unsinkable]

And yet it does often feel like there is, especially with a first child.

 

I'm fortunate that my best friend is a child psychologist and also very patient. When my son was 2, I'd call her on a weekly basis, telling her about how I was SURE I'd already ruined him. It was over. Clearly, he was going to be a despot, a serial killer, or both. I had raised Pol Pot. I mean, he threw tantrums, threw objects, hit when upset, demanded his own way all the time, wouldn't accept no for an answer, and on and on. He wasn't even potty-trained yet, and I'd ruined him. I was pretty sure that the only thing that would ensure he didn't throw tantrums, hit people, and start biting when somebody said "no" as an adult was if I managed to parent it out of him ASAP. The idea that maybe just not being two would help the situation greatly didn't occur to me, although my friend was nice enough to remind me.

 

Wait, he wasn't potty-trained by 2?!?!

 

You obviously did something wrong!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:lol:

[AmyTompkins]

I can see that but in the other thread I got the impression you might say the same of the Pearl's methods.

 

Well the only thing I have read by the Pearls is the HelpMeet book and I did not agree with everything I read. I have had an abusive relationship but did not read their advice and think "Gee, that sounds like a good idea.". This could be argued to the end of days but it seems to me that their children are really wonderful adults, successful, happy and well-adjusted for the most part. That has to say something. You are responsible for you actions 100% of the time. There is no room to point to a book you read, a website you have seen, a church leader's sermon, what another Mom does to her kids, what Anderson Cooper would do, WWJD, you Daddy didn't love you enough, your parents spanked, your teacher gave you the bad touch. Be responsible for yourself. Get help. If you don't know you need it, something like this will let the world and you know you need it. Get help. Your choice. Stop blaming others.

[twoforjoy]

This could be argued to the end of days but it seems to me that their children are really wonderful adults, successful, happy and well-adjusted for the most part. That has to say something.

 

It says that human beings are pretty darn resilient, and that most people turn out just fine even if you raise them really, really badly. We all know adults who were abused as kids who are wonderful people. That isn't a testament to the abuse having good results, but to the resiliency of children.

 

I don't think the fact that the Pearl children appear to have turned out okay is an endorsement of beating babies for crying (which is exactly what the Pearls recommend).

[WeeBeaks]

I'm not a perfect parent so I'm not going to be judging what you (general other parents) do as long as it is not crossing the line into abuse frankly.

 

I was an excellent parent until I had kids. :lol:

 

My 4 children are very very different temperment. What works for one does not with another (speaking of my oldest 3 there - the baby who knows yet). I think each parent needs to deal with their child according to temperment (of the child that is). I'm not excluding spanking there as long as it is not abusive style and not with an angry vengeful parent.

 

But some kids are not going to respond well to it and parents should be aware of that. Parents should be well educated on all the possible methods of training and not rely on what their parents did or the only thing they know.

[Ellesmere]

 

Well the only thing I have read by the Pearls is the HelpMeet book and I did not agree with everything I read. I have had an abusive relationship but did not read their advice and think "Gee, that sounds like a good idea.". This could be argued to the end of days but it seems to me that their children are really wonderful adults, successful, happy and well-adjusted for the most part. That has to say something. You are responsible for you actions 100% of the time. There is no room to point to a book you read, a website you have seen, a church leader's sermon, what another Mom does to her kids, what Anderson Cooper would do, WWJD, you Daddy didn't love you enough, your parents spanked, your teacher gave you the bad touch. Be responsible for yourself. Get help. If you don't know you need it, something like this will let the world and you know you need it. Get help. Your choice. Stop blaming others.

 

I know a lot of wonderful, happy people that came out of abusive backgrounds. I always thought it was in spite of, not because of, their struggles. No strength without struggle, sure. But I don't believe that parents should be producing the struggles in their children's lives by following the Pearl methodology.

 

I sincerely hope you don't run into any of the people that have been indoctrinated since birth or manipulated during a difficult time and are trying to get out and get help.

 

Personal responsibility is important. No one can say that a book made anyone harm their child. I agree with that. But without taking away one's personal accountability, I do place some weight those who presume to be teachers and use their position to teach their parenting methods as absolute truth. Not all of these groups use the Pearl books, but some do. Anyway, mock if you will, but could you have compassion on those who are brought into what seems to be a perfectly nice church and family and are worn down to the point that they accept some outrageous teachings? Even though I think the Pearls themselves aren't the issue, I'm not upset to see this being discussed and with some resentment for what they are promoting. Because I'd rather not have anything more "like this" letting the world know that a lot of people need help, not mockery, more blame, and more judgment. They get enough of that already and too many children are being hurt.

[JennifersLost]

I think it's hard to have a conversation about this because so many other factors come in to play.

 

In my experience, many of the "no-spanking" parents (and by spanking I mean a swat on the butt, not a Pearl-type beating, and certainly no "switches"!) are also the "everything-is-negotiable" type parents. So it doesn't really matter if there are or aren't spankings - the kids just don't feel the need to follow any rules.

 

We all know parents like this - the ones who have to spend 10 minutes begging, pleading and cajoling their four-year-old to do (insert anything that needs to be done). It is exasperating to watch and it is an easy leap from there to "That kid needs some discipline!" And another easy leap for someone who likes rules and rule-abiding kids to feel like kids who have never had a swat on the butt are just out of control.

 

On the other hand for sensitive parents who hate the thought of their kid experiencing any type of pain, and who have a vision of guiding their child through each difficult circumstance, it is easy to focus on the type of parent you often see in a big shopping mall with an over-loaded cart and four kids racing around who has HAD IT and responds by smacking the nearest kid four or five times on the butt with way too much anger and force.

 

The sensitive parent then feels that all parents who spank are out of control when they spank and are inflicting unjustified and over-the-top pain on their children.

 

It's perspective and what we focus on. My experience is that with a large percentage of kids a single smack on the bum once or twice when they're three will keep them from doing all kinds of dangerous things and make it really simple for them to decide to listen to Mom and Dad. After that consistent rules and consequences should be the main theme of discipline.

 

If you are spanking a kid over five or any kid more than a handful of times during their life, there's a bigger problem that needs to be addressed in a different way.

 

As for babies.....NO WAY! All babies want is your attention. If you are nursing and they bite you, gently unlatch the baby and put him or her down in a safe place and let them be furious for a minute or two! Then pick them back up and try again. Repeat until the message is clear: bite = no food!

[OH_Homeschooler]

It has really only been in the last half century that that mind set has been calling what was once acceptable and common "abuse." (I'm not talking about more severe punishments with harmful physical consequences, and I am not talking about the Pearls.) Now, if spanking or switching is abuse, then our parents and grandparents and great grandparents, who we love, were abusers. That can be hard to swallow.

 

The "only in the last half century" argument means absolutely nothing to me. A lot has changed in the last half century, and for the better. Doing things the same way just because it's always been done is not going to sway my opinion on anything.

[Abigail4476]

I really didn't get the idea that the *controversial* thread about the Pearl's was actually anti-spanking in nature. Nor do I think that every parent who spanks is a bad parent. When we were younger parents, we spanked more often, although still rarely, and it was just a swat or two on the behind. As we matured as parents and educated ourselves, we found that we could get good results without using pain in any way. My personal view is that if I can use a method that doesn't cause pain and get the same (or better) result, why would I choose [prefer?] a painful method?

 

Good parents do their best with the knowledge and tools at their disposal. A person who spanks may do it because they have reasonably decided it is effective, but they may be ignorant of other methods that would work equally well.

 

I'm not of the opinion that a spanking parent is a bad parent. Necessarily. However, the older I get, the more negatively I view corporal punishment. Our kids will probably be non-spankers because we have so effectively navigated their childhood without using physical force or pain. I definitely view spanking infants as 100% abusive, and on that point we'll have to agree to disagree if you're guilty of that kind of "discipline." :glare: I also consider it abusive to spank until you're sure you've caused actual, physical pain, and to spank with harsh implements or for a lengthy period of time (until the child has fully surrendered :001_huh:). I can be fairly understanding in basic spanking/non-spanking discussions; I cannot be understanding or patient with people who practice child abuse and call it "discipline" or "Christianity."

[myfunnybunch]

In my experience, many of the "no-spanking" parents (and by spanking I mean a swat on the butt, not a Pearl-type beating, and certainly no "switches"!) are also the "everything-is-negotiable" type parents. So it doesn't really matter if there are or aren't spankings - the kids just don't feel the need to follow any rules.

 

So do you assume that every parent with well-behaved children swats (or swatted) them?

 

I know you said "many" and not "all" but the message seems to be that not spanking and permissiveness are one and the same.

 

Permissive parents don't spank (usually), but not all parents who do not spank are permissive. We've all seen "everything is negotiable" parents in the moments when the kids are misbehaving in public. But my experience is that most children who are able to control themselves in public have parents who set consistent boundaries, spanking or no. We simply don't notice those children in the same way we notice the kids who are acting out while their parents plead with them to behave.

 

I think we agree on this: Consistent rules and consequences are what makes the difference.

 

One does not have to spank to be consistent or to have appropriate meaningful consequences. The real discipline comparison in your examples, I think, is this: Permissive parents who don't spank but plead with their children and parents who spank out of anger or frustration both have in common the lack of consistency and lack of meaningful age-appropriate guidance and consequences.

 

(I know tone is difficult on the internet, so I'll add that I'm offering another perspective respectfully, not trying to fight with you. :) )

 

Cat

[gardenmom5]

When my babies were nursing and they bit me I pulled them in towards me to cut off the air to their nose. Babies have very good survival instincts. They let go and it enourages them not to bite. It got the job done without smacking or thumping a baby.

 

I am not 100% anti-spanking. I am anti-spanking babies. I am against hitting kids with a switch until they cannot breathe. I have no patience, tolerance or understanding of that.

:iagree: I also found when baby was biting alot, s/he was teething and rubbing gums with my finger would usually meet the need causing them to bite and then I wouldn't be bitten. (one dd would open her mouth wide for me to rub her gums.). When needed I'd insert my finger into baby's mouth to break the suction.

[gardenmom5]

emotional abuse and shouldn't be put in the same category of physical abuse. .

 

 

do NOT underestimate the destructivenss of emotional/mental abuse.

[Orthodox6]

:iagree: I am a survivor of both physical and emotional/mental abuse. The only difference is that the former shows blood and scars on the external body, and the latter does not.

 

 

do NOT underestimate the destructivenss of emotional/mental abuse.

[wy_kid_wrangler04]

I didn't read any posts on this thread so I have no clue where this thread has gone in 12 pages and I probably won't read any posts before mine.

 

NOW- that being said: My kids get spanked. They get spanked when needed. When a spankable offense happens they get sent to their room for a minimum of 15 minutes. If its an offense that has dh or I upset they are in their rooms until we are no longer upset- one time when ds broke our picture window by throwing a hammer through it he was in his bedroom for 2 hours. He did it because he was upset that his brother was playing with his toys so yes, dh and I were upset so that is why he was in his room so long. We were not upset that long, but HE needed that long to really think about his behavior. However long it takes. They go to their room and know they are not to play. They are to sit and think about what they did and what is about to happen. (THAT is punishment number 1) Then when we are ready (and not upset, if it didn't upset us then they are in there for 15 minutes to think) dh and I call the child out and we discuss what happened and make sure they know why its wrong. Then they get their spankings. THEN they get a hug and kiss so they know we love them but yes, they had a spanking and are usually crying. They are free to go do what they want afterwards. Usually they opt to go outside or in their bedrooms afterwards. We do not beat our children but we do spank them. We are not ashamed because they do not get spanked for everything, and its never more than 3.

Edited August 19, 2011 by wy_kid_wrangler04

[Mommy22alyns]

My girls have been spanked, 99% of the time it was one swat only. Never ever before the age of one! I do get impatient when people label mild spankings as abuse. I wouldn't change how we did things - the girls are extremely well-behaved and I'm very proud of them.

[SailorMom]

So - I've been thinking about all this all day.

I still think spanking is ok. I'm not ignorant, have read and know a lot about parenting, but chose to spank because I have no problems with it.

Anyway- as I was reading through the thread and read about the biting during nursing - and the squishing the baby's nose to the breast so that they will stop- that shocked me.

No offense, and I don't think it's abuse or anything like that - but I can't see how a tap on the hand is worse than making a baby feel like they are being smothered. I'd prefer the tap, personally..... I didn't do either - but I weaned before mine had teeth.

I think our perceptions of things have a lot to do with how we see these issues. I absolutely freak out if I can't breath, or if I feel like I won't be able to soon. So - the thought of the above freaks me out as well.

Whereas, NORMAL spanking doesn't phase me at all.

[BakersDozen]

It's always interesting to read the various viewpoints on this subject yet it can get frustrating as well so I'll just leave my response at this:

 

I still think spanking is ok. I'm not ignorant, have read and know a lot about parenting, but chose to spank because I have no problems with it.

 

:iagree:

[Orthodox6]

Truthfulness requires me to say that I did spank, according to specific method to be described, when children were between the ages of 4 and 6. When behaviour occasionally warranted it, I would tell the child that I was going to deliver three swats to his "sit-down". I then would administer three carefully controlled (in strength) "pops". They were to make a point; they were not intended to hurt. This "spanking", as I suppose it must be called, was announced ahead of time, so the child was not caught off-guard. The child also was reminded first what the infraction was. Most often, in fact, only one "swat" was announced and delivered.

 

I never, never could have done anything more than that. As a survivor of physical abuse, there is no way that I could assault my children in the ways that have been discussed in recent threads.

[SailorMom]

Truthfulness requires me to say that I did spank, according to specific method to be described, when children were between the ages of 4 and 6. When behaviour occasionally warranted it, I would tell the child that I was going to deliver three swats to his "sit-down". I then would administer three carefully controlled (in strength) "pops". They were to make a point; they were not intended to hurt. This "spanking", as I suppose it must be called, was announced ahead of time, so the child was not caught off-guard. The child also was reminded first what the infraction was.

 

I never, never could have done anything more than that. As a survivor of physical abuse, there is no way that I could assault my children in the ways that have been discussed in recent threads.

 

You seem to think this is unique to how you spanked.....

 

I think most of the people I know who spank do this (for the most part), including myself. Of course, IRL - I know hardly anyone who admits to spanking.

 

We didn't just smack our kids. We calmly told them what they had done, and paddled them a bit. We never even left a red mark, so I can't imagine it actually hurt. I think it was more the thought of it, and the fact that my kids knew this was the "biggie" - that they really messed up.

[Orthodox6]

Yes, I do. Most "spankers" whom I have run across respond impulsively, in anger, without much self-control.

 

You seem to think this is unique to how you spanked.....

.

[SailorMom]

Yes, I do. Most "spankers" whom I have run across respond impulsively, in anger, without much self-control.

 

Huh - the only place I've seen that is on TV.

I respect your experience, but that has not been mine at all.

[Soror]

The "only in the last half century" argument means absolutely nothing to me. A lot has changed in the last half century, and for the better. Doing things the same way just because it's always been done is not going to sway my opinion on anything.

 

I wonder about this as well. How long have child labor laws been in place? How long has it been illegal to hit your wife? Does not everyone now believe that hitting a spouse for any reason and in anyway is wrong?

[dirty ethel rackham]

Yes, I do. Most "spankers" whom I have run across respond impulsively, in anger, without much self-control.

 

:iagree: That has been my experience as well. I was totally shocked to hear that people spanked when they weren't angry. That just made my stomach churn - It all seemed so cold-blooded. I could not understand it as I had never seen it. The only time I had an impulse to spank was when I was flat out exhausted and unable to think of a logical way of dealing with a behavior. That was when I knew the I needed the time-out.

 

One time, I did spank ds in anger - I thought he was being defiant and, being sleep-deprived, I gave in to the impulse. He looked at me with shock and fear and said, "Mommy, why did you hit me?" It was like a splash of cold water to the face. I later found out that the issue was not defiance, but a medical condition that he couldn't control.

[Peela]

I only spanked when I was upset/angry/overwhelmed.

I could not imagine spanking from a calm, calculated place- for me, if I was that calm I wouldn't have spanked- I could have thought of other ways of dealing with the behaviour.

[Carol in Cal.]

Yes, I do. Most "spankers" whom I have run across respond impulsively, in anger, without much self-control.

 

I would amend this to "all". Otherwise, I totally agree.

[Cheryl in NM]

When my babies were nursing and they bit me I pulled them in towards me to cut off the air to their nose. Babies have very good survival instincts. They let go and it enourages them not to bite. It got the job done without smacking or thumping a baby.

 

I am not 100% anti-spanking. I am anti-spanking babies. I am against hitting kids with a switch until they cannot breathe. I have no patience, tolerance or understanding of that.

 

I really mean this in the most respectful, non-judgmental manner:

 

How is cutting off your child's air supply any better/less traumatizing than spanking? I would think it would be more traumatizing than a normal, non-abusive spanking. If you are against hitting a child until they cannot breathe how can you advocate cutting off a baby's air supply?

 

I understand you are talking about a very small timeframe here and that the child is in no danger of suffocating. I also think it is probably way more effective than corporal punishment for that offense. But I don't see it as different than spanking or thumping; it is a physical punishment that plays on their basic survival instincts way more than spanking or thumping.

------------

We spanked. We had a willful child that nothing worked for. She was just disturbed and I don't know what would have worked.

 

I hate the planned spankings. I got one every Sunday after church. If I so much as wiggled or whispered (as a 3 - 5 year old!) I got spanked immediately after church. I'm sure there were times I earned those spankings, but what I remember is that I didn't remember doing anything to earn them.

 

Planned spankings, to me, seem vindictive. Maybe it's my personal experiences and maybe it's from watching a family I know. The parent's count up "licks" or "thumps" and then before the child can do something fun they must stand still and receive their punishment. So a child, with a smile on his face, ready to participate in an activity now must receive his punishment.

 

I think it's best to spank right away, upon offense, and get beyond it. I see it as a "dirty deed" that must be done. I didn't enjoy it and wouldn't have done it if I thought there were a better way. But I consider it a proven, effective method of disciplining children. Again, just my opinion, no judgment to anyone who believes differently. I probably fall smack dab in the middle of the OPs post. lol

 

ETA: In my "career" as a mom I have not personally any non-spanking families that had predictable boundaries or discipline. I'm glad to read in this thread that they exist. But if I haven't met any, it isn't a far stretch to assume that others haven't either.

Edited August 20, 2011 by Cheryl in NM
typo, addition

[SailorMom]

I would amend this to "all". Otherwise, I totally agree.

 

How can you say "all" when I've clearly indicated that that is not how I did it????

[SailorMom]

Ok - done with this thread.

I am now a cold-blooded, ignorant, child-abuser who needs to be taught the error of her ways.

Give me a break.....:lol:

[obsidian]

How can you say "all" when I've clearly indicated that that is not how I did it????

 

I think she meant all that she had met.

[Joanne]

ETA: In my "career" as a mom I have not personally any non-spanking families that had predictable boundaries or discipline. I'm glad to read in this thread that they exist. But if I haven't met any, it isn't a far stretch to assume that others haven't either.

 

I suspect some of this is what researchers call "rater's bias". It's when you know something of the persons involved and you filter evaluations through it.

 

Someone ignorant of or hostile to homeschooling, for example, is more likely to spot awkward social behavior in homeschoolers and label it as having been created my homeschooling/lack of socialization.

 

A non-spanker is more likely to see obedient behavior in children as "robotic, because the child is scared."

 

A parent who believes in spanking is more likely see see childish behavior and evaluate it as "out of control".

 

If it IS permissiveness, it is not lack of spanking that is the problem; it is lack of discipline.

[wy_kid_wrangler04]

Yes, I do. Most "spankers" whom I have run across respond impulsively, in anger, without much self-control.

 

 

That is exactly when it can turn abusive (I said can, not does ;))

[Carol in Cal.]

How can you say "all" when I've clearly indicated that that is not how I did it????

 

I've never met you. That's how.

[LisaKinVA]

WRT a "calm" spanking... it's no different than how any other discipline should be practiced.

 

Is a mother who issues a verbal warning to a child, gives the child a moment to respond appropriately, then following through with a Time Out being "cold and calculated?"

 

Spanking in anger (impulsively, without warning) is no different than a mother losing control yelling and dragging the child off to time out. It sends the wrong message.

 

Discipline is a "matter of fact" matter. One should be in control of their actions, their volume, and their tone of voice... period.

 

For the most part, we do things the "Super Nanny" way. Most times, that means a Time Out. Occassionally, and depending upon the child, that means a spanking of 1-3 swats. My oldest... well, he's being "tomato-staked."

[Amy in NH]

That they used physical correction of some kind does not mean they were ignorant. Neither were they abusers. It is not clear to me that children--especially older children--are better behaved today, or better adjusted emotionally, than they were in previous generations when parents physically corrected their dc for misbehavior.

 

:iagree: 100%

[Cheryl in NM]

WRT "calm" spanking, I don't mean that the alternative is yelling, screaming, "losing control mom" spanking. I mean, instead of adding up all the spankings earned in a set period and then, after the child and parent have moved beyond the bad behavior, WHAM, here's the spanking you earned, sometimes hours ago. I mean, calmly spank at the time of the offense or, like a pp said, after a short period of time (15 or so minutes).

 

I also don't think "all spanking, all the time" is appropriate. I think, as parents, we know our children and what works with them. It's our job to find that out and try to consistently parent towards that. Like a pp said, find your kids currency. Realize the currency changes as the child grows and matures.

 

Joanne ~ I understand what you are saying about the bias. That's why I commented that it's nice to hear parents on this board that don't spank, but still discipline their children. And I have heard the "spanked children appear to be robots". It's all in our perception. Which goes back to, let's not judge each other too harshly, especially without learning about the specific situation we feel the need to judge.

 

I sincerely hope I did not offend anyone with my post. My intent was to sincerely compliment those non-spanking parents who discipline their children.

[LibraryLover]

Ok - done with this thread.

I am now a cold-blooded, ignorant, child-abuser who needs to be taught the error of her ways.

Give me a break.....:lol:

 

 

:(

 

I missed all of that. I read your post and then went back to read everything. I don't see anyone saying anything of the sort. I do see people trying to consider other measures, but cold-blooded, ignorant, child-abuser are not coming up here, not even in a specific search. (Except for your post.)

 

I've been off the forums for hours, but I was wanting to check back in with this thread.

[KungFuPanda]

:iagree: That has been my experience as well. I was totally shocked to hear that people spanked when they weren't angry. That just made my stomach churn - It all seemed so cold-blooded. I could not understand it as I had never seen it. The only time I had an impulse to spank was when I was flat out exhausted and unable to think of a logical way of dealing with a behavior. That was when I knew the I needed the time-out.

 

One time, I did spank ds in anger - I thought he was being defiant and, being sleep-deprived, I gave in to the impulse. He looked at me with shock and fear and said, "Mommy, why did you hit me?" It was like a splash of cold water to the face. I later found out that the issue was not defiance, but a medical condition that he couldn't control.

 

:iagree: YES. ALL of it. It feels creepy to me that people can ritualize spankings and deliver them in a calm manner. I believe that spanking is a bad habit that is inherited. If you had good parents who spanked, it can be very difficult to view spanking as unnecessary. I've known many people who were spanked chose NOT to hit their own children. I don't know anyone who was raised without it that spanks their children. It seems an archaic notion that has fallen away, but has a few staunch defenders holding on.

 

I'm also the parent of a disabled child who wasn't diagnosed until the age of seven. I shudder to think of the abuse he would have endured at the hands of parents who spanked. There were so many things he couldn't help, though he 'seemed' normal for so long. His disability is obvious now that he's in a wheelchair at 11, but he was walking during those prime spanking years.

 

I taught school before I was a mother. If it's possible to control an entire class of children without hitting them, I can certainly control the two I have at home without spanking OR negotiating with them. My guess is that some of you would just assume I spank my children if you met them today because they are well-behaved . . . even the one who was challenging in his early elementary years.

[8circles]

:iagree: YES. ALL of it. It feels creepy to me that people can ritualize spankings and deliver them in a calm manner. I believe that spanking is a bad habit that is inherited. If you had good parents who spanked, it can be very difficult to view spanking as unnecessary. I've known many people who were spanked chose NOT to hit their own children. I don't know anyone who was raised without it that spanks their children. It seems an archaic notion that has fallen away, but has a few staunch defenders holding on.

 

I agree. I have spanked but I don't believe if is the right thing to do. No matter how its done,its wrong IMO. I don't believe i'll never do it again but I can't justify it at all. Im really not sure how spanking calmly is any better than spanking in anger. Just different kinds of 'out of control'. I spank because I was spanked. It doesn't make it right.

[JeneralMom]

Yes, I do. Most "spankers" whom I have run across respond impulsively, in anger, without much self-control.

 

 

I agree. Most people I know who admit to spanking occasionally have done so out of anger, frustration and loss of control. I have no experience with the kind of calm/premeditated spanking several people are discussing here.

[JeneralMom]

:iagree: That has been my experience as well. I was totally shocked to hear that people spanked when they weren't angry. That just made my stomach churn - It all seemed so cold-blooded. I could not understand it as I had never seen it. The only time I had an impulse to spank was when I was flat out exhausted and unable to think of a logical way of dealing with a behavior. That was when I knew the I needed the time-out.

 

I'm glad I wasn't the only one who had the stomach-churning feeling. It makes it sound so much worse. And the poor child with the anticipation of the spanking building up. It veers into emotional manipulation territory.

[Julie Smith]

I don't know anyone who was raised without it that spanks their children.

 

If you are curious a poll was started (by me with the help of STEM who got it working) to ask about this subject.

[JeneralMom]

In defense of all the other AP, LLL, crunchy-earth-mommas who seem to getting a bad rap as permissive and non-disciplining. I do not know a single one who does not set, establish and enforce logical boundaries and consequences. Sometimes, those are natural consequences and might be what I think is being deemed permissive here. For example, when DS8 was little, he and another boy were playing on a bench. I told DS that it was dangerous and he needed to get off (he was about 2 at the time), as did the other mom. Her little boy did not immediately respond and was yanked off the bench and spanked. When she dragged her kid off the bench, DS fell off and thumped on the ground. He was not hurt, but just a little shocked. He came over to me, I explained that he fell because the bench was not meant for running on, and he went off to play, and never bothered with the bench again. Did I let him stay on the bench? Yes. Did he learn the natural consequence of running on a bench? Yes. Would I have allowed him to run on the edge of a steep drop? No.

[Trish]

I've never met anyone who thought they were an abusive parent.

[8circles]

I've never met anyone who thought they were an abusive parent.

 

Excellent point.

[ThatCyndiGirl]

I've never met anyone who thought they were an abusive parent.

 

:iagree: The parents who "of course heat up the extension cord on the stove before I whip them with it" do not think that they are abusive. The preacher who held a hot iron to his daughter's flesh because she lied did not think himself abusive. The mom who forced her son into ice cold showers and forced hot sauce into his mouth? Also did not think herself abusive. :001_huh:

 

And, FTR,I am not equating any of the above with spanking, just saying that no one seems to recognize it in themselves when it is happening, so saying, "I don't consider myself abusive" doesn't seem to lend any credence to the argument.

Edited August 20, 2011 by ThatCyndiGirl

[Joker]

I don't think anyone can really agree on just what "spanking" means. I was spanked ~ twice. I remember both times and what they were for and I never did them again. My parents sent me to my room and came in a few minutes later. I was not abused and it was not cold or calculating. I don't remember them hurting physically it was more just that I had let them down. As I grew I realized the reason I didn't rebel like some of my friends was because I had a lot of respect and love for my parents (it had nothing to do with spanking). The key is the relationship.

[texasmama]

ETA: In my "career" as a mom I have not personally any non-spanking families that had predictable boundaries or discipline. I'm glad to read in this thread that they exist. But if I haven't met any, it isn't a far stretch to assume that others haven't either.

 

Hi, I'm Carol. My kids are not spanked. They are well-disciplined and are reported by all who interact with them as delightful, obedient and well-behaved. I don't take too much credit for that, frankly. They just have pleasant personalities now that they are beyond the difficult toddler stages. Now you have met another person who doesn't spank but has very predictable boundaries and discipline.;)

 

I have spanked in the past, much as Peela describes, due to being at the end of my rope. These were not my finest parenting moments.

 

My goal as a parent is to err on the side of kindness. Always. As a therapist, I have observed more harm and damage done by harshness than by laxity in parenting style, if those are the only two choices. Of course, they are not. Most parents on this board, I suspect, are fairly middle of the road, whether they spank or not.

 

As others have stated, spanking doesn't equal abuse or well-behaved kids. Not spanking does not equal permissiveness or ill-behaved kids.

 

As Joanne stated, when spanking is "off the table" as an option, parents choose other disciplinary techniques.

 

I am completely with Tara on this one - spanking is the "straw man".

[Guest submarines]

I only spanked when I was upset/angry/overwhelmed.

I could not imagine spanking from a calm, calculated place- for me, if I was that calm I wouldn't have spanked- I could have thought of other ways of dealing with the behaviour.

 

:iagree:I spanked DD twice, when at the end of my rope and utterly exhausted. I don't understand the need to spank, when both parties are calm. :confused:

 

I can't decide which is worse, an occasionaly impulsive spanking, or calculated, calm spanking. My gut feeling says the latter is worse, but I can also see how impulsive spanking can lead to more physical damage.

 

I think there are two types of impulsive spankers. Someone like me thinks taht spanking is horrible, and vows not to use it, ever. I educated myself on alternatives, and I consciously chose to parent without violence. But I'm human, and I make mistakes. When I spanked DD, I apologised for losing control. I felt awful. I definitely believe that a calm spanking is much worse than this kind of spanking.

 

 

Then there's another type of impulsive spanker. This person won't necessarily educate herself, is not a very involved parent, and doesn't want to make an effort of calming down before spanking. Yet she believes in spanking, and has no problem with spanking her child whenever she is angry or frustrated. She doesn't regret it, and she does't try to do better. This is truly dangerous, I believe, and calm spanking is a safer choice.

 

And yet I can't comprehend why one would want to spank when both parties are calm, other than to show one's dominance and control. My goal is to parent from love and kindenss, not from dominance and control. I think it is possible to set boundaries, without resorting to violence.