s/o What do you consider child abuse?

[sunshine]

Can you clarify something here? Are you saying you have a six-year-old who would put scissors in an electrical outlet unless you spanked her?

 

This is an example of what she did when she was 3, now that she is 6 (as of 5 days ago) she goes for more interesting targets of death, like my son's 4-wheeler, which we diligently hide the keys but don't think she doesn't look for it. This child in 1 week (oops I interupt this post to tell you that this said child in the five minutes I have been reading the responses to these threads I posted has while I was watching her in between strokes done the following: cut the brownies, thankfully with a butter knife, she circled the back way around the kitchen, climbed up on the counter reached over the sink, pulled down 2 bags of cereal and poured 1/2 gallon of milk into a cup. How you say? Because she is quick and sneaky!! I never heard a thing, I kept looking up and watching her dance in front of the TV to a movie, but as she moves so quickly she was dartig in and out of the kitchen, oh look she is moving into the kitchen to get a second brownie)

Back to my post: in 1 week she jumped into the pool while standing by my side and in a swimmy suit which she stripped out of in 2 seconds flat as I was talking to my other daughters swim teacher and proceeded to drown in front of me and 2 lifeguards who developed blindness all of the sudden to the point that I had to jump in fully clothed. 2 days later, we ran in the house and the two little ones ran back to their room and put on swim suits, and in the 3 minutes that it tookd for them to change the phone rang and somehow while I was looking up a telephone number for dh, the little one then 4 ran out the garage to our car and got in (we were going to the pool) without me seeing her. I yelled a moment later for them to load up and what do you know I can't find her. As I run screaming around the house and call 911 and all the neighbors I stop to cry out to God in prayer and I was walking by our car and heard a murmur, a noise, something and yanked open the door to find my naked beet red daughter laying on the floor of the car. It had only been about 15 minutes but in GA that is enought to raise a car temp to over 115 degrees or more. I of course took her the tub to lower her 101.00 temp and then hightailed it to the hospital. I call that week the week of trying to commit suicide.

Shall I tell you about the following year on Black Friday when I had gone home to pick up the kids after the morning sales because they callled wanting to be with me at the mall so I took them shopping and while trying on a scarf on my other daughter with the little tornadoe right next to me she backed into the jeans rack and hid. Just playing around as she and her brother had been playing hide and seek all morning but Mommy panicked and started calling out for her which of course set off all the mothers in the store calling and she got scared at the commotion and voila'! Code 'Adam and the mall was locked down. 10 of the longest minutes of my life with me a screaming puddle on the floor (I know pedophiles hunt for children in malls) later a lovely older woman spotted the jeans moving. and drug that protesting little ball of blonde hair to me. did I beat her? No but I should have! I was too busy kissing her and calling for a valium.

 

so yes I am telling you there are children who will stick a pair of scissors in a socket while looking you in the eyes. They really don't believe you when you tell them it will hurt. They have to find out for themselves. My girlfriend has foster she adopted who is her clone, and now that they can spank her she is shaping up. Seriously, it is a mixture of discipline techniques. That I believe is the best way. But catch the "I believe" no one else has to. And as for my 6 year old. The training of "come to me" only has failed once. Guess when? you betcha, that day on Black Friday at the mall.

 

I learned how to parent better because I got a tougher kiddo where spanking and punishment not only didn't work but caused more problems. I had to learn better discipline because I still only had the same 16-21 years with this kiddo that everyone else has but had a lot more obstacles to overcome. This child NEEDED better discipline. So many people assume that those of us that learn better must have easy kids. If we had easy kids, we never would have spent SO much time and effort into learning better. We wouldn't have had a reason to because the ways everyone use would work. Instead, we learned better because we had to in order to help this kiddo make it to adulthood and then to end up being a happy, healthy, contributing member of the family, society, and congregation.

 

ETA: This is not to say I believed in doing "whatever" before. I wanted to be a better parent than my father so I had tried to learn ways so as not to be angry, punish in harsh ways, etc. And I believe in parents aiming to become better and better, but mostly I was happy enough with what I had learned and only did SIGNIFICANTLY better because my kid required me to learn to do so.

 

Surely you understand that I had to use generalities and overused examples as you didn't give any specifics. I just had to pull SOMETHING out of thin air :) I addressed some of what you said in my original post (such as allowing certain natural consequences but not others for obvious reasons). Your post suggests you are happy enough with your choices and not really interested in learning differently, possibly not believing there is better. That, of course, is your right.

 

Au contraire my dear, I always want to learn but have yet to hear anyone give a list of great working techniques. Let them rip, I am always ready to learn. But I won't insult your techniques if they are not abusive, and I will encourage you to continue using them if they are working. And I hope no one will insult me either.

 

One thing though? From childcare, fostering, and parent coaching, I have noticed that people tend to teach their kids to up the anty. They inadvertantly teach their kids to listen only once they get to 3, a certain decible level, a spank. They also accidentally teach their kids that milder forms of discipline are a joke. You can back up and unteach those things though.

 

:iagree:We always prescribe to obey the first time. It keeps anger and frustration from becoming part of the discipline. Where it doesn't belong.

 

This is an example of a parenting perspective that is the polar opposite of what I believe. I am not talking about spanking or not. I am talking about the adversarial assumptions and the inaacurate assumptions that a child who hits peers will grow into a adult or older child who assaults. This is completely against my experience and observation. most kids hit at some point;most never assault as adults. Whether they were spanked, timed out or even passively parented (not that I recommend that).

 

Yes most kids hit at some point, spanks come in when they don't learn from their first warning. And I rarely see a child hit once, have a lovely chat with Mummy and never do it again. I have seen the exact opposite, as I said earlier I worked for a child psychiatrist for many years and I have also helped raise 5 other children besides my own, worked in our church nursery for 13 years and been in a very active homeschool group for 8 years, before that public and private school, so I have been around multiple ages and multiple enviroments and I have noticed that the worst bullies are either mummy's darling or abused. The darlings are allowed to be aggressive with Mummy, so enlightened, spouting off about boundaries and other peoples feelings, say you are sorry dear and then as soon as Mummy head is turned they are little hellions again. but Mummy thinks things are grand. Seen it dozens of times and guess what he stays that way. so yes I stand by my primitive way that way unless given something concrete to use. Not that I mean a pole or anything.

 

As far as spanking for safety, the truth is that you can't punish a child enough to make them responsible for their own safety. If you,ve got kids young enough that streets and scissors are an issue,vigilence, prayer and quick parental feet are the best parenting.

 

How nice if you are superman. or superMom. but the truth is, sometimes a child will jerk out of an adults hand or older sibling.Case in point: tragedy a few years ago when a 15 yr olds 4 yr old brother yanked away just as a porche, yes a porche, was coming in the opposite direction as they waited to cross the street, killed him instantly. It was no one's fault, just a tragedy.

 

Well, and if you're disabled as *I* was with 5 young children (2 special needs), you put in place a lot of prevention. You can't prevent EVERYTHING but you can prevent a whole lot more than most able-bodied parents do. Like Joanne said, you just can't punish a child enough to make them safe and by doing so means you dropped the ball in the first place. It only takes ONCE for a child to be seriously injured or killed. You really don't want to take that risk with a safety issue.

 

So I guess I was blessed with a tough kiddo AND disability in order to learn different :)

 

You have done great I am sure.

 

Oh MY, it is a dissertation!! I am sorry yall, I will try to quit writing so much!

 

HA!! I multi quoted!!

[Remudamom]

Ah, "St Claire"............?

Edited November 16, 2008 by Remudamom

[sagira]

Whew!

 

To the OP, here's a response form Helpguide.org on the definition of physical abuse:

 

"Many physically abusive parents and caregivers insist that their actions are simply forms of discipline, ways to make children learn to behave. But there’s a big difference between giving an unmanageable child a swat on the backside and twisting the child’s arm until it breaks. Physical abuse can include striking a child with the hand, fist, or foot or with an object, burning, shaking, pushing, or throwing a child; pinching or biting the child, pulling a child by the hair or cutting off a child’s air. Another form of child abuse involving babies is shaken baby syndrome, in which a frustrated caregiver shakes a baby roughly to make the baby stop crying, causing brain damage that often leads to severe neurological problems and even death."

 

That said, here are a few of my observations of this thread (and I have read almost all, if not all, the posts (BTW, I'm not going to be reeled into an argument -- if anybody wants a clarification, PM me ;)):

 

-pqr's post is eloquent, but that doesn't mean I agree with what was said. I don't.

-IMO, To Train Up a Child belongs in the trash. I usually don't harbor strong opinions, but as someone who has read more parts of this book than I care to go into and know a few kids brought up in this "system", I think it's horrible, sad and awful. Hitting infants? Setting kids up to fail and then striking them? Spanking thirteen-year-olds (or something to that effect)? Hitting with a smile? I'm sorry, but all that sounds seriously perverted to me.

 

I was spanked and always resented it. I don't ever say, "I deserved it," because I didn't. Was I defiant? Yes. Rebellious? Yes, only in so far as refusing to clean and organize my room. Whenever I was spanked by my mom, I got angrier and to this day I'm still defiant (especially with her) and can't seem to clean my own house (sigh). I didn't respect my mom because she spanked me, I respected my dad because he didn't. I also listened to my dad more as his approach was always compassionate and gentle. He trusted me, and I responded to that. Aside from the spankings, my mom was and is a great and involved mother but boy do I wish she didn't spank.

 

I am the child who, in Kindergarten, refused to come inside after class because I didn't want to. Then it started raining. And I still didn't come. Even after the teacher called me. I was wet, but determined. To this day, I'm a determined woman who doesn't let minor obstacles ruin her dream or whatever she has set her mind to do.

 

Needless to say, I'm not spanking. The other reason I'm not spanking my kids is because I'm afraid I can get out of hand if I ever try as I was spanked before. I feel this could be an issue if I did spank. Does not mean it could be an issue for someone else, but in my case, I feel it could be an issue.

 

My son is a bit defiant, like I am, and I understand him very well :tongue_smilie: A month or so ago I caught him explaining to his baby sister (1) how frustrated he was that she knocked over his blocks. Two spanking mothers turned to me in wonder and said, "That's great. Mine would have hit her without a word." And I was concerned about the tone he was using with her ;)

 

It's a lot easier to resort to the knee-jerk reaction of "how dare you" and spank, rather than rise up above that and think of actual long-term parenting consequences and effective skills. It is a lot harder to trust that your child will learn. Trust can be hard. But you know what? I think my children are worth that effort.

Edited November 16, 2008 by sagira

[Lovedtodeath]

Sagira. Wow. ::applause:: I was feeling bad about resurrecting the thread.

 

What's funny is I had no idea what to say because I agreed with almost everyone. (How is that even possible?) I don't know. But I think Sagira's post coincides with my feelings the most.

 

I also just want to say that many times we are expecting our children to accomplish things they simply are not capable of, or it is very difficult for them. I can't keep my own house clean either. If I was 4 or 7 and couldn't (didn't) clean up something I would get spanked? I can't (don't) do it now as an adult. I wish I could (did), but something in me just doesn't work that way. Our kids have the same problems we do. Maybe we just don't understand them.

[sunshine]

Sagira. Wow. ::applause:: I was feeling bad about resurrecting the thread.

 

What's funny is I had no idea what to say because I agreed with almost everyone. (How is that even possible?) I don't know. But I think Sagira's post coincides with my feelings the most.

 

I also just want to say that many times we are expecting our children to accomplish things they simply are not capable of, or it is very difficult for them. I can't keep my own house clean either. If I was 4 or 7 and couldn't (didn't) clean up something I would get spanked? I can't (don't) do it now as an adult. I wish I could (did), but something in me just doesn't work that way. Our kids have the same problems we do. Maybe we just don't understand them.

 

 

I wonder how many people would spank for not cleaning up a room? I would hope not many. Spanking infants? no I don't agree with that and I know that the Pearls do not either. A light swat... now that is another story. and like I said, no spanks at all before 18 months to 2 yr and it must be active defiance. Yes the little darlings are capable of defiance at 18 mon and 2 yrs.

In any book, website, conversation or sermon I think we pick and choose what we know applies to our situation and our families. There are some things that would never work in my kids life and then it might work for #1 or #3 but not #2. A blanket approach to child rearing never works because each child is different and responds to different methods. My middle one responds to reason, and usually all I have to do is tell her once and I do like to say an explanation after saying not to do something and she gets it immediately, the other two not so much and the non biological ones are as apt to be one way as another. Teens always need multiple explanations and then explanations why their way may not work and to go ahead and do it the right way..... it just varies, you have to be in tune to what works for your child with grace extended alot. There are many times I have asked the child what they think should happen in a circumstance and their punishment is always harsher than what I would do, and those times are the times that I say "mercy says no, it was given to me, so of course I will give it to you..." Hugs, kisses etc.. follow.

Oh no here I go again, yada yada yada, you know my stance, I am not trying to convince you either way. You do what is right for your child as long as they are not afraid of you I am good. If they are not little brats no one wants to be around because you don't discipline them, I am good there too. Not that it matters.

Edited November 16, 2008 by sunshine
spelling...again

[Lovedtodeath]

In any book, website, conversation or sermon I think we pick and choose what we know applies to our situation and our families. A blanket approach to child rearing never works because each child is different and responds to different methods. You do what is right for your child as long as they are not afraid of you I am good. If they are not little brats no one wants to be around because you don't discipline them, I am good there too.

 

:iagree: You explained it! (I was including you in the almost everyone bit.. ya silly!:grouphug: Originally Posted by Lovedtodeath

What's funny is I had no idea what to say because I agreed with almost everyone. (How is that even possible?) I don't know.

[sunshine]

:iagree: You explained it! (I was including you in the almost everyone bit.. ya silly!:grouphug: Originally Posted by Lovedtodeath

What's funny is I had no idea what to say because I agreed with almost everyone. (How is that even possible?) I don't know.

 

LOVE you too!!:001_smile:

[st_claire]

No, but neither do I ask their consent about the veggies or their ability to move out.

 

So if your kid was screaming no! you would force veggies down their throat? I wouldn't. I don't think that is right.

[st_claire]

 

Second, perhaps the current state of obesity in children is due to parents who feel their children have the right to consent to (and there by the right to refuse) what they are fed. Let's see-what does the average eight year old want-Twinkies or Green Beans?

 

Hmmm......Food for thought?;)

 

Most kids who are overweight are so due to lack of exercise, not eating habits. And most kids love doing sports or other activities. Lazy parenting that uses TV as a babysitter is a far more likely cause of childhood obesity than lack of veggie eating. And I didn't say you should ask your kid everytime if they want to eat their veg, but if they refuse, I don't think parents should force it on them. Just like adults, children are people, and should be able to say no.

[st_claire]

Self defense is not physical punishment. You are preventing harm to yourself. That is not the case when you spank a child. Police don't shoot you to "teach you a lesson". Do not equate the two.

 

Do you feel that public canings resolve situations in the most efficient way it can? It's certainly faster and cheaper justice. If you do, then there are many countries where that is their justice system. You should consider them as a home. If you don't, then why would physical punishment be effective for your children but not for you?

 

If someone is a child molester, I would call the police and work hard to see them behind bars. I also have no idea how a well supervised child would meet such a person. If my child truly wanted to live with someone else, I would let them yes. I think the odds of a child wanting to leave a healthy loving home are almost nonexistant however.

 

So if adults can make poor decisions, why can't children?

 

 

that's why we don't haul off and hit for no reason. But even adults are prone to physical punishment when they step outta line -- that's why police carry guns and people are trained in self defense. I absolutely believe in training a child. And that training is to set them up to AVOID spankings and other physical punishments and think through a situation before doing something wrong. So it is not my intent to 'assume they want to be hit'-- it is my intent to resolve a situation the most efficient way i can, based on what i know about the options, possible consequences, and the child's demeanor.

 

 

 

except what happens if some wacko pervert has talked your dc into living w/ THEM? Are you going to LET them?? A child simply DOES NOT have the experience or maturity to make those decisions for themselves.

 

Yes, most children want to stay in a loving home. And many children will opt to stay w/ a dysfunctional family too. And many battered women actually do have some sick sort of needy relationship and won't leave. And even children in a loving home are prone to the ol' 'the grass is always greener' syndrome and want to move in w/ another family who gets chicken nuggets every night for dinner.....because they are CHILDREN and don't have teh experience or maturity to think about the Whole Picture. What people 'want' isn't always in their best interest.

[st_claire]

Ah, "St Claire"............?

 

Yes?

[Peek a Boo]

 

So if your kid was screaming no! you would force veggies down their throat? I wouldn't. I don't think that is right.

 

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

And I didn't say you should ask your kid everytime if they want to eat their veg, but if they refuse, I don't think parents should force it on them. Just like adults, children are people, and should be able to say no.

--------

 

Self defense is not physical punishment. You are preventing harm to yourself. That is not the case when you spank a child. Police don't shoot you to "teach you a lesson". Do not equate the two.

 

Do you feel that public canings resolve situations in the most efficient way it can? It's certainly faster and cheaper justice. If you do, then there are many countries where that is their justice system. You should consider them as a home. If you don't, then why would physical punishment be effective for your children but not for you?

 

If someone is a child molester, I would call the police and work hard to see them behind bars. I also have no idea how a well supervised child would meet such a person. If my child truly wanted to live with someone else, I would let them yes. I think the odds of a child wanting to leave a healthy loving home are almost nonexistant however.

 

So if adults can make poor decisions, why can't children?

 

 

 

Why should children be able to refuse something that they need?

I have yet to hear you give a good reason that we should let children continue in a course of action that may be detrimental to them.

I don't think THAT is right either. In fact, your negligence in making sure they eat a nutritionally balanced diet could be called physical abuse too at this rate.

 

Children do not KNOW how to 'prevent harm to themselves" --that's ANOTHER reason we don't treat them like adults. Police shoot because someone is doing something WRONG that may endanger the life of the officer or another. That is also one of the cases where spankings are issued: we don't shoot children [usually], but we do issue a similar punitive punishment that ADULTS WOULD FACE. back to pqr's initial post.

 

 

You keep saying that children are 'just like' adults but we have clear scientific evidence from child development studies that they are NOT 'just like adults' and plenty of evidence psychologically that children do NOT function or think like adults. that's why we have laws in place to protect them. You would have to make a stronger case that children do not need these extra protections if you are going to continue saying that children are 'just like adults.'

 

And no, you don't have to force veggies down their throat. A quick spanking /ear flick for disobedience will usually settle that pretty quickly and from then on out they'll usually eat the veggies rather than take another spanking. I have found that a solid start w/ initial training in non-punititive measures helps keep these instances to a minimum and makes the few punitive corrections a bit more effective.

 

In the real world, if you start screaming NO! in a courtroom a bailiff is likely to escort you out, and if you continue to refuse you will be Physically Made to Comply. So if you're looking for treating children 'like adults' there's PLENTY of real-world scenarios where punitive correction comes into play. pqr laid that out in his first post.

 

 

I already mentioned why we don't tend to support canings/ spankings for older childrejn or adults as a routine measure, so no, i would not be interested in that as a form of justice for thinking adults. I am content w/ our system of trial by jury.

 

this last part really concerns me tho:

If someone is a child molester, I would call the police and work hard to see them behind bars. I also have no idea how a well supervised child would meet such a person. If my child truly wanted to live with someone else, I would let them yes.

 

Statistics show that the person you need to worry about most when it comes to molestation is SOMEONE YOU KNOW. Usually people who finagle their way into your lives and find opportunities to work w/ children. You'd have to raise your children in an isolated bubble to prevent that. So from your posts here, you would be willing to let someone that you don't know whether they are a molestor or not talk your child into living w/ them. And once your child is living w/ them, you'd have NO IDEA whether they were being molested or not. Good call.

 

Adults are given the freedom to make poor decisions because they are a [more] mature individual w/ more experience and reasoning capability than a child. THAT's why.

Edited November 16, 2008 by Peek a Boo

[st_claire]

I never suggest you sit back and watch as children continue a detrimental course of action. I merely suggested that physical harm was not an acceptable solution. How about time-outs? fines? This is much more like the real world punishments an adult would face.

 

Why do you assume I would not ensure they ate a balanced diet? It's rather difficult for a kid to eat bad food when good food is put on the table.

 

I feel I must repeat myself yet again, adults do not face physical punishment. I'm confused as to why you keep claiming they do.

 

Children are mentally different than adults, yes. But some adults are mentally different than others. At what age does a child have a right to say "don't hit me!"? If an adult wants to get drunk everyday, that's not a wise choice, but do we say "you obviously can't decide things for yourself, so we will decide for you"? Children make mistakes. They learn from them. Just like adults.

 

You physically hurt your child to gain compliance. I would never do such a thing. Just as the child would comply in order to avoid harm, so to would a child easily comply in order to avoid inconvienience, like a time-out, a fine, a loss of priviliges, etc...

 

Being escorted out or restrained in self defense is NOT the same as physical punishment. Stop equating the two. After you are escorted out, no one spanks you.

 

Again, if you think physical punishment is the most effective solution (as you stated before), why do you not feel it is effective for adults?

 

So you don't let your kids sleep over at anyone's house? Cause they could be being molested there. And your kids aren't allowed to stop unwanted behavior. I wouldn't allow my kids to be alone with anyone I didn't know. And yes, I might be wrong about the person, but my children would know that they have a right to say "No!". That they have a right to use self defense. And that NO ONE has a right to touch them in a way they don't want! I'm pretty confident that my approach is safer than yours.

 

 

Why should children be able to refuse something that they need?

I have yet to hear you give a good reason that we should let children continue in a course of action that may be detrimental to them.

I don't think THAT is right either. In fact, your negligence in making sure they eat a nutritionally balanced diet could be called physical abuse too at this rate.

 

Children do not KNOW how to 'prevent harm to themselves" --that's ANOTHER reason we don't treat them like adults. Police shoot because someone is doing something WRONG that may endanger the life of the officer or another. That is also one of the cases where spankings are issued: we don't shoot children [usually], but we do issue a similar punitive punishment that ADULTS WOULD FACE. back to pqr's initial post.

 

 

You keep saying that children are 'just like' adults but we have clear scientific evidence from child development studies that they are NOT 'just like adults' and plenty of evidence psychologically that children do NOT function or think like adults. that's why we have laws in place to protect them. You would have to make a stronger case that children do not need these extra protections if you are going to continue saying that children are 'just like adults.'

 

And no, you don't have to force veggies down their throat. A quick spanking /ear flick for disobedience will usually settle that pretty quickly and from then on out they'll usually eat the veggies rather than take another spanking. I have found that a solid start w/ initial training in non-punititive measures helps keep these instances to a minimum and makes the few punitive corrections a bit more effective.

 

In the real world, if you start screaming NO! in a courtroom a bailiff is likely to escort you out, and if you continue to refuse you will be Physically Made to Comply. So if you're looking for treating children 'like adults' there's PLENTY of real-world scenarios where punitive correction comes into play. pqr laid that out in his first post.

 

 

I already mentioned why we don't tend to support canings/ spankings for older childrejn or adults as a routine measure, so no, i would not be interested in that as a form of justice for thinking adults. I am content w/ our system of trial by jury.

 

this last part really concerns me tho:

If someone is a child molester, I would call the police and work hard to see them behind bars. I also have no idea how a well supervised child would meet such a person. If my child truly wanted to live with someone else, I would let them yes.

 

Statistics show that the person you need to worry about most when it comes to molestation is SOMEONE YOU KNOW. Usually people who finagle their way into your lives and find opportunities to work w/ children. You'd have to raise your children in an isolated bubble to prevent that. So from your posts here, you would be willing to let someone that you don't know whether they are a molestor or not talk your child into living w/ them. And once your child is living w/ them, you'd have NO IDEA whether they were being molested or not. Good call.

 

Adults are given the freedom to make poor decisions because they are a [more] mature individual w/ more experience and reasoning capability than a child. THAT's why.

[wheezie]

Loving parents spank their children.

 

Ummm, no they don't. That statement alone just gives me the creeps. I'm about as anti spanking as a person can be as I was abused as a child. Trust me, there was nothing loving about my home or my parents. ;) The whole "I love you, and that's why I'm going to spank you" thing is just ridiculous.

[CAMom]

If someone is a child molester, I would call the police and work hard to see them behind bars. I also have no idea how a well supervised child would meet such a person. If my child truly wanted to live with someone else, I would let them yes. I think the odds of a child wanting to leave a healthy loving home are almost nonexistant however.

 

So if adults can make poor decisions, why can't children?

 

Well, because children don't have the ability or life experience to think through the consequences of their choices. At all!

 

I'm just curious, and I've read the whole discussion, if you have some age limit on letting your child go live with someone else? How young would you allow that? Because, my dd wanted to go live with her "other mommy" (who was imaginary, btw) when she was about 5 because she was nicer than me.

[Peek a Boo]

I never suggest you sit back and watch as children continue a detrimental course of action. I merely suggested that physical harm was not an acceptable solution. How about time-outs? fines? This is much more like the real world punishments an adult would face.

 

and when time outs and fines don't work, adults are sent to jail. and when they don't comply at jail, they WILL use force to HURT an adult and make them comply. So what would YOU do when those non-physical methods don't work on a child?

 

Why do you assume I would not ensure they ate a balanced diet? It's rather difficult for a kid to eat bad food when good food is put on the table.

 

I feel I must repeat myself yet again, adults do not face physical punishment. I'm confused as to why you keep claiming they do.

 

I'm only assuming that which you have stated: that you would not force your kids to eat something they don't want to. It is YOU who are assuming that a child will choose good over junk. Not every child will do that.

 

and yes, adults DO face physical punishments --are you familiar w/ the American law enforcement system? Law enforcement personnel are trained in methods to take down a person *when other methods do not work*, and some of those methods include taking them down by inflicting a LOT of pain. That IS a physical punishment for continued disobedience.

 

Children are mentally different than adults, yes. But some adults are mentally different than others. At what age does a child have a right to say "don't hit me!"? If an adult wants to get drunk everyday, that's not a wise choice, but do we say "you obviously can't decide things for yourself, so we will decide for you"? Children make mistakes. They learn from them. Just like adults.

 

Some adults are so mentally different from others that they DON't have the rights that other adults do. A child has the right to say 'don't hit me" when they have the responsibility and maturity to obey the rules set before them --in their community and home. Since this discussion has turned from 'what is abuse' to 'hurting even another adult is never practiced in the real world' I'm going to focus on the real world scenarios where pain IS used. I still maintain that not all spanking is abusive, but that some abusive people do use spanking.

 

We DO punish adults who are publicly inebriated and/or a danger to themselves or others. They will be put in jail, and if they refuse, they will be physically forced to comply, sometimes w/ painful methods. Sometimes learning from those mistakes has a couple bruises to go along w/ them. not that i think spanking should involve a bruise-- my entire point [that pqr already noted] is that spanking a child is a scaled down version of what adults DO face when they refuse to comply.

 

You physically hurt your child to gain compliance. I would never do such a thing.

 

Are you assuming that people who spank do so for every little thing and never try a non-punitive form of training? I'm sure there are some, but you'd be wrong by a longshot if that's what you are basing this discussion on.

 

I don't have to physically hurt them for each and every little thing --only when those non-punitive training methods do not accomplish the training necessary. Like for adults --if the police are trying to use a non-punitive method of getting an adult to comply and it works, great! If it fails, they up the ante, and they will continue to up the ante until pain is involved.

 

and i would NEVER let my child continue in a course of action that could be detrimental to them or others. Even if i had to resort to physically hurting them in a lesser way than the natural consequence would be.

 

Just as the child would comply in order to avoid harm, so to would a child easily comply in order to avoid inconvienience, like a time-out, a fine, a loss of priviliges, etc...

 

you are assuming that every child would respond to loss of privileges/inconvenience, timeouts, etc, like they do pain. That is not always true.

 

Being escorted out or restrained in self defense is NOT the same as physical punishment. Stop equating the two. After you are escorted out, no one spanks you.

 

If you fail to comply w/ the escort, you can absolutely bet they will hurt you to get you out of that room. The equating here is FAILURE TO COMPLY after initial methods have been tried.

 

 

Again, if you think physical punishment is the most effective solution (as you stated before), why do you not feel it is effective for adults?

 

I didn't say it was always The Most Effective solution --i said that in some instances it is for those that refuse to comply via other methods. And apparently it IS effective for some adults --law enforcement still continue to use it for adults that Fail to Comply.

 

So now I ask you point blank: what would you expect law enforcement to do to an adult that is not complying?? wait for the adult to consent?? you keep saying that adults are not prone to physical punishment, but you ignore the instances already given in this thread.

 

 

So you don't let your kids sleep over at anyone's house? Cause they could be being molested there. And your kids aren't allowed to stop unwanted behavior. I wouldn't allow my kids to be alone with anyone I didn't know. And yes, I might be wrong about the person, but my children would know that they have a right to say "No!". That they have a right to use self defense. And that NO ONE has a right to touch them in a way they don't want! I'm pretty confident that my approach is safer than yours.

 

Yes, i do allow some sleepovers. And yes, i know the risks. My two older boys are coming home from a Scout campout as i type. The Scouts is one organization to be very careful in because of the risk for adults to build close relationships w/ the kids. Churches are another. But I would never allow my child to actually LIVE w/ someone else 'just because they wanted to.'

Do you allow sleepovers?

There are plenty of parents here on the board that DON't allow sleepovers tho for that and numerous other reasons. And like the experts say-- it's the people that you think you DO know that are usually the ones molesting your children. And I'm glad you have taught your children that they have a right to say no and to use self defense, but people like this are experts at emotional and physical manipulation.

 

Your confidence is admirable, but not realistic based on the number of children that are molested every day.

And no, i think my approach to not let my children be talked into living w/ someone else IS safer than yours.

Edited November 16, 2008 by Peek a Boo
duh to that last line, lol!

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

Most kids who are overweight are so due to lack of exercise, not eating habits. And most kids love doing sports or other activities. Lazy parenting that uses TV as a babysitter is a far more likely cause of childhood obesity than lack of veggie eating. And I didn't say you should ask your kid everytime if they want to eat their veg, but if they refuse, I don't think parents should force it on them. Just like adults, children are people, and should be able to say no.

 

You appear to believe that if parents provide the right environment children will always make the correct and best choices. While I agree that parents should provide a positive environment: a loving home, good food, education, and fun; children are immature and make poor choices. That is part of growing up and children need both guidance and consequences to mature.

 

If kids loved exercise so much they would be outside playing tag or running about and not sitting in front of their computer or playstation or TV. And we wouldn't have every news outlet telling us our kids are overweight due to the amount of "screen time" they are allowed.

 

Besides, if, according to you, my kids have the right to refuse their veggies then they must also have the right to refuse to participate in sports and exercise. Or is it ok to drag them to the soccer field but not insist they make healthy food choices?

[pqr]

So if your kid was screaming no! you would force veggies down their throat? I wouldn't. I don't think that is right.

 

 

No I would not force veggies down their throat, there are other methods that all parents use. Believe me a spanking is frequently the last method of discipline that I apply. Not always the last, but frequently.

 

What you fail to understand is that when parents use the entire arsenal of discipline techniques they generally have extremely well behaved children.

 

The scenario above would never happen. We put veggies in front of the children; sometimes they tell us that they are not fond of them, we reply that we understand but that veggies are part of a healthy diet and that the children are expected to eat them. The children may grimace but will then eat all their vegetables. I honestly do not think that it would occur to my children to scream No!

 

Actually the more I think about it, I know that my children would never behave in that manner. To scream at the dinner table would be rude, to scream at their parents would be, well.....beyond belief.

 

Further, screaming at one's parents would result in far more dire consequences than simply not eating vegetables. If you really want to know, ....yes children certainly would get a spanking for being rude to their parents.

 

Some of us still live in a world where our children are respectful and do what they are told. Perhaps this is because, when necessary, we spank.

[tibbyl]

... Spanking infants? no I don't agree with that and I know that the Pearls do not either...

 

If by "spanking" infants, you mean slapping on the buttocks with hand, then, no, the Pearls do not advocate spanking.

 

Instead, they advise the use of a foot long switch on infants as young as a few months old: " ... For the under-one-year-old, a little, 10- to 12-inch long, willowy branch (stripped of any knots that might break the skin) about one-eighth inch diameter is sufficient ... " In fact, early on in the book they describe whipping their own 4 month old daughter.

 

The book is available in its entirety online at:

http://city.hokkai.or.jp/~repent/EnglishPages/TrainUp.html

[Lovedtodeath]

In fact, early on in the book they describe whipping their own 4 month old daughter.

 

I am going to be sick.

[bumbledeb]

No I would not force veggies down their throat, there are other methods that all parents use. Believe me a spanking is frequently the last method of discipline that I apply. Not always the last, but frequently.

 

What you fail to understand is that when parents use the entire arsenal of discipline techniques they generally have extremely well behaved children.

 

The scenario above would never happen. We put veggies in front of the children; sometimes they tell us that they are not fond of them, we reply that we understand but that veggies are part of a healthy diet and that the children are expected to eat them. The children may grimace but will then eat all their vegetables. I honestly do not think that it would occur to my children to scream No!

 

Actually the more I think about it, I know that my children would never behave in that manner. To scream at the dinner table would be rude, to scream at their parents would be, well.....beyond belief.

 

Further, screaming at one's parents would result in far more dire consequences than simply not eating vegetables. If you really want to know, ....yes children certainly would get a spanking for being rude to their parents.

 

Some of us still live in a world where our children are respectful and do what they are told. Perhaps this is because, when necessary, we spank.

 

Just got back and still busy but just wanted to say that my children are respectful and do what they are told. They eat the vegetables they like, try the ones they don't and eat lots of fruit. They are polite, well-behaved and admired by lots of my friends. Perhaps that's because I don't spank them?

[bumbledeb]

You appear to believe that if parents provide the right environment children will always make the correct and best choices. While I agree that parents should provide a positive environment: a loving home, good food, education, and fun; children are immature and make poor choices. That is part of growing up and children need both guidance and consequences to mature.

 

If kids loved exercise so much they would be outside playing tag or running about and not sitting in front of their computer or playstation or TV. And we wouldn't have every news outlet telling us our kids are overweight due to the amount of "screen time" they are allowed.

 

Besides, if, according to you, my kids have the right to refuse their veggies then they must also have the right to refuse to participate in sports and exercise. Or is it ok to drag them to the soccer field but not insist they make healthy food choices?

 

In my experience, kids are only too happy to leave the screens and play active games if the parents take to time to play with them.

 

This kind of parenting takes lots of effort and involvement. It is not an easy option or one for lazy parents.

[Lovedtodeath]

I think some children naturally have dispositions that are harder to deal with. No I know they do. My DD was harder than DS from birth.

[st_claire]

and when time outs and fines don't work, adults are sent to jail. and when they don't comply at jail, they WILL use force to HURT an adult and make them comply. So what would YOU do when those non-physical methods don't work on a child?

 

They use force to make them comply when their compliance is required yes. They do not use force to teach them a lesson. If your kid broke a rule, using force on them after is not to make them comply. It is to teach them a lesson. That is the difference. We do not go to adults after the crime and hurt them as punishment.

 

 

I'm only assuming that which you have stated: that you would not force your kids to eat something they don't want to. It is YOU who are assuming that a child will choose good over junk. Not every child will do that.

 

Like I said, rather hard to chose junk when it is not around.

 

and yes, adults DO face physical punishments --are you familiar w/ the American law enforcement system? Law enforcement personnel are trained in methods to take down a person *when other methods do not work*, and some of those methods include taking them down by inflicting a LOT of pain. That IS a physical punishment for continued disobedience.

 

How many times do we have to go over this? A take down is not the same as punishment. One is for immediate action, the other is retribution. Anything after the fact is what I consider not ok. Keep your debate to that. Learn the difference. I'm going to refrain from correcting this error again and again in the remainder of your post. Please compare apples to apples.

 

 

you are assuming that every child would respond to loss of privileges/inconvenience, timeouts, etc, like they do pain. That is not always true.

 

That's right. They will not. I don't want a child to have to respond to something like they do pain. All they will learn is to fear your. Fear is not respect.

 

Yes, i do allow some sleepovers. And yes, i know the risks. My two older boys are coming home from a Scout campout as i type. The Scouts is one organization to be very careful in because of the risk for adults to build close relationships w/ the kids. Churches are another. But I would never allow my child to actually LIVE w/ someone else 'just because they wanted to.'

 

Do you think they have less chance of being molested at camp then when living with someone? I'd say the prior is more likely than the latter.

 

Do you allow sleepovers?

Sure, if I know the people.

 

And no, i think my approach to not let my children be talked into living w/ someone else IS safer than yours.

 

So what if they are at camp and an adult tries to touch them and they don't want it to happen? You taught them that adults can touch children even if the child doesn't want it.

[pqr]

When I stated that loving parents spank, you replied:

 

Ummm, no they don't. That statement alone just gives me the creeps. I'm about as anti spanking as a person can be as I was abused as a child. Trust me, there was nothing loving about my home or my parents. ;) The whole "I love you, and that's why I'm going to spank you" thing is just ridiculous.

 

 

Beyond being simply rude, you are confusing abuse with spanking. There may have been little loving about your home, and that is sad, but your statement is is outrageous. To be anti-spanking because you were abused is comparing apples and oranges. While abusers may spank (perhaps beat is a better word in this case), this is generally done to excess, without justification and causes long term damage. Abusers also frequently employ other techniques of abuse. To oppose spanking because you were abused is akin to opposing driving because you have been in a car accident.

 

Are you further saying that those of us who were spanked somehow did not have loving parents? Throughout the last 1,000 years of Western Civilization when spanking was almost universal (other than for the past 50 years) there were no loving parents who spanked? Come on...

 

Lets be honest here some loving parents do spank. I would agree that some loving parents do not spank. I merely feel that those who do not spank are incorrect in their logic or, in some cases unwilling, to bear the burden of spanking, but I do not doubt that they are loving.

 

Why do you think parents spank their children, for fun, out of anger, from some sense of superiority? I spank because I love my children with all my heart. There is nothing I would not to to ensure their welfare and to ensure that they grow up to be individuals of character, honor and value, there is no sacrifice too great. I love them too much to fail in this endeavor. As such, when necessary, I spank.

[Blessedfamily]

If by "spanking" infants, you mean slapping on the buttocks with hand, then, no, the Pearls do not advocate spanking.

 

Instead, they advise the use of a foot long switch on infants as young as a few months old: " ... For the under-one-year-old, a little, 10- to 12-inch long, willowy branch (stripped of any knots that might break the skin) about one-eighth inch diameter is sufficient ... " In fact, early on in the book they describe whipping their own 4 month old daughter.

 

The book is available in its entirety online at:

http://city.hokkai.or.jp/~repent/EnglishPages/TrainUp.html

 

O.k. I've been staying out of this but this link is atrocious. I don't think everyone who spanks is abusive, but I would never use these people as an example. What I have read so far is a lot of equating training children with animal training. And they seem to think if the children sit quitely, this training has work and is o.k. And they use scriptures to back it up.

 

 

Quote

 

"One particularly painful experience of nursing mothers is the biting baby. My wife did not waste time finding a cure. When the baby bit, she pulled hair"

 

She pulled a baby's hair? I would report that.

 

Quote-

"The mother clumsily holds her cereal bowl at arms length as she wrestles her infant for supremacy. When she places the bowl out of the baby's reach, he is taught it is off limits only if it is out of reach. To train him, place the bowl within easy reach. When he reaches out, say "No" and thump his hand."

 

Quote-

"One of our girls who developed mobility early had a fascination with crawling up the stairs. At four months she was too unknowing to be punished for disobedience. But for her own good, we attempted to train her not to climb the stairs by coordinating the voice command of "No" with little spats on the bare legs. The switch was a twelve-inch long, one-eighth-inch diameter sprig from a willow tree."

Edited November 16, 2008 by Blessedfamily

[st_claire]

No, I never said kids always make the right choices. They make tons of mistakes. But so do adults. And just like I have the right o make poor choices, I feel so should children.

 

Kids will do what is easy and what is presented to them. If a kid lives in the city, its hard to play tag with their friends. Not much room, not allowed out alone, etc... TV is offered to them, they use it. But I bet if you ask that kid "What would you rather, play some more video games, or come paintballing with me?" (for example, use whatever activity they enjoy) that kid would much prefer the activity.

 

And no, I would not force activity on my child. But they will find activity with the family is much more fun than sitting at home bored.

 

 

You appear to believe that if parents provide the right environment children will always make the correct and best choices. While I agree that parents should provide a positive environment: a loving home, good food, education, and fun; children are immature and make poor choices. That is part of growing up and children need both guidance and consequences to mature.

 

If kids loved exercise so much they would be outside playing tag or running about and not sitting in front of their computer or playstation or TV. And we wouldn't have every news outlet telling us our kids are overweight due to the amount of "screen time" they are allowed.

 

Besides, if, according to you, my kids have the right to refuse their veggies then they must also have the right to refuse to participate in sports and exercise. Or is it ok to drag them to the soccer field but not insist they make healthy food choices?

[st_claire]

I actually agree quite a bit with you. What I wrote was in response to the other poster suggesting that my children could simply say no and not eat veggies. I expect both situations would play out identically in our homes. by how you describe yours. My point was that should it not work out the expected way, and by some strange turn they absolutely refused to eat the veggies, I would not use force on them to ensure compliance.

 

 

No I would not force veggies down their throat, there are other methods that all parents use. Believe me a spanking is frequently the last method of discipline that I apply. Not always the last, but frequently.

 

What you fail to understand is that when parents use the entire arsenal of discipline techniques they generally have extremely well behaved children.

 

The scenario above would never happen. We put veggies in front of the children; sometimes they tell us that they are not fond of them, we reply that we understand but that veggies are part of a healthy diet and that the children are expected to eat them. The children may grimace but will then eat all their vegetables. I honestly do not think that it would occur to my children to scream No!

 

Actually the more I think about it, I know that my children would never behave in that manner. To scream at the dinner table would be rude, to scream at their parents would be, well.....beyond belief.

 

Further, screaming at one's parents would result in far more dire consequences than simply not eating vegetables. If you really want to know, ....yes children certainly would get a spanking for being rude to their parents.

 

Some of us still live in a world where our children are respectful and do what they are told. Perhaps this is because, when necessary, we spank.

[st_claire]

In my experience, kids are only too happy to leave the screens and play active games if the parents take to time to play with them.

 

This kind of parenting takes lots of effort and involvement. It is not an easy option or one for lazy parents.

 

:iagree: with both your posts :) Well said.

[Blessedfamily]

I respect people's opinions on both sides of this issue to a degree. Feel free to disagree vehemently but this kind of a thread is just what is meant by "spiraling downward" and reading the original post I'm not sure it could have done anything else.

[LisaNY]

I respect people's opinions on both sides of this issue to a degree. Feel free to disagree vehemently but this kind of a thread is just what is meant by "spiraling downward" and reading the original post I'm not sure it could have done anything else.

 

Ya think? :blink:

[Blessedfamily]

Ya think? :blink:

 

:001_smile: I know I sound ralled up but when a thread is started with terms like......

 

" a swat on the backside still be considered discipline"

 

"What about a smack across the face for mouthing off?"

 

"holding the wrist tightly enough to leave a temporary mark while restraining a child?"

 

 

you know a big argument will be incited.

Edited November 16, 2008 by Blessedfamily

[pqr]

You taught them that adults can touch children even if the child doesn't want it.

 

How did you draw that conclusion from Peek's comments? If you are arguing that Peek, by spanking teaches that "adults can touch (I assume you mean molest) children" you are stretching logic past the breaking point.

Edited November 16, 2008 by pqr

[Jenny in Atl]

My MIL was a big on spanking, well until my Dh was old enough to hit back. She quickly learned it was not the best tool in the parenting box. :D

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

In my experience, kids are only too happy to leave the screens and play active games if the parents take to time to play with them.

 

This kind of parenting takes lots of effort and involvement. It is not an easy option or one for lazy parents.

 

No, I never said kids always make the right choices. They make tons of mistakes. But so do adults. And just like I have the right o make poor choices, I feel so should children.

 

Kids will do what is easy and what is presented to them. If a kid lives in the city, its hard to play tag with their friends. Not much room, not allowed out alone, etc... TV is offered to them, they use it. But I bet if you ask that kid "What would you rather, play some more video games, or come paintballing with me?" (for example, use whatever activity they enjoy) that kid would much prefer the activity.

 

And no, I would not force activity on my child. But they will find activity with the family is much more fun than sitting at home bored.

 

Sadly the shelves in the local bookstore are filled with tomes of research that completely disagree with your opinions. For an example of this I suggest you try Jane Healy's books, which, although they speak more to cognitive development, do discuss obesity.

 

Unfortunately kids won't choose exercise as their form of enjoyment everytime. Diet is a huge factor in childhood obesity. Period. Your earlier statement that children must consent to being well fed is untenable. Children should be well fed, that is a parent's duty to fulfill to the best of their ability. A parent always has the ability to select the child's food.

 

As for bumbledeb-I find your post a bit accusatory. I am not a lazy parent nor are my children inactive. My kids enjoy team sports, long distance running, swimming and a good old fashioned trip to the playground. They have limited screen time and eat their vegetables and fruit before being allowed any form of dessert. They also have limited access to candy, sodas, etc.

 

The point of this discussion is that you have repeatedly stated that children must consent to all that is asked of them and I contend that such a situation is not parenting. Some parents may be able to achieve this without disciplinary techniques as spanking others may not, this is a choice and a far cry from abuse.

[bumbledeb]

Sadly the shelves in the local bookstore are filled with tomes of research that completely disagree with your opinions. For an example of this I suggest you try Jane Healy's books, which, although they speak more to cognitive development, do discuss obesity.

 

Unfortunately kids won't choose exercise as their form of enjoyment everytime. Diet is a huge factor in childhood obesity. Period. Your earlier statement that children must consent to being well fed is untenable. Children should be well fed, that is a parent's duty to fulfill to the best of their ability. A parent always has the ability to select the child's food.

 

As for bumbledeb-I find your post a bit accusatory. I am not a lazy parent nor are my children inactive. My kids enjoy team sports, long distance running, swimming and a good old fashioned trip to the playground. They have limited screen time and eat their vegetables and fruit before being allowed any form of dessert. They also have limited access to candy, sodas, etc.

 

The point of this discussion is that you have repeatedly stated that children must consent to all that is asked of them and I contend that such a situation is not parenting. Some parents may be able to achieve this without disciplinary techniques as spanking others may not, this is a choice and a far cry from abuse.

 

Not meaning to be accusatory, just pointing out that I've chosen this kind of parenting, not because I can't be bothered, or because I'm prepared to allow my children to suffer rather than punish them or enforce my will upon them, but because I am prepared to go to HUGE effort to make sure that they have the happiest possible lives as far as it depends upon me.

 

Someone said something to the effect that children would rather enjoy screen time than active games and that to allow that would lead to obesity, I was trying to point out that that is rarely the case if the parents are willing to accompany their children in the active pursuits.

 

I do sometimes think that it may be that some parents who spank and use other punishments to enforce their will upon children, do so rather than go to the effort to make better parenting decisions.

[Peek a Boo]

They use force to make them comply when their compliance is required yes. They do not use force to teach them a lesson. If your kid broke a rule, using force on them after is not to make them comply. It is to teach them a lesson. That is the difference. We do not go to adults after the crime and hurt them as punishment.

 

 

are you saying that nothing is learned when physical punishment is used??

The lesson is learned both ways:

we use training before hand to teach the lesson of how to BE obedient and physical punishment when they break the rules and don't respond to other corrections. where in the world did you get the idea that we spank to be the entire lesson??

 

when someone is forced to comply, they learn a couple different things:

1. the rules will be enforced.

2. it is usually easier to obey the rules than suffer another painful consequence.

 

The lesson IS compliance.

The effects of this LESSON are seen in criminals who are planning on breaking a law: they plan to AVOID the painful scenarios.

 

since you were interested in correcting errors below, we'll toss this one in:

lesson:

2 a: a piece of instruction b: a reading or exercise to be studied by a pupil c: a division of a course of instruction

3 a: something learned by study or experience <his years of travel had taught him valuable lessons> b: an instructive example <the lessons of history> c: reprimand

 

I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that a punishment doesn't teach a lesson. People learn from experiences --including painful ones.

 

 

Like I said, rather hard to chose junk when it is not around.

 

that would depend on your definition of 'junk.' Which leads me to assume you are raising your children in a bubble so they will never be faced w/ that choice?

 

How many times do we have to go over this? A take down is not the same as punishment. One is for immediate action, the other is retribution. Anything after the fact is what I consider not ok. Keep your debate to that. Learn the difference. I'm going to refrain from correcting this error again and again in the remainder of your post. Please compare apples to apples.

 

a take down IS a punishment.

since you are wanting to correct errors, we'll start w/ your own:

 

punishment:

2 a: suffering, pain, or loss that serves as retribution b: a penalty inflicted on an offender through judicial procedure

3: severe, rough, or disastrous treatment

 

a spanking is done immediately to stop an unwanted behavior. It is a severe punishment done when other training methods do not work.

a take down is done immediately to stop an unwanted behavior. It is a severe punishment done when other methods have not worked.

 

both are punishment.

both are applied to an immediate circumstance to achieve a desired result.

 

you are confusing your own idea of a timetable w/ something that is not in line w/ the dictionary.

the judicial procedure of a takedown is taught and applied during an officer's training. It is an acceptable method and not likely to get the officer fired-- unless he ABUSES that method. the judicial procedure of a spanking is via the parent's own parenting philosophy per parental rights --unless they ABUSE that method.

 

That's right. They will not. I don't want a child to have to respond to something like they do pain. All they will learn is to fear your. Fear is not respect.

 

that's your own opinion, proved wrong by at least a couple statements here in this thread alone. That you have a fear of someone's spanking doesn't make it a universal fact. You also have not addressed what you intend to do if you are dealing w/ a child that does not respond to typical child training or your preferred methods:

 

 

Do you think they have less chance of being molested at camp then when living with someone? I'd say the prior is more likely than the latter.

 

then you are blind to the daily molestations of children living at home. especially if we're talking about an adult that has talked a child into letting the kid living with them and the parents actually agree to it

 

 

So what if they are at camp and an adult tries to touch them and they don't want it to happen? You taught them that adults can touch children even if the child doesn't want it.

 

No, you are making assumptions on what i have taught them:

have you looked at the Scout training materials that the boys and adults and leaders are required to know? There is obviously a difference between teaching a child that they will be punished in a specific way for continued disobedience vs the tactics of a molestor. If you don't understand the difference, then there's not really a discussion to be had.

[Peek a Boo]

Not meaning to be accusatory, just pointing out that I've chosen this kind of parenting, not because I can't be bothered, or because I'm prepared to allow my children to suffer rather than punish them or enforce my will upon them, but because I am prepared to go to HUGE effort to make sure that they have the happiest possible lives as far as it depends upon me.

 

=================

I do sometimes think that it may be that some parents who spank and use other punishments to enforce their will upon children,[added by Peek: or don't] do so rather than go to the effort to make better parenting decisions.

 

 

As Joanne - i think?- mentioned, i think this can apply to both sides of the spectrum ;)

[Peek a Boo]

How did you draw that conclusion from Peek's comments? If you are arguing that Peek, by spanking teaches that "adults can touch (I assume you mean molest) children" you are stretching logic past the breaking point.

 

((i kinda liked it when you had it as Pook, lol!))

[bumbledeb]

As Joanne - i think?- mentioned, i think this can apply to both sides of the spectrum ;)

 

Yes, you are completely correct of course.

 

I kind of prefer to believe that my style of parenting is no longer on that particular spectrum.

Edited November 16, 2008 by bumbledeb
spelling

[Joanne]

Lets be honest here some loving parents do spank. I would agree that some loving parents do not spank. I merely feel that those who do not spank are incorrect in their logic or, in some cases unwilling, to bear the burden of spanking, but I do not doubt that they are loving.

 

Bold emphasis added by me.

 

This is an example of the hyperfocus, myopic view of spanking (and child raising in general) that concerns me. Why is *spanking* elevated to this status in terms of parenting? Why the universal questioning of a non spanking parents' logic? Why the assumption that including spanking = best way to parent? Why does *spanking* get that kind of intensity, focus and reverence?

 

If you removed the words "spank" and "spanking" from the bolded part and inserted the word "discipline", I'd agree.

 

The hyperfocus on spanking creeps me out. The hyperfocus on not spanking concerns me as well.

 

Raising, training and discipline of children is far to complex and important to make spanking that kind of focus. Whether you spank or not, it should be a very small part and concern of family dynamics at any age.

[bumbledeb]

The hyperfocus on spanking creeps me out. The hyperfocus on not spanking concerns me as well.

 

 

I'm not sure what you mean. I decided several years ago not to spank. That was it, decision made, time to move on to the next thing.

 

When the subject comes up I do make my views known, where appropriate, but I don't bring up the subject myself or spend virtually any time whatsoever thinking about it.

Edited November 16, 2008 by bumbledeb
spelling again

[JumpedIntoTheDeepEndFirst]

Not meaning to be accusatory, just pointing out that I've chosen this kind of parenting, not because I can't be bothered, or because I'm prepared to allow my children to suffer rather than punish them or enforce my will upon them, but because I am prepared to go to HUGE effort to make sure that they have the happiest possible lives as far as it depends upon me.

 

Someone said something to the effect that children would rather enjoy screen time than active games and that to allow that would lead to obesity, I was trying to point out that that is rarely the case if the parents are willing to accompany their children in the active pursuits.

 

I do sometimes think that it may be that some parents who spank and use other punishments to enforce their will upon children, do so rather than go to the effort to make better parenting decisions.

 

Actually, I took an informal poll of my children over dinner tonight. They answered that their friends would prefer to play video games than head out to mess around on a playground or in a yard. There was one friend who dislikes video games but would rather watch TV. I would also like to add that my kids pointed out that the kids often chose these passive amusements over other indoor play, crafts etc. As is evidenced by the mother who recently complained to me that all her daughter and friends (age 9) did at playdates and slumber parties was play on their Nintendos rather than interacting with each other. Furthermore, I remember as a child, particularly a school age child, not needing any parental participation to get outside and play with my friends, roller skate, play tag, ride bikes etc. The problem that is bemoaned in the studies I mentioned is that many kids today need to have such outdoor activities programmed by their parents or another agency because they will not independently choose such activity with other children. This, combined with poorer dietary choices, has led to childhood obesity on an alarming scale. Which leads to my argument that my children do not get to consent to eating well or getting exercise. The may have some choices in how that is carried out but I don't need their consent to enforce a balanced diet and exercise.

 

True, some parents may spank to enforce their will but you are still enforcing your will through different methods. Is the problem the physical act of spanking or the enforcing of parental will? Is the spanking the problem if it is done to enforce parental will or if it is done as a consequence of rule breaking? Spanking may be part of a parenting style in some situations. You really must know the family and children before passing judgement by implying their parenting is lazy, uninvolved, and misguided.

[pqr]

Bold emphasis added by me.

 

This is an example of the hyperfocus, myopic view of spanking (and child raising in general) that concerns me. Why is *spanking* elevated to this status in terms of parenting? Why the universal questioning of a non spanking parents' logic? Why the assumption that including spanking = best way to parent? Why does *spanking* get that kind of intensity, focus and reverence?

 

If you removed the words "spank" and "spanking" from the bolded part and inserted the word "discipline", I'd agree.

 

The hyperfocus on spanking creeps me out. The hyperfocus on not spanking concerns me as well.

 

Raising, training and discipline of children is far to complex and important to make spanking that kind of focus. Whether you spank or not, it should be a very small part and concern of family dynamics at any age.

 

 

I might agree with you, but for the fact that this discussion revolves around spanking, hence the comment. Were the topic something else I may well have made the same statement on the other topic.

 

Spanking also generates debate because of the very nature of inflicting pain on one's child. The fact that I do spank is a very small part of our family dynamics, but according to some it is enough to make me a less than loving parent and for the purposes of THIS discussion it is a major point.

[buddhabelly]

I believe that spanking just teaches fear. Obeying out of fear does not, IMO, segue into an adult who makes good choices because those choices are respectful and compassionate to herself and to others. It also teaches that the bigger, stronger person can use this advantage to hurt another person. Since our family teaches that violence is NEVER an option, a child that is spanked would (IMO) be more likely to choose physical contact as a solution to disputes on the playground, for example. My sister and brother were spanked and I was not. I was just very, very fearful from seeing them spanked. So I never did anything to deserve a spank. But hold your applause for a moment. I never really did ANYTHING. Because I was afraid it might not be the right thing. I never even painted a picture. Not once. Because it might not be the right thing.

 

Are those violins I hear?

 

Oh, I should add that my parents' discipline was inconsistent and not well considered in advance. My dad would ignore everything and my mom wouldn't say anything until a sibling did something REALLY unacceptable. So I'm not saying that the physical discipline was part of some well-reasoned plan. It was usually done out of anger. We had such a huge house that they never knew my brother was threatening me verbally and physically. If I had told on him, I would have received worse beatings from my brother. Or at least that's what he told me! They never interfered with our verbal arguments either, so I never learned (at home) how to argue fairly. I would just shut down in order to not be hurt. It took many adult years to learn that dispute/disagreement is healthy and necessary in any relationship, and needs to be learned. My mom still avoids all disagreements. Or at least she tries!

Edited November 16, 2008 by buddhabelly

[bumbledeb]

Actually, I took an informal poll of my children over dinner tonight. They answered that their friends would prefer to play video games than head out to mess around on a playground or in a yard. There was one friend who dislikes video games but would rather watch TV. I would also like to add that my kids pointed out that the kids often chose these passive amusements over other indoor play, crafts etc. As is evidenced by the mother who recently complained to me that all her daughter and friends (age 9) did at playdates and slumber parties was play on their Nintendos rather than interacting with each other. Furthermore, I remember as a child, particularly a school age child, not needing any parental participation to get outside and play with my friends, roller skate, play tag, ride bikes etc. The problem that is bemoaned in the studies I mentioned is that many kids today need to have such outdoor activities programmed by their parents or another agency because they will not independently choose such activity with other children. This, combined with poorer dietary choices, has led to childhood obesity on an alarming scale. Which leads to my argument that my children do not get to consent to eating well or getting exercise. The may have some choices in how that is carried out but I don't need their consent to enforce a balanced diet and exercise.

 

True, some parents may spank to enforce their will but you are still enforcing your will through different methods. Is the problem the physical act of spanking or the enforcing of parental will? Is the spanking the problem if it is done to enforce parental will or if it is done as a consequence of rule breaking? Spanking may be part of a parenting style in some situations. You really must know the family and children before passing judgement by implying their parenting is lazy, uninvolved, and misguided.

 

I'm sorry, I know I must be expressing myself badly. Truly, I am not trying to pass judgement on anyone here. Really, I am trying to explain what I feel is my logical choice not to spank, or indeed to inflict any other form of unpleasantness upon MY children.

 

If I polled my children they would no doubt answer the same way. I meant that they would rather engage in active play, games, etc., ifI[/b,]the parent will take part in the activity with them.

 

I really try not to enforce my will upon my children using any method.

 

Yes, at first it was purely the inflicting of pain upon my children as a means of punishment that I began to see as morally wrong. Over time I began to understand that punishment of any kind is morally wrong in the case of children. (In my opinion, I mean to say.)

 

I am not implying that YOUR parenting or the parenting of anyone else in particular is lazy or uninvolved. I do know parents who spank who are far from lazy and uninvolved. Misguided, yes, in my opinion.

[Jenny in Atl]

I might agree with you, but for the fact that this discussion revolves around spanking, hence the comment. Were the topic something else I may well have made the same statement on the other topic.

 

Spanking also generates debate because of the very nature of inflicting pain on one's child. The fact that I do spank is a very small part of our family dynamics, but according to some it is enough to make me a less than loving parent and for the purposes of THIS discussion it is a major point.

 

I don't think it's a lack of love as much as it is a lack of education and using other tools or methods to achieve the same ends. If we can train animals w/o "spanking" why not our kids?

 

My brothers and I were never spanked; my folks had both had been brought up spanked/whipped, and wanted to try another way. All three of us turned out as good people. So, when I had kids, I saw no reason to spank. My dh also was "whipped" as a kid by his parents and grandparents. He also did not want to repeat the pain, fear, and anger he felt for his parents and grandparents. In moments of frustration I have seen he want to repeat his childhood experience, but he has always stepped back and used other means. It's not been easy, and thankfully our kids have been receptive to a more gentle style of parenting.

[tibbyl]

My MIL was a big on spanking, well until my Dh was old enough to hit back. She quickly learned it was not the best tool in the parenting box. :D

 

Jenny, I have often wondered what happens when the spankee eventually grows into having physical advantage over spanker and what self-respecting teen would stand by while an adult hit them.

[Jenny in Atl]

Jenny, I have often wondered what happens when the spankee eventually grows into having physical advantage over spanker and what self-respecting teen would stand by while an adult hit them.

 

Ya, that last time she had slapped him in the face. He never actually hit her back, but he caught her arms, and let her know that under no certain terms would she ever be able to hit him again, and she never did. It was a real wake-up call for them both.

[bumbledeb]

Jenny, I have often wondered what happens when the spankee eventually grows into having physical advantage over spanker and what self-respecting teen would stand by while an adult hit them.

 

I think the above case may be unusual. Most people have been thoroughly convinced and persuaded that only the parent has the 'right' to hit by the time they reach teenage years.