NationStates Jolt Archive

Like California is talking about now, Sweden outlawed spanking as far back as 1979. Although increasing accepted by the citizens of Sweden as a proper course of action, Swedish police records indicated a 672% increase in assaults by minors against minors (under 15) from 1981 to 1994. link (http://people.biola.edu/faculty/paulp/sweden.html#article). Maybe Sweden can afford a 6x increase in minor on minor assaults, but I doubt California can afford such an increase...

Additonally, research about spanking's affects, good or bad depend on the report, or so it would seem, because here is a BMJ (doctor's journal) discussion about how the anti-spanking crowd exagerates their evidence of negative impact... http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/320/7248/1538/a

no

in other words its a bad technique that has to be dropped before it goes too far.

You mean we shouldn't use time outs because it might lead to parents locking their children in a room for months at a time, like the kind of child we see being rescued on TV every now and then having spent years in a room, locked to a bed, or in a dog kennel etc.,. Time outs and groundings lead to this sort of behavior, according to your methodology.

The government alreadyi s involved in a huge way, on the federal, state and local level with school lunch programs, funding for education, etc.

Moron.:upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours: :upyours:

And this justifies them being able too force regulation on parents concerning dicipline techniques? Erm, your not too bright are ya mate? Lets think for a second....Where does the goverments money come from? Heres a hint, its not from lepricons.

When my first child is born, on the day of his birth, I'm going to cut off a finger. And another one every year on his birthday. And when he hits 10 I'll start in on his toes.

And sometimes, when I'm in the mood, I'll drag him out of bed and beat him with a switch for two or three hours. And if he ever gives me any attitude, I'll heat up the stove a nice red hot, and hold his face on it for a few minutes.

And you know what? There's not a damn thing you or anybody else can do about it, and you know why? Because it's not the government's job to tell me how to raise my children.



















Have I made my point yet? Good. Now let's lose the tired old line of "the government can't tell me how to raise my kids!" line, nobody actually agrees with it. If it were true, the moral implications of such a thing would be monsterous.

So let's just stop with that, and recognize that EVERYBODY here agrees that the government damned motherfucking RIGHT can tell you how to raise your children. It's simply a matter of degree.

I don't think the bill goes far enough. You should never hit anyone, especially your children. If spanking is the only way you can control your child, you are not fit to be a parent.

I take it you dont have children? Or your just dangerously ignorant too the plain and simple fact, most children will behave unruly at times, and they only respond too pain, in whatever manner applied. A moderate spanking, could get farther into the pscyche of a 5 year old, versus trying too get him too take a personality survey, or express his feelings in a discussion group. ;)

after a certain age spanking IS beating

Only if you choose to escalate it.

did your brother get an openhanded swat on his trousered behind from your mother to get him to behave when he was 10?

Essentially, yes. Maybe one or two swats for good measure.

the older the child the more severe the spanking has to be in order to get any results. what works for the 2.5 year old who is wearing diapers certainly wont work for a 15 year old.

As a general rule, you wouldn't need spanking at that age. And it wouldn't be effective. I pointed out earlier that your parenting methods will most likely have to change with age.


1: Fuck that strawman tactic. I was sitting on the floor, watching TV and eating my hamburger, when I reached to grab some chips. I elbow nudged my glass, and it fell over. Before I could do anything about it, *SMACK*. I was on the floor at that point, when my dad proceeded to scream at me for spilling water on the carpet. Don't think you can use such shallow tactics with people who have memories as clear as mine.

Wow, defensive much? I didn't even suggest that you weren't accurately describing what happened to you. Hence the reason that I agreed with you that it was unnecessary. The rest was to give an example of when a spanking *might* have been order.

See the difference?

Maybe if you weren't ultra-defensive, you could actually read what is written, eh?

2: See above for my reasoning in this thread. If people are willing to fucking defend a guy like my dad for what he did, even when I recite events exactly as they happened almost fifteen years ago, I'm not going to be opening my ears, period.

Nobody defended him. You were just so terrified that someone was that you didn't read the part where I clearly stated that he was out of line.

Spanking is a tool. It can be overused and abused. Because of this, an idiot in California (no surprise) wants to ban it. Now, while I agree that babies shouldn't be spanked (kids under a year just aren't going to get it, all they know is that someone they trusted hurt them), sometimes a swat across the rear is needed. There are children who are impervious to restriction, isolation, deprivation of privileges, grounding, etc.; they do, however, understand a well-placed, properly timed swat. This ban would be like making hammers illegal because someone used a hammer to kill someone. There are laws against child abuse in place - they need to be properly and consistently enforced. Another law is not going to help.

If California goes much further with these laws that are supposedly "Good for the general welfare by all" based on a few members of the state house and/or senate, can I start referring too California as a Socially Liberal-Fascist state? Oh please! Oh please!

You mean we shouldn't use time outs because it might lead to parents locking their children in a room for months at a time, like the kind of child we see being rescued on TV every now and then having spent years in a room, locked to a bed, or in a dog kennel etc.,. Time outs and groundings lead to this sort of behavior, according to your methodology.

Basically what hes saying, is that almost every social debate is circumstantial, looking at the parents traits and qualities, and how far they distribute punishment. Child safety laws: Yes. Riddiculous laws too prohibit proven sensible adults from raising thier children, they see, in a positive way, that does not result in anything more than a slight temporary physical pain: NO

When my first child is born, on the day of his birth, I'm going to cut off a finger. And another one every year on his birthday. And when he hits 10 I'll start in on his toes.

And sometimes, when I'm in the mood, I'll drag him out of bed and beat him with a switch for two or three hours. And if he ever gives me any attitude, I'll heat up the stove a nice red hot, and hold his face on it for a few minutes.

And you know what? There's not a damn thing you or anybody else can do about it, and you know why? Because it's not the government's job to tell me how to raise my children.

Summary: These laws should be circumstantially based upon the parents, and thier fitness when it comes too raising children. Good point by the way.

Have I made my point yet? Good. Now let's lose the tired old line of "the government can't tell me how to raise my kids!" line, nobody actually agrees with it. If it were true, the moral implications of such a thing would be monsterous.

So let's just stop with that, and recognize that EVERYBODY here agrees that the government damned motherfucking RIGHT can tell you how to raise your children. It's simply a matter of degree.

Summary: These laws should be circumstantially based upon the parents, and thier fitness when it comes too raising children. Good point by the way. Oh and...leave your fingers alone, im sure thier very lovely and you'd miss them. :(

My concern with parenting strategies is not that they be fitted to a false ideal of eschewing physical punishment and replacing it with what is often a more painful emotional punishment (such as a time-out or a removal of privileges), but that parenting strategies be suited to the personality of the child and that the more significantly important aspects of parenting such as open communication and genuine healthy affection along with verbal and material encouragement of the child in healthy behaviors be the focus of the parent.

Precisely!!


really, its not a choice between physical abuse and mental abuse

its just as bad to use painful emotional punishments

All punishments are painful in some way, shape, or form. That, in the end, is their intent. Like I said earlier, it was much, much more painful for me to have my mother look at me and say the words, "I'm very disappointed in you." When she did that, I would have gladly taken a spanking instead. It would have hurt less.

Should she have spanked me instead, since that would have been less painful?

Just emotional harm, then?

Find me a single punishment that doesn't cause that type of "emotional harm".

If your intent is to ban all punishment, come out and say it. Otherwise, you have no argument here.

I must admit that I'm not convinced about the effectiveness of spanking a child below the age of three, seeing as how I'm not convinced that he / she would know or understand why she recieved that kind of punishment.

Regardless of that, let's for now agree that you know where to draw the line between a harmless swat and a hit / beating / what-shall-we-call-it.

Does your neighbour?

Seems to me that there are many people out there who aren't able to draw the line, seen from an outside-perspective. What I might see as a beatdown or abuse might be another persons "harmless swatting". Some people don't know their own strength, some overestimate how much a baby can take, some loose control. This kind of law will help combat abuse in an efficient manner, and you who can see the line between a swat and a hit clearly will most likely never be prosecuted as long as you don't hit the baby outside your own home.

This law isn't going to help combat abuse. All it is going to do is punish relatively good parents. Taking a child away from a parent (or fining that parent $1000) for a swat on the rear end makes equal sense with the overzealous jurisdictions who have taken children away from parents for months on end for taking pictures of them in the bathtub or swimming naked on a camping trip.

All a law like this will do is traumatize children by ripping them away from perfectly competent parents and putting them in foster care for months until DEFACS gets its head together and puts the children back where they belong.

Please refer to the arguments for corporal punishment in Heinlein's "Starship Troopers". The book, not the shameful movie.

its still not a choice between physical and mental abuse.

No, but the person you were responding to wasn't talking about abuse at all. There are emotional and physical ways to punish children. All are, in some way, painful. To pretend otherwise and suggest that only physical punishment causes pain is ridiculous.

All punishments are painful in some way, shape, or form. That, in the end, is their intent. Like I said earlier, it was much, much more painful for me to have my mother look at me and say the words, "I'm very disappointed in you." When she did that, I would have gladly taken a spanking instead. It would have hurt less.

Should she have spanked me instead, since that would have been less painful?

its still not a choice between physical and mental abuse.

As a trained martial artist I have a strong aversion to striking anyone, let alone a child. The intent of a strike is clear - "I wish to cause pain." You just don't hit someone in any way unless you mean it. If you are striking a child and you mean it... Well, there are other problems with you, no?

Now, it may, or may not, be an effective method of control, but I'm made uncomfortable by the way that we minimalize the act of attacking. Yes, it is done with the best interests of the child in mind, but that does not take away the nature of an attack. An attack is a statement of agression, and a statement of agression against a child is wrong, at least in my mind.

As a trained martial artist I have a strong aversion to striking anyone, let alone a child. The intent of a strike is clear - "I wish to cause pain." You just don't hit someone in any way unless you mean it. If you are striking a child and you mean it... Well, there are other problems with you, no?

Now, it may, or may not, be an effective method of control, but I'm made uncomfortable by the way that we minimalize the act of attacking. Yes, it is done with the best interests of the child in mind, but that does not take away the nature of an attack. An attack is a statement of agression, and a statement of agression against a child is wrong, at least in my mind.

thats kinda sensible

i dont know why anyone would plan to hurt a child when it is not necessary.

after a certain age spanking IS beating

did your brother get an openhanded swat on his trousered behind from your mother to get him to behave when he was 10?

the older the child the more severe the spanking has to be in order to get any results. what works for the 2.5 year old who is wearing diapers certainly wont work for a 15 year old.

this is one reason why most parents stop spanking their children after age 7 or so.

You miss the point that if you train a child between one and six you won't have to punish them afterward. My children are 21, 19, and 16. I haven't punished them since they were 6. There was no need. They knew they had limits and if they had a question about where those limits were they asked. As they grew those limits became broader because they could judge right and wrong for themselves. (ate from that Biblical tree) It always felt good when they would say "I didn't do it because it would have been wrong."

Any parent that doesn't have their children trained by 6 will have a tough life ahead. Whenever you hear a parent talk about wild teenagers, ask what they did between one and six. If you ever have one that says they had them trained by six, let me know. It will be a day to sell heaters in hades. On the other hand if they say they used time-out and reasoned with them, just smile and shake your head knowingly. You will do a lot of head shaking.

I fully support this bill.

I don't care what anyone says, hitting a child of that age is not discipline, but abuse and beating, mostly done by inept parents who wish to boost their ego and sense of self-importance by feeling their superiority by hitting someone who can't oppose them, using religion and ultra-conservative 'family values' as a shield for criminal and indecent behavior.

I fully support this bill.

I don't care what anyone says, hitting a child of that age is not discipline, but abuse and beating, mostly done by inept parents who wish to boost their ego and sense of self-importance by feeling their superiority by hitting someone who can't oppose them, using religion and ultra-conservative 'family values' as a shield for criminal and indecent behavior.

:rolleyes:

...I take it, due too none of my posts being quoted and refuted, i'm making valid points?

...I take it, due too none of my posts being quoted and refuted, i'm making valid points?

It happens to me all the time. I just figure I'm too logical for people making lifetime decisions on emotion alone.

...I take it, due too none of my posts being quoted and refuted, i'm making valid points?

Yeah, me too.

Yeah, me too.

Where did you actually make any points?

Where did you actually make any points?

Haha, yes ignoring opinion contrary to your own, nice one.

Haha, yes ignoring opinion contrary to your own, nice one.

It isn't ignoring an opinion. All you did is make an attack. If you'd like to state an opinion as opinion, instead of, "ZOMG, EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS TEH EVIL!" people might care what you have to say.

You made it clear that you think you absolutely right and you "don't care what anyone else says." As such, what is the point of even attempting discussion with you?

Any parent that doesn't have their children trained by 6 will have a tough life ahead. Whenever you hear a parent talk about wild teenagers, ask what they did between one and six. If you ever have one that says they had them trained by six, let me know. It will be a day to sell heaters in hades. On the other hand if they say they used time-out and reasoned with them, just smile and shake your head knowingly. You will do a lot of head shaking.

what you mean is if you break their will by the time they are 6 that they never recover, and you think that's a good thing :(

I expect my kids to rebel, I welcome them to. I expect conflict in my marriage, I think it's great. Too many parents want kids who sit quietly and don't speak until spoken to, who never have their own opinion, who never say anything, I don't want kids like that, because it doesn't serve the world to have adults like that.

I think a lot of the difference between our parenting strategy is because we have had different goals for our kids, I want people, and you want trained dogs.

what you mean is if you break their will by the time they are 6 that they never recover, and you think that's a good thing :(

I expect my kids to rebel, I welcome them to. I expect conflict in my marriage, I think it's great. Too many parents want kids who sit quietly and don't speak until spoken to, who never have their own opinion, who never say anything, I don't want kids like that, because it doesn't serve the world to have adults like that.

I think a lot of the difference between our parenting strategy is because we have had different goals for our kids, I want people, and you want trained dogs.

im hoping that he's overstating it and that youre being harsh

if a child never disobeys enough after age 6 to ever require punishment, something is wrong. either he doesnt remember the time little johnny used his power saw to cut up the dining room table to make a fort or he wasnt told about it by his wife.

or he just means that he stopped spanking his kids by age 6. which you have to do if you want to avoid abuse anyway.

a child over age 6 who never misbehaves is just creepy-wrong.

im hoping that he's overstating it and that youre being harsh

if a child never disobeys enough after age 6 to ever require punishment, something is wrong. either he doesnt remember the time little johnny used his power saw to cut up the dining room table to make a fort or he wasnt told about it by his wife.

or he just means that he stopped spanking his kids by age 6. which you have to do if you want to avoid abuse anyway.

a child over age 6 who never misbehaves is just creepy-wrong.

the feeling I got from him in the last thread we discussed this (that went on for like 40 pages) is that I am not being harsh and that he is happy that he "trained" his kids by 6, who btw are just like animals, he likened it to using a hotshot (that's like a taser for cows) on livestock, we got into a long discussion about how I never do that either, and how I didn't ever hit my sheep when I worked on my uncle's farm herding them either, you know what happens when you hit a sheep? it runs off. it's hard to get it back too, it won't trust you anymore, you have to trick it.

the feeling I got from him in the last thread we discussed this (that went on for like 40 pages) is that I am not being harsh and that he is happy that he "trained" his kids by 6, who btw are just like animals, he likened it to using a hotshot (that's like a taser for cows) on livestock, we got into a long discussion about how I never do that either, and how I didn't ever hit my sheep when I worked on my uncle's farm herding them either, you know what happens when you hit a sheep? it runs off. it's hard to get it back too, it won't trust you anymore, you have to trick it.

*shudder*

as if ANY child raised with love and consistency doesnt naturally progress toward good behavior as they grow older.

as long as you dont do that let-the-kid-cry-for-20-minutes-then-give-in thing you child will not be a brat. the form of discipline isnt as important as doling it out in a timely manner. so why introduce violence into your home?

*shudder*

as if ANY child raised with love and consistency doesnt naturally progress toward good behavior as they grow older.

as long as you dont do that let-the-kid-cry-for-20-minutes-then-give-in thing you child will not be a brat. the form of discipline isnt as important as doling it out in a timely manner. so why introduce violence into your home?

exactly.

the letting the kid cry for 20 minutes thing, is part of a psychological process that is similar to the one that makes gambling addictive, it causes compulsive behavior. that's why those brats will be throwing a fit and you ask them why and they say "I don't know", they are addicted to it, in many ways (emotionally) it's worse than drug addiction, when you do drugs you get high every time, when you are going for that brain chemical high, you keep having to push the envelope to get it, gamblers start betting more and more money to get the bigger high, and bratty kids start throwing more violent fits.

There have been children I've known whose heads I'd happily bash in, as well as those of their parents for raising them so poorly. Sometimes I wonder if resorting to harshness against kids -- not necessarily violence, but at least putting them to work from age three, instead of pampering and spoiling them -- is the only way to teach them anything.

no

their parents need the teaching, not the kids.

there are some very crappy parents out there who have no clue as to how to raise their children.

its not the pampering, its the giving them what they want in response to a tantrum that makes the kids act so badly. if it gets a kid what he wants, he'll scream all day.

Im in a slap bass ensemble called spank.

On topic I think that the proposed law is super gay

There have been children I've known whose heads I'd happily bash in, as well as those of their parents for raising them so poorly. Sometimes I wonder if resorting to harshness against kids -- not necessarily violence, but at least putting them to work from age three, instead of pampering and spoiling them -- is the only way to teach them anything.

Because it's not the government's job to tell me how to raise my children.

Have I made my point yet? Good. Now let's lose the tired old line of "the government can't tell me how to raise my kids!" line, nobody actually agrees with it. If it were true, the moral implications of such a thing would be monsterous.

So let's just stop with that, and recognize that EVERYBODY here agrees that the government damned motherfucking RIGHT can tell you how to raise your children. It's simply a matter of degree.

yep, they can forbid sales of videogames and music, ban porn, stop media piracy, dictate what you can feed your child; when and how, they could also forbid homeschooling, dictate that one man married to one woman are the only people who can raise children, make laws saying what games children can play, all that and more for the "sake of the emotional/physical wellbeing of a child... they have that right. but IS it right?

Im in a slap bass ensemble called spank.

On topic I think that the proposed law is super gay

well i guess you wont be playing in california if this law gets passed.

exactly.

the letting the kid cry for 20 minutes thing, is part of a psychological process that is similar to the one that makes gambling addictive, it causes compulsive behavior. that's why those brats will be throwing a fit and you ask them why and they say "I don't know", they are addicted to it, in many ways (emotionally) it's worse than drug addiction, when you do drugs you get high every time, when you are going for that brain chemical high, you keep having to push the envelope to get it, gamblers start betting more and more money to get the bigger high, and bratty kids start throwing more violent fits.:p
As a child who threw frequent tantrums, we... er they.. know exactly why we.. er.. they do it. it gets us what we want. the moment you start giving into tantrums, you teach us... er... them, "make noise and throw fits, you will get what you want." and as one gets older, the more violent the fits become.

my tantrums stopped the moment everyone started ignoring my tantrums.

no

their parents need the teaching, not the kids.
If the kid is screaming its head off, for instance, on an aeroplane, the parents should have a right to hit it if that teaches it to be quiet, or at least to withhold from it things it wants or needs.

there are some very crappy parents out there who have no clue as to how to raise their children.
Granted.

its not the pampering, its the giving them what they want in response to a tantrum that makes the kids act so badly. if it gets a kid what he wants, he'll scream all day.
It is the pampering, too. If a kid thinks s/he can get everything s/he wants or needs from her parents, s/he'll never learn to be independent. Likely, if kids aren't taught what life is really like from very early, they'll end up with depression or anxiety attacks when they do figure it out, the hard way.

yep, they can forbid sales of videogames and music, ban porn, stop media piracy, dictate what you can feed your child; when and how, they could also forbid homeschooling, dictate that one man married to one woman are the only people who can raise children, make laws saying what games children can play, all that and more for the "sake of the emotional/physical wellbeing of a child... they have that right. but IS it right?

But what is "right"? No human being can make the claim that anything is right or wrong, because that's essentially asserting that your opinion is worth more than that of other people. That's why people invented God in the first place -- to have a way to express their views on morality without being accused of such hubris.

I agree 100%, however, I would argue that a responsible parent doesn't hurt their child.

Yep, but there are also Responsible parents that spank responsibly. They can and do use such a tool wisely and effectively.

If the kid is screaming its head off, for instance, on an aeroplane, the parents should have a right to hit it if that teaches it to be quiet, or at least to withhold from it things it wants or needs.


you dont smack a child to get him to stop crying. the airplane is a tough spot but there are many many ways to get your child to behave in public the best one being not taking them into public if they cant behave.



It is the pampering, too. If a kid thinks s/he can get everything s/he wants or needs from her parents, s/he'll never learn to be independent. Likely, if kids aren't taught what life is really like from very early, they'll end up with depression or anxiety attacks when they do figure it out, the hard way.

i dunno. everyone gets things handed to them when they are a kid. if you are poor it might only be food clothing and shelter but you sure dont have to earn it. having to work for stuff is a good thing but i dont think ive known anyone who failed to adjust to the realities of life once they went out on their own. some did take longer than others i suppose.

It is the pampering, too. If a kid thinks s/he can get everything s/he wants or needs from her parents, s/he'll never learn to be independent. Likely, if kids aren't taught what life is really like from very early, they'll end up with depression or anxiety attacks when they do figure it out, the hard way.

true and by spanking them are you teaching them what life is "really like" or are you teaching them

might is right
if you make me mad I can hit you
if someone does hit you it's your own fault and you shouldn't talk back


yeah? that sounds like the life I want my kids to have.:rolleyes:

might is right
if you make me mad I can hit you
if someone does hit you it's your own fault and you shouldn't talk back

All true, as per current international as well as individual doctrine.

'Might is right' is the entire concept behind all government: the more powerful people make the rules. Whether that be the majority of citizens, a dictator, or a parent, it's still 'might is right'.

If someone makes you mad, you can hit them. However, it's not going to be as productive or useful as walking away. And shooting them with a sniper rifle instead.
If someone hits you, it's probably your fault in some way, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't talk back. So I might disagree with that one, too.

Anyway, I suggest raising your kids in a farm-type environment -- one in which their presence is necessary for work, not optional for presents and the like. I know, I'm like the least qualified person in the world to offer parenting advice, but it's just a *suggestion*.

But what is "right"? No human being can make the claim that anything is right or wrong, because that's essentially asserting that your opinion is worth more than that of other people. That's why people invented God in the first place -- to have a way to express their views on morality without being accused of such hubris.

In the case of spanking? I stated what is "right" in my viewpoint.

but what works for one aspect, won't work for all aspects. Child Abuse is a terrible crime, HOWEVER, Abuse is not just hitting a child, it's repeated instances of Hitting a child (and many here have pointed out the difference between Hitting and spanking.) yet, as the line is drawn, people also want to move it because that gives them more power. so Abuse turns from not just physical but mental and emotional, thats where stupid laws like banning "tag" come from. where would it end? would we see a law that makes awarding only a winning sports team in any event illegal because it traumatizes and alienates those that lost? will Childhood taunts become illegal because its now viewed as anti-social behavior. heck, a child kissing another child on the cheek is already viewed as sexual harrasement in some areas.

in other words, what is Right is always and should be a case by case situation.

you dont smack a child to get him to stop crying. the airplane is a tough spot but there are many many ways to get your child to behave in public the best one being not taking them into public if they cant behave.
As I suggested: withholding from him things he wants or needs. He acts badly? He doesn't get, for instance, food or attention. That does reflect the real world a bit more.


i dunno. everyone gets things handed to them when they are a kid. if you are poor it might only be food clothing and shelter but you sure dont have to earn it. having to work for stuff is a good thing but i dont think ive known anyone who failed to adjust to the realities of life once they went out on their own. some did take longer than others i suppose.
After a few years of that, it should end... children should have to start helping the family in some way, as soon as they're physically capable of doing so, or they won't get anything.

After a few years of that, it should end... children should have to start helping the family in some way, as soon as they're physically capable of doing so, or they won't get anything.

:p
Careful Czardas, most forms of Neglect occure because of that line of thought as well as why most Child Labor laws were made.

(I Know what you mean, they should help with the chores around the house.) :D

:p
As a child who threw frequent tantrums, we... er they.. know exactly why we.. er.. they do it. it gets us what we want. the moment you start giving into tantrums, you teach us... er... them, "make noise and throw fits, you will get what you want." and as one gets older, the more violent the fits become.
I ask them frequently, I get the same answer

"why are you screaming?"
"I don't know"
then I look at the parents to explain
"we said Bobby couldn't have any more candy"
so I look at the kid
"you can't have any more candy"
"but......but.....I will scream"
"you were already screaming"
"oh"
then he quits crying and I take the candy out of dad's hand and put it back on the shelf.



my tantrums stopped the moment everyone started ignoring my tantrums.
oh, I took my kids to the bathroom and told them 'okay, throw a fit here, when you are done we will go back out' for some reason it wasn't any fun to throw a fit without any witnesses. :confused: :p

I had my niece one day and she was throwing a "quiet fit" in the floor of a restaurant and my sister in law started turning red, so I bent down and said "can you please do that under the table? so the waitresses don't have to step over you?" so she crawled under the table and continued to hold her breath, I picked up the conversation with my sister in law like nothing happened, after about 2 minutes my niece crawled back up into her chair and was quiet for the rest of brunch. ;)

Eh. At first I thought this thread was titled "Anti-Wanking bill". Then we'd have more to talk about.

I ask them frequently, I get the same answer

"why are you screaming?"
"I don't know"
then I look at the parents to explain
"we said Bobby couldn't have any more candy"
so I look at the kid
"you can't have any more candy"
"but......but.....I will scream"
"you were already screaming"
"oh"
then he quits crying and I take the candy out of dad's hand and put it back on the shelf.

ahh, but you got the support of the kid's parents. usually in those situations, those parents would look at me and say "let em have it, it won't hurt." I just sigh and shake my head.

of course, I have two sets of neices and Nephews... and boy are they different, one would acutally support the aunt and uncle's decisions and the other undermines it.

can you guess which set of children act like angels and the other little hellions? :p

oh, I took my kids to the bathroom and told them 'okay, throw a fit here, when you are done we will go back out' for some reason it wasn't any fun to throw a fit without any witnesses. :confused: :p

I had my niece one day and she was throwing a "quiet fit" in the floor of a restaurant and my sister in law started turning red, so I bent down and said "can you please do that under the table? so the waitresses don't have to step over you?" so she crawled under the table and continued to hold her breath, I picked up the conversation with my sister in law like nothing happened, after about 2 minutes my niece crawled back up into her chair and was quiet for the rest of brunch. ;)

my parents just let me cry. after a while, I got bored with it as it wasn't producing the expected results. ;)

I ask them frequently, I get the same answer

"why are you screaming?"
"I don't know"
then I look at the parents to explain
"we said Bobby couldn't have any more candy"
so I look at the kid
"you can't have any more candy"
"but......but.....I will scream"
"you were already screaming"
"oh"
then he quits crying and I take the candy out of dad's hand and put it back on the shelf.




oh, I took my kids to the bathroom and told them 'okay, throw a fit here, when you are done we will go back out' for some reason it wasn't any fun to throw a fit without any witnesses. :confused: :p

I had my niece one day and she was throwing a "quiet fit" in the floor of a restaurant and my sister in law started turning red, so I bent down and said "can you please do that under the table? so the waitresses don't have to step over you?" so she crawled under the table and continued to hold her breath, I picked up the conversation with my sister in law like nothing happened, after about 2 minutes my niece crawled back up into her chair and was quiet for the rest of brunch. ;)

*takes notes*
Never know when they'll come in handy.

As I suggested: withholding from him things he wants or needs. He acts badly? He doesn't get, for instance, food or attention. That does reflect the real world a bit more.

After a few years of that, it should end... children should have to start helping the family in some way, as soon as they're physically capable of doing so, or they won't get anything.

you really dont have to be that harsh. but the basics of what you said is a good plan if done consistently. you just dont want to reduce your kids to naked starving animals in order to get them to obey. loving safety is necessary for your kids to grow up to be good adults.

ahh, but you got the support of the kid's parents. usually in those situations, those parents would look at me and say "let em have it, it won't hurt." I just sigh and shake my head.

of course, I have two sets of neices and Nephews... and boy are they different, one would acutally support the aunt and uncle's decisions and the other undermines it.

can you guess which set of children act like angels and the other little hellions? :p



my parents just let me cry. after a while, I got bored with it as it wasn't producing the expected results. ;)

all kids have tantrums. i mean small children. its not a sign of bad parenting when a child has a tantrum now and then. even the most obedient sunny child boils over with frustration on occasion.

parents tend to over react to them though. they either spank the child as if he is willfully misbehaving or they give in to stop the disturbance. bad moves.

the best thing is to do what your parents did and smunkee advocates. ignore it. if necessary put them into a place where they can do no harm to themselves or others. when they regain control, they can come back as if nothing happened.

over time, if they are not rewarded for having them, they will learn to keep enough control of themselves that they no longer boil over like that.

Anyone who says spanking is bad, obviously didn't know me as a child, or other children who sit and contemplate how to get back at their parents for punishment...

According to my parents who were reluctant to use spanking, except for when I was VERY young, and I remember only being spanked once, but I deserved it big time, I should have been spanked more than just that one time.

Sure I'm a good kid now, I have my own place and such and I'm in a strong relationship, and planning to have kids one day.

But, honestly, I think that if the kid is strong-willed and VERY stubborn, as I told I was and still am, time outs do nothing. My parents tried it and failed. I used that time to plot my revenge. I would act one way when I was released from punishment but then I would go behind their back and take what I felt was mine.

Eventually I learned how to piss off my parents more than they pissed me off when I did something they didn't like, nor approved of. I would let them scream and holler, hence, giving them room to insult me. Of course, that would fester and contribute to my plotting of their demise.

Did I learn anything? Sure I did - how to plot my revenge and slowly unleash it onto my unsuspecting parents.

The one time I was spanked, I didn't plot my revenge...

What does my girlfriend in college have to do with this?

Did you ever spank her?

Anyone who says spanking is bad, obviously didn't know me as a child, or other children who sit and contemplate how to get back at their parents for punishment...

According to my parents who were reluctant to use spanking, except for when I was VERY young, and I remember only being spanked once, but I deserved it big time, I should have been spanked more than just that one time.

Sure I'm a good kid now, I have my own place and such and I'm in a strong relationship, and planning to have kids one day.

But, honestly, I think that if the kid is strong-willed and VERY stubborn, as I told I was and still am, time outs do nothing. My parents tried it and failed. I used that time to plot my revenge. I would act one way when I was released from punishment but then I would go behind their back and take what I felt was mine.

Eventually I learned how to piss off my parents more than they pissed me off when I did something they didn't like, nor approved of. I would let them scream and holler, hence, giving them room to insult me. Of course, that would fester and contribute to my plotting of their demise.

Did I learn anything? Sure I did - how to plot my revenge and slowly unleash it onto my unsuspecting parents.

The one time I was spanked, I didn't plot my revenge...

that one time you were VERY young as you said

do you really think that a child like you would not have resented spanking bitterly? that he wouldnt soothe his pride by not reacting at all to the spanking as if it didnt hurt? that he wouldnt laugh at the spanking? until his parents either have to abandon it or hit him so hard as to leave marks?

spanking would have been the bitter pill you took as payment for doing whatever you wanted. you still would have taken your revenge, spanking cant beat your basic nature out of you.

If you don't have children you shouldn't be responding to this thread.

This bill is absolutely asinine. Abuse is one thing (and it's already illegal), but spanking your child is sometimes the only way to get a message across.

Gonna try this again. No responses the first time...not sure why.

After reading this thread, I now know why there should be a third thing to never discuss in polite public company. The first two, as I've come to learn them, are religion and politics. The third is parenting.

Guess what? People WITH children are a hell of a lot more likely to be hair-triggered on hot-button parenting issues than those WITHOUT them or those who never had them. Some parents get flat-out defensive and surly.

It seems to me that parenting debates, like those on abortion, have a defined acceptible membership. In the case of abortion, it's usually "no uterus, no opinion". In the case of parenting, it seems to be "no children, no opinion."

Thing is, those of us without children are still affected by their behavior -- fly on any airliner with an unruly child if you doubt this. I've been a public school teacher at the high school level, and I can see the indelible marks (sometimes literally) left on children as a result of parenting -- both good and bad.

All that said, the bill in question in California is unenforceable and unnecessary. CPS can be, and usually is, activated by those who notice the signs of abuse.

I'll add that despite what some here have posted, the notion that "I was spanked and I turned out well" is NOT rubbish. I lived in fear of doing anything that might deserve my mother's dreaded wooden spoon. It hurt, and it made me consider the consequences of my actions before taking them. It hasn't made me a violent adult, and I do not fear that it will make me a violent parent.

There's a scale for just about everything. We can have Murder 1 and Murder 3 -- and there's a difference between corrective punishment and abuse. There's also isolation, denial of privileges, withholding of rewards an many more options. It is a continuum, and within it, parents exust on a continuum as well. Those who resort almost instantly to spankings seem to me to be hurried, overburdened, outnumbered (why any couple has more than two young children at a time bogles my mind) or lazy. Proper conditioning takes time, and if spanking is all you have time for, that's what you'll use, because for better or worse, it has its worth and range of effect.

And that's the catch -- punishments must vary to be effective. As I got older, I lived less in fear of any spankings than I did of "holy shit, Mom called Dad AT WORK with what I did!" It depended on the severity of the offense, the nature of the offense, who was affected by my behavior and Dad's overall mood. When I broke the garage door opener by opening and closing it over and over 'cause it made a cool noise (and let's face it, when you're a kid, remote controls are COOL), I had to stay home that weekend and "chore off" the cost of the new motor instead of accompanying Dad on a fishing trip. At 10, when I spent the money I'd collected by selling candy for the Boy Scouts, I was pulled from scouts and had a short session with Dad's infamous belt. At no time after that did I abuse machinery or mishandle others' money (good thing, too, because one of my first jobs as a young adult was an agent for the Department of Licensing, with hundreds of thousands of dollars of State money in my charge).

So the bill is unrealistic, if well-intended. Better than that would be to save that effort and put it into what is almost always an underfunded and undermanned CPS/foster care system.

Like California is talking about now, Sweden outlawed spanking as far back as 1979. Although increasing accepted by the citizens of Sweden as a proper course of action, Swedish police records indicated a 672% increase in assaults by minors against minors (under 15) from 1981 to 1994. link (http://people.biola.edu/faculty/paulp/sweden.html#article). Maybe Sweden can afford a 6x increase in minor on minor assaults, but I doubt California can afford such an increase...

Additonally, research about spanking's affects, good or bad depend on the report, or so it would seem, because here is a BMJ (doctor's journal) discussion about how the anti-spanking crowd exagerates their evidence of negative impact... http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/320/7248/1538/a

you misinterpret the data...of course Sweden recorded an increase in assaults, the assaults went unreported before as they were allowed/ignored, it is now unacceptable and people are now coming forward to report those assaults where they wouldn't have before...even the children are aware of the new laws and now freely complain when assaulted...when I was a kid we kept our mouths shut for fear of more assaults, but of course that only let the abusers free to continue on...

for centuries sexual assaults were never reported because of embarrassment and the unlikelihood of any action being taken...statistics would show that reports of sexual assaults may appear to be on the increase but that would be misleading, they are now just being reported more often...

all kids have tantrums. i mean small children. its not a sign of bad parenting when a child has a tantrum now and then. even the most obedient sunny child boils over with frustration on occasion.

parents tend to over react to them though. they either spank the child as if he is willfully misbehaving or they give in to stop the disturbance. bad moves.

the best thing is to do what your parents did and smunkee advocates. ignore it. if necessary put them into a place where they can do no harm to themselves or others. when they regain control, they can come back as if nothing happened.

over time, if they are not rewarded for having them, they will learn to keep enough control of themselves that they no longer boil over like that.

kids will always have emotions, end of story. my kid is angry right now in her room, when she has enough self control to talk to me she can come out, did I send her to her room? nope, she went on her own. She knows (at the age of 3 no less) that we don't yell at my house, she is getting her "angry" out and then we will talk. If more adults could do the same thing, think how wonderful the world would be.......

kids will always have emotions, end of story. my kid is angry right now in her room, when she has enough self control to talk to me she can come out, did I send her to her room? nope, she went on her own. She knows (at the age of 3 no less) that we don't yell at my house, she is getting her "angry" out and then we will talk. If more adults could do the same thing, think how wonderful the world would be.......

you are treating your child with respect when you allow her to have her emotions. what a great headstart she has in being allowed to be mad and to learn how to deal with strong emotions like that.

---
And let's face it, some of us as kids were just plain fucking brats, as my previous post contends. We needed more than a time out because we didn't like to listen and sometimes the threat more than the action made us think twice more than anything else.

And let's face it, some of us as kids were just plain fucking brats, as my previous post contends. We needed more than a time out because we didn't like to listen and sometimes the threat more than the action made us think twice more than anything else.

Agreed.

that one time you were VERY young as you said

do you really think that a child like you would not have resented spanking bitterly? that he wouldnt soothe his pride by not reacting at all to the spanking as if it didnt hurt? that he wouldnt laugh at the spanking? until his parents either have to abandon it or hit him so hard as to leave marks?

spanking would have been the bitter pill you took as payment for doing whatever you wanted. you still would have taken your revenge, spanking cant beat your basic nature out of you.
No, I didn't seek revenge after a spanking because I knew I deserved it. I was six years old at the time, and I was being an incredible brat. I wasn't listening and my parents put me in my room, and locked the door from the outside because I refused to stay put. I then went to the window and yelled out that my parents were keeping me prisoner and I kicked on the wall, leaving marks... now you see why they chose to spank me. I didn't do it again.

Of course, I did many other things again and again because I hated being yelled at more than being spanked.

Yelling at me got my parents nowhere because as far as I knew, they were being bullies, whereas with that spanking, they didn't yell so I took them seriously. I couldn't take my parents seriously because both have severe anger management issues.

Sure, I hated it, but, I didn't resent my parents half as much as when they yelled at me, belittling me through their words. To me, the words hurt far more than the actions.

The stinging went away, but the emotional pain doesn't.

Being told you're not normal and you dress like a retard by your mother who says she tried to do 'teen stuff' so she could relate to you hurts. She then insulted me because I hate most music, I would read and I had few friends.

That hurt more than anything.

Not having my beliefs accepted hurt more than a spanking ever could.

No, I didn't seek revenge after a spanking because I knew I deserved it. I was six years old at the time, and I was being an incredible brat. I wasn't listening and my parents put me in my room, and locked the door from the outside because I refused to stay put. I then went to the window and yelled out that my parents were keeping me prisoner and I kicked on the wall, leaving marks... now you see why they chose to spank me. I didn't do it again.

Of course, I did many other things again and again because I hated being yelled at more than being spanked.

Yelling at me got my parents nowhere because as far as I knew, they were being bullies, whereas with that spanking, they didn't yell so I took them seriously. I couldn't take my parents seriously because both have severe anger management issues.

Sure, I hated it, but, I didn't resent my parents half as much as when they yelled at me, belittling me through their words. To me, the words hurt far more than the actions.

The stinging went away, but the emotional pain doesn't.

Being told you're not normal and you dress like a retard by your mother who says she tried to do 'teen stuff' so she could relate to you hurts. She then insulted me because I hate most music, I would read and I had few friends.

That hurt more than anything.

Not having my beliefs accepted hurt more than a spanking ever could.

how did you get that bad at 6? surely the spankings were a good form of discipline right?:rolleyes:

No, I didn't seek revenge after a spanking because I knew I deserved it. I was six years old at the time, and I was being an incredible brat. I wasn't listening and my parents put me in my room, and locked the door from the outside because I refused to stay put. I then went to the window and yelled out that my parents were keeping me prisoner and I kicked on the wall, leaving marks... now you see why they chose to spank me. I didn't do it again.

Of course, I did many other things again and again because I hated being yelled at more than being spanked.

Yelling at me got my parents nowhere because as far as I knew, they were being bullies, whereas with that spanking, they didn't yell so I took them seriously. I couldn't take my parents seriously because both have severe anger management issues.

Sure, I hated it, but, I didn't resent my parents half as much as when they yelled at me, belittling me through their words. To me, the words hurt far more than the actions.

The stinging went away, but the emotional pain doesn't.

Being told you're not normal and you dress like a retard by your mother who says she tried to do 'teen stuff' so she could relate to you hurts. She then insulted me because I hate most music, I would read and I had few friends.

That hurt more than anything.

Not having my beliefs accepted hurt more than a spanking ever could.

it is STILL not a choice between mental and physical abuse.

if your parents (and i do mean your) had spanked you as a primary form of punishment, it would not have been done with loving guidance. it would have been as abusive as what they actually used was.

what they would most likely have done is just ADD the physical to the mental and in the end they would have been beating the crap out of you as well as belittling you. maybe they would even have convinced you that you deserved to be beaten.

you werent a fucking brat because of your nature, you were a fucking brat because you had bad parents.

so those are the only options, spankings and timeouts?...timeouts work with some and not with others a good parent keeps searching and adapting to control their children.

I have a teenager with major attitude and hormones i feared losing her for a year and I had run out of ideas...after the last confrontation I was absolutely desperate things had reached a breaking point, I could think of nothing else so I sat her on my knee and we hugged and talked for an hour, eureka!, one lonely kid with self esteem issues is my best pal again...she needed physical contact to prove that I loved her words alone weren't enough her...

im so glad for you that you found a way to reach her. too many kids go the wrong way because we just dont know what to do to get them back.

how did you get that bad at 6? surely the spankings were a good form of discipline right?:rolleyes:

Actually, they didn't spank me until then. All the time outs in the world did nothing until they spanked me. That and the 'special', which was a simple lock they put on my door. My parents would use it if I had been very bad (like kicking a teacher and slamming a door in the same teacher's face...). I hated the 'special' so much. Talking never worked because it involved a lot of yelling... that was until I told both of my parents off. I told my mother off when I was 16 years old and I told my dad off last year, at 23 years old.

How did I get to be so bad? I was just a brat plain and simple. I was and always have been extremely stubborn, with a strong dislike of authority and rules.

Anyone who says spanking is bad, obviously didn't know me as a child, or other children who sit and contemplate how to get back at their parents for punishment...

According to my parents who were reluctant to use spanking, except for when I was VERY young, and I remember only being spanked once, but I deserved it big time, I should have been spanked more than just that one time.

Sure I'm a good kid now, I have my own place and such and I'm in a strong relationship, and planning to have kids one day.

But, honestly, I think that if the kid is strong-willed and VERY stubborn, as I told I was and still am, time outs do nothing. My parents tried it and failed. I used that time to plot my revenge. I would act one way when I was released from punishment but then I would go behind their back and take what I felt was mine.

Eventually I learned how to piss off my parents more than they pissed me off when I did something they didn't like, nor approved of. I would let them scream and holler, hence, giving them room to insult me. Of course, that would fester and contribute to my plotting of their demise.

Did I learn anything? Sure I did - how to plot my revenge and slowly unleash it onto my unsuspecting parents.

The one time I was spanked, I didn't plot my revenge...

so those are the only options, spankings and timeouts?...timeouts work with some and not with others a good parent keeps searching and adapting to control their children.

I have a teenager with major attitude and hormones i feared losing her for a year and I had run out of ideas...after the last confrontation I was absolutely desperate things had reached a breaking point, I could think of nothing else so I sat her on my knee and we hugged and talked for an hour, eureka!, one lonely kid with self esteem issues is my best pal again...she needed physical contact to prove that I loved her words alone weren't enough her...

Actually, they didn't spank me until then. All the time outs in the world did nothing until they spanked me. That and the 'special', which was a simple lock they put on my door. My parents would use it if I had been very bad (like kicking a teacher and slamming a door in the same teacher's face...). I hated the 'special' so much.

How did I get to be so bad? I was just a brat plain and simple. I was and always have been extremely stubborn, with a strong dislike of authority and rules.

if they were using the time out as a punishment they were using it incorrectly.

if they were using the time out as a punishment they were using it incorrectly.

And it didn't work because I didn't like being social as a kid.

Sitting in the corner was no chore for me. I would close my eyes and make up a story while I sat there and I would make believe while I had just my mind and hands to play with.

And it didn't work because I didn't like being social as a kid.

Sitting in the corner was no chore for me. I would close my eyes and make up a story while I sat there and I would make believe while I had just my mind and hands to play with.

you guys make all these false choices, like it's either spanking or time out, it's either mental or physical abuse.

there are other options, sure they take more time and maturity, but there are ways to communicate and relate to your kids that don't involve various levels of abuse.

so those are the only options, spankings and timeouts?...timeouts work with some and not with others a good parent keeps searching and adapting to control their children.

I have a teenager with major attitude and hormones i feared losing her for a year and I had run out of ideas...after the last confrontation I was absolutely desperate things had reached a breaking point, I could think of nothing else so I sat her on my knee and we hugged and talked for an hour, eureka!, one lonely kid with self esteem issues is my best pal again...she needed physical contact to prove that I loved her words alone weren't enough her...

My mother was not the type of person who would have done that. She would never admit she was wrong.

you guys make all these false choices, like it's either spanking or time out, it's either mental or physical abuse.

there are other options, sure they take more time and maturity, but there are ways to communicate and relate to your kids that don't involve various levels of abuse.

But sometimes it doesn't matter how creative you are. IF you repeat the same punishment, it loses impact value, and the kid will learn ways to get around it. It especially works well if your parents are divorced because then there are different rules and you can get away with more.

But sometimes it doesn't matter how creative you are. IF you repeat the same punishment, it loses impact value, and the kid will learn ways to get around it. It especially works well if your parents are divorced because then there are different rules and you can get away with more.

kids need consistency.

But sometimes it doesn't matter how creative you are. IF you repeat the same punishment, it loses impact value, and the kid will learn ways to get around it. It especially works well if your parents are divorced because then there are different rules and you can get away with more.

most of the time it doesnt involve punishment at all. good parenting is more about dealing with your child as he is. you make it worth his while to behave. when it comes time that you have to punish, you do it immediately before he gets out of hand and you have the punishment make sense in relation to the infraction.

What exactly is the big deal with spanking your kid? Especially when the child is young and so won't understand other possible punishments, spanking is a good way for the kid to understand that their bad actions have a consequence.

either you hit the kid so they will learn a lesson (in which case you can teach them without hitting)

Qué?

What exactly is the big deal with spanking your kid? Especially when the child is young and so won't understand other possible punishments, spanking is a good way for the kid to understand that their bad actions have a consequence.

if the child does not understand, they don't understand. what's so hard to get? either you hit the kid so they will learn a lesson (in which case you can teach them without hitting) or they don't understand and then you are just hitting them to make yourself feel better.

What exactly is the big deal with spanking your kid? Especially when the child is young and so won't understand other possible punishments, spanking is a good way for the kid to understand that their bad actions have a consequence.

if a child is too young to understand, then she is too young to understand spanking. all she will learn is that daddy is dangerous and that he sometimes hurts. is that really the lesson you want to teach?

when a child is too young to understand you manage their lives so that they have little chance to get into trouble. its not being bad if you dont know what bad IS.

If you don't have children you shouldn't be responding to this thread.

This bill is absolutely asinine. Abuse is one thing (and it's already illegal), but spanking your child is sometimes the only way to get a message across.

I don't see why the opinions of people who don't have kids shouldn't be responding. We were all children once upon a time.

I was spanked by my parents. My mom's spanking had no effect, us kids would pretend it hurt and cry (faking) and as soon as she would leave the room we'd burst into an uncontrollable laughter. Dad, he was a different story our cries were for Real. He even made himself a paddle and engraved on it "THE BOSS" and the other side, though a little smaller letter size for the size of the word, "THE PERSUADER" He favored "THE BOSS" side, I remember that "BO" would appear in red on one of my butt cheeks, usually not more than a day. My mom, eventually learned and began to use the threat of Dad for misbehaving deterance, which definately worked. It didn't matter what my mom used, I've been spanked with metal coat hangers, switches, a vacuum cord, hand, bamboo sticks, etc... even with some leaving welts such as that vacuum cord but it all had that same reactions of laughter afterwards. I still don't understand except she looked funny when mad. We feared Dad.

Anyways, do you think that the California legislature is going to put a memo stateing "Only Parents may vote for or against this bill" I think not. As others have already stated their are already laws regarding abuse. The government is overstepping the boundaries that should belong to the parents. I for example have turned into a very respectable adult, have a good job and benefits, responsiblities, an overall good head on my shoulders and I have to thank the discipline choices my parents made. Parents have a right of being parents and the Government doesn't have any rights to take Parental Rights away. Yes, it's unfortunate if parents take it too far but there are a hell of a lot of parents out there who don't abuse their children and are raising their children up to be respectable adults. Speculation on my part is, if you take away the right to spank or physically discipline (with limits of course) you can expect these kids to become unruly, disrespectful, and demanding.

This is kind of funny, I've known parents who would "ground" their kid for whatever reasons and send them to their bedrooms. In the bedroom, they have a TV w/cable, computer w/internet, PS2, and telephone or cellphone. When I got grounded, I would have loved to have all that in my room but I never had any of the above. Some groundings... :rolleyes:

Qué?

whats so hard to understand? if spanking can teach the lesson you want to teach you dont need to spank. she can learn it without being hit.

if spanking can teach the lesson you want to teach you dont need to spank.

Says who?

I don't see why the opinions of people who don't have kids shouldn't be responding. We were all children once upon a time.

I was spanked by my parents. My mom's spanking had no effect, us kids would pretend it hurt and cry (faking) and as soon as she would leave the room we'd burst into an uncontrollable laughter. Dad, he was a different story our cries were for Real. He even made himself a paddle and engraved on it "THE BOSS" and the other side, though a little smaller letter size for the size of the word, "THE PERSUADER" He favored "THE BOSS" side, I remember that "BO" would appear in red on one of my butt cheeks, usually not more than a day. My mom, eventually learned and began to use the threat of Dad for misbehaving deterance, which definately worked. It didn't matter what my mom used, I've been spanked with metal coat hangers, switches, a vacuum cord, hand, bamboo sticks, etc... even with some leaving welts such as that vacuum cord but it all had that same reactions of laughter afterwards. I still don't understand except she looked funny when mad. We feared Dad.

Anyways, do you think that the California legislature is going to put a memo stateing "Only Parents may vote for or against this bill" I think not. As others have already stated their are already laws regarding abuse. The government is overstepping the boundaries that should belong to the parents. I for example have turned into a very respectable adult, have a good job and benefits, responsiblities, an overall good head on my shoulders and I have to thank the discipline choices my parents made. Parents have a right of being parents and the Government doesn't have any rights to take Parental Rights away. Yes, it's unfortunate if parents take it too far but there are a hell of a lot of parents out there who don't abuse their children and are raising their children up to be respectable adults. Speculation on my part is, if you take away the right to spank or physically discipline (with limits of course) you can expect these kids to become unruly, disrespectful, and demanding.

This is kind of funny, I've known parents who would "ground" their kid for whatever reasons and send them to their bedrooms. In the bedroom, they have a TV w/cable, computer w/internet, PS2, and telephone or cellphone. When I got grounded, I would have loved to have all that in my room but I never had any of the above. Some groundings... :rolleyes:

your experience of being spanked as a regular form of punishment seems to me to be typical of people i know who were raised the same way.

as to grounding... all that matters is whether or not it works.

do you think you are a good person because your parents used fear to control you or in spite of it?

And if he answers "because of"?

My mother was not the type of person who would have done that. She would never admit she was wrong.

my parents never admitted they were wrong either...they were good role models for what not to do as a parent...at times I catch myself being just like them, at those times I take a timeout and come back and apologize to my kids...by admitting to my kids that I too can be wrong, I have found earns me enormous respect from them...

Says who?

me

unless you are supposing you have a mentally deficient child.

IF spanking can teach a child that its wrong to....run in the house... then she can learn the same lesson with less violent means.

if she CANT learn it from less violent means, all you have really done is to teach your child to avoid pain.

do you think you are a good person because your parents used fear to control you or in spite of it?

In part, Yes. I feel that I'm a good person who during his youth was taught the difference from Right and Wrong. Taught to be Respectful of others. The discipline of spankings taught me that their are consequences for my actions and choices. At the time of being a child I would have giving my parents a grade of C. Today, as an adult, I understand and am more thankful of how they raised me and would grade them with an A-.

-snip-
Anyways, do you think that the California legislature is going to put a memo stateing "Only Parents may vote for or against this bill" I think not. As others have already stated their are already laws regarding abuse. The government is overstepping the boundaries that should belong to the parents. I for example have turned into a very respectable adult, have a good job and benefits, responsiblities, an overall good head on my shoulders and I have to thank the discipline choices my parents made.

do you think you are a good person because your parents used fear to control you or in spite of it?

if the child does not understand, they don't understand. what's so hard to get? either you hit the kid so they will learn a lesson (in which case you can teach them without hitting) or they don't understand and then you are just hitting them to make yourself feel better.

They will certainly understand that if they do something and get a swat on the the bottom then the kid will know that perhaps they should not do it again. It seems to be the most direct and logical punishment, especially if you have a wild kid. It is my assumption anyway, if I see some kid screaming his head off at the supermarket then it seems that there is a lack of punishment going on at home. Or maybe parents think a "no desert" type of punishment actually works or something. What I do know is when I was spanked as a kid I certainly didn't feel like repeating my misdeed!

They will certainly understand that if they do something and get a swat on the the bottom then the kid will know that perhaps they should not do it again. It seems to be the most direct and logical punishment, especially if you have a wild kid. It is my assumption anyway, if I see some kid screaming his head off at the supermarket then it seems that there is a lack of punishment going on at home. Or maybe parents think a "no desert" type of punishment actually works or something. What I do know is when I was spanked as a kid I certainly didn't feel like repeating my misdeed!

if they understand a "swat on the butt" they will understand other types of redirection as well.

if you see a kid screaming in the store the problem isn't with the discipline model used at home, but the lack of consistency at home.

if a child is too young to understand, then she is too young to understand spanking. all she will learn is that daddy is dangerous and that he sometimes hurts. is that really the lesson you want to teach?

when a child is too young to understand you manage their lives so that they have little chance to get into trouble. its not being bad if you dont know what bad IS.

Why does the father have to do the spanking? Seems like both parents are perfectly capable of disciplining their child.

What they will understand is that after they did something they were punished. They will know not to do it again. They may not understand why what they did is wrong but they will still know that doing it again would be unwise.

Why does the father have to do the spanking? Seems like both parents are perfectly capable of disciplining their child.

What they will understand is that after they did something they were punished. They will know not to do it again. They may not understand why what they did is wrong but they will still know that doing it again would be unwise.

if you want to train your child the same way you train a dog, then fine, she can learn one lesson at a time

dont run in the house or you will get hurt
dont run into the street or you will get hurt
dont run at school or you will get hurt.
dont run in the mall or you will get hurt.

or you can have your child want to be a big girl who only runs when its safe. who stays by you because that is how we do things outside. that way when youre not there to threaten her, she will still behave because its what she thinks she should do.

I got spanked by my father (who actually worked for CPS) at the age of 5 for taking candy from my sister's Halloween stash. After he finished, I called him a bully and told him to pick on someone his own size. He never spanked any of us again.

My mother spanked me but only after a major rulebreaking (i.e. leaving the yard, wandering off at the grocery store, etc.) and once when I was actually 16. But then I really was being a pain in the ass teenager.

We also did have time-outs, no desserts, groundings, etc.

My parents would not have deserved any imprisonment or fines for their disciplinary tactics.

In part, Yes. I feel that I'm a good person who during his youth was taught the difference from Right and Wrong. Taught to be Respectful of others. The discipline of spankings taught me that their are consequences for my actions and choices. At the time of being a child I would have giving my parents a grade of C. Today, as an adult, I understand and am more thankful of how they raised me and would grade them with an A-.

I give my parents a failing grade, yet, I am still respectful, and a good citizen. I am in spite of the beatings, not because of them.

me

Fancy.

IF spanking can teach a child that its wrong to....run in the house... then she can learn the same lesson with less violent means.

if she CANT learn it from less violent means, all you have really done is to teach your child to avoid pain.

Avoiding pain is innate. That's what pain is, to tell you that putting your hand in that fire is damaging you, stop doing it.

P.S. Well, unless you're a masochist, that's a whole 'nother can o' worms, eh?

Why does the father have to do the spanking? Seems like both parents are perfectly capable of disciplining their child.

What they will understand is that after they did something they were punished. They will know not to do it again. They may not understand why what they did is wrong but they will still know that doing it again would be unwise.

so you would control your children through fear then? If they do not understand why what they did was wrong, how do you know they will not try it again? they have no basic understanding of anything other than "I got hit" do they?

I give my parents a failing grade, yet, I am still respectful, and a good citizen. I am in spite of the beatings, not because of them.

I am very glad that you became Respectful and a good citizen despite of the beatings by your parents. I don't think that all children who grow up without spankings are growing up Respectful.

I can only speak of the children in my particular neighborhood. I've seen many times the kids as little as six swearing very loudly F this and F that and FU mothereffer, etc... I've seen them be very disrespectful to the elderly people living in the neighborhood, breaking into homes and cars, vandalizing others property, cussing at their own parents, etc... I'm almost 30 and I still don't cuss infront of my parents. I think it's disrespectful. By some (not all) of the kids actions and behavior in my neighborhood, I cannot help but to think of the lack of discipline and teachings of the parents.

Parents who use spanking for discipline are, in my opinion, lazy as hell. They are choosing a quick-fix that requires little effort on their part, at the expense of their child's growth and maturation. They are training their offspring the way one trains a dog, which is only a good idea if you want dogs for children.

Spanking is appropriate as an emergency or last-ditch option. For instance, sometimes my brother would work himself into tantrums so severe that he would start choking. A swat on the butt would shock him out of it (mainly because he was so surprised at being struck at all) even if it really wasn't hard enough to do more than sting for a moment or two. This was necessary because he was completely past the point of being able to listen to anybody, and he needed to be stopped before he worked himself into personal injury.

I, myself, remember having my hand swatted very hard when I decided I wanted to keep reaching for the stove burner. Of course, my mother then explained to me WHY I shouldn't touch the burner, and why she had swatted me. The swat was the emergency reaction in a situation where I was in immediate danger; it was not used for discipline, nor was it considered enough to teach me any important lesson. That kind of teaching requires more effort than a *thwap* or two.

My dad used to hit, shake, or swat me when I was young. He has since told me that he considers it the single worst mistake of his entire life, that he actually believed hitting me was an effective way to parent. Not only did it seriously jeopardize our relationship, it also flat out didn't work. From being hit, I learned that the most important thing was to not get caught doing things that would get me hit. On the other hand, when my parents explained to me why a given behavior was a lousy idea, then I would have a reason to refrain from doing it even when I might have been able to get away with it.

Parents who use spanking for discipline are, in my opinion, lazy as hell. They are choosing a quick-fix that requires little effort on their part, at the expense of their child's growth and maturation. They are training their offspring the way one trains a dog, which is only a good idea if you want dogs for children.

-snip-

Funny you mention dogs...I would definately say atleast my one dog of the two is more well behaved compared to some of the neighborhood kids. :p

all children are not growing up respectful because they have piss poor parents.


-snip-

I agree with that.

I am very glad that you became Respectful and a good citizen despite of the beatings by your parents. I don't think that all children who grow up without spankings are growing up Respectful.
all children are not growing up respectful because they have piss poor parents.

I can only speak of the children in my particular neighborhood. I've seen many times the kids as little as six swearing very loudly F this and F that and FU mothereffer, etc... I've seen them be very disrespectful to the elderly people living in the neighborhood, breaking into homes and cars, vandalizing others property, cussing at their own parents, etc... I'm almost 30 and I still don't cuss infront of my parents. I think it's disrespectful. By some (not all) of the kids actions and behavior in my neighborhood, I cannot help but to think of the lack of discipline and teachings of the parents.
really? I see a lot of that from the kids in my neighborhood that do get spankings, again it's because of the piss poor parents. I will say it again (for at least the third time) there is nothing magic about spankings, any form of punishment applied consistently will work, I just prefer not to hit my kids.

I, myself, remember having my hand swatted very hard when I decided I wanted to keep reaching for the stove burner. Of course, my mother then explained to me WHY I shouldn't touch the burner, and why she had swatted me. The swat was the emergency reaction in a situation where I was in immediate danger; it was not used for discipline, nor was it considered enough to teach me any important lesson. That kind of teaching requires more effort than a *thwap* or two.

For the record, *opens notepad* You would, in fact, not want your mother jailed and fined for this particular occurance?

if you want to train your child the same way you train a dog, then fine, she can learn one lesson at a time

dont run in the house or you will get hurt
dont run into the street or you will get hurt
dont run at school or you will get hurt.
dont run in the mall or you will get hurt.

or you can have your child want to be a big girl who only runs when its safe. who stays by you because that is how we do things outside. that way when youre not there to threaten her, she will still behave because its what she thinks she should do.

Running when they shouldn't isn't what I had in mind when thinking of reasons to spank. I was thinking more along the lines of breaking things, taking things they shouldn't, etc. Besides, I think the period of being old enough to be spanked but not understanding the reason for the spanking is a short period if it exists at all.

Now that I think on it more the idea of spanking if the child doesn't understand why is pretty dumb. Still, they will understand basic right and wrong quickly and when that occurs I see no problem with that kind of discipline. You can try other types of discipline if you want to avoid spanking but if nothing seems to work and parents want to try spanking then I really don't see any issue in doing it. Afterwards, they explain why the kid was punished, why what they did was wrong. Hopefully the kid will know that what they did was wrong or at the very least they don't want to experience another spanking so they won't do it again. As long as you don't overdo it and stay consistent in your punishment I don't see how it won't work just as well as any other method.

kids will always have emotions, end of story. my kid is angry right now in her room, when she has enough self control to talk to me she can come out, did I send her to her room? nope, she went on her own. She knows (at the age of 3 no less) that we don't yell at my house, she is getting her "angry" out and then we will talk. If more adults could do the same thing, think how wonderful the world would be.......

For one thing, laws like this proposed one wouldn't be needed.

and another thing is that all these threads about spanking would be about a totally different thing. :p

Fancy.



Avoiding pain is innate. That's what pain is, to tell you that putting your hand in that fire is damaging you, stop doing it.

P.S. Well, unless you're a masochist, that's a whole 'nother can o' worms, eh?

only if the child can figure out what she got hit for. for kids too young to learn by other methods, its usually a complete mystery.

if the child does not understand, they don't understand. what's so hard to get? either you hit the kid so they will learn a lesson (in which case you can teach them without hitting) or they don't understand and then you are just hitting them to make yourself feel better.

Why do so many people not quite get this concept? A child can do things that will hurt them, and so they should be taught not to do those things in the most effective way possible.
They might not understand what it means to get burned, but would you prefer to wait until they do get burned so they understand, or would you prefer to smack them when they try?
And this does not just cover spanking either. If you try to time-out a young child they will still not understand why its being done, and as the punnishment doesnt cause that much immidiate emotional pain (took me about half an hour to get bored when i was a child), then the child may not associate it to the event, and so might do it again.

only if the child can figure out what she got hit for.

It's a rather simple thing really, so long as they can figure out why they got hurt (which most living organisms can do), and avoid that, it may very well save the child from actual injury. Feel free to supplement the lesson with words, that's your perogative.

I am very glad that you became Respectful and a good citizen despite of the beatings by your parents. I don't think that all children who grow up without spankings are growing up Respectful.

I can only speak of the children in my particular neighborhood. I've seen many times the kids as little as six swearing very loudly F this and F that and FU mothereffer, etc... I've seen them be very disrespectful to the elderly people living in the neighborhood, breaking into homes and cars, vandalizing others property, cussing at their own parents, etc... I'm almost 30 and I still don't cuss infront of my parents. I think it's disrespectful. By some (not all) of the kids actions and behavior in my neighborhood, I cannot help but to think of the lack of discipline and teachings of the parents.

where do you think kids learn those words? they hear their parents saying them. they are out on the streets at 6, 7, 8 when any good parent would keep them home. they might get good hard spankings now and then but its the day to day paying attention to your kids that keeps them from this kind of behavior.

yeah their parents suck no matter if they spank or not.

For one thing, laws like this proposed one wouldn't be needed.

and another thing is that all these threads about spanking would be about a totally different thing. :p

Ah, what a day that'll be, eh?

if they were using the time out as a punishment they were using it incorrectly.Unfortunatly, alot of 'experts' council in using "Time outs" as a form of punnishment.

you guys make all these false choices, like it's either spanking or time out, it's either mental or physical abuse.

there are other options, sure they take more time and maturity, but there are ways to communicate and relate to your kids that don't involve various levels of abuse.
yep, but the fact is, we can only share stories of our experiences, also, what we share is our interpretation of what happened.

I was spanked, but not just spanked, I was also told why I was getting spanked and normally (for me) it was the last resort. (and the fact I was spanked alot meant I was a little hellion. :p )

So I had groundings (time outs) I have privaleges removed etc... but I was also a devious little twerp. Groundings were little vacations into my own little world, removing of privaleges only enforced to me that I could do without them, lectures were quickly forgotten or ignored... but the spankings were something I tried to avoid.

It's a rather simple thing really, so long as they can figure out why they got hurt (which most living organisms can do), and avoid that, it may very well save the child from actual injury. Feel free to supplement the lesson with words, that's your perogative.

they got hurt because daddy hit them. that they can understand quite well. WHY daddy hit them is another question entirely.

Ugh, spanking just doesn't work with all kids.

I'm not reading "spanking works with no kids". Should I be?

they got hurt because daddy hit them. that they can understand quite well. WHY daddy hit them is another question entirely.

Jeez, someone has a low opinion of children's mental factulties.

Ugh, spanking just doesn't work with all kids. Didn't work on me or my brothers, and doesn't work for shit on my kids. Why would you continue to do something that doesn't work? At that point, you're doing it because you want to hurt them, not because you truly think it's going to correct any negative behaviours. Any form of discipline should eventually cease to need to exist, or it simply didn't work. So if you start swatting your kids at three, and keep it up until 13? Yeah. You're a dense one.

Why do so many people not quite get this concept? A child can do things that will hurt them, and so they should be taught not to do those things in the most effective way possible.
They might not understand what it means to get burned, but would you prefer to wait until they do get burned so they understand, or would you prefer to smack them when they try?
And this does not just cover spanking either. If you try to time-out a young child they will still not understand why its being done, and as the punnishment doesnt cause that much immidiate emotional pain (took me about half an hour to get bored when i was a child), then the child may not associate it to the event, and so might do it again.

if a child is so young that they do not understand why they are being hit, then it is abuse. period.

if you are worried about your toddler (because that's what this law covers) sticking pins in light sockets, maybe you should keep the pins out of their reach and childproof your house.


how hard is that to understand?

I don't see why the opinions of people who don't have kids shouldn't be responding.
I'm thinking more of someone who doesn't have kids AND thinks it's wrong to spank. I don't see how they think their opinion would matter since they have no experience to form an opinion.

We were all children once upon a time. True. But the difference between being a parent and being a child are no where near similar.

The government is overstepping the boundaries that should belong to the parents. ... Speculation on my part is, if you take away the right to spank or physically discipline (with limits of course) you can expect these kids to become unruly, disrespectful, and demanding. You got that right. :)

This is kind of funny, I've known parents who would "ground" their kid for whatever reasons and send them to their bedrooms. In the bedroom, they have a TV w/cable, computer w/internet, PS2, and telephone or cellphone. When I got grounded, I would have loved to have all that in my room but I never had any of the above. Some groundings... :rolleyes: Absolutely! :)

if a child is so young that they do not understand why they are being hit, then it is abuse. period.

if you are worried about your toddler (because that's what this law covers) sticking pins in light sockets, maybe you should keep the pins out of their reach and childproof your house.


how hard is that to understand?

Thats the thing, a child DOES understand why its being hit.
"I put my finger at this flamy thing, pain follows."

What it doesnt understand is you sitting it sown and trying to explain to it why its wrong, or being told to go somewhere else to stand when it tries it.

And yes, this is like training an animal, and no, this does not leave your children completely unable to think for themselves when they reach an age where they can understand reasoning.

here's a link to the interview with Sally Lieber on NPR.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6939415

My mother was not the type of person who would have done that. She would never admit she was wrong.

oh, my mother would admit when she's wrong. She once spanked me for something SHE did but thought I did. when she realized I had told her the truth...

lets just say we laugh now whenever I bring up that "IOU for one bad deed."

Jeez, someone has a low opinion of children's mental factulties.

toddlers? they don't make adult connections especially illogical ones? :eek: OMG, say it ain't so?!

where do you think kids learn those words? they hear their parents saying them. they are out on the streets at 6, 7, 8 when any good parent would keep them home. they might get good hard spankings now and then but its the day to day paying attention to your kids that keeps them from this kind of behavior.

yeah their parents suck no matter if they spank or not.

What you say is the truth, however, they also learn those words from their peers outside and within the Public Schools.

toddlers? they don't make adult connections especially illogical ones? :eek: OMG, say it ain't so?!

I'm saying a kid can figure out [*takes action* -> *feels pain* -> *avoids action]. It's not even a higher brain function, for all your comparing everyone to dog trainers while calling their kids dogs, I'm suprised the idea that kids can understand at least that much doesn't click well with y'all.

Running when they shouldn't isn't what I had in mind when thinking of reasons to spank. I was thinking more along the lines of breaking things, taking things they shouldn't, etc. Besides, I think the period of being old enough to be spanked but not understanding the reason for the spanking is a short period if it exists at all.

Now that I think on it more the idea of spanking if the child doesn't understand why is pretty dumb. Still, they will understand basic right and wrong quickly and when that occurs I see no problem with that kind of discipline. You can try other types of discipline if you want to avoid spanking but if nothing seems to work and parents want to try spanking then I really don't see any issue in doing it. Afterwards, they explain why the kid was punished, why what they did was wrong. Hopefully the kid will know that what they did was wrong or at the very least they don't want to experience another spanking so they won't do it again. As long as you don't overdo it and stay consistent in your punishment I don't see how it won't work just as well as any other method.

most people who spank start when their child is in diapers and keep it up until they realize its not working. only the worst spank after their child is 10 years old.

few parents use spanking as a primary form of punishment.

the vast majority of parents, even those who spank, use time-outs, taking-tos, rewards, removal of privileges, whatever, as their primary form of teaching their child good behavior.

they save spanking as the big time threat. its used when susie pushes janey down the stairs or when johnny cuts the tail off the cat. the rest of the time its an idle threat. idle threats are a poor way of getting compliance.

when the child is a toddler they spank because they are too lazy or too imcompetent to know that they can get the same level of compliance (spotty at best) using nonviolent methods. methods that encourage their child to learn to want to behave instead of learn to avoid getting hit. they have no clue that in half a year, their child will be a sweettempered angel again. they expect unreasonably mature behavior out of kids who are mentally incapable of it. they think that spanking accomplished what was in fact accomplished by normal child development. they hurt their child for no good reason.

we are not raising our children to be fearful obeyers of authority. we are raising our children to be responsible adults.

What you say is the truth, however, they also learn those words from their peers outside and within the Public Schools.

they certainly do.

and some kids that you see swearing on the streets would never use any of those words at home.

lets see

kid walks into the kitchen where mommy is

mommy hits the kid

hmm? what do you think the kid learns?

Apparently this kid you like to describe is, in fact, lower than an animal. And I get called monster by you lot. *shrug*

if the child is too young to understand it's own actions, it's too young to learn anything from any form of punishment.

until they reach an age of accountability (meaning they understand what they are doing and can reason that they are accountable for that) then any punishment is abuse.

Wait, what? No punishment never ever never works ever at all on any kid past present or future ever?

Thats the thing, a child DOES understand why its being hit.
"I put my finger at this flamy thing, pain follows."
lets see

kid walks into the kitchen where mommy is

mommy hits the kid

hmm? what do you think the kid learns?

What it doesnt understand is you sitting it sown and trying to explain to it why its wrong, or being told to go somewhere else to stand when it tries it.
if the child is too young to understand it's own actions, it's too young to learn anything from any form of punishment.



And yes, this is like training an animal, and no, this does not leave your children completely unable to think for themselves when they reach an age where they can understand reasoning.
until they reach an age of accountability (meaning they understand what they are doing and can reason that they are accountable for that) then any punishment is abuse.

the law is talking about toddlers, babies if you will, you think a baby can make that connection?

NO, babies and toddlers are VERY seperate things. A baby cannot understand, but you have to be a REALLY lax parent to leave a baby unattended. Generally because it cant usually crawl or walk yet...
I do agree tho that when they are a BABY (not toddler) that there is no reason to smack them.
But then, if you look through the debate then everyone who is for smacking appears to be refering to children who are about 2 and a half. Thats not a baby.

I'm thinking more of someone who doesn't have kids AND thinks it's wrong to spank. I don't see how they think their opinion would matter since they have no experience to form an opinion.


so, you think that removing anyone from the debate that doesn't agree with you will make it go easier? ;)

What you say is the truth, however, they also learn those words from their peers outside and within the Public Schools.

and where do you think their peers learn the words?

the law is talking about toddlers, babies if you will, you think a baby can make that connection?

Now, hold, toddlers or babies? Babies, as in *spits up*, *pees*, *poos* baby?

and where do you think their peers learn the words?

Violent video games?

I'm saying a kid can figure out [*takes action* -> *feels pain* -> *avoids action]. It's not even a higher brain function, for all your comparing everyone to dog trainers while calling their kids dogs, I'm suprised the idea that kids can understand at least that much doesn't click well with y'all.

the law is talking about toddlers, babies if you will, you think a baby can make that connection?

toddlers? they don't make adult connections especially illogical ones? :eek: OMG, say it ain't so?!

Yes, but some connections are so easily made that you have to be particularly dense not to get it. Especially if its a case of say, touching something hot. Then the parent would have removed your hand from danger, in which case you would have have some stimuli to help you understand what the pain was refering to.

The only reason you could not be sure why your daddy was hitting you would be if your daddy hit you a lot, and that nothing to do with smacking.

Why do so many people not quite get this concept? A child can do things that will hurt them, and so they should be taught not to do those things in the most effective way possible.
They might not understand what it means to get burned, but would you prefer to wait until they do get burned so they understand, or would you prefer to smack them when they try?
And this does not just cover spanking either. If you try to time-out a young child they will still not understand why its being done, and as the punnishment doesnt cause that much immidiate emotional pain (took me about half an hour to get bored when i was a child), then the child may not associate it to the event, and so might do it again.

why do you not understand a simpler concept which is easier for you to understand than a child...keep your children safe...do not let them in the kitchen, do not leave them in dangerous areas unsupervised, do not leave them unattended near roads(hold their hand)...

if a child gets hurt it's the parents fault not the child's, it's lazy and neglectful parenting...spanking might work better on parents who are careless with their children's safety...

when one of my children was burned in the kitchen, it was my wife's fault for letting her in there...when another toddler took a tumble down the stairs, it was my fault for leaving the door open...when another stuck a fork in the electrical outlet it was the fault of both of us for not safety plugging the outlets...the kids were never at fault the parents who knew the dangers were at fault....

I'm saying a kid can figure out [*takes action* -> *feels pain* -> *avoids action]. It's not even a higher brain function, for all your comparing everyone to dog trainers while calling their kids dogs, I'm suprised the idea that kids can understand at least that much doesn't click well with y'all.

after a certain age a child can figure out that she should avoid a certain action, touching the ming vase perhaps, because every time she does it, she gets hit.

that doesnt generalilze into not touching the picasso.

that doesnt generalize into not touching it when no one who might hit her is looking.

the vast majority of "bad behaviors" of children under 3 are best taken care of by avoiding the situation. you put covers on all the electrical plugs, you put the ming vase into storage, you keep the pot handles pointed toward the back of the stove. you dont set up your home as a mine field of things that get you hit.

Yes, but some connections are so easily made that you have to be particularly dense not to get it. Especially if its a case of say, touching something hot. Then the parent would have removed your hand from danger, in which case you would have have some stimuli to help you understand what the pain was refering to.
then why hit at all? when my kids got near the stove, I picked them up and said "no touching, that's hot" and took them into the living room, what's the need to add in physical punishment?

The only reason you could not be sure why your daddy was hitting you would be if your daddy hit you a lot, and that nothing to do with smacking.
most kids under 3 aren't potty trained, you want to know why? because they can't make the connection between the urge to piss and the action of pissing, do you really think they have the mental capacity to understand why an adult is hitting them?

Now, hold, toddlers or babies? Babies, as in *spits up*, *pees*, *poos* baby?

lets say a 12 month old? a 2 year old?

under three, that's what the law is talking about.

Anyway, i will run off from this discussion and leave you with my thoughts:

It is not ok to smack a child who is too young to have any higher brain functions (mainly curiosity being the one that gets them into trouble)
-usually less than about 1

However, it is ok to smack a child who has enough brain functions to hurt themselves, but is not yet old enough to understand reasoning or explainations
-up to about 2.5

It the then not ok to smack a kid once other forms of punishment become a viable option (i.e. if a child is old enough to respond to grounding etc.) unless it does something that causes SERIOUS harm to someone else.

See? This debate becomes nice and easy once you split it up into the three debates which it actually is.

I'm thinking more of someone who doesn't have kids AND thinks it's wrong to spank. I don't see how they think their opinion would matter since they have no experience to form an opinion.
I'd say that's BS in most cases. I don't have kids of my own, but I've been closely involved in the care of three different little kids. My own little brother, who is a decade younger than I, was largely my responsibility growing up. I've baby-sat I don't know how many times. I've been a teacher in a kindergarten class.

Now, obviously none of these situations are the same as being a full-time parent of your own kids. However, it's bunk to say that people like me have "no experience to form an opinion." Sure we do. I have more experience than a lot of first-time parents do! I've spent more time taking care of babies than a lot of parents have done. Hell, one of my uncles never changed a single diaper, never sat up at night while his kid had the flu, never burped a baby, and never administered a single time-out, and he's got five kids.

And, furthermore, even people who don't have experience taking care of kids STILL have experience on which to judge whether or not spanking is a good strategy. They have their own experience as a child, and that's perfectly useful and valid. I know, from personal experience, that hitting was a crappy excuse for "parenting" in my case.

The most basic foundation of human morality should be empathy. You shouldn't refrain from hurting people simply because hitting is against the rules...ideally, you should refrain from hitting people because you understand what it feels like to be hit, and you can appreciate why somebody would be sad if you hit them.

It's like that old saying about how humanity was at a particularly low point when somebody actually had to write down, "Thou Shalt Not Kill." You shouldn't need God to tell you to not kill people, because you should have some fucking empathy and you shouldn't be wanting to kill people in the first place.

With that said, one's own experience being a child gives one a ton of experience that is relevant to this topic. It lets you empathize with the child, because you have a sense of how it might feel to be on the receiving end of any punishment or penalty. Think about what would have worked with you, and what would not have worked.

If you aren't prepared to use empathy as a basic starting point for your parenting strategy, then you've got bugger all chance of ever teaching your kids empathy. Enjoy raising up some nice healthy sociopaths.

For the record, *opens notepad* You would, in fact, not want your mother jailed and fined for this particular occurance?
Of course not. But, then again, I wouldn't want my mother to go to jail if she robbed a liquor store, either, because I don't want my mother to go to jail.

If you are asking if I believe it is appropriate to jail people for swatting their kid on the hand, the way my mom did, then the answer should be obvious from my post. Of course not.

Do I think that people should be jailed for using spanking as their primary means of discipline? Not really, unless the spanking is of a level that qualifies under our standards of physical abuse. However, I do think such people are shitty parents, and I'll be happy to tell them so whenever they like.

Of course not. But, then again, I wouldn't want my mother to go to jail if she robbed a liquor store, either, because I don't want my mother to go to jail.

If you are asking if I believe it is appropriate to jail people for swatting their kid on the hand, the way my mom did, then the answer should be obvious from my post. Of course not.

Do I think that people should be jailed for using spanking as their primary means of discipline? Not really, unless the spanking is of a level that qualifies under our standards of physical abuse. However, I do think such people are shitty parents, and I'll be happy to tell them so whenever they like.

im beginning to think that these later posters think that smunkee and i are advocating that this bill be passed.

as much as i think that spanking should go by the wayside as a poor parenting technique, i am not in favor of criminalizing it. at least not in the form that most parents use it today.

Of course not. But, then again, I wouldn't want my mother to go to jail if she robbed a liquor store, either, because I don't want my mother to go to jail.

If you are asking if I believe it is appropriate to jail people for swatting their kid on the hand, the way my mom did, then the answer should be obvious from my post. Of course not.

Do I think that people should be jailed for using spanking as their primary means of discipline? Not really, unless the spanking is of a level that qualifies under our standards of physical abuse. However, I do think such people are shitty parents, and I'll be happy to tell them so whenever they like.

I think the point of the law is education, informing parents that it isn't acceptable to strike/spank children...from websites I've read on the Swedish law against spanking it appears that there is a new generation of Swedish parents who do not spank their children, and the attitude toward violence in general has changed...this is a good thing, the entire society will become less violent over time, as any level of violence becomes unacceptable...

I read this.... link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070123/ap_on_re_us/flight_tantrum)... and immediately thought of this thread.

So how many people here think the daughter hitting her parents and refusing to sit in her seat on an airplane are or are not spanking parents? And how many people think the mother should have been allowed to force the entire plane to wait while she tries to calm down a tantrum filled and parent hitting child?


If they are the non spanking type why would their daughter be hitting? If they are the spanking type, why weren't they able to get her to stay in her seat long enough for take off? Either way it's totally ridiculous :p

Nope, and I'm dead-set against this sort of legislation. But I do abhore the fact that many people who use spanking do it as punishment, not discipline, and never intend to stop using it...well until junior grows up and kicks the shit out of them.

M'kay, just checking.

I think the point of the law is education, informing parents that it isn't acceptable to strike/spank children...from websites I've read on the Swedish law against spanking it appears that there is a new generation of Swedish parents who do not spank their children, and the attitude toward violence in general has changed...this is a good thing, the entire society will become less violent over time, as any level of violence becomes unacceptable...
I absolutely support the idea of educating parents. I just don't know if a law is the best way to do it.

I think it's kind of odd that we require people to take classes and tests before they can drive a car, but any yahoo can make a baby and do whatever they want with it, even if they haven't the faintest idea what they're doing. For me, it's not about wanting to impose "parenting tests," so much as it is concern over society's priorities. We're really concerned with make sure people are responsible drivers (which makes sense), but shouldn't we be at least equally concerned with making sure they are responsible parents?

I think the point of the law is education, informing parents that it isn't acceptable to strike/spank children...from websites I've read on the Swedish law against spanking it appears that there is a new generation of Swedish parents who do not spank their children, and the attitude toward violence in general has changed...this is a good thing, the entire society will become less violent over time, as any level of violence becomes unacceptable...

Nice theorycraft... It's been 27 years... when do the results you are expecting begin?

I'm not reading "spanking works with no kids". Should I be?

Nope, and I'm dead-set against this sort of legislation. But I do abhore the fact that many people who use spanking do it as punishment, not discipline, and never intend to stop using it...well until junior grows up and kicks the shit out of them.

im beginning to think that these later posters think that smunkee and i are advocating that this bill be passed.

as much as i think that spanking should go by the wayside as a poor parenting technique, i am not in favor of criminalizing it. at least not in the form that most parents use it today.

as a libertarian I can't really say I want the law to be passed can I? I think I said before (twice) that I don't agree with criminalizing it, but I do think it's a crappy way to interact with your children.

as a libertarian I can't really say I want the law to be passed can I? I think I said before (twice) that I don't agree with criminalizing it, but I do think it's a crappy way to interact with your children.

Agreed.

Nice theorycraft... It's been 27 years... when do the results you are expecting begin?

trouble with reading comprehension?....I wrote "from websites I've read on the Swedish law against spanking it appears that there is a new generation of Swedish parents who do not spank their children, and the attitude toward violence in general has changed"...translation just for you-the results are in

I absolutely support the idea of educating parents. I just don't know if a law is the best way to do it.

I think it's kind of odd that we require people to take classes and tests before they can drive a car, but any yahoo can make a baby and do whatever they want with it, even if they haven't the faintest idea what they're doing. For me, it's not about wanting to impose "parenting tests," so much as it is concern over society's priorities. We're really concerned with make sure people are responsible drivers (which makes sense), but shouldn't we be at least equally concerned with making sure they are responsible parents?

look at this thread and how much attention it has gained, I'm sure if the laws are adopted there will be enormous attention gained and it will become very informative/educational...and parental education is what you want as it's impossible to license parents...

Now, hold, toddlers or babies? Babies, as in *spits up*, *pees*, *poos* baby?the law talks about children UNDER the age of 3.

the law talks about children UNDER the age of 3.

Three days ago they were talking about 4, that got squashed quickly. Now they are talking abotu 3, it's still going to get squashed. 2 will be next, that might work... or 18 mos., would be a better law, if there has to be any law at all. Better just drop the whole thing and use an education campaign instead of a law.

as a libertarian I can't really say I want the law to be passed can I? I think I said before (twice) that I don't agree with criminalizing it, but I do think it's a crappy way to interact with your children.

Enforcing it going to be a bitch.

Enforcing it going to be a bitch.

I think they know that, it's definitely educational...in the future though police will be able to take action if nessecary and parents won't be able to hide behind a parents right to spank...I've seen some horrific spankings that parents should have gone to jail for, with laws like this one those parents could be stopped...

Enforcing it going to be a bitch.

Enforcing any law is a bitch.

I read this.... link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070123/ap_on_re_us/flight_tantrum)... and immediately thought of this thread.

So how many people here think the daughter hitting her parents and refusing to sit in her seat on an airplane are or are not spanking parents? And how many people think the mother should have been allowed to force the entire plane to wait while she tries to calm down a tantrum filled and parent hitting child?


If they are the non spanking type why would their daughter be hitting? If they are the spanking type, why weren't they able to get her to stay in her seat long enough for take off? Either way it's totally ridiculous :p

from the article, i doubt that they are spanking parents.

they seem to be baby-darling parents who dont think that their little angel should be forced to do anything.

*shudder*

their child hits and kicks and hides under the seat because she knows she can. not that you can always predict when your child will act up. they do have their own minds.

the parents needed the lesson as much as their daughter did. good for the airline to have removed them from the plane.

Enforcing it going to be a bitch.

I would rather focus on education than enforcement of a crappy law to tell you the truth.

and when I say "I" I don't mean "government"

there are parenting classes here, they are only opened to people who beat the kids already.

I am working on trying to get something set up for pregnant moms and their partners so that they can get a good handle on "the plan" before "the opposition" shows up. *plus it might just help me promote my book

Enforcing any law is a bitch.Some are easier than others... like counterfieting, theift, most traffic laws...

Three days ago they were talking about 4, that got squashed quickly. Now they are talking abotu 3, it's still going to get squashed. 2 will be next, that might work... or 18 mos., would be a better law, if there has to be any law at all. Better just drop the whole thing and use an education campaign instead of a law.It would be interesting to see how low they will go.

I would rather focus on education than enforcement of a crappy law to tell you the truth.

and when I say "I" I don't mean "government"

there are parenting classes here, they are only opened to people who beat the kids already.

I am working on trying to get something set up for pregnant moms and their partners so that they can get a good handle on "the plan" before "the opposition" shows up. *plus it might just help me promote my book Good luck! if you finish, let me know, I'm willing to 'reverse shoplift' some of your reading materials in our hospitals.

trouble with reading comprehension?....I wrote "from websites I've read on the Swedish law against spanking it appears that there is a new generation of Swedish parents who do not spank their children, and the attitude toward violence in general has changed"...translation just for you-the results are in

I already posted a report that showed police reports many years after the law was passed that minor on minor violence rose 679% after spanking was outlawed. Nice results you have there.

I already posted a report that showed police reports many years after the law was passed that minor on minor violence rose 679% after spanking was outlawed. Nice results you have there.

and I posted that violence rose because the reports went up, violence is less tolerated, people are no longer afraid to report offenders...sexual abuse has always been with us but reports of abuse have gone up because people are not afraid as they once were to report it and police are more apt to do something about it....and that is the reason for the increase of minor violence in Sweden, there is less toleration for bullies, people report them and police take action...

the results speak for themselves, you just can't understand them...

When they behaved badly, I used to spank my parents.

I see that the 'tards have spoken.

I suppose you don't think that kids should ever be punished but instead should be lavished and showered with lollipops and extra large tins of forstings even if they skin the dog alive.

I bet you also believe that failing grades in school should be outlawed.

Go back to moronville and lock yourself in.

The win.

The win.

The lose, actually. Posts like that earned him a little vacation.

Oh, and your nation name makes me freakin' ill.

The lose, actually. Posts like that earned him a little vacation.

Oh, and your nation name makes me freakin' ill.

But it is the win.

How could it make you ill?<Maddox> It's the two best things in the world, combined: degrading women and pirates <Maddox> :D

But it is the win.

How could it make you ill?<Maddox> It's the two best things in the world, combined: degrading women and pirates <Maddox> :D

it may, MAY, break the rules against offensive names.

oh and no, it's not the win.

Dude, it's the win:rolleyes:

Who does my name offend?
By universal law, no one can be offended by pirates, because pirates are freakin' cool. Only jumberjacks can be compared with them in terms of manliness.

And who could ever be offened by the word "Bukkake". It actually means "your vacuum cleaner has lung cancer" in a dialect of Yiddish. I swear.

Johnny Wad? Is that you again?

it may, MAY, break the rules against offensive names.

oh and no, it's not the win.

Dude, it's the win:rolleyes:

Who does my name offend?
By universal law, no one can be offended by pirates, because pirates are freakin' cool. Only jumberjacks can be compared with them in terms of manliness.

And who could ever be offened by the word "Bukkake". It actually means "your vacuum cleaner has lung cancer" in a dialect of Yiddish. I swear.

that's the problem.

so what's the solution? a blanket ban on any form of physical violence?
Yes? Why not?

Does my neighbor know how to light his stove without blowing himself, his kids, and all his shit up? Does my neighbor drink gallons of gin, smoke meth or eat kittens? Does he enjoy midget erotica?

It would be a bummer if he did, but in the end it's not my problem.
But it's those people that are the problem, and a problem the legislature needs tools to deal with.

If I saw someone all out assaulting a child I would definately call the cops and try to do everything in my power to see it stopped forever, no doubt. But, in the end it is for personal responsibility to see that child abuse is stopped, not sweeping laws that could see a decent parent tossed in a cell for giving their kid a much-deserved spanking, while piss-poor parents let their kids run hog ass wild without so much as a stern word.

A touchy issue, to be sure.
What would you do if you saw someone in the park giving their child a hard slap across the face for dropping an ice cream? Would you intervene, call the cops, talk to them?

Spanking is a tool. It can be overused and abused. Because of this, an idiot in California (no surprise) wants to ban it. Now, while I agree that babies shouldn't be spanked (kids under a year just aren't going to get it, all they know is that someone they trusted hurt them)...
:p

You made me giggle.
Another law is not going to help. It might.


This law isn't going to help combat abuse. All it is going to do is punish relatively good parents. Taking a child away from a parent (or fining that parent $1000) for a swat on the rear end makes equal sense with the overzealous jurisdictions who have taken children away from parents for months on end for taking pictures of them in the bathtub or swimming naked on a camping trip.

All a law like this will do is traumatize children by ripping them away from perfectly competent parents and putting them in foster care for months until DEFACS gets its head together and puts the children back where they belong.
Who's saying anything about taking the child away from the parents?

Anyone who says spanking is bad, obviously didn't know me as a child, or other children who sit and contemplate how to get back at their parents for punishment...

[snip]

Did I learn anything? Sure I did - how to plot my revenge and slowly unleash it onto my unsuspecting parents.
Did you plot your revenge when you were two years old? Oh my...
No, I didn't seek revenge after a spanking because I knew I deserved it. I was six years old at the time, and I was being an incredible brat.
And older than the age proposed in this law.
I got spanked by my father (who actually worked for CPS) at the age of 5 for taking candy from my sister's Halloween stash.

[snip]

My parents would not have deserved any imprisonment or fines for their disciplinary tactics.
And they wouldn't have gotten any either since you were older than the age proposed in this law.
For the record, *opens notepad* You would, in fact, not want your mother jailed and fined for this particular occurance?
Which she wouldn't have been anyway, seeing as how the swat in question was a direct intervention to stop a greater harm?
NO, babies and toddlers are VERY seperate things. A baby cannot understand, but you have to be a REALLY lax parent to leave a baby unattended. Generally because it cant usually crawl or walk yet...
I do agree tho that when they are a BABY (not toddler) that there is no reason to smack them.
But then, if you look through the debate then everyone who is for smacking appears to be refering to children who are about 2 and a half. Thats not a baby.
So it's the exact age you disagree with...
Some are easier than others... like counterfieting, theift, most traffic laws...
:D :D

Oh, you made me laugh hard! Is it easy to enforce traffic laws? Not really. Most violations of traffic laws goes undetected, unreported and unpunished.

Who's saying anything about taking the child away from the parents?

Do you think children get to stay with their parents in jail?

Yes? Why not?careful then, when you hold your child too tightly, or pull on their arm. all that can fall under Physical Abuse. ;)

and should they find need to include Emotional and Mental abuse... well forbidding "Tag" is a start...

:D :D

Oh, you made me laugh hard! Is it easy to enforce traffic laws? Not really. Most violations of traffic laws goes undetected, unreported and unpunished.I didn't say Traffic laws were 100% enforcable, I said they are easier to enforce than this spanking law. Big difference! :p

Do you think children get to stay with their parents in jail?

It's only a misdemeanour if it passes. Hardly a lot of jail time - and personally I'm for this. Been proven many a time by psychologists that spanking really isn't good.
I know some will start screaming for sources, but I can't, because it's in an A level text book of mine. It's pretty much a given that if you spank a kid, they will grow up a bit messed up more often than not.

Do you think children get to stay with their parents in jail?
I just didn't think perfectly competent parents would end up in jail for a swat on the rear end. I would imagine that's what the fines were for...
careful then, when you hold your child too tightly, or pull on their arm. all that can fall under Physical Abuse. ;)

and should they find need to include Emotional and Mental abuse... well forbidding "Tag" is a start...
I see your point, and raise you "mens rea"... :cool:

I didn't say Traffic laws were 100% enforcable, I said they are easier to enforce than this spanking law. Big difference! :p
Hehe :p

I'm not sure though. The spanking that happens at home, yes, but the spanking that happens in public, no?

It's only a misdemeanour if it passes. Hardly a lot of jail time - and personally I'm for this. Been proven many a time by psychologists that spanking really isn't good.
I know some will start screaming for sources, but I can't, because it's in an A level text book of mine. It's pretty much a given that if you spank a kid, they will grow up a bit messed up more often than not.

It hasn't been "proven." It has been suggested by some psychologists. Others have said otherwise.

Meanwhile, any amount of jail-time separates a parent from a child for that amount of time. If that parent is a single parent, the child has to go elsewhere. And how many parents do you think have $1000 to just throw away because they chose to discipline their child?

The very idea is utterly ridiculous. And it really is pretty much exactly like freaking out over pictures of children in bathtubs.

I just didn't think perfectly competent parents would end up in jail for a swat on the rear end. I would imagine that's what the fines were for...

So only poor parents would end up in jail, as they wouldn't be able to pay the fine, eh? Hell, I don't have $1000 to just throw away, and I'm not trying to raise a child or working a minimum wage job.

It's only a misdemeanour if it passes. Hardly a lot of jail time - and personally I'm for this. Been proven many a time by psychologists that spanking really isn't good.
I know some will start screaming for sources, but I can't, because it's in an A level text book of mine. It's pretty much a given that if you spank a kid, they will grow up a bit messed up more often than not.

I found this on the American Psychological Association website:

http://www.apa.org/monitor/dec01/spanking.html

I think it outlines the entire discussion fairly well.

I'm not sure though. The spanking that happens at home, yes, but the spanking that happens in public, no?those that happen in public is investigated as child abuse by the police. and usually those are caught on cameras for evidence. That's already being done now. so why the law if it's not planned on being enforced differently than now?

It's only a misdemeanour if it passes. Hardly a lot of jail time - and personally I'm for this. Been proven many a time by psychologists that spanking really isn't good.
I know some will start screaming for sources, but I can't, because it's in an A level text book of mine. It's pretty much a given that if you spank a kid, they will grow up a bit messed up more often than not.

The bill, backed by Democrat Sally Lieber of San Francisco, a member of the state legislature, would outlaw spanking children three years old or younger and carry a possible penalty of jail time or a 1,000-dollar fine.so how much jail time? a week? a month? several months?

so how much jail time? a week? a month? several months?

Depending on the level of misdemeanor applied, I'd think you're probably looking at somewhere between 6 months and 3 years.

Not to mention a criminal record that could potentially cause the parent to lose his/her job and have trouble finding another one in the future.

So only poor parents would end up in jail, as they wouldn't be able to pay the fine, eh? Hell, I don't have $1000 to just throw away, and I'm not trying to raise a child or working a minimum wage job.
So there's an incentive to find a different way to discipline your toddler.

That's the preventive side of it: It'll hurt your wallet so you won't do it.

But I must agree with you on one thing I hadn't noticed: A $1000 fine seems to be a bit too high.
those that happen in public is investigated as child abuse by the police. and usually those are caught on cameras for evidence. That's already being done now. so why the law if it's not planned on being enforced differently than now?
I would imagine, as I've said before, it's because it's more difficult to prove abuse than it is to prove a single hit. If it's caught on camera it will be enough under the new law but insufficient under the old one.

Bah.

I can't beat my wife, you can't beat your kids. :mad:

End of story.

So there's an incentive to find a different way to discipline your toddler.

That's the preventive side of it: It'll hurt your wallet so you won't do it.

But I must agree with you on one thing I hadn't noticed: A $1000 fine seems to be a bit too high.

And in the end, all it will do is hurt parents and children.

We already have ways to stop people who abuse their children. What you are wanting to do is take those who use spanking occasionally and force them to use other methods that may or may not work with their children.

I would imagine, as I've said before, it's because it's more difficult to prove abuse than it is to prove a single hit. If it's caught on camera it will be enough under the new law but insufficient under the old one.

A single hit SHOULD BE insufficient.

It is pretty easy to find evidence of physical abuse if such abuse is actually going on. There are physical signs. All this law will do is catch those who aren't abusing their children and treat them as if they are.


Feeding children nothing but PopTarts would be neglect. Does that mean that we should put every parent we catch on camera giving a child a single PopTart in jail or fine them?

Bah.

I can't beat my wife, you can't beat your kids. :mad:

End of story.

Who said anything about beating?

If your wife reaches for your French Fry, and you smack her hand away, are you going to jail or paying a $1000 fine?

Bah.

I can't beat my wife, you can't beat your kids. :mad:

End of story.

you cant even beat your freaking DOG any more. its like we've been cheated out of something.

you cant even beat your freaking DOG any more. its like we've been cheated out of something.

Ahh.. but you can still beat your... err... choke y.. spank y... you get the picture! :D

you cant even beat your freaking DOG any more. its like we've been cheated out of something.

No, but you can smack him on the nose or the rump to teach him what he can and cannot do.

Who said anything about beating?

If your wife reaches for your French Fry, and you smack her hand away, are you going to jail or paying a $1000 fine?

That's not spanking*.

On the other hand I'm sure if my wife gets mouthy at the check-out line and I put her over my knee in public, then criminal and civil consequences will ensue.

Bottom line. No hitting people. It's wrong.

*Though probably grounds for divorce under cruel and inhuman treatment in NY.

you cant even beat your freaking DOG any more. its like we've been cheated out of something.

:( America, what happened to you? *sniff*

In about half of the states in America, public schools paddle students. This would indicate state support for spanking. A heavy wooden paddle, like what is used in most of those schools, hurts a child much more than what they usually get from most parents. Obviously educators seem to think that it is an effective tool. However I don't think that toddlers should be spanked unless it is to save them from physical harm which would do even more damage.

That's not spanking*.

No, but it would most likely be covered under this bill.

And beating != spanking either.

On the other hand I'm sure if my wife gets mouthy at the check-out line and I put her over my knee in public, then criminal and civil consequences will ensue.

Probably. But largely irrelevant to the discussion.

Bottom line. No hitting people. It's wrong.

Really? In all circumstances?

In about half of the states in America, public schools paddle students. This would indicate state support for spanking. A heavy wooden paddle, like what is used in most of those schools, hurts a child much more than what they usually get from most parents. Obviously educators seem to think that it is an effective tool. However I don't think that toddlers should be spanked unless it is to save them from physical harm which would do even more damage.

What states? I was under the impression that public schools, as a general rule, were now banned from using corporal punishment pretty much everywhere. Even at my school in rural GA, the parents had to give special permission to allow it.

In about half of the states in America, public schools paddle students. This would indicate state support for spanking. A heavy wooden paddle, like what is used in most of those schools, hurts a child much more than what they usually get from most parents. Obviously educators seem to think that it is an effective tool. However I don't think that toddlers should be spanked unless it is to save them from physical harm which would do even more damage.

What schools are you referring to? :eek:

In every school I have attended/visited/tutored at etc. there was absolutely no evidence of physical disciplinary tactics against the students. In fact, most teachers seemed very hesitant to lay a finger on the students, probably in fear of lawsuits from parents.

Anyway, could you provide some links for us?

What states? I was under the impression that public schools, as a general rule, were now banned from using corporal punishment pretty much everywhere. Even at my school in rural GA, the parents had to give special permission to allow it.

Mostly rural states, like in the South. Not all schools in these states do that, but they are allowed to, and many more schools practice paddling than most people think, but now it is used as more of a last resort instead of how it was 30 years ago.

Probably. But largely irrelevant to the discussion.


That's spanking though. That's what you want protected. Sauce for the goose Mr. Savvik.

There is a humilation element as well as a physically punishing element to spanking. And I say again, if I can't legally inflict that on my wife, you can't inflict it on your kids.

Really? In all circumstances?

Except in cases of self defence where there is a significant likelihood of serious injury, yes, it really is.

Sauce for the goose Mr. Savvik.

You are now officialy fired from this thread. :p

That's spanking though. That's what you want protected. Sauce for the goose Mr. Savvik.

There is a difference between wanting something "protected" and thinking that it shouldn't be illegal.

There is a humilation element as well as a physically punishing element to spanking. And I say again, if I can't legally inflict that on my wife, you can't inflict it on your kids.

You can do all sorts of things to your kids that you can't do to your wife. If you locked your wife in her room or took away her belongings as punishment or forced her to go to school or any number of things, she would have legal recourse. Your child, on the other hand, does not. Do you think children should be treated the exact same as adults under the law?

As for the humiliation aspect, I don't see it. I suppose some people might use it that way, but none that I've seen. In the vast majority of cases, spanking is a private thing - the child is even separated from other children.

Except in cases of self defence where there is a significant likelihood of serious injury, yes, it really is.

Oh dear, we're adding exceptions.

Oh, and I found this, concerning the fine and such:
Lieber said it would be a misdemeanor, punishable by up to a year in jail or a fine up to $1,000, although a legal expert advising her on the proposal said first-time offenders would probably only have to attend parenting classes.
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/16487654.htm?source=rss

And in the end, all it will do is hurt parents and children.
Will it?

I don't know if any studies have been conducted - I glanced at the one comparative study posted here previously - but have outlawing the corporal punishments of babies and toddlers hurt parents and children in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Austria?

And if the studies that claim that spanking has a negative effect on children are true, then this proposal might be beneficial to the children.

We already have ways to stop people who abuse their children. What you are wanting to do is take those who use spanking occasionally and force them to use other methods that may or may not work with their children.
I don't want anything, but it seems like that's what the bill is aiming at yes. And I have yet to be convinced that spanking is a method that is needed, even occasionally, so I don't, in principle, see the problem with outlawing one violent method that may or may not work with their children - and may or may not also cause damage - and force the parents to replace it with non-violent methods that may or may not work with their children.

A single hit SHOULD BE insufficient.
Why? I'm talking "hit" there, not "swat". Why should people be allowed to hit their toddlers?

It is pretty easy to find evidence of physical abuse if such abuse is actually going on. There are physical signs. All this law will do is catch those who aren't abusing their children and treat them as if they are.
...and send the signal that corporal punishment is not acceptable.

Feeding children nothing but PopTarts would be neglect. Does that mean that we should put every parent we catch on camera giving a child a single PopTart in jail or fine them?
http://img131.imageshack.us/img131/8858/police7mp.jpg
Two vastly different problems.

In about half of the states in America, public schools paddle students. This would indicate state support for spanking. A heavy wooden paddle, like what is used in most of those schools, hurts a child much more than what they usually get from most parents. Obviously educators seem to think that it is an effective tool. However I don't think that toddlers should be spanked unless it is to save them from physical harm which would do even more damage.

I'm an educator, and I don't think corporal punishment is an effective tool. How can we teach children that bullying is wrong when we hit them every time they don't do what we say?

Corporal punishment in schools in the US is, to my understanding, a joke. The state allows it at the discretion of the county. The county allows it at the discretion of the school. Nobody answers to anyone and there's no accountability. When students are seriously hurt by (and in rare cases, killed as a result of) corporal punishment, the state looks away, the school passes the buck and there's no justice.

Tell me this is right: http://nospank.net/johnny.htm
Have a look at the photos here and tell me that a twelve-year-old, ANY child for that matter, deserves to have this done to him: http://nospank.net/n-q43r.htm

When I drive, I'm restricted to 50km/h on a suburban road. I can handle a car going a lot faster, but some motorists can't. Thus, a speed limit is enforced to protect ALL road users. I don't care whether you were spanked and turned out fine, or whether you think the links above are isolated incidents. The fact is they happened, and we need laws to protect ALL victims.

There is a reason why the civilised world banned corporal punishment in schools a long time ago. Hopefully the world outside of schools will follow shortly.

You can do all sorts of things to your kids that you can't do to your wife. If you locked your wife in her room or took away her belongings as punishment or forced her to go to school or any number of things, she would have legal recourse. Your child, on the other hand, does not. Do you think children should be treated the exact same as adults under the law?

I wouldn't lock a kid in a room either. But that's just me. And no, children are not adults, and should not be treated as such. That doesn't mean that you should treat them like livestock. Obviously.

As for the humiliation aspect, I don't see it. I suppose some people might use it that way, but none that I've seen. In the vast majority of cases, spanking is a private thing - the child is even separated from other children.

Did I say public humiliation? No. I did not. Anytime someone exercises that type of physical dominion over someone else it is inherently shameful for the victim - whether people see it happening or not. Wouldn't you feel shamed if someone held you down and spanked you without your consent. Or would you only be shamed if that happened in public?

Oh dear, we're adding exceptions.

There are always exceptions. Except in your world.

I see that the 'tards have spoken.

I suppose you don't think that kids should ever be punished but instead should be lavished and showered with lollipops and extra large tins of forstings even if they skin the dog alive.

I bet you also believe that failing grades in school should be outlawed.

Go back to moronville and lock yourself in.

Oi! There are various ways in which you can punish a kid, and spanking is only one in a great many. Different punishments work for different children. If you think spanking works for yours, then that's fine; it may not work for someone else's.

As much as I think the law is a waste of time, resources, and paper, it may serve as a wake-up call to parents to try other methods. Yes, I grew up on the thwack, but you won't believe how much I prayed for the day my parents would just ground me.

Fooforah, if you wish to flame someone, expect the consequences of your actions. You've just showed yourself to be a jerk.

I found this on the American Psychological Association website:

http://www.apa.org/monitor/dec01/spanking.html

I think it outlines the entire discussion fairly well.

that's what I learned way back in my Uni days....kids whether they are spanked or not spanked turn out very similar, although spanked kids tend to have less empathy and a greater chance for being screwed up because you just know some parents will take things to far...

so if spanking is ineffective why bother inflicting pain on kids? what's the point? is some sick satisfaction that the parents gain by believing they're being good parents?

so if spanking is ineffective why bother inflicting pain on kids? what's the point? is some sick satisfaction that the parents gain by believing they're being good parents?

I don't think people who spank do it because they think they are good parents.

People - this applies especially to the retarded lefties that seem to infest this forum (although admittably the jury is still out as to whether lefties have brains and thus can qualify as "people") - do everyone a favor and discipline your children, and yes hit them, because if you don't do it when they're 3, somebody is probably going to have to do it when they're 16 or 17, the only difference is you care about your children.

Also "Smunkeeville," when your children grow up to be disrespectful, undisciplined retards, you'll only have yourself to blame.

http://necroticobsession.com/bb/images/smiles/icon_rolleyes.gifIt's amazing the anger produced in someone just because his uncle made him touch his "captain winkey" when he was a kid.

What's the matter? Life got you down? Everyone else is out there getting laid and having fun while you're stuck in the basement with your kiddy porn?

It's okay, guy. There are counselors that can help you come to grips with all those memories of laying awake at night, knowing that at anytime your drunk uncle was going to come in to your room and put his "captain winkey" in your "little firehouse." Do you still remember the smell of Whiskey on his breath? Was it JD or did he drink that cheap garage made stuff?

Are you still hurt by the fact that all your first sexual experience had to say to you was, "Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!" "Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!" Or was it, "Mooooooo."

Put the peanut butter down and put the dog back in the backyard. Get your fat ass on a treadmill, lose some weight and maybe a little anger over your unfortunate introduction to incest and maybe you can find a sexual partner that can talk and doesn't walk on all fours. ;)

Opposing spanking as a form of child abuse whilst at the same time trying to poke fun at child abuse itself? And you think Bush is dumb? Stay in LA you f*cking retard.

Does anyone find it interesting that the same morons who want to outlaw spanking also want to see abortion promoted to the max?

Welcome to the left, where the only thing that makes sense, is the opposition.

I'm an educator, and I don't think corporal punishment is an effective tool. How can we teach children that bullying is wrong when we hit them every time they don't do what we say?

Corporal punishment in schools in the US is, to my understanding, a joke. The state allows it at the discretion of the county. The county allows it at the discretion of the school. Nobody answers to anyone and there's no accountability. When students are seriously hurt by (and in rare cases, killed as a result of) corporal punishment, the state looks away, the school passes the buck and there's no justice.

Tell me this is right: http://nospank.net/johnny.htm
Have a look at the photos here and tell me that a twelve-year-old, ANY child for that matter, deserves to have this done to him: http://nospank.net/n-q43r.htm

When I drive, I'm restricted to 50km/h on a suburban road. I can handle a car going a lot faster, but some motorists can't. Thus, a speed limit is enforced to protect ALL road users. I don't care whether you were spanked and turned out fine, or whether you think the links above are isolated incidents. The fact is they happened, and we need laws to protect ALL victims.

There is a reason why the civilised world banned corporal punishment in schools a long time ago. Hopefully the world outside of schools will follow shortly.

luckily for teachers here that sort of thing is no longer tolerated here, I say lucky for them because they would police protection if my kids came home looking like that...surprising to hear it's still allowed in the USA, corporal punishment in schools was banned in the old Soviet Union 75yrs ago...

when I was young I had similar treatment, barbaric I don't know how I made it through school...hit with a leather shaving strap for missing a homework assignment, the usual smacks with rulers pointers, ears yanked, slapped, and the best of all for saying to the teacher "I don't see it(understand)" I had my head repeatedly smacked into the blackboard...my brother couldn't take it and never finished the eight grade...

luckily for teachers here that sort of thing is no longer tolerated here, I say lucky for them because they would police protection if my kids came home looking like that...surprising to hear it's still allowed in the USA, corporal punishment in schools was banned in the old Soviet Union 75yrs ago...

Shame killing, "disappearing" and starving 30-40 million people wasn't.

I don't think people who spank do it because they think they are good parents. judging by the posts here they do..

People - this applies especially to the retarded lefties that seem to infest this forum (although admittably the jury is still out as to whether lefties have brains and thus can qualify as "people") - do everyone a favor and discipline your children, and yes hit them, because if you don't do it when they're 3, somebody is probably going to have to do it when they're 16 or 17, the only difference is you care about your children.

Also "Smunkeeville," when your children grow up to be disrespectful, undisciplined retards, you'll only have yourself to blame.

Nice first post. FYI, Smunkee's eldest is already more respectful and disciplined than you (going by your first post here.) In fact, I look forward to the day Smunkee's eldest joins us on NSG!

judging by the posts here they do..

I'm guessing post facto justification of their behaviour.

too stupid to reply to...you're a commie if you disagree with hurting kids, brilliant:rolleyes: please go away...

No - you're an idiot if you disagree with discipline, thus its a natural position for lefties to take, since you're all idiots.

I'll go away if you go live in a socialist economy that isn't a sham second-rate institution .. OH WAIT

People - this applies especially to the retarded lefties that seem to infest this forum (although admittably the jury is still out as to whether lefties have brains and thus can qualify as "people") - do everyone a favor and discipline your children, and yes hit them, because if you don't do it when they're 3, somebody is probably going to have to do it when they're 16 or 17, the only difference is you care about your children.

Also "Smunkeeville," when your children grow up to be disrespectful, undisciplined retards, you'll only have yourself to blame.

too stupid to reply to...you're a commie if you disagree with hurting kids, brilliant:rolleyes: please go away...

Nice first post. FYI, Smunkee's eldest is already more respectful and disciplined than you (going by your first post here.) In fact, I look forward to the day Smunkee's eldest joins us on NSG!

FYI I don't care

too stupid to reply to...you're a commie if you disagree with hurting kids, brilliant:rolleyes: please go away...

No, you're stupid if you don't discipline your kids, which is a natural position for lefties to take since you're all stupid.

FYI I don't care

Kinda like the feelings the entire posting community of NSG has concerning your posts. Well done :)

Oh, one more thing: You fail.

Kinda like the feelings the entire posting community of NSG has concerning your posts. Well done :)

Oh, one more thing: You fail.

Oh leftie, saying you don't care and then replying to my post, my aren't you a genius.

Oh leftie, saying you don't care and then replying to my post, my aren't you a genius.


Leftie?
I don't care about what you have to say or your opinions on the subject. You've rendered them worthless. I do care that you're cluttering up the thread with stupidity. Thus I responded. I see now that I fed the troll. It will not happen again.
If YOU didn't care about her kids, why did you bring them up in the first place?
You deserve this, ya commie:
http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/4572/smileytroutsmack22lw.gif

Leftie?
I don't care about what you have to say or your opinions on the subject. You've rendered them worthless. I do care that you're cluttering up the thread with stupidity. Thus I responded. I see now that I fed the troll. It will not happen again.
If YOU didn't care about her kids, why did you bring them up in the first place?
You deserve this, ya commie:
http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/4572/smileytroutsmack22lw.gif


Wait you're blaming me for something SHE brought into the thread? She used her kids as a defence of her position, thus if anybody can turn that around, its fair game.

Oh leftie, saying you don't care and then replying to my post, my aren't you a genius.

Shoo. You give my political wing a bad name.

I swear... this is why I stopped supporting the Republican Party. Eh, being a political nomad is pretty sweet though.

FYI I don't care

apparently. bye troll.

Shoo. You give my political wing a bad name.

I swear... this is why I stopped supporting the Republican Party. Eh, being a political nomad is pretty sweet though.
HEY! you don't need to insult the Republican Party by saying he's apart of it.

I don't think people who spank do it because they think they are good parents.

I'm not.

a parent that is. but I know that like anything else, spanking can be abused and mis-used, but it can also be used responsibly and with great effectiveness.

however, there are those that think that anyone for spanking automatically beats their children, their spouse, their pets, and anyone who looks at them funny to a near bloody pulp.

I wouldn't lock a kid in a room either. But that's just me. And no, children are not adults, and should not be treated as such. That doesn't mean that you should treat them like livestock. Obviously.

No time outs either, then? What can you do to discipline your children then?

Did I say public humiliation? No. I did not. Anytime someone exercises that type of physical dominion over someone else it is inherently shameful for the victim - whether people see it happening or not. Wouldn't you feel shamed if someone held you down and spanked you without your consent. Or would you only be shamed if that happened in public?

When I was a child, I was ashamed if I'd done something wrong - exactly what a spanking is meant to convey to a child. Like I said before, I felt more shame and pain from my mother saying the words, "I'm very disappointed in you," than I ever did from a spanking.

There are always exceptions. Except in your world.

No, in my world there are exceptions. There are children who are different from other children. There are children who respond differently to different sorts of discipline.

Of course, I'm not the one trying to make a swat on the ass illegal.

No time outs either, then? What can you do to discipline your children then?

No. I give adults time outs too. You fail to understand the time out. It has nothing to do with locking people in rooms.


When I was a child, I was ashamed if I'd done something wrong - exactly what a spanking is meant to convey to a child. Like I said before, I felt more shame and pain from my mother saying the words, "I'm very disappointed in you," than I ever did from a spanking.

Good. So we agree that spanking accomplishes nothing then. And given the downside risk banning it is totally justifiable.


No, in my world there are exceptions. There are children who are different from other children. There are children who respond differently to different sorts of discipline.


And when you fail, beat them into submission.

No. I give adults time outs too. You fail to understand the time out. It has nothing to do with locking people in rooms.

It is forced isolation. If you tell a child to stay in his room, you're going to have to enforce it somehow, now aren't you? If you tried the same thing with an adult, a lock would pretty much be the only way to enforce it.

And you give adults time outs? Are you kidding me? What authority do you have to do any such thing?

Good. So we agree that spanking accomplishes nothing then. And given the downside risk banning it is totally justifiable.

Eh? Where did I say that? I pointed out that spanking wasn't as painful to me as other forms of punishment. When my mother said the same words to my brother, do you know what the reaction was? Nothing, absolutely nothing. It meant nothing to him. It wasn't a punishment to him.

It all goes back to the fact that children aren't little automatons. Different children are....welll...different. They react differently to various forms of discipline and a good parent will have to find the one that works for that child in a given situation. Unlike you, I'm not looking for a one-size-fits-all solution.

Spanking shouldn't be a first-resort punishment, but it may be necessary with a given child.

And when you fail, beat them into submission.

:rolleyes: Yes, because I'm advocating beating.

Seriously, can you people even try to make an argument against anything I'm actually saying?

what you mean is if you break their will by the time they are 6 that they never recover, and you think that's a good thing :(

I expect my kids to rebel, I welcome them to. I expect conflict in my marriage, I think it's great. Too many parents want kids who sit quietly and don't speak until spoken to, who never have their own opinion, who never say anything, I don't want kids like that, because it doesn't serve the world to have adults like that.

I think a lot of the difference between our parenting strategy is because we have had different goals for our kids, I want people, and you want trained dogs.

I think you only hear what you want to hear.

Of course there are conflicts, and there are active discussions with both sides stating their point in a civilized manner. Youth should know how to express conflicting ideas as our society has set the rules of logic and argument.

Yes, I have compared training children to training animals. Children are animals. Have you considered why the children of those that deal with agriculture, (not 5-10 acres and an already trained horse) have children that commit less crime and have fewer social problems? I know many consider the answer to be geography so they buy their 10 acres and move to a rural area. And what happens--the crime rate goes up because the problem isn't geography but a culture that doesn't understand training. Training of an animal or child doesn't leave you with a robot, it leaves you with a creature that understands the rules and lives by them--regardless if the trainer is within sight or not. In other words the person who trains your dog should not create a robot dog, but one that understands the cultural expectations of his human pack. A child needs to know the cultural expectations of the pack that is human culture. This is how it has been for 10,000 years.

You choose a "green broke" human animal. I choose an adult that understands and is able to operate in the norms of society.

if a child never disobeys enough after age 6 to ever require punishment, something is wrong.

a child over age 6 who never misbehaves is just creepy-wrong.

What is wrong is the parents didn't want to train their children in the norms of society. Children (as everyone) make mistakes, but they need not "misbehave". I don't misbehave, why should a child.

he likened it to using a hotshot (that's like a taser for cows) on livestock, we got into a long discussion about how I never do that either, and how I didn't ever hit my sheep when I worked on my uncle's farm herding them either, you know what happens when you hit a sheep? it runs off. it's hard to get it back too, it won't trust you anymore, you have to trick it.

A "taser"??? You obviously don't have a clue what a "hotshot is.

"Uncle's Farm" A couple days and you're an expert on how to handle livestock. This is the problem. Every parent--before becoming a parent should be required to raise at least five animals of at least 3 species and show that those animals are able to function in human society.

you dont smack a child to get him to stop crying. the airplane is a tough spot but there are many many ways to get your child to behave in public the best one being not taking them into public if they cant behave.


And if they are not in public and are not corrected while in public, how exactly are they to learn how civilized beings behave in public?

It is forced isolation. If you tell a child to stay in his room, you're going to have to enforce it somehow, now aren't you? If you tried the same thing with an adult, a lock would pretty much be the only way to enforce it.

And you give adults time outs? Are you kidding me? What authority do you have to do any such thing?

Time outs have nothing to do with enforced isolation. You clearly do not understand the concept. Doubly so since you seem to think it relies on some type of authority. In fact, most adult give time outs to other adults at some point in their lives, you just aren't paying attention.

Eh? Where did I say that? I pointed out that spanking wasn't as painful to me as other forms of punishment. When my mother said the same words to my brother, do you know what the reaction was? Nothing, absolutely nothing. It meant nothing to him. It wasn't a punishment to him.

And you know that for a fact? You know that had absolutely no effect on your brother whatsoever? Or was it just because your mother couldn't the instant reaction she wanted just by saying she was disappointed meant that going straight to the hitting phase was justified.

Not to mention that your whole example is suspect because you were an interested party in the outcome.

It all goes back to the fact that children aren't little automatons. Different children are....welll...different. They react differently to various forms of discipline and a good parent will have to find the one that works for that child in a given situation. Unlike you, I'm not looking for a one-size-fits-all solution.

I never once said that there was a 'one size fits all' solution. All I am saying is that the solution should never involve physical violence. Which is what spanking is. It's an inherently violent act, made all the worse because children suffer such an imbalance of power with respect to their parents.

Spanking shouldn't be a first-resort punishment, but it may be necessary with a given child.

And if it doesn't work? Spank harder?

:rolleyes: Yes, because I'm advocating beating.

Seriously, can you people even try to make an argument against anything I'm actually saying?

Yes, you are advocating beating. You are advocating what would be considered battery if it was practiced on an adult. There simply is no justification for it. Most civilzed countries have already banned it.

"Uncle's Farm" A couple days and you're an expert on how to handle livestock. This is the problem. Every parent--before becoming a parent should be required to raise at least five animals of at least 3 species and show that those animals are able to function in human society.

Dog, dog, dog, dog, dog, cat, cat, cat, horse, horse, pigs, rabbits, mice, rats, budgies.

Do I qualify?

I got spanked by my father (who actually worked for CPS) at the age of 5 for taking candy from my sister's Halloween stash. After he finished, I called him a bully and told him to pick on someone his own size. He never spanked any of us again.

My mother spanked me but only after a major rulebreaking (i.e. leaving the yard, wandering off at the grocery store, etc.) and once when I was actually 16. But then """""""""""""""""""I really was being a pain in the ass teenager."""""""""""""""

We also did have time-outs, no desserts, groundings, etc.

My parents would not have deserved any imprisonment or fines for their disciplinary tactics.

Pain in the ass teenager is what we are trying to avoid. That's why ages one through 6 are the important period where children eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If that is missed, then it takes a lot more sweat and tears.

Dog, dog, dog, dog, dog, cat, cat, cat, horse, horse, pigs, rabbits, mice, rats, budgies.

Do I qualify?

hmmm...me... Dog, dog, dog, chicken, dog, rabbit, rabbit, fish (alot), salamander, duck, duck, duck, duck, GOOSE! Cookie for all those who gets the reference

:D *Runs*

I read this.... link (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070123/ap_on_re_us/flight_tantrum)... and immediately thought of this thread.

So how many people here think the daughter hitting her parents and refusing to sit in her seat on an airplane are or are not spanking parents? And how many people think the mother should have been allowed to force the entire plane to wait while she tries to calm down a tantrum filled and parent hitting child?


If they are the non spanking type why would their daughter be hitting? If they are the spanking type, why weren't they able to get her to stay in her seat long enough for take off? Either way it's totally ridiculous :p

If I weren't able to control a child under 50 lbs, I'd put my children up for adoption as an incompetent parent.

At a complete ban. Using violence against a child is just unacceptable, and it is mind-boggling that there are still first world countries out there who allow such abuse.

Oh, and we should ban football, and wrestling, and tag, and touching each other (Sexual reference not intended.), and living, you know, because in life, there'll be PAIN! My god, save us!:rolleyes:

Once, I broke a table. Once. It was a very expensive table, maybe, four hundred dollars. I get my ass beat raw. I never screwed around with metal and glass again.

I carve wood. Once, the knife slipped and I got cut on my hand, and now there is a scar (the cut was pretty deep). I learned to not carve that way. You learn through pain. You make mistakes, and you get pain. Pain is the ultimate learning tool.

Time outs have nothing to do with enforced isolation. You clearly do not understand the concept. Doubly so since you seem to think it relies on some type of authority. In fact, most adult give time outs to other adults at some point in their lives, you just aren't paying attention.

As a form of discipline, that is exactly what time outs are. The child is expected to go and sit somewhere (usually their room) quietly and think about what they have done wrong. They are not supposed to play with anything or with anyone.

And you know that for a fact? You know that had absolutely no effect on your brother whatsoever?

Yup. It never had any effect on him. In the end, very little did.

Or was it just because your mother couldn't the instant reaction she wanted just by saying she was disappointed meant that going straight to the hitting phase was justified.

Reading is really difficult for you isn't it? It's funny that you people can't have a civil discussion without trying to be insulting to my mother at every turn.

First of all, my mother never expected a huge reaction out of either of us with those words. She just happened to get it with me. They were never uttered without further discussion of the issue.

Second of all, as I have already made exceedingly clear, spankings weren't a frequent thing around my house. No, my mother didn't "go straight to the hitting phase."

Could you at least try to be civil and follow the conversation?

Not to mention that your whole example is suspect because you were an interested party in the outcome.

In that case, every example anyone has of anything they've ever been remotely related to is equally suspect. Every example given by every parent in this thread has to be thrown out. Every person who has been a child and discussed their own background in being punished - thrown out of the conversation.

Oh, wait, that means nobody can say anything. :rolleyes:

I never once said that there was a 'one size fits all' solution. All I am saying is that the solution should never involve physical violence. Which is what spanking is. It's an inherently violent act, made all the worse because children suffer such an imbalance of power with respect to their parents.

Physical restraint is a "violent act", too, but it is sometimes necessary.

And if it doesn't work? Spank harder?

Search for any technique you might have missed. Realize that sometimes, nothing will work.

Yes, you are advocating beating.

No, I'm not. Try again.

hmmm...me... Dog, dog, dog, chicken, dog, rabbit, rabbit, fish (alot), salamander, duck, duck, duck, duck, GOOSE! Cookie for all those who gets the reference

:D *Runs*

What civilized thing did you teach your fish to do?

And if they are not in public and are not corrected while in public, how exactly are they to learn how civilized beings behave in public?

are you SURE youre a father?

in the same way you dont teach your child to swim by tossing them into the deep end of the pool, you dont expect your child to behave well in stressful busy public situations. at least not until they reach an age and maturity to handle it.

so if your 2.5 year old son is a fractious little beast, dont take him to a formal wedding. he cant handle it and you cant handle it.

if your kid cant take a trip to a grocery store without throwing a tantrum. leave her home. in a few months maybe she will be able to deal with the frustration of not getting everything she wants. if you arent sure that she can handle it, you take her in while being fully prepared to leave if she throws a tantrum.

sure you can take her to the store once a week and spank her whenever she throws a tantrum and in a few months or maybe a year she will have learned her lesson. or you can wait a few months or maybe a year and she will be old enough to handle it without your ever having to lay a hand on her.

in the meantime whenever you go out in public in a non stressful situation you reinforce her proper behavior and teach her the way big girls behave in public. little children are eager to learn the ways of the world.

What civilized thing did you teach your fish to do?

why... to pee in the bowl with the lid down! :D :D

As a form of discipline, that is exactly what time outs are. The child is expected to go and sit somewhere (usually their room) quietly and think about what they have done wrong. They are not supposed to play with anything or with anyone.

Time outs aren't punishment. You'd do well to learn about the real function of the naughty step.

Yup. It never had any effect on him. In the end, very little did.

What do you mean in the end?

Reading is really difficult for you isn't it? It's funny that you people can't have a civil discussion without trying to be insulting to my mother at every turn.

First of all, my mother never expected a huge reaction out of either of us with those words. She just happened to get it with me. They were never uttered without further discussion of the issue.

I can read quite well. I never insulted your mother. If I had, I would have been clear about it.

Second of all, as I have already made exceedingly clear, spankings weren't a frequent thing around my house. No, my mother didn't "go straight to the hitting phase."

Could you at least try to be civil and follow the conversation?

I never said they were frequent. When did I say they were frequent? I was simply answering your point. I think you are the one with reading problems.


In that case, every example anyone has of anything they've ever been remotely related to is equally suspect. Every example given by every parent in this thread has to be thrown out. Every person who has been a child and discussed their own background in being punished - thrown out of the conversation.

Oh, wait, that means nobody can say anything. :rolleyes:

Aren't you the one that is keen on lecturing everyone about the scientific method? Yes? If you are personally affected by the outcome you shouldn't proffer that as evidence. However, there are plenty of studies which have been properly conducted that show spanking is ineffective and does far more harm than good. Hence, civilized countries banning it.

And in any event, you were using a personal example as evidence of the efficacy of spanking. My point is that it is therefore suspect. You are still free to argue the philosophical or legal underpinnings that support hitting people much smaller than you because you don't like the way they behave of course. I was simply pointing out that you cannot use your own results as proof of effectiveness in general.


Physical restraint is a "violent act", too, but it is sometimes necessary.

And yet a lot less traumatic. Which is why we don't let the police beat people into submission, even if it doesn't permenantly damage them. Funny that, isn't it?

Search for any technique you might have missed. Realize that sometimes, nothing will work.


Oh, after the first round of battery, then you think it is time to look for other methods. So it isn't absolutely the last resort after all? So why resort to it in the first place.

What civilized thing did you teach your fish to do?

I actually have some water frogs(3) right now. (Don't ask, they are really the cat's pets).

Anyway, they are trained to come to the front of the aquarium when you put your finger there.

are you SURE youre a father?

in the same way you dont teach your child to swim by tossing them into the deep end of the pool, you dont expect your child to behave well in stressful busy public situations. at least not until they reach an age and maturity to handle it.

so if your 2.5 year old son is a fractious little beast, dont take him to a formal wedding. he cant handle it and you cant handle it.

if your kid cant take a trip to a grocery store without throwing a tantrum. leave her home. in a few months maybe she will be able to deal with the frustration of not getting everything she wants. if you arent sure that she can handle it, you take her in while being fully prepared to leave if she throws a tantrum.

sure you can take her to the store once a week and spank her whenever she throws a tantrum and in a few months or maybe a year she will have learned her lesson. or you can wait a few months or maybe a year and she will be old enough to handle it without your ever having to lay a hand on her.

in the meantime whenever you go out in public in a non stressful situation you reinforce her proper behavior and teach her the way big girls behave in public. little children are eager to learn the ways of the world.

My children never had a babysitter. They went to the store from a month old. They went to every formal wedding we went to. They went to church and set with us, not the children's room. They went to formal restaurants. They went to formal parties. They went to the theater and concerts. They went everywhere we went and so did most of the children in our extended families. Better they should embarrass me at 1-6 years when people would understand than not know how to behave as a teen.

They grew up in formal and crowded situations. They learned to do adult things by seeing adults do them. On the few times it was needed, they were removed, punished and returned. They knew misbehavior wouldn't get them out of a situation and the alternative was worse than the situation.

That's not throwing them in the deep end as much as it would be to take a 10 year old to a first formal situation (or 3 year old to the airport) and expect them to know how to behave. Obviously, if they hadn't observed for 10 years (or 3) then find themselves in a totally unknown would be terrifying, that would be like being thrown in the deep end. But, by the time my children were 10 they had many experiences to draw upon. They also knew they could watch their parents and get clues from them. It's not "getting thrown in" if you grow up in the water.

Time outs aren't punishment.

Yes, they are.

What do you mean in the end?

I mean nothing she tried ever really worked. And now he's an adult, so no one else is going to discipline him unless he does something out-of-line enough to get him thrown in jail.

I can read quite well. I never insulted your mother. If I had, I would have been clear about it.

Yes, you did. You and everyone else who are jumping to make random comments that basically amount to, "ZOMG, YOUR MOTHER'S AN AWFUL PARENT!"

I never said they were frequent. When did I say they were frequent? I was simply answering your point. I think you are the one with reading problems.

You implied it. Otherwise, the comment I was replying to makes no sense at all. If she didn't frequently use spankings, she obviously didn't jump to spanking any time another method failed.

How do you explain a comment like this:
Or was it just because your mother couldn't the instant reaction she wanted just by saying she was disappointed meant that going straight to the hitting phase was justified.
when discussing a woman who used spankings very infrequently?

Aren't you the one that is keen on lecturing everyone about the scientific method?

Are we conducting a scientific study?

Yes? If you are personally affected by the outcome you shouldn't proffer that as evidence. However, there are plenty of studies which have been properly conducted that show spanking is ineffective and does far more harm than good. Hence, civilized countries banning it.

....most of which didn't control much for other effects or compared "no spanking at all," to "OMG, all the time spanking!" As cited within this very thread, a comparison of occasional spanking to no spanking at all revealed no significant differences. Only with frequent, strong spanking were issues seen.

And in any event, you were using a personal example as evidence of the efficacy of spanking.

And everyone else - well, those who aren't just yelling, "SPANKING IS TEH EVIL AND THAT'S IT!" - is using personal examples as evidence of the efficacy of not spanking or of the perils of using it. This thread has been full of personal stories.

I was simply pointing out that you cannot use your own results as proof of effectiveness in general.

Of course not! And that's the whole point I am making! Everyone wants to say, "Spanking just made me angry," or, "My mom used time-outs and I never learned anything," or "My child responds to x," or "My child responds to y," as absolute proof of a given method.

My entire point has been that you can't do that. Different children respond differently to different forms of discipline. That's the way of the world. A given parent has to determine the effectiveness and necessity of given methods as tailored to their individual child. You might be able to convey everything you need to to one child with a few harsh words. With another, even within the same household, you might need to restrict privileges or take away toys or ground them. And, on occasion, you might find use for swat on the ass or two.

And yet a lot less traumatic. Which is why we don't let the police beat people into submission, even if it doesn't permenantly damage them. Funny that, isn't it?

Irrelevant as well, since we aren't talking about beating anyone into submission. If an officer feels he needs to hit the guy once, or tase him, or throw him to the ground, and it isn't obvious that the person was cooperating, no one says a word. If the officer beats someone over the head with a nightstick, suddenly it becomes a problem. It's all a matter of scale.

Oh, after the first round of battery, then you think it is time to look for other methods. So it isn't absolutely the last resort after all? So why resort to it in the first place.

It is the last resort. But if your last resort doesn't work, what else is there but to hope and pray that you missed something?

Of course, it's impossible to talk to someone who can't see the difference between a swat on the ass and a beating. :rolleyes:

I don't think people should ever spank their kids.

Ditto.

I don't care if there is a law.

When/If I have children, I will spank them from the time that their rears can handle it.

When he was very young, my brother was trying to stick a paper clip in an electrical socket. My dad took the paper clip from him, put him on the other side of the room, and told him no. My brother got something else and went back over to the socket. My dad took it away, moved him, and again to him no.

This went two or three more times. The last time, my father gave him a firm smack on the butt. He never tried to stick anything into the socket again.

Because your hearsay about your brother is proof...?

Show me some proof that spanking works. Then we can continue this discussion.

Do you think spanking ought to be illegal?

Well, it is illegal to punch a drunk guy for coming on to your girlfriend, so why shouldn't it be illegal to maliciously & purposefully harm children?

Also "Smunkeeville," when your children grow up to be disrespectful, undisciplined retards, you'll only have yourself to blame.
I really don't anticipate that being a problem.
No - you're an idiot if you disagree with discipline, thus its a natural position for lefties to take, since you're all idiots.

I'll go away if you go live in a socialist economy that isn't a sham second-rate institution .. OH WAIT

FYI I don't care

No, you're stupid if you don't discipline your kids, which is a natural position for lefties to take since you're all stupid.

wow. I really see how respectful and intelligent and what an all around good debater you are! You have really changed my mind, I will go hit my kids now! Thanks!:rolleyes:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070119/lf_afp/uspoliticschildren_070119202053



You can't spank for three and under, but as soon as the brat turns four, he's getting a whuppin'.

Seriously, where does the line get drawn?

Apologies if this topic has already been posted.

Um yea.... this falls under the Stupidest Bills of all time folder.

I could say only in California. Hopefully this gets shot down by the legislature or by the Governor.

Time outs aren't punishment.
Not wanting to butt in to a conversation but...

The hell they're not. Time-outs were just about the worst punishment I could imagine when I was little. I hated the time-out chair. I had to sit and do nothing at all for minutes on end!!! I wasn't allowed to talk!!! It was absolute agony.

maybe your dad should have better child proofed the house?

And yet that can only do so much. A child misbehaves he deserves to be punished. Not saying spanking on every little incident but big ones do deserve a good swift strike on the butt.

I'm not entirely clear on how hitting your kids will prevent mental retardation. Could you tell me more?

I'm thinking that he thinks the ratteling around inside the skull keeps the brain nice and active... :rolleyes:

Does anyone find it interesting that the same morons who want to outlaw spanking also want to see abortion promoted to the max?
I'm not sure why that is "interesting," any more than it is "interesting" that people who claim to be all about protecting "unborn children" are simultaneously eager to beat up born children.

People - this applies especially to the retarded lefties that seem to infest this forum (although admittably the jury is still out as to whether lefties have brains and thus can qualify as "people") - do everyone a favor and discipline your children, and yes hit them, because if you don't do it when they're 3, somebody is probably going to have to do it when they're 16 or 17, the only difference is you care about your children.
May we assume that you are the glowing result of this form of "discipline"?


Also "Smunkeeville," when your children grow up to be disrespectful, undisciplined retards, you'll only have yourself to blame.
I'm not entirely clear on how hitting your kids will prevent mental retardation. Could you tell me more?