NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/toddlers-temper-ousts-family-from-plane/20070123133709990002?ncid=NWS00010000000001


A disruptive, spoiled brat and her parents are put off a plane and the parents have the gall to complain.

I wouldn't be a shithead like that kid's parents obviously are in the first place.

Possibly then, my kid would be better behaved.

The father said his family would never fly AirTran again.

I'm sure AirTran will lose sleep over that.

I'd give her to her mother for a spanking.

If she were a he, I'd do the spanking.

But, I'm not the target group of the question.

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/toddlers-temper-ousts-family-from-plane/20070123133709990002?ncid=NWS00010000000001


A disruptive, spoiled brat and her parents are put off a plane and the parents have the gall to complain.

Can you post the story here? They want me to "upgrade" to IE or Netscape...

Actually, I've changed my mind.

I now see the light. I was wrong about spanking, and it becomes clear to me that the correct way to solve all my disagreements with man, child or animal, is through physical violence.

Obviously the parents should have spanked the child into submission. Then punched out the aircrew for inconviencing them.

After that, they should have searched out the passengers who complained, and knocked their teeth out too.

That's how I would have handled it.

BTW, did anyone else notice that the article never said that the parents in question don't spank their kids?

those parents are morons. it's ridiculous that they should think the plane should be held up while they try to calm down their hyperactive kid. i used to work for british airways doing flight despatch and i've got to say i would have no problem telling them to get off the plane. airports and airlines have to work to a strict schedule where the slightest delay can escalate as they miss their take-off slots, there simply isn't time to wait for a kid to come down off a sugar high.

BTW, did anyone else notice that the article never said that the parents in question don't spank their kids?

I don't think that was the point.

I took it as: "Here's an example of a child out of control. You say we ought not to spank children, so how would you deal with it."

I don't think the article was anything more than an example.

But, I'm not the OP, so I could be wrong.

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/toddlers-temper-ousts-family-from-plane/20070123133709990002?ncid=NWS00010000000001


A disruptive, spoiled brat and her parents are put off a plane and the parents have the gall to complain.

Doesn't say they were anti-spankers themselves - meybe they were a spanking family, and that's where the kid learned to hit her parents when she got upset? Aaa, speculation is fun :)

As to what anyone could have done, it remains a mystery if one believes the story of the parents:
"We weren't given an opportunity to hold her, console her or anything," Julie Kulesza said in a telephone interview Tuesday.

I liked that poll. Who do you sympathize with the most? Almost 70%, “the other passengers.” Fucking hate kids on airplanes.
The airline was right, and I'm no expert on parenting so I don't know how to answer the martial punishment question.

I would've spanked the child.

are you asking what i would have done if i were the parent of that child?

i would have dragged her out from under the seat. sat her one the seat, and buckled the seat belt.

problem over.

I don't think that was the point.

I took it as: "Here's an example of a child out of control. You say we ought not to spank children, so how would you deal with it."

I don't think the article was anything more than an example.

But, I'm not the OP, so I could be wrong.

It's a bad example because it offers no history to how the child has been raised. One could speculate that the child is so unruly because of previous spankings. It really adds nothing to the debate.

Acutally, you're dead religious. Do you think Jesus would spank kids, and do you have any scriptural evidence to support the proposition that he did?

Can you post the story here? They want me to "upgrade" to IE or Netscape...

here you go.

Toddler's Temper Ousts Family From Plane
By JIM ELLIS
AP
ORLANDO, Fla. (Jan. 23) - AirTran Airways on Tuesday defended its decision to remove a Massachusetts couple from a flight after their crying 3-year-old daughter refused to take her seat before takeoff.

AirTran officials said they followed Federal Aviation Administration rules that children age 2 and above must have their own seat and be wearing a seat belt upon takeoff.

"The flight was already delayed 15 minutes and in fairness to the other 112 passengers on the plane, the crew made an operational decision to remove the family," AirTran spokeswoman Judy Graham-Weaver said.

Julie and Gerry Kulesza, who were headed home to Boston on Jan. 14 from Fort Myers, said they just needed a little more time to calm their daughter, Elly.

"We weren't given an opportunity to hold her, console her or anything," Julie Kulesza said in a telephone interview Tuesday.

The Kuleszas said they told a flight attendant they had paid for their daughter's seat, but asked whether she could sit in her mother's lap. The request was denied.

She was removed because "she was climbing under the seat and hitting the parents and wouldn't get in her seat" during boarding, Graham-Weaver said.

The Orlando-based carrier reimbursed the family $595.80, the cost of the three tickets, and the Kuleszas flew home the next day.

They also were offered three roundtrip tickets anywhere the airline flies, Graham-Weaver said.

The father said his family would never fly AirTran again.

I wanna fly Air Tran!... if there is enough room for a 3 year old to climb under, damn, that's more leg room than our local airlines!

are you asking what i would have done if i were the parent of that child?

i would have dragged her out from under the seat. sat her one the seat, and buckled the seat belt.

problem over.

and the screaming and yelling?

are you asking what i would have done if i were the parent of that child?

i would have dragged her out from under the seat. sat her one the seat, and buckled the seat belt.

problem over.
and what if the child grabs hold and digs in? how much force would you use to get her out?

and what if the child grabs hold and digs in? how much force would you use to get her out?

shes 3. i would pry her fingers off whatever she had hold of and proceed as above.

I don't think that was the point.

I took it as: "Here's an example of a child out of control. You say we ought not to spank children, so how would you deal with it."

I don't think the article was anything more than an example.

But, I'm not the OP, so I could be wrong.

Actually, that was exactly what I intended.

I frankly think that, in the case of the child and her parents in the article, it should never have gone that far. Even a three-year-old should know how to act in public and other people should not have to suffer because the parents did not know how to control her/him or to teach her/him self-control. I do not know and have no interest in their child-rearing techniques, since they are so obviously ineffective; I am interested in the how a non-spanking parent would have prevented this fiasco.

and the screaming and yelling?

you cant possibly think that spanking stops a kid from crying.

she would scream and yell and after a while she would stop.

shes 3. i would pry her fingers off whatever she had hold of and proceed as above.

... MAN Air Tran has alot of Leg Room if you can do that! :D


I can barely fit much less stuff my carry on (a backpack) under the seat infont of me, much less reach around to pry a three year old who's somehow crawled into that space... :D

Actually, that was exactly what I intended.

I frankly think that, in the case of the child and her parents in the article, it should never have gone that far. Even a three-year-old should know how to act in public and other people should not have to suffer because the parents did not know how to control her/him or to teach her/him self-control. I do not know and have no interest in their child-rearing techniques, since they are so obviously ineffective; I am interested in the how a non-spanking parent would have prevented this fiasco.

prevents it?

non spanking parents prevent it by raising obedient children who would never dream of behaving that way in public. if it still happens, you just do as i said above and go on with your life.

I frankly think that, in the case of the child and her parents in the article, it should never have gone that far. Even a three-year-old should know how to act in public and other people should not have to suffer because the parents did not know how to control her/him or to teach her/him self-control. I do not know and have no interest in their child-rearing techniques, since they are so obviously ineffective; I am interested in the how a non-spanking parent would have prevented this fiasco.

I imagine they would have prevented it with forethought.

... MAN Air Tran has alot of Leg Room if you can do that! :D


I can barely fit much less stuff my carry on (a backpack) under the seat infont of me, much less reach around to pry a three year old who's somehow crawled into that space... :D

they kicked the family off the plane. obviously they got the little girl out from under the seat eh?

prevents it?

non spanking parents prevent it by raising obedient children who would never dream of behaving that way in public. if it still happens, you just do as i said above and go on with your life.

Yah, really.

Though we could still go with my beat everyone into submission plan. ;)

Actually, that was exactly what I intended.

I frankly think that, in the case of the child and her parents in the article, it should never have gone that far. Even a three-year-old should know how to act in public and other people should not have to suffer because the parents did not know how to control her/him or to teach her/him self-control. I do not know and have no interest in their child-rearing techniques, since they are so obviously ineffective; I am interested in the how a non-spanking parent would have prevented this fiasco.

agreed, unless it's something like she wanted to sit by the window but ended up over the wing, her tantrums would've started outside at the boarding area... where it could've been dealt with.

even those who advocate spanking would probably not spank the child then and there.

They never stated what caused the tantrum anyway.

you cant possibly think that spanking stops a kid from crying.

she would scream and yell and after a while she would stop.

Worked on me.

It's a bad example because it offers no history to how the child has been raised. One could speculate that the child is so unruly because of previous spankings. It really adds nothing to the debate.

Acutally, you're dead religious. Do you think Jesus would spank kids, and do you have any scriptural evidence to support the proposition that he did?

Jesus was God, God divinely inspried the Bible, so here you go:Proverbs 13:24 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs%2013:24;&version=47;)

It's a proverb and is to be used as one: it's a general statement to be applied when appropriate.

"Look before you leap" applies before you cross the road.
"He who hesitates is lost" applies to when you're halfway across and a bus is speeding toward you.

The application of Proverbs 13:24 is very broad. Corporal punishment is to be used, but it is not the only punishment to be used, nor is it to be taken to the extreme of abuse.

Bad example. Kids respond to pain by crying, right? If the parent hits the kid in this scenario, the kid STILL cries, STILL disrupts. The parents may feel better due to that sense of empowerment that comes from hitting the weak, but, aside from that, no difference.

Worked on me.

QFT

Jesus was God, God divinely inspried the Bible, so here you go:Proverbs 13:24 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs%2013:24;&version=47;)

It's a proverb and is to be used as one: it's a general statement to be applied when appropriate.

"Look before you leap" applies before you cross the road.
"He who hesitates is lost" applies to when you're halfway across and a bus is speeding toward you.

The application of Proverbs 13:24 is very broad. Corporal punishment is to be used, but it is not the only punishment to be used, nor is it to be taken to the extreme of abuse.


I agree that discipline is necessary. In all things, and not just for children. But it's just a proverb as you say. There is no explicit injunction to actually lay hands upon a child. At best you can say the issue of spanking is undecided. No?

Worked on me.

your parents spanked you for crying.

great example.

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/toddlers-temper-ousts-family-from-plane/20070123133709990002?ncid=NWS00010000000001


A disruptive, spoiled brat and her parents are put off a plane and the parents have the gall to complain.

so how would you have handled it?

I agree that discipline is necessary. In all things, and not just for children. But it's just a proverb as you say. There is no explicit injunction to actually lay hands upon a child. At best you can say the issue of spanking is undecided. No?

No. It says right there: if you don't use the rod, you hate your child. That's the end. Must you always use corporal punishment? No, I think it would be horrible to do so. Should you use the rod only? No, again, that would be horrible. Should you hit and not explain? No, that's a sin plain and simple.

How much is too much? A belt/spoon/hand to the backside and a hand across the mouth for older children (preteens and teens) is fine. Anything more is probably (not necessarily) abuse.

Jesus was God, God divinely inspried the Bible, so here you go:Proverbs 13:24 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Proverbs%2013:24;&version=47;)

It's a proverb and is to be used as one: it's a general statement to be applied when appropriate.

"Look before you leap" applies before you cross the road.
"He who hesitates is lost" applies to when you're halfway across and a bus is speeding toward you.

The application of Proverbs 13:24 is very broad. Corporal punishment is to be used, but it is not the only punishment to be used, nor is it to be taken to the extreme of abuse.
oh my, not this again.

the word rod is taken from the greek word the means the tool of the Shepard. the shepard's crock. now that staff is never used to beat the sheep, but to guide them by laying the end of the staff onto the sheep's back or side and giving a gentle push.

so the Rod is in reference to Guidance, not to a physical beating. Discipline does not mean corporal Punishment, but Discipline in general.

Actually, that was exactly what I intended.

I frankly think that, in the case of the child and her parents in the article, it should never have gone that far. Even a three-year-old should know how to act in public and other people should not have to suffer because the parents did not know how to control her/him or to teach her/him self-control. I do not know and have no interest in their child-rearing techniques, since they are so obviously ineffective; I am interested in the how a non-spanking parent would have prevented this fiasco.
So basically, this thread is pointless...

No. It says right there: if you don't use the rod, you hate your child. That's the end. Must you always use corporal punishment? No, I think it would be horrible to do so. Should you use the rod only? No, again, that would be horrible. Should you hit and not explain? No, that's a sin plain and simple.

How much is too much? A belt/spoon/hand to the backside and a hand across the mouth for older children (preteens and teens) is fine. Anything more is probably (not necessarily) abuse.

Fair enough, but remember that what goes around comes around, and the children are strong when their parents are old and weak... It's equally acceptable, then, right? I mean, "this is for sabotaging my relationship with my girl when I was 20!" or "stop trying to wash my computer with water and soap!" *pow*.

Newton's 3rd Law of Motion.

Why, you'll say it's absurd? Then what makes it acceptable for PARENTS to do it? Or you'll claim that old people can't be unreasonable, and, thus, in pro-spanker's minds, deserving of a good spanking, ever?

Regardless, who died and made the guys that wrote the Bible into psychologists???

so how would you have handled it?

It never would have gotten that far. Not because I believe in spanking, though I do (as a last resort, only if all else has failed), but because I believe that children need to learn that courtesy for others is expected of them. When my children showed public discourtesy, they were disciplined; I did not cater to tantrums. Most of the time, it was resolved without spanking, maybe once or twice in their lives did they receive spankings. Having that tool made my job as a single mother much easier. They knew it could happen so they never misbehaved sufficiently that it would happen. Also, I tried to avoid situations that weren't appropriate for their age, I tried to make sure they weren't over-tired or over-stimulated - admittedly, it's not always possible to account for all situations or avoid all traps, but no one said being a parent was easy. The problem is, most people don't want to do it and want to blame others when things go wrong.

No. It says right there: if you don't use the rod, you hate your child. That's the end. Must you always use corporal punishment? No, I think it would be horrible to do so. Should you use the rod only? No, again, that would be horrible. Should you hit and not explain? No, that's a sin plain and simple.

How much is too much? A belt/spoon/hand to the backside and a hand across the mouth for older children (preteens and teens) is fine. Anything more is probably (not necessarily) abuse.

It says nothing about spoons, belts or hands. If you are a literalist then you must only use the rod. Anything else would be an unjustifiable exception.

If you are not a literalist and choose to interpret it metaphorically then then range of measures to instill discipline cover non physical methods also.

And if you do not except that the rod is the only method, you cannot argue that striking the child is mandated per se.

oh my, not this again.

the word rod is taken from the greek word the means the tool of the Shepard. the shepard's crock. now that staff is never used to beat the sheep, but to guide them by laying the end of the staff onto the sheep's back or side and giving a gentle push.

so the Rod is in reference to Guidance, not to a physical beating. Discipline does not mean corporal Punishment, but Discipline in general.

More support for corporal punishment (but not abuse): Deuteronomy 25:2-4 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2025:2-4;&version=31;)
Deuteronomy 21:18-21 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2021:18-21;&version=31;)

The second is for the death penalty for rebellious (not merely disobedient) youths. If God commands the use of capital punishment for both the youth and the adult, and He gives His blessing on corporal punishment for adults it can be concluded that He also blesses corporal punishment for youths and children.

Also, I have heard what you say about the shepherd's crook, but this means the use of guiding discipline, it does not eliminate corporal punishment. In fact, the crook had many uses, including punishment. Or at least I've been told by someone at church who would know such things. But he is not God, and therefore subordinate to Scripture which I have provided.

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/toddlers-temper-ousts-family-from-plane/20070123133709990002?ncid=NWS00010000000001


A disruptive, spoiled brat and her parents are put off a plane and the parents have the gall to complain.
Don't have to spank a kid to grab it by its screaming head and lock it down in a seat. Besides, it would be better to knock the kid out with some liquid Tylenol before she even got on the plane. Everyone's happy that way.

Fair enough, but remember that what goes around comes around, and the children are strong when their parents are old and weak... It's equally acceptable, then, right? I mean, "this is for sabotaging my relationship with my girl when I was 20!" or "stop trying to wash my computer with water and soap!" *pow*.

Newton's 3rd Law of Motion.

Why, you'll say it's absurd? Then what makes it acceptable for PARENTS to do it? Or you'll claim that old people can't be unreasonable, and, thus, in pro-spanker's minds, deserving of a good spanking, ever?

Regardless, who died and made the guys that wrote the Bible into psychologists???

Exodus 21:15 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2021:15&version=31)

It says nothing about spoons, belts or hands. If you are a literalist then you must only use the rod. Anything else would be an unjustifiable exception.

If you are not a literalist and choose to interpret it metaphorically then then range of measures to instill discipline cover non physical methods also.

And if you do not except that the rod is the only method, you cannot argue that striking the child is mandated per se.

The Bible is to be interpreted literally, meaning as the literature it is written.

History as history
Poetry as poetry
and Proverbs as proverbs.

I already explained how proverbs are to be applied.

It never would have gotten that far. Not because I believe in spanking, though I do (as a last resort, only if all else has failed), but because I believe that children need to learn that courtesy for others is expected of them. When my children showed public discourtesy, they were disciplined; I did not cater to tantrums. Most of the time, it was resolved without spanking, maybe once or twice in their lives did they receive spankings. Having that tool made my job as a single mother much easier. They knew it could happen so they never misbehaved sufficiently that it would happen. Also, I tried to avoid situations that weren't appropriate for their age, I tried to make sure they weren't over-tired or over-stimulated - admittedly, it's not always possible to account for all situations or avoid all traps, but no one said being a parent was easy. The problem is, most people don't want to do it and want to blame others when things go wrong.

so why bring spanking into to the discussion?

To everyone, Biblical support for corporal punishment is not the topic of this thread. It was asked for and I have provided it, but if you prefer to continue discussing it, it would probably be better to start another thread about it.

More support for corporal punishment (but not abuse): Deuteronomy 25:2-4 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2025:2-4;&version=31;)
1When men have a dispute, they are to take it to court and the judges will decide the case, acquitting the innocent and condemning the guilty.2 If the guilty man deserves to be beaten, the judge shall make him lie down and have him flogged in his presence with the number of lashes his crime deserves, 3 but he must not give him more than forty lashes. If he is flogged more than that, your brother will be degraded in your eyes.
basically, the punishment must fit the crime, and this is in the eyes of the LAW, not parenting.



Deuteronomy 21:18-21 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy%2021:18-21;&version=31;)
18 If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who does not obey his father and mother and will not listen to them when they discipline him, 19 his father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him to the elders at the gate of his town. 20 They shall say to the elders, "This son of ours is stubborn and rebellious. He will not obey us. He is a profligate and a drunkard." 21 Then all the men of his town shall stone him to death. You must purge the evil from among you. All Israel will hear of it and be afraid.
again, it's for Punishment according to LAWS and not about parenting.


The second is for the death penalty for rebellious (not merely disobedient) youths. If God commands the use of capital punishment for both the youth and the adult, and He gives His blessing on corporal punishment for adults it can be concluded that He also blesses corporal punishment for youths and children.so you stone your children for being rebellious? then according to you, you would've killed that 3 yr old because she was stubborn, Rebellious and didn't listen to her parents as it was stated in the bible! you're showing your disobediance by only spanking her then.

Also, I have heard what you say about the shepherd's crook, but this means the use of guiding discipline, it does not eliminate corporal punishment. In fact, the crook had many uses, including punishment. Or at least I've been told by someone at church who would know such things. But he is not God, and therefore subordinate to Scripture which I have provided. the bible does not make that distiction between Punishment Discipline or Guiding discipline. infact, both fit
24Whoever spares the (guidance) hates his son,
but he who loves him is diligent to (guide) him.[e]
24Whoever spares the (Punishment) hates his son,
but he who loves him is diligent to (Punish) him.[e]
so the one YOU choose to follow just shows your preference for either Violence or Kindness.

so why bring spanking into to the discussion?

Because many people do not regard it as a valid child-rearing tool. Because there are children who do not respond to other forms of discipline. Because there are people, like, for example, Smunkee, who seem to have well-behaved children without spanking them. Because so many out-of-control children seem to have parents who don't spank. How do you prevent situations like the above without having, at least, the promise of spanking as a "court of last resort?"

Violence is the solution to everything.

I don't care if the Bible says you should spank your kids. The Bible can be and is wrong on several things, and this is one of them.
And one last point:
Why do people rely on a book written for a specific group of (not incrediblly moral) people over 2000 years ago as advice for what to do nowadays?
(Even if it was written by God, which it wasn't.)

EDIT: The Bible allows what I'll count as rape under certain circumstances(that don't justify it any) (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=%20Deuteronomy%2021:10-14;&version=31;).
Ancient Israel massacred thousands of people for no reason. (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Judges%2018:7-29%20;&version=31;)
God massacred thousands of Israelites for even less then no reason. (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2016:41-50;&version=31;)
And that's just a few examples. (http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/)

Because many people do not regard it as a valid child-rearing tool. Because there are children who do not respond to other forms of discipline. Because there are people, like, for example, Smunkee, who seem to have well-behaved children without spanking them. Because so many out-of-control children seem to have parents who don't spank. How do you prevent situations like the above without having, at least, the promise of spanking as a "court of last resort?"
Like I said above, you can control an unruly child without hitting it, especially one the age in the story. She was three. If you can't pick up and restrain a three year old child, you don't have any business bringing it on a plane.

Like I said above, you can control an unruly child without hitting it, especially one the age in the story. She was three. If you can't pick up and restrain a three year old child, you don't have any business bringing it on a plane.

Yes, but that kind of attitude displays normal intelligence. So it has no place in this discussion whatsoever.

Like I said above, you can control an unruly child without hitting it, especially one the age in the story. She was three. If you can't pick up and restrain a three year old child, you don't have any business bringing it on a plane.

LOL we can make kid carriers.... and strap them all in in one section of the plane where they are shown cartoons and given fresh fruit as
snacks for the duration of the flight.

Yes, but that kind of attitude displays normal intelligence. So it has no place in this discussion whatsoever.

Ah. My bad. I just thought that since I helped raise a well-adjusted teenager while never spanking her I might know a little something. ;)

LOL we can make kid carriers.... and strap them all in in one section of the plane where they are shown cartoons and given fresh fruit as snacks for the duration of the flight.
and poofy chairs (that still meet regulations) for them to sit on...

I think you might have something there kat...

Ah. My bad. I just thought that since I helped raise a well-adjusted teenager while never spanking her I might know a little something. ;)

The whole discussion reminds me of yellowbeard.

"Mr. Crisp, nail that man's foot to the deck! Preventive punishment, that's what the royal navy has discovered. Punish a man before he has done wrong, and he will never do wrong again!"

I paraphrase, of course.

Actually...

could the parents' insistance on trying to expose the child to an experience they are clearly not ready for constitute abuse?

And... as for strapping the kid in and taking off with them screaming hysterically --I'd be mighty upset to have to spend hours trapped next to a freaked out kid shrieking in rage/terror.

Actually...

could the parents' insistance on trying to expose the child to an experience they are clearly not ready for constitute abuse?

And... as for strapping the kid in and taking off with them screaming hysterically --I'd be mighty upset to have to spend hours trapped next to a freaked out kid shrieking in rage/terror.

as well as the trauma induced by forcibly strapping the child into the chair.

I'm sorry, but by advocating striking a child in the head, you've robbed yourself and all pro-spankers of what little rationality you had.No, not all Pro-Spankers, just him.

I am pro spanking, but whether or not I could spank my child is a different thing, and I have strict rules on what is considered a spank.

How much is too much? A belt/spoon/hand to the backside and a hand across the mouth for older children (preteens and teens) is fine. Anything more is probably (not necessarily) abuse.bolded is all that I consider crossing the line to abuse.

How much is too much? A belt/spoon/hand to the backside and a hand across the mouth for older children (preteens and teens) is fine. Anything more is probably (not necessarily) abuse.

I'm sorry, but by advocating striking a child in the head, you've robbed yourself and all pro-spankers of what little rationality you had.

This is what drugs are for. They ought to have knocked her out with some Gravol.

Because many people do not regard it as a valid child-rearing tool. Because there are children who do not respond to other forms of discipline. Because there are people, like, for example, Smunkee, who seem to have well-behaved children without spanking them. Because so many out-of-control children seem to have parents who don't spank. How do you prevent situations like the above without having, at least, the promise of spanking as a "court of last resort?"

people have out of control kids because they arent consistent. some of those poor parents spank, some dont. spanking is no magic bullet for out of control children.

Actually...

could the parents' insistance on trying to expose the child to an experience they are clearly not ready for constitute abuse?

And... as for strapping the kid in and taking off with them screaming hysterically --I'd be mighty upset to have to spend hours trapped next to a freaked out kid shrieking in rage/terror.The key was to get the plane off the ground--then, if necessary, the parents could have taken the kid out of the seat and comforted her. But that plane wasn't going anywhere with a kid sitting on the floor.

Part of the bitch part of being a parent is having to be tough on your kids at times. It wouldn't have killed the kid to have been put in the chair and strapped down long enough for the plane to get airborne.

To be fair, this sounds more like spoiled parents who think their child can do no wrong than a matter of whether or not spanking is necessary.

The airline reimbursed the family and offered them a free flight elsewhere even though they caused the disturbance and inconvenience and the guy still complains that he'll never fly with them again?

If the parents are this spoiled, how do you expect the child to turn out?

Yeah, if anything I'm impressed that AirTran decided to try to appease them--they certainly weren't deserving of such treatment.

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/toddlers-temper-ousts-family-from-plane/20070123133709990002?ncid=NWS00010000000001

A disruptive, spoiled brat and her parents are put off a plane and the parents have the gall to complain.

To be fair, this sounds more like spoiled parents who think their child can do no wrong than a matter of whether or not spanking is necessary.

The airline reimbursed the family and offered them a free flight elsewhere even though they caused the disturbance and inconvenience and the guy still complains that he'll never fly with them again?

If the parents are this spoiled, how do you expect the child to turn out?

Because many people do not regard it as a valid child-rearing tool. Because there are children who do not respond to other forms of discipline. Because there are people, like, for example, Smunkee, who seem to have well-behaved children without spanking them. Because so many out-of-control children seem to have parents who don't spank. How do you prevent situations like the above without having, at least, the promise of spanking as a "court of last resort?"

well ok. sometimes kids have bad days. sometimes we all have bad days

it could very well be that this was an otherwise well behaved child who was having a bad day.

spanking a 3 year old for having a bad day does nothing to ensure that the child will never have another bad day.

the threat of a beating to take place some time in the future is an extremely lame form of discipline.

are you asking what i would have done if i were the parent of that child?

i would have dragged her out from under the seat. sat her one the seat, and buckled the seat belt.

problem over.

Amen!

I would also calmly hold my hand over her mouth (making sure she could breathe) thereby muffling the sound. All very calmly but she would know without a doubt who was in control and it wasn't her.

Now that she (and her parents) got national publicity out of this----How many guys on this forum would like to have such a child (adjusting for your age) as a spouse in 20 years? I predict a child who will be divorced many times. I predict a lot of drugs and sex very young. I predict a child that won't hold a job and wonder why. I predict a very sad future for her and a lot of tears for her parents. And the parents will never understand that a child is trained between 1 and 6. She is half way through basic training and totally failing as a future adult.

Perhaps the parents should have taught the child to behave better, by positive reinforcement & a loving environment. That's what I would have done. Plus, kids will be kids. All children have temper tantrums from time to time, even the well behaved ones. That doesn't mean they deserve to be physically hurt.

Exodus 21:15 (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%2021:15&version=31)

I ask again, who died and make the Bible more than literature?

Yeah, if anything I'm impressed that AirTran decided to try to appease them--they certainly weren't deserving of such treatment.

Which would suggest to me that the carrier was more than reasonable to EVERYONE'S needs, and would be a carrier I would be more likely in using when I fly next.

Which would suggest to me that the carrier was more than reasonable to EVERYONE'S needs, and would be a carrier I would be more likely in using when I fly next.

Not that this is something they do out of good will necessarily. Maybe they decided to try and avoid bad publicity/get some good publicity. It worked for the latter because the parents were such asses.

Not that this is something they do out of good will necessarily. Maybe they decided to try and avoid bad publicity/get some good publicity. It worked for the latter because the parents were such asses.

Well.

Would they be able to deny them service without reimbursing them? No.
Has there been a precedent set that when they bump you from a flight and you go voluntarily, generally they offer you some perk? Yes.

Is it fair to the rest of the passengers on this plane and all others it may connect to, and all the planes that need to use the gates on both sides of the journey, to delay because of one kid freaking? No. And considering how messed up air travel had been recently because of weather, they probably did not want to contribute to that.

It's not required that they act out of "good will" -- the whole thing was simply expedient and good for business. I don't require that my waitress have a deep and personal relationship with me... efficiency, politeness, and maybe some pleasantries to people who are not being difficult asses is all that's required for me to think she deserves a nice tip.

Well.

Would they be able to deny them service without reimbursing them? No.
Has there been a precedent set that when they bump you from a flight and you go voluntarily, generally they offer you some perk? Yes.

Is it fair to the rest of the passengers on this plane and all others it may connect to, and all the planes that need to use the gates on both sides of the journey, to delay because of one kid freaking? No. And considering how messed up air travel had been recently because of weather, they probably did not want to contribute to that.

It's not required that they act out of "good will" -- the whole thing was simply expedient and good for business. I don't require that my waitress have a deep and personal relationship with me... efficiency, politeness, and maybe some pleasantries to people who are not being difficult asses is all that's required for me to think she deserves a nice tip.

Oh, I agree completely with everything you pointed out, was just making a small point, really.

hmm.....my kid is hysterical......what should I do? I know knock the shit out of her! that will surely calm her down!

:rolleyes:

I hope I never have a panic attack or something on a plane, I mean what if they decide it's best to just hit me?

I hope someone near me HAS a panic attack in a plane, it must be extremely therapeutic to beat the crap out of them. :D

hmm.....my kid is hysterical......what should I do? I know knock the shit out of her! that will surely calm her down!

:rolleyes:

I hope I never have a panic attack or something on a plane, I mean what if they decide it's best to just hit me?

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/toddlers-temper-ousts-family-from-plane/20070123133709990002?ncid=NWS00010000000001


A disruptive, spoiled brat and her parents are put off a plane and the parents have the gall to complain.

What's the problem? Apparently, none of the flight attendants slapped the parents, did they?

Or are you trying to insinuate that the parents, who obviously are not very well-raised themselves, should have slapped the kid for their own failure to set boundaries and teach their child manners?

hmm.....my kid is hysterical......what should I do? I know knock the shit out of her! that will surely calm her down!

:rolleyes:

I hope I never have a panic attack or something on a plane, I mean what if they decide it's best to just hit me?

Surely, though, removing the child from the situation is something you can get behind, especially since in all fairness AirTrans was sensitive to everyone's needs.

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/toddlers-temper-ousts-family-from-plane/20070123133709990002?ncid=NWS00010000000001

A disruptive, spoiled brat and her parents are put off a plane and the parents have the gall to complain.
I wouldn't be a shithead like that kid's parents obviously are in the first place.
Yeah, if anything I'm impressed that AirTran decided to try to appease them--they certainly weren't deserving of such treatment.
To be fair, this sounds more like spoiled parents who think their child can do no wrong than a matter of whether or not spanking is necessary.

The airline reimbursed the family and offered them a free flight elsewhere even though they caused the disturbance and inconvenience and the guy still complains that he'll never fly with them again?

If the parents are this spoiled, how do you expect the child to turn out?
Not that this is something they do out of good will necessarily. Maybe they decided to try and avoid bad publicity/get some good publicity. It worked for the latter because the parents were such asses.
What am I missing? :confused: Why all this hostility towards the parents? How come they deserve terms such as "shithead" and being called "asses"?

The airline has issued an apology, reimbursed their tickets, AND offered them three roundtrip tickets anywhere the airline flies, so it seems to me that the airline is trying to make up for a mistake - i.e. they don't feel that the parents are to blame.

From another site:
So on Jan. 11, the family flew from Logan Airport to Fort Meyers on AirTran Airways, and even though it was Elly’s first plane trip she behaved like a dream and spent most of the flight coloring in her coloring book and watching movies on a portable DVD player.
So the flight down went without any problems...

Then came … The Boarding. Suddenly and without warning, angelic little Elly morphed into every parents’ nightmare.

Her mom thinks it may have been because of the ear surgery Elly underwent earlier this month, and perhaps her memory of the discomfort and ear pressure she endured during the plane’s descent into Florida. For whatever reason, when they got on the plane, Elly started to cry and wouldn’t stop. Nor would she sit down — she plopped herself down on the floor in front of her seat and proceeded to throw a temper tantrum.

“I was trying to console her and the stewardess came over and said, ‘Did you buy that seat for her?’ remembers Ms. Kulesza, 31, who is four months pregnant. “I said yes, and she told me my daughter needs to sit in it. I told her I was trying.”

Moments later, an AirTran Airways employee armed with a walkie-talkie addressed Mr. Kulesza.

“Sir, you need to get her under control,” she said.

“We’re trying,” Mr. Kulesza noted.

The passengers, meanwhile, were quite understanding and one of them offered the toddler a lollipop, which she rejected. Then the walkie-talkie woman returned to the Kuleszas’ aisle and displayed the raw tact and diplomacy of Donald Trump.

“Sir, you need to get off the plane,” she announced.

“What?” a stunned Mr. Kulesza asked. “Are you serious?”

“Sir, you need to get off the plane now.”

They got off the plane, while their luggage and car seat flew on to Boston. In the terminal they were directed to an AirTran supervisor, who told the couple that the stewardess was uncomfortable “because you have an unruly child who struck a woman on board.”

Mr. Kulesza was incredulous. “That was her mother,” he explained. “She hit her on the arm. Lady, this is a 3-year-old child we’re talking about.”

“Sir, we don’t differentiate between 3 and 33,” the AirTran supervisor replied. Mr. Kulesza said the woman proceeded to lecture him about child discipline, and how she would never tolerate her children behaving in such a manner, at which point Mr. Kulesza said, “You really need to stop talking now.”

The couple were also told that, since they had been ejected from the plane, they were banned from flying with AirTran for 24 hours. So they were forced to return to Bonita Springs for the night, and Mr. Kulesza missed a 16-hour work shift
AirTran, meanwhile, has apparently had a change of heart. After the airline received a phone call Thursday from yours truly, an AirTran customer service rep called the Kuleszas, apologized profusely for the incident and refunded them the $595 cost of their tickets.

“We do believe the situation could have been handled differently,” said AirTran spokeswoman Judy Graham-Weaver. “We will use this case as a means to train our agents on dealing with this type of situation on our flights … While there are FAA regulations that mandate all passengers have to be securely fastened in their seat belts before a plane can depart, we need to work with our customers in situations like this to help them — and that is what we will focus on.”

Ms. Kulesza is appreciative of the response, but believes she could have calmed her daughter down, if given the chance.
http://www.telegram.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070121/COLUMN01/701210459/0/FRONTPAGE

Neither can I see that this thread has anything at all to do with spanking / not spanking.

Snip.

In my case it's their post-facto reaction that caused my view of them - the company tried to make amends for a problem that was their kids' one, and they go "I'll never fly with you again" on them.

Surely, though, removing the child from the situation is something you can get behind, especially since in all fairness AirTrans was sensitive to everyone's needs.
of course. If my kid is having a problem I would absolutely take them out of the area and find out what was going on. I have no problem whatsoever with the airline's actions.



What am I missing? :confused:



http://www.telegram.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070121/COLUMN01/701210459/0/FRONTPAGE

Neither can I see that this thread has anything at all to do with spanking / not spanking.

apparently if your child is screaming, instead of finding out why, you are supposed to hit them, beat them into submission, because being physically assaulted is a world renowned treatment for everything.

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/toddlers-temper-ousts-family-from-plane/20070123133709990002?ncid=NWS00010000000001


A disruptive, spoiled brat and her parents are put off a plane and the parents have the gall to complain.

I'd spank her butt and take away her allowence till I recoup the money lost.

Doesn't say they were anti-spankers themselves - meybe they were a spanking family, and that's where the kid learned to hit her parents when she got upset? Aaa, speculation is fun :)

Just because she hit her parents does not mean that she learned it from spanking. Kids at that age would lash out by hitting regardless if they had been spanked or not.

I'd spank her butt and take away her allowence till I recoup the money lost.

you would give a toddler allowance? how do you expect them to manage their money at all? how do you expect them to connect weeks of your "keeping their money" with an incident on a plane? surely if your preschooler has that kind of cognitive ability you could just as well talk to them? ask them what's wrong?

I'd spank her butt and take away her allowence till I recoup the money lost.

I shiver at the thought of what your father would do to you if he found you attaching tin cans to a cat's tail.

apparently if your child is screaming, instead of finding out why, you are supposed to hit them, beat them into submission, because being physically assaulted is a world renowned treatment for everything.

I agree with Smunkee. The last thing I would do to my daughter if she acted like that would be to beat her (that always calm things down:rolleyes: )

I would try and find out the cause of her distress, and would remove her MYSELF if the situation was causing her or other passengers major discomfort.

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/toddlers-temper-ousts-family-from-plane/20070123133709990002?ncid=NWS00010000000001


A disruptive, spoiled brat and her parents are put off a plane and the parents have the gall to complain.
Um...I would not have a disruptive, spoiled brat. If somebody somehow forced me to care for a disrupted spoiled brat, I would not take it on airplanes.

I ask again, who died and make the Bible more than literature?

I just can't resist!

Jesus, Paul, Peter, Mark, Matthew, John....

hmm.....my kid is hysterical......what should I do? I know knock the shit out of her! that will surely calm her down!

:rolleyes:

I hope I never have a panic attack or something on a plane, I mean what if they decide it's best to just hit me?

Oh brother. You really like to think in the extreme don't you? :rolleyes:

I just can't resist!

Jesus, Paul, Peter, Mark, Matthew, John....

Wait, that means Darkstalkers will become reality when their authors die? DIBS ON NAILING MORRIGAN! I'LL LOCATE THEIR ADDRESSES AND YOU WHACK THEM!!! :D

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Shakespeare is dead too.

DIBS ON NAILING TITANIA!!! :D

you would give a toddler allowance? how do you expect them to manage their money at all?

Teach them how to manage it early and you'll never have a problem with them in regards to money. And who said it would be big anyway?

how do you expect them to connect weeks of your "keeping their money" with an incident on a plane? surely if your preschooler has that kind of cognitive ability you could just as well talk to them? ask them what's wrong?

Smunkee? Don't lecture me on how to raise kids. You've done a good job with yours so far. As for me, my wife and I will do what we think is best for them and not what some lady on the internet says.

In my case it's their post-facto reaction that caused my view of them - the company tried to make amends for a problem that was their kids' one, and they go "I'll never fly with you again" on them.
Well, given that their story is correct, they were treated pretty rudely on the plane and even after having been thrown off - and being denied flying for 24 hours and loosing a 16-hour work shift I can see how they would be mad. And it's the only way a consumer have to protest really, to decide to not use their services again. So I won't hold it against them...

Especially since the company only tried to make amends post-media contact ;)
apparently if your child is screaming, instead of finding out why, you are supposed to hit them, beat them into submission, because being physically assaulted is a world renowned treatment for everything.
Hitting a screaming child... That sounds like the very best way to stop the screaming right then and there. :)
Just because she hit her parents does not mean that she learned it from spanking. Kids at that age would lash out by hitting regardless if they had been spanked or not.
So this thread really doesn't have anything to do with spanking or not... 's what I thought ;)

I just can't resist!

Jesus, Paul, Peter, Mark, Matthew, John....
Not to put too fine a point on it, but Shakespeare is dead too.

I shiver at the thought of what your father would do to you if he found you attaching tin cans to a cat's tail.

Never had a cat till I was like 12. Though my Grandfather's cat scratched me when I pulled its tail. Learned nicely that you should never pull a cat's tail. Mother was not to happy about it but let it slide because my grandfather told her I got what I deserved for pulling the cat's tail. Was never comforted from that incident.

I'm getting dizzy by the timewarping here...
http://www.rockymusic.org/OLD/covers/timewarp-austr-front.jpg

Never had a cat till I was like 12. Though my Grandfather's cat scratched me when I pulled its tail. Learned nicely that you should never pull a cat's tail. Mother was not to happy about it but let it slide because my grandfather told her I got what I deserved for pulling the cat's tail. Was never comforted from that incident.

I was driving home a point. Regardless, you're expecting your kid to spend about four years without an allowance for an incident he'd not remember. That's... not smart. Furthermore... I think the years of evolutionary progress made us better at child-rearing and at reacting to bad situations than the average feline.

in the extreme? how so?

"Hope I do not have a panic attack because if I do, they might beat me?" Oh brother.

everyone knows that kids don't ever have problems? I mean if they are screaming obviously it means you didn't hit them yet right?:rolleyes:

:rolleyes:

teach them when they are 2 or 3 years old? I wonder how you can reconcile the two statements you seem to be making

1 kids that young don't understand reason, so I can't talk to them, I have to hit them

and

2 kids that age can understand money, an abstract concept, if I take the money away they will remember and understand.

Maybe I was being sarcastic? Maybe I did not realize how young the girl was? Or maybe you just plain do not get what I was saying?

maybe you should read a few books.

HA! Sorry. I am not going to read books on parenting. I have four live sources if my soon to be wife and I have problems with our soon to come children.

Oh brother. You really like to think in the extreme don't you? :rolleyes:

in the extreme? how so?

your kid is having some kind of problem evidenced by screaming, so you would what? hit her? yeah.

that's totally different than, say, me having a panic attack and someone hitting me

way extreme jump

everyone knows that kids don't ever have problems? I mean if they are screaming obviously it means you didn't hit them yet right?:rolleyes:

Teach them how to manage it early and you'll never have a problem with them in regards to money. And who said it would be big anyway?
teach them when they are 2 or 3 years old? I wonder how you can reconcile the two statements you seem to be making

1 kids that young don't understand reason, so I can't talk to them, I have to hit them

and

2 kids that age can understand money, an abstract concept, if I take the money away they will remember and understand.





Smunkee? Don't lecture me on how to raise kids. You've done a good job with yours so far. As for me, my wife and I will do what we think is best for them and not what some lady on the internet says.
maybe you should read a few books.

teach them when they are 2 or 3 years old? I wonder how you can reconcile the two statements you seem to be making

1 kids that young don't understand reason, so I can't talk to them, I have to hit them

and

2 kids that age can understand money, an abstract concept, if I take the money away they will remember and understand.

Nice move! Beautifully executed!

Neither can I see that this thread has anything at all to do with spanking / not spanking.
the OP challenges those who are anti-spanking. thus making into a spank/no spank thing.

Maybe I was being sarcastic? Maybe I did not realize how young the girl was? Or maybe you just plain do not get what I was saying?
explain it to me.



HA! Sorry. I am not going to read books on parenting. I have four live sources if my soon to be wife and I have problems with our soon to come children.
so, you know everything? everyone in your small circle knows everything there is to know about raising kids? wow. share the wealth dude! tell me, everything, I really need to know, see I am only human, I sometimes make mistakes, sometimes I try things that don't work, hell, I am even going to school to learn about this stuff, but nope, you don't need any help at all? wow, you must be uber-parent.....please, tell me everything.

explain it to me.

No.

so, you know everything?

Did I say that? No. Maybe I prefer to raise my kids the way my wife and I want to and not what some snot nosed author has to say about it.

everyone in your small circle knows everything there is to know about raising kids?

Did I say that? No I did not. However, my soon to be fiance's parents turned out a lovely young girl and my parents taught me as well as they can.

the OP challenges those who are anti-spanking. thus making into a spank/no spank thing.

But... but... it's so silly! And it's not even an example of anything... And there is a lack of logic! On NSG!! :eek: Heaven forbid, who would have tought it??

the OP challenges those who are anti-spanking. thus making into a spank/no spank thing.

because apparently it's in the mind of others that if your kid is screaming it's because you didn't hit them enough.

because apparently it's in the mind of others that if your kid is screaming it's because you didn't hit them enough.

Mmm. I'm thinking my folks here scream a lot. Maybe I should get a metal pipe somewhere to start hitting them with?

But... but... it's so silly! And it's not even an example of anything... And there is a lack of logic! On NSG!! :eek: Heaven forbid, who would have tought it??... I know... you know... mostly everyone knows. but you know how it is... there are those that have to make a topic into something it's not... :rolleyes:

because apparently it's in the mind of others that if your kid is screaming it's because you didn't hit them enough.just like in the mind of others, that a spank on the bottom is far more violent than a steel cage match at the WWE! :rolleyes:

just like in the mind of others, that a spank on the bottom is far more violent than a steel cage match at the WWE! :rolleyes:

physical violence is physical violence, I have a zero tolerance policy.

it's like a house cat and a tiger are both in the same family of mammals.

spanking is physical violence, in the same way decapitating your kid is, it's just not the same level.

I seek to have no physical violence in my life, that's not always something I can control, however I can control my own actions, and I choose not to spank my kids when other non-violent methods are acceptable.

physical violence is physical violence, I have a zero tolerance policy.

it's like a house cat and a tiger are both in the same family of mammals.

spanking is physical violence, in the same way decapitating your kid is, it's just not the same level.

I seek to have no physical violence in my life, that's not always something I can control, however I can control my own actions, and I choose not to spank my kids when other non-violent methods are acceptable.

and that is your choice. I respect that and I will honor that. but I also know that while there are those that do Abuse the tool called spanking, there are others that do use it responsibly. Even child experts are split on the values of spanking (the responsible kind.)

it's like people saying that Homeschooling should be outlawed because the promenent few raises children who learn their parents hatred and bias, and they lack socal experiences public schools have to offer... we know that may be true in some cases, but there are other cases where the parents take care NOT to have that sort of transferrence and also care about their child's social upbringing. Home schooling, like spanking, is a tool that can be abused. does that mean we should take a blanket stand for/against it? or take it on a case by case situation. (this is just an example. no need to debate it.)

Punish those that abuse their children, but don't punish those for percieved abuse when there really isn't any.

and that is your choice. I respect that and I will honor that. but I also know that while there are those that do Abuse the tool called spanking, there are others that do use it responsibly. Even child experts are split on the values of spanking (the responsible kind.)

it's like people saying that Homeschooling should be outlawed because the promenent few raises children who learn their parents hatred and bias, and they lack socal experiences public schools have to offer... we know that may be true in some cases, but there are other cases where the parents take care NOT to have that sort of transferrence and also care about their child's social upbringing. Home schooling, like spanking, is a tool that can be abused. does that mean we should take a blanket stand for/against it? or take it on a case by case situation. (this is just an example. no need to debate it.)

Punish those that abuse their children, but don't punish those for percieved abuse when there really isn't any.

I am not one of the ones pushing for this law, I am against legislating it, that's not going to stop me from saying that I 100% think it's a wrong thing to do.

I am not one of the ones pushing for this law, I am against legislating it, that's not going to stop me from saying that I 100% think it's a wrong thing to do.

I know. and I know you also know the difference between a spank and physical abuse (which doesn't contradict your stand btw.) I'm referring to others who do equate a spank as a full contact, beat-to-a-bloody pulp action... and this is reference to both sides of the issue.

What I don't understand is... there are both parents present, why couldn't they have picked up the child, with one of them holding the child down while the other does up the belt and then stop the tantrum from there?

so you refuse to explain yourself, and also you admit that you are not all knowing and still laugh that you might benefit from education.

interesting.

I fear for his future children, and I pity his soon to be wife (assuming she exists).

I'm sorry, but by advocating striking a child in the head, you've robbed yourself and all pro-spankers of what little rationality you had.

Teens and preteens are physically developed enough to handle it and are mentally developed enough to get a meaningful shock from it.

I'm not saying you ushould bash their heads in. What I'm saying is that if they say something sinful then a brisk slap (not many slaps) is not a problem. Providing of course, it is followed by a scolding and explanation.

No.



Did I say that? No. Maybe I prefer to raise my kids the way my wife and I want to and not what some snot nosed author has to say about it.



Did I say that? No I did not. However, my soon to be fiance's parents turned out a lovely young girl and my parents taught me as well as they can.

so you refuse to explain yourself, and also you admit that you are not all knowing and still laugh that you might benefit from education.

interesting.

What I don't understand is... there are both parents present, why couldn't they have picked up the child, with one of them holding the child down while the other does up the belt and then stop the tantrum from there?

because it could be that it would've been percieved as physical and mental abuse. they would've been PHYSICALLY restraining her against her will. Forcing her to sit still in a situation that is mentally/physcially uncomfortable/painful to her.

Basically, they were damned if they did, and damned if they didn't.

so you refuse to explain yourself, and also you admit that you are not all knowing and still laugh that you might benefit from education.

interesting.

My college education ends this semester and my work education will begin soon after that. I will always continue to learn.

You are right that I am laughing. Laughing over the way you are mis construding comments and thinking that spanking means beating which it does not.

I'm sure we have all seen parents that refuse to control their children. They are truly annoying -- the parents, I mean. All that was required of either parent, in this AirTran episode, was for them to reach down, pick up the kid, set her in the seat, and fasten the belt. One hundred and twelve people should not have to wait on a temperamental 3 year old to decide when she wanted to sit still.

AirTran did exactly the right thing.

Why were the parents offered 3 free tickets and the passengers that had their flight disrupted received no compensation?:headbang:

because it could be that it would've been percieved as physical and mental abuse. they would've been PHYSICALLY restraining her against her will. Forcing her to sit still in a situation that is mentally/physcially uncomfortable/painful to her.

Basically, they were damned if they did, and damned if they didn't.

No, parents have the responsibility to teach their kids what behavior is acceptable. If that requires force, then force it is. To think anything else is naive.

No, parents have the responsibility to teach their kids what behavior is acceptable. If that requires force, then force it is. To think anything else is naive.

Then most anti-spanking advocates are naive.

I'm sure we have all seen parents that refuse to control their children. They are truly annoying -- the parents, I mean. All that was required of either parent, in this AirTran episode, was for them to reach down, pick up the kid, set her in the seat, and fasten the belt. One hundred and twelve people should not have to wait on a temperamental 3 year old to decide when she wanted to sit still.

AirTran did exactly the right thing.

Agreed 100%

No need to spank the child. A glass of whiskey usually does wonders. And if it doesn't calm the kid then you can have one yourself.

No need to spank the child. A glass of whiskey usually does wonders. And if it doesn't calm the kid then you can have one yourself.

Giving alcohal to a minor is crime.

Oh boy...

I'm not sure how I'll say this...

I agree with you!

*Watches as the Four Horsemen start walking by*

You've got me looking over my shoulder, too.

Giving alcohal to a minor is crime.

Are we talking about what's legal or about what's right?

My college education ends this semester and my work education will begin soon after that. I will always continue to learn.
but only about certain things?

You are right that I am laughing. Laughing over the way you are mis construding comments and thinking that spanking means beating which it does not.
you mean because I use the word hit instead of spank?

No, parents have the responsibility to teach their kids what behavior is acceptable. If that requires force, then force it is. To think anything else is naive.

that is why I said Percieved to be Mental and Physical violence.

the girl had an ear operation so her inner ear may have been in pain in the pressurized cabin (and I am referring to the start of the trip, not this time which is the return flight.) so you have a 3 year old who remembers the pain and now mommy and daddy, who are supposed to LOVE, CARE and PROTECT her are suddenly forcing her to sit down and be STRAPPED in what se remembers as a painful experience. that is mental torture. so she fights. by struggling, they have to use more force... crossing the line into abuse. remember, she crawled under the seat and would not come out. she was Hitting her parents.

What the parents should've done was explain what was happening and see if they can be booked on another flight for the same amount instead of waiting to the point that they had to be asked off.

It IS possible for a father to raise the kid in such a manner as to not require force. Psychology 101.

These people must have failed that class. Now, how did we agree about forcefully placing the child in the seat and ...? Or was it about AirTran getting it right?

but only about certain things?

I'm learning what I need to make a living and to earn a paycheck so that I begin to build something up for when I do get married. Parenting is OJT.

I'm sure we have all seen parents that refuse to control their children. They are truly annoying -- the parents, I mean. All that was required of either parent, in this AirTran episode, was for them to reach down, pick up the kid, set her in the seat, and fasten the belt. One hundred and twelve people should not have to wait on a temperamental 3 year old to decide when she wanted to sit still.

AirTran did exactly the right thing.

Oh boy...

I'm not sure how I'll say this...

I agree with you!

*Watches as the Four Horsemen start walking by*

No, parents have the responsibility to teach their kids what behavior is acceptable. If that requires force, then force it is. To think anything else is naive.

It IS possible for a father to raise the kid in such a manner as to not require force. Psychology 101.

that is why I said Percieved to be Mental and Physical violence.

the girl had an ear operation so her inner ear may have been in pain in the pressurized cabin (and I am referring to the start of the trip, not this time which is the return flight.) so you have a 3 year old who remembers the pain and now mommy and daddy, who are supposed to LOVE, CARE and PROTECT her are suddenly forcing her to sit down and be STRAPPED in what se remembers as a painful experience. that is mental torture. so she fights. by struggling, they have to use more force... crossing the line into abuse. remember, she crawled under the seat and would not come out. she was Hitting her parents.

What the parents should've done was explain what was happening and see if they can be booked on another flight for the same amount instead of waiting to the point that they had to be asked off.
I can accept that. But at the same time, I don't think that changes a parent's responsibility to control their children's behavior.

I'm sure we have all seen parents that refuse to control their children. They are truly annoying -- the parents, I mean. All that was required of either parent, in this AirTran episode, was for them to reach down, pick up the kid, set her in the seat, and fasten the belt. One hundred and twelve people should not have to wait on a temperamental 3 year old to decide when she wanted to sit still.

AirTran did exactly the right thing.
And how do we know that they didn't try that? That it would have been enough? We don't. We weren't there, and there isn't enough information.

I prefer to learn about everything, not just things that might make me money. Parenting is very much on the job training, but that doesn't stop me from learning new parenting theories either. Reading a parenting book doesn't mean that I have to accept everything in it, but being educated about other ideas is always good.

I won't read any books on parenting. period. If my child deserves a swat on the butt, then s/he will get a swat on the butt.

To give a real life example, I teach a class twice a week, reading about the curriculum and learning how to present it has helped me, even so, teaching a class is like being thrown into the deep end of the pool, I didn't learn everything I ever needed to teach from books, but I wouldn't want to teach without some of it.

Big difference between getting an education degree (my soon to be fiance is an elementary Education major and getting her ESL certificate) and parenting.

I think that if I was going to take a kid on a plane, I'd go to the doctor first and ask about some mild sedatives for the trip.

The kid can't kick and scream if it's sleeping.

Aside from that, I think that by three my hypothetical offspring will have the idea that tantrums get them nowhere and good behaviour gets them treats as I will totally ignore them when they have tantrums and bribe them when they're good.

I would slightly reword that to "teaching their children to control themselves" since I don't believe anyone can truly ever control anyone but themselves.

And what if a kid does not want to control themselves?

I'm learning what I need to make a living and to earn a paycheck so that I begin to build something up for when I do get married. Parenting is OJT.

I prefer to learn about everything, not just things that might make me money. Parenting is very much on the job training, but that doesn't stop me from learning new parenting theories either. Reading a parenting book doesn't mean that I have to accept everything in it, but being educated about other ideas is always good.

To give a real life example, I teach a class twice a week, reading about the curriculum and learning how to present it has helped me, even so, teaching a class is like being thrown into the deep end of the pool, I didn't learn everything I ever needed to teach from books, but I wouldn't want to teach without some of it.

I would slightly reword that to "teaching their children to control themselves" since I don't believe anyone can truly ever control anyone but themselves.

And even that's a challenge. ;)

I can accept that. But at the same time, I don't think that changes a parent's responsibility to control their children's behavior.

I would slightly reword that to "teaching their children to control themselves" since I don't believe anyone can truly ever control anyone but themselves.

What the parents should've done was explain what was happening and see if they can be booked on another flight for the same amount instead of waiting to the point that they had to be asked off.

Based on their explanations, things went rather quickly and they thought they would have gotten her calmed down if they had gotten some more time. Since we don't know how long they had been trying to calm the girl down before they got thrown off, we can't say that it's plausible that they would have managed to do so - but neither can we say that they did too little or waited too long. We have too little information.

Giving alcohal to a minor is crime.

So you wouldn't spank the child if they made that illegal, would you?

(Yeah, I know, that belongs in the other thread but meh ;) )

So you wouldn't spank the child if they made that illegal, would you?

(Yeah, I know, that belongs in the other thread but meh ;) )

I just won't be traveling to California if it passes there.

Is it just me or is this timewarp thing really bad this morning?

I can accept that. But at the same time, I don't think that changes a parent's responsibility to control their children's behavior.Edit, sorry, going on 24 hours w/o sleep, i misread your post.

it's not meant to change responsiblity, just end the situation without them being "kicked off" the plane but leaving voluntarily.

Based on their explanations, things went rather quickly and they thought they would have gotten her calmed down if they had gotten some more time. Since we don't know how long they had been trying to calm the girl down before they got thrown off, we can't say that it's plausible that they would have managed to do so - but neither can we say that they did too little or waited too long. We have too little information.yep. but as you said, we don't know how long they waited. after all, one article had someone offering the girl a lollipop.

I would slightly reword that to "teaching their children to control themselves" since I don't believe anyone can truly ever control anyone but themselves.

You might not be able to stop a kid from screaming, but considering the difference in size, if a pair of adults can't pick up a three year old bodily and stuff her into a seat and get a seatbelt on her, then something is seriously wrong.

And how do we know that they didn't try that? That it would have been enough? We don't. We weren't there, and there isn't enough information.

The flight was delayed fifteen minutes because of the out of control child. If that wasn't enough time for the parents to get the upper hand, too bad. AirTran earned my respect by recognizing the 'rights' of the 112 passengers that weren't misbehaving to reach their destination on time.

I won't read any books on parenting. period. If my child deserves a swat on the butt, then s/he will get a swat on the butt.
willful ignorance, nice.

Big difference between getting an education degree (my soon to be fiance is an elementary Education major and getting her ESL certificate) and parenting.
I am aware of that, if I wanted to say something that was the exact same thing as what I was talking about I would just say it instead of trying to use an analogy.




And what if a kid does not want to control themselves?
my children want to control themselves because I make it worth their while.

if your child does not want to control themselves no amount of spanking is going to change anything.....people who are stubborn and set in their ways will throw a fit whether or not it's in their best interests or not.


And even that's a challenge. ;)
LG you know better than anyone that parenting is never easy.

Is it just me or is this timewarp thing really bad this morning?

I told you last year, it's just you. :D

my children want to control themselves because I make it worth their while.

So did mine so whats your point?

if your child does not want to control themselves no amount of spanking is going to change anything.....

Wanna bet?

people who are stubborn and set in their ways will throw a fit whether or not it's in their best interests or not.

Some yes but if you spank them, that'll silence them and they'll realize that they are not supposed to do that.And that is after you tried everything else. Just like war, spanking is the last resort and parenting can be a war at times.

I told you last year, it's just you. :D

It's the same thing I told him next year.

It's the same thing I told him next year.

I did tell you tomorrow that this will be a nice line you wrote there, right?

(Okay, let's stop this threadjack lest the mods will have banned us ten years ago for it.)

I did tell you tomorrow that this will be a nice line you did there, right?

I remember you will. Ok, I'm done hijacking the thread.

what's yours?




I am sure that it would stop an argument with my husband if he punched me in the face too, what's your point again?

I think the point we're overlooking is that some parents can't even bring themselves to say 'No', and mean it.

I think spanking is good for those hard headed children!! but making them sit in the corner works for most. Kids know when they can run you over. you have to not give and not let them get away with stuff. they want to know the difference between good and bad!!! they need you to be their parent not just someone who cuddles with them! I think that it would be even better if it was Mandatory to take child psychology class before the baby arrives!!!!!!!!!!
heres the kid :headbang: heres you then the kid ends up like this :D !!!!

LG you know better than anyone that parenting is never easy.

My eldest son is in his so-called 'terrible twos'. They're not so terrible. He's a lot like me. The game he plays is "Check me out!"

He wants to amuse me and his mother. That's his reward for 'proper' behavior; laughter. And he also knows when we're NOT amused anymore. *nod*

So did mine so whats your point?
what's yours?



Some yes but if you spank them, that'll silence them and they'll realize that they are not supposed to do that.And that is after you tried everything else. Just like war, spanking is the last resort and parenting can be a war at times.
I am sure that it would stop an argument with my husband if he punched me in the face too, what's your point again?

And, surprisingly, THESE are most of the parents that end up beating children. Why? Because they can't assert authority through speech.

That's interesting. I would have thought that the parent in the grocery store that can't say no to a candy bar at the checkout, would have been the least likely to enforce any discipline at all.

We almost never spanked any of our kids. I can't remember a single incident that provoked a paddling. On the other hand, the few times that we did have to utter the words, "Do we need to go outside/home?" usually calmed the offending behavior very quickly.

I think the point we're overlooking is that some parents can't even bring themselves to say 'No', and mean it.

And, surprisingly, THESE are most of the parents that end up beating children. Why? Because they can't assert authority through speech.

And, surprisingly, THESE are most of the parents that end up beating children. Why? Because they can't assert authority through speech.
QFT

And, surprisingly, THESE are most of the parents that end up beating children. Why? Because they can't assert authority through speech.In all fairness, there are times where speech alone isn't going to be enough, but especially with small children, you can physically constrain them without resorting to hitting them.

I would spank on occasion sucj as the kid is disobeying both parents for no apparent reason. On the other hand I could call this guy...
http://images.wikia.com/uncyclopedia/images/5/50/Chuck_norris_punch.gif

















:p

yep. but as you said, we don't know how long they waited. after all, one article had someone offering the girl a lollipop.
Exactly, which is why I wouldn't attack the parents for this... Not with only the information we have here.
The flight was delayed fifteen minutes because of the out of control child. If that wasn't enough time for the parents to get the upper hand, too bad. AirTran earned my respect by recognizing the 'rights' of the 112 passengers that weren't misbehaving to reach their destination on time.
The article isn't clear on if the delay was due to the child or due to other reasons. But 15 minutes should be enough if that was the time they had. If the plane was already delayed for other reasons and the airline "took it out on" the parents and the child, then I'm not impressed with regards to the companys handling of passangers. But as I said, we don't know.

My eldest son is in his so-called 'terrible twos'. They're not so terrible. He's a lot like me. The game he plays is "Check me out!"

He wants to amuse me and his mother. That's his reward for 'proper' behavior; laughter. And he also knows when we're NOT amused anymore. *nod*

I'm imagining some AWSOME home movies!

Exactly, which is why I wouldn't attack the parents for this... Not with only the information we have here.

and I'm not... just to make it clear. :p

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/toddlers-temper-ousts-family-from-plane/20070123133709990002?ncid=NWS00010000000001


A disruptive, spoiled brat and her parents are put off a plane and the parents have the gall to complain.

This is all over CNN this morning, as if the airline did something horrible. Fuck those parents. They wouldn't have had any trouble if they had bothered to keep their screaming brat in line.

what's yours?

I asked you first.

I am sure that it would stop an argument with my husband if he punched me in the face too, what's your point again?

Spousal abuse. Nice.

I asked you first.
if a child does not want to control themselves then you have to move them to a place where they can't hurt themselves or others and ride it out......



Spousal abuse. Nice.
what? your solution for a problem with a kid is to hit them, what's the difference here?

Or swat them on the butt to gain attention. but then, you do not think of that. To bad those books on parenting didn't tell you that.



No. In some circumstances, it is appropriate to spank them.
This coming from a person who's still a child in many ways himself, as opposed to all the people who have raised children. :rolleyes:

Simple. I would sedate the little brat if he/she/it couldn't behave. That said, if I had kids, they would be so afraid of me that they wouldn't dare misbehave in my presence or if they even thought I would find out.

On a plane, I would whip them right off the plane right away for misbehaving and tell them, "If you don't stop screaming, we're going to miss our flight, we'll be stuck here, and it will be all your fault. And if they didn't stop misbehaving, I wouldn't get on the plane, we would stay right there, and they would be in serious trouble. Needless to say, once we got somewhere where it was feasible, the words "drop and give me fifty" would be out of my mouth very quickly.

I am convinced my parents were crying sissies who just wanted friendship with their kids so we would learn to hate the other parent. I fully intend to be a tyrant and to put up a single front. I don't intend for my kids to be friends with me. If they cross me, if they misbehave, they learn that the family suffers the consequences, and they will take the fall for it. If we miss a flight because of their bad behavior, they will draw the resentment of everyone and will suffer for it. No spanking is necessary, just an iron-fisted grip on your children.

if a child does not want to control themselves then you have to move them to a place where they can't hurt themselves or others and ride it out......

Or swat them on the butt to gain attention. but then, you do not think of that. To bad those books on parenting didn't tell you that.

what? your solution for a problem with a kid is to hit them, what's the difference here?

No. In some circumstances, it is appropriate to spank them.

Or swat them on the butt to gain attention. but then, you do not think of that. To bad those books on parenting didn't tell you that.
my experience tells me that hitting someone who is frantically upset isn't going to stop them.



No. In some circumstances, it is appropriate to spank them.
I don't think it's ever appropriate to spank them.

my experience tells me that hitting someone who is frantically upset isn't going to stop them.

Worked for me.

I don't think it's ever appropriate to spank them.

That's fine. I do.

Worked for me.
I am glad that you respond to physical violence by backing down. I haven't really met many people that do.

and I'm not... just to make it clear. :p
;) No worries, I know you don't. It's just that...
This is all over CNN this morning, as if the airline did something horrible. Fuck those parents. They wouldn't have had any trouble if they had bothered to keep their screaming brat in line.
...well, some people seem to do it. :p

I am glad that you respond to physical violence by backing down. I haven't really met many people that do.

I've met several. Maybe it was because of the crowd I was with.

Simple. I would sedate the little brat if he/she/it couldn't behave. That said, if I had kids, they would be so afraid of me that they wouldn't dare misbehave in my presence or if they even thought I would find out.

On a plane, I would whip them right off the plane right away for misbehaving and tell them, "If you don't stop screaming, we're going to miss our flight, we'll be stuck here, and it will be all your fault. And if they didn't stop misbehaving, I wouldn't get on the plane, we would stay right there, and they would be in serious trouble. Needless to say, once we got somewhere where it was feasible, the words "drop and give me fifty" would be out of my mouth very quickly.

I am convinced my parents were crying sissies who just wanted friendship with their kids so we would learn to hate the other parent. I fully intend to be a tyrant and to put up a single front. I don't intend for my kids to be friends with me. If they cross me, if they misbehave, they learn that the family suffers the consequences, and they will take the fall for it. If we miss a flight because of their bad behavior, they will draw the resentment of everyone and will suffer for it. No spanking is necessary, just an iron-fisted grip on your children.

Okay, tell me now, what Disney movie did you jump from? Because that's the only kind of movie I saw with characters advocating the "be a tyrant to your kid" line of psychology.

That's interesting. I would have thought that the parent in the grocery store that can't say no to a candy bar at the checkout, would have been the least likely to enforce any discipline at all.

Actually the parent that can't control through words will not be able to when the need arises, thus trying to control through violence.

what are you going to do when your kids aren't afraid of you anymore? what do you expect to keep them in line when they are adults? fear of getting caught?

More specifically, when HE's the old and frail one, what does HE expect THEY will do to HIM? I'm sure they'll find many creative ways to repay him...

Simple. I would sedate the little brat if he/she/it couldn't behave. That said, if I had kids, they would be so afraid of me that they wouldn't dare misbehave in my presence or if they even thought I would find out.

On a plane, I would whip them right off the plane right away for misbehaving and tell them, "If you don't stop screaming, we're going to miss our flight, we'll be stuck here, and it will be all your fault. And if they didn't stop misbehaving, I wouldn't get on the plane, we would stay right there, and they would be in serious trouble. Needless to say, once we got somewhere where it was feasible, the words "drop and give me fifty" would be out of my mouth very quickly.

I am convinced my parents were crying sissies who just wanted friendship with their kids so we would learn to hate the other parent. I fully intend to be a tyrant and to put up a single front. I don't intend for my kids to be friends with me. If they cross me, if they misbehave, they learn that the family suffers the consequences, and they will take the fall for it. If we miss a flight because of their bad behavior, they will draw the resentment of everyone and will suffer for it. No spanking is necessary, just an iron-fisted grip on your children.

what are you going to do when your kids aren't afraid of you anymore? what do you expect to keep them in line when they are adults? fear of getting caught?

what are you going to do when your kids aren't afraid of you anymore? what do you expect to keep them in line when they are adults? fear of getting caught?


Heh shit, I'm still a little afraid of my Dad.

what are you going to do when your kids aren't afraid of you anymore? what do you expect to keep them in line when they are adults? fear of getting caught?

Methods of discipline evolve as they get older, Smunk, as I'm sure you already know.

Methods of discipline evolve as they get older, Smunk, as I'm sure you already know.

Yes, but do check what IHP said. Are THESE "evolved" methods?

I was afraid of my dad until the day he died, I didn't respect him, I didn't obey him, I was deathly afraid of the man.

Control by fear is not my parenting strategy.


And fair do's to ya. I love my dad and respect him. Not coz he used to beat me, but for the fact that he had ahell of a job bringing up his children and each and every one of us turned out not only fine, but better.

so you start out with violence and fear and move on to what?

A light swat on the arse is hardly violence. Yeesh... :rolleyes:

I have to say, though, that we've never had to resort to that, but then we've got a great kid. :D

I was afraid of my dad until the day he died, I didn't respect him, I didn't obey him, I was deathly afraid of the man.

Control by fear is not my parenting strategy.

Hence your aversion. Maybe he went too far with it?

Heh shit, I'm still a little afraid of my Dad.

I was afraid of my dad until the day he died, I didn't respect him, I didn't obey him, I was deathly afraid of the man.

Control by fear is not my parenting strategy.

Methods of discipline evolve as they get older, Smunk, as I'm sure you already know.

so you start out with violence and fear and move on to what?

Okay, tell me now, what Disney movie did you jump from? Because that's the only kind of movie I saw with characters advocating the "be a tyrant to your kid" line of psychology.

Really. I don't know of too many tyrants in Disney movies. All I know is this - kids have too much control these days. I intend to incorporate a lot of natural consequences, but simply put - a lot of fear has to be instilled in children of both me and the consequences. Basically, they will understand that the punishment for misbehaving is whatever would have happened anyway PLUS something else unpleasant, to the point where they wouldn't even dream of misbehaving. If the only punishment for breaking a window is that I make them do push-ups or go to their room, pretty soon they will figure out, "I'm 20 years old and just broke a window and Dad's not around to punish me. I got away with one." On the other hand, if all they have to do is apologize and have me shell out money to replace the window, how is it unpleasant?

And for the record, beating children is wholly unnecessary. There are other ways to make kids fear their parents besides violence. I believe it was Machiavelli who said that it was better to be feared than loved. And it also should eliminate the consistent "I want the new game system!" whines with a simple "You're not getting it, and if you complain about it one more time, you're grounded for a month." Plain and simple.

Really. I don't know of too many tyrants in Disney movies. All I know is this - kids have too much control these days. I intend to incorporate a lot of natural consequences, but simply put - a lot of fear has to be instilled in children of both me and the consequences. Basically, they will understand that the punishment for misbehaving is whatever would have happened anyway PLUS something else unpleasant, to the point where they wouldn't even dream of misbehaving. If the only punishment for breaking a window is that I make them do push-ups or go to their room, pretty soon they will figure out, "I'm 20 years old and just broke a window and Dad's not around to punish me. I got away with one." On the other hand, if all they have to do is apologize and have me shell out money to replace the window, how is it unpleasant?

And for the record, beating children is wholly unnecessary. There are other ways to make kids fear their parents besides violence. I believe it was Machiavelli who said that it was better to be feared than loved. And it also should eliminate the consistent "I want the new game system!" whines with a simple "You're not getting it, and if you complain about it one more time, you're grounded for a month." Plain and simple.

I said "Disney movie villain" to avoid saying "psychopath", really.

Let me put it this way. You respect the decisions of authorities in your country because you think that they know better or because you fear and loathe them? Assuming it's the second case (and you're living in North Korea), would you not rather respect because you think they know better?

A light swat on the arse is hardly violence. Yeesh... :rolleyes:

I have to say, though, that we've never had to resort to that, but then we've got a great kid. :D

if hitting isn't violence what is it?

Hence your aversion. Maybe he went too far with it?
way too far.

A light swat on the arse is hardly violence. Yeesh... :rolleyes:

I have to say, though, that we've never had to resort to that, but then we've got a great kid. :D

Isn't it conceivable that you have a great kid BECAUSE you never resorted to that?

I said "Disney movie villain" to avoid saying "psychopath", really.

Let me put it this way. You respect the decisions of authorities in your country because you think that they know better or because you fear and loathe them? Assuming it's the second case (and you're living in North Korea), would you not rather respect because you think they know better?

No one thinks that the law always knows better. I don't murder because I believe murder is wrong. However, I watch my speed on the highway despite having no moral qualms about going 90 in a 65 zone. Why? That cop might pull me over, write me a ticket, and my insurance would go up. People follow the law because of the consequences of it. That doesn't always make it right, but it's a world we live in, and it's a good lesson to pass on.

I don't expect my kids to loathe me. Fear, yes. Or rather, fear what I can do if they misbehave. However, I also want them to fear what happens on the outside for misbehaving. If they get to college and get busted for smoking weed, it won't be me who has the first word about it - it will be hte cops or the university. They should learn to fear that. They should also learn to fear the effects of smoking weed (well, not that it has too many unless you drive or overeat, but it's an example.) In the early stages of discipline, they will understand, "If I throw a fit in the restaurant, Mom and Dad take us home and make us eat food we hate instead." It evolves into, "If I throw a fit in the restaurant, Mom and Dad are asked to leave and other people get mad. Oh yeah, and Mom and Dad get mad, too." Soon enough, they should learn that, "If I throw a fit in the restaurant, I get asked to leave and maybe arrested for disturbing the peace." So yes, it does evolve. You just go with what works.

And don't use the word "psychopath." We prefer the term "jaded asshole."

In all fairness, there are times where speech alone isn't going to be enough, but especially with small children, you can physically constrain them without resorting to hitting them.

which makes understanding child development crucial.

too many parents think that they should be able to command little suzy to get out from under the airplane seat when she is in the middle of a tantrum. its not going to happen no matter how many times she has been spanked and no matter what you threaten her with now.

with small children, you pick them up and do with them what needs doing no matter if they agree with it or not. its part of your parental authority.

if you dont know what your child is developmentally capable of, you will end up punishing her for all sorts of normal child behavior. you will also think that its those punishments that make her behave in the future when the truth is that she outgrows the behavior in her own time.

its more effective and gives you a much happier home of you concentrate on rewarding the behavior you want your child to have and ignore as much of the bad behavior as is possible. kids want praise, they want to be big girls and boys. they want their parents to be nice to them. reinforcing good behavior is a simple and very effective way of parenting. add consistency in enforcing the rules and you will have a happy well adjusted child.

Simple. I would sedate the little brat if he/she/it couldn't behave. That said, if I had kids, they would be so afraid of me that they wouldn't dare misbehave in my presence or if they even thought I would find out.

On a plane, I would whip them right off the plane right away for misbehaving and tell them, "If you don't stop screaming, we're going to miss our flight, we'll be stuck here, and it will be all your fault. And if they didn't stop misbehaving, I wouldn't get on the plane, we would stay right there, and they would be in serious trouble. Needless to say, once we got somewhere where it was feasible, the words "drop and give me fifty" would be out of my mouth very quickly.

I am convinced my parents were crying sissies who just wanted friendship with their kids so we would learn to hate the other parent. I fully intend to be a tyrant and to put up a single front. I don't intend for my kids to be friends with me. If they cross me, if they misbehave, they learn that the family suffers the consequences, and they will take the fall for it. If we miss a flight because of their bad behavior, they will draw the resentment of everyone and will suffer for it. No spanking is necessary, just an iron-fisted grip on your children.


the image of the little 3 year old girl trying to do ONE pushup made me laugh out loud

Really. I don't know of too many tyrants in Disney movies. All I know is this - kids have too much control these days. I intend to incorporate a lot of natural consequences, but simply put - a lot of fear has to be instilled in children of both me and the consequences. Basically, they will understand that the punishment for misbehaving is whatever would have happened anyway PLUS something else unpleasant, to the point where they wouldn't even dream of misbehaving. If the only punishment for breaking a window is that I make them do push-ups or go to their room, pretty soon they will figure out, "I'm 20 years old and just broke a window and Dad's not around to punish me. I got away with one." On the other hand, if all they have to do is apologize and have me shell out money to replace the window, how is it unpleasant?

And for the record, beating children is wholly unnecessary. There are other ways to make kids fear their parents besides violence. I believe it was Machiavelli who said that it was better to be feared than loved. And it also should eliminate the consistent "I want the new game system!" whines with a simple "You're not getting it, and if you complain about it one more time, you're grounded for a month." Plain and simple.

you overstate the case greatly but are in essence right. your child needs to know that they are not allowed to break the rules. you dont whine at them, plead, beg, cajole, reason, you dont spend an hour yelling at them from a distance to cut it out. you go right to them and do whatever is required to get compliance. sometimes thats a punishment, sometimes its more like management. but you do not let your child continue the undesirable behavior.

one of my favored techniques for getting my son to pick up his toys was to start throwing them away if he didnt get right to it. this is the reason we ate all our restaurant meals at mcdonalds. i would start with the much beloved but worthless mddonalds toys. i never had to toss out more than a few. and they never came back out of the trash. another benefit of starting with the mcdonalds toys, no big loss to me.

which makes understanding child development crucial.

too many parents think that they should be able to command little suzy to get out from under the airplane seat when she is in the middle of a tantrum. its not going to happen no matter how many times she has been spanked and no matter what you threaten her with now.

with small children, you pick them up and do with them what needs doing no matter if they agree with it or not. its part of your parental authority.

if you dont know what your child is developmentally capable of, you will end up punishing her for all sorts of normal child behavior. you will also think that its those punishments that make her behave in the future when the truth is that she outgrows the behavior in her own time.

its more effective and gives you a much happier home of you concentrate on rewarding the behavior you want your child to have and ignore as much of the bad behavior as is possible. kids want praise, they want to be big girls and boys. they want their parents to be nice to them. reinforcing good behavior is a simple and very effective way of parenting. add consistency in enforcing the rules and you will have a happy well adjusted child.

darn skippy.

I should note that my kids are not perfect and they do go through those weird kid stages, like the one where my oldest didn't want to wear shoes.....I had to hold her down to put them on and only right before we left the house otherwise she would take them off, which wasn't fun, until she decided that she didn't like clothes either......then the shoe thing didn't seem so bad. haha.

Sometimes a parent has to be the enforcer, but I would rather enforce things like "we have to wear a coat outside" than arbitrary guidelines that my kids aren't developmentally able to meet anyway.

darn skippy.

I should note that my kids are not perfect and they do go through those weird kid stages, like the one where my oldest didn't want to wear shoes.....I had to hold her down to put them on and only right before we left the house otherwise she would take them off, which wasn't fun, until she decided that she didn't like clothes either......then the shoe thing didn't seem so bad. haha.

Sometimes a parent has to be the enforcer, but I would rather enforce things like "we have to wear a coat outside" than arbitrary guidelines that my kids aren't developmentally able to meet anyway.

when my neice's little girl was 5 or 6, it must have been when her younger sister was being potty trained, she decide that she would never shit again. ever. it was just too disgusting an act for her to do.

you cant beat a kid into shitting. not that they tried. but in the end they had to spend lots of time talking about their own bowel movements and emphasizing that its something that absolutely everyone does.

when my neice's little girl was 5 or 6, it must have been when her younger sister was being potty trained, she decide that she would never shit again. ever. it was just too disgusting an act for her to do.

you cant beat a kid into shitting. not that they tried. but in the end they had to spend lots of time talking about their own bowel movements and emphasizing that its something that absolutely everyone does.

when my youngest was potty training she would do everything right at home, but when she would spend the night at Grandma's she wouldn't use the potty, she kept having accidents, even after she had been sitting on the potty. I finally figured out that my mother-in-law had been standing in the bathroom with her :p so we all sat down and my kid told her "Gramma I need pee-pee privacy" so my mother in law would wait outside the door.......and everything was fine then.

one of my favored techniques for getting my son to pick up his toys was to start throwing them away if he didnt get right to it. this is the reason we ate all our restaurant meals at mcdonalds. i would start with the much beloved but worthless mddonalds toys. i never had to toss out more than a few. and they never came back out of the trash. another benefit of starting with the mcdonalds toys, no big loss to me.

I've heard of that...the example I can remember was in a classroom with a teacher who was trying to get kids to understand that, when someone gave them something good, they should thank the person. If the student did not respond with a thank you within three seconds of being handed, say, a cookie, the teacher would take the cookie back, and the student would have no opportunity to get the cookie again. It's far less brutal than anything I suggested, but everything I suggested was as an extreme measure. Ideally, nothing like that would have to come up, although the bit about taking a crying child out of a restaurant was something my wife's parents used to do.

I've heard of that...the example I can remember was in a classroom with a teacher who was trying to get kids to understand that, when someone gave them something good, they should thank the person. If the student did not respond with a thank you within three seconds of being handed, say, a cookie, the teacher would take the cookie back, and the student would have no opportunity to get the cookie again. It's far less brutal than anything I suggested, but everything I suggested was as an extreme measure. Ideally, nothing like that would have to come up, although the bit about taking a crying child out of a restaurant was something my wife's parents used to do.

I agree that a good parent will take the kid out of a situation they can't handle, I have left the grocery store before in the middle of shopping and took my kids home because one of them wasn't behaving.

I did pick up a method here (can't remember from who) called "Saturday Basket" where after dinner I pick up whatever toys are left in the floor and put them away in a closet, the kids can earn back their toys on Saturday. It only took once for them to leave all the Barbies out on Tuesday night for them to realize that it wasn't cool not to pick up after yourself.

I've heard of that...the example I can remember was in a classroom with a teacher who was trying to get kids to understand that, when someone gave them something good, they should thank the person. If the student did not respond with a thank you within three seconds of being handed, say, a cookie, the teacher would take the cookie back, and the student would have no opportunity to get the cookie again. It's far less brutal than anything I suggested, but everything I suggested was as an extreme measure. Ideally, nothing like that would have to come up, although the bit about taking a crying child out of a restaurant was something my wife's parents used to do.

oh sometimes you just have to.

today its not just that people put up with bad behavior at the table in the restaurant. they let their kids run around and bother other people! how unsafe is it to let small children wander around where big trays of hot food are being carried?

by the time my son was old enough to respond to discipline it was seldom that i had to do anything but look at him. actually thats true of most small children. they are acting out and i just look at them. some give me looks back; some burst into tears; but none keep doing whatever it is that we both know they arent supposed to be doing.

oh sometimes you just have to.

today its not just that people put up with bad behavior at the table in the restaurant. they let their kids run around and bother other people! how unsafe is it to let small children wander around where big trays of hot food are being carried?

by the time my son was old enough to respond to discipline it was seldom that i had to do anything but look at him. actually thats true of most small children. they are acting out and i just look at them. some give me looks back; some burst into tears; but none keep doing whatever it is that we both know they arent supposed to be doing.
You must be kin to my wife. She teaches 8th grade and has a look that will instantly petrify any unruly student. In fact my daughters all refer to it as 'the look'. I just call her Medusa -- just a joke, of course.

I agree that a good parent will take the kid out of a situation they can't handle, I have left the grocery store before in the middle of shopping and took my kids home because one of them wasn't behaving.

I did pick up a method here (can't remember from who) called "Saturday Basket" where after dinner I pick up whatever toys are left in the floor and put them away in a closet, the kids can earn back their toys on Saturday. It only took once for them to leave all the Barbies out on Tuesday night for them to realize that it wasn't cool not to pick up after yourself.

i never had to take my son out of the store. i dont remember him ever making a fuss but i suppose he must have once or twice.

what i would do when he was small was to pick out a treat right as we got into the store. something like a box of animal crackers. he couldnt open it of course--its not yours until you pay for it. we sometimes traded it out for something "better" along the way.

but

if he started whining or complaining, he could lose that treat. and once it went back, it was never being picked up again. it was a very powerful control. those stupid cookies were SO important to keep.

like i said, we never had trouble in the store...however my son is now 20 and he still wants me to buy him stuff when we go to the store...

What am I missing? :confused: Why all this hostility towards the parents? How come they deserve terms such as "shithead" and being called "asses"?

The airline has issued an apology, reimbursed their tickets, AND offered them three roundtrip tickets anywhere the airline flies, so it seems to me that the airline is trying to make up for a mistake - i.e. they don't feel that the parents are to blame.



The whole problem is the parents didn't civilize the child from the beginning. The airline gave the tickets for public relations.

You must be kin to my wife. She teaches 8th grade and has a look that will instantly petrify any unruly student. In fact my daughters all refer to it as 'the look'. I just call her Medusa -- just a joke, of course.

wow thats impressive. 12 and 13 year olds are tough cookies.

http://news.aol.com/topnews/articles/_a/toddlers-temper-ousts-family-from-plane/20070123133709990002?ncid=NWS00010000000001


A disruptive, spoiled brat and her parents are put off a plane and the parents have the gall to complain.

WTF?

i never had to take my son out of the store. i dont remember him ever making a fuss but i suppose he must have once or twice.

what i would do when he was small was to pick out a treat right as we got into the store. something like a box of animal crackers. he couldnt open it of course--its not yours until you pay for it. we sometimes traded it out for something "better" along the way.

but

if he started whining or complaining, he could lose that treat. and once it went back, it was never being picked up again. it was a very powerful control. those stupid cookies were SO important to keep.

like i said, we never had trouble in the store...however my son is now 20 and he still wants me to buy him stuff when we go to the store...

well, I found out later that my kid was screaming in pain, but either way she wasn't going to shut up LOL I took her to the doctor the next morning because she was insanely cranky, she had an ear infection.

What I don't understand is... there are both parents present, why couldn't they have picked up the child, with one of them holding the child down while the other does up the belt and then stop the tantrum from there?

Because, according to several on this thread, physically forcing your child to do anything is child abuse.

Giving alcohal to a minor is crime.

I grew up in a German community. I've seen babies suck beer out of a nipple. I don't recommend it but it did calm down fussy babies.

Because, according to several on this thread, physically forcing your child to do anything is child abuse.

I don't have a problem with them buckling the kid in, but hitting is not acceptable.

see? we all have a line.

Because, according to several on this thread, physically forcing your child to do anything is child abuse.

you are misreading the posts then.

or perhaps youll come back and quote one of the posts that suggests that physically forcing your child ot do anything is child abuse.

if my toddler is headed into the street, im picking her up. if she is hitting the cat with a shoe, she is getting the shoe taken away and she'll be put into the playpen (if i had ever used a playpen). if i say its time to go get into the car and she says NO, she'll be picked up and stuffed into her car seat.

those things are very different from hitting your child to get compliance.

Because, according to several on this thread, physically forcing your child to do anything is child abuse.

No.

We all proposed sitting the kid down and fastening the belt, only we proposed doing so WITHOUT beating the kid up.

Edit: Beaten to it. I think.

I don't think most Germans would approve of that. I'm Brazilian, we're supposed to be LESS cultured than Germans and I never EVER saw anyone giving "cachaça" (fermented sugar cane drink) to a baby.

my mum used to give me rum, i was a very placid baby, still am :)

I grew up in a German community. I've seen babies suck beer out of a nipple. I don't recommend it but it did calm down fussy babies.

I don't think most Germans would approve of that. I'm Brazilian, we're supposed to be LESS cultured than Germans and I never EVER saw anyone giving "cachaça" (fermented sugar cane drink) to a baby.

my mum used to give me rum, i was a very placid baby, still am :)

We got a small teaspoon of whisky. :D

If any of us acted out anywhere outside of home as kids, we immediately got put in the car to wait or just taken home. My mother definitely followed through on her threats.

Because, according to several on this thread, physically forcing your child to do anything is child abuse.

And according to more, forcing your child to do anything, whether physical or not, is child abuse. Not giving in to your child's demands is child abuse. Raising your voice to a child is child abuse. Taking away your child's iPod for a couple of hours is child abuse. Not letting your child play Nintendo Wii for hours on end is child abuse.

Now do you see why I'm jaded?

wow thats impressive. 12 and 13 year olds are tough cookies.
A lot of them think they are. I don't think my wife even hands out detention regularly. I've been 'looked' at. The proper answer is always "Yes, dear, right away."

And according to more, forcing your child to do anything, whether physical or not, is child abuse. Not giving in to your child's demands is child abuse. Raising your voice to a child is child abuse. Taking away your child's iPod for a couple of hours is child abuse. Not letting your child play Nintendo Wii for hours on end is child abuse.

Now do you see why I'm jaded?

...because setting up all those straw men gets you bored?

A lot of them think they are. I don't think my wife even hands out detention regularly. I've been 'looked' at. The proper answer is always "Yes, dear, right away."

Uhm... Riiiiiiiight...

*Decides not to touch Myrm's domestic life with a 10-ft. pole.*

Uhm... Riiiiiiiight...

*Decides not to touch Myrm's domestic life with a 10-ft. pole.*

Good choice.

Ack, I can't decide between a simple "no" and a simple "Bullshit", so I'll go with both:

No, that's bullshit.

Aaaaah... :)


So you think the parents were right to let their child cause a public disturbance for over 15 minutes, inconveniencing everyone else on the plane, and then whine about it when the airline decided that it had to get the flight going, with our without them? Especially considering that the airline actually gave them extra perks, something it didn't have to do, considering that the disturbance was entirely theirs....

This case is pretty clearly a case of the parents being spoiled brats. They think the world should revolve around them and their little one, no matter how much it inconveniences others. How well do you think people like that are going to raise a child?

The whole problem is the parents didn't civilize the child from the beginning. The airline gave the tickets for public relations.

Ack, I can't decide between a simple "no" and a simple "Bullshit", so I'll go with both:

No, that's bullshit.



Aaaaah... :)

You must be kin to my wife. She teaches 8th grade and has a look that will instantly petrify any unruly student. In fact my daughters all refer to it as 'the look'. I just call her Medusa -- just a joke, of course.

My mother has the same kind of look and when she gives that, most of the people in her sight run in the other direction. Its quite funny to watch unless I'm getting it then I go and hide. LOL

I don't have a problem with them buckling the kid in, but hitting is not acceptable.

see? we all have a line.

Yea we do have a line but there is a difference between beating your child and disciplining him/her.

So you think the parents were right to let their child cause a public disturbance for over 15 minutes, inconveniencing everyone else on the plane, and then whine about it when the airline decided that it had to get the flight going, with our without them? Especially considering that the airline actually gave them extra perks, something it didn't have to do, considering that the disturbance was entirely theirs....

This case is pretty clearly a case of the parents being spoiled brats. They think the world should revolve around them and their little one, no matter how much it inconveniences others. How well do you think people like that are going to raise a child?

Not reall well.

Yea we do have a line but there is a difference between beating your child and disciplining him/her.

Exactly. The latter you can do WITHOUT beating your child.

So you think the parents were right to let their child cause a public disturbance for over 15 minutes,
We're not sure about this. The articles don't state that they were trying to calm her down for 15 minutes. The plane might already have been delayed when the tantrum started.

inconveniencing everyone else on the plane,
Boo hoo. Children cry. It's annoying, yes - but?
and then whine about it when the airline decided that it had to get the flight going, with our without them?
Without previous warning, without time to calm the child, and without trying to assist in calming the child... According to the parents.

Especially considering that the airline actually gave them extra perks, something it didn't have to do, considering that the disturbance was entirely theirs....
Extra perks? You mean a round-trip compensation for the 24 hour flight ban, the 16 hour work shift lost, and the lack of customerservice both on the plane and afterwards? - according to the parents.

The airlinecompany apologized for a reason.

This case is pretty clearly a case of the parents being spoiled brats.
No it really isn't.

They think the world should revolve around them and their little one, no matter how much it inconveniences others.
Where did you get that from?

How well do you think people like that are going to raise a child?
I would imagine they could raise a child extremely well - to be honest, I'd imagine they would range between perfect and horrible. You see, this case in no way reflects poorly on the parents' skill as, well, parents.

It sure as hell isn't any indication that the parents didn't "civilize" the child before the flight.

...because setting up all those straw men gets you bored?

Straw men, no, Excessive sarcasm, sure. There's a bit of a difference between being sarcastic and setting up a straw man. Sadly, it doesn't always show through.

Straw men, no, Excessive sarcasm, sure. There's a bit of a difference between being sarcastic and setting up a straw man. Sadly, it doesn't always show through.

Piece of advice: Avoid things that look like strawmen. Internet doesn't have intonation...

Exactly. The latter you can do WITHOUT beating your child.

I was never bruised and I was diciplined in numerous ways from a swat on the butt to being grounded with my gaming priveleges revoked for awhile. Hell my mother put locks on where the controlers were at.

Yea we do have a line but there is a difference between beating your child and disciplining him/her.

you mean you draw a line between hitting a lot and hitting a little

I draw the line between hitting and not hitting.

you mean you draw a line between hitting a lot and hitting a little

I draw the line between hitting and not hitting.

And what if it is the only way? What if everything else failed and that was the last option? WOuld you use it?

I wouldn't have had to handle it.

Know why?

'cause I won't hesitate to spank my kids when necessary. My kids are perfectly well aware of this. As a direct result, they are very well behaved, and I can't remember the last time I had to spank any one of them.

I would imagine they could raise a child extremely well - to be honest, I'd imagine they would range between perfect and horrible. You see, this case in no way reflects poorly on the parents' skill as, well, parents.

It sure as hell isn't any indication that the parents didn't "civilize" the child before the flight.

I'm sorry I know this wasn't directed toward me but I feel I must respond to it.

It DOES reflect upon the parents' skill. It reflects badly indeed.

First, the child refused to get into her seat. That means a lack of discipline. Children shoudln't be able to REFUSE anything their parents tell them to do. That child shouls have been physically complelled into that seat and the belt buckled, and if she tried to get up, restrained. The parents' first mistake is allowing that child to feel as if she has a choice of whether or not to obey.

Second, she was crawling under the seat. This isn't that easy to do, even for a 3-year-old. This means the parents were either neglecting to pay attention for a few moments or were unwilling to kneel down on the floor and pull her out.

Both of the above could have been accomplished without doing anything to the child that could be considered abuse, even if you're against spanking. Physically restraining or pulling the kid out need not be done violently or aggressively. An adult is a lot stronger than a small child.

Finally, she was hitting her parents. This is the height of an unruly and disrespectful child. A child who hits their own parents is a child who is not receiveing NEARLY enough discipline, spanking or not. Kids who are properly discplined (through spanking or through some other means) do NOT physically act out against their parents. Period.

Yes, I know she was 3. So what?

I'm sorry I know this wasn't directed toward me but I feel I must respond to it.
And you're welcome to. It is an open forum after all, so don't feel hesitant in the future :)

It DOES reflect upon the parents' skill. It reflects badly indeed.

First, the child refused to get into her seat. That means a lack of discipline. Children shoudln't be able to REFUSE anything their parents tell them to do. That child shouls have been physically complelled into that seat and the belt buckled, and if she tried to get up, restrained. The parents' first mistake is allowing that child to feel as if she has a choice of whether or not to obey.

Second, she was crawling under the seat. This isn't that easy to do, even for a 3-year-old. This means the parents were either neglecting to pay attention for a few moments or were unwilling to kneel down on the floor and pull her out.

Both of the above could have been accomplished without doing anything to the child that could be considered abuse, even if you're against spanking. Physically restraining or pulling the kid out need not be done violently or aggressively. An adult is a lot stronger than a small child.

Finally, she was hitting her parents. This is the height of an unruly and disrespectful child. A child who hits their own parents is a child who is not receiveing NEARLY enough discipline, spanking or not. Kids who are properly discplined (through spanking or through some other means) do NOT physically act out against their parents. Period.

Yes, I know she was 3. So what?
I see your points, but I still disagree: Just because the child threw a tantrum, had a panic attack or whatever set this episode off, does not mean that the parents are bad parents or that they haven't civilized their child, or won't be able to raise her properly.
Shit happens, and this time it happened to them - and they still don't know why it happened. I can't say if they reacted adequately to the situation or not, but I see no reason to slam them based on the information at hand.

And what if it is the only way? What if everything else failed and that was the last option? WOuld you use it?

it is never the only way.

what situation could possibly develop that can only be solved by hitting your child? and what if the one swat doesnt do it? do i hit harder? and harder? do i get out the belt? what if the only way is to leave welts? what if the only way is to beat my child senseless?

spanking is not a magic bullet (as smunkee said). its a technique. just as time-outs are not the only way, spanking can never be the only way.

I'm sorry I know this wasn't directed toward me but I feel I must respond to it.

It DOES reflect upon the parents' skill. It reflects badly indeed.

First, the child refused to get into her seat. That means a lack of discipline. Children shoudln't be able to REFUSE anything their parents tell them to do. That child shouls have been physically complelled into that seat and the belt buckled, and if she tried to get up, restrained. The parents' first mistake is allowing that child to feel as if she has a choice of whether or not to obey.

Second, she was crawling under the seat. This isn't that easy to do, even for a 3-year-old. This means the parents were either neglecting to pay attention for a few moments or were unwilling to kneel down on the floor and pull her out.

Both of the above could have been accomplished without doing anything to the child that could be considered abuse, even if you're against spanking. Physically restraining or pulling the kid out need not be done violently or aggressively. An adult is a lot stronger than a small child.

Finally, she was hitting her parents. This is the height of an unruly and disrespectful child. A child who hits their own parents is a child who is not receiveing NEARLY enough discipline, spanking or not. Kids who are properly discplined (through spanking or through some other means) do NOT physically act out against their parents. Period.

Yes, I know she was 3. So what?

I would rather my children behave out of respect and self control rather than blinding fear.

Do you not see the danger in having a child who obeys without question?

We're not sure about this. The articles don't state that they were trying to calm her down for 15 minutes. The plane might already have been delayed when the tantrum started.

The article seemed pretty clear that the plane was being delayed because of this child.

Boo hoo. Children cry. It's annoying, yes - but?

The crying isn't the problem. We all hate to hear children screaming on a plane, but it's a risk of flying. The problem was that the plane could not take off until the child was in her seat and buckled in - and the parents weren't achieving that.

Without previous warning, without time to calm the child, and without trying to assist in calming the child... According to the parents.

15 minutes isn't long enough to get a child in her seat?

Extra perks? You mean a round-trip compensation for the 24 hour flight ban, the 16 hour work shift lost, and the lack of customerservice both on the plane and afterwards? - according to the parents.

All of those things were caused by the unruly child. The airline had no obligation to provide compensation for that, anymore than they would have had to compensate the parents if the child was sick at home and they missed work. The airline chose to do so, with no obligation, so yes, that's extra perks.

The airlinecompany apologized for a reason.

Yeah, bitchy people. They certainly had no obligation to do any of this. But AirTran, overall, is a really great carrier, so I'm not surprised that they did everything they could to help these people out.

The fact that the parents are essentially ignoring the fact that they have been treated well above and beyond anything they should have expected says a lot about them.

No it really isn't.

Yes, it really is.

Where did you get that from?

The fact that they think a plane full of people should have been further delayed simply because their child wanted to throw a tantrum. The fact that they think they are somehow entitled to inconveniencing all of those people instead of picking the girl up, sitting her in her seat, buckling her in, and holding her there if necessary.

I would imagine they could raise a child extremely well - to be honest, I'd imagine they would range between perfect and horrible. You see, this case in no way reflects poorly on the parents' skill as, well, parents.

It reflects poorly on their sense of responsibility. It demonstrates that they are spoiled brats themselves. I would expect then, that they wouldn't be very good at giving her a sense of responsibility (since they don't have one themselves) and that she'll probably be a spoiled brat, too.

So did mine so whats your point?



Wanna bet?



Some yes but if you spank them, that'll silence them and they'll realize that they are not supposed to do that.And that is after you tried everything else. Just like war, spanking is the last resort and parenting can be a war at times.

You know it doesn't likely help your credibility that you just suggested your children are the enemy. Parenting isn't a war. It's an education. You are teaching your children. Everything you do, everything you say teaches your children. And when you strike a child, you teach them that when you get frustrated with the actions of someone you can't control, strike them.

I've seen a lot of spankings in my life and never a one that resulted in silence.

Dem, honestly, I can't wait until you have kids yourself. All sorts of your assumptions here are going to be put to the test.

You know it doesn't likely help your credibility that you just suggested your children are the enemy. Parenting isn't a war.

Yeah, wow. That's a pretty low place to be at with your family, in my opinion. If I was ever at the point of viewing my family relations as a war then I would have us all in emergency therapy PRONTO.

I don't believe it is remotely possible for there to be healthy relationships if parents view their children as the enemy. I don't believe it is possible to parent effectively if you see yourself as trying to "win" against your own kids.

Now, sometimes a kid is going to see their parent as the enemy, even if that parent is doing everything right, but I think that parents are supposed to be a bit more advanced than their minor children. At least that's the hope.

The article seemed pretty clear that the plane was being delayed because of this child.
I disagree, but I don't know the facts.


The crying isn't the problem. We all hate to hear children screaming on a plane, but it's a risk of flying. The problem was that the plane could not take off until the child was in her seat and buckled in - and the parents weren't achieving that.
You brought up the crying.

15 minutes isn't long enough to get a child in her seat?
It should be, as I've said before. So given that they had 15 minutes to get her in the seat it should have been enough time. But it seems that the stewardess didn't warn them that if they didn't manage to get her under control they would be thrown off the plane. And they didn't help in any way, nor did they offer up any suggestions as how to do this. Strange that nobody would say "just pick her up and place her in the seat and calm her when you get airborn. If you don't you will have to disembark"?

That's where the airline failed.

All of those things were caused by the unruly child. The airline had no obligation to provide compensation for that, anymore than they would have had to compensate the parents if the child was sick at home and they missed work. The airline chose to do so, with no obligation, so yes, that's extra perks.
The airline compensated the poor customer service, the failure of their personel, and the delays the family suffered. Just because they weren't obligated to do so doesn't make it a perk; it was an apology.

Yeah, bitchy people. They certainly had no obligation to do any of this. But AirTran, overall, is a really great carrier, so I'm not surprised that they did everything they could to help these people out.
Like giving them a 24 hour flight ban? And offer "helpful" advise after the family had disembarked, just to raise tensions even further? And not doing anything about the luggage that was on the plane - including the car seat - and not offering any apology before the media contacted them... In adition to the (claimed) general lack of service. Yeah, sure sounds like they did everything they could to help them out. :rolleyes:

The fact that the parents are essentially ignoring the fact that they have been treated well above and beyond anything they should have expected says a lot about them.
Ah. You've never gotten mad, and you've never felt you were treated poorly. I see.

So because they thought the compensation they got offered was too little too late, they must believe that the world revolves around them. Yeah, pure brilliance.


Yes, it really is.
No it isn't. Shall we continue?

The fact that they think a plane full of people should have been further delayed simply because their child wanted to throw a tantrum.
Wanted? So it was a choice? Why did she throw the tantrum in the first place?

The fact that they think they are somehow entitled to inconveniencing all of those people instead of picking the girl up, sitting her in her seat, buckling her in, and holding her there if necessary.
So, as you have read their minds since you present this as a fact: Would it have been that easy? Why didn't they do just that? What were they doing instead? What was their motivation?

It reflects poorly on their sense of responsibility. It demonstrates that they are spoiled brats themselves. I would expect then, that they wouldn't be very good at giving her a sense of responsibility (since they don't have one themselves) and that she'll probably be a spoiled brat, too.
So you judge them completely based on one incident, in which we do not have all the information about what actually happened, in adition to quite a bit of speculation on your part.

I can only say that I disagree, and won't judge them on this basis alone.

I would rather my children behave out of respect and self control rather than blinding fear.

Do you not see the danger in having a child who obeys without question?

I simply wonder if the parents are giving any kind of discipline at all for something like this to occur. There are plenty of parents who manage not to have their kids make scenes in public but somehow this set failed in a big way. Then whining about being removed when the airline chose not to be held up by a screaming child? I don't know if a spanking would have worked on this child but I would suspect that these parents are the type who don't like to give any kind of discipline whatsoever.

I simply wonder if the parents are giving any kind of discipline at all for something like this to occur. There are plenty of parents who manage not to have their kids make scenes in public but somehow this set failed in a big way. Then whining about being removed when the airline chose not to be held up by a screaming child? I don't know if a spanking would have worked on this child but I would suspect that these parents are the type who don't like to give any kind of discipline whatsoever.

I can't defend these parents at all.

I would rather my children behave out of respect and self control rather than blinding fear.

Do you not see the danger in having a child who obeys without question?
You're making a false assumption.

My children don't fear me. How do I know this? Because they're always happy to see me. Because they understand the reason they were spanked when it wa snecessary. Because I explain to them why they were punished (whether it was a spanking or something else). Because they have no reason to question that I love them.

And most visibly to people who are first getting to know us, when I joke with my kids and say "don't make me smack you" they don't have a moment of fear, they don't clam up at terrible memories. When I say that, my daughter (who is 7) usually gets up in my face and dares me to do it.

Really, all three of them are too old now for spanking anyway. (13, 11 and 7) The fact is, my kids DO respect me. (Even the 13 year old. Can you believe it?) And our relationship is incredible.

My point? It's that I honestly believe that part of the reason my kids respect me is because they know two things: 1)When I do punish them it's for their own good... and never make an empty threat and 2)I listen to them, to their side, and make sure that they understand what they've been puished for. Sometimes I'm wrong, and by listening to them it becomes evident, and I will aplogize if I misunderstood something. Doing that makes them feel like their voice matters, and that they are free to express their feelings. Even so, they understand that mine is the final authority.

I generally enjoy debating you folks but please don't just reflexively try and find fault with every single post I make. I'd much prefer you ask me to elaborate before assuming the worst.

Yeah, wow. That's a pretty low place to be at with your family, in my opinion. If I was ever at the point of viewing my family relations as a war then I would have us all in emergency therapy PRONTO.

I don't believe it is remotely possible for there to be healthy relationships if parents view their children as the enemy. I don't believe it is possible to parent effectively if you see yourself as trying to "win" against your own kids.

Now, sometimes a kid is going to see their parent as the enemy, even if that parent is doing everything right, but I think that parents are supposed to be a bit more advanced than their minor children. At least that's the hope.

And therein lies the problem. One would hope that the parents would view their relationship with their child with a bit more maturity than the child does. Children are attempting to turn it into a war. It's the parents' duty to keep it under control, safe, healthy, etc. It's the parents' duty to act on behalf of the children, to protect them, not work against them.

Parents who do not teach their children to behave because they want to instead of out of fear are not acting in the interest of their children.

What I find worrisome is that parents view their children as such simple creatures that the only motivation they could understand is fear.

And you're welcome to. It is an open forum after all, so don't feel hesitant in the future :)

I see your points, but I still disagree: Just because the child threw a tantrum, had a panic attack or whatever set this episode off, does not mean that the parents are bad parents or that they haven't civilized their child, or won't be able to raise her properly.
Shit happens, and this time it happened to them - and they still don't know why it happened. I can't say if they reacted adequately to the situation or not, but I see no reason to slam them based on the information at hand.

Thanks :)

So I guess we agree to disagree. It's just hard for me to see this as being an isolated incident. Typically behavior like that is a pattern... But to paraphrase something you said, the available information isn't complete.

And therein lies the problem. One would hope that the parents would view their relationship with their child with a bit more maturity than the child does. Children are attempting to turn it into a war. It's the parents' duty to keep it under control, safe, healthy, etc. It's the parents' duty to act on behalf of the children, to protect them, not work against them.

Parents who do not teach their children to behave because they want to instead of out of fear are not acting in the interest of their children.

What I find worrisome is that parents view their children as such simple creatures that the only motivation they could understand is fear.

The thing is, 2 and 3 year old kids typically act out a LOT. Little girls especially. They do it to test their boundaries and it's at that age that parents have to be on top of their game the most. That's the age at which patterns are set. I've seen parents try and reason with their toddlers, to try to talk them into behaving well as they would a much older child. Kids at that age just don't get it.

It's not that they should be using fear, it's just that (and I know I'll probably g et a flame or two for this) training a child at that age is in some ways similar to training a dog. They can't be expected to understand the realities of why they must obey, so we teach them through positive and/or negative reinforcement. (I find a combination of the two to be most effective.) Later, as the child develops emotionally and intellectually, you can move to other tactics that involve empathy and reason. Like I said my daughter is only 7 and I already feel she's too old to be spanked.

anything I said, I took directly from your post.

I would rather my children behave out of respect and self control rather than blinding fear.

Do you not see the danger in having a child who obeys without question?

Where do you get the business of "blinding fear?" You did NOT take that directly from my post unless somehing was very seriously misunderstood.

You're making a false assumption.

My children don't fear me. How do I know this? Because they're always happy to see me. Because they understand the reason they were spanked when it wa snecessary. Because I explain to them why they were punished (whether it was a spanking or something else). Because they have no reason to question that I love them.

And most visibly to people who are first getting to know us, when I joke with my kids and say "don't make me smack you" they don't have a moment of fear, they don't clam up at terrible memories. When I say that, my daughter (who is 7) usually gets up in my face and dares me to do it.

Really, all three of them are too old now for spanking anyway. (13, 11 and 7) The fact is, my kids DO respect me. (Even the 13 year old. Can you believe it?) And our relationship is incredible.

My point? It's that I honestly believe that part of the reason my kids respect me is because they know two things: 1)When I do punish them it's for their own good... and never make an empty threat and 2)I listen to them, to their side, and make sure that they understand what they've been puished for. Sometimes I'm wrong, and by listening to them it becomes evident, and I will aplogize if I misunderstood something. Doing that makes them feel like their voice matters, and that they are free to express their feelings. Even so, they understand that mine is the final authority.

I generally enjoy debating you folks but please don't just reflexively try and find fault with every single post I make. I'd much prefer you ask me to elaborate before assuming the worst.
anything I said, I took directly from your post.




I'm sorry I know this wasn't directed toward me but I feel I must respond to it.

It DOES reflect upon the parents' skill. It reflects badly indeed.

First, the child refused to get into her seat. That means a lack of discipline. Children shoudln't be able to REFUSE anything their parents tell them to do. That child shouls have been physically complelled into that seat and the belt buckled, and if she tried to get up, restrained. The parents' first mistake is allowing that child to feel as if she has a choice of whether or not to obey.

Second, she was crawling under the seat. This isn't that easy to do, even for a 3-year-old. This means the parents were either neglecting to pay attention for a few moments or were unwilling to kneel down on the floor and pull her out.

Both of the above could have been accomplished without doing anything to the child that could be considered abuse, even if you're against spanking. Physically restraining or pulling the kid out need not be done violently or aggressively. An adult is a lot stronger than a small child.

Finally, she was hitting her parents. This is the height of an unruly and disrespectful child. A child who hits their own parents is a child who is not receiveing NEARLY enough discipline, spanking or not. Kids who are properly discplined (through spanking or through some other means) do NOT physically act out against their parents. Period.

Yes, I know she was 3. So what?

I would rather my children behave out of respect and self control rather than blinding fear.

Do you not see the danger in having a child who obeys without question?