“Go get me belt and bend over” or “Come here Joey, we need to talk”

[Sn-man]

“Go get me belt and bend over” or “Come here Joey, we need to talk”

My eyes are about to fall out of my head from reading about disciplining children. If you look at most of recorded history, discipline was swift, somewhat harsh, and in the extreme, lethal. You look at books written in the last 25-30 years and most profess talking, bargaining, setting up contracts. The good old “Spare the rod and spoil the child” is out of vogue. Which actually should be: “He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him.” It seems that as a firmer approach to disciple waned, children and society in general has degenerated into the mess you see today. Children killing children, a lack of respect for other people in general. I believe discipline to be one of the major reasons that as a race we have achieved so much

[David B]

Yeah, you're right. It was so much better when parents could whip their children. I mean, we didn't have any of the problems we have now. No crime, no war, no famine, no poverty, no violence. So what if a few of the kids were scarred, maimed, or killed. That'll learn 'em, right?

[Sn-man]

Originally posted by David B
Yeah, you're right. It was so much better when parents could whip their children. I mean, we didn't have any of the problems we have now. No crime, no war, no famine, no poverty, no violence. So what if a few of the kids were scarred, maimed, or killed. That'll learn 'em, right?

I am not advocating whips or maiming. I did not say that there were no problems, wars etc…The question really is one general discipline such as spanking, not whipping with an electrical cord. I am reading everything I can get my hands on as to try to do the best to raise my children. I have an 8 almost 9 year old daughter who is into lying, ignoring our house rules and being disrespectful of Mom & Dad. I see very little discipline like I remember growing up. I see more and more problems with children these days. My wife and I are trying to decide if stronger discipline would work. I am looking for information accusations.

[DoctorJ]

<Eastern KY accent> "My Daddy whooped me ever' day when I was a youngun, and it never did me no harm!" </Eastern KY accent>

Throughout my college years, I have tried to make a mental catalog of how the people I grew up with "turned out", compared with their upbringing. I'm hoping this will be useful info if and when I have kids.

I know a lot of people who were spanked and turned out to be hellions, and plenty who were not that turned out to be great people. I also know plenty who were spanked who turned out OK (myself included), and plenty who were not who became hellions. Can't say that it makes much difference, in my experience.

Discipline is important, but there are other ways of going about it. Actually, in my experience, it was the kids whose parents pushed the discipline too hard who had problems later on. I knew a lot of people who were never allowed to do anything unless their parents knew and approved every detail way in advance, and who were never allowed to make any decisions for themselves. When they got on their own, they went one of two ways--they either proceeded to make all the wrong decisions, or never made any at all. You have to find a way to balance discipline and trust.

Dr. J

[Sn-man]

The last line of my prior post should have read:
I am looking for information, NOT accusations.

[divemaster]

I would love to reply to this thread, but the OP is kindof jumbled. Is there a corporal punishment debate in there somewhere? It appears that's what Sn-man is aiming for, but then what's that talk about lethal punishment? In stating "I believe discipline to be one of the major reasons that as a race we have achieved so much," are you talking specifically about spanking, other types of "get tough" discipline, or just an overall attitude?

If this is a "spanking" debate, I'll throw this out: There is a difference between spanking, and a whipping or beating. If the call here is for more scarring, maiming, and killing (the approach David B has assumed); well, good luck trying to find any takers.

[Sn-man]

I am sorry if the OP is jumbled. I really am looking for peoples thoughts on the effectiveness of as DIVEMASTER put it: “Get Tough” Discipline. I remember spankings and they were effective. My wife and I do not agree on the use of spankings and so do not use them (twice in 8 years). I am interested in finding out what people think about the practice and it’s influence on society. Specifically, if the decline in the practice of spankings and firmer discipline relates to an increase in social and societal problems.

[divemaster]

Ok, other posters got in there ahead of me, so that clears up a little of my confusion.

Yes, it is a difficult balance. On one hand, you have the parents who rule with an iron fist; on the other hand, you have the parents who are so afraid to stand up to their kids that they basically forgo any effective discipline.

If the latter is the case, by the time a child is 9 or so, it will be extremely difficult to break the bad habits that were sown. Children know when a parent is afraid to come down hard. It will be difficult for this child to take a newfound approach to discipline seriously. Consistency is better than waiting 9 years to find a spine. (I'm not saying this is the case with the OP; just making a general point).

I know parents who wish to be "buddies" with their children rather than present a clear authority figure. These parents are well-meaning, but are doing their kids a great disservice. They feel that anything more than a weak or gentle attempt at correction will cause the child not to like them any more.

I'm sure you've seen kids like this. Restaurant behavior is a good clue. "Please sit down." "Please sit down." "Please sit down." "You make Mommy sad when you run around" (like the kid cares). "Let's discuss why sitting down would make Mommy happy." "Other diners don't like it when you lick their forks." "No TV tonight if you don't sit down." (kid knows Mommy never follows through). Mommy to friend: "I just don't know why I can't control my child."

Parent at next table with her own kid: "If you don't sit down, you will be punished when we get home." If the kid knows this is true, he is more likely (though by no means guaranteed!) to be a better-behaved child.

[divemaster]

Sn-man, I am a believer in spanking in theory. However, it is my opinion that 90% of parents don't use it effectively or in a manner of loving discipline. I also do not think starting corporal punishment on a child of 9 would be effective. She would likely be confused ("Why is Daddy hitting me?"). It's one thing to rear a child with spanking, rather another to spring it on her as some type of surprise new approach.

I would guess most posters on this board are probably against spanking in any and all cases. But since even I wouldn't recommend it in your case, I don't feel compelled to spell out or defend my position at the moment. (Must...resist...urge...) Maybe later if things head in that direction.

That's all well and good, I guess; but it doesn't help your situation at all. Generally, I suggest that you and your wife set down ground rules for what behavior is accepted and what is not. Let the little one know that certain actions will receive certain consequences. Then follow through. Inconsistency is many parents' biggest downfall.

[bunnymom]

::sticking neck out::

Part of the problem with the 'Bring back spanking' issue is a perception of 'good old days' that doesn't reflect the actual state of society at the time.Bad kids did bad things, you just didn't have Sally or Maury around to broadcast it nationwide.
I agree with the sentiment that many (not all) parents these days are taking the soft or easy road when it comes to discipline.I won't get into the specific argument of spanking, but I believe some sort of discipline is vital for a child to grow into a decent member of society. And many children are being deprived of this. This laziness or laxness on the part of some parents is what I feel to be the problem, not that they are specifically not spanking. Many methods to teach and enforce discipline exist, so spanking doesn't nessecarily have to be the method one chooses.If you don't agree with it, fine.Don't spank.But you must do something. And it is there that I think the problems come in.
It seems as if, when the old standard of spanking is no longer desirable or acceptable, some folks will just surrender entirely.Rather than put the effort in to find another viable form of discipline, some people throw their hands up in despair and cry, "But I can't spank him! There's nothing I can do about his behaviour." Which I personally think is a cop out.
I think its important to look at other standards for behaviour when trying to figure out the difference between kids then and now. I'm not exactly sure how to word this, but for instance:
Respect for others is an something you brought up in the OP.It seems to you (correct me if I'm wrong) that in days gone by, children had more respect for others.Alright, lets look at how they got to be that way.
What did those parents teach those children that is different from what children today are learning? What did those children see their parents doing? Did they learn early on to be respectful? In what ways is it different from what parents do now?
See, I think its not so much 'How did they punish them for not doing the right thing?", but more about 'How did they teach them to do right in the first place?" .

I am totally with divemaster on this.Kids will do just as much as you will let them.And they learn early what they can get away with, so suddenly deciding that an behaviour is unacceptable will really throw them.If you've spent a lot of time bargaining with your kids, they are sure to have decided who's in control by now and breaking them of that will be hard. You will have to be consistent, it will not be fun, but it can be done. But the hard work will fall to you and you've got to be willing to do it, else don't bother.It's definitely too late to bring spanking in to the equation.I imagine all it would do is make your daughter resent you and your authority, making the situation that much worse.Definitely lay down house rules and stick by them.By clearly stating what is and what is not acceptable (and the consequences) you will make things easier on yourself and your child.

I can relate to how I think you are feeling. My oldest had a rough patch and it worried me that he would turn out like one of the Maury Povich horror-children. Looking back, I think that it was just the age. But by seeing all the horrible things kids were up to on TV, etc. it seemed , at the time, like I had a future criminal on my hands.I know how it is to be desperate to help your kid. Something good to do for yourself would be to talk to others whose children are older than yours. Find out if their kids did similar things. You may just find that your daughter is going through a typical 9yr old girl, pre-puberty phase. You may find out that what she's doing is normal.Not acceptable, but not so unusual. Sometimes parents need a little reassurance, too.

[Satan]

My dad is a bleeding heart liberal.

That said, he believed in spanking. However, he did this only in the most dire circumstances. In fact, I can only recall one spanking and one other physical punishment when I was older.

Frankly, I deserved it a few more times as well, but the lessene3d frequency of this type of punishment made me realize exactly WHEN I had really gone over limits.

I think that never spanking your kids can lead to trouble, but so can spanking them too much.

But if you save it up for special cases, it can do wonders. It did for me and my family...
__________________
Yer pal,
Satan

TIME ELAPSED SINCE I QUIT SMOKING:
Three months, three weeks, two days, 2 hours, 53 minutes and 2 seconds.
4564 cigarettes not smoked, saving $570.60.
Life saved: 2 weeks, 1 day, 20 hours, 20 minutes.

Vist the The Fabulous Forums of Fathom (http://fff.fathom.org/cgi-bin/Ultimate.cgi?)

[pepperlandgirl]

We always had the threat of spanking, but the one time we were actually told to "bend down and touch your ankles", my dad chickened out. He just couldn't spank us. And we deserved it. If any child ever deserved a spanking, we did that day. But my parents didn't need to spank us, they just took things away. Not priviliages, we never heard "you're grounded!" But they took away our favorite toys, books, movies, whatever. I think they took the right approach. I mean, when you screw up at work big time, you lose your job, or at least get "Written up", and it's brought home that you MIGHT lose your job. Now, if it came down to it, would you rather your employer box your ears or take your job?
Personally, I would rather get smacked. If you cheat on your SO, do you get a spanking and then all is forgiven? No, chances are, you lose your significant other.
I think spankings work because they instill fear. So it's out of fear children behave, not respect. I would rather the child learn respect, not fear. But that's just my HO.

[even sven]

Okay, I guess I have to throw in my beliefs...
When I was growing up I did not get spanked. I didn't even get grounded. What I did get was hours upon hours of lectures...and if listening to your mom drone on and on hour after hour isn't enough to set you straight, nothing else will.
But I think what she did was right. First, she tried to avert disaster. She told me ahead of time what sort of things I shouldn't do (along the lines of "watch this paper burn..thats what can happen if you play with matches, now don't") When I was in trouble, she explained to me why it was wrong and what would happen if I continues to act that way. If I did not behave in a restaraunt, she explained that I was making it hard for other people and if I continued she would not be able to take me to restraunts any more.
Finally, and most importantly, she let me get in a little trouble. In situations where there was an obvious bad consequence, she would let me expeiriance it. In Ninth grade I went on a staying up until three every night phase, but soon I learned that if I stayed up all night I would not be able to function well at school or enjoy my life much. That phase was shortlived. It is better to learn that sort of thing where the consequences are still small.
Dearest mother always made rules that made sense. She would allow me to have a piece of candy if I asked, but was not afraid to say no if I had too much. My cousin's dad's rule was "No candy-ever, unless we give it to you which is a rare event". As a result, my cousin stole candy as often as she could and genrally snuck around her father's back. I, however, learned to eat candy in moderation and never needed to push that limit.
Likewise, I never had a curfew. When I wanted to go out, my mom wanted to know where I was going and what time whatever I was doing was over. Generally "hanging out" late at night with no plan was not generally acceptable. Going to a concert or a movie, however, was, and I was expected to come home after the event was over. This made a lot more sense than my friends that had to be home at 11:00 (Just before the end of the concert!) because of some arbitrary requirement their parents made to assert their authority. As such, I generally went out to my events and came home when they were done, while my friends were staying out to their cerfew every night, doing lord knows what, just to push the limits.
I guess I was allowed to make a lot of decisions. It was not a matter of "I have to do this because mom said so", but of "this is the right thing to do". I think this has better equipt me for life after parents. While my friends in college, new to real freedom, are fumbleing around, I have already learned real decision making. I have learned to live in moderation and how to set limits on myself (not just how to live up to and test limits imposed upon me)

[ticker]

My mother used spanking sparingly and I believe quite effectively. An important part of her strategy was to only use it as an immediate measure to stop us from continuing our bad behaviour; on those rare occasions it came as such a shock that we were stunned out of acting badly. We never had the prospect of a good ol' spanking hanging over us from some past misdemeanour. In retrospect I cannot even say it was a violent act, though perhaps just a bit humiliating. It did not really hurt. Had she used it less sparingly we would have soon realised and it would have lost its effectiveness. I am fairly confident that we were in no way damaged by her spanking and were on the whole well behaved children.

I am not claiming that it was the only way to use spanking effectively nor necessarily better than non-physical discipline - my nephews are very well behaved kids and have never received any physical punishment. I do feel however that spanking can be used as an effective and humane punishment.

That said, I am actually against giving parents carte blanche to exact physical punishment. Too many parents would, either through ignorance or malice, go too far to the detriment of the children. It would be difficult to create laws which uphold the right to 'reasonable' punishment yet still outlaw the excesses. It is not always the type of punishment which is damaging but when and how it is applied. I would rather see all spanking outlawed to save those for whom it is a form of abuse.

[divemaster]

Hey ticker, do you really want to create a criminal class out of a great number of parents? If your suggestion of outlawing spanking were to be implemented, how many of your friends and collegues would end up arrested? Do you think having their parents arrested is better for the kids than a spanking?

What penalty would you suggest? Prison? A fine? Being sent to re-education camps?

I frame my question in this way, because it seems like a response so typical of the times: ask the Federal government to step in and regulate, without really analyzing the consequences.

Of course, physical abuse is already against the law. And although spanking in itself does not constitute abuse, it can metastisize into abuse behavior. I agree with your concern over making sure this line is not crossed; I just think criminalizing action 'A' in order not to encourage action 'B' is a misguided approach.

[Sn-man]

Points well made. I will discuss this more with Mama.

[IzzyR]

Two advantages of spanking over other forms of discipline:

1. It is immediate. At younger ages particularly, this is important, as you are attempting to associate the crime with the punishment. Another form of discipline such as grounding or removal of this or that priviledge is problematic in that by the time the punishment is administered the situation which provoked it is often long gone.

2. It is also over immediately. This is also important. As soon as it is administered, a reconciliation can begin.

It goes without saying that a child raised with fear will not be effectively raised. A child must be raised with love. But a little bit of fear is a healthy compliment.

[ticker]

Divemaster you are probably correct, an over reaction on my part. I do see a problem still in that some parents seem unable, whether through ignorance or having themselves suffered as children, to distinguish between appropriate and abusive punishment. Laws which meerly state that excessive punishment constitutes abuse will offer no real guidence to those people to judge what society finds acceptable. As I see it laws which explicitly outlaw specific forms of punsihment will inevitably affect degrees of usage which most would find acceptable. You can either legislate too much or too little. Can you see a way out of this?

[Unauthorized Cinnamon]

First, let me point out the etymology of "discipline." Middle English, from Old French & Latin; Old French, from Latin "disciplina" teaching, learning, from "discipulus" pupil.

That said, I agree that parents need to discipline their children more - in the teaching sense.

IMHO, parents who spank their kids are equally ineffectual as the ones who try to be their friends. What are you teaching the kid when you spank him? That you have no control over the situation except by virtue of your greater size. That conflict and anger can be resolved by resort to physical abuse. That the biggest person wins - might makes right.

I completely agree with the poster who pointed out that consequences for adults are rarely corporal punishment. Even jail time is more like grounding than spanking. Why not teach your kids the skills they'll need to get by as adults - by showing them that freedom/fun/respect are curtailed by misbehavior, rather than teaching them to solve problems by brute force?

[Guinastasia]

I don't really like the idea of spanking, because of what Aeryn Sun said. It teaches that violence is the correct way to solve things.
I RARELY, if ever was spanked. I don't even remember being spanked. I remember being slapped across the face once at the dinner table for calling my dad a fucking asshole.

That said, my parents were pretty strict. Discipline was, "Please sit down..NOW." And it was said in a stern voice, leaving no room for argument. (I don't mean the Please honey, sit down, come on, type.) More like, "Now, we are at a restaurant. The proper thing to do is to sit. If you do not behave, we will leave." My parents said please, but it was still a command, not a request.
My parents grounded me. And when they said, "If you don't behave, no tv," and they MEANT it. I knew they meant it.

The best way of discipline is being consistent, and NOT giving into tantrems. I remember throwing a three hour screaming fit when I was 8 just for a doll. I didn't get it. My mom sat in the other room, ignoring me the entire time.
When I finally tired myself out...my dad sat me on his lap and calmly but FIRMLY explained that such a display was totally uncalled for (we at my gramma's, too!), and that I was not going to get the doll and I was ESPECIALLY not going to get what I wanted by screaming and throwing a fit about it. My dad really didn't HAVE to raise his voice. He would speak very slowly, and very calmly. But if you met my dad, you would know right away that he's one of those people who doesn't take shit from anyone, though he is very easygoing. It's strange. My mom yelled at me more, but I was more inclined to pay attention to my dad, cuz I knew he meant business.

Personally, I think you'll get a REAL hoot of out THIS website:
http://www.tcs.ac
I belong to the mailing list, and I read all the posts and think...what is WRONG with these people!

[rackensack]

While opinion is all over the map, the question to me is fairly simple: in the absence of any clear evidence that it is an effective disciplinary tactic, why would I want to hit my kids?

If it were obvious that spanking worked, I might feel differently. As several people have said, however, there seems to be little correlation between whether a child is spanked and their subsequent behavior. As DoctorJ put it:

I know a lot of people who were spanked and turned out to be hellions, and plenty who were not that turned out to be great people. I also know plenty who were spanked who turned out OK (myself included), and plenty who were not who became hellions. Can't say that it makes much difference, in my experience.

Since it doesn't seem to make a difference, I'd prefer to invest my energy in other strategies that might work better. Just as some parents think that if they can't spank their kids there's nothing else they can do but whine and plead with the kids to behave, there seem to be other parents who think that hitting their kids is all they can do (or who're unwilling to work any harder than that), who're content to spank and then shrug their shoulders when it doesn't have the desired result.

Coming up with appropriate consequences for a particular unacceptable action is tough to do -- I frequently find myself at a loss to know how to deal with something my son has done that doesn't admit of some obvious response. Remaining firm in the face of crying and protesting isn't easy either. But just as I refuse to give in to the desire to have my children "like" me when it means failing to follow through in disciplining them, I also refuse to give in to the easy answer of hitting them.

As hard as it is to remember at times, the right strategy is to discipline; to train and teach appropriate behavior. Punishment is something else, something that may be an appropriate tactic in the service of discipline, or that may be a counterproductive emotional reaction on the part of the parent that takes the place of real discipline. To me, punishment consists of a punitive act (or refusal to act) that is not a direct and logical consequence of the child's action. Refusing to take the child on a promised trip to the park is merely discipline if it results from the child's refusal to get dressed, punishment if it results from the child throwing food or hitting a sibling. These are nevertheless examples of punishment in the service of discipline, not in lieu of it. Hitting the child in reaction to any of these would be, in my opinion, punishment instead of discipline.

[Hamadryad]

Sorry, but when my five-year-old deliberately pulled down his pants and urinated in the corner of my bedroom, I spanked him. Far more sound than fury, as any parent who knows the difference between "spanking" and "beating" knows.

He didn't NOT know he wasn't supposed to. As a matter of fact, when I caught him his little sister was in the room. I heard this as I rounded the corner:
"Carl, why you peeing?"
"Shhhh, don't tell mommy."

He has not done it since. After I spanked him, I sat down with him and we discussed it. He doesn't pee anywhere but the toilet any more, either.

Obviously spaking is not always the solution. Sometimes I have to step back and cut through the red-grey fog of rage that surrounds me when I catch him doing something blatantly wrong...like pumping out the entire contents of a bottle of shampoo into the tub. That time, I didn't spank him; he didn't know WHY not to pump all of the shampoo down the drain. I explained about wasting, and that now when his brothers wanted to wash their hair they wouldn't be able to, because he had wasted it...and we talked about wasting things and why we don't do that. No sweat. Now he's got that concept too. It's all a matter of circumstance and degree.

I do think that people who punch, throw, whip, or otherwise actually *damage* their kids have a special circle of Hell waiting for them.

[Saint Zero]

I've learned that by starting early with my two, they do learn. Rick (2) knows some things are wrong and tries to tell Deirdre (1) not to do them.

So cute.

[Joe_Cool]

Pain is the most highly evolved teaching method in existence, and it exists for a reason: to negatively reinforce behavior that is undesirable/dangerous.

Spanking, when used properly (not excessively, not abusively) is simply taking advantage of this. Pain (example: a slap on the hand or a swat on the butt) when the child does something dangerous or against the rules is the most effective way to deliver a message across. After all, which method will best stay with the child: Hearing his mother tell him two dozen times not to touch the hot stove, or one time touching it?

It is not teaching a child that "might makes right" or that violence is a perfectly good response to a stimulus (although there are times when that's true. But that is for another day and another thread). What it is is establishing cause and effect.

Cause: I ignore my parents when they tell me (not) to do something.
Effect: I get put in timeout, told no TV, put to bed, sat in the corner, etc.
Cause II: I ignore timeout, watch TV anyway, get out of bed, leave the corner without permission, etc
Effect II: I feel nature's teacher (pain from a spanking).

Spanking gives weight to timeouts and removal of privileges. What is important and most people do not realize is that whether you're talking about spanking, taking away privileges, timeouts, etc...none of them is a disciplinary method all by itself. They have to be used in concert together and properly.

Another very important point: Spanking needs to be done calmly, NOT in anger. It needs to be given in a corrective manner, not as revenge for making the parent mad, and should be discussed with the child to make sure they know why they're being spanked.

And I personally favor flogging as a punishment for adults as well.

[Gaudere]

I've looked into the spanking issue for a few years now, and in the studies I've seen (as a general rule), children who are spanked (NOT abused, just spanked--I checked the methodology for the studies, and they clearly demarcated between a few smacks and a beating), often show higher levels of aggression and lower IQs and scholastic advancement. IIRC, It tends to correlate pretty well with degree of spanking; severely spanked children do worst, slightly spanked (once a month or so) do better, and children who aren't spanked at all do best. I dug up a ton of cites for the last thread on spanking, but it is unfortunately lost to the archives. There *are* some studies that support spanking, or at least say it does no harm--I recall one minor study that found if a male child had a close bond with his father, spanking (as long as it was not overly harsh) might be effective in controlling aggressive and antisocial behavior--but the weight of the evidence seems to be in favor of no spanking. It *is* possible that more aggressive children are spanked more often, rather than spanking makes children more aggressive, but I do not think it is a good idea to teach children that it is acceptable to hit people smaller and weaker than you if they don't do what you want them to. You can discipline children without spanking; and if you *must* spank, make sure you use it appropriately, and not just because you lost your temper.

Believe it or not, I had a terrible temper (still do, actually, just well-controlled) as a small child, and my brother was even worse. My mother never used violence to discipline us, though; she had three major rules: no hitting, no lying and no name-calling. How could she tell us not to hit and then hit us herself? She taught me how to control my temper, how to discipline myself instead of hurting me physically to get me to do what she wanted. And my brother and I never got in any serious trouble, we have good jobs, and we can be aware of our anger and still control it--I haven't hit anyone since my brother and I would have pillow fights, and I'm pretty sure my brother can say the same.

[Edited by Gaudere on 08-01-2000 at 10:47 AM]

[Stuffy]

Fo the most part I use time out (go stand in the corner and think about what you just did). However I also use spanking when the situation warrants. Thankfully it's very rare. (i have three boys bet ages 5-9 and there's only been one incident this year which warranted it). In both cases following the discipline we discuss the offending behavior and why it was wrong and what's expected of them.

In short I think both ways are effective with consistency and discussion. But effective communication seems to be the most effective form of contriolling behavior. My kids and I discuss behavior we observe(like a kid throwing a tantrum in the gorcery store), so my kids know how I feel about a given set of actions.

[IzzyR]

Gaudere:I've looked into the spanking issue for a few years now, and in the studies I've seen (as a general rule), children who are spanked (NOT abused, just spanked--I checked the methodology for the studies, and they clearly demarcated between a few smacks and a beating), often show higher levels of aggression and lower IQs and scholastic advancement. IIRC, It tends to correlate pretty well with degree of spanking; severely spanked children do worst, slightly spanked (once a month or so) do better, and children who aren't spanked at all do bestIt would seem to me that all these studies suffer from a cause and effect problem. Parents who are themselves more prone to violence are more likely to be hitting their children. If those children are themselves violent, it's hard to tell if this is the result of being hit by their parents, or that they have merely inherited their parent's tendency towards violence.

Also, it is quite likely that in lower socio-economic strata spanking is more common, as such people have been less influenced by "enlightened" psychological thought. (This is also widely thought to be true, anecdotally). Children of these classes are more likely to have the problems you describe, with the reasons not limited to the spankings that they have received.

[TwistofFate]

"I dont spank my children. I find that waving the gun around does the job just as well"
Denis Leary.

Discipline dosent have to involve spanking at all. If you can explain to your child that what they are doing is wrong, and thet you are upset by their actions, they should think twice about doing something like that again. It is a lot more favourable than a child who is too AFRAID to do something.

but then again, I dont have children....

[Gaudere]

Possible, Izzy. I did note that it is possible that more aggressive children are simply spanked more often, but from the studies I've seen, children's behavior tends to worsen over time when spanked, rather than improve.

The studies that I looked at did separate out socio-economic strata, and still spanking was correlated with aggressive and anti-social behavior even in better-off families.

[lee]

I don't like spanking for this reason:

My parents were reasonable spankers. The did spank me and my brother but used other methods as well and did not beat us. We were

However, when we went to my Aunt's she not only spanked, but beat us with a belt, sometimes using the buckle end as well. I was terrified of her as were her children. They would lie and hide things from her and blame things on others to avoid trouble. When i tried to complain to my mother about my aunt she did nothing, afterall my aunt was just spanking me for misbehaving. I was unable to get it through to her that what my Aunt did was so much worse that any spanking that i ever got at home. I even got in more trouble for trying to undermine adult authority and gave up.

Also:
My younger brother did abuse me and was allowed to get away with it because for some bizarre reason my mother felt that fighting between siblings wasn't all that bad and should be sorted out between them without interference. My brother seemed to think he could teach me to obey him if he hit me hard enough often enough.

I have not spoken to my brother since he broke my nose. I find my Aunt's oldest two children are too annoying to be around as adults. I avoid them. The youngest, who was coddled by her standards, seems ok.

[realidad]

"I RARELY, if ever was spanked. I don't even remember being spanked. I remember being slapped across the face once at the dinner table for calling my dad a fucking asshole."

Huh?

Granted I don't think that the first thing that you should turn to is spanking, but I am not going to say that it does not have its place along with some real systems of discipline. Some of the children I see around me, friends children, relations etc are so severely lacking in ANY kind of discipline that it makes me really question what society is going to end up like. These are the kids who would call their dad a "fucking asshole". I just think that people are so intent on not disciplining their children and occasionally spanking them that children have no idea what it is to have a boundaries. Discipline is NOT just about spanking, but it is sometimes a part of it. And there is a big BIG difference between spanking and abuse.

My mother spanked me (Dad never touched me, it was not about force) if I did something that was wrong or down right disrespectful. I can tell you that "I" learnt my lesson. Shit, I STILL couldn't and wouldn't say something like that to my parents.
Consequently I have nothing but respect for the way that they bought me up. I had boundaries, I knew when I crossed then. They did not abuse me, but when I needed it I was punished. And hey, I don't think I turned out so bad. I didn't throw tantrums and demand things in supermarkets because I KNEW it was not acceptable. I am not a violent person. Neither of my brothers is a violent person. In fact I think we are all pretty ok.

I realise that I am going a little off subject, but I really think that generally a lot of children now lack discipline and self control and just simple respect and if a spanking now and then is going to teach them a little bit about that, then I have absolutely no problems with it.

[Myron Van Horowitzski]

It isn't just about WHETHER to spank: it's about when and why.

For example, in my family, if you broke or spilled something while horsing around doing something that you knew better not to do, you might have got spanked.

If you broke or spilled something by accident, you were told to clean it up and be more careful next time. (I have a great-aunt, a neat freak, who I've seen crack her kids across the face if they accidently dropped a bit of food on the floor at dinner <shudder>)

In our house, if you DID do something to deserve a whack, it was always on the bottom, never in the face or anywhere else. And mom or dad might even get mad enough to yell at you, but NEVER called you names and always stuck specifically to what you did, never making generalizations: "I can't believe you did that, you know better!" not "You're stupid, you've never been able to do anything right!" When we were old enough to articulate properly, we were also allowed explanations (if they were legitimate), instead of my parents just going ballistic first and asking questions second.

As for misbehaving in public, I never remember doing that, because it must have been nipped in the bud REAL early. And whining not only DIDN'T get us what we wanted, it got something taken away.

Sorry this is getting long, but it's turning out to be a paeon to my parents, who are the coolest...They walked that fine line so well. They were in charge, yet so reasonable; if you acted like a child you got treated like a child. If you acted like an adult surprise! you got treated like an adult. They had good but not extreme expectations for us and we lived up to them. When we moved out one by one they considered it a job well done, and today treat us all as adults and as equals. Bless 'em!

[Myron Van Horowitzski]

*&%$#* smiley code! Snarl! Gnash! Can you fix that for me, mods? It's supposed to be a parenthesis, not a &*%$# smiley!

[John Corrado]

realidad said:

(Regarding someone calling their father a fucking asshole) Shit, I STILL couldn't and wouldn't say something like that to my parents.

Obviously, then, your father wasn't a fucking asshole.

I have a great deal of respect for my father and my elders (no matter how much they hate it, it's far too ingrained in me to refer to them by proper surnames, for example)- but that doesn't change the fact that my father could be a fucking asshole, and that once or twice in my life I was brave enough to call him on it (though usually weeks after the fact, after having built courage up).


As for the OP- I don't think spanking beyond a certain age is an effective tool. At a very young age children have a tough time associating cause and effect, and so a quick swat on the bottom (as mentioned before, a combination of 'Stop that *right* now!' and 'Don't *do* that!') can be an effective tool in disciplining. Once a child gets older, though, I don't think it's nearly as effective as other types of punishments.

That having been said, I think it's important to remember that spanking is a *tool* of discipline, and that overuse and exaggeration of any of the tools is abuse; spanking just grabs people's attention because it leaves obvious marks, whereas the other types of abuse- emotional and mental- can be just as damaging.

[Scylla]

I was never spanked but one time when I was twelve or so, I hit my mother. I didn't hurt her, was in fac throwing a tantrum, but my mother was very upset.

My father who was a marine came home that night to find me in my room awaiting doom. He said to me very calmly "I have never hit you, or threatened to hit you, but if you ever a raise a hand against your mother again, I am going to break it off. (he made a snapping motion over his knee) Now goodnight."

It made a lasting impression.

[rackensack]

Originally posted by realidad
. . . but I really think that generally a lot of children now lack discipline and self control and just simple respect and if a spanking now and then is going to teach them a little bit about that, then I have absolutely no problems with it.

I can't argue that many kids lack discipline and self-control. And if it were the case that spanking could ameliorate that, I'd support it too. The evidence, however, is that it does not teach children discipline and self-control. It teaches them nothing at best and to solve problems with violence at worst. Either they become indifferent to the pain (in which case it's pointless) or they become resentful and defiant (in which case it's worse than pointless, it's destructive of the ends you're trying to achieve).

Establish for me a coherent body of evidence based on solid experimental data that shows beneficial effects from spanking, and I'll stop opposing it. Mine is less a philosophical opposition than a practical one. I'd rather see parents look for and adopt disciplinary strategies that do in fact work than have them spanking their kids, believing that they've thereby done their job as parents, relying on the wisdom of the ages as their authority. Two hundred years ago, "everyone knew" that bleeding patients suffering from a "plethory" was sound medical practice, restoring the balance of the humours in the body. While many of our traditional beliefs and accepted practices are quite sound, many do not hold up to close inquiry. I maintain that spanking is one of these, and that it's injurious not only in the most obvious sense, but also in that is too often allowed to substitute for more effective measures.

[Grim_Beaker]

Just wanted to chime in and drop an interesting tidbit from my college Sociology book. According to some studies people discipline their children in different ways based upon their work experience not necessarily their socio-economic status. People with blue collar jobs are more apt to use strict rules and physical punishment then people with white collar jobs. Example:

Little Johnny is jumping on the bed which is against the rules...

Blue collar worker is more likely to punish based on rules and enforce conformity regardless of the circumstances.

White collar worker more likely to determine the cause ("Why are you jumping on the bed?") and determine whether or not this exception would be ok.

Generally speaking if, in the parents workplace, conformity is rewarded parents often punish in ways to promote conformity. Conversely if, in the parents workplace, independence and autonomy is rewarded the parents will be more likely to discipline their children differently. Essentially parents were found to discipline their children in ways which help their child succeed if they were in the parents position.

Grim Beaker

[Guinastasia]

My dad was neither a fucking asshole, nor was a little brat.
That was when I was 14 and going through my bitchy puberty phase.
My dad was tough but fair, trust me. I was scared of him, but NOT because I would get hit. My dad just LOOKS scary when he's pissed!
That was the one and ONLY time I ever did THAT....
Like all kids are perfect?
(Well, I do call my mom a bitch, but she calls me one too, it's an inside joke between the two of us now that I'm older...)

Trust me, my parents never NEEDED to spank me. When they told me something, I listened!

BTW, did anyone else's dad have the "Dad Look?" You know, the folded brow, the tight mouth, and the puckered forehead stern-you listen NOW!-look?
All my dad had to do was give me that look...and I obeyed!

But then, I was a quiet child. I was most contented to sit in my room and play with my dolls. My sister was the one who wrote on walls and poured flour on the cat!

(My sister DID get spanked a few times...my parents had to get one of those kid leeshes for her...because she always ran away in the stores!)

[Guinastasia]

Besides, realidad, are you saying you NEVER tried to purposely push boundaries, or piss off your parents on purpose?
That's what I was trying to do....trust me, my parents had boundaries...but I was 14 and a snotty punk kid. I wanted to antagonize them! I'm sure a lot of us here tried to push our parents to the limits at one point or another.
Yeah, I pulled some stunts, but my parents didn't let me get away with it. I was in with the wrong crowd. The one night I tried to call 911 just to scare my parents. A cop came to our house and yelled at me. THEN...my parents yelled at me and grounded me for three months.
My folks were and still are pretty strict. Hell, I'm 22 and my mother STILL gets pissed off at me for swearing.
So don't just assume that I'm a disrespectful, undisciplined hooligan. That is so far from the truth it's laughable.

[Guinastasia]

And one last thing-when I misbehaved in public, my folks didn't say a word-they just picked me up and carried me out to the car...then we went home and I was sent to my room to scream my lungs out....without an audience, I soon quit.

[Needs2know]

I am a single parent. I rarely spank my children. My daughter is now to old to spank anyway. I must admit that my son is much more likely to receive a spanking than my daughter did. Not because he is a boy specifically but because I almost NEVER spanked her at all. I am simply trying a new approach. Both of my children are/were very active, impulsive, and tempermental. They both have reading disabilities, otherwise their IQs are normal. I can't say a lot about them having a temper, I always did and had to learn to control it over the years. At 15 my daughter began to give me serious problems. It was tearing our little family apart. She also had grown to the point that she was a full 3 inches taller than me. She thought that I could not control her at all. She actually thought she could "whip my ass". One night she became so mad at me that she took a swing at me. So I did a little WWF on her in the middle of kitchen floor. She bumped her head on the oven door on the way down. I simply tackled her and laid on her until she calmed down. After that the stage was set for more challenges. Our problems went on for a year.

Anyway, this is what I began to think. What will I do when HE is 14? He won't just be 5'9" or 10" and another woman to deal with, he'll be the size of man. Perhaps he'll be even larger, what will I do then? I've known of single women raising boys who became scared of their sons. And I won't be as young and strong as I am now either. Not that I expect him to go through a terribly defiant stage, but you never know.

My way of thinking about spanking is this...sometimes there may come a day when it is not possible to control a child by respect alone. I realize that children should be taught to settle their differences in an intelligent non-violent way...But let's get off it here! The world is violent! Your home may be the most peaceful, loving spot in the universe but when you send your children out into the cold world, or the middle school bus, they may encounter violence. They don't need to learn violence or anything else for that matter at home, all they have to do is turn on the television or ride the school bus.

So as for my son...I suppose he has received a couple of more spankings that she did not. Usually for "showing his temper" or being disrespectful when I am trying to discipline him for something else, being defiant. Truth is it's been awhile since I did spank him. I just know that I can't allow him to see me as wishy-washy or easily pushed around. One day he and I will be alone in that house together and he will be a teenager, bigger than me. I really don't think I have anything to fear from my son, but I don't think it hurts my situation one bit for my kids to think that mama is just "too bad" to be messing with. You can dislike my position on this if you choose but I can't afford to let our situation ever get out of hand. I'm "the mama" and I have to stay boss, even if I have to use force to prove it.

Needs2know

[Guinastasia]

So, what if when he grows up and starts hitting his wife?
I'm not saying you're a bad mother...and yes, sometimes there ARE times for restraint...physical, I mean.
I still don't see how spanking is bad. My most hated punishment as a child were time outs and having some of my toys taken away.

Like I said, what you NEED to develope is a "Look", like the one my dad had...ooohh...I'd see that face when I was little and just start crying...it was enough.

[Gaudere]

I agree that if your child attempts to hurt you, you have every right to use force to prevent tham from harming you (although certainly you should not start whaling on them out of revenge; just restrain them enough to get them to stop). But if you're depending primarily on your superior physical strength to enforce rules and maintain authority, you won't have any means of doing this once you lose that advantage. They may respect or fear your ability to physically harm them if they misbehave when they're small, but what about when you can't do that anymore, since they're bigger and stronger than you?

In my circumstances, the thoughht of physically challenging either of my parents honestly never occured to me. I could probably beat up my mom (actually imagining doing so is highly disturbing, though; you just don't *do* that). However, my mom taught me that you never hit anyone except to protect yourself or another person, and she didn't teach this just with words; she practiced what she preached. Once (and *only* once) she *did* spank one of us kids, and afterwards she apologized profusely, told us that what she did was wrong and why it was wrong. The fact that she honestly evaulated her own actions and held them to the same moral code she demanded from us made a big impression on me.

[Needs2know]

I never meant to say that I advocate spanking. I'm not sure that I do. I was rarely spanked. Never by my mother that I can remember. Several times by my beloved grandmother, who I grew up to love and respect far more than my own mother, not because of the spankings but despite them I'd say. I think what I've been trying to do since I lost control so badly of our lives for awhile there is to establish a certain amount of power over my children. I know that might sound a little over the top but I can't think of a better way of putting it. Of course I do not advocate violence and my everyday actions bare this out. But as many have stated in this thread, many parents seem to not be able to exercise their parental authority. I suppose it would be nice to be able to say you are a "pal" to your kids but in the end I think they have the opportunity to make plenty of friends. Getting a decent set of parents is a lot harder. And perhaps that is my problem too, I'm single and their father is there but "not there". If you know what I mean. He sees them on the weekend but for the most part he is completely ineffectual as a parent. There are no life lessons to be learned by visiting dad every other weekend except maybe that he seems to value his relationship with his current wife more than he does he relationship with his children.

I think raising your kids single might just put a little different spin on things anyway. I'm just out here floundering around in the dark like the rest of you. I refuse to read too many books or drive myself crazy with theories. I don't have time for it anyway. The laundry needs doing, my son needs help with his reading, my daughter has a ball game at 6:00, and now we have a dog! I'm going by trial and error. I know that despite any mistakes I might make my children know who loves them and who takes care of them. They know who will stand by them and be there for them when they need guidance. That's the best I can do.

Needs2know

[Manda JO]

Couple points:

1) Age makes an enourmous difference. Swatting a 2 year old on the bottom is not degrading; makeing a 10 year old drop her pants is.

2) Toddlers are not logical, and the world is dangerous. Based on these two ideas I think there is a very short list of things where is is probably the best choice to use pain to condition your child at once not to do certain things. This list includes things like climbing out of the car seat when the car is in motion, running out into the street, sticking paper clips in electrical sockets,playing with matches, etc. There are things you can not afford to let a child try twice.

3)Kids vary alot. What is effective on one makes no difference to another. I am one of six children. Some of us responded to spanking, others responded to other forms of disiplene. Fear of spanking woked great for me; pain just made my little siter sullen and resentful. On the other hand, I didn't really socialize much, or watch television--bout the only privledge they could have taken away from me would have been to take my library card, something that I'm sure no parent would want to do. You have to know your kids and adjust your disipline plans accordingly.

4)Spanking, like all punishment, needs to be 100% consistiant and never linked to a parent's emotional state. Otherwise, kids don't learn "X is bad"; instead they learn "Don't let mama get irritated". I think this is where you get people that think there is no right or wrong, only caught and uncaught; growing up there actions had little to due with there life--whether or not mama was PMSing or Daddy was tired was a much bigger factor, and in self-defense they learned to pay more attention to these issues than to thier own, ineffective, actions. With the exceptioon of situations such as detailed in #2, my parents always made sure they calmed down before they administered any kind of punishment. It was always "Go to your room and think about what you've done". An hour or so later they would come in with the verdict. That hour was the real punishment--whatever came after was a relief!

Obviously, you dont HAVE to spank a child to disiplene one. But it is important that children have some sort of structure and disiplene. Not everyone realizes this: my mother-in-law seems to feel that any structure or restraint placed on children will permently cripple their spiritual and emotional growth. I thnk that such a philosophy is almost a form of abuse--sending children into the world with no ability to regulate thier own behavior is not doing them or the rest of us anyfavors.

[Guinastasia]

Originally posted by Manda JO

Obviously, you dont HAVE to spank a child to disiplene one. But it is important that children have some sort of structure and disiplene. Not everyone realizes this: my mother-in-law seems to feel that any structure or restraint placed on children will permently cripple their spiritual and emotional growth. I thnk that such a philosophy is almost a form of abuse--sending children into the world with no ability to regulate thier own behavior is not doing them or the rest of us anyfavors.


As I posted before: http://www.tcs.ac

They believe children should have the same rights as adults, and should never have a moment's discomfort, or be told what to do, school is a prison, and discipline is a dirty word with these people.

[Maeglin]

I don't remember ever being spanked as a child. My parents did everything in their power to prevent violence between my siblings and I, and held themselves up to the same standard. I have even talked to them relatively recently about raising children.

I believe that the purpose of spanking should not be to reinforce negative behavior with pain. I think the shame of being spanked is a more powerful motivator than the pain. The pain fades quickly, and is easier to endure the next time it happens. However, if parents somehow set up spanking to the most shameful, babyish, and humiliating form of punishment, then perhaps it would be more effective. Rather than threatening pain, threaten shame. This might not work for every child, but I am sure it will work for some.

MR

[rackensack]

Originally posted by Manda JO
Obviously, you dont HAVE to spank a child to disiplene one. But it is important that children have some sort of structure and disiplene. Not everyone realizes this: my mother-in-law seems to feel that any structure or restraint placed on children will permently cripple their spiritual and emotional growth. I thnk that such a philosophy is almost a form of abuse--sending children into the world with no ability to regulate thier own behavior is not doing them or the rest of us anyfavors. [/B]

I agree that failing to discipline children is a form of neglect as surely as failing to feed them or provide them with clothing or shelter. What I don't understand is why so many of us are unable to distinguish between discipline (look it up -- it really is spelled that way, and perhaps reading the definition will help you understand what I'm saying) and spanking. I'm a nut on the subject of discipline with my kids. I'm far stricter than many parents of my acquaintance. I consider it my responsibility to my children, myself, and the rest of the world to teach my children appropriate ways to behave and to respect others. The goal (no one's perfect, but this is what I strive for) is first of all to ensure that my kids understand what they should do, then to expect that they will do so, and to correct them in an effective manner when they fail to meet that expectation.

The reasons that I do not believe spanking to be an effective way of disciplining a child are manifold, but they include:


the utter lack of any solid evidence that it is so
the availability of any number of studies showing no correlation between behavior and use of spanking by parents
the very real possibility that the spanking, not the misbehavior, becomes the focus of both the child's and the parent's attention
the introduction of force and violence by the more powerful party into a relationship that has to be predicated on respect, trust, and love
the opportunity it affords for the parent to act out of anger or resentment, allowing the vengeful aspect of punishing the child to dominate
the strong likelihood that the spanking will take the place of other tactics that are more likely to be successful.


I'm not condemning parents who do occasionally spank their kids. I don't believe that an occasional spanking is likely to have significant adverse effects on either the children or their parents. I certainly believe that any attempt to criminalize such behavior is woefully misguided. But I have to return to the question I asked in the first few lines of my first post in this thread: why, if it isn't likely to result in a better-behaved child, would I want to hit one of my children? The only answers that suggest themselves are unfortunate ones: to coerce them into doing what I want them to do rather than teach them how to behave, or to vent my frustration by lashing out physically at someone who can't defend himself.

[Joe_Cool]

Originally posted by Guinastasia
As I posted before: http://www.tcs.ac

They believe children should have the same rights as adults, and should never have a moment's discomfort, or be told what to do, school is a prison, and discipline is a dirty word with these people.

I'm an adult and nobody ever told me I had those rights. Wow, my civil rights are being infringed: I have to adhere to discipline (laws), I'm told what to do constantly (laws and job), I go to a prison (school and job), and I have discomfort all the time!

Who can I sue?

Seriously, that crap makes me sick. If children know so much and deserve to have a say in everything, why not let them vote and send them out into the world to seek their fortunes as soon as they know how to talk? Hell, it's obvious after reading over that site that parents aren't even necessary at all, since children are so logical and rational as they claim.

In Praise of Ignorance, by David Deutsch “Innocence, properly conceived, is a positive attribute. It is the ignorance that comes from a voluntary decision not to engage (or not to engage yet) with a particular area of complex knowledge. Innocence in that sense is essential for all genuine learning. Compulsory teaching is the destruction of innocence, forcing the victims to waste the opportunity, which comes only once in each lifetime, to encounter that knowledge for the first time. It is no wonder, then, that pumping information prematurely into people's minds simply triggers emergency procedures that do everything in their power to shield the recipient from engaging with that information, and that the usual result is the permanent destruction of the recipient's ability to engage with information of that type. How many people have a feeling that there is something rich and wonderful in science, or in mathematics, or in Shakespeare, but that it is somehow inaccessible to them? Is that not a tragedy? If they could have acted on that same impulse innocently, at the moment when they were ready, what then could possibly have spoiled those rich and wonderful areas of knowledge for them?”

What a bunch of drivel. The reason adults raise and teach and guide children is that children do NOT know what is best for themselves, and in fact have no concept whatsoever of what they need, only what they want.

[lee]

Those ppl are the Peta of children's rights. Children's rights should be protected more than they are at times. Specifially, I do think they should video confessions of children to crimes and in other way protect children's rights when in the justice system. A case last year showed how vulnerable children are. Two preteens were suspects for a murder and had confessed. Only when semem of a known criminal was found on the body did the police admit they might have erred.

When I was a child and I complained about various abuse to my mother and father, I was not taken seriously. I told my mother that my aunt beat me, that certain babysitters hit me and that i was beaten up in school and on the bus nearly daily and I was ignored. My brother beat me with what ever was handy, including a metal ashtray stand. I had bruises to prove my statements many times and it was dismissed as not important. Any violence from fellow children, I was supposed to cope with and learn how to not get them to beat me up. Any violence from adults was viewed as disipline and my complaints viewed as exaggerations.

I think children have a right to live without being beaten and their caregivers have a responsibility to do something about their children being beaten up.

[thewiz]

The problem I have with all of the studies cited is the determination of cause and effect. For example, one study surveyed prison inmates who were in for violent crimes. The study showed a huge majority of those inmates were "abused" as kids (abuse was defined as anything from an occasional spanking to beatings). Therefore, the study concluded that abuse (including spankings) led to higher rates of incarceration.

I bet I could come up with a study that showed that bedtimes directly correlates to discipline problems (kids that stay up later tend to get in trouble more). Would this be a valid study or really prove anything? Not really.

How do you correlate discipline as a child to any behavior as an adult? As Mark Twain said, there's lies, damn lies, and statistics.

[Manda JO]

Rackensack, what do you think about the use of spanking to condition toddlers not to preform behavior that is dangerous? The most basic job of a parent is to keep a child alive until they reach 18; everything else is garnish. As I remember from Pych 101, the second quickest form of opererant conditioning is shock/pain (Nausea is first, but almost impossible to administer aws a parent). For certain specific activities it seems to me that the most important priority is making sure that the behavior is not repeated, not even once. In my own experence, techniques such as time out, taking away away privledges, etc. work, but with toddlers they take 4 or 5 or more iterations before the toddler gets the idea. Thsi is fine for dealing with misbehavior, but you cannot have a child try to stick paperclips in the wall socket 5 times. Now, you may think that in a well-regulatted house there are not oppurtunities for paperclips and wall sockets, and playing with matches and such things, but if you take a child out into the world (which I think is importatnt) you have to condition them not to do certain thinkgs the very first time they try it.

[h_thur]

Mandajo, regarding spanking toddlers - a friend of mine had a system that worked very well. When his son did something that warranted quick discipline, he scooped him up in his arms, with his face very close to his son's face, so that that his son couldn't look anywhere except into his father's face to see the expression on his face - which varied from shock to horror depending on what the son just did. He then said very sternly, "[Name], Daddy was really scared/hurt/etc. when you [action]. When you [action], you could [consequence]." Then he would talk about what the child could have done instead. Sure at 2, his son didn't know exactly what he was talking about, but he saw his error reflected in his father's face - and it got the point across in a non-violent manner. BTW, his son was the most well-behaved toddler (and child) I have ever known and was never spanked. Now I don't think this would work with an older child, but worked well for his toddler.

I was spanked as a child and it did me no good. I learned to be sneaky, to lie, and at first to fear my parents, later to defy them. Because of spanking there was no communication between child and parent other than the sound of the belt smacking the butt and Mom yelling, "You will never ever do this again" or something along those lines. They were also the type to answer an appeal with, "because I said so". They were the law and we were always guilty and never allowed to prove our innocence. Don't get me wrong, they didn't beat me senseless or anything. Sometimes it didn't even hurt, but we weren't really disciplined; we were punished, and sometimes didn't understand why we were being punished or even what the appropriate action should have been.

Being the oldest I was the guinea pig. They later learned with my younger sister that they couldn't spank her because she'd be black and blue and just as defiant - stubborn to the end. They ended up sending her to her room (still no explanation - just "think about what you did") because she hated to be banished. My brother got a combination of both - spankings and sent to his room.

Still, we didn't grow up to be evil people. I am honest in society, have a job, never robbed, cheated, or killed, but I still have a very hard time being open and honest with my mother, though I know she wouldn't dare spank me at my age.

How will I discipline my son? It will depend on what works best for him. I like the method that my friend used for the toddler years, but also realize that it may be ineffective for my son. I know that I must communicate with him, there must be clear consequences for his actions, and I have to be consistant and practice what I preach. I think there are a lot of alternatives to spanking, and I would only use it as a last resort. I never liked acting out of anger, either. When I'm angry with someone, I like to cool off and approach him/her calmly and rationally and discuss the problem rather than letting tempers flare and saying things I will later regret.

The fact is, discipline is hard work. Many parents don't want to follow through with it, are too tired, etc., etc. Another factor affecting the behavior of children is the family structure itself. 30-40 years ago the typical home had two parents, the father worked outside the home, and the mother worked inside the home taking care of the house and children. There were two parents to discipline a child and to support one another in their efforts. The mother was with the younger children all day, observed their behavior first hand, and was probably pretty adept at nipping inappropriate behavior in the bud. (She didn't have to wait for a call/note from daycare - she could take immediate action.) In these days, in many households, both parents (if there are indeed 2) work outside the home and therefore have less contact with their children. If their toddler is biting at daycare they then have to deal with that in their limited time in the evening and on weekends and hope that the daycare deals with it during the day. I don't want to start a stay at home parent vs. working parent debate; I just want to point out that the job of discipline is harder the less time you spend with your children. If you work outside of the home, are a single or divorced parent, are ill or facing a crisis of some sort, your job as disciplinarian is going to be harder. But the reward is worth all the work.

(FTR I am a single parent - and was very interested in Needs2know's posts. We all wear different shoes.)

[rackensack]

Originally posted by thewiz
The problem I have with all of the studies cited is the determination of cause and effect. For example, one study surveyed prison inmates who were in for violent crimes. The study showed a huge majority of those inmates were "abused" as kids (abuse was defined as anything from an occasional spanking to beatings). Therefore, the study concluded that abuse (including spankings) led to higher rates of incarceration.

A study exists whose methodology was flawed, or from which the authors drew conclusions not warranted by the data. Therefore, no study exists that can tell us anything useful. Is that really the argument you want to make?

Originally posted by thewiz
I bet I could come up with a study that showed that bedtimes directly correlates to discipline problems (kids that stay up later tend to get in trouble more). Would this be a valid study or really prove anything? Not really.

I bet you could. Would it be a valid study? Depends on how well it was constructed, whether it controlled for other factors, etc. Would finding a correlation between bedtimes and behavior indicate that one causes the other? Not necessarily. But finding no correlation between two factors suggests that either one has no effect on the other or that there are so many other factors involved that any dependence between them is masked by the other factors. My contention has been that the preponderance of the evidence accumulated to date argues against the proposition that spanking is effective in improving the behavior of children at any age. I've never said that spanking turns children into monsters, criminals, or game show hosts. I have said that there's no evidence that spanking them prevents them from doing so. I have taken it as a given that in any particular situation parents are more likely to either spank or use other tactics, but not do both. If there's no correlation between one approach and the desired result, and there is between the other approach and the desired result, and I'm going to choose between them, which should I choose?

Originally posted by thewiz
How do you correlate discipline as a child to any behavior as an adult? As Mark Twain said, there's lies, damn lies, and statistics.

Again, your argument seems to be that statistical correlations between factors are useless in determining causal relationships between them. You can of course construct infinite numbers of spurious correlations: death in a car wreck is highly correlated with proximity to vulcanized rubber (in car tires). This of course doesn't mean that proximity to vulcanized rubber causes traffic fatalities. Properly designed, however, and controlling for other factors, studies that use statistics to identify correlations between factors are essential to any kind of progress. Are you ready for drug companies to abandon clinical trials of new drugs on the basis that nothing useful can be learned from them, simply shoving new compounds out into the market and collecting no data on their effects (positive or negative)?

[rackensack]

Taking things slightly out of order . . . .

Originally posted by Manda JO
The most basic job of a parent is to keep a child alive until they reach 18; everything else is garnish.

I really hope that you'd reconsider that statement on further reflection. Certainly keeping the kid alive is a necessary precondition for anything else, but I can't regard it as sufficient.

Originally posted by Manda JO
Rackensack, what do you think about the use of spanking to condition toddlers not to preform behavior that is dangerous?
. . . .
As I remember from Pych 101, the second quickest form of opererant conditioning is shock/pain (Nausea is first, but almost impossible to administer aws a parent). For certain specific activities it seems to me that the most important priority is making sure that the behavior is not repeated, not even once. In my own experence, techniques such as time out, taking away away privledges, etc. work, but with toddlers they take 4 or 5 or more iterations before the toddler gets the idea. Thsi is fine for dealing with misbehavior, but you cannot have a child try to stick paperclips in the wall socket 5 times.

I really do understand the reasoning behind this argument. As you may have deduced by now, however, I'm not much of a Skinnerian. Neither, I think you'll find, are most of the psychologists, neurologists, and other scientists who've contributed most to recent gains in our understanding of how children learn and develop. I really have spent a lot of time reading not just the pet theories of the various child-rearing "experts", but whatever I've been able to find on the development of the brain and mind in infants and children, in an effort to base what I do as firmly as possible on what is likely to work. The most complete overview of the subject I know of is Lise Eliot's What's Going on in There? : How the Brain and Mind Develop in the First Five Years of Life (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0553102745/qid=965340978/sr=1-1/104-0575672-9316759).

I do think that the approach suggested by h_thur is the most appropriate -- it's worked well for me so far with my son (now 3) and daughter (14 months). First step: remove the child from the dangerous situation in whatever way is required. Next step: demonstrate by your demeanor, words, and actions how dangerous what he did was and how upset you are about it -- not by yelling at the child, but by tone of voice, facial expression, etc. The youngest toddlers won't understand many of the words, but they're remarkably adept at understanding emotion and reading expression. You're expressing your concern for their welfare and your fear that their actions might have endangered them. You're not introducing an unfamiliar element of pain and what must be perceived by the child as anger into a situation that requires that the child be as receptive as possible to what you're saying.

I realize that sounds hopelessly namby-pamby to many, but I have rarely, if ever, had to use this approach more than once for any specific action. Perhaps the greatest benefit is that it isn't limited to ex post facto use the way swatting bottoms or hands is. If we're in a situation that I perceive to be potentially dangerous, I can adopt the same tone of voice and demeanor and explain in advance what they shouldn't do, and it has the same effect as when I do it in reaction to something they've done. I can't very well spank them ahead of time and say "That's to remind you not to climb over that railing," now can I?

Kids under 7 are decidedly bad at generalizing from one situation to others, however, so a ton of vigilance is still worth more than an ounce of whuppin' or warning.

Originally posted by Manda JO
Now, you may think that in a well-regulatted house there are not oppurtunities for paperclips and wall sockets, and playing with matches and such things, but if you take a child out into the world (which I think is importatnt) you have to condition them not to do certain thinkgs the very first time they try it.

Actually, I think nothing of the sort. We've done our best to minimize opportunities for our kids to get hurt in and around our home, but they still find ways that amaze us. As I said above, the approach I use allows me to deal with potentially dangerous situations, at home or abroad, before the first instance of trouble, not in reaction to it.

[Green Bean]

I find it interesting that so many posters assume that there is a clear line between "appropriate spanking" and abuse.

Some parents are able to consistently spank in a restrained way, but many others edge onto the slippery slope between "spanking" and "beating." My father was one whose spankings turned into blows and kicks.

I'm not going to get near that slippery slope. I have to wonder whether my upbringing has given me potential to turn into an abuser. I have seen no evidence of violent tendencies in myself, but I'm not going to take that chance. I will not spank my kids.

[Rysdad]

Originally posted by Green Bean
I find it interesting that so many posters assume that there is a clear line between "appropriate spanking" and abuse.

Some parents are able to consistently spank in a restrained way, but many others edge onto the slippery slope between "spanking" and "beating." My father was one whose spankings turned into blows and kicks.

I'm not going to get near that slippery slope. I have to wonder whether my upbringing has given me potential to turn into an abuser. I have seen no evidence of violent tendencies in myself, but I'm not going to take that chance. I will not spank my kids.

I could've written that. I was spanked, slapped, and punched. I had nose bleeds as well as welts from "switches."

You know how it affected me? First, I was made to be afraid of my parents--not a good thing. Secondly, when I grew enough, and they once again ganged up on me (for not cleaning my room), we finally had ourselves a free-for-all...wherein I kicked some ass and advised them to never, ever lay a hand on me again. They never did.

Lastly, long before my son was born, I made a decision -a vow- that the abuse would stop with me. I have never spanked, hit, or otherwise struck my son. Luckily, he's the kind of kid that responds well to verbal discipline.

Spanking may work for others; that's all well and good. I, on the other hand, could not raise my hand against my son.

One more note: If some kind of force/pain multiplier (switch, belt, hair brush, etc.) is used, that's abuse in my eyes. Isn't an open hand enough?

[Guinastasia]

I think that too many parents are so quick to spank when it comes to tantrums and fits and the like. Also, I've noticed that people who spank (especially out in public) tend to go for extremes...(like if the kid turns his head to look at something)
Last week, I saw a guy in KrapMart take his screaming child calmly out of the store, carrying the child and just smiling at everyone. THAT was the best approach, in my opinion. When I threw a tantrum, my parents left the room...depriving me of the audience I craved.