Heywood Floyd says this:

quote:

---

A reasoned and judicious application of corporal punishment is a very effective tool for disciplining boys. Smacking them for every little infraction is not.

---

and

quote:

---

Striking another person is not wrong per se. Striking another person without reasonable cause and/or to excess is wrong.

---

To which I responded:

quote:

---

if you're using corporal punishment on your kids, even if you explain why you're hitting them, all you're teaching them is that it's okay to hurt people as long as you can come up with some excuse or pretense for the abuse--they're likely not thinking at all about whatever "crime" they committed to "justify" your "reasoned and judicious application of corporal punishment," but just only the fact that their own dad is hitting them.

I just don't understand why anyone would hit their own child. Your job as a parent is to keep them healthy and happy, not inflict pain and fear on them.

---

I think there may be some merit in small applications of corporal punishment in children who are too young to be easily reasoned with, but old enough to harm themselves, for example a 3 year old who insists on sprinting away from parents and into traffic.

quote:

---

I think there may be some merit in small applications of corporal punishment in children who are too young to be easily reasoned with, but old enough to harm themselves, for example a 3 year old who insists on sprinting away from parents and into traffic.

---

That's bullshit. You can reason with a two year old, you just have to have the flexibility and imagination to explain it in terms that they understand. People regularly underestimate the reasoning ability of small children.

Edited to add: Not that I'm disagreeing with you, just nitpicking the logic.

[ 28 August 2003: Message edited by: Mandos ]

From my own experience, I knew a fuckofalot more about how kids *should* be raised before I had one. The one thing I find is that every day, they prove me wrong. It's a big ol' learning curve, being a parent. There are some things you don't learn except by experience.

But corporal punishment as discipline, I don't know. I don't think it works well and I think it's wholly inappropriate for things like not doing the dishes, not getting straight A's on the report card, having sex with the boyfriend. It's the wrong tool for the job in cases like that. It won't change attitudes and will foster resentment.

They've left that perspective. That's like an upper-class Bay Street guy saying "I know what it's like to be poor -- I was once living in a basement apartment when I was a student". Sure, they may feel that they have some experience. But they're no longer poor. They don't have to deal with it on a daily basis. They don't know what it's like to be poor TODAY.

[ 28 August 2003: Message edited by: spatrioter ]

quote:

---

One thing I just want to touch on -- I am extremely offended when this topic comes up and people say things like "you wouldn't know -- you don't have kids".

---

People often throw that into an argument to discredit the non-parents. I tend to respond that while I don't have kids of my own, I have had plenty of experience working with kids, and taking care of them, and I know how to talk to them and a lot of the issues that come up with kids. This experience, while not as intensive as first-hand parenting, is still valuable and valid.

Equally valid, I think, are my still-relatively-fresh memories of being a kid who got smacked every now and then. From this perspective I can tell you without a smidge of trepidation or doubt that hitting kids is worse than useless, because all it really does, in the end, is make the child fear the parent.

And then who does the kid turn to when they're scared or lonely or sad?

[ 28 August 2003: Message edited by: Lima Bean ]

I agree with Mr Magoo in that a toddler engaging in dangerous behavior needs a sharp and immediate correction. A spanking would be best.

How do you deal with teens acting inappropiately? I haven't got a damn clue. I know what worked for me, though. My fear of getting the strap kept me out of four schoolyard fights that I can remember.

When I got caught having sex with my girlfriend, my parents never struck me. Her dad did, though and I deserved it. However, I re-earned his respect and trust afterwards by treating his daughter properly.

When I drove home drunk, my dad gave me a few good smacks. I was 17 and this was the first time he had to use his hands to discipline me in years. It worked. I didn't drive drunk again.

quote:

---

When I got caught having sex with my girlfriend, my parents never struck me.

---

quote:

---

And then who does the kid turn to when they're scared or lonely or sad?

---

I knew that my dad loved me even when he was punishing me. When I was scared, lonely, or sad, I knew I could turn to him for support.

quote:

---

But corporal punishment as discipline, I don't know. I don't think it works well and I think it's wholly inappropriate for things like not doing the dishes, not getting straight A's on the report card, having sex with the boyfriend. It's the wrong tool for the job in cases like that. It won't change attitudes and will foster resentment.

---

You can reason with a child and say, 'Don't hit your brother'. The child will say OK and SORRY and when you explain why it is wrong, the child will put on a pouty face and admit their mistake. The child will also wait until you are away to hit the brother even harder. Why? Because he/she is a CHILD, doing childish things, learning about the ways of the world.

I don't believe this kind of punishment sends any particular messages other than:

A) Respect authority (or if you prefer) Recognize danger. We live in a society, which is why we teach our children that there are rules and rules must be followed or there will be punishment. If they don't need to listen to their parents, why do they need to listen to laws. Because the government isn't afraid to punish and hurt feelings. Raising them to believe they can do whatever they want is almost cruel.

B) Cause and effect. My actions have outcomes beyond my immediate interests. If I eat the cookies I was told not to eat, the outcome will be worse than the enjoyment of the cookies. If I hit this person, I will be hit back.

When we talk about it bluntly, it all sounds so cold. But I was only spanked as a child when I did something really bad. I realize some people may have been abused in this way, but for the majority of people: Do you remember being spanked and now think that it was so terrible? Looking back, do you not see that it was necessary to stop you from doing something you most likely would have continued doing, just because you wanted to? Just questions.

quote:

---

a toddler engaging in dangerous behavior needs a sharp and immediate correction. A spanking would be best.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Piao:
Do you remember being spanked and now think that it was so terrible? Looking back, do you not see that it was necessary to stop you from doing something you most likely would have continued doing, just because you wanted to? Just questions.

---

I was spanked as a child and I grew to hate my father. Not dislike. Hate. Spanking turned into hitting, hitting turned into punching. I realize this is not what you may have in mind when you're talking about corporal punishment or discipline, but I would never, EVER hit my child because I wouldn't ever want my child to feel towards me what I still feel towards my father to this day.

quote:

---

One more observation: It seems that parents are becoming more and more gentle and compassionate, yet our children are becoming more violent and criminal, coincidence?

---

edited to add.

Spatrioter, what happened to you sucks and was probably criminal. I would never condone that kind of abuse. Ever.

[ 28 August 2003: Message edited by: HeywoodFloyd ]

quote:

---

One more observation: It seems that parents are becoming more and more gentle and compassionate, yet our children are becoming more violent and criminal, coincidence?

---

Hardly constructive.

Now, having said that, let me back up and point out my earlier statements on babble where I relate that in certain cases it is my considered opinion it is simply far more effective to smack their fingies, as it were.

The only time this should even be considered is when it is abundantly clear that there are no more options, and when the action to be corrected has been done, against parental instruction, repeatedly.

Now, having gotten that out of the way, corporal punishment is never the best response, or even a good one. It can affect behavior on a short term basis if very rarely used, but otherwise is a poor tool and counterproductive in the long run. There are always better ways.

Heywood, your Dad slapped you when you drove drunk, and you stopped. I can sympathise with his reaction without agreeing with it, but you didn't change that behavior because you were hit. You changed it because on some level you already knew you really shouldn't have been doing it. Other interventions by your dad would have worked, but he was upset and your actions scared him.

My creds are that I worked many years in children's mental health, (yeah, a so-called "professional") I'm a parent of a 16 and 12 year old, and I was a juvenile delinquent. I've got the bases covered.

Oddly, what changed me after becoming a parent is that I'm a lot less snooty and more forgiving about imperfections in the parenting styles of others, or when other parents just get frustrated and react in a less than great manner.

[ 28 August 2003: Message edited by: oldgoat ]

quote:

---

the main problem is that in many cases the parent does it in the heat of anger, and the concepts of "reasoned" and "judicious" go out the window completely.

---

quote:

---

it doesn't take a whole lot of qualifications to have a child...

---

quote:

---

Heywood, your Dad slapped you when you drove drunk, and you stopped. I can sympathise with his reaction without agreeing with it, but you didn't change that behavior because you were hit. You changed it because on some level you already knew you really shouldn't have been doing it. Other interventions by your dad would have worked, but he was upset and your actions scared him.

---

I am not so sure. My brother-in-law was convicted three times of drunk-driving. He crashed into parked cars on all three occasions. My mother-in-law used the speaking etc. method to discipline him and it didn't work.

I have lived through a short period (about a year now) of being struck regularly by an adult. He is not rational, so striking back was never an option. The obvious response -- and it did seem obvious to me, from the very beginning -- was to hug, and then hug harder, and harder ... It works, you know.

I have never been a parent either. I am a lot older than spatrioter, but I still sort of share his convictions. Nothing gets in the way of my memories of being a child, of being insulted by adults when I was a child -- and even adults who loved me, whom I knew to love me, insulted me.

quote:

---

The main effect of the discipline that adults levied on me when I was little was to make me pity them, more and more, as I grew up. And pity is the nicest thing I could feel for someone who hits someone else.

---

The memories I have of getting smacked still raise a fair bit of anger and resentment in me. All I can really think about it is that I was the kid, and he was the adult, and even I knew that you're not supposed to hit people, so why was it okay for him to do it? I still get angry thinking about all the other ways that the situations could have been handled that wouldn't have involved physical pain.

quote:

---

Actually, for a kid who is out of control, or who has "lost it" for any of a variety of reasons, (and it's not uncommon) spanking is about the worst possible reaction.

---

quote:

---

There are just always always always alternatives. I like your suggestion a lot skdadl. I think it would work really well in the situation posted above where the toddler runs into traffic. Grab the baby up in your arms and hold on tight and tell them how much you love them and how sad you'd be if they got hit by a car in the street.

---

Agreed! Actually, for something as important as a safety issue, you want the most effective in the long term intervention possible.

Just throwing it out because not only is the experience gained by being a parent important to this discussion, but also methods that work with one child do not work with others. A lot of people say that they have no problems raising their kids using reason alone, but it may be that their kids are predispositioned to this. This is a clear situation where anecdotal evidence can be almost pointless.

quote:

---

Originally posted by oldgoat:
Another problem with spanking is that it doesn't really engage a child.

---

What is interesting in this thread is the variety of things that cause resentment in children - generally the use of corporal punishment is the big 'un, but the use of confinement or withdrawal of social privileges seems to be secondary, as is verbal harassment by a parent.

What also seems to come up is that sometimes getting a child to learn that what he or she did was wrong involves counterintuitive activities such as using hugging and embracing to convey attention and affection in order to lay the foundation for being able to calmly explain to a child why their actions are inappropriate.

quote:

---

Has any parent here, facing a child who is losing control -- and in danger of losing control him/her self -- ever tried just wrapping the child in a great big bear hug and telling him/her how much he/she is loved?

---

Yes. We worked through a spate of serious tantrum behaviour with Ms B when she was younger, about 3 yrs old, by simply holding on until she could get a grip and we could then talk about the trouble. She'd get so worked up that she just couldn't stop, poor thing was scaring herself to death. The worst tantrum she ever had found us both on the floor, holding on for dear life and crying our heads off. It was tough, but she's past it. There's no way corporal punishment would have worked, she needed to know I would still be there and still love her, no matter how angry she got.

Ms T hasn't had many tantrums (more easy-going personality, not so high-strung), but the few she's had have been handled in the same way. I think it actually shortens the "terrible two" stage a bit.

quote:

---

You can reason with a child and say, 'Don't hit your brother'. The child will say OK and SORRY and when you explain why it is wrong, the child will put on a pouty face and admit their mistake. The child will also wait until you are away to hit the brother even harder. Why? Because he/she is a CHILD, doing childish things, learning about the ways of the world.
...
When we talk about it bluntly, it all sounds so cold. But I was only spanked as a child when I did something really bad. I realize some people may have been abused in this way, but for the majority of people: Do you remember being spanked and now think that it was so terrible? Looking back, do you not see that it was necessary to stop you from doing something you most likely would have continued doing, just because you wanted to? Just questions.

---

Depends on how you do it. You CAN reason with a child, even a very small child. You just have to understand that what they value is not the same as what you value, and that they won't necessarily get it the first time. Instead of "Don't hit your sister", we say "we don't hit each other at our house". If we have to make a point by removing the offender, we do. Time out makes a whole lot more sense than a slap. You can teach respect for authority without hitting.

Funny thing -- my mother says if she had it to do over again, she wouldn't spank. It was never very effective. I agree that consequences should be felt, but that they should also at least appear to flow from the action -- like, if you eat those cookies, you don't get one later. If you leave stuff lying around, you don't get to use it next time. Kids are brighter than we give them credit for -- they figure it out.

Also -- if you smack your kid for smacking her sibling, just what message are you sending?

I'd recommend the book "Talk So Your Kids Will Listen and Listen So Your Kids Will Talk". Many of their methods work really well, even on small children. (Mine are 6 and 2 1/2 yrs old)

quote:

---

IMO, the main problem is that in many cases the parent does it in the heat of anger, and the concepts of "reasoned" and "judicious" go out the window completely.

---

Yabbut, isn't it somehow worse to hit somebody when you're cool? I can at least understand and accept that somebody may be capable of such a thing in anger, but what kind of person is capable of hitting another when they're completely cool? Isn't that a scarier thing?

(Hint: I think it is.)

quote:

---

Sometimes our life cannot only be childrearing, sometimes it is just life. If the ride leaves in five minutes and Junior is running in the opposite direction, you can't always cancel the ride and talk/hug the problem away.

---

quote:

---

That's bullshit. You can reason with a two year old, . . . .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cougyr:

There is nothing more exasperating than someone trying to "reason" with a two year old. Adults should be smarter than that!

---

You can reason with anyone who is reached the stage when they're verbal. Obviously you have to change your idiom considerably, and reason on a very basic and concrete level, but there's no reason why not.

quote:

---

There is nothing more exasperating than someone trying to "reason" with a two year old. Adults should be smarter than that!

---

Did I say it was easy?

Oldgoat's already explained that, while different than reasoning with another adult or an older child, it's still possible.

quote:

---

You can reason with anyone who is reached the stage when they're verbal.

---

Nonsense! If you want to reason with a tot, please do it in the privacy of your own home. It certainly doesn't work when the child has an audience, like in a super market or movie theatre.

Tantrums are basic emotions. There's no reasoning with tantrums. As often as not, a tantrum comes from being over tired.

quote:

---

If you want to reason with a tot, please do it in the privacy of your own home. It certainly doesn't work when the child has an audience, like in a super market or movie theatre.

---

quote:

---

Nonsense! If you want to reason with a tot, please do it in the privacy of your own home. It certainly doesn't work when the child has an audience, like in a super market or movie theatre.

Tantrums are basic emotions. There's no reasoning with tantrums. As often as not, a tantrum comes from being over tired.

---

I don't think you can reason with anyone who is in the process of throwing a tantrum, regardless of the age.

However, the question was whether you can reason with a 2 yr old, not a tantrum. And, provided the child hasn't started in on a tantrum, it's possible to reason and potentially subvert the tantrum before it begins. Sometimes you can, sometimes you can't.

And sometimes you have to remove yourself and the child from a situation and let the tantrum subside before using reasoning and communication. That doesn't mean it's impossible or unworkable. Certainly not as easy as whacking them on the butt, but better in the long run.

And, as you comment, the exact same technique that will work on one kid won't work on another. You have to find the right leverage. I still maintain, though, that regardless the leverage (sending to room, suspension of priveleges, whatever), it is still possible and beneficial to reason with and explain to your child.

[ 29 August 2003: Message edited by: Zoot Capri ]

quote:

---

Well that wouldn't warrent a spanking. I just picked mine up and left the store doing the big hug thing to keep the flailing youngin' under control

---

quote:

---

Nonsense! If you want to reason with a tot, please do it in the privacy of your own home.

---

Cougyr, your statement makes me wonder if you and I mean the same thing by "reason with". I can tell you what I don't mean. I don't mean pathetic cajoling when a child is being horrid in public. I don't mean negotiating and bribing, or in any way compromising parental authority when a child is clearly in need of limit setting. Zoot described it pretty well above. As far as tantrums in stores goes, I've done exactly what you described, once for my son and a couple of times for my daughter, who was a bit more "asseritive" as a wee one. Still worked though.

quote:

---

Originally posted by DrConway:
An imperfectly analogous example is the way some people use the strategy of spraying a cat with water when they want the cat to not do something. It doesn't harm the cat, but since most cats dislike water, they associate the water with what is undesirable and avoid it in the future.

---

Yes, but with cats it is straight BF Skinner behaviourism, while negative reinforcement in kids is necessarily more complicated. Punishment fits the crime, ensuring that the message conveyed keys on the wrongness of the action, not just 'if I do it again, Dad will harm me (take away my allowance, ground me, spank me).

[ 31 August 2003: Message edited by: Pogo ]

quote:

---

I have indeed used the great big bear hug approach, with calm and soothing reassurances, to very good effect.

---

It definitely works. I worked in an alternative Drop-in centre. A lady lost complete control. I bear hugged her, in a manner of speaking as I was smaller than she was, from behind. It worked and calmed down practically immediately.

quote:

---

Originally posted by clersal:
It definitely works.

---

For me the bear hug works 9 out of 10 times. Sometimes it just carries the patronizing message that the child's very determined message is being put off indefinitely -- but hey remember we love you. I remember one time I had offered the kids chocolate bars in a certain range and my oldest insisted on one outside that range. I warned her that she would get nothing. The inevitable tantrum started I picked her up, gave her a hug and carried her towards the car. She said "I am going to count to 10 and then I am going to hit you", which I said some standared "you better not" as I figured that I would grab her arms or something at 8 or 9. Anyway a few seconds later BLAM right in the eye. I said "I thought you were going to count to ten" to which she replied that she had done that in her head. The situation was then diffused as I was beside myself that she was able to count in her head, and that it took a poke in the eye before I found out.

[ 31 August 2003: Message edited by: Pogo ]

But then, I knew I had graduated to the next step, which would have been punching or something.

Never came to that.

Not that my dad was an ogre or abusive. It was the times. He was very moderate compared to how he was raised.

I used to buy into the toddler running into traffic as reason for corporal punishment. In fact, back when I started here on 'babble' I remember saying as much.

But, thinking about it, if you have time to spank them, you have time to remove them.

If the child wants to be outside, but plays the game of scaring mom and dad by running towards the road, then taking them indoors will teach them not to do it faster than anything else.

Thing is, I used to get the belt for one specific thing. I used to take off into the woods for long walks without telling anyone, and be gone for hours. That would send my mom into a high state of anxiety. There was, at that time, a serial killer operating in the London area. Or maybe two. Some victims were young women, some were young kids of both genders.

Today, I can see why it was such a big deal.

But you know, even though I knew I was going to get the belt on these little excursions, it never stopped me.

If anything, it made me linger a bit longer, knowing what was in store on my return.

No, spankings and whippings never did correct behavior, even when it was used by the British military as an unofficial method of execution.

So, as a method of discipline, it's proven ineffective, and there are better, more effective methods.

Unfortunately, they involve some thought, sacrifice and discipline on the part of the parent.

When I broke the basement window, playing catch- or more properly, not catch, with a friend.

I offered to pay for it, of course. But my dad said that glass was cheap. He handed me a hammer and chisel and told me to clean out the old mastic from the metal window frame, instead.

I did it, and never broke a window again. It took me two or three hours. A long time for a kid. The mastic was rock hard.

With the corporal punishment it has always been an issue of trying everything else first. We have timeouts, we try to physically eliminate the opportunity of misbehaviour, we have one on one discussions, the issues are brought up in the weekly family meeting, sometimes promises are written down and signed. Yet sometimes one of them is doing something that is dangerous to themselves, harmful to others or similiarly intolerable. It has to stop, it cannot play out as a learning experience. What I found is that a pat on the bum (a cat jumping on your lap has more pressure) carries a message that this act makes Dad boil over. The behaviour stops. Of course this cannot be done frequently or this message is lost (Dad becomes a nutcase who boils over too much). The empirical evidence in our home says that rare usage of corporal punishment helps to make clear goalposts for those actions that are beyond discussion, they are just wrong.

quote:

---

Spanking kids is, at the very least, lazy parenting.

---

It's just that in the rare instances I did, it was because I found a more effective discipline too much trouble at the time.

Finally, having exhausted every non-violent method known to humanity, I said to her, "if you don't stop, I'll put you over my knee and spank your bottom until you do". And I did, every night for about two weeks. She stopped.

I never knew what to think about that. I mean, I know that he tried and failed to comfort her in the first place, but leaving her outside? That had me nervous all one summer.