This item is for a discussion about physical discipline (spanking), 
which discussion arose in item #110, Valerie's item about child rearing 
for her kids, Arlo and Kendra.

33 responses total.

The previous discussion from #110:

#296 of 299 by Happy as a little girl (beeswing) on Thu Dec 5 02:55:10 
2002: 
I'm a little aggravated concerning my nephew and his parents (my 
brother and his wife). And I am not sure if I'm justified. Will try to 
condense the scenario:

Earlier tonight, we were all having dinner at my parents' house. My 
parents had their christmas tree up, and they'd gotten an electric 
train to go around the bottom of the tree. My nephew (he's 2 1/2) loves 
trains, so he was fascinated by it, watching it go round and round. 
Then it was time to eat, so we told Ryan that he had to come to the 
kitchen. Of course, he didn't want to and after saying "No" a few 
times, my brother scooped him up and took him into the kitchen. By now, 
Ryan is crying. They strapped him in his high chair and despite 
everyone explaining to him that he could play with the train as soon as 
dinner was over, he cried harder and harder and screamed twice. My mom 
gave him some toys on his tray, but instead of playing with them, was 
banging them on the tray. My brother slapped his hand and told him to 
stop or he'd "take him in the other room". Ryan got a little quieter 
but was still very upset. Like he's going to eat at this point anyway?

My brother decides to take him out of the chair and into the bathroom 
to spank him. My parents and I are not comfortable with this, and my 
mom explains that Ryan is not going to understand why he is being 
spanked, so it's not going to do any good, and the kid is tired to 
begin with and therefore won't behave 100%. I agree with my mom. But my 
sister-in-law insists Ryan will know why he's being spanked and shrugs 
it off, saying that Ryan needs to fear his parents so he won't do wrong 
later on. We hear two popping sounds and Ryan is of course crying 
louder and harder than he ever was before. Then my brother has to strap 
him in the high chair again, which starts the tantrum all over. The 
poor guy just looked so frustrated and upset. It killed me.

Now, I think if they'd just left the kid in the high chair, he'd 
eventually calm down and know he'd have to be in the high chair for a 
little while. Spanking him didn't stop anything. And it's plain wrong 
to hit a kid for any reason, IMHO. I can't help but think Ryan felt so 
threatened, because here's a person 10 times his size whom he has no 
choice but to rely on... who is now hitting him. And he's powerless. I 
tried, as calmly as possible, to explain to my sister-in-law that 
spanking him would only make it worse. She just said it was necessary. 
Mom asked if they'd ever tried time outs. They both said no and kept 
eating their soup, saying he "needed discipline". 

I am not a parent. I'm not sure I have the patience it takes to be one. 
And I've seen how kids can push their parents to the limit. And I know 
how tempting it is to just spank the kid and get it over with. 

And at the same time, I'm so mad that parents think hitting a child 
(and the "I don't hit hard" argument means nothing to me) is perfectly 
fine. It just seems to be a tool to intimidate and frighten, or 
something done out of anger. I mean, just 150 years ago, society 
thought it was OK to have slaves. 100 years ago, society thought it was 
OK to not allow women to vote. Yet all this time, it's been OK to hit 
children who can't defend themselves.

(FWIW, Native Americans were horrified to witness Puritans spanking 
their kids.) 

 #297 of 299 by Mary Remmers (mary ) on Thu Dec 5 06:57:52 2002: 
I too am horrified and I end up with such sympathy for
the children coming out of those homes.  It's a control
and humiliation thing for parents lacking the skills to
peacefully teach by example.  

I've had this on my bulletin board for over 25 years because
I thought it wise:

    A child hits a child,
            and we call it agression.
    A child hits an adult,
            and we call it hostility.
    An adult hits an adult,
            and we call it assault/battery.
    An adult hits a child,
            and we call is discipline.
  
                  - Haim Ginott

299 of 299 by John Ellis Perry Jr. (jep) on Thu Dec 5 09:05:00 2002: 
I could probably say a lot about physical discipline, but don't wish to 
disrupt Valerie's item.  I'll create another item in the parenting 
conference for the topic.  I'm sure there are some items already, but 
it's a timeless discussion.

I'm consistently unimpressed when people cite Native American practices 
as examples of how to behave.  Many of them had practices which were 
gruesome, including rites of passage for their teenagers which commonly 
resulted in fatality.  I'd rather raise my kids according to modern 
standards, whether that includes spanking or whether it doesn't.

Before I was a parent myself, I was all for spanking.  When I got 
married, though, my stepson wasn't being raised that way, and when my 
son was born, it didn't make sense to raise him differently than his 
brother.  I have spanked John III a few times, but not for quite a 
while now, and it was never used very commonly.

John responds very well to timeouts (though he doesn't even get those 
very often, not from me), sharp words, or just plain explanations.  He 
really wants to please.  He hates to think he's done anything wrong.  
He's so well behaved, I've wondered if that itself is a problem.

He's not a risk taker, as his teacher says.  In his class, he's one of 
just a couple of kids who have never had to be disciplined.  
(They "pull cards" for discipline, and have the date and incident 
recorded on their cards.  Some of the kids have cards covered with 
incident reports, but John's card is clean.)

Anyway, I'm not horrified by the idea of spanking, but just don't need 
to use it.

I see spanking as a parenting tool. Not to be pulled out in lots of cases,
but it *is* appropriate with some kids and in some situations. And I'm not
talking about anything but a swift swat or two to the behind, either. (I grew
up as a kid hit with belts, yardsticks, and tree branches (switches), and I
*know* the difference between beating and spanking. There is one, in fact and
in practice. A spank is a swat, not too hard, on the butt, to reinforce a
command or a punishment, in my definition.) Now, the times when I'd say it's
okay would be (a) if the child had run out into the street and had ignored
your telling them not to -- that's a case where being swatted can make a
difference to the kid realizing that this is a SERIOUS bad thing, particularly
if they're on the cusp between understanding what you're saying and not. (b)
when a child is the kind who does not respond to the timeout, etc. There comes
a time when you say, okay, *this* is the punishment if you continue to break
the rules. You don't do it when you're angry, you don't do it when you're
frustrated, and you do it as a very clearly understood consequence of choosing
to violate the rules. It's something that some children react to as a
conssequence more effectively than another type of consequence. Ithink you
have to use it sparingly, but it can work in those types of situations.

But wouldn't that teach the kid that by hurting someone, you can get 
what you want?

Sigh. I feel like I almost don't have a right to comment since I'm not 
a parent. I can't say I know how a parent feels.

But I just can't help but think that it's stemmed in fear and 
humiliation. Most spankings are not necessarily painful, so it's the 
emotions associated with it that are meant as a deterrent. Fear, 
because here's someone bigger than you who has now shown you they have 
the will and capability to hurt you; humiliation because you can't 
defend yourself and you're the victim; confusion because you are 
dependent on someone who also hits you.

I didn't have to be spanked to know that I'd get in big trouble for 
doing wrong. My parents being upset with me was bad enough.

And in the case of my brother/sis in law, they hadn't even considered 
other alternatives. I think the church they go to tends to encourage 
hard discipline for kids.

I understand why you say it's stemmed in fear and humiliation.  And while I
to do not agree with how things were handled in with your nephew, I sometimes
fear isn't always a bad thing.  I used to fear Taylor would get hit by a car
when he was too close to the street.  It wasn't a humiliation thing - it was
the only thing that seemed to get his attention.  Some kids you can explain
things to until you are blue in the face - other kids get it.  Discipline is
(to me), or rather should be, as unique as the child, as what works for one,
won't work for another.

Exactly, Brooke. That's what I mean -- it's not to cause the child fear and
humiliation -- it's to "get the attention". Some children simply don't "get"
timeouts. Or having things taken away or parental upset as deterrents. For
you, beeswing, having your parents upset was "bad enough". For some kids, it's
not. And I really don't feel that a swat makes you feel helpless or humilated
or any of the things you say they do -- I know how I felt when I was punished,
and when my Dad had his rage attacks -- THAT's helpless! But when I got
swatted, no. I've asked my children how they felt when they were spanked (now
that they're older and we can discuss this) -- they don't recall any of the
bad feelings you mention. Maybe they've repressed it, and maybe I have too,
but I don't have the conviction that a spanking is always a bad thing and
always leads to kids thinking that hitting is okay. 

This doesn't mean that I think spanking is okay all the time with all kids.
There are some kids who are perfectly socialized to find timeouts and other
consequences exactly what they respond to. There are some kids who aren't.
That's all I'm saying. A two year old, or so (still in high chair), isn't
misbehaving because he wants to go against the rules. He's still finding out
what rules are, and testing. In that case, no. I wouldn't spank unless it was
a case of the whole running into the street -- because I'd WANT my kid to stay
safe, even if it was because they din't want to be whacked again. Time enough
to tell them why when they can understand why's. Right then, I want a safe
and alive kid, and if it takes a swat to get it into his head, then I'll do
that. 

I like to think that if I had kids, I would not spank them. I think 
that the message it sends is totally wrong and since I do not think 
hitting *anyone* is ok, I would want to model that "no hitting" 
behavior for my children. 

The real question here though isnt so much what each of us would do if 
we were parents, the question I see, is should we interfere and when. 
No one wants to see a child be abused, especially physically abused. 
While I think it is possible to spank a child and have it not be child 
abuse, I think that most spankings are getting pretty close to the line 
especially when the parent is angry. They might be hitting harder than 
they think they are hitting, for example. In general, I think that 
parents should be allowed to parent however they see fit. However, I 
also believe that it is appropriate to intervene when abuse is present. 
The question is, "how do you know?"

Each of us may become a parent.  If it happens, the most important 
thing in the world is to know how to raise your own kid.  So I disagree 
with #7 (reluctance to participate) and #11 (importance of the question 
for your own kids).

I think #11 raises an important question, though.  I wouldn't call the 
police if I saw someone giving a kid a swat as described by Twila.  I 
sure enough would if I thought the kid was being physically injured.  
Where's the line?  It's hard to know where to draw it.

For your own kids... I agree to some extent with the anti-spanker set.  
I don't want my kids to be afraid of me, or to do what I say because 
they're afraid of me.

However, there are situations where you have to be listened to.  I'd 
rather spank my kids than have them run over by cars.  If I had to, I 
could spank.

Also, I would find it upsetting to not be respected and listened to by 
my kids.  I know because I had that problem pretty frequently with my 
stepson.  I didn't use spanking, but I probably would have if his 
mother wouldn't have objected.  Overall, I think it's better she 
objected.

Hitting kids isn't likely to make them respect you, anyway.

I don't necessarily agree with that.  I sure respected my dad.

You know. I really respect my Dad and he never hit me. He is very 
consistant though. Did you respect your Dad *because* he hit you or for 
some other trait he possessed?

I think I started out respecting him from fear.  It's hard to be sure, 
I am a long way from my childhood.  That's how it seems to me now.  I 
am also a long way from fearing my dad.  He's a sweet old man now.

I don't raise kids the way my dad did.  My dad used to say, "I don't 
know if they'll love me, but they WILL respect me."  I sure don't agree 
with that.  I don't blame him for it, either.  My brother and I turned 
out all right.

I love my dad now, for what he is and was, and also for what he isn't 
and wasn't.  My brother is still resentful and avoids our parents.

I have to agree with Twila, it depends on the child.  I was firmly against
spanking when I became a parent.  My father went overboard and bordered on
abusive, and I was determined never to do that.

With my younger son, Corey, who has a temperament like mine, spanj=king was
never an issue.  He cared what I thought and wanted to do the right thing.
If he misbehaved, there was always a reason, and when we got to the bottom
of it, it was unlikely to recur.  Thn there was my elder child, TJ.  TJ was
a wild child.  I never did get the hang of teaching him discipline -- self
disipline or otherwise.  His father was also abusive,m so I almost never
resoirted to spanking...it wouldn't have served to get his attention anyway,
since it was onersued 9and nt even consistently) in his fathers' home.  But
in retrospect, I wonder if that particular child might have been one for whom
spanking, used sparingly, might have made a positive difference.

Thanksfully, both got to adulthood ... 

There is definitely a subset of our society that confuses "fear" with
"respect". This seems most common in authoritarian personalities. Perhaps
it has something to do with our nation's puritanical roots.

I don't know. I am probably all tainted by my puritanical roots or something,
but I think I can differentiate between "fear" and "respect". I can also
differentiate between the kind of instinctive, unreasoning fear I have when
large men get angry/annoyed in my presence (a programmed in fear from having
my father hit me, etc.) and a justified fear. I do know that physical
discipline of a child can go too far, very easily -- I've been on the
recieving end of that. But a little bit, in the form of a spanking (as I've
defined above), does not have to be evil, or soul-corroding, or anything but
a disciplinary tool. I don't advocate one in every instance of misdoing. I
don't even advocate one if it seems that your particular child can learn
without it. But for some children, in some circumstances, a spanking is a very
good thing and teaches the lesson that needs to be taught in a way that works.

View hidden response.

But there is a difference between the fear that a stranger inspires and
the fear a bullying parent can inspire. It goes right to the child's basic
needs. A child doesn't have to fear that the stranger will cut off love,
support, brood angrily for weeks, or lash out violently with total
impunity.

Complicated issue.
What is the relationship between your mom and your brother, Bees? Sounds like
he could use some advice and support, and to observe other parents.
I don't like taking the kid away to spank; like the punishment is worthy of
shame, or the child is. I thought, in your story, that swatting his hand for
banging toys was reasonable, although taking them away for a few moments 
would have been more direct.  You were right, thought, that taking a 2 year
old to the bathroom for a spanking was too late- and might make toilet
training harder... 
the child and situation which is in front of you, not your own baggage or
history or expectations. Twila, I'm impressed with your ability to see past
your father's mistakes and take a balanced approach to disciplining your
own kids.
You teach respect by demonstrating it. When a child is too out of control
to be respectful or reasonable, you discipline the little animal they are
being, as you would a puppy- with a quick swat and removal from the situation.
At all other times, deal with them as the person they are- rational or not,
patient or not, comprehending or not. Yes? Not as easy as it sounds, though.
And then there's that other issue- parenting teens. Oof! I know it's coming
soon for me, and as I watch some of my friends, I'm worried... Well, no- I
think I'm setting a reasonable foundation for dialog and compromise with my
young people.

This response has been erased.

/tod puts on "Cool Hand Luke" sunglasses and sends david
out to the pPlesco Workfarm

This response has been erased.

"git in there an start packin th' ferilizer into them
 fitty gallon drums, boy...and NO DESSERT if yew fuck
 up them fuses agin."

Sorry- don't get the references. About teens? Or discipline? I'm confused.

This response has been erased.

the grass is always greener outside of the isolation unit

This response has been erased.

if i have to push them down with this crusty
torlet plunger you will eat them fifty eggs.

This response has been erased.

ON WHAT SIR?

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss