Greenring7, I think you're missing the point of this topic. It is about spanking, simple swats on the bottom or the hand for a misdeed. No one here is advocating anyone beat a child. There is a world of difference between the two. Beating is a criminal activity. Spanking is not.

Do you have an opinion on spanking as separate from beating?

Is spanking, when used in moderation and with good judgment, an effective and acceptable method of disciplining your kids?

No, I feel that resorting to physical violence to your children is a sign of failure.

The reason for this feeling is that we do not do these things to serial rapists, and looneys.

As I believe that resorting to physical violence against your children is a sign of inadequate skills, I believe that one who resorts to physical violence towards their children should seek training on alternatives.

Or am I wrong to believe that children should be treated better than serial rapists?
---
Do you have an opinion on spanking as separate from beating?

Yes. Beating is exponentially worse than spanking. Spanking may be a lesser evil than beating, but it is still an evil, that in my opinion, is a sign of inadequacy.
---

In reference to my first row up there and my previous post, I said basically the exact same thing. There is no name calling. It is constructive, as I answered the question for debate posed to me. In addition, "spanking" is "n. To slap on the buttocks with a flat object or with the open hand, as for punishment. Beat is "To punish by hitting or whipping; flog." So my point that both are forms of physical violence is correct. No matter how well cloaked in innocent sounding "children" words, it is still physical violence.

I indeed show respect for parents, my own and others included. However that does not mean I am not allowed an opinion on the methods they use. I know several people who do not resort to physical violence on their children, and they act in a perfectly normal and acceptable manner. This is not just one child. Several families and 14 children (that I specifically know of in this manner) were never punished by physical violence.

From now on Platypus, if you believe that I am not constructive, or want to give advice on "respect", please save it for a PM. Unlike part of this post (a clarification of my previous post, both of which answer the question posed), yours is just blatent digression meant to "scold" me.

-Robert

Sorry, I don't feel like a failure. Both our kids say they don't even remember being spanked, both are college graduates, got married, THEN had babies (in that order). They have 5 children between them, and they are all happy, well adjusted people.
My wife came from the same kind of people, the only spanking she ever got was when she and her brother started a bonfire under an above ground gas tank on the farm. They came close to killing themselves, and serious punishment was called for. She was so damaged by the event that she how has multiple master's degrees and teaches school. She still loves her parents, though. Go figure.
I am the only one close to mentally defective (3 occasions of depression over the last 30 years) , and it wasn't so much the abuse as the lack of parental love. But even so, I have never been a violent person. In fact, I can't even stand to watch horror or violence in the movies.
There are probably more parents out there
who failed their children by lack of discipline than by insisting that they behave themselves.
My wife teaches 8th graders, she sees that type frequently.

The fact that your children turned out normal despite resorting to physical violence to discipline them does not mean that physical violence is an acceptable solution.

And a lack of beating (or spanking, if you prefer that euphamism) is not the same thing as a lack of discipline. You can discipline a child without beating it.

As a seven year old boy, I was sexually molested. I'm normal. Does that mean it is now acceptable to molest seven year old boys?

-Robert

Greenring, though you may have antagonized some folks, I for one mostly agree with you. I am a father of three (6, 10, 12) and neither my wife nor myself have ever spanked our children. That in no way means we do not discipline our children. The biggest issue in discipline by FAR is consistency. If you make a threat, carry it through. How many parents have we heard say to their misbehaving kids "if you do that one more time, you're going to your room!" And then they don't actually follow through. Or they make threats they have no intention of keeping, like "If you don't stop, we're turning around and going home!" (in the middle of some long road trip).

Corporal punishment is unnecessary, and can have negative effects on children. So why do it? Whether or not it physically hurts, it is a representation of power through physical dominance.

I've said this before on this thread: if you CAN have well adjusted, disciplined kids WITHOUT spanking, which most parents admit they don't enjoy doing, why ever would you continue to spank?

Here's a scenario I see far too often:

Kid commits infraction

Stop it.

Kid commits infraction

Stop it now!

Kid commits infraction

Stop it or you'll get a time out/go to your room!

Kid commits infraction

I said stop it!

Kid commits infraction

I mean it, you're going to be in big trouble!

Kid commits infraction

(spanking)

and then they'll say something like "that kid just doesn't listen! All he responds to is spanking!"

I use spanking and I believe I am consistent when I apply discipline.
I intend to cut out spanking as my children get older, but if I have a misbehaving child I choose the discipline tool that I deem to be most effective. A strong word or a restriction of privileges breaks my daughter's heart, my son is much more headstrong.

I don't mind you thinking I am a bad parent because I spank. I do mind you seeing a video of me spanking a child in public because of a tantrum. When that video makes the news I mind if you think my child, raised in love, needs to be taken away from me and given to the state.

Quarkhead, It is individual to the child.

I know people with 8 children who have never encountered the problems I had with my FIRST. One thing I've learned as a parent, you never throw stones. Things I once believed I'd never do (playstation? No way!) go by the wayside (Playstation is very good bribery). Parenthood, as I'm sure you know, is a humbling experience. I don't spank my children. However, I do swat their hands if they are into something dangerous. I am a single mother about 60 percent of the time, so I don't trust myself to spank, frankly. I do believe it is an effective form of discipline for some children, primarily because of its deterrence value.

I agree that consistency is very important, but sometimes a child that fears a spanking will be less inclined to test the outer limits of a parent's tolerance and therefore avoid danger.

Please don't confuse the subject.

Tackleing someone to push them out of the way of an oncoming bus, or swatting away a hand about to reach into some acid or a hot stove is not a "spanking."

Remember the definetions? "Dicipline." "Spanking" as we should remember, is striking someone as a form of discipline. A punishment.

If you unknowingly walk into oncoming traffic, you are innocent, and are in no need of dicipline. However, you do need someone to yank or tackle you out of the way before you get run over.

However, there is no excuse to take a wooden paddle with holes drilled through it to their *** NOTICE: THIS WORD IS AGAINST THE RULES. FAILURE TO REMOVE IT WILL RESULT IN A STRIKE. *** afterwards.

Like I said before, if we don't do it to serial rapist child molesters, we shouldn't do it to children.

-Robert (I don't mean to insult anyone, this is just the way I see things.)

So we put them in jail with the worst group of children we can find so they act better?

That is your opinion that there is no excuse for it. I look around the world and I see a lot of children who don't listen to their parents.

I actually agree with Quarkhead about the cause of that. Parents need to be consistent and that quest is truly (Mrs.P reference) is a humbling experience.

Eeyore, I am not trying to say you are a bad parent for spanking. And mrsP, I'm not trying to throw stones. And of course discipline is individual to the child. What I am saying is this: if the parent does not like spanking their child, and discipline can be maintained without it, why spank? There are plenty of approaches to discipline that do not involve physical domination, enough to account for dealing with individual children. I look at it this way: if you can't get your kid to obey you without spanking, perhaps you should reassess your parenting techniques (this is very generalized "you" by the way). If you can, then spanking is unnecessary.

I am not a perfect parent. I am not talking from a high horse. I am as flawed as anyone else.

Our basic tool is a "three strikes" rule for discipline. If my kids are misbehaving, or if one kid say, says something nasty to another kid, I will say "strike one." This is the verbal warning. At this point they know they are supposed to apologize to the injured party and move on (and NOT talk back). Strike Two is going to their room for 15 minutes, cooling off, then apologizing and moving on. Strike Three is the loss of privilege, and that varies from kid to kid, depending on what they are particularly fond of doing. My 12 year old son loves to play Warcraft, so he may be banned from that (usually the remainder of the day, plus the whole following day). For the other kids it's something else.

This isn't perfect, and we are constantly evolving it to work out the kinks, but it works really well. Needless to say, though, it takes a lot of attention on my part to stick to it, though once it becomes habit it's easier, plus infractions occur less and less. Another part of this that I felt was important was the way this system was introduced. I came up with the basic idea, called a "family meeting" after dinner, and presented my idea, then asked for input. Specifically, I asked the children to present what they thought should constitute their particular "strike three" punishment. I told them to think hard about it; if they presented something too soft, I would veto it and decide myself. They all chose very well. I think it has really helped in the execution of this discipline that they felt more vested in the decision-making process.

I think it also helps for the parent to read up on developmental psychology. More than a pop psych book about child raising that attempts to give a "magic formula," really studying this can help us also understand what behaviors are age-appropriate. Thus our discipline is evolving along with the psyche of the child.

Sorry if anyone thought I was being condescending or insulting; it was not my intent. Healthy child-rearing is one of the most important things we can do to make the world a better place in the future; it is dear to my heart.

We do not use spanking for discipline. I have six sealets.

The poor aspects of spanking...
It is violence.
It uses fear( of you).
It teaches might is right.
It is disrespectful to the person being hit.

Its good aspects...
Easy to do.
Effective.

I have used other means to discipline as I did not like the negative points.

Authoritative types might be those who prefer spanking. I can be authoritarian myself, but rather limit that kind of thinking as much as possible. I prefer reasoning.

I am not so sure there is a big enough difference between 'swatting' and 'beating'. Both are hitting. I guess the difference is one causes obvious physical damage while the other, at most, causes psychological effects which is not so obvious to observe.

Who said anything about a wooden paddle with holes drilled in it? What is next, the 2x4 with spikes? What does how we treat serial rapists have to do with teaching children to behave?
Beating and spanking are vastly different, despite your insistence that they are not. Apples and pears are both fruit, but they are not the same fruit.
I come from an earlier generation than most here, and that generation turned out very few nutcases compared to today. I saw some brats that never got disciplined, but very few. That changed over the years, thanks to Dr. Spock and his fairy tales. If you can dig up some real facts that prove spanking, not beating, turns out violent criminals or maladjusted adults, do so.
I suspect that the lack of discipline has caused more problems than the occasional spanking.
And it isn't just my kids that I have experience with. There are lots of cousins, nephews, nieces, etc, plus I did my stint as a scoutmaster. My wife and son are teachers, they can tell very quickly which parents have abrogated their responsibility to discipline their children.
BTW, Dr. Spock's book was first published in 1946, the year of my birth. I can assure that my parents never read it.
At that time, a spanking was not the form of punishment typically used; it was a whipping, with a stick, switch, or belt. So his writings on the subject were likely a reaction to seeing the evidence on the backsides, and backs, of some of his patients. He stuck to his opinion to his death, but lots of parents and psychologists today are ignoring the doctor's advice. Now they are saying, if all else fails, try the spanking.

We are overcomplicating things here people. If a child does something wrong, and he/she is spanked, chances are he/she won't do it again. Some people don't like it, cool, don't spank, but, 9/10 it does work. This sensitivity business doesn't work on young children, they don't understand it, so why fix something that isn't broke.

CP

I definatly think spanking in moderation and not out of anger is okay. I was spanked when I did something outragous (which was often!) and was raised with respect and discipline and I see a difference with SOME people who weren't disciplined in the same fashion. Example: My parents are divorced and my dad remairried. My step mom doesn't spank her kids and my step sister is extreamly disrespectful. I don't condone abuse of authority by a parent though. If you are going to spank, you need to make sure that you don't grab that tool of discipline at every confrontation with your child, but rather as a last resort. If they know that could be an option, they might think twice.
"Spare the rod, spoil the child" is a terrible quote. Not spanking your child won't spoil them, not setting paramaters for your child spoils them. I think spanking really isn't the issue, it's the amount of time and energy a parents willing to dedicate to raising their childeren. Patience and understanding should be just as important as punishment.

I'd like to hear a parent claim that after a spanking (not a beating), their child never did that, whatever it was, again, CP.

I don't think I was overcomplicating the issue, CP, but I do think you are oversimplifying it. It's NOT a choice between spanking and "this sensitivity business." Discipline does not have to equate to spanking.

Does anyone like spanking their children? I doubt it. And so my question, which is a simple one, goes unanswered: IF you do not enjoy spanking your children, AND it is perfectly possible to be an effective disciplinarian without spanking, WHY SPANK?!?!?!? That's not a hard question.

Bill wrote:


Any sources? I've got a few:











The Swedish Example:


ConservPat, we may indeed be talking about fixing something that IS broke.

I swatted my daughter on the butt when she reached for something cooking on the stove before. She's never done it again.

I swatted her on the butt one time when she tried to bite me when I was taking one of her toys away as punishment. She's never tried THAT again.

I can think of several examples of where it did the trick.

Just out of curiosity, how many kids do you have? And do you handle every situation the same with them?

[quote=quarkhead,Jun 18 2003, 07:24 AM]
1.
Spanking may relieve a parent's frustration for the moment and extinguish the undesirable behavior for a brief time. But it is the least effective way to discipline.
2.
It is harmful emotionally to both parent and child. Not only can it result in physical harm, but it teaches children that violence is an acceptable way to discipline or express anger. While stopping the behavior temporarily, it does not teach alternative behavior. It also interferes with the development of trust, a sense of security, and effective communication. (Spanking often becomes the method of communication.) It also may cause emotional pain and resentment.


3.
[QUOTE]Methods: In this general population survey, a probability sample of 9953 residents of Ontario aged 15 years and older who participated in the Ontario Health Supplement was used to examine the prevalence of a history of slapping and spanking.

4.
-Those findings led us to theorize that if parents avoid corporal punishment (such as slapping a child's hand or "spanking," i.e., slapping on the buttocks) they are more likely to engage in verbal methods of behavior control such as explaining to the child, and that the increased verbal interaction with the child will in turn enhance the child's cognitive ability.




5.The Swedish Example:
[QUOTE]1920: At this time severe beatings were being given to children in Sweden often based on religious (Lutheran) influence.


.

[/quote]
1.Good parents don't spank to relieve their frustration. Least effective, I think not. Worked on me and my entire generation, except for a very small number of us.
2.Psychobabble. Saying "it is" implies a fact not in evidence.
Spanking as defined already in this thread will not result in physical or emotional harm. Dang right it caused temporary resentment, but it worked. Spanking OFTEN becomes the means of communication? What kind of garbage is that?
3. Inevitable? an outright lie, more assumptions based on facts not in evidence.
And now we are adding slapping? Stick to spanking, not slapping, whipping, beating, or application of the rack.
4. Theorizing now? And it implies that before the study that spanking was the preferred method of punishment.
5. Again, we are discussing spanking, not severe beatings.
I know 2 former Lutherans, they left because of the strict disciplinarian types in the church. Old ML was a certified lunatic, advocated the deaths of many thousands of peasants. Look it up. He was as least as vicious as the popes he was protesting against.

Now, concerning the professions of psychology, counseling, etc. These are the same clowns who told us that children don't lie, and as a result more than a few innocent child care workers went to prison for many years until the courts finally got their collective heads out of their orifices and overturned the convictions. Still, their lives were destroyed, their assets gone, and all they have left is the possibility of winning a law suit against a gaggle of lawyers, judges, and prosecutors (and the counselors) who should have known better than to trust a few so-called experts in the field of child psychlogy. There were 2 prominent cases, one on each coast, where the kids said the most outlandish things at the prompting of these professionals, but the tapes were edited so only the "relevant" stories were heard by the juries. Of course, allowing them to hear the rest of it would have made it clear that children do lie and they do it with incredible imagination. There was never any proof whatsoever that the sexual abuse occurred. Children will say whatever they think the adults want to hear. That is the nature of children. And these highly trained experts in the human mind don't know that?

I have three children, ages 12 (boy), 10 (girl), and 6 (girl). They are all very different, and of course I handle them differently. Guess you paid zero attention to my previous post in which I described our system pretty carefully. But here's a clue: I still don't spank them! Approaching discipline is adaptive to the child's personality. And there's a whole lot of room for differentiation without resorting to spanking!

And Bill, you seem to be basing your view on your personal experience - and while the majority of people who were spanked as children turn out fine, there is enough evidence pointing to negative effects in a minority of spankees to make me steer clear of it. As I said twice before, I've asked a decent question, which is still waiting for any answer at all. This isn't about what happened to us as kids - that's not a strong enough basis to argue theory.

And back to DaytonRocker: how will you ever know if a non-spanking discipline would have worked just as well? You won't because you didn't try. Kind of like how you didn't try reading my posts very thoroughly. Ah well, maybe next time.....

Quarkhead, did you read the book 7 Habits for Highly Effective families? Your approach is very Stephen Covey

nope, just fulfilling my stereotype - the Buddhist socialist...

Is that a good book? I tend to push books with titles like that away with a ten-mile pole... but I've been proven wrong before. Once.

Yes, I think you'd like it.
Actually, you've made statements on other topics which I thought had Covey overtones. He has a lot of 'seek first to understand, then to be understood' principles, as well as interactive solutions for family disagreements. It's simply a wonderful read, and I highly recommend it to everyone.

I will definately spank my children in the future. Spanking is natural, my parents spanked me and I had no problem with it. It makes the child think twice before doing something again.

I am NOT using personal experience if by that you mean my own immediate family. There are friends, co-workers, relatives, and 57 years of observation.
Your experience, with your own children, indicates that you haven't had to use any kind of force. You are lucky, so far.
For myself and others who know how to swat or spank without causing real harm, we have to do what we think will work. We don't have a Dr. Spock living in our house to help us. It is our responsiblility, and desire, to raise our children so they can survive in this world, and be happy, and not be a problem to others. Lacking the education that the so-called mental health professionals have, I will do what I know works. And if a loud "NO" doesn't keep my toddler grandchildren from sticking their fingers in the wall socket or chewing on a lamp cord, you can bet that a little leg or butt will get a swat. Likewise the older child that deliberately disobeys in a way that could get him hurt, or have him causing hurt to others.
I will risk their temporary resentment for the benefit of having them live longer, and better.

I had 3 children. All grown now. I never spanked them. I don't believe in it. But I had the look. All I had to do was give them look and they knew "DON'T " do it again. Jaime can you tell me if you know the look?

Good one, Momof3. But how did the "look" come to have its effect? Surely because they knew that there would be further consequences if the "look" didn't work.
We used the count to 3 method a lot, and I see a lot of others using it. But when 3 gets sounded off, and the child isn't obeying, he gets sent to his room or something appropriate.
Repeating myself here, but I only spanked a couple times each child, and then they knew that I meant business when I spoke in a certain tone of voice. Never had to spank after that.
My parents, however, were not speakers, just hitters, so I have seen both sides. Seems to me that being hit, or spanked, or beat, is just as likely to cause a person to resolve to never use such methods with their own children as it is likely to turn them into hitters themselves.

Bill - mom is forgetting to mention some of her other discipline methods which included biting me when I wouldn't cease biting my sister (I was two, so this is hearsay) or her classic screech, "Just wait till your father gets home!!"

Actually, what my mom was good at, and she is not acknowledging here, is that she was a master of distraction. When we acted up, she would redirect our attention to something else. Sometimes it was a simple, "go play outside" to making it something special like reading time or coloring time. Mom didn't need to spank us because she was very clever at refocusing our attention and explaining why we needed to stop our destructive actions and do something constructive.

Funny
I heard that last one a lot, as my mom was too small to physically hurt me. Her skills were in the emotional hurt.
Dad could hurt, but he knew that she was disturbed and blowing most things out of proportion. Eventually he told her to leave me alone, somewhere around when I was 16.
I sure am glad I don't have relatives on this forum!

Bill:


That may be true, but almost everyone who has advocated spanking on this thread has indicated something to the effect of, "I was spanked, and I turned out OK."

What IS known, is that having been spanked as a child definitely makes one more likely to spank as a parent - just as being abused increases the likelihood of continuing that cycle.

Once again I present my main argument against spanking:

1. Some kids are adversely affected by even "normal" spanking.

2. Kids can be raised, disciplined and respectful, without any spanking.

3. Most parents do not enjoy spanking their children.

OK, that's simplified, but what it amounts to is, why spank? If you don't need to, and it's not fun, then why?

Quarkhead, I don't enjoy any form of disciplining my children. I enjoy it when they behave like perfect angels. I am not sold on number 2 as a system that will work for me without the threat or use of spanking. I envision reducing spanking drastically as the kids get older and I hope to use other methods of punishment as their capacity for reason increases. But I don't think your three points are givens in terms of being absolutes (2) or different than non-spanking methods (3)

I would much rather spank my child in ten seconds then monitor one hour of punishment behavior.

I think it is great that you have the time and ability to use a system that requires no spanking. But when it comes down to it, even you point number one is not exclusive to other forms of discipline. All methods of behavior modification (it seems to me) could adversely affect a child. So, definitely, can failing to attempt behavior modification.

The final thing that concerns my about your summary is that looks eerily like a policy proposal, which I think you have denied before on this thread. I am concerned that there is a movement to criminalize spanking in this country. This is a country where we also say that not enough parents are active enough in their childrens' lives. I think starting to regulate parenting by criminalizing behavior further than the standard of child abuse is a horrible thing. Let us always remember what the reality ids of the system into which children are placed when they are taken from their parents.

Hi I am new to this but I would like to say that I did not agree with spanking children because I am so passive and I feel a loving parent. I helped to raise my younger sister and let me tell you this she has never been spanked ever in her life and yes this does make her more sure of herself but she is not always in the right in the things she is so sure of. I can say she knows how to show love and caring to others but she never will take no for an answer and her way of thinking is ALWAYS right.I now have two girls and let me ask you this if your child kicks you and tells you no or runs after a moving van because when you tell her no she ignores you what whould you do say oh well she could of been run over because you as a parent should not give her a swat on the but because you think it may put out the message that you don't love your child.I will say thanks to all of those out there telling me that I should not give my child a swat on the butt my daughter almost got run over since this day I have come to the conclusion that it is not wrong to teach your children when they do something wrong that a swat on the butt is going to be the result.I do how ever believe that you should do so for important things that could cause harmful results to them or others.Life can be cut short so easily I would like my children to live all of theres and if it means you or others feel it's wrong I throw up my hands to this.I hope you do better in your efforts and comend you for finding another way.

Because parenting isn't necessarily fun. That's like saying it's a pain to take them to school, so why do it?

The first thing everyone says when they see my kids is "My, how well behaved they are!" That's because they've learned their boundaries and know what they can do and what they can't. While spanking certainly isn't "fun", there are times when it is necessary to get the proper behavior. It's certainly better than the idiots who let their kids run around like animals with absolutely no guidance, who get really miffed when you even dare to suggest that their little monsters should stop causing property damage and upsetting other people.

I was spanked as a child and I turned out fine. My wife was spanked as a child and turned out healthy. My kids are spanked when necessary and my oldest is the top of her class and has *NEVER* once been reprimanded in school, unlike one child whose parents don't believe in discipline, who has been in "time out" daily since he started school and spends at least 3-4 hours a month in the principle's office.

Like quarkhead, I am a firm believer in the "spanking is NOT necessary" philisophy. Does that mean there is a lack of discipline? Not necessarily (admittedly some do, just like some who use physical punishment are actually physically abusing their kids). Lack of spanking HARDLY equals lack of discipline and the argument I've heard time and time again is "well I'm not letting my kids run loose and do whatever they want". Well, neither am I, I just don't use physical force to get my "point" across.

My B.S. is in Family Studies...we studied child development a great deal (the main "emphasis" was human development, with most courses about children) and as such, I am certain that spanking is unnecessary and does not "teach" anything other than fear. I don't want my children behaving because they fear being spanked (and they don't learn the REAL reason why they shouldn't do something when you say "don't do X or you'll get a spanking"), rather I want them to behave because it's right and because they understand the REASON they are supposed to act a certain way and not act a certain way.

I've heard the "I was spanked and I turned out fine" argument time and time again. But honestly, what does that say? I'm sure there are plenty of people who have been raped but they're "turned out fine" too...that certainly doesn't make it okay to rape someone.

Kids aren't perfect regardless of the form of discipline you use. If you look back at your childhood, you'd probably notice that you did your fair share of "not so good" things as a teenagers (drinking, sneaking out, drugs, ditching school, etc.). I was spanked once when I was about four. My sister was spanked a handful of times (she's 4 yrs. younger and was a little more "rebellious" than I was) - neither one of us snuck out, drank, did drugs, smoked, stole, etc. My husband and his brother and just about every other person on the planet that I know who were spanked as a normal part of their discipline "regiment" - snuck out, stole, drank, experimented with drugs (less common than the others), smoked, etc. I was constantly praised by strangers for my excellent manners, behavior, and such as a child. My mother didn't use violence as a threat (the spankings we did get were when we were in dangerous situations, with the ONE exception of my sister stealing some collector's cards of some kid's show when she was 5 nd subsequently getting spanked), so obviously spanking is not necessary to get "good behavior" results. Is it easier? Yes. It's a "quick fix" and you do see immediate results (they stop doing the "punished" behavior because they've just been spanked), but an existence of immediate results does not equate an understanding of the reason they should behave and be good children.

My daughter is almost 2 and has not been spanked and (hopefully) won't be (I say hopefully because my husband is pro-spanking as he was spanked and says "I turned out fine" just like everyone else seems to say). She doesn't fully understand the reasons she's not supposed to do certain things at this age. So I should punish HER because I can't convey the message to her so that she understands? I don't think so. I just don't understand, other than "instant gratification/immediate behavior modification", what the purpose of spanking is and what it "teaches" other than fear. Fear is not ALWAYS a bad thing, but when it's accompanied by a violent act, it is. Would you threaten your husband/wife with violence if they did not act the way you wanted them to act? No, because it's considered abuse and is illegal...

Which brings me to my question: why is it okay to spank/hit your children, who are too young/small to defend/stand up for themselves, but it's not okay to use physical forms of "punishment" on your spouse?

I've not read the whole thread so if Im doubling a point shout at me.

I think spanking (in moderation, ie not physical damage just shock and pain) is a sensible idea. When a child is naughty they are told it is wrong and spanked, the physical shock helps carry the message. After the child is hit all tension is difused and normal life is resumed. A strong talking to tends to leave an unpleasant air of angst. Redirecting attention merely teaches that there is no punnishment.

Im the oldest of two brothers and I was spanked a few times. I'm civil and disciplined. My brother was not and is unruleyl and unfocused. Yes we are different persoanlities but discipline can always be established to a reasonalbe extent.

Im way too tired to spell check so sorry for any bloopers.

We spank- some. My daughter gets a swat, especially when she does something rough with my son (3 months) after being told "no". She listens pretty good for a 3 year old, but I have "got her attention" a few times. 'Course, I do have a "look" that I developed working with serial killers and rapists that my Mom says conveys the same message as a hissing snake or charging bear LOL- Mom said "I hope you spank her instead of using that look, it is to rough for children" LOL

I believe in spanking all the way up to about 14. Then I believe in basic training camps. Or a 55 gallon drum with a small opening for air and food.

I studied human and child developement as well in school, and the US stuff especially is full of alot of plain old *** NOTICE: THIS WORD IS AGAINST THE RULES. FAILURE TO REMOVE IT WILL RESULT IN A STRIKE. ***. Dr Spock was a great salesman and a terrible influence on American culture.

My grandfather is very old, and is over a hundred now. I listened to a very interesting story from him about spanking. He said (I won't use quotes and am paraphrasing) that growing up in rural Texas, it was a day wagon ride to town or to school, so they had a tutor, male, teach them at home (it was a ranch and they were rather affluent) and really had very little contact with others except family, which of course, was large, and several generations and cousins etc. Other than the affluence this was not untypical in rural america at the time. He was never spanked, because his social conditioning taught him that everyone older than him was his boss, period. Punishment not being allowed into family acvitities, and ostrasizing basically, usually for an after noon or something, with occasional extreme punishment of "to bed without any supper"- which was very rare. Now, he raised his sons many years later and had to "whup the tar out of those hell raisers" - and according to everyone involved, was neccesary and appropriate, and kept them (mostly) out of trouble with the law. Or as my uncle said "we were not afraid of the law, we were afraid of paw!" If you look at discipline problems of the 1950s (major violations- chewing gum and inappropriate dress and losing thier homework) and today (guns and drug dealing in school) - the main difference appears to be lack of fear of discipline upon returning home for "embarrasing your parents" - something I once thought must be a capital crime!

You're making two mistakes here, both of which I have addressed more deeply earlier in this thread.

1. You're setting up an either-or; either you spank, or you let your kids run around and do what they want. Know what? I have three kids, ages 12, 10, and 7, and the first thing people say when they meet them is how well behaved they are. They all get straight "A"s in school. They are creative, bright, and funny. My wife and I have never spanked any of them. And guess what? We don't let them run around and do what they want. IF you manage to go back through this thread, perhaps you'll see a bit of the stuff I posted.

2. You make the mistake of generalizing from your own story. Sure you turned out fine - does that mean that everyone who gets spanked turns out fine? That's not what any of the research shows. Every study done on corporal punishment has shown that some children are adversely affected by it.

So what I said, simplified, was this: if you don't like doing it, and it is not necessary to spank kids in order to have them be well-behaved, then why do it? You didn't answer that question at all.

Discipline is about follow-through, more than anything else. Don't make promises you're not going to keep.

My classmates were all spanked (with RARE exception) when I was growing up. I seem to recall kids being afraid of getting spanked, not of disappointing their parents. Fear was instilled in them to "do this or this will happen" not because they wouldn't want to do anything to "shame" their parents. And I don't even think that's necessarily the best method either (afterall, when they're on their own and don't have to worry about not "shaming their parents" what would stop them from doing all sorts of terrible things if their motivation was to not embarass their parents?). They key to teaching your kids to TRULY not want to disappoint is to develop a wonderful relationship with them, not that you do or don't use physical discipline/"corporal punishment" (as the anti-spankers tend to call it). I respected my mother and went out of my way (sometimes too much so, but that's because I'm a "pleaser" by nature) to NOT disappoint her. But you know what's more important than not wanting to disappoint your parents, IMO...not wanting to disappoint YOURSELF FOR YOURSELF. To me, it was always important to get good grades, work hard, be on my best behavior, show respect for people, etc. because I knew it was the right thing to do and I wanted to live my life doing what was good and right. I wanted to be my best (I am a perfectionist, after all) and in doing so, I was always well-behaved and an overall wonderful kid...I really was THAT good of a kid - the worst thing I EVER did was lie about getting a C (I'd never gotten anything but As and was embarrased by the 'C') in high school. My mother definitely used discipline (we were never "grounded" per say, but privileges were sometimes taken away - mostly it was a matter of us just getting "lectures" about why we should and shouldn't do things and the reason we were in trouble was made VERY clear without use of force) and she turned out two wonderful adults in doing so. Part of it is "do as I do not as I say"...she didn't drink and we knew that, she didn't smoke and we knew that, she didn't really do much of anything 'wrong' other than things that involved memory and inaccurately "remembering" past events - all a result of her brain tumor. My friends in high school were all drinking, I didn't see the point. My friends in high school smoked pot (most), I didn't see the point. NONE of that was a result of my being spanked or not being spanked. It was a result of the teaching/learning/understanding relationship that my mother and I had and the importance she placed upon the "good" things.

I think today's problems can't simply be wrapped up into a little pretty package by and labeling it "lack of discipline". There are TONS of negative things in our culture today that have little to do with discipline. Messages from the media, for one, I think have been a great (not great as in good, great as in tremendous) impact upon our kids and their choices. Be sexy and flaunt your stuff, but don't have sex, smoking is cool, it isn't good for you so don't do it, drinking gets you hot guys/girls, don't drink, etc. YES, many parents are lackadaisical in their parenting - there are all sorts of gadgets out there today to make you have to spend less and less time with your kids (there are even bottles that hold themselves up for newborns, for goodness sake!), but I don't think it's as simple as a discipline issue. And today there are also mixed messages for parents. There are 5 million "self help" books about parenting, each one laying out what is right and wrong and how to get the best results. To me, it's more about doing what your instincts as a parent tell you. For me, that means not spanking because I don't believe it's "natural" or "right" to use physical force against a defenseless being to get "your way". If you want to spank that's fine (though I can still wish you wouldn't ), but don't go assuming that those of us who make a choice NOT to spank are raising heathens or are not being good parents. I'm an EXCELLENT mother, much of which I attribute to my desire to do right by my children not just to have them do right by me

quarkhead writes:


That's not the case. Spanking is a last resort only, when all other forms of punishment fail. I'm glad your kids are smart and well-behaved, that seems to be very rare these days. I know that when I was in the Post Office yesterday, there was a woman with a boy that was maybe 9-years old and he was running around screaming, throwing things and she wasn't even paying attention. IMO, someone needed to give that kid a few swift whacks on the backside because he was completely out of control. If you can keep your kids under control without spanking, great. More power to you. Don't tell other parents that your way is the only way though.



Neither does everyone who doesn't get spanked turn out fine. You're doing quite a bit of generalizing yourself. Up until the current generation, spanking was an acceptable and probably exected method of punishment and most of *US* turned out just fine. Now that it's "bad for the children", there are far too many really annoying, unresponsive, irresponsible kids running around. But that's my opinion, your mileage may vary.



That's true of a lot of things. There is no one correct way to raise a child. I don't recall anyone telling you that you have to spank your children, so why don't the loony child-rightists stop telling the rest of us that we're somehow bad parents for doing so?

Kmsouthern writes:


When I was going to school, getting swatted with a paddle or slapped on the wrist with a ruler was common. In fact, my parents had to sign a permission slip that gave the school explicit permission to do that should it be required or I couldn't go to school! And you're right, nobody cared about causing their parents shame but they sure did care about getting whacked in the backside in front of the whole class!

WOW, Wild thread from what I can see.

I was abused and therefore do not believe ideologically in physical abuse of any kind, but I would say its not always possible.
IE:
Many people say, never spank in anger, yet in my mind spanking in anger and more so 'fear' is when you are most likely to deal out a good wholop. When a child is in danger and not listening. This is the crucial time when you have NO TIME to do otherwise and a message needs to be brought across immediately. I have run after children down a busy street, in a parking lot, out of control, like everyone else here. These are the times when it just seems natural to bring a sense of reality to the situation by a swift smack. Even if the child begins to cry, they are no longer endagering themselves. This is the only time I am likely to hit a child, or animal in my case, because I AM AFRAID FOR THEM and I need them to know and remember that this is NEVER going to be acceptable, now and forever. With a toddler you cant talk them into it, it needs to be immediatley ingrained that they can never do such a thing.

I dont believe in spanking as thought out punishment, such as go to your room and youre going to get a spanking, this is abuse. Physical pain is not an adequate punishment for anything and teaches all the wrong lessons. I believe it teaches nothing but fear and the wrong kind.

Perhaps there is a big difference between a crucial sudden smack and 'thought out' spanking as punishment. I would NEVER, as my parents did rely on it from a belt as a dicsiplinary tactic. That is truly a sickness, a problem with the parent, not the child. I can certainely see slapping a childs wrist that is reaching for a burning pot or having a serious tantrum or running amuck. I think sometimes children, or animals get all etherial and a physical smack can bring them to reality, of course Im not talking about something that really hurts, just a jolt.
I have to give it to all you parents because I know its not easy.

The whole point of spanking is that it isn't abuse. it quickly draws the boundaries and should be presented kind of seperate to a normal parental realtionship. If spanking is causing actually physical damage then it should stopped but its not by definition abuse untul this point.

I must respectfully disagree with you here. It takes a lot to physically damage a child but much less to psychologically damage. I believe that physical pain as disciplinary action is the least effective and most detrimental form of control and punishment. It bad enough when parents lash out because they have simply had 'enough', we know kids can be impossible sometimes, we are not perfect, but physical pain as condonned discipline to me is unaceptable.

No matter what your reason for spanking your child may be, there's still the possibility that you won't be able to control yourself and the spanking will escalate into abuse. Has anyone seen the Oprah episode "Mothers out of control" or some such title? Normal parents, people who appropiately shudder in disgust and sympathy when they hear of a case of child abuse, can all too easily become those very people. Do you honestly think any of you can separate your emotions enough to "appropiately" spank? What if you've had a horrible day at work, someone rear-ended you on the way home, you still have yet to cook dinner, Mike's failing math, and little Susan does something that you feel warrants a spanking? Are you really in control of your emotions to guarantee that frustration won't carry over when you start hitting your child? I'm sure every mother featured on that program thought they were, or they wouldn't have used spanking as an option.
My mother was raised in the deep south, in the country. No one is fazed if you beat your daughter or son senseless with a switch. Apparently, this is the culture she was raised in. Some of you may consider that child abuse, but it was the norm for her. As a result of how she was raised, and her own inability to control her emotions, she abused me severely and my little brother occasionally (because I've since learned that it's not acceptable to make your child undress before you begin hitting them with the belt). I was spanked as a child, and I can assure you all not an iota of good came from it. Spankings begin to be coupled with verbal abuse, then the physical abuse begins. I don't think any human being can distance themselves from their emotions, especially when it involves their own child, enough to honestly say they'd never do such a thing. Because the fact is, you can't. It's possible for each and every one of you to cross that line in rage, or frustration or what-have-you, whether you admit it or not. As much as I may need to give my future children swift, effective discipline, I'd love them too much to take that risk. I'd settle for even a less effective "no!" than a more effective spanking and the risk of harming my child physically or emotionally.
On a side note, I was shocked to learn from reading your posts that a "spanking" consists of a few swats on the behind. A spanking for me has always been with a belt. I thought everyone spanked with a belt

One thing to consider when discussing this, if you do not have control of your child by the time he or she turns 5 or 6, you have probably already failed. So if a light spanking does the trick, so be it, every child is different. I never used a belt, just swats when I needed to get their undivided attention. Certainly this thread has run the gamut when it comes to defining a spanking.
I have seen the results of children that never got spanked, or got spanked to the point of abuse. Most turn out o.k., some not o.k. I doubt that spanking alone is a typical cause of bad adult behaviour. Emotional abuse is probably more damaging overall. A child that is loved can handle the spanking, one that is not loved has a double whammy coming his way.
Parenting is hard, and I think that this thread could have been better if responses were limited to parents, excluding those who have yet to have the pleasure of trying to make a willful 2 year old stay away from electrical sockets. I have had a couple friends over the years change their tune when they get a child of their own.

Yes, a lot of people seem to forget that. I've seen people go from touchy-feely ideas of parenting and do a 180-degree turn as soon as they had kids of their own. The real thing isn't anything like the fantasy world presented in books on parenting. If you've got little angels that never do anything wrong, great. Consider yourself lucky. The majority of kids though aren't and just giving them dirty looks isn't going to magically change their attitudes.

There is also nothing abusive about spanking. It's a wake-up call, nothing more. It lets the child know that their actions are unacceptable at the highest level. Kids need to have boundaries set and if you don't have the ability to let them know they've crossed over a boundary, they'll never really learn that. Being sent to their room doesn't work, having things taken away doesn't work, they need to know that there's an immediate and somewhat painful response to bad behavior. You certainly don't beat your kids but a little warm feeling on their backside never hurt anyone.

My wife is a Family Practitioner who has done a lot more research about this stuff than I have. I asked her about this, and she said that there is no research to support the idea that it is the spanking itself which instills disciplined behaviour; rather that what is effective is the follow-through and consistency of the overall disciplining of the child. This is why some people who spank their kids get behaviour results, and others don't - or why discipline without spanking either works or doesn't. In other words, it's the context more than the punishment itself which makes the difference.

Cephus wrote:


A few swift whacks might have stopped him for the moment, but it wouldn't adjust his general behaviour. This mother was missing a lot of elements needed for effective discipline, whether or not she spanked the kid. I've also seen this scenario in stores:

(kid acting out)
"Stop it."
(kid keeps on)
"I said stop it."
(Kid keeps going)
"If you don't stop you're gonna get a time out."
(kid keeps going)
"You better stop it."
(kid keeps going)
(swat!)

What's wrong with this? There's no consistency. Consistency is the real issue.

I have said repeatedly that most kids who are spanked turn out fine. I have been clear not to generalize about that. What I have said, is that the research shows that SOME kids who are spanked (not abused, spanked) can have adverse behavioural problems.

Then, I have also said that (and Sweden is a good example of this) it is entirely possible to raise a child using consistent, non-physical discipline. It is hard, but possible.

It was pointed out early in this thread by some spanking parents that they did not like spanking their kids.

Therefor my question was formed, based on research and data, and I stand by it.
I am NOT a "loony child-righter" or anything else.

Cephus again:


Ah, but there is one correct thing which all disciplined children are a product of, and that is consistency. I'm not lobbying for a law to ban spanking. I'm not telling you to stop spanking. I'm merely pointing out that the assumption that spanking=discipline and not-spanking=kids-running-around-unfettered is not correct. Truly, I understand when you say spanking is a last resort, etc. I'm not implying that you (or anyone else) is just spanking kids randomly and often.

There are spanking parents who have discipline problems, there are non-spanking parents who have discipline problems. So obviously, it is something besides the actual spanking which makes the difference, and that's what I'm getting at. As parents, we need to focus more on the follow-through and consistency of our approach to discipline than anything else. If I say to my child, "do that one more time and you're going to your room," I mean it. My kids know that I keep my promises. When we make threats which we do not follow through on, we are undermining discipline.

Let's say the family is on a car trip. How many parents have said "Do that again and I'm turning around and going home," or "Do that again, and I'll let you out right here," when they don't intend to really do it? If you're not willing to do it, don't say it.

It's probably not good to over-explain things to young children, either - they need to learn that "no" means "no," just because you say so.

In my house, I will issue a strike one accompanied with an explanation. But it is clear that there will be no further explanation or questioning. A continuation of the behaviour moves them directly to strike two. I've only had to use strike three twice - both times because two of my kids were arguing with eachother and were just too "het up" to be able to really listen to me.

cephus again:


But see, I mostly agree with you. But I don't think it's "luck," at least not in most cases. I do not consider my parenting style to be "touchy-feely" at all. I am a stern disciplinarian. You're still presenting this false either/or mentality, that parents who don't spank are fruity hippies who don't discipline their children. There are people like that, we've all seen them, but they are not indicative of non-spankers, just like the parent who smacks their kid around in the grocery store is not representative of all spankers.

Yes, it is highly for the vast majority of us to spank our children without turning it into a beating. There are a few nuts in this world who just should not have children. Most of us love our children enough, and are sane enough, to understand they do need discipline, without abuse.

quarkhead writes:


Example has been snipped. I agree with you about consistency, and as I said, physical discipline should always be the method of last resort. My own kids have been taught what they can and can't do from day one and it's extremely rare when I have to say more than "stop that". In fact, it's rare when I even have to say anything, they know what is acceptable and what is unacceptable and are extremely well behaved. My oldest didn't have a single 'time-out' in her last year of school and I think she was one of the only ones in the class that can say that. The last time I was in her classroom, which was Father's Day, there were kids who were throwing food, hitting other kids, etc. and their fathers were completely ignoring them.



There are kids out there who likewise have adverse behavioral problems regardless of how they are disciplined. I don't think that really says much. There are plenty of kids who are *NOT* spanked who turn out to be criminals, should we suddenly expect all kids to be spanked?



No one is holding a gun to their head and insisting they do. By the same token, they shouldn't tell parents who choose to spank what to do. It isn't any of their business.

Timeout: Even though this would not work in the long term, it will give the child some time to chill out and think about what he/she did

Taking things away: This will definetly work because i don't think there is any kid who is scared of having his favorite things taken away for a specified amount of time for his/her behavior

If I were a parent (*Shudders), I would like to use physical punishment, but in a different way.

I would make my children do repetitive tasks or something REALLY boring. Like cleaning the fire place, or better, have them stand in the corner for a half-hour with their nose to the wall.

If I couldn't get them to do that, I think that non-permanent injuring would be a good choice. I have seen several parents who chose not to use physical punishments, and as a rule (all of them I have seen) they are unruly. I'm sure there is a way to discipline a child without violence, but it must be really hard.

Half the country doesn't spank their kids, so not everyone of them can possibly be unruly. Personally, I think if you raise your kids in a way that they don't come to expect constant attention, constant gifts and constant gratification, then you won't need to discipline them that much at all, much less spank them. It's worked out pretty well for me so far.

I have listened to people like you for 5 years and though I don't have it in me to be mean I will say what till you do have them you will never know what it is like.To make you understand you would have to have my girls for one night.That's all it took for my sister-in-law(no children either).I have read all the books on how to discipline your children with out spanking. Tell me what you would do if you sat your child down in time out and she head butted you and busted your lip because she didn't want to sit there Now that I have decided a few busted lips later to start spanking my children. I need help because I have a 5 year old that does not listen to me and hits me with her hands feet and once has thrown keys at my back.Didn't feel good either.I stared but it isn't in me I feel like a bad parent but my Dad did say that it doesn't mean I don't love them and that it takes a lot of love to go through the heart ache of disciplining your children.I was a stay at home Mom. Now that I do work it is only for 10-12 hours a week. I also have read about child phycology so it is not my job because I was having these problems before I got a part time job and my husband is home with them when I am at work and they love there Daddy. I am trying but I have been listening for 5 years on how to raise your children with out spanking as an option(not that any of it worked) and I find myself of unsure of how to do it right. I'm not afraid of hurting them I never and I mean never would. I seem to not have any impact and I am going to end up on a talk show for parents that are beaten up by there children.I feel bad for those women because I am one of them and I know how they feel. How many times are you suppose to tell them no before you give them a swat it seems like thats all I ever do and yes I did try the sit down and talk to them thing. I am afraid to discipline my own children I don't want to have some teacher hear Mommy spanked me and call human services on me I would like to know if we as parents are allowed to spank our children anymore maybe I would feel better if I knew. I can control my temper because I don't get mad that often and never have I swatted my children when I was upset and believe me I don't get upset about the coloring on the walls or the bathroom they have ruined by splashing or the juice milk or water they dump on the floor or the vcr they put there lunch in or the cookies they hide in there room or the nights when they are up till 5:00am in the morning or the busted lips so I think it is safe to say if I didn't swat them for that or get angry but instead talked to them and told that it was wrong and put them in time out that I can swat my girls with out going out of control and beating them. I can not even go to the bathroom for a second without taking them with me for fear they will destroy the house the vcr happened when I tried the wall coloring was when I was trying to do dishes. I have my hand full with what people who say time out works created what do I do. Also I can count 1 time in my life I ever snuck out and I was 17 before I even tried it 3 months before I turned 18. So it isn't always the ones who got spanked. I had respect for my parents and still do. I don't know how they did it.