I had to start this thread after Limpubus's comments regarding the woman beating her child in a parking lot in Indiana.

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

If it isn't, what method(s) of discipline are appropriate?

Mike

I think there is a big difference between a spanking and a beating. A spanking to me is maybe a couple of slaps on the behind. And that is even questionable. But beating a child is another thing. Never should a child be beaten as that little girl was. She was defenseless. Besides hitting her repeatable and then putting her in a car restraint and then hitting her again is to me horrific. Now the child was in a spot where she couldn't even try to move out of the hits that mom did. I am a mom of 3. And yeah of course I got mad at my kids when they were little and maybe a slap, but never would I repeatedly ever beat one of my kids to the point that woman did.

I don't think it's appropriate to hit a child. The same message of discipline can be given without violence, and hitting a child teaches them that it's okay to react in a violent manner when their angry.

It's difficult for me to say what an appropriate punishment would be, because it would change with each situation, but I do think that kids should be held responsible for their own actions.

I believe spanking should be practiced with young kids who don't listen to reason (the ever-popular toddler running into the street example) pass a certain age it is no longer effective. A parent should never hit a child, or make any disciplinary desiscion, in anger.

I am, as it may already be apparent from other posts, very opposed to any form of physical punishment ( as well as mental). No I have not had a child yet so my opinions may be irrelevent but I do plan on having a couple and when I do I, and my wife, will teach them why it is wrong to do certain things instead of smacking them and saying NO!. I was never hit as a child and I never did any damage to the person I now am. Maybe I was smarter than the average child, that's not saying I am anymore. I saw plenty of other kids get hit or pushed inside the house and those were the ones that snuck back out later...

I have two toddlers and believe that spanking is not only acceptable, it is essential. Like turnea said, toddlers don't respond to reasoning, or even commands. But, they'll listen to a whack in the beehind.

I agree that there there is a difference between physical discipline and child abuse. To me, here's the key difference. Physical discipline is preceeded with a warning and the level of discipline matches the level of seriousness of the problem. Like, I'm not going to give 10 lashings if all my daughter has done is accidently spilt her milk.

As our kids grow up and develop reasoning powers, we'll transition away from physical punishment to other forms of discipline. Just as the level of discipline must match the severity, the form of discipline must also match their level of maturity.

I second what otseng wrote. Thanks for your eloquence, I completely agree.

I totally agree with otseng. Ever since Dr. Spock came along, parents following his advice have turned America's children into unmanagable, defiant beings. Spanking, especially when younger, helps. My husband is a teacher and I am a future teacher and children are out of control. Discipline needs to be enforced, and yes, spanking should be involved.
As others have said, spanking is very different from beating and child abuse. Spanking does not constitute repeated "lashings." Spanking helps teach respect. A child is not going to respect you if you let him/her run over top of you. If a child isn't disciplined, that child will never learn to take responsibility for their actions.

Oh spare me! One thing for certain where children are concerned is until you have one you really do not have any idea of what you will do. Do you think that woman thought she would beat her child? I doubt it very much. That doesn't excuse it in any way, shape or form. What she did was dead Wrong.
Momf3 got it right along with several others. There is a huge difference between spanking and beating. I would venture to say between spanking and "hitting".
I am the mother of 7 who are now grown. I will tell you that each was different. Spanking was always my last choice of punishment, but there are some kids who just don't respond to other means. Parents must be in control of the children not the other way around. Nikioz0630 had it right about Dr. Spock. That book started permissiveness that has gotten out of hand. The pendulum is swinging the other way to some extent, but not far enough in my opinion. The way children act at school, and the way the speak to teachers and parents in appalling.

OK. Spanking a child. NO! nikioz turnea and otsenq you all stated pretty much at a young age spanking should be administerd, because they have to learn at a young age?
at what age are you talking? 1, 2, 3,??? No spanking is not the answer. The word NO has to be introduced, not a spanking. Spanking at that age teaches very young children that it is ok to hit another person. I agree with Nettie and she has 4 more kids than I do. Yes I do agree there are kids that are out of control but not at that young age and if you TEACH them NO not spanking at a young age they will know what is expected. When they get to be a little older "communication" is where you have to go. I f you don't like what he/she is doing you tell them why? I just am curious at to how old you all are and how many kids you have. were you spanked?

The point is at a young age children do not fully understand the word no, a spanking is much more likely to communicate the message that the child's behavoir is unacceptable, until he/she developes reasoning skills.
Yes, I was spanked.

That's what I used to think...until I had 2 girls of my own.

There is nothing that gets the message across better than a quick swat to the 'no sunshine' state. This is after several attempts at asking the child nicely, ordering the child not so nicely, trying to send the child to her room, etc.

Kids will test your limits and see how far you are willing to go to enforce your rules. Why do they? I don't know. Why should they listen? Because you are the parents and they are the children. You (hopefully) have a lot to teach them and they will be much better off learning these lessons from you than from someone else.

I just wish to add that NO is just fine.....AS LONG AS THE CHILD IS THE TYPE WHO MINDS THIS... What happens to the defiant child who is in danger (reaching for the hot coffee pot, running into the street etc) who doesn't listen to no? If this child can't be taught one way, he must be taught another. My wife did a great job this way. She didn't BEAT any of them, but we had some toddlers who thought no was a game. It isn't and she managed to convey that when she said no she meant it. We have very well adjusted, well educated sucessful children without (unless they do an excellent job of hiding it) and major problems from a tap or two on the bottom.

I believe spanking a child is the last resort and I only ever used it on my kids for repeated offences and after being warned three times.

My wife and I always instilled into them that doing something wrong once was not good and explained why, doing it twice was inviting punishment but the third time got punishment.

I feel there is a niche for controlled punishment during a childs formative years, but it is the parents responsibility to control it.
I have seen children being abused unmercifully for allowing ice cream to dribble down a dress.
A child takes on board the treatment it was exposed to.
Its not their fault if they go bad....its ours.

Regards..Alan

But what sir did you do when they were in danger...slightly out of reach...and not the age of reason? It is hard to believe anyone has not had toddlers and not had this situation.

You are quite right asking this question.

From memory I am pretty certain the rule of three didnt apply in that situation.

Regards...Alan

I just can't get the idea where a toddler has to be spanked. And how that would teach them right or wrong. We are talking about a child that is 1-4. Many have said it is to stop them when they are in a dangerous situation. Like running it the street, reaching for hot coffee. If you were watching your child and saw then reaching for say a coffee pot you merely take their hand and say no, HOT! They know by your reaction and facial expression that it is not allowed. When they get a little older and they don't respond then it is time outs or even a little older groundings. I can't wait to see all of you who spank your kids see what your kids turn out to be? I think very aggressive and very abusive. Talk to me when your kids are teenagers! You'll never make it.

It was always a matter of discretion.

Between 1 and 4 all we can do is protect them to the best of our ability.
Of course they are going to get into mishchief, of course they are going to fall down, of course they are going to get things wrong.

My comments were more concerned with 4 onwards.

Even after that a spanking was a rare event, but required on occasions.

Our children have grown up to love us as we love them and we are a very close family who like to be in each others company as friends.

I really think it is a question of the love you give is the love you get back no matter if you spank or not.

Regards........Alan

Haha very funny Mom. Sure you didn't spank her toddlers but...

I recall you BIT me when I was little because I wouldn't stop biting my little sister!!

I think it worked; I haven't bitten her since.

Momof3
I think I can answer your post. Out of 7 kids I can truthfully say that I am proud of each of them. They all finished their educations, have responsible jobs, go to church, don't beat their kids or spouses, have strong family values etc.ect. I would say they all turned out ok.
I can tell you that with 7 kids I sometimes had my hands literally full, and was not always able to reach a child in time of danger. I felt they had to listen and obey me the FIRST time I said no. Not 1,2,3 not if you don't stop that I'll...... It had to be now. As they grew older and could understand what I was saying reason was always used. It is amazing what a light rap on the behind can do. Also, I did not have to spank some of the kids ever. There was a huge difference in the personalities of kids as there is the case with adults. I can say that I probably spanked whoever needed it as toddlers but not once they could be reasoned with. I'll admit the kids always say I am a top sergeant, but they say it with love and laughter, I know.
Now I have a bunch of grandchildren, and I don't have to spank or punish in any way and I love i!!

I think spanking should be used as a last resort, and always with clothes and no objects should be used. I was spanked when I was a child, only a few times, it made me realize the severity of what I did. It was on *extremely* rare occasion, most of the time a good yelling sufficed. I thnk it also depends on the child, there are plenty of children that will never need a spanking, and others that do. Naturally there are some children that listen better than others. I dont think its wrong to spank a child, I believe its more the physical contact that jolts than than actual pain.

Jaime maybe you were hungry and that is why you bit Jen. I deprived you so much as a child.

Jeepers MoM!!!.

I AM surprised at you and Jaime....................
Fancy teaching your kids to be cannibals!!!

Regards.....Alan

Spanking has kept kids in line forever, and it works. We are seeing the results of a no-spanking generation today. A bunch of kids that are all drugged up and have so many excuses to why they do the things that they do that they can practically get away with murder, it's ridiculous. It was saying in the news today that High school shootings have been linked to prozac. I'm sorry, but spankings don't develop huge emotional scars and they are effective in the learning process. A child who is spanked won't test your patience, but a child who is told "No!" will. After all, what consequences has he/she faced so far? But, as stated above, it depends on the childs personality. I myself wasn't spanked often as a kid, I was and still am a mamma's boy. My two younger sisters on the other hand, were and still are 2 little trouble makers, hehe. My youngest sister has ADHD and has gotten away with so much since my mother has quit using her spanking policy. I have seen it SO many times the answer is spanking ME on the behind. I believe the line that defines spanking from child abuse is simple, if there are no emotional or physical scars, you got swatted, if there are, you got abused.

One thing for everyone to keep in mind is that moderation in almost everything is a good idea. Are there any absolutes?

I think if it comes to the point to where it is questionable to whether or not moderation is being used, it's time to use a different approach.

I think a few good pops on the rear will do some good. My aunt is the kind of woman who will sit there and scream and threaten her kids and never do anything to follow through, so therefore they run a little wild and simply laugh at her when she says don't do something. My mother, on the other hand, was not afraid to let us know when we did something wrong, and I turned out just fine, good grades, great attitude, and a good head on my shoulders. I'm definetely not on Springer blaming my parents for everything, if I screw up from this point on, it's my own d*** fault, because they taught me well. I agree that parents are way too lenient these days!

I work in the retail business, and I have to tell you that children today are very definitely out of control. The laws in place have given children the upper hand in everything. You cannot spank them, because that is abuse. All a child now has to do, in most parts of the country, is accuse the parents of hitting them, and the parents are arrested. The law gives children the power to blackmale their parents, in essence. Don't believe me? Go into a department store sometime during the day. Its nothing but wild screaming, and the parent(s) are embarrassed, but at the same time afraid to do something about it.
Having come from a home with an abusive father, I understand very well the narrow line between discipline and abuse. Discipline is a necessary evil, however. Children do not teach themselves that there are consequences to bad behavior. And I don't buy this 'time out', and revokation of 'priveledges' garbage, either. 99.9% of the time, the child just screams until the parent is so sick of hearing it that they give in. I've seen it 100,000 times.
Instances like that woman that got caught on the security tape beating her child... It is quite obvious that it was abuse. Watching her on the tape, it looked like she was trying to kill the child, I'd go so far as to say. Children should not be beaten, obviously, and anybody that does it should be locked up. But even I'll agree that a little swat on the butt once in awhile is necessary to keep them on the right path. The only thing I'd want to add to that is; if you hit a child out of anger, you're probably crossing the line.

Kids as they grow go through different stages. As some ages, they simply can not handle the situation of being in stores. The answer is not to hit them. If your child can not handle shopping, find alternatives. This could be as simple as limiting you shopping time at a single stretch to finding someone to watch them while you shop.

I am still waiting for that age when I can handle going shopping for more than an hour at a time. I get whinny and crabby and scream. Luckily, there is no one around big enough to whomp on me.

Amen

I have to ask, what should punishments in school be? Most kids jus dont care about detention, or suspension. Do you think it right to expel a kid for shooting spitballs? I think pain is a good punishment. Obvviously somthing has to be done.

Discipline needs to reign in children. I speak for every child that needs it. They dont wanna feel pain, but they will continue to stay outta control until you lay down the law. The law needs to be enforced with discipline and pain, if need be.

Recently, in church, as i was sitting down listening to the pastor speak, a child, about 5 yrs old, began to kick my chair. I thought i could ignore it, but after 20 minutes, i knew i could not. I asked to parent to control the child, but she jus shrugged and said, "She's a little girl. Show some generosity." oohhh... generosity my @$$. I could do nothing. I dont want to hit a child. Esp one i dont know. But i tell ya, that kid was askin for it. I ended up jus leaving early; i wasnt happy, but it was better than hitting the child.

I speak with exp when i say children are WAY outta control. ESP teenagers.

L. Zeved

Actually, I wasn't just talking about shopping. Overall, in just about every situation, children are out of hand. Parents have had their right to discipline their children revoked by the state, and now we're beginning to see the backlash of that. As I said, the "alternative" forms of punishment are bogus. Most parents never see them through... So if not an occasional disciplinary swat, then what? Keep letting them run rampant until they enter adulthood? Then what? You have people that think if they scream loud enough, they're going to get whatever they want, and that they can do whatever they feel like, no matter what. In the real world that is not the case, and that is why it is so very important to teach them during their early childhood two very major lessons; 1. You won't always get what you want even if you scream until you turn blue... 2. There are consequences, sometimes painful ones, for not behaving oneself.

As to the age question, I would probably say about 2 would be an appropriate age. It is when children really begin "testing their boundries" to see how much they can get away with. They are actually seeking the guidance and discipline. This is when they begin to learn how it is acceptable, and not acceptable to behave, both at home, and in public. And unfortunately, since there is little rational understanding at that age, it means that those lessons need to be conveyed in a more direct fashion.

I'm a firm believer though, that the disciplinarian should be the parent, not a teacher or other educator. If teachers see a problem, they need to let the parents know, and let them take care of it. If they do nothing about it and the child becomes too disruptive in class then the child should be removed from the school, or placed in a special needs program.

Um...no you don't.

You can be quite dramatic sometimes, LZ

Whoa, back up that spanking train... I have a couple of points to make.

1. It is the lack of discipline that makes children wild, not spanking. Discipline. Believe it or not, the two are not one and the same.

2. In my own experience, about 85% of toddler troubles, if not more could be prevented. Better supervision, better babyproofing and keeping things around so children don't get bored (and into trouble).

3. The difference between phases is not shortened by spanking or any other method of punishment or discipline. Seems silly to me to spank when a child will outgrow whatever behavior in the same time frame.

4. Kids are literal creatures. They also learn more by what you do than what you say. This makes it very important to keep a check on our actions, including spanking. YOU realize that you are spanking for a good reason and that is different than hitting your siblings, friends or other family members. Children, however, are much slower on this concept. The lesson learned is might makes right.

5. Respect? Respect out of love or respect out of fear? I didn't respect my spanking parents, I feared them and their reactions to my misdeeds. This leads to lying, cheating and sneaking. All of which are punishable.

6. How many times to parents try to instill in children that fighting isn't the answer? Probably about as many times as they swat them on the behind for misdeeds.

7. Lastly, there is a very good method of discipline that requires less energy from you than chasing a kid down and swatting it. Natural and Logical consequences. Kid reaches for the toaster? Tell the kid no, that will hurt. Kid keeps it up? Take his or her hand close enough to feel the heat without being burned. Forget about it. Kid does it again they'll know what you were talking about and aren't likely to try that lesson again. Obviously one can't do this with more serious health issues like running in the road... but the consequence there is simple too. Can't behave outside? We're going home, or inside.

8. I have spanked. Every time I have spanked it has been for something that was my fault. What the heck do I expect when I leave such and such out and toddler terror has a ball with it while I'm on the computer or checking the mail?

9. A parent's responsibility is to keep children safe, teach them and guide them. I think this can be accomplished without physical punishment. I'll admit it's darn hard not to swat that little butt that has said "No!" with a gleam in his eye for the fiftieth time... but that doesn't make spanking acceptable.

10. I don't agree with spanking, obviously... but I believe consistancy is far more important than the method of punishment or discipline used. So long as a parent is consistant, won't hear too many complaints from me on the debate front.

Last point... The absolute truth of the matter in this household is that I, or my spouse, have spanked only when we had enough. We spanked because it was too much and we snapped a little. Not gone crazy snapped, just snapped a little bit. It was anger, pure and simple. Frustration, pure and simple. Not a well thought out discipline technique brought out in the best interest of our offspring. I imagine this is true for more parents than not.

madmax, excellent post!

I have three kids, 11, 9, and 6. I have never spanked them, nor has my wife. I would add that another reason I think kids are so wild these days ... ok back up, a couple of reasons.

1. I see too many middle class parents who are gripped by the gotta work gotta get more stuff frenzy. You know what? Raising children, once you have them, is SO important. My wife and I have always felt it is better to do with less than to raise "latch-key" kids. One of us has almost always been home with our kids. There were times when things were really tight and we both had to work, but when we could afford it, we felt it was important to be at home, raising our children. Part of it is the focus on "career." Part of it is an increased self-centeredness in parents, who spend most of their time thinking about their own personal goals and dreams, while ignoring their parental resonsibilities.

2. The focus in our culture has shifted from reading, a participatory event, to watching, a receiving event. I notice, particularly since we don't have cable tv, nor do we receive any channels on our tv, that tv is so jumpy, so short-attention-span oriented, it seems schizophrenic to me.

3. As a result of the guilt parents feel when they raise latch-key kids, they tend to be over permissive, as if to make up for their lack of attention. After all, when you are gone all day, and don't see your kid until 6 pm, you don't want to go straight into being the bad guy!

Once again, though, madmax, kudos. I couldn't have possibly stated it any better. Spanking, like violence, is the last refuge of the incompetent!

By the way, I forgot to say that my kids have no discipline problems to speak of, beyond the minor things that come and go with their various ages. Another big plus, they all love to read!! Don't get me wrong, in our house it's not some crunchy no tv no nothing thing. We have videos, and a playstation 2, and a computer (well duh!). But what do our kids see us doing the most during our free time? Reading.

I don't believe that spanking your children is right. You may hurt your child on accident leaving bruises. The child might think that every time that he/she does something wrong that he/she will be hit be there parents. The risk is to great to spank. You should sit down with your child and talk about what they did wrong

I think it is individual, depending on the nature of the child. When I simply lightly scold my oldest son, he is devastated for the rest of the day. My youngest thinks that 'no' means 'please continue'. I would spank (not yet, because he is only 16 months old) in the event that he becomes uncorrectable with other measures. I honestly don't believe it would come to that, because I can always put him in his room or remove a toy that he likes as 'punishment'.

I do believe in one cardinal rule regarding spanking, however...It should NEVER be done in anger. If the house has certain guidelines, and spanking is the last of a number of corrective resorts, I believe it can be part of a disciplinary approach. It should never be an automatic emotional response to a child's behavior.

Spanking only made me more sneaky. And resentful. And defiant.

Tried it on a kid I was helping to raise. It didn't work then, either. Same results.

I may be a big brute and a parent who needs his children taken away from the state, but I use spanking as a tool in my discipline bag. As our 4 year old is getting better at understanding the spoken word I try to devise punishments that involve taking privileges away, but when our children cross the line with me they know that they may get spanked for it.

Usually when I engage in spanking I am angry. Children can get into dangers that need to be corrected by an immediate response. I want my children to know that when they hear a certain tone in my voice it is time to do what daddy says or else.

I feel this will help when one of our children starts running out toward a street or gets too close to our creek or is going to be near a dangerous dog, or is about to get into some chemicals or household poisons.

You aren't a brute, Eeyore. It is individual to the child. I don't think a swat on the tush is necessarily less 'humane' than throwing a child into his/ her room while they're kicking and thrashing.

I remember once, at a zoo in Italy, I had my new infant in a snuggly, and my toddler was jealous. My husband was deployed, so I was alone. He proceeded to dump dirt on his head, throw himself on the ground and scream. I announced that we were leaving, and he refused. I was forced to carry/drag him, kicking an screaming, about a mile in one hand (because I didn't want him to kick the new baby strapped to my chest). When we got to the car, he threw himself on the road in front of an approaching truck.

After placing the infant into his baby seat, I took the screaming and kicking 3 year old and strapped him into the car. I am sure that I looked abusive during that time. I didn't spank him (it was an hour drive home, and he stopped screaming and fell asleep after about 20 minutes), but I'm sure that was probably abuse to all the Italians who looked on with their 50 supportive family members per child. You just never know until you're there.

As a child I was spanked for doing bad things, Had my mouth washed out with soap for lying, and was made to stand in the corner for up to an hour for back talking my mother or aggravating my sister.I was taught at an early age to address my elders with "yes sir, no sir" and "yes maam and no maam". "Quiet time" was generally between the hours of 9:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M. on school nights. If my sister or I were to throw a fit in public, chances are good we were looking at a good spanking when we got home.
Was that considered abuse? Maybe or maybe not, depends on which generation is answering it.
But the end result is, I grew up knowing the difference between right and wrong, I grew up respecting my elders, I grew up telling the truth.
By knowing i was "gonna get a lickin" for doing something wrong or bad, made me stop and think before i did it.
Todays society with their "quiet time" punishment is not working because we have way to many child experts telling us how to raise our children,and i bet most of those"experts" have no children to begin with.
My father used to tell me" This is going to hurt me more than it hurts you" before he would administer a spanking on the bare butt. It wasnt until I had children of my own that i realized the wisdom he was telling me at the time. He hated having to do it but he was hoping that by spanking me i might stop and think next time before doing something wrong. Yeah i spanked my kids and I washed their mouth out with soap for lying and swearing,and it hurt me more than it hurt them. But my kids grew up respecting their elders and none of them have had to go to prison.
I feel our society as a whole needs to evaluate the direction our children are going."quiet time" has not and will not work, Think about that the next time you read about a kid taking a gun to school and shooting other kids.

Fish, I understand your position, however I believe you're falling into a common trap when it comes to creating generalizations from anecdotes. There is no way you can make the connection from your being spanked to your development of a moral sense of right and wrong. As far as anecdotes go, I was never spanked, and I also know right from wrong. I have never spanked my children, and they have no behavioral problems. So going from anecdotal evidence simply doesn't work, because there's simply too many factors for us to be able to isolate one thing as the responsible causal agent.

That means we have to find a more empirical way to look at it. I wish I could source this stuff, but it's coming from my memory of studying child psychology at university. There are a number of studies which suggest that corporal punishment has little to no effect on the child's behavior. There are also studies that suggest that violence (and corporal punishment is violent behavior, whatever else it is) leads most often to its own continuation - that is, if you hit your children, they are more likely to, in turn, hit their children, and to view violence as a more acceptable behavior when solving a problem.

The biggest problem parents have is not following through on their discipline. "Time outs" can be extremely effective, as long as they administered consistently and clearly. It is the same with loss of privileges. The problem is parents who make idle threats, and never carry them out. Sometimes, they never intend to carry it out - the dad who says, while driving the car, "if you don't quiet down, I'm turning this car around and we'll go back home." The key is to only threaten a punishment you are willing to carry out, and then if you say you will, do it.

Of all these, the worst is corporal punishment combined with "idle threats."

DAD: "be quiet or you'll be in big trouble."

KID: "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!!!"

DAD: "Quiet down RIGHT NOW! Or you'll be in for it!"

KID: "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!!!"

DAD: "You better listen boy!"

KID: "WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!!!"

DAD: (smack!)

What did the kid learn? Fear. Fear of being hit when misbehaving. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to suffering. Suffering leads to the dark side. Please, don't send your kids there!

Common sense tells us that correct behavior inspired by fear does not a healthy person make.

I don't think I would take advice from Yoda on rearing a child Quarkie.


I agree with spanking as a deterrent, especially in the way Eeyore is talking about in dangerous situations for your child.
When mine was about to put a key from a key ring in an electric socket I gave him a good spanking on his butt. Even though I am not home most of the day(working), my wife said he has never tried that again. I would call that a successful deterrent.

OK, sleeper, I got a bit carried away with the Yoda bit...

It may work as a deterrent, but what I'm saying is that it is possible to raise children well without ever spanking them. Cutting off the hands of a thief works too, but we don't generally condone that. I'm not equating the two at all, mind you, only using that as an example that just because one method works does not mean it is the only effective method. If we can raise well-adjusted, well behaved children without spanking, why wouldn't we want to? I will grant you that perhaps spanking requires less effort on the part of the parent, but everyone has also agreed that they don't like or enjoy spanking their kids. If you don't like it, and it isn't necessary, and it inflicts pain, then why do it at all?

I guess I just don't understand. I can see smacking the kid's hand away from the socket, sometimes drastic action is necessary. I want to add here that I am not a proponent of some touchy-feely parenting, where the kids get away with stuff and are never disciplined. I'm addressing the biggest parenting problem (in the discipline area) out there, whether or not you are a spanker, and that is inconsistency. When you make a threat, you carry it out. If I say, "do that once more and you'll be punished with xxxxx," then when the kid does it, you've GOT to follow through. Every day I see parents making idle threats to their kids - and the biggest problem is that usually, the threats are so improvised that the parent pretty obviously has no intention of carrying out the punishment.

Violence begets violence, and hitting someone to modify their behavior only instills the concept that physical dominance is an acceptable means for controlling behavior.

Having two kids myself, I can testify that it's perfectly possible to raise children without ever spanking them. Actually, I've decied that it's better to have just as much, if not more, positive reinforcement as negative reinforcement, and my system seems to be working well (so far.) My children actually care if the upset me, and not just because they're afraid of what I'm going to do to them. Sure, this may change when they turn into teenagers, but as far as I see it, my children are just as well behaved as any whose parents spank them.

My advice: spend time with your kids, but don't drag them to places that they aren't going to enjoy (after a while, the zoo gets boring.) It helps grow bonds while avoiding temper tantrums. Make sure they have friends, and encourage them to spend time with them. They need to get social skills, and it's important that they start growing them at a young age. While you should have rules, don't be afraid to sometimes break them. Otherwise you become an ogre. Let them stay up and watch a movie for an extra hour from time to time, especially if they've done something good. Read to your kids. Don't get really angry unless they've done something really serious. And above all: respect your kids, and they'll probably respect you.


And if for some reason you absolutely need to spank your kids, don't use anything except your hand, and don't take off their clothes. You can underestimate what that stuff can do to a kid.


<EDIT: Damn, I posted on a dead thread>

Well as a parent of 2 ages 10(daughter) and 12(son) i used a swat on the butt when they got out of line,but only after repeated attempts to make them stop what they were doing.Sometimes no or go to your room doesnt work but each kid is different.My daughter for example i havnt laid a hand on in 4 years and can count on one hand the amount of times ive spanked her because she listens.The boy on the other hand required more effort in the spanking dept because he was just hard headed but havnt had to touch him in almost 2 years.As to momof3 who stated she believed kids who were spanked turn out aggressive i completely disagree.Neither one of my kids have problems at school or at home because they know who is in charge and that there are consequences for their actions.Imo a timeout or go to your room doesnt do the trick all the time occasionly a pop on the rear is what is needed.

I helped raise my sister's two children for several years until she got her life together. Something I found very helpful when they were toddlers was to place my hand on top of theirs and hit MY hand real hard so it made a sharp cracking sound.

That got their attention, actually scared them to the point of crying sometimes, but never physically hurt them.

As they got older, I would swat their backside a couple of times, but I knew when to stop. Some parents don't.

It appears to me reading this thread that spanking works for some and not for others. I think that's very good.

When both my kids were somewhere under 3 (and in diapers/pullups), I swatted them on the butt when I needed to. It really didn't hurt them, but it was the best signal to them who was really in charge.

But after they got a little older, it became pretty ineffective because they were smart enough to figure out I wouldn't hurt them. So, we had to resort to the best method we could come up with:

BLACKMAIL.

Kids respond a lot differently when they lose their favorite things for weeks at a time. For us, it was like breaking a horse in the first time. There was two weeks of an ugly power struggle, but after the kid found out who was in charge, it was smooth sailing.

Don't want to take a nap? No problem. Say goodbye to your aladdin video.

Talking back again? No problem. Say goodbye to your favorite princess dress.

No negative attention, no yelling, no debating. Problem solved.

I have spanked both mine, about 2 times each, when they were too little to reason with, and were behaving very badly. A spanking done by me was 3 or 4 swats to a bare leg at the most. Spanking a padded, diapered behind can be dangerous as you may hit too hard just to be sure the kid feels it. Each time it was with apparent anger, not real anger. I talked first, raised my voice next, then yelled, then spanked. They learn to associate the raised voice with danger and the necessity to listen and obey.
It worked with my son. When he was around 8, his uncle threw some dry ice his way at a picnic table and said, "Here, Chris, have some ice".
Chris didn't know the difference between plain ice and dry ice, and popped it in his mouth. I yelled, "spit that out!" as it was going in his mouth, and he did. Now, if it had been my daughter, she would has just asked why.
One of my nieces, old enough to have plenty of teeth, put a lamp cord in her mouth. There was no time for all the steps listed above. I yelled no and swatted her bare leg at the same time. Her mom was mad at me for that, and her dad thought that there was no danger, that the circuit breaker would have tripped before doing any damage. That is not true, I wouldn't even trust a GFI in that situation. Later they found out why the little girl down the street was periodically going in for oral surgery. She bit through a lamp cord when little.
Sometimes you just have to hit, but there is a right way to do it.
I was beaten many times as a child by a short tempered father who used a big belt, usually at the insistence of my mother. Long story there that I won't share. At any rate, I knew how NOT to do it long before I got kids of my own.

Resorting to physical violence to your children is a sign of failure.

We do not beat the criminally insane, psychotics, and criminals when they do wrong. If they are violent, they are restrained, however, no matter how wrong the act, we do not beat them.

If you are so inept that you must beat a child to maintain order, perhaps you should seek help.

Or maybe I'm just completely looney thinking that children should be treated better than a serial rapist.

-Robert

That really wasn't very constructive, Greenring7. Several responsible people with actual parenting experience have responded to this thread, explaining why they believe spanking - not beating - is necessary in certain cases. Maybe you don't agree, maybe they are in a factual or moral sense wrong, but calling them failures, inept, etc. is just gratuitous name-calling. I wouldn't be so quick to judge, especially since I have not experienced the trials of parenting first-hand, and perhaps you should show (perhaps for similar reasons) some respect too.