Poll: Is it ok for parents to spank their kids?

[EcoHulk]

Hit this kid and you are arrested. Seems right to you? I didn't think so.

Spoiler

 

[Thespian]

I was coming from the fact words can be ignored. The conditioning cannot. You can brush off teachings easily, I seen many children refuse to acknowledge any importance especially if they cannot properly control the child. The child is not developed, and mostly responds to the lowest of stimuli.

Humans are programmed to pay heed to the wisdom of the rest of the tribe. If a parent can not get a message across to a child who is at the age when they are most desperate for guidance, then the parent has gone wrong somewhere. Simple as that.

 

[Dyme]

No it is not.
It is not necessary and makes no one happy. It is just bad.

 

[JoJo]

I was coming from the fact words can be ignored. The conditioning cannot. You can brush off teachings easily, I seen many children refuse to acknowledge any importance especially if they cannot properly control the child. The child is not developed, and mostly responds to the lowest of stimuli.

Humans are programmed to pay heed to the wisdom of the rest of the tribe. If a parent can not get a message across to a child who is at the age when they are most desperate for guidance, then the parent has gone wrong somewhere. Simple as that.

Right, and all the gang members and arrogance that comes with childhood are just parents who told their children to do those things. Children are stupid, and they do not always listen to words.

You do know there are other punishments rather than physical right? I swear every pro-spanker believes that it's only a choice between either hitting your kids or telling them in a nice voice to stop, which is isn't. Other punishments include:

-Grounding to a particular room
-Extra chores
-Removal of a treat such as TV, video games, internet access etc

Sure, these take more effort for the parent but they're better for the child in the long run as shown by scientific research that I posted earlier in this thread.

 

[rje5]

No. To my mind, there should never be a situation where you'd need to. There are plenty of ways of disciplining children that don't require hitting them that will be just as effective.

EDIT: Hitting children only serves to teach them that hitting is an effective way to deal with someone who isn't doing what you want them to. I'd say it's much better to explain to them why what they did was wrong the first time they do it, and after that discipline them in a way which doesn't require hitting them.

No, some kids need it. And I'm tired of people saying spanking is hitting. It's not. And spanking is an open palm to the buttocks. Anywhere else and anything else isn't spanking. The butt has a lot of meat and that's why it's used to spank. It doesn't hurt, it stings. And it stings the parent as well.

Taking something from a child doesn't always get through, and by the time it does, then spanking probably won't work anymore.

My parents spanked me when I was young, until I got big enough that the spankings hurt my father more than it hurt me, which is when they started taking my tv privileges and gaming consoles away. Worked fine for me and I never thought I was being abused.

If anyone has come from a household where spanking has been used appropriately, they probably don't have a problem with it. Most people who have an issue with it were probably either beaten (not spanked) or never punished at all.

I couldn't disagree more; no child 'needs' to be spanked. And no, spanking is not the same as beating your kids, there are very few people who would argue that they are the same thing, but spanking is still hitting, and parents who spank their kids are still hitting them.

I've also never bought the argument 'I was spanked and I turned out ok' as a reason why spanking is acceptable. I wasn't spanked when I was a child, and I turned out fine. And of those two options, one involves hitting your children and one doesn't. I know which one I prefer.

You missed the point of my post. I said SOME kids need it. You obviously weren't one of those kids, as long as you grew up to respect your parents. Some kids don't accept their parents as an authority figure that they need to obey.

Some kids if you tell them to stop what they're doing will listen. Some won't. Some will respond to being grounded or having some things taken away. Some won't. Some need a little kick of adrenaline to remind them who is actually in charge.

Keep in mind for the most parts, kids will listen and won't need spanked. But I see too many kids in public mouthing off and screaming and ignoring their parents, and I personally believe it's because they don't respect them. I knew if I mouthed off in public, as soon as I got home I would get spanked, so I didn't mouth off in public. I didn't think "oh they may take my gameboy or tv away", because kids don't think like that. I knew no matter what they took away I still had my imagination and could have fun in my own way. It's hard to have fun when your rear is stinging, and that's the point of punishment. You shouldn't be able to be happy or having fun when you're being punished.

It's a child by child basis, and a household by household basis. If used correctly, I feel spanking is a perfectly fine alternate punishment that some kids respond to. It's your responsibility as a parent to figure out what works and doesn't work as punishment for your child. If spanking works, fine. If grounding works, fine.

My beef is that in today's world people are extremists and absolutists. People believe one thing is either completely right or completely wrong. People don't seem to see shades of grey anymore. And that's what spanking, and really any form of punishment is, a shade of grey.

 

[b3nn3tt]

I couldn't disagree more; no child 'needs' to be spanked. And no, spanking is not the same as beating your kids, there are very few people who would argue that they are the same thing, but spanking is still hitting, and parents who spank their kids are still hitting them.

I've also never bought the argument 'I was spanked and I turned out ok' as a reason why spanking is acceptable. I wasn't spanked when I was a child, and I turned out fine. And of those two options, one involves hitting your children and one doesn't. I know which one I prefer.

You missed the point of my post. I said SOME kids need it. You obviously weren't one of those kids, as long as you grew up to respect your parents. Some kids don't accept their parents as an authority figure that they need to obey.

Some kids if you tell them to stop what they're doing will listen. Some won't. Some will respond to being grounded or having some things taken away. Some won't. Some need a little kick of adrenaline to remind them who is actually in charge.

Keep in mind for the most parts, kids will listen and won't need spanked. But I see too many kids in public mouthing off and screaming and ignoring their parents, and I personally believe it's because they don't respect them. I knew if I mouthed off in public, as soon as I got home I would get spanked, so I didn't mouth off in public. I didn't think "oh they may take my gameboy or tv away", because kids don't think like that. I knew no matter what they took away I still had my imagination and could have fun in my own way. It's hard to have fun when your rear is stinging, and that's the point of punishment. You shouldn't be able to be happy or having fun when you're being punished.

It's a child by child basis, and a household by household basis. If used correctly, I feel spanking is a perfectly fine alternate punishment that some kids respond to. It's your responsibility as a parent to figure out what works and doesn't work as punishment for your child. If spanking works, fine. If grounding works, fine.

My beef is that in today's world people are extremists and absolutists. People believe one thing is either completely right or completely wrong. People don't seem to see shades of grey anymore. And that's what spanking, and really any form of punishment is, a shade of grey.

I think that if the children aren't responding to the parents, then it's more to do with the fact that the parents haven't instilled the proper respect in their kids. There are plenty of ways of disciplining kids and asserting authority that don't require spanking. I'm pretty sure that in any case where spanking is 'needed' it's more a case that the parents have inadequately attempted to assert authority through non-violent means.

I do see spanking as a black and white issue, I firmly believe that there is no good reason to spank kids; I feel that any perceived reason is a failure to properly implement non-violent punishments, which is a failure on the part of the parent, not a problem with the kid.

 

[Thespian]

Right, and all the gang members and arrogance that comes with childhood are just parents who told their children to do those things. Children are stupid, and they do not always listen to words.

You'll have to make the underlined sentence a lot clearer. I'm going to guess you're implying that modern day gang members are living their lives that way because of poor parenting, or something. I'm sure it could all be avoided if their parents were just a tad more violent and half assed.

 

[Jamieson 90]

All children are different and in the right circumstances a smack on the bottom might be the only punishement that will work and get through to them. When it comes to parenthood and raising children, (I am not a parent) I would rather the goverment and state not dictate to me how I should go about it as long as I am not doing anything illegal.

If and when I ever have children I would like to know I have a "if everything else fails" then I can smack them option. Thats exactly it, a last resort, something that should only be used when nothing else will work. There are two types of bad behavior that I could actually see myself smacking a child.

The first being stealing. My parents brought me up to respect my property but to also respect every one elses. I find the act of stealing to be disgusting one and if I ever found one of hypothetical children stealing then yes I would smack them. The second being bullying, bullying is for cowards who can only pick on the weak and vunerable. Again if I ever found out one of my hypothetical children was bullying then I would smack them and teach them how it feels to be on the other end of it.

I wont have any of this nanny crap, If I have kids they will be brought up to be respectful citizens, who have good jobs and contribute to society. They will not go around speaking to teachers and other adults in authority posisitions without respect. Teachers might not have the power to instill respect but I bloody will.

 

[DarthScorpio11]

In my opinion, i think spanking is good for kids. I mean, as long as it doesn't get out of hand. I'm 21, and in the 90s, it was completely normal. However, seems like the kids that grew up in the 00s are out of control because the parents are scared of the kids, because kids can manipulate the situation so much, and get the parents arrested. I'm not saying some kids are legit abused, but many kids are just spoiled brats that need a good ass whoopin

 

[Abbyrose07]

My mom used to go after my brothers and I with a cheese grader and huge metal spatula...good times! Kids need more spankings these days...little brats...lol.

 

[Bane_Star]

...{snip}..

But heres the thing that bugs me about this whole debate: when did we decide that it was wrong for children to act like, well, children? Children are loud and hyperactive, and our ultimate counter measure is to beat them? Right. Its like killing all cats because they like fish, and liking fish is against the rules, as decided by adults around the world. Fucking stupid.

If you can give me one good reason to beat children I will eat my hat. It does nothing much except repress and leads to severe issues later in life more often than it does not.

...{snip}...

Children should be children, but as they grow they need to learn to STOP doing things that are not appropriate for being an Adult.

Trying to teach a Teenager how to behave is like teaching a cat not to eat fish, But children are far more maleable.

I was a child care worker, I'm now a teacher, I learned psychology of learning, childhood behaviour patterns in adults and relationships between children vs adults.

Children Learn from two factors, Respect and Fear. Respect comes with age. How can you train a 2 year old with no comprehension of respect? Fear.. fear of loss, fear of anger, fear of pain. Not every child will respond to each equally. Over time, they build up a resistance to these fears and if you haven't earned their respect (following up on your threats, following set recognisable behaviours, setting boundaries and limits) your only recourse is to increase the fear.

But the Main point I want to raise is your usage of the word BEAT?!

The OT is about spanking, defined as a light quick moderately painful shock to the skin. More the action itself works than any residual pain. Beating is Illegal, dangerous and abusive, I agree that there is no reason to beat, EVER.

 

[Thespian]

You are naive enough to assume that a few strong words will effect anything, especially when the rebellious stage sets in. Children do have a mind of their own, but are arrogant enough to disregard any advice and do what they wish. not every child is the stepford children.

You just saying a few harsh words does not always work.

Actually, I said earlier that words alone will not neccessarily be enough, and that you need to couple them with action. However, if you think slapping your child's bum is the most complex and profound action available then you need to expand your horizons.

 

[Ramzal]

I was coming from the fact words can be ignored. The conditioning cannot. You can brush off teachings easily, I seen many children refuse to acknowledge any importance especially if they cannot properly control the child. The child is not developed, and mostly responds to the lowest of stimuli.

Humans are programmed to pay heed to the wisdom of the rest of the tribe. If a parent can not get a message across to a child who is at the age when they are most desperate for guidance, then the parent has gone wrong somewhere. Simple as that.

Right, and all the gang members and arrogance that comes with childhood are just parents who told their children to do those things. Children are stupid, and they do not always listen to words.

Actually, I'm from an environment where gang activity was high. (Real gang activty, such as stabbing a woman for asking you to please move to the other side because you are blocking the stairs and she has to carry up 40 pounds of groceries. Not "Standing on the corner" B.S") The biggest consistence between the majority of people who ran that life was that they were beaten stupid by their mothers and fathers.

The problem with physical reinforcement is that people get carried away because they are angry. And anger can bring out a lot. From slapping your kid across the face, to beating your own child over the head with a frying pan because he/she asked what "Jerk off" means. There needs to be a balance for what you're doing as a parent. If a kid talks back, you don't have to hit them. Talk to them about the subject at hand. Hell, you might even find that you are in the wrong. Kids are strange like that.

One hit is enough. Not in the face, and not using an object. Use your own hands so that you can control yourself and realize that it's you that's doing the action and causing the pain. A slap on the hand or the butt is enough for a kid to get the point. If you hit a kid more than once as punishment, then you're doing it because -you're- angry and that's the same thing as child abuse. However, it's not the physical reinforcement that builds a child up to not be rude, join a gang, or do something that would have them killed.

It's discipline. Children crave it, and the more you stick to a fair schedule in their life with limits, and you explain WHY you're doing it you minimize the chances of a child doing damage to others and more importantly themselves. The main reason why children grow to be out of control people is the lack of fair discipline. The difference in before and after some people joining military service makes that clear as well.

 

[Bane_Star]

I still disagree. If you are only able to raise your child by means of fear, you shouldnt be a parent and you shouldnt be around children AT ALL. Its as simple as that. How you got and kept that child care job, I have no idea.

because I taught them all to respect their teachers, parents and childcare workers. and they Loved me for it.. Hmm. funny that!

 

[JoJo]

Right, and all the gang members and arrogance that comes with childhood are just parents who told their children to do those things. Children are stupid, and they do not always listen to words.

You'll have to make the underlined sentence a lot clearer. I'm going to guess you're implying that modern day gang members are living their lives that way because of poor parenting, or something. I'm sure it could all be avoided if their parents were just a tad more violent and half assed.

You are naive enough to assume that a few strong words will effect anything, especially when the rebellious stage sets in. Children do have a mind of their own, but are arrogant enough to disregard any advice and do what they wish. not every child is the stepford children.

You just saying a few harsh words does not always work.

Did you not read my above quote which you ignored and contained the exact answer to your query in this post? No offence but you're losing credibility here. I'll repeat in a more concise manner:

Discipline is not limited to just a choice between physical and "harsh words". Several examples are listed in my above post of other methods.