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

[JaredXE]

Absolutely yes. Time-out doesn't work. Trying to talk to a 3 year-old doesn't work. A swift, painful shock when a child is naughty does work. Negative reinforcement. You can try other things when a child is older, but at an early age, spanking is an excellent way to discipline a youngster.

EDIT: To those posters who say that only shitty parents spank their kids. You are dumb. You just called your grandparents and nearly every parent all the way back to the beginning shitty parents. I also can tell that you don't have kids yourself, otherwise you would know better. I have a couple of adopted sisters, all in their early teens now. They were told since a young age by child counselors that no adult is allowed to touch them and if they do to call the police because that is abuse. They are killing my mother with their misbehavior because she's supposedly not allowed to touch them and other punishments don't work if the kids can just walk away from you.

Whenever I come over to visit.....they behave. They behave because I have hit them for being absolute shits. I ignore it when they tell me I will get into trouble and I will force them to do their chores and behave properly and I will be physical to them if needed. They understand that my affection is predicated upon good behavior and so they act accordingly.

SPANKING WORKS.

Calling people who hit their kids shitty parents is to allow generations of kids to be entitled brats who never fear adults. This is part of parenting. You arent supposed to be your kid's friend, you are supposed to guide them and help them make right choices and have them learn the consequences of bad ones.

 

[Condemned]

Physical violence is the sign of a weak and desperate mind. It is strength to make a child see reason trough dialog or less aggressive punishment rather than beating them into submission.

So how many kids do you have and how old are they?

Let me tell you a little story.

Ever since my parents divorced I've been living with my mother who is constantly on the brink of depression and nervous breakdowns and my two little brothers, one who is suffering from a form of autism and the other who has ADHD. I'm the oldest child in the family and thus it has become my responsibility to carry a part of the burden of raising my two little brothers.

My father was an unsociable and aggressive parent. He didn't refrain from beating me or my brothers. I still bear scars that remind me. It sure as hell didn't do me any good since I am now an overly anxious person with a slightly unstable personality. I still resent him for what he did to me and my family.

Nevertheless I now take part as mediator in the family to try and keep things working smooth. It's not easy since my brothers constantly fight with each other and my mother doesn't have the backbone to step up and work things out. And thus it falls to me. I refrain from letting my anger on the loose and try to be as reasonable as possible.

In short according to my personal experience beating your child is wrong and could damage them emotionally.

Physical violence is the sign of a weak and desperate mind. It is strength to make a child see reason trough dialog or less aggressive punishment rather than beating them into submission.

I think you may be forgetting (or ignoring) how children aren't mature, and thus, aren't capable of logic or rationalization on a sufficiently deep level. If you could, we'd all have jobs at 10 and we'd have elected the Jonas Brothers president at some point.

As for taking away their beloved possessions or activities, they know it's not permanent, and are often distracted soon enough by something else so that when they can access these things again, they're like... "Oh. Uhm, ok." If these actions are made permanent, by perhaps disposing of a favored toy, or banning an activity for a very lengthy period of time, are acceptable alternatives, however.

Physical pain? Everything understands that, and nature's not shy about using it. I don't think humans should be. Knowing the limit, however, and not taking it too far, is what separates us from animals. Over-moralization is weakening the survival capacity of the human race, IMHO.

Please see the above.

 

[artanis_neravar]

No, because I can't go beating adults can I?

But that's just one point. More points:

Children should love their parents, not fear them.
Children shouldn't not do something because they might get hit, they should not do something because it is wrong.
Parent-child relationships should be built on mutual respect and trust.

Also, "It happened to me and I'm fine!" is not a good argument, I can't say, "I had smallpox and I'm fine!" in order to discredit vaccines.

No, because I can't go beating adults can I?

Adults aren't learning the difference between right and wrong. An adult who steals money gets sent to jail a 2 year old who steels money doesn't. Adults and children are completely different and are treated as such, because children are still maturing and learning.

Children should love their parents, not fear them.

Spanking doesn't induce fear in the parent as long as the parent explains why they did it and only do it when the child does something wrong, while heaping praise when the child does something right.

Children shouldn't not do something because they might get hit, they should not do something because it is wrong.

And spanking a child is a good way to show them that it is wrong. Also just because something is "wrong" doesn't mean kids still won't try to do it. It's wrong to sneak snacks, but kids are still going to do it.

Parent-child relationships should be built on mutual respect and trust.

Respect is earned, not given. A child won't respect their parents if their parents let them run around and do what ever they want to.

 

[artanis_neravar]

Physical violence is the sign of a weak and desperate mind. It is strength to make a child see reason trough dialog or less aggressive punishment rather than beating them into submission.

So how many kids do you have and how old are they?

Let me tell you a little story.

Ever since my parents divorced I've been living with my mother who is constantly on the brink of depression and nervous breakdowns and my two little brothers, one who is suffering from a form of autism and the other who has ADHD. I'm the oldest child in the family and thus it has become my responsibility to carry a part of the burden of raising my two little brothers.

My father was an unsociable and aggressive parent. He didn't refrain from beating me or my brothers. I still bear scars that remind me. It sure as hell didn't do me any good since I am now an overly anxious person with a slightly unstable personality. I still resent him for what he did to me and my family.

Nevertheless I now take part as mediator in the family to try and keep things working smooth. It's not easy since my brothers constantly fight with each other and my mother doesn't have the backbone to step up and work things out. And thus it falls to me. I refrain from letting my anger on the loose and try to be as reasonable as possible.

In short according to my personal experience beating your child is wrong and could damage them emotionally.

Physical violence is the sign of a weak and desperate mind. It is strength to make a child see reason trough dialog or less aggressive punishment rather than beating them into submission.

I think you may be forgetting (or ignoring) how children aren't mature, and thus, aren't capable of logic or rationalization on a sufficiently deep level. If you could, we'd all have jobs at 10 and we'd have elected the Jonas Brothers president at some point.

As for taking away their beloved possessions or activities, they know it's not permanent, and are often distracted soon enough by something else so that when they can access these things again, they're like... "Oh. Uhm, ok." If these actions are made permanent, by perhaps disposing of a favored toy, or banning an activity for a very lengthy period of time, are acceptable alternatives, however.

Physical pain? Everything understands that, and nature's not shy about using it. I don't think humans should be. Knowing the limit, however, and not taking it too far, is what separates us from animals. Over-moralization is weakening the survival capacity of the human race, IMHO.

Please see the above.

You are confusing spanking with beating, spanking should never leave scares and never be done out of anger or rage.

 

[Neonit]

yes. of course it is. as long as parent realizes that by doing so he/she has failed.
now, hear me out before rage quoting me.
spanking is not a good way to teach your children. its a.... not really good, but effective way of "unlearning" certain behavior.
now keep in mind, im not an expert, im just 19 and i still remember how pissed i was when my parents did it. it did however made me not repeat my mistakes.
if your way of rising a child is punishing for everything he/she does wrong, without showing how it SHOULD be done.... you fail.
without any punishments at all your kids wont be prepared for real world, so once again - fail.

like ALWAYS moderation is the way to go. and im surprised that after, i dunno, 10000 years of civilization people havent realized this.

 

[aescuder]

As long as they say "I love you" after each spank.




lol

 

[artanis_neravar]

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/125/5/e1057
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1983895,00.html

Research found above has shown that:

"As 5-year-olds, the children who had been spanked were more likely than the nonspanked to be defiant, demand immediate satisfaction of their wants and needs, become frustrated easily, have temper tantrums and lash out physically against other people or animals."

There are many non-violent alternates which are a little more inconvient for the parent but pay-off in the long run for the children's mental state.

You now what the flaw in that is? It doesn't show causation. Were the kids more trouble because they were spanked? Or were they spanked because they were more trouble?

One of the control variables was the child's behaviour. It says it in the abstract and goes into more detail in the method section.

How does one use a child's behavior as a control? There is no way of knowing if a child will be aggressive in 2 years, and there is no real way of knowing if spanking is what brought that along.

Because it was a longitudinal study, they looked at the kids' behaviour and how much they were spanked when they were three, and looked at their behaviour again when they were five. The link to the study is somewhere earlier in the thread, go take a look for yourself.

How do they tell if the kid would have acted the exact same way if they weren't spanked?

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Physical violence is the sign of a weak and desperate mind. It is strength to make a child see reason trough dialog or less aggressive punishment rather than beating them into submission.

So how many kids do you have and how old are they?

Let me tell you a little story.

Ever since my parents divorced I've been living with my mother who is constantly on the brink of depression and nervous breakdowns and my two little brothers, one who is suffering from a form of autism and the other who has ADHD. I'm the oldest child in the family and thus it has become my responsibility to carry a part of the burden of raising my two little brothers.

My father was an unsociable and aggressive parent. He didn't refrain from beating me or my brothers. I still bear scars that remind me. It sure as hell didn't do me any good since I am now an overly anxious person with a slightly unstable personality. I still resent him for what he did to me and my family.

Nevertheless I now take part as mediator in the family to try and keep things working smooth. It's not easy since my brothers constantly fight with each other and my mother doesn't have the backbone to step up and work things out. And thus it falls to me. I refrain from letting my anger on the loose and try to be as reasonable as possible.

In short according to my personal experience beating your child is wrong and could damage them emotionally.

Physical violence is the sign of a weak and desperate mind. It is strength to make a child see reason trough dialog or less aggressive punishment rather than beating them into submission.

I think you may be forgetting (or ignoring) how children aren't mature, and thus, aren't capable of logic or rationalization on a sufficiently deep level. If you could, we'd all have jobs at 10 and we'd have elected the Jonas Brothers president at some point.

As for taking away their beloved possessions or activities, they know it's not permanent, and are often distracted soon enough by something else so that when they can access these things again, they're like... "Oh. Uhm, ok." If these actions are made permanent, by perhaps disposing of a favored toy, or banning an activity for a very lengthy period of time, are acceptable alternatives, however.

Physical pain? Everything understands that, and nature's not shy about using it. I don't think humans should be. Knowing the limit, however, and not taking it too far, is what separates us from animals. Over-moralization is weakening the survival capacity of the human race, IMHO.

Please see the above.

You are confusing spanking with beating, spanking should never leave scares and never be done out of anger or rage.

This. And I truly feel for your situation, but I also had ADHD as a child (undiagnosed then, because it was unheard of, and it was simply called being hyper or overactive in those days/this region), and feel that my spankings, along with other punishments helped me understand actions and consequences with a higher regard.

 

[karamazovnew]

Well, I've seen really naughty children, but I've also seen really insane parents, overreacting and yelling like hurricanes. I'm no parent so I can't understand what how it is to raise a kid. I won't have one until I'm completely ready and have spent time with my friends' kids, to know what to expect.
Even so, I'm prepared to use light spanking well before I get really really angry. It's better for the kid to get a slight slap on the butt rather than me yelling at him like a madman. I don't want him to fear me, and I don't want him to fear doing the wrong stuff just because that would anger me. Anyway, I guess I'll see when it happens

 

[Condemned]

You are confusing spanking with beating, spanking should never leave scares and never be done out of anger or rage.

So what you are saying is that you dont know the difference between spanking a child and beating them.

This. And I truly feel for your situation, but I also had ADHD as a child (undiagnosed then, because it was unheard of, and it was simply called being hyper or overactive in those days/this region), and feel that my spankings, along with other punishments helped me understand actions and consequences with a higher regard.

It might me my own personal resentment that makes me dislike and generalize this so much. I could perhaps see how spanking might put a child on the right path. It's just that some people fail to see when they are going to far.

 

[Custard_Angel]

Good idea: Slapping a child when they badly misbehave.

Bad idea: Beating up a kid to make yourself feel big.

As with all things, moderation is key.

 

[PukingRainbows]

"You ever notice how kids were a lot less fucking annoying back when parents were EXPECTED to smack them on the ass if they were acting up?" Evidence?

"So, my answer would be, yes it's alright, and fuck you if you think the slightest bit of physical contact will scar them for life." There might not scar everyone, but it will leave some physcologgical damage in some in the long run. http://www.nospank.net/straus14.htm "DURHAM, N.H. -? Children who are spanked or victims of other corporal punishment are more likely to have sexual problems as a teen or adult, according to new research presented today by Murray Straus, co-director of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire."

 

[b3nn3tt]

http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/125/5/e1057
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1983895,00.html

Research found above has shown that:

"As 5-year-olds, the children who had been spanked were more likely than the nonspanked to be defiant, demand immediate satisfaction of their wants and needs, become frustrated easily, have temper tantrums and lash out physically against other people or animals."

There are many non-violent alternates which are a little more inconvient for the parent but pay-off in the long run for the children's mental state.

You now what the flaw in that is? It doesn't show causation. Were the kids more trouble because they were spanked? Or were they spanked because they were more trouble?

One of the control variables was the child's behaviour. It says it in the abstract and goes into more detail in the method section.

How does one use a child's behavior as a control? There is no way of knowing if a child will be aggressive in 2 years, and there is no real way of knowing if spanking is what brought that along.

Because it was a longitudinal study, they looked at the kids' behaviour and how much they were spanked when they were three, and looked at their behaviour again when they were five. The link to the study is somewhere earlier in the thread, go take a look for yourself.

How do they tell if the kid would have acted the exact same way if they weren't spanked?

Granted, they didn't control for that. But then it would be impossible to do that. The closest you could get would be to have a matched pairs design, where they match the children as closely as possible based on behaviour.

And actually having read the study again, there were a number of confounding variables which could also have affected the results. However, these confounding variables centred around the mistreatment of the children, which was associated with mothers who spanked their children.

 

[FamoFunk]

Uh, no.

You don't hit or smack a random person on the street who mis-behaves or plays up, so why do it to a small child just because they're yours?

It's cruel, it doesn't work like people would love to believe. It makes your child scared and full of resentment. You're the one of two people in the world (Mum and Dad) who the child 100% trusts and looks up to for love, reassurance and guidance; not smacks, hits and being screamed at.

Also, smacking is a sign a parent has lost control of themselves and of their child/situation. Not a good thing to be brought up in.

 

[artanis_neravar]

This thing of, "Don't call it hitting, that's got negative connotations," is a very interesting view. People in favour of, say, assissinating dictators don't really like calling it murder (though it is arguable it isn't that) or even killing (though it definetly is that) because they have negative connotations.

When you spank your child, you are hitting your child, if you want a reasoned and adult argument about this you have to face up to the facts and be proud of what you are doing, don't sugar the pill, it makes the pill look bad.

Well, connotations or not, hitting is what is being done. It may well be a specific type of hitting, but it is still hitting.

To properly compare the two, it would be like the parent touching the child's hand to a hot stove to show them that it's hot.

No it isn't because that is forcing your child to do something that they should. The parent touching the child's hand to a hot stove to show them that it's hot, is much closer to the parent putting a crayon in the kids hand and using their(the parent's) hand to direct the child's hand in drawing on the walls and then spanking them.
Spanking your child is not always the answer, but pain is one of the best motivators especially when the parent later sits down and explains what the child did wrong. Spanking by itself isn't very effective but spanking followed by adult conversation with your kids is very effective.

I would argue that the child needs the explanation that they've done something wrong as soon as possible, so that they can form a connection between the event and the subsequent punishment. And I would also argue that that punishment absolutely does not need to take the form of hitting your child.

When someone says I hit my kid, people will immediately thing of child abuse, where if you say I spank my kid people will think of a slap on the ass. You are using "hit" because of the way it sounds, whether you will admit it or not, you are saying it because it makes the practice look bad. It is like calling what soldiers do in combat murder, they are killing but it's not really murder.

Children aren't stupid they have memories longer then 5 seconds. They need time to calm down from the initial act to a point where they can actually pay attention to what you are saying. No spanking your kid doesn't always need to happen but there are cases where it is better then just taking away their toys.

 

[dead.juice]

No, because I can't go beating adults can I?

How is this a point?

But that's just one point. More points:

Children should love their parents, not fear them.
Children shouldn't not do something because they might get hit, they should not do something because it is wrong.
Parent-child relationships should be built on mutual respect and trust.

Children aren't born with discipline, just because they know what is right or wrong won't stop them from doing wrong if they want to.
Punishment teaches discipline, spanking teaches respect. If you don't teach your children these things somehow, then you don't love them.

Also, "It happened to me and I'm fine!" is not a good argument, I can't say, "I had smallpox and I'm fine!" in order to discredit vaccines.

I guess having experience in the subject matter doesn't mean jack shit anymore.

 

[MetalDooley]

Why is this in the gaming discussion forum?

Because it is under "off topic".

It's been moved.This was originally posted in the gaming discussion section.Hence why I asked the question