Bingo, a smack is but one tool in the arsenal that requires thoughtful and measured deployment. With this I have on caveat, as my mother was fond of saying "Smacking my children is a privilege I reserve for myself".inu-kun said:
Smacking Your Child.
- Thread starter Parasondox
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Speaking as somebody involved with Childline I have had to listen to the stories of how the occasional slap gradually evolved into full on physical abuse too many times to ever accept smacking as an acceptable disciplinary measure. The victim and the perpetrator are usually the last people to realise that they have an abusive relationship.
Smacking is effective as a shock tactic to make your child quickly obey you, that's basically it (if you rarely shout at your kid then you can use that to have basically the same effect). If you do it more than a handful of times then there is no more shock value (like hearing an "edgy" comedian make their 12th Down Syndrome joke) so you have to hit harder to have the same effect.
So basically smacking is the heroine of parental disciplinary measures. Maybe you can get away with using it a couple of times but why even bother when there are other better options that don't make you feel like shit afterwards.
If you have a good relationship with your kid and a good control of your own temper then I see no reason that the occasional once-in-a-blue-moon smack will have any adverse effects... but in this situation you're likely never going to need it anyway.
Smacking is effective as a shock tactic to make your child quickly obey you, that's basically it (if you rarely shout at your kid then you can use that to have basically the same effect). If you do it more than a handful of times then there is no more shock value (like hearing an "edgy" comedian make their 12th Down Syndrome joke) so you have to hit harder to have the same effect.
So basically smacking is the heroine of parental disciplinary measures. Maybe you can get away with using it a couple of times but why even bother when there are other better options that don't make you feel like shit afterwards.
If you have a good relationship with your kid and a good control of your own temper then I see no reason that the occasional once-in-a-blue-moon smack will have any adverse effects... but in this situation you're likely never going to need it anyway.
Pointless in the longrun, or even counter productive sometimes.
But in the end, if it shuts them up at a movie who am I to argue?
I will probably judge you if you hit your kid, but aside from looking like an asshole it doesn't really matter in the end.
As a kid that was hit occasionally, it certainly didn't make me stop doing something. I just didn't get caught anymore. And definitely made me a little shit to deal with for the rest of the day.
I always rebelled more if I thought a punishment was unjustified as a kid. And to this day I'm proud of that.
There is also of course smacking them up all the time for little reason which is simply not okay. But a for a clip over the ears while out shopping to get them to shut up, its not going to make them grow up any differently.
But in the end, if it shuts them up at a movie who am I to argue?
I will probably judge you if you hit your kid, but aside from looking like an asshole it doesn't really matter in the end.
As a kid that was hit occasionally, it certainly didn't make me stop doing something. I just didn't get caught anymore. And definitely made me a little shit to deal with for the rest of the day.
I always rebelled more if I thought a punishment was unjustified as a kid. And to this day I'm proud of that.
There is also of course smacking them up all the time for little reason which is simply not okay. But a for a clip over the ears while out shopping to get them to shut up, its not going to make them grow up any differently.
Personally, I feel there are times it may be necessary, but do it in such a way as to not damage the kid's psyche, impart excessive gender roles or disrespectful chivalry, things like that. It's tricky. I can't help wondering if my parents had done that (raised by Mom so, to be fair, that's more difficult for women to follow through with, but then again women can also physically rape men and physically abuse depending on context, strength differentials between the two, and coercion tactics) if I'd be better off now for example. It'd probably make me to grow to hate them and distance myself from them at the same time. It's very tricky and the research is clear that it's better not to hit if you can avoid it. Resort to when they have a very serious self discipline problem, maybe?
Oh my fucking god this spanking thing.
Sometimes you need to beat a child in order for it to learn what's not right. I was spanked, my brothers were spanked, my friends were spanked, and we all came out normal. Spanking a child is a tool, because you need to use that tool sometimes to correct a chile, and shape it from animal, to a responsible human adult.
In my opinion, it's no different than having your meal before your hungry pet dog. It's a necessary method to teach the animal/child the pecking order... Well, fine, Spanking is much more extreme than proper pet care, but I stand by the fact that a parent will need to strike their child at least once in their lifetime. Hopefully no more than 3-5 times.
Sometimes you need to beat a child in order for it to learn what's not right. I was spanked, my brothers were spanked, my friends were spanked, and we all came out normal. Spanking a child is a tool, because you need to use that tool sometimes to correct a chile, and shape it from animal, to a responsible human adult.
In my opinion, it's no different than having your meal before your hungry pet dog. It's a necessary method to teach the animal/child the pecking order... Well, fine, Spanking is much more extreme than proper pet care, but I stand by the fact that a parent will need to strike their child at least once in their lifetime. Hopefully no more than 3-5 times.
I only ever needed to be smacked once, and it was on the butt (I wasn't hit hard, it didn't hurt, but I was young, and I think it was more the sound than anything, but I digress).
Every child is different, some children won't/don't respond to certain methods (I'm certainly not advocating spanking), it's more about knowing how to discipline your child in knowing what works and what doesn't.
Every child is different, some children won't/don't respond to certain methods (I'm certainly not advocating spanking), it's more about knowing how to discipline your child in knowing what works and what doesn't.
I was smacked until a certain point. I dunno, if you act like a prat in the real world you're probably gonna get hit, so before a kid is really able to be self-critical I can get behind it to an extent. I think it's better than screaming at the kid... *cough cough* Neighbours.
Personally, I was hit as a child, and it had pretty much exactly the effect on me that psychologists who've studied it said it would: I started using violence to "discipline" others who'd wronged me, and learned that might made right (i.e. I beat up kids at school). This behaviour took a long time to unlearn, and I still don't have a great relationship with my parents as a result.
But yeah, anecdotes aside, the science on this is painstakingly clear: kids who are subjected to corporal punishment are more likely to be violent themselves, exhibit criminal behaviour, etc. It isn't even as effective as positive reinforcement in teaching a child (or hell even a dog for that matter) correct behaviour.
The problem is, people get emotionally invested in it and think that anecdotes = fact (e.g. "I was spanked as a kid, and I turned out okay, therefore it's totally fine!") and blame social "ills" on the lack of corporal punishment (when in fact the violent crime rate is the lowest it has been since the 1950s, the lowest it has ever been among youth).
Sadly, blaming problems on the youth and change and wanting to take the easy way out (kid does something wrong? smack 'em!) are human nature.
But yeah, anecdotes aside, the science on this is painstakingly clear: kids who are subjected to corporal punishment are more likely to be violent themselves, exhibit criminal behaviour, etc. It isn't even as effective as positive reinforcement in teaching a child (or hell even a dog for that matter) correct behaviour.
The problem is, people get emotionally invested in it and think that anecdotes = fact (e.g. "I was spanked as a kid, and I turned out okay, therefore it's totally fine!") and blame social "ills" on the lack of corporal punishment (when in fact the violent crime rate is the lowest it has been since the 1950s, the lowest it has ever been among youth).
Sadly, blaming problems on the youth and change and wanting to take the easy way out (kid does something wrong? smack 'em!) are human nature.
Personally, in the past I have stuck by spanking (despite having no children) as a valid form of discipline, but over time it becomes clearer and clearing that the research just does not agree on this matter. It's becoming harder and harder to stand by the half arsed anecdotal evidence of "I was spanked and turned out okay" (especially with this same bullshit line being used to justify smoking, and drink driving, and even usage of hard drugs), so I couldn't call myself a rational person if I didn't go with the evidence.
So no, I don't think spanking is a valid form of discipline anymore.
So no, I don't think spanking is a valid form of discipline anymore.
I wish some parents would do it more, or at least stay home if their kinder methods of instilling good manners in public don't seem to be working worth a damn. A spanking won't injure a kid and won't leave scars. Some kids maybe it'll help them understand what they should or shouldn't be doing, other kids maybe not.
Anecdotes are underrated. I'm not going to ignore everything I learned in my own meatspace because it's not scientifically rigorous.WarpedMind said:
For my own education, could you please link these studies? Everyone references them, but no one can even tell me what methods were used.
(Also, the definition of violence involves intent to notably hurt or damage something. If the spanking can fit that definition, you're doing it too hard. A mild sting that goes away within seconds? I don't call that violence. Unless you're telling me that poking someone annoying with a stick is now a violent act.)
I don't normally condone it, but I understand that it might be warranted in extreme situations.
So my friend used to work at gamestop. There was this kid who stole from his parents in order to buy games. The parents couldn't afford rent because of this, but couldn't get a cash refund due to not having receipts. I'd say that's an extreme enough situation to warrant that.
"Anecdotes are underrated"lacktheknack said:
I think you'll find that the exact opposite is true, especially as it pertains to general public opinion.
The average person is much more likely to be convinced of something by a well told anecdote than by actual data, despite anecdotes being inherently unreliable.
"could you please link these studies?"
I'll start off just quoting myself from an earlier post.
Also, since a few links in the sources of the first video seem to have become broken since it was published, here's a few more:WarpedMind said:
Spanking increases aggression: http://tulane.edu/news/releases/pr_03122010.cfm
Spanking doesn't work as a disciplinary tool and has no positive outcomes: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213411000512
Spanking increases lying and other anti-social behavior: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01663.x/abstract
Spanking lowers cognitive ability and physically alters brain chemistry in detrimental ways: http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/CP51.pdf http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/125/5/e1057.short
Spanking increases learning difficulty: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/10/16/peds.2013-1227
I recommend the video though, it's quite comprehensive.
My thoughts on the striking of children are pretty simple:
If you strike the child believing it will get the child to stop doing something/punish them for a past action, you have failed as a parent in that instance. There are countless different ways to approach the issue and you have gone for one of the worst. Bravo.
If striking the child is in fact the best way to stop the child, then you have failed as a parent in the past, because you let it get this bad. A child does not spontaneously or without cause get to the point where they need to be struck to discipline them.
If you strike the child believing it will get the child to stop doing something/punish them for a past action, you have failed as a parent in that instance. There are countless different ways to approach the issue and you have gone for one of the worst. Bravo.
If striking the child is in fact the best way to stop the child, then you have failed as a parent in the past, because you let it get this bad. A child does not spontaneously or without cause get to the point where they need to be struck to discipline them.
Personally, I have been smacked and between smacking and being punished without tv, access to a computer and going out, I think the latter worked better (when I was a ten year old I remember I insulted my mom for some stupid thing and she punished me without doing "anything considered fun". I don't know how she managed to do that, but it worked waaaaay better than smacking)
The name amuses me.WarpedMind said:
I dunno, it bothers me. I feel like we're in this age of coddling and "No child can do wrong." "No child left behind." and "Failure doesn't exist." We're all animals here, and until the child learns the social order, it's just like one of the other pets. Then again, you could be right about me, and I'd make an awful parent. Kids were never my forte. I did ramble. And I probably said some pretty wrong comparisons there.
Let me just take a look at your vi-wait... That name's familiar. Stefan Molyneux? I've heard that from somewhere, and I need more time to look into it, but I'm pretty sure this FDR thing he's doing is kind of messed up. Not just because I disagree with him, but I've talked to someone who watches him. Isn't this the guy that also says that there's no such thing as a mental illness? And that Women are "the source of evil?" You're taking advice from this ************? I'm too lazy to look into it much further, but after an iota of digging, I'm finding some things that hint to what I've heard.
I'm really freaking iffy on that. Let's leave it there.
The Tulane university one is talking about spanking a child at the age of three, which even for my hateful "Psychotic" standards is insane. I'm talking about striking the thing after the age of 5. And sparsely at best to make a point. Of course you're going to fuck a child up by spanking it frequently as early as three years of age. This is Humanity 101, and you need a study to prove that? I'm nice enough to give you a C on that one.
The Science Direct article has nothing to do about spanking, just weather or not children can understand what abuse actually is, and if those children believe that they can come out. In HK, their culture dictates modesty and loyalty. The children have very differing views on what abuse is, but is unlikely to report it because of the strong belief, which is very likely shared across multiple cultures, that the parent can do no wrong, and that it is infallible. We all have that discovery that your Mother isn't omnipotent when we're around that age.
Bear in mind that we also need to factor in differences in culture. Chinese culture is extremely different from say, British or Canadian culture. Hell, the Americans have a different culture than us up here. This does affect children at an extremely young age, as they're receptive to the behavior of others when they're as young as 6 months old.
Spanking increases lying... I need to pay for that? Let's skimp the abstract. Children learn around this age that grown-ups are not infallible. This is an natural response at this age. Can we avoid a punishment if we lie? Yes? Fuckin' do it! Congratulations. Children can reason. Who knew?
When I'm talking about all of this stuff, I'm interested in the end goal. We do something thats morally gray now, to ensure that 20 years into the future our child isn't a shit-head who thinks they can do no wrong. I'm not paying for a research paper. It's probably a good one, but I have more important things to pay for.
I'm on the PDF now, and although it's a '09 study, it looks like it was scanned in the 80's. I'm coming to the realization that I think you're more concerned about a specific time. These studies, to me, talk about excessive use of spanking. Knocked over my glass and it shattered? That's a'spankin'. Turned on the TV? That's a'spankin'. Late for curfew? That's a'spankin'. Don't like trains? That's a'spankin'. Shit like that? Of course that's going to cause problems for the child. I love to joke and bash children, say they're stupid, they shit everywhere, steal money, etc, etc... But the truth is that children are actually really receptive to their surroundings. They need to be, because the parent needs to show and teach the child what life is going to be like. A parent needs to explain to the child when things are wrong, and parents do need to take disciplinary action to condition the child that doing something seriously wrong, has serious consequences. As a moderately reasonable Tent (Shocking, I know.) when I talk about spanking, I'm not talking about mercilessly beating the child at the ages between 2-4. I'm talking about a severe corrective measure after the age of 5-6. You walked out on the road without checking and almost got run over? You bet your ass it's gonna be red. You knocked over my glass of pop? Whoop de do, let's clean it up together. These things happen when you're not careful, and maybe later you'll choose what we replace it with.
I'd never say I'd be a good parent. I'd be awful. But I like to think that I have a good idea what it's like to be a dip-shit 5 year old.
This is the pure truth, I was a horrible, terrible child when I was little. I was rude, angry, a screamer, and I lied all the time. My parents spanked me every day. And every time my dad spanked me, he immediately hugged me a told me it hurt him a lot too. Now I'm a well adjusted contributor to society with a lot of patience. Guess what happened to all those kids whose parents never spanked them? They grew up to be malicious, self entitled morons who believe they can do no wrong. These events are facts, not opinions.
I am guessing that a lot of people in this thread aren't parents. No offense to anyone, especially those that are, but just an observation. If you aren't a parent, your perspective might (probably will) change on this after you have to deal with your own.
The question is not one that can be answered by rules, laws, or society. Obviously, some level of corporal punishment (probably a great deal) rises to the level of abuse, and should, of course, be outlawed and punished.
That said, no two children are exactly alike in how they behave or what motivates them and it is entirely the responsibility of the parents to do their best in helping the child adjust to acceptable levels of behavior, respect, and education. Using what the child is motivated by to enforce structure and rules, resulting in healthy behaviors can, in some cases, resort to appropriate levels of corporal punishment.
My parents used spanking, to an extent. This worked, also to an extent, on my sister, who was otherwise unmotivated by guilt, reason, or privileges. I am unmotivated by pain, but I was motivated by guilt. Spanking didn't generally work on me (though, unlike my sister, I had self-control and rarely warranted much punishment), privileges/grounding had no effect on me (I easily found ways to entertain myself despite attempting to ground me from things like TV, playing outside, playing with toys, etc... being an avid reader as a child is great... no intelligent parent grounds their kinds from reading, only psychopaths do that). On the other hand, my father was a master of calm, reason-based guilt, which I found highly motivating.
With my daughter, we have tried several privileges and time out techniques. She is obnoxiously strong willed, like her parents, and, from her mother, she has inherited the ability to throw epic level tantrums. Generally, the threat of losing privileges can have some effect, but when her emotions spiral out of control, no amount of reason will convince her to calm down or behave appropriately.
I know some parents deal with tantrums by taking the "ignore them or send them to their room and they'll eventually calm down or sort themselves out, they are looking for attention" route. I heartily disagree with this. I honestly believe that self-control is, at least partially, a learned and socialized behavior (I think Freud agrees with me on that), and I think allowing children to spiral out of control and put on a fit actually negatively reinforces their lack of emotional control and leads to serious social dysfunction later, including a feeling that their opinion/belief/wants are more important that consideration for those around them.
To snap my daughter out of it, I use a small amount of corporal punishment (read as: I use tiny stings of pain). I don't "spank." I don't hit her on the butt, legs, face, etc. I very calmly and dispassionately (extremely important, never ever touch a child (or pet, particularly dogs) in anger) take her wrist and with two fingers smack the back of her hand. I do it just enough to sting, maybe turn her skin pink for about a minute, but never more than that. A bruise would be disgraceful on my part.
The reason I do this is because pain can result in some good physiological effects (read some studies or, if you want the more fun route, watch the Mythbusters build team slap each other), such as adrenaline release. I have studied her face as I do this and it's enlightening to watch a single smack to the hand result in some instant effects: dilated pupils narrow, breathing slows down and gets deeper, focus increases. I've watched my kid go from a full on wild tantrum to completely calm and controlled in the space of 15 seconds. I don't think I've ever had to repeat this punishment for the same episode.
It's important to note that this is one of my last resorts and it's a very rare occurrence. She's 4 now and I didn't do it until she was at least 2 and have rarely gone less than 3-4 months between occurrences; generally other threats/punishments work just fine. Also, the incidence is decreasing as she gets older and other more traditional threats of loss of privilege and reason are starting to have an effect.
A lot of people in this thread have stated something to the effect that it is not legal to smack an adult. The comparison is completely unwarranted. Apples and oranges as people say. Children are not adults. First off, adults are rarely under the care and legal guardianship of someone else. Once you're an adult, no one is responsible for helping you adapt to society. Presumably, you are old enough and developed enough to do take that responsibility on yourself. Second, children do not have the mental and emotional development of adults. Children are walking balls of id at young ages. They are, in many ways, tiny little sociopaths that have no real concept of conscience or empathy. These are things that develop over time in normal people. In order to help curb bad behaviors in children that lack reason, empathy, and conscience, punishments sometimes have to appeal to id. A small amount of dispassionately applied pain in the right situation may occasionally be called for.
Again, it's important for parents to understand their individual child before determining the right way to encourage and punish behaviors. Not all kids will respond to corporal punishment, while some will only respond to it.
Making outright rules about a time tested technique for society at large misunderstands the individuality and developmental level of children and is counter-productive. There are rules against abuse already and anything that rises to the level of abuse should be swiftly identified and harshly punished. However, in the right circumstances a tempered and controlled smack is not abuse.
The question is not one that can be answered by rules, laws, or society. Obviously, some level of corporal punishment (probably a great deal) rises to the level of abuse, and should, of course, be outlawed and punished.
That said, no two children are exactly alike in how they behave or what motivates them and it is entirely the responsibility of the parents to do their best in helping the child adjust to acceptable levels of behavior, respect, and education. Using what the child is motivated by to enforce structure and rules, resulting in healthy behaviors can, in some cases, resort to appropriate levels of corporal punishment.
My parents used spanking, to an extent. This worked, also to an extent, on my sister, who was otherwise unmotivated by guilt, reason, or privileges. I am unmotivated by pain, but I was motivated by guilt. Spanking didn't generally work on me (though, unlike my sister, I had self-control and rarely warranted much punishment), privileges/grounding had no effect on me (I easily found ways to entertain myself despite attempting to ground me from things like TV, playing outside, playing with toys, etc... being an avid reader as a child is great... no intelligent parent grounds their kinds from reading, only psychopaths do that). On the other hand, my father was a master of calm, reason-based guilt, which I found highly motivating.
With my daughter, we have tried several privileges and time out techniques. She is obnoxiously strong willed, like her parents, and, from her mother, she has inherited the ability to throw epic level tantrums. Generally, the threat of losing privileges can have some effect, but when her emotions spiral out of control, no amount of reason will convince her to calm down or behave appropriately.
I know some parents deal with tantrums by taking the "ignore them or send them to their room and they'll eventually calm down or sort themselves out, they are looking for attention" route. I heartily disagree with this. I honestly believe that self-control is, at least partially, a learned and socialized behavior (I think Freud agrees with me on that), and I think allowing children to spiral out of control and put on a fit actually negatively reinforces their lack of emotional control and leads to serious social dysfunction later, including a feeling that their opinion/belief/wants are more important that consideration for those around them.
To snap my daughter out of it, I use a small amount of corporal punishment (read as: I use tiny stings of pain). I don't "spank." I don't hit her on the butt, legs, face, etc. I very calmly and dispassionately (extremely important, never ever touch a child (or pet, particularly dogs) in anger) take her wrist and with two fingers smack the back of her hand. I do it just enough to sting, maybe turn her skin pink for about a minute, but never more than that. A bruise would be disgraceful on my part.
The reason I do this is because pain can result in some good physiological effects (read some studies or, if you want the more fun route, watch the Mythbusters build team slap each other), such as adrenaline release. I have studied her face as I do this and it's enlightening to watch a single smack to the hand result in some instant effects: dilated pupils narrow, breathing slows down and gets deeper, focus increases. I've watched my kid go from a full on wild tantrum to completely calm and controlled in the space of 15 seconds. I don't think I've ever had to repeat this punishment for the same episode.
It's important to note that this is one of my last resorts and it's a very rare occurrence. She's 4 now and I didn't do it until she was at least 2 and have rarely gone less than 3-4 months between occurrences; generally other threats/punishments work just fine. Also, the incidence is decreasing as she gets older and other more traditional threats of loss of privilege and reason are starting to have an effect.
A lot of people in this thread have stated something to the effect that it is not legal to smack an adult. The comparison is completely unwarranted. Apples and oranges as people say. Children are not adults. First off, adults are rarely under the care and legal guardianship of someone else. Once you're an adult, no one is responsible for helping you adapt to society. Presumably, you are old enough and developed enough to do take that responsibility on yourself. Second, children do not have the mental and emotional development of adults. Children are walking balls of id at young ages. They are, in many ways, tiny little sociopaths that have no real concept of conscience or empathy. These are things that develop over time in normal people. In order to help curb bad behaviors in children that lack reason, empathy, and conscience, punishments sometimes have to appeal to id. A small amount of dispassionately applied pain in the right situation may occasionally be called for.
Again, it's important for parents to understand their individual child before determining the right way to encourage and punish behaviors. Not all kids will respond to corporal punishment, while some will only respond to it.
Making outright rules about a time tested technique for society at large misunderstands the individuality and developmental level of children and is counter-productive. There are rules against abuse already and anything that rises to the level of abuse should be swiftly identified and harshly punished. However, in the right circumstances a tempered and controlled smack is not abuse.
I'm completely anti-smacking. It's not necessary at all and I believe it's harmful to the development of children.
You aren't allowed to hit another adult, you aren't allowed to hit your animals, why on earth would you think it's okay to hit a person much smaller than you who is completely dependant on you? It's not.
All smacking teaches a child is that if someone doesn't do what you want and you're bigger than them, hit them.
I've worked with kids for quite a bit previously, and have lots of experience with children, and I know it can be extremely frustrating at times. That is no excuse, you are the adult.
/rant over
You aren't allowed to hit another adult, you aren't allowed to hit your animals, why on earth would you think it's okay to hit a person much smaller than you who is completely dependant on you? It's not.
All smacking teaches a child is that if someone doesn't do what you want and you're bigger than them, hit them.
I've worked with kids for quite a bit previously, and have lots of experience with children, and I know it can be extremely frustrating at times. That is no excuse, you are the adult.
/rant over