glass-slipper
Mouseketeer<br><font color=deeppink>If it's chocol
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2004
- Messages
- 541
What the Heck said:I see where you got your first sentance, but I believe you misread the OP. I read it as being that the timeout wasn't working and that was when the child would be spanked.
As for the 2nd paragraph, that was why I started my children on an allowance as soon as possible (my son was 4 and my daughter 5). For most things, it worked great. I would take a dime here, or a quarter there, depending on the offense. I told them I could discipline them in the middle of Wal-Mart and not have to worry about child services.
As for your last paragraph, I disagree with the no spanking croud. In my opinion, for some children, not spanking them is child abuse. For the wrong child, it teaches them that if they cause enough of a problem, they will get their way by wearing out their parent. I have know some parents who were so proud that they never spanked their child - who was in the process of tearing up as much as they could my medical facility.
My children were spanked - about once a year or so. If I had used it as my only parenting tool, it wouldn't have worked. By using it as the tool of last resort, it reinforced in them what was truly important. As has been said before, there is a huge difference between spanking and abuse.
Not spanking is child abuse?? Just because I didn't spank doesn't mean I didn't discipline. Believe me, my kids never wore me down. They knew I meant what I said and that I stuck to it. BTW, I also don't believe in the last resort excuse, and I never said spanking was abuse.