Opinions on spanking children?

[nmmom95]

To discourage, to enforce change in the negative behavior. That would be "handle".

Or to show them that they will get the result they want by hitting someone...

 

[jlewisinsyr]

Or to show them that they will get the result they want by hitting someone...

Education is not about one event, children and all human's learn through multiple channels. I can assure you that I didn't learn that I need to hit my partner if I don't get the answer I want, and I was spanked as a kid. I'm sure FireDancer doesn't beat his significant other when he doesn't get the result he wants.

Maybe, instead, we should just put all of our children in the corner when we don't get the result we want. And when they grow up, they'll put their employees in the corner for not doing as they are asked.

 

[bicker]

Exactly, Freyja is broad brushing that all spanking is abuse, and I disagree. Heart of the problem, yes, but heart of the discussion!

I think I'm a bit older than some folks, so perhaps that colors some of my perspective, but I remember a time when many things were different, one of which was the manner in which physical contact took place in the workplace. Over time, some physical contact became correlated to often with a form of abuse. The rational, mature, and responsible reaction to this was to have people avoid anything that has the propensity to perhaps be confused with abuse, i.e., to avoid physical contact in the workplace. Has the workplace lost something as a result? Perhaps. But the benefits far outweigh those losses.

Of course, folks who don't respect the feelings of others tend to refuse to acknowledge that. They often only see the down-side because they were never personally subjected to, and/or never would have been personally subjected to, and/or think they would never have been personally subjected to, the abuse. So they fail to integrate into their evaluation the negatives of the old way, instead just focus on and bemoan the negatives of the new way.

What is greatly needed in this situation is similar to what was needed in that case of abuse in the workplace: A preponderance of people willing to put themselves in other people's shoes, respecting and granting other people the dignity and respect that they expect themselves, and thereby acknowledging both the existence of the abuse and the scale of the abuse - how much worse it is than ramifications of the actions taken to preclude such abuse.

 

[Freyja]

I think I'm a bit older than some folks, so perhaps that colors some of my perspective, but I remember a time when many things were different, one of which was the manner in which physical contact took place in the workplace. Over time, some physical contact became correlated to often with a form of abuse. The rational, mature, and responsible reaction to this was to have people avoid anything that has the propensity to perhaps be confused with abuse, i.e., to avoid physical contact in the workplace. Has the workplace lost something as a result? Perhaps. But the benefits far outweigh those losses.

Of course, folks who don't respect the feelings of others tend to refuse to acknowledge that. They often only see the down-side because they were never personally subjected to, and/or never would have been personally subjected to, and/or think they would never have been personally subjected to, the abuse. So they fail to integrate into their evaluation the negatives of the old way, instead just focus on and bemoan the negatives of the new way.

What is greatly needed in this situation is similar to what was needed in that case of abuse in the workplace: A preponderance of people willing to put themselves in other people's shoes, respecting and granting other people the dignity and respect that they expect themselves, and thereby acknowledging both the existence of the abuse and the scale of the abuse - how much worse it is than ramifications of the actions taken to preclude such abuse.

Excellent post! ITA

 

[FireDancer]

Education is not about one event, children and all human's learn through multiple channels. I can assure you that I didn't learn that I need to hit my partner if I don't get the answer I want, and I was spanked as a kid. I'm sure FireDancer doesn't beat his significant other when he doesn't get the result he wants.

Maybe, instead, we should just put all of our children in the corner when we don't get the result we want. And when they grow up, they'll put their employees in the corner for not doing as they are asked.

No, I'm a lover not a fighter. In all seriousness I've been in one fight in my life even though I was spanked. Part of educating and disciplining a kid is teaching them that there are things you can do as the parent which they can't do. One is hitting. Another example is drinking. Mom or dad can have wine or beer with dinner because they are adults, little Johnnie or Suzi can't.

Really, stop telling other people how to raise their kids. Why is it that the people who spank don't (ore at least rarely) try to force their way on those that choose not to but those that choose not to are always trying to get their nose in other parent's business?

 

[jlewisinsyr]

I think I'm a bit older than some folks, so perhaps that colors some of my perspective, but I remember a time when many things were different, one of which was the manner in which physical contact took place in the workplace. Over time, some physical contact became correlated to often with a form of abuse. The rational, mature, and responsible reaction to this was to have people avoid anything that has the propensity to perhaps be confused with abuse, i.e., to avoid physical contact in the workplace. Has the workplace lost something as a result? Perhaps. But the benefits far outweigh those losses.

Of course, folks who don't respect the feelings of others tend to refuse to acknowledge that. They often only see the down-side because they were never personally subjected to, and/or never would have been personally subjected to, and/or think they would never have been personally subjected to, the abuse. So they fail to integrate into their evaluation the negatives of the old way, instead just focus on and bemoan the negatives of the new way.

What is greatly needed in this situation is similar to what was needed in that case of abuse in the workplace: A preponderance of people willing to put themselves in other people's shoes, respecting and granting other people the dignity and respect that they expect themselves, and thereby acknowledging both the existence of the abuse and the scale of the abuse - how much worse it is than ramifications of the actions taken to preclude such abuse.

But you also have those who were spanked and see no harm in it. If it was an either or, I would agree with your assessment and your correlation of the workplace environment and physical abuse.

I respect those who were abused and understand the pain that can come from it, but correlating all physical forms of discipline as abuse is broadbrushing things.

 

[bicker]

Isn't that the purpose of DISCUSSION boards, to discuss similar and differing opinions as well as opinions to why?

Have you seen some further movement in that regard that I missed? All I've seen is folks saying "yes it is" and "no it isn't". But perhaps I missed something. Sorry if I did.

You know what I find perplexing? Why is it that when a child fails or the schools are inadequate it is "society's" fault or responsibility to fix it but if that same kid goes on to graduate from Harvard or that same school out performs all the other schools in the area it is always the kid's drive or the school's attention to academics?

I agree. It is both in both cases.

You can't fail because of society but succeed on your own.

Correct: Both success and failure are attributable both to society and the individual.

I will not take the blame for someone else's kid's problem unless I also get the credit for someone else's kid's achievements.

Consider yourself so credited.

And in reality, that's the way it works, at leas there in the US: We are all so proud of the Americans who win gold medals at the Olympic Games. We root for sports teams and feel pride and gratification when they win. We watch American Idol and feel glad when someone enjoys that rags-to-riches moment.

 

[Freyja]

No, I'm a lover not a fighter. In all seriousness I've been in one fight in my life even though I was spanked. Part of educating and disciplining a kid is teaching them that there are things you can do as the parent which they can't do. One is hitting. Another example is drinking. Mom or dad can have wine or beer with dinner because they are adults, little Johnnie or Suzi can't.

Really, stop telling other people how to raise their kids. Why is it that the people who spank don't (ore at least rarely) try to force their way on those that choose not to but those that choose not to are always trying to get their nose in other parent's business?

Since you asked I´ll tell you again. It´s because they consider it abuse!
I don´t care whether your children get to wake up late or eat sweets on a weekday (if it´s not in such amounts that it proposes a health risk). I do care whether you abuse them or not.

 

[nmmom95]

Education is not about one event, children and all human's learn through multiple channels. I can assure you that I didn't learn that I need to hit my partner if I don't get the answer I want, and I was spanked as a kid. I'm sure FireDancer doesn't beat his significant other when he doesn't get the result he wants.

Maybe, instead, we should just put all of our children in the corner when we don't get the result we want. And when they grow up, they'll put their employees in the corner for not doing as they are asked.

I'm not saying that every child who is spanked will be an abuser. That is a ridiculous generalization. I am saying that your child learns from your actions.
BTW, the phrase is "for all intents and purposes."

 

[NMAmy]

That's why I edited, I realized you didn't live in the US. Coastal states tend to be a little bit more, um, liberal (note, I live in for all intensive purposes a coastal state).

It is sad that all spanking is broad-brushed as abuse!

Not all non-spankers are in a U.S. coastal state. And it's "intents and purposes."

Maybe, instead, we should just put all of our children in the corner when we don't get the result we want. And when they grow up, they'll put their employees in the corner for not doing as they are asked.

So are you being spanked or put in the corner as an employee?

A lot of folks seem to think that there are only two choices--spanking or letting your children walk all over you. There are a lot of other ways to discipline a child that don't involve violence.

 

[jlewisinsyr]

Have you seen some further movement in that regard that I missed? All I've seen is folks saying "yes it is" and "no it isn't". But perhaps I missed something. Sorry if I did.

Yes. I see developed opinions, developed conversation with personal supporting opinions and beliefs. That is part of an active conversation/discussion.

 

[Freyja]

not all non-spankers are in a u.s. Coastal state. And it's "intents and purposes."



so are you being spanked or put in the corner as an employee?

a lot of folks seem to think that there are only two choices--spanking or letting your children walk all over you. There are a lot of other ways to discipline a child that don't involve violence.

amen!

 

[FireDancer]

And in reality, that's the way it works, at leas there in the US: We are all so proud of the Americans who win gold medals at the Olympic Games. We root for sports teams and feel pride and gratification when they win. We watch American Idol and feel glad when someone enjoys that rags-to-riches moment.

You had me until that last part.

 

[bicker]

But you also have those who were spanked and see no harm in it. If it was an either or, I would agree with your assessment and your correlation of the workplace environment and physical abuse.

You really think that folks abused in the workplace in the 1960s didn't rationalize it?

I respect those who were abused and understand the pain that can come from it, but correlating all physical forms of discipline as abuse is broadbrushing things.

I don't disagree, but you still have to prove that the physical forms of discipline are so much better than the non-physical forms that it is worth the risk that your claim that broad-brushing applies. If we can't assure against going over the line into the abuse, then it is simply better to avoid acceptance of the physical strike entirely. If leaving it up to the person doing the striking to draw the dividing line in the right place too often leads to something worse than disobedience, then allowing the person doing the striking that discretion is the wrong thing to do.

 

[jlewisinsyr]

BTW, the phrase is "for all intents and purposes."

And it's "intents and purposes."

Thank you for the correction.

So are you being spanked or put in the corner as an employee?

No, I'm not, and I wouldn't do the same to my employees. I was spanked as a kid, but I don't spank my employees. Correlation is not causation.

A lot of folks seem to think that there are only two choices--spanking or letting your children walk all over you. There are a lot of other ways to discipline a child that don't involve violence.

There are definately more then one way, but I do not believe spanking is violence, that is the crux of the issue. Abuse is violence, but what a few of us are saying is spanking is not abuse. I have no particular issue with you choosing your way of raising a child and instilling proper behavior and your form of discipline. As I would hope you would not have an issue with mine, again, as long as it's not abusive, but then again, we run a little full circle.

 

[Freyja]

This is a great article http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1581853,00.html

 

[bicker]

This is a great article http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1581853,00.html

I especially like this part:

"A hundred years ago it was considered a novel idea for the law to say you couldn't hit your wife," said Block.

 

[Freyja]

I especially like this part:

​

I agree!

 

[jlewisinsyr]

You really think that folks abused in the workplace in the 1960s didn't rationalize it?

Rationalizing doesn't diminish the difference between abuse and discipline.

I don't disagree, but you still have to prove that the physical forms of discipline are so much better than the non-physical forms that it is worth the risk that your claim that broad-brushing applies. If we can't assure against going over the line into the abuse, then it is simply better to avoid acceptance of the physical strike entirely. If leaving it up to the person doing the striking to draw the dividing line in the right place too often leads to something worse than disobedience, then allowing the person doing the striking that discretion is the wrong thing to do.

Conversely, wouldn't it be beneficial to prove that non-physical forms of discipline are better and don't have negative risks attached to them (ie. failure to be able to take negativity later in life)?

Unfortunately behavior is a hard subject to correctly and accurately regulate because it is nothing but a big grey, fuzzy line. There is a happy median in discipline, but like many things in social life, society takes it to extremes, it's either everything is abusive, or there is no abuse. There is eating tons of carbs, or no carbs. There is eating a ton of junk food or no junk food.

 

[FireDancer]

A lot of folks seem to think that there are only two choices--spanking or letting your children walk all over you. There are a lot of other ways to discipline a child that don't involve violence.

Absolutely, I don't think anyone here would argue that point. Spanking is just one of many tools that a parent can choose to have in their parental tool belt.

I don't think anyone that spanks their kids uses that as the punishment for every form of misbehavior. Spill the milk? Spanking. Run into the street? Spanking. Talk back to mom? Spanking.

If the only form of punishment you dole out is physical you are probably going overboard.

Going back to the tool belt analogy for a second. You never should have just one tool in your tool belt. At the same time different people will choose different tools to have in that tool belt depending on the job they have to do and everyone's situation is different which, in effect, means everyone has a slightly different job to do and will choose different tools to do that job with.