Spanking: Should spanking be used to discipline a child?

[Frosty]

I dont hit my cats. I find it horrible, they dont know any better and just... the level of confusion and betrayal in their little faces kills me when ANYONE approaches them aggressively.

If I woudnt hit my cats I cant imagine myself hitting a child. There are many other ways to get through besides aggression.

Im not really for spanking even if its done right. My parents spanked me (not hard or anywhere near inappropriately) and I just remember I was always terrified to the point of hyperventilating whenever it happened. I just felt like a bad person. I feel like being talked to would have been so much better then bringing the hammer down with spanking. Maybe other kids are different but... its not something I personally believe in

 

[Sacrophagus]

I don't mean to sound critical. That sounds very impressive and good . However it's a bit idealistic for any parent with a four year old I'm not so sure about the viability of the advice.

Not all parents hit their children out of egotistic sadism, and not all parents hit their children out of genuine concern. No one can take that away from you.

Since we're talking about the good parents, I mentioned once an instance where my late father hit me hard as a kid.
He had a stoic and reserved nature, but I could tell remorse in his words. Since I had an introspective nature, I could tell why he did that. I told him exactly why he did that, and he was proud. He just hugged me in silence.

Bear in mind that for my biological age, I was years ahead of many. A HSP sister of mine wouldn't have had the same great relationship with my father if I wasn't there to clarify his motives. He never laid a hand on her, but he used to criticize her in a healthy manner.

What about those children who are not as connected and socially shrewd who had good parents hitting them?

Some of them might grow hateful, some would not even believe that there is a shred of goodness in their parents, and if they are fortunate enough, only years afterwards they might realize why their parents were acting a certain way. "They knew this was bad for me, and I should've listened."

If you want to tackle the core of the good parents' behavior, hitting their children comes from frustration, impatience, a projection of what is and what is not tolerated, and it is in their minds the last resort to correct that disorederly conduct.

Hitting them is but a tool, and if it is a tool, we can find another alternative.


Now, I am a man who firmly believes that using my physical strength or status to intimidate those who are weaker than I is a sign of insercurity, lack of faith in the other, lack of understanding, and pitiful cowardliness. The aforementioned belief is extended to how I manage my family.

My brother in law is an emotionally retarded man who used to hit his daughter. When I confronted him he said "She's the devil in disguise", insinuating that she only acts like a good girl when I am around.

Later, I had my niece live with me for a long period of time on and off.
One day, I heard the orotund of something breaking in the kitchen where she was. I calmly went there, and with a smirk looked at her while she was making a guilty face, almost on the verge of crying because she would've been hit mercilessly if that scene happened at her parents'. I completely omitted any importance, and broke her state by remaining calm. I wasn't really "remaining" calm. I was just me. After all, I don't get mad at myself if I break anything. After I playfully fooled around her about her lack of sight, she asked me for a hug, and then suggested to clean up the kitchen which wasn't really necessary since I or the maid could do that. It was her way of saying thank you.

This is called Polarity reversal.

Another time, she thought she damaged the TV, so she came with a guilty face to my chambers. Upon seeing that, I whispered with a smile "What did you do?", and she whispered back "I broke the TV over there" with a confused and amused expression on her face this time. I took her hand and said "Take me to the scene of the crime", and there we went.
Upon inspection, it was actually just a minor problem in the power outlet. It fixed itself.

Her father would've hit her or guilt tripped her for toying with the TV, and she would've been too afraid to tell him in the first place.
On the other hand, she feels safe with me, and she can actually learn and adjust her behavior more effectively since she trusts me and sees me as an example of what she should be.

I took her and her classmates to shelters and they felt "so cool" for helping other people and had many stories to tell their friends.

I can joke around and tease her about her imaginary boyfriend just to see her blush. I have all her secrets, and she has become more feminine, more confident, more cheerful, she has better grades, and a better understanding of others and herself as well. She also has an amazing relationship with both of her parents now.
.

Her father was right when he insinuated before that she acts in a different way around me. We all adjust our behavior to a certain extent depending on who we are talking to. That is a fact.

It's your choice whether to inspire your children confidence, and teach them all of that you can teach them.
If anyone thinks that being a parent is about feeding your children, putting a roof over their heads, and scolding them when their behavior doesn't meet your expectations, think again.

If you believe that you are not armed to have such a relationship with your child but you still want it, then seek it. You cannot sell the bear's skin before you have killed the beast. Teach yourself first before you can teach them anything. You will stop demanding respect from your children and it will commend itself. You will stop demanding love from your children and they will love you profusely.

Hit your children if you feel unequipped for such a feat, but I will not take "spoiled" as an excuse.


That, is my philosophy.

 

[rav3n]

Having raised a child to adulthood without every hitting him, I'm uncertain why people keep insisting that physical force is necessary. If you can't hit an adult, it should be illegal to hit a child who's even more defenseless than an adult.

Children understand a lot more than people think. It's a matter of paring down your explanations to age appropriate levels with the view that they believe they're the center of the universe. It's sincerely too easy.

 

[Tellenbach]

I'm not opposed to hitting adults either. Reasonable levels of physical violence should be an option for some crimes; think of all the money we can save in prison costs.

 

[1487610420]

I'm not opposed to hitting adults either. Reasonable levels of physical violence should be an option for some crimes; think of all the money we can save in prison costs.

 

[SurrealisticSlumbers]

No. never.

 

[j.c.t.]

No, but that's not to say discipline isn't important.

 

[Sineva]

I'd spank the shit out of my child, if I'd get one.

This new generation of kids that's making its way into schools today is out of control. They're so overprotected and are allowed to do anything they please, that upbringing and teaching them transforms into absolute torture. Even when I travel cross-border for education/work, and see parents at airports with their out-of-control kids, it pisses me off so much I wanna punt those little monsters into the nearest jet engine.

Of course there are kids who are genetically bestowed with the necessary psychology to grow up into pleasant adults with just verbal punishments during childhood (I was such a kid, was mostly silent and even refused to cry when I was upset), but not everyone is the same, and there's plenty of monsters that need taming.

 

[prplchknz]

No, but that's not to say discipline isn't important.

I agree i wasn't spanked but i was still disciplined. And got in trouble if i ran amok. I think people who say kids aren't well behaved because of not being spanked are seeing kids who aren't disciplined at all. And that may have to do with the fact that a lot of parents are working 2 to 3 jobs and don't have time to discipline. Or simply don't know how.i was a well behaved child because i still was disciplined and taught right from wrong i still say yes mam and sir and thank you

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

I'm not invested in what you do with your kids as long as their bad behavior doesn't impact me. I'll do as I see fit with mine.

 

[Lark]

I agree i wasn't spanked but i was still disciplined. And got in trouble if i ran amok. I think people who say kids aren't well behaved because of not being spanked are seeing kids who aren't disciplined at all. And that may have to do with the fact that a lot of parents are working 2 to 3 jobs and don't have time to discipline. Or simply don't know how.i was a well behaved child because i still was disciplined and taught right from wrong i still say yes mam and sir and thank you

They could be seeing kids that are unloved and attention starved too, that can give rise to attachment disorders, which can give rise to other disorderly behaviour and thinking.

If you think about most of the "out of control" behaviour looks like kids who are desperately craving attention and know that whatever they do they arent going to get it, its why when others notice them the kids response with the sort of "YOU CAN SEE ME!" surprise.

Plus, and I think this is a big one, what age group is being talked about? I hate the victorian ideas of children seen and not heard, the ideal of sitting like some sort of life like wood carving, that's not what children are like or ought to be like. Its lifeless.

And to be honest most of the behaviour that I dislike the most when I see it is from adults or adolescents and not children, they are either painfully self-aware, self-absorbed or self-preoccupied, it results in absent mindedness of the first order or brash, arrogant, douchebraw behaviour. Which is the worst.

 

[Lark]

I'm not invested in what you do with your kids as long as their bad behavior doesn't impact me. I'll do as I see fit with mine.

I wonder when I read your posts sometimes if you mean them to come of as sinister as they sound.

 

[neko 4]

My sister and I were never spanked; neither of us is a sadist or a masochist. We don't smile on any sort of violence.

 

[Maou]

Without fear of violence, there is no law.

Simply put, if your kids do not fear you. They will be little pieces of trash when they get older.

 

[rav3n]

Without fear of violence, there is no law.

Simply put, if your kids do not fear you. They will be little pieces of trash when they get older.

My son is an adult now and we get along great! He's in graduate studies a few years ahead of his biological age peers, engaged to a beautiful girl from a good family and he also makes friends easily. Never laid a hand on him and he doesn't fear me. Give me an emotionally and socially well adapted kid like him over any other.

 

[Maou]

My son is an adult now and we get along great! He's in graduate studies a few years ahead of his biological age peers, engaged to a beautiful girl from a good family and he also makes friends easily. Never laid a hand on him and he doesn't fear me. Give me an emotionally and socially well adapted kid like him over any other.

Anecdotal evidence isn't an argument.

You must also factor in socio-economic influences, his own nature, and the peers he is around. For example, the children that are more likely to need spanked grow up in poor neighborhoods where peer influence is stronger than parental influence. A child's world is tightly contained in a microverse, that they cannot see out of till they are older. Learning that everything isn't nice early, is a good thing. As well as teaching authority.

Then the parents themselves is also a factor in the future of the child when they become adults.

Some parents are neglectful, and that can promote self-sufficiency, or dependency depending on the kid's nature.

If you're a good parent, more power to you. But a kid might become too dependent, if you are easily supporting them.

I have also seen good parents produce the most spoiled children when it comes to them living on their own, because they are relying on them as a back up crutch. Nothing wrong with helping your kid out in financial situations, but if they don't learn to become self-sufficient, it will turn out poorly.

 

[Jaguar]

Simply put, if your kids do not fear you. They will be little pieces of trash when they get older.

Losers need to scare the hell out of their kids.

 

[rav3n]

Anecdotal evidence isn't an argument.

You must also factor in socio-economic influences, his own nature, and the peers he is around. For example, the children that are more likely to need spanked grow up in poor neighborhoods where peer influence is stronger than parental influence. A child's world is tightly contained in a microverse, that they cannot see out of till they are older. Learning that everything isn't nice early, is a good thing. As well as teaching authority.

And yet, physical punishment is quite common among poor neighborhoods. Stop and consider that, in that domestic violence breeds domestic violence.

 

[Lark]

And yet, physical punishment is quite common among poor neighborhoods. Stop and consider that, in that domestic violence breeds domestic violence.

I used to be impressed by the idea of those sorts of casually violent individuals, those that are carriers of the whole violence mimetic thing, meeting with greater violence and being snuffed out, Death Wish or Frank Castle style. Sometimes I think that's something everyone thinks or feels. One of the better Punisher story arcs actually has the character kill off his adversaries, King Pin included but the whole affair is very unmarvel if that makes sense, its more like the Sopranos (he kills King Pin by impaling him in the head with a hammer), and then going off home to die in the house which had been his home and which he's recovered his families corpses to (I know, ill right?). Anyway, that's not the important thing, what's important is that the story results in the end in a "vigilante uprising", a cop who has known about Frank's private war and hasnt exactly gone all out to apprehend him watches it on the news and says Frank got what he wanted in the end because the whole public mindset towards crime changed.

Maybe so, zero tolerance towards crime involves more of a sea change in public attitudes towards criminal behaviour than it does anything else, nothing surer than the experience of shame and regret is going to stop someone doing a thing than anything else, unfortunately, in our day and age that is connected with being apprehended or caught which most fools think is not going to happen, or if it does enough people will give them a free pass or believe their stories and excuses not to mind. There are still crimes that this is not necessarily the case with but you can probably count them on one hand and they probably have "communities" and "spaces" online where they gather to give each other props the people that do those things.

However, ultimately, I do think a lot of the time that violent punishment just teaches lessons about power rather than teaching life lessons about consequentialism. A lot of the time learning does not necessarily follow from experience. Or the learning that follows from it is not what you may think. For instance being a victim of anti-social behaviour in contexts were that is the norm is unlikely to convince someone of the detestable nature of anti-social behaviour so much as it will lead them want to "pay it forward" to another.

Finally, one of the greatest pieces I ever read about corporeal punishment was in a british tabloid in which one person put an opinion and the next person countered. It had been prompted by news that a British diplomat had planned to hand his son over to Chinese authorities to be beaten with a birch, I think the boy had scratched a car with keys or something of that nature. The pro-punishment side suggested the birching was a great idea and asked why it couldnt be introduced in the UK. The anti-punishment side countered with, and I thought this was an amazing argument, the example of punishment beatings carried out by paramilitaries in northern ireland and a guy who had lost a leg by having it shot off pretty much by a blast from a shotgun at short range to dissuade him from stealing cars and driving them dangerously about the streets but who was a few weeks later out doing this once more. They were saying, well, look, not only does corporeal punishment not work but when you're resorting to violence you have to keep increasing it until ultimately it gets to an unconscionable point or you simply have to kill the person involved because its not working.

 

[rav3n]

They were saying, well, look, not only does corporeal punishment not work but when you're resorting to violence you have to keep increasing it until ultimately it gets to an unconscionable point or you simply have to kill the person involved because its not working.

Coincidentally, that was part of my thought process and something that I was going to mention when that member responded.

I recall having a similar discussion about spanking on another site. There were three who were adamantly 'for' spanking since they turned out okay. One even claimed that escalation of violence was necessary for him to listen, to the tune of his parent using a weapon. A few years pass on that site and I find that one of them had depression, the second had bipolar disorder and the third, had SAD with ADHD. It's obvious that they needed something other than to be beaten into submission.