Author Topic: Discipline (Read 2036 times)

Raubvogel · « **Reply #45 on:** May 04, 2004, 08:42:32 PM »

I spanked my kids everytime they needed it from the ages of 2 to 4 or 5ish. I haven't laid a hand on either in years and there's never been a reason to. They're polite, well-mannered, and as far as kids go, well-behaved. Setting a foundation of boundaries early in a childs life is the most important part of parenting as far as I'm concerned. I wish they'd bring corporal punishment back to elementary schools too. It only took me 1 spanking in 1st grade to realize it wasn't something I wanted to encounter very often.

Just my 2 cents.

txmx · « **Reply #46 on:** May 04, 2004, 08:50:33 PM »

My father used to make me go cut my own switch off the tree LOL no kidding .
And man he could wield that thing like Zoro OUCH!!

As far as teachers spanking my kids If I ever have any LOL .
I would not like someone else touching my child Im afraid Of what I might have to do to them If they did.

But parents should have that right to spank If needed.

Lizking · « **Reply #47 on:** May 04, 2004, 09:29:47 PM »

Flossie, could it have been the sugar, not the additives?

FUNKED1 · « **Reply #48 on:** May 04, 2004, 11:01:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
...the problem is used as an excuse to drug a kid that may not need the medication., which is not right IMO.

What's even more "not right" is taking a kid who has a well documented medical disorder and making him think his problems are due to some kind of moral deficiency, then making the problem worse by physically abusing him and denying him treatment for the medical condition.

I'm not saying you are doing this to your kids, or it describes the other guy's situation or anything like that, just presenting an alternate view. I got plenty of "corporal punishment" and did plenty of "running" as a kid and it didn't do a damn thing to help me. What helped me was dealing with the underlying medical problem.

opus · « **Reply #49 on:** May 04, 2004, 11:25:20 PM »

I think if you're spanking your child after they're five or so, you have a problem that spanking isn't going to fix. Most children learn who is in absolute authority before they're 3. They're may be *few* occaisions where you need to smack their bottom after, just to remind them, but if one is consistantly spanking a child over 5 or so, its just plain useless or worse, abuse.

Spanking means rapping a toddler's behind to get they're attention. Its more psychological than physical. Hitting a child with an object (like a belt or a switch) or with enough force to leave a mark is beating a child and not spanking.

But I have no problem with corporal punishment if its limited to its psychological effect and not to cause physical pain, which pretty much rules it out for any case over 5 (schoolage).

Funny, few people talk about the psychological abuse of children, i.e, the use of guilt as punishment. IMO, using guilt on a child is no better than using a 2x4, and if fact may be more damaging over the childs life. Its a lot more common than physical abuse, but stiill they're are many jokes about it (e.g., the stereotypical Jewish mother's knack of inflicting guilt on children).

IMO, if one is still having major discipline issues with children over 8, they have completely missed the window (for setting boundries) or the child has other problems (psychological or even biological). In any case, consulting a proffessional would probably be the best thing for the child.

Lizking · « **Reply #50 on:** May 04, 2004, 11:34:52 PM »

You are not catholic, are you?

Flossy · « **Reply #51 on:** May 05, 2004, 02:11:17 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Lizking
Flossie, could it have been the sugar, not the additives?

I don't think so, because he still ate and drank sweet things..... it was only artificial colours we concentrated on cutting out.

Thrawn · « **Reply #52 on:** May 05, 2004, 03:51:43 AM »

I wonder how many parents think that age appropriate behaviour is bad behaviour, especially when their child is between 2-4. How horrible if someone punishes third child for displaying behaviour which is perfectly natural for thier age.

My daughter (22 months) whacked me on the head while I was reading the other day. I got ticked off as I didn't think it was appropriate. My wife pointed out that she was just bored and wanted to me to play with her. And as I thought about it I realised that she had sent me tons of signals before she resorted to the whacking. If I had paid more attention to what she was trying to communicate the whacking wouldn't have happened at all. And I need to keep in mind that toddlers can't communicate very well...well that's not necessarily true, but you have to pay attention.

Anyways, there is a correlation between corporal punishment and: anti-social behaviour , agression, abuse of other children, spousal abuse when the child becomes an adult, and mental problems..

The only benefit of corporal punishment is for reinforcing immediate compliance. Which is good and bad. It means if you give a directive there is a better chance that the child will immediately follow it. But it doesn't mean that child will follow the directive why you aren't in view. In fact, it can lead to them hiding their behaviour from you.

And although immediate compliance seems to make parenting easier, in the long run it makes it harder, do to the increase in anti-social behaviour and the detriment to other behaviours.

And exactly what verbalised directives that is given a child really need immediate compliance? I can think of a few. If the child is endangering themselves, others or valuble property, and you can't reach them in time before the damage may occure. So maybe immediate compliance needs to be reinforce just in those contexts.

I also wonder if reinforcing immediate compliance to much turns a child into a "yes-man" sheeple. Will end up being end up being everyones *****?

Decipline means teaching, not punishment. If a child stops a behaviour because of fear of punishment, it doesn't mean they have learned why their behaviour isn't appropriate. It means they've leared that their parents hurt them if they display that behaviour.

wipass · « **Reply #53 on:** May 05, 2004, 08:00:18 AM »

Spare the rod, spoil the child ....

and so true today, both my kids have been been beaten since three years of age and continue to be beaten if they misbehave or I have been drinking.

It's done neither of them any harm and lots of good in my opinion,

Don't let them get confused, any minor transgression should result in the same punishment, and I mean physical.

wipass

mora · « **Reply #54 on:** May 05, 2004, 08:17:50 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by wipass
Spare the rod, spoil the child ....

and so true today, both my kids have been been beaten since three years of age and continue to be beaten if they misbehave or I have been drinking.

Nice troll.

eskimo2 · « **Reply #55 on:** May 05, 2004, 09:11:46 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by FUNKED1
Consequences of Corporal Punishment
Accumulated research supports the theory that corporal punishment is an ineffective discipline strategy with children of all ages and, furthermore, that it is often dangerous. Corporal punishment most often produces in its victims anger, resentment, and low self-esteem. It teaches violence and revenge as solutions to problems, and perpetuates itself, as children imitate what they see adults doing. Research substantiates the following consequences of corporal punishment:
Children whose parents use corporal punishment to control antisocial behavior show more antisocial behavior themselves over a long period of time, regardless of race and socioeconomic status, and regardless of whether the mother provides cognitive stimulation and emotional support (Gunnoe & Mariner, 1997; Kazdin, 1987; Patterson, DeBaryshe, & Ramsey, 1989; Straus, Sugarman, & Giles-Sims, 1997).
A consistent pattern of physical abuse exists that generally starts as corporal punishment, and then gets out of control (Kadushin & Martin, 1981; Straus & Yodanis, 1994).
Adults who were hit as children are more likely to be depressed or violent themselves (Berkowitz, 1993; Strassberg, Dodge, Pettit, & Bates, 1994; Straus, 1994; Straus & Gelles, 1990; Straus & Kantor, 1992).
The more a child is hit, the more likely it is that the child, when an adult, will hit his or her children, spouse, or friends (Julian & McKenry, 1993; Straus, 1991; Straus, 1994; Straus & Gelles, 1990; Straus & Kantor, 1992; Widom, 1989; Wolfe, 1987).
Corporal punishment increases the probability of children assaulting the parent in retaliation, especially as they grow older (Brezina, 1998).
Corporal punishment sends a message to the child that violence is a viable option for solving problems (Straus, Gelles, & Steinmetz, 1980; Straus, Sugarman, & Giles-Sims, 1997).
Corporal punishment is degrading, contributes to feelings of helplessness and humiliation, robs a child of self-worth and self-respect, and can lead to withdrawal or aggression (Sternberg et al., 1993; Straus, 1994).
Corporal punishment erodes trust between a parent and a child, and increases the risk of child abuse; as a discipline measure, it simply does not decrease children's aggressive or delinquent behaviors (Straus, 1994).
Children who get spanked regularly are more likely over time to cheat or lie, be disobedient at school, bully others, and show less remorse for wrongdoing (Straus, Sugarman, & Giles-Sims, 1997).
Corporal punishment adversely affects children's cognitive development. Children who are spanked perform poorly on school tasks compared to other children (Straus & Mathur, 1995; Straus & Paschall, 1998).

This is the most powerful response in this thread, and it has been largely ignored.

You guys do realize what each (Name, date) represents don’t you? They do not represent one dude’s ideas based on a VERY small sample, a biased opinion, lack of considering thousands of variables, and an unscientific approach and analysis to a question. These are long term scientific studies that generally weed out the possibilities of bias, sample size, and most variables having a serious impact on the findings.

Corporal punishment does work, and it works with immediate results. What is much harder to see right away however, is the long term side effects. What happens when a person most trusted by a child uses physical violence to gain control? What that teaches may not be seen instantly.

One bit of evidence that corporal punishment does more harm than good is evident in that laws have been passed to prevent its use.

eskimo

opus · « **Reply #56 on:** May 05, 2004, 10:02:13 AM »

Since corporal punishment is is also a political issue ( what isn't now?), there's a lot of crappy science out there illustrating exagerated effects in its use and disuse.

Its convenient to include people who whack their children (however minor the whack) just because the child is agravating them. Thats not corporal punishment, but bullying a child. And I have no doubt that smacking down a child everytime they get on your nerves will create the problems you listed.

Spanking a 2 or 3 year old who refuses to obey a timeout or runs into the street, is quite different. A lot of crappy science out there doesn't distinguish the two.

Laws have been passed banning corporal punishment in schools because its ineffective after a certain age, usually school age. Since an increasing number of parents completely miss the opportunity of establishing authority in their child's life (thank you Dr. Spock), all discipline measures are less effective. Without respect for authority, any punishment is pretty useless. It simply means that they got caught, and next time they'll try not to get caught.

gofaster · « **Reply #57 on:** May 05, 2004, 10:22:25 AM »

I didn't bother reading all of this thread, and I had a couple of points I wanted to make, but the thoughts got all jumbled up in my head. Hey, there's a crow stealing twigs from the duck's nest outside. I wonder why the duck doesn't do something about that. Wait, where was I? Oh yeah, I took that ADD quiz. I've only had to spank my nephew once, because he splashed water on a group of girls sitting in front of us and he hasn't misbehaved since. I scored a 15 on the ADD quiz. Now the crow is sitting on the window ledge of my office, staring at me as I write this. Do I start a lot of projects without finishing any of them? Well, I have a bunch of scale models on the bench in various states of completion but that's typical for a lot of modelers so I checked "somewhat" on the ADD quiz. Oh, and kids need a balance of positive and negative reinforcement in order to develop a healthy behavior. They have to learn that there are both positive (a big end-of-year salary bonus) and negative (Congressional hearings, prison time) consequences for their actions. Its ok to be a pacifist so long as you're not afraid to use Roosevelt's Big Stick once in awhile.

texace · « **Reply #58 on:** May 05, 2004, 11:44:49 AM »

My dad spanked both me and my brother when we were younger, and now we're both in college and leading rather good young adult lives.

Yeah, we did poorly in school and we think violent behavior is a good response to everything...

Thrawn · « **Reply #59 on:** May 05, 2004, 12:34:06 PM »

is right.

Just because it didn't turn out that badly for you doesn't invalidate the research.

One has to wonder though, if you and your brother would have been super-jeanius multi-bajillionaires if your father hadn't spanked you.

eskimo,

"They do not represent one dude’s ideas based on a VERY small sample, a biased opinion, lack of considering thousands of variables, and an unscientific approach and analysis to a question. These are long term scientific studies that generally weed out the possibilities of bias, sample size, and most variables having a serious impact on the findings."

You should read some of the critisms of the research. In some of Strauss's research he includes the use of belts and such as corporal punishment. The use of a weapon is generally considered to be abuse, not corporal punishment.