Spanking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Civil poster here and since we are having an honest and civil discussion, where I'm swearing up and down why I'm right that spanking is not ideal and carries big time potential to harm kids, I absolutely need to admit that I have one child that I really do struggle with his behavior sometimes. I absolutely do think sometimes that "a good spanking" would end this ceaseless back and forth over the relentless onslaught of parenting a strong-willed child. Must we really do this thing again where I tell him 15 times to get his darn clothes on? So I'll open that up to you. I was able to change his behavior by concerted effort at redirecting, immediate consequence (you take someone's toy, mom takes it off you and hands to other kid with a redirection. You push a child or misbehave, you come sit with mom for a few minutes when youd' rather be playing, you hit or bite? we leave immediately, etc) (BTW thank god neither of mine were biters!)

My kids are a little bit older now - one is well past spanking age and the other (the rascal) is still in the spanking age but on the older side at 7. Overall i'm really happy with the human beings they are becoming but there were many, many times i left a party feeling like i had the worst behaved kid there. And I bet if I did spank i wouldn't have had that problem. So I really do get why people do it, and I've simply made a different but perhaps also not perfect choice. I just have to think that one involves a big person hitting a child and the other doesn't.

Your comment is very civil indeed. I only take slight issue with your last line because that's kind of developed to still go for *some* moral high-ground. I'm betting that there were plenty of times when you used your advantage of physical size to enforce the "sit by mom" punishments or leave the party punishments.

The other question I'd consider is that would the overall happiness and peacefulness of all parties have been improved if one spanking prevented 15 other punishments or confrontations (or whatever ratio you suggested)?

To your first comment, I get what you mean, but obviously I do think I get the moral high ground, I never said that I don't think spanking is wrong - I've said all along that I DO think it is wrong, but at the same time I both understand why some people do it and certainly don't think that my parenting is perfect and couldn't guarantee that I'm not screwing my kids up equally (again, assuming that I'm right, which obviously I do, and you don't) in some other way.

To your second comment, I don't think so with respect to the peacefulness of all parties would increase if one spanking prevented 15 (or countless, sometimes) other confrontations, but of course, that's the question I DO ask myself - and I DO sometimes think that a "good spanking" would have saved some time and made me into one of those moms who just had to raise an eyebrow to get compliance. But, at the end of the day, I think that compliance would come with a cost.

Honestly, even if I'm wrong, feeling how I feel about spanking, it was always going to be the wrong thing for me to do. Because I wouldn't have felt right doing it, etc. If you're very confident, and you truly spank in this controlled way, than my guess is that you are probably doing better than most parents including many who do NOT spank but do yell (I do, but damn i try hard not to, yell) or even uber permissive parents who never teach their kid not to be an entitled jerk. none of us are getting it right, so I guess I'm just saying that - don't know - it's a big bright line for me when it comes to hitting or hurting. I think that is NEVER okay, no matter the justification, except genuine self defense / defense of others. But there are some people who go a step further and are super horrified by it and I guess I'm not one of those people either, I don't think it's okay, and yet as I said, I see how there are many crappy things that otherwise well intentioned people do to their kids every day.

And I'm not exactly helping the "anti spanking" demographics with all of those typos - I swear I can write more cohesively when I'm not multi-tasking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Civil poster here and since we are having an honest and civil discussion, where I'm swearing up and down why I'm right that spanking is not ideal and carries big time potential to harm kids, I absolutely need to admit that I have one child that I really do struggle with his behavior sometimes. I absolutely do think sometimes that "a good spanking" would end this ceaseless back and forth over the relentless onslaught of parenting a strong-willed child. Must we really do this thing again where I tell him 15 times to get his darn clothes on? So I'll open that up to you. I was able to change his behavior by concerted effort at redirecting, immediate consequence (you take someone's toy, mom takes it off you and hands to other kid with a redirection. You push a child or misbehave, you come sit with mom for a few minutes when youd' rather be playing, you hit or bite? we leave immediately, etc) (BTW thank god neither of mine were biters!)

My kids are a little bit older now - one is well past spanking age and the other (the rascal) is still in the spanking age but on the older side at 7. Overall i'm really happy with the human beings they are becoming but there were many, many times i left a party feeling like i had the worst behaved kid there. And I bet if I did spank i wouldn't have had that problem. So I really do get why people do it, and I've simply made a different but perhaps also not perfect choice. I just have to think that one involves a big person hitting a child and the other doesn't.

Your comment is very civil indeed. I only take slight issue with your last line because that's kind of developed to still go for *some* moral high-ground. I'm betting that there were plenty of times when you used your advantage of physical size to enforce the "sit by mom" punishments or leave the party punishments.

The other question I'd consider is that would the overall happiness and peacefulness of all parties have been improved if one spanking prevented 15 other punishments or confrontations (or whatever ratio you suggested)?

To your first comment, I get what you mean, but obviously I do think I get the moral high ground, I never said that I don't think spanking is wrong - I've said all along that I DO think it is wrong, but at the same time I both understand why some people do it and certainly don't think that my parenting is perfect and couldn't guarantee that I'm not screwing my kids up equally (again, assuming that I'm right, which obviously I do, and you don't) in some other way.

To your second comment, I don't think so with respect to the peacefulness of all parties would increase if one spanking prevented 15 (or countless, sometimes) other confrontations, but of course, that's the question I DO ask myself - and I DO sometimes think that a "good spanking" would have saved some time and made me into one of those moms who just had to raise an eyebrow to get compliance. But, at the end of the day, I think that compliance would come with a cost.

Honestly, even if I'm wrong, feeling how I feel about spanking, it was always going to be the wrong thing for me to do. Because I wouldn't have felt right doing it, etc. If you're very confident, and you truly spank in this controlled way, than my guess is that you are probably doing better than most parents including many who do NOT spank but do yell (I do, but damn i try hard not to, yell) or even uber permissive parents who never teach their kid not to be an entitled jerk. none of us are getting it right, so I guess I'm just saying that - don't know - it's a big bright line for me when it comes to hitting or hurting. I think that is NEVER okay, no matter the justification, except genuine self defense / defense of others. But there are some people who go a step further and are super horrified by it and I guess I'm not one of those people either, I don't think it's okay, and yet as I said, I see how there are many crappy things that otherwise well intentioned people do to their kids every day.

There are options other than yelling or spanking.

It sounds like you would benefit from a PEP class to learn how to handle situations that make you so angry or exasperated that you want to spank.

http://pepparent.org/classes-programs/class-schedule/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's have an honest discussion. I think spanking is wrong. I think it can damage kids and cause distrust. More broadly, i believe (and i think some studies have shown) that demonstrating the resolution of problems, or enforcement of boundaries / one's wishes greatly contributes to a world where our impulses are to shove, punch, bully, murder, execute, and nuke one another into submission. At the same time, I can't even with these people who say EVERY child will respond well to positive reinforcement only and that anyone whose child doesn't respond isn't doing it right. i know spanking is wrong, and yet i don't have a foolproof substitute!

Why would it damage kids and cause distrust any more than any other punishment? I'm up for a civil discussion. My assessment is that it all depends on how it's explained and implemented.

Yay for civility!

I don't think that every spanking causes lasting, irreversable, major damage to children but i'd be willing to bet that the way most people are doing it does some damage, the way most people are doing it and the way they THINK they are doing it is probably a good deal different, and also that even the most benign instance is still carrying the capability to cause some damage. Why? Well, there are probably numerous studies that lay out why it does damage, but to me the duty of a parent to protect child from harm, and the need for the child to 100 percent feel physically safe with the parent is sacrosanct. Every time you spank, you're eroding that trust just a little bit, even temporarily. While there are certainly lots of ways to undo trust that do not involve parents striking and intentionally inflicting physical pain on the child, I don't think these are okay, either. I think there is probably a continuum where on one end you get the parent fluttering around trying to lovingly redirect where there is minimal harm done in the immediate sense (but depending on the circumstance if the kid isn't really getting any discipline and boundaries some lifelong consequences there too) to severe emotional abuse or physical abuse being on the other side of the continuum. I'm talking about child abuse there. Spanking, to me, has more in common with the abuse because at the end of the day, no matter how well intentioned, it is the trusted parent figure that is intentionally causing physical pain, there is a great risk of a breach opening up.

But why is moderate and controlled physical pain somehow more detrimental than the emotional pain that you cause by any other punishment, such as putting a child in timeout (which can be physical in itself) and denying the opportunity for interaction with others?

Because denying a child attention or the opportunity to interact is a natural consequence of antisocial or unpleasant behavior. It happens among adults as well - if my friends mistreat me, I make myself unavailable to them.

Spanking, on the other hand, is not something done among healthy adults who are having a disagreement. It epitomizes disrespect and abuses the spanker's power.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's have an honest discussion. I think spanking is wrong. I think it can damage kids and cause distrust. More broadly, i believe (and i think some studies have shown) that demonstrating the resolution of problems, or enforcement of boundaries / one's wishes greatly contributes to a world where our impulses are to shove, punch, bully, murder, execute, and nuke one another into submission. At the same time, I can't even with these people who say EVERY child will respond well to positive reinforcement only and that anyone whose child doesn't respond isn't doing it right. i know spanking is wrong, and yet i don't have a foolproof substitute!

Why would it damage kids and cause distrust any more than any other punishment? I'm up for a civil discussion. My assessment is that it all depends on how it's explained and implemented.

Yay for civility!

I don't think that every spanking causes lasting, irreversable, major damage to children but i'd be willing to bet that the way most people are doing it does some damage, the way most people are doing it and the way they THINK they are doing it is probably a good deal different, and also that even the most benign instance is still carrying the capability to cause some damage. Why? Well, there are probably numerous studies that lay out why it does damage, but to me the duty of a parent to protect child from harm, and the need for the child to 100 percent feel physically safe with the parent is sacrosanct. Every time you spank, you're eroding that trust just a little bit, even temporarily. While there are certainly lots of ways to undo trust that do not involve parents striking and intentionally inflicting physical pain on the child, I don't think these are okay, either. I think there is probably a continuum where on one end you get the parent fluttering around trying to lovingly redirect where there is minimal harm done in the immediate sense (but depending on the circumstance if the kid isn't really getting any discipline and boundaries some lifelong consequences there too) to severe emotional abuse or physical abuse being on the other side of the continuum. I'm talking about child abuse there. Spanking, to me, has more in common with the abuse because at the end of the day, no matter how well intentioned, it is the trusted parent figure that is intentionally causing physical pain, there is a great risk of a breach opening up.

But why is moderate and controlled physical pain somehow more detrimental than the emotional pain that you cause by any other punishment, such as putting a child in timeout (which can be physical in itself) and denying the opportunity for interaction with others?

Because denying a child attention or the opportunity to interact is a natural consequence of antisocial or unpleasant behavior. It happens among adults as well - if my friends mistreat me, I make myself unavailable to them.

Spanking, on the other hand, is not something done among healthy adults who are having a disagreement. It epitomizes disrespect and abuses the spanker's power.

Different poster. I disagree about disrespect, of course. But I don't understand why the parent-child relationship should be identical to a relationship among adults. I would think that the parent-child relationship is different, although some relationships can be similar -- teacher-student for one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you do it?

I mean - do literally?

Do you put your child over your knee and hit them? Do you hit them where they are standing?

What are the logistics of spanking?

I was spanked as a child (once) and I never forgot it. I'm wondering if it works the same for all parents.

For us, we don't do it out of anger or in the moment, which I think could be confusing. So one of us will sit down with the child and briefly go over the behavior that has earned the spanking. Then put him or her over our knee and give three or four spanks on the bare tush.

There's crying, of course, but it's not an out of control angry event.

Honestly, I think that is even more messed-up. The thought of making a child pull down their pants so you can strike their bare bottom while they are over your knee is about as nuts as you can get.

Why is it nuts?

Because it is the ultimate abuse of power. Having to bare one's bottom is humiliating, and that humiliation is exponentially increased by having to submit the bared bottom to hitting.

How would you feel if e.g. a police officer or your boss or some other person who has authority over you had the power to impose a punishment on this like you? Sure, it might "work" for the short-term vis-a-vis your behavior, but over the long term it would make you feel angry and it would make you want to get as far away from that person as you possibly could.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's have an honest discussion. I think spanking is wrong. I think it can damage kids and cause distrust. More broadly, i believe (and i think some studies have shown) that demonstrating the resolution of problems, or enforcement of boundaries / one's wishes greatly contributes to a world where our impulses are to shove, punch, bully, murder, execute, and nuke one another into submission. At the same time, I can't even with these people who say EVERY child will respond well to positive reinforcement only and that anyone whose child doesn't respond isn't doing it right. i know spanking is wrong, and yet i don't have a foolproof substitute!

Why would it damage kids and cause distrust any more than any other punishment? I'm up for a civil discussion. My assessment is that it all depends on how it's explained and implemented.

Yay for civility!

I don't think that every spanking causes lasting, irreversable, major damage to children but i'd be willing to bet that the way most people are doing it does some damage, the way most people are doing it and the way they THINK they are doing it is probably a good deal different, and also that even the most benign instance is still carrying the capability to cause some damage. Why? Well, there are probably numerous studies that lay out why it does damage, but to me the duty of a parent to protect child from harm, and the need for the child to 100 percent feel physically safe with the parent is sacrosanct. Every time you spank, you're eroding that trust just a little bit, even temporarily. While there are certainly lots of ways to undo trust that do not involve parents striking and intentionally inflicting physical pain on the child, I don't think these are okay, either. I think there is probably a continuum where on one end you get the parent fluttering around trying to lovingly redirect where there is minimal harm done in the immediate sense (but depending on the circumstance if the kid isn't really getting any discipline and boundaries some lifelong consequences there too) to severe emotional abuse or physical abuse being on the other side of the continuum. I'm talking about child abuse there. Spanking, to me, has more in common with the abuse because at the end of the day, no matter how well intentioned, it is the trusted parent figure that is intentionally causing physical pain, there is a great risk of a breach opening up.

But why is moderate and controlled physical pain somehow more detrimental than the emotional pain that you cause by any other punishment, such as putting a child in timeout (which can be physical in itself) and denying the opportunity for interaction with others?

Because denying a child attention or the opportunity to interact is a natural consequence of antisocial or unpleasant behavior. It happens among adults as well - if my friends mistreat me, I make myself unavailable to them.

Spanking, on the other hand, is not something done among healthy adults who are having a disagreement. It epitomizes disrespect and abuses the spanker's power.

Different poster. I disagree about disrespect, of course. But I don't understand why the parent-child relationship should be identical to a relationship among adults. I would think that the parent-child relationship is different, although some relationships can be similar -- teacher-student for one.

It is not identical. It does, however, share some characteristics. For me, the primary one is respect and perhaps, bodily autonomy.

[Anonymous]

If you are disrespectful to your friends, they can't put you in timeout.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's have an honest discussion. I think spanking is wrong. I think it can damage kids and cause distrust. More broadly, i believe (and i think some studies have shown) that demonstrating the resolution of problems, or enforcement of boundaries / one's wishes greatly contributes to a world where our impulses are to shove, punch, bully, murder, execute, and nuke one another into submission. At the same time, I can't even with these people who say EVERY child will respond well to positive reinforcement only and that anyone whose child doesn't respond isn't doing it right. i know spanking is wrong, and yet i don't have a foolproof substitute!

Why would it damage kids and cause distrust any more than any other punishment? I'm up for a civil discussion. My assessment is that it all depends on how it's explained and implemented.

Yay for civility!

I don't think that every spanking causes lasting, irreversable, major damage to children but i'd be willing to bet that the way most people are doing it does some damage, the way most people are doing it and the way they THINK they are doing it is probably a good deal different, and also that even the most benign instance is still carrying the capability to cause some damage. Why? Well, there are probably numerous studies that lay out why it does damage, but to me the duty of a parent to protect child from harm, and the need for the child to 100 percent feel physically safe with the parent is sacrosanct. Every time you spank, you're eroding that trust just a little bit, even temporarily. While there are certainly lots of ways to undo trust that do not involve parents striking and intentionally inflicting physical pain on the child, I don't think these are okay, either. I think there is probably a continuum where on one end you get the parent fluttering around trying to lovingly redirect where there is minimal harm done in the immediate sense (but depending on the circumstance if the kid isn't really getting any discipline and boundaries some lifelong consequences there too) to severe emotional abuse or physical abuse being on the other side of the continuum. I'm talking about child abuse there. Spanking, to me, has more in common with the abuse because at the end of the day, no matter how well intentioned, it is the trusted parent figure that is intentionally causing physical pain, there is a great risk of a breach opening up.

But why is moderate and controlled physical pain somehow more detrimental than the emotional pain that you cause by any other punishment, such as putting a child in timeout (which can be physical in itself) and denying the opportunity for interaction with others?

Because denying a child attention or the opportunity to interact is a natural consequence of antisocial or unpleasant behavior. It happens among adults as well - if my friends mistreat me, I make myself unavailable to them.

Spanking, on the other hand, is not something done among healthy adults who are having a disagreement. It epitomizes disrespect and abuses the spanker's power.

Different poster. I disagree about disrespect, of course. But I don't understand why the parent-child relationship should be identical to a relationship among adults. I would think that the parent-child relationship is different, although some relationships can be similar -- teacher-student for one.

It is not identical. It does, however, share some characteristics. For me, the primary one is respect and perhaps, bodily autonomy.

Your child does not have bodily autonomy. Not when it's bath time, or toothbrushing time, or bedtime, or timeout time, or immunization time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you are disrespectful to your friends, they can't put you in timeout.

If I disrespect my husband, he can't take away my favorite toy.
If I come home an hour later than I told him I would arrive, he can't forbid me from going out the next night or ground me for a week.
If my child doesn't perform to certain standards, I can't "fire" him/kick him out of the family like a boss could fire an employee from the company.
If I swear in a conversation with my husband, he won't tell me it's inappropriate and not to say it again...yet hopefully a parent would say that to a child if he or she swore.
As an adult, my husband does not tell me when I need to go to bed and carry me to my room if I refuse.

The analogies people throw out are so absurd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you are disrespectful to your friends, they can't put you in timeout.

If I disrespect my husband, he can't take away my favorite toy.
If I come home an hour later than I told him I would arrive, he can't forbid me from going out the next night or ground me for a week.
If my child doesn't perform to certain standards, I can't "fire" him/kick him out of the family like a boss could fire an employee from the company.
If I swear in a conversation with my husband, he won't tell me it's inappropriate and not to say it again...yet hopefully a parent would say that to a child if he or she swore.
As an adult, my husband does not tell me when I need to go to bed and carry me to my room if I refuse.

The analogies people throw out are so absurd.

YES.

Children are not adults. Adult analogies don't apply.

[Anonymous]

This isn't directly spanking per say but one time my sister was babysitting for a wealthy white family and the Mom picked up a toy wooden train and smacked her kid in the head with it really hard. I don't know any of the details but, wealthy people absolutely hit and beat their kids too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How do you do it?

I mean - do literally?

Do you put your child over your knee and hit them? Do you hit them where they are standing?

What are the logistics of spanking?

I was spanked as a child (once) and I never forgot it. I'm wondering if it works the same for all parents.

Pull your pants down, bend over and grab your ankles. Then you grab a belt and spank. The amount of licks depends on the offense and the aftermath like running away, crying ect. Running away or crying immediatly gets double if not tripple the lickings. A licking is a swat with a belt by the way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you do it?

I mean - do literally?

Do you put your child over your knee and hit them? Do you hit them where they are standing?

What are the logistics of spanking?

I was spanked as a child (once) and I never forgot it. I'm wondering if it works the same for all parents.

Pull your pants down, bend over and grab your ankles. Then you grab a belt and spank. The amount of licks depends on the offense and the aftermath like running away, crying ect. Running away or crying immediatly gets double if not tripple the lickings. A licking is a swat with a belt by the way.

Jesus. That's absolutely horrifying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This isn't directly spanking per say but one time my sister was babysitting for a wealthy white family and the Mom picked up a toy wooden train and smacked her kid in the head with it really hard. I don't know any of the details but, wealthy people absolutely hit and beat their kids too.

The plural of anecdote is not data.

[Anonymous]

I think that poster is joking.

We do bare bottom because we don't spank very hard at all, and when DS was still wearing pull ups, he just laughed if it was over the pull up. So after he crossed the line one day, I pulled it down and it made all the difference. After that, it just seemed to make more sense than spanking over jeans.