Science: Actually, you can beat sense into your kids
posted at 5:40 pm on January 4, 2010 by Allahpundit
The secret? Get ‘em while they’re young.
It found that children who are smacked before the age of six perform better at school when they are teenagers.
They are also more likely to do voluntary work and to want to go to university than those who have never been physically disciplined.
But the study also revealed that children who are smacked after the age of six were more likely to exhibit behavioural problems, such as being involved in fights.
Smacking is currently banned in 20 European countries, including Germany, Spain and the Netherlands…
Two years ago, Britain was criticised by the UN for failing to ban smacking in the home, after experts said it was a form of abuse.
How unlike the UN to frown on discipline. I have no parental anecdotes to share here, but can report that I received the helpful corrective slap well past the age of six and suffered no discernible ill effects. Except, perhaps, for the whole beta-male thing, which, er, would explain the lack of parental anecdotes. Exit question: What makes six the magic number? My guess is that that’s when kids finally become intelligent enough to follow verbal commands semi-consistently, but I have a feeling I’m about to be disabused of that notion in the comments rather strenuously.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3
I was addressing Bizarro in the second part of my comment. Sorry for the confusion.
Ingenue on January 4, 2010 at 11:36 PM
“Shepherding a Child’s Heart” by Ted Tripp
Send_Me on January 4, 2010 at 11:37 PM
I’ve had friends that have walked all over the parents that use the methods that you’re talking about. That may work with some kids but not with all. To call the parents weak is a bit of a stretch there . . .
Ingenue on January 4, 2010 at 11:39 PM
Who’s saying that a father spanking his daughter prepares her for subservience? Don’t see it that way. I think it’s ridiculous.
I know my dad tended to beat my tail, when called for, more often than my mom. My mom always threatened my behavior with “I’ma call your father.” Don’t know. Maybe having the father as disciplinarian, is something of cultural norm. But mom definitely could deliver if necessary. Mostly I think she was just tired of me and pushed it onto my dad.
I’m happy. healthy, independent and most importantly non-subservient.
xax on January 4, 2010 at 11:44 PM
I agree with you 100%!
I will first start off by saying that “smart” and “wise” aren’t synonymous, and I didn’t make that as clear in my post as I could have.
I wouldn’t say that all people who spank are ignorant in the connotation of “idiotic”, but I would say they all are in the “unaware” sense.
I believe that people end up spanking because of a lack of creativity and calm reasoning. I got hit on 3 occasions, which I didn’t deserve. I, nor my 3 siblings, needed spankings to teach us to follow directions. Why was that, you ask? I say it’s simply because my parents expected us to obey them, even when we didn’t like it, and we lived up to their expectations. They patiently talked to us and explained things instead of striking us when they wanted us to learn our lessons about safety and ethical behavior. Pretty novel of them, eh?
I don’t subscribe to the belief that children are naturally disobedient. In fact, I believe it’s just the opposite; I think kids are born with the desire to please their parents. What I see with those who disagree with me on this is that if they think kids are naturally disobedient, they have immediately entered into an adversarial relationship with them, which won’t promote genuinely good behavior. Parents with that worldview shouldn’t be surprised when their kids rebel and cause trouble.
Bizarro No. 1 on January 4, 2010 at 11:59 PM
It is not possible for a kid to walk over a parent who follows what I said. As I said, the only power a kid can have over a parent is what a parent gives up to them, and wise parents understand the folly of relinquishing any of their power to children who are in need of mature, adult guidance, not immature spoiling…
Bizarro No. 1 on January 5, 2010 at 12:05 AM
Children are exposed to more than just their parents. Someone outside of their parents can lead them to believe they have power over their parents. It’s not very hard to do, I’ve seen it done.
btw, I knew what you meant by “wise”, when I said my parents were well respected in the community I was making a reference to them being “wise.” Sorry, I should have made that more clear.
My father is a pediatrician and was just a few hours away from getting his masters in psychology. I’d consider him well versed on the subject of children. My parents disciplined us accordingly.
Ingenue on January 5, 2010 at 12:14 AM
Bleeds Blue is having problems with the distinction between “subservient” and “subordinate”. To be fair, the poster he was replying to wasn’t too clear in expressing it, but that’s because most of us, especially Americans, “get it” without verbalizing the explanations.
Subordination does not mean inferiority. You do the work your boss tells you to do; that’s subordination. You aren’t inferior to your boss in any existential or categorical sense — he isn’t the boss because he has some “right” to that status, he simply got there first. Soldiers on the march take turns calling cadence. If the lowest private in the unit is the caller, the First Sergeant will obey those instructions. “Top” is then accepting subordination. Is he inferior? I don’t think so!
Subservience does imply inferiority. People who demand it be sick in de haid, IMO. That doesn’t mean there aren’t a lot of such sick f*s around.
At the end, it’s a matter of conflict resolution. Unresolvable conflicts come up from time to time in any group, even if the group is just two people. When that happens, somebody has to have the tie-breaking vote, and the others are “subordinate”. In my personal experience, families in which the father has the ultimate authority and uses it from time to time are happier than those using other arrangements, most especially the Kumbaya gambit (which leaves the conflict unresolved, whereupon it festers), and all the variants of Solomonic cut-the-baby-in-half “resolution” (which leave everybody dissatisfied and resentful). That’s anecdote, but I haven’t personally witnessed any exceptions in my half-century or so of adulthood.
Smacking kids — as somebody upthread noted, children below a certain age are to a large extent pre-sentient. They haven’t yet developed the intellectual capacity to make connections between causes and consequences on a thinking level, and a little aversive conditioning at that age helps lay the groundwork for that development. It is not, however, a case where if a little is good a lot is better, and a lot of the opposition to spanking comes from the perfectly valid observation that, in all too many cases, it turns into a dominance game instead of a disciplinary action.
Regards,
Ric
warlocketx on January 5, 2010 at 12:26 AM
I meant to address this in the last post, but forgot to.
When Paul describes love in 1 Corinthians 13:4, the first adjective he uses to do so is “patience”. Parents who are impatient with their kids are not demonstrating love towards them.
Do you believe parents who lose patience with their kids to be exhibiting strength? Impatience in general is a weakness; and it’s most destructive when exposing children to it.
Bizarro No. 1 on January 5, 2010 at 12:28 AM
I was wondering when you were going to show up.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 12:29 AM
Hot Air has the worst search feature I have ever encountered….if it were adequate I could direct you to a post from a few years ago discussing a speech by a liberal who examines the liberals goal of destroying the father figure and the male role model. Feminism, socialism, and their anti-religion activities all designed to weaken the male role model and replace it with the state. They (the demratf**ks) did the same thing with slavery. They created enmity between the father and the wife/child and replaced it with the Massa.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 12:37 AM
That is your first mistake. Kids have rights from God that a parent cannot take away. They have the power of free will and self determination (thought). A parent can only manipulate behavior toward the desired results.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 12:40 AM
What does kids believing they have power over their parents have to with the fact they can’t have power over them unless the parents give it up willingly? Here, I’ll save you the effort, and answer for you: NONE!!!
Wise parents understand that kids need their parents, and not the reverse, so these wise parents know where all of the power actually lies, and thus won’t allow themselves to be trampled upon by their tots. Do you dispute this, and, if so, on what grounds?
I’ve heard many adults defend/downplay parental abuse they received as kids by saying, ‘yeah, my drunk dad beat the Hell out of me when I was a kid, but it wasn’t so bad really because look, I turned out alright!’ Yuck.
Bizarro No. 1 on January 5, 2010 at 12:42 AM
Wonder no more! :)
Bizarro No. 1 on January 5, 2010 at 12:44 AM
I haven’t heard anyone justify drunken beatings and abuse.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 12:46 AM
I don’t believe that punishing a child means that you are impatient. You’re making a lot of generalizations here.
Exodus 12:15
And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death.
or
Mark 7:10
For Moses said, Honour thy father and thy mother; and, Whoso curseth father or mother, let him die the death:
or
He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes. (Proverbs 13:24)
Ingenue on January 5, 2010 at 12:47 AM
Parents have all the power; kids have none.
Bizarro No. 1 on January 4, 2010 at 11:26 PM
LOL you’re nuts, and you don’t even realize it!
Can you tell me what needs in a parent’s life that child can/should fulfill?
Oh, I’d also like to know if you believe that there is a difference between “wants” and “needs”, smart guy! :)
Bizarro No. 1 on January 5, 2010 at 12:47 AM
Why do people have kids?
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 12:49 AM
Ditto. You make such broad generalizations in your assertions.
I love the way you jumped from disciplining to drunk dad beatings. They aren’t the same thing.
Ingenue on January 5, 2010 at 12:50 AM
You haven’t, but I have.
See, I consider spanking to be a form of abuse by people who are at best naive and at worst cretinous.
People who feel they have to resort to spanking to teach their children aren’t very creative nor cerebral – that’s what happens when you let your decision-making be run by the lizard brain.
Bizarro No. 1 on January 5, 2010 at 12:52 AM
Oh lordy! I’m just getting started with this one! Bizarro read a book! Reality is waaaaaaaaay different.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 12:52 AM
And you call csdeven nuts . . .
Ingenue on January 5, 2010 at 12:54 AM
This may interest you: a documentary called The Monstrous Regiment of Women.
Send_Me on January 5, 2010 at 12:54 AM
Liberal claptrap. Generalizations, assumptions, and ignorance. You’ve hit the Trifecta!
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 12:54 AM
Because they want, not need, to. Kids on the other hand need, not just want, adults for their survival.
If you still can’t understand what I meant when I said adults have all the power in their relationships with their young children, it’s because you don’t want to understand.
Bizarro No. 1 on January 5, 2010 at 12:58 AM
Awesome! I bookmarked it for future discussions.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 1:00 AM
Without children, adults betray the survival of their species. Adults NEED children.
Epic failure on the foundation of your theory in child rearing.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 1:01 AM
Spankings and drunk dad beatings are both abusive, albeit to different degrees.
I’ll tell you, if either of my parents honestly believed s/he had to spank me or my brothers in order to properly discipline us, I’d think s/he was limited in thought i.e stupid.
Bizarro No. 1 on January 5, 2010 at 1:02 AM
No. It’s a false premise. You will see this revealed as I get you to clarify your comments.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 1:02 AM
By your reasoning, no child would be able to rise above an abusive father or mother. Children do not need their parents, they can survive on their own if necessary. Many children become their own adult figures because they realize they can’t rely on anyone but themselves.
It all depends on the atmosphere.
Ingenue on January 5, 2010 at 1:03 AM
All children are not the same. Period.
Ingenue on January 5, 2010 at 1:04 AM
That’s nice you believe that.
I believe that believing spankings are necessary and good to be indicative of someone who isn’t a very deep thinker.
What those first 2 verses have to do with spanking, you tell me…!
As for the last verse: if you aren’t aware, the OT was written more than 2000 years ago. I like to think that we are more civilized than to follow such admontions. Or maybe you think times were better when men were to be executed in the name of God for committing homosexuals acts?
Bizarro No. 1 on January 5, 2010 at 1:11 AM
I only said it because it’s true! :)
Bizarro No. 1 on January 5, 2010 at 1:13 AM
Whatever you say, smart guy, whatever you say! :)
Bizarro No. 1 on January 5, 2010 at 1:14 AM
You quoted the Bible first, I just followed suit.
That’s nice that you believe that.
Ingenue on January 5, 2010 at 1:14 AM
The child that continues to run into the street irrespective of time outs and creative techniques will eventually have to experience pain.
Bizarro assumes that a parent can control the free will of a child. A child btw that has to learn the dangers of the world it lives in.
All children are different. Bizarro’s theory may work for a certain child, but the minuscule number it would work for would carry a heavy toll of lives if his theory was put into widespread practice. He is a typical example of academia. If it reads well on paper, it must work in the real world.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 1:15 AM
I really hate to be the one to break it to you, but the survival of humanity is a want, not a need.
If you, or I, were the last person on Earth, your life wouldn’t necessarily come to end because you didn’t have kids.
Bizarro No. 1 on January 5, 2010 at 1:19 AM
Hopefully not from a vehicle. I’d much rather be spanked then hit by a car . . .
Ingenue on January 5, 2010 at 1:19 AM
Nighty night! I have to go convince my 5 year old that standing in a tub full of water while playing with a hair dryer will cause the magical electricity to make him stop breathing. It should be easy since the concept of electron flow is so easy to understand.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 1:22 AM
No, it wasn’t a false premise. What we have here is a failure to communicate, and I can tell you that the communication problem isn’t coming from my end! :)
Bizarro No. 1 on January 5, 2010 at 1:23 AM
One or the other. By the time this discussion is over, bizarro will be close to saying Darwinism is the preferred rearing technique for children.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 1:23 AM
Bwahahahahahahaha!!!!
He is on the verge of Darwinism! Pretty soon he’ll be telling us that only his kind are worthy to survive! You liberals are reallllly something to watch.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 1:27 AM
You can claim that all night long, but the reality is that children have power that adults cannot take away. It is in that power where your theory fails.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 1:28 AM
Uh, that wasn’t my reasoning at all.
Really now? How many babies have you seen out growing their own crops, raising buffalo, fishing, and/or shooting guns at moose with Sarah Palin in order to meet their physical requirement for food? I admit I’ve seen a few, but I bet it isn’t nearly as many as you’ve seen…
Ingenue on January 5, 2010 at 1:03 AM
Bizarro No. 1 on January 5, 2010 at 1:29 AM
Some may continue arguing (it’s actually kinda fun to read it all), but this guy slipped in the absolute truth (in my opinion) and I just wanted to acknowledge it.
Hades69 on January 5, 2010 at 1:55 AM
Yes, because all parents grow crops and raise buffalo . . .
How the heck do you think kids survive out on the street when their parents are drug addicts incapable of taking care of themselves? In many situations it’s the kids taking care of the parents not the other way around.
Yes, it was your reasoning, by saying that a child relies solely on his or her parents and cannot act of their own accord. If that was the case no child would rise above his or her personal situation, they would simply suffer.
Ingenue on January 5, 2010 at 1:57 AM
The Catholic Church has always taught that the “age of reason” is generally reached at seven.
atheling on January 5, 2010 at 2:04 AM
Over thinking. Waaayyy to much emotion and waayy too little thought.
The boss does not remain the boss and accept rebellion.
Kids are not the boss. Growing up means testing limits. Discipline is required to produce an adult.
Mom or Pop doesn’t matter. Accept BS, get BS adults.
The deliberate lies are not for the benefit of anyone. For confusion only.
And the weak, no morals, no conscience, everything acceptable adults that result from no discipline are sheeple. Hello slaughter.
Caststeel on January 5, 2010 at 2:29 AM
There’s difference between abuse and corporeal punishment. Abuse is physically assaulting a person because you feel like it and for no good reason other than to satisfy your own rage. Corporeal punishment is a last resort in getting a kid’s attention. Some never need to be spanked or smacked…with others it doesn’t do any good anyway.
If anyone doesn’t think that kids out in the country and the working class neighborhoods in Europe don’t get smacked upside their heads by their parents are deluded.
Dr. ZhivBlago on January 5, 2010 at 2:39 AM
I wasnt spanked as a child, (oh heaven, did I need it!!!!), but when I was going thru my worst rebellion around 16, I called my mother a very nasty name, f’ing beeyotch IIRC, and she punched me hard right in the mouth. I had 3 loose teeth and needed 7 stitches.
She is 74 and I am still scared of her. I also think that was the coolest sucker punch I have ever seen.
di butler on January 5, 2010 at 3:00 AM
I simply cannot understand the young people my age who called their parents all manner of filthy names in their teenage years and got away scot-free with doing so.
It’s been years since I’ve been spanked or slapped, but I would sooner pull a lion’s tail than speak of my parents in such a manner, especially to their faces!
Right now the unspoken policy is “hands off”, and I think that’s about right. (But I did make it quite clear in a few tense moments that statements like “shut up” would be met with “come and make me”, and that I will respond if hit first.)
Dark-Star on January 5, 2010 at 9:09 AM
Dark-Star,
That wasnt the first time I was a snotty little turd, and a lying one to boot, but the first (and only) time I ever said anything like that to my mother. I thoroughly deserved it. And to be fully honest, that was the first time I remember ever really respecting my mother. I would mind her to her face and do what I wanted behind her back. She seemed much cooler to me after she decked me. I was standing in front of the bathtub when she punched me, and I flipped back into the tub and hit my head on the tiles. She laid me out. Never said a word, turned around and walked out. I can guarantee even at her age now she would do the exact same thing if I ever said anything like that now even though I am 43. Not that I would. Lesson learned.
di butler on January 5, 2010 at 9:26 AM
I and my siblings were beaten fairly severely, (bruises, injuries)in anger, by my father. Yeah, he was psycho. He took our choices. As a result, I never had the stomach for spanking. But there are other things you can do, that are probably not as effective as spanking, but work. One of the things small children lack nowadays is supervision. Mom is working, Dad is working, the babysitter doesn’t give a crap what they do, as long as they don’t break anything. With a child smaller than six, if they are properly supervised, you can head off a lot of bad behavior with the liberal use of vitamin N- Loudly and forcefully saying NO. That was enough to scare my kids into subordination. If they did whatever it was any way, I put them in their cribs until they were done having their tantrum, and walked away. Even a very young child can be taught that unpleasant consequences come when you choose wrong. I feel by the age of eight a child knows right from wrong. Now that my kids are older, I give them choices: you can continue to speak to me in that disobedient and belligerent manner ( yes, I say that.) and lose whatever is dearest to them at the time, or you can straighten up and be in my good graces. They would rather be in my good graces.
And I take exception to all these posters blathering on about making women subservient to men through discipline. Part of the problem we have with our young men now is no one teaches them their duty- if my boys are hassling their sister or poking their younger brother- they know they are going to catch it hot and have to repeat endlessly what their duty is: to care and protect women, girls, and children.
Kristamatic on January 5, 2010 at 9:33 AM
Well said.
dedalus on January 5, 2010 at 9:37 AM
LOL. No, I actually am a professional animator (like cartoons), but I see where you might get that idea about the name…. Perhaps recounting my less-than-shining childhood moments was not advisable.
Animator Girl on January 5, 2010 at 9:50 AM
How old are your kids?
Chris_Balsz on January 5, 2010 at 9:55 AM
He didn’t take your choices away, he manipulated them to his own ends. In the end, through abuse, you chose to change. It isn’t fair and you were destined to adjust, but it was a choice all the same.
The destruction of the family is paramount to this question. Having children to turn them over to others to raise is just wrong.
Many would say that is sexist. In most instances I believe in traditional roles for men and women. Women raise and men provide. It isn’t a matter of limiting either persons options, it is a matter of taking on the role each is best suited for. A single mother can (and must) do both. A single father can (and must) do both.
There is a connection that is unique to the experience of giving birth and men will never fully grasp it, except to know that they cannot grasp it and defer it’s lessons to women.
In my experience, it is easier for men to be completely detached from emotional burdens. This is a double edged sword. On the one hand, they can accurately create the brutal conditions of ambivalence the world has toward the life that a child will experience as an adult. This allows him to teach them coping skills. On the other hand, if he isn’t careful, he will emotionally detach. When you underscore the coldness of the world, the family unit becomes more valued as a haven of trust and love.
The liberals have switched those roles. They have created enmity in the family and propped up Obama’s government as the new family.
That philosophy is of Satan.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 10:02 AM
That is quite ironic. lol I have seen cartoons of a child with frizzed hair sitting next to an electrical socket. :-) Hell, I’d bet you have drawn a similar picture in your career. lol
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 10:05 AM
I have seen MANY parents take on the belief that a child, as an innocent, has more insight to truth than they do and thus should be paid attention to. I think this leads the child to the idea that it is true and therefore when they get the feeling that the parent is wrong, his absolute moral authority gives him leave to disrespect the adult. It’s a result of liberal 60′s whackjob thinking.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 10:09 AM
Rock on csdeven. I don’t care if people think it is sexist. I’m teachin’ it to mah boys ;)
Kristamatic on January 5, 2010 at 10:11 AM
Actually not…just one needs to learn respect, alpha, beta, or omega…
right2bright on January 5, 2010 at 10:21 AM
Okay, how many of us has seen a child who is acting like a little monster and heard the parent say “I can’t do anything with him/her?” Barring illness or exhaustion, both remedied by immediate removal from pulbic, I hate hearing that. Older, wiser, bigger but unable to control a small child isn’t comforting. That said, behavior is usually a phase and there is more fun right around the corner.
Cindy Munford on January 5, 2010 at 10:24 AM
The other alternative to spanking is hard labor. No one uses hard labor as discipline anymore. There is something about cleaning toilets that really focuses a child’s mind. And I have to admit, it makes me do my evil laugh to see them at it.
Kristamatic on January 5, 2010 at 10:48 AM
Nothing more irritating then a mother saying a dozen times…”stop that”, or “leave the dog alone”…and then ignoring that they keep doing it.
Parents were always saying, “I can’t believe they are so well behaved at your house”, well, that’s because when my wife said “stop”, she meant it, and our kids friends learned real fast…pick up their toys, pick up their plates, wash their plates, thank the Mrs…and they are treated with respect.
right2bright on January 5, 2010 at 10:59 AM
With kids 3 and younger a lot of behavior is a result of feeding and sleeping. If a child is rested and fed, it’s a good start. If either is lacking any child will have difficulty with self-control. At those times any type of punishment or attempt at explaining logical consequences will be ineffective.
dedalus on January 5, 2010 at 11:06 AM
Kristamatic on January 5, 2010 at 10:48 AM
Good one! I may use that on the hellions one day.
I like the log carry myself for punishment. They run around the yard with a nice heavy log contemplating the error of thier ways.
The other good part about hard labor is that they get nice and tired and do not argue about naps or early bed times.
And there is the implied threat of humiliation for older kids. Say revealing how they acted in the bathtub as a kid to thier friends. Or play dress up and and “follow the kid to school day”.
LincolntheHun on January 5, 2010 at 11:13 AM
It is funny how these spanking conversations always have someone who is so sure that they have the super smart never, never, never spank ever line. Spanking is a tool. It works for some kids and parents and not for others. If it doesn’t work for you don’t spank, but don’t assume that other parents are inferior because they do. Of course parents who do spank should probably not assume that a non-spanking parent is permissive and out of control.
darcee on January 5, 2010 at 11:18 AM
My kids have been known to run laps around the cul-de-sac and scrub the kitchen floor.
darcee on January 5, 2010 at 11:19 AM
Obviously some of you were not spanked enough as children.
lol
bridgetown on January 5, 2010 at 11:29 AM
I have ADD. I usedto have ADHD, but my Dad “beat” the H out of me.
davidk on January 5, 2010 at 11:40 AM
My sister (the younger one) did not spank her children. They turned out to be outstanding young people.
Causes me to rethink my assumptions about spanking.
davidk on January 5, 2010 at 11:43 AM
I wish I had it all together like you guys. I know what the desired behavioral outcome is, but I often don’t know how to achieve it.
To the “never-ever-spank” people: If you can insist that your way leads to good behavior and that all spanking is bad, can I insist that my preferred methods of getting infants and small children to sleep are superior and all others suck? Because my kids were always great sleepers even as newborns and I know a lot of frustrated parents (mostly current non-spankers) who were sleep-deprived and miserable for months, even years. Obviously if they followed MY way they’d have been golden. :)
Missy on January 5, 2010 at 11:50 AM
Right. The ones that I suspect are permissive and out of control are the ones who dismiss spanking as a useful way to modify behavior in any instance.
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 11:54 AM
Everyone needs the dog crap knocked out of them from time to time. Was AP ever spanked?
wepeople on January 5, 2010 at 11:59 AM
Human nature hasn’t changed one iota throughout all of recorded history so why should the passage of time make us ‘more civilised’? The significant features of civilisation were all in place more than 2000 years ago.
Do you really think the world is more civilised today than it was 2000 years ago? And, if so, are you sure you are not mistaking greater technology for greater civilisation?
YiZhangZhe on January 5, 2010 at 12:09 PM
It’s easy to be “together” when they are grown, not in jail and gainfully employed. Add to that a mother who lived a block away life can be golden. I usually will help a parent in public out by distracting a little person with a game of peek-a-boo or something stupid. As for non-sleepers, that was my last one and if he had been first he might be an only child.
Cindy Munford on January 5, 2010 at 12:24 PM
Amen. Except for recreation (beach park etc) I would have rather taken a beating then take all three of mine out at the same time. Under the best of circumstances. The best I could do is make them keep their hands in their pockets and tell them that anyone who misbehaved would get underwear for Christmas. My favorit remark to my kids was “Ok, let’s all act like we’ve been somewhere before.”
Cindy Munford on January 5, 2010 at 12:29 PM
Thanks, that cheers me up. It’s nice of you to be the helpful parent – I’ve been moved to tears by such kindness in the past. I think nonparents don’t always appreciate how exhausting it all is. Esp. when both parents work full time and there is no family around to help (my husband’s parents are no longer living and mine are several states away).
We’re expecting #3, so maybe I’ll have a similar experience to yours and he/she will be turn out to be the noncompliant sleeper. Actually the way things are going, I’d bet on it. :)
Missy on January 5, 2010 at 12:36 PM
LOL. I will file both of those away to tell the kids in the future!
Missy on January 5, 2010 at 12:37 PM
May I recommend the early works of Erma Bombeck. “The Grass is Always Greener of the Septic Tank”, “If Life is a Bowl of Cherries, Why am I in the Pits” etc. I perfer her earlier books because the let you know we are all out there fighting the good fight. I don’t know if it was just me but having three is weird, I was always counting heads and feeling that someone was missing.
Cindy Munford on January 5, 2010 at 12:46 PM
We had four and it’s our sanity that was missing. lol
csdeven on January 5, 2010 at 12:48 PM
LOL!!! More sounds good when your done.
Cindy Munford on January 5, 2010 at 12:59 PM
Thanks, Cindy. I love Erma Bombeck but have yet to read any of the books cover-to-cover. Did you ever read “Life Among the Savages” by Shirley Jackson? It is quite a departure for her, about bringing up four kids in an old house in rural Vermont, but it’s hilarious.
Missy on January 5, 2010 at 1:32 PM
I haven’t but thanks, I will look into it. Sounds like my cup of tea.
Cindy Munford on January 5, 2010 at 2:16 PM
I have enjoyed both Bizarro and CSDeven’s discussion and would like to apply my experience into it.
I personally have no kids in the biological sense, although I do take care of my 3 nephews and niece. The boys are from my older sister, who has no control over them and the girl is from my younger older sister who uses corporal punishment. Both sisters are not married (one divorced the other got pregnant in highschool…she is one year older than me). I say this now so that the following won’t sound odd.
I am definitely no liberal and am a firm believer in the literal translation of “spare the rod, spoil the child.” However, I do agree with his observation about the relationship between adults and children with the exception of the word “power.” I believe it should be stated as follows: “Children have no authority over adults.” Granted that a child can have authority if the adult gives it to them. This will also satisfy CSDeven’s argument that kids do have some power that adults cannot remove.
Spanking is a tool in which adults assert their authority (just like the police use physical force to assert theirs). I do not look down on those who do not spank their children. In fact, they must be great parents (provided their children behave) because they have not had to resort to physical correction. It means their children already fear the consequences of disobedience and understand the authority their parents have. Other children need to experience that authority. I do not, however, have any respect for those who outright refuse to result to corporal punishment when needed. Parents who do so have already given over their authority to their children. Their words hold no power of enforcement because of the power the children have to say no. You can tell a child to put a knife down and threaten no presents or ground them or anything, but they still must choose to do it. If they say no you have only two choices. You can physically take the knife away from them or you can ignore it and let them cut themselves.
The niece and nephews I mentioned above are in both of those categories. I have never spanked my niece and I doubt I ever will even though I take a large roll in raising her (every day for hours since her mom is in medical school). The boys, however, do not respect their mother (who cannot bring herself to spank the boys…or hardly correct them for that matter). I have only spanked each of them once. It wasn’t even a hard spanking. It’s a miracle the change in behavior they have when I am around. They are little angels in front of me and little devils with their mother. Why? Because they respect my authority and fear the consequences that would come about if they did what they knew was wrong.
Having said that, how to use spanking is very important. If you strike your children because you are angry, then you have done nothing but beat them. You must do it because you love them. The best way is to tell them to go to their room and “prepare for their spanking.” This allows you to calm your emotions before you deliver the punishment (which you MUST follow through with). You must then explain why you are spanking them so that they know what behavior they must avoid in the future (99% of the time the kids already know, but just be safe). Next you must spank them enough to hurt, but not enough to disable. It only takes a little sting for most kids to get the message. Lastly you must hug them and tell them how much you love them.
I don’t see how anyone with any common sense can call the above method abuse. It is simply the only way to deal with some children. If you do it properly, you may only have to do it once because the next time you threaten them, they know that you will do what you said. My nephews are awesome. I love them so much and I rarely even have to raise my voice since I applied the above method.
Lastly, remember that most punishment can be avoided if you are giving your child the proper amounts of attention and clearly stating the rules that must be followed. Too much attention spoils them just as badly as too little and unclear rules simply are unfair to the child.
Pattosensei on January 5, 2010 at 4:14 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3