View Full Version : does a smack harm a child?
Quote; Campaigners demand legal ban on hitting children after PM admits smacking his kids; unquote.
Well what do you think?
Can never make up my mind about this. It seems like the most sensible thing to do with small children - a gentle smack gives them the message when maybe they're too young to understand reason. Trouble is they then think smacking is OK and they pass it on, or even back. If you can smack me, why can't I smack you or my little brother/sister? It's the natural thing to do, after all animals do it. Wish I knew which side of the fence to come down on but I don't, even though I'm a granny.
I dont think it does any harm, ovousley within reason, but what someone may call a smack, someone else may say its a hit. where do you draw the line on this? it sure didnt do me any harm or my kids.
what someone may call a smack, someone else may say its a hit. where do you draw the line on this?
I also dont know what side of the fence to sit on.
I can understand what you mean, drawing the line is very difficult.
Another thing is that nowadays, many kids are wise to the fact that they wont get a smack, and the worst punishment will be no pocket money or get grounded etc. I think that this leads them to not be afraid of breaking the rules.
rich62_uk
11-Jan-06, 14:49
I think it depends very much on the child, one of mine would die if I smacked him he just couldn't cope, another one I could take a baseball bat to and he wouldn't even flinch, now removing some of his "favorite" clothes :D. Now my daughter you have to smack albeit very very very rarely anything else and she wets herself, she cant cope with a drawn out punishment, over and done with suits her (not sure if she would agree). As long as its done in a controlled way one smack on the bottom and no raising of your voice, then letting it go I don't have a problem with it. There are so many things you can do like the corner, bottom step, bedroom, bed (if its late enough) but most importantly PRAISE in the first place, they love it cannot get enough...:D Trish.
As a child,I was smacked too often and for very little.This was an accepted thing in the forties and fifties in the Glebe.However,this situation created in me an aversion to violence towards children until I had children of my own and then I found myself in a dilema. As it turned out,I rarely had to resort to smacking but once I had used violence(for blatant lying) I found that the threat was enough and rarely had to resort to smacking again.
I am not in favour of smacking children but the threat of the belt in school was a fair deterent and we had considerably more order in school than seems to be the case now.
I think that if a young child is doing something that could harm them they a quick smack on their hand is enough to deter them.
I have gotten most of the smacking out of the way with my five year old, just the threat now is enough to deter any undesirable behaviour. I much prefer the counting to 3 method, it works a treat!
I actually don't agree with smacking children, I do not agree that the government has control over how you should bring up your children BUT on the other hand if it's not regulated it can lead to children suffering physical abuse.
I give lots of praise to good behaviour and just try to ignore the bad, they soon give up, or maybe I've just been lucky.
rich62_uk
11-Jan-06, 15:39
Gleber2.... Do you think most of the smacks you received was to keep the neighbors/family happy ? I believe mine were, you hear a child scream in a busy place and it wont be long before you hear an "older" person say "in my day" What is wrong with them ? If you smack the child its just going to scream louder ! The "older" folk may feel better but I bet the child and mother don't just more stressed. And I for one would not allow the school to smack/belt/cane my children (I think Rich would so that would be a problem in this house)....Trish. :(
As a child,I was smacked too often and for very little.This was an accepted thing in the forties and fifties in the Glebe.However,this situation created in me an aversion to violence towards children until I had children of my own and then I found myself in a dilema. As it turned out,I rarely had to resort to smacking but once I had used violence(for blatant lying) I found that the threat was enough and rarely had to resort to smacking again.
I am not in favour of smacking children but the threat of the belt in school was a fair deterent and we had considerably more order in school than seems to be the case now.
I too was brought up in the Glebe in the 40's and got a skelp now and again from my Granny, Mum and my aunt, if I had ever any wrong. The worst belting I ever got in my life was from my Mum, I was warned time and time again never to go near the rocks or the Victoria Walk by myself but aged five I did not listen, I came out of school followed some older kids the the steps down to the rocks. to cut a long story short, I was found by my Mum and I was belted in public all the way from the Victoria Walk across the playing fields with a dogs leash, that happend a good 60 years ago, did it turn me into a hooligan, I dont think so, did it make me hate my parents No, my Mum is still alive today and I love and respect her heaps. Did I learn a lesson YES
I never went near the rocks again and I am alive and well now because of it.
And as a parent my two boys got a skelp if I or their mother thought fit, are they hooligans NO, they were no angels they were normal laddies, I never had "the polis" at my door ever. They are married with children of their own and they skelp theirs Im sure, but as a Grandad I leave that decision to them.I would never lay a finger on my little angels of Grandaughters
dragonfly
11-Jan-06, 16:11
NO, it might hurt for a short time, but "a" smack does not harm a child. If a parent loses control and hits out at a child that is a different matter and may well cause harm if the parent loses control repeatedly
A smack as part of loving discipline doesnt do any harm. Did anyone see the two wifies on BBC this morning talking about this? The one against smacking kept talking about parents "losing it" and smacking their children. Smacking is not about parents "losing it". A smack should only take place after a warning has been given and in a controlled way. Used in that manner it is a sensible way to discipline a child.
I believe a smack does no harm provided it is done in a controlled manner. I also believe that when a threat is made it should be carried through how often have you heard someone say if you do that once more you are getting a smack then the child does it again and no smack. Children have rights yes I totally agree with that but with laws the way they are children have more rights than adults and do not know how to use them in a sensible way. They know the law but do not know the difference between what is chastisement and what is definate abuse.
I got a good smack from my mother and if i was really bad it was "wait till yer faither gets home " that was enough for me to answer cos when he came home by hell you got it.
Nowadays with my kids yes me and mum does give them a smack when needed, mines is like rich62_UK, hit one faint and fade away the other hit him he will walk away and laugh.
I believe that the belt should still be used in the school today i got it many a time, it never done me any harm and when i did get the belt and told my dad when i went home i got it again for getting it in the firsrt place.
Gleber2.... If you smack the child its just going to scream louder !
:(
What a load of old tripe!!
When our son was a toddler he started to throw a "rage" in Woolies. A quick detour behind the sale rack and one swift smack to his bottom from my Wife and he was silent and good as gold for the rest of the day.
As for teachers, if they have to deal with your kids why should they have the deterrent of the belt taken away? In my opinion parents should have the option to say whether or not they will allow the belt. I know we would let it be dished out because if punishment is warranted it should be given. I attended Wick High for 6 years when the belt was allowed and only saw a handful of people receive the belt. The fact that it was there was enough to make most people behave.
Grandparents don't usually smack their Grand Kids in my experience, I know my parents don't, but they don't live with the kids 24/7 as we have to and they forget that all kids will behave badly at some time and if it were not for the fact that my wife and myself meted out the punishment when it was needed than the kids would not be as well behaved as they are in all walks of life today.
You can reason more with kids as they get older but when they are young the pain reflex is nature's way of explaining to them not to touch hot things etc and a swift warming of the hips has the same effect!!
Love and praise are very important for kids as well but the old saying about sparing the rod and that about being cruel to be kind are very valid in my opinion.
It is also worth thinking about whether banning smacking in public would make it worse for the child as a parent might bottle the rage until getting home and then give the child much worse than they would have done in public and at a time when the child would not know what it was being punished for.
Ahh, its a far cry from the days of kids going up Chimneys to earn a crust!!
If you had any sense when you were a kid you would learn by your older siblings mistakes. Many a time it saved me from any sort of punishment. Im not saying that I was a little angel, i was far from it. I just learnt how not to get caught lol.
I think that if a young child is doing something that could harm them they a quick smack on their hand is enough to deter them.
I have gotten most of the smacking out of the way with my five year old, just the threat now is enough to deter any undesirable behaviour. I much prefer the counting to 3 method, it works a treat!
I actually don't agree with smacking children, I do not agree that the government has control over how you should bring up your children BUT on the other hand if it's not regulated it can lead to children suffering physical abuse.
I give lots of praise to good behaviour and just try to ignore the bad, they soon give up, or maybe I've just been lucky.
I agree with everything you say. BUT just because the government say not to hit a child it's not going to stop abuse. Smacking a child to disciplin him/her is not abuse, beating them to satisfy your own temper is - and how does the government know what goes on behind closed doors?
Passing a law is not going to stop a true abuser, although it might make them more careful where they do it!
i would personally not smack a child bt i do not think any less of any1 that does. i would be more towards the 'naughty step' and that bt yes i no it wont always work. The only time i would smack a child would b if they were in danger such as if they were about to run out across a road infront of a car! i was smacked as a child not often and im not a violent perosn now bt i still personally wouldnt choose that option
how can the government ban it? they will not always no wat goes on behind closed doors? so how can they monitor every1? evern if it was banned there will still b ppl who will smakc their children.
E same age from e same place. I wonder if ye ever fought wi me? I was skelped the same route as yourself and it never kept me away from the rocks.I also got skelped for not going to the Sally Ann so what was the point?And I will always believe that the removal of the tawse was a backward step in school disipline.
I seriously object to the government taking away our God given right to bring up our own children as we see fit.
landmarker
11-Jan-06, 19:13
My children were very well behaved and we hardly ever had to smack. But smack we did, on a handful of occasions.
My daughter now prefers the 'time-out' method of isolating for a minute or two and it works well. She will smack when appropriate (extremely rare)
Talk of banning smacking is ridiculous. A slap will not harm a child.
Obviously there is a world of difference between a smack and a punch, or a beating.
I confess to losing my temper with my daughter ( with three or four slaps) just the once. She was fourteen and she deserved it. Now 33, she is one of the sweetest and most generous people I know. And, I'm happy to say, loves me to pieces.
My mum occasionally gave me a real winger (open handed slap) across the face for being cheeky ! & I turned out allright <he said>
rich62_uk
11-Jan-06, 19:18
What a load of old tripe!!
All I can say to that is the results speak for themselves my children's school reports are glowing however robots they are not, I do not disagree with smacking I will smack if a smack is needed, not because I am intimidated by tuts from people in the supermarket, our youngest is 13 months old and gets many taps on the hand during the course of the day.
As for the belt in schools I would be one of the parents that say no, if they have a problem with one of my children they can deal with it in many ways, younger children could watch their friends playing while they have to stand by the wall etc, older children should be placed in an inclusion unit or allow the parents to deal with it. ( my husband agrees with you ) if the parents fail then the inclusion unit it is.
Banning smacking in public places, No ! Its the parents choice on how they raise their children not the goverment.
I hope this makes sense I am tired but wanted to reply to you. Trish.
I don't think there's anything wrong with a quick smack on the behind. I also would be for bringing back the belt in schools. I would expect my children to behave well enough not to need it.
Also in the years since the belt and a smaked backside have gone, the behaviour of children seems to be going from bad to worse.
Alice in Blunderland
11-Jan-06, 19:37
I believe it is up to the individual sets of parents whether or not to smack our children not the government.I think we should be allowed to continue to give them a 'controlled' smack if it is needed.I dont often resort to this but will if I have to.My youngest two have had the odd smack on the back of the hand when needed although with my oldest I find that if I lower my voice and tell her I am deeply dissapointed and that I cannot even speak to her thats enough to have the tears flowing .My eleven year old boy would snigger if I did this but he soon would wise up when he sees the playstation sitting on my Tv instead of his .Dfferent measures for different children with different attitudes but a punishment in each case.I dont agree with the belt in school as there are many other forms they can resort to on an accademic level load them with homework that hurts more.When I was at school it was a competition to see who could get the most of the belt in the year.
A little serious discipline would have done a power of good to those Westminster MPs who behaved like hooligans during Question Time today. Whatever happened to "respect"? Obviously not something they were taught as children.
It really depends on what you mean buy smack a smack on the bum never hurt no one and all kids need some form of disciplin to behave properly.if the kid was getting a thumping or serouis smack then thats a different story altogether
landmarker
11-Jan-06, 20:09
A little serious discipline would have done a power of good to those Westminster MPs who behaved like hooligans during Question Time today. Whatever happened to "respect"? Obviously not something they were taught as children.
The section of P.M.Q's I heard seem quite civilised. Cameron , up to now anyway, has had nothing to do with the 'punch and judy politics' he railed against. His exchanges with Blair sounded very grown up indeed.
Old Mingies walked into a trap of his own making and seemed out of his depth, sadly. But I digress.........
landmarker
11-Jan-06, 20:14
I don't think there's anything wrong with a quick smack on the behind. I also would be for bringing back the belt in schools. I would expect my children to behave well enough not to need it.
Also in the years since the belt and a smaked backside have gone, the behaviour of children seems to be going from bad to worse.
I agree. There seem to be no boundaries now. There is no going back though. The battle is lost and the insidious march of the namby pamby p.c. brigade has held sway. Can you imagine how many parents now, on news that their beloved offspring have been hit, would march down to school ready for a scrap with the teacher?
Instead of remonstrating with the kid and asking 'why' and perhaps even realising the punishment was appropriate.
I was strapped across the hand twice at school. I can't remember tellin' my parents because I would have landed in more trouble. It didn't hurt too much but I can remember it like it was yesterday.
I don't think a tap on the hand of a young child harms them if your trying to teach them right from wrong..i tapped my sons hand a few times when he was a toddler for touching the fire, hot kettle and climbing on the work tops.
As they get older i agree with Alice in Blunderland telling them you are disappointed in their behaviour It works on mine nice as pie then.
I never thought about plugging the playstation into my tv lol, i'd love to see their faces.
porshiepoo
11-Jan-06, 21:03
For what it's worth, my opinion is that any hitting is unacceptable. To smack a child for doing something YOU think is wrong is abuse, to smack a child out of your own anger, fear, frustration etc is abuse. It has no place in society today.
When you smack any child at any age you are teaching that child that smacking is ok as long as the person dishing it out feels that it is warranted and your also teaching your kids to accept being hit as a part of life.
It's no wonder men and women in abusive relationships find it so hard to speak out about it, all through childhood we have it instilled in us that hitting and being hit is ok, it's only predictable that that is going to cause problems later on in life.
What happens when the 'one off smack' has had so many one offs it's no longer working? Does the smack get harder? If it does, what happens when that harder smack no longer works? Do we start to punch? What happens if the child decides it must be ok to smack back? We can hardly have a go at them for it can we, no, we'd just end up smacking them for smacking us - viscious cycle.
I really fail to understand how anyone can think hitting any child is ok just because they think it's for the childs best interests - how can it be?
If someone walked up to me in the street and smacked me one because they thought it was for my best interests I'd wallop them back or call the police. This option isn't available to kids.
I do understand however that people who have been bought up in that way feel it's ok to pass that on because it diid them no harm, but society is so much more aware now of the damage it DID do to those kids that were bought up that way, there have to better ways of disciplining kids.
In the days of our parents being smacked they had no other ways of being punished, nowadays we can withdraw pocket money, gameboys, play stations, grounding etc. Times have moved on in this subject and so should we.
Let every child know that being hit is not acceptable at any time and maybe we'd see a decline in the amount of abusive relationships in the future.
Besides all that, who really wants to see the fear on their childs face when that child knows they are going to get a smack? I certainly don't, and I'm all up for making it illegal completely.
For what it's worth, my opinion is that any hitting is unacceptable. To smack a child for doing something YOU think is wrong is abuse, to smack a child out of your own anger, fear, frustration etc is abuse. It has no place in society today.
When you smack any child at any age you are teaching that child that smacking is ok as long as the person dishing it out feels that it is warranted and your also teaching your kids to accept being hit as a part of life.
It's no wonder men and women in abusive relationships find it so hard to speak out about it, all through childhood we have it instilled in us that hitting and being hit is ok, it's only predictable that that is going to cause problems later on in life.
What happens when the 'one off smack' has had so many one offs it's no longer working? Does the smack get harder? If it does, what happens when that harder smack no longer works? Do we start to punch? What happens if the child decides it must be ok to smack back? We can hardly have a go at them for it can we, no, we'd just end up smacking them for smacking us - viscious cycle.
I really fail to understand how anyone can think hitting any child is ok just because they think it's for the childs best interests - how can it be?
If someone walked up to me in the street and smacked me one because they thought it was for my best interests I'd wallop them back or call the police. This option isn't available to kids.
I do understand however that people who have been bought up in that way feel it's ok to pass that on because it diid them no harm, but society is so much more aware now of the damage it DID do to those kids that were bought up that way, there have to better ways of disciplining kids.
In the days of our parents being smacked they had no other ways of being punished, nowadays we can withdraw pocket money, gameboys, play stations, grounding etc. Times have moved on in this subject and so should we.
Let every child know that being hit is not acceptable at any time and maybe we'd see a decline in the amount of abusive relationships in the future.
Besides all that, who really wants to see the fear on their childs face when that child knows they are going to get a smack? I certainly don't, and I'm all up for making it illegal completely.
I take it you did'nt get a smack when you did something wrong then poshiepoo ?
landmarker
11-Jan-06, 21:50
I hear the P.M. while admitting he smacked his older children, said that he has not yet smacked the young 'un, Leo'
I must say I would think again before smacking my grandaughter. I'd feel much guiltier afterwards than ever I would have done with my own children. If other methods were proved to work it could easily be a redundant measure.
I'm sure that other methods can work - as demonstrated by our own 'time-out' method.
There is some sense in what you say Porshiepoo but I dont agree with all of it.
A child 'smacking back' for instance. If I'd have done that I would have been decked. Rightly so. This you see is the essence of the matter. A smack can be the jolt which reminds the child of the respect and the neccesary pecking order.
Respect (and a modicum, only a modicum mind, of fear) for your parents means you accept the smack and would not dream of hitting them back.
Parenthood is not about negotiation. As a parent you cannot also be your childs 'friend' not 'til they're about mid-teens anyway. It's one thing or the other and both concepts are quite different.
Nothing wrong with a little smack, within reason, it certainly made me think twice about misbehaving again! Not that i had that many smacks, but when i did i probably deserved them! I know that many people say that violence isnt the answer but like i say within good reason should it really be looked upon as violence?
How many times do we see parents being terrorised by their kids because they hold out on the notion that smacking is wrong? Surely it is wrong for a parent to be bullied and bossed by their own kids?
Parents whose first response to bad behavior is to smack are ineffective parents, those that never smack are likewise.
Smacking should never be too painful, it should be violence ritualised where authority over a child is firmly established. I always think that parents that don't smack are having a dysfunctional relationship with their child where firm barriers are not established, kids are not friends,parents, dolls, soulmates, partners, they are kids. OK, some kids never get smacked and fall into a normal functional relationship with their parent but a lot don't.
The threat of a smack should in 99% of occasions be sufficient, if not you are doing something wrong.
porshiepoo
12-Jan-06, 01:23
Icebox: Yes I did get a smack when I was younger, and it scared the living daylights out of me. lol.
Landmarker: Your points on what is and isn't right in the area of smacking kids is my point entirely.
Teaching a child to establish a 'pecking order' from a young age is not (IMO) the way to teach anyone their place in life. Essentially what that is doing is teaching that child to accept the place someone else has seen fit to point or else they'll get a smack, therefore they learn to accept the smack as 'normal'.
Another example is kids that bully and are bullied. I know theres been lots of debate on here about whether bullies are just wayward kids or whether their kids that are abused themselves or have learnt that hitting is acceptable.
In my opinion it's the latter two but what about the kids that are bullied! How many of them are disciplined at home and have learnt not to defend themselves or stand up for what they'know' to be wrong, because they've been bought up to accept being 'put in their place' or getting a smack.
It becomes ok for the older, bigger people to smack the younger ones when they want to get a point across.
How many of you would accept a smack from someone? No matter what the reason.
It's ok to say that kids won't hit back, but thats usually out of fear not respect, how can we expect kids to respect adults that smack them? And what happens when that kid grows up, is twice the size of an adult and decides they've had enough and hits back? Who would be at fault then?
The other thing is where does everyone stand on the prospect of teachers etc having the right to exercise discipline in this way?
No matter what reason people smack their kids they do it for selfish reasons, because it satisfies something in themselves to do it. Whether it be the kids are argueing and you've had enough - smack from your anger, child touches something you don't want them to - smack out of your frustration or a child doesn't look when they cross the road - smack out of your fear.
Smacking is NEVER in the best interests of a child especially as it is always done from our own anger or frustration etc, in any other situation it would be called assault.
How many of you would accept a smack from someone?
A straw man arguement.
Porshiepoo, don't you think you are just projecting your own adult sensibilities on to what you think a child should be thinking? You talk as if they can reason in terms that an adult can, well they can't.
porshiepoo
12-Jan-06, 01:38
A straw man arguement.
Porshiepoo, don't you think you are just projecting your own adult sensibilities on to what you think a child should be thinking? You talk as if they can reason in terms that an adult can, well they can't.
Just because a child can't reason as an adult does doesn't mean we have the right to take advantage of that and abuse them.
I'm not projecting anything! The question was whether smacking is ok, I didn't realise it was a yes / no only answer, I'm just explaining the way I feel, I don't expect everyone to feel the same way.
Just because a child can't reason as an adult does doesn't mean we have the right to take advantage of that and abuse them.
.
Abuse them? It is only you that has said smacking is abuse? Are you condemning all those parents who give their kiddie a slap into the same category as those two monsters on the news this week?
If you are and you certainly have then you should be utterly ashamed of yourself!
I'm not projecting anything! .
Yes you did, you asked the question and you rationalised smacking as abuse by asking if we would put up with someone giving us a smack. Since I am an adult and am thinking on an adult train of thought then my first response is NO, (then again I can think of some circumstances where I could but that is beside the point.)
A smack has never done me any harm and i dont think a tap on the bum would do my childern any harm neither .
There is a huge gulf between "chastisement" and "abuse".
Sometimes even just using words can be an "abuse".
This is a subject, like so many others, where words can be used in a very emotive manner and often in a very misleading way.
The Angel Of Death
12-Jan-06, 02:00
Personally i think that smacking doesnt do any child any harm as many have said it never did me any harm it taught me right from wrong and if nothing else to try harder to not get caught again :rolleyes:
Beating a child is a diffrent matter and shound NEVER be tolerated at all
Abuse them? It is only you that has said smacking is abuse? Are you condemning all those parents who give their kiddie a slap into the same category as those two monsters on the news this week?
If you are and you certainly have then you should be utterly ashamed of yourself!
Well said rheghead.
I said in a previous post when my son was about 2 years old i used to tap his hand when he would touch the kettle, etc. I viewed this a stern warning of the dangers it held, god! was this child abuse! porshiepoo that is absurd to associate parents who smack their children with abusers.
After this I have never had to smack/tap my children a stern warning and the threat of a slap is enough. I often give the silent treatment for a while works a treat. i would'nt hesitate to smack my children if the situation arose and i would not view myself as an abuser.
Parents ... that never smack are likewise. Don't generalise Rheghead. I thought you were keen on logic. :rolleyes:
The threat of a smack should in 99% of occasions be sufficient, if not you are doing something wrong.That's a bit better. :)
Just because a child can't reason as an adult does doesn't mean we have the right to take advantage of that and abuse them.
I'm not projecting anything! The question was whether smacking is ok, I didn't realise it was a yes / no only answer, I'm just explaining the way I feel, I don't expect everyone to feel the same way.
That's a truly super set of posts porshie. I couldn't have put it better myself. ;)
pooh pooh, how disgraceful. Your child would have learned not to reach for the kettle soon enough without a smack.
And all the way to the hospital to have it's scalds treated you would have had the satisfaction of knowing that you had resisted the terrible temptation to relieve your anger by resorting to violence!
pooh pooh, how disgraceful. Your child would have learned not to reach for the kettle soon enough without a smack.
And all the way to the hospital to have it's scalds treated you would have had the satisfaction of knowing that you had resisted the terrible temptation to relieve your anger by resorting to violence!
smack..a light tap was what he got! i seem to be the only 1 in this thread you classed as disgraceful, confusing!
violence my goodness.Anger what on earth!
i would rather tap my sons hand than to have him learn from scalded skin "ouch! that was a bit hot".
pooh pooh, how disgraceful. Your child would have learned not to reach for the kettle soon enough without a smack.
And all the way to the hospital to have it's scalds treated you would have had the satisfaction of knowing that you had resisted the terrible temptation to relieve your anger by resorting to violence!
I don't see anthing disgraceful about giving your child a tap one the hand i rather do that than see them scared for life are you human jaws ?
I don't see anthing disgraceful about giving your child a tap one the hand i rather do that than see them scared for life are you human jaws ?
Imagine a child walking around with burns as a result of scalding water from a kettle and the mother so happy she did'nt tap that childs hand each time he touched the kettle. Better your burnt son so i did'nt have to resort myself to abuse and violence.
I have'nt heard anything as ridiculous as the post from JAWS.
pooh pooh, how disgraceful. Your child would have learned not to reach for the kettle soon enough without a smack.
And all the way to the hospital to have it's scalds treated you would have had the satisfaction of knowing that you had resisted the terrible temptation to relieve your anger by resorting to violence!JAWS, judging by the 3 posts immediately following yours, I do believe you are playing with your food. Are you a great white? ;)
Imagine a child walking around with burns as a result of scalding water from a kettle and the mother so happy she did'nt tap that childs hand each time he touched the kettle. Better your burnt son so i did'nt have to resort myself to abuse and violence.
I have'nt heard anything as ridiculous as the post from JAWS.
I know some people talk some rubbish i cant imagine anybody letting there child get scalded for the sake of not giving them a smack .
JAWS, judging by the 3 posts immediately following yours, I do believe you are playing with your food. Are you a great white? ;)
Some do speak with their mouths full.
Did your post have something to do with the thread? NO.
I hate when someone gloats.
Sorry. Pooh Pooh, that wasn't meant to be taken as a serious comment and certainly wasn't meant to describe you as behaving disgracefully, far be it from me to do that.
I thought people were more aware of my sense of sarcasm than they obviously are. I will have to be a little more cautious with my comments to prevent misunderstandings.
Crayola, I suspect is nearer to the mark. It was a mischievous post meant to point out that there are far worse things than a gentle slap which can happen to a child.
If I thought for one moment that I knew of somebody who had intentionally let their child scald themself as a lesson I would move heaven and earth to make sure they spent a lot of time as a guest of Her Majesty.
I am genuinely sorry if I caused anybody, especially pooh pooh, distress, it was totally unintentional.
pooh pooh, I rather think that crayola was telling me to behave myself.
Sorry. Pooh Pooh, that wasn't meant to be taken as a serious comment and certainly wasn't meant to describe you as behaving disgracefully, far be it from me to do that.
I thought people were more aware of my sense of sarcasm than they obviously are. I will have to be a little more cautious with my comments to prevent misunderstandings.
Crayola, I suspect is nearer to the mark. It was a mischievous post meant to point out that there are far worse things than a gentle slap which can happen to a child.
If I thought for one moment that I knew of somebody who had intentionally let their child scald themself as a lesson I would move heaven and earth to make sure they spent a lot of time as a guest of Her Majesty.
I am genuinely sorry if I caused anybody, especially pooh pooh, distress, it was totally unintentional.
JAWS apology accepted. I love a little mischievous posts myself but wow! your post sounded so serious i was thinking "Is this really what someone thinks" so glad it's only mischief.
pooh pooh, I rather think that crayola was telling me to behave myself.
I'd rather think mischief! lol
If I ever post anything like that which is serious then you have my permission to visit with a shotgun. I will even write the note so you don't get the blame.
I sometimes forget that not all people know me well enough to know when I am not being serious.
Occassionally I wonder how I have managed to survive so long without somebody having caused me serious injury because of it.
Mind you, there have been times when I have had to be rather fast on my feet and a few places I would not risk returning to! :)
If I ever post anything like that which is serious then you have my permission to visit with a shotgun. I will even write the note so you don't get the blame.
I sometimes forget that not all people know me well enough to know when I am not being serious.
Occassionally I wonder how I have managed to survive so long without somebody having caused me serious injury because of it.
Mind you, there have been times when I have had to be rather fast on my feet and a few places I would not risk returning to! :)
I'm pretty nippy on my feet too! lmao.
connieb19
12-Jan-06, 09:19
smack..a light tap was what he got! i seem to be the only 1 in this thread you classed as disgraceful, confusing!
violence my goodness.Anger what on earth!
i would rather tap my sons hand than to have him learn from scalded skin "ouch! that was a bit hot".For goodness sake...can't you tell Jaws was being sarcastic...do you seriously , I mean seriously think he meant you should have let your child touch the kettle. You should take time to read the post and think, before jumping in with such rubbish!!!!!!!!!!
For goodness sake...can't you tell Jaws was being sarcastic...do you seriously , I mean seriously think he meant you should have let your child touch the kettle. You should take time to read the post and think, before jumping in with such rubbish!!!!!!!!!!
ooh! i do like sarcasim.
For goodness sake...can't you tell Jaws was being sarcastic...do you seriously , I mean seriously think he meant you should have let your child touch the kettle. You should take time to read the post and think, before jumping in with such rubbish!!!!!!!!!!
It's OK connieb we've sorted that one out.
Looking back, I suspect that if I thought something like that had been aimed at me I would probably have hit the roof before I stopped to consider it.
Thanks for sticking up for me in any case.
One day my sarcasm will get me hanged.
porshiepoo
12-Jan-06, 10:25
For those of you that have asked whether I think any form of smacking a child is abuse , the answer is yes. It is physical abuse hidden under a guise of doing what is best for a child.
Again I'll say, hitting a child under any circumstances is not good, beneficial or in a childs best interest. How can it be when it's carried out from negative emotions on the part of the person dishing it out?
For those of you that think a smack works ask yourself this - if you smack a child for being disrespectful, then a couple of weeks later they're disrespectful again and get another smack, then has the smack worked? No!
If smacking actually worked there would be need for it because the first smack would suffice but it doesn't.
How would any of you feel if the child you smack grows up and jumps into a relationship with a person that hits them? You'd be up in arms, insisting they leave the no good so an so - and thats probably the least you'd do- now how many of you would look at why that child has formed a relationship with an abusive person (physical, mental or emotional) because it feels 'normal'?
I know for a fact that 90% of people would report a person they saw hitting a dog or any other animal, most people accept that hitting a dog achieves nothing more than an animal that cringes at every move.
Most pet owners take their time to train a dog kindly because they don't want them messing in the house, stealing food etc etc, why can't we all do the same with our children? Hitting, smacking,tapping they all equate to the same thing - deliberately causing pain or fear to someone we supposedly love.
With values like that it's no wonder there are so many bullies and victims out there.
Something I find so amazing is the fact that when someone mentions making hitting illlegal, parents are up in arms feeling as though a right has been taken away from them. Absurd!
Pooh Pooh, I have to address your comments on the burns victims.
At 18 months old one of my daughters reached up for a hot cup of tea while my husbands back was turned getting the milk from the fridge. I was in the room too and saw it all unfold in slow motion. I couldn't get there quick enough and the hot tea went straight down her front.
Luckily she had a coat on as we'd literally just got in and the shower was downstairs so I could get her in it quick enough.
The damage was done though and she had to have a lot of treatment, the scar is obviously still there - for myself as well as my daughter.
Had I been able to get to her quicker would I have smacked her? I really don't know. Perhaps I would have, but that would have been born of my fear, my daughter had no conception that what she was doing was going to result in that and therefore didn't see the danger.
Usually I have found though that a very sharp no has done the trick. Children pay so much more attention to the tone of the voice and the look on your face than they do to a smack.
Porshiepoo, every argument you use there can be used for any other type of correction.
Even talking to a child can be described as carried out from negative emotions.
A child repeating an action shows a smack does not work? The same again can be said if a child does the same after any other form of guidance.
Do we really dismiss any form of guidance because the child doesn't learn immediately and never makes the same mistake again.
I rather think a lot of teachers would rejoice if they only had to tell students something once and never had to repeat it.
If we are going to equate what happens to dogs with what happens to children then are we going to allow children only "one bite"?
Whilst it might get a lot of hooligans off the streets I would hardly thing it would be an acceptable way of doing things.
As for the cup of tea, I must assume that the methods you use didn't make you any faster either, so that does not stand up as an argument either.
Whilst on that subject, and I don't for one minute think it will help the way you feel about what occurred but here goes anyway.
Accidents happen and often cannot be avoided. I know it is instinct to blame yourself for it having happened but if you were able to take a look from outside your emotions and see it as if you were an outsider just watching then I think you will find that there was very little you could do about it.
Yes, I know, if only you had been a bit closer, if only you had been a bit more watchful, if only........ you will have been through them all.
It happens, and no matter how hard anybody tries they cannot always be in just the right place at just the right time all the time.
And many of us just only wish we could but life ain't like that.
Hmm Porshiepoo - physical abuse? I dont agree with that although i respect your opinion. I have smacked my children as part of a chastisement. My boys are not frightened of me and treat me with great respect.... mostly lol. although the fun they make of my singing might make you wonder sometimes!
The key to whether smacking is abuse is whether it is delvered within a loving relationship, discussed and explained to the child. I dont think there is a right and wrong answer to this as its up to personal choice. Whilst i smart at Porshiepoos suggestion that i am a child abuser I am comfortable with my way of bringing up children and satisfied and confident that i am doing my best for my children. I have three happy healthy loving boys to show for it
porshiepoo
12-Jan-06, 11:39
Porshiepoo, every argument you use there can be used for any other type of correction.
Even talking to a child can be described as carried out from negative emotions.
But doesn't equate to abuse. Unless it's a tirade of course!
A child repeating an action shows a smack does not work? The same again can be said if a child does the same after any other form of guidance.
Do we really dismiss any form of guidance because the child doesn't learn immediately and never makes the same mistake again.
I rather think a lot of teachers would rejoice if they only had to tell students something once and never had to repeat it.
I'll admit that there are times when a smack does work. Eek!
e.g. schoold bullies in the playground - they hit out for whatever reason and the end result is usually the desired result (at least thats what they think).
But does that make it right? No.
If a smack has the same outcome as a talking to i.e it needs several repititions to get the idea across (depending on age of course), then surely the non violent way is the better route to take?
Teachers having the right to dish out a smack! Now would that be right? And up to what age? Do we say they have a right to do it up until the age a child becomes an adult? Because after that age the chances are the 'child' is going to hit back and we wouldn't want to risk that would we!!!!! Oh no!
If we are going to equate what happens to dogs with what happens to children then are we going to allow children only "one bite"?
Whilst it might get a lot of hooligans off the streets I would hardly thing it would be an acceptable way of doing things.
The use of the canine example was just an example. What I'm trying to say is that most people who agree with hitting of a child would be mortified at the sight of someone doing the same to a dog.
As for the cup of tea, I must assume that the methods you use didn't make you any faster either, so that does not stand up as an argument either.
Thats the point! I didn't have a chance to use any method.
Had I been closer I may have smacked her and yes, it probably would have stunned her into stopping what she was doing but it wouldn't have made it right. I would have been smacking her out of my own fear, she did not understand the danger in that situation at her age.
If I had been closer I also think that a quick tug back, a very loud NO and the look of fear on my face would have also had the desired effect, and I'd much rather that way than a way that can cause a whole load of other issues in itself.
Whilst on that subject, and I don't for one minute think it will help the way you feel about what occurred but here goes anyway.
Accidents happen and often cannot be avoided. I know it is instinct to blame yourself for it having happened but if you were able to take a look from outside your emotions and see it as if you were an outsider just watching then I think you will find that there was very little you could do about it.
Yes, I know, if only you had been a bit closer, if only you had been a bit more watchful, if only........ you will have been through them all.
It happens, and no matter how hard anybody tries they cannot always be in just the right place at just the right time all the time.
And many of us just only wish we could but life ain't like that.
Obviously anyone in that situation will have the feelings of guilt that we do. I understand that, but my guilt isn't born of not getting to her quick enough and smacking her, it was a situation where I should have been more aware of what a child that age would get up to. As it was, I was sitting on the work top well out of reach. Luckily she had the coat on which soaked up alot of the water before it got to her chest and neck, but with the damage that still happened I dread to think what the outcome would have been if she hadn't been wearing it.
porshiepoo
12-Jan-06, 11:47
Hmm Porshiepoo - physical abuse? I dont agree with that although i respect your opinion. I have smacked my children as part of a chastisement. My boys are not frightened of me and treat me with great respect.... mostly lol. although the fun they make of my singing might make you wonder sometimes!
I completely respect the fact that we all have different ways of chastising kids, I'm not on a liberation for kids tirade. However:
I would be destroyed if I thought for one minute that my kids were frightened of me.
A little example here of a conversation I've had with my kids many a time who are both almost 15.
My husband doesn't think theres anything wrong with a smack and has been known to smack them, I on the other hand, would prefer to tell them of and punish them in other ways.
When I asked them why they listen to me more it basically boiled down to the fact that it was because I don't hit them. They say that they're more scared of dad but he has less control than I do and they're not scared of me! Suits me!!
The key to whether smacking is abuse is whether it is delvered within a loving relationship, discussed and explained to the child. I dont think there is a right and wrong answer to this as its up to personal choice. Whilst i smart at Porshiepoos suggestion that i am a child abuser I am comfortable with my way of bringing up children and satisfied and confident that i am doing my best for my children. I have three happy healthy loving boys to show for it
So do we teach our kids that as long they're in a relationship that they deem 'loving' that smacking is ok?
By instilling that into them what we would actually be teaching them is that loving relationships contain abuse and that it's ok as long as it's 'explained'.
Surely we should be teaching them that abuse of any form or severity is not ok? But we can't contradict that by following it with 'Unless it's an adult, or theres a reason for it or it's because I love you'.
I can't be the only one that can see what values and morals hitting, smacking or whatever is instilling in our kids?
smack..a light tap was what he got! i seem to be the only 1 in this thread you classed as disgraceful, confusing!
violence my goodness.Anger what on earth!
i would rather tap my sons hand than to have him learn from scalded skin "ouch! that was a bit hot".
I think Jaws was actually agreeing with you and his post was a bit tongue in cheek. At least that was the way i took it.
oops! Maybe I should have read all the posts before replying. But seriously, how could you think jaws was serious?
I had a few smacks myself as a child, but I probably deserved them, and I am glad my parents cared enough to disciplin me. Did that teach me that it was okay to hit my younger siblings? No. I always accepted that that was my parents perogitive, not mine. Would I accept being hit as an adult because of it? Definately not.
Has anyone in this board walked into an abusive relationship thinking it okay because they were smacked by their parents or strapped at school? I doubt it!
Of course smacking should be kept at a minimum and other ways used when possible - and i think time out etc. more appropriate and effective in an older child, but sometimes there's just not time as when the child is in danger.
the proof of the pudding is in the eating as they say, and I think the evidence blows your arguement out of the water porchiepoo.
Of course true abuse is a whole different arguement.
Whitewater
12-Jan-06, 12:23
Again I'll say, hitting a child under any circumstances is not good, beneficial or in a childs best interest. How can it be when it's carried out from negative emotions on the part of the person dishing it out?
I don't think that there is any problem with smacking a child after you have warned it of danger and it continues to ignore you. When you love your children and do all you can to teach them right from wrong, and warn them when they are in danger and you are continually ignored (some children are very strong willed) giving them a light smack is NOT a negative emotion, on the contrary it is a very positive emotion aimed at protecting that child from what could be a very painfull and perhaps even a life threatning experience.
When I was young I was given a smack from my parents when I deserved it and I'm the first to admit that I always deserved it, I was a proper little 'B',
but because of their understanding and love and knowing when to give me a smack I survived the dangers of this world in which young children are completely ignorant, they do not know that they can drown, fall over cliffs, get killed by cars, or get hurt by the natural things of every day life.
I believe that what my parents taught me, with an odd smack when required, helped me to survive in this life. I find nothing wrong with that, I was made aware of all the dangers and pitfalls at an early age.
I also got the belt at school, it was well deserved, and on the occations when I received it I always felt ashamed after, as I knew I had let myself down and because of what my parents had taught me I knew that I should have known better.
I have given my children a smack when required, they are both grown up now with families of there own, both are well adjusted and have lovely children who are bold and intelligent and also mannerly and well behaved.
Yes I agree with the odd smack, but not battering. There is a big difference between a smack and child abuse and if porshiepoo you do not know the difference between that you have an aweful lot to learn about life.
oops! Maybe I should have read all the posts before replying. But seriously, how could you think jaws was serious?
Maybe you should have, it's been cleared up.
I did not ponder over the reply what do you think i should do read someones reply 10 times and think "is this a joke, is this serious"?
Now i can clearly see where jaws was coming from lol, at the time of the posting i was unaware if his/her great wit!.
As connie said i should not jump in with rubbish! oh! dear i hang my head in shame. it's been all cleared up so i think the thread can now run on it's title not my "jumping in with rubbish".;)
porshiepoo
12-Jan-06, 13:01
Whitewater, seriously how can you say striking a person, any person, is a positive emotion??
It's ok putting an adult perspective on why you were hit as a child now, but at the time it was happening I doubt you felt quite so blessed with this human form of love.
Katarina, do you seriously believe that a person who hits you must love you? I'm not saying parents who smack don't love their kids of course they do but it's setting foundations for hitting to be 'acceptable'.
People who walk into abusive relationships don't do so consciously (unless they really are sadistic. lol) it's a subconscious action to preserve a comfort zone.
You've also just kind of answered my theory about parents feeling it their right to hit their kids. You say you believe it was your parents perogative to hit you. No one has a right to hit you ever.
When we were growing up smacking was normal, I doubt anyone liked it but it was normal. We don't have to stay in those times though, wouldn't every parent love to learn a way to discipline kids without having to resort to smacking?
Don't we owe it to ourselves and to our kids to learn positive reinforcement rather than negative?
well in my opinion I prefered the world where I got a smack as a child and taught respect for my elders than the world we live in today where people are too scared to say what they think and can't bring their own children up as they see fit because of the politically correct brigade!
I suspect that there were times when my lads would have preferred a quick smack instead of one of my lectures, if only to shut me up!
porshiepoo
12-Jan-06, 13:41
well in my opinion I prefered the world where I got a smack as a child and taught respect for my elders than the world we live in today where people are too scared to say what they think and can't bring their own children up as they see fit because of the politically correct brigade!
Hmm, IMO, smacking doesn't teach respect it teaches fear, and I say again, I seriously doubt you felt respectful at the time.
If a person is smacked for say swearing in front of adults, that child doesn't learn to never swear again just to not swear in front of the person who dishes out the smack and I doubt that child would ever say "No, I respect them too much for hitting me to ever swear in front of them". It's more likely to be that they're too damn frightened, and yes while you may say that the smack has worked, to what end result? A frightened child.
If a small child is hit for say not watching the road, ask that child later that week what they remember and I'll bet it's the smack they remember and not what caused it.
When discussing this thread with my son,he made a very good point.He asked me,if,in the old days(old days??),many people got expelled from the High school and how many teachers were assaulted by pupils.I had to reply none to the former and very,very few to the latter.He then said that assaults were almost daily and a fair number of his peers were expelled. How much of this modern trend can be attributed to our humane,non-violent ways of bringing up bairns.Bring back the tawse,take a stronger hand with our children and re-introduce the birch for teenage(and older) criminals. We might then be able to curb the violence and crime which is now endemic among our younger citizens.Many of todays children act and think like adults and should be treated accordingly when they step out of line. Make the punishments fit the crime and we might have less crime.
Ok lets have an example
An eight year old boy is told to pick his toys up. Mum says " come along and pick these toys up before daddy comes home" His brother dutifully does so and the eight year old says "im not picking them up". she tries to make it a game - points for those who pick up the most toys and he still refuses. She says "I have told you to pick these toys up now help your brother. NO is the response - I dont want to".
" if you dont do as you are told i will have to smack you - pick up these toys NOW"
He still sits there and his mum tells the brother to leave the rest of the toys and the wee boy STILL refuses to pick them up - She counts to three and he still does not pick them up then she smacks him - he cries and begins to pick up the toys in view of the fact he might get another. Mum silently helps him and finally when all the toys are away she sits down and says
" Thank you - you did that really nicely - now look how much better this room looks. Why didnt you tidy them up when i asked you to do so" She explains that when she asks him to do something he has to do it and not be rude and cheeky because she is his mum. She tells him that being rude and cheeky will earn him a smacked bottom and they agree that its much better to do as he is told. Finally she gives him a cuddle and dries his eyes and says "tomorrow lets tidy them up without a smacked bottom"
The next night she says " its time to tidy up" and guess what - it gets tidied. A week later he says no again and she says " what did i tell you about being rude and cheeky - it will earn you a smacked bottom" The room gets tidied.
Bingo - controlled and loving discipline - hardly child abuse
Well said squidge , when i was a bairn i remember getting a smack and that was not that often. I usually did as i was told out of fear of my dad when he got home. But i don't remember being smacked or even grounded alot i do remember one time my brother blaming me for something he did and my dad threating me with the slipper. I do think that stands out in my mind more than any other time because i did'nt do it . I do respect my parents and think that they did a good job as my parents.
For what it's worth, my opinion is that any hitting is unacceptable. To smack a child for doing something YOU think is wrong is abuse, to smack a child out of your own anger, fear, frustration etc is abuse. It has no place in society today.
I really fail to understand how anyone can think hitting any child is ok just because they think it's for the childs best interests - how can it be?
Have you brought up a family yourself?
I have done so and feel qualified to weigh up the benefit of smacking when appropriate.
Children are born without knowledge and it is our responsibility to teach them the basic rights and wrongs. When kids are toddlers it is not possible to have a reasoned discussion with them about what to avoid in the world around them. The family home is a dangerous place for kids and we are all given the pain reflex to warn us of things that are unwise to touch. A child that is unguided can only find out what is bad by experiencing the pain when touching hazardous items in the home. It is not a question of what WE think is wrong, it is merely good sense to let your child know what is unsafe for them and what is an acceptable way to behave in society. To suggest that this amounts to abuse is utter nonsense. Most people are capable of balancing the carrot and the stick and their kids are better for it.
I know that my kids would no be the well-behaved and polite young people they are had they not had a little sting in the tail when it was warranted!!
I was giving the slipper once it never harmed me the threat of that slipper did it for me after that, a smack around the bottom does no child any harm i have the greatest respect for my mother.
I turned out just fine never considered myself an abused child, if i was punched, kicked, locked up in a cupboard and left to starve no food no covers, shivering cold sitting in my own urine, beaten again every few hours then i would say i was an abused child.
I can't be the only one that can see what values and morals hitting, smacking or whatever is instilling in our kids?No, you're not alone porshiepoo. I (almost) never smack my kids.
I can (and do) discipline my kids in any of the scenarios mentioned on this thread without resorting to physical violence. Having said that, I can frighten the living daylights out of them by screaming at them, so perhaps I'm not a lot better than the baby bashers -- that's a humorous term in case anyone didn't spot it.
I find reasoned argument, persistent goading, or the threat of treat-removal works a treat in 99% of cases, and the "yell" is needed rather infrequently.
Having said that, I remain to be convinced that making "light smacking" illegal would be of much benefit to anyone.
I (almost) never smack my kids.
So in what circumstances would you? And does Mrs DrSzin do the smacking - my dad rarely smacked us - in fact i cant remember one instance where My dad smacked but my mum did. My boys were only very very very rarely smacked by their dad - if smacking was done it was done by me
porshiepoo
12-Jan-06, 17:21
In answer to scorries question, yes I have bought up a family of my own.Scorrie, a child accidentally touching something hazardous in the home and recieving pain is slightly different to recieving a painful slap from a big person who did it deliberately.And how can you 'know' that your kids wouldn't be the well behaved kids that they are without a slap if you haven't tried it?You're right when you say kids are born without knowledge and understanding, these are values and morals that are taught by us as the child grows up, wouldn't it be better to start right from the beginning showing children non abusive ways of getting their point across and getting things done?I'd be interested to know what people consitute abuse. Does it change to suit everyones lifestyle? Is smacking a child not abuse but that child in later life hitting a wife / husband is abuse? How does it work?Squidge that scenario is very good, but the same could be turned around into a non violent way. It may take a little longer to wear them down by removing privileges but it teaches them better values in the long run (IMO).I'd rather not have to feel the need to slap a child because it won't do what I want it to do. If the toys don't get tidied up, do what I did, walk in with a bin bag and threaten to chuck em all (hide them in the attic though. lol). Yes they'll give it a big 'yeah yeah whatever', so go along with it. Don't back down and it'll work.There are so many ways that don't have to result in violence.
When discussing this thread with my son,he made a very good point.He asked me,if,in the old days(old days??),many people got expelled from the High school and how many teachers were assaulted by pupils.I had to reply none to the former and very,very few to the latter.He then said that assaults were almost daily and a fair number of his peers were expelled. How much of this modern trend can be attributed to our humane,non-violent ways of bringing up bairns.Bring back the tawse,take a stronger hand with our children and re-introduce the birch for teenage(and older) criminals. We might then be able to curb the violence and crime which is now endemic among our younger citizens.Many of todays children act and think like adults and should be treated accordingly when they step out of line. Make the punishments fit the crime and we might have less crime.
I think I'm no weel!!!.......I agreed with Jaws in an earlier post...now I have to agree with Gleber2 100% on this issue.........I'm coming down with something [disgust] [mad]
So in what circumstances would you? And does Mrs DrSzin do the smacking - my dad rarely smacked us - in fact i cant remember one instance where My dad smacked but my mum did. My boys were only very very very rarely smacked by their dad - if smacking was done it was done by me
OOH your a hard wuman Squidge.......but I like you!!!!!
Squidge that scenario is very good, but the same could be turned around into a non violent way. It may take a little longer to wear them down by removing privileges but it teaches them better values in the long run (IMO).I'd rather not have to feel the need to slap a child because it won't do what I want it to do. If the toys don't get tidied up, do what I did, walk in with a bin bag and threaten to chuck em all (hide them in the attic though. lol). Yes they'll give it a big 'yeah yeah whatever', so go along with it. Don't back down and it'll work.There are so many ways that don't have to result in violence.
I wasnt debating the rights and wrongs of the scenario and what works better porshiepoo - I was questioning whether that scenario depicts a child abuser or not. Is the mum depicted in the scenario a child abuser? According to your definitions she quite clearly is. Surely this means that the full force of the law should be brought to punish her and prevent her from carrying out her abuse on any more children. This could lead to her being imprisoned and her children being put into care. Her family being ripped apart and her children being scarred for life because they were protected from "child abuse".
The thing is with all these knee jerk reactions that you and so many others have - you dont think them through. "Making smacking illegal" is one of the policies that make people feel better - as though something is being done to tackle issues which they feel emotional about. Stop parents smacking and stop child abuse! Issue Identity cards and stop illegal immigrants! Ban hoodies and stop threatening behaviour by adolescents!
Its all nonsense - none of these policies tackle the problem they are simply a smokescreen created by an increasingly nannying state. They are not thought through to the end result which scarily could be the situation i describe above. I absolutely uphold your right to discipline your children in the way you see fit. I would NEVER criticise you or suggest you should do it "my way". Equally I absolutely uphold my right to do the same without being labelled as a child abuser.
Sheesh squidge, you set up more straw men in that post than I could shoot down with a gatling gun. Methinks she's getting to you! Calm down!
Hey Dr after two and a bit weeks off work im chilled as chilled can be. No one is getting to me my world is allllllllllllllllllllllllllll rosey:o
porshiepoo
12-Jan-06, 21:24
I wasnt debating the rights and wrongs of the scenario and what works better porshiepoo - I was questioning whether that scenario depicts a child abuser or not. Is the mum depicted in the scenario a child abuser? According to your definitions she quite clearly is. Surely this means that the full force of the law should be brought to punish her and prevent her from carrying out her abuse on any more children. This could lead to her being imprisoned and her children being put into care. Her family being ripped apart and her children being scarred for life because they were protected from "child abuse".
So why not start raising children with the morals not to smack and then that situation wouldn't arise in the first place.
Tell a parent that smacking a child will result in hefty fines or a prison sentence then I'm sure we'd all start to learn the less violent ways of dealing with chastising kids.
I have told both of my kids that if I lay a hand on them then I am more than prepared for them to report me, this hasn't given them a power over me because I don't intend to hit them in the first place.
The thing is with all these knee jerk reactions that you and so many others have - you dont think them through. "Making smacking illegal" is one of the policies that make people feel better - as though something is being done to tackle issues which they feel emotional about. Stop parents smacking and stop child abuse! Issue Identity cards and stop illegal immigrants! Ban hoodies and stop threatening behaviour by adolescents!
Squidge, please don't tell me that this is a knee jerk reaction of mine, it most certainly is not, and it is extremely well thought through.
I do not believe that violence toward a child in any way or to any degree is acceptable, obviously not every one thinks that way, fine, but my thoughts and ideals are just as permissable as your own.
Yes banning smacking would make me feel 'so much better' and yes I do feel emotional about it.
I have never said that stopping smacking will stop child abuse full stop, it will however help to stop the abuse that a parent dishes out each time they raise a hand to a child.
Its all nonsense - none of these policies tackle the problem they are simply a smokescreen created by an increasingly nannying state. They are not thought through to the end result which scarily could be the situation i describe above. I absolutely uphold your right to discipline your children in the way you see fit. I would NEVER criticise you or suggest you should do it "my way". Equally I absolutely uphold my right to do the same without being labelled as a child abuser.
Well see I also uphold my right to define what I call child abuse, and I feel that child abuse includes smacking.
What about the rights of a child to grow up in a loving,safe enviroment, learning the morals and values that abuse is not acceptable in any form or to any degree?
No one has a right to lay a hand on a child. If the word abuse is too hard to chew on, try bully. We all define bullies by the way they act: Inflicting pain or terror on smaller more vulnerable people, smacking a child is just the same, bullying at it's best abuse at it's worse.
I used to tell my boys that they had to do as they were told because I was bigger than them and if they didn't behave I would sort them out.
I worked extremely well.
At least, it did until the day I realised that I was looking my elder son straight in the eye.
Suddenly I decided that perhaps it was time to work out a different way to tackle the problem! :eek:
landmarker
12-Jan-06, 21:42
No one has a right to lay a hand on a child. .
And if you saw one about to stick his hand in the fire?
To label the odd smack 'abuse' demeans & diminishes the seriousness of the word.
Furthermore, 'bullying' is also a misnomer in this context.Bullies are not motivated by love, and caring. Parents on the other hand, who administer an occasional smack to a child to establish boundaries often are.
Children are precious of course, but to be over precious in their care & to shrink away from even the possibility of the sanction of smacking does them a great dis-service in my opinion.
It is a measure to be used very sparingly, this in itself will increase the
gravity of a smacking situation & make a child think about what it has done.
porshiepoo
12-Jan-06, 21:58
And if you saw one about to stick his hand in the fire?
My first reaction would be to pull it away, not smack it.
To label the odd smack 'abuse' demeans & diminishes the seriousness of the word.
The 'odd smack'? So is it ok for me to give my friend the odd smack? Given out of love and concern for thei welfare of course!
Furthermore, 'bullying' is also a misnomer in this context.Bullies are not motivated by love, and caring. Parents on the other hand, who administer an occasional smack to a child to establish boundaries often are.
So when a child goes into a playground and hits out to establish boundaries, thats bullying but when an adult hits a child for the same reason, that's not??
Hitting a child out of what you call love does not make it ok, surely 'out of love' we would want to discipline in ways that didn't involve making a child feel scared, threatened or vulnerable in their own home by their own parents??
Children are precious of course, but to be over precious in their care & to shrink away from even the possibility of the sanction of smacking does them a great dis-service in my opinion.
The possibility of smacking shouldn't even be a possibility. IMO.
It is a measure to be used very sparingly, this in itself will increase the
gravity of a smacking situation & make a child think about what it has done.
IMO it doesn't. We all remember the smack even years later, most of us can't remember what the smack was for though.
I STILL dont think you have thought through the consequences of the "ban smacking" law
The scenario I painted still holds but i accept your right to hold your opinion and discipline your children the way you see fit
When discussing this thread with my son,he made a very good point.He asked me,if,in the old days(old days??),many people got expelled from the High school and how many teachers were assaulted by pupils.I had to reply none to the former and very,very few to the latter.He then said that assaults were almost daily and a fair number of his peers were expelled. How much of this modern trend can be attributed to our humane,non-violent ways of bringing up bairns.Bring back the tawse,take a stronger hand with our children and re-introduce the birch for teenage(and older) criminals. We might then be able to curb the violence and crime which is now endemic among our younger citizens.Many of todays children act and think like adults and should be treated accordingly when they step out of line. Make the punishments fit the crime and we might have less crime.
Like I tried to say earlier - the proof of the pudding and all that....
And to porshiepoo, I was smacked as a child - But I NEVER feared my parents. In fact, I probably should have had a few more smacks when i think back. Giving a child guidelines gives them security.
I seldom hit mine, the 1,2,3 method worked - but only because the threat of a smack was at the end of it. The threat of being banished to the bottom step had no effect at all!
landmarker
12-Jan-06, 22:31
a child 'hitting out' in the playground is not automatically a 'bully'.
At younger ages I'm afraid human nature often drives children to slap, smack or punch whether they are subject to smacking at home or not.
Systematic, continuous or methodical hitting or psychological torment IS bullying.
To instill into kids that anyone who gets physically violent -even once - is a bully is making them a victim. My first advice would be hit them back, and make a good job of it. Of course if this happened again then my advice would be entirely different. I'd have a word with the kids parents first, then the school if there was no resolution.
I agree with squidge and of course you have the supreme right to bring up your family anyway you choose. It's your terminology, as much as anything else that prompted me to respond.
Thankfully my son at almost 31 is six foot three now built like a brick outhouse & unlikely to be bullied.
Oh and I have to add, Is there not a fear that banning smacking might lead to more verbal abuse which can be much more damaging to a child?
The tongue can often be mightier than the hand!
All of the posts on this thread sound to me to be made by good parents who love and discipline our children fairly by what ever means. And I'm sure they will all turn out well.
It's the others we have to worry about - and banning smacking isn't going to help them one iota!
porshiepoo
12-Jan-06, 22:54
And to porshiepoo, I was smacked as a child - But I NEVER feared my parents. In fact, I probably should have had a few more smacks when i think back. Giving a child guidelines gives them security.
Yeah right! Not even when you knew that smack was coming? If not then you're braver than most at that age.
I seldom hit mine, the 1,2,3 method worked - but only because the threat of a smack was at the end of it. The threat of being banished to the bottom step had no effect at all!
[/QUOTE]
Gets better! Smacking AND threatening, gee what a great way to go. Personally I don't get the threatening to give out wallops either but then thats just me.
I completely understand that we all have different ways of bringing kids up, theres no hand book to guide us with the rights or wrongs, all we can hope for is that they turn out to be balanced young adults.
porshiepoo
12-Jan-06, 22:58
Oh and I have to add, Is there not a fear that banning smacking might lead to more verbal abuse which can be much more damaging to a child?
Huh? Surely we can achieve both? I don't smack my kids but they aren't verbally abusive to anyone.
Verbal abuse worse than physical abuse ?????? Hmm, I don't think so. Neither form is better or worse than other but we shouldn't have to settle for either of them.
The tongue can often be mightier than the hand!
All of the posts on this thread sound to me to be made by good parents who love and discipline our children fairly by what ever means. And I'm sure they will all turn out well.
It's the others we have to worry about - and banning smacking isn't going to help them one iota!
Like I said my kids have turned out so far to be average, polite kids. They don't cause us any trouble, they're extremely honest mostly, they're open, they stand up for what they believe in and guess what - I didn't have to smack them into it.
How often are teenage girls verbally bullied by groups of other girls and end up feeling so demoralised and inadequate that they end up committing suicide.
Very rarely do the bullies need to touch them. The constant pick, pick, pick slowly strips away every bit of confidence they have until they feel life is no longer worth living.
There are no bruises, no visible scars, no broken bones. Just an invisible broken spirit.
landmarker
12-Jan-06, 23:46
How often are teenage girls verbally bullied by groups of other girls and end up feeling so demoralised and inadequate that they end up committing suicide.
Very rarely do the bullies need to touch them. The constant pick, pick, pick slowly strips away every bit of confidence they have until they feel life is no longer worth living.
There are no bruises, no visible scars, no broken bones. Just an invisible broken spirit.
I'm afraid there is little more callous and cruel than a vituperative child.
Teenagers of the ilk must be even worse amongst their peers.Fortunately I used to find verbal abuse relatively easy to deal with. A cutting riposte, an equally nasty jibe.
Childhood can be tough, as this thread has reminded me.
Sometimes these rose tinted specs of nostalgia are dislodged albeit temporarily.
Badness is out there & always has been but the most important thing is to keep communicating with our children. Probe and discuss on a daily basis. The scenario you describe is rare, but all too common -if that makes sense.
We all seem to be discussing this problem from the comfort of our ageing armchairs.We do not stop and think what the reality of today is like for our children.It is our kids who should be on the forums and then we might get a truer view of the situation.
We all seem to be discussing this problem from the comfort of our ageing armchairs.We do not stop and think what the reality of today is like for our children.It is our kids who should be on the forums and then we might get a truer view of the situation.
Aye Right....children in here...come on Gleber2 that would be anarchy
Seriously now,would you like to be a growing-up loon in the Glebe circa 2000.No matter how much we talk to our offspring,can we even begin to imagine what it must be like for them in the world we have created for them.
Children are vicious little savages when they are small.
Just watch a small child throw a complete wobbler before you can get to them.
If they had the size and strength they would do real damage, there is no holding back, they really mean it.
I'm convinced that if they had the size and weight and the skill they would kill.
I don't believe for one minute that they understand the possible consequences or that it is done after they have reasoned it out.
At that point pure animal instinct takes over.
Obviously, as they get older, they learn different but at that age I suspect it is just pure animal instinct.
Don't take me too literally in what I have said because I realise we are talking about a very small child.
But next time you see a couple of toddlers "loose it" whilst you are stopping it just imagine two full sized adults doing the same with the same disregard for the consequences. It's a frightening prospect.
Come on Gleber2. The main difference now is the speed of change and more traffic.
We might have terrorism but does that really compare with coming within two to three hours of total nuclear annihilation.
It would have been even closer if a certain lift in Moscow had remained out of order for a little longer.
World War 3 with no holds barred because of a faulty lift.
Hoodies and violence?
The Glasgow Razor Gangs.
"Lets slash somebody with a cut-throat razor. It's great fun."
Finally stamped out after one played noughts and crosses on a babies face.
Teddy Boys and flick knives.
"What's the style of collar today, sir?"
"The one with the bike chain tacked in under the collar, please."
"And the pockets, sir?"
"Just leave enough room for the knuckle duster, thanks."
Mods and Rockers having full scale riots at Seaside Resorts.
Of course, today’s youth is far worse than we were.
Jobs are more difficult to come by today and that can be no fun for them.
But then again, they don't have the apprenticeship system where you learned to behave or you literally got knocked into shape.
I won’t mention National Service, that gets a little too heated.
I don’t think most things are really much better or worse, just very different. [evil]
In principal I don't or can't really dispute your points.As a matter of interest,do you have much contact with the teenagers of today? We didn't have the temptation of alcopops,all the drugs so available ,free love as soon as puberty was over,the number of divorces and musical partners,the ever present in your face advertising,computers,calculaters,mobile phones, multi channel TV and all the rest that so called progress has given us over the last 25 years. And the numbers are increasing rapidly.I think we are progressing too fast for the human mind to really adjust to each step.the crash,when it comes will be a big one,methinks.:cry:I don't think,in fact,that things are worse now,only more complex and confusing.
Turn on, Tune in, Drop out! Wow, man!
If you remember the '60s you weren't really there! I suppose that's why I stopped at the Mods and Rockers, it's a bit vague after that. :lol:
Mushrooms anywhere?
One of the people who did Play School was doing an interview a couple of years back and told a story.
He turned up to do the Christmas Play School. When he got there he discovered that the rest of them were completely stoned out of their minds.
The bit that caused him most problem was that he was the only one fluffing his lines.
Must admit, the designer drugs, as they are called, are a different kettle of fish to even the worst ones back then.
Some of those produced now are really scary.
I agree about the rate of change, but how do you slow it down. Saying this or that has gone far enough let it stay as it is for now sounds OK, but how do you decide what this or that is.
I can't even begin to imagine how fast things will change in the next twenty years.
But I suppose today’s kids will just grow up with it as the norm.
So in what circumstances would you? And does Mrs DrSzin do the smacking - my dad rarely smacked us - in fact i cant remember one instance where My dad smacked but my mum did. My boys were only very very very rarely smacked by their dad - if smacking was done it was done by meI don't and she doesn't either. I have done once or twice in the past, but I don't any more.
This has nothing to do with political correctness. As various people have pointed out, the latter is a poor substitute for thought.
Some posters have more-or-less argued that hitting kids is good for kids because it instills respect. I don't see the connection. Others have said it didn't do them any harm, and used this to justify smacking their own kids. That's not a very good reason IMHO.
I don't insist that we ban smacking. I don't gamble and I don't have a dog which might poo on your pavement, but that doesn't mean I want to ban them. If you want to smack your kids occasionally, that's ok with me, but I'm not going to smack mine.
Well, I've been watching this thread closely and I have to say I'm actually suprised that there are not more people lining up to speak out against smacking.
How many of you that see fit to smack your beloved children actually really do it for their best interests? Could it not rather be that you get more from it yourself? It stops a situation dead in it's tracks and gets YOU the outcome that you wanted without having to put more effort into learning other ways of dealing with the issue.
In todays society where it's more common for both parents to work, time is limited and when you get home you just want to get everyone sorted and settled, the last thing you need is for kids to disobey your orders or to argue amongst each other. What quicker way to sort it and get you what you want than to threaten to hit them first and then hit them if they don't do as they're told. Sorted. Everyone falls silent, kids do as they're told, you go back to the T.V (or whatever), of course thats after the "That hurt me more than it hurt you" speech.
Could it possibly be that many of you are aghast at the thought of not being able to smack your kids because - as many of you have pointed out one way or another - it's your right as a parent to smack them and many of you are just too damn lazy to take time to cherish your kids while you have them?
Course, none of you are going to admit to that are you!
The thread last year regarding changes to wick, how many of you said that Wick needed to keep up with the times? I bet alot of you that said that still smack your kids seeing as you know, it's your right.
Why can you not have the same forsight into the emotional and physical welfare of your kids and seek out the same changes to your methods of punishment?
There may appear to be more cases of verbally abusive children in society today and maybe that could be partly put down to the stigma attatched to smacking but it could also be put down to more and more families having two working parents and no time for the kids, kids having more luxuries and not having to earn any of it, parents that were hit as kids and have passed it down so disrespect has resulted.
There are many reasons for kids being abusive today but it would appear those of you that want to hold on to their right to smack their kids only see the side you want to see.
It's my opinion that smacking should be made illegal - and yes I have thought about the consequences fully - but I do feel that this has to be replaced with other methods. What are they? Try for yourself, find out what works and what doesn't. Yes it make take time but it has to be better than hitting kids doesn't it?
I don't insist that we ban smacking. I don't gamble and I don't have a dog which might poo on your pavement, but that doesn't mean I want to ban them. If you want to smack your kids occasionally, that's ok with me, but I'm not going to smack mine.
Thats exactly what i think too
Bringing up kids is hard enough and a personal issue. I dont shout at my children for things that others would find a problem. I let things go that my mother would find unacceptable - the thing is that as a single mum i could shout at them all the time and smack them every day. I dont do that - I decide what is important to ME within my family and i stick to it. Its acutely personal - i have never smacked any of my kids for doing something that might hurt them or endanger them ever. I personally deal with that differently. But if a parent thinks that is the way they have to deal with things tehn thats fine by me
You never answered my question.Have you had much contact with young people over the last year or two? We can't slow it down and we can't stop it.
We can olnly survive as best we can.
whew where to begin!
first have not read all the posts head started spinning!
but i read where they were talking about fearing parents..
i think a small amount of healthy fear is good.
i feared my father.. but i love him very much..
i knew that if i did something bad.. then i was done for...
def did not want to be home when he found out.
would have got my bum smacked as a small child and as an older one the
lecture of your life.
and one of my dads lectures will put any grown man or woman to shame over what they have done.
then there would be the punishment.. no money no friends extra chores and def no life outside the house for a while
do i belive in smacking?
yes.
a smack on the bum when all else fails will always garner the attention..
a smack on teh hand to stop them from grabbing teh kettle, sticking something in a socket, ectt. def yes..
a slap across the face for cheek or michief? NO!
punishments should fit the crime.. there is no set way to disipline a child..
landmarker
13-Jan-06, 18:30
A drop of Brandy is always good.
Some real common sense.
I thought me Mam's 'wingers' across my face were a bit over the top 'n all.
However, there were only about four of them - they just stick in my memory.
Dad never hit me and was seldom stern. Of the two, I loved him more. Miss him more if that doesn't sound cruel. Although he was often down the pub with his mates - a generational working class thing I guess.
If I trangressed badly I 'feared' both of 'em. My Mum for her tongue and her left palm, my Dad for his disapproval. They've both been dead for almost thirty years. How I still miss them.
Well, I've been watching this thread closely and I have to say I'm actually suprised that there are not more people lining up to speak out against smacking.
That is because most people know that sensible use of smacking does not harm a child. That was the original question posed here.
I was smacked as a child, not often and 99% of the time it was warranted. I love and respect both my parents even though they both carried out the "foul deed"
Almost all the horror stories of abuse will relate to parents who went way over the score and who would have committed the act with or without a ban in place. I feel that anyone suffering nightmares now about a slap on the hand that happened 30 years ago, is ill equipped to cope with real life.
I appreciate the ideal of bringing up kids without violence but rearing children is an inexact science. One might be able to bring their own kids up that way but never underestimate the element of luck that there is in what you are blessed with bringing up. Some kids would have had Mother Theresa reaching for the Valium and horsewhip after a while!!
Looking at my kids and knowing the relationship I have with them tells me all I need to know about the rights and wrongs of the decision I made to smack them when I considered it was warranted.
I don't think anyone who knows nothing about me or my children, or our family functionality, is in a position to declare my previous activities as something that should be illegal.
The world may be constantly evolving and changing but many of the basics remain the same. It is not a perfect world and never will be. I would be more concerned about the other "Smack" being the danger to kids nowadays.
I dont think it does any harm, ovousley within reason, but what someone may call a smack, someone else may say its a hit. where do you draw the line on this? it sure didnt do me any harm or my kids.
How do you measure a smack?
How do you measure a smack?
On a Clapometer!!
"And I mean that most sincerely folks"
porshiepoo
13-Jan-06, 23:39
That is because most people know that sensible use of smacking does not harm a child. That was the original question posed here.
Sensible smacking?????? Seriously?? How can any kind of hitting, slapping or smacking be sensible??? I just don't get it!!
Almost all the horror stories of abuse will relate to parents who went way over the score and who would have committed the act with or without a ban in place. I feel that anyone suffering nightmares now about a slap on the hand that happened 30 years ago, is ill equipped to cope with real life.
So what is "'way over the score'?. Your way over the score may be nothing to the next person.
I certainly don't have nightmares about a slap on the hand and I'm well equipped to deal with 'real' life. Just so happens that my 'real' life doesn't involve handing out abuse to my kids.
I appreciate the ideal of bringing up kids without violence but rearing children is an inexact science. One might be able to bring their own kids up that way but never underestimate the element of luck that there is in what you are blessed with bringing up. Some kids would have had Mother Theresa reaching for the Valium and horsewhip after a while!!
Just because rearing kids can be hard, tiresome, trying does not mean we have a right to smack them.
Looking at my kids and knowing the relationship I have with them tells me all I need to know about the rights and wrongs of the decision I made to smack them when I considered it was warranted.
Look, I'm not saying that you're kids are great, balanced individuals. Great! Well done!! Seriously.
But what happens if one of your kids tells you in the future how those smacks that you felt justified made him / her feel? What if every time you raised a hand to them, they later on tell you that it instilled fear into them?
Or if you see them belting your grandkids to a point that you feel is 'way over the top' but they felt was 'justified'?
I don't think anyone who knows nothing about me or my children, or our family functionality, is in a position to declare my previous activities as something that should be illegal.
But I do have a right to declare that I feel that all smacking should be made illegal.
The world may be constantly evolving and changing but many of the basics remain the same. It is not a perfect world and never will be. I would be more concerned about the other "Smack" being the danger to kids nowadays.
ANY smack should be a cause for concern IMO.
The fact that anyone would rather hit a child than take time to find other ways around it is what I feel the 'danger'is.
On a Clapometer!!
"And I mean that most sincerely folks"
No! Surely on a 'Slapometer' ? :p
ANY smack should be a cause for concern IMO.
The fact that anyone would rather hit a child than take time to find other ways around it is what I feel the 'danger'is.
You are just repeating yourself endlessly without offering anything other than the fact that you don't agree with smacking. That's fine, we know your standpoint, why do you need to repeat it so often? Perhaps knowing you are in the minority and feel the need to balance the numbers?
I am finished commenting on this subject. Please feel free to have that all so important last word!!
"Smack, Crack, Bushwhacked, Tie another one to the racks Baby, Hey kids where are you? Nobody tells you what to do"
I always found the reminder that, "Unconcious children are always quiet and extremely well behaved!" had the desired effect.
Failing that the reminder that, "Death can be instantanious and quite painless!" never failed.
It helps, of course, if they are never sure if they are going to find out if either are true!
Billy Boy
01-Feb-06, 11:58
i really dont believe in smacking a child no matter what age they are, its is better to explain to a child why something is wrong rather than to smack. with older children a better deterant for them is to take away a favourite toy or if they have their own video machine or tv remove it for a few days. they will learn a lot better than if you give them a smack.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.