What exactly was the sweeping generalisation you observed?
to say that spanking is wrong because of ONE family's ability to "talk." why not just say, "i don't agree with spanking and my family operates just fine without spanking" rather than saying that people who spank their children are irrational, and incapable of constructive discussion?
That's what keeps this message board chugging along. And you're right, my experiences are definitely isolated to what I've experienced in my current life. I unfortunately don't have any recollection or knowlege of events in any past lives.
i am not talking about past lives...i am talking about passing judgment on a area of discipline based on your experience with your family.
to say that spanking is wrong because of ONE family's ability to "talk." why not just say, "i don't agree with spanking and my family operates just fine without spanking" rather than saying that people who spank their children are irrational, and incapable of constructive discussion?
I personally believe that when people choose to spank they are choosing a route that is not about reasoning. They are showing physical force which in my mind is quite different from reasoning. I felt that jeffbr was referring to when people specifically use a lack of reasoning, that they are choosing non-reason as a method. He's not saying they are unreasonable all the time, I don't think--but rather only when they choose non-reason.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
i am not talking about past lives...i am talking about passing judgment on a area of discipline based on your experience with your family.
I'm basing my opinion that spanking is not good on personal experience and Dev. Psych.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
I personally believe that when people choose to spank they are choosing a route that is not about reasoning. They are showing physical force which in my mind is quite different from reasoning. I felt that jeffbr was referring to when people specifically use a lack of reasoning, that they are choosing non-reason as a method. He's not saying they are unreasonable all the time, I don't think--but rather only when they choose non-reason.
you are defined by the decisions you make...thus, by making an unreasonable decision you are unreasonable. my issue, with his stance, is that he believes that spanking is wrong based on his dealings with his family. that's not the way to determine what is or is not wrong...it is merely a way to say what is right for an extremely limited, unrepresentative group of people.
i do not advocate spanking children under 5...there are children that just do not understand "talking"...they understand why they are being punished, but, without the "fear" (that jeffbr is so afraid of) there will be no true punishment...and, thus, a lack of discipline...all children are different...some respond to words some respond to spanking...
I'm basing my opinion that spanking is not good on personal experience and Dev. Psych.
what are your experiences? and what in developmental psychology tells you that spanking is bad? i want the study...and i want a link (not your take on it...that will be too long-winded and superfluous).
My personal belief is that you need to disicpline your child with one hand and love them with the other.
You cannot have one without the other becuase it will cause the child to sway one way or the other (to resent you for no love or to disobey you for no discipline).
you are defined by the decisions you make...thus, by making an unreasonable decision you are unreasonable. my issue, with his stance, is that he believes that spanking is wrong based on his dealings with his family. that's not the way to determine what is or is not wrong...it is merely a way to say what is right for an extremely limited, unrepresentative group of people.
My intentions were more as Angelica described them, but if you wish to be defined by your decisions, then I will go with it. Hitting a kid isn't reasonable or rational. So if you hit kids you aren't reasonable or rational. How could someone who can't lead/instruct/teach without striking be considered reasonable?
i do not advocate spanking children under 5...there are children that just do not understand "talking"...they understand why they are being punished, but, without the "fear" (that jeffbr is so afraid of) there will be no true punishment...and, thus, a lack of discipline...all children are different...some respond to words some respond to spanking...
There are different motivations for behavior. I'm sorry that you appear to only be motivated by fear. My kids can be motivated by praise, by respect, by knowing right from wrong and desiring to choose that which is right, by the feeling of accomplishment or achievement. Why would someone want to use fear as a motivator when there are so many other motivations? The only reasons I can think of include irrationality and/or laziness.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
what are your experiences? and what in developmental psychology tells you that spanking is bad? i want the study...and i want a link (not your take on it...that will be too long-winded and superfluous).
I don't have a single study that proves it. It's the general understanding of how people work and develop. You mentioned not hitting kids under 5 years. But honestly, that is when your least likely to be able to have communication with them. Pain is a very basic stimulus and might work for primitive beings like dogs and cats, maybe even small children. But children and teenagers are far more complex, they can attribute the pain to whatever cause they assume is responsible. Children also do not have the ability to figure things out the same way an adult does. So if you hit a kid and say "figure it out" you are just messing up their heads.
It's far more important to take the time to explain what went wrong and how they can avoid making the mistake in the future. But, I suppose that depends on how much you actually care about raising your children and how much of your free time you are willing to invest in them. It takes no time and very little energy to hit your kids. To me it's a cop out and a very inefficient method of parenting.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
you are defined by the decisions you make...thus, by making an unreasonable decision you are unreasonable. my issue, with his stance, is that he believes that spanking is wrong based on his dealings with his family. that's not the way to determine what is or is not wrong...it is merely a way to say what is right for an extremely limited, unrepresentative group of people.
i do not advocate spanking children under 5...there are children that just do not understand "talking"...they understand why they are being punished, but, without the "fear" (that jeffbr is so afraid of) there will be no true punishment...and, thus, a lack of discipline...all children are different...some respond to words some respond to spanking...
I personally don't say spanking is "wrong", but I think it's okay to say it's unreasonable because based on the definition of "reasoning", it's the opposite of that. I also think that parents seek to create fear of harm in their children by spanking, as a deterrent, so I think it's accurate when jeffbr says every child who is hit learns to fear the person who hit them--afterall, that's the intended point of the spanking!
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
I personally don't say spanking is "wrong", but I think it's okay to say it's unreasonable because based on the definition of "reasoning", it's the opposite of that. I also think that parents seek to create fear of harm in their children by spanking, as a deterrent, so I think it's accurate when jeffbr says every child who is hit learns to fear the person who hit them--afterall, that's the intended point of the spanking!
My personal belief is that you need to disicpline your child with one hand and love them with the other.
You cannot have one without the other becuase it will cause the child to sway one way or the other (to resent you for no love or to disobey you for no discipline).
really well stated. some children just follow easily, others need a more firm talking to, and sometimes hand. it really is that delicate, and individual balance a parent must strive for with their child.
When I am reasoning with someone, I am talking, and explaining. I am being reasonable when I reason--by definition. When I am hitting someone, I am not being reasonable--reasoning is an action of our logical part of our brain--not an action entailing my hand hitting someone. Brute force is definitely not reasoning. It is the absence of reasoning.
Why does a spanking stop children from doing an action? We all know it's because they are afraid to do it for fear of being physically assaulted or hurt and for fear of pain. What other possible reason are they stopping for, related to the spanking? It's not because the reasoning part of their brain wakes up and they understand what they have done and how it is wrong. They are in self-preservation mode and shock--brought on by those who "love" them.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
you're missing what i'm saying...the most important thing is that the child understands what he/she did wrong...how their behavior does not match what is expected.
stop saying "hit" in reference to spanking a child. spanking is not hitting. hitting is physical abuse...spanking is not. spanking can be emotional abuse if the above reasoning is not present before the instance.
AGAIN, no, you do not just grab a child and spank them. that's wrong. OBVIOUSLY. they have to know why they are being spanked. there are children that do not respond to time-out, grounding, and/or negative punishment. children that respond in a positive way to those things, should not be spanked.
you people think that i'm a proponent of child abuse...i am not. but, i do not believe in these generalizations about a parent taking out their bad day on their children. i do not believe in parents not being capable of dealing with their anger as an explanation for why they spank their children.
I don't have a single study that proves it. It's the general understanding of how people work and develop. You mentioned not hitting kids under 5 years. But honestly, that is when your least likely to be able to have communication with them. Pain is a very basic stimulus and might work for primitive beings like dogs and cats, maybe even small children. But children and teenagers are far more complex, they can attribute the pain to whatever cause they assume is responsible. Children also do not have the ability to figure things out the same way an adult does. So if you hit a kid and say "figure it out" you are just messing up their heads.
It's far more important to take the time to explain what went wrong and how they can avoid making the mistake in the future. But, I suppose that depends on how much you actually care about raising your children and how much of your free time you are willing to invest in them. It takes no time and very little energy to hit your kids. To me it's a cop out and a very inefficient method of parenting.
you're missing what i'm saying...the most important thing is that the child understands what he/she did wrong...how their behavior does not match what is expected.
stop saying "hit" in reference to spanking a child. spanking is not hitting. hitting is physical abuse...spanking is not. spanking can be emotional abuse if the above reasoning is not present before the instance.
AGAIN, no, you do not just grab a child and spank them. that's wrong. OBVIOUSLY. they have to know why they are being spanked. there are children that do not respond to time-out, grounding, and/or negative punishment. children that respond in a positive way to those things, should not be spanked.
you people think that i'm a proponent of child abuse...i am not. but, i do not believe in these generalizations about a parent taking out their bad day on their children. i do not believe in parents not being capable of dealing with their anger as an explanation for why they spank their children.
I'm not saying any of that, but spanking is hitting IMO. What is the difference? It's all intended to inflict pain?
I don't think hitting = child abuse. But I think it's a major cop out. Babies are a blank slate, so when you say "some kids" don't respond to alternative punishment, that's dependent on their past experiences with discipline and praise.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
i don't have children. thanks for psych 101 lesson...are you and ahnimus roommates? go read my response before this one...if you understand it, then good...if not, then you are stuck in a utopian vacuum.
see, like i said, stop making generalizations based on your children. your children are perfect and you're a perfect parent. that's good that your children respond to alternatives to corporal punishment. all children are not that way.
My intentions were more as Angelica described them, but if you wish to be defined by your decisions, then I will go with it. Hitting a kid isn't reasonable or rational. So if you hit kids you aren't reasonable or rational. How could someone who can't lead/instruct/teach without striking be considered reasonable?
There are different motivations for behavior. I'm sorry that you appear to only be motivated by fear. My kids can be motivated by praise, by respect, by knowing right from wrong and desiring to choose that which is right, by the feeling of accomplishment or achievement. Why would someone want to use fear as a motivator when there are so many other motivations? The only reasons I can think of include irrationality and/or laziness.
When I am reasoning with someone, I am talking, and explaining. I am being reasonable when I reason--by definition. When I am hitting someone, I am not being reasonable--reasoning is an action of our logical part of our brain--not an action entailing my hand hitting someone. Brute force is definitely not reasoning. It is the absence of reasoning.
Why does a spanking stop children from doing an action? We all know it's because they are afraid to do it for fear of being physically assaulted or hurt and for fear of pain. What other possible reason are they stopping for, related to the spanking? It's not because the reasoning part of their brain wakes up and they understand what they have done and how it is wrong. They are in self-preservation mode and shock--brought on by those who "love" them.
That's it. It's not accomplishing much to have a child simply mind because they fear a spanking. They need to know what they did was wrong and why it should't be done. They need to not repeat their actions because they know it to be wrong not because they will receive pain if they do it again. A child can understand reasoning if the time is taken to explain it properly. Spanking only teaches them to work harder at not geting caught which breeds sneakiness and a lack of trust.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I'm not saying any of that, but spanking is hitting IMO. What is the difference? It's all intended to inflict pain?
I don't think hitting = child abuse. But I think it's a major cop out. Babies are a blank slate, so when you say "some kids" don't respond to alternative punishment, that's dependent on their past experiences with discipline and praise.
well, you are entitled to that lack of distinction. the difference, i feel, is that a child can distinguish between being spanked for inappropriate behavior and being hit indiscriminately because the disciplinarian had a bad day. if you don't believe that children can make that distinction then you are grossly underestimating children.
why do you continue to blather on about "babies"? children that do not respond to time-out, or negative punishment are children that do not suffer any ill-effects of such consequences. effective consequences lead to wanted behavior.
what do you do when a child does something wrong, and you talk to him/her and he/she understands why it was wrong and what he/she should have done instead (you know this because the child told you these things in the course of the discussion about the behavior). so, as punishment, you put your child in time-out. later that week, the child repeats the behavior...what dod you do then? the child knows what is expected but fails to act accordingly. do you take away a favorite toy? limit their exposure to their friends? what if the behavior continues even after a progressive system of disciplinary action?
That's it. It's not accomplishing much to have a child simply mind because they fear a spanking. They need to know what they did was wrong and why it should't be done. They need to not repeat their actions because they know it to be wrong not because they will receive pain if they do it again. A child can understand reasoning if the time is taken to explain it properly. Spanking only teaches them to work harder at not geting caught which breeds sneakiness and a lack of trust.
The amazing thing about children is that they exist in a state of hypnotic suggestion, so as parents the words we say to them eventually take root. If we can just love and accept them through their various growth stages. They may not seem like they are listening any times, and yes it's natural that they are naturally driven to become their own selves and to assert their independence. And yet, we program them from day one. The apple does not fall far from the tree. We need love them and we need to explain, explain and explain some more--age appropriately of course.
And I agree about breeding sneakiness and mistrust. Like I say, my 17 year old son trusts me enough to ask me if he can stay home and miss some morning classes. He knows I am reasonable and will walk him through the steps. I won't judge him and shame him. And I let him make the ulimate choice, knowing the words I've been speaking to him day in and out from birth have been and are taking root.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
That's it. It's not accomplishing much to have a child simply mind because they fear a spanking. They need to know what they did was wrong and why it should't be done. They need to not repeat their actions because they know it to be wrong not because they will receive pain if they do it again. A child can understand reasoning if the time is taken to explain it properly. Spanking only teaches them to work harder at not geting caught which breeds sneakiness and a lack of trust.
AGAIN, no, you do not just grab a child and spank them. that's wrong. OBVIOUSLY. they have to know why they are being spanked. there are children that do not respond to time-out, grounding, and/or negative punishment. children that respond in a positive way to those things, should not be spanked.
no, spanking does not teach them to maneuver in such a way as to not get caught. if they a child does that then the punishment is not effective. they understand the different between right and wrong, they just choose to ignore it and, instead, opt for that which gives them pleasure at that time, i.e. disobeying rules.
the model in peoples' heads about spanking is the parent that grabs the child, says, "NO," and spanks the child...and, then, later, goes to the child and says, "you know the only reason i do that is to teach you." by that time, the time for a lesson to be learned has past. there is no understanding gained.
time-out alone does not help. taking away privileges alone does not help. sending a child away from the dinner table before dessert alone does not help. spanking alone does not help. whatever punishment system you decide on for your child should be consistent, explained, understood, and, most importantly, the child should know why the punishment is taking place and what they can do in the future to avoid such a consequence.
well, you are entitled to that lack of distinction. the difference, i feel, is that a child can distinguish between being spanked for inappropriate behavior and being hit indiscriminately because the disciplinarian had a bad day. if you don't believe that children can make that distinction then you are grossly underestimating children.
why do you continue to blather on about "babies"? children that do not respond to time-out, or negative punishment are children that do not suffer any ill-effects of such consequences. effective consequences lead to wanted behavior.
what do you do when a child does something wrong, and you talk to him/her and he/she understands why it was wrong and what he/she should have done instead (you know this because the child told you these things in the course of the discussion about the behavior). so, as punishment, you put your child in time-out. later that week, the child repeats the behavior...what dod you do then? the child knows what is expected but fails to act accordingly. do you take away a favorite toy? limit their exposure to their friends? what if the behavior continues even after a progressive system of disciplinary action?
I'm too tired for this. Sorry.
I have no problem with kids, they always respect me and respect my advice when I give it. I don't try to control children, I let them do what they do and I just give my advice, they respect it.
My cousin's daughter used to come over and wash my walls because she respected me so much. She said she wanted to do it, she said it was fun. I never asked her to do it. But when she was at home, it was all chores and she didn't want to do any of it.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
The amazing thing about children is that they exist in a state of hypnotic suggestion . . .
i do not believe children are in such a state. i believe children are sponges that soak up that which they feel is valuable and retain that which becomes true from their experiences throughout the developmental process. how do children determine what is worthy of retention in the formation of the self? through reinforcement and punishment. so, effective uses of both are essential.
maybe, we're saying the same thing and this is a semantical argument...but, to me, a state of hypnotic suggestion means that a child behaves based on "commands" without really knowing why they are behaving or how exactly they are behaving.
I have no problem with kids, they always respect me and respect my advice when I give it. I don't try to control children, I let them do what they do and I just give my advice, they respect it.
My cousin's daughter used to come over and wash my walls because she respected me so much. She said she wanted to do it, she said it was fun. I never asked her to do it. But when she was at home, it was all chores and she didn't want to do any of it.
i know you said that you're tired...so, i guess, the board can field this one. why do you think she "liked" washing your walls, but disliked doing the chores at home?
i know you said that you're tired...so, i guess, the board can field this one. why do you think she "liked" washing your walls, but disliked doing the chores at home?
Because I appreciated it and at home it was her duty. I didn't pay her, I just thanked her and never expected anything from her. She's kind of a unique child too. I wouldn't expect any child to do that. I expect them to run around acting like children. Hurting themselves and each other. All those things kids learn from.
We also had a lot of fun whenever I babysat. Her brothers were a lot more to handle but they turned around.
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Spanking is a clear message that a parent doesn't know about child development. It is a quick action that at least physically hurts, and stuns a kid. It is a reflection of poor parenting skills.
There is no such thing as leftover pizza. There is now pizza and later pizza. - anonymous The risk I took was calculated, but man, am I bad at math - The Mincing Mockingbird
It's a psychological fact. (source John Bradshaw's book "Bradshaw on: The Family")
how do children determine what is worthy of retention in the formation of the self? through reinforcement and punishment.
In other words, through consequences for their actions. What you call "punishment" I call "consequences. And there is a world of difference. Children learn by life experiences all the time, that reinforce the words, yes. There are innumerable life experiences that we learn from throughout our lives that have nothing to do with violent acts from our "loved ones". I choose to teach my children in terms that do not make them "wrong" "bad" or that give them the idea that love and harm go hand in hand. I choose to teach them that no one ever has the right to hurt them physically.
Besides, the key reason we all have so many psychological problems is because we are taught to stifle this "self" you talk about. We're taught to submit and do as we're told, rather than to grow into who we are designed to be. Therefore most adults are walking around acting like emotional children (check any thread on this board for glaring evidence of this), because they did not learn to emotionally grow up. This problem is considered to be an issue for 95% of the population. The Self, with a capital "S"--the healthy, authentic self becomes a reality for a small minority of humans at this time. It's a psychological tragedy, knowing what we know.
so, effective uses of both are essential.
If you believe that "punishment" must include spanking..... then I repeat what I said earlier, and I fully stand behind it: the people who say this are those who have settled at the level of spanking and cannot comprehend the myriad disciplinary measures that go far beyond spanking. When we accept the use of physical harm as a means of solving our problems, we stunt our own ability to learn more effective and more humane measures. It's only when we say "violence is not the answer" that we will find the methods that are beyond spanking.
maybe, we're saying the same thing and this is a semantical argument
It seems we're saying very similar things, here, however it looks like you use "punishment" where I use "consequences". That may seem semantical, but the connotations between the two words hold a world of difference.
...but, to me, a state of hypnotic suggestion means that a child behaves based on "commands" without really knowing why they are behaving or how exactly they are behaving.
They internalise what we tell them without knowing it is happening, and without understanding why. The brain quadruples in size from birth as all they are taught is absorbed. It takes immense work for any of us to change patterns that are ingrained in us. That's why we like to justify our patterns, and make the other guy wrong. It's muuucch easier. After absorbing the hypnotic suggestions, throughout the rest of our lives, people will retrigger these suggestions and we'll find ourselves, oh say on a message board acting like we are 5 years old, or 10, at any given time. Look around you--the triggers and the childish behaviour is all over the place.
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr
it's not a psychological fact...it's john bradshaw's opinion.
irrationality results when you fail to recognize rational thought...believing that there is one way to perform something is irrational. you'll never understand that, apparently. enjoy.
It's a psychological fact. (source John Bradshaw's book "Bradshaw on: The Family")
In other words, through consequences for their actions. What you call "punishment" I call "consequences. And there is a world of difference. Children learn by life experiences all the time, that reinforce the words, yes. There are innumerable life experiences that we learn from throughout our lives that have nothing to do with violent acts from our "loved ones". I choose to teach my children in terms that do not make them "wrong" "bad" or that give them the idea that love and harm go hand in hand. I choose to teach them that no one ever has the right to hurt them physically.
Besides, the key reason we all have so many psychological problems is because we are taught to stifle this "self" you talk about. We're taught to submit and do as we're told, rather than to grow into who we are designed to be. Therefore most adults are walking around acting like emotional children (check any thread on this board for glaring evidence of this), because they did not learn to emotionally grow up. This problem is considered to be an issue for 95% of the population. The Self, with a capital "S"--the healthy, authentic self becomes a reality for a small minority of humans at this time. It's a psychological tragedy, knowing what we know.
If you believe that "punishment" must include spanking..... then I repeat what I said earlier, and I fully stand behind it: the people who say this are those who have settled at the level of spanking and cannot comprehend the myriad disciplinary measures that go far beyond spanking. When we accept the use of physical harm as a means of solving our problems, we stunt our own ability to learn more effective and more humane measures. It's only when we say "violence is not the answer" that we will find the methods that are beyond spanking.
It seems we're saying very similar things, here, however it looks like you use "punishment" where I use "consequences". That may seem semantical, but the connotations between the two words hold a world of difference.
They internalise what we tell them without knowing it is happening, and without understanding why. The brain quadruples in size from birth as all they are taught is absorbed. It takes immense work for any of us to change patterns that are ingrained in us. That's why we like to justify our patterns, and make the other guy wrong. It's muuucch easier. After absorbing the hypnotic suggestions, throughout the rest of our lives, people will retrigger these suggestions and we'll find ourselves, oh say on a message board acting like we are 5 years old, or 10, at any given time. Look around you--the triggers and the childish behaviour is all over the place.
Spanking is a clear message that a parent doesn't know about child development. It is a quick action that at least physically hurts, and stuns a kid. It is a reflection of poor parenting skills.
that is a generalizations...thanks for playing though.
Because I appreciated it and at home it was her duty. I didn't pay her, I just thanked her and never expected anything from her. She's kind of a unique child too. I wouldn't expect any child to do that. I expect them to run around acting like children. Hurting themselves and each other. All those things kids learn from.
We also had a lot of fun whenever I babysat. Her brothers were a lot more to handle but they turned around.
so, what does this have to do with spanking a child?
Comments
to say that spanking is wrong because of ONE family's ability to "talk." why not just say, "i don't agree with spanking and my family operates just fine without spanking" rather than saying that people who spank their children are irrational, and incapable of constructive discussion?
from my window to yours
i am not talking about past lives...i am talking about passing judgment on a area of discipline based on your experience with your family.
from my window to yours
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
I'm basing my opinion that spanking is not good on personal experience and Dev. Psych.
you are defined by the decisions you make...thus, by making an unreasonable decision you are unreasonable. my issue, with his stance, is that he believes that spanking is wrong based on his dealings with his family. that's not the way to determine what is or is not wrong...it is merely a way to say what is right for an extremely limited, unrepresentative group of people.
i do not advocate spanking children under 5...there are children that just do not understand "talking"...they understand why they are being punished, but, without the "fear" (that jeffbr is so afraid of) there will be no true punishment...and, thus, a lack of discipline...all children are different...some respond to words some respond to spanking...
from my window to yours
what are your experiences? and what in developmental psychology tells you that spanking is bad? i want the study...and i want a link (not your take on it...that will be too long-winded and superfluous).
from my window to yours
You cannot have one without the other becuase it will cause the child to sway one way or the other (to resent you for no love or to disobey you for no discipline).
My intentions were more as Angelica described them, but if you wish to be defined by your decisions, then I will go with it. Hitting a kid isn't reasonable or rational. So if you hit kids you aren't reasonable or rational. How could someone who can't lead/instruct/teach without striking be considered reasonable?
There are different motivations for behavior. I'm sorry that you appear to only be motivated by fear. My kids can be motivated by praise, by respect, by knowing right from wrong and desiring to choose that which is right, by the feeling of accomplishment or achievement. Why would someone want to use fear as a motivator when there are so many other motivations? The only reasons I can think of include irrationality and/or laziness.
I tend to appreciate women who enjoy a mild and playfull spanking, before getting down to business.
But that's just me.
I don't have a single study that proves it. It's the general understanding of how people work and develop. You mentioned not hitting kids under 5 years. But honestly, that is when your least likely to be able to have communication with them. Pain is a very basic stimulus and might work for primitive beings like dogs and cats, maybe even small children. But children and teenagers are far more complex, they can attribute the pain to whatever cause they assume is responsible. Children also do not have the ability to figure things out the same way an adult does. So if you hit a kid and say "figure it out" you are just messing up their heads.
It's far more important to take the time to explain what went wrong and how they can avoid making the mistake in the future. But, I suppose that depends on how much you actually care about raising your children and how much of your free time you are willing to invest in them. It takes no time and very little energy to hit your kids. To me it's a cop out and a very inefficient method of parenting.
I personally don't say spanking is "wrong", but I think it's okay to say it's unreasonable because based on the definition of "reasoning", it's the opposite of that. I also think that parents seek to create fear of harm in their children by spanking, as a deterrent, so I think it's accurate when jeffbr says every child who is hit learns to fear the person who hit them--afterall, that's the intended point of the spanking!
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
that's just not true.
from my window to yours
really well stated. some children just follow easily, others need a more firm talking to, and sometimes hand. it really is that delicate, and individual balance a parent must strive for with their child.
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
When I am reasoning with someone, I am talking, and explaining. I am being reasonable when I reason--by definition. When I am hitting someone, I am not being reasonable--reasoning is an action of our logical part of our brain--not an action entailing my hand hitting someone. Brute force is definitely not reasoning. It is the absence of reasoning.
Why does a spanking stop children from doing an action? We all know it's because they are afraid to do it for fear of being physically assaulted or hurt and for fear of pain. What other possible reason are they stopping for, related to the spanking? It's not because the reasoning part of their brain wakes up and they understand what they have done and how it is wrong. They are in self-preservation mode and shock--brought on by those who "love" them.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
stop saying "hit" in reference to spanking a child. spanking is not hitting. hitting is physical abuse...spanking is not. spanking can be emotional abuse if the above reasoning is not present before the instance.
AGAIN, no, you do not just grab a child and spank them. that's wrong. OBVIOUSLY. they have to know why they are being spanked. there are children that do not respond to time-out, grounding, and/or negative punishment. children that respond in a positive way to those things, should not be spanked.
you people think that i'm a proponent of child abuse...i am not. but, i do not believe in these generalizations about a parent taking out their bad day on their children. i do not believe in parents not being capable of dealing with their anger as an explanation for why they spank their children.
from my window to yours
I'm not saying any of that, but spanking is hitting IMO. What is the difference? It's all intended to inflict pain?
I don't think hitting = child abuse. But I think it's a major cop out. Babies are a blank slate, so when you say "some kids" don't respond to alternative punishment, that's dependent on their past experiences with discipline and praise.
see, like i said, stop making generalizations based on your children. your children are perfect and you're a perfect parent. that's good that your children respond to alternatives to corporal punishment. all children are not that way.
from my window to yours
That's it. It's not accomplishing much to have a child simply mind because they fear a spanking. They need to know what they did was wrong and why it should't be done. They need to not repeat their actions because they know it to be wrong not because they will receive pain if they do it again. A child can understand reasoning if the time is taken to explain it properly. Spanking only teaches them to work harder at not geting caught which breeds sneakiness and a lack of trust.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
well, you are entitled to that lack of distinction. the difference, i feel, is that a child can distinguish between being spanked for inappropriate behavior and being hit indiscriminately because the disciplinarian had a bad day. if you don't believe that children can make that distinction then you are grossly underestimating children.
why do you continue to blather on about "babies"? children that do not respond to time-out, or negative punishment are children that do not suffer any ill-effects of such consequences. effective consequences lead to wanted behavior.
what do you do when a child does something wrong, and you talk to him/her and he/she understands why it was wrong and what he/she should have done instead (you know this because the child told you these things in the course of the discussion about the behavior). so, as punishment, you put your child in time-out. later that week, the child repeats the behavior...what dod you do then? the child knows what is expected but fails to act accordingly. do you take away a favorite toy? limit their exposure to their friends? what if the behavior continues even after a progressive system of disciplinary action?
from my window to yours
And I agree about breeding sneakiness and mistrust. Like I say, my 17 year old son trusts me enough to ask me if he can stay home and miss some morning classes. He knows I am reasonable and will walk him through the steps. I won't judge him and shame him. And I let him make the ulimate choice, knowing the words I've been speaking to him day in and out from birth have been and are taking root.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
no, spanking does not teach them to maneuver in such a way as to not get caught. if they a child does that then the punishment is not effective. they understand the different between right and wrong, they just choose to ignore it and, instead, opt for that which gives them pleasure at that time, i.e. disobeying rules.
the model in peoples' heads about spanking is the parent that grabs the child, says, "NO," and spanks the child...and, then, later, goes to the child and says, "you know the only reason i do that is to teach you." by that time, the time for a lesson to be learned has past. there is no understanding gained.
time-out alone does not help. taking away privileges alone does not help. sending a child away from the dinner table before dessert alone does not help. spanking alone does not help. whatever punishment system you decide on for your child should be consistent, explained, understood, and, most importantly, the child should know why the punishment is taking place and what they can do in the future to avoid such a consequence.
from my window to yours
I'm too tired for this. Sorry.
I have no problem with kids, they always respect me and respect my advice when I give it. I don't try to control children, I let them do what they do and I just give my advice, they respect it.
My cousin's daughter used to come over and wash my walls because she respected me so much. She said she wanted to do it, she said it was fun. I never asked her to do it. But when she was at home, it was all chores and she didn't want to do any of it.
i do not believe children are in such a state. i believe children are sponges that soak up that which they feel is valuable and retain that which becomes true from their experiences throughout the developmental process. how do children determine what is worthy of retention in the formation of the self? through reinforcement and punishment. so, effective uses of both are essential.
maybe, we're saying the same thing and this is a semantical argument...but, to me, a state of hypnotic suggestion means that a child behaves based on "commands" without really knowing why they are behaving or how exactly they are behaving.
from my window to yours
i know you said that you're tired...so, i guess, the board can field this one. why do you think she "liked" washing your walls, but disliked doing the chores at home?
from my window to yours
Because I appreciated it and at home it was her duty. I didn't pay her, I just thanked her and never expected anything from her. She's kind of a unique child too. I wouldn't expect any child to do that. I expect them to run around acting like children. Hurting themselves and each other. All those things kids learn from.
We also had a lot of fun whenever I babysat. Her brothers were a lot more to handle but they turned around.
The risk I took was calculated, but man, am I bad at math - The Mincing Mockingbird
In other words, through consequences for their actions. What you call "punishment" I call "consequences. And there is a world of difference. Children learn by life experiences all the time, that reinforce the words, yes. There are innumerable life experiences that we learn from throughout our lives that have nothing to do with violent acts from our "loved ones". I choose to teach my children in terms that do not make them "wrong" "bad" or that give them the idea that love and harm go hand in hand. I choose to teach them that no one ever has the right to hurt them physically.
Besides, the key reason we all have so many psychological problems is because we are taught to stifle this "self" you talk about. We're taught to submit and do as we're told, rather than to grow into who we are designed to be. Therefore most adults are walking around acting like emotional children (check any thread on this board for glaring evidence of this), because they did not learn to emotionally grow up. This problem is considered to be an issue for 95% of the population. The Self, with a capital "S"--the healthy, authentic self becomes a reality for a small minority of humans at this time. It's a psychological tragedy, knowing what we know.
If you believe that "punishment" must include spanking..... then I repeat what I said earlier, and I fully stand behind it: the people who say this are those who have settled at the level of spanking and cannot comprehend the myriad disciplinary measures that go far beyond spanking. When we accept the use of physical harm as a means of solving our problems, we stunt our own ability to learn more effective and more humane measures. It's only when we say "violence is not the answer" that we will find the methods that are beyond spanking.
It seems we're saying very similar things, here, however it looks like you use "punishment" where I use "consequences". That may seem semantical, but the connotations between the two words hold a world of difference.
They internalise what we tell them without knowing it is happening, and without understanding why. The brain quadruples in size from birth as all they are taught is absorbed. It takes immense work for any of us to change patterns that are ingrained in us. That's why we like to justify our patterns, and make the other guy wrong. It's muuucch easier. After absorbing the hypnotic suggestions, throughout the rest of our lives, people will retrigger these suggestions and we'll find ourselves, oh say on a message board acting like we are 5 years old, or 10, at any given time. Look around you--the triggers and the childish behaviour is all over the place.
http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta
Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
it's not a psychological fact...it's john bradshaw's opinion.
irrationality results when you fail to recognize rational thought...believing that there is one way to perform something is irrational. you'll never understand that, apparently. enjoy.
from my window to yours
that is a generalizations...thanks for playing though.
from my window to yours
so, what does this have to do with spanking a child?
from my window to yours