Thanks,
My kids rarely got a smack when they were little and other things are more effctive but they did fully get the rule: I count till 3... giving them a little time to obey. As they need to learn to obey dad and mum to become listning, kind and lovely kids. kids learn with mistakes made but they also need a consequence if they have hurt others or their belongings. A loving but firm enviroment/ bounderies to feel safe, secure respected and loved.
I watch parens being to busy to bother to shape their children into respectful and kind human beings. Kids need to learn to see the need of others. The world does not turn around them alone.

Smacking is a great debate as there are so many different vieuws!!

Runner:”The effects of kids not getting smacked are clearly seen in society. More violence, less respect, bigger liars, more vandalism and contempt for the law. “

You know the violent disrespectful vandalizing liars with contempt for the law weren’t smacked as children? I’d guess they probably came from homes where a smack was getting off lightly.

Runner:”The sooky social engineers of the 60's and 70's have proven a total failure.”

Maybe, what does it have to do with smacking?

Runner:”People are dumb enough to ask why we have so much violence now in our communities. No doubt some uni has done a study showing how much distress smacking causes. “

Of course it causes distress (at the very least) that is why many do it. Not however in the examples OUG gave though… I think that was Action = Pain but the pain I inflict wont be nearly as bad as a truck mowing you down or a few thousand volts passing through your little body.

runner your passion for smacking is scary.

aussy first just to preempt those who will try and relate this to adult's beating up kid's, beating up kid's is a different issue.

As I understand it the current research seems to suggest real value in limited use of smacking when children are to young to understand other approaches. Beyond that there is a small correlation between frequent smacking and problem behaviors (assaulting others, sexual coercion etc) especially if the smacking is associated with high levels of demonstrated affection. Some coverage of the latter at http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/CP91-ID91-PR91-%20Draft%20I%20with%20Gamez%20comments%20accepted.pdf

I don't think I've got anything handy on more recent work which shows some positive outcomes for children who were smacked at appropriate times when young. Again I think it's a small correlation, not a smack or else scenario.

I think that there is a lot of emotive overplay on both sides of the debate. I'm strongly of the view that the stuff runner discusses is a reflection of a lack of discipline of any kind for some kid's not a lack of smacking but also of the view that kid's and parents can be saved a lot of pain by a smack at the right time and place.

R0bert

When you watch the horse races, the horses always seem to run faster when the jockeys whack them. And so logically, the more often you smack your children, the better they will do on the athletics field.

Yes Pat, but only if you are fast enough to keep up with them, during the race.

Runner, you took the words out of my mouth. The present state of western society absolutely proves that all those sooky 60s experts were wrong.

RObert there is nothing like looking at the real world results to see the truth.

As we can see with our global warming trick, research can all too often give the result desired by the researcher. Deferring to the "current" research is mostly a waste of time, when it will be corrected next year by more new research.

Just how many amazing new research results make a huge splash, [when announced often on our ABC], only to sink like a stone next week. Publish or perish has a lot to answer for in the ills of our society.

The humanities are the worst at this stuff, as it is all only someones opinion, with little fact involved. You only have to look at the constant change in the recommendations of nutritionists to see how "research" results, even in real science, are often subjective.

Hasbeen the focus on smacking compared to discipline (boundaries and consequences etc) hurts the debate. It takes attention away from the bigger issues.

In the real world I see some who don't smack with great kid's, others with little monsters. Same with those who do smack. Smacking which is done away away from a framework of consistent discipline just sorts out an immediate issues (mummy or daddy is upset right now) rather than helping a child learn to operate as a human being in the real world.

The research is useful (if you watch for agenda's) because it helps us step outside our own demographics and what we already believe.

R0bert