The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > To SMACK or not to smack....our children

To SMACK or not to smack....our children

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 8
  7. 9
  8. 10
  9. All
SHOCKING......

I smacked my kids...

This morning on the news, there was some story research done on Australians Attitudes.

The report appears to be DELIBERATELY incenduary. It says "45% of Australians believe it is ok to leave a MARK on their kids due to physical punishment, 1 in 10 believe it is ok to use an implement"

BUT HOW MANY believe it is ok to smack generally, withOUT leaving a mark ?

When my 12 year old daughter slipped out her bedroom window at 2.00am with her 11 year old girlfriend, and sat in the middle of the bush surrounded oval over our back fence, I took her in the presense of her friend, and smacked her bum many MANy times... and deliberately sought to TRAUMATIZE her to a limited degree..while ramming home in very LOUD words that there are people out there who would do diabolical things to them, and that it was the most stupid thing they could ever do.

We could have had a reasonable' discussion about all this, and of course, pictures of mouth cancer on cigarette packets 'reasonably' deter smokers from the habit.....right ? WRONG, but a trip to intensive care does.

The ONE thing children must always understand in the administration of discipline of any kind, is that it comes from love and concern, and is about their welfare.

I can STILL remember the ONE time my father whacked me in an unjust manner...and I still resent it, but forgave him. The MANY times I got the strap for knowingly doing the wrong thing, are simply water under the bridge in my upbringing. Sometimes there are more effective strategies than smacking. Like when my cousin and I (under his leadership of course :) flogged some smokes from Coles. Dad busted us and told us we had to go back there, confess and return them. I never repeated the offense.

Make smacking illegal, and reap the anti social consequences. Thats not a threat...its a promise. (hands up all who would choose 'teaching' as an occupation ?)
Posted by BOAZ_David, Sunday, 10 September 2006 7:56:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Boaz, whilst I agree with corporal restraint in very limited circumstances, mainly when a child is about to place themselves directly in danger, as in run out on a busy road. What you describe and how you handled it, shows your lack of understanding of childhood behaviour To abuse and hit someone, use threats and fear, certainly doesn't get the message across for an elicit adventure. Sure there are bad people out there but its not endemic, its rare except within the houses of god.

To inflict that form of psychological and physical abuse upon someone who would appear to be trying to push the boundaries they have suppressing them, doesn't warrant your response. However I'm wiling to concede you can't perceive, maybe your daughter's just rebelling against the amount of suppression you place upon her life. She may also be a rebelling at what see she's is the uselessness and falseness of your faith and wishes to get away from it.

Its your suppressive and dogmatic approach that makes you fear giving your daughter some of the freedom and adventure she most surely is missing, having to sneak out.

However a great example of a monotheistic approach, violent, abusive and repressive. I bet she doesn't see you in the light you want her to. Sad how your belief ends up ruining so many lives with your indoctrinated fear of the worlds reality. Sounds like your young daughter is desperate to get out.

Ps, I'm not prepared to discuss scripture, particularly science fiction as Daniel is. Maybe your daughter has evolved further than you and is frightened under your violent direction. Doesn't seem to be working for you, so only one option for an unthinking monotheist, you resort to violence

I see no love in hitting a 12 year old young women many times, except when instilling gods form of love.
Posted by The alchemist, Sunday, 10 September 2006 9:48:04 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Smacking is for pre-schoolers - after that, the promise of heaven and threat of hell ;-)
Posted by Seeker, Sunday, 10 September 2006 10:32:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
a hand "smack" on my son't butt when was necessary probably saved his life by keeping him from burning his hand on the stove to running out, without looking of course, into the highway!
Posted by mardisbro, Sunday, 10 September 2006 11:51:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Seeker...good one :)

Alchy

that particular incident was the first smack she had experienced for probably 5 yrs :) You clearly don't know my area, or the dangers involved with 'that' park. There have been rapes there. There are drug users and pushers who frequent it at night, usually after midnight.

PS.. we did 'lose' out daughter once before this, in Croydon main street, I walked out of a shop after telling her to stay with my wife, then she came out of the shop after me, but went the wrong direction.. as simple as that. My wife thought she was with me.

The last thing passers by who we asked said was "We saw 2 men talking with her, and one saying he should take her to the police station"...... which of course could have been ANYwhere....he chose to take her...

Fortunately in this case. He did the right thing, and when we rang them they told us they had her.

Your comments about 'my faith' ? sheesh.. you must think I wiped their bums while quoting bible verses as well eh ? I didn't tell her she would 'go to hell' if she disobeyed me...maybe ur telling more about you ? :)

Anyway, you could have left all reference to 'faith' out of the discussion, because its not about faith so much as plain common sense.
Though, the Bible does say "Spare the rod and spoil the child". The principle obviously being 'discipline'.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Sunday, 10 September 2006 2:53:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
BD, its the faith children have in you, that determines their reactions to your directions. If they don't have faith in your faith and the way you provide them with education and care in life, then they rebel. They need parental care that helps develop their individuality and ability to feel secure and free within the restraints of their environments, not making them rebel.

Considering what you say about your area, only makes it worse that she wished to disobey and get a thrill from what she sees as a restrictive and boring life. A psychological diagnosis would determine she isn't happy, as would her disobeying you whilst shopping. If your 12 year old daughter has to seek the help of strangers whilst shopping, then she doesn't seem to have much sense of the reality around her. Again a plea for help and understanding.

During my time in the church, I spent quite a time working with young ladies from 6 to 17, many very confused about what they saw life as and what their religious parents presented to them. Some gave up and became miserable clones of their parents. Many rebelled, either ending up pregnant trying to find love, running away or distancing themselves from their parents once they could leave home.

So I would say, using corporal punishment for some one of that age, would be a good sign of your parental failure. Maybe she feels your family is more devoted to your beliefs than her, very sad for young minds but prevalent in families of worship.

Your beliefs bring your children up, mine brought mine up, to say otherwise is typically blind denial.
Posted by The alchemist, Sunday, 10 September 2006 3:43:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What will hurt them more,a momentary smack that effectively connects a child with the responsibility at hand,or years of wishy washy no borders leftism,that has produced the confused ill displined and often unloved dysfunctional generation we see today.

Prior 1980 most of us experienced some form of corporal punishment.The greatest child abuse is happening right now,that is sanctioned by the state.It is the selling of children their rights in the name of protecting them.They can leave home at will with the financial backing of the state,with no emotional responsibility to the family from which they left,and no pressure to conform to social norms or adult role models to set them on the right track.

Our public schools lost the art of discipline years ago.Police have no power over youth who flout the law,and judges just seem to delight in presiding over the ill disciplined system they have created.

We as a society,have just lost it.
Posted by Arjay, Sunday, 10 September 2006 6:19:47 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
70% of Australians believe that a smack is acceptable. These people are only in favour of mild corporal punishment yet idiots like Joe Tucci presume to go against the vast majority by trying to demonise these same people and demanding that laws be changed in favour of the minority. Where does he and his (sheep) followers come from? Politically Correct Ville.
Posted by JSP1488, Sunday, 10 September 2006 7:21:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Personally I dont really smack my 3 1/2 years old. Not that I see there is anything wrong with the occasional smack on the legs. I just never really have to smack her. I have friends that are very freehanded a little over the top but then that is their choice. I do get a little peed off when you cant even smack your child in public for fear of someone giving you the evil eye. I try to take things away from her or time out. But if that doesnt work then a tap on the legs or hand never hurt anyone.
Posted by Deborah58, Monday, 11 September 2006 2:11:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I also agree with the comment that smacking only works up to a certain age. I couldnt begin to imagine the histerics my 15, 18 and 19 years old would go into if I tried that type of punishment.
Posted by Deborah58, Monday, 11 September 2006 2:14:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
yep.. pretty much 'amen' to all those comments.

I do feel that excessive physical handling should be defined, such as shaking and hitting the head etc.. I don't agree at all with it.

My approach was always bum and below. But bum was the 'punishment zone' and they knew it. I also used a wooden spoon, which we called 'The Smacker' and it kind of separated the issue of punishment a bit from us. They knew that if they did something sufficiently 'evil' that "The Smacker" would pay them rear ends a visit.

When children KNOW that the cost of bad behavior is thus and so, it will often be sufficient deterrant. Also, the threat of it is effective. Placing a kid in "solitary" does work for some, or withdrawing some favorite object, but for OTHERS.. which I've seen, its meaningless.

Unfortunately, just like a horses independant spirit needs to be reigned in, some children are just like that. Mine weren't, but I've seen some rippers.. No amount of solitary or silent treatment or ostracization or frowning or speaking will do squat..he is out to stage a COUP and that's that !

The issue is often 'power' as in 'who is running this show' ? and many children WILL challenge that structure. James Dobson gives some classic illustrations of how one lost 'coup' attempt resulted in hyper destructive behavior in teen years.

The Sky News survey ended up with 89% approve of smacking, 11% did not.
The childrens lobby is 'which' lobby ? Surely not representative of the community.
Their philosophical underpinning is quite spurious.
If they don't believe in God, (who said "spare the rod,spoil the child") then we are just 'animals' like glorified Chimps, and THEY constantly discipline with 'violence' :)
Posted by BOAZ_David, Monday, 11 September 2006 7:30:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Seeker I agree...but by the same token not really...that sounds contradictory.I lived in a home where we were frightened of our dad..
A lot of domestic violence as well just in a general sense mainly toward my mother..

I dont think it is healthy to grow up in an enviroment of fear...it certainly caused many unhappy times in my childhood..we only get one shot at it.

Having said that no we did not disrespect our parents and we knew we were loved..

Not all kids respond to democratic proccess and are born to push boundaries...some kids are happy to maintain the status quo ..so parents should treat children as individuals...but beware that what we dish out does not come back at us when we are vulnerable, old and helpless to defend OURSELVES.
Posted by OZGIRL, Monday, 11 September 2006 8:53:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
correction...'we did respect our parents'...cheers
Posted by OZGIRL, Monday, 11 September 2006 9:02:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
BD, the problem with the type of corporal punishment you’ve described is that it’s not terribly effective at making the kind of behavioural change you’re trying to achieve. My guess is that to your daughter and her friend it simply looked as though you had lost control of yourself. I wonder if there’s a part of you that feels the same. Perhaps this episode might have effectively communicated to her your anxiety about the danger you felt she was putting herself in, but as a long term strategy for setting boundaries around the behavior of a girl entering adolescence it ain’t going to work. Maybe it might be appropriate for a toddler in a fork-in-the-powerpoint situation, but I’m not even sure about that.

What works is being clear about the expected behavior, being clear about the consequences, and above all following through on those consequences. Don’t set consequences you might not be able to enforce. I reckon sometimes it’s more important to be consistent than to be fair. Don’t hit kids, and don’t humiliate them: in the long run this will lessen your daughter’s trust in you, and ultimately make you less in charge. Eventually you might be able to make your daughter understand why you are setting these boundaries, but this is only going to work if you can maintain her trust (which is different from her fear or her love).

My guess is that I read the Bible differently from you. My interpretation of “spare the rod….” isn’t literal: I take it to mean “don’t be afraid to set and enforce limits when you need to”. Doing so with violence isn’t the right way. Perhaps it was hard to send a naughty Israelite to his room when they were living in tents.

No, I’m not a teacher, I’ve been working for the last eight years in a juvenile detention facility. I wish you luck: it must be scary having a kid entering adolescence these days.
Posted by Snout, Monday, 11 September 2006 10:48:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I difficult topic.

I'm in the "To smack" camp rather than the "To SMACK" camp. Its a tool in the discipline toolbox that should only be used with great care
- when no other tool will do the job effectively
- at the time of the incident, only use it to stop a situation escalating out of control not as a consequence for something that is over and done with and just needs follow up.
- never when the smacker is angry.
- not on adolescent or teenage bottoms. BD I think a twelve year old girl is getting old enough that you should consider her bottom off limits no matter how well meaning your intent might be.
- never above the waist

There are times with some kids in day to day parenting when a smack can stop a much bigger situation developing, they can be a very effective means of getting the attention of a child who is not interested in thinking about longer term consequences for their actions. I don't think that they are effective in altering long term behaviour but can have a place in managing right now behaviour.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Tuesday, 12 September 2006 8:47:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Has anyone else managed to view ADHDCURE.WMV which shows one of the Characters on Southpark a teacher, with three out of control kids in the background. The teacher then provides some corporal punishment to two of them and the third suddenly becomes - well let's say "more reasonable".

The punch line (if you will pardon the pun) is "You can either calm down or I can pop you in the mouth again"

Have a look and see what you think.

Then go and have a look at how docile children become when they are not fed junk food most of the time.
Posted by garpet1, Wednesday, 13 September 2006 6:01:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
To Robert and Snout and others....

thanx for the feedback. I've deliberately set a rather controversial tone to the thread :)...but in conclusion I have to agree with Robert on his 'Corporal punishment is just one of a raft of discipline tools'

As for me and my daughter.. we have a great relationship, and she never repeated that dangerous behavior, and I never smacked her again.
The key to that whack, was that she was subjecting her self to potential PHYSICAL violence of the worst kind...... hence my rather physical approach. No further correspondence on that :)

Corporal punishment indeed should be a tool of last resort, and the Biblical point of 'spare the rod' ... yes.. it means as far as I can see 'discipline' rather than a litteral whacker, but it sure does not exclude a whacker or a whack.

Did I hear SOUTH PARK ? :) I find them to be... one of the most insightful sources of social commentary around. Specially the episodes on Peta and Scientology.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Wednesday, 13 September 2006 6:25:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I used to be a 12 year girl/woman once and like any human being wasn't always perfect.

My father NEVER, EVER raised a hand to me. If he had done what Boaz did to his daughter, I am sure that my mother would've left him. I am disgusted. When I read his post I couldn't help but to put myself in his daughter's shoes - I am utterly sickened. I wonder now, how BD's daughter treats her children. And I wonder how secretive she became while still in Boaz' household - the lengths one would go to, to avoid such inappropriate over reaction.

As for physical punishment, I wonder why adults seem to think that misbehaviour is so out of bounds - children - they're little human beings! It is not necessary to hit anyone - including animals. And it is easier explaining the rules of ones home to a child than it is to an animal and I have no need use physical punishment on either.
Posted by Scout, Wednesday, 13 September 2006 11:23:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'Violence begets violence'..
The cycle of violence must be broken at some point in families such as the one I came from...
I had a less than perfect role model in the form of my now deceased father and children do not,those that come from these homes, learn appropriate anger management so that they have the correct blueprint to equip them for situations that are challenging and require calm behaviour and emotions out of control, abusers dont know anout self love,self worth,compassion etc and often dont know how to change, for they too were abused.When we know better ,we DO better.

A smack is not just a smack..if ur partner 'smacks' you for some misdemeanour...you would be hurt and feel violated...so does a child..children are not stupid..communication is the key.

Some kids get a bit harder to parent than others ,still there are other methods..
If a child is about to dash out under a bus...i dont know.. but where do we draw the line?

Anger stems from fear...not understanding anger means that the cycle will continue and be inflicted on the next generation...
Posted by OZGIRL, Wednesday, 13 September 2006 5:06:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The problem with using physical punishment against a 12 year old girl is that it leaves her with two options. One is that she can decide that being hit is not okay and that you are way out of line, in which case you threaten the trust and communication channels you have built up over the years. That trust is going to be vital as she enters adolescence, Boaz. You said that it was the most stupid thing she could ever do. It’s possible she could prove you wrong about this at some stage over the next six to eight years.

The second option is she might decide that it’s okay for a man to hit her under some circumstances, especially if it’s a man she loves…

With boys, I think it works a little differently. The problem with corporal punishment here is that it teaches boys that it’s okay to whack someone if you believe you’re in the right and it’s necessary to drum home your point. Being bigger and stronger than the whackee is optional but desirable. This is a very dangerous learning for a six foot 75 kg adolescent, especially if his frontal lobe function is impaired by alcohol or testosterone or stress hormones, which happens with monotonous regularity. My colleagues in Juvenile Justice spend an inordinate amount of time and energy trying to get young men to unlearn this. Please make our job easier by not teaching them this in the first place.
Posted by Snout, Wednesday, 13 September 2006 7:18:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
BOAZ,

Rereading your posts I gather your daughter is now grown, and things have worked out well... I'm glad. I got a bit confused about the timeframes!

I stand by my general points, though.
Posted by Snout, Wednesday, 13 September 2006 7:28:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Snout

I know this will sound entirely cynical, but I have read many of Boaz's posts for a long time now.

And, well, of course he would claim his daughter is fine, but we only have his word.

Belting the bejesus out of any 12 year is poor parenting indeed.

Hitting any child is unnecessary. People who hit do so because they lack basic communication skills and have problems with anger.

I was never beaten as a child, yet somehow wound up married to an abusive man, who was beaten by HIS father. My ex hit me when:

a) He couldn't 'win' an arguement - that is I continued to disagree with him

or

b) I 'disobeyed' him - like cutting my hair or going out with my friends.

Boaz's daughter disobeyed him and instead of explaining why he was so concerned about her safety he threatened her safety and wellbeing by physically abusing her - a 12 year old is clearly old enough developmentally to negotiate and establish behaviourial guidelines with.

Boaz failed parenting, some may claim he was brave admitting this, but he claims that his behaviour has not had any long term effect on his daughter - thus mitigating his poor behaviour. He also knows that there are others on OLO who will back up his actions or at the very least agree by their silence.

There is no excuse for hitting anyone as a form of punishment.
Posted by Scout, Thursday, 14 September 2006 10:05:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanx for all your contributions, but WOAH.. this was not actually meant to be about 'me'.... enuf already :) It was mean't to provide an opportunity to explore the issue rather than me. But.. I suppose in analysing my own situation, we can do both. Never mind.

Ok..update.

My daughter is now 22, I asked her the other night if she remembered that 'incident' and yep..she sure does. I asked "Did you feel I was wrong or right to smack you for the reasons I gave on that occasion ?"
Her answer was "Well... I never did it again, did I" ? then she added, H*_*_*_*_ also never did it again. (her friend)

I have wear any criticism of my parenting skills that may come my way, its all good. Haven't ever claimed to be perfect.

One more thing. The other day, I was sitting watching TV and my daughter was home (Temporarily laid off ..casual). She was very quiet, then, in a low voice, she said "Dad....I'm pregnant" and burst into tears.
I've often wondered what I'd do, or how I'd react if I ever heard those words. Well, for those who may wish to know, I just took her in my arms and said "Hmm..really?" It was clear that she felt devastated that she had dissappointed me and her mum (she said this), and given that there is nothing to do but move forward, I simply expressed my love and support for her. She did ask me about the boy she is going with in regard to marraige, and we already agreed about him, and they do wish/plan to marry, so, its a 'chronology' issue rather than a moral one.

But let me just conclude on the smacking theme again. Robert said it.
'One of many tools' and age and circumstances should dictate how we act in this regard within a framework of restraint. Irrespective of any personal failing by me, this is the message I hope to convey.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Thursday, 14 September 2006 10:41:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Scout I need to disagree with you on "People who hit do so because they lack basic communication skills and have problems with anger".

I don't think thats a fair generalisation. I think you are making to much correlation between abuse and mild corporal punishment as discipline. There are those who abuse kids by hitting in anger and using hitting as a first port of call, they are not discipling their kids they are abusing them. There are also those who fail to discipline kids (the other end of the spectrum) or discipline based on their mood at the time and they also are abusing their kids.

It sounds like your ex came from an abuse situation, mine came from the other side, never hit, spoilt and left with little idea of the consequences of her actions. She also hit when she was unhappy, not because she was hit as a child but rather because she has not learned to restrain herself.

I was brought up with the knowledge that if I continued to push the point one of the discipline options would be rapidly painful to me and involve minimal inconvenience to others. It has not created any sense that I should be able to go round sorting out problems with others by bashing them, almost the opposite.

It seems to me that the main opposition to controlled smacking comes from those who've either not been smacked as kids or those who were abused, not from those who experienced it as as one of the consequences for breaking boundaries.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Thursday, 14 September 2006 12:12:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Boaz YOU opened YOUR discussion with a PERSONAL anecdote.

You could’ve made general comments about disciplining children and then stated your POV.

But no, you chose to make a personal anecdote and now you complain when your actions are commented upon.

Tough.

I have no doubt your daughter loves you – that’s the amazing thing about kids they love their parents despite all the mistakes parents make. I still love my dear departed dad even though he was an alcoholic and compulsive gambler. He wasn’t exactly a ‘good’ parent either – in different ways to you. However, I think I prefer his parenting to yours anyday, you were lucky your daughter didn’t run away as so many kids do who are abused by their parents.

And this is the crux of the matter, some kids can tolerate physical abuse better than others. Lucky you.

My point is that corporal punishment is simply indicative of a failure on the part of the person administering the punishment to find reasonable, logical and fair means of establishing the rules of their household.

Saying. “I’m not perfect” is OK if all you did was administer a light spank to the bottom of a 3 year old. But belting a 12 year old – that’s abuse, that’s beyond mere imperfection. If you didn’t want to be taken to task upon that admission then you never had to bring it to the discussion in the first place.

continued
Posted by Scout, Thursday, 14 September 2006 1:23:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
R0bert

I guess I didn't make a clear enough distinction for you - I was responding the Boaz's actions regarding his 12 year old daughter.

However, where does one draw the line?

I can remember my mother, just once, wacking my behind when I was about 5, I can't remember what it was for, I know it didn't hurt, let alone leave a mark. I guess I'd been really impossible, but that was only once and, for me, it was a significant event. I know at other times, if it was really serious, both my parents sitting and talking to me about what I done or thought I'd done. I was asked about my behaviour. I learnt very early about the rules my parents had regarding acceptable behaviour.

I see parents who regularly smack their kids - not hard, but because it happens so frequently the kids just don't take it seriously.

Also, I was caned at school once for something I didn't do - in front of the entire class. I have never trusted authority since.

Boaz called his discussion 'to smack or not' - you'd hardly call what he did mere smacking - sorry I just can't fathom someone who repeatedly claims self righteous superiority, actually trying to justify what he did to his daughter.

What did he do to his kids when they were younger? Of course he'll say they are all fine now. But have they gone on (or will they go on) to hit their children when there are suitable alternatives to corporal punishment?

Where does it end?

Where is it appropriate to draw the line if you do choose to hit your child?
Posted by Scout, Thursday, 14 September 2006 1:25:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
RObert,

I’ve been criticized on another thread for stretching the definition of child abuse, but your description of your ex makes me think this could apply here as well. I’d describe a person whose upbringing has left her with “little idea of the consequences of her actions” or had “not learned to restrain herself” as neglected in a fundamental way. Don’t get me wrong – I’m not in any way against the disciplining of children: in fact it’s crucial to the development of a healthy social being.

What we need to consider is the lessons learned through corporal punishment. Reading your posts on OLO you strike me as being in possession of a mature, well-functioning brain capable of looking critically and sensibly at your experience. Not everyone is so endowed, especially when they’re young, or under various psychosocial, hormonal or chemical stresses, and this is where we run into problems.

Much of the child abuse literature emphasizes that parents can sometimes have a lot of difficulty negotiating that blurry line between physical discipline and physical abuse. There’s also good evidence that physical discipline generally carries at best short term benefits, often at the expense of long term boundary setting – which is the main game here, I think.
Posted by Snout, Thursday, 14 September 2006 1:33:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is a topic that has always puzzled me.

Why is beating one's children something that needs extra legislation?

We already have laws that cover assault, and I certainly don't believe that the excuse "but officer, I am the [12 year-old girl's] father" is at all valid.

The only difference should arise at the time of sentencing, when the fact that she is only twelve years old should merit the perpetrator a far longer sentence.

Preferably with a tattooed cellmate called Bubba.

From my own observation, beating a twelve year-old girl says an awful lot more about the parent than it does about the child.

The willingness to commit physical violence on someone smaller, weaker and in a somewhat subservient relationship to oneself is a significant indicator of character.

But it is probably a very Christian thing to do, what do I know?
Posted by Pericles, Thursday, 14 September 2006 2:35:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
wow...this is quite something.....a feeding frenzy no less, with me as the tuna.

Robert and Snout.. wise words from both of you. Good to see some participants are looking at the issue.

err Scout you next, would you mind referring me to any place where I have declared my 'self righteous superiority'? I don't recall saying such things, I've always described myself as a sinner saved by Grace, the only 'righteous' One is God.

I'm not sure also how 'smacking' grew to 'beating'.... the connotations are kind of different.

Dear Pericles, you claim not to believe in God, hence, all issues of right and wrong...as I've long "taught" you, are relative. Your portrayal of a big bully inflicting 'physical violence' on a 'physically weaker, subservient teenager' can have only one goal at its heart.. "self righteousness" ... see, I can do it too. But the reference point you appeal to is.... ? Chimps physically discipline their offspring. Your basis of differentiating us from the rest of the animal world (By your presuppositions) is...what ?

Violence is an innappropriate term to use in regard to "corporal punishment", (which is the more appropriate term) and I believe we have a cultural understanding of common sense when it comes to such punishment.

Yours or anyone elses aversion to it, had better have a better basis than 'my opinion' or your words mean little.
I suppose you would describe a doctor inflicting 'pain' on a patient to remove a splinter as 'violent' ? No, not at all, he 'hurts' the patient but does no harm.

There were MANY occasions where I could have 'lost it' and "whacked" my daughter up to and after that incident and did not, but that was a special circumstance which in my fatherly view was appropriate at the time, so that's where I stand.

Pericles the 'bad Christian' ploy is beneath you mate.

The most important guidelines in my view for corporal punishment are:

a) Nothing physically dangerous which can damage.
b) They are CLEAR on the reason for it.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Thursday, 14 September 2006 4:23:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Snout, Scout and others I'll agree that the lines can be hard to define. I listed some parts of that early in the thread (especially the never when angry item) that helps.

Beyond that any part of parenting requires the same kind of judgement calls. I'm not convinced that physical punishment is any more risky than other form of punishment when they turn into abuse, possibly less. A sore butt is easier to get over than growing up being told you are worthless or with the idea that you parents don't care enought to discipline.

I intend to drop off this thread, I think I can be better occupied looking at other options on my toolkit thread. Even for those of us who have some space in the toolkit for smacking (small letter, not capitals) it should only ever be a small rarely used tool, not sitting at the top of the box with a worn handle.

Cheers
R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Thursday, 14 September 2006 6:16:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am spending more time on this pointless discussion than necessary.

1. Boaz is incapable of determining the difference between a single smack to the backside of a toddler and smacking an adolescent girl.

2. Boaz argues semantics - claims he hasn't taken moral superior position, when in fact he constantly preaches that a beliefin christ is the only way to be and has suggested that R0bert and I require 're-education' in the past.

3. I have made similar points to Snout And R0bert regarding corporal punishment, yet Boaz only acknowledges Snout and R0bert as being reasonable and singles me out. Biased? Absolutely.

4. As stated, if Boaz didn't want personal comments made about his behaviour, then he shouldn't provide personal anecdotes about what he does to adolescent children - hits instead of talks.

Bye

Going to R0bert's thread now where I can expect sane and reasoned opinion. Biased? Absolutely!
Posted by Scout, Friday, 15 September 2006 8:59:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I forgot to mention that when I was in "shop" class I made a paddle for my High School Principal dad; Yep he ended up using it on me! :)
Posted by mardisbro, Friday, 15 September 2006 9:12:23 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Firstly, I would like to question the knee-jerk common cultural, ‘if there is a problem – apply prohibitive legislation to it.’ There are usually better ways of dealing with issues and the training of children is one of them.

I use the word ‘training’ deliberately instead of ‘discipline’ because ‘discipline’ has become a euphemism for ‘punishment’ and punishment is only invoked when there is a transgression – training starts at a very early age. I also prefer the term training because of the connection to the training of animals particularly dogs about which I do know something. Yeah, you can train a dog with a stick, you can gain high compliance but you end up with a frightened and/or vicious dog with anxiety issues. You can also train a dog with non-violent training methods and you get a much higher level of compliance and a much greater range of competencies without the fear, anger or anxiety.

Most people do not know how to properly train a dog and use the method they used or saw when they were children, ie beating the dog when it does something wrong. Most people raise children the same way. Whether smacking is illegal or not doesnt have to be important - when people realize that they can get much better results with non-violent methods they choose non-violent methods. The trouble is that people have to be taught these non-violent strategies. People have to be schooled in non-violent child raising techniques in exactly the same way and for exactly the same reasons that people have to be schooled in non-violent dog training techniques.

Raising children with non-violent training methods gives a much higher level of compliance and a much greater range of competencies without producing the fear, anger or anxiety of violent methods.

And if you don’t think ‘smacking’ is violent imagine someone twice your height and four times your weight belting you with a wooden spoon that is the length of your arm.
Posted by Rob513264, Friday, 15 September 2006 12:48:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Boaz, you are sinking fast here. I'd call it quits pretty quickly if I were you.

>>Chimps physically discipline their offspring. Your basis of differentiating us from the rest of the animal world (By your presuppositions) is...what ?<<

Is this intended to be some form of justification on your part?

Because I certainly didn't accuse you of chimp-like behaviour, or draw any inferences or conclusions from the comparison.

My view is that we have moved beyond chimpy habits, and are obliged to use our ever-so-slightly more developed brains to work out an alternative strategy to physical violence.

I know you don't accept this, but even non-Christians have moral values. And as it happens, this particular non-Christian chooses not to use physical violence against his offspring. If that is a sin in your eyes, then we can just park it along with all the others, can't we?

>>Violence is an innappropriate term to use in regard to "corporal punishment", (which is the more appropriate term) and I believe we have a cultural understanding of common sense when it comes to such punishment.<<

This is the "everybody does it, so it must be OK" school of thought, coupled with the convenient appropriation of a euphemism.

Once upon a time there were civilians killed, now they are merely collateral damage. One man's violence against children is another's corporal punishment, I guess.

>>There were MANY occasions where I could have 'lost it' and "whacked" my daughter up to and after that incident and did not<<

This is good. You curbed your aggressive instincts. You should be proud of yourself.

>>Pericles the 'bad Christian' ploy is beneath you mate<<

I was simply referring back to the "spare the rod and spoil the child" quote, which I hadn't realized before is in fact biblical.

Fancy that!
Posted by Pericles, Friday, 15 September 2006 1:24:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Robert..well said (thanx also Rob513264)

"A sore butt is easier to get over than growing up being told you are worthless or with the idea that you parents don't care enought to discipline."

Which... to those with the ability to look beyond my melodramatic 'capitals' intro, is the issue.

My capitals were designed to attract interest. The idea that a small group of people in DEFIANCE of the clear majority (90%) of Australians would seek to outlaw a cultural practice which has been proven, is annoying to say the least. I want to draw attention to THAT issue.

No Pericles, I'm not suggesting you accused me of Chimp like behavior, but in terms of your presuppositions about life, it would have been quite in order and I would have accepted it.

Scout, I praise those who deal with the ISSUE and don't take out some personal vendetta against me when I reveal something of myself.
When I read that you were seeing a psychiatrist I did NOT jump in and give you a serve about 'seee...' etc.. did I ? Your personal issues are yours. Do me the same kindness please.

I have to add one more point to my key points before, which I sadly neglected to include.

ALL discipline should be administered in a manner consistent with conveying "care, concern and love, where the interests of the child are at heart"... as long as they understand this, as Robert said, a sore bum is quite easy to get over.

The only 'whack' I never got_over from my dad was an unjust backhander to my face. All the rest were fine by me because I knew I'd done wrong.

CONCLUSION. Don't let this whacko group the 'childrens lobby' determine how we bring up our children !
Posted by BOAZ_David, Friday, 15 September 2006 3:06:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
BOAZ...
The very fact you began this thread at all speaks for itself.
Why are you trying to justify this position?
Do you feel a measure of guilt?

Has societys stand on this challenged you as a parent?
That you ought to feel ashamed of the way you parent your child?

I think it is understood that your temper is a problem for you..the way you are careful to state that it could have gone beyond what you intended but didnt...It seems as though you have to keep reminding yourself to not 'let loose'.
In which case you should never ever raise a hand in anger at your child ,anger out of control is a dangerous thing...anger management issues....There is help for this..we are not talking about a parent who gives a small smack to the bottom of a toddler for safety reasons to prevent a dangerous situation...this is more ominous than that.
Posted by OZGIRL, Friday, 15 September 2006 8:14:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
USE OF VIOLENCE TO SOLVE PROBLEMS
One of the big difficulties I see with using violence on children is that it teaches them that violence is how you deal with a lack of agreement.

Ironically, when children hit each other, the standard injunction from the parent is that they must ‘find another way to settle the dispute’ – how can we possibly expect our children to find non-violent means of dealing with problems if we ourselves are unable to do so?!

With regard to the ‘it has worked traditionally’ argument I would ask, ‘Has it?’ Look at the adult world that this tradition has produced – look at the way adults deal with conflict: Afghanistan, Iraq, Gaza, Bosnia, Lebanon, etc, etc, etc ad historical infinitum. This has been our tradition – this has been our history – A History of Violence. Has violence worked-well traditionally – has it really?

Studies show that ‘authoritarian’ parenting [smacking, ridicule, ostracism, derision, etc] is better than no parenting at all but just because it is better than no parenting does not mean that it is not still an awful long way from the best parenting we can provide.
Posted by Rob513264, Saturday, 16 September 2006 1:49:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I would like to see someone try this in Court, "I didnt beat my wife your honour - I just gave her a good hard smack." I'm sure the Court would agree that this was a reasonable attitude as there is obviously a great deal of difference between smacking and beating.

If you accept that hitting a woman is wrong and you accept that a girl is more vulnerable than a woman and the younger a girl is the more vulnerable she is - it raises an interesting conundrum - when is a girl vulnerable enough to start hitting?
Posted by Rob513264, Saturday, 16 September 2006 1:59:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
OZ and Rob

the reason I raised the discussion is this:

1/ 90% of Australians believe smacking children to discipline them is ok.
2/ A small group called the 'childrens lobby' seeks to change the law to prevent this.

That is undemocratic no matter HOW you feel about the issue.

ROB.. your wisdom ended when you claimed that smacking children "teaches them that violence is the solution to disagreements"

Do you have children ? That is probably one of the shallowest comments thus far.. in fact it rates as a 'slogan' and ignores the basic psychology of corporal punishment and family life and about 6000 yrs of culture. The result of lax boundary enforcement is a breakdown of respect for teachers at crisis levels. Ask them.

Now.. let me ask you the same question as I asked Pericles. DO you believe in God ? If not, then any evaluation of parenting is morally relative. You cannot point to 'studies' suggesting that smacking is responsible for 'World Violence' .. makes you sound like a beauty queen trying to score points in the absense of something to say with substance.

If you DO Believe in God, why do you go against the Scriptures ?

OZGIRL you are clearly trying deliberately to 'read into' my posts your own biases. You quote me as saying I could have gone further, when in FACT I said there were many occasions before and after where I COULD have smacked her due to the seriousness of the boundary breaking.
This one incident was probably the ONLY smack she had for many years.
But this is NOT about me and my daughter, as much as you may wish it to be so. It is about democracy, lobby groups and culture.

Rob and Oz I suppose you prefer to 'wisely counsel and reason with' a man robbing a bank ? :) give me a break. The boundaries of our WHOLE society are based on.....'violence'. Why do police have service revolvers ?
Posted by BOAZ_David, Saturday, 16 September 2006 6:59:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
BOAZ...2 wrongs dont make a right.
The 'law' has to have protection...otherwise they cant do their job effectively..they put themselves IN harms way..

2 wrongs dont make a right.
Posted by OZGIRL, Saturday, 16 September 2006 8:15:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I don't particularly like the idea of parents smacking their children, but I would not be judgemental about a parent who found himself/herself unable to discipline his/her child by any other means.

If a parent completely loses control of his/her child because he/she is constrained by the law from from being able to smack his/her child, then the child, as well as the parent, will ultimately lose out.
Posted by daggett, Sunday, 17 September 2006 11:25:27 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
BOAZ:”90% of Australians believe smacking children … is ok…That is undemocratic no matter HOW you feel about the issue.”
By that rationale then – if 90% believed in slavery then that would be ok too.

”ROB.. your wisdom ended when you claimed that smacking children "teaches them that violence is the solution to disagreements"”
I am sorry to hear that the concept of children ‘learning by imitation’ is a bit of a stretch for you. What I actually wrote was that it teaches them that ‘violence is how you deal with a lack of agreement’. It is part of my argument that it is not ‘the solution’. If you cannot even quote something from a few posts ago accurately, what is going on in your head? And there are plenty of studies that show that children that are treated violently tend to treat other children violently.

”Do you have children ?”
I had 2 children a boy and a girl who were both perfectly well behaved – I never had any discipline problems with either of them (they are adults now). There is no reason why people need to have badly behaved children anymore than they need to have badly behaved animals but just as most people cannot teach their dogs to cross the road most people cannot teach their children to behave. It is a question of skills not personal worth of the parents.

“The result of lax boundary enforcement is a breakdown of respect for teachers at crisis levels”
Boundaries for children can be set and maintained more efficiently with non-violent measures than with violent ones.

“The boundaries of our WHOLE society are based on.....'violence'.
That is what I said.
Posted by Rob513264, Monday, 18 September 2006 2:14:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
David

I am sure this thread is probably one of the most important threads on this forum

I just wish the others would read it because it could change their kids lives.

Your words of wisdom however will go as far as their own background. Those raised with some good old fahioned principles will agree.

Those who allow screaming little brats to rule the home wont.
There is a balance with love and understanding between parents and child.

The good old fashioned copper that would give you a kick up the bum and send you home. Wasnt so much crime in those days either.

Just some food for thought.

Thank You David for being around it does!! makes a difference.
Posted by TarynW, Sunday, 24 September 2006 10:42:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Taryn...ur most welcome :)

Rob
your comments are also appreciated. I sense though that you were blessed with 'nice kids' :) probably a reflection of their parents.
I don't think as yet you have met the 'Strong Willed Child'...evidently you did not have them.

I recall two doctors, the wife especially had a volatile and intense temperement. The son inherited hers, and the daughter inherited his more placid personality.

I can guarantee with complete confidence that nothing in this world would have stopped that little boy other than a decent whack.

Whacking is not always the answer I totally agree. When a nephew of mine spat in the face of my children day after day, and my patience wearing thinner and thinner and my kids saying DAD.. CAN YOU MAKE HIM STOP ! and his parents saying 'We have tried EVerything, including smacking' but nothing seemed to work.

I solved that problem in about 2 days. I didn't smack, I DID use negative re-inforcement though. If an ingrained negative behavior occurs, which is dangerous, destructive (to self or others) you have an obligation to the child and the victims to DO something quick....which works. It is impossible to rely only on 'positive' re-inforcement of good behavior and ignore negative.

I guess your approach would be 'sure..use negative re-inforcemnt and aversion principles, but just don't smack them'?

I disagree....in SOME (but not all) cases, smacking is the only workable solution. But "smacking" is just code for aversion therapy. There are many possibilities. A child uses foul language..
a) Warn them about it. Explain it is hurtful.?
b) Warn them and punish them with isolation "Goto your room")?
c) Distract them, reward them for good language ?
d) When all of the above fail...wash the mouth out with soap ?

Value your response.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Monday, 25 September 2006 8:37:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rob your comments are also appreciated. I sense though that you were blessed with 'nice kids' I don't think as yet you have met the 'Strong Willed Child'...evidently you did not have them.

I dont know what sense you used but my kids were both clinically hyperactive.

"When a nephew of mine spat in the face of my children day after day"

This raises the issue I mentioned in my first post - people do not think of applying discipline until there is a breach. It is why I specifically used the word 'training' because this child should have been trained from a v early age that spitting is not acceptable and then this breach situation would never have arisen.

"'We have tried EVerything, including smacking' but nothing seemed to work."

I think the admission that smacking did not work says a great deal. The justification on the basis of efficacy is flimsy indeed. Smacking is often a sign of desperation by the parent. It is a great pity that people feel the need to justify smacking rather than simply admit they were at their wits end.

But just as people can be at their wits end with a dog that wont stop barking - a few simple days training from someone who knows the techniques can resolve a problem that has been going on for years. We have all seen 'Dr Harry' solutions (in the promos anyway) - I really want to get away from condemnation of people who smack - it is not bad parents it is only bad parenting and that simply requires learning some appropriate techniques. To simply ban smacking without any backup is ridiculous - it is taking away the only tool many parents have and many studies have shown that children who are smacked and loved do much better than children who are not smacked but not loved either.
Posted by Rob513264, Tuesday, 26 September 2006 2:02:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
PART 2 - Sorry I got caught by the word-counter:
"It is impossible to rely only on 'positive' re-inforcement of good behavior and ignore negative. I guess your approach would be 'sure..use negative re-inforcemnt and aversion principles, but just don't smack them'?"

I feel that the positive re-enforcement only approach is v weak and entirely unnecessary - in fact I do not even necessarily disagree with a smack in every case. The issue is the child's resilience - it is extremely easy for someone who is twice the height of a child and 4 times their weight to exceed the child's resilience in delivering physical disincentives.

Of course appropriate alternative techniques depend on the age of the children, eg when the children were coming into adolescent and money was v important to them I posted their pocket money on the fridge in white board marker - if all their chores were done they received full pocket money if not they were docked. I never entered into an argument over it - they knew the rules and I never let them see me rub the marks out. When their chores were done - the marks just as mysteriously reappeared - they understood v quickly how it worked. In fact on day I came home and my son was raking the yard - which was not one of his chores - I asked him why he was doing it and he said, 'I'm going out with my friends this weekend and I could really use some extra pocket-money.' He extrapolated the system to pretty much mimic the way adult life works - I thought it was a good methodology rather than simply asking for more so he got his extra.

"I disagree....in SOME (but not all) cases, smacking is the only workable solution."
Again this approach starts AFTER the transgression - 'training' begins at a very early age and is continuous so that it is not a question of how to deal with the transgressions but preventing the transgressions from ever occuring.
Posted by Rob513264, Tuesday, 26 September 2006 2:10:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Good comments Rob but also a bit idealistic I feel. The time to 'train' as you say.. in the midst of a busy/hectic/paying off the mortgage/social obligation/sick when you least want to be/ etc etc...
sometimes all the good intent flies out the window.

We actually did use the jobs/pocket money system for a while, and it does have some effect. But family life is dynamic...not always the same leeway to use 'structured learning'.

I feel the best solution to this is for mothers to remain home doing this, and fathers to be bread winners and part time helpers in raising the kids. At least until the children are of a 'trained and independant' age :)

Our current system of 2 hard working possibly stressed and tired parents coming home to rowdy kids, who may well be so because of lack of parental attention, is not conducive to the 'training' structure you suggest.

Hyper active ? thats different from 'strong willed':) you can chanel 'energy and activity' but its most difficult to steer a 'strong willed' child, where the actual ussue is 'power' and who runs the show.

Yes...I'm glad you are moving away from 'condemning' smacking parents and that you made the point about the resilience of the child.. we usually know our kids and if we truly love them we are not going to harm them. Smacking appropriately is not abuse. As u said.. the kids know the rules and if one of them is "If you do that.. you will get a painful reminder" they do 'that' full well knowing what is coming.

The painful reminder can also be a stint in 'solitary' :) and we have used that a fair bit too. Smacking is something I rarely used. Facial expression, voice tone and temporary ostracization can and do work as well.

I just reject the 'political' pressure from small groups of power hungry social trendies to prevent something that did me no harm and my children, and that 90% of us agree with.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Tuesday, 26 September 2006 9:19:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
im a adolecent and i get smaked. i belive smaking is ok ...as a last resort. the first thing i would do is sit the child down and expalain what they did was wrong and why it is wrong then explain what would happen if they did it again and then ask them to apologise. only after a third warning would i smack the child

rizz
Posted by Rizz, Sunday, 1 October 2006 8:55:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanx Rizz...
your input is appreciated.

I applaud your emphasis on the 'speaking to first,and the warning etc and smack (or other punishment) as a last resort'..

May I ask what is your own background please ? (like is it Anglo aussie or are you from an ethnic background, if so, which one ?)

cheers
Posted by BOAZ_David, Monday, 2 October 2006 9:26:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
i am a 16 yr old white australian girl
Posted by Rizz, Monday, 2 October 2006 10:47:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
i also wish to give warning to parents or people who do smack that sometimes other people do call child protection when a child is smacked even if it was a light smack on the bottom that does not leve a mark, i know this coz it happened to me agter a hour after the smack we had the police at our door
Posted by Rizz, Monday, 2 October 2006 10:52:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanx Again Rizz

yep... sad that people would call the police unless something very serious was going on.
Smacking should always be a last resort, and be avoided as far as possible.
A parent needs to use instinct at times... as there are moments when a smack simply will not do the job of teaching the child the boundary.
Deprivation of some cherished activity can often see them 'CHOOSING' a smack to get it out of the way and get back to something they love like TV or video games etc.

I think sometimes it takes MORE strength as a parent to actually enforce the 'deprivation' method compared to the simple whack on the bum.

Look at some other issues also Rizz.. see what you can contribute to them.. see if they have much relevance to you.
I'd be interested in your thoughts about females in front line combat. I started that thread this morning in the 'general' section.
I just rang the Senators office and gave him a piece of my mind :)
Posted by BOAZ_David, Monday, 2 October 2006 1:39:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanx Again Rizz…yep... sad that people would call the police unless something very serious was going on.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Monday, 2 October 2006 1:39:13 PM

For a start let’ s recognise the euphemism – ‘smacking’ – it is an action of hitting someone, whether it is called smacking, beating, striking or anything else the action is the same.

I think Rizz’s experience exposes the double-standards around this issue more clearly than any other example that has so far come forward. If Rizz was hit by her boyfriend it would be DV and, according to current social mores, a v serious issue and completely unacceptable.

If Rizz is hit by her father (according to you) it is acceptable. This is logically inconsistent because the action is the same, either the action constitutes abuse or it does not. According to your logic whether or not the action is abuse depends on the identity of the perpetrator. But since the identity of the perpetrator is independent of the action it cannot logically be an issue in determining whether or not an action constitutes abuse.

This rebuttal does however presume that you (David) subscribe to the current attitude that DV is serious and is unacceptable – if however that is not your position perhaps you would like to admit that.
Posted by Rob513264, Monday, 2 October 2006 9:22:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rob 'Domestic Violence' is something normally meaning violence between adults. Husbands and wives, or.. excessive physical violence towards children I guess.

My position is that smacking should be limited in impact, contextualized, administered fairly and used as a last resort.

There are many situations in family life where to take your approach of 'big picture training' is simply not workable. How many times have you had to tell children 'STOP that now... stop it.... STOP!'
with the explanation that what they are doing is
a) Dangerous
b) Annoying
c) Generally unnacceptable.

but they jussssssst keep on doing it.

We had a simple but usually effective system. "1.....2......3"
They were warned, that if they did not cease the activity by 3, they would be smacked. So, if they wanted to avoid this painful experience, they would conform.

Now.. I know that on the surface it could be said this is teaching them to 'resolve issues of conflict with violence' but I simply disagree. They are not mature enough at 2 or 3 to comprehend such grandiose ideas. When they do mature, they 'get it' that it was all meant to bring them into line with socially acceptable behavior.

I 'got it' and I'd say that 90% of Australians 'got it' because I don't see 90% of Australians starting fist fights over the slightest disagreement. In fact, what I observe is that most Aussies will go to the utmost lengths to avoid physical confrontation. Perhaps this is a positive side of early childhood smacking ? Perhaps there is this aversion to behavior or confrontation which can result in pain ?
Perhaps the 'early childhood pain' embeds in their psyches the idea that 'persistent anti social behavior will result in pain' hence they are LESS likely to be anti social.

I believe that corporal punishment (as a last resort) administered in a context of family love, is neither hurtful or wrong.

We seem to have a fundamental philosophical/psychological difference of opinion here. Personally, I think culture and history is on my side in this discussion.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Tuesday, 3 October 2006 6:29:08 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
BD, it would be interesting to see if any research has been done on the willingness to use physical violence against others from those who have been smacked as children and those who have not (Note, I'm not talking about those who've been beaten relentlessly).

Part of the argument against smacking is the idea that it teaches the use of violence to solve problems. Is that case proved? What is the reverse is true and children who are never smacked are more likely to use violence?

It's also interesteing to see how much more interest this thread has attracted than the thread on tools for discipline. If people are really serious about reducing the use of smacking then that thread should have overflowed with ideas and strategies for discipline.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Tuesday, 3 October 2006 9:48:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
RObert,

I think at heart most of us on OLO love a bit of controversy: the longest threads always seem to be the ones where there are at least two opposing camps debating back and forth. But some of the shorter threads are the most sensible and useful as far as ideas go.

Personally, I love going head to head with posters I disagree with, provided we can keep the argument civilized and respectful. I reckon after a while you learn who these ones are (BOAZ and Martin come to mind) and who is likely to get upset and abusive or who you're just going to go round in circles with. A sense of humour helps, as does not being too thin skinned.

I find OLO is a great way of honing my thinking and testing my beliefs, and often learning something new (or at least learning about other ways of looking at an issue).

Cheers,
Posted by Snout, Tuesday, 3 October 2006 12:24:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rob
yes... it would be a most difficult study to see if there is any connection between 'childhood smacking experiences' and 'propensity to use violence as an adult to solve conflict' (with other adults)

I feel that the propensity to use violence goes WAY beyond smacks administered in love during the terrible twos. The other robert has mentioned that psychological cruelty is potentially for more dangerous in this connection.

We are all capable of 'violence', but I feel fairly confident that a grown up who has been told continuously they are worthless, no-good, without hope and stupid, is more likely to resort to violence against others than one who was suitably build up as a person by parents.
I think the smacking kind of fades into insignificance.

Most importantly though, I challenge the assumption that smacking teaches children to solve conflict with violence. Because the issue is usually about doing 'right and wrong' For example, if a child is aggressive towards his little brother who is playing with the childs toy, and he starts whacking his little brother.. a parental smack is quite appropriate along with the message about how wrong that is.

Now, you might be tempted to draw the conclusion "That its just one form of violence used to solve another", but the message the child receives is "If I'm violent to my brother, I'll feel it myself" which is a good deterrent. In fact it teaches "Violence begets violence" which should teach them 'Don't be violent' :)

I would attribute adult view of solving disputes with violence much more to what happens during teenage years than the terrible twos. In that regard, I could definitely see a connection.

Snout.. 'amen' :)
Posted by BOAZ_David, Wednesday, 4 October 2006 9:40:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 8
  7. 9
  8. 10
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy