I'm off to bed. Ciao.

Herbie out.

[QUOTE=Herbert_da_fish]I'm off to bed. Ciao.

Herbie out.[/QUOTE]
/spanks.


;-)

/spanks too.. late. mrow!

I agree with punishment. Also, 90% of law breakers should be brutally beaten in public.

[QUOTE]It's different for every child, really. Sometimes the "I'm not mad, I'm disappointed" thing will work wonders. Sometimes not. Spanking teaches children that what they did was wrong. If you say that it only makes them feel bad but doesn't teach (is that what you're saying?) then how will ANY discipline work? Children need to be shaped. It's sad that sometimes it involves spanking, but it will need to be done sometimes, just not as a primary.[/QUOTE]

sorry that wasnt very clear. All I mean to say is that if you do spank your child or enforce any type of discipline it is imperative that you tell them why what theyre doing is wrong so they can project those morals into other situations that the parents may or may not have any say about. So the reason I disagree with spanking and other forms of physical punishment (herbie) is because usually the effects of that override the sense of disappointment or the learning that goes along with punishment. Say you just got spanked for eating a cookie--are you going to remember that the spanking hurt, and that eating cookies is bad or are you going to remember that eating cookies is bad because... whatever reason you're presented with?

All i mean to say is that it is important for a parent to tell the kid why theyre being punished so they can use that set of morals in the future. Because a parent's not going to be there for every situation to present praise or discipline--its inevitably up to the kids personal chioce

[QUOTE=Pop music sucks]Spanking a child over a cookie isn't the right situation.[/QUOTE]
Actually....what kind of cookie is it?


>_>


<_<

Yeah, let's advocate violence and purposeful degredation of self esteem to teach them not to hit, and to respect others.

Sorry, but all the research is against you. Punish your kids in your own homes if you want, but it has no place in schools or workplaces.

Essentially any punishment handed out by the parent is designed to cause unpleasantness to the child. I think that any reasonable person knows the line between discipline and abuse. Moreover, I think that it is wrong to give the representation so far, that mental punishment is entirely innocent. Essentially, it involves similar requirement for restraint.

If a parent screams at a young child constantly and deprives the child of all toys, TV, books for days at a time, I'm sure we can all agree that the level of mental anguish inflicted can qualify as abuse. Equally, if a child is say (to recall something I did at about 5) pull a siblings hair and the parent gives them a tap on the wrist to make them let go, I think it's hard to call this abusive, or argue that it will have lasting impact on the mental state of the child.

All discipline is about knowing where to draw the line.

[QUOTE=PerpetualBurn]Essentially any punishment handed out by the parent is designed to cause unpleasantness to the child. I think that any reasonable person knows the line between discipline and abuse. Moreover, I think that it is wrong to give the representation so far, that mental punishment is entirely innocent. Essentially, it involves similar requirement for restraint.

If a parent screams at a young child constantly and deprives the child of all toys, TV, books for days at a time, I'm sure we can all agree that the level of mental anguish inflicted can qualify as abuse. Equally, if a child is say (to recall something I did at about 5) pull a siblings hair and the parent gives them a tap on the wrist to make them let go, I think it's hard to call this abusive, or argue that it will have lasting impact on the mental state of the child.

All discipline is about knowing where to draw the line.[/QUOTE]
Agreed.

[QUOTE]If a parent screams at a young child constantly and deprives the child of all toys, TV, books for days at a time, I'm sure we can all agree that the level of mental anguish inflicted can qualify as abuse. Equally, if a child is say (to recall something I did at about 5) pull a siblings hair and the parent gives them a tap on the wrist to make them let go, I think it's hard to call this abusive, or argue that it will have lasting impact on the mental state of the child.
[/QUOTE]

making them let go and punishing them for what they've done are two completely different things.

[QUOTE=The Tway]making them let go and punishing them for what they've done are two completely different things.[/QUOTE]

You make it seem like you don't believe in any form of punishment.

I'm getting fenwood to spank tway.


hee hee hee

[QUOTE=Mr. Ron]I'm getting fenwood to spank tway.


hee hee hee[/QUOTE]

No... fenwood would say that there's a conspiracy behind spanking. Something about republican parents keeping their children from thinking freely.

[QUOTE=IdioticJester]No... fenwood would say that there's a conspiracy behind spanking. Something about republican parents keeping their children from thinking freely.[/QUOTE]
Damnit. :/

[QUOTE]You make it seem like you don't believe in any form of punishment.[/QUOTE]
You make it seem like you hate freedom.

It's pointless and useless.

[QUOTE=The Tway]You make it seem like you hate freedom.[/QUOTE]

I've grown to accept that and underwent councelling and now score 0.15 on the social scale how do I stil hate freedom dammit

Skinner or one of those psychologists:

Proportionate, consistent, immediacy, and explanation.

According to Wikipedia, Watson was against corporal punishment. I think these guidelines to punishment are acceptable :)

[QUOTE]Spanking a child over a cookie isn't the right situation.[/QUOTE]

that's not the point

[QUOTE=The Tway]making them let go and punishing them for what they've done are two completely different things.[/QUOTE]

So there are situations in which you think it right to use physical force against a child?

[QUOTE=PerpetualBurn]Essentially any punishment handed out by the parent is designed to cause unpleasantness to the child. I think that any reasonable person knows the line between discipline and abuse. Moreover, I think that it is wrong to give the representation so far, that mental punishment is entirely innocent. Essentially, it involves similar requirement for restraint.

If a parent screams at a young child constantly and deprives the child of all toys, TV, books for days at a time, I'm sure we can all agree that the level of mental anguish inflicted can qualify as abuse. Equally, if a child is say (to recall something I did at about 5) pull a siblings hair and the parent gives them a tap on the wrist to make them let go, I think it's hard to call this abusive, or argue that it will have lasting impact on the mental state of the child.

All discipline is about knowing where to draw the line.[/QUOTE]
This guys got it right :)

I have no problem with parents punishing their children physically...in moderation, but I don't think teachers in schools should have this power.

[QUOTE=Lupus]I have no problem with parents punishing their children physically...in moderation, but I don't think teachers in schools should have this power.[/QUOTE]

Agreed.

[QUOTE=The Profit of Maine]I've been thinking lately that corporal punishment needs to be reinstituted in schools and that a little slapping around of your kid is a good thing in moderation. First off, Corporal punishment is the infliction of pain intended as correction or punishment. Maybe I'm generalizing this too much, but the kids now in Middle and High school in America (and I think this has applied to England for at least ten years with "hoodlums" and whatnot) have lost all respect for their elders. Kids think it's hilarious when they go around in gangs and beat up lone people (stupid chavs) or curse out their teacher for some stupid reason or other. I think we need to remind them of their own mortality.

When I say "we," I of course only mean DBoon, but still, kids are getting more and more defiant for the dumbest reasons nowadays. I certainly have no way of knowing if it's only nowadays, but that's in your court to argue against me. But I sincerely believe that the teenage trust in their own immortality has made them unnecessarily disrespectful to their elders on multiple levels. If they were reminded of the physical power their elders have then social nuances and its hierarchy would be implied.

I haven't researched this, but you can at [url]www.corpun.com[/url] and probably other sites.

What do you think?[/QUOTE]
That thing about disrespectful kids is a stupid stereotype. Most kids are pretty well-behaved. Beating children can cause extreme emotional issues. There are better ways to punish.

[QUOTE=Led-Zeppelin]That thing about disrespectful kids is a stupid stereotype. [B]Most kids are pretty well-behaved. [/B]Beating children can cause extreme emotional issues. There are better ways to punish.[/QUOTE]
:lol: do you live under a rock?

As other large-scale social issues, a blanket policy of pain infliction for percieved "disrespect" will not solve the problem of disrespectful attitudes but will only force them to simmer under the surface, which could lead to much more dangerous territory. The only corrective for the growing levels of incredible insubordination and the degree to which it is tolerated by society is dependant entirely on the intelligent raising of these kids by aware, resourceful, and educated parents. When those numbers start increasing, the number of kids like those described in the first post will decrease. But it has to made on a person by person basis...there's no large policy you can just implement that will solve the problem.

That said, teachers should have more punishment leeways and powers of judgement than they're currently awarded by parents. If the kid ****s up in school, it's his/her responsibility to be appropriately reprimanded by the authority figure they're charged to. Parents shouldn't be listening to sob stories from their screwup kids and then threaten to sue the teacher as much as they do.

[QUOTE]That thing about disrespectful kids is a stupid stereotype. Most kids are pretty well-behaved. Beating children can cause extreme emotional issues. There are better ways to punish.[/QUOTE]

It's not really, if you're actually paying attention. I live in a town where you can't keep a house cheaper the 300,000 dollars, which makes it quite high-class, and yet the number of blatantly stupid, apathetic kids that populate the high school is overwhelming. You'd think that even in higher-class areas this would be less of a problem, but it's gone so far that the school is spending valuable dollars on drug-sniffing dogs for school events.

[QUOTE=Cain]It's not really, if you're actually paying attention. I live in a town where you can't keep a house cheaper the 300,000 dollars, which makes it quite high-class, and yet the number of blatantly stupid, apathetic kids that populate the high school is overwhelming. You'd think that even in higher-class areas this would be less of a problem, but it's gone so far that the school is spending valuable dollars on drug-sniffing dogs for school events.[/QUOTE]
In my opinion, it seems more logical for these blatantly defiant kids to occur at higher rates among the upper class (I'm not sure of a figure, but I'd say higher than other classes) because of the use of non-relative caretakers and a general passive role in the child's upbringing. Strong familial support as well as active parenting is a strong preventative of deviance.

Such blatant deviancy in the upper class could also come from having more resources available to them which increases their ability to act out. And, sadly, it seems, that those born with everything around them often take for granted its luxory. It's like teaching a child the value of money.

I know all classes have deviant youths, as it goes back to family not wealth, but that upper class families just have more obligations or distractions from a nurturing family environment.

[QUOTE=thedeadwalk!]In my opinion, it seems more logical for these blatantly defiant kids to occur at higher rates among the upper class (I'm not sure of a figure, but I'd say higher than other classes) because of the use of non-relative caretakers and a general passive role in the child's upbringing. Strong familial support as well as active parenting is a strong preventative of deviance.

Such blatant deviancy in the upper class could also come from having more resources available to them which increases their ability to act out. And, sadly, it seems, that those born with everything around them often take for granted its luxory. It's like teaching a child the value of money.

I know all classes have deviant youths, as it goes back to family not wealth, but that upper class families just have more obligations or distractions from a nurturing family environment.[/QUOTE]

Oh I totally agree about the fact that it all goes back to family. I just figured that perhaps if the family had more resources there would be more of nurturing of individual talent and passion.

But on the other hand, I have excellent parents, so maybe I'm just biased or lucky. Now that I think about it, you're more right. I agree with what you say.

I agree with physical punishment (note: NOT beating. Spanking and beating are 2 entirely different things.) in certain circumstances.

The Tway: What do you do if your child is running amok, maybe he's picked up a knife that was left out (don't say "I wouldn't leave the knife out in the first place", these things happen), you catch him, you take the knife off him, explain why it's dangerous, he says he understands, everything's lovely and dandy. He then gets a knife again, and is running around with it. Do you explain it over and over again, or do you actually punish him?

What forms of punishment would you employ?

Sorry to all those who are arguing against spankings, but you all seem to be lumping spankings with beatings and domestic abuse. You also seem to be assuming that in the process of spanking, explanation is left out by default. Why can't it be:

1. A request to stop bad behaviour
2. A command to stop bad behaviour
3. A threat of punishment
4. Carrying out of above punishment
5. A threat of more severe punishment
6. Carrying out of above punishment
7. A threat of spanking
8. Carrying out of spanking

Obviously if the child stops, you don't go on to the next stage. If the child doesn't stop, then I don't know. Perhaps physically restrain the child.

Like Herbie and someone else said, as long as it's consistent, and with explanation there shouldn't be psychological damage to the child. Children need stability, and stability involves limits. If a child doesn't learn these limits, then they will most likely grow up with something wrong with them.

Just look at Paris Hilton. *shudders*

EDIT: Just in case you were wondering, my user title doesn't advocate the beating of kids. It's off a TV show.

[QUOTE=Pastorius]The Tway: What do you do if your child is running amok, maybe he's picked up a knife that was left out (don't say "I wouldn't leave the knife out in the first place", these things happen), you catch him, you take the knife off him, explain why it's dangerous, he says he understands, everything's lovely and dandy. He then gets a knife again, and is running around with it. Do you explain it over and over again, or do you actually punish him?

What forms of punishment would you employ?[/QUOTE]
Show him pictures of stab victims? I wonder how that would work.

For some things, the child just may be too young to understand. I mean, at first, an infant will think once they stop seeing something it stops existing. You have to take education in strides and spanking them because they can't understand seems unfair let alone a productive form of discipline. Furthermore, child-proofing your house (prevention) is probably a better beginning than hoping to catch them in the act (reaction). Why wait for the bad times?

Additionaly, children, being the active and inquisitive scamps that they are, want to learn, and surprisingly, help their parents around the house. Teach them the proper use of any dangerous items and give them responsibilities that make them feel important.

Finally, don't think spanking is the end-all answer. My father spanked me numerous times for the same offense. This offense, dealing with certain bodily functions, certainly didn't help the matter. How long do you spank them before you try something else? Should you spank them any harder? My father confesses to hurting his own hand in the act of spanking me. Did I stop the undesirable action? Yes, eventually. Did it speed up the process? I'll never know since the only alternative discipline tried was telling me to "stop it."

I realize with the above example I may have just gotten a raw deal and biological lessons aren't the same as moral or social ones. But, where do you go once the first spanking doesn't help?

[QUOTE]It's not really, if you're actually paying attention. I live in a town where you can't keep a house cheaper the 300,000 dollars, which makes it quite high-class, and yet the number of blatantly stupid, apathetic kids that populate the high school is overwhelming. You'd think that even in higher-class areas this would be less of a problem, but it's gone so far that the school is spending valuable dollars on drug-sniffing dogs for school events.[/QUOTE]

One of my friends goes to beverly hills high and he says theres basically no control. The kids are all rich enough to have their own cars and they come and go whenever they want. Teachers are either overly impressed by the parents power and money or are just ineffective. Plus kids are rich enough to get all sorts of drugs all the time.

[QUOTE=thedeadwalk!]I realize with the above example I may have just gotten a raw deal and biological lessons aren't the same as moral or social ones. But, where do you go once the first spanking doesn't help?[/QUOTE]

I realise that spanking isn't the be all and end all solution for punishment, but as a last resort it [i]should[/i] be effective. Violence is a universal language, and whilst children aren't lab rats, they will (or should) understand that when a certain action = pain, they shouldn't do that action.

In the same way, where do you go once the alternative solution doesn't help? Swings both ways. Whilst the knife example could be prevented, and was probably a bad example, all kids will present their parents with behaviour the parents see as unpermittable. The bad times WILL come, like it or not.

I also agree that children are capable of a lot more than we give them credit for. But they are only kids after all, and I don't think we neccesarily should burden them with responsibilites so young. I mean, I loved my carefree days, when my only responsibility was to keep myself entertained.

Some problems, like your mentioned one, simply cannot be helped. Toilet training for example. The child has to learn, and things like toilet training would not involve spanking in my mind. Encouragement and praise for success are what is needed here.

I think with the fall of real punishment in kids, they've grown up expecting no punishment, only reward. I mean, kids in the UK can get [i]paid[/i] for going to sixth form! (school at 17-18). PAID! How in the hell can you justify paying children to impart knowledge unto them! That's ridiculous in my eyes, but these days, kids are just........bleh. My kid's going to be good whether his backside is flayed raw!!!:angry: :p

[QUOTE=Lupus]I have no problem with parents punishing their children physically...in moderation, but I don't think teachers in schools should have this power.[/QUOTE]

I remember when I was in second grade in Bosnia, my teacher pulled my ear. haha that was one punishment when you don't follow rules. It's not that bad though. I enjoyed it. :naughty:

Seriously though, I'm not sure whether I am against or for the reasonable physical punishment of kids in school.

[QUOTE=Pastorius]I realise that spanking isn't the be all and end all solution for punishment, but as a last resort it [i]should[/i] be effective. Violence is a universal language, and whilst children aren't lab rats, they will (or should) understand that when a certain action = pain, they shouldn't do that action.

In the same way, where do you go once the alternative solution doesn't help? Swings both ways. Whilst the knife example could be prevented, and was probably a bad example, all kids will present their parents with behaviour the parents see as unpermittable. The bad times WILL come, like it or not.[/quote]
It does work both ways, but with non-violent discipline there are loads of outlets for reform; with violence, there is only escalation. I agree bad times will come, but not that spanking in any form is a necessary part of ending it (I don't even want to hint at possible psychological/physical problems being part of my motivation, I just don't see spanking as functional in the process of teaching).

[QUOTE=Pastorius]I also agree that children are capable of a lot more than we give them credit for. But they are only kids after all, and I don't think we neccesarily should burden them with responsibilites so young. I mean, I loved my carefree days, when my only responsibility was to keep myself entertained.[/quote]
I'm not implying anything so harsh as a child working for their meals, just rather menial tasks, in our eyes, such as loading the dishwasher after we've cleaned them, making sure the doors and windows are locked, getting ingredients for dinner, etc. Give them the sense they have control over different areas and they'll be less inclined to exercise their control with "no!" or bad behavior.

[QUOTE=Pastorius]Some problems, like your mentioned one, simply cannot be helped. Toilet training for example. The child has to learn, and things like toilet training would not involve spanking in my mind. Encouragement and praise for success are what is needed here.

I think with the fall of real punishment in kids, they've grown up expecting no punishment, only reward. I mean, kids in the UK can get [i]paid[/i] for going to sixth form! (school at 17-18). PAID! How in the hell can you justify paying children to impart knowledge unto them! That's ridiculous in my eyes, but these days, kids are just........bleh.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't say the lack of punishment (though I don't consider discipline and punishment always interchangable) has fostered the growth of the inherent right children feel to reward. I believe a lot of parents have mistaken some scholarly information of positve reinforcement and warped it into something just as bad as abuse, which they in turn indoctrine their children to be accustomed to.

[QUOTE=Pastorius]My kid's going to be good whether his backside is flayed raw!!!:angry: :p[/quote]
I wholeheeartedly agree that too many kids feel entitled to too many things without earning it, and our disagreement is minor since we do agree that education is the foremost part of discipline (we just differ on its best enforcement, actually, only at the latter stages of enforcement).

I'm just glad there aren't any people advocating a "broken windows" type method of child-rearing. The spankers here at least want to teach as well as whip a little a[SIZE="2"]s[/SIZE]s should they find it necessary (not that it is :cool:).

If a teacher struck my child, i'd kick their ***.

State sponsored physical abuse? I like it!

Here's the underlying factor:

If a child cannot discern between right and wrong, that is not the child's fault, s/he was more than likely raised incorrectly; it is the parents' fault for not instilling values in their child. If you are so unbelievably primitive as to suggest that a beating is a better way to instill those values then an actual conversation with your own child, then you have clearly failed as a parent.

I love how alot of people in this thread seem to think that kids are less respectfull than they were a generation ago.. just like the previous generation thought their kids were less respectfull than their earlier generation, and so on, and so on.. If this is so true, and has been going on for 2000 years, then how come complete anarchy hasn't broken out yet?

[QUOTE=Knifeboy]I love how alot of people in this thread seem to think that kids are less respectfull than they were a generation ago.. just like the previous generation thought their kids were less respectfull than their earlier generation, and so on, and so on.. If this is so true, and has been going on for 2000 years, then how come complete anarchy hasn't broken out yet?[/QUOTE]
No I disagree- kids these days are much worse. I spoken to multiple teachers at my school and- one of them who'd been working there 20+ years and has said she's never seen it worse than this in the past couple of years. It's awful- and our school is the leading one in the county.

[QUOTE=Herbert_da_fish]No I disagree- kids these days are much worse. I spoken to multiple teachers at my school and- one of them who'd been working there 20+ years and has said she's never seen it worse than this in the past couple of years. It's awful- and our school is the leading one in the county.[/QUOTE]
I second this statement.

That and the worst they got in the 19 and 1860's were race riots, not cursing out a teacher because it was "cool."