Spanking your Child as Punishment

[DannyBoy_892]

I just thought it would be interesting to debate on weither on not some people think spanking/hitting your child is a good form of punishment. Some people think it isn't and may lead to abusive action later down the road. In my own experience, as being spanked as a child, I see nothing wrong with it. All of the people I've talked to that have been punished this way agree that if it weren't for the spanking, they would have most likely been worst children. Some studies show that hitting young children leads to a disconnection between the child and parent since the child relates the parent to punishment. I just wanted to hear some of your experiences on this form of punishment and weither or not you agree with it?

[Cicero]

The government shouldn't get involved. Just leave it to e parents, if the government decides how to punish a child, what will be next that they can control and decide for parents?

I'm strongly against spanking though. Especially rage fueled spanking. I think it's good for some and it may work, but it never worked for me. Every time my mom spanked me, I just got madder and madder, anger I had to hold in.

[randomnessqueen]

while i dont think its at all a effective form of discipline
i dont think its necessarily abuse.
it can certainly be taken to that level, but there is a huge line between spanking a child as punishment and abusing your child.

[likemike]

I think it is fine as long as you arent spanking out of anger. My mom always calmed herself down before spanking me.

[Hunter_Steel]

Spanking should be reserved for when a kid does something that warrants it.

Like: killing a cat or a dog for fun, burning he's bed or nearly burning the house down as an experiment, and the list goes on for severe cases.

Other times, grounding works perfectly to represent the effect of being in prison.

~Hunter

[NzForever]

Hell no spanking should not be allowed.

[Hypers]

I dont think spanking is a good method of punishment.The child that is spanked will eventually hate/be scared of going home after prolonged spanking. Parents are supposed to make their children better, and abuse sort of contradicts that idea. Also, there are lots of other forms of punishment that aren't abusive and teach lessons properly.

[Ryhanna]

I think it's fine to spank. It's definitely an effective form of discipline - It worked on me, anyway. I honestly think I would have turned out far worse had my parents not spanked me when I was acting like a brat. It's an 'Ow, that hurt! I'm not doing that again!' thing.

What's important to remember is that there is a very fine line between discipline and abuse. You can't go overboard. I remember there was a video a week or two ago of this man whipping his daughter with a power cord because he caught her twerking, or something. That was disturbing to watch. What was more disturbing was the comments on the video saying that what he was doing was an appropriate form of discipline. That's not on.

Spanking and violently attacking are very different things.

[Jess]

I don't like spanking, but I wouldn't say it's abuse unless it's constantly done (even for minor things), and some object is used.

[xmojox]

If a man hits his wife, it's a crime. If a parent hits a kid, it's ok? Bullshit. A crime is a crime no matter how old the victim.

[Jay1]

If a man hits his wife, it's a crime. If a parent hits a kid, it's ok? Bullshit. A crime is a crime no matter how old the victim.


If a man hits his wife because she say burnt his dinner wife could think
a/ well I'd better not burn his dinner next time
b/ he's hit me I'll report him and have him punished

Point being the wife can decide whether she thinks being hit is a crime or not - no doubt there are wives who accept being hit by their husband.

Where I live if a kid was hit by their parents they could in theory report it if they were savvy enough (or a teacher might see marks etc) and the parents would be in trouble.

A crime is only a crime if the person on the receiving end thinks it's a crime.

[xmojox]

If a man hits his wife because she say burnt his dinner wife could think
a/ well I'd better not burn his dinner next time
b/ he's hit me I'll report him and have him punished

Point being the wife can decide whether she thinks being hit is a crime or not - no doubt there are wives who accept being hit by their husband.

Where I live if a kid was hit by their parents they could in theory report it if they were savvy enough (or a teacher might see marks etc) and the parents would be in trouble.

A crime is only a crime if the person on the receiving end thinks it's a crime.

Where I live a crime is a crime is a crime....

[Emerald Dream]

A crime is only a crime if the person on the receiving end thinks it's a crime.

So when a man beats his child unconscious, should we wait and ask them when (or if) they wake up if it's a crime?

[Jay1]

Where I live a crime is a crime is a crime....
so where you live every man who's ever hit his wife has been punished for committing a crime?

Without knowing where you live I find that very hard to believe

[xmojox]

Being punished and having committed a crime are two very different things. I'm pretty sure it says where I live to the left of every post I make.

A murder victim would have to think it's a crime for murder to be a crime by your logic...

[Jay1]

Being punished and having committed a crime are two very different things. I'm pretty sure it says where I live to the left of every post I make.

A murder victim would have to think it's a crime for murder to be a crime by your logic...

It does say where you live - but you'll forgive me for not knowing much about midwest USA.

So you would say if a person hits their spouse in midwest USA a crime has been committed even though nobody ever knows it's happened and the spouse perfectly accepts being hit as part of a relationship?

[Emerald Dream]

So you would say if a person hits their spouse in midwest USA a crime has been committed even though nobody ever knows it's happened and the spouse perfectly accepts being hit as part of a relationship?

I certainly would.

I'm sure there are a lot of spouses who are abused and can not stand up for themselves. Just because it is not reported doesn't mean it is not a crime. Someone may be afraid of being killed by their spouse if they report it.

[Jay1]

I certainly would.

I'm sure there are a lot of spouses who are abused and can not stand up for themselves. Just because it is not reported doesn't mean it is not a crime. Someone may be afraid of being killed by their spouse if they report it.

Agreed.

But there could be all sorts of reasons why a person would accept being hit by their spouse. My point was if the spouse accepts it then it isn't a crime.

[Emerald Dream]

Agreed.

But there could be all sorts of reasons why a person would accept being hit by their spouse. My point was if the spouse accepts it then it isn't a crime.

Wrong. If the spouse accepts it, it's still a crime. It's just an unreported one.

[Jay1]

Wrong. If the spouse accepts it, it's still a crime. It's just an unreported one.

So you don't think the person being hit has a right to decide for themselves whether a crime has been committed?

[Emerald Dream]

So you don't think the person being hit has a right to decide for themselves whether a crime has been committed?

Not when it comes to abuse, neglect, violence, intimidation...or a situation where a victim may not want to come forward out of fear.

[Jay1]

Not when it comes to abuse, neglect, violence, intimidation...or a situation where a victim may not want to come forward out of fear.

Are you saying if any (adult) person is hit in the context of a relationship it is 100% always a crime?

[Emerald Dream]

Are you saying if any (adult) person is hit in the context of a relationship it is 100% always a crime?

Why wouldn't it be? I don't see where it's acceptable, in any context.

[Jay1]

Why wouldn't it be? I don't see where it's acceptable, in any context.

Neither do I - obviously I'm not going to accept being hit and I'm sure you wouldn't either.

What would you say to a woman (not being sexist but it probably will be a woman) who has a nice life, nice family, nice kids but her husband hits her sometimes and she chooses not to report
a/ she should be allowed to decide for herself what's acceptable in her life
b/ the family should be broken up because he's committed a crime

I just think there's grey areas and it's down to the individual to decide

[Emerald Dream]

Neither do I - obviously I'm not going to accept being hit and I'm sure you wouldn't either.

What would you say to a woman (not being sexist but it probably will be a woman) who has a nice life, nice family, nice kids but her husband hits her sometimes and she chooses not to report
a/ she should be allowed to decide for herself what's acceptable in her life
b/ the family should be broken up because he's committed a crime

I just think there's grey areas and it's down to the individual to decide

It's still a crime. She is choosing not to report it, but it's a crime nonetheless

[Jay1]

It's still a crime. She is choosing not to report it, but it's a crime nonetheless

So if you knew about this "crime" you'd break up the family?

[xmojox]

So you don't think the person being hit has a right to decide for themselves whether a crime has been committed?

No. I'm pretty sure the law decides what is and isn't a crime.

[Jay1]

No. I'm pretty sure the law decides what is and isn't a crime.

You might have a different system in midwest USA but in the rest of the world if a person is hit and doesn't report it no crime has been committed.

If I hit you and you didn't report it where's the crime?

[Emerald Dream]

So if you knew about this "crime" you'd break up the family?

Putting the word crime in quotations is ridiculous, sarcastic, and insulting to abuse victims.

But to answer your question, yes I would report it. For the spouse (or children) who can't for themselves. Even if the spouse was "ok" with it (as you say it might happen), what if the abuser if abusing others as well? Or will in the future? Something has to be done about it.

[xmojox]

You might have a different system in midwest USA but in the rest of the world if a person is hit and doesn't report it no crime has been committed.

If I hit you and you didn't report it where's the crime?

If you hit me I could report it, though, because it is against the law.

[Jay1]

If you hit me I could report it, though, because it is against the law.

I've no doubt you would report it.

Point was if I hit you and you CHOSE not to report it is it still a crime?

[xmojox]

I've no doubt you would report it.

Point was if I hit you and you CHOSE not to report it is it still a crime?

What I would or wouldn't do in your hypothetical attack is irrelevant.

It an action is against the law, it is a crime to perform that action.

[Emerald Dream]

What I would or wouldn't do in your hypothetical attack is irrelevant.

It an action is against the law, it is a crime to perform that action.

Exactly. There isn't much gray area as to whether there was a crime or not. Abuse, battery, assault...whatever you want to call it - whether or not the victim reports it, it's still a crime. If the victim wishes to come forward later, or it's reported later...it's still a crime.

Abuse is wrong by the law whether its allowed or not.

[Jay1]

Exactly. There isn't much gray area as to whether there was a crime or not. Abuse, battery, assault...whatever you want to call it - whether or not the victim reports it, it's still a crime. If the victim wishes to come forward later, or it's reported later...it's still a crime.

So if you were a woman say 30 years old with a husband 2 kids and a really nice life and your husband hit you once you'd break up the family bring up your kids without a father and have them live on welfare?

[Harry Smith]

I know I'm going to get in so much shit for this but I really can't be fucked. Jay1 I know what your doing- your just trying to rattle people up to see there reaction. You and I both know what you are saying about crime is bullshit. Your acting just like Prodigy17 a member who got banned and also held very extreme views just to annoy people. Now I'm not saying your the same person but stop just arguing for the point of it. Your not impressing anyone

[Emerald Dream]

So if you were a woman say 30 years old with a husband 2 kids and a really nice life and your husband hit you once you'd break up the family bring up your kids without a father and have them live on welfare?

I would think that if he hit me then he would have violent tendencies. Since when does someone hit just once? I don't believe for a second that it would be the only time and that it would just go away forever. That's not being realistic. I think a woman or man who believes that it won't happen again is fooling themselves, and endangering themselves (or kids) in the future.

[Jay1]

I would think that if he hit me then he would have violent tendencies. Since when does someone hit just once? I don't believe for a second that it would be the only time and that it would just go away forever. That's not being realistic. I think a woman or man who believes that it won't happen again is fooling themselves, and endangering themselves (or kids) in the future.

You're probably right.

In an ideal world a woman would be able to see those "violent tendencies" before he hit her rather than after

[Emerald Dream]

You're probably right.

In an ideal world a woman would be able to see those "violent tendencies" before he hit her rather than after

Which is why I am not accepting the theory of being hit one time and it magically going away. I would think that potential tendencies would be shown leading up to that. Violence has a tendency to escalate, not go away on its own.

[Jay1]

Which is why I am not accepting the theory of being hit one time and it magically going away.

Anyone would have be delusional to accept that theory - if one person hits another and gets what they want as a result they're going to hit again. Hopefully that's obvious.

I would think that potential tendencies would be shown leading up to that. Violence has a tendency to escalate, not go away on its own.

True. Do women think this big macho guy that has already exhibited violent tendencies toward everyone else is never going to hit me?

If a woman wants to with such a guy she'd probably need to accept being hit - which goes back to the first point about it not being a crime if it's not reported.

[Hunter_Steel]

Point: A husband shouldn't hit his wife EVER. That is not acting like a gentleman, more like a common thug, sets a bad example for the children (if there are any) and throws the balance of marriage out of whack. This debate about whether or not a husband hits his wife and doesn't get reported is stupid.

It should never happen, a man should NOT raise a hand to his wife, or any woman unless she is running at him with a knife wanting to stab him, a gun wanting to shoot him, or a chainsaw wanting to chop him up. Only time its acceptable is to defend your own life. Any other time is abuse and should never happen. (sorry for missing the NOT in my typo)

In the case of a parent spanking a child for punishment, it depends on what the kid did wrong. You can't obviously spank the child for accidentally breaking a window. But you most certainly can do it to teach the child that killing an animal for an experiment is not good whatsoever, because it gives way to the child potentially becoming a murderer in the future. So a few red stripes where the belt connected on the child's ass is not abuse if its to punish a severe crime.

The abuse comes in if you hit hard enough to leave blue welts or marks, draw blood or anything that needs to be medically treated. Thats abuse. But a few red stripes that disappear after 30 minutes or even 5 minutes is not abuse. Its just teaching the kid there's pain involved with inflicting pain for fun.

~Hunter

[xmojox]

Still a crime regardless....

And if one adult so much as touches another adult without consent, it's a crime. Why does the same rule not apply just because it's a kid and a parent?

[Jay1]

Still a crime regardless....

And if one adult so much as touches another adult without consent, it's a crime. Why does the same rule not apply just because it's a kid and a parent?

Because (god help us) a parent is given some latitude as to how he brings up his kids. It's perfectly legal to bring a kind into the world knowing you don't have the means to feed/clothe/house him or her.

If you want to dictate how other people treat their kids you would have to first dictate who should be allowed to have kids.

[xmojox]

Because (god help us) a parent is given some latitude as to how he brings up his kids. It's perfectly legal to bring a kind into the world knowing you don't have the means to feed/clothe/house him or her.

If you want to dictate how other people treat their kids you would have to first dictate who should be allowed to have kids.

Untrue. There are countries where corporal punishment is against the law, and, so far as I know, having kids isn't licensed in them.

[Jay1]

Untrue. There are countries where corporal punishment is against the law, and, so far as I know, having kids isn't licensed in them.

Yeah, there are countries were murder is against the law - funny thing is murder still happens. Would it be legal for your parents to spank you in midwest USA? If so why do you think they don't?

I'd still be interested to hear what train of thought makes you believe China and North Korea are allies

[Emerald Dream]

Keep the thread on-topic, please.

[xmojox]

Yeah, there are countries were murder is against the law - funny thing is murder still happens. Would it be legal for your parents to spank you in midwest USA? If so why do you think they don't?

I'd still be interested to hear what train of thought makes you believe China and North Korea are allies

And murderers are punished when caught and convicted. Yes it's legal here. My parents aren't barbarians, though.

That other thing was a different thread. I withdrew because my behavior was bad.

[Jay1]

And murderers are punished when caught and convicted. Yes it's legal here. My parents aren't barbarians, though.

It's legal here too (I think). Point was it's also legal for a drug addicted delinquent to bring a child into the world. If you had a choice would you rather
a/ be brought up in a nice middle class home were you got spanked when you screwed up
or
b/ be brought up in an environment where you go to bed hungry or worse

I wouldn't like to be spanked but it must beat being brought up in a ghetto no?

That other thing was a different thread. I withdrew because my behavior was bad.

I 'll start another thread on that other thing - no bad behaviour just a fair exchange of views. I would genuinely like to hear why you think China and North Korea are allies

[xmojox]

It's legal here too (I think). Point was it's also legal for a drug addicted delinquent to bring a child into the world. If you had a choice would you rather
a/ be brought up in a nice middle class home were you got spanked when you screwed up
or
b/ be brought up in an environment where you go to bed hungry or worse

I wouldn't like to be spanked but it must beat being brought up in a ghetto no?



I 'll start another thread on that other thing - no bad behaviour just a fair exchange of views. I would genuinely like to hear why you think China and North Korea are allies

It isnt a bi-polar proposition, though, meaning it isn't one way or the other.

[Jay1]

It isnt a bi-polar proposition, though, meaning it isn't one way or the other.

Unfortunate use of the term bi-polar but point taken.

Is your basic point that a parent who chooses to spank their child should be punished?

[xmojox]

Unfortunate use of the term bi-polar but point taken.

Is your basic point that a parent who chooses to spank their child should be punished?

Bi-polar only means either one thing or another.

No, my point is that it should be just as illegal for a parent to hit a kid as for that parent to hit another adult.

[Hunter_Steel]

In the case of punishment, it should not be illegal.

Thats my stance on it.

But I somewhat prefer the grounding method to corporal punishment because one day I wouldn't want my kids to associate me with pain. But I will spank if what he did fits to be spanked for. In my view, very severe cases.

~Hunter

[Jay1]

Bi-polar only means either one thing or another.

No, my point is that it should be just as illegal for a parent to hit a kid as for that parent to hit another adult.

You should be careful with your language - bi-polar is an ailment which some people suffer from. It's not an acceptable term to use if you just want to say neither one nor the other. Some people might find the term offensive in your context similar to saying "he gave me a black look" when you meant he looked at me harshly.

What would happen in midwest USA if a parent hit a kid and it came to the attention of authorities?

[xmojox]

You should be careful with your language - bi-polar is an ailment which some people suffer from. It's not an acceptable term to use if you just want to say neither one nor the other. Some people might find the term offensive in your context similar to saying "he gave me a black look" when you meant he looked at me harshly.

What would happen in midwest USA if a parent hit a kid and it came to the attention of authorities?

If people are offended by valid English, that's not my problem.

bi·po·lar /bīˈpōlər/

Adjective 1. Having or relating to two poles or extremities. 2. (of a plant or animal species) Of or occurring in both polar regions.


I suppose it depends on the situation. Counselling, parenting classes, in an extreme case the kid would taken away.

[LouBerry]

It's hard to discipline some children. Talking may work with one, grounding with another, but some kids need their hind end whipped sometimes. Most kids that are spoiled rotten, are that way because they didn't get disciplined when they were younger. I know because my best friend is one of those kids, and she can be down right horrible to be around.

[xmojox]

It's hard to discipline some children. Talking may work with one, grounding with another, but some kids need their hind end whipped sometimes. Most kids that are spoiled rotten, are that way because they didn't get disciplined when they were younger. I know because my best friend is one of those kids, and she can be down right horrible to be around.

So violence is the answer?

[Cygnus]

I personally do not like the concept of spanking, there are better ways to impose discipline. However I think it is up to parents, and they can do it with their child, just not in public.

[Jay1]

If people are offended by valid English, that's not my problem.

Interesting point of view from a liberal guy - opens the door to all sorts of valid English being used. Were you aware of the connotation of bi-polar when you first used it?


I suppose it depends on the situation. Counselling, parenting classes, in an extreme case the kid would taken away.

So hitting a child would not be acceptable - from a legal standpoint? I thought you were going to say it would be deemed OK for a parent to hit a child.

[HollisterGirl98]

I don't think hitting a child is necessary. I think too much of it can damage the way someone feels as they grow.

[xmojox]

Interesting point of view from a liberal guy - opens the door to all sorts of valid English being used. Were you aware of the connotation of bi-polar when you first used it?




So hitting a child would not be acceptable - from a legal standpoint? I thought you were going to say it would be deemed OK for a parent to hit a child.

You've got me confused with someone else. I'm not liberal. I used the word because it meant what I wanted to say. You're the one who brought up bipolar disorder. I didn't say a thing about it.

I was speaking to a situation where social services deemed there to have been abuse.

[Jay1]

You've got me confused with someone else.

Funny how that happens isn't it

I was speaking to a situation where social services deemed there to have been abuse.

How do they make that decision in midwest USA?

[Twilly F. Sniper]

Only if used in major offense.

[xmojox]

Funny how that happens isn't it



How do they make that decision in midwest USA?

I'm Libertarian, quite honestly.


I've never been involved in it, thank goodness, but I do know that in my state they're required to investigate within 24 hours of a complaint.

[dontfiguremeout]

Spanking is an effective way to teach children from wrong! If they do something bad, they get a painful swat on the butt telling them in their mind not to do that bad deed again or they will get a spanking. It's just like using shocker collars for dogs. You shock them when they do a bad deed, and it teaches them not to do it again so they don't get shocked. We need spanking as a tool of discipline. Just doing time outs isn't good enough for children to really get the notion of not to do it again. Yes, young kids don't agree with spanking, but once you become older you do realize that it's an excellent tool to teach your kids to behave. Plus it gives the authority for the parent over their kids. You see like on super nanny most kids over rule their parents because their parents didn't give a whole lot of discipline.

[xmojox]

Spanking is an effective way to teach children from wrong! If they do something bad, they get a painful swat on the butt telling them in their mind not to do that bad deed again or they will get a spanking. It's just like using shocker collars for dogs. You shock them when they do a bad deed, and it teaches them not to do it again so they don't get shocked. We need spanking as a tool of discipline. Just doing time outs isn't good enough for children to really get the notion of not to do it again. Yes, young kids don't agree with spanking, but once you become older you do realize that it's an excellent tool to teach your kids to behave. Plus it gives the authority for the parent over their kids. You see like on super nanny most kids over rule their parents because their parents didn't give a whole lot of discipline.

Why not use a shock collar on kids then? Spanking teaches that violence is acceptable and that might makes right. Are these really the lessons we want to teach kids?

[dontfiguremeout]

Why not use a shock collar on kids then? Spanking teaches that violence is acceptable and that might makes right. Are these really the lessons we want to teach kids?

It's not used for violence at all. It's used to teach! If the parent does it right, spanking teaches discipline, not to teach kids to fight others. If you noticed most kids who are well behaved will say they have been spanked when they were little and they said it taught them major lessons to be polite.

[xmojox]

It's not used for violence at all. It's used to teach! If the parent does it right, spanking teaches discipline, not to teach kids to fight others. If you noticed most kids who are well behaved will say they have been spanked when they were little and they said it taught them major lessons to be polite.

The intent doesn't matter. The results matter. Please read this Time Magazine article ( http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1983895,00.html).

[dontfiguremeout]

Well probably those parents didn't really explain to their kids why they spanked them. There's so much more you have to do besides spanking them. You have to talk to them and make sure they understand why they were spanked, what they did wrong, and what they can do next time to prevent doing that bad deed. Spanking just gives the child the physical "no" so it doesn't want to get a spanking.

[Andy daMuzak mAn]

I think there's better ways to handle situations than with physical violence, regardless of the context. Just my opinion.

It's not used for violence at all. It's used to teach! If the parent does it right, spanking teaches discipline, not to teach kids to fight others. If you noticed most kids who are well behaved will say they have been spanked when they were little and they said it taught them major lessons to be polite.

I've never been spanked a day in my life and I'm an honor roll student and have never been in serious trouble. :confused:


-merged double post. -Emerald Dream

[xmojox]

Well probably those parents didn't really explain to their kids why they spanked them. There's so much more you have to do besides spanking them. You have to talk to them and make sure they understand why they were spanked, what they did wrong, and what they can do next time to prevent doing that bad deed. Spanking just gives the child the physical "no" so it doesn't want to get a spanking.

But if there are forms of discipline that are just as effective (and there are) why not use them rather than violence? And I'm sorry, but hitting is violence.

[Danny Phantom]

I am really against it. I can tell there are effects psychologically (as a psychology student.)
There is, in my opinion, no PERFECT way to discipline a child/teen. You can try anything, but there is no guarantee that they'll change. My stepbrother gets spanked, a few of my friends did too. They tell me that it was traumatizing, but they noticed and I have to, that their behaviour hasn't changed. Really, a child will instead fear the punishment of spanking for doing something bad, instead of fearing to do the wrong thing. It basically teaches them that its okay to fear being caught and getting dealt with, instead of doing the wrong thing, and that isn't what should be taught.

[Thunduhbuhlt]

It depends, a quick swat when they are out of line is fine, but if it gets so far as to where they are leaving bruises and causing a lot of physical and emotional pain the police need to get involved.

[dontfiguremeout]

I don't see it really violent at all. Now it's violent if the parent hit's extremely hard and leaves a really big mark on the kid. The parent should only hit hard enough just so it doesn't feel good and teaches the kid you will get this if you keep doing this bad deed trying to teach them. It shouldn't feel like a beating at all.

[xmojox]

I don't see it really violent at all. Now it's violent if the parent hit's extremely hard and leaves a really big mark on the kid. The parent should only hit hard enough just so it doesn't feel good and teaches the kid you will get this if you keep doing this bad deed trying to teach them. It shouldn't feel like a beating at all.

So it's ok to hit a kid and leave a mark as long it's not a really big one? Why not use a discipline method that doesn't involve hitting at all if it's just as effective? The American Pediatric Association says that spanking is detrimental, as do all of the serious studies that I've seen.

[SAR151]

I was spanked as child, with a multitude of items, hell I was even smacked a few times. I see nothing wrong with it as long as there's no punching, kicking, throwing, or choking from the parent. From my personal experiences I learned a lot from my spankings. My parents were smart enough to know when I needed an ass whooping and when all I needed was a good talking to. I'm sorry but I laugh at people who believe a "spanking" is child abuse. I see kids who never got their ass whooped and they walk all over their parents because all the parents did was give false threats or idle threats like no TV, computer or phone for a month...now I'm not saying those are bad techniques but sometimes a brat of a child needs to be set straight, learn who the head of household is and respect them (of course that's if the parents or legal guardians are fit enough to be respected as a parent).

[PinkFloyd]

Kids no matter how old, are their own people. No parent should be allowed to hit them in anyway and not expect to be hit back. I know that sounds foolish, but it's what I believe. The government shouldn't get involved in my opinion. If parents want to be fucked up, let them.

[SAR151]

Kids no matter how old, are their own people. No parent should be allowed to hit them in anyway and not expect to be hit back. I know that sounds foolish, but it's what I believe. The government shouldn't get involved in my opinion. If parents want to be fucked up, let them.

If that's the case they should get out and work, pay their own bills, act like an adult if they want to be treated like one but there are laws that prevent that, they're called kids for a reason, they need to be taught what is right/wrong, yes a kid is a human being but a foolish human being who doesn't know right from wrong until their preteen years. I'm not disrespecting your POV but I don't agree with your opening statement. The parent(s) are responsible for the kid and if they feel their kids need a physical form of discipline then they have every right.

[PinkFloyd]

If that's the case they should get out and work, pay their own bills, act like an adult if they want to be treated like one but there are laws that prevent that, they're called kids for a reason, they need to be taught what is right/wrong, yes a kid is a human being but a foolish human being who doesn't know right from wrong until their preteen years. I'm not disrespecting your POV but I don't agree with your opening statement. The parent(s) are responsible for the kid and if they feel their kids need a physical form of discipline then they have every right.

I guess that makes some sense. I mean I have a job, and if my parents ever hit me, I would just move out. I mean I think I could live by myself on a McDonalds salary... I guess if like a 6 year old did something really bad, then it would be a good thing.

[xmojox]

see I was spanked as child, with a multitude of items, hell I was even smacked a few times. I see nothing wrong with it as long as there's no punching, kicking, throwing, or choking from the parent. From my personal experiences I learned a lot from my spankings. My parents were smart enough to know when I needed an ass whooping and when all I needed was a good talking to. I'm sorry but I laugh at people who believe a "spanking" is child abuse. I see kids who never got their ass whooped and they walk all over their parents because all the parents did was give false threats or idle threats like no TV, computer or phone for a month...now I'm not saying those are bad techniques but sometimes a brat of a child needs to be set straight, learn who the head of household is and respect them (of course that's if the parents or legal guardians are fit enough to be respected as a parent).

I was never spanked. I don't do any of the negative things you said I'm supposed to because I was never hit by a parent. From the tone of your post, it seems that your spankings taught you that violence is acceptable behavior and might makes right.

[Cicero]

So it's ok to hit a kid and leave a mark as long it's not a really big one? Why not use a discipline method that doesn't involve hitting at all if it's just as effective? The American Pediatric Association says that spanking is detrimental, as do all of the serious studies that I've seen.

No. If it leaves a mark, it's abuse. He's saying you should only spank hard enough so your child remember it hurt. For a lot of parents, spanking is a last result. Sometimes, grounding the kid isn't enough, nor is taking stuff away. No, it's not "detrimental", its only detrimental if the parent spanks all the time and leaves marks. If a parent uses spanking appropriately, it's beneficial.

[xmojox]

No. If it leaves a mark, it's abuse. He's saying you should only spank hard enough so your child remember it hurt. For a lot of parents, spanking is a last result. Sometimes, grounding the kid isn't enough, nor is taking stuff away. No, it's not "detrimental", its only detrimental if the parent spanks all the time and leaves marks. If a parent uses spanking appropriately, it's beneficial.

Read the article I linked above. And why is the American Pediatric Association against it if it's such a wonderful thing?

[dontfiguremeout]

So it's ok to hit a kid and leave a mark as long it's not a really big one? Why not use a discipline method that doesn't involve hitting at all if it's just as effective? The American Pediatric Association says that spanking is detrimental, as do all of the serious studies that I've seen.

Dude, did you read what I said?! Because you read it incorrectly! I said now it's not okay to hit them hard to leave a mark.

[xmojox]

Dude, did you read what I said?! Because you read it incorrectly! I said now it's not okay to hit them hard to leave a mark.

So you meant any mark instead of a really big mark. I misunderstood what you meant from what you said. Apologies.

[val3ri397]

well you could always just be serious and not hit them there is other ways to deal with it

[dontfiguremeout]

So you meant any mark instead of a really big mark. I misunderstood what you meant from what you said. Apologies.

Yeah, any mark that is made is too hard. Just enough to give them an uncomfortable feeling teaching them I'll get this if I do a bad deed again.

[xmojox]

Yeah, any mark that is made is too hard. Just enough to give them an uncomfortable feeling teaching them I'll get this if I do a bad deed again.

I'm glad to know that we agree that leaving marks on a kid is bad, but I'd also like to suggest that some marks can't necessarily be seen.

Your reaction to the article I linked earlier was that the parents had spanked incorrectly. May I point out that the study sample was just under 2,500 families, and that spanking led to more aggressive behavior in half of the kids in the study. That means that 1,250 ( more or less) parents in this study spanked incorrectly. How many would need to be shown to spank incorrectly for you to see spanking as harmful to kids? 75%? 90%? 100%?

This is a bit longer than the article I linked earlier, but I believe you might find this from the American Academy of Pediatrics ( http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/101/4/723.full?sid=f0875557-4573-4595-bdc7-2beedb991950) to be enlightening.

[Jay1]

Your reaction to the article I linked earlier was that the parents had spanked incorrectly. May I point out that the study sample was just under 2,500 families, and that spanking led to more aggressive behavior in half of the kids in the study. That means that 1,250 ( more or less) parents in this study spanked incorrectly. How many would need to be shown to spank incorrectly for you to see spanking as harmful to kids? 75%? 90%? 100%?

That is very flawed logic. You're saying because spanking doesn't change (or even worsens) kids behaviour it should be banned.

You probably know a high percentage of people sent to prison commit similar crimes when they're released - so being in prison doesn't actually improve behaviour in at least 50% of people. Therefore sending people to prison should be banned because it doesn't improve behaviour.

You're seriously confused about the purpose of punishment.

[Andy daMuzak mAn]

Your reaction to the article I linked earlier was that the parents had spanked incorrectly. May I point out that the study sample was just under 2,500 families, and that spanking led to more aggressive behavior in half of the kids in the study. That means that 1,250 ( more or less) parents in this study spanked incorrectly. How many would need to be shown to spank incorrectly for you to see spanking as harmful to kids? 75%? 90%? 100%?.

This is an interesting point. How do you make sure everyone "does it the right way?"

[xmojox]

That is very flawed logic. You're saying because spanking doesn't change (or even worsens) kids behaviour it should be banned.

You probably know a high percentage of people sent to prison commit similar crimes when they're released - so being in prison doesn't actually improve behaviour in at least 50% of people. Therefore sending people to prison should be banned because it doesn't improve behaviour.

You're seriously confused about the purpose of punishment.

Oh. You're still here?

No. I'm saying that it should be illegal for any person to hit any other person. Plain and simple.

Your statistics are meaningless. They aren't sourced, neither are they relevant to this debate.

[Jay1]

Oh. You're still here?

No. I'm saying that it should be illegal for any person to hit any other person. Plain and simple.

Your statistics are meaningless. They aren't sourced, neither are they relevant to this debate.

No need for a source - I assume somebody of your intelligence level would know prison doesn't stop re-offending in the same way spanking doesn't make kids behave better. Look it up if you really need to.

Why was your statistic relevant? If a stat showed that spanking does always change behaviour you'd still think it was wrong to hit another person.

[Hunter_Steel]

I was spanked until 2 years ago.

Am I an aggressive person? NO.
All of my friends that have been spanked, turned out fine and are not aggressive. Infact, every child that has not been spanked has been completely disrespectful, not just to adults, but also to me and other people when we didn't even tell them anything or do anything for them to act that way.

Their parents ground them and everything. BUT IT DOES NOT work for them. So in a sense, if they got a lil fire on their pathetic asses, they would be MUCH better mannered. I nearly kicked a guy's ass for throwing large stones at me. Being the better man, I didn't. I warned him I would next time though. Haven't seen him since.

So in the end: What is better to teach a child that won't listen after being given a timeout, being grounded, having his freedom and stuff taken away? What do you do? You take off your belt, bend him over your knee, and give him 3 good whacks. Its a last resort, should be used. And should never be banned.

~Hunter

[dontfiguremeout]

I'm glad to know that we agree that leaving marks on a kid is bad, but I'd also like to suggest that some marks can't necessarily be seen.

Your reaction to the article I linked earlier was that the parents had spanked incorrectly. May I point out that the study sample was just under 2,500 families, and that spanking led to more aggressive behavior in half of the kids in the study. That means that 1,250 ( more or less) parents in this study spanked incorrectly. How many would need to be shown to spank incorrectly for you to see spanking as harmful to kids? 75%? 90%? 100%?

This is a bit longer than the article I linked earlier, but I believe you might find this from the American Academy of Pediatrics ( http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/101/4/723.full?sid=f0875557-4573-4595-bdc7-2beedb991950) to be enlightening.


Well all of my family was spanked when we were little and we aren't aggressive. We are more behaved now than if we hadn't been.

[xmojox]

Well all of my family was spanked when we were little and we aren't aggressive. We are more behaved now than if we hadn't been.

Respectfully, you have no way to know how well or ill behaved you would've been if you hadn't been spanked but had rather been disciplined in some different way....

No need for a source - I assume somebody of your intelligence level would know prison doesn't stop re-offending in the same way spanking doesn't make kids behave better. Look it up if you really need to.

Why was your statistic relevant? If a stat showed that spanking does always change behaviour you'd still think it was wrong to hit another person.

This is a debate. It's your job to source your statements, not mine.


-merged double post. -Emerald Dream

[Jay1]

This is a debate. It's your job to source your statements, not mine.

OK, I assumed the fact was so well known it didn't need sourcing but here's best I could find with a quick search
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism#Recidivism_rates

Point is there's no form of punishment that's proven to stop more than 50% of kids or adults doing the same thing again - not spanking, not prison etc.

If spanking was proven to stop kids doing the same thing again say 90% of the time presumably you'd still be against it because it's wrong to hit somebody.

[xmojox]

I was spanked until 2 years ago.

Am I an aggressive person? NO.
All of my friends that have been spanked, turned out fine and are not aggressive. Infact, every child that has not been spanked has been completely disrespectful, not just to adults, but also to me and other people when we didn't even tell them anything or do anything for them to act that way.

Their parents ground them and everything. BUT IT DOES NOT work for them. So in a sense, if they got a lil fire on their pathetic asses, they would be MUCH better mannered. I nearly kicked a guy's ass for throwing large stones at me. Being the better man, I didn't. I warned him I would next time though. Haven't seen him since.

So in the end: What is better to teach a child that won't listen after being given a timeout, being grounded, having his freedom and stuff taken away? What do you do? You take off your belt, bend him over your knee, and give him 3 good whacks. Its a last resort, should be used. And should never be banned.

~Hunter

I wasn't spanked. When have I ever been disrespectful toward you?

[Hunter_Steel]

Did I point it to you?

[xmojox]

Did I point it to you?

I assume that I would be included in ...every child that has not been spanked....