# It's OK to spank when....



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

Your child runs into the street, or trys to touch fire, or the stove, or yad yada.
How do you deal with this? I know people who would never spank, _except_ in one of these cases. I really don't think any of these needs a spanking. My ds#2 was one to run towards the street, and it scared the crud out of me, but he doesn't now. Mostly I think he learned it was not a good idea because I became so hystrical.








Anyway, I was just thinking about this, due to a conversation I had with someone resently. Who said they would hit thier child if they ran into the street, but otherwise never did.







:

H


----------



## lisac77 (May 27, 2005)

I don't get it either. My son has also stopped running into the street - not because I hit him, but because I would scream and grab him and flip out. I guess my issue is that what does a spanking really do in this scenario? Does it teach your child not to run into the street, or does it teach him that when you are upset you will hit him?


----------



## abac (Mar 10, 2005)

My father told me I should hit ds when he runs toward the road. I thought I had made my position on spanking crystal clear, but apparently not. I told him, "You don't want to have this discussion with me. I'm not hitting ds. I'm not going to talk about it."

I've heard others on MDC make the logical suggestion that if a child runs into the street, it is not the child who is at fault, but the parent. So it seems pretty silly to suggest hitting a child for something the parent has done wrong.

I've also heard people suggest (again on MDC,) that if spanking taught children to stay out of the street, you could hit them once and leave them unsupervised near a road because they've learned their "lesson" and won't run into the street, because, you know, you spanked them







.

Generally I don't discuss it with people often because I see red when it comes to hitting children.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abac*
I've heard others on MDC make the logical suggestion that if a child runs into the street, it is not the child who is at fault, but the parent.

Why is that logical? I don't think the child is "at fault", as I think that's an asinine thing to say about a small child. But, I don't necessarily think the parent is, either.

Anyway...I have some sympathy with the viewpoint in the OP. I don't do it, partly because that kind of situation reduces me to complete hysteria. But, from talking to various people who do this, I know what the thinking behind it often is. They believe that pain is built into us to teach us that something is harmful - if we didn't feel pain when we touched a hot stove, for example, we'd leave our hand there, and suffer a greater injury. So, the thought is that if you spank (most people I know who do it actually slap the relevant hand...eg, the one reaching for the fire) when a child is doing something dangerous, the pain causes them to avoid doing it again. It's not intended as a punishment, ime. I'm not saying it's a good idea, but that does seem to be the basis for it.


----------



## georgia (Jan 12, 2003)

My mom is a big believer in spanking when there's danger involved. It makes no sense to me--I've asked her why she thought it was appropriate to be sending the message that in times of great stress or danger, we resort to violence?


----------



## Ruthla (Jun 2, 2004)

I can understand becoming emotional when a child does something dangerous and, in the heat of the moment, hitting the child. What I can't understand is deciding ahead of time that hitting children is ever a good idea, and talking about it in front of children.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

... it's between two consenting adults. Otherwise it's assault.

I don't think it's ever okay to assault someone regardless of age. The argument about when it's ever acceptable seems ridiculous to me--it presumes that adults have a natural right to hit defenseless children and that the only dispute is over how they should exercise that right. But if you view children as people with natural rights of their own, it makes no sense.

Is it understandable and forgivable if someone lashes out in anger in a crisis situation? Yes. But is it ever *acceptable* to hit a defenseless child? Absolutely not.


----------



## mollyeilis (Mar 6, 2004)

OK hmm.

Child runs into street, gets the punishment of having insane, hair-flying, screaming banshee parent coming after them. Also has punishment of feeling cars go past and scaring the hoosis out of them.

Child touches hot stove, gets burned.

Child reaches out to touch fire, really, if child has normal nervous system, child isn't getting very far towards that fire, b/c people really can sense heat and they don't like it.

In each scenario, there's a pretty natural negative thing happening, so NO I don't think those cases should involve someone going the extra mile. I mean, safety is a personal issue, one that we should each learn for our OWN sake. Not so that we please others. So the natural and immediate punishment that would happen from each of these situations really SHOULD suffice.


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

My best answer to the stove situation is that kids don't think stoves love them, so if they get hurt by a stove it hurts, and then it's over...like any other accident they might have, stubbing their toe, etc. (albeit much more painful, and obviously I think it's the parent's responsibility to keep them away from a hot stove). Being hurt by someone you love, and who tells you they love you, however, has to be incredibly confusing for a child.

For me, I think it boils down to this:

I don't ever want my children to associate the love I have for them with me intentionally causing them pain for something they did. No matter what. I just don't want them to think that it's OK to hit someone you love "if __<insert bogus reason here>". The only consequence it teaches them is that if you do something mom or dad doesn't like, or scares them, you'll get hit. That someone who loves you will also intentionally hurt you - AND, therefore, it must be OK for you to do it too, if your little brother takes a toy, or a friend does something you don't like. NOT something I want to model to my children. Period.

I especially, with a daughter, would NEVER want her to ever be in a situation where she thought being hit by someone she loves was OK because of something "she did". Ever. It mus tbe really damaging to a child's self esteem to be taught that they "deserve" to be hit by their parent because of something they did. I can't even imagine.

As someone else mentioned, if spanking "worked", then it would only need to be done once and the child would have 'learned their lesson' - but it doesn't - I don't think I've ever heard of a parent spanking once and the child never having the same issue again. Since children who are spanked, as well as children who are not will eventually developmentally attain self control, why on earth would I intentionally repeatedly hit them if it didn't make a difference in their impulse control? OK, maybe if I hit them enough, they would become scared of me and not do anything while I was around, but the thought of that makes me shudder on so many levels. If anything, spanking probably hinders a child's development of self regulation, because they're not learning the reason behind things, they're just learning that if they do X, they'll get hit....what happens when nobody is around to hit them? Versus a child who is gently guided with explanations and consistent redirection, they are internalizing reasons behind things instead of just fear reactions.

Spanking is just such a short term result, and a really lousy one at that. It causes nothing but resentment in the parent because they're "still not listening" if they have to do it again and again







, and resentment in the child because they don't understand how someone who claims to love them can hurt them. Just an all around lousy way to "love" and "teach" your child.

So many ways to get the same result, without intentionally hurting your child...AND preserving their spirit, inquisitiveness, AND self esteem.


----------



## taz925 (Nov 29, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *donosmommy04*
If anything, spanking probably hinders a child's development of self regulation, because they're not learning the reason behind things, they're just learning that if they do X, they'll get hit....what happens when nobody is around to hit them?

I think that needs to be said again. We need to guide them not punish them.

Doreen


----------



## oliversmum2000 (Oct 10, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *lisac77*
Does it teach your child not to run into the street, or does it teach him that when you are upset you will hit him?

actually i think its worse than that it teaches your child to dear you and hide from you when they make a mistake, and to keep secrets from you because the consequences are so scary.

the damage to parent - child attachment i feel could be more life threatening when they become teenagers


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

This attitude comes from the old tradition of "beating the bounds" (I won't explain, look it up yourself if you've got a strong stomach.)

If someone has time to spank, they have time to redirect.


----------



## Ruthla (Jun 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Brigianna*
... it's between two consenting adults. Otherwise it's assault.









:


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

The answer I have always given these people is "Why would you want to hit your child when 1) even you don't think it is guranteeed to work (since as pp said you aren't goint to spank once and then leave your child near the road, and 2) swooping them up and having a VERY SERIOUS convesation (if you are calm) or a hysterical parent (if you are not) will work every bit as well to dissuade them from going near the street as a spanking!


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

Brigianna:









Thank you everyone, I felt like I was the only one who thought that that didn't make since. And you know, I never thought of this, but your right, if spanking worked you would only have to do it once. Yet you never see that.









H


----------



## DevaMajka (Jul 4, 2005)

Yeah, its silly logic. Kids run into the street mostly because either 1) they have no impulse control at that moment or 2) they have no understanding of how dangerous it is.
Hitting them won't give them impulse control! And I guess it could "work" for the second reason, but there are definitely other, non-cruel ways to get them to understand that its dangerous. I'm sure a freaked out mama does the job pretty well! lol


----------



## CaraboosMama (Mar 31, 2005)

Lots of great responses already...
but what I have never understood about the arguments for this type of spanking is that if you have enought time to run up and smack them and get them out of harm's way - don't you also have enough time to grab them & hold them close to you? If an adult you loved was in danger - would you punch them in the face to let them know they are in a dangerous position? The argument just isn't logical at all!!


----------



## CaraboosMama (Mar 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sapphire_chan*
If someone has time to spank, they have time to redirect.

exactly!


----------



## mollyeilis (Mar 6, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *CaraboosMama*
Lots of great responses already...
but what I have never understood about the arguments for this type of spanking is that if you have enought time to run up and smack them and get them out of harm's way - don't you also have enough time to grab them & hold them close to you? If an adult you loved was in danger - would you punch them in the face to let them know they are in a dangerous position? The argument just isn't logical at all!!

I don't know anything about all the books and articles about how to spank, all I know is what I've seen in my life. And it's not like what you've described, rather it's getting the kid out of danger, then sitting down and smacking them b/c they ran out into the street and they need to know it's bad. 'cuz, you know, the fear they just experienced doesn't actually tell them that.







:


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

I always forget spankers are into punishment not correction. They aren't trying for a "natural consequence."

(By the way, if you're visiting this forum to find alternatives to spanking, you are not a 'spanker' even if you have been in the past.)


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mollyeilis*
...rather it's getting the kid out of danger, then sitting down and smacking them b/c they ran out into the street and they need to know it's bad. 'cuz, you know, the fear they just experienced doesn't actually tell them that.







:

What fear? DS1 ran into an intersection when he was two, and was almost hit by a van. I ran into the street and scooped him up, and _I_ was terrified...it took me almost three hours to get back to anything resembling normal. He just thought it was all hilarious.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *donosmommy04*
Being hurt by someone you love, and who tells you they love you, however, has to be incredibly confusing for a child.

Why? I was spanked occasionally as a child - I never found it even slightly confusing.

Quote:

As someone else mentioned, if spanking "worked", then it would only need to be done once and the child would have 'learned their lesson' - but it doesn't - I don't think I've ever heard of a parent spanking once and the child never having the same issue again.
Why? Does that apply to gentle discipline? If we do something once, then the issue at hand is resolved?

Quote:

It causes nothing but resentment in the parent because they're "still not listening" if they have to do it again and again







, and resentment in the child because they don't understand how someone who claims to love them can hurt them.
My mom never resented us because we "still weren't listening", and I never resented her for spanking us.

I don't spank my kids for a variety of reasons, but I'm really boggled at some of the assertions about spanking that I see on this forum. I won't say I particularly liked getting spanked, but I didn't particularly like _anything_ that thwarted me, including redirection. And, if I had a choice between a spanking and several non-physical punishments I received (from another relative, not my mom), I'd have begged for the spanking every time.

Anyway...I'm not promoting spanking. I'm just occasionally taken aback by the _degree_ of contempt for it here. There seems to be an underlying attitude of "nobody who loves their child as much as I do could ever spank" that frankly turns my stomach. Maybe it's just me, but it seems a little over the top.


----------



## MammaKoz (Dec 9, 2003)

I don't get people's logic either. IMHO spanking a child is a result of a parent out of control. I know the few times I have *wanted* to spank (but didn't) it is because I was so angry I was losing control, not my kids losing control, I was losing control. And any other time I've seen a child been spanked (which thankfully is rarely) it is the same thing. And not very often is it a spanking to teach them a lesson like don't run into the street, it was usually a spanking simply because the child did not obey. Spanking is a power thing to me.

I was spanked as a child. When someone is trying to tell me that spanking helps the child learn the lesson and they *remember* and apparently will *never do it again* (ya right) I always say to them:

"I was spanked as a kid and I remember every time I was hit, I remember how scared and confused I was as to why my mom/dad would hit me, not to mention humiliated, but I can't tell you why I was hit by my parents during those times because I don't remember why. All I remember is my parents hitting me, not the lesson. "

I make sure that after the first word "spanking" every other word I use instead of spanking is "hitting", because, simply that is what spanking is, it is hitting your child.

That usually ends the conversation right there. If I have to, I also mention to the "pro-spanking" person I am talking with, that I think spanking is the lazy way of parenting, because I think it is honestly. I might have to repeat myself 1000 times and talk to/redirect my kids about the same thing 1000 times to get something to sink in (_like don't run into the road, don't pour water from the kitchen sink onto the floor after I asked you not to, don't tease your brother/sister, throw toys at your brother/sister, don't pull the curtains off the wall please, etc etc you get the point_







) but at least my kids will remember that I took the time to redirect them and talk to them, try to understand where they were coming from and didn't just hit them and leave it at that.


----------



## jenn5388 (Nov 6, 2005)

Poking in...









I've heard of people believing this way also. I'm not sure why they think it's okay to spank the child if they do something that is dangerous. It makes no sense.

My miranda loves the street. she's also 19 months old. I'm not going to hit her for running into the street, but I watched the neighbor do it for the same reason to her 2 year old a couple months ago.
she also loves to sit on the arm of the couch.. It takes every bit of me not to scream for her to get off the end of the couch.. I wanna scream because I guess it makes me so nervous. (we have hardwood floors. AKA no soft carpet to break the fall. lol)

I believe in Getting them out of the situation.. if they like to run into the road keep them in the house or build a fence.. If they like the stove, child proof the stove and keep them away from it when you are cooking, ETC.

I also use No's and Time outs. It works. better than hitting the child does.


----------



## abac (Mar 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
Why is that logical? I don't think the child is "at fault", as I think that's an asinine thing to say about a small child. But, I don't necessarily think the parent is, either.

Poor choice of words on my part. I wouldn't fault a parent or other caregiver if their child ran into the street. What I should have said is that it is not the child's responsibility, but the parent's, to keep the child off of the road and out of harm's way.

Quote:

As someone else mentioned, if spanking "worked", then it would only need to be done once and the child would have 'learned their lesson' - but it doesn't - I don't think I've ever heard of a parent spanking once and the child never having the same issue again.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
Why? Does that apply to gentle discipline? If we do something once, then the issue at hand is resolved?

I don't think it applies to gd either, but I think the idea is that people use the argument that it's okay to spank in dangerous situations, but not others, because it is neccesary to teach the child a lesson. It is used as an excuse to hit, whereas with gd one doesn't really need an excuse or justification for how one treats their child.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
My mom never resented us because we "still weren't listening", and *I never resented her for spanking us*.

You are a very special person. It took me years to get to the point where I no longer resented my father for hitting me, and I was only able to achieve that by empathizing with him. It was not at all easy for me to consider how he must have been feeling as he hit me, and feel compassion for him regardless of the anger and abuse. I was certainly not able to accomplish this as a young child when I was being hit. I think you are the exception, not the rule.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
I'm just occasionally taken aback by the degree of contempt for it here. There seems to be an underlying attitude of "nobody who loves their child as much as I do could ever spank" that frankly turns my stomach. Maybe it's just me, but it seems a little over the top.

I don't think that people who spank love their children any less than I do, but I don't think they have the same ability to empathize that I do. It can be difficult in a moment of frustration to stop and consider how one's child is feeling. I think the degree of contempt is directed towards those who believe it is their right and duty to hit their children, not towards those who occasionally lose their temper and hit, but seek a better way.


----------



## gentle_mama04 (Dec 1, 2005)

My mil said the same thing as what was said in the op. I did some searching on the internet and found this on Dr. Sear's web site. http://www.askdrsears.com/html/6/T061200.asp

From the site:

Don't spank. As young parents with our first few children, we believed that spanking was appropriate in life- threatening situations, such as toddlers running out into the street. We reasoned it was necessary to make an impression on mind and body that the child would remember to prevent running into the street again. At the time we concluded that safety comes before psychology. But as we learned more about discipline, we realized there are better ways than spanking to handle even danger discipline. We realized toddlers don't remember from one time to the next, even with the "physical impression."
Any "danger" situation still requires constant adult supervision-no amount of spanking will danger-proof a child when the adult is not there to administer the blows. Any after-the-fact hitting will just be confusing-he won't know why he's being hit. Your job as a disciplinarian is to keep your child away from situations in which his ignorance or impulsiveness could get him into real danger.

There were a lot of other great things said by pp.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abac*
Poor choice of words on my part. I wouldn't fault a parent or other caregiver if their child ran into the street. What I should have said is that it is not the child's responsibility, but the parent's, to keep the child off of the road and out of harm's way.

Ah - okay. That one just kind of rubbed me the wrong way, because I remember the time my son ran into the road...I was on my face on the ground, having knocked all my breath out, after slipping on the wet grass tryign to grab him and pick him up. I've seen the "the parent is at fault" assertion here a few times, and it always kind of feels like a slap in the face. I was doing everything I possibly could to keep him off the road.

Quote:

I don't think it applies to gd either, but I think the idea is that people use the argument that it's okay to spank in dangerous situations, but not others, because it is neccesary to teach the child a lesson. It is used as an excuse to hit, whereas with gd one doesn't really need an excuse or justification for how one treats their child.
Ah, okay. I've always just seen it as substituting the pain of a swat for the pain of being hit by a car or burned. I'd definitely rather have the pain of a swat! I do think pain teaches us - in fact, I think that's why we feel it. But, I've never seen any studies on parents who _only_ spank in this instance, so I don't know if it really does work, or not. If parents are spanking for other things, then it all gets jumbled together as "punishment".

Quote:

You are a very special person. It took me years to get to the point where I no longer resented my father for hitting me, and I was only able to achieve that by empathizing with him. It was not at all easy for me to consider how he must have been feeling as he hit me, and feel compassion for him regardless of the anger and abuse. I was certainly not able to accomplish this as a young child when I was being hit. I think you are the exception, not the rule.
Maybe so. I don't think I'm particularly special. Spanking was just an occasionaly part of the ways things were. It only happened sometimes, for some things and it was used pretty consistently. I don't remember thinking that I "deserved" it, exactly...just that it was predictable. Of course, I've seen a lot of people post about spankings, and most of their childhoods were also quite emotionally unfriendly. Mom was a SAHM, and she baked with us, took us out to parks and such everyday, breastfed (even my brother, in '63), etc., etc. There was never any doubt in my mind that she loved us totally.

Quote:

I don't think that people who spank love their children any less than I do, but I don't think they have the same ability to empathize that I do. It can be difficult in a moment of frustration to stop and consider how one's child is feeling. I think the degree of contempt is directed towards those who believe it is their right and duty to hit their children, not towards those who occasionally lose their temper and hit, but seek a better way.
I think my mom felt that it was part of her job as a parent to spank occasionally. However, I don't believe she ever lacked empathy. She remembers being a child quite well, and knows how it felt. It wasn't about losing her temper (she yelled when she lost her temper, but never hit us that I can recall). It was just part of her parenting toolbox. She says now that she probably wouldn't do it, because she doesn't think it accomplishes anything - but she saw it differently 35-40 years ago. Of course, her mother _didn't_ hit, but _was_ tremendously emotionally distant and withheld affection and such for punishment. Maybe viewpoints on this really depend on the overall childhood of the person in question. Mom wasn't hit, but _was_ unhappy. I was hit, but was happy.


----------



## abac (Mar 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
Maybe viewpoints on this really depend on the overall childhood of the person in question. Mom wasn't hit, but was unhappy. I was hit, but was happy.

Yes, you're probably right. My mother occasionally spanked us also, and it sounds similar to how you viewed spankings from your mother. The spankings that stuck with me though are the ones that came from my father, because they were angry and violent and uncontrolled. I know you're not saying spanking is okay, but saying you were hit, but happy reminds me of people who say, "I was spanked and I turned out okay." I don't think people can really predict how a child will come to view spankings after the fact, when they are adults. Some grown children have no issues with it, (although I suspect they have not really dealt with it and are repressing and are therefore more likely to spank their own children,) while others suffer the consequences throughout their adult lives. Others are somewhere in between. Regardless, it is wrong every single time.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abac*
I know you're not saying spanking is okay, but saying you were hit, but happy reminds me of people who say, "I was spanked and I turned out okay."

I can understand why you'd see a similarity. But, I think I mean it differently. I see the spankings as...neutral, mostly. They really didn't mean much of anything, in terms of feeling betrayed, resentful, abused, etc. But, I also don't think they accomplished anything in terms of discipline. They were just part of life. Of course....I don't think I ever really felt that mom was hurting me...it was more "I did X and Y (the spanking) happened and Y hurt". It's hard to say for sure now, but I think I saw it about the same way I'd see a bee sting...I disturbed the bee, and I got stung. It wasn't about "deserving" to be hurt.

On the other hand, I think when people say, "I was spanked and I turned out okay", what they're usually really saying is "I turned out okay _because_ I was spanked". That's a very different mental state than I'm coming from.

I do have to admit to having hit ds1 a couple of times when he was little, and I'm not proud of it...nor was I then. I just lost control, because I was _way_ over-stressed and sometimes _I_ couldn't cope and my little guy got hit. This ended up with both of us sitting on the floor in tears. I don't expect I was exactly creating golden memories for my son.









And, I hit dd one day, too...when she hurt ds2. It just took me by surprise, and I reacted without thinking. I can guarantee that if someone else did the same thing to ds2, I'd hit them, too! Now, I've given myself a sort of mantra ("she hurt my baby, but she _is_ my baby") for that situation, so I haven't hit her again. I can't claim I'm doing that great. Mom hit me more times than I've hit my kids, but I actually think I've hurt them more.


----------



## Lazyhead (Mar 27, 2006)

:


----------



## abac (Mar 10, 2005)

Lisa, we all lose our temper with our children on occasion. The thing that makes you very different from others who spank is that you don't think it was okay.


----------



## jenmk (Apr 28, 2005)

I wanted to add two thoughts:

My feeling of why people spank a child when s/he runs into the road is because the parent is scared and upset, and needs an emotional release. It's all about the parent, not about the child in a dangerous situation. I think people who rationalize this as the only time it's okay to spank do it because it's the accepted norm in our society and they want to feel okay about doing it. I also think we're a lot more likely to get the message across to our child by telling them why we're upset and how dangerous the situation was, rather than just whacking them on the butt until we feel better.

I also wanted to comment on a pp about why spanking is demonized on this site. Regardless of whatever reasons people give for not spanking or thinking spanking is terrible . . . it all comes down to one simple fact: _It's never okay to hit someone, big or little._ If I hit another adult, I get charged with assault. If my DH hits me, it's abuse and he could go to jail. It's wrong to hit someone. Period. And that applies to children too, regardless of whether your childhood experience with spanking was harmful or neutral. And for those of us who really think about this issue, it just seems more wrong to hit a child because of the strength, size, and weight discrepancy between child and adult. There's nothing right about it, and never a good reason/excuse to do it.


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
Why? I was spanked occasionally as a child - I never found it even slightly confusing.

I can't see how it woudn't confuse the heck out of me if as a child learning about love and relationships, a person who said they loved me also hurt me. On purpose.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
Why? Does that apply to gentle discipline? If we do something once, then the issue at hand is resolved?

No, and that was my point. If it doesn't work after one time with spankers, and it doesn't work after one time with gentle discipline, why on earth would I pick the one that deliberately hurt my child physically and emotionally?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
My mom never resented us because we "still weren't listening", and I never resented her for spanking us.

That actually bothers me, that you weren't resentful of being hit by your parent...that you thought it was 'ok' or you somehow deserved it...or were even neutral towards it. Maybe it's because it's how you grew up, but I couldn't ever be OK with someone who claimed to love me hitting me, no matter what the reason.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
And, if I had a choice between a spanking and several non-physical punishments I received (from another relative, not my mom), I'd have begged for the spanking every time.

I hear you, sometimes emotional pain can be worse than physical pain...but even that makes part of the point I was trying to make. Spanking is a very short term solution - dole it out, and nothing much changes, really - so why do it? So many more gentle ways to get your point across and actually teach your child reasons behind things, other than "because I said", or whatever.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
There seems to be an underlying attitude of "nobody who loves their child as much as I do could ever spank" that frankly turns my stomach. Maybe it's just me, but it seems a little over the top.

I don't think that at all. I would like to think that mosty people who spank don't know there is another way, and if they did, they would consciously make the decision to stop hitting their children. That neither spanking them or not spanking them isn't going to make a child 'magically behave", so why on earth hit them? I believe that most parents love their children so much that they'd gladly die for them. I don't believe i love my children more than a person who spanks. BUT, I also believe that most parents who spank don't think about how hypocritical it is to be OK with hitting them for whatever various reason they have decided is an appropriate one, rather than finding a different, more gentle way, since they'd likely lay their own life down for their child - to me, that's just messed up.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jenmk*
I also think we're a lot more likely to get the message across to our child by telling them why we're upset and how dangerous the situation was, rather than just whacking them on the butt until we feel better.

What do you mean by this? Are you talking about hitting the child over and over? I'm not sure what "until we feel better" is referring to.

Quote:

I also wanted to comment on a pp about why spanking is demonized on this site. Regardless of whatever reasons people give for not spanking or thinking spanking is terrible . . . it all comes down to one simple fact: _It's never okay to hit someone, big or little._ If I hit another adult, I get charged with assault. If my DH hits me, it's abuse and he could go to jail. It's wrong to hit someone. Period. And that applies to children too, regardless of whether your childhood experience with spanking was harmful or neutral. And for those of us who really think about this issue, it just seems more wrong to hit a child because of the strength, size, and weight discrepancy between child and adult. There's nothing right about it, and never a good reason/excuse to do it.
I understand all this. I still object to the tone of a lot of posts here. The most abusive parents I've personally ever known never laid a hand on their child, and I don't feel that I was abused by my mother at all. A man I used to talk to on another forum once called my mom a cockroach because she spanked me, and I see that same kind of attitude here - a lot. My mom wasn't and isn't a cockroach or an abusive parent. She was very loving, attentive mom who happened to do something that people here disagree with. I don't think she was wrong, and she certainly wasn't a bad parent.

Of course, I also disagree that it's "never" okay to hit someone.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

triple post


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

triple post


----------



## abac (Mar 10, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
I understand all this. I still object to the tone of a lot of posts here. The most abusive parents I've personally ever known never laid a hand on their child, and I don't feel that I was abused by my mother at all. A man I used to talk to on another forum once called my mom a cockroach because she spanked me, and I see that same kind of attitude here - a lot. My mom wasn't and isn't a cockroach or an abusive parent. She was very loving, attentive mom who happened to do something that people here disagree with. I don't think she was wrong, and she certainly wasn't a bad parent.

Of course, I also disagree that it's "never" okay to hit someone.

Hitting is abusive, bottom line. If your mother hit you, she was abusive toward you and she was most definitely wrong. This doesn't mean she was a horrible person, or that she wasn't a great mother, or that she wasn't doing the best she knew how to do. It doesn't mean that she deserves to be blamed or criticized for hitting her child, because blaming and criticizing isn't usually helpful.

But she was very wrong to hit you.

I think that we can make progress in the area of child abuse if we view the abusers with compassion, empathy and understanding. But we cannot minimize their behavior.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *donosmommy04*
I can't see how it woudn't confuse the heck out of me if as a child learning about love and relationships, a person who said they loved me also hurt me. On purpose.

Okay...I've been thinking about it some more today. Maybe it's because I didn't see it as any different than any other pain when I was a child. I thought mom had control of everything...food, shelter, clothes, etc. I think I really believed she could control the weather (possibly because she ALWAYS knew when it would rain). I'm not sure I really processed a spanking as being any different than a bee sting or stepping on a sharp rock. It was all mom's responsibility in my world. If I stepped on a sharp rock, I got cut. If I stuck a utensil in an electrical outlet, I got spanked...all the same thing.

Quote:

That actually bothers me, that you weren't resentful of being hit by your parent...that you thought it was 'ok' or you somehow deserved it...or were even neutral towards it. Maybe it's because it's how you grew up, but I couldn't ever be OK with someone who claimed to love me hitting me, no matter what the reason.
I think I already covered that above. But, I certainly never looked at it as something I "deserved".

Quote:

I hear you, sometimes emotional pain can be worse than physical pain...but even that makes part of the point I was trying to make. Spanking is a very short term solution - dole it out, and nothing much changes, really - so why do it?
I honestly don't think I ever did stick anything in an electrical outlet again. Maybe it did work. ??

Quote:

So many more gentle ways to get your point across and actually teach your child reasons behind things, other than "because I said", or whatever.
Agreed. But, I'm never really sure how much dd understands, and she's really smart. I've somehow managed to make her terrified of any car that goes by...even one in the parking lot while we're standing in front of our place. I don't know what idea she has about cars, but something in my attempts to have her hold my hand, stay on the sidewalk, look both ways, etc. has obviously gone completely wrong. My mom told me to hold her hand, etc. because she said so...and I did. She also gave me reasons at other times (ie. not in the middle of the intersection). It worked. I don't know yet that my way does.

Quote:

I don't think that at all. I would like to think that mosty people who spank don't know there is another way, and if they did, they would consciously make the decision to stop hitting their children. That neither spanking them or not spanking them isn't going to make a child 'magically behave", so why on earth hit them? I believe that most parents love their children so much that they'd gladly die for them. I don't believe i love my children more than a person who spanks. BUT, I also believe that most parents who spank don't think about how hypocritical it is to be OK with hitting them for whatever various reason they have decided is an appropriate one, rather than finding a different, more gentle way, since they'd likely lay their own life down for their child - to me, that's just messed up.
If I truly believed that giving my child a swat when they reached for the stove would teach them to associate hot stoves with pain, I don't think I'd hesitate to swat them. I don't find that hypocritical at all. To me, that's weighing the damage of my child briefly thinking that mommy doesn't love them (which can also happen if they don't get ice cream or have to take a nap) and making myself feel bad against the damage of them actually touching a hot stove at some point. Burns are nasty - it would be a no-brainer for me. But, I'm not sure it works, so it would be pretty stupid to do it.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *abac*
Hitting is abusive, bottom line. If your mother hit you, she was abusive toward you and she was most definitely wrong. This doesn't mean she was a horrible person, or that she wasn't a great mother...

Perhaps the problem here is our definitions of abusive. By my definition, an abusive parent isn't a great parent. The two are incompatible.


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

I want to clarify that I don't agree with what my thread is about. It is something that has been bugging me since I had a conversation with someone.
I use to call it "spanking" it seems nicer, friendlier. But when you call it hitting... it stings, it makes you think. I have hit my kids in the past, when I say hit... it makes me sick to my stomach. If I say I "spanked" my kids, it is less painful for me. It doesn't seem as bad as it really is. So to keep myself in check I say hit. I have hit my kids. That way, I don't do it.














It makes me ashamed of myself.
I have pondered this subject for many years. I was hit as a child, and I was scared of my parents. I was so scared that I would lie to not get hit. And it has left a mark on my relationship with my folks. They don't get to have my kids over night, or even watch them for more than a couple hours, because I don't trust that they will be gentle with them.
I like when hitting a child is compared to hitting an adult. I use that same thing when I talk to people about CIO. Would you leave a helpless adult all alone to cry and beg for help?? NO!
Thank you for having this discussion with me.

H


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaofthree*
I use to call it "spanking" it seems nicer, friendlier. But when you call it hitting... it stings, it makes you think. I have hit my kids in the past, when I say hit... it makes me sick to my stomach. If I say I "spanked" my kids, it is less painful for me. It doesn't seem as bad as it really is. So to keep myself in check I say hit. I have hit my kids.

I agree with using hit for that reason. But, there are times that I'm trying to specify a certain kind of hit. To me, "spanking" is hitting on the bum with a bare hand...no other kind of hitting. A "swat" is a single, stinging slap - usually to a hand. Hitting encompasses both of those, but also many other things. I usually use "spank" or "swat" when I'm specifically expressing a particular thing...such as my mom spanked me - she never hit me in any other way.

Quote:

I have pondered this subject for many years. I was hit as a child, and I was scared of my parents. I was so scared that I would lie to not get hit.
I can't even imagine being scared of my parents. Maybe that's why I don't get quite as worked up about this as most posters here. A spanking just wasn't that big a deal - and hurt so much less than so many other things! I mean - a spanking didn't even come close to a bee sting or a skinned knee.

Quote:

I like when hitting a child is compared to hitting an adult.
I have trouble with that one. I'm not sure what I'd do if I were living with another adult who was constantly doing things that were unreasonable (and children are kind of unreasonable from an adult perspective) and hurting me and couldn't just walk out the door. I think I'd be far more inclined to hit an adult if I were in the same circumstances. DD does things to me every day that would be flat out physical abuse if another adult did them to me. If dh bit my ear when he was frustrated, I'd leave (permanently!)...I'm not going to just walk out on a 3-year-old. I just don't have anything like the same dynamic with my children that I do with adults. I don't spank, but I don't see the situations as being the same at all.


----------



## obiandelismom (May 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
Mom hit me more times than I've hit my kids, but I actually think I've hurt them more.









I'm not one that sees spanking as some menace - I honestly don't spend a lot of time thinking about it.

But on the issue of whether or not it's "traumatic" or confusing, I think it comes down to the 'A' part of AP. My parents spanked me occasionally, and I remember being afraid of the spanking, but not of my parents. The spanking became the "natural consequence", and I suffered through it without much thought to who was causing it. I still loved and trusted my parents, and do to this day.

BUT - my parents were NOT attachment parenting me!! They were old school "grown ups are different from and have more power than children" parents. They did all kinds of stuff that was inexplicable to me as a kid!







It didn't confuse me when they spanked me because I had long since given up understanding half they did.

I, on the other hand, want to always be completely open and "understandable" to my kids. Since attachment parenting is primarily about the parent/child relationship, about guiding and leading and teaching, then it's absolutely necessary that my kids understand most of what I do. I've found that parenting in this way teaches my kids to do what I say simply because they've found me to be a reasonable person who has their best interests at heart. In order for this to "work", though, my kids must have complete faith in my good intentions, and in my wisdom. To me, when it comes down to it, spanking is counterproductive to the primary goal - which is an attached relationship. But the flip side to that, I think, is that attached parents who do spank DO have the potential to cause more harm than non-attached parents.


----------



## georgia (Jan 12, 2003)

Quote:

Of course, I also disagree that it's "never" okay to hit someone.
Storm Bride, would you be willing to elaborate this point?


----------



## georgia (Jan 12, 2003)

Note from One of Your Friendly GD Moderators







:

I'm concerned that posts to this thread _not_ appear to advocate physical punishment in any way, shape or form. {Sorry, it's hard for me to state that in a positive way--time crunch here.} Sometimes, it seems there is a fine line when dealing with opinions and personal experiences. Please be very careful to follow the Gentle Discipline Forum Guidelines when posting:

Quote:

*Gentle Discipline Forum Guidelines*

Welcome to Gentle Discipline. This forum has a specific aim: to help parents learn and apply gentle discipline methods in raising their children.

Quote:

Effective discipline is based on loving guidance. It is based on the belief that children are born innately good and that our role as parents is to nurture their spirits as they learn about limits and boundaries, rather than to curb their tendencies toward wrongdoing. Effective discipline presumes that children have reasons for their behavior and that cooperation can be engaged to solve shared problems.

Hitting is never the best way to teach a child. Even in the case of real danger - as when a child runs out into the road - you can grab him, sit him down, look him in the eyes, and tell him why he must never do that again. The panic in your voice will communicate your message much more effectively than any spanking. You can be dramatic without being abusive.

'Natural Family Living' by Peggy O'Mara

Please appreciate that this forum is not a place to uphold or advocate physical punishment of children. Personal preferences for and encouragement of use of physical punishment are inappropriately posted here. Posts of that nature will be edited by the member upon request or will be removed.

Please feel free to discuss your problems and needs with the intent to learn more about Gentle Discipline
Thanks, everyone


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *georgia*
Storm Bride, would you be willing to elaborate this point?

Sure.
If I walk in on an adult hurting or molesting one of my kids, I believe it's perfectly okay for me to hit them to get them off my child. Actually, while I think the best thing to do in that situation is get them off my child, then call the police, I don't think it woud be "wrong" if I beat them black and blue. Don't mess with mama bear.

If someone walked up and kicked me in the stomach, I believe it's perfectly okay for me to hit them back (if I'm able to) and fight my way loose. I go back and forth on whether I should then just run for it, or continue to fight back...I guess it would depend on various factors.

So, basically - I see no problem with hitting in self-defense or in the defense of my children.

Also, I do want to make it clear that I'm not advocating spanking. I just have difficulty with what I perceive to be the demonizing of parents who spank, and it's probably making me come across as pro-spanking, when I'm not.


----------



## Teensy (Feb 22, 2002)

Okay - I'll fess up - I've slapped my DS #2's hand (twice) when he grabbed our oven door and pulled it open (once when hot, once not) - and I don't really feel bad about it, nor do I feel like hitting my son's hand in that instance makes me a child abuser.

That same week he had begun pulling the dishwasher door open - I tried redirecting, keeping him away from the dishwasher, putting childproof locks on the dishwasher, etc. - he still opened that sucker at least a hundred times. Now the dishwasher - the worst he could do was pull out a knife and cut his fingers, not good, but not too terrible.

But the oven - with a pot of boiling liquid in it!?!?!?! If he grabbed the pot and pulled it over on himself, can you imagine the potential burns. Grabbing the rack might be one thing, but if he grabbed the edge of a pot of chicken and dumplings or french onion soup and pulled it onto himself - the burns could be very serious. I've got one pair of eyes and one pair of hands and at the time I had two extremely active little boys - the oldest of which was an ace at getting past safety gates and the like.

So when I slapped his hand, I wasn't trying to punish him - I was trying as efficiently as possible to keep him from doing something dangerous again. I guess I'd compare it more to Anne Sullivan teaching Helen Keller that something was dangerous. Scream and yell instead? Well, unfortunately I also tend to do that when the boys poured paint on my carpet or deliberately peed on the furniture - so I'm not sure that would have been the best deterent.

I am far from a perfect parent and there are many things I feel guilty about - but acting on my natural instinct and slapping DSs hand in that instance is not one of them.


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

Ok, so before this gets closed down... I want to make sure that everyone knows this IS NOT a pro-spanking thread. I started this mostly because I find that statement "It's Ok to spank when...." from people who normally wouldn't think of hitting their child. And what do you say to that??

As for the hitting an adult who may act like a child that is still illegal. And that is where the problem is. If you have an adult with the mental ablility of a 2 year old it is ILLEGAL to hit them, no matter how aggressive they get with you. So if we are going to be far, sure if a normally rational adult attacks you you defend yourself, BUT if a two year old (or an adult who is like a two year old) attacks you, you shouldn't hit them. One group it is against the law to hit, and one it is OK to hit. It is hameful, the double standard we have. And like I said, I am guilty of it. I would never hit an adult who was two mentally, but I did hit my dd when she was 2. Why?? Beacsue I could? Because if it was an adult I would see that they couldn't help themselves, but with my child I didn't think that?? That is why I am ashamed of myself. Because I should know better. I am the adult. I need to behave like it, not like another child getting mad.









H


----------



## mollyeilis (Mar 6, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
What fear? DS1 ran into an intersection when he was two, and was almost hit by a van. I ran into the street and scooped him up, and _I_ was terrified...it took me almost three hours to get back to anything resembling normal. He just thought it was all hilarious.

1. That *sucks*.
2. I'm not sure you were really seeing his reaction, since you were so upset yourself.

Of course I wasn't there. However, I was a kid once (really? who knew?), and I remember seeing my mom terrified, petrified, beyond reason b/c of something I did. And I shut down, just trying to help HER. There's likely no way for her to have known how scared I was, b/c I was focusing so much on what SHE WAS GOING THROUGH.

It's possible that's what was going on. And anything he (or I, way back when) might have learned from seeing the big car and feeling the car go by and feeling small...might have been dumped, b/c he saw you, someone who is his whole world, so so so scared.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *jenmk*
My feeling of why people spank a child when s/he runs into the road is because the parent is scared and upset, and needs an emotional release. It's all about the parent, not about the child in a dangerous situation.

I absolutely agree with that. That it's the reason people do it, not that I agree with hitting b/c I'm upset. (seems we need to use all our words here, lest someone skimming miss something!)

Just *today* my son nearly got on my last nerve. He's coming up on 2, his molars are pushing through something awful, and we've both got this bug that's sweeping the nation (you know the one, sore throat, mucus everywhere, goopy eyes, miserable and exhausted) and no one's sleeping very well. My neck was hurting really bad for some unknown reason, and I could barely open my eyes b/c of the brightness in the room. And he took my last nerve and was about to leap....I swooped him up and I *wanted* to bite him. *Wanted.*

Why? Because *I* was frustrated.

Luckily, I've recently (let's mention again he's approaching 2, and also mention his 2 year molars have been steadily moving up since he was 1.5) developed some lightening fast mental-reflexes that race through the consequences...would it hurt him? yes. would I be the one to wipe up the mess I'd caused? yes. would that help me? no. would he learn anything? yes, that biting is OK with me. ooh, bad learning. that won't work at all. OK, breathe, hug him, breathe, kiss him, find something else for him to do.

So as of today, I *understand* reaching a limit (and he wasn't even doing anything dangerous!) and *wanting* to do something, something that would release the feelings from ME...but I don't b/c I don't want to hurt my boy, I know that it won't teach him anything good, and etc etc etc.


----------



## mollyeilis (Mar 6, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
I can't even imagine being scared of my parents. Maybe that's why I don't get quite as worked up about this as most posters here. A spanking just wasn't that big a deal - and hurt so much less than so many other things! I mean - a spanking didn't even come close to a bee sting or a skinned knee.

Have you ever asked your mom if she was really spanking you? If she was never hit and just thought it was something she *should* do, is it possible she wasn't putting much force into it?

I mean, I know skinned knees and bee stings hurt like anything, but I also know (when I was a teen my mom and I, who had tempers and were about the same size and height, used to get into stupid slap-fights, ugh







) that being hit with an open hand HURTS.

(edited to change fist to hand. if it's open, it's not a fist, of course. of course, nowadays, thanks to the 22 month old boy, I also know how much being hit with a *fist* hurts...sigh)


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Teensy*
But the oven - with a pot of boiling liquid in it!?!?!?! If he grabbed the pot and pulled it over on himself, can you imagine the potential burns.

That's what back burners are for.


----------



## sapphire_chan (May 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamaofthree*
Ok, so before this gets closed down... I want to make sure that everyone knows this IS NOT a pro-spanking thread. I started this mostly because I find that statement "It's Ok to spank when...." from people who normally wouldn't think of hitting their child. And what do you say to that??

As for the hitting an adult who may act like a child that is still illegal. And that is where the problem is. If you have an adult with the mental ablility of a 2 year old it is ILLEGAL to hit them, no matter how aggressive they get with you. So if we are going to be far, sure if a normally rational adult attacks you you defend yourself, BUT if a two year old (or an adult who is like a two year old) attacks you, you shouldn't hit them. One group it is against the law to hit, and one it is OK to hit. It is hameful, the double standard we have. And like I said, I am guilty of it. I would never hit an adult who was two mentally, but I did hit my dd when she was 2. Why?? Beacsue I could? Because if it was an adult I would see that they couldn't help themselves, but with my child I didn't think that?? That is why I am ashamed of myself. Because I should know better. I am the adult. I need to behave like it, not like another child getting mad.









H









I bet if you think about it now, you've been doing a great job at being the adult lately.


----------



## mollyeilis (Mar 6, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sapphire_chan*
That's what back burners are for.

"Grabbing the rack might be one thing, but if he grabbed the edge of a pot of chicken and dumplings or french onion soup and pulled it onto himself - the burns could be very serious."

I've never made those things, but from what she's saying, they go in the oven. They weren't ON the stove, but IN the oven, and he was trying to open the oven.

I'm not advocating the hand-slap, but clarifying what the situation actually was.


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

I was spanked as a child. My mom changed her mind when I was around 7 years old. So I was only spanked for part of my childhood. I have no problems from it. It was scary to see my mom out of control like that and of course it hurt. But I was not afraid of her or had a lesser relationship because of it.

BUT

That does not mean that I think spanking is OK under any circumstance. I have no way of knowing whether my child will be one that is negatively impacted by spanking. Some people are just more sensitive than others. I happen to not be one of those people. But many many others did have problem with "spanking out of love". I do not want to take ANY chance that a discipline tool I use disrupts the attachment with my child.

I do not think spanking parents that do not know better are bad people. Nor do I demonize the parent that is against spanking but looses control in a rare instance of terror or rage. While I have never spanked, I definately have done things against my ideal (such as a thinly veiled bribe) in moments of frustration so I can understand how it happens and sympathize with those individuals.

But I do think spanking can effect the feeling of unconditional love that children should have. Someone mentioned that their child questions their parents love when they *make* them take a nap, for instance. Well, I do not do that either. I try to avoid all situations where my child will think there is any chance I do not love her. But there is no question in my mind that hitting a child can lead to them questioning your love for them.

And you know what? I have the world's biggest daredevil of a child, but she has (over some patient days, weeks, or months) learned how to be safe around the stove, road, cliffs, etc..... And until she was, I just had to deal with the fact that I had to be 100% vigilant around those things. Why hit a child that opens an oven that is off? My dd likes to open the oven. I have no problem with it when it is off. Actually, I have no problem with it when it is on either as she has learned to handle the oven responsibly. But whatever the case is, it seems sort of fruitless to spank a child for touching something that is not even hot. What kind of lesson is that? Now the child is afraid he will get hit if he touches the oven, but other hot surfaces are apparently OK (until he gets spanked over them that is)? I think it is much more effective to explain (even if it takes time) the whys and hows. It is easier for the child to transfer that info to other situations where spanking is just black and white.


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
I'm not sure I really processed a spanking as being any different than a bee sting or stepping on a sharp rock. It was all mom's responsibility in my world. If I stepped on a sharp rock, I got cut. If I stuck a utensil in an electrical outlet, I got spanked...all the same thing.

As someone mentioned previously, I think your reaction and experience is the exception, not the rule. DH was spanked, and when I talk to him about it, he seems to have the "well, I must have deserved it" frame of mind, which really does make me sad, that a child would ever think they deserved to be hit.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
But, I'm not sure it works, so it would be pretty stupid to do it.

Now this we can agree on. I don't think it works either, or people who have hit their kids wouldn't ever worry about leaving their children unattended in questionable situations.









I guess it all comes down the the relationship you want to have with your child, and the goals you have for them as adults. I don't want my kid(s) to think I control everything in their world. I want them to know the difference between an accident (like a stubbed toe, or a bee sting), and any kind of limit I put on them to prevent them from hurting themselves (like holding hands when out in public, or staying away from the stove). I want them to know that I will do everything I can to protect them from harm, and not harm them intentionally myself; that I will advocate for them, but allow them to stand up for themselves too; and other things like this...but I don't want them to think I am the be all and end all of everything in their lives...they will see and know that I am imperfect and human, but do the best I can to treat them respectfully and lovingly. I can't see me hitting them, for any reason, as ever fitting into that kind of relationship. I want them to have a strong sense of internal motivation of right and wrong, as I won't always be there to help guide them, so I'm laying the groundwork now...and being in control doesn't have a lot to do with it.

As far as I'm concerned, it's just not OK for me to ever hit my child, just as much as it would not be OK to me for my husband to ever hit me. I didn't cover it as a point in any of my other posts, but the more I think about it, the more that simple fact bothers me...that I could have my husband thrown in jail because he hit me, but up to a point I could hit my children and it's legally OK. That is just wrong. If it's not OK to hit an adult unless in self defense, it certainly shouldn't be OK to hit a child...

I understand your point about children may be doling out more physical abuse that a parent tolerates from them than they would another adult, but following along that line of thinking, and rationalizing that since they don't have control over their aggression until later on makes it OK for you to hit them in the heat of the moment, or whenever, just doesn't make sense. It's two wrongs, which definitely don't make a right.

ITA with previous posters that have talked baout hittign your child when they were in danger to be more of a stress release for the parent than anything constructive to teach the child, too. Many good points raised here that I didn't touch on, and I've really enjoyed this thread.

Oh, and for the record, I am not a person who thinks that hitting is never OK. You can bet your bottom dollar I would bring out a can of whup a## on anyone who threatened my life or my children's lives or well being. But self defense, to me, is a completely different situation than me whacking my kid because I was scared they might get burned. WORLDS apart.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *donosmommy04*
I don't want my kid(s) to think I control everything in their world. I want them to know the difference between an accident (like a stubbed toe, or a bee sting), and any kind of limit I put on them to prevent them from hurting themselves (like holding hands when out in public, or staying away from the stove).

I don't think my mom ever tried to give me the impression that she was in control of my world. She never had any hesitation about saying, "I don't know", or admitting that things happened that she couldn't see coming or wasn't expecting...or couldn't control. That was all _me_. She made the food, she washed the clothes, she put a roof over my head (I thought so, anyway), she knew when it would rain. When I was little, I practically thought she was God...and I don't think that's uncommon.

Quote:

but the more I think about it, the more that simple fact bothers me...that I could have my husband thrown in jail because he hit me, but up to a point I could hit my children and it's legally OK. That is just wrong. If it's not OK to hit an adult unless in self defense, it certainly shouldn't be OK to hit a child...

I understand your point about children may be doling out more physical abuse that a parent tolerates from them than they would another adult,
It's not just that we tolerate more from kids. It's that we more-or-less _have_ to tolerate more. If anybody else treated me the way dd does, they'd be out of my life - period. I'd dump a friend, kick out my dh...you name it. With dd, I can't even leave the house to cool off. Again, this isn't about "it's okay to spank", but the whole "they're so little, and we're so big - it's not like they can hurt us" thing drives me wild. DS1 almost broke my nose (accidentally!) on numerous occasions. DD has kicked me in a surgical (c-section) incision, twisted my ears, poked me in the eye, etc,. etc., etc. No - except once when she hurt ds2, I haven't hit her. I don't intend to. But, dealing with children is _not_ the same dynamic as dealing with an adult, so I don't accept that comparison.

Quote:

ITA with previous posters that have talked baout hittign your child when they were in danger to be more of a stress release for the parent than anything constructive to teach the child, too.
What about parents who already believe/know that they would hit in this situation, but haven't been in it yet? I don't think they're relieving stress ahead of time!

This has been a good thread for me. I've been enjoying the GD forum for months - it's an excellent resource. But, there's been something nagging at me, and this thread pulled it out into the light to look at. I'm still not on quite the same page re: spanking as most posters here, but now I know what's been bothering me, and it probably won't so much now.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Yooper*
Someone mentioned that their child questions their parents love when they *make* them take a nap, for instance. Well, I do not do that either. I try to avoid all situations where my child will think there is any chance I do not love her.

That was also me. I have two choices - make her take a nap, or spend about 6-8 hours/day doing damage control and fighting back the urge to yell and/or slap her. DD is absolutely INSANE when she doesn't get enough sleep. She doesn't make the connection, even though we've tried repeatedly to help her see it, but she's _very_ unhappy when she doesn't have her nap, which isn't good for her...and it's not good for anybody else in the house, either.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

I think that those of us who are advocates for better treatment of children sometimes over-emphasize the "damage" caused by punitive parenting. My parents only occasionally spanked me, and I actually don't remember its being that bad. They also did some other less-than-gd things like making me stand out in the cold for whining, that today I look back on and think "I can't believe they did that," but at the time I didn't think of as that bad. And these certainly weren't my worst childhood memories--if I'd had a choice between getting a spanking every day or going to school every day, you better believe I'd have taken the spanking.

I don't believe that spanking or punitive discipline permanently damages children, and I think this isn't a good argument for the children's rights side to make because most people can see that it's false and it hurts the credibility of the cause. But unfortunately, most people in our society have accepted unquestioningly the idea that the only moral constraint on the treatment of children is that which causes permanent damage--everything else is "personal choice." We do not apply the permanent damage standard to treatment of any other group of people besides children and, some people have argued, suspected terrorists. No one else. And, really, the permanent damage standard is hardly any standard at all. I could go up to any one of you and punch you in the nose, and unless I managed to hit you really really hard, you probably wouldn't be permanently damaged. But I don't think anyone would use that to say that I wouldn't be wrong to do that. People are incredibly resilient, and they can endure a lot of abuse without being permanently damaged. There should be a much higher standard for how we treat other people than simply not causing them permanent damage.

I don't think people who spank their children are bad people. I don't think my parents were bad people. I'm certainly not setting myself above them. We are all flawed individuals. But I am absolutely going to say that the action of hitting a child is always wrong. I would say that hitting another person, regardless of age, in any situation other than self-defense or defense of another person, is always wrong. It may be understandable and forgivable, someone who does it may still be a basically decent person, but the act itself is always wrong.

I have never hit either one of my children. I have hit a child exactly once in my life. This was several years ago before I was a parent. I was with my then-5-yr-old niece. I was under a lot of stress and had different things on my mind, and she came up behind me, grabbed my hand, and made this noise like a shrieking sound. It scared the crap out of me. I grabbed her hand and smacked her and yelled "Don't do that!" She got this horribly frightened look on her face and started crying, and I knew immediately that I had done something reprehensible. I picked her up and apologized to her and after a while she was fine. I could make all sorts of excuses for what I did--I didn't know about children, I was stressed, I acted without thinking--but the fact is that it was simply wrong. Immoral. Unethical. Inexcusable. There is no good reason to hit a child, ever.

I also don't agree that spanking doesn't work. Violence works, especially systematic abuse. There are a very few people who can resist this kind of abuse, but for most of us, if we are subjected to enough violence we will submit to just about anything. The only difference is how much violence is necessary to break the person. I do not doubt for a minute that children subjected to the kind of systemic abuse advocated by people like the Pearls do in fact end up in submission to their parents' will. But again, this doesn't make it right.

I would not say that spanking parent love their children less, but honestly I think that love is overrated. I know that's a controversial opinion, but I have seen some twisted stuff done in the name of love. I think a more pertinent issue is respect. I can't say that spanking is unloving, but it is certainly disrespectful. And it is emblematic of our society's disrespect for children as people. It is *illegal* to hit an adult. People go to jail for doing to adults what if done to children would be called "personal choice." Children, being smaller and more vulnerable, should be at least as protected from assault as adults, but the powers that be are more concerned with protecting parents' "choice."


----------



## Ruthla (Jun 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Brigianna*
I am absolutely going to say that the action of hitting a child is always wrong. I would say that hitting another person, regardless of age, in any situation other than self-defense or defense of another person, is always wrong. It may be understandable and forgivable, someone who does it may still be a basically decent person, but the act itself is always wrong.


----------



## mamaofthree (Jun 5, 2002)

Brigianna: WOW. Respect. That is right on. You hit the nail right on the head. It isn't whether you love them or not... but respect.

H


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Stormbride:

I can understand the need to defend your mom against a general statement about spankers that you think is unfair.

I also think the ability to recognize the terrible damage spanking has done to so many others here is important. You have posted so much that seems to indicate viewing spankers harshly is an excessive posture to take.

I have seen this in discussions on race and various other topics in which an accepted form of treatment within society caused great harm to be done to individuals.

When a person thinks "Hey, it wasn't so bad for me, really, what's the big deal?", they need to look around and consider "Maybe there is more to this, and I need to keep listening, instead of persuading people away from their anger".

Or if not, accept you have the entire country to agree with you that spanking isn't so terrible, and accept that this a place where we can safely say "It's terrible".


----------



## illinoismommy (Apr 14, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *taz925*
I think that needs to be said again. We need to guide them not punish them.

Doreen

I agree.... we need to guide them not punish. Too many parents think parenting is all about punishment and they can't learn without it, but what children really need is us to help them learn to make wise decisions on their own-- and spanking does not accomplish this goal.


----------



## snugg_bug (Nov 21, 2005)

I just want to initiate this by saying that I love my parents, and I know that they did the best job they could, with what they knew, at the time we were growing up.

My siblings and I, were spanked when we were children. I remember it quite clearly. I remember feeling that I should avoid getting my parents angry. I did not respect the rules, I feared my parents. As I grew older, and as life happens, I got into trouble, I did not go to them. I honestly felt that because I had done something wrong, that I was going to get hit. I once got into an accident driving my fathers snowmobile. He nearly stripped me a new skin. I had been hurt and scared and he was upset because I nearly got killed - but I did not realize this till I was an adult. As a young teen, I believed he was angry because I crashed his machine. I never went to my parents as a soft place to land when I was in trouble.

I know that ppl beleive that spanking serves a purpose in some situations, but children live in the moment, and when the are being hit, they are frightened that the person they love and trust the most, has now put them in a very uncomfortable and hurtful (physically and emotionally) situation. We are the only living beings that do this to our young.


----------



## CaraboosMama (Mar 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Teensy*
So when I slapped his hand, I wasn't trying to punish him - I was trying as efficiently as possible to keep him from doing something dangerous again. I guess I'd compare it more to Anne Sullivan teaching Helen Keller that something was dangerous. Scream and yell instead? Well, unfortunately I also tend to do that when the boys poured paint on my carpet or deliberately peed on the furniture - so I'm not sure that would have been the best deterent.

I am far from a perfect parent and there are many things I feel guilty about - but acting on my natural instinct and slapping DSs hand in that instance is not one of them.

This makes me very sad







Why do you think slapping was your natural instinct? Perhaps because you were parented the same way? I am not trying to judge you - I just wanted to add another perspective. While I don't think that it is necessary that you feel guilty about the slapping (or screaming or yeling for that matter) I don't think you see what a big deal it really is. Violence in any form in your home is going to erode the trust between you and your kids. period. If you are interested in some more info on this - check out

www.stophitting.org

and

www.nospank.net

I believe that a commitment to nonviolence in your home is one of the greatest gifts you can give your child.


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
Again, this isn't about "it's okay to spank", but the whole "they're so little, and we're so big - it's not like they can hurt us" thing drives me wild. DS1 almost broke my nose (accidentally!) on numerous occasions. DD has kicked me in a surgical (c-section) incision, twisted my ears, poked me in the eye, etc,. etc., etc. No - except once when she hurt ds2, I haven't hit her. I don't intend to. But, dealing with children is _not_ the same dynamic as dealing with an adult, so I don't accept that comparison.

Actually, for me it's not about size so much, as the emotional and social immaturity of a child. If it's not OK for me to hit an adult, a (assumed) fully functioning, emotionally developed, understanding the ways of the world adult, why on earth would it be OK for me to hit a child who has a very limited experience and existence on this planet? If anything, you should extend children a thousand times MORE leeway than an adult, since their brains haven't fully developed yet and they are learning about the world around them. Not to mention, even though they can in theory get in a good shot and hurt us when they're flailing, etc., they still *are* in general smaller, weaker, and less dextrous than adults.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
What about parents who already believe/know that they would hit in this situation, but haven't been in it yet? I don't think they're relieving stress ahead of time!

I believe that people that plan on hitting their children before hand ina certain situation, or hit them after they calm down, are just plain wrong. Hitting in anger or fear can almost be understandable as it's like a visceral reaction, but hitting when you're calm, or planning ahead to hit your child for some infraction you deem 'suitable' is just creepy, as far as I'm concerned. It's 2 different situations, 2 different reactions behind it - I meant for the people who lose it and hit their kids when they were in danger, it's more about the pareng releasing their fear than what the child did.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Storm Bride*
I'm still not on quite the same page re: spanking as most posters here, but now I know what's been bothering me, and it probably won't so much now.

You know, I'm not on the same page as some people here, either...I think there is a very real difference between "spanking" and abuse, while many people here do not make a distinction and think that any form of spanking _is_ abuse. I think spanking is a really lousy way to parent, doesn't achieve anything except teaching your kid that hitting others is OK, is short-sighted in teaching children self-regulation and self discipline, and that it can cause real problems in the parent-child love relationship. But I do see occasional spanking as vastly different from serious, chronic child abuse where the child is routinely and repeatedly put in serious life threatening danger. I know I'm in the minority here with that opinion, but that's why it's an opinion. Spanking makes me cringe and feel sorry for the parent for not knowing there's a better way, and for the child for being hurt and learning that it's OK to hit others. Serious abuse makes me physically ill - I do have distinctly different physical reactions to them, and I don't know exactly where I draw the line, but my body knows. I don't think any form of hitting a loved one (except in self defense) is OK at ALL, but I don't lump it all together in the same category.

Anyway, good discussion all around here.


----------



## Mama2 '05'06 (Mar 5, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *donosmommy04*
My best answer to the stove situation is that kids don't think stoves love them, so if they get hurt by a stove it hurts, and then it's over...like any other accident they might have, stubbing their toe, etc. (albeit much more painful, and obviously I think it's the parent's responsibility to keep them away from a hot stove). Being hurt by someone you love, and who tells you they love you, however, has to be incredibly confusing for a child.










Even if I accidently hurt dd (pull her hair while combing or drop something and it hits her when she's playing by my feet) She KNOWS the difference!! And she isn't easily consoled if I've done something that hurt her. She touched my hot rollers while I was putting them in even though I'd been saying "hot, no, it will hurt you" and moving her hand away, she touched it when I wasn't looking at her.







I picked her up and comforted her saying "hot,owwie". She didn't cry long and she's never even reached for them again. I can't see how spanking teaches a child anything other than that its ok to hit someone.


----------



## Titus2WannaBe (Apr 19, 2006)

I am curious to know from those who have posted that they incorporate hysterics/yelling during child training, would you say that your home and children are peaceful? Or is discipline a constant struggle?

As well, how do you feel about screaming/yelling at children in relation to mother deafness (tuning out mother's cries after awhile)? Would quick rap on the leg be something more injurious than the emotional trauma of a mother who's tongue is out of control?

Sincerely wanting to know your thoughts







)


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama*
Stormbride:

I can understand the need to defend your mom against a general statement about spankers that you think is unfair.

I also think the ability to recognize the terrible damage spanking has done to so many others here is important. You have posted so much that seems to indicate viewing spankers harshly is an excessive posture to take.

I have seen this in discussions on race and various other topics in which an accepted form of treatment within society caused great harm to be done to individuals.

When a person thinks "Hey, it wasn't so bad for me, really, what's the big deal?", they need to look around and consider "Maybe there is more to this, and I need to keep listening, instead of persuading people away from their anger".

Or if not, accept you have the entire country to agree with you that spanking isn't so terrible, and accept that this a place where we can safely say "It's terrible".

I'm not trying to persuade people away from their anger. If anything, I'm trying to understand _why_ people were so affected by spankings. I just don't get why people have such a massive emotional reaction to them. (I'm also responding to various posts people have made to me. I do think the harsh viewpoint towards spankers on here is excessive, for reasons I've already mentioned here. I'm trying very hard to get a grasp on that viewpoint.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *donosmommy04*
Actually, for me it's not about size so much, as the emotional and social immaturity of a child. If it's not OK for me to hit an adult, a (assumed) fully functioning, emotionally developed, understanding the ways of the world adult, why on earth would it be OK for me to hit a child who has a very limited experience and existence on this planet? If anything, you should extend children a thousand times MORE leeway than an adult, since their brains haven't fully developed yet and they are learning about the world around them.

I definitely do extend children a thousand times (at least) more leeway than an adult. If an adult did any of the things that my children have done to me, and I had no way to leave (as with children, when there's no other adult around), I'd probably beat them into next week. I don't have any problem with hitting someone in self-defense, and if an adult were doing these things to me, I'd have to defend myself. The only point I was making is that children aren't adults, so I don't think analogies about hitting adults vs. hitting kid make any sense.

Quote:

I believe that people that plan on hitting their children before hand ina certain situation, or hit them after they calm down, are just plain wrong. Hitting in anger or fear can almost be understandable as it's like a visceral reaction, but hitting when you're calm, or planning ahead to hit your child for some infraction you deem 'suitable' is just creepy, as far as I'm concerned. j
What "infraction"? I was talking mostly about the "hitting kids when they're doing something dangerous" thing. I don't know anybody who does that because they consider the dangerous behaviour to be some kind of infraction. It's not a punishment.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Titus2WannaBe*
I am curious to know from those who have posted that they incorporate hysterics/yelling during child training, would you say that your home and children are peaceful? Or is discipline a constant struggle?

As well, how do you feel about screaming/yelling at children in relation to mother deafness (tuning out mother's cries after awhile)? Would quick rap on the leg be something more injurious than the emotional trauma of a mother who's tongue is out of control?

Sincerely wanting to know your thoughts







)

I don't think hysterics and yelling should be incorporated into discipline, but if the mother is sincerely upset about something, I don't always think it's necessary to put up a false front of calm. I'm not talking about totally losing it, but just being visibly upset. I don't think it's harmful for a child to see that sometimes things upset people. But there's a big difference between that and yelling/hysterics as part of discipline.

I think hitting a child and using hysterics to discipline a child are both wrong. But a child who never ever sees his mama get upset might have a harder time learning about feelings and how to express himself without losing it.

Also, a brief tip: some people on this site consider the word "training" objectionable.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

'm not trying to persuade people away from their anger. If anything, I'm trying to understand why people were so affected by spankings. I just don't get why people have such a massive emotional reaction to them. (I'm also responding to various posts people have made to me. I do think the harsh viewpoint towards spankers on here is excessive, for reasons I've already mentioned here. I'm trying very hard to get a grasp on that viewpoint.
Okay. If you don't understand why people were so affected by spankings, isn't it premature to imply their attitude towards spankers is excessive?

There are several good books on the topic of spanking effects. You might scroll the GD book post at the top of the page and see if they are listed there, or run an amazon search for books on this topic.


----------



## Titus2WannaBe (Apr 19, 2006)

How funny that some have an adverse reaction to the word "training"...what exactly do they think parenting incorporates? Whether intentional or unintentional, parenting a child will involuntarily mean that they are "trained" in the fashion of the homes atmosphere and the convictions of the parent/s.

Their mentality is akin to saying that "There are no absolutes."...which is an absolute statement. I would much prefer to direct a child in the most beneficial of ways rather then leaving their "training" to culture and all of the other influences that would be more than happy to market and sell them on THEIR ideals.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Titus2WannaBe*
How funny that some have an adverse reaction to the word "training"...what exactly do they think parenting incorporates? Whether intentional or unintentional, parenting a child will involuntarily mean that they are "trained" in the fashion of the homes atmosphere and the convictions of the parent/s.

Their mentality is akin to saying that "There are no absolutes."...which is an absolute statement. I would much prefer to direct a child in the most beneficial of ways rather then leaving their "training" to culture and all of the other influences that would be more than happy to market and sell them on THEIR ideals.

I know what you mean and I agree with you. I am not offended by the word "training" which basically means the same thing as teaching or discipline. I was just pointing out that some people object to it and you might want to use a different word on this site so people don't misunderstand you. Apparently "training" has a connotation of certain child-torture fetishists.


----------



## Storm Bride (Mar 2, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama*
Okay. If you don't understand why people were so affected by spankings, isn't it premature to imply their attitude towards spankers is excessive?

There are several good books on the topic of spanking effects. You might scroll the GD book post at the top of the page and see if they are listed there, or run an amazon search for books on this topic.

I've read lots of stuff about spanking effects. Without exception, everything I've read has either been loaded with "maybe", "could", and such _or_ has referred consistently to something far beyond a spanking. Maybe I'm just defining my terms differently or something. (For instance, anything that leaves a bruise or a welt goes well beyond a spanking and into a beating.)

And, no - I don't think it's premature to imply their attitude towards spankers is excessive. I've seen many, many absolute statements made on this forum about spankers and spankees - they don't apply to my mom, or me. They don't apply to another relative of mine who spanks her kids. But, if I come here and say that spanking didn't affect me like that, I get told I'm somehow "exceptional". I've seen many, many anti-spank posts (and other websites) that simply dismiss anybody who says that spanking didn't have all these horrible effects on them. We're lying, or in denial, or self-deluded, or something. Being anti-spanking is one thing (as I said, I don't spank my kids, myself), but that doesn't mean that other people's experiences are invalid, just because they simply weren't that negative.

Anyway...I'm going to gracefully (at least as gracefully as possible after a dozen or so "dissenting" posts) bow out of this. It's obviously something that I see quite differently from most posters. At least I've identified the aspect of this forum that makes me so uneasy...now I'll get back to my focus on using it as a parenting resource and "help line".


----------



## alley cat (Mar 18, 2006)

I have a very nasty memory from my childhood that affects me to this day. I ran across the road in front of my uncles car , I was happy to see them and was just running to greet them. I got in the house and got beaten within an inch of my life with a stick end of a feather duster. I was so shocked and didn't even know what I had done wrong. Now my cousin the son of my uncle had been hit and killed by a car a few months earlier so my parents reaction or over reaction was the result of fear of the same thing happening to me. But it has really really affected me I have some strong gut feelings of angry / hurt betrayal all these years later. I was about 5 . How much nicer it would have been and more loving if they had put me in their arms told me how scared they were and how much they loved me and didn't want to see me hurt.
I have mentioned this incident to my mother a number of times [ she was the beater] and have never been apologised to just told that it was a response to what had happened to my cousin. This has damaged my relationship with my parents along with other incidences as a child [this is the one I remember the most]
My response to my children is that a car will hurt them and they will have big oww's and I love them and don't want to see them hurt. I have never needed to use harsh methods on them.
I did smack my dd in the early days before I started to have doubts and have lost it one with my son, never ever again.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

How funny that some have an adverse reaction to the word "training"...what exactly do they think parenting incorporates?

Teaching.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

I've seen many, many anti-spank posts (and other websites) that simply dismiss anybody who says that spanking didn't have all these horrible effects on them. We're lying, or in denial, or self-deluded, or something.
Maybe "we" are.

I hear you saying that you dislike people who claim that spanking is a big deal and who say you are exceptional to think it is not. However you have repeatedly said that people who think spanking is a big deal are self deluded, over the top, even "lying" and "in denial".

Do you see you are doing the very thing you claim to dislike in others here?

Anyway I see you are leaving the thread.

Personally I do not think the message " spanking is wrong" can be stated too strongly in the United States. Spanking is rampant in this country. I have read that fewer than 1% of U.S. parents surveyed claim to never have spanked.

The research on spanking that I have read is far from wishy washy. It was compelling enough to persuade (8?) goverments in various countries to ban it completely.


----------



## Titus2WannaBe (Apr 19, 2006)

With respect to preferred verbage, it may do everyone well to look at the meanings of the words they choose to use in child rearing.

From the dictionary:

teaching
1.To impart knowledge or skill to:
2.To provide knowledge of; instruct in:.
3.To condition to a certain action or frame of mind:
4.To cause to learn by example or experience:
5.To advocate or preach:
6.To carry on instruction on a regular basis in:

training
1.To coach in or accustom to a mode of behavior or performance.
2.To make proficient with specialized instruction and practice.
3.To prepare physically, as with a regimen:
4.To focus on or aim at (a goal, mark, or target); direct.

Obviously, parenting requires both teaching and training; however with regard to "running into the street" it may do well for parents to actually train a child rather than to soley teach them. Teaching has the conotation of passing along knowledge and training relates to actual physical behavioral instruction, practice and focus.

In "training" my children years ago, when they were small, in relation to staying out of the street I took time to show them what happens to bugs when we step on them and correlated the result with what would happen to people if they are hit by a car. Of course, this made a more lasting impression than yelling, hysterics or spanking.

I made an intentional choice to not resort to hysterics and yelling as it is my deepest heart to leave as few emotional wounds by the careless words that unfortunately grow in my heart and escape via my tongue as I possibly can.

The point in "training" little ones is just that...you do not wait to scream at an infant heading to the stairs while you are busy in the kitchen, resorting to anger and violent tones. You take time when the house is calm to teach them to stay away from danger. Yet this requires time and patience...which in todays culture we have been told do not hold value with regard to children. It also requires knowing ahead of time that a 2 or 3 year old will not instinctually know that things can hurt.

Honestly, sweet ladies the time put into the many entries could be better used to "train" your precious babies. I do not think it necessary to go into spanking vs not spanking, rather the discussion could be better used to offer younger mothers, who are ready to "throw in the towel", effective training techniques to help bring peace to the home and in turn, unite the hearts of the ones within the family.

After all, what many mothers long for are well behaved children who do not exhaust their mommies by constantly testing the boundaries and pushing for their way. Rather for peaceful times together to enjoy one another's company, activities and relationship.

This only comes from intentional training, teaching and setting firm boundaries so that the child can relax in the concrete structure of the parent's leadership. Much like children on a playground will huddle in the center when there is no fence surrounding for protection ~ once the fence is in place the children feel free to run, explore and pursue the adventures of childhood.

Young mothers, do not be afraid to set boundaries, train and teach your children. They are yours and they truly long for the protection of your loving leadership.

My heart...


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

After all, what many mothers long for are well behaved children who do not exhaust their mommies by constantly testing the boundaries and pushing for their way. Rather for peaceful times together to enjoy one another's company, activities and relationship.

This only comes from intentional training, teaching and setting firm boundaries so that the child can relax in the concrete structure of the parent's leadership.
For me it came from living joyfully myself, and realizing children are not obligated to "be" a certain way in order for me to feel rested and joyful.

Also, it has been very helpful for me to re evaluate my idea's about "testing boundaries" and "Pushing for their way" as being wrong or undesirable.

Quote:

I do not think it necessary to go into spanking vs not spanking, rather the discussion could be better used to offer younger mothers, who are ready to "throw in the towel", effective training techniques to help bring peace to the home and in turn, unite the hearts of the ones within the family.
It isn't necessary to go into spanking vs/ not spanking because this forum has already stated that spanking is unacceptable as a form of discipline.

Otherwise, I think it's very necessary to look at the ways in which one will "train" a child, and decide whether they are truly respectful, non violent, and, in the case of this forum, a part of Gentle Discipline.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Titus2WannaBe*
Much like children on a playground will huddle in the center when there is no fence surrounding for protection ~ once the fence is in place the children feel free to run, explore and pursue the adventures of childhood.

They do? I'm sorry but this really stood out at me--I have never seen or heard of this phenomenon. Are you basing this on personal experience?

I understand what you're saying about training and to a certain extent I agree with you but this example just seemed really off to me. And I don't think of training as being like a fence to confine them, but an awareness of life and the world. I don't train my children to fence them in but to set them free.


----------



## Titus2WannaBe (Apr 19, 2006)

I'm sorry for the confusion about the fencing; there was a study done with elementary school children on their playground. The fence had been removed (to be replaced with a new one) and while the fence was obsolete the children huddled in the center of the playground; they were afraid of the busy cars on the street, strangers, etc...and rightfully so! However, once the fence was rebuilt the children ran and played, in the yard of the playground as well as on the equiptment, in what they considered a safe environment because of the protective boundary provided by the fence.

In relation to children, boundaries provide freedom...contrary to popular thought. Much like you and I can sleep better (although not completely free from fear) at night because we know that our society has "boundaries" intact for those who would prefer your items of choice over their own. Not everyone stays in these boundaries and cause those of us who do to suffer the pain of their poor choices.

Children who are trained to remain in the boundaries set for them can "color" from a huge box of crayons (choices) on the palate of freedom. Children can be peaceful and delightful when we realize the following:

1. They are indeed children

2. Set realistic expectations for their ages ~ many times a mother's frustrations heighten when she sets the bar too high. Example ~ A mother forgets that a toddler may be excited to visit the street and resolves to hysterics when the wee one toddles over to see what there is to see. Reasonable expectations would tell her that a toddler has very little abstract reasoning skills and that she is the only one who has the passion of a mother to protect him from harm and in turn must train him.

3. We are indeed parents and not absolved from the responsibility of training and teaching their little hearts.

It is a rare occasion to meet humble, kind hearted children who are ready to serve and love others with a happy heart. Fortunately, my husband and I are honored to raise three people who live, laugh and love in our home. We make many mistakes, but with deligence, consistency and plenty of asking for forgiveness, we have found them to be a joy.

As I was with my daughter at a function recently, with over 100 other little preteen girls, I was amazed when she asked me to come and sit with her and her friends to eat pizza and talk. I hesitantly sat down and listened. What I heard was , "Where is your mom?", "Oh, I don't know...that's the best part of this whole thing...you can lose your mom.", "Yeah, no moms." replied the little girl who started the conversation. Turning to look at my daughter I saw that she was near to tears. She whispered, "Oh mommy, I WANT you here with me. Why don't they want their moms? You're my friend."

My only conclusion is that I have tried to develop relationship with this little woman twirling around my livingroom and to train her to love others (even her momma







) ...and that more than likely many of these little girl's moms have chosen to let them focus on themselves and what a group of preteens thinks is "cool". I much prefer her to have relationship (and a few good friends) with me and seek me for advice than that of a group of prepubescent girls.

In closing, I can say from the heart that I have seen the sweetness that comes from children who are trained, with love, to be a blessing to those around them and not self-focused and absorbed with their own desires. Selfishness is a common thread in today's youth, and adults, and one that will break the hearts of the parents more so when the child is full grown. Lifting their little heads in childhood to see that we are better people when we are "trained" and "taught" to think of others above ourselves produces amazing little people who grow into amazing adults.

This will be my last post, as I am pretty sure that I've gotten off subject! And I still have the pleasure of children in my home and I can already tell that as a woman, I would much prefer to sit here and spout off my supposed "wisdom" only to waste the fleeting time that I enjoy spending with my children and husband.







)

Good luck everyone!


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Titus2WannaBe*
I'm sorry for the confusion about the fencing; there was a study done with elementary school children on their playground. The fence had been removed (to be replaced with a new one) and while the fence was obsolete the children huddled in the center of the playground; they were afraid of the busy cars on the street, strangers, etc...and rightfully so! However, once the fence was rebuilt the children ran and played, in the yard of the playground as well as on the equiptment, in what they considered a safe environment because of the protective boundary provided by the fence.

In relation to children, boundaries provide freedom...contrary to popular thought. Much like you and I can sleep better (although not completely free from fear) at night because we know that our society has "boundaries" intact for those who would prefer your items of choice over their own. Not everyone stays in these boundaries and cause those of us who do to suffer the pain of their poor choices.

Children who are trained to remain in the boundaries set for them can "color" from a huge box of crayons (choices) on the palate of freedom. Children can be peaceful and delightful when we realize the following:

1. They are indeed children

2. Set realistic expectations for their ages ~ many times a mother's frustrations heighten when she sets the bar too high. Example ~ A mother forgets that a toddler may be excited to visit the street and resolves to hysterics when the wee one toddles over to see what there is to see. Reasonable expectations would tell her that a toddler has very little abstract reasoning skills and that she is the only one who has the passion of a mother to protect him from harm and in turn must train him.

3. We are indeed parents and not absolved from the responsibility of training and teaching their little hearts.

It is a rare occasion to meet humble, kind hearted children who are ready to serve and love others with a happy heart. Fortunately, my husband and I are honored to raise three people who live, laugh and love in our home. We make many mistakes, but with deligence, consistency and plenty of asking for forgiveness, we have found them to be a joy.

As I was with my daughter at a function recently, with over 100 other little preteen girls, I was amazed when she asked me to come and sit with her and her friends to eat pizza and talk. I hesitantly sat down and listened. What I heard was , "Where is your mom?", "Oh, I don't know...that's the best part of this whole thing...you can lose your mom.", "Yeah, no moms." replied the little girl who started the conversation. Turning to look at my daughter I saw that she was near to tears. She whispered, "Oh mommy, I WANT you here with me. Why don't they want their moms? You're my friend."

My only conclusion is that I have tried to develop relationship with this little woman twirling around my livingroom and to train her to love others (even her momma







) ...and that more than likely many of these little girl's moms have chosen to let them focus on themselves and what a group of preteens thinks is "cool". I much prefer her to have relationship (and a few good friends) with me and seek me for advice than that of a group of prepubescent girls.

In closing, I can say from the heart that I have seen the sweetness that comes from children who are trained, with love, to be a blessing to those around them and not self-focused and absorbed with their own desires. Selfishness is a common thread in today's youth, and adults, and one that will break the hearts of the parents more so when the child is full grown. Lifting their little heads in childhood to see that we are better people when we are "trained" and "taught" to think of others above ourselves produces amazing little people who grow into amazing adults.

This will be my last post, as I am pretty sure that I've gotten off subject! And I still have the pleasure of children in my home and I can already tell that as a woman, I would much prefer to sit here and spout off my supposed "wisdom" only to waste the fleeting time that I enjoy spending with my children and husband.







)

Good luck everyone!

Okay it is a little off topic, but if you get a chance I would love to discuss this issue with you on a separate thread. I am a little skeptical of extrapolating from the fence story--in that specific case I can see why they would have reacted that way because they were used to the fence being there and then one day it wasn't. But I suspect that if there had never been a fence there, they would have learned the boundaries of the playground and would have run and played the same as the fence kids. And I would ask, what was the purpose of the fence, to keep the kids in or to keep strangers out? Was it a *fence* fence that they couldn't cross or was it more of a symbolic fence to show where the playground boundaries were? Even if it's not significant to that actual case I think it's relevant in the symbolic sense that you're meaning.

Now I agree with you about selfishness being a common problem, but I'm not sure we can teach/train people not to be selfish. We have to model it and let it influence our daily lives.

And I agree that boundaries provide freedom, not for us but for other people. If I'm not misremembering it I think this is called positive freedom and negative freedom--positive freedom being the right to make our own choices and do what we want, and negative freedom being the right to be protected from violence and harm. And of course without negative freedom, positive freedom is meaningless.

Where I think I would disagree with you--and please correct me if I'm wrong--is that it seems like you're conflating arbitrary boundaries of authority with the boundaries relating to the natural order and other people's negative freedom. The reason I say that is because there would seem to be a sort of "because I said so" element to the training you're advocating, which is not based on any natural order. Which is why I support training of infants and toddlers but not older children capable of understanding rational thought and learning about the natural order on their own. Because as I understand it one of the purposes of early training is to improve the chances of living harmoniously and consentually later on. So there should be an end goal to all of this training, not just for the sake of doing so. Am I making any sense?

That is a beautiful story about sitting with your dd and the other girls.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

It is a rare occasion to meet humble, kind hearted children who are ready to serve and love others with a happy heart.
I would like to ask if you spank or use other methods of physical punishment?


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

Which is why I support training of infants and toddlers but not older children capable of understanding rational thought and learning about the natural order on their own. Because as I understand it one of the purposes of early training is to improve the chances of living harmoniously and consentually later on.
Training infants so they are conditioned to be "harmonious" later on is aggressively promoted by the No Greater Joy and Growing Kids Gods Way groups. It might not be intentional, but you are saying things here that echo the underlying philosophy of Gary Ezzo and Michael Pearl so strongly, I honestly feel bad that you may not realize how controversial your statement reads. Even if you have found a "gentle" way to use the concept of infant training and conditioning, the above statement is incompatible with attachment parenting and gentle discipline. I can't imagine Peggy O' Mara agreeing with this, let alone Sears, Kohn, Holt, or anyone else who has defined ap and gd?


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama*
Training infants so they are conditioned to be "harmonious" later on is aggressively promoted by the No Greater Joy and Growing Kids Gods Way groups. It might not be intentional, but you are saying things here that echo the underlying philosophy of Gary Ezzo and Michael Pearl so strongly, I honestly feel bad that you may not realize how controversial your statement reads. Even if you have found a "gentle" way to use the concept of infant training and conditioning, the above statement is incompatible with attachment parenting and gentle discipline. I can't imagine Peggy O' Mara agreeing with this, let alone Sears, Kohn, Holt, or anyone else who has defined ap and gd?

I don't follow the child-torture fetishists. If they say things like that then they're lying. They're using Orwellian language to make child torture seem harmonious. There is nothing harmonious about beating infants with plumbing pipes. That is not their underlying philosophy. Their underlying philosophy is to cause pain for young children because they hate them. What little of their "philosophy" I read made it clear to me that they are simply an anti-child hate group, the same as any ethnic hate group or anything else.

I have never punished my children. Not ever. Not once in their little lives. In the case of my 6 yr old it has literally been months since I have corrected or disciplined her with anything other than a verbal reminder or request. I have to be a little more proactive with my 3 yr old since he has a shorter attention span. But I have never ever punished them. Training is *not* the same as punishment. And it is certainly not the same as lunatic fringe sociopathic child-torture-loving totalitarian Dominionists.

And you can not "condition" people to be harmonious. It is a state of mind. It can only be taught in a gentle environment with loving examples. People can be beaten into submission but they can't be beaten into harmony or love.

I'm sorry and I'm sure you didn't mean it this way but honestly your post really offended me. I have worked so hard not only to be good to my own children but to advocate for all children. I have preached in word and in deed the benefits of ap at our church and cpc. I have written every elected representative I have to try to ban corporal punishment in schools. I have lobbied and marched for a cleaner environment and safer food for our children. I have written articles and letters about how treatment of children is the greatest moral issue of our time. I have constantly advocated a permanent revolution in the way we think of children and child-rearing. There is *nothing* inconsistent about ap and teaching children to live harmoniously. Nothing at all.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

I am not criticizing you as a parent or citizen. I am pointing out that the terminology you have used in this forum is controversial at least and offensive at worst. I realize this is unintentional. However, it has been pointed out repeatedly. I am sorry you feel misunderstood.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

Child-torture fetishists do not have a monopoly on wanting to teach children to live harmoniously. You said that this was "incompatible with attachment parenting and gentle discipline." I have never read anything from any ap source indicating that teaching children to live harmoniously was incompatible with ap. I did not advocate any kind of "conditioning." It is only controversial if you are reading into it something that isn't there.

You may not have intended to criticize me as a parent or citizen but you were saying that my teaching my children to live harmoniously was echoing the philosophy of child-torture fetishists. I believe that that is an unfair characterization compared to what I was actually saying.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

If I use terminology offensive to a group, I can either accept it and find more agreeable ways to express my ideas, or I can continue, and possibly risk the kind of personalization of the controversy which you are doing now. It isn't about you. However you have repeatedly used terminology here that is offensive. "Infant Training" and "Blanket Training" in particular. Some phrases are too controversial for us to sit back and claim for our own personal self expression without accepting the reality of how those words are commonly intended and used. I don't know you, and I assume you have invented your own philosophy around these phrases with the best of intentions. What that philosophy might be has been difficult to pin down, although many have tried, including yourself, to make sense of it here. An obvious reason for the repeated misunderstanding is that every time you use these phrases, the context shifts enough to make it sound alarming or confusing all over again.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

I am not trying to use misleading language. But if the child-torture types are describing beating babies as "training them to be harmonious" then honestly they are the ones misusing language, not me. Unless someone were familiar in advance with child-torture code words I don't see why they would interpret "one of the purposes of early training is to improve the chances of living harmoniously and consentually later on" as talking about conditioning or something negative or anti-ap.

I'm sorry I overreacted to your post. But it just reminded me of so many other discussions where I've tried to say something I thought was reasonable and gotten responses of "that sounds somewhat similar to something these other people might say and they advocate something that's bad therefore you're wrong." This line of argument makes no sense to me.

I am sorry but I do think you really have to be stretching and looking for something to interpret wanting to live "harmoniously and consensually" as having anything to do with whatever Ezzo and company are advocating.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

If reclaiming phrases like "infant training" and "blanket training" from the Ezzo-ites and the Pearls is your mission, then it is. It might be possible you have misunderstood the history and intensity over these phrases in the board culture here. These are very loaded statements. You couldn't do much worse if you stepped into a racial discussion and used a term that was deeply controversial, insisting you were "reclaiming it's original meaning back from the racists". Objectively it might be a noble goal, but the reality is that you are going to confuse and offend a whole lot of people in the process.

Please do not underestimate the widespread understanding of terms like "Blanket training" and "Infant Training". When you use them casually, it actually appears that you are promoting the very things you oppose. *I* realize you do not mean it this way. However the last paragraph written by you that I quoted, when read without any prior knowledge of your idea's, reads almost verbatim like a public relations blurb for Babywise. "Train your infant now, so that he is a joy to you later!". This is a giant board with a huge public readership. If you want to use these phrases, is there a way to do it without causing controversy? I don't see it, but maybe you do.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

I'm not trying to reclaim the terms. I don't know what terms are used by these people. I don't read their stuff. I read part of "Babywise," saw it was evil hateful child-torturing crap and didn't investigate further. I knew about No Greater Joy from their non-parenting, semi-resonable pieces and while I knew they advocated spanking I only recently learned how evil they were. I only learned last week that blanket-training was advocated by Ezzo and that his version involved beating. Nobody I know irl uses these fringe child-torture things, even the strict punitive mainstream people.

Also I agree that saying "train your infant now so that he is a joy to you later" sounds creepy because it's not babies' job to bring joy to adults. But what I said was training children to live consensually and harmoniously, which I think is quite different.

I am pretty sensitive to language but honestly if you hadn't said so I would never have known that training a child to live harmoniously was associated with child-torture fetishists because it sounds like the complete opposite of what they really advocate.

In fact it's sort of funny to me that you used the word "misunderestimate" which has a certain negative connotation to me and a lot of people. But I wouldn't assume that just because you used that word that you share the opinions of the politician I associate it with.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Double post


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

(It was a typo, sorry, I went back and fixed it. Thanks for pointing it out!)

I feel like you are trying to convince me these words are not controversial, or that if they are, they shouldn't be. I'm not sure what I can say to you. You have a lot of other people to convince.


----------



## lilylove (Apr 10, 2003)

Please try to keep off-topic posting to a minimum

Thanks


----------



## vermonttaylors (May 17, 2005)

My in-laws have one of those fake gas "wood stoves" and my ds put his hand on the glass and suddenly started screaming. There were no flames, but it was still hot (I felt so horrible, we were both crying). Anyway, his hand blistered, but it healed quickly and he is really careful around woodstoves now. He gets it. His little sister also understands that the stove is HOT, and she can't touch it, mostly by the panicked look on my face when she toddles toward it.

Kids are not stupid. They don't want to get hurt. They don't need to be hit in order to understand something is dangerous. I will NEVER understand why people think they do.


----------



## TinkerBelle (Jun 29, 2005)

Quote:

As someone else mentioned, if spanking "worked", then it would only need to be done once and the child would have 'learned their lesson'
Not defending spanking, of course, but couldn't the same thing be said for people who use full-on GD? Or any other discipline method?


----------



## snugg_bug (Nov 21, 2005)

While visiting Japan last year, where my SIL has resided for the past 12 years as a teacher - I was fascinated to learn that the Japanese do not discipline their children till they reach the age when they start schooling. The believe that the children should be allowed to be children. It may sound impossible to never discipline and they suddenly start at age 3 or 4, but there, it works.


----------



## snugg_bug (Nov 21, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TinkerBelle*
Not defending spanking, of course, but couldn't the same thing be said for people who use full-on GD? Or any other discipline method?

Actually, I think that is the point. If any form of discipline is going to have to be repeated over and over again until the child finally gets it, then why go the route of using violence, when in fact, it could have some very negative long-term effects? Using GD, although it may not be effective in the immediate, will not have a potentially negative outcome.


----------



## The4OfUs (May 23, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *snugg_bug*
Actually, I think that is the point. If any form of discipline is going to have to be repeated over and over again until the child finally gets it, then why go the route of using violence, when in fact, it could have some very negative long-term effects? Using GD, although it may not be effective in the immediate, will not have a potentially negative outcome.









:.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama*
(It was a typo, sorry, I went back and fixed it. Thanks for pointing it out!)

I feel like you are trying to convince me these words are not controversial, or that if they are, they shouldn't be. I'm not sure what I can say to you. You have a lot of other people to convince.

I'm not saying they aren't or shouldn't be controversial. But anything can be controversial to someone. You seem to be acting on the assumption that the established meaning of these terms and concepts is the meaning in the context of the child-torture people; am I right? I do not believe that that is the established meaning based on the fact that I have never met even one person who uses those terms that way. And I am very sensitive to language issues but I wouldn't hold someone else accountable for saying something that could look bad if taken out of context.

I also think it's very unfair to say that gently training children to live harmoniously is incompatible with ap. I think it's part of the foundation of ap.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *vermonttaylors*
My in-laws have one of those fake gas "wood stoves" and my ds put his hand on the glass and suddenly started screaming. There were no flames, but it was still hot (I felt so horrible, we were both crying). Anyway, his hand blistered, but it healed quickly and he is really careful around woodstoves now. He gets it. His little sister also understands that the stove is HOT, and she can't touch it, mostly by the panicked look on my face when she toddles toward it.

Kids are not stupid. They don't want to get hurt. They don't need to be hit in order to understand something is dangerous. I will NEVER understand why people think they do.

I don't think this is universally true. Some kids don't really mind getting hurt--not seriously hurt of course, but moderately. I didn't mind much, and I would do fun stuff even if it meant getting hurt.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *snugg_bug*
While visiting Japan last year, where my SIL has resided for the past 12 years as a teacher - I was fascinated to learn that the Japanese do not discipline their children till they reach the age when they start schooling. The believe that the children should be allowed to be children. It may sound impossible to never discipline and they suddenly start at age 3 or 4, but there, it works.

Would you mind elaborating on this a little bit?


----------



## snugg_bug (Nov 21, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Brigianna*
Would you mind elaborating on this a little bit?

Your question prompted me to research this a little further. Here is one piece of information I found:

Quote:

_Japanese child-rearing philosophy has been more permissive since its origin in ancient Japanese folkways. In pre-modern Japanese folklore, children were thought to be close to the gods' world. An ancient Japanese saying, "nanatsu made ha kami no uchi [until seven years old, (children are) in the gods' domain]", reveals that the origin of this belief. Iijima (1991) laid out discussion on this theme in reviewing literature of Japanese folklore. According to Iijima (1991), with support of other pieces of literature in the field, the existence of children before seven (actually, before they turn six years old in the Western age counting system) is not regarded as of this side of the world, where living things reside, nor of the other side of the world; rather, children were thought to belong to subspace, or marginal space between the two worlds. Therefore, children were allowed to be free from any social restrictions. Formal initiations have been imposed after these years in the old Japanese folk society, taking the form of formal visit to local Shinto shrines, or being granted a membership of the children's group in the village._
I don't know if this is specific to what my sister-in-law was speaking of, however I will ask her as it does sound very similar. I observed that the Japanese culture is very ritualistic and that they have their own "coming of age" (similar to Western Catholicism Communion) ceremonies with children.


----------



## Brigianna (Mar 13, 2006)

That is interesting, especially about the children being of the gods' domain until age 7. In most of the Christian tradition 7 is considered the "age of reason" or when children are no longer completely innocent. I wonder if any other traditions have this significance to age 7... I'll have to look into that.

I'm still not clear on the no discipline/free of social restrictions thing though. I have a hard time imagining that parents would not try to teach their kids anything at all during this time. Or does that just refer to "formal" learning?


----------



## lilylove (Apr 10, 2003)

While cultural differences in discipline are very interesting, this thread is not about that. Please feel free to start a new thread.


----------



## snugg_bug (Nov 21, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Brigianna*
....I'm still not clear on the no discipline/free of social restrictions thing though. I have a hard time imagining that parents would not try to teach their kids anything at all during this time. Or does that just refer to "formal" learning?

I am not sure on the specifics of this. I can only speak on what I personally viewed during my 2 week stay there. I did meet alot of young children, and my SIL even had a party while I was there. I found the children to be very well adjusted, polite, extremely affectionate, mature and very laid back. The kids did not "act up" (not that I witnessed) and we had spent a day with many children at an activities centre as well. Perhaps, in some respects, children are very capable of learning purley based on observation? It is a very interesting subject matter to me. I am going to look into this further, I am curious to know if there have been studies done in this regard.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Quote:

I do not believe that that is the established meaning based on the fact that I have never met even one person who uses those terms that way.
Well, many people here have shared otherwise.

The mod has hinted we are going off topic.


----------



## georgia (Jan 12, 2003)

Ok, this mod is going to flat out state, not hint, that y'all are off-topic! Please start a new thread to discuss anything other than the original post's topic of (not) spanking in (except for) dangerous situations and the reasoning surrounding this concept.

When threads stay on topic, it makes this forum so much easier to navigate and perform searches







Thanks so much for your cooperation.


----------



## MommytoB (Jan 18, 2006)

From growing up in a spanking enviroment and other bad disciplines enviroment and only knowing that and not learning others I believe ppl do this because of a loss of control and do not know any other ways to discipline . I think alot ppl think kids are young adults than just kids trying to learn and reach out.

I know w/ my son I say b don't go pass the red and green pop machines .
he does really good w/ that


----------



## Peepsqueak (Jul 5, 2005)

I used to believe this too to get "immediate" results and due to emergency purposes. Actually I found to avoid this alternative (spanking), I just needed to keep my child out of the position to need this....in other words they do not have the opportunity to run in the street, etc. However, this is easier said than done.

Spankers generally have it as a "last resort", learning tool, or panic attack....either way, I feel prevention is the best cure.


----------

