Spanking children, is it wrong?

[darkmage099]

 

 

 

 

Guys, when I was a kid, my great grandmother and grandparents switched me. If you guys whine about spanking, I'd rather take a paddle (and oh, I've gotten it too!) over a switch. Those things HURT.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure what a switch is.. I know I got the belt when I was younger :ohnoes:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You know those things they use to roll roti (That Indian bread stuff). Yeah, well I used to get hit with that. It's like a wooden stick.

[gryphon618]

 

 

 

 

 

Guys, when I was a kid, my great grandmother and grandparents switched me. If you guys whine about spanking, I'd rather take a paddle (and oh, I've gotten it too!) over a switch. Those things HURT.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure what a switch is.. I know I got the belt when I was younger :ohnoes:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You know those things they use to roll roti (That Indian bread stuff). Yeah, well I used to get hit with that. It's like a wooden stick.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, my Mom said that she always got spanked by that from HER mom. Its always a part of "You-should-be-lucky-back-in-my-day..."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My brother smacked one of those on my head once. It HURT!

[SuziAngel]

I used to get a wire coat hanger on the back of my legs. :( Ouch!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

When I misbehaved in school I wouldn't dare tell my parents when I got home, because I knew the punishment Mum would give me would be far worse than anything from school.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nowadays, when a child misbehaves at school, the school staff will attempt to discipline him/her by telling them off and possibly giving a detention when they see fit. The child will then go home and complain to their parents. Many of the parents will then go to the school to complain about the "mistreatment" of their child.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And people wonder why the children of today are growing up thinking the world owes them a living.

[yomom1919]

I used to get a wire coat hanger on the back of my legs. :( Ouch!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

When I misbehaved in school I wouldn't dare tell my parents when I got home, because I knew the punishment Mum would give me would be far worse than anything from school.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nowadays, when a child misbehaves at school, the school staff will attempt to discipline him/her by telling them off and possibly giving a detention when they see fit. The child will then go home and complain to their parents. Many of the parents will then go to the school to complain about the "mistreatment" of their child.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And people wonder why the children of today are growing up thinking the world owes them a living.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Detention is a joke...

[Giordano]

 

 

 

Nowadays, when a child misbehaves at school, the school staff will attempt to discipline him/her by telling them off and possibly giving a detention when they see fit. The child will then go home and complain to their parents. Many of the parents will then go to the school to complain about the "mistreatment" of their child.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And people wonder why the children of today are growing up thinking the world owes them a living.

 

 

 

So ever true...the kid never did anything, its all the teacher's fault. Oooooooo

 

 

 

Sometimes I wish I was a teacher to show those kids a lesson, from first grade to twelfth. But then I'll get fired because of extreme violence. :-w

[Barihawk]

 

 

 

 

Guys, when I was a kid, my great grandmother and grandparents switched me. If you guys whine about spanking, I'd rather take a paddle (and oh, I've gotten it too!) over a switch. Those things HURT.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure what a switch is.. I know I got the belt when I was younger :ohnoes:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A switch is a really strong and thin branch from a small tree. Parents scored double punishment from them, because they would send the child out to the tree to pick the switch.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My dad got it that way on the farm. I'm lucky he used a paddle on me. The sheer intimidation factor was enough to keep me in line.

[Flametrooper]

Yes, most people at my middle school today are, indeed, the sort of person who should have been spanked when they were younger.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I never was - my mom was always very anti-punishment. She almost never spanked me, and so I started to discipline myself. Commonly used methods: Banging my head against something, hitting myself. My mom got sort of sad and dissapointed whenever she saw me doing this - she was rarely ever angry, and still rarely ever is. She was more a user of positive reinforcement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And yet, I am not a juvenile deliquent, though for some reason I am totally unafraid of most punishment. I won't badmouth teachers too much because I realize how freakin' hard of a job they have, but if they're being plain stupid (Example, our g@y vice principal decided that we couldn't play dodgeball anymore. Out of the blue. After we'd been playing it for 4 weeks. He's just like: "We don't throw the ball at people. That's not what we do." My response: "Yes we do, it's called dodgeball!" I never fear school punishment, that said, I try not to act like an a-hole.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I mostly had to find out, and enforce, my philosophies on discipline myself - in fact, most of what I know about the real world, about discipline, morals, life, et cetera, I was never taught. Really, though, that's the best way, in my opinion. What parents need to do it just everything they can to make sure their kid grows up to be a plus to the world as a whole, not a decrement to it. Set them on the path, yes, but let them walk it - I get more annoyed by overprotective parents than ones who don't do much at all. Seriously, when you're kid's 13, give them independece, for cryin' out loud. Don't shelter them constantly till they turn 18/21, go out into the world, and get hit by the full force all at once.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance - harsh punishment for wrongs, and lavish rewards for rights, you need both. That's what I'd do, if I were a parent.

[Jirka333]

To reiterate what people have said about punishment in schools, it is a complete joke: in my school, techers don't even raise their voice, they just give long speeches and expect jerks and morons to get better. The worst punishment is having to pick up trash or calling your parents. I think that instead of banning corporal punishment, governments should seriously implement it in schools, especially when parents side with their little brats. A nice hour of kneeling on gravel or writing things 500 times would serve them right. Also, they should immidiately remove problematic children to military schools so they don't affect other children. (Hm, imagine how fun it would be to get this law through Congress! :lol: ) And about punishing criminals this way, it's not actually that bad of an idea, public flogging putting people in the stocks were quite effective methods. (instead of prison, where they get free food, medical care, and a warm place to stay, at the expense of the honest taxpayers)

[Guest AshKaYu]

Idiots! Spanking is the best punishment for a kid. Not, "Go to your room young man! Go to your room [that contains a TV, and Xbox 360, a Wii, a computer with DSL, and a fridge with food]. Go to your room!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHY does everyone seem to think that?

 

 

 

No parent does that. If they do, then they're idiots.

 

 

 

It's more like "Go to your room, no reading, no game boy, NO NOTHING".

 

 

 

That argument is getting old and not true.

[Barihawk]

 

Idiots! Spanking is the best punishment for a kid. Not, "Go to your room young man! Go to your room [that contains a TV, and Xbox 360, a Wii, a computer with DSL, and a fridge with food]. Go to your room!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHY does everyone seem to think that?

 

 

 

No parent does that. If they do, then they're idiots.

 

 

 

It's more like "Go to your room, no reading, no game boy, NO NOTHING".

 

 

 

That argument is getting old and not true.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Then the kid is playing Game Boy with his finger on the "off button" listening carefully for his parents.

[Bloodredsword]

I think it's just fine. I was spanked as a child and I turned out well, didn't I?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Did you? :o

 

 

 

:lol:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I remember those days....ouch :wall: #-o

[The Dark Lord]

 

Idiots! Spanking is the best punishment for a kid. Not, "Go to your room young man! Go to your room [that contains a TV, and Xbox 360, a Wii, a computer with DSL, and a fridge with food]. Go to your room!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHY does everyone seem to think that?

 

 

 

No parent does that. If they do, then they're idiots.

 

 

 

It's more like "Go to your room, no reading, no game boy, NO NOTHING".

 

 

 

That argument is getting old and not true.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yup @ Dark

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Even if they "forbid" us to use it, we could just shut the door and pretend to be off of it but still be playing the living hell out of the Xbox or whatever.

[Guest AshKaYu]

 

 

Idiots! Spanking is the best punishment for a kid. Not, "Go to your room young man! Go to your room [that contains a TV, and Xbox 360, a Wii, a computer with DSL, and a fridge with food]. Go to your room!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHY does everyone seem to think that?

 

 

 

No parent does that. If they do, then they're idiots.

 

 

 

It's more like "Go to your room, no reading, no game boy, NO NOTHING".

 

 

 

That argument is getting old and not true.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Then the kid is playing Game Boy with his finger on the "off button" listening carefully for his parents.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why not have the kids door open and randomly check in?

[The Dark Lord]

 

 

 

Idiots! Spanking is the best punishment for a kid. Not, "Go to your room young man! Go to your room [that contains a TV, and Xbox 360, a Wii, a computer with DSL, and a fridge with food]. Go to your room!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHY does everyone seem to think that?

 

 

 

No parent does that. If they do, then they're idiots.

 

 

 

It's more like "Go to your room, no reading, no game boy, NO NOTHING".

 

 

 

That argument is getting old and not true.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Then the kid is playing Game Boy with his finger on the "off button" listening carefully for his parents.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why not have the kids door open and randomly check in?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Children could easily hear their parents walking to their door. Won't work... It's easy for the kid to pretend not to be doing something.

[Unrealevil]

The reason that I feel that banning corporal punishment is a good thing is because whereas people from not too long ago were spanked etcetera and turned out fine, there are a lot more people today who don't really know what they're doing. When it's the right time to do it. When to stop. And when you get just a handful of people who don't know when to stop and it turns into child abuse, it's not worth it. There are too many other ways for a parent to discipline their child. When a child can't shut the hell up and stop being spoiled, that is a behavioral issue that cannot be solved with violence. In fact, it would probably worsen the situation. In some cases, that's not true. A kid might need it once in a while. But a young child is not only more susceptible to abuse but hitting them is only telling them that it's okay to do so to other people when they have a problem with 'em. It's like: Johnny hits Billy. Then, Johnny's Dad hits Johnny for hitting Billy. Then there's older children. If they need hitting, there are very few reasons for it because, as you can see from these forums, we are a little bit more conscience than people seem to realize. Do you really think that hitting me is going to solve anything?

[deloriagod]

 

Idiots! Spanking is the best punishment for a kid. Not, "Go to your room young man! Go to your room [that contains a TV, and Xbox 360, a Wii, a computer with DSL, and a fridge with food]. Go to your room!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHY does everyone seem to think that?

 

 

 

No parent does that. If they do, then they're idiots.

 

 

 

It's more like "Go to your room, no reading, no game boy, NO NOTHING".

 

 

 

That argument is getting old and not true.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If those kids are anything like me, they'll spend that time pondering over something fairly important and time will fly by. It's not difficult to entertain yourself with nothing more than what God gave you ;)

[Viktorkrum77]

 

Idiots! Spanking is the best punishment for a kid. Not, "Go to your room young man! Go to your room [that contains a TV, and Xbox 360, a Wii, a computer with DSL, and a fridge with food]. Go to your room!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHY does everyone seem to think that?

 

 

 

No parent does that. If they do, then they're idiots.

 

 

 

It's more like "Go to your room, no reading, no game boy, NO NOTHING".

 

 

 

That argument is getting old and not true.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lol, it's as bad as grounding. "You're grounded young man!" Me, "Ok..." *Gets back on computer*. :P

[remoteman]

In my opinion, everybody is becoming too politically correct. Smacking (i despise the word spank lol, everyone i know refers to it as a smack.) i belive is a vital part of growing up. Most kids only need to be smacked once or twice before they recognise that it won't happen if they stop doing what ever cause them to be smacked. It should definatly be confined to the bum, anything else is abuse. 'time out' and being sent to your room certainly does not work. I kept most of my toys in my room, it's not punishment at all. I refuse to be grounded, I will go to the beach or whatever, my parents aren't going to stop me from having fun. I rarely cause any trouble anyway, so thats hardly a problem. School punishment is ridiculous too, an hour detention after school gets me out of sport :roll: as i'm busy most afternoons with rowing anyway.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Corporal punisment has been used since the dawn of man, looking at todays teenage population and the disrespect that comes out of it i belive can be pointed at the lack of a good smack as the child grew up. Without a major deterent from that sort of behaviour, who's to stop them? When you look at our grandparents or our parents there was no such action, because people had learnt the hard way. If laws like this keep popping up around the world i can only fear for future generations to come.

 

 

 

Remoteman

[BlueTear]

I'd like to suggest a new, and clearly completely groundbreaking, idea.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rather than repeatedly stating the ineffeciency of sending kids to their rooms doesn't work, because there's computers, TV's, toys and gameboy's in there that the child can entertain him or herself with, why not, you know, take these things away from your child?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe I'm going out on a limb here, just maybe, but it strikes me as exceptionally stupid to say that a punishment is ineffective because "he has a TV". Well, where I live, TV's do not magically materialize out of thing air. Usually, the aquiring, and subsequent placement of said TV in little Timmy's room, requires the active action of a parent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If your little brat of a child can't behave properly, how about *gasp* not letting him watch TV, sit infront of the computer or handle a gameboy? TV is - contrary to what appears to be a popular belief in this thread - not a human right, and the removal of the privilege of watching TV can not possibly be labeled more inhumane than inflicting physical pain.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So, let's abandon this whole "sending them to their room's doesn't work, there's all kinds of nifty toys there" idea, because those toys are a privilege you - as a parent - supplied in the first case, and if you're not strong enough to take these privileges away, you ain't gonna un-spoil your child with a smackdown, that's for sure. And please, try to remember; TV is not a human right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In my honest opinion, physical pain as a deterent is 'cheap parenting'. Rather than going out of your way to explain to little Bobby that pushing Jane like that was a friggin stupid thing to do, and why, making him apologize and mean it once he's understood what he's done, removing a few of Bobby's privilege's - which has the added benefit of hopefully convincing him that they are just that, privilege's, not rights - you inflict a temporary discomfort and then decide that he has been sufficiently "punished". And like all animals, he has learned not to perform action A, because it results in response B, which is painful. Thus, we avoid action A. Here's a thought; You help your child develop a moral and ethical standard by actually evoking a sense of empathy, rather than raising him the way you'd raise a dog? Bad dog, don't pee inside! Okay, not gonna pee inside, 'cause it causes discomfort. Clever animals that. They're a bit lacking on morals and ethics, but hey...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On top of that, I have to wonder, how long does it take for a child of average intelligence to figure out that some actions are worth temporary discomfort and pain, because hey, said discomfort can then be endured in front of a computer or a TV because you've "already been punished enough"?

[How2PK]

*spanks Daan* :D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ooh, yah baby!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Spanky Spanky!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Spanking is good for you!

[____]

I'd like to suggest a new, and clearly completely groundbreaking, idea.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rather than repeatedly stating the ineffeciency of sending kids to their rooms doesn't work, because there's computers, TV's, toys and gameboy's in there that the child can entertain him or herself with, why not, you know, take these things away from your child?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maybe I'm going out on a limb here, just maybe, but it strikes me as exceptionally stupid to say that a punishment is ineffective because "he has a TV". Well, where I live, TV's do not magically materialize out of thing air. Usually, the aquiring, and subsequent placement of said TV in little Timmy's room, requires the active action of a parent.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If your little brat of a child can't behave properly, how about *gasp* not letting him watch TV, sit infront of the computer or handle a gameboy? TV is - contrary to what appears to be a popular belief in this thread - not a human right, and the removal of the privilege of watching TV can not possibly be labeled more inhumane than inflicting physical pain.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So, let's abandon this whole "sending them to their room's doesn't work, there's all kinds of nifty toys there" idea, because those toys are a privilege you - as a parent - supplied in the first case, and if you're not strong enough to take these privileges away, you ain't gonna un-spoil your child with a smackdown, that's for sure. And please, try to remember; TV is not a human right.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In my honest opinion, physical pain as a deterent is 'cheap parenting'. Rather than going out of your way to explain to little Bobby that pushing Jane like that was a friggin stupid thing to do, and why, making him apologize and mean it once he's understood what he's done, removing a few of Bobby's privilege's - which has the added benefit of hopefully convincing him that they are just that, privilege's, not rights - you inflict a temporary discomfort and then decide that he has been sufficiently "punished". And like all animals, he has learned not to perform action A, because it results in response B, which is painful. Thus, we avoid action A. Here's a thought; You help your child develop a moral and ethical standard by actually evoking a sense of empathy, rather than raising him the way you'd raise a dog? Bad dog, don't pee inside! Okay, not gonna pee inside, 'cause it causes discomfort. Clever animals that. They're a bit lacking on morals and ethics, but hey...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On top of that, I have to wonder, how long does it take for a child of average intelligence to figure out that some actions are worth temporary discomfort and pain, because hey, said discomfort can then be endured in front of a computer or a TV because you've "already been punished enough"?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eh... my mum would take away priverlages, my dad would smack me. I can say with all confidence that the smacking got me in line quicker than losing priverlages.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Although I'd say that there's a point where smacking should be replaced with reasoning and explaining why what they did was wrong. If need be; give them a smack AND the explination as to why. They'll get it soon enough.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That'd depend on the kid though. I know some pretty messed up kids (around 11 / 12) who wouldn't know that stealing is wrong. These little brats effectively take ANYTHING that's lying around in our street which isn't tied down. They've even came into other people's BACK YARDS and taken toys and such. They honestly don't seem to have a clue - that or the do; and their parents just don't give a [cabbage].

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gotta start early with either option to make sure it works.

[darkmage099]

 

Idiots! Spanking is the best punishment for a kid. Not, "Go to your room young man! Go to your room [that contains a TV, and Xbox 360, a Wii, a computer with DSL, and a fridge with food]. Go to your room!"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WHY does everyone seem to think that?

 

 

 

No parent does that. If they do, then they're idiots.

 

 

 

It's more like "Go to your room, no reading, no game boy, NO NOTHING".

 

 

 

That argument is getting old and not true.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ha, well guess what? THEY DO! I would say majority say that but really never enforce it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You are suggesting this and that, but that is really not the point. The point is that it is happening now. By providing suggestions on how it can be fixed, you are proving me right.

[Defender2516]

Intresting..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sorry, but I didn't find any physical evidence where not spanking a child was making them a better person in life.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If anything.. spanking helps make you a better person in life and is the only option for hard headed or strong spirited kids.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its amazing how California thinks they solved some Life Mysterious Clue.. and is going to force parents not to whip their kids.. So much for "freedom".

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Its Amazing how many things come up about kids that are banned all because a kid is so fragile.. Anyone hear about them banning "Tag" in some schools? All because the kids got hurt sometimes?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I have a niece.. and I had alittle situation once with her. She kept going into the babies room and we told her no, so she wouldn't wake up her. Well she would laugh.. play it off.. and continue to sneak in.. Eventually, verbage was not getting the issue resolved.. and a spanking was neccessary.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

She cried of course.. and when she saw me again she ran >.< but she never went in that room again.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If people actually think they can control their kids with words.. LOL at them. Its like your giving your kid a option. And 99% will say no to your suggestion.. lol.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Spankings are what teachs kids.. they don't really sit down and have a personal conversation with you on how they really want that cookie..

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reguardless.. I always believe the Bibles perspective on it.. Spare not the Rod.. inless you hate your child and turn him into a fool.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~Defender~

[insane]

In my honest opinion, physical pain as a deterent is 'cheap parenting'. Rather than going out of your way to explain to little Bobby that pushing Jane like that was a friggin stupid thing to do, and why, making him apologize and mean it once he's understood what he's done, removing a few of Bobby's privilege's - which has the added benefit of hopefully convincing him that they are just that, privilege's, not rights - you inflict a temporary discomfort and then decide that he has been sufficiently "punished". And like all animals, he has learned not to perform action A, because it results in response B, which is painful. Thus, we avoid action A. Here's a thought; You help your child develop a moral and ethical standard by actually evoking a sense of empathy, rather than raising him the way you'd raise a dog? Bad dog, don't pee inside! Okay, not gonna pee inside, 'cause it causes discomfort. Clever animals that. They're a bit lacking on morals and ethics, but hey...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My parents tried both. They'd take privileges away first, and that wouldn't work in the long run. The spanking would. Calling it "cheap parenting" by comparing it to animals isn't really a good analogy, because you don't explain how it's cheap. You just say it is, and throw the example of an animal in there. The last time I checked, humans were animals too, and unless you've radically restructured your belief system you're a moral relativist who doesn't believe in an objective standard of morality so throwing the whole "animals don't have morals" is irrelevant as humans don't either.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't see what is so wrong with physical pain when you've exhausted other options?

[Locke]

Here's a thought; You help your child develop a moral and ethical standard by actually evoking a sense of empathy, rather than raising him the way you'd raise a dog? Bad dog, don't pee inside! Okay, not gonna pee inside, 'cause it causes discomfort. Clever animals that. They're a bit lacking on morals and ethics, but hey...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The problem I have with your reasoning is that it assumes...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1. That parents do not use both methods of punishment. You assume spanking and taking away privileges are mutually exclusive, which by the given examples above, are not.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2. You also assume that children who are at a young age are able to grasp difficult moral and ethical concepts that people much older than them sometimes have trouble grasping. You might notice that spanking children only lasts so long. Why is that? Because spanking is used as a deterrent only when children are too young to be able to clearly reason through ethical dilemmas. When children grow older and more competent, then other forms of parenting develop.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

To use your dog example, children are spanked only to a certain age usually. Dogs are spanked their entire life. Why? Because dogs will never develop the reason and understanding it takes to teach them "ethics and morality" - they will always be lacking, but children won't.