Spanking Kids in Kansas

[Revoltingest]

I'm talking about parents, But then again, I don't have much problem with corporal punishment, But I suppose that's a different debate.

Oh, yes, it is entirely different.

 

[Thana]

Many schools have banned the practice, and if DCF gets wind of a parent smacking a child, they will intervene. Most states have a zero tolerance policy, and will remove the child from the home, and ask questions/investigate later. Seems like the safety of the child comes first. The system isn't perfect, but I can guarantee you Child Protective Services will take action if they suspect "smacking", ESPECIALLY with a belt, cane, wooden spoon, and whatever other evil device you people seem to condone and even encourage.

I don't know where you live, So I don't know the laws in your country (I assume, America?) If it is America, As far as I know, It's not illegal and in Australia it's not illegal. DOCS (Department of Child Safety) Do not remove children from parents who smack them. They remove children from parents who abuse them.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Smacked children more successful later in life, study finds - Telegraph

I think this is worth noting:

The research questioned 179 teenagers about how often they were smacked as children and how old they were when they were last spanked.

Their answers were then compared with information they gave abou their behaviour that could have been affected by smacking. This included negative effects such as anti-social behaviour, early sexual activity, violence and depression, as well as positives such as academic success and ambitions.

It seems to me that asking teenagers for their own evaluation of how smacking could have affected their behavior isn't a very reliable method of determining the psychological effects of physical punishment on children. Even in this very thread, there are people defending spanking and other forms of violence against children because it supposedly "worked out" for them or their parents, despite evidence indicating the harms of hitting children--like this, for example:

The case against spanking

Personal anecdotes aren't really scientific evidence. I could just as well say that physical punishment is abusive and exploits the parents' authority over their children as well as the power dynamic involved in a parent-child relationship, and I think that would actually have more validity than the arguments defending corporal punishment.

 

[kashmir]

Some people say they spank their kids, because their parents spanked them, because their parents spanked them....
We really cant be pointing fingers at someone who spanks their children, there is a difference is a one or twos pat on the behind.
Huge difference then whopping that behind until its black and blue.
I think some are being a tad bit hard on @Thana.

I still say that any physical form of punishment, tells the kid that it is ok to hurt someone when you are mad at them.
If its normal behavours, as Thana said, she only does it in serious situations.
Explaining to them what they did wrong, and taking away privileges, goes a lot further at teaching them, in my opinions.
Kids remember the times they could not play with their friends, watch tv, or loose their video games for a week or two, but a butt whopping, is over fast, done.

I had a friend whose mom beat her and her brother half to death with ironing cords, broom handles, what ever she could grab, nothing in the years of knowing them tells me if did a bit of good.
You must also take into account that she really didn't try to teach them what exactly the problem was other than "I told you not to do that, hold still...."
I know, I could here it happening, lived right next door.
The boy was so scared of her, but it did not stop him from taking the roast that mom made for dinner, back into the wood for a cookout with his friends
(much younger then I was, he was about 12 at the time)
That's kind of funny in a way, image going to check the roast and its gone.
BTW, dude is grown now, married and doesn't put a finger on his kids, and they are pretty decent.
She is in and out of jail, drug problems/prostitution.
I ask him about that roast, he still has no idea why he did it.
It is kind of funny now though.

 

[beenie]

I don't know where you live, So I don't know the laws in your country (I assume, America?) If it is America, As far as I know, It's not illegal and in Australia it's not illegal. DOCS (Department of Child Safety) Do not remove children from parents who smack them. They remove children from parents who abuse them.

Wrongggg. I know of a couple who had three children removed from their home when their son told his school principal that his dad smacked his butt for going somewhere he wasn't supposed to on his bike. They got their children back, but they were removed for quite some time.

 

[Thana]

Wrongggg. I know of a couple who had three children removed from their home when their son told his school principal that his dad smacked his butt for going somewhere he wasn't supposed to on his bike. They got their children back, but they were removed for quite some time.

I seriously, seriously doubt that. Atleast, not just for a smack on the butt.

Those departments are usually overflowing with abused/neglected kids in unsafe homes, And very little fosters carers, That most of the time they return the children to their parents.

If you think they'd take a child away for anything less than something very serious, You're mistaken.

Atleast, that's how it is in Australia. I assume it to be worse in America, Considering your higher population and welfare/unemployment issues.

 

[kashmir]

I seriously, seriously doubt that. Atleast, not just for a smack on the butt.

Those departments are usually overflowing with abused/neglected kids in unsafe homes, And very little fosters carers, That most of the time they return the children to their parents.

If you think they'd take a child away for anything less than something very serious, You're mistaken.

Atleast, that's how it is in Australia. I assume it to be worse in America, Considering your higher population and welfare/unemployment issues.

Nope, in my experiences they take kids out of homes when they shouldn't and the kids needing help they ignore, such as the friends from my last post.
Children services were called many times, nothing was ever done.
Today though, if you call on someone in USA and the kid says yah, dad beats us with a belt, all hell opens up and even though I do not believe in beating kids, just normal butt whopping, helps the child, I don't believe its wrong either and the kids should be taken out, because usually, the kids end up in a worse off place, but even if they are put in a better home, butt whoppins is not actual abuse.
I am just saying education/grounding works better, that is experiences talking.

 

[beenie]

I seriously, seriously doubt that. Atleast, not just for a smack on the butt.

Those departments are usually overflowing with abused/neglected kids in unsafe homes, And very little fosters carers, That most of the time they return the children to their parents.

If you think they'd take a child away for anything less than something very serious, You're mistaken.

Atleast, that's how it is in Australia. I assume it to be worse in America, Considering your higher population and welfare/unemployment issues.

I do not lie--do you think I made that story up for the sake of this thread? I have better things to do, and I certainly don't need that (real) story to make my argument. I also said that the children WERE returned to the parents, but my point is that had they not smacked their kids, they wouldn't have been in that situation. Why take the chance?

The parents did have to take anger management classes, however.

 

[Thana]

I do not lie--do you think I made that story up for the sake of this thread? I have better things to do, and I certainly don't need that (real) story to make my argument. I also said that the children WERE returned to the parents, but my point is that had they not smacked their kids, they wouldn't have been in that situation. Why take the chance?

The parents did have to take anger management classes, however.

There would have been an investigation. And they probably found something that gave them cause to remove the children (If such a thing happened, Forgive me for being skeptical, I can't help it), And I doubt that it was just a smack on the bottom.

You don't know. I doubt the parents would even tell you the truth. Why would they admit they did something awful to their kids? They probably lied.

 

[Alceste]

I have found kids who are spanked are no more likely to pay attention or to be well-behaved than kids who are not spanked.

Most often, the parents who discover their kids did not behave well in class who tended to lose their own self-control in public were the ones who spanked.

As a child, I was hit, kicked, and belted by my father, and the only result was that I feared for my life around him. My brother used to lock himself in his room with a knife when my dad would lose his temper. Nobody knew when he would be mad, and what he was angry at always changed depending on if he had a bad day.

My mother spanked me less than a handful of times. It was never from punishment, was only a couple of smacks on the bum with her open hand, and was only done when she lost her temper and didn't know what else to do. Completely ineffective.

Eventually my dad laid off me when he raised his hand to smack me when I was 15, and I stared at him without fear.

My mom eventually stopped hitting when she discovered natural consequences and leading by example are the most effective way of parenting. AND, she found ways to manage her stress better.

My own kids respond best to reason. By far - far and away - it's better than reactive parenting. When I teach, I am clear about the rules of participation, and if those rules aren't followed, a simple reminder about the rules, and then they aren't allowed to participate. It works beautifully.

When I was growing up, a teacher used to lock her door to dance class if people were late. Even if they were late one minute, she locked the door the minute class started. People learned very quickly to be in class ready to go once the clock was on the hour. She never yelled, threatened, or physically grabbed any kids to get into class. She never even gave a warning. She simply closed the door and locked it on the hour.

Very very effective.

The overwhelming majority of studies on the effects of spanking suggest that it's ineffective at best, and abusive at worst. Parents are allowed to be ineffective and make mistakes, and I live in a culture where spanking is normalized. But to suggest that spanking is integral to parenting is something I argue against.

It's like telling parents who think it's vital to let a baby cry it out for sleep training, or "they'll never have good sleep habits"....that's a myth. Though those folks will never be convinced that kids develop into circadian rhythms of sleep on their own while they are still developing physically.

People will cling to the myth that spanking is a must until parents get the guts to refrain from it. Then they discover it isn't as necessary as they and their family once thought.

When I started babysitting, I had one mum tell me I was supposed to let the baby cry himself to sleep because they were sleep training. That was her first time leaving him, and he was already about 16 months old.

That kid cried the entire time she was gone. Not just crying, but screaming. By the time I couldn't take it any more, after waiting ten minutes as instructed, the kid was completely inconsolable. Probably the worst night I ever had, and him too.

That was the last time I ever tried to let a child cry themselves to sleep. From that day forward, I pick babies up when they're crying and walk around with them, singing, until they stop. For a child to trust you enough they fall asleep in your arms is kind of an amazing experience, and I don't understand why everyone isn't seeking out every opportunity to cuddle babies to sleep rather than listen to them being psychologically traumatized by the shock of an adult suddenly not appearing in response to the only way babies can communicate their needs.

 

[Alceste]

Fine

But it's not assault, It's not abuse. These are facts, Whether people like them or not.

And I just have to say, You putting a smack on the bottom in the same boat as slavery and rape, Well.. I mean, That's worrying and probably offensive to people who have been through that awful ordeal.

Your own sentiments are probably rather worrying and offensive for people who have been through the ordeal of child abuse, but that doesn't seem to interfere with your advocacy of it.

And it is abuse, of course. In fact, abusive behavior need not even involve physical violence. Abusive behavior involves intentionally causing others to suffer needlessly, usually for breaking irrational, arbitrary rules that the abusive person never bothered to communicate. Being beaten with an improvised weapon by your mother just for talking to a stranger is certainly abusive, but "only" being screamed at, threatened and / or put down would also be abuse.

 

[beenie]

There would have been an investigation. And they probably found something that gave them cause to remove the children (If such a thing happened, Forgive me for being skeptical, I can't help it), And I doubt that it was just a smack on the bottom.

You don't know. I doubt the parents would even tell you the truth. Why would they admit they did something awful to their kids? They probably lied.

Ok seriously, I'm done arguing about this case. You don't even live in the US so please don't pretend to know about how things work here. Like I said before, the DCF system is far from perfect, and as Kashmir said, they do make mistakes and remove children who shouldn't be, etc., but I won't tolerate you basically calling me a liar.

Smacking children is wrong and detrimental to their psychological welfare, and it has been documented. If you want to bury your head in the sand and pretend that smacking someone 1/3 your size is ok, then I worry about you.

You've gone through hand smacking (which I still find wrong) to using wooden spoons and even canes. I cannot fathom using any of those devices on any human being, let alone a child who trusts and depends on a parent to defend and protect them.

My children sure have tried to cross a street when they shouldn't, and they have out their hands near my hot stove. My startling voice was enough to deter them from ever trying it again. I generally don't raise my voice, so when I do, they know I mean business.

Here's my problem: if parents smack, and it doesn't deter the child, then what?

 

[Vinayaka]

And it is abuse, of course. In fact, abusive behavior need not even involve physical violence. Abusive behavior involves intentionally causing others to suffer needlessly, usually for breaking irrational, arbitrary rules that the abusive person never bothered to communicate.

As a teacher, it was far harder to figure out neglect than it was to figure out physical abuse. Not feeding your kid breakfast, as a punishment, was terribly saddening when you found out.

There are just so many better methods like withholding privileges, time-outs, etc. Lots of good positive parenting books out there too.

Like this site: http://www.positivediscipline.com/

 

[Alceste]

If it were, Then it'd be illegal. Right?

Once again, I remind you that marital rape is legal in some countries, and the execution or imprisonment of homosexuals is mandatory in some. And I remind you that slavery was once legal. Are you really so confident that the law is your best way to know whether or not a behavior is morally permissible? Our laws are only as moral as those who write them.

Smacked children more successful later in life, study finds - Telegraph

That's talking about a light tap with the hand for preschoolers only, and nowhere enough to cause pain or bruising. You're talking about beating children of any age with a weapon because you don't feel you are able to inflict enough pain with your bare hands. You really can't see the difference?

 

[Thana]

Your own sentiments are probably rather worrying and offensive for people who have been through the ordeal of child abuse, but that doesn't seem to interfere with your advocacy of it.

And it is abuse, of course. In fact, abusive behavior need not even involve physical violence. Abusive behavior involves intentionally causing others to suffer needlessly, usually for breaking irrational, arbitrary rules that the abusive person never bothered to communicate. Being beaten with an improvised weapon by your mother just for talking to a stranger is certainly abusive, but "only" being screamed at, threatened and / or put down would also be abuse.

I wonder, Do you even think about what you're saying and what you're calling people?
You're calling me an abuser, A child abuser.

I just don't know where you get off with that kind of judgement. If it were abuse, As I have stated before, It would be illegal, And DOCS would take children from their parents. But they don't and it isn't because for the millionth time, It is not abuse.

I can't even begin to imagine the kind of self righteousness it would take to be able to pass that judgement on someone. I would never think to say something that serious to someone I don't even know.

You can't go around screaming rape when a guy hits on you, Because it demeans the reality and the awfulness of rape. So you should not go around screaming child abuse when someone says they'd smack their kids because it does the same thing. It demeans the seriousness of child abuse.

The second someone says they're smacking their kids, You think you have the right to judge and abuse them for just trying to do what they think is best as parents. It's awful and just really superficial. I cannot even muster up a tiny amount of respect for you or your argument.

 

[Debater Slayer]

There would have been an investigation. And they probably found something that gave them cause to remove the children (If such a thing happened, Forgive me for being skeptical, I can't help it), And I doubt that it was just a smack on the bottom.

You don't know. I doubt the parents would even tell you the truth. Why would they admit they did something awful to their kids? They probably lied.

Maybe they talked about it because they didn't believe what they did to their kids was awful, much like how you have been glorifying beating children as a way to "teach" them in this thread.

I don't recall learning anything useful from corporal punishment. I just remember that it made me experience fear and sometimes have contempt and lack of respect for whatever "rules" I was supposed to follow after being punished. Actually, the times when I respected instructions from my parents the most were when they talked to me instead of trying to reinforce their words by physical means.

Personally, when/if I have kids, I don't think I'll ever raise my hand against them. Children are defenseless, and beating any child--much less one that relies on you for sustenance and protection--is barbaric and abusive, as far as I'm concerned. It boggles my mind that some people spend their whole lives wishing they had children while others so readily defend inflicting pain on the ones they have.

 

[Alceste]

Wrongggg. I know of a couple who had three children removed from their home when their son told his school principal that his dad smacked his butt for going somewhere he wasn't supposed to on his bike. They got their children back, but they were removed for quite some time.

I knew a woman who had her preschooler taken away because someone noticed she had a bruise or bruises the size and shape of an adult hand. This woman had a doubly stressful time - she was going out of her mind trying to figure out who hurt her daughter, while at the same time only being allowed supervised visits and fighting to get her back.

Why on earth anyone would intentionally risk being reported for child abuse and losing their children is beyond me. Tangling with social services in my country is an absolute nightmare.

 

[beenie]

I knew a woman who had her preschooler taken away because someone noticed she had a bruise or bruises the size and shape of an adult hand. This woman had a doubly stressful time - she was going out of her mind trying to figure out who hurt her daughter, while at the same time only being allowed supervised visits and fighting to get her back.

Clearly, you are making this story up just like I did. These events never happen. :sarcasm:

Why on earth anyone would intentionally risk being reported for child abuse and losing their children is beyond me. Tangling with social services in my country is an absolute nightmare.

Absolutely. It seems to me that it's the parents, not the child, who need to work on managing their temper.

(Kid is crying, mom smacks kid, kid cries harder because now his *** hurts, mom does what? Gets out her cane/wooden spoon/belt)

Yeah, that seems to work. Only it doesn't.

 

[Alceste]

Clearly, you are making this story up just like I did. These events never happen. :sarcasm:



Absolutely. It seems to me that it's the parents, not the child, who need to work on managing their temper.

(Kid is crying, mom smacks kid, kid cries harder because now his *** hurts, mom does what? Gets out her cane/wooden spoon/belt)

Yeah, that seems to work. Only it doesn't.

Yeah, whenever I see parents smacking their kids, it's pretty obvious that the parents have anger management issues and their expectations for what qualifies as good behavior have not been made clear. From what I've seen, the "gentle, cool headed tap on the butt as a disciplinary tool of last resort for preschoolers only" that Thana's study advocates is not the norm. Most people who hit kids do it primarily when they're feeling angry or overwhelmed.

I think anger management training for violent parents would be more beneficial than corporal punishment for kids.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

When I started babysitting, I had one mum tell me I was supposed to let the baby cry himself to sleep because they were sleep training. That was her first time leaving him, and he was already about 16 months old.

That kid cried the entire time she was gone. Not just crying, but screaming. By the time I couldn't take it any more, after waiting ten minutes as instructed, the kid was completely inconsolable. Probably the worst night I ever had, and him too.

That was the last time I ever tried to let a child cry themselves to sleep. From that day forward, I pick babies up when they're crying and walk around with them, singing, until they stop. For a child to trust you enough they fall asleep in your arms is kind of an amazing experience, and I don't understand why everyone isn't seeking out every opportunity to cuddle babies to sleep rather than listen to them being psychologically traumatized by the shock of an adult suddenly not appearing in response to the only way babies can communicate their needs.

The Ferber method (cry it out in longer intervals) is still a popular method of parenting here in the states. Neurologists are divided on if the practice is overall detrimental from what I've read.

Me? Never did it. Kiddos slept with us until they didn't want to anymore. They have bedtime routines without fuss or fury. They have always slept super good. I count one single nightmare in all our four kids in my personal 16+ years of parenting.

The worry of spoiling kids is a myth. I say crying it out is for convenience. Not necessity.