If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Not in my experience.
Buw I do agree that smacking is an acceptable form of discipline. After all other ways of stopping a child from being naughty have been used then the child should be smacked on the hand or bum or even legs. Smacking around the head is not right I see it done most days around my area.
Smacking should never become illegal as it's away which children realise what they are doing is wrong. Words are not enough for a child to realise what they are doing is wrong.
Smacking should have limits but not too many so that the parent feels like a criminal. Parnets have a right to bring up their child the way they want.
I don't hit animals unless I see no other way to prevent an immediate dangerous situation and just want it to back off so that I can assess the situation. The reason is that it doesn't work. If it's a repeated behaviour kicking an animal isn't the place to start.
Usually, when my horse misbehaves it's because of something I'm not explaining well enough to him, I'm asking him to do something he doesn't know how to or I've been letting him get away with something and the problem has escalated. Hitting him isn't going to help with any of these.
I feel the same way about children. While I'm sure there are times when to some parents it seems like smacking it is the only way to stop the behaviour, usually the solution is to change something you do in the long term. Parents need to be consistant and fairly reasonable. Trust goes both ways, the parent needs to know the kid trusts its judgement and the kid needs to trust the parent is thinking of its best interest.
I talk a lot about animals because I don't have an experience with children, but know that a lot of the methods used to train animals are now being introduced for children. In some ways, the 'non-physical' training methods are brutal. Like some of the most accepted natural training methods with horses includes giving it only two options, the right one or something that's worse. No pain, but usually more work. It isn't about being nice all the time and giving your kid candy, it is about asserting yourself as the person in charge. You're pretty much saying "I want you to do this, but if you don't want to you will have to do that instead." It's not about giving in, it's not about being soft. And if you go the right way about it, the kid will accept it and feel better for it. But it mustn't go too far. Like with my horse, if I do the same thing he doesn't particularly enjoy all the time and never budge, in the end he will lose his spirit and not want to please me any longer. The same can happen with kids if the parents demand too much of them. It can't be all work and no play.
Raising children is probably one of the most challenging things to do, especially when they get sensible enough to start questioning you. That's when smacking becomes the worst way to go. If you can't assert yourself as the leader in another way, then what is the kid supposed to think of you? I know I'd get hurt that my parents could do such a thing, then moody and seek ways to not do what I'm told. But then again, I'm a very disagreeable person at times.
Well all I can say is that it worked for me. I haven't lived the lives of other people who were or weren't so I can only comment from my own experience. Perhaps I do have a simple view of kids because I haven't got any but this is still my opinion and I doubt whether it will change when I do have kids.
No. You smack a child because you are trying to instill lessons and behaviours from a young age that will help them and be useful for when they grow up. If an adult has the mental age of a child, they will not 'grow up' as fast as a normally developing child and so smacking would be pointless as chances are, they shouldn't be allowed out of some form of care as children or adults with mental ages of children as a whole cannot look after themselves. Were it not in extremely poor taste, I could mention Stephen Hawking... [allegedly]
Jaloux, it's interesting that you bring up the topic of animals again as I had done unwittingly by mentioning Pavlov.
I've lived with horses and dogs all my life, as has my mum. Interestingly I have never smacked a horse nor has my mother but then again, I can't think of any occasion where it would have crossed either of our minds probably because I can't think of any time where any of our horses did anything to merit a smack. That said, our dogs have received mild smacks on occasions. For example, when the younger one stole a lamb chop from under the grill, it got a small smack and now doesn't go near the grill no matter what happens to be cooking underneath. Now this is an interesting example not only because what the dog did was wrong ie. it shouldn't be stealing food from the grill and also it's wrong because it's dangerous. A small smack, and now he wouldn't think of putting his mouth up to the grill.
This is what I was trying to say in my bumbling and slightly long-winded way. Thank you.
one or two smacks every now and again is ok but i think its appalling when parents do it ALL the time.
my dad used to smack me occasionally when i was smaller and ive grown up.. reasonably ok never did me any long term damage
.. although when he did it, it was bloody scary! :nervous:
i remember when i got a bad report card from school, and i hid in the bath for over an hour because i knew when my dad got home id get a smack for it.. needless to say he found me straight away!
Wow! You've got amazing lung capacity!
Smacking does make kids understand they've done wrong - if they're being naughty and they get smacked they know not to do it again - punishment and reward type learning. But like someone said, it should be used as a last resort, not all the time.
Kids are overprotected by government laws nowadays, and as a result look at the thousands of little dickshits that roam the streets terrorising anyone and everyone.
I'm sure that never used to happen when my parents were kids.
People who say "smacking is wrong" like it's some sort of objective fact are idiots.
That's a rather bold assertion.
Agreed.
I think smacking should be the last resort after everything has been tried first. (sending to room, taking away toys, not letting the child do something, etc)
I wouldn't hesitate about using physical restraint if a child was about to put themselves in physical danger though.
And yes, there is a considerable (and obvious) difference between smacking and abuse.
So you do agree with smacking?
Let's dispose of the beating, belting and other diversionary arguments. They're detrimental to a reasoned debate.
Essenitally you either believe that ultimately smacking is never acceptable, or you think that given a certain time, place, and child, that it is acceptable.
I think debate on this subject is healthy, but i'm yet to see a convincing arguement as to why smacking is never acceptable.
Which is what I do at my work placement, but we don't smack the child. It's normally just stuff like taking them away from other children. (whereby, one of them is about to do something they shouldn't do to the other)
i would never smack a child for something trivial like drawing on the wall, i WOULD smack them if they were screaming in the middle of the shop and i would smack them if they went to do something which was harmful to them and i`d already told them that it was harmful to them
I think the option to smack your kids should always be available, whether you're going to use it or not. As Scrotey says, all kids are different and some will respond to to different ways of discipline.
This idea that we should teach kids that violence is never ever the answer is complete crap IMO.
And do you think that if your Mum had sat you down and explained why it was dangerous you would have still done it?
This proves my point that smacking should only be done to show the kid that the thing they are doing is detrimental to either themselves or other people. I would certainly smack my child for doing something like that and as Skive demonstrates, it has deterred him ever since (I hope!)
i think i would explain why they shouldnt do something, if they then chose to do it again, they`d get a smack on the hand or maybe bottom
Damn straight it was a good post.
I think for something as dangerous as sticking various objects in a socket, I wouldn't bother with the talking to because you can kill yourself doing it. This isn't exactly breaking mum's vase by playing football in the house.
Oh, and please change your signiture. It's too confusing having two people with that phrase in their posts.
i have a diff user name and avatar, if it confuses u, thats tough tittie
Well my old man had apparently caught me doing it before but had only told me off - my old man never smacked me. I don't remember that though.
I do remember the my mum going mad though and recieving a smack for it, and no I never did it again.
Don't be so rude.
I agree with VV and skive, i was smacked as a child but only really as a last resort and it never did me any harm either. It taught me the boundaries of what and what was not acceptable for me to do.
When i was older i too got the 'harsher' punishment of being grounded. Really sucks when you're 14 and just want to go out with your mates but cant because you did something stupid that pissed your parents off. Makes sure you never do it again though!
i apologise thunder, if u took offence to my reply, (altho i`m sure u didnt as u sound a tough nut ) but it is tough tittie
(If this is what you meant then it's not my fault I'm no mind reader.)
Well what is the line then? When does it change from 'mild punishment' to abuse? The amount of pain the child is in? If you smack him with bare hands or an object? How 'bad' he was behaving before he was smacked? If you give us a definition maybe we can debate on better grounds.
Imo hitting someone, smacking or slapping them is violent by definition. Of course it's not as violent as other conducts -there are degrees- but they're still violent. That we think they're acceptable is another story... one that has made us forget it's still violent.
Yes, of course children need to be punished, I never said any differently. Not physical though, that's something else. I'm sorry if I misunderstood you, but I reacted to your comment because it is the typical justification abusive parents give to beat their children ("he's my kid, I raise him however I want"). I'm not implying you plan to be one of those parents but it sounded to me as the same justification - which is why it's dangerous because then what stops you doing something worse? Hence why I asked you to provide a description of the 'line' you mention.
As for this: You serious?
Why is contact disciplinary action more intrinsically wrong than non-contact disciplinary action?
I was never smacked by my dad. He always threatened but we learned that he'd never actually hit us. My sisters get away with murder with him and don't listen to him but their mum does smack occasionally and they always listen to her. They have little respect when it comes to my dad.
My mum on the other hand always smacked. One time she wen't thorough a belt phase when i was younger. I was never that badly behaved but I swear to God, I will never trust my Mum not to hit me again, as much as i love her and I'm older now, she has no problems lifting the first thing that comes to hand and throwing it.