BS: Spank, or No-Spank?

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Bernard
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 07:19 AM

In answer to GUEST 06:44 PM who claims ANY smack is 'redefined abuse'.

I hope you've read subsequent posts which show how irresponsible you sound.

Allowing a child to play with fire or run into the street when a 'short sharp shock' will prevent it is also a form of abuse.

Which is preferable?

A good parent knows where to draw the line, and by the same token, their children know where that line is.

It's easy to be pompous and claim that a great big adult is abusing a tiny little child, but that is fatuous and being used for effect. Nobody seriously believes such wild accusations!!

A tiny child will accept a light tap on the hand as a symbolic of a real slap - the child isn't hurt or abused, but knows he/she has crossed a line.

In the ideal world this would not ever be necessary, but this is far from an ideal world.

The real problem is those who abuse for pleasure...

Let's not lump conscientious, caring parents in with such animals.

We all know where the line is!

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 07:33 AM

"The only time a child under three may need a spank is if he/she is repeatedly doing something unsafe like hitting their forehead against a window pane. I know that sounds strange but..."

Sometimes a spank isn't necessary then.

When she was 2, Limpit used to bang her head on the floor in a rage when she didn't get her own way. I let her do it, because the third or fourth time she did it, it was on a concrete floor and she learned the hard way that it wasn't as nice as carpet to bang her head on. She didn't hurt herself much (she wasn't THAT stupid) and she was halfway through her second bash when she paused.. You could see the little wheels go round in her head connecting her bad temper with the head banging and the pain and she stopped and was all smiles again.    Sometimes the burnt hand teaches best.

She was also a runner - would dash off at every opportunity. I had her on walking reins but they were too short. I bought one of those extending dog leads and clipped that onto the harness. It meant she
had about 10' to run before she was brought up short. Now I can barely get her out of my ruddy pockets!

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Bernard
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 07:53 AM

Aah, Liz, exactly.

The responsible parent knows best.

;o)

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 08:04 AM

Bernard - you've met me and yet you still call me 'responsible'?!!!

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 08:15 AM

dianavan and Lynne - very well balanced opinions, I'm with you!

Kendall - your kid's right, you ARE a great guy, I have the good fortune to know you personally and you have my sincere respect. But I also think you have been very fortunate with your family, and that good fortune has served to reinforce your views (and of course I respect your right to have and express those views). If things had gone the other way with one or more of your kids, I'm certain you'd see it another way. Pax mate!
S:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 08:47 AM

I really, really hate the idea of hitting kids - or anyone, for that matter! But I have come to the sad conclusion that some people only understand the threat of force and it is the only way that their anti-social proclivities can be deterred. Also, especially in a school situation, it's only the threat of instant retribution that seems to work. I would hate to be a teacher in one of today's schools in which some kids seem to be completely out of control.

On the other hand I remember my own school days in which some teachers used their power to hit wisely, and were able to control their classes with the absolute minimum of force, whilst others were just sadistic bastards who seemed to really enjoy hitting kids. Sadly it would seem that if you give some people any power at all they will abuse it.

I think that this dilemma is a very profound one and our society has no idea how to cope with it. At the moment all we have, as with most ethical questions, is thousands of people jumping on the 'holier than thou bandwagon' and out-competing each other to scream, "hitting people is wrong!!". Of course it's wrong, in most cases, but is it wrong in all cases?

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: kendall
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 09:12 AM

Giok, don't missunderstand me. I said I have known kids who were beaten and abused..I that is. Personal experience. Thats not to say that ALL kids who were beaten will gtrow up to be beaters, but there is a damn good chance of it.
My father was a drunk. I have 4 brothers who have or have had a problem with booze. I am the one exception. So does that mean that one in 5 will grow up booze free?

Slag, I was married to a child psychologist. I've known her for 26 years and I have seen her work. She knows what she is talking about. There are always exceptions, but the general rule still is, beaten kids will grow up to be beaters, and sexually abused kids will abuse others. It's all they know.

Now, let's be clear here; There are cases where a stubborn child needs more than to be yelled at, and a smack on the bum gets their attention. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about BEATING children, and I find it hard to believe that any of the group that comes here is a beater.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Bernard
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 09:30 AM

Liz - what can I say...??

Benefit of the doubt...?!!

;o)

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 10:33 AM

Nice post Kendall. Cleared some points up (for me at least).
Cheers,
S:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Wesley S
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 11:04 AM

I'm in the no spank camp.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 11:46 AM

I was beaten across the back and rear with belts, yard sticks and hands on minimum a dozen occasions before I fought back at the age of 12 and took a knife to my step-dad. (He ran out of the house and that was the last corporal punishment I ever got at home from either mom or him.) In school, I received the strap five or six times that I can recall. Truth is, it never taught me a damned thing except to 'get tough' and just not give a shit about the adult world. However, all it took to make me 'see the light' or 'error of my ways' was a word from my grandfather. He never once raised his hand to me. I thought the world of him, and just a look of disapproval would make me rethink whatever had brought on 'the look'.

I have never hit children. Not mine or those of others. Hitting kids is not right IMO.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Bernard
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 12:12 PM

GUEST 11:46...

What you claim to have been subjected to is undoubtedly abuse. Sorry about the use of the word 'claim', but I hope you will understand - I'm not trying to trivialise your experiences, believe me.

I, too, was 'bullied' by adults. They including my father, who is still alive, and my primary school headmaster who died some years ago. The headmaster used to slap me to 'make me learn my arithmetic and I'd thank him for it one day', and the net result is I'm still hopeless at it - and no, I don't thank him at all.

I believe it has made me into a potential bully, but I am able to recognise it and avoid it. I accept that others may not.

The difficulty, as has already been said, is 'where do we draw the line?'

I don't think we're addressing the 'corporal punishment' issue here, but the parent's right to 'smack', which is a completely different thing.

It is very rare that a total ban (on anything) achieves its objective, possibly because it isn't fair to both camps.

The big problem is in catching and sorting out the bullies - whose activities will continue despite any legislation. Preventing parents from bringing up their children as they see fit sets a dangerous precedent.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 12:20 PM

gOVERMENTS ARE REALLY GETTING FAR TO INTUSIVE. tHIS OUGHT TO BE A PRIVATE MATTER.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: kendall
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 12:50 PM

What should be a private matter, beating children?

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: kendall
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 01:04 PM

Here is an example of my ex wife's expertise with unruly kids.

We took in a little girl who had been beaten and sexually abused by her relatives, mainly, her MOTHER!

We were having dinner in a nice restaurant, and the child, who was three at the time, went charging up and down the isle bothering people and generally making a nuisance of herself. No amount of talking did a bit of good, so my wife held her and looked directly into her eyes and said "You have a choice, either sit here with us, or, be put into the car and wait for us to finish. Which will it be"?

Of course, the child didn't like either option, so she continued to raise hell. Wife took her by the hand and said "Ok, you made your choice." and took her to the car and locked the doors.
Where we were sitting we could see the car, otherwise I would have had a real problem with leaving her alone there.
About ten minutes later, wife went out and brought the child in. She sat with us and acted like a civilized human from then on.
We continued this "choice" thing for the whole time we had her.

I was amazed to see just how easy it was for someone who knew what they were doing. Somehow, people get the idea that they automatically know how to raise kids, but that just isn't so. We have to learn.

One question to ask yourself is, what is most important here, to get the child to behave without a fuss, or to be in charge and break their spirit by bullying. If winning is more important than teaching by example, go back and read Guest 11:46.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Bernard
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 02:14 PM

Children need to be protected. The Government has the power to intervene where necessary. What we need to avoid is unnecessary intervention... and that's the problem!!

Teaching by example is the ideal, but there are rare occasions when it is neither practical nor desirable... "Don't touch that, you'll..."! Maybe a smack is justified?

The "choice" thing is very sound - it reinforces good behaviour and penalises bad behaviour. 'Behave, or lose your privileges'. But what happens when all the privileges are gone? There's nothing left to bargain with.

I don't have the answer.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: kendall
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 03:07 PM

The final answer is isolation. It is the ultimate punishment. Time out is a mild form of it, but if that doesn't work, lock them in their room.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Scoville
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 03:09 PM

The choice thing is great. I do that all the time with my First Day School kids (many of whom are well-practiced at parent/child power struggles). They get A or B--I don't care which, they can choose. If they don't, they get handed back over to their parents, who will either make them sit quietly or take them home. They don't get to do whatever the rest of the kids are doing. They shape up very quickly when everyone else is doing something interesting and they can't because they hit somebody or threw a tantrum and locked horns with me.

Furthermore, none of these children are at all afraid of me. Even the most difficult ones rarely give me any trouble any more, and they look for me first thing when they get to meeting. One in particular is a very high-strung, temperamental, needy, little boy and is pretty much an attention sink, but it's paid off very well to go the extra mile with him and has ended a lot of the issues teachers were having with him.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 03:25 PM

When we had children we discussed whether to spank or not. We chose not to. The deciding factor for me was when I thought about when I was most likely to spank. It seemed I would be most likely to spank when I was mad which is exactly the wrong time to be hitting a child, no matter how or how hard. I am not strictly anti-spanking, ours was a personal choice.

I am uneasy about a law against spanking. Nobody should be hitting babies but a law like this could get messy.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 05:23 PM

KB - my feelings exactly.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Genie
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 05:34 PM

Spanking can be as mild and non-traumatic as a little swat on the clothed buttocks or as severe and traumatizing as a bloody beating. Verbal "chastising" can be as mild as a gently "That behavior is not acceptable" or as severe and damaging as "You worthless little piece of sh*t, I'm sorry you were ever born and you will never amount to anything! Now go outside and play in the traffic!"

Well, you get the point.   People can abuse a child with almost any form of "discipline," and many a child would probably prefer a slap on the butt to being deprived of affection and approval for an extended period or having horrible things said to him/her.   Moreover, any 'system' of discipline is ineffective if it's arbitrarily and inconsistently applied.

Ironically, I think if there's any age when spanking might be more useful than other forms of discipline, it's during the pre-verbal years.   No, I'm not recommending spanking babies.   It' generally "overkill,"   But in the first year or two of a kid's life, you can't ethically withhold food or use "time outs" without risking being MORE abusive than you'd be if you gave the kid a slap on the tush. "Reasoning" with a toddler isn't gonna work. And I think things like yelling "Bad boy!" may do more lasting harm than moderate spanking.

The most important point is that you're not going to turn bad parents into decent ones by legally specifying what form their (bad) parenting may take.   Yes, the law should step in when parents produce injuries or use "cruel or unusual" punishments, but a total ban on spanking before age 3 seems not only unnecessary but bound to penalize many a reasonably responsible parent.

What're you gonna do -- take a two-year-old away and put him in a "loving, caring foster home" because his mom or dad spanked him/her?   Yeah, that'll really help.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 05:52 PM

Being given a choice is a hell of a lot better than being screamed at and hit by a parent who can't control his or her own temper when not getting his or her own way. I say this as one who was not given a choice when he was a child, but who was hit, yelled at, humiliated, and verbally intimidated into doing whatever the hell the parent wanted and NOT given any choice about it, and I still bear the scars of it to this day.

I would have been delighted to have been given some coherent choices instead, believe me. Then I could have used my intelligence, which was considerable, and made some decisions of my own. That would have been nice.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Jim Lad
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 06:11 PM

No Spank. Parents should consult with each other long and hard before deferring to me. Who needs monsters when there's plenty of parents to go around?

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Bernard
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 06:46 PM

Rather than ban spanking, parents should be given compulsory lessons on parenthood - by experienced parents, not by do-gooders who haven't a clue!

Excuse me... must nip out and re-surface the runway. Some pigs are needing flying lessons...

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: GUEST,JTT
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 07:12 PM

It's extraordinary how this debate goes. Because *every* time I've seen the debate, people make the same points, and rebut them the same way.

It would do more good if people actually looked at the research on the effects of different methods of child rearing.

Saying what your own experience was and taking it as a universal rule is about like saying "I've walked across five-storey roofs hundreds of times and I've never fallen off, so it's perfectly safe"!

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: kendall
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 07:16 PM

And what about experienced parents who believe in beatings?

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Peace
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 07:25 PM

Most pro-spanking literature (research) seems to come from 'religious proponents of one form or other'. Most other research indicates that spanking leads to many other disorders.

What is not defined to my satisfaction is this: spanking.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Becca72
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 07:35 PM

First I will say that there is definitely a difference between "spanking" and "beating". Spanking may not necessarily be that bad...I don't think.

That said, I have one parent (Kendall) who in my almost 35 years on this planet has never laid a hand on me for any reason. I love and respect him with all my heart, and I have always been able to talk to him about any subject, knowing that I would get an honest answer, help, advice or whatever it was that I needed.

The other parent was (I say was because she suffers from severe dementia now) a bitter, mean-spirited, jealous awful person who would sooner hit us than tell us the time of day. When my sisters and I moved her into assisted living a few years back we found the old metal yard stick that she used to whack us with...you can tell because all the paint is worn off the end that connected with our butts. She is the reason I chose not to have children of my own. I watched my eldest sister turn into her and there is no way in hell I'm going to let that happen to me.

I haven't spoken to my mother in several years and even though she's very sick now I just can't feel sorry for her. Karma is a bitch. I have absolutely NO respect for the woman and never have because she didn't earn it.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Slag
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 07:45 PM

kendall, I was reacting to the illogicality of that initial post. You made a sweeping generalization "ALL" and then you cited anectodal evidence of some you had known and then turned around and stated that you would not accept anecdotal evidence. Further you stated that you had other evidence but cited none of it.

I got your general drift and by and large I agree with you but you certainly did NOT mount a logical argument!!

The things done to children usually sink into the deep subconscious and become part of the matrix of pesonality and it is amazing how learned behaviors such as beating or molestation comes out in a given situation. It takes a lot of personal insight, self awareness and work to not take the easy road and follow the paradigm laid down for you in infancy. Most never confront it and many who do need assistance from those in the mental health field.

The less some form of corporeal punishment is used, the more significant it becomes. It estabilishes an ultimate line. Unfortunately that is a two-edged sword (so to speak) in that some little ones like to keep butting up against that line to see if it really is there. And so, for consistency's sake, some may feel trapped into continually repeating the punishment. Not so! Get creative! At some point you may even try "reason" with the little tykes. In fact, you should never stop talking to them. Teach them communication. Tell them the truth. Explain things over and over again. A little more gets through each time and some day they WILL thank you for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Scoville
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 08:07 PM

Wait--so everyone who thinks kids shouldn't be spanked is a do-gooder without a clue?

Isn't it safe to assume that at least SOME of the lawmakers in question have raised productive, functional children without spanking, too?

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Genie
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 08:55 PM

Guest: "It would do more good if people actually looked at the research on the effects of different methods of child rearing. "

Guest, that's what my post was based on. (Plus some common sense -- which is often corroborated by childrearing research findings.)

The bulk of research on childrearing practices indicates that consistency of discipline is far more important than specific disciplinary techniques, both in terms of controlling behavior and in terms of producing non-neurotic kids and adults. Another key factor seems to be the parent-child affectional bond.   Which is why I made that sarcastic remark about taking a toddler away from a bad old parent who spanks and placing him/her in a foster home where such practices are not used.

But again, "spanking" is a term that covers an awfully broad territory.   (Especially if the "spankee" has a weight problem, but that's another topic.)
;-D
Banning "spanking" is as ridiculous as banning "negative verbal sanctions."   The term is way too imprecise.

Again, I am not endorsing any form of physical punishment. Just saying the body of research on childrearing does not support the idea that it cannot be used effectively as a disciplinary technique, regardless of when and how and by whom it is used.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Peace
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 08:58 PM

But the body of research does draw a line between spanking and beating. I'd like a clear definition of 'spanking'.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Genie
Date: 22 Jan 07 - 09:34 PM

I'd like one too, Peace. Especially when the law gets involved.

That said, non-"physical" abuse can be as damaging to a child's psychological development (and maybe even physical health) as "beating" if it's extremely cruel.   So can extreme rejection that consists of just withholding attention or affection.

OK, I'm not going to draw a direct parallel between rodent and human behavior (even though some of us are rats), but some research on infant mice found that early stimulation had a positive effect on mental and physical development, whether the stimulation was from mild electric shock, sudden temperature change, or fondling the infant mice.   The lack of stimulation was the most negative condition.   

I don't think it's much of a stretch from common sense to think that a child who is provided a lot of stimulation and contact with caregivers, including an occasional mild spanking, may be better off than one who is deprived of close human contact and kept in a severely restrictive environment.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Liz the Squeak
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 05:30 AM

You can shout, yell, scream, declare all you like that 'I will never do *such and such* to my child like my parents did to me'... but rest assured, one day you will do something to your child and find you HAVE turned into that parent.

If you can recognise this moment for what it is, stop your own behaviour and go get professional help, then you are a good parent. If you cannot recognise yourself in your child and remember how frustrating it was for YOU to be ignored, misunderstood or abused, then the pattern will continue down the generations until someone DOES decide not to accept it and says stop.

Remember how once upon a time everyone thought it was OK to own another human being and make them work for you for a pittance? How it used to be OK to beat your wife? How it was accepted behaviour to mistreat people because their skin was a different colour? How all this was justified because that's how your father and his father and his father's father had done it?? That behaviour had to stop somewhere. In this day and age, there is no excuse for excessive beating or abuse of any person, regardless of race, gender, sexual preference or age.

It is true that the burnt hand teaches best, we learn by experience. It's not true that a 'good slap now and then never hurt me as a kid'... I was slapped as a child, usually by my father, mother only threatened me with him. When his slaps started getting harder, more frequent and with a fist, I hit back and he never touched me again. I admit I have spanked Limpit, when she was younger and deserved it. When I found I was doing it more often for less reasons, I investigated my own behaviour first and found it was me that had the problem. From what I can see of her behaviour (pretty appalling at times...) spanking her hasn't made any difference, so we don't do it any more. When she was 2, it stopped her biting people and trying to get in the washing machine because she was too young to understand the consquences of those actions. Now she's nearly 11 (ye Gods!!) it is not an appropriate punishment because her communication skills mean we should be able to reason out the argument and make ourselves understood. It's US who have to learn to sit and listen and work out what the problem really is. I'd far rather reassure her with a cuddle and a conversation than slap her into silence.

LTS

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Bernard
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 05:59 AM

Scoville - my comment above about 'do-gooders who haven't a clue' did not specifically refer to the anti-spanking lobby. You've read something into my words that I did not say.

Quite the contrary - my remarks are tempered by many years of primary school teaching. In the 1980s I had classes of over forty nine-year-old children, and such 'do-gooders who haven't a clue' were being paid by the local education authority as 'advisers'.

These people would go into a classroom and try to tell the teacher how to organise their classroom. Yet these people had no formal teacher-training, and had no first hand experience of teaching. They were a waste of space in many cases, and there for political reasons rather than educational.

That is the thinking behind my remark - parents are in a better position to advise other parents tempered with experience.

Rather than waste effort on banning smacking, I believe parent training would be more useful and effective.

I could plainly see the results of poor parenting when I was teaching. Some children were constantly talking, and it emerged their parents rarely chatted with them at home. Children who were aggressive often had aggressive parents...

My own daughter (29) has two children of her own now, aged 6 and 3. She is not a violent person, and was not brought up ruled by violence. She is a very caring Mum, and makes sure they know what constitutes acceptable behaviour, and what does not. Even so, they will push the boundaries, as they are intelligent, inquisitive children.

It is impossible for anyone to comment accurately about circumstances they neither know nor understand. That is why educating the parents is the correct answer, I believe.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 08:05 AM

After some reflection, I realize that my choice of words, "any child of any age", was, at best, a very poor choice. My apologies to Peace.

I guess I just figured that "child" means an individual that is mentally aware of what s/he is doing and continues poor behaviour, despite reasoning with s/he, and a warning of punishment, whatever that punishment might be, with physical punishment being a last resort.

As an example, my great nephew, at the age of five years old, at a family gathering, began kicking me in the shins because it was great fun. The first time, I told him not to it as it was impolite and it hurt. Ten minutes later, after another sneak attack, I told him not to do it again, and I warned him I would hit him back. Same thing a few minutes later, so, as he turned to flee, I flicked his ear lobe with my middle finger. No damage done, but it does smart.

His mother was rather upset. I said to her something like, "You had better teach him not to kick people because when he comes home from school this fall with a black eye and a fat lip after kicking the wrong kid, it will be your fault."

Anyway, sorry Peace.

I'll leave youse all to it... again.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 08:16 AM

I get very nervous every time a government tries to control people in the area of family. I do not believe in hitting children but outlawing it will not stop it. It will simply lead to hiding it away. Whenever are we going to learn that outlawing things simply makes them illegal, it does not stop them happening. We need to look at the issue of parenting skills, not the result of not having any skills.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: GUEST,redhorse at work
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 08:16 AM

The difference between spanking (UK "smacking") and beating couldn't be simpler.

When I do it it's spanking, when someone I disapprove of does it it's beating

nick

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: MBSLynne
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 09:52 AM

Guest, you are absolutely right. Also, it's a fairly unenforcable law and we are getting more and more of them. The more unenforceable laws the government passes the less people will respect the law.

Love Lynne

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: dianavan
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 10:05 AM

"You had better teach him not to kick people because when he comes home from school this fall with a black eye and a fat lip after kicking the wrong kid, it will be your fault." - a very good point.

Children need to learn that other people have boundaries.

I had a neighbor who never spanked. In fact she never held that kid accountable for anything. He would do things like hit another kid over the head with a Tonka truck and laugh. He grew into a self-centered adult with no empathy.

I also knew a parent who used a chair in the corner as punishment for his hyper son. The kid had to face the wall and not move. It looked like torture to me. I also wonder about the long term effects of a leash (some people still use them). Seems to me it might impede the development of motor skills.

In any event, its such a broad question that it is best left to the parent unless the spankings are severe and with such regularity that it constitutes abuse. I don't see how such a law could be enforced without neighbors turning on neighbors. Even then, if 'the authorities' can't find foster homes for the kids who have definitely been abused, what are they going to do with those who are spanked?

Education is the answer, not legislation.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: kendall
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 10:15 AM

Spanking = no more than two smacks on the bum with an open palm.
Beating =   Using an implement of any kind, or smacking more than twice. That is, of course, my own definition.

Slag, I disagree.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: jacqui.c
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 10:58 AM

My parents never, in my memory laid a hand on me. However, both were verbally abusive and neglectful the vast majority of the time. On a couple of occasions, when I was about 10 or 11 my mother packed my baby brother into his pram and walked out on me and my other brother when we had done something to upset her, telling us that she was going back to her mother's and we could explain to my father why. She would stay out for an hour or two, leaving Mike and me in real fear of our father's reaction. I grew up feeling unloved and worthless, ended up pregnant at 17 because someone showed me some affection. I was estranged from my parents for a few years and, more recently, estranged from my mother for about 20 years because there was no love there and she still tended to be abusive, even when I was an adult.

With my own children I occasionally spanked them, particularly when I was the only parent after my divorce. My daughter, in particular, could be very defiant and needed definite boundaries set. I did realise that I was tending to scream at them, in the same way as my parents had screamed at me. I tried to tone that down once I became aware of the problem. The difference was, I always told my children how much I loved them, showed interest in what they were doing and tried to give them confidence in their own abilities. They have both grown up to be good people who have shown their love for me on many occasions. Both have a child and have used smacks occasionally. However, they both make sure that their child knows it is loved and work to build a good relationship while the child is small.

I think that, if you can avoid it, then don't spank. IMHO it is more important to inculcate a sense of worth into any child and to make them feel that someone really cares for them.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: kendall
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 11:36 AM

Trying to raise children by yelling at them is like trying to drive a car by blowing the horn.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Bernard
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 11:40 AM

Jacqui, that's probably the most important point anyone has made so far.

My own daughter was insulted by my ex-wife a few years ago (in her early twenties) by a suggestion that she was 'a mistake'.

Whilst it's true her birth hadn't been planned, the suggestion seemed to be that she wasn't wanted, either. Fortunately I was luckier with my choice of words when she told me what her mother had said - I said 'The best things often happen by accident'... it raised a lovely big smile.

Yes, words can be as abusive as violence - often more so, as the effects are more far reaching.

The story goes that a man told lies about his neighbour. He quickly regretted what he had said, and went to the Wise Old Woman for advice on how to put things right.

She told him to fill a carrier bag with feathers and take it to her, which he did.

She then asked him to go to the top of a nearby hill, empty the bag into the wind, then return with the empty bag, which he did.

She then said 'Now go and bring back every one of those feathers..."

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Bernard
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 12:08 PM

Yes, Kendall - one thing that has always irritated me is the way people shout rather than walking an extra couple of yards. Adults do it to other adults, too...

It seems so silly. Shouting from a small distance instead of walking over and taking charge... and then wondering why the child ignores you.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Genie
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 12:08 PM

Liz said, "When she [Limpit] was 2, it [a slap] stopped her biting people and trying to get in the washing machine because she was too young to understand the consquences of those actions. Now she's nearly 11 (ye Gods!!) it is not an appropriate punishment because her communication skills mean we should be able to reason out the argument and make ourselves understood."

Excellent example. When a child is too young for verbal instruction to be effective, sometimes "aversion training" may be the only viable way of helping them learn to avoid dangerous situations (since you are unlikely to be able to physically guard them every second).   Sometimes this is done using "natural consequences," such as letting the kid pull the cat's tail and letting the cat deliver its own lesson.    But obviously letting a toddler learn everything that way can be perilous.   

This is why I find it odd that a law would prohibit spanking under the age of 3. Let me repeat that unnecessary and excessive force should not be sanctioned, nor beating permitted, regardless of age.   But if a slap on the wrist, or on the backside, is ever a very useful teaching technique, it's probably in the first 2 or 3 years.   After that, if you can't keep a kid's behavior within reasonable boundaries by reasoning, time outs, modelling, reinforcement of desired behavior, etc., you've got real childrearing problems and using physical punishment is not likely to make things better.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Mrs.Duck
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 12:25 PM

I find it strange that people want to put an age limit on smacking. I have on various occasions smacked all my children but as they grew older and therefore more able to be reasoned with I never felt the need. Sending a two or three year old to their room would to me seem far more cruel than a smack on the bum. A smack is a short sharp shock and should not be confused with beating where the purpose is to hurt!

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 12:42 PM

In any civilized society,

Adults are not allowed to hit other adults

Children are not allowed to hit other children

Children are not allowed to hit adults

Need I go on to ask why children sometimes get confused?


I've heard some of the wierdest people claim that they were smacked "and it didn't do me any harm".

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: Mrs.Duck
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 02:50 PM

I would never claim that being smacked 'didn't do me any harm' I would state categorically that it did me good as it taught me to grow up to be a caring responsible adult who sees it as important that I bring my children up in the same loving way my parents brought me. Smacking is not hitting and in any civilised society parents should be responsible for educating their children responsibly.

Subject: RE: BS: Spank, or No-Spank?
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 23 Jan 07 - 02:53 PM

100