posted
I'm not invested in the scientific part of the great 'should I smack that ass debate.' I just want to die and come back from the dead after the great tone debate is over.
Posts: 805 | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
So there are, in the study you mentioned, circumstances in which corporal punishment is ideal?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
This might be the passage, from the summary:
"They also identified an optimal type of physical discipline, called conditional spanking, which led to better child outcomes than 10 of 13 alternative disciplinary tactics and produced outcomes equivalent to those of the remaining three tactics.5 Conditional spanking is nonabusive, used when a child responds defiantly to milder disciplinary tactics such as time out (based on research on 2- to 6-year-olds). “Nonabusive” is defined as about 2 open-hand swats to the buttocks when a parent is not angrily out of control. Conditional spanking teaches a child to cooperate with the milder disciplinary tactic, thereby making spanking less necessary in the future."
Apparently, however, the study has already been discredited, according to Samp (see last 2 pages of this thread).
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm actually gonna stick up for it some: "discredited" is something that could happen specifically to this report — I think it is more that the idea, upon aggregate review, has failed to show enough demonstrable traction in studies. As in, if there IS a 'proper' way to hit kids, it is notoriously difficult to determine through longitudinal study, and when layman analysis of 'proper' spanking application is studied methodologically, the kids pretty much always turn out worse than the ones in the group whose parents either don't spank on preference, or were asked to not spank to act as a control.
When the methodological study shows a huge quantity of very difficult to avoid complicating and negative effects from incorporating spanking — even by parents who are very sure that they are doing it 'properly' and 'lovingly,' which are completely avoided by not spanking, versus a handful of studies which indicate that there may be very specific forms of spanking which are maybe about as good as most (but not all) non-spanking punishment forms, the APA has only one real course to take. Follow the model, apply the data, make the recommendation based on the data.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If the APA (AAP? American Academy of Pediatrics?) finds that any form of spanking in any circumstance is at best ineffective and at worst detrimental to the kid's development, then yeah, I'm inclined to go along with them. Like I said earlier, I've spanked my kids on very rare occasions when all other warnings, diversions, getting-down-on-your-knees-and-explaining-the-error-of-their-ways-in-little-kid-terms failed and the behavior needed to end and not be repeated; I'm talking on the level of trying repeatedly to open the oven door when dinner's cooking--they're either ultimately deterred by a swat on the bum followed by a loving yet earnest lecture, or by a serious burn and a trip to the hospital, you take your pick. If there is a better way to deter that rare yet inevitable boneheadedness, I'm all for it.
I'd actually like to see the AAP's recommendations against spanking clearly spelled out in terms parents/guardians can use in a variety of common situations--not to prove them wrong but to have some good "alternative" strategies to try the next time my kids try to kill themselves or each other. Maybe they've published them in parenting magazines we don't subscribe to? We've certainly sought out and tried to adopt the best practices we can find in terms of reinforcing positive behavior and administering discipline.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Advice for robots, that one is easy. Stick them in their room and close the door. Or a playpen, bouncer, crib, whatever contained area there is in your house. If you don't have a contained area, get one.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I don't know how competently I can describe the technique before my questions come back in, but in a situation like that (involving our frequent hypothetical foe, the stove) the mom swept into action immediately, pulled the child back and said NO, you do NOT touch that, it is DANGEROUS. expressly and clearly forbid to the child going near the stove again.
I said "you know he's gonna wander near it again, right?" and she said "yeap." She completely anticipated it. essentially all part of the plan, I guess.
Kid got close again, mom immediately swept up the kid and put the kid in a timeout corner, kid lost it because he really really wanted to be in kitchen with mommy, but mommy watched him and put him back in the corner every time he got out of the seat, without wavering, then at the end of the timeout clock put him on bed and explained stove is no no bad. period. You can come back in the kitchen but if you go near stove you get timeout for twice as long and you can't be in the kitchen with mommy anymore.
the more important second half is the positive reinforcement; it's not sufficient to merely tolerate correct behavior and only act on incorrect behavior, you have to reinforce the correct behavior. So the kid got a sandwich cream thingy when he was good and had been in the kitchen for a whole ten minutes without going near the stove horray! and got told how he was doing the RIGHT thing and that was good.
After a few subsequent reinforcements, stove was really seriously not at issue. Another incident involving the kids trying to climb a trellis-like object in the backyard was more difficult to extinguish but managed in pretty much the identical way.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, a lot of your parenting techniques shouldn't be limited to in the moment. I think it was kq who had her kids blanket trained so she just laid out her blanket and the kids knew from like 9 months that they should not leave that blanket.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: Advice for robots, that one is easy. Stick them in their room and close the door. Or a playpen, bouncer, crib, whatever contained area there is in your house. If you don't have a contained area, get one.
not room! timeout bench, eventually becoming timeout corner stand.
posted
We also role play proper responses and have since the kid was three. With my kids being younger, they wouldn't go ten minutes before positive feedback. Bin would get a marble after 30 seconds and then again at like 2 minutes and then after 4. Marbles have changed in value and immediacy since bin was 3 though. At three ten marbles might be a cookie or stickers or something but now at 5, she gets 250 marbles for about $20. It takes about a month but that has been something we built up slowly.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: Also, a lot of your parenting techniques shouldn't be limited to in the moment. I think it was kq who had her kids blanket trained so she just laid out her blanket and the kids knew from like 9 months that they should not leave that blanket.
.. hadn't thought of that. behaviorally, it would be easy to implement. whoooa
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, positive reinforcement is one thing. I mean, it definitely works to reward good behavior, and of course we have our own reward systems in place and try to remember to tell them how good they're being, etc. My kids aren't hellions and don't do boneheaded stuff very often. They know better--and sometimes that's the problem. They know better, so now what do we do?
I also appreciate the lesson in giving time outs. Believe me, with kids ranging from baby to 11 years old, I am well-versed in all the variations. Usually the threat of a time out works just fine. Usually in a dangerous situation they understand after you pull them away and give them a short lecture in why we don't do that. I have given many such lectures. Most of the time that time out is enough of a lesson in don't do that. Every once in a while they go right back to it.
Most of the time you can take measures to make the situation less dangerous--closing them out of the room, sticking them in the playpen until they've forgotten whatever perfidy they were up to (if they're small enough), locking the front door so they can't get out and run down the street, putting a fancy plexiglas guard on the stove, whatever. But every once in a while they keep doing it. Sometimes they're just resistant to being reasoned with. Our 2-year-old doesn't quite get "if you do this, I'm going to have to do that" or even "if you can do this, you'll get this reward." Obviously you can train them from a very young age, but kids have such a talent for finding dumb things to do that you just haven't prepared for, and when they really, really want to do it you have to hustle to dissuade them. I still don't deploy the spank unless all other avenues of reason and restraint are exhausted and it's either that or actually watch them get burned, shocked, run over, or whatever horrible thing they're dead set on doing. Then it's a couple of firm pats on the diaper to get their attention, and then a hug and another gentle reaffirmation/lecture.
I mean, I'm inclined to believe what the AAP says because it's backed up by research, and if they had some practical suggestions for incorporating their recommendations I'd certainly give them the time of day. Otherwise, everybody and their brother has a way of getting their kids to behave that works like a charm, if you get what I mean.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by advice for robots: Otherwise, everybody and their brother has a way of getting their kids to behave that works like a charm, if you get what I mean.
posted
I don't get why if you have time to spank kid you can't grab and keep hand from getting burned. It seems to me spanking is a tougher action than grab. I also loved the child leashes. When my daughter couldn't be trusted to be free, she got child leashed. That leash was a very effective tool.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, I don't think a person is bad for spanking. I just find that spanking is not a necessary or sufficient tool to parenting. I live in Texas where spanking seems to be the preferred punishment so I am often told there is no way I can raise decent children without swatting. My sister in law even sent me a parenting book on the proper way to spank. Though I also have different goals with my kids. Blind obedience would kinda disgust me.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
So scholarette, you're saying that you're against spanking children because, other, more humane methods are just as effective... but you will attach a rope to your child and pull them along like a common house pet. Please explain to me the logic in that.
Posts: 87 | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't get why if you have time to spank kid you can't grab and keep hand from getting burned. It seems to me spanking is a tougher action than grab.
Well, that's the thing. I have been grabbing their hand, pulling them away, taking them out of the room, having the serious talk with them, all that stuff repeatedly already, and for some reason they're not getting it. The kid flagrantly violates everything I just told her and starts running for the stove yet again. The spank is to make the lesson sink in a little deeper, for lack of better words. It's the once and for all for something they should not think it's ok to do as a general rule, if nothing else has worked. Getting their fingers burned would be just as effective, but I'm not going to let that happen. I don't want her to think she can just try to do it again as soon as I'm not looking.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Blind obedience--I'm not a huge fan of spanking, despite what I've just said. On the rare occasions I have spanked one of my kids, I did it to get their attention so they'd really listen and hopefully remember what I tell them, lovingly, right after I spank them. I didn't do it to instill fear in them. Letting them know that there are both real consequences for breaking a rule and rewards for following it is not blind obedience; it's the basis of them being able to make good decisions on their own.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by advice for robots: On the rare occasions I have spanked one of my kids, I did it to get their attention so they'd really listen and hopefully remember what I tell them, lovingly, right after I spank them. I didn't do it to instill fear in them. Letting them know that there are both real consequences for breaking a rule and rewards for following it is not blind obedience;...
posted
For the leash, I use it on my dog to keep my dog safe. I love my children a million miles more so why wouldn't I use it for that. Also, I dont use it to drag them along. I use it so they can't run away and disappear in the store.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've considered a child leash like that when we're in very crowded places and envied the parents who had them. Just what scholarette said: to keep them safe in certain circumstances. It actually gives them more freedom than they'd have if you were holding on to their hand or arm, and it gives you more freedom as well. If ever we find ourselves at Disneyland or some other such place in the next few years, I'd have them for our two littlest.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thanks for the response, afr. I forgot to reply earlier and lost the response box text-didn't want you to think I was ignoring what you'd said.
Yeah, I saw that bit too. It does coincide somewhat with what I would expect to be the result of a parent who used corporal punishment 'properly' (i.e. rarely and with a very large degree of restraint). As others have said, though, even that is not really a recommendation for corporal punishment as much as a description of how, if it's going to be used, should be done.
Also, as for the idea of child leashes, I suppose the get a bad rap, but there are many circumstances in which I can imagine they'd be not just unobjectionable but even a good idea. The cosmetic angle of it that ZachC mentioned seems pretty silly to me-parents already are required to treat their children in ways not dissimilar to pets-they regulate when they eat, sleep, where they eat and sleep, *how* they eat and sleep, use overt punishment and reward to modify simple behaviors, even speak in silly voices, so on and so forth.
So if a given parent is going to be in a situation where they can't feel secure enough in their ability to manage just how much roaming exactly their kid is going to do, for whatever reason (hands full, busy, crowded, multiple kids, etc.) then...why not, exactly? Would be my question. It's not as though anyone has suggested staking the kid out in the yard while you're inside visiting...
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: Also, I don't think a person is bad for spanking. I just find that spanking is not a necessary or sufficient tool to parenting.
Correct. I had summarized this up like a long, long time ago .. let me see if I can find the quotes I have stood by the longest.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Most who spank are just trying to get their kids in line and they are going with what they think works.
They probably also work under a belief that it is neglectful to not incorporate spanking as a disciplinary method. In that sense, most who do it are only trying to do what's right for the kiddo. In and of itself, spanking is not something I consider to be a cruel act. I just advocate that it is a misinformed practice that has better alternatives, and this only really contests viewpoints that assert that spanking is a 'necessary' or 'preferable' practice that is integral to parenting.
posted
and i wish i hadn't gone back for spankin' threads because they involve characters like malanthrop reminding us that yes, they bred, and they spank their children because it works for dogs right
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
With children who don't speak Chinese, there is no way I would do hong kong without leashes. When they weren't leashed, they were confined to strollers which was a lot less fun and freedom than the leashes. But streets were way to crowded to feel safe without something. Not because of kids behavior but the crowds. My older actually liked the leash because she felt safer.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am actually entirely for leashes. I got an extremely negative view of leashes, but that was from the early visible examples of use here being terrible parents who had no reasonable control of their children whatsoever anyway, and would just pull them back by the leash over and over again and bark yappy useless shouts at them, so.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
One of my coworkers recently posted on Facebook a quote about how we don't spank our kids ad then complain when they have no conscious. This is the attitude I get at work all the time. Every one of my coworkers believes that if you aren't spanking, you are a bad parent. I also talk about my kids and complain over the stuff they do (well I used to, not so much now) and they all use this as proof that my parenting style is failing. When they were kids, they would never have done the stuff my kids do. Based on my nephews who spank and other kids, mine are angels. And when I was a kid, my parents spanked and I did a lot worse than mine have even considered. I also like the whole raise your daughters rude movement so I will never force my kids to say hug someone f they don't want to. Our number one rule, for which all other rules can be ignored is don't let self get hurt. So if a kid is bullying, she can ignore rules and get herself safe (she once sat there while bullies spit on her for like ten minutes because her teacher said to sit there so we spent a lot of time on defending self). But, I am so tired of hearing how spanking would fix my kids and I am such a bad parent for not.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
(((scholarette))) for what it's worth, I think you're a great parent not to use spanking, and to help your kid defend itself, and think and act for itself. Just know, if you'd live somewhere else, they'd find the others bad parents and you the good one (and that teacher would be fired). Spanking is just some habit, no habits are necessarily right just because they are habits. And noone would defend a bad habit by saying, 'I do it as a habit' they would come up with some philosophy to defend it. But luckily, in the end people are willing to give up bad habits, as our marvelous human love and intelligence win in the end (I hope).
Posts: 135 | Registered: Sep 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
While I use and defend spanking as possibly necessary at times, I in no way think that -not spanking- makes you a bad parent, and from what little I know of your parenting and personality I do not hesitate to say those people criticizing you do not know their rectums from a hole in ground.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
My sister in law actually sent me a parenting book that explains how to spank properly. That book actually kinda made me sick because it was very biblical, original sin kinda stuff. One claim was that if a child disobeys their parent, it should be treated the same as outright defiance of God. It also went on about how even a newborn infant is sinful and evil and it is the parents job to beat the evil out of them.
What I find strange is when I was a stay at home mom, the other moms I hung out with where more anti spanking. Now that I am working, my associates are much more pro spanking. Before my sister in law was just the crazy one and now it is like wow, she is not as fringe as I thought she was.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:My sister in law actually sent me a parenting book that explains how to spank properly. That book actually kinda made me sick because it was very biblical, original sin kinda stuff. One claim was that if a child disobeys their parent, it should be treated the same as outright defiance of God. It also went on about how even a newborn infant is sinful and evil and it is the parents job to beat the evil out of them.
Isn't, in such traditions, the punishment for outright defiance of God supposed to be everlasting damnation in Hell? If so, it wouldn't be surprising to see such an awful and yet also impossible, Hell in such a tradition being so much more cruel than any amount of human effort could accomplish.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scholarette: My sister in law actually sent me a parenting book that explains how to spank properly. That book actually kinda made me sick because it was very biblical, original sin kinda stuff. One claim was that if a child disobeys their parent, it should be treated the same as outright defiance of God. It also went on about how even a newborn infant is sinful and evil and it is the parents job to beat the evil out of them.
posted
People who tell you that you are a bad parent because you don't spank are in that category of people who need to be shamed and have their opinion burnt out and prevented from passing to new generations.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Delineating between those types and people who like me only use spanking as a last resort, and use it properly is an important delineation, one which requires knowledge of circumstance.
I hope that your last post signifies a dichotomy of your previous absolutist stance.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
My last post doesn't change anything about my Absolutist stance being Absolutely 'you should not spank your kids' — everything I have offered thus far remains consistent to that fact, and right.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Put another way: 'parents shouldn't spank does not equal parents who spank are bad and unloving'. That distinction has been made at least three or four times in this discussion, and usually 'this particular method is wrong' is not read as 'you are doing this entire complicated long term project badly'.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
My point is you should take circumstance into account to know which tactics to use, as parents like myself should not fall into the "people who need to be shamed and have their opinion burnt out and prevented from passing to new generations" category even by your entirely binary moral stance.
While I am utterly acclimated to the simple fact that you will not change your view that "kids should not be spanked" I hope you will wake up to the idea that being a jerk to all on the other side of this argument is at best counter productive to your stated goal.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I hope you will wake up to the idea that being a jerk to all on the other side of this argument is at best counter productive to your stated goal.
My tone is not a factor in whether or not spanking children is a good idea. If someone is unwilling to listen to the evidence on account of my tone, that's a problem with their emotional approach in listening to reason, not with the facts.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I hope you will wake up to the idea that being a jerk to all on the other side of this argument is at best counter productive to your stated goal.
My tone is not a factor in whether or not spanking children is a good idea. If someone is unwilling to listen to the evidence on account of my tone, that's a problem with their emotional approach in listening to reason, not with the facts.
No, it's a problem for you too *if* one of your aims is to actually be listened to, rather than to preach. But that's an old discussion. And you're right to say that a perceived bad tone doesn't justify rejecting an entire argument, either.
That said, I wonder: how black and white *is* your stance on corporal punishment? Clearly it is black and white to the extent that spanking should not be done because there are other, better parenting tools to hand.
Is it also your view that parents who spank, to any extent and in any circumstances, period, ought to feel ashamed of themselves and be considered bad parents on the question of corporal punishment alone? It seems clear to me that this is not your stance, and more than once you've said things that point in that direction, but I haven't been looking for a fight with you either.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Is it also your view that parents who spank, to any extent and in any circumstances, period, ought to feel ashamed of themselves and be considered bad parents on the question of corporal punishment alone? It seems clear to me that this is not your stance,
If it's clear, why are you asking?
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, that is murky. I should rather say: having read what you have said on a variety of topics in the past, including this one in this thread, I don't think that's your view-therefore you are being this militant (in choice of language, anyway) to have some fun.'
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, issues like this are ones I am intently inclined to purposefully not coach in politeness, and state it straightforwardly without any regard for (or probably with the open expectation that)people are going to levy a tone argument and try to turn the argument into "you should be expected to tell me i should stop hitting my child only if you do so nicely!" — I am definitely being listened to on the terms I want by being 'absolutist' or 'militant' about it.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sam has actually kept an impressive number of parents from spanking, and actually taught a single mother of two how to do it in person.
Posts: 805 | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Specialists oppose the use of corporal punishment both in families as in schools, juvenile facilities, child care nurseries, and all other institutions, public or private, where children are cared for or educated. They claim that corporal punishment is violent and unnecessary, may lower self-esteem, and is liable to instil hostility and rage without reducing the undesired behaviour. They also state that corporal punishment is likely to train children to use physical violence.
By now 32 states have completely prohibited corporal punishment of children, so including spanking by parents, by law. In addition, supreme court rulings prohibit corporal punishment in 2 further states, while another 21 states have officially committed to full prohibition. Countries that have completely prohibited corporal punishment of children by law are, in chronological order:
Sweden (1979) Finland (1983) Norway (1987) Austria (1989) Cyprus (1994) Denmark (1997) Latvia (1998) Croatia (1999) Bulgaria (2000) Israel (2000 Germany (2000) Iceland (2003) Ukraine (2004) Romania (2004) Hungary (2005) Greece (2006) Netherlands (2007) New Zealand (2007) Portugal (2007) Uruguay (2007) Venezuela (2007) Spain (2007) Togo (2007) Costa Rica (2008) Republic of Moldova (2008) Luxembourg (2008) Liechtenstein (2008) Poland (2010) Tunisia (2010) Kenya (2010) Congo, Republic of (2010) Albania (2010) South Sudan (2011).
Artikel 19.1 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child states 'States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child.' This Convention is binding international law for all countries, except for The United States, Somalia and South Sudan, who have not ratified the Convention.
Posts: 135 | Registered: Sep 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll also point out as a gentle aside that many pediatricians, politicians, and other policy makers are themselves parents.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you look at daycares and schools, there are tons of kids in there and many don't use any negative discipline at all. Mine is a big believer in distraction and time outs aren't a you were bad, go but a we need a minute to diffuse this situation. More a break than a punishment. If places that deal With large numbers of kids for long hours can do it, I figure me with just two can do it. Though as stated above, I did work tutoring some very badly behaved children with only positive feedback allowed. So, I did get some formal training in discipline methods for kids.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Believe me, with kids ranging from baby to 11 years old, I am well-versed in all the variations. Usually the threat of a time out works just fine. Usually in a dangerous situation they understand after you pull them away and give them a short lecture in why we don't do that. I have given many such lectures. Most of the time that time out is enough of a lesson in don't do that. Every once in a while they go right back to it.![[Wink]](wink.gif)
