FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » How did people get so harsh towards children? (Page 4)

  This topic comprises 7 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7   
Author Topic: How did people get so harsh towards children?
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post 
(Edited by me, because Moose already made a statement-should've read the entire thread, my mistake)
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Papa Moose:
I don't have a dog in this fight, but I'm curious about the subject from a social evolution standpoint. Is it possible that in earlier times, in more tribal societies, spanking (or probably beating at the time -- corporal punishment anyway) developed characteristics in children that allowed them to survive to adulthood, and that those characteristics are not in fact necessary (or one might argue beneficial) in our current society?

It often makes me think of boot camp. All I know of boot camp is from books/movies/etc. -- I have no personal experience (aside from a drill instructor yelling at his recruits because my (at the time 9-year-old) sister could climb the ropes at the confidence course with ease, and some of the recruits couldn't (this was a cub scout outing, but my dad was the cubmaster and my mom was a den leader so my sister always ended up attending). And I don't remember it that well -- I remember my dad recounting it. What I remember is the challenge from a marine that I couldn't drink 15 glasses of chocolate milk. That bet I won. [/tangentially related but non-topical aside]

There seems to be a lot of yelling, and hazing, and ridiculously unnecessary stuff like shining shoes and cleaning floors with toothbrushes and all that. From the outside it seems ridiculous. But are these actually necessary to building the unit cohesion required in the military, and the unquestioning following of orders which may sometimes be required on the battlefield?

And wasn't more of life a battlefield back then? Wild animals attacked flocks, and there weren't the same kinds of weapons to fend them off. Marauders (if stories be believed) were much more common. Civilizations were scattered, and there was much more no-man's-land (and no-law-land) in between.

To be clear, I'm not arguing for this concept. I'm asking about it -- if anyone's thought of it before (here, that is -- I'm sure someone somewhere has). And if there's any basis to it, then is it possible that the time/need for corporal punishment may be passing (or already have passed, some would argue) away? Or that it may return in the case of societal collapse?

Thoughts, thoughts....

Interesting points, hazing is another subject because some of the stuff they make people do these days when it comes to hazing are pretty disturbing.
And folks will argue, but it makes the group bond.
But, there's a difference between traumatic bonding and actual bonding. Traumatic bonding is quite unhealthy, as unhealthy as some of the ridiculous rituals folks who are hazed are forced to do from Fraternities and the military. Is there some way to create those same kind of bonds without the hazing? The hazing can be reduced to something that is actually fun and not dangerous.

But then you wonder about militaries and boot camps.Hmmm. Kids aren't quite the same as soldiers.

But, I reckon that would depend on the civilization. Right now there's all sorts of hunter gatherer societies. It would be interesting to look at how they raise their children. Maybe folks were more AP about infants than older children?
I'd like to get a book and learn more about that.
I do think that much of the culture of corporal punishment in the African American community comes from slavery. As for Europe, I've read some great books by Alice Miller and this book called The Invention of the Child. All of those had some insightful things to say on the subject.
I do not want folks who use spanking as an occasional tool to feel alienated. I've got to admit it. I'm biased.

Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I'm also saying that there may be times and children for when spanking is the only option left to a parent.
As for me, I'm just saying that 'never-ever-ever' is very rarely true when it comes to human affairs, and I can easily imagine many (that is not to say most) examples of corporal punishment where it wouldn't be true, either.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
Ok then, I can't promise that I'd know what to do when my hand raises against my will. Kids can be annoying and frustrating. They will try someone's patience.
But they are kids. Their brains are developing. They are still learning. If I think of them as being bad that would make it way too easy to hit, but if I lose control, I'm not above apologizing and trying to do better.

Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MightyCow
Member
Member # 9253

 - posted      Profile for MightyCow           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Christine:
Spanking is effective at getting an immediate, short-term response, but has shown to be an ineffective strategy for shaping long-term behavior.

I don't understand how you can say that spanking is ineffective at shaping long-term behavior, but at the same time equate it with doing long-term harm to children.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MightyCow
Member
Member # 9253

 - posted      Profile for MightyCow           Edit/Delete Post 
Allow me to point out that many adults spank and are spanked BY OTHER ADULTS, and that it is not only not-hitting, and non-abusive, but enjoyable.

Spanking is not always "hitting," nor is it violence towards children.

I'll bring up again that the people who are the most strongly anti-spanking seem to have had bad experiences in their childhood, which were hitting, by most people's definition. Please realize that there's a difference.

Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by MightyCow:
quote:
Originally posted by Christine:
Spanking is effective at getting an immediate, short-term response, but has shown to be an ineffective strategy for shaping long-term behavior.

I don't understand how you can say that spanking is ineffective at shaping long-term behavior, but at the same time equate it with doing long-term harm to children.
Probably because a kid is more likely to be "good" out of fear, not because they've actually learned why the behaviour was unacceptable. Some other methods might be better for something like that.
It would probably vary from child to child or depend on the force, the duration, whatever, to me it's just too risky. There's that fear thing for one thing, and the trust.
I know that getting hit by my mother.. it seemed to have taken away my gumption a bit. When I was a kid and someone was smoking, I could tell them to stop. As an adult, I feel so timid. Too timid. There's that risk of making a child too obedient. Making it hard to say no to authorities, but it depends.
I don't think it did me much good. I kept off drugs because I don't see the sense in them. There are ways to discipline that can really get them to learn, to understand and to want to do the right thing not out of fear of pain, but because it's the right thing to and because they can trust their parents. Too much spanking or the wrong kind could undo that.
So how can a child be built up without becoming too entitled? I'm looking for that middle ground between authoritarian who and helicopter parent whose parents don't let the child take responsibility for themselves. Both are unhealthy extremes.
I think of parenting as sending kids out into a wilderness.They've got to be prepared for that.

Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
jebus202
Member
Member # 2524

 - posted      Profile for jebus202   Email jebus202         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by MightyCow:
Allow me to point out that many adults spank and are spanked BY OTHER ADULTS, and that it is not only not-hitting, and non-abusive, but enjoyable.

You seem to know a lot about this.
Posts: 3564 | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by MightyCow:
Allow me to point out that many adults spank and are spanked BY OTHER ADULTS, and that it is not only not-hitting, and non-abusive, but enjoyable.

Spanking is not always "hitting," nor is it violence towards children.

I'll bring up again that the people who are the most strongly anti-spanking seem to have had bad experiences in their childhood, which were hitting, by most people's definition. Please realize that there's a difference.

What is the difference though? I have trouble seeing spanking as anything but hitting because it really is hitting. Not all spanking is abusive, but spanking is hitting. It's in the dictionary. It's inflicting enough pain to create a change in behaviour. It's the inflicting pain aspect I have a problem with.
Especially when it comes to toddlers.

Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by jebus202:
quote:
Originally posted by MightyCow:
Allow me to point out that many adults spank and are spanked BY OTHER ADULTS, and that it is not only not-hitting, and non-abusive, but enjoyable.

You seem to know a lot about this.
That's actually another good reason not to hit a kid, especially on the butt.
I will not have my kid running around in some spank dungeon.

Unless it's not my fault. Then I don't want to know about it!

Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by MightyCow:
quote:
Originally posted by Christine:
Spanking is effective at getting an immediate, short-term response, but has shown to be an ineffective strategy for shaping long-term behavior.

I don't understand how you can say that spanking is ineffective at shaping long-term behavior, but at the same time equate it with doing long-term harm to children.
Because when you use it, the 'shaping' you get is vastly more likely to not be what you intended.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sinflower
Member
Member # 12228

 - posted      Profile for sinflower           Edit/Delete Post 
Why exactly is inflicting physical pain so much worse than inflicting emotional pain? When you're spanking a child (not hitting, not abusively), you're inflicting mild physical pain to change a behavior. When you tell a child you're ashamed of her actions and put her in a corner, you're inflicting mild emotional pain to change a behavior. Why is one necessarily worse than the other?
Posts: 241 | Registered: Nov 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post 
If one is worse than the other, it would be because of the tangible and potent differences between children's psychological response to being put in a corner versus being physically struck to induce pain.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
sinflower
Member
Member # 12228

 - posted      Profile for sinflower           Edit/Delete Post 
I don't see causing pain in a child as a bad thing when it's used by a parent who's in control of his own emotions. Light pain is a signal for the brain to pay attention to whatever's going on, which can reinforce the message or lesson a parent is trying to convey.

And is there solid evidence for there being a "tangible and potent" difference in the psychological response in physical vs. nonphysical disciplining? I haven't seen that in this thread so far...

[ March 12, 2010, 05:08 AM: Message edited by: sinflower ]

Posts: 241 | Registered: Nov 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
AvidReader
Member
Member # 6007

 - posted      Profile for AvidReader   Email AvidReader         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Samprimary:
If one is worse than the other, it would be because of the tangible and potent differences between children's psychological response to being put in a corner versus being physically struck to induce pain.

And I definitely think that would depend on the personality of the child. For some people, that time out might be a necessary cool down period to shed their overstimulation and leave them the mental clarity to understand what they did wrong. For others, the boredom could leave them more aggitated than they were when they went in and completely unable to process new information.

Remember, not everyone fears pain to the same degree. I run into walls and furniture on a fairly regular basis because it doesn't hurt enough to distract me from whatever else I'm doing. I've done worse to myself through inattention than my parents ever did as punishment. It never rose to a level that my pain threshold viewed as frightening.

By middle school, the world was over if Mom took the phone away. She didn't even have to ground me, just tell me I couldn't talk on the phone and I was miserable. That was the most effective punishment in the bag for me.

Everybody's different. What scares one person might seem ridiculous to another. What helps one person internalize a lesson just makes another angry. There's so much going on in effective discipline that's so specific, I don't know how anyone could ever craft hard and fast rules for it.

Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by sinflower:
Why exactly is inflicting physical pain so much worse than inflicting emotional pain? When you're spanking a child (not hitting, not abusively), you're inflicting mild physical pain to change a behavior. When you tell a child you're ashamed of her actions and put her in a corner, you're inflicting mild emotional pain to change a behavior. Why is one necessarily worse than the other?

I'd say, let's not do either of those things. Let's not inflict pain on people in general to change their behaviour but find a better way.
No shaming, no being harsh and cruel, respecting people's feelings. Trying to make the child understand that their behaviour was bad, but they themselves are not bad. I think children should be communicated with, respecting their age without pain. They'll face enough harshness in the so-called real world. Why should they get that from their parents? Folks don't have to raise their kids with pain to get their attention when there are better ways.

Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
It's inflicting enough pain to create a change in behaviour.
I would argue that most modern spankers do not in fact intend to inflict pain as much as they intend to inflict humiliation. Whether this is better or worse is left for you to decide.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
quote:
It's inflicting enough pain to create a change in behaviour.
I would argue that most modern spankers do not in fact intend to inflict pain as much as they intend to inflict humiliation. Whether this is better or worse is left for you to decide.
I don't see the necessity of inflicting either of those things. Pain and humiliation tend to make people feel like a pile of steaming dog crap.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jim-Me
Member
Member # 6426

 - posted      Profile for Jim-Me   Email Jim-Me         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Synesthesia:Trying to make the child understand that their behaviour was bad, but they themselves are not bad.
Syn, if you figure out how to do this without getting played, write a book. It'll be a best seller.
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Christine
Member
Member # 8594

 - posted      Profile for Christine   Email Christine         Edit/Delete Post 
Animals in pain don't think clearly...they start going into a fight or flight mode. The mental and physiological reactions to pain are quit different from the reactions to shame and humiliation.

Syn -- I'm afraid a child just isn't going to go through life constantly feeling good about him or herself. Even under the best circumstances, when you try to clearly differentiate between a bad behavior and a bad child, the child internalizes it as shame and humiliation. For example, when I put my son in time out, he refuses to come out for a long time, even when I say time's up. He's too embarrassed. I can't not punish him for throwing or hitting, though.

Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Scott R
Member
Member # 567

 - posted      Profile for Scott R   Email Scott R         Edit/Delete Post 
Thanks, Christine; I'd been trying to think of a way to say precisely that.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Christine:
Animals in pain don't think clearly...they start going into a fight or flight mode. The mental and physiological reactions to pain are quit different from the reactions to shame and humiliation.

Syn -- I'm afraid a child just isn't going to go through life constantly feeling good about him or herself. Even under the best circumstances, when you try to clearly differentiate between a bad behavior and a bad child, the child internalizes it as shame and humiliation. For example, when I put my son in time out, he refuses to come out for a long time, even when I say time's up. He's too embarrassed. I can't not punish him for throwing or hitting, though.

Yeah, this is true, folks seldom can feel good about themselves, but I'd definetly want to decrease those sort of feelings by not spanking or shaming for starters intentionally....
Oddly enough, many of the mothers on GCM do not time out. But they seem to have a lot of other methods. But it's impossible to totally isolate kids from negative feelings.

Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by AvidReader:
Everybody's different. What scares one person might seem ridiculous to another. What helps one person internalize a lesson just makes another angry. There's so much going on in effective discipline that's so specific, I don't know how anyone could ever craft hard and fast rules for it.

As I mentioned before, all parenting is, to some degree, adaptive. But there's always underlying biological and psychological universalities. You could always say that punching your child in the face is something you should not do. You could always say that starvation should not be used as a disciplinary tool. What the pediatrics and other medical/psychological bodies are doing when they come out against spanking is noting that when you review the process methodically and empirically, it proves to be an inferior and problematic parenting method, and they represent this by actively discouraging its use.

The next iteration of defense for the practice is that parents will claim that it was either preferable or necessary in the case of certain children, and try to use anecdote and informal test cases. Stuff like "well, you should see MY child, I dare any pediatric researcher to tell me that he/she didn't benefit from spanking" — happens all the time, and they're practically always wrong.

Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Scott R
Member
Member # 567

 - posted      Profile for Scott R   Email Scott R         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Stuff like "well, you should see MY child, I dare any pediatric researcher to tell me that he/she didn't benefit from spanking" — happens all the time, and they're practically always wrong.
How do you conclude this in specific cases?
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dabbler
Member
Member # 6443

 - posted      Profile for dabbler   Email dabbler         Edit/Delete Post 
In case it was missed in the other thread:
quote:

I found a review looking at corporal punishment. There are plenty of articles about physical abuse/maltreatment but I guess the closest to Pearl's behaviors are corporal punishment as management of children.

quote:
Ten of the 11 meta-analyses indicate parental corporal punishment is associate with the following undesirable behaviors and experiences: decreased moral internalization, increased child aggression, increased child delinquent and antisocial behavior, decreased quality of relationship between parent and child, decreased child mental health, increased risk of being a victim of physical abuse, increased adult aggression, increased adult criminal and antisocial behavior, decreased adult mental health, and increased risk of abusing own child or spouse. Corporal punishment was associated with only one desirable behavior, namely, increased immediate compliance (whether immediate compliance constitutes a meaningful desirable behavior is qualified below).
Depression may be higher, shown in a retrospective study. Associated with increased antisocial behavior or "externalizing behaviors" at a young age even after controlling for other variables. This review for the Journal of Developmental Behavioral Pediatrics looks interesting, though I can only see the abstract. Too lazy to go fetch my ID to login to the hospital.

Now I did look up that last review while I'm at the hospital. One pertinent section is below. I removed the footnote numbers for ease of reading. If you'd like me to link the relevant footnotes I can do that today.
quote:
Research investigating the predictors of children’s psychosocial adjustment has consistently demonstrated the importance of parental warmth to children’s mental health. It also has uncovered the relationship between punitive parenting—and physical punishment in particular—and poorer psychological adjustment. A meta-analysis of 88 studies found that, almost without exception, the literature reveals negative relationships between “normative” physical punishment and children’s mental health. While short-term compliance might sometimes result, it can come at a high cost over the long term.

For example, physical punishment’s erosion of parent-child relationships is seen among children as young as 2. Physical punishment has been consistently associated with poorer child and adult mental health, including depression, unhappiness and anxiety, and feelings of hopelessness. Rather than teaching children right from wrong, physical punishment predicts weaker internalization of moral values (e.g., empathy, altruism, resistance to temptation). It should not come as a surprise, then, that physical punishment consistently predicts increased levels of antisocial behavior in children, including aggression against siblings, peers, and parents, as well as dating violence.

I believe that many actions by the parent can change the course of development for a child. You do have to accept some risks: choosing day care, eating at a fast food place for lunch, and maybe even spanking. Each person chooses what they're comfortable with. My point in providing this information is to show that there has been data suggesting that physical punishment causes some quantitative harm and it's now the guideline of various pediatric organizations to discourage its use.
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
andi330
Member
Member # 8572

 - posted      Profile for andi330           Edit/Delete Post 
I have a question for the forum because I think that this is something that is glossed over. There are many parents I know that think that sending a child to bed without dinner is acceptable punishment. I don't. I was spanked a few times as a child (probably less than 5) it was always for extremely bad behavior, never enough to leave a mark, and always open hand on clothed bottom. I don't have a problem with this type of spanking.

For those who disagree with spanking, do you find withholding food as an acceptable punishment? I ask because a lot of parents who don't agree with spanking that I know, do agree with sending a child to bed without dinner. In my opinion, that's the worse of the two punishments. A few minutes of discomfort from a spanking (and yes, a real non-abusive spanking really only causes a few minutes of discomfort) vs. a whole night of hunger. Which is better?

Posts: 1214 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Christine
Member
Member # 8594

 - posted      Profile for Christine   Email Christine         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by andi330:
I have a question for the forum because I think that this is something that is glossed over. There are many parents I know that think that sending a child to bed without dinner is acceptable punishment. I don't. I was spanked a few times as a child (probably less than 5) it was always for extremely bad behavior, never enough to leave a mark, and always open hand on clothed bottom. I don't have a problem with this type of spanking.

For those who disagree with spanking, do you find withholding food as an acceptable punishment? I ask because a lot of parents who don't agree with spanking that I know, do agree with sending a child to bed without dinner. In my opinion, that's the worse of the two punishments. A few minutes of discomfort from a spanking (and yes, a real non-abusive spanking really only causes a few minutes of discomfort) vs. a whole night of hunger. Which is better?

I think this is a stupid punishment. A hungry child is a grumpy, ill-behaved child. My children are always much better behaved with a full belly.

My children have gone to bed hungry, though...when they refuse to eat my dinner. I try to provide at least one food that I think everyone will like but I'm not a short-order cook. We do offer a bed time snack, but if they're really hungry and really anti-dinner then it could easily not be filling enough. I'm honestly still not 100% sure if my strategy is good or not. I've modified it several times over the years.

In general, though, I think withholding of food as an active punishment is a terrible idea.

Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Scott R
Member
Member # 567

 - posted      Profile for Scott R   Email Scott R         Edit/Delete Post 
Hmm.

Our 7 year old is finnicky to the point of frustration. We deal with this by making one dinner for everyone; whoever wants to eat can eat, but we don't make extra meals or special orders. We also don't give out punishments for not eating (except that not eating == no dessert).

When dinner is over, it's over; Mom and Dad make dinner once, and put the leftovers away, and everyone helps clean up the kitchen. If a child decides that they want to eat after the kitchen is clean, and the food is put away, they're mostly out of luck.

Occasionally, the kids have chosen to go hungry rather than eat what we've made, in the time frame that we've allowed for dinner.

I don't think we've ever told a child to go to bed without dinner; that seems like it would exacerbate any problem my kids might have. On the very rare occasion that they've behaved so poorly that they're unwelcome at the dinner table, we've brought dinner up to them.

Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Christine:
quote:
Originally posted by andi330:
I have a question for the forum because I think that this is something that is glossed over. There are many parents I know that think that sending a child to bed without dinner is acceptable punishment. I don't. I was spanked a few times as a child (probably less than 5) it was always for extremely bad behavior, never enough to leave a mark, and always open hand on clothed bottom. I don't have a problem with this type of spanking.

For those who disagree with spanking, do you find withholding food as an acceptable punishment? I ask because a lot of parents who don't agree with spanking that I know, do agree with sending a child to bed without dinner. In my opinion, that's the worse of the two punishments. A few minutes of discomfort from a spanking (and yes, a real non-abusive spanking really only causes a few minutes of discomfort) vs. a whole night of hunger. Which is better?

I think this is a stupid punishment. A hungry child is a grumpy, ill-behaved child. My children are always much better behaved with a full belly.

My children have gone to bed hungry, though...when they refuse to eat my dinner. I try to provide at least one food that I think everyone will like but I'm not a short-order cook. We do offer a bed time snack, but if they're really hungry and really anti-dinner then it could easily not be filling enough. I'm honestly still not 100% sure if my strategy is good or not. I've modified it several times over the years.

In general, though, I think withholding of food as an active punishment is a terrible idea.

I think so too. Plus there's the bathroom to consider.
It's too harsh. Folks need food.

I also remember having to sit for hours being forced to eat grits. I hate grits. I won't eat them as an adult. gross.

Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
Syne, what sort of punishments would you not consider "too harsh?"
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Christine
Member
Member # 8594

 - posted      Profile for Christine   Email Christine         Edit/Delete Post 
Scott: You seem to use strategies pretty similar to mine.

quote:
Originally posted by Synesthesia:
I also remember having to sit for hours being forced to eat grits. I hate grits. I won't eat them as an adult. gross.

For me it was brussel sprouts...shudder

Yeah, the flipside of my plan is I don't force my kids to eat. They have control over what they put in their bodies. They just don't get to request substitutes. And if they don't at least try to eat dinner (one bite of everything), they don't get special treats afterward.

A while back I ran into someone who forced (through intimidation) their child to eat more food than the child really seemed interested in. Seemed like a good way to give a child an eating disorder.

Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by TomDavidson:
Syne, what sort of punishments would you not consider "too harsh?"

Losing priviledges, consequences like having to study extra for bad grades.
Mostly stuff that isn't pain, isn't humiliating or isn't having their music taken away.
It would be torture if someone took away my mp3 player, stereo, and deleted all of my mp3s. [Eek!] [Frown] [Angst]
Something like that should be reserved for severe circumstances like bullying.
I can't stand bullying.

Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Christine
Member
Member # 8594

 - posted      Profile for Christine   Email Christine         Edit/Delete Post 
If you really like music, then taking away music (one way or another) is an excellent punishment.
Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mr_porteiro_head
Member
Member # 4644

 - posted      Profile for mr_porteiro_head   Email mr_porteiro_head         Edit/Delete Post 
What about looking at them crosseyed? Too harsh?
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
Yes, but only for extreme cases. Instead of saying punish me with music deprevation I should say punish me by taking me to a dir en grey concert full of very attractive men, mostly with lovely tattoos.

Yes, that would be torture. It would be awful. Especially if one took me out for a sundae afterwards and fond my quirks to be cute and irresistible. Oh, the humanity.

Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Scott R
Member
Member # 567

 - posted      Profile for Scott R   Email Scott R         Edit/Delete Post 
We definitely restrict our kids' media intake, including music.

My 11 year-old is old enough to want to listen to the music that her peers listen to (alas! No more Sandra Boynton for her...) She also saved up money to buy her own iPod.

Recently she wanted to purchase...I don't remember the name of the song, but it was something along the lines of being drunk (literally and figuratively) in love with some guy. We sat down together and found the lyrics on the internet and reviewed them; she was able to make the decision that the lyrics weren't really positive in light of our beliefs. She made the decision that that was a song she didn't want to use her money to purchase.

I'm glad she came to that conclusion on her own; however, if she still wanted to purchase the song, I wouldn't have allowed it. (I also won't let her purchase songs that over-dramatize romance or where the singer-- especially female singers-- desperately pine for their Man. I mention those, because so much of pop music seems centered around unhealthy, desperate declarations of love.)

We've got standards we want our kids to live by. Part of being a parent means enforcing those standards (and living them yourself) even when that decision is unpopular or uncomfortable.

Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
What about looking at them crosseyed? Too harsh?

naw, i do wish I knew how to glare.I think I look like a rabbit trying to be angry when glaring.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Scott R:
We definitely restrict our kids' media intake, including music.

My 11 year-old is old enough to want to listen to the music that her peers listen to (alas! No more Sandra Boynton for her...) She also saved up money to buy her own iPod.

Recently she wanted to purchase...I don't remember the name of the song, but it was something along the lines of being drunk (literally and figuratively) in love with some guy. We sat down together and found the lyrics on the internet and reviewed them; she was able to make the decision that the lyrics weren't really positive in light of our beliefs. She made the decision that that was a song she didn't want to use her money to purchase.

I'm glad she came to that conclusion on her own; however, if she still wanted to purchase the song, I wouldn't have allowed it. (I also won't let her purchase songs that over-dramatize romance or where the singer-- especially female singers-- desperately pine for their Man. I mention those, because so much of pop music seems centered around unhealthy, desperate declarations of love.)

We've got standards we want our kids to live by. Part of being a parent means enforcing those standards (and living them yourself) even when that decision is unpopular or uncomfortable.

That is very responsible. I am such a heathen that I worry that when I have kids they can't watch the things I like like South Park. At least most of Dir en grey is in Japanese, so that's good and you can hardly understand Kyo saying the F word, but that's one thing I wonder about. I hated having my books restricted as a jr high school student for example, having books I bought taken away from me. But, sometimes things that are too violent need to be restricted.

Also, she should never listen to Bessie Smith. "I'd rather my man hit me then quit me"!!!
Songs back then were so unhealthily co-dependent, but they were so good. All of these Billie songs, but she's singing about a man who beats her and is mean to her and she likes him anyway.
Billie Holiday was rather troubled anyway. I'd definetly want to ban most modern pop music.
And pink and orange together.

Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jake
Member
Member # 206

 - posted      Profile for Jake           Edit/Delete Post 
Scott, at what age do you plan to stop using veto power over purchases like that?
Posts: 1087 | Registered: Jul 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
dabbler
Member
Member # 6443

 - posted      Profile for dabbler   Email dabbler         Edit/Delete Post 
I could see a reasonable argument of, "until it's her own money."

I've always been fond of letting kids get a feel for the consequences of their choices, like letting a kid stay up late but still insisting they wake up and go to school on time. But it's just one tool in a multitude of techniques to help a kid figure things out.

Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jake
Member
Member # 206

 - posted      Profile for Jake           Edit/Delete Post 
I could too. My question wasn't intended to imply judgement.
Posts: 1087 | Registered: Jul 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rakeesh
Member
Member # 2001

 - posted      Profile for Rakeesh   Email Rakeesh         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:

I'm glad she came to that conclusion on her own; however, if she still wanted to purchase the song, I wouldn't have allowed it. (I also won't let her purchase songs that over-dramatize romance or where the singer-- especially female singers-- desperately pine for their Man. I mention those, because so much of pop music seems centered around unhealthy, desperate declarations of love.)

How confident are you that she actually reached that conclusion on her own? I only ask because I can easily a kid realizing, "This conversation won't end with me getting the song no matter what happens. So I may as well get what I can from it." That's not to say I'm asking, "How confident are you that she's telling the truth?" but rather wondering how much, if at all, that pragmatic consideration entered into the matter at all?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Christine
Member
Member # 8594

 - posted      Profile for Christine   Email Christine         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by dabbler:
I could see a reasonable argument of, "until it's her own money."

This works for some things. It really depends upon your value system. You have to choose your battles, of course, but there are definitely things that I would not "let" my children do or buy until they are legally adults. Body piercings and tattoos come to mind.

Music isn't such a big thing for me right now but that may be because my oldest is 4 and doesn't pick his own music yet.

Posts: 2392 | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kwea
Member
Member # 2199

 - posted      Profile for Kwea   Email Kwea         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by andi330:
I have a question for the forum because I think that this is something that is glossed over. There are many parents I know that think that sending a child to bed without dinner is acceptable punishment. I don't. I was spanked a few times as a child (probably less than 5) it was always for extremely bad behavior, never enough to leave a mark, and always open hand on clothed bottom. I don't have a problem with this type of spanking.

For those who disagree with spanking, do you find withholding food as an acceptable punishment? I ask because a lot of parents who don't agree with spanking that I know, do agree with sending a child to bed without dinner. In my opinion, that's the worse of the two punishments. A few minutes of discomfort from a spanking (and yes, a real non-abusive spanking really only causes a few minutes of discomfort) vs. a whole night of hunger. Which is better?

I think it is fine, as long as it isn't a default punishment. As long as your child gets regular, nourishing meals, one night going hungry is not a big deal. It won't hurt them in the long run.

But in my past it was used rarely, and usually only for being disagreeable or rude while at the table. And there was almost always something brought to my room....maybe not a full meal, but some sort of food.

I think that ALL punishments have to be doled out responsibly. Sending your child to their room without entertainment options is fine, but locking them in a closet isn't. Going to bed without dinner is fine, but starving your kid isn't (neither is feeding them only crap food, but that is a different topic.). Spanking is ok, but beating your child isn't.


It's more a matter of degree than anything. As are most things in life.

Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Scott R:
quote:
Stuff like "well, you should see MY child, I dare any pediatric researcher to tell me that he/she didn't benefit from spanking" — happens all the time, and they're practically always wrong.
How do you conclude this in specific cases?
Well, in the case I've known, it's when they actually consult childrearing experts.

Then there's the cases on those Nanny shows, where these parents get incredulous when supernanny-911 or whoever tells them that part of the PROBLEM with their parenting methods is the use of spanking, and they insist it's necessary and that their kids would be worse off if they quit spanking because it's what keeps them in line and/or they SHOULD do it in instances where the child's safety is at issue and the nanny is always like no no no no etc *fixes all problems*

but these are unscientific versions of what enhanced study is also showing. I don't have to conclude myself, not being part of more studious research.

Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jim-Me
Member
Member # 6426

 - posted      Profile for Jim-Me   Email Jim-Me         Edit/Delete Post 
From previous thread, lightly edited:

quote:
Samp put it well. Corporal punishment is basically a lazy, low effort way out-- you convey much disapproval combined with a real, tangible punishment, and, unlike other forms of punishment, it does not require constant follow up and enforcement over time: it's one and done (as an aside, is this less traumatic than a long and ongoing explanation of why a kid is bad/wrong?).

However...

As I am constantly telling my kids when I play the "I'm the parent and you will listen to me" card, when there's a limited amount of parent and an excessive amount of kid, sometimes you don't have time to mess around. My overall response to this [previous] thread was basically what Hank said: until you are a parent, you don't understand how time, energy, and emotion-expensive kids are.

So, as Samp said, spanking is pretty much a crutch. I would add, however, that sometimes a crutch is helpful.

This speaking as someone who tries to minimize spanking, but is absolutely willing to use that particular tool. I think the biggest issues with spanking occur when it's your "go-to" method. When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

"That's all I have to say about that."
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Synesthesia
Member
Member # 4774

 - posted      Profile for Synesthesia   Email Synesthesia         Edit/Delete Post 
I really, really, really wish people would stop saying "Until you are a parent.. blah blah blah" when it comes to spanking because on some levels it's true. Having your own child isn't the same as say, babysitting my cousin when I was 13, and he was about 6 months and she'd party all night.
I took care of that kid until he was in elementary school most of the time. It was because of him I didn't think I'd want kids. (Especially when he peed all over my room, not as a toddler, but an elementary school child. His mother spanked him over that. It really didn't work.)
But, one cannot understand how deeply I do not want to spank.
I do like that there's a ton of resources, more folks proudly breastfeeding and slinging babies. I wish my mother had those sort of resources. I feel bad for her because she went through a lot and I had cancer and she didn't really have a lot of support.

There's definitely got to be something more affective than JUST punishment. And there is. If at one time it was considered acceptable to discipline women by hitting, one day it will be totally unacceptable to hit children...

Which especially bothers me when it's done in schools. I went to school down south for a while and I remember getting paddled for running in the hall.

Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Sean Monahan
Member
Member # 9334

 - posted      Profile for Sean Monahan   Email Sean Monahan         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Synesthesia:
Mostly stuff that isn't pain, isn't humiliating or isn't having their music taken away.

I'm wary about linking to tvtropes, but I was reminded here of this.
Posts: 1080 | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scholarette
Member
Member # 11540

 - posted      Profile for scholarette           Edit/Delete Post 
While I understand the frustration at being told "until you are a parent" being a parent does change everything. I don't spank and still disagree with the idea, but I can understand it much better.For me, the big thing I changed my view on was tv. I swore my daughter would never watch tv. Anyone who knows me knows I have failed horribly at that one. [Smile] I think this point comes up so frequently because people don't like being judged by others who have no practical understanding of the situation. And babysitting is very different from being a parent, no matter how frequent the sitting is.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Glenn Arnold
Member
Member # 3192

 - posted      Profile for Glenn Arnold   Email Glenn Arnold         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Papa Moose:
I don't have a dog in this fight, but I'm curious about the subject from a social evolution standpoint. Is it possible that in earlier times, in more tribal societies, spanking (or probably beating at the time -- corporal punishment anyway) developed characteristics in children that allowed them to survive to adulthood, and that those characteristics are not in fact necessary (or one might argue beneficial) in our current society?

From an evolutionary standpoint, hitting when you want something is simply communication. It may mean you want someone's attention, you want them to move, or they did something you don't like. That's why kids hit too. Like it or not, when you hit a child, especially a preverbal one, you're speaking their language.

Synesthesia said:
quote:

I think children should be communicated with, respecting their age without pain.

Hitting doesn't always hurt. Just think how effective it is when a child reaches for something they shouldn't have, and you tap the back of their hand with one finger. It communicates exactly what they need to understand, and they will pull back their hand immediately. The fact that you used one finger and didn't hurt them shows control on your part, and I think that before it reaches the kind of hitting that we all agree is abuse, spanking out of anger, or because you aren't in control sends exactly the wrong message.

quote:
Ok then, I can't promise that I'd know what to do when my hand raises against my will. Kids can be annoying and frustrating. They will try someone's patience.
I posted about this on a previous page, but no one has responded to it. I don't argue that you should spank your kids, but I do argue that you should have a plan in mind before your hand starts to move. If you're totally against spanking so you don't have that plan, I guarantee you it's going to be worse when you do hit. My first step was always to say "if you do that one more time I will spank you." I don't think Raymond ever got a spanking that way, because he stopped what he was doing.


quote:

Originally posted by TomDavidson:
Syne, what sort of punishments would you not consider "too harsh?"

Losing priviledges, consequences like having to study extra for bad grades.

See, as a former remedial math teacher, I think this could be a big problem. From what I have seen, having to study extra just makes them more resistant to learning. I'm sure that good students will benefit if their grades are bad because they slacked off, but if the child feels they are being punished just because they are "dumb," giving them more work is usually harmful. Better to find some learning games and try to get them to enjoy it. Being a lousy student isn't always intentional behavior, so it shouldn't be punished, as such.

Tom Davidson said:
quote:
I would argue that most modern spankers do not in fact intend to inflict pain as much as they intend to inflict humiliation.
Did you really mean to say that? I certainly never intended to inflict humiliation. My purpose was to show that there was an absolute limit to what a child can get away with. I didn't spank very often, but each time, I sat the child down and talked to them about what they had done, and about the fact that they had been warned that certain behaviors carried a "sentence" of spanking. Raymond says that my rule was no more than a single swat, but that's not the case. What actually happened was that after we had talked about it for awhile, we agreed that only one swat was necessary, based on his remorse and his understanding of what he'd done wrong. One swat was the minimum, because they had broken the rule, and spanking was the punishment, and I'm adamant that under no circumstances should you ever make a threat that you don't intend to carry out. Raymond was always good at showing that he understood that what he had done was wrong, so he only got one swat. Emily was considerably more defiant, and I'm pretty sure she got 4 swats, at least once.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 7 pages: 1  2  3  4  5  6  7   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2