29
   

Spare the rod . . .

 
 
Abel Conklin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 01:14 pm
This site is rife with harsh discipline
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 01:18 pm
@JPB,
Quote:

I'm not sure how old you were when this happened but rather than have you cut your own switch and having it used on you, I would have imposed an immediate cease and desist on whatever activity you were doing that resulted in the broken picture frame and put you to work to earn the money to replace it.

Grandma's tears were probably shame enough to know that you'd done something you shouldn't be proud of and making restitution would/should have make you both feel better.


I can't remember how old I was, 6 or 7? How was I to earn money to replace it? Any pretense of such would be exactly that, just my parents forcing me to engage in labor instead of direct resolution of the problem.

Quote:
Grandma's tears were probably shame enough to know that you'd done something you shouldn't be proud of and making restitution would/should have make you both feel better.


Sorry to laugh, but - no. No way. Perhaps your kids are angels of some type, but what you are talking about would not have constituted a meaningful punishment or discipline for me whatsoever.

I don't want to give the impression that physical punishment was a common thing in my household - it certainly was not. I can count the time I was spanked on one hand. But that's the entire point, isn't it? Rare but effective. I cannot speak for the experiences of others, but the physical punishments I received as a child were quite effective and lead to an improvement in my behavior, and I certainly have suffered no long-term damage from them.

Cycloptichorn
DrewDad
 
  3  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 01:19 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
You don't seem to understand that the point of beating a child isn't to hurt them physically, but to shame them. It is a shaming act.

Bullshit. Furthermore, shaming is harmful, too.

Cycloptichorn wrote:
And it was a quite effective form of discipline; far more effective than other forms my parents attempted.

Then your parents should have had more tools at their disposal.

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Kids are not always capable of adult levels of logic and reasoning; they are however perfectly capable of understanding the logic of physical punishment.

Kids need to be taught logic and reasoning. Please explain how beating them accomplishes this.

Cycloptichorn wrote:
I've known several kids in my life whose parents didn't believe in spankings, and they were snotty and disobedient little shits, one and all.

Bad parenting is bad parenting, whether there is spanking involved or not.

We don't spank, and our kids are the best behaved kids in our circle.

Frankly, the only thing that hitting a kid teaches them is how to physically dominate people.

Cycloptichorn wrote:
I'm not a strict disciplinarian or anything like that, but I firmly believe that physical punishment transmits information to a child on a level which words do not, and when done correctly, there is no lasting damage, either physical or psychological.

Study after study shows that it isn't done correctly, and that it does have lasting effects.

By far the most frequent reason for spanking/hitting is that the parent is angry, not because of a stated disciplinary rule. Also, parents misjudge the amount of force and physically scar kids.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 01:19 pm
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:

JPB wrote:
No child "deserves" to be spanked, beaten, whipped, or otherwise hit. It's a reflection of the inability of the parent to discipline effectively.

Exactly.

The grandparents should have been able to foresee the consequences of allowing Cyclo to run indoors.


What makes you think they 'allowed' me or my brothers to engage in these behaviors? I am quite sure that we chose to do so in violation of standing rules which we were well aware of; and the punishment was a consequence of our failure to respect those rules.

Cycloptichorn
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 01:21 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Corporal punishment, when done correctly, is not done in anger or haste, but instead is a deliberate act.

Except this is almost never done.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  2  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 01:44 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
No, cyclo. My kids aren't angels. They're kids (mostly grown now) but the behavior expected of them was always age appropriate with a bent towards being respectful.

What's wrong with labor to work off one's debts? You broke a frame by your actions. You needed to replace the frame (and apologize to your Grandma). People are forced to work towards making restitution all the time to work of their debt to society - they don't get whippings. Why? Because it's cruel!
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 01:45 pm
@DrewDad,
Quote:

Bullshit. Furthermore, shaming is harmful, too.


In fact, it is not bullshit. This isn't really a credible rebuttal to my opinion.

Quote:

Then your parents should have had more tools at their disposal.


Such as?

Quote:

Kids need to be taught logic and reasoning. Please explain how beating them accomplishes this.


I am amazed that this is not immediately obvious, and that any adult would need this basic fact of life explained to them: that actions have consequences, and severe transgressions have consequences which rise in severity.

Quote:

Bad parenting is bad parenting, whether there is spanking involved or not.

We don't spank, and our kids are the best behaved kids in our circle.

Frankly, the only thing that hitting a kid teaches them is how to physically dominate people.


I disagree with your opinion regarding physical domination. The infrequent spankings I received taught me nothing of the sort whatsoever.

It is not bad parenting to spank your children when they have been bad, not in the slightest.

Quote:

Study after study shows that it isn't done correctly, and that it does have lasting effects.

By far the most frequent reason for spanking/hitting is that the parent is angry, not because of a stated disciplinary rule. Also, parents misjudge the amount of force and physically scar kids.


I guess some parents do. Anything is harmful if you do it wrong...

Cycloptichorn
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 01:47 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Then I would suggest that you weren't properly parented. It's a vicious cycle. Your grandparents probably spanked their children and your parents spanked you and you think it's a good idea to spank your children -- none of which prevents the frame from getting broken.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 01:58 pm
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

No, cyclo. My kids aren't angels. They're kids (mostly grown now) but the behavior expected of them was always age appropriate with a bent towards being respectful.

What's wrong with labor to work off one's debts? You broke a frame by your actions. You needed to replace the frame (and apologize to your Grandma). People are forced to work towards making restitution all the time to work of their debt to society - they don't get whippings. Why? Because it's cruel!


Well, I agree that that was the worst physical punishment I ever experienced. But I must say that at such a young age, I had no real ability to 'work' the payment off. What would I have done? Chores? I already did chores for free!

My parents could have made up work for me to do, but that's simply substituting physical labor for physical punishment. I am unsure how that would have been a more effective punishment than the one I received.

I must say, I never considered any spanking I ever had to be cruel, not in the slightest. It was never about cruelty at all. I completely understand however that discretion and restraint must be in the forefront of one's mind when engaging in physical punishment of a child...

Cycloptichorn
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 02:06 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
You keep using the word punishment as if punishment is necessary. It isn't! Discipline is necessary. You needed to learn the self-discipline to not run in Grandma's house. You learned that by getting a spanking. You could have also learned it by being taught that it's dangerous to Grandma's belongings to run in the house and that all running had to occur outside.

Once you flagrantly violated that rule and learned that running in the house is, in fact, dangerous to Grandma's belongings and that you'd made your Grandma cry you could have spent the next 14 Saturdays (or whatever) pulling weeds in Grandma's garden to earn the money to make up for it. Lesson learned, restitution paid, and if you broke another of Grandma's belongings at a later date then Grandma has the option of having you pay restitution a second time or telling your parents to leave you at home with a sitter the next time they visit.

Not a punishment --- discipline and natural consequences.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 02:17 pm
@JPB,
I find the distinction between Punishment and Discipline to be completely arbitrary, and what more, immaterial.

You state,

Quote:
You could have also learned it by being taught that it's dangerous to Grandma's belongings to run in the house and that all running had to occur outside.


I had already been taught that. It wasn't as if it wasn't clear that I had committed a transgression; I knew what I had done was wrong. I did not need a lesson in what was right and what was wrong in this instance; I merely needed a reminder of the penalties for breaking the rules.

Quote:

Once you flagrantly violated that rule and learned that running in the house is, in fact, dangerous to Grandma's belongings and that you'd made your Grandma cry you could have spent the next 14 Saturdays (or whatever) pulling weeds in Grandma's garden to earn the money to make up for it. Lesson learned, restitution paid, and if you broke another of Grandma's belongings at a later date then Grandma has the option of having you pay restitution a second time or telling your parents to leave you at home with a sitter the next time they visit.


There is no real difference between the forced labor you propose and the physical punishment that I experienced. In fact, I am not convinced that making your kids slave off their transgressions is not in fact more cruel then the direct application of force; if the same lesson is learned in far less time...

Providing the money to my Grandma is meaningless, the cost of the frame itself was trivial. The point wasn't about financial damage that was done but the penalty for breaking the rules.

I understand that others have different opinions regarding corporal punishment, but as someone who has experienced the direct application of it, I must state that fears of long-term damage and concerns about 'what lessons it teaches' are rather overblown in my opinion. Life is a rough ******* place, and it's better if kids learn that at a young age.

Cycloptichorn
dlowan
 
  5  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 02:31 pm
@Merry Andrew,
Heap of ****.

a. There's no spanking, just hitting.

b. This whipping caused an injury.

Where else do you get to assualt people with impunity?

This was an assault.

he should have received legal sanction.
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 02:40 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Providing the money to my Grandma is meaningless, the cost of the frame itself was trivial. The point wasn't about financial damage that was done but the penalty for breaking the rules.


Which is the opposite point of the one that was important. Arbitrary punishments imposed for arbitrary rules only teach you that those who are bigger than you can beat you if they chose.

Of course the cost of the frame was meaningful. It's what you "owed" your Grandmother for destroying her frame. It doesn't matter if it was inexpensive or a family heirloom. You disrespected her house and her belongings and you should have paid to replace them and apologized for your actions.
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 02:42 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:

Bullshit. Furthermore, shaming is harmful, too.


In fact, it is not bullshit. This isn't really a credible rebuttal to my opinion.

It's at least as credible as your claim. More so, I suspect: I've studied how to discipline kids effectively and my wife is a Ph.D. psychologist who has studied the research and has direct experience with child and family therapy.

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:

Then your parents should have had more tools at their disposal.


Such as?

Such as effective discipline techniques. These include but are not limited to: natural consequences, time out, loss of privileges, discussions of proper behavior, reward economies, etc.

You'd be surprised what a kid will go through to get a $3 ride on a pony....

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:

Kids need to be taught logic and reasoning. Please explain how beating them accomplishes this.


I am amazed that this is not immediately obvious, and that any adult would need this basic fact of life explained to them: that actions have consequences, and severe transgressions have consequences which rise in severity.

What's not immediately obvious is how physical punishment accomplishes this.

Physical punishment works so long as a) there is someone to enforce the punishment, b) the act and the punishment are temporally related, c) the child understands the consequence, and c) the child believes there is a reasonable chance of getting caught.

Your example lacks c).

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:

Bad parenting is bad parenting, whether there is spanking involved or not.

We don't spank, and our kids are the best behaved kids in our circle.

Frankly, the only thing that hitting a kid teaches them is how to physically dominate people.


I disagree with your opinion regarding physical domination. The infrequent spankings I received taught me nothing of the sort whatsoever.

It is not bad parenting to spank your children when they have been bad, not in the slightest.

You're welcome to your opinion, but I suggest you do some research before you start throwing it around. Your opinion flies in the face of the accepted research on the subject.

Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:

Study after study shows that it isn't done correctly, and that it does have lasting effects.

By far the most frequent reason for spanking/hitting is that the parent is angry, not because of a stated disciplinary rule. Also, parents misjudge the amount of force and physically scar kids.


I guess some parents do. Anything is harmful if you do it wrong...

Not "some". Almost all parents who spank do it wrong. Not necessarily to the point of physical injury, but in terms of it being an effective disciplinary technique.

Here's what research says about it: consistency is the most important factor; severity of the punishment (spanking vs. non-spanking) is almost meaningless. Spanking can be an effective disciplinary tool, if it is used in a consistent manner. But spanking is almost never used in a consistent manner, and so becomes useless as a tool. Furthermore, even when used consistently, it is no more effective than other disciplinary techniques.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 02:48 pm
@dlowan,
Quote:
Heap of ****.

a. There's no spanking, just hitting.


Both the Law and my personal experience disagree with you on this point.

There is a meaningful difference between Corporal punishment and 'hitting.'

Cycloptichorn
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 02:51 pm
@JPB,
JPB wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Providing the money to my Grandma is meaningless, the cost of the frame itself was trivial. The point wasn't about financial damage that was done but the penalty for breaking the rules.


Which is the opposite point of the one that was important. Arbitrary punishments imposed for arbitrary rules only teach you that those who are bigger than you can beat you if they chose.

Of course the cost of the frame was meaningful. It's what you "owed" your Grandmother for destroying her frame. It doesn't matter if it was inexpensive or a family heirloom. You disrespected her house and her belongings and you should have paid to replace them and apologized for your actions.


But, it isn't arbitrary in the slightest. Learning the lesson that those who are 'bigger' than you - and note that this isn't really about physical size, but about a power discrepancy - can punish you if you break the rules is an important lesson for children to learn, as they are going to experience exactly this situation over and over in their lives, whether the 'bigger' person is the Law or your Employer or some other authority-bearing unit that we are forced to deal with.

I DID apologize to my grandmother, and I most certainly paid for my actions; but not with something so meaningless as money, how trite! As a child money had no real meaning to me, that's part of the Adult world. However, punishment had a very real and direct meaning, and I can report to you accurately that it was extremely effective.

Cycloptichorn
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 02:54 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Meaningful to whom?


People who "spank" are just lying to themselves about what they are doing.

At least have the guts to defend the reality of what you do, if you approve of hitting kids.
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 02:55 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
But none of those entities can hit you, right? Not ONE. Why? Because it's assault and assaulting a child is no way to teach them a lesson.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 02:55 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
It is perfectly possible to teach kids about consequences without hitting them.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Dec, 2009 02:57 pm
@DrewDad,
Quote:

It's at least as credible as your claim. More so, I suspect: I've studied how to discipline kids effectively and my wife is a Ph.D. psychologist who has studied the research and has direct experience with child and family therapy.


My personal experiences do not match your studies, and I'm well aware of modern psychological opinions on the subject, having a wife who is a few months from receiving her PHD in Psychology as well, and works with kids. I'm sure I don't have to tell you that the Soft Science known as psychology is a heavily evolving one; I don't agree with the conclusions that many modern researchers seem to have reached on this and several other subjects.

I'm usually not a traditionalist, but in this case I totally am - spare the rod, spoil the child. You can use whatever works for the rod, but to claim that corporal punishment is ineffective or leads to lasting harm is rather specious in my opinion and is not born out by my life experiences.

Cycloptichorn
 

Related Topics

My daughter - Discussion by Seed
acting out or real problem - Question by Bl08791
Tween girls - Discussion by sozobe
Nebraska Safe Haven Law - Discussion by Diest TKO
For Parents - Discussion by shawn1989
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/06/2022 at 08:42:11