Posted on 09/20/2014 11:22:55 AM PDT by DogByte6RER
FReep This Poll!
Do You Think It’s OK for Parents to Spank Their Children?
YES
NO
Note: Go to the U-T San Diego link provided. On the U-T San Diego homepage scroll down a bit until you see the poll in the center column. Vote your choice.
(Excerpt) Read more at utsandiego.com ...
The topic is spanking, not beating.
I didn't know that he changed his mind about spanking.
Interestingly, though; in his famous book about child-rearing, he said that he didn't like spanking, but he said that spanking was better than putting a guilt-trip on the kid. He said that guilt-trips were much worse.
Now, let's see - who is it that likes to put guilt-trips on their kids (and on everyone else)?
The “look” is merely a warning, not punishment. It only works when they know if they don’t straighten up immediately, then they have a spanking coming when they get home. Most kids enjoy the taking away of things so they can torment their parents over the course when the thing is removed. They know enough whining will wear down many a parent.
Never used: pipes, ball bats, clothes hangers, 2x4s, etc.
USED: wooden spoons, 3/8" dowel rods, ping pong paddles, plastic balloon sticks, etc.
Never struck: head, face, bones, joints, back, neck, throat, chest, stomach. The exception was when little hands tried to get in the way, lightly smacking the hand.
STRUCK: fleshly portion of the posterior and backs of thighs.
NOT WHILE ANGRY.
NEVER carried without accompanying positive training.
Sadly, it looks like that would be a thin thread...
Spanking requires control and common sense. It requires understanding the difference between child abuse and discipline. Unfortunately too many Americans have no common sense and neither do many in Congress. Congress plays the polls and winds instead of what is actually good for American society.
Giving the government control over your children regardless of Party is never good for society.
Throwing water in their face didn't leave scars - didn't hurt them at all - shocked them a bit, for sure. And it worked. The children were taught, when babies, not to cry or carry on in meetings - and they also had to learn to be quiet when told back then, for safety.
The older of my five was the only one who ever needed more that verbal reasoning.
When he was about 2, he decided that if he couldn't get his way, he'd hold his breath. I'd leave the room and ignore. He quickly realized that was an exercise in futility and dropped that.
His next attempt at 'bringing me to heel' was to bang his head on the floor. For some reason, ignoring didn't work - and for a while he had a welt on his forehead. He was actually injuring himself. So the next time he did it, I calmly went to the sink, poured a big glass off cold water, walked over and threw it in his face. Then I turned and walked out of the room.
Never banged his head again, never held his breath again, never had to throw water again.
Oh yes, at about that age, he decided to be a biter. He bit another kid. No explaining nor admonishing had any effect. He bit me. I bit him back. THAT he understood - and that was the end of the biting.
I don't remember many problems with him behaving after those episodes - he got the message that I was in control, that I didn't get upset - and that he was the only one who experienced negative consequences.
If and adult can't outsmart a little child, they maybe shouldn't have kids.
As for the ad infinitum quoting of the Bible for a backup to 'ROD" the child - Any excuse to beat a child - pretty pathetic.
Sounds like a disturbing number of Freepers would consider this book as a companion to the Bible
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3UY_HoG6gw
Guess you didn’t read every post from me. Okay.
Yes 84% (1226)
No 15% (218)
Back in the ‘60s, many mothers (nearly exclusively mothers) said that they would “beat” the kids “black and blue,” “tan” their “hides,” “skin” them “alive,” “break every bone in” their “bodies,” “kill” them, “beat” them “to death,” “ring” their “necks” and so on.
Yeah, all those expressions - hateful.
As maine-iac7 said, there's a world of difference between spanking and beating.
Not really. Only figures of speech that we, as a generation, did not take seriously. Being Baby Boomers, many of us probably didn’t get enough proper spankings.
Be happy your family didn’t beat you.
Absolutely disagree! A hand can injure the child, ie, break bones, etc., whereas a switch or belt might leave a bruise or welt, it'll be gone in no time at all. A doctor, many, many years ago, told my parents that if you're going to spank your child, do it with a belt or switch, but never your hand(s), because of the chance of real injury.
“The Native Americans didn’t use corporal punishment. They used shame. If you misbehaved, you dishonored your parents and the community. To be shamed was something a child tried to avoid at all costs.”
Which tribes? All of them? I’ll bet there was a lot of “away” from the Teepee slapping and cuffing and buffalo chip hauling for young bucks misbehaving. Shaming only works for aroused consciences, and corporal punishment exists to remind us that we have consequences beyond not listening to our consciences!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.