Posted on 12/20/2001 4:39:20 AM PST by frmrda
Question for Freeper Parents - My wife and I have a 3 year old who is beginning to explore his boundaries. As with every child that includes doing what he is told not to, throwing fits of rage when he doesn't get his way, etc. My wife and I beleive he is now old enough to be spanked when he does not listen and starts trying to do his own thing.
However, my wife, who was not spanked as a child, brought up an interesting question. My son is in the stage where he sometimes shows anger by hitting. We always tell him this is wrong and punish him for it. What do we tell him when he asks why it is OK for us to spank him, but not OK for him to hit.
Granted the right answer to this is "Because I'm the parent". That would be explanation enough for an older child to understand but I don't think a a 3 year old (who is very perceptive) will comprehend that explanation. When I was spanked I never asked that question, mainly out of fear. But it is a good question. Now mind you, this will not stop me from spanking but I just want to see if anyone else had this dilema and how it was solved.
And for all you anti-spanking Nazi's I'm not abusing my son. He will be told before being spanked why he's getting it, will only get one swat on the butt (my father told me when I was older that if you give the kid more than one swat you are doing it for yourself, and not for the education of the child, which is the purpose), and after it is over I tell him I love him and did it because he had to learn a lesson.
Any responses. Thanks in advance.
Anyone who ever said "terrible twos" has NEVER had a three-year old.
Going through age three with my twins was pure HELL at times, pure joy at others. Yet we rarely resorted to anything more than a swat on the bottom (and then only when it was a logical consequence -- ie running out in the street you could get hurt -- I wanted them to associate pain with running out in the street).
Anyway -- my point being -- if you tell a child to "stop" you must also tell them how to "go." Like with hitting -- we did a lot "hitting hurts -- LOVE instead" and would gently guide their hands to a face and a gentle rub, or into a hug. Make sense?
I guess in a sense it's still redirection, but postive redirection. Also -- along these same lines -- if you take something away, you have to give them something else to do. We also did a lot of putting toys in "time-out" -- esp. when we didn't know who had it first :-)
twinzmommy
LOL oh so sweet and innocent playing dress up or running round naked wearing mummies hat, such an embarrassment factor for a 14 to 17 year old girl.
Any sign of trouble and the next time her mates are around out comes the video.
Mary will still not let me look at the videos of when she was a little girl.
When the kids are old enough I will teach them the right way to make the old mans tea, and bacon butty.
Cheers Tony
To this day, I am blessed with the two most well behaved TEENAGERS I've ever encountered. On numerous occasions after spend the night parties or outings with their friends, other parents have called me to compliment me on my children's behavior. I am so proud of them and honestly believe that we are the best of friends.
Good Luck.
Spanking (assuming it is done justly) is simply of a different moral order than hitting, or other types of violence. And children can understand this. They have an excellent sense of justice, and will have until they fall into the clutches of a Ph.D. sociologist, or a network news anchor.
If violent adults were the result of spankings, then you would expect to see violence among the adult population decrease as spanking falls out of vogue. The opposite has happened. I mean, really: how many children shoot people in their high school becasue their mom spanked them? Isn't the opposite actually so true it has become a stereotype? The kid who is neglected by his rich, bored parents doesn't learn about boundaries and so he has no sense of transgression or respect for others' bodies. So he takes a gun to school and kills people.
So it is only adults who detest distinctions who have this confusion.
I'm not saying children don't go through a short stage where they will try to USE the argument, but they will hear it from someone else before they learn it from you (IF you are spanking correctly). And they will try to use it because, well, they're kids. They try everything.
Just like we don't equate the violence of the police officer (when acting lawfully) with the violence of the mugger, there is no reason to equate the punishment of wrong with the smacking of a playmate. And one way humans reflect moral order is in their language. So my wife and I are careful to always distinguish between SPANKING and HITTING in the presence of our three year old, and I absolutely correct anyone who confuses the language in his presence. And we simply tell him, without apology, that mommy and daddy spank but he cannot hit.
(BTW, three year olds hit. They don't "learn it from spanking". They hit because it often works.)
It is only the liberal mind, with it desperate need to obliterate moral distinctions, which even thinks of melding all physical force into one fuzzy category.
Does all this work? Well, I was spanked by both parents. I was a model student and never in serious trouble at school or elsewhere. I am 45 years old, and haven't hit anyone since I was 16. I cannot ever remember thinking the thought that my parents' spankings of me had anything to do with me hitting anyone else. It simply never occurred to me. I don't remember one moment of resentment of my parents' discipline.
If anything, I've often thought they were too lax and I would be a better man if they had been tougher on me.
But you have to do all the things that everyone has said a million time:
...be scrupulously consistent...don't spank when you're temper is out of control...don't be a hypocrite...explain, explain, even when they are too young to understand the words, they will "read" the emotional content of your gentle explanation...mom and dad have to be on the same page always...as much discipline as you impose, you have to work at communicating that much and more affection, so the over-riding tone of the child's universe is loving -- if you love much, you can discipline hard. If you love lazily, no amount of discipline will be accepted inwardly by the child as justice...and so on and so forth.
Don't spank past puberty. If you need to, you failed earlier. I'm not saying discipline will never be necessary, but not physical. Not after the child has fully individuated. What is a correction at 5 is an emotional assault at 13.
BTW, I don't agree with an absolute rule that you only hit once. You have to make it hurt enough that it is unpleasant. If you use something that will sting the skin (NOT a blunt object, like a hand) you can use less force and not injure. Things like switches and belts, when used appropriately, were actually humane adoptions by our forebears, instead of the tools of torture they have been made out to be by propogandists.
You might try a little, light wooden ruler on the thigh, because a light smack with it would sting the skin enough just to say "Pay attention."
I realize all this is not PC, so some will be horrified. There ARE alot of parents out there who do it badly, but that is a feature of slovenly love, and not intrinsic to the concept of corporeal punishment.
I have only spanked my children for 1 of 3 reasons: 1) They were doing something that would put them in immediate danger (i.e., running into the road); 2) They hit, bit, or spit at me. (rarely) 3)all other methods failed.
Now...the best thing to do when spanking has been all listed above (don't do it in anger, don't do it in excess, etc), so I don't need to tell you all that, either. I will say this though: taking away something they love more than anything (favorite video, game, chore, whatever) works very, very well. Making them go to their room for 1/2 hour (which seems endless when you're young) seems to work well also.
That being said...let me tell you something funny....my 5 year old started a nasty habit of saying a bad word a few months ago. I tried EVERYTHING....SPANKING didn't even work, because he thought it was funny...the word, not the spanking...so finally I said, "If I hear you say that word one more time, I will put soap in your mouth." Well, he said it. So, I put the bar of soap in his mouth (follow through---very important). Just for about 5 seconds or so, enough for him to get the idea that soap doesn't taste too good. He spit it out and started crying. However.....the next night while he was in the bathtub....I walked in and he was sitting there with the bar of soap in his mouth. He said, "I like the way it tasted." *grins*
I will say this: I have never heard him say that word again.
Spanking shouldn't be something used routinely to simply reinforce a parental directive or they lose their impact. Spanking should not be used to 'encourage' a child to stop crying. Spanking should be used to get the child's attention, let the child know in no unceratin terns that they have crossed a line, and must be accompanied by verbal correction and instruction in the proper, expected behavior.
Also, never, never give swats when angry. Sometimes a parent has to count to 10 before punishing a child.
As a young boy I could deal more with the spanking that the disappointment.
When I did something wrong I would get spanked of the old man end of story it hurt for a bit, but by the end of the day I would be tearing round the park with the rest of my mates.
The disappointment was different it made me question my actions, more it lasted a lot longer.
I could not assuage any feeling of guilt with the fact that I took my lickings like a man.
Out of the two the disappointment was worse.
Tony
No comment.
My method of bringing them up was to never let them get away with anything from the time they were born. My husband and I were in agreement and we monitored them constantly. It is a lot of work to do this, but if you do it consistently up to the age of two, you almost have a free ride from that time on.
I also didn't believe in letting children cry, my belief is that children who are crying are sick, tired or hungry. I don't believe that children can be spoiled by picking them up when they cry.
Another thing I did when one of them was being bad was to kneel down and face-to-face take her face in my hand and make her look at me while I was talking to her. This worked very well.
Also, we talk in quiet voices most of the time, so if our voices became amplified it always got their attention.
I could take my children anywhere, they always behaved and never embarassed us.
My husband and I both worked full time jobs but we were able to arrange our time so one of us was home most of the time. When we used babysitters, they were family.
Could not disagree more. But it does need to be used wisely. I had a VERY strong-willed toddler who is today a wonderful, helpful and fun 17-year-old. Children are by nature physical. That's the reason you hug and hold them. Discipline is also a strong form of love and needs to be physical as well. But it should never be abusive. I learned that one good swat across the bottom or legs in the event of defiance (or physical danger) did the trick. After I got her attention, then I would use a time out, after which we always concluded the interlude with a discussion of what she did wrong and her apology. Worked like a charm!
I didn't threat, count to 10, plan spankings for a later time, or any of the other actions. When they were put into a chair it was long enough for them to hate it. They weren't allowed to leave the chair/room/whatever by a mere 'I'm sorry', because those words could be too easily used.
When I was angry, my kids knew it, and when I was happy with them, they knew it too. My 4 kids were all a year apart, so there wasn't too much time for psychological niceties. When they were older, deprivation of something seemed to work. That question of authority, that always comes up, was answered by "Because it's my job."
One thing that I did do, was to admit when I was wrong and let them know it. The kids have long grown up, but they still happily come home and we are all very close, so I guess we were OK as parents.
(insert Beavis and Butthead laughter here).
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.