Poll: Do You/Will You/Would You Spank your kids?

[Stifko]

I will subscribe to the old addage spare the rod and spoil the child when I have kids.

 

[Ornery]

Good luck with your future kids, Pundit. At least you have a good idea of how you will handle this. I doubt most folks give it any thought till the kids are roaming the house in walkers.

I had some idea of how I would go about it, but hands on was a tad different than I expected. I was also pleasantly surprised how easy it could be, once you get in the groove. To make a long story short, start good habits, be consistent and follow through.

Yelling is pretty lame too, but I don't treat kids any differently than adults. Just more growth I'll have to go through before I'm rid of that bad habit.

Edit:

"No child that is to young to understand don't run toward the road..."

I'll tell you one habit we got into for safety's sake, was that they HAD to hold our hand when near the road or a parking lot etc. Starting that early made it MUCH easier to enforce when they were a little older. There just was no arguing about it. Same with seat belts. They've worn them every time they're in a car... no exceptions. Try that with a kid whose parents let them go without a belt on occasion or under certain circumstances!

 

[Pundit]

<< Good luck with your future kids, Pundit. At least you have a good idea of how you will handle this. I doubt most folks give it any thought till the kid's are roaming the house in walkers. >>


A few close calls with my girlfriend have forced me to think about it since I'm against abortion

 

[Vernor]

I was never beaten, and never will beat any kids of mine.

 

[john35]

<< I was never beaten, and never will beat any kids of mine. >>



Me either!!

 

[chrisjor]

Yes, I will spank your kids (particularly your daughters between 16-18 years of age).

 

[Platypus]

I was, and in the highly unlikey scenario I have kids, I would never lay a harmfull finger on them

 

[Pundit]

The past six posters have restored my faith in humanity, especially chrisjor

 

[Nemesis77]

Didn't read the thread but...

Spanking and other kinds of physical punishment is illegal in Finland. I disagree with that law. When I was kid, I was spanked once (and sufferend from other kinds of less severe physical punishments), and I turned in to a productive member of the society.

If my kid (when I have 'em) did something REALLY stupid, a spanking would be in order. For example once in a bus stop, there was this (about) 5 year old kid (with his mother) screwing around. There was also another child, about 1-2 year old girl (with her father). The older boy looked at the girl, and spat on her face. They were from separate families. Father of the girl looked at the boy, wiped the girls face clean and looked at the mother of the other kid expecting her to do something. Only thing the mother did was to say "Now now, that's not a nice thing to do". Had it been my kid (and had it been legal), I would have punished him. You DO NOT go around and spit others!

But, I consider any kind of bodily harm to be the last thing to do. First, you talk with the child, send him/her to his room, deny dessert, no toons etc. etc. If the message just doesn't go through, some other kind of punishment would be in order. But, since it's illegal in Finland, all this is purely theoretical.

 

[Yeeny]

The way I look at it, none of us should be judging our parenting abilities by what a stranger on the net says. If you want to know if you are doing a good job, look at your kids. They are the true judge of your parenting, not someone you have never met before.

 

[Elledan]

<< Didn't read the thread but...

Spanking and other kinds of physical punishment is illegal in Finland. I disagree with that law. When I was kid, I was spanked once (and sufferend from other kinds of less severe physical punishments), and I turned in to a productive member of the society. >>


Physical punishment is illegal here as well. I agree with that law.

One can only punish out of ignorance or anger. Neither state is desirable, therefore 'spanking' your offspring is irrational. Other ways of dealing with undesirable situations must be created. Each situation requires a different approach, therefore no one can compose a number of guidelines, laws or rules a parent should stick to, which would lead to a just treatment in any case.

 

[Elledan]

<< The way I look at it, none of us should be judging our parenting abilities by what a stranger on the net says. If you want to know if you are doing a good job, look at your kids. They are the true judge of your parenting, not someone you have never met before. >>


You're overlooking the 'luck'- and 'coincidence'-factors.

 

[Nemesis77]

<<

<< Didn't read the thread but...

Spanking and other kinds of physical punishment is illegal in Finland. I disagree with that law. When I was kid, I was spanked once (and sufferend from other kinds of less severe physical punishments), and I turned in to a productive member of the society. >>


Physical punishment is illegal here as well. I agree with that law.

One can only punish out of ignorance or anger. Neither state is desirable, therefore 'spanking' your offspring is irrational. Other ways of dealing with undesirable situations must be created. Each situation requires a different approach, therefore no one can compose a number of guidelines, laws or rules a parent should stick to, which would lead to a just treatment in any case. >>



Like I said, I would consider spanking as "weapons of last resort". First you use other means of punishment (like having a "discussion", denying dessert, no TV etc. etc.). If the child just refuses to listen/behave, no matter how you tru to discipline using more "soft" methods, you should try different approach.

Believe me, I have had ringside seats to situations where child just acted so bad that physical punishment was in order. And in one case, that punishment was administered. But, like it was already said, the punishment wasn't painful. The thing that was the punishment was the fact that the child knew that he had done bad and had angried his parents. the thing that makes that punishment effective is the same thing as it is with "softer" methods: the fact that the child realizes that he has done something wrong. The actual act of punishment is a secondary issue.

When I was spanked (only once), my father was not angry nor was he ignorant. Looking back, I realize that he did what he had to do.

Even if physical punishment was legal in Finland, I would physically punish my children very, very rarely, if ever.

 

[db]

Question:

You live on a very busy street. You have told your todler/child not to go into the street or cross it, because it's very dangerous, etc.
They do it anyway. You punish them in some non-spanking way and tell them they will get punished again if they go in the street.
They go into the street again. You're worried they might get killed if it happens again.
Do you:

A. Tell them that next time no TV for a week.
B. Tell them next time they will get a spanking
C. Spank them and warn of another spanking if it happens again

 

[Elledan]

<< When I was spanked (only once), my father was not angry nor was he ignorant. Looking back, I realize that he did what he had to do. >>

I can not judge whether it was indeed the right courseof action without sufficient information.

However, I consider punishment to be wrong, regardless of the parameters of the situation.

If the action of your father was just, it wasn't 'punishment'.

 

[Elledan]

<< Question:

You live on a very busy street. You have told your todler/child not to go into the street or cross it, because it's very dangerous, etc.
They do it anyway. You punish them in some non-spanking way and tell them they will get punished again if they go in the street.
They go into the street again. You're worried they might get killed if it happens again.
Do you:

A. Tell them that next time no TV for a week.
B. Tell them next time they will get a spanking
C. Spank them and warn of another spanking if it happens again >>


D. Interrogate and act on the information gained.

A, B and C all involve some kind of punishment.

 

[gopunk]

<<

<< Question:

You live on a very busy street. You have told your todler/child not to go into the street or cross it, because it's very dangerous, etc.
They do it anyway. You punish them in some non-spanking way and tell them they will get punished again if they go in the street.
They go into the street again. You're worried they might get killed if it happens again.
Do you:

A. Tell them that next time no TV for a week.
B. Tell them next time they will get a spanking
C. Spank them and warn of another spanking if it happens again >>


D. Interrogate and act on the information gained.

A, B and C all involve some kind of punishment. >>




how so? the line "you're worried they might get killed if it happens again" seems to indicate it's not out of ignorance or anger, that you need them stop a dangerous behavior. the question assumes that you already have the necessary information, so d is kind of pointless.

 

[Elledan]

<< how so? the line "you're worried they might get killed if it happens again" seems to indicate it's not out of ignorance or anger, that you need them stop a dangerous behavior. the question assumes that you already have the necessary information, so d is kind of pointless. >>


The line 'you're worried they might get killed if it happens again' indicates that you are ignorant of the reason why the child does not comprehend the dangers involved in its behaviour.
By punishing the child you admit that you do not know why it acts the way it does and how you can prevent it from continuing to expose itself to unnecessary risks.

In short, you're still ignorant of the real cause.

Note: the 'you' used in the above explanation refers to the hypothetical person of the original question.

 

[Ornery]

You live on a very busy street. You have told your todler/child not to go into the street or cross it, because it's very dangerous, etc.

A toddler can NEVER be left out of your sight in that type of situation. The younger the child is, the less they can be left out of sight.

An older child should know to ask to go across the street. At that point, you either take them across or tell them no.

If a child is told no, but insists, something is already wrong. I don't /won't argue. There is nothing to discuss. This should be established before it becomes the safety issue you posed. If they defy you for any reason, you've already lost your grip. You could list thousands of tragic scenarios that result from that basic problem. You're in charge, they do as you say... PERIOD! If that isn't the case at all times, one problem after another will crop up over and over. If that's what happens in the homes of most of this topic's respondents, then no wonder all the spanking is going on. PURE FRUSTRATION! :Q

 

[Elledan]

<< PURE FRUSTRATION! >>

Manifesting itself as anger.

 

[Geekbabe]

<< The past six posters have restored my faith in humanity, especially chrisjor >>



I was smacked around pretty regular as a kid,I remembered how that made me feel and couldn't do that to my own flesh and blood.


If you ask my daughters today,they'll tell you that they would have far prefered a smack over seeing the look of disappointment in my eyes when they did something really out of line. Wanting my support and my approval was a far more effective way of discipline than any belt,stick or fist ever could have been !

Btw, my kids are very cool people

 

[Cattlegod]

<< Question:

You live on a very busy street. You have told your todler/child not to go into the street or cross it, because it's very dangerous, etc.
They do it anyway. You punish them in some non-spanking way and tell them they will get punished again if they go in the street.
They go into the street again. You're worried they might get killed if it happens again.
Do you:

A. Tell them that next time no TV for a week.
B. Tell them next time they will get a spanking
C. Spank them and warn of another spanking if it happens again
>>



E. Let the kid play in the street and learn the hard way

 

[djheater]

<<
If you ask my daughters today,they'll tell you that they would have far prefered a smack over seeing the look of disappointment in my eyes when they did something really out of line. Wanting my support and my approval was a far more effective way of discipline than any belt,stick or fist ever could have been !
>>



Agreed. People without children (and tragically some with children) seem to think of them as incapable of independant though and action. From the moment a child is born (even infants display this to my mind) every ounce of energy is devoted to becoming like thier parents. They want to do everything big people do and are incredibly proud of themselves if something they do gains your approval and absolutely crushed if they anger you. This being the case I fail to see why physical remonstrance is needed. Be firm but compassionate. What's that Crow quote? "Mother is the name of God in the heart and mind of a child..." or something like that.

 

[Geekbabe]

<<

<<
If you ask my daughters today,they'll tell you that they would have far prefered a smack over seeing the look of disappointment in my eyes when they did something really out of line. Wanting my support and my approval was a far more effective way of discipline than any belt,stick or fist ever could have been !
>>



Agreed. People without children (and tragically some with children) seem to think of them as incapable of independant though and action. From the moment a child is born (even infants display this to my mind) every ounce of energy is devoted to becoming like thier parents. They want to do everything big people do and are incredibly proud of themselves if something they do gains your approval and absolutely crushed if they anger you. This being the case I fail to see why physical remonstrance is needed. Be firm but compassionate. What's that Crow quote? "Mother is the name of God in the heart and mind of a child..." or something like that. >>




That is a beautiful quote


For me,hitting them would be like hitting a piece of myself the sun rose and set on the three of them in my eyes and it always will

 

[Murphyrulez]

<<



<< When I tell my 3 year old that he can't go to McDonald's today, and he takes the plate with his ham sandwich and throws it on the ground, and says "I don't care", you think he has good intentions? No. He has an attitude, because he didn't get his way. And he is going to get a smacked bottom. Next time, he will realize, "Hey, dad didn't like it when I threw my plate and yelled last time. Maybe I should not do that this time." >>


Murphyrulez, have you ever tried treating your son like you treat adults? I highly suggest you start doing so. You can reason with children just the same as you can reason with adults.
>>



Pundit, there is a reason children are called children. It is because they are not adults. Their mind does not work like an adults. As much as I would love to be my son's best friend all the time and always be happy with him, it is not possible to do so, and raise a healthy boy. He needs to recognize the adult in the relationship has the authority. It is not a democracy.



<< Anything action they perform, they do so because they believe it to yield pleasure and there is nothing wrong with that. >>



This statement is just plain ignorant. First off, not everything they do is because they think it is pleasurable. When they talk back when you tell them it is bedtime, when they pinch one of their playmates. This is stuff that gets a smacked bottom, and it had nothing to do with pleasure for them. Do you let your kids do everything they think will bring them pleasure? Do you let them eat tons of junk food? Do you let them go out and play in the mud? Do you let them throw balls in the house? Do you let them pull the cats tail? There is plenty that could be wrong with what a CHILD thinks is pleasureable. That's why they are the CHILD. They don't know any better.