|
|
A slant on spanking
A different slant on spanking
By: Meyerhoff, Michael K Volume: 19 Number: 8 ISSN: 07306725 Publication Date: 01-01-2001 Page: 8 Type: Periodical Language: English Perspectives on Parenting If you are an alert parent, you probably have surmised that professionals in the field of psychology have reached something of a consensus on the subject of spanking. I refer here to a swat on the bottom with a hand, not hitting the child with any sort of object and no hitting hard enough to cause much more than a loss of dignity. Thanks to numerous reports that have appeared in the popular media, it now seems as though there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that spanking is a highly detrimental practice which not only is largely ineffective, but also leads inevitably to some degree of emotional damage. Today, mothers and fathers are aware that any type of corporal punishment is likely to be viewed as child abuse by those who are authorities on the subject of early development. Well, I guess that forces me to stand apart from the crowd. In my opinion, this across-the-board condemnation of spanking is based more on personal attitudes than professional studies. And whatever professional studies may be involved tend to lack a great deal of credibility due to either built-in biases or faulty research techniques. I have yet to see anything so substantial and convincing that it would cause me to jump on the anti-spanking bandwagon. Most of the assumptions and assertions I've seen about the alleged negative effects of spanking on a young child's mind set are plagued by what I refer to as "adultomorphism." The experience is interpreted through the mental and emotional processes of an adult - mental and emotional processes that are entirely different than those employed by a young child. It is highly inappropriate to project one's own thoughts and feelings into the heart and head of a two-year-old; and most conclusions drawn as a result are highly likely to be grossly erroneous. With regard to the studies that appear to demonstrate the long-term detrimental effects of spanking, most that I've seen suffer from limited focus. For example, many report something like "85% of the inmates doing time on death row in a federal prison were spanked when they were young children." What is not noticed, much less investigated, is that 85% of the graduates of Harvard Medical School were spanked when they were young children as well. Meanwhile, my anti-anti-spanking position is not without solid support. As a researcher with the Harvard Preschool Project, I had the opportunity to participate in the most comprehensive and extensive study of early development ever performed. Furthermore, I had the opportunity to look at experiences that produced "optimal" outcomes as well as those that produced "problems." We had no pre-set notions. We merely observed what happened in families of all kinds. One of the things we discovered was that in two out of three families where children were developing into bright, happy, well-adjusted, responsible people, the kids were spanked from time to time - especially in the period from about 18 months to three years of age. The spankings were not frequent, nor were they brutal, and they never involved paddles, switches, belts, or any other such equipment. However, a swat on the behind or a slap on the wrist was not an uncommon occurrence. What we learned is that discipline is a critically important part of promoting optimal development, and that effective discipline during this particular period is quite difficult. In order to teach a child to be personally safe and respectful of others, it is necessary to "speak" to the child in a "language" he truly understands. And given the limited cognitive capacities of a toddler, a small spanking often results in a considerably better "education" than a prolonged discussion. Now, I will also distance myself from the "spare the rod, spoil the child" crowd. After all, we found that one in three families managed to get through even this difficult period without spanking. Clearly, depending upon the child and the circumstances, it is possible to be effective with other-than-corporal procedures. But it is equally clear that with a lot of children in a lot of circumstances, spanking is preferable to disciplinary techniques that just aren't working or no discipline at all. So please note that I am not recommending that all parents place spanking in their arsenal of child-- rearing techniques. On the contrary, I always urge mothers and fathers to take steps to avoid as many confrontations with their young child as possible, and then attempt to deal with those that inevitably occur with whatever non-corporal methods may reasonably be thought to have a genuinely educational impact. Nevertheless, I recognize there are situations where a spanking just may be the best thing for that particular parent to do for their particular child at that particular time. So, if your little one starts to stick a fork in an electrical outlet and you slap his wrist, or if he let' s go of your hand so he can rush into heavy traffic and you give him a swat on the bottom as you pull him back, don't beat yourself up. And don't let the dirty looks you get from holier-than-- thou bystanders or the condemnations from pop psychologists on TV talk shows convince you that you've done irreparable damage to your child's psyche. Just make sure that the spankings aren't coming along too often or getting out of hand. Otherwise, if you are a loving, caring, sensible parent, I would suggest that you keep in mind the following adage that was formulated by the late Dr. Louise Bates Ames, a wise, sweet, gentle woman who was the director of the Gesell Institute for several decades and regarded as one of the world's foremost authorities on early education and development: "If you plan on never spanking your child, you'll probably end up doing it the proper number of times." By Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed. D. Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D., is executive director of The Epicenter Inc., "The Education for Parenthood Information Center," a family advisory and advocacy agency located in Lindenhurst, Illinois. His e-mail address is . Meyerhoff, Michael K, A different slant on spanking. , Pediatrics for Parents, 01-01-2001, pp 8. |
A slant on spanking
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:04:22 -0800, Doan wrote:
A different slant on spanking By: Meyerhoff, Michael K Volume: 19 Number: 8 ISSN: 07306725 Publication Date: 01-01-2001 Page: 8 Type: Periodical Language: English Perspectives on Parenting If you are an alert parent, you probably have surmised that professionals in the field of psychology have reached something of a consensus on the subject of spanking. I refer here to a swat on the bottom with a hand, not hitting the child with any sort of object and no hitting hard enough to cause much more than a loss of dignity. Thanks to numerous reports that have appeared in the popular media, it now seems as though there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that spanking is a highly detrimental practice which not only is largely ineffective, but also leads inevitably to some degree of emotional damage. So far, just going down the Droany path. There may be SOME such articles in the popular media but that is faaaar outweighted by the massive but unnoted because it is so common (90%) that mention spanking as a good experience in their lives. And many books and articles supporting the practice of spanking. This is a typical apologist piece of tripe long seen for what it is: shallow, tradition and superstition based, and factually unsupported. Today, mothers and fathers are aware that any type of corporal punishment is likely to be viewed as child abuse by those who are authorities on the subject of early development. Well, now we are cooking. This appeal to authority, when in fact this is simply a more slickly writen piece of spanking compulsives propaganda is right up there with, "but cops hit perps" analogies. Well, I guess that forces me to stand apart from the crowd. In my opinion, this across-the-board condemnation of spanking is based more on personal attitudes than professional studies. A blatant lie. Sad. And whatever professional studies may be involved tend to lack a great deal of credibility due to either built-in biases or faulty research techniques. The usual nonsense. The only thing really missing is the experimental model typical to medical research, where the subject is sacrificed, trauma and autopsy wise.....we simply cannot subject children or families to such tests. If all social science studies were forced to this standard, there would be no research done. In fact over the years when hard WAS noted in such study models ethicists and scientists alike curtailed those models. I have yet to see anything so substantial and convincing that it would cause me to jump on the anti-spanking bandwagon. Of course. Yet another, as admitted, opinion piece. Most of the assumptions and assertions I've seen about the alleged negative effects of spanking on a young child's mind set are plagued by what I refer to as "adultomorphism." As are, by what I refer to concerning the practice of spanking compulsivism. It is "adultmorphism;" the assumption the child is like a little adult and thinks, feels, and understands as an adult does so will have the same responses for the same reasons to the experience of pain applied by a trusted other. The experience is interpreted through the mental and emotional processes of an adult - mental and emotional processes that are entirely different than those employed by a young child. That argument alone destroys the pro spank viewpoint. It is highly inappropriate to project one's own thoughts and feelings into the heart and head of a two-year-old; and most conclusions drawn as a result are highly likely to be grossly erroneous. It certainlly is and certainly does. Unfortunately, just as you Droany, this author gets it entirely ass backwards in an effort to preempt the arguments of the anti spanking advocates. It's typical, but very poor, attempt to turn the argument of the other side on its head...preemption has been noted since Socrates and earlier. With regard to the studies that appear to demonstrate the long-term detrimental effects of spanking, most that I've seen suffer from limited focus. That is for lack of subject destruction and is a constant in all current and recent social science research. For example, many report something like "85% of the inmates doing time on death row in a federal prison were spanked when they were young children." R R R R ...don'tcha love it. Did you read this before you posted it, Droananator? This lays the lie to the 85% claim. FEWER are spanking in the death row population than the general public, which you and your spanking compulsives is claimed to be 90% or MORE? R R R R Oh dear, now I've gotten the hiccups...all your fault, Droaner... {;- What is not noticed, much less investigated, is that 85% of the graduates of Harvard Medical School were spanked when they were young children as well. I have NEVER seen this , and I've been doing this for many more years than I've been here....from the age of 19 onward with hardly a break. There is no 85% figure anywhere at all, except by virtue of a subject NOT reporting one way or another. So the remaining 15% in both populations, death row inmate and Harvard Medical School, could have been or could not have been spanked. Talk about junk science. And no, the similar experiences of the two subject groups is so noted. Where do you get these flights of fancy, Droany? The point missed and avoided and run from by you, and this author, is that as a spanking compulsive parent you risk your child going EITHER way by spanking, since the threshold for abuse is unknown until one has crossed it. You have at the maximum, if we are to believe him, a 15% chance of an unspanked child on death row...and that figure isn't establish by any research I've ever been able to find. More often it is noted that an unspanked person cannot be found in the violent portion of the prison population and we know...or you think you do...that 90% of THAT population is also spanked...minimum What is ignored is that if spanking WORKED, the prisoner on death row population would be over represented with the UNSPANKED. The fact they are the same suggests, to any thinking social scientist, that something is at work here that is unaccounted for. And being one myself, I know that it is the variable threshold for abuse....and of course the fact that Harvard Medical School grads almost NEVER come from the strata of society that death row inmates come from. I've always advoctated the $60K or so a year spent to send a first time offender to prison would be better spend on a Harvard education. Thanks for pointing this out....R R R R R R R Meanwhile, my anti-anti-spanking position is not without solid support. As a researcher with the Harvard Preschool Project, I had the opportunity to participate in the most comprehensive and extensive study of early development ever performed. Furthermore, I had the opportunity to look at experiences that produced "optimal" outcomes as well as those that produced "problems." We had no pre-set notions. We merely observed what happened in families of all kinds. A human being raised by human beings, a supposed social scientist is claiming he and they had NO pre-set notions? Were did you find him, Droaner? He's already run out more that a couple. One of the things we discovered was that in two out of three families where children were developing into bright, happy, well-adjusted, responsible people, the kids were spanked from time to time - especially in the period from about 18 months to three years of age. The spankings were not frequent, nor were they brutal, and they never involved paddles, switches, belts, or any other such equipment. However, a swat on the behind or a slap on the wrist was not an uncommon occurrence. And they followed these children for coming up on 40 years as I have? Sure. And they had an equal number of unspanked children for comparison...sure. What we learned is that discipline is a critically important part of promoting optimal development, and that effective discipline during this particular period is quite difficult. In order to teach a child to be personally safe and respectful of others, it is necessary to "speak" to the child in a "language" he truly understands. And given the limited cognitive capacities of a toddler, a small spanking often results in a considerably better "education" than a prolonged discussion. In the immediate sense. No one has ever claimed in this ng or among other professionals that a hit won't immediately stop unwanted behavior. That is a given. It only proves that brutality works in the short run, that humans are tough, and you can ease and dilute ALL KINDS OF PAIN AND LOSS if you are these for the child in nurturing ways as well. It does NOT prove that NOT spanking is less effective or harmful, and no study has proven it to be so. Embry laid the ghost on that. Now, I will also distance myself from the "spare the rod, spoil the child" crowd. Of course he will, as that would be courting exposure by flirting with honesty. It's exactly the same "science" that Baumrind practiced when she stripped the more severely spanked children from a tiny sample so that her outcomes would reflect low levels of spanking...the same dishonorable and stupid bias you have when you claim that a parent can avoid crossing the line by going 5 miles an hour..(light taps on the butt). Baumrind ignored that spanking, for purposes of study, must study ALL the forms and intensity that PARENTS CLAIM is spanking...or it is no study of "spanking" at all. Just a tiny subset called tapping. This isn't alt.parenting.tapping-on-the-butt-with-no-objects newsgroup and that is for a reason....Chris knows, as all intelligent, none deluded humans know that "spanking" isn't limited to a tap on the clothed but with a gentle hand. What dishonorable twits. You are trying your damnest, after years of defending the broadest range of spanking behaviors, now that your a little butt has been caught in The Question, to reframe and redefine spanking so you won't have to answer The Question honestly. Morally you leave considerable to be desired, Droaner, but that we have always known. After all, we found that one in three families managed to get through even this difficult period without spanking. Clearly, depending upon the child and the circumstances, it is possible to be effective with other-than-corporal procedures. R R R R ... he buries his own argument...don'chalove it? The parent is being told by this that there are some chidlren so powerful, so evil, so in control of the parent, and conditions that are so unmanagable that one may just HAVE to spank. ... The Devil's Spawn Parenting Handbook should cover that quite well. But it is equally clear that with a lot of children in a lot of circumstances, spanking is preferable to disciplinary techniques that just aren't working or no discipline at all. No listing of the techniques. Want tah bet the aren't nonpunitive? They are just OTHER punishments that are equallly ineffective....and the age range he is talking about includes the time that parents are supposed to supervise, modify the environment, and redirect the child for maximum develpment with minimum risk....and this yahoo, and you by posting it, are recommending throwing that away...and WHY? To preserve the illusion there aren't plentiful parenting NONPUNITIVE techniques that DO work, but parents are ignorant of them. Instead of supporting teaching of an adequate repertoire what do we have? Yet another junk science defense of spanking compulsions. So please note that I am not recommending that all parents place spanking in their arsenal of child-- rearing techniques. On the contrary, These caveats are mindless twittering dodges just like yours, Droananator. And ther are public masturbation to make the thug thinker feel good about himself, even while he defends pain and humiliation as a teaching tool for children too young to comprehend what is happening to them. Or even how to avoid the pain without some compensatory neurotic reaction...such as fearful withdrawal, or rage on hold for the teen years. . I always urge mothers and fathers to take steps to avoid as many confrontations with their young child as possible, and then attempt to deal with those that inevitably occur with whatever non-corporal methods may reasonably be thought to have a genuinely educational impact. Male bovine excrement. There NO behaviors of children that cannot be efficiently and effectively moderated of even complety redirected with non punitive methods. It is NOT hard to learn EXCEPT for the barriers created by one's OWN spanked childhood experiences...and normally intelligent courageous people that won't let their childhood implated fears and biases stop them from truly loving their children and escaping this kind of mumbo jumbo punishment think can do. http://sandradodd.com/s/proof http://sandradodd.com/s/pressure http://sandradodd.com/s/why Experience vs junk science....PARENTS MAKING UP THEIR OWN MINDS Nevertheless, I recognize there are situations where a spanking just may be the best thing for that particular parent to do for their particular child at that particular time. Spanking is never the best thing no matter the circumstances. This is an attempt to excuse ignorance of non-punitive methods, and out of control parents. So, if your little one starts to stick a fork in an electrical outlet and you slap his wrist, or if he let' s go of your hand so he can rush into heavy traffic and you give him a swat on the bottom as you pull him back, don't beat yourself up. No, just know that it very likely to NOT stop him from doing what YOUR failure to supervise caused. In fact that it may instead inspire the child to try again. We have, as humans, a built in compulsive desire to explore our environment that we will hurt ourselves on PURPOSE even when we are grown UP to have that exploratory experience. And even with adults, self managing, they know to not fight it but to modify the circumstances for safety or at least to divert themselves. That IS one of the reasons we marry. Sex with one is safer. And don't let the dirty looks you get from holier-than-- thou bystanders or the condemnations from pop psychologists on TV talk shows convince you that you've done irreparable damage to your child's psyche. Just make sure that the spankings aren't coming along too often or getting out of hand. Plentiful Patronizing Platitudes from an "expert" that has provided not a whit of any proof beyond his own observations and opinions as his exhalted position should require him to do for believability. Shades of Diana Baumrind. "I'm an expert. Trust me, and my opinion." But possibly he could answer The Question, or a portion. How much is "too often" and what is "getting out of hand" in terms of frequency, intensity, and The Line you stop at before you get there......sans references to already gone-over-the-line and damaged spanked child. None of this nonsense of "just don't hurt them." Parent want to at what point to stop BEFORE THE CHILDREN ARE HURT. Ring him up and ask. I'll be he could give me a better run for my money than you have, playground boy. Otherwise, if you are a loving, caring, sensible parent, Please point out those that think they are NOT. I would suggest that you keep in mind the following adage that was formulated by the late Dr. Louise Bates Ames, a wise, sweet, gentle woman who was the director of the Gesell Institute Well, isn't that nice, and very special, but of course has no referrance in these times that make a bit of sense to current parents of small children. How rudely patronizing and what psychological manipulation. for several decades and regarded as one of the world's foremost authorities on early education and development: I have to ask, what does it take to be labeled a foremost world authority at anything, and who are some of the world's idiots that have held the title? "If you plan on never spanking your child, you'll probably end up doing it the proper number of times." She must have been very old to mouth such nonsense. And it must have been rather a long time back when other options were in short supply. It should have been said, "If you commit to never spanking your child you will be inspired to learn how to parent them non-punitively...and there is more than enough knowledge to do so brilliantly and successfuly." Did anyone aske her "the proper number of times?" She may well have meant zero, if you really PLAN, not just idly wish. So I took the trouble of looking her up... http://tinyurl.com/33xh5 From Amazon: 1 out of 5 stars Not Very Enlightening, June 1, 2003 Reviewer: Kenneth LaFrance (see more about me) from Cotati, CA USA and quotes from the book: Ames on the subject of spanking; http://tinyurl.com/323e6 Speaking of planning, as in commiting: I planned from age 19 and I had my first child at 22, to NOT spank. and I was short on non-punitive methods. So I muddled along trusting myself and used mostly, from my heart and my feelings, non-punitive methods. I discovered in 1975 the first of what became a series of sources for those kinds of parenting methods. And parenting turned into a joyfilled sleighride from then on. Others have made it...I gave the URLs earlier. By Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed. D. Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D., is executive director of The Epicenter Inc., "The Education for Parenthood Information Center," a family advisory and advocacy agency located in Lindenhurst, Illinois. His e-mail address is . Meyerhoff, Michael K, A different slant on spanking. , Pediatrics for Parents, 01-01-2001, pp 8. Gee, yah don't think he might have just a teensy weiny bias in favor of spanking, now do yah? http://tinyurl.com/3gucv R R R R ....good one Droany.....yet another fall flat on your butt exhibition. I post from parents experience, supposedly YOUR bias, and you post, apparently in reply, someone that is from someone professionally invested in better parenting....what you THINK is my bias....R R R R...what a maroon. See yah next Wednesday. Be there, with YOUR FARE, or be square. Kane |
A slant on spanking
Just as expected, I threw out a bone and the Kane9 barked! :-) Doan On 21 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 11:04:22 -0800, Doan wrote: A different slant on spanking By: Meyerhoff, Michael K Volume: 19 Number: 8 ISSN: 07306725 Publication Date: 01-01-2001 Page: 8 Type: Periodical Language: English Perspectives on Parenting If you are an alert parent, you probably have surmised that professionals in the field of psychology have reached something of a consensus on the subject of spanking. I refer here to a swat on the bottom with a hand, not hitting the child with any sort of object and no hitting hard enough to cause much more than a loss of dignity. Thanks to numerous reports that have appeared in the popular media, it now seems as though there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that spanking is a highly detrimental practice which not only is largely ineffective, but also leads inevitably to some degree of emotional damage. So far, just going down the Droany path. There may be SOME such articles in the popular media but that is faaaar outweighted by the massive but unnoted because it is so common (90%) that mention spanking as a good experience in their lives. And many books and articles supporting the practice of spanking. This is a typical apologist piece of tripe long seen for what it is: shallow, tradition and superstition based, and factually unsupported. Today, mothers and fathers are aware that any type of corporal punishment is likely to be viewed as child abuse by those who are authorities on the subject of early development. Well, now we are cooking. This appeal to authority, when in fact this is simply a more slickly writen piece of spanking compulsives propaganda is right up there with, "but cops hit perps" analogies. Well, I guess that forces me to stand apart from the crowd. In my opinion, this across-the-board condemnation of spanking is based more on personal attitudes than professional studies. A blatant lie. Sad. And whatever professional studies may be involved tend to lack a great deal of credibility due to either built-in biases or faulty research techniques. The usual nonsense. The only thing really missing is the experimental model typical to medical research, where the subject is sacrificed, trauma and autopsy wise.....we simply cannot subject children or families to such tests. If all social science studies were forced to this standard, there would be no research done. In fact over the years when hard WAS noted in such study models ethicists and scientists alike curtailed those models. I have yet to see anything so substantial and convincing that it would cause me to jump on the anti-spanking bandwagon. Of course. Yet another, as admitted, opinion piece. Most of the assumptions and assertions I've seen about the alleged negative effects of spanking on a young child's mind set are plagued by what I refer to as "adultomorphism." As are, by what I refer to concerning the practice of spanking compulsivism. It is "adultmorphism;" the assumption the child is like a little adult and thinks, feels, and understands as an adult does so will have the same responses for the same reasons to the experience of pain applied by a trusted other. The experience is interpreted through the mental and emotional processes of an adult - mental and emotional processes that are entirely different than those employed by a young child. That argument alone destroys the pro spank viewpoint. It is highly inappropriate to project one's own thoughts and feelings into the heart and head of a two-year-old; and most conclusions drawn as a result are highly likely to be grossly erroneous. It certainlly is and certainly does. Unfortunately, just as you Droany, this author gets it entirely ass backwards in an effort to preempt the arguments of the anti spanking advocates. It's typical, but very poor, attempt to turn the argument of the other side on its head...preemption has been noted since Socrates and earlier. With regard to the studies that appear to demonstrate the long-term detrimental effects of spanking, most that I've seen suffer from limited focus. That is for lack of subject destruction and is a constant in all current and recent social science research. For example, many report something like "85% of the inmates doing time on death row in a federal prison were spanked when they were young children." R R R R ...don'tcha love it. Did you read this before you posted it, Droananator? This lays the lie to the 85% claim. FEWER are spanking in the death row population than the general public, which you and your spanking compulsives is claimed to be 90% or MORE? R R R R Oh dear, now I've gotten the hiccups...all your fault, Droaner... {;- What is not noticed, much less investigated, is that 85% of the graduates of Harvard Medical School were spanked when they were young children as well. I have NEVER seen this , and I've been doing this for many more years than I've been here....from the age of 19 onward with hardly a break. There is no 85% figure anywhere at all, except by virtue of a subject NOT reporting one way or another. So the remaining 15% in both populations, death row inmate and Harvard Medical School, could have been or could not have been spanked. Talk about junk science. And no, the similar experiences of the two subject groups is so noted. Where do you get these flights of fancy, Droany? The point missed and avoided and run from by you, and this author, is that as a spanking compulsive parent you risk your child going EITHER way by spanking, since the threshold for abuse is unknown until one has crossed it. You have at the maximum, if we are to believe him, a 15% chance of an unspanked child on death row...and that figure isn't establish by any research I've ever been able to find. More often it is noted that an unspanked person cannot be found in the violent portion of the prison population and we know...or you think you do...that 90% of THAT population is also spanked...minimum What is ignored is that if spanking WORKED, the prisoner on death row population would be over represented with the UNSPANKED. The fact they are the same suggests, to any thinking social scientist, that something is at work here that is unaccounted for. And being one myself, I know that it is the variable threshold for abuse....and of course the fact that Harvard Medical School grads almost NEVER come from the strata of society that death row inmates come from. I've always advoctated the $60K or so a year spent to send a first time offender to prison would be better spend on a Harvard education. Thanks for pointing this out....R R R R R R R Meanwhile, my anti-anti-spanking position is not without solid support. As a researcher with the Harvard Preschool Project, I had the opportunity to participate in the most comprehensive and extensive study of early development ever performed. Furthermore, I had the opportunity to look at experiences that produced "optimal" outcomes as well as those that produced "problems." We had no pre-set notions. We merely observed what happened in families of all kinds. A human being raised by human beings, a supposed social scientist is claiming he and they had NO pre-set notions? Were did you find him, Droaner? He's already run out more that a couple. One of the things we discovered was that in two out of three families where children were developing into bright, happy, well-adjusted, responsible people, the kids were spanked from time to time - especially in the period from about 18 months to three years of age. The spankings were not frequent, nor were they brutal, and they never involved paddles, switches, belts, or any other such equipment. However, a swat on the behind or a slap on the wrist was not an uncommon occurrence. And they followed these children for coming up on 40 years as I have? Sure. And they had an equal number of unspanked children for comparison...sure. What we learned is that discipline is a critically important part of promoting optimal development, and that effective discipline during this particular period is quite difficult. In order to teach a child to be personally safe and respectful of others, it is necessary to "speak" to the child in a "language" he truly understands. And given the limited cognitive capacities of a toddler, a small spanking often results in a considerably better "education" than a prolonged discussion. In the immediate sense. No one has ever claimed in this ng or among other professionals that a hit won't immediately stop unwanted behavior. That is a given. It only proves that brutality works in the short run, that humans are tough, and you can ease and dilute ALL KINDS OF PAIN AND LOSS if you are these for the child in nurturing ways as well. It does NOT prove that NOT spanking is less effective or harmful, and no study has proven it to be so. Embry laid the ghost on that. Now, I will also distance myself from the "spare the rod, spoil the child" crowd. Of course he will, as that would be courting exposure by flirting with honesty. It's exactly the same "science" that Baumrind practiced when she stripped the more severely spanked children from a tiny sample so that her outcomes would reflect low levels of spanking...the same dishonorable and stupid bias you have when you claim that a parent can avoid crossing the line by going 5 miles an hour..(light taps on the butt). Baumrind ignored that spanking, for purposes of study, must study ALL the forms and intensity that PARENTS CLAIM is spanking...or it is no study of "spanking" at all. Just a tiny subset called tapping. This isn't alt.parenting.tapping-on-the-butt-with-no-objects newsgroup and that is for a reason....Chris knows, as all intelligent, none deluded humans know that "spanking" isn't limited to a tap on the clothed but with a gentle hand. What dishonorable twits. You are trying your damnest, after years of defending the broadest range of spanking behaviors, now that your a little butt has been caught in The Question, to reframe and redefine spanking so you won't have to answer The Question honestly. Morally you leave considerable to be desired, Droaner, but that we have always known. After all, we found that one in three families managed to get through even this difficult period without spanking. Clearly, depending upon the child and the circumstances, it is possible to be effective with other-than-corporal procedures. R R R R ... he buries his own argument...don'chalove it? The parent is being told by this that there are some chidlren so powerful, so evil, so in control of the parent, and conditions that are so unmanagable that one may just HAVE to spank. ... The Devil's Spawn Parenting Handbook should cover that quite well. But it is equally clear that with a lot of children in a lot of circumstances, spanking is preferable to disciplinary techniques that just aren't working or no discipline at all. No listing of the techniques. Want tah bet the aren't nonpunitive? They are just OTHER punishments that are equallly ineffective....and the age range he is talking about includes the time that parents are supposed to supervise, modify the environment, and redirect the child for maximum develpment with minimum risk....and this yahoo, and you by posting it, are recommending throwing that away...and WHY? To preserve the illusion there aren't plentiful parenting NONPUNITIVE techniques that DO work, but parents are ignorant of them. Instead of supporting teaching of an adequate repertoire what do we have? Yet another junk science defense of spanking compulsions. So please note that I am not recommending that all parents place spanking in their arsenal of child-- rearing techniques. On the contrary, These caveats are mindless twittering dodges just like yours, Droananator. And ther are public masturbation to make the thug thinker feel good about himself, even while he defends pain and humiliation as a teaching tool for children too young to comprehend what is happening to them. Or even how to avoid the pain without some compensatory neurotic reaction...such as fearful withdrawal, or rage on hold for the teen years. . I always urge mothers and fathers to take steps to avoid as many confrontations with their young child as possible, and then attempt to deal with those that inevitably occur with whatever non-corporal methods may reasonably be thought to have a genuinely educational impact. Male bovine excrement. There NO behaviors of children that cannot be efficiently and effectively moderated of even complety redirected with non punitive methods. It is NOT hard to learn EXCEPT for the barriers created by one's OWN spanked childhood experiences...and normally intelligent courageous people that won't let their childhood implated fears and biases stop them from truly loving their children and escaping this kind of mumbo jumbo punishment think can do. http://sandradodd.com/s/proof http://sandradodd.com/s/pressure http://sandradodd.com/s/why Experience vs junk science....PARENTS MAKING UP THEIR OWN MINDS Nevertheless, I recognize there are situations where a spanking just may be the best thing for that particular parent to do for their particular child at that particular time. Spanking is never the best thing no matter the circumstances. This is an attempt to excuse ignorance of non-punitive methods, and out of control parents. So, if your little one starts to stick a fork in an electrical outlet and you slap his wrist, or if he let' s go of your hand so he can rush into heavy traffic and you give him a swat on the bottom as you pull him back, don't beat yourself up. No, just know that it very likely to NOT stop him from doing what YOUR failure to supervise caused. In fact that it may instead inspire the child to try again. We have, as humans, a built in compulsive desire to explore our environment that we will hurt ourselves on PURPOSE even when we are grown UP to have that exploratory experience. And even with adults, self managing, they know to not fight it but to modify the circumstances for safety or at least to divert themselves. That IS one of the reasons we marry. Sex with one is safer. And don't let the dirty looks you get from holier-than-- thou bystanders or the condemnations from pop psychologists on TV talk shows convince you that you've done irreparable damage to your child's psyche. Just make sure that the spankings aren't coming along too often or getting out of hand. Plentiful Patronizing Platitudes from an "expert" that has provided not a whit of any proof beyond his own observations and opinions as his exhalted position should require him to do for believability. Shades of Diana Baumrind. "I'm an expert. Trust me, and my opinion." But possibly he could answer The Question, or a portion. How much is "too often" and what is "getting out of hand" in terms of frequency, intensity, and The Line you stop at before you get there......sans references to already gone-over-the-line and damaged spanked child. None of this nonsense of "just don't hurt them." Parent want to at what point to stop BEFORE THE CHILDREN ARE HURT. Ring him up and ask. I'll be he could give me a better run for my money than you have, playground boy. Otherwise, if you are a loving, caring, sensible parent, Please point out those that think they are NOT. I would suggest that you keep in mind the following adage that was formulated by the late Dr. Louise Bates Ames, a wise, sweet, gentle woman who was the director of the Gesell Institute Well, isn't that nice, and very special, but of course has no referrance in these times that make a bit of sense to current parents of small children. How rudely patronizing and what psychological manipulation. for several decades and regarded as one of the world's foremost authorities on early education and development: I have to ask, what does it take to be labeled a foremost world authority at anything, and who are some of the world's idiots that have held the title? "If you plan on never spanking your child, you'll probably end up doing it the proper number of times." She must have been very old to mouth such nonsense. And it must have been rather a long time back when other options were in short supply. It should have been said, "If you commit to never spanking your child you will be inspired to learn how to parent them non-punitively...and there is more than enough knowledge to do so brilliantly and successfuly." Did anyone aske her "the proper number of times?" She may well have meant zero, if you really PLAN, not just idly wish. So I took the trouble of looking her up... http://tinyurl.com/33xh5 From Amazon: 1 out of 5 stars Not Very Enlightening, June 1, 2003 Reviewer: Kenneth LaFrance (see more about me) from Cotati, CA USA and quotes from the book: Ames on the subject of spanking; http://tinyurl.com/323e6 Speaking of planning, as in commiting: I planned from age 19 and I had my first child at 22, to NOT spank. and I was short on non-punitive methods. So I muddled along trusting myself and used mostly, from my heart and my feelings, non-punitive methods. I discovered in 1975 the first of what became a series of sources for those kinds of parenting methods. And parenting turned into a joyfilled sleighride from then on. Others have made it...I gave the URLs earlier. By Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed. D. Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D., is executive director of The Epicenter Inc., "The Education for Parenthood Information Center," a family advisory and advocacy agency located in Lindenhurst, Illinois. His e-mail address is . Meyerhoff, Michael K, A different slant on spanking. , Pediatrics for Parents, 01-01-2001, pp 8. Gee, yah don't think he might have just a teensy weiny bias in favor of spanking, now do yah? http://tinyurl.com/3gucv R R R R ....good one Droany.....yet another fall flat on your butt exhibition. I post from parents experience, supposedly YOUR bias, and you post, apparently in reply, someone that is from someone professionally invested in better parenting....what you THINK is my bias....R R R R...what a maroon. See yah next Wednesday. Be there, with YOUR FARE, or be square. Kane |
A slant on spanking
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 19:45:21 -0800, Doan wrote:
Just as expected, I threw out a bone and the Kane9 barked! :-) Just as expected. I responded to the content of your post, and instead of resonding in kind, you choked. Couldn't handle my responses, eh? Do you know why your "fun with" me is up? I do. Wednesday, February 25th, 8 am Kane |
A slant on spanking
On 21 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 19:45:21 -0800, Doan wrote: Just as expected, I threw out a bone and the Kane9 barked! :-) Just as expected. Yup! :-) I responded to the content of your post, and instead of resonding in kind, you choked. LOL! I couldn't laugh enough. :-) Couldn't handle my responses, eh? Nope! ;-) Do you know why your "fun with" me is up? Only when you stop posting. ;-) I do. Wednesday, February 25th, 8 am Is that the Rapture? :-) Doan |
A slant on spanking
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 21:52:52 -0800, Doan wrote:
On 21 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 19:45:21 -0800, Doan wrote: Just as expected, I threw out a bone and the Kane9 barked! :-) Just as expected. Yup! :-) I responded to the content of your post, and instead of resonding in kind, you choked. LOL! I couldn't laugh enough. :-) Couldn't handle my responses, eh? Nope! ;-) Do you know why your "fun with" me is up? Only when you stop posting. ;-) There is one other way. I do. Wednesday, February 25th, 8 am Is that the Rapture? :-) Depends on you. It's your Rapture." Either way. Doan Kane out until Wednesday, February 25th, then it's Doan out. |
A slant on spanking
On 21 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 21:52:52 -0800, Doan wrote: On 21 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 19:45:21 -0800, Doan wrote: Just as expected, I threw out a bone and the Kane9 barked! :-) Just as expected. Yup! :-) I responded to the content of your post, and instead of resonding in kind, you choked. LOL! I couldn't laugh enough. :-) Couldn't handle my responses, eh? Nope! ;-) Do you know why your "fun with" me is up? Only when you stop posting. ;-) There is one other way. I do. Wednesday, February 25th, 8 am Is that the Rapture? :-) Depends on you. It's your Rapture." Either way. Doan Kane out until Wednesday, February 25th, then it's Doan out. Run like a dog, Kane9. ;-) Doan |
A slant on spanking
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 22:00:39 -0800, Doan wrote:
On 21 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 21:52:52 -0800, Doan wrote: On 21 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 19:45:21 -0800, Doan wrote: Just as expected, I threw out a bone and the Kane9 barked! :-) Just as expected. Yup! :-) I responded to the content of your post, and instead of resonding in kind, you choked. LOL! I couldn't laugh enough. :-) Couldn't handle my responses, eh? Nope! ;-) Do you know why your "fun with" me is up? Only when you stop posting. ;-) There is one other way. I do. Wednesday, February 25th, 8 am Is that the Rapture? :-) Depends on you. It's your Rapture." Either way. Doan Kane out until Wednesday, February 25th, then it's Doan out. Run like a dog, Kane9. ;-) Where. I have no escape hatch as you do. In fact I closed all possibly ways out for myself, publically to you. You do three things and I'm on. That traps me, and opens escape hatches for YOU. I notice you couldn't resist the temptation and are gather for the spring....right out the hatch. I offered to respond to your challenge to debate the Embry street entry study. I asked for only three conditions. You've not met them. Easy too. All they take is honesty. If you don't want to, or can't meet met them we won't just automatically assume you ran. We'll ask others to help decide. Want to ask them if I'm running? Want to ask them if you are? I'll also ask them if they think you are a fit opponent to debate and if they wish to address you any longer in this ng. Hey, some may not be able to resist your baiting and dodging, but I can easily, after I've used them and you up....and February 25th isn't far away. Do as you wish... Be my guest. My door is open to you, your hatch is closing. Two ways out, which will you take? Doan Yes, I know you are. And YOU just took the bait. I know what you can't resist answering. Kane |
A slant on spanking
Barking like a dog again, Kane7! Doan On 21 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 22:00:39 -0800, Doan wrote: On 21 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 21:52:52 -0800, Doan wrote: On 21 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 19:45:21 -0800, Doan wrote: Just as expected, I threw out a bone and the Kane9 barked! :-) Just as expected. Yup! :-) I responded to the content of your post, and instead of resonding in kind, you choked. LOL! I couldn't laugh enough. :-) Couldn't handle my responses, eh? Nope! ;-) Do you know why your "fun with" me is up? Only when you stop posting. ;-) There is one other way. I do. Wednesday, February 25th, 8 am Is that the Rapture? :-) Depends on you. It's your Rapture." Either way. Doan Kane out until Wednesday, February 25th, then it's Doan out. Run like a dog, Kane9. ;-) Where. I have no escape hatch as you do. In fact I closed all possibly ways out for myself, publically to you. You do three things and I'm on. That traps me, and opens escape hatches for YOU. I notice you couldn't resist the temptation and are gather for the spring....right out the hatch. I offered to respond to your challenge to debate the Embry street entry study. I asked for only three conditions. You've not met them. Easy too. All they take is honesty. If you don't want to, or can't meet met them we won't just automatically assume you ran. We'll ask others to help decide. Want to ask them if I'm running? Want to ask them if you are? I'll also ask them if they think you are a fit opponent to debate and if they wish to address you any longer in this ng. Hey, some may not be able to resist your baiting and dodging, but I can easily, after I've used them and you up....and February 25th isn't far away. Do as you wish... Be my guest. My door is open to you, your hatch is closing. Two ways out, which will you take? Doan Yes, I know you are. And YOU just took the bait. I know what you can't resist answering. Kane |
A slant on spanking
|
A slant on spanking
"Doan" wrote in message ... A different slant on spanking By: Meyerhoff, Michael K Volume: 19 Number: 8 ISSN: 07306725 Publication Date: 01-01-2001 Page: 8 Type: Periodical Language: English Perspectives on Parenting If you are an alert parent, you probably have surmised that professionals in the field of psychology have reached something of a consensus on the subject of spanking. I refer here to a swat on the bottom with a hand, not hitting the child with any sort of object and no hitting hard enough to cause much more than a loss of dignity. Thanks to numerous reports that have appeared in the popular media, it now seems as though there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that spanking is a highly detrimental practice which not only is largely ineffective, but also leads inevitably to some degree of emotional damage. Today, mothers and fathers are aware that any type of corporal punishment is likely to be viewed as child abuse by those who are authorities on the subject of early development. Well, I guess that forces me to stand apart from the crowd. In my opinion, this across-the-board condemnation of spanking is based more on personal attitudes than professional studies. And whatever professional studies may be involved tend to lack a great deal of credibility due to either built-in biases or faulty research techniques. I have yet to see anything so substantial and convincing that it would cause me to jump on the anti-spanking bandwagon. Most of the assumptions and assertions I've seen about the alleged negative effects of spanking on a young child's mind set are plagued by what I refer to as "adultomorphism." The experience is interpreted through the mental and emotional processes of an adult - mental and emotional processes that are entirely different than those employed by a young child. It is highly inappropriate to project one's own thoughts and feelings into the heart and head of a two-year-old; and most conclusions drawn as a result are highly likely to be grossly erroneous. With regard to the studies that appear to demonstrate the long-term detrimental effects of spanking, most that I've seen suffer from limited focus. For example, many report something like "85% of the inmates doing time on death row in a federal prison were spanked when they were young children." What is not noticed, much less investigated, is that 85% of the graduates of Harvard Medical School were spanked when they were young children as well. Meanwhile, my anti-anti-spanking position is not without solid support. As a researcher with the Harvard Preschool Project, I had the opportunity to participate in the most comprehensive and extensive study of early development ever performed. Furthermore, I had the opportunity to look at experiences that produced "optimal" outcomes as well as those that produced "problems." We had no pre-set notions. We merely observed what happened in families of all kinds. One of the things we discovered was that in two out of three families where children were developing into bright, happy, well-adjusted, responsible people, the kids were spanked from time to time - especially in the period from about 18 months to three years of age. The spankings were not frequent, nor were they brutal, and they never involved paddles, switches, belts, or any other such equipment. However, a swat on the behind or a slap on the wrist was not an uncommon occurrence. What we learned is that discipline is a critically important part of promoting optimal development, and that effective discipline during this particular period is quite difficult. In order to teach a child to be personally safe and respectful of others, it is necessary to "speak" to the child in a "language" he truly understands. And given the limited cognitive capacities of a toddler, a small spanking often results in a considerably better "education" than a prolonged discussion. Now, I will also distance myself from the "spare the rod, spoil the child" crowd. After all, we found that one in three families managed to get through even this difficult period without spanking. Clearly, depending upon the child and the circumstances, it is possible to be effective with other-than-corporal procedures. But it is equally clear that with a lot of children in a lot of circumstances, spanking is preferable to disciplinary techniques that just aren't working or no discipline at all. So please note that I am not recommending that all parents place spanking in their arsenal of child-- rearing techniques. On the contrary, I always urge mothers and fathers to take steps to avoid as many confrontations with their young child as possible, and then attempt to deal with those that inevitably occur with whatever non-corporal methods may reasonably be thought to have a genuinely educational impact. Nevertheless, I recognize there are situations where a spanking just may be the best thing for that particular parent to do for their particular child at that particular time. So, if your little one starts to stick a fork in an electrical outlet and you slap his wrist, or if he let' s go of your hand so he can rush into heavy traffic and you give him a swat on the bottom as you pull him back, don't beat yourself up. And don't let the dirty looks you get from holier-than-- thou bystanders or the condemnations from pop psychologists on TV talk shows convince you that you've done irreparable damage to your child's psyche. Just make sure that the spankings aren't coming along too often or getting out of hand. Otherwise, if you are a loving, caring, sensible parent, I would suggest that you keep in mind the following adage that was formulated by the late Dr. Louise Bates Ames, a wise, sweet, gentle woman who was the director of the Gesell Institute for several decades and regarded as one of the world's foremost authorities on early education and development: "If you plan on never spanking your child, you'll probably end up doing it the proper number of times." By Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed. D. Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D., is executive director of The Epicenter Inc., "The Education for Parenthood Information Center," a family advisory and advocacy agency located in Lindenhurst, Illinois. His e-mail address is . Meyerhoff, Michael K, A different slant on spanking. , Pediatrics for Parents, 01-01-2001, pp 8. This is the weirest article I have ever read. Where's the beef? S |
The Same Old Doan Slant On Spanking, was A slant on spanking
Have you ever wondered why individuals fight so terribly hard to keep
children legally hittable? It seems pretty bizarre to me. Is it ignorance? Is it fear? Is it the enjoyment of being able to hit someone and children are small, safe, and not legally protected? Is it the need to feel powerful? Is it a replay of the parenting these individuals received as children? Is it payback? I don't get it. I cannot understand why anyone would rationally justify or fight for the supposed right to raise his/her hand and hit the body of a little child. LaVonne Doan wrote: A different slant on spanking By: Meyerhoff, Michael K Volume: 19 Number: 8 ISSN: 07306725 Publication Date: 01-01-2001 Page: 8 Type: Periodical Language: English Perspectives on Parenting If you are an alert parent, you probably have surmised that professionals in the field of psychology have reached something of a consensus on the subject of spanking. I refer here to a swat on the bottom with a hand, not hitting the child with any sort of object and no hitting hard enough to cause much more than a loss of dignity. Thanks to numerous reports that have appeared in the popular media, it now seems as though there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that spanking is a highly detrimental practice which not only is largely ineffective, but also leads inevitably to some degree of emotional damage. Today, mothers and fathers are aware that any type of corporal punishment is likely to be viewed as child abuse by those who are authorities on the subject of early development. Well, I guess that forces me to stand apart from the crowd. In my opinion, this across-the-board condemnation of spanking is based more on personal attitudes than professional studies. And whatever professional studies may be involved tend to lack a great deal of credibility due to either built-in biases or faulty research techniques. I have yet to see anything so substantial and convincing that it would cause me to jump on the anti-spanking bandwagon. Most of the assumptions and assertions I've seen about the alleged negative effects of spanking on a young child's mind set are plagued by what I refer to as "adultomorphism." The experience is interpreted through the mental and emotional processes of an adult - mental and emotional processes that are entirely different than those employed by a young child. It is highly inappropriate to project one's own thoughts and feelings into the heart and head of a two-year-old; and most conclusions drawn as a result are highly likely to be grossly erroneous. With regard to the studies that appear to demonstrate the long-term detrimental effects of spanking, most that I've seen suffer from limited focus. For example, many report something like "85% of the inmates doing time on death row in a federal prison were spanked when they were young children." What is not noticed, much less investigated, is that 85% of the graduates of Harvard Medical School were spanked when they were young children as well. Meanwhile, my anti-anti-spanking position is not without solid support. As a researcher with the Harvard Preschool Project, I had the opportunity to participate in the most comprehensive and extensive study of early development ever performed. Furthermore, I had the opportunity to look at experiences that produced "optimal" outcomes as well as those that produced "problems." We had no pre-set notions. We merely observed what happened in families of all kinds. One of the things we discovered was that in two out of three families where children were developing into bright, happy, well-adjusted, responsible people, the kids were spanked from time to time - especially in the period from about 18 months to three years of age. The spankings were not frequent, nor were they brutal, and they never involved paddles, switches, belts, or any other such equipment. However, a swat on the behind or a slap on the wrist was not an uncommon occurrence. What we learned is that discipline is a critically important part of promoting optimal development, and that effective discipline during this particular period is quite difficult. In order to teach a child to be personally safe and respectful of others, it is necessary to "speak" to the child in a "language" he truly understands. And given the limited cognitive capacities of a toddler, a small spanking often results in a considerably better "education" than a prolonged discussion. Now, I will also distance myself from the "spare the rod, spoil the child" crowd. After all, we found that one in three families managed to get through even this difficult period without spanking. Clearly, depending upon the child and the circumstances, it is possible to be effective with other-than-corporal procedures. But it is equally clear that with a lot of children in a lot of circumstances, spanking is preferable to disciplinary techniques that just aren't working or no discipline at all. So please note that I am not recommending that all parents place spanking in their arsenal of child-- rearing techniques. On the contrary, I always urge mothers and fathers to take steps to avoid as many confrontations with their young child as possible, and then attempt to deal with those that inevitably occur with whatever non-corporal methods may reasonably be thought to have a genuinely educational impact. Nevertheless, I recognize there are situations where a spanking just may be the best thing for that particular parent to do for their particular child at that particular time. So, if your little one starts to stick a fork in an electrical outlet and you slap his wrist, or if he let' s go of your hand so he can rush into heavy traffic and you give him a swat on the bottom as you pull him back, don't beat yourself up. And don't let the dirty looks you get from holier-than-- thou bystanders or the condemnations from pop psychologists on TV talk shows convince you that you've done irreparable damage to your child's psyche. Just make sure that the spankings aren't coming along too often or getting out of hand. Otherwise, if you are a loving, caring, sensible parent, I would suggest that you keep in mind the following adage that was formulated by the late Dr. Louise Bates Ames, a wise, sweet, gentle woman who was the director of the Gesell Institute for several decades and regarded as one of the world's foremost authorities on early education and development: "If you plan on never spanking your child, you'll probably end up doing it the proper number of times." By Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed. D. Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D., is executive director of The Epicenter Inc., "The Education for Parenthood Information Center," a family advisory and advocacy agency located in Lindenhurst, Illinois. His e-mail address is . Meyerhoff, Michael K, A different slant on spanking. , Pediatrics for Parents, 01-01-2001, pp 8. |
The Same Old LaVonne A slant on spanking
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004, Carlson LaVonne wrote: I don't get it. And you would be right! ;-) Doan |
The Same Old Doan Slant On Spanking, was A slant on spanking
One must defend the rightness of hitting one's kid or one has to face that
it was wrong for their parents to do it to them. This would result in either the need to forgive or to hate. Neither is easy. Denial is easier. S "Carlson LaVonne" wrote in message ... Have you ever wondered why individuals fight so terribly hard to keep children legally hittable? It seems pretty bizarre to me. Is it ignorance? Is it fear? Is it the enjoyment of being able to hit someone and children are small, safe, and not legally protected? Is it the need to feel powerful? Is it a replay of the parenting these individuals received as children? Is it payback? I don't get it. I cannot understand why anyone would rationally justify or fight for the supposed right to raise his/her hand and hit the body of a little child. LaVonne Doan wrote: A different slant on spanking By: Meyerhoff, Michael K Volume: 19 Number: 8 ISSN: 07306725 Publication Date: 01-01-2001 Page: 8 Type: Periodical Language: English Perspectives on Parenting If you are an alert parent, you probably have surmised that professionals in the field of psychology have reached something of a consensus on the subject of spanking. I refer here to a swat on the bottom with a hand, not hitting the child with any sort of object and no hitting hard enough to cause much more than a loss of dignity. Thanks to numerous reports that have appeared in the popular media, it now seems as though there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that spanking is a highly detrimental practice which not only is largely ineffective, but also leads inevitably to some degree of emotional damage. Today, mothers and fathers are aware that any type of corporal punishment is likely to be viewed as child abuse by those who are authorities on the subject of early development. Well, I guess that forces me to stand apart from the crowd. In my opinion, this across-the-board condemnation of spanking is based more on personal attitudes than professional studies. And whatever professional studies may be involved tend to lack a great deal of credibility due to either built-in biases or faulty research techniques. I have yet to see anything so substantial and convincing that it would cause me to jump on the anti-spanking bandwagon. Most of the assumptions and assertions I've seen about the alleged negative effects of spanking on a young child's mind set are plagued by what I refer to as "adultomorphism." The experience is interpreted through the mental and emotional processes of an adult - mental and emotional processes that are entirely different than those employed by a young child. It is highly inappropriate to project one's own thoughts and feelings into the heart and head of a two-year-old; and most conclusions drawn as a result are highly likely to be grossly erroneous. With regard to the studies that appear to demonstrate the long-term detrimental effects of spanking, most that I've seen suffer from limited focus. For example, many report something like "85% of the inmates doing time on death row in a federal prison were spanked when they were young children." What is not noticed, much less investigated, is that 85% of the graduates of Harvard Medical School were spanked when they were young children as well. Meanwhile, my anti-anti-spanking position is not without solid support. As a researcher with the Harvard Preschool Project, I had the opportunity to participate in the most comprehensive and extensive study of early development ever performed. Furthermore, I had the opportunity to look at experiences that produced "optimal" outcomes as well as those that produced "problems." We had no pre-set notions. We merely observed what happened in families of all kinds. One of the things we discovered was that in two out of three families where children were developing into bright, happy, well-adjusted, responsible people, the kids were spanked from time to time - especially in the period from about 18 months to three years of age. The spankings were not frequent, nor were they brutal, and they never involved paddles, switches, belts, or any other such equipment. However, a swat on the behind or a slap on the wrist was not an uncommon occurrence. What we learned is that discipline is a critically important part of promoting optimal development, and that effective discipline during this particular period is quite difficult. In order to teach a child to be personally safe and respectful of others, it is necessary to "speak" to the child in a "language" he truly understands. And given the limited cognitive capacities of a toddler, a small spanking often results in a considerably better "education" than a prolonged discussion. Now, I will also distance myself from the "spare the rod, spoil the child" crowd. After all, we found that one in three families managed to get through even this difficult period without spanking. Clearly, depending upon the child and the circumstances, it is possible to be effective with other-than-corporal procedures. But it is equally clear that with a lot of children in a lot of circumstances, spanking is preferable to disciplinary techniques that just aren't working or no discipline at all. So please note that I am not recommending that all parents place spanking in their arsenal of child-- rearing techniques. On the contrary, I always urge mothers and fathers to take steps to avoid as many confrontations with their young child as possible, and then attempt to deal with those that inevitably occur with whatever non-corporal methods may reasonably be thought to have a genuinely educational impact. Nevertheless, I recognize there are situations where a spanking just may be the best thing for that particular parent to do for their particular child at that particular time. So, if your little one starts to stick a fork in an electrical outlet and you slap his wrist, or if he let' s go of your hand so he can rush into heavy traffic and you give him a swat on the bottom as you pull him back, don't beat yourself up. And don't let the dirty looks you get from holier-than-- thou bystanders or the condemnations from pop psychologists on TV talk shows convince you that you've done irreparable damage to your child's psyche. Just make sure that the spankings aren't coming along too often or getting out of hand. Otherwise, if you are a loving, caring, sensible parent, I would suggest that you keep in mind the following adage that was formulated by the late Dr. Louise Bates Ames, a wise, sweet, gentle woman who was the director of the Gesell Institute for several decades and regarded as one of the world's foremost authorities on early education and development: "If you plan on never spanking your child, you'll probably end up doing it the proper number of times." By Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed. D. Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D., is executive director of The Epicenter Inc., "The Education for Parenthood Information Center," a family advisory and advocacy agency located in Lindenhurst, Illinois. His e-mail address is . Meyerhoff, Michael K, A different slant on spanking. , Pediatrics for Parents, 01-01-2001, pp 8. |
The Same Old Doan Slant On Spanking, was A slant on spanking
I just love the logic of the anti-spanking zealotS! :-) Let's try this: One must defend the rightness of DIAPERING one's kid or one has to face thatit was wrong for their parents to do it to them. This would result in either the need to forgive or to hate. Neither is easy. Denial is easier. Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS, are they mutually exclusive? ;-0 Doan On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Stephanie Stowe wrote: One must defend the rightness of hitting one's kid or one has to face that it was wrong for their parents to do it to them. This would result in either the need to forgive or to hate. Neither is easy. Denial is easier. S "Carlson LaVonne" wrote in message ... Have you ever wondered why individuals fight so terribly hard to keep children legally hittable? It seems pretty bizarre to me. Is it ignorance? Is it fear? Is it the enjoyment of being able to hit someone and children are small, safe, and not legally protected? Is it the need to feel powerful? Is it a replay of the parenting these individuals received as children? Is it payback? I don't get it. I cannot understand why anyone would rationally justify or fight for the supposed right to raise his/her hand and hit the body of a little child. LaVonne Doan wrote: A different slant on spanking By: Meyerhoff, Michael K Volume: 19 Number: 8 ISSN: 07306725 Publication Date: 01-01-2001 Page: 8 Type: Periodical Language: English Perspectives on Parenting If you are an alert parent, you probably have surmised that professionals in the field of psychology have reached something of a consensus on the subject of spanking. I refer here to a swat on the bottom with a hand, not hitting the child with any sort of object and no hitting hard enough to cause much more than a loss of dignity. Thanks to numerous reports that have appeared in the popular media, it now seems as though there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that spanking is a highly detrimental practice which not only is largely ineffective, but also leads inevitably to some degree of emotional damage. Today, mothers and fathers are aware that any type of corporal punishment is likely to be viewed as child abuse by those who are authorities on the subject of early development. Well, I guess that forces me to stand apart from the crowd. In my opinion, this across-the-board condemnation of spanking is based more on personal attitudes than professional studies. And whatever professional studies may be involved tend to lack a great deal of credibility due to either built-in biases or faulty research techniques. I have yet to see anything so substantial and convincing that it would cause me to jump on the anti-spanking bandwagon. Most of the assumptions and assertions I've seen about the alleged negative effects of spanking on a young child's mind set are plagued by what I refer to as "adultomorphism." The experience is interpreted through the mental and emotional processes of an adult - mental and emotional processes that are entirely different than those employed by a young child. It is highly inappropriate to project one's own thoughts and feelings into the heart and head of a two-year-old; and most conclusions drawn as a result are highly likely to be grossly erroneous. With regard to the studies that appear to demonstrate the long-term detrimental effects of spanking, most that I've seen suffer from limited focus. For example, many report something like "85% of the inmates doing time on death row in a federal prison were spanked when they were young children." What is not noticed, much less investigated, is that 85% of the graduates of Harvard Medical School were spanked when they were young children as well. Meanwhile, my anti-anti-spanking position is not without solid support. As a researcher with the Harvard Preschool Project, I had the opportunity to participate in the most comprehensive and extensive study of early development ever performed. Furthermore, I had the opportunity to look at experiences that produced "optimal" outcomes as well as those that produced "problems." We had no pre-set notions. We merely observed what happened in families of all kinds. One of the things we discovered was that in two out of three families where children were developing into bright, happy, well-adjusted, responsible people, the kids were spanked from time to time - especially in the period from about 18 months to three years of age. The spankings were not frequent, nor were they brutal, and they never involved paddles, switches, belts, or any other such equipment. However, a swat on the behind or a slap on the wrist was not an uncommon occurrence. What we learned is that discipline is a critically important part of promoting optimal development, and that effective discipline during this particular period is quite difficult. In order to teach a child to be personally safe and respectful of others, it is necessary to "speak" to the child in a "language" he truly understands. And given the limited cognitive capacities of a toddler, a small spanking often results in a considerably better "education" than a prolonged discussion. Now, I will also distance myself from the "spare the rod, spoil the child" crowd. After all, we found that one in three families managed to get through even this difficult period without spanking. Clearly, depending upon the child and the circumstances, it is possible to be effective with other-than-corporal procedures. But it is equally clear that with a lot of children in a lot of circumstances, spanking is preferable to disciplinary techniques that just aren't working or no discipline at all. So please note that I am not recommending that all parents place spanking in their arsenal of child-- rearing techniques. On the contrary, I always urge mothers and fathers to take steps to avoid as many confrontations with their young child as possible, and then attempt to deal with those that inevitably occur with whatever non-corporal methods may reasonably be thought to have a genuinely educational impact. Nevertheless, I recognize there are situations where a spanking just may be the best thing for that particular parent to do for their particular child at that particular time. So, if your little one starts to stick a fork in an electrical outlet and you slap his wrist, or if he let' s go of your hand so he can rush into heavy traffic and you give him a swat on the bottom as you pull him back, don't beat yourself up. And don't let the dirty looks you get from holier-than-- thou bystanders or the condemnations from pop psychologists on TV talk shows convince you that you've done irreparable damage to your child's psyche. Just make sure that the spankings aren't coming along too often or getting out of hand. Otherwise, if you are a loving, caring, sensible parent, I would suggest that you keep in mind the following adage that was formulated by the late Dr. Louise Bates Ames, a wise, sweet, gentle woman who was the director of the Gesell Institute for several decades and regarded as one of the world's foremost authorities on early education and development: "If you plan on never spanking your child, you'll probably end up doing it the proper number of times." By Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed. D. Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D., is executive director of The Epicenter Inc., "The Education for Parenthood Information Center," a family advisory and advocacy agency located in Lindenhurst, Illinois. His e-mail address is . Meyerhoff, Michael K, A different slant on spanking. , Pediatrics for Parents, 01-01-2001, pp 8. |
The Same Old Doan Slant On Spanking, was A slant on spanking
Can diapering be harmful? I never knew that.
geeeeesh "Doan" wrote in message ... I just love the logic of the anti-spanking zealotS! :-) Let's try this: One must defend the rightness of DIAPERING one's kid or one has to face thatit was wrong for their parents to do it to them. This would result in either the need to forgive or to hate. Neither is easy. Denial is easier. Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS, are they mutually exclusive? ;-0 Doan On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Stephanie Stowe wrote: One must defend the rightness of hitting one's kid or one has to face that it was wrong for their parents to do it to them. This would result in either the need to forgive or to hate. Neither is easy. Denial is easier. S "Carlson LaVonne" wrote in message ... Have you ever wondered why individuals fight so terribly hard to keep children legally hittable? It seems pretty bizarre to me. Is it ignorance? Is it fear? Is it the enjoyment of being able to hit someone and children are small, safe, and not legally protected? Is it the need to feel powerful? Is it a replay of the parenting these individuals received as children? Is it payback? I don't get it. I cannot understand why anyone would rationally justify or fight for the supposed right to raise his/her hand and hit the body of a little child. LaVonne Doan wrote: A different slant on spanking By: Meyerhoff, Michael K Volume: 19 Number: 8 ISSN: 07306725 Publication Date: 01-01-2001 Page: 8 Type: Periodical Language: English Perspectives on Parenting If you are an alert parent, you probably have surmised that professionals in the field of psychology have reached something of a consensus on the subject of spanking. I refer here to a swat on the bottom with a hand, not hitting the child with any sort of object and no hitting hard enough to cause much more than a loss of dignity. Thanks to numerous reports that have appeared in the popular media, it now seems as though there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that spanking is a highly detrimental practice which not only is largely ineffective, but also leads inevitably to some degree of emotional damage. Today, mothers and fathers are aware that any type of corporal punishment is likely to be viewed as child abuse by those who are authorities on the subject of early development. Well, I guess that forces me to stand apart from the crowd. In my opinion, this across-the-board condemnation of spanking is based more on personal attitudes than professional studies. And whatever professional studies may be involved tend to lack a great deal of credibility due to either built-in biases or faulty research techniques. I have yet to see anything so substantial and convincing that it would cause me to jump on the anti-spanking bandwagon. Most of the assumptions and assertions I've seen about the alleged negative effects of spanking on a young child's mind set are plagued by what I refer to as "adultomorphism." The experience is interpreted through the mental and emotional processes of an adult - mental and emotional processes that are entirely different than those employed by a young child. It is highly inappropriate to project one's own thoughts and feelings into the heart and head of a two-year-old; and most conclusions drawn as a result are highly likely to be grossly erroneous. With regard to the studies that appear to demonstrate the long-term detrimental effects of spanking, most that I've seen suffer from limited focus. For example, many report something like "85% of the inmates doing time on death row in a federal prison were spanked when they were young children." What is not noticed, much less investigated, is that 85% of the graduates of Harvard Medical School were spanked when they were young children as well. Meanwhile, my anti-anti-spanking position is not without solid support. As a researcher with the Harvard Preschool Project, I had the opportunity to participate in the most comprehensive and extensive study of early development ever performed. Furthermore, I had the opportunity to look at experiences that produced "optimal" outcomes as well as those that produced "problems." We had no pre-set notions. We merely observed what happened in families of all kinds. One of the things we discovered was that in two out of three families where children were developing into bright, happy, well-adjusted, responsible people, the kids were spanked from time to time - especially in the period from about 18 months to three years of age. The spankings were not frequent, nor were they brutal, and they never involved paddles, switches, belts, or any other such equipment. However, a swat on the behind or a slap on the wrist was not an uncommon occurrence. What we learned is that discipline is a critically important part of promoting optimal development, and that effective discipline during this particular period is quite difficult. In order to teach a child to be personally safe and respectful of others, it is necessary to "speak" to the child in a "language" he truly understands. And given the limited cognitive capacities of a toddler, a small spanking often results in a considerably better "education" than a prolonged discussion. Now, I will also distance myself from the "spare the rod, spoil the child" crowd. After all, we found that one in three families managed to get through even this difficult period without spanking. Clearly, depending upon the child and the circumstances, it is possible to be effective with other-than-corporal procedures. But it is equally clear that with a lot of children in a lot of circumstances, spanking is preferable to disciplinary techniques that just aren't working or no discipline at all. So please note that I am not recommending that all parents place spanking in their arsenal of child-- rearing techniques. On the contrary, I always urge mothers and fathers to take steps to avoid as many confrontations with their young child as possible, and then attempt to deal with those that inevitably occur with whatever non-corporal methods may reasonably be thought to have a genuinely educational impact. Nevertheless, I recognize there are situations where a spanking just may be the best thing for that particular parent to do for their particular child at that particular time. So, if your little one starts to stick a fork in an electrical outlet and you slap his wrist, or if he let' s go of your hand so he can rush into heavy traffic and you give him a swat on the bottom as you pull him back, don't beat yourself up. And don't let the dirty looks you get from holier-than-- thou bystanders or the condemnations from pop psychologists on TV talk shows convince you that you've done irreparable damage to your child's psyche. Just make sure that the spankings aren't coming along too often or getting out of hand. Otherwise, if you are a loving, caring, sensible parent, I would suggest that you keep in mind the following adage that was formulated by the late Dr. Louise Bates Ames, a wise, sweet, gentle woman who was the director of the Gesell Institute for several decades and regarded as one of the world's foremost authorities on early education and development: "If you plan on never spanking your child, you'll probably end up doing it the proper number of times." By Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed. D. Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D., is executive director of The Epicenter Inc., "The Education for Parenthood Information Center," a family advisory and advocacy agency located in Lindenhurst, Illinois. His e-mail address is . Meyerhoff, Michael K, A different slant on spanking. , Pediatrics for Parents, 01-01-2001, pp 8. |
The Same Old Doan Slant On Spanking, was A slant on spanking
Yes! Ever heard of DIAPER rash? I think the medical term is diaper dermatitis. And you called yourself a mom! ;-) Doan On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Stephanie Stowe wrote: Can diapering be harmful? I never knew that. geeeeesh "Doan" wrote in message ... I just love the logic of the anti-spanking zealotS! :-) Let's try this: One must defend the rightness of DIAPERING one's kid or one has to face thatit was wrong for their parents to do it to them. This would result in either the need to forgive or to hate. Neither is easy. Denial is easier. Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS, are they mutually exclusive? ;-0 Doan On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Stephanie Stowe wrote: One must defend the rightness of hitting one's kid or one has to face that it was wrong for their parents to do it to them. This would result in either the need to forgive or to hate. Neither is easy. Denial is easier. S "Carlson LaVonne" wrote in message ... Have you ever wondered why individuals fight so terribly hard to keep children legally hittable? It seems pretty bizarre to me. Is it ignorance? Is it fear? Is it the enjoyment of being able to hit someone and children are small, safe, and not legally protected? Is it the need to feel powerful? Is it a replay of the parenting these individuals received as children? Is it payback? I don't get it. I cannot understand why anyone would rationally justify or fight for the supposed right to raise his/her hand and hit the body of a little child. LaVonne Doan wrote: A different slant on spanking By: Meyerhoff, Michael K Volume: 19 Number: 8 ISSN: 07306725 Publication Date: 01-01-2001 Page: 8 Type: Periodical Language: English Perspectives on Parenting If you are an alert parent, you probably have surmised that professionals in the field of psychology have reached something of a consensus on the subject of spanking. I refer here to a swat on the bottom with a hand, not hitting the child with any sort of object and no hitting hard enough to cause much more than a loss of dignity. Thanks to numerous reports that have appeared in the popular media, it now seems as though there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that spanking is a highly detrimental practice which not only is largely ineffective, but also leads inevitably to some degree of emotional damage. Today, mothers and fathers are aware that any type of corporal punishment is likely to be viewed as child abuse by those who are authorities on the subject of early development. Well, I guess that forces me to stand apart from the crowd. In my opinion, this across-the-board condemnation of spanking is based more on personal attitudes than professional studies. And whatever professional studies may be involved tend to lack a great deal of credibility due to either built-in biases or faulty research techniques. I have yet to see anything so substantial and convincing that it would cause me to jump on the anti-spanking bandwagon. Most of the assumptions and assertions I've seen about the alleged negative effects of spanking on a young child's mind set are plagued by what I refer to as "adultomorphism." The experience is interpreted through the mental and emotional processes of an adult - mental and emotional processes that are entirely different than those employed by a young child. It is highly inappropriate to project one's own thoughts and feelings into the heart and head of a two-year-old; and most conclusions drawn as a result are highly likely to be grossly erroneous. With regard to the studies that appear to demonstrate the long-term detrimental effects of spanking, most that I've seen suffer from limited focus. For example, many report something like "85% of the inmates doing time on death row in a federal prison were spanked when they were young children." What is not noticed, much less investigated, is that 85% of the graduates of Harvard Medical School were spanked when they were young children as well. Meanwhile, my anti-anti-spanking position is not without solid support. As a researcher with the Harvard Preschool Project, I had the opportunity to participate in the most comprehensive and extensive study of early development ever performed. Furthermore, I had the opportunity to look at experiences that produced "optimal" outcomes as well as those that produced "problems." We had no pre-set notions. We merely observed what happened in families of all kinds. One of the things we discovered was that in two out of three families where children were developing into bright, happy, well-adjusted, responsible people, the kids were spanked from time to time - especially in the period from about 18 months to three years of age. The spankings were not frequent, nor were they brutal, and they never involved paddles, switches, belts, or any other such equipment. However, a swat on the behind or a slap on the wrist was not an uncommon occurrence. What we learned is that discipline is a critically important part of promoting optimal development, and that effective discipline during this particular period is quite difficult. In order to teach a child to be personally safe and respectful of others, it is necessary to "speak" to the child in a "language" he truly understands. And given the limited cognitive capacities of a toddler, a small spanking often results in a considerably better "education" than a prolonged discussion. Now, I will also distance myself from the "spare the rod, spoil the child" crowd. After all, we found that one in three families managed to get through even this difficult period without spanking. Clearly, depending upon the child and the circumstances, it is possible to be effective with other-than-corporal procedures. But it is equally clear that with a lot of children in a lot of circumstances, spanking is preferable to disciplinary techniques that just aren't working or no discipline at all. So please note that I am not recommending that all parents place spanking in their arsenal of child-- rearing techniques. On the contrary, I always urge mothers and fathers to take steps to avoid as many confrontations with their young child as possible, and then attempt to deal with those that inevitably occur with whatever non-corporal methods may reasonably be thought to have a genuinely educational impact. Nevertheless, I recognize there are situations where a spanking just may be the best thing for that particular parent to do for their particular child at that particular time. So, if your little one starts to stick a fork in an electrical outlet and you slap his wrist, or if he let' s go of your hand so he can rush into heavy traffic and you give him a swat on the bottom as you pull him back, don't beat yourself up. And don't let the dirty looks you get from holier-than-- thou bystanders or the condemnations from pop psychologists on TV talk shows convince you that you've done irreparable damage to your child's psyche. Just make sure that the spankings aren't coming along too often or getting out of hand. Otherwise, if you are a loving, caring, sensible parent, I would suggest that you keep in mind the following adage that was formulated by the late Dr. Louise Bates Ames, a wise, sweet, gentle woman who was the director of the Gesell Institute for several decades and regarded as one of the world's foremost authorities on early education and development: "If you plan on never spanking your child, you'll probably end up doing it the proper number of times." By Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed. D. Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D., is executive director of The Epicenter Inc., "The Education for Parenthood Information Center," a family advisory and advocacy agency located in Lindenhurst, Illinois. His e-mail address is . Meyerhoff, Michael K, A different slant on spanking. , Pediatrics for Parents, 01-01-2001, pp 8. |
The Same Old Doan Slant On Spanking, was A slant on spanking
Diaper rash comes from failing to diaper. Not diapering.
Geeesh, "Doan" wrote in message ... Yes! Ever heard of DIAPER rash? I think the medical term is diaper dermatitis. And you called yourself a mom! ;-) Doan On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Stephanie Stowe wrote: Can diapering be harmful? I never knew that. geeeeesh "Doan" wrote in message ... I just love the logic of the anti-spanking zealotS! :-) Let's try this: One must defend the rightness of DIAPERING one's kid or one has to face thatit was wrong for their parents to do it to them. This would result in either the need to forgive or to hate. Neither is easy. Denial is easier. Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS, are they mutually exclusive? ;-0 Doan On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Stephanie Stowe wrote: One must defend the rightness of hitting one's kid or one has to face that it was wrong for their parents to do it to them. This would result in either the need to forgive or to hate. Neither is easy. Denial is easier. S "Carlson LaVonne" wrote in message ... Have you ever wondered why individuals fight so terribly hard to keep children legally hittable? It seems pretty bizarre to me. Is it ignorance? Is it fear? Is it the enjoyment of being able to hit someone and children are small, safe, and not legally protected? Is it the need to feel powerful? Is it a replay of the parenting these individuals received as children? Is it payback? I don't get it. I cannot understand why anyone would rationally justify or fight for the supposed right to raise his/her hand and hit the body of a little child. LaVonne Doan wrote: A different slant on spanking By: Meyerhoff, Michael K Volume: 19 Number: 8 ISSN: 07306725 Publication Date: 01-01-2001 Page: 8 Type: Periodical Language: English Perspectives on Parenting If you are an alert parent, you probably have surmised that professionals in the field of psychology have reached something of a consensus on the subject of spanking. I refer here to a swat on the bottom with a hand, not hitting the child with any sort of object and no hitting hard enough to cause much more than a loss of dignity. Thanks to numerous reports that have appeared in the popular media, it now seems as though there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that spanking is a highly detrimental practice which not only is largely ineffective, but also leads inevitably to some degree of emotional damage. Today, mothers and fathers are aware that any type of corporal punishment is likely to be viewed as child abuse by those who are authorities on the subject of early development. Well, I guess that forces me to stand apart from the crowd. In my opinion, this across-the-board condemnation of spanking is based more on personal attitudes than professional studies. And whatever professional studies may be involved tend to lack a great deal of credibility due to either built-in biases or faulty research techniques. I have yet to see anything so substantial and convincing that it would cause me to jump on the anti-spanking bandwagon. Most of the assumptions and assertions I've seen about the alleged negative effects of spanking on a young child's mind set are plagued by what I refer to as "adultomorphism." The experience is interpreted through the mental and emotional processes of an adult - mental and emotional processes that are entirely different than those employed by a young child. It is highly inappropriate to project one's own thoughts and feelings into the heart and head of a two-year-old; and most conclusions drawn as a result are highly likely to be grossly erroneous. With regard to the studies that appear to demonstrate the long-term detrimental effects of spanking, most that I've seen suffer from limited focus. For example, many report something like "85% of the inmates doing time on death row in a federal prison were spanked when they were young children." What is not noticed, much less investigated, is that 85% of the graduates of Harvard Medical School were spanked when they were young children as well. Meanwhile, my anti-anti-spanking position is not without solid support. As a researcher with the Harvard Preschool Project, I had the opportunity to participate in the most comprehensive and extensive study of early development ever performed. Furthermore, I had the opportunity to look at experiences that produced "optimal" outcomes as well as those that produced "problems." We had no pre-set notions. We merely observed what happened in families of all kinds. One of the things we discovered was that in two out of three families where children were developing into bright, happy, well-adjusted, responsible people, the kids were spanked from time to time - especially in the period from about 18 months to three years of age. The spankings were not frequent, nor were they brutal, and they never involved paddles, switches, belts, or any other such equipment. However, a swat on the behind or a slap on the wrist was not an uncommon occurrence. What we learned is that discipline is a critically important part of promoting optimal development, and that effective discipline during this particular period is quite difficult. In order to teach a child to be personally safe and respectful of others, it is necessary to "speak" to the child in a "language" he truly understands. And given the limited cognitive capacities of a toddler, a small spanking often results in a considerably better "education" than a prolonged discussion. Now, I will also distance myself from the "spare the rod, spoil the child" crowd. After all, we found that one in three families managed to get through even this difficult period without spanking. Clearly, depending upon the child and the circumstances, it is possible to be effective with other-than-corporal procedures. But it is equally clear that with a lot of children in a lot of circumstances, spanking is preferable to disciplinary techniques that just aren't working or no discipline at all. So please note that I am not recommending that all parents place spanking in their arsenal of child-- rearing techniques. On the contrary, I always urge mothers and fathers to take steps to avoid as many confrontations with their young child as possible, and then attempt to deal with those that inevitably occur with whatever non-corporal methods may reasonably be thought to have a genuinely educational impact. Nevertheless, I recognize there are situations where a spanking just may be the best thing for that particular parent to do for their particular child at that particular time. So, if your little one starts to stick a fork in an electrical outlet and you slap his wrist, or if he let' s go of your hand so he can rush into heavy traffic and you give him a swat on the bottom as you pull him back, don't beat yourself up. And don't let the dirty looks you get from holier-than-- thou bystanders or the condemnations from pop psychologists on TV talk shows convince you that you've done irreparable damage to your child's psyche. Just make sure that the spankings aren't coming along too often or getting out of hand. Otherwise, if you are a loving, caring, sensible parent, I would suggest that you keep in mind the following adage that was formulated by the late Dr. Louise Bates Ames, a wise, sweet, gentle woman who was the director of the Gesell Institute for several decades and regarded as one of the world's foremost authorities on early education and development: "If you plan on never spanking your child, you'll probably end up doing it the proper number of times." By Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed. D. Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D., is executive director of The Epicenter Inc., "The Education for Parenthood Information Center," a family advisory and advocacy agency located in Lindenhurst, Illinois. His e-mail address is . Meyerhoff, Michael K, A different slant on spanking. , Pediatrics for Parents, 01-01-2001, pp 8. |
The Same Old Doan Slant On Spanking, was A slant on spanking
There will be no diaper rash if there is no diaper. Kids do not need diaper. Doan On Tue, 2 Mar 2004, Stephanie Stowe wrote: Diaper rash comes from failing to diaper. Not diapering. Geeesh, "Doan" wrote in message ... Yes! Ever heard of DIAPER rash? I think the medical term is diaper dermatitis. And you called yourself a mom! ;-) Doan On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Stephanie Stowe wrote: Can diapering be harmful? I never knew that. geeeeesh "Doan" wrote in message ... I just love the logic of the anti-spanking zealotS! :-) Let's try this: One must defend the rightness of DIAPERING one's kid or one has to face thatit was wrong for their parents to do it to them. This would result in either the need to forgive or to hate. Neither is easy. Denial is easier. Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS, are they mutually exclusive? ;-0 Doan On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, Stephanie Stowe wrote: One must defend the rightness of hitting one's kid or one has to face that it was wrong for their parents to do it to them. This would result in either the need to forgive or to hate. Neither is easy. Denial is easier. S "Carlson LaVonne" wrote in message ... Have you ever wondered why individuals fight so terribly hard to keep children legally hittable? It seems pretty bizarre to me. Is it ignorance? Is it fear? Is it the enjoyment of being able to hit someone and children are small, safe, and not legally protected? Is it the need to feel powerful? Is it a replay of the parenting these individuals received as children? Is it payback? I don't get it. I cannot understand why anyone would rationally justify or fight for the supposed right to raise his/her hand and hit the body of a little child. LaVonne Doan wrote: A different slant on spanking By: Meyerhoff, Michael K Volume: 19 Number: 8 ISSN: 07306725 Publication Date: 01-01-2001 Page: 8 Type: Periodical Language: English Perspectives on Parenting If you are an alert parent, you probably have surmised that professionals in the field of psychology have reached something of a consensus on the subject of spanking. I refer here to a swat on the bottom with a hand, not hitting the child with any sort of object and no hitting hard enough to cause much more than a loss of dignity. Thanks to numerous reports that have appeared in the popular media, it now seems as though there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that spanking is a highly detrimental practice which not only is largely ineffective, but also leads inevitably to some degree of emotional damage. Today, mothers and fathers are aware that any type of corporal punishment is likely to be viewed as child abuse by those who are authorities on the subject of early development. Well, I guess that forces me to stand apart from the crowd. In my opinion, this across-the-board condemnation of spanking is based more on personal attitudes than professional studies. And whatever professional studies may be involved tend to lack a great deal of credibility due to either built-in biases or faulty research techniques. I have yet to see anything so substantial and convincing that it would cause me to jump on the anti-spanking bandwagon. Most of the assumptions and assertions I've seen about the alleged negative effects of spanking on a young child's mind set are plagued by what I refer to as "adultomorphism." The experience is interpreted through the mental and emotional processes of an adult - mental and emotional processes that are entirely different than those employed by a young child. It is highly inappropriate to project one's own thoughts and feelings into the heart and head of a two-year-old; and most conclusions drawn as a result are highly likely to be grossly erroneous. With regard to the studies that appear to demonstrate the long-term detrimental effects of spanking, most that I've seen suffer from limited focus. For example, many report something like "85% of the inmates doing time on death row in a federal prison were spanked when they were young children." What is not noticed, much less investigated, is that 85% of the graduates of Harvard Medical School were spanked when they were young children as well. Meanwhile, my anti-anti-spanking position is not without solid support. As a researcher with the Harvard Preschool Project, I had the opportunity to participate in the most comprehensive and extensive study of early development ever performed. Furthermore, I had the opportunity to look at experiences that produced "optimal" outcomes as well as those that produced "problems." We had no pre-set notions. We merely observed what happened in families of all kinds. One of the things we discovered was that in two out of three families where children were developing into bright, happy, well-adjusted, responsible people, the kids were spanked from time to time - especially in the period from about 18 months to three years of age. The spankings were not frequent, nor were they brutal, and they never involved paddles, switches, belts, or any other such equipment. However, a swat on the behind or a slap on the wrist was not an uncommon occurrence. What we learned is that discipline is a critically important part of promoting optimal development, and that effective discipline during this particular period is quite difficult. In order to teach a child to be personally safe and respectful of others, it is necessary to "speak" to the child in a "language" he truly understands. And given the limited cognitive capacities of a toddler, a small spanking often results in a considerably better "education" than a prolonged discussion. Now, I will also distance myself from the "spare the rod, spoil the child" crowd. After all, we found that one in three families managed to get through even this difficult period without spanking. Clearly, depending upon the child and the circumstances, it is possible to be effective with other-than-corporal procedures. But it is equally clear that with a lot of children in a lot of circumstances, spanking is preferable to disciplinary techniques that just aren't working or no discipline at all. So please note that I am not recommending that all parents place spanking in their arsenal of child-- rearing techniques. On the contrary, I always urge mothers and fathers to take steps to avoid as many confrontations with their young child as possible, and then attempt to deal with those that inevitably occur with whatever non-corporal methods may reasonably be thought to have a genuinely educational impact. Nevertheless, I recognize there are situations where a spanking just may be the best thing for that particular parent to do for their particular child at that particular time. So, if your little one starts to stick a fork in an electrical outlet and you slap his wrist, or if he let' s go of your hand so he can rush into heavy traffic and you give him a swat on the bottom as you pull him back, don't beat yourself up. And don't let the dirty looks you get from holier-than-- thou bystanders or the condemnations from pop psychologists on TV talk shows convince you that you've done irreparable damage to your child's psyche. Just make sure that the spankings aren't coming along too often or getting out of hand. Otherwise, if you are a loving, caring, sensible parent, I would suggest that you keep in mind the following adage that was formulated by the late Dr. Louise Bates Ames, a wise, sweet, gentle woman who was the director of the Gesell Institute for several decades and regarded as one of the world's foremost authorities on early education and development: "If you plan on never spanking your child, you'll probably end up doing it the proper number of times." By Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed. D. Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D., is executive director of The Epicenter Inc., "The Education for Parenthood Information Center," a family advisory and advocacy agency located in Lindenhurst, Illinois. His e-mail address is . Meyerhoff, Michael K, A different slant on spanking. , Pediatrics for Parents, 01-01-2001, pp 8. |
A slant on spanking
"Stephanie Stowe" wrote in message ... "Doan" wrote in message ... A different slant on spanking By: Meyerhoff, Michael K Volume: 19 Number: 8 ISSN: 07306725 Publication Date: 01-01-2001 Page: 8 Type: Periodical Language: English Perspectives on Parenting If you are an alert parent, you probably have surmised that professionals in the field of psychology have reached something of a consensus on the subject of spanking. I refer here to a swat on the bottom with a hand, not hitting the child with any sort of object and no hitting hard enough to cause much more than a loss of dignity. Thanks to numerous reports that have appeared in the popular media, it now seems as though there is overwhelming evidence to suggest that spanking is a highly detrimental practice which not only is largely ineffective, but also leads inevitably to some degree of emotional damage. Today, mothers and fathers are aware that any type of corporal punishment is likely to be viewed as child abuse by those who are authorities on the subject of early development. Well, I guess that forces me to stand apart from the crowd. In my opinion, this across-the-board condemnation of spanking is based more on personal attitudes than professional studies. And whatever professional studies may be involved tend to lack a great deal of credibility due to either built-in biases or faulty research techniques. I have yet to see anything so substantial and convincing that it would cause me to jump on the anti-spanking bandwagon. Most of the assumptions and assertions I've seen about the alleged negative effects of spanking on a young child's mind set are plagued by what I refer to as "adultomorphism." The experience is interpreted through the mental and emotional processes of an adult - mental and emotional processes that are entirely different than those employed by a young child. It is highly inappropriate to project one's own thoughts and feelings into the heart and head of a two-year-old; and most conclusions drawn as a result are highly likely to be grossly erroneous. With regard to the studies that appear to demonstrate the long-term detrimental effects of spanking, most that I've seen suffer from limited focus. For example, many report something like "85% of the inmates doing time on death row in a federal prison were spanked when they were young children." What is not noticed, much less investigated, is that 85% of the graduates of Harvard Medical School were spanked when they were young children as well. Meanwhile, my anti-anti-spanking position is not without solid support. As a researcher with the Harvard Preschool Project, I had the opportunity to participate in the most comprehensive and extensive study of early development ever performed. Furthermore, I had the opportunity to look at experiences that produced "optimal" outcomes as well as those that produced "problems." We had no pre-set notions. We merely observed what happened in families of all kinds. One of the things we discovered was that in two out of three families where children were developing into bright, happy, well-adjusted, responsible people, the kids were spanked from time to time - especially in the period from about 18 months to three years of age. The spankings were not frequent, nor were they brutal, and they never involved paddles, switches, belts, or any other such equipment. However, a swat on the behind or a slap on the wrist was not an uncommon occurrence. What we learned is that discipline is a critically important part of promoting optimal development, and that effective discipline during this particular period is quite difficult. In order to teach a child to be personally safe and respectful of others, it is necessary to "speak" to the child in a "language" he truly understands. And given the limited cognitive capacities of a toddler, a small spanking often results in a considerably better "education" than a prolonged discussion. Now, I will also distance myself from the "spare the rod, spoil the child" crowd. After all, we found that one in three families managed to get through even this difficult period without spanking. Clearly, depending upon the child and the circumstances, it is possible to be effective with other-than-corporal procedures. But it is equally clear that with a lot of children in a lot of circumstances, spanking is preferable to disciplinary techniques that just aren't working or no discipline at all. So please note that I am not recommending that all parents place spanking in their arsenal of child-- rearing techniques. On the contrary, I always urge mothers and fathers to take steps to avoid as many confrontations with their young child as possible, and then attempt to deal with those that inevitably occur with whatever non-corporal methods may reasonably be thought to have a genuinely educational impact. Nevertheless, I recognize there are situations where a spanking just may be the best thing for that particular parent to do for their particular child at that particular time. So, if your little one starts to stick a fork in an electrical outlet and you slap his wrist, or if he let' s go of your hand so he can rush into heavy traffic and you give him a swat on the bottom as you pull him back, don't beat yourself up. And don't let the dirty looks you get from holier-than-- thou bystanders or the condemnations from pop psychologists on TV talk shows convince you that you've done irreparable damage to your child's psyche. Just make sure that the spankings aren't coming along too often or getting out of hand. Otherwise, if you are a loving, caring, sensible parent, I would suggest that you keep in mind the following adage that was formulated by the late Dr. Louise Bates Ames, a wise, sweet, gentle woman who was the director of the Gesell Institute for several decades and regarded as one of the world's foremost authorities on early education and development: "If you plan on never spanking your child, you'll probably end up doing it the proper number of times." By Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed. D. Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D., is executive director of The Epicenter Inc., "The Education for Parenthood Information Center," a family advisory and advocacy agency located in Lindenhurst, Illinois. His e-mail address is . Meyerhoff, Michael K, A different slant on spanking. , Pediatrics for Parents, 01-01-2001, pp 8. This is the weirest article I have ever read. Where's the beef? S Here. By Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed. D. Michael K. Meyerhoff, Ed.D., is executive director of The Epicenter Inc., "The Education for Parenthood Information Center," a family advisory and advocacy agency located in Lindenhurst, Illinois. |
Diapers
Doan wrote in message ...
There will be no diaper rash if there is no diaper. Kids do not need diaper. No, but carpets do. |
Diapers
On 4 Mar 2004, CBI wrote:
Doan wrote in message ... There will be no diaper rash if there is no diaper. Kids do not need diaper. No, but carpets do. So carpets are more important than kids??? Doan |
Diapers
In article , Doan says...
On 4 Mar 2004, CBI wrote: Doan wrote in message ... There will be no diaper rash if there is no diaper. Kids do not need diaper. No, but carpets do. So carpets are more important than kids??? Doan ::Groooaan:: I did a thread on these "Diaper" posts, and discovered myself in a spanking wars thread. I usually manage to avoid these. So I won't post the blindingly obvious answer..and will be gone. Banty |
Diapers
In article ,
Doan wrote: On 4 Mar 2004, CBI wrote: Doan wrote in message ... There will be no diaper rash if there is no diaper. Kids do not need diaper. No, but carpets do. So carpets are more important than kids??? Doan Are you really suggesting that we ought to let our kids run around indoors undiapered? Granted, when one of my kids developed a diaper rash, I left them undiapered as much as possible, but ALL the time? Lord, what a lot of time I'd have spent cleaning up -- and I'm not sure I see what would have been gained. meh -- Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care |
Diapers
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, dragonlady wrote:
In article , Doan wrote: On 4 Mar 2004, CBI wrote: Doan wrote in message ... There will be no diaper rash if there is no diaper. Kids do not need diaper. No, but carpets do. So carpets are more important than kids??? Doan Are you really suggesting that we ought to let our kids run around indoors undiapered? Granted, when one of my kids developed a diaper rash, I left them undiapered as much as possible, but ALL the time? Of course not! If you've followed this thread, there are certain people who think that they know more about your kids then you do. They even have the nerve to call other parents who don't do it their way "ignorant". Lord, what a lot of time I'd have spent cleaning up -- and I'm not sure I see what would have been gained. Exactly! But, hey! C'est pour les enfants! :-) Doan meh -- Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care |
Diapers
On 4 Mar 2004, Banty wrote: In article , Doan says... On 4 Mar 2004, CBI wrote: Doan wrote in message ... There will be no diaper rash if there is no diaper. Kids do not need diaper. No, but carpets do. So carpets are more important than kids??? Doan ::Groooaan:: I did a thread on these "Diaper" posts, and discovered myself in a spanking wars thread. I usually manage to avoid these. So I won't post the blindingly obvious answer..and will be gone. Banty It would have been better if you've posted nothing. Doan |
Diapers
"dragonlady" wrote in message ... In article , Doan wrote: On 4 Mar 2004, CBI wrote: Doan wrote in message ... There will be no diaper rash if there is no diaper. Kids do not need diaper. No, but carpets do. So carpets are more important than kids??? Doan Are you really suggesting that we ought to let our kids run around indoors undiapered? Granted, when one of my kids developed a diaper rash, I left them undiapered as much as possible, but ALL the time? My kids next to never get diaper rash. Is diaper rash a problem for some even if you clean up the poo quickly? Lord, what a lot of time I'd have spent cleaning up -- and I'm not sure I see what would have been gained. I *think* that he is trying to beat up to argument that: - there is a potential for spanking to be harmful to a child - there is no way to know for certain what is a "safe" level of spanking at which you will certainly not - therefore it is wisest to avoid spanking He is saying that because something has the possibility to damage is not a good reason to avoid it. If a baby is wearing a diaper then there is a risk of diaper rash. The difference that he fails to see is that diaper rash is very observable and one can respond to it. The damage done to a child by hitting is less easily observed, particularly by the parent who is doing the hitting. S meh -- Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:10 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
ParentingBanter.com