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.