when isnt a spanking neccesary?

i fell that children should only be spanked at the times where the
child is putting themself into a dangerous situation.where many people
spank for not following directions the first time given or not going to
bed on time or not eating all their dinner.give some advise or feedback

dessi wrote:
i fell that children should only be spanked at the times where the
child is putting themself into a dangerous situation.where many people
spank for not following directions the first time given or not going to
bed on time or not eating all their dinner.give some advise or feedback

In my opinion, spanking should always be avoided. I think it's the
wrong thing t do.
Amanda

Dessi,

Spanking children for putting themselves in dangerous situations makes
no more sense than spanking children for not going to bed on time.
Here's why:

1. Spanking doesn't teach children to fear the dangerous situation.
Spanking teaches children to fear the person who is hitting and hurting
them. Because children haven't learned why certain situations are
dangerous, they are more likely to place themselves in the dangerous
situation when the chances of being caught and spanked are unlikely.
Embry's research revealed that children who are spanked for going into
the street are more likely to continue to enter the street than are
children who have been taught the dangers of street entry.

2. It is the parents' responsibility to keep children safe and protect
them from dangerous situations. That's why little children have
parents. As children gradually learn what is safe and unsafe,and
develop the impulse control necessary to avoid certain situations,
parents can gradually allow children more freedom to control their behavior.

3. Spanking teaches children to fear and avoid the punisher, not the
situation.

4. Spanking teaches children to be sneaky. Because they have not
learned reasons for behavioral expectations, they have little reason to
make good choices when the likelihood of being caught and spanked is
minimal.

5. Spanking may impact the parent/child bond and be detrimental to
learning to trust others.

6. Spanking teaches children that violence is as acceptable way to
control those smaller and weaker that displease or anger them.

7. Spanking sends a mixed message. "It's okay for me to hit you,
because I am your parent. But, it's not okay for you to hit me or
anyone else."

8. Spanking is physical assault and battery, if the victim is
unconsenting and 18 or over. Only our youngest, smallest, and most
vulnerable members of society are denied legal protection from physical
assault.

9. Many adults recommend hugs and reassuring the children of their love
once the spanking is over. This teaches children that hitting or being
hit by those individuals who profess to love them, and whom they love is
acceptable. This is a recipe for either being a victim or perpetrator
of domestic assault. Research has demonstrated this time and time again.

For these reasons, and many more, spanking a child in the name of
discipline is never acceptable.

LaVonne

dessi wrote:
i fell that children should only be spanked at the times where the
child is putting themself into a dangerous situation.where many people
spank for not following directions the first time given or not going to
bed on time or not eating all their dinner.give some advise or feedback

On 20 Jul 2006 08:43:43 -0700, "Amanda" wrote:


dessi wrote:
i fell that children should only be spanked at the times where the
child is putting themself into a dangerous situation.where many people
spank for not following directions the first time given or not going to
bed on time or not eating all their dinner.give some advise or feedback

In my opinion, spanking should always be avoided. I think it's the
wrong thing t do.
Amanda

Aside from that spanking *after* a child has gotten into danger seems
highly silly. If you want to prevent, I guess you would have to spank
*before* he actually got into the dangerous situation. If you really
believe that spanking teaches anything, then why would it be done
*only* after the fact.

It is much more effective to teach things the child can do that
substitute for the dangerous action, imo.

For example, instead of spanking or punishing *after* the child runs
into the street, you supervise closely and reward the child when s/he
plays safely on the sidewalk or in the yard or park, but near the
street. When the ball goes into the street and the child does not go
after it, you notice that and praise him and have an adult get it for
him.




--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

toto wrote:


Aside from that spanking *after* a child has gotten into danger seems
highly silly. If you want to prevent, I guess you would have to spank
*before* he actually got into the dangerous situation. If you really
believe that spanking teaches anything, then why would it be done
*only* after the fact.

It is much more effective to teach things the child can do that
substitute for the dangerous action, imo.

For example, instead of spanking or punishing *after* the child runs
into the street, you supervise closely and reward the child when s/he
plays safely on the sidewalk or in the yard or park, but near the
street. When the ball goes into the street and the child does not go
after it, you notice that and praise him and have an adult get it for
him.


Actually, punishing a child for doing something dangerous when she
wasn't quite aware of the consequences is cruel and illogical.From the
logical point of view, it's like, at work, scolding someone under you
because he didn't fully understand your instructions. If you're a good
boss, you make sure your subordinates understood your instructions and
make them feel free to ask questions if they have doubts.

The situation is trickier when a child or a teen does something wrong
or dangerous out of curiosity or per pressure.Even good kids sometimes
do something like that.I went through this 2 months ago. My 12 yo
daughter is a very good girl, but it happened that she and a friend
ended up alone at her friend's home and, out of curiosity, they drank
some wine.I got to know because my daughter regreted what she did, told
me and apologized, I forgave and told her I was proud of her honesty.
Should I punish?Several parents said I should, because, although her
honety, she had done something very wrong.Some - incredible -said she
should feel some harsh lashes.

Punishing a kid who regrets what she did seems cruel and illogical,
even more lbecause her wrongdoing didnt affect anyone else. If you are
harsh, the kid may decide not to tell you if she does something wrong
again.But as a mom, I felt I should do something. I didnt spank, didnt
scold, did my best to be a mom who forgives and understands, but
doesn't agree with what she did. I told her she would write and essay
on why a girl her age should never drink, She would do a small research
on this. Gave her about a week to do it, working one hour a day.
Nothing harsh. She wasn't grounded, , didnt have to spend a whole
weekend on the essay. I even helped her to write, it, we both were
learning something.

Was it a punishment? Well, writing an esay like that is not exactly
what a 12 yo girl likes to do, but it wasn't so bad. When she finished,
she even wrote To mom with love, which made me cry (and I'm an engineer
and people usually say engineers are cold...Well, if you read the posts
I usually send to the Usenet, you may find a bit weird that now Im
posting about parenting) I think she learned her lesson without any
resentment . But I'm not sure if I should have made her write that
essay.

But , back to the original question. When to spank? Not to say never, I
would say, if at the point of a gun, cause you (an d your kids need
you) or your kid may die.

Amanda

Greegor wrote:
Non spanking methods work best when backed up
by the spanking option as a last resort.

No, actually that isn't true.

Unless you mean gradations of "punishment."

In all punishment models, that is all unwanted behavior is punished in
some way, using both non physical and physical punishment you might be
able to sell that.

But parents that simply don't indulge in the 'punishment' model and go
with the supportive, coaching, corrective, validate wanted behavior
model consistently have high scores of compliance...in fact,
"compliance" is usually NOT even tracked, though COOPERATION is noted.

Even Strauss the guru of biased research
to support the anti-spanking agenda screwed
up on that particular point.

No, what he screwed up about, and you and others here, namely screeching
monkeyboys, is that he pointed to non-spanking models that were in fact
(three out of four) PUNISHMENT methods.

Children know the difference. I recognize power struggles for what they
are, and they recognize support and help with learning for what they are.

Toto gave a good example of one of the many easy techniques of teaching
a reluctant child. Give them two desired actions to chose from that
results in what you want, regardless.

Like, "you can go inside and either chose to play with your X toys, or I
can read that story you've been asking for." (The point being, it's time
to go in now and the child was reluctant).

I'm paraphrasing of course. Thinking of how I raised my children.

He didn't take into account that many people
who say they don't spank are actually
people who seldom or rarely spank.

Yessss....R R R R ....and YOU, of course, don't get the significance
about spanking as a choice out of that, do you, Greg?

Even more interesting is that this subgroup
of seldom spankers had the best results,
even better than true non-spankers.

And you don't understand the concept of a continuum of force, do you Greg?

Or that we aren't dealing with mechanics, as a recent poster pointed
out, but with human beings.

Two pieces of steel made under the same conditions with the same
components will have the same characteristics. Engineers count on that
both for design work and for testing purposes.

Problem with children, humans, is that you cannot ensure you get
duplication like that no matter how hard you try. Even Identical twins
will have significant differences in response and interaction with the
environment.

Never say never.

Sure, I can. And I fault Straus' work for a very different reason than
you ****ants that wish to risk injury to the child in the name of
"discipline," when it's entirely unnecessary.

We used to have a saying around the track (I worked as a horse trainer
as a young man) that every tiny scratch makes the horse run that much
more slowly.

In other words, do NOT risk hurting the horse, even if it's only a tiny
hurt. They are cumulative.

I suspect the same is true with humans. Many ailments of the elderly
(and I am elderly...so have some experience) seem to be found to be the
results of lifelong and early life small injuries that were handled
then, but left a mark not noticed until later in life.

I was a smoker, for instance. And quite after 20 years. I've been hale
and hearty and lived a very vigorous outdoor kind of life. Lots of
outdoor sports, and heavy labor for the sheer fun of it. I can afford to
have firewood delivered to me (we heat exclusively with it) but I drop
my own large evergreens and limb and buck them, haul and split them
pretty much by hand....though I do use a chainsaw these days for the
felling, limbing and bucking.

Splitting a few cords of firewood for winter is for me a joy.

Yet I've gotten a few aches and pains that became chronic. A little food
sensitivity here, a greater sensitivity to some burning products...like
tobacco smoke.

And I can feel in my bones it was those 20 years of smoking that cause
the later problems. And research seems to agree.

If I can get the job done an NOT spank a child, then why would I spank?

Just to show I'm bigger?

Why, Greg, that would be like picking on a fool because he's ignorant
and stupid.....opps....blush

Frankly, I'd rather NOT get compliance, and be able to start fresh
another time, Greg, than to risk lifelong injury to a child, even tiny
hurt that the child appears to be able to handle -- at the moment.

0:-


--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

Kane, you PACIFIST you! (sic)

Jennie wrote:
If you're a good boss, you make sure your
subordinates understood your instructions
and make them feel free to ask questions
if they have doubts.

Children frequently disobey because they don't realize the consequences
of their acts. In such cases, I think my comparisson is good.


Yes, but we were talking about deliberate disobedience, not a failure
to understand instructions. Depending on how important obedience is at
the time, spanking may be a quick, effective remedy.

In such cases, a punishment may be in order, but it must always be a
punishment coming from a parent for the child best. Spanking is not the
case. Spanking breaks affection links. It may be an immediate remedy,
but will create problems in the future. Impossible to spank out of
love.

That's my opinion. I don't think I'll ever convince you, but you'll
never convince me, either.

Amanda

Jennie

Greegor wrote:
Kane, you PACIFIST you! (sic)

Would that make you a war monger?

And why are you misusing the editor proof reader mark "[sic]" incorrectly?

If YOU make and error, simply correct it. Don't mark it as an error.

If I make and error, and YOU see it, feel free to mark it with a "[sic]."

It means, "Thus; so."

And is used to indicate that a quoted passage, especially one containing
an error or unconventional spelling, has been retained in its original
form or written intentionally.

Were you quoting me?

I don't recall claiming to be a pacifist.

Where, please?

I feel no need to go to war with a child. I only believe in the use of
violence and lethal force in situations that are justifiable by danger
to myself or others of a physical injury or life threating action of
another.

So far no small child (though I have had to physically battle and
restrain a couple of 'legal' 200+lb teen 'children) have made me feel
that threatened.

Why would I hit a child simply for disobeying me? What lesson does that
teach him about the use of force by the stronger against the weaker?

You have a weird way of looking at the world. You remind me of the more
savage of third world fanatics and fundamentalists.

I simple don't see the world in those terms except for those that DO.
They, they are the ones that keep the world a dangerous place to live,
and they raise their children to be like them, model them, and the world
stays dangerous.

Both boys I had to battle and take down were in fact, "spanked." Neither
had ever been beaten according to my records. They were on my caseload,
and it was the first week. Later they calmed down and learned ways of
negotiating their needs and wants appropriately as good citizens.

Both grew up to do well in fact.

0:-






--
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else)

Amanda wrote:
dessi wrote:
i fell that children should only be spanked at the times where the
child is putting themself into a dangerous situation.where many people
spank for not following directions the first time given or not going to
bed on time or not eating all their dinner.give some advise or feedback

In my opinion, spanking should always be avoided. I think it's the
wrong thing t do.
Amanda

are you a parent? if so how many children do you have?