If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote:
Doan wrote: On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote: Doan wrote: On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote: Donna Metler wrote: "toto" wrote in message No, actually, what has been pushed is *not* teaching without punishing, though teaching without corporal punishment has been pushed in 27 states for more than a decade. Using different punishments like detentions and bad grades is still punitive. And what has been pushed is using material rewards like stickers and bribes which is the other side of the control coin. It works just as poorly. Detention isn't allowed in my school-too many parents don't want it. IN general, just about everything which could be deemed "punitive" has been disallowed. A teacher in my school was given a formal reprimand just for requiring that students clean up a mess that they had made-because it was "humiliating" for the students. And teachers are told not to use rewards because it "ruins intrinsic motivation". ------------------- You're merely lying in everything you just said. How pitiful. Steve Looking in the mirror again, Steve? ;-) Doan --------------- You're extremely stupid. Doesn't your ignorance embarrass you? Of course not, YOU'RE TOO IGNORANT!! Steve LOL! And you are a "never-spanked" kid with "****" oozing out of his mouth! Doan ---------------- No. You're the only sick piece of ****-for-brains here. Steve LOL! It's you! The only time when **** doesn't get to your mouth is when you're constipated! Doan |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote:
Doan wrote: On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote: Doan wrote: On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote: Doan wrote: On 17 Jun 2004, Chris wrote: This brings us right back to our aborted, unfinished debate of 2001, Nathan; aborted because you disappeared and days later said you "didn't have time" to debate about the scientific studies on spanking. You did your best to discredit the available evidence linking spanking to a wide variety of negative long term effects on children. When you disappeared was after I invited you to now produce evidence of equal rigor in support of your own position, adding that I would of course expect your evidence to meet all of the same standards you had recently demanded of evidence cited by me. Three years later, I ask you again: where is your scientific evidence of measurable long term benefit to children from spanking? If you have none, please signify by ignoring this question, or perhaps by vanishing again. Chris Here is what Chris said about Straus & Mouradina (1998) study in the past: However, there is evidence that this connection exists, however it may work. Gunnoe & Mariner (1997) and Straus et al. (1997) both found that the more children were spanked at the beginning of each study, the more their behavior had deteriorated years later in comparison with other children the same age, despite controlling for a variety of other variables such as maternal warmth/involvement, family socioeconomic status, race, sex, etc. Since neither of these studies had a "never spanked" group, they cannot rule out the possibility that low levels of spanking had positive effects. However, another study did look at children who had never been spanked by their mothers versus children who were spanked very infrequently and the difference in age adjusted antisocial behavior scores was quite pronounced. The children in the never-spanked group were markedly more well-behaved than even the most rarely-spanked children. And my response: "Chris is now admitting that there are evidence of beneficial effects of low-level spanking. ------------------ No, you were a ****ty little liar then as now. Steve LOL! Typical respond from a "never-spanked" boy. And I thought you were constipated! Doan --------------------- You're the one who's full of ****! Steve Then how did it get to your mouth? :-) Doan ------------------------- Your mouth, your lying ****. Steve It's either YOUR mouth or my ass-hole! Doan |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote:
Doan wrote: On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote: Doan wrote: On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Lesa wrote: "Tori M." wrote in message ... This whole thing is unrealistic and will set a child to fail later in life. If you do something bad 90% of the time there will be consequences. What you don't seem to realize is that eliminating punishment is not eliminating consequences. In a school setting if a child does not do their homework, they get a poor-- this is consequences. What is not necessary are lectures, remaining after school, notes home to parents, meetings about what a terrible child this is, etc. A simple statement from the teacher that this child *WILL* receive a poor grade if this behavior continues, followed by a poor grade is all that is necessary. And what are the results of this philosophy? Do the students learned more? Do the schools no longer need cops nor metal detectors? In the home setting there are also consequences. If you spill your drink at diner, you clean it up-- again, no lectures, or spankings or time in the corner or restrictions are needed. What if the children don't want to clean it up? Doan ------------- If you don't abuse them, they don't suffer your kind of emotional and motivational distortion, and they naturally want to be nice to people who have been nice to THEM! Steve Like you? :-) Doan ------------- Yes! I only assault abusers. Steve And I only **** into your mouth! :-) Doan |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote:
Doan wrote: On Sat, 19 Jun 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote: Doan wrote: On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Lesa wrote: "Doan" wrote in message ... On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Lesa wrote: "Tori M." wrote in message ... This whole thing is unrealistic and will set a child to fail later in life. If you do something bad 90% of the time there will be consequences. What you don't seem to realize is that eliminating punishment is not eliminating consequences. In a school setting if a child does not do their homework, they get a poor-- this is consequences. What is not necessary are lectures, remaining after school, notes home to parents, meetings about what a terrible child this is, etc. A simple statement from the teacher that this child *WILL* receive a poor grade if this behavior continues, followed by a poor grade is all that is necessary. And what are the results of this philosophy? Do the students learned more? Do the schools no longer need cops nor metal detectors? In the home setting there are also consequences. If you spill your drink at diner, you clean it up-- again, no lectures, or spankings or time in the corner or restrictions are needed. What if the children don't want to clean it up? Doan Quite honeslty this in not something I've encountered on more than a very very infrequent basis. It is understood that taking responsiblity for one's actions is expected, and I've found that children will what you expect of them. If you expect that a child will act in a cooperative manner, they do so. If you expect that a child will constantly rebel and refuse to do what is required, they do this as well. On those rare occasions where a child would not want to clean up, all that is necessary is disussing with the child that you understand that they don't want to do this now, but that it needs to be done and you would appreciate their taking care of it -- neve rhad a problem beyond that. Good for you! You seem to have figured out what work with your kids. --------------- It works with ALL kids, asshole! The problem I have with this is when you try to generalize it to everyone. ---------------- The only reason YOUR sort of emotionally distorted personality can't make it work is NOT because of YOUR children, but because of YOU, you're a ****ing raving abusive paranoid! As you acknowledged, it didn't work 100% of the times even with your own kids! ---------------- She never said that, asshole liar! She told you what to do! Imagine a single-mom having to catch a bus to work in the morning and uncooperating child that don't want to go to daycare that day. -------------------- You support her till the child is old enough to go to school. You provide a society that understands such things. Like they tried in the Soviet Union? :-) ---------------------- No. Much better. If your society doesn't do that then the society is abusive, and she is excused for any crime she has to commit for her kid. What are the consequences in this case? Theory is nice, but reality is what really bites! Doan ---------------------- As long as you persist in abuse, you will fail as a parent. Steve Nope! They should just kill the kid before it turned 3-month old, like I would if I have kid like you! :-) Doan ------------------------ Then you'd die like a ****. Steve LOL! And you eat **** and die, "never-spanked" boy. Doan |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
"Doan" wrote in message ... On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote: On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 11:42:06 -0700, Doan wrote: Quite honeslty this in not something I've encountered on more than a very very infrequent basis. It is understood that taking responsiblity for one's actions is expected, and I've found that children will what you expect of them. If you expect that a child will act in a cooperative manner, they do so. If you expect that a child will constantly rebel and refuse to do what is required, they do this as well. On those rare occasions where a child would not want to clean up, all that is necessary is disussing with the child that you understand that they don't want to do this now, but that it needs to be done and you would appreciate their taking care of it -- neve rhad a problem beyond that. Good for you! You seem to have figured out what work with your kids. The problem I have with this is when you try to generalize it to everyone. As you acknowledged, it didn't work 100% of the times even with your own kids! Imagine a single-mom having to catch a bus to work in the morning and uncooperating child that don't want to go to daycare that day. What are the consequences in this case? Theory is nice, but reality is what really bites! What age is the child? So much depends on their age in cases like this and on the reason the child does not want to go to this daycare. The child can be 3,4,5,6. The reason is he/she just doesn't feel like it! Doan Children who have been given respect and kindness will not do this. There will be a reason that the child does not want to go to daycare. It may take time for the parent to disucss this chid's concerns, but the disucssion must take place. |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
"Doan" wrote in message ... On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote: On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 14:38:21 -0700, Doan wrote: On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote: On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 11:42:06 -0700, Doan wrote: Quite honeslty this in not something I've encountered on more than a very very infrequent basis. It is understood that taking responsiblity for one's actions is expected, and I've found that children will what you expect of them. If you expect that a child will act in a cooperative manner, they do so. If you expect that a child will constantly rebel and refuse to do what is required, they do this as well. On those rare occasions where a child would not want to clean up, all that is necessary is disussing with the child that you understand that they don't want to do this now, but that it needs to be done and you would appreciate their taking care of it -- neve rhad a problem beyond that. Good for you! You seem to have figured out what work with your kids. The problem I have with this is when you try to generalize it to everyone. As you acknowledged, it didn't work 100% of the times even with your own kids! Imagine a single-mom having to catch a bus to work in the morning and uncooperating child that don't want to go to daycare that day. What are the consequences in this case? Theory is nice, but reality is what really bites! What age is the child? So much depends on their age in cases like this and on the reason the child does not want to go to this daycare. The child can be 3,4,5,6. The reason is he/she just doesn't feel like it! You treat a 3 year old differently than you do a 6 year old. Ok! How so? And there is *always* something more to the reason than they don't feel like it despite the child's inability to express the real reason. The bus is leaving in 5 minutes! Does it matters? If you care about your child, then *YES* their feelings, thoguhts and concerns most certainly do matter, regardless of what their age may be. |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
"toto" wrote in message ... On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 12:59:24 -0500, "Lesa" wrote: "Doan" wrote in message ... On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Lesa wrote: "Tori M." wrote in message ... This whole thing is unrealistic and will set a child to fail later in life. If you do something bad 90% of the time there will be consequences. What you don't seem to realize is that eliminating punishment is not eliminating consequences. In a school setting if a child does not do their homework, they get a poor-- this is consequences. What is not necessary are lectures, remaining after school, notes home to parents, meetings about what a terrible child this is, etc. A simple statement from the teacher that this child *WILL* receive a poor grade if this behavior continues, followed by a poor grade is all that is necessary. And what are the results of this philosophy? Do the students learned more? Do the schools no longer need cops nor metal detectors? In the home setting there are also consequences. If you spill your drink at diner, you clean it up-- again, no lectures, or spankings or time in the corner or restrictions are needed. What if the children don't want to clean it up? Doan Quite honeslty this in not something I've encountered on more than a very very infrequent basis. It is understood that taking responsiblity for one's actions is expected, and I've found that children will what you expect of them. If you expect that a child will act in a cooperative manner, they do so. While I agree with this to an extent, I also think it is partly how *you* model cooperation and responsibility. Do you as a parent clean up your own messes? Does your spouse or s/o? If so, your child is pretty likely to learn to do so since you expect it of everyone in the household. When your child asks you to cooperate with him, do you help him or refuse because it's *his* responsibility? Very good point, Dorothy. At home DH and I do model these things. We share the workload (part of being a family) we listen to one anothers thoughts and feelings (part of being a family) and we show respect for one another, as well as others we encounter (part of being human and sharing the planet we live on). We don't ahve a lot of set responsiblities, but share them. Things like feeding the dogs, vacuuming the house, making meals, cleaning up after meals, etc are shared by all as they are needed. For example, when a dog says he needs to go out, often all of us will head to the door to let him out -- we just know that we need to respond to this. When someone notices that the carpet in the living room has dog hair on it, that person vacuums it. The person who throws something out and fills the trash can changes that bag, and if the large barrel in the garage is full that person will take the barrel to the dumpster at the end of the road. Yes, tehre are times we cannot do these things (invovled in a major project, engrossed in a good book, not feeling well, whatever) and then we ask for assistance. I didn't need to take punitve action regarding this, its just simply the way we do things. In the school setting, I've taken a similar tact. I've never had problems in that setting, even with special needs students as young as 3. There are times when we a child simply does not want to, then we take time to discuss why, and what might happen if tasks such as these are not completed. Punitve actions, yelling, lectures, etc are not necessary. |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... Donna Metler wrote: As I've stated, a teacher recieved a formal reprimand for requiring a group of students clean up a mess (after they decided to shoot spitballs in the library)-because that was degrading. So much for a logical conseqence. -------------------- If they are to clean up, then provide the tools. IT IS degrading to be made to pick them up by hand, and handling other people's spitballs IS unsanitary and a violation of child safety regulations. As far as grades go, grades are considered punitive by some parents too-so much so that schools in some districts aren't supposed to post graded work, honor rolls and the like. ------------------ Systematic humilation does not benefit students. The grades are still there for evluation purposes. Grades SHOULD be absolutely private, like medical records. And sending homework home is asking to have parents down your throat complaining that it's interfering with family time. ------------------ Families have so little time today with long travel times to decent employment that this is understandable, the school day should be lengthened and schools kept open for math and english exercises. While I agree that families have too little time, and homework should be kept to a minimum -- long term research projects, and study for exams only-- I have a different solution. The school day should not be lengthened but shortened, and the school year itself should be lengthened. Elementary schools in our area do not dismiss until 3:45-4:00, so that by the time students arrive home on the bus it could be as late as 5:00. Middle and high schools dismiss approximately 2:30- 2:45, but with clubs and sports these students are also often not arriving home until 5:00 or later. IMO the school day should end 1 1/2 - 2 hours early, but school should go year-round. Rather than the period from Memorial Day to Labor Day off, have a week at Memorial Day, a week at Independence Day, and a week at Labor Day. Add in a full week at Thanksgiving, 2 full weeks at the end of December/beginning of January, and a full week mid-March. This system will eliminate the need to review and regroup at the beginning of the school year, allow for more consistency in education, and allow for more family time in the evenings. |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
Keep in mind that in the adult world, the consequence of refusing to do one's job on an ongoing basis is getting fired. So it's not as if imposing something more serious than a bad grade on a child would be out of line with the consequences adults face for similar behavior. In the adult world if one is not matched to one's job (be it due to co-workers, employers, or interest) one is able to leave that job and find another. Children are not able to do this. They must remain with their given teacher, school, classmates, etc with no thought given to their abilities, strengths or weaknesses. Why should I engage in punitive action toward a child who is engaging in his/her studies to the best of he/her, but still getting a poor grade? Grades are not the basis of life. |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
"Kim E." wrote in message a.net... In article , says... "Tori M." wrote This whole thing is unrealistic and will set a child to fail later in life. If you do something bad 90% of the time there will be consequences. What you don't seem to realize is that eliminating punishment is not eliminating consequences. In a school setting if a child does not do their homework, they get a poor-- this is consequences. What is not necessary are lectures, remaining after school, notes home to parents, meetings about what a terrible child this is, etc. A simple statement from the teacher that this child *WILL* receive a poor grade if this behavior continues, followed by a poor grade is all that is necessary. I am just curious - do you see getting suspended or expelled from school as a punishment or natural consequence? And what type of consequence would you suggest for children in schools who sexually molest another student, bring weapons or drugs to school, assault other students or teachers? -kim Actions such as molestation, possession of illegal drugs, and assault are crimes. They already have stated consequences. At no time have I stated that actions do not contain consequences. Again, however, those consequences have a place and a procedure. Such actions are turned over the their proper authorities (i.e. the local police department). There is not need for lectures, yelling, hitting, etc from parents or school. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"Parenting Without Punishing" | Chris | General | 328 | July 1st 04 05:59 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | Spanking | 12 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
Kids should work. | LaVonne Carlson | General | 22 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |
Kids should work. | ChrisScaife | Spanking | 16 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |