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 |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
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 |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
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. Requiring a child to complete unfinished homework at recess will have parents complaining that it is unfair to require their child to miss recess because he/she needs the physical activity. ------------------ Indeed they do! They could get an embolism sitting all day! Lengthen the school day, take off the pressure, and increase the education! Assigning only incomplete work as homework? Still unfair-after all, why should this poor child who works slowly be penalized because of that (never mind that this poor child who works slowly spent the whole period talking to his friends) ---------------------------- Have classes conducted in isaolation booths with computer tutors or teachers piped in on video. I teach music-the most common logical consequence is the "use it correctly or lose it" rule-which works great, until PARENTS started complaining that it was unfair for their poor baby to be unable to use an instrument just because he/she decided to play the drum with their feet instead of their hands-after all, I was stifling the poor child's creativity. --------------------------------- You're too much of an asshole, here as there, nobody could get along with a **** like you, you whine and bitch and moan and distort the truth constantly, you'd make a really ****ty art or music teacher, none of them were anything like that when *I* was in school! And believe me, it isn't the parents who advocate more punitive discipline who refuse to allow logical consequences-it's the ones who believe in NO punishment, and apparently, NO consequenses. --------------- That's merely YOUR paranoia and YOUR dishonest politically motivated distortion of the truth! Other Liberal teachers not only don't SAY that, but they actually seem to ENJOY their students!! You seem to be a twisted-knicker sort of abusive prune of a teacher, the kind who permits no joy in anything! I believe strongly in logical conseqences-because I KNOW they work if I'm allowed to use them. But all it takes is one parent complaining for any reason, and they're not allowed. ---------------------- Then why don't you just ADAPT and quit trying to foist your sick political and social agenda on others when we obviously hate your kind and don't agree with you?? Or else get the hell out of teaching and take up telemarketing or something!?? And, what happens when minor consequences are not allowed is that only the major ones are left-so the teacher or principal ends up calling the parent for every trivial thing (because the parent has tied their hands) and then the parent is even more convinced that the school is out to get their child. --------------------------------------- You need to find different work, you're really ****ty at teaching. Steve |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
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! Your mouth is an 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! Typical response from a "never-spanked" kid! :-) 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! Typical response from a "never-spanked" kid! :-) 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? :-) 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. War is peace! 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 |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
"Lesa" wrote in message ... "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 happens if bad grades are not a sufficiently serious consequence for the child to correct the failure to do his or her homework? As long as the child is making good grades on tests, it may not be an issue. But if the child starts to fall behind, and bad grades aren't motivating the child to keep up, isn't something more serious needed? ------------------- Yes, a new teacher!!!! 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. ----------------------- Learning HAS to be interesting for it even to OCCUR! That being true, if you can't keep their interest, then you will fail, and it is YOU who should be replaced! Steve |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
Doan wrote:
That is a BIG difference from what Chris claimed. Like I've said before, a fourteen year old kid can be spanked 1,000 times a year for the first 13 years of his life (13,000 times) can still be included in this "not spanked in the "previous six-month" group. Did that sounded like "rarely spanked" to you? ----------------------- All you ever do is lie and distort, lie and distort. You should be publically beaten for fraud. In Straus & Mouradian (1998), non-cp alternatives predicted ASB 10 times more strongly than did non-impulsive spanking. Now you know why Chris doesn't dare to discuss this study with you for days now! :-) Doan ------------------------- Lie and distort, lie and distort. That's why no one will talk to you, you don't take the truth seriously! Steve |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
"Lesa" wrote in message ...
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. While its nice that you've never experienced this problem, it isn't uncommon at all. At some point, most children will refuse to perform some unpleasant task - such as cleaning up a mess they made - and the parent must deal with both the completion of the unpleasant task and the fact that the child has refused to cooperate. Now, punishment isn't required. You can just smile pleasantly, clean up the mess yourself and never mention it again. But whatever you chose to do, you are teaching your child a lesson of some sort. However, many parents find punishment of some sort, whether a spanking, a time-out, a restriction of some sort, or a lecture, to be an appropriate reaction. I certainly did. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... Nathan A. Barclay wrote: Scientific truth is not determined by majority vote. ------------------- True, but people who collect selective support and discard most that do not should be required to do so if only to keep them honest! It is determined by the proper use of scientific methodologies and ONLY by the proper use of scientific methodologies. If scientists express opinions that go beyond what the methodologies they use can support, those opinions are merely PERSONAL opinions, not science. -------------------- The thing is, it cannot BE carried on fairly either on Usenet OR in any private conversation, the budget is not available! Any such situation then requries instead that people argue from structure, which is the way people actually change minds and come to believe new things anyway, and NOT through evidence, as odd as that seems! Would you please explain what you mean by arguing from "structure"? --------------------------- Logical reasonable assertion of cause and effect relationships and proper syllogism. It takes an infinitude of studies to convince absolutely in a peer- reviewed arena, but doing so is not actually needed to prove anything reasonably. Instead, the reasonableness of believing this or that, namely an honest impersonal structural argument is superior! It does not take an "infinitude" of studies to make a compelling case. ----------------- That all depends whom you're trying to compel. Dishonest disingenuous assholes with veiled political social agendas of abuse will resist you no matter how much you provide, thus they don't deserve citations, they will abuse them, they need to be held to strict logical reasoned explanation for their positions, the better to reveal themselves as asshole to onlookers, and if they will not, which is usually the case, they must be harangued and insulted off the venue. In a Future I believe will occur, they will be forced to be logical, reasonable, and explain themselves fully, or else be required to recant or be tortured for their frauds. The human race has a long time ahead of it, and much more will be required of people to be considered civil or even legal citizens, in that distant Future!! Just enough studies, and sufficiently diverse studies, to address whatever credible challenges are raised. For example, the tobacco industry long ago gave up trying to explain away the evidence that smoking is harmful because they no longer had any credible challenges left that research had not addressed. -------------------------- Yup. All disingenuous Rightists on Newsgroups do the same thing when finally cornered by enough Truth Tellers. If you are aware of any studies that looked specifically at parents who never punished at all, or who never punished except when the children's behavior would be considered a crime in adults, or some such, I would probably find it interesting to look at. ----------------- In this culture those would be hard to find, but in the entire body of the research that conclusion is entirely implied by the trends in history and the research overall. This can be discerned by the logical reasonable person. The fact that too much of something is harmful does not imply that its total absence would be a good thing. --------------- Not in the case of vitamin C, perhaps, but in the case of abuse, yes, of course, why not? Some things are bad in ANY amount! Clearly, too much reliance on authority and punishment is harmful. But evidence supporting that conclusion does NOT inherently support the conclusion that a total absence of coercion except in response to violations of adult laws would be reliably good. --------------------------------- Lie. There is no such "evidence". Further, I know from my own experience that your "structural arguments" are built on an incorrect (or, at the very least, not reliably correct) model of how children react to being coerced. -------------------------- Lie. There is no such "evidence". Your experience is neurotic and partly buried traumatically. You are damaged and don't even truly recall your pre-traumatized state. You choose to deny that, because you are so convinced in your model's reliability that you completely ignore evidence to the contrary. ----------------------- Lie. No such "evidence" exists. Your kind always alludes to some "evidence" you can never seem to produce. But in doing so, you pretty thoroughly demolish your credibility from my perspective. Nathan ------------------------ Now you're lying and posturing desperately. Steve |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
Doan wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 21:42:25 -0500, "Tori M." wrote: To raise a child to not have cause and effect other then the "natural consequenses" (IE sticking a fork in the outlet will get the child shocked) is just as bad IMO then to over punish a child. Children learn easily that *other people* can be punitive without having their parents punish them. Yes, that is why it is better for their parents to prepare them for the REAL WORLD, not Oz land. Do you want your children to grow up and be like Steve? :-) Doan ----------------- Given my CV you'd be an idiot to decline!! Steve |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
Doan wrote:
On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote: On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 03:42:12 -0700, Doan wrote: On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, toto wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 21:42:25 -0500, "Tori M." wrote: To raise a child to not have cause and effect other then the "natural consequenses" (IE sticking a fork in the outlet will get the child shocked) is just as bad IMO then to over punish a child. Children learn easily that *other people* can be punitive without having their parents punish them. Yes, that is why it is better for their parents to prepare them for the REAL WORLD, not Oz land. Do you want your children to grow up and be like Steve? :-) Parents do NOT have to punish kids to prepare them for the *real world.* They do have to instill a sense of ethics and a sense of self-discipline. For some, yes; for all? Kids are individuals. There is no one size fits all solution. ----------------------- Cowardly equivocation, your last "out" to try to excuse your abuse. My children both have that and I am now helping to raise my grandchildren in the same way. Good! Are they better than the Serena/Venus Williams sisters? Are they better than Ted Turner? Mother Theresa? ---------------------------------- I don't see any of those as excellent people, they are just famous. That takes nuthin'! I have said before that permissive parenting is not the same thing as positive parenting. Giving in to the whims of anyone doesn't help them to learn to respect the feelings of the other person involved. But there is no need to punish children to accomplish this. Now where did I say anything about permissive. I am talking about doing what best for your kids. Parents are the best ones to decide what discipline strategy works best for their kids. Doan ----------------------------- Nope, their kids are. Parents are universally deluded by their OWN abusive upbringing, and are worse people than they hope their children will be, thus they are the least able to judge that! Steve |
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 |