To Spank or Not To Spank?

[chri'stina 190]

Del Jones, USA Today

The debate over whether CEOs are born or made remains unresolved, but there is one thing they overwhelmingly have in common.

As children, they were paddled, belted, switched or swatted.

Child psychologists wince at such a finding. They warn that spanking slows mental development and retards achievement.

I just wanted to make one more comment about the above...

I think it's a broad generalization.

Like I said, I was spanked but I was not "hit" with I would consider what a hit is. I was given a swat, only to the butt. Never smacked in the face nor anywhere else. I excelled in school work and skipped over 7th grade. My parents didn't tell me to skip a grade. I was given the choice by my school and I thought Ohh one less year of school to go to, "I'll take it!" So how can they say that simply spanking can slow mental development and retard achievement?

I don't believe in lashing out at kids, no way. But to say, "You are not listening to me, so now you will have to get a swat on your behind" is not lashing out IMO.

Abuse, which I think is very different, is harmful of course. My grandfather was abused by his father(my great-grandfather), who was an alcoholic, and had a hatchet thrown at him once that left a scar across his elbow. He was always getting hit for no reason. But thank God my grandfather did not become an abuser.

[whenwillithappen 0]

after having 4 kids i have to agree that a smack on the behind does the job but does not install fear.. i was spanked by my parents and would never talk to my parents the way i hear some kids talk to their parents today ... i also think that a lot of kids act up nowadays because they know that the only punishment they get is ... naughty step/ toys removed etc and whilst this works in the younger kids i dont think it has much effect on older ones.... kids are told now that parents are not allowed to spank and i think kids play on that fact.

[Traviesa 0]

Children definitely know what they can get away with. They'll get away with only as much as you allow them to. As for spanking, I was spanked only 2 or 3 times as a child...one time was when I was having a temper tantrum and threw my cup of juice at the wall (I was still really young) and the other was when I left the playground to go to a new friend's house without telling my parents; and they thought I had run away. Both were pretty serious offenses and I never did them again! Spanking got the message through, but was reserved for only the most serious things...just the fear that it "might" happen pretty much kept me in line the rest of the time...for example, being "taken outside" while acting up at a restaurant was very scary for me...

I can't say if I will spank my kids or not. If I do, it will model my parents, by reserving it only for the worst offenses.

[Caladan 19]

The article uses fallacious reasoning. It's focusing on the wrong percentages. I'm sure a significant proportion of those CEOs also drink alcohol, but that doesn't mean we should start junior on Jim Beam.

What's relevant is the number of people who were spanked who become CEOs. Going to be quite a bit smaller, obviously. But control it for social class, upbringing, and education. What's the percentage of spankees that are successful?

Anyhow, I don't believe in hitting kids. I will find another way. My parents believed in corporal punishment and we were hit with sticks, hit in the face, pounded on the head with a hand wearing a ring. The last time my dad decided to 'discipline me', he threw me into a wall and hit me in the jaw. I was 20 and my roommate at college had mailed me a mean note over the summer, which proved I was a bad person.

I'm sure I'll be really successful, though.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

At the school I worked at, when the kids were bad they had to go to a time out type of chair called "reflection" to reflect on what they did. *rolls eyes* The kids who were always in trouble were always in and out of the chair, and yet always repeating the same things they weren't supposed to do, because their parents at home never disciplined them. The only kids who were sad about going to the time out chair were the kids who were usually well behaved but might have had a bad day. The misbehaved kids would care less.

Yeah. Time-out works sometimes in some situations, but parents have to be active and really look at the underlying issue. For one, kids have a lot of energy and need to expend it. If they are spending a lot of time in front of the TV or playing video games, they're going to get restless. Sometimes kids will act out because that is the only time they will get your attention. I don't think kids are inherently bad or bratty - they just need parents who are actively involved in their lives and there to give them boundaries and guidance.

I'd feel bad for some of the kids who would be at the school from 7am until 6pm, because both parents worked long hours. I know these days, it usually takes 2 incomes to run a housee, but some of these kids had little to no time with their parents during the day. It'd be bedtime for them after eating dinner and that was the end of the day. It was sad. And many times, they would act out and get in trouble. So we would try to keep them active and having fun in the after school program.

But everything we tried would get reversed when the child was back with their parents, if the parents did not follow through. Many children would act pretty good around us teachers, and as soon as their parents walked in the door, they'd go crazy and do everything they aren't supposed to, because they knew mom and dad wouldn't do anything about it. Like what happens on Supernanny, etc, they know the nanny means business but without the parents following through, as soon as the nanny leaves it reverses back.

It is disheartening. Parents should be required to take parenting classes before the birth of their first child. Parenting has got to be the most underrated and most difficult job there is, and it often goes unrewarded other than the satisfaction in loving your children.

Del Jones, USA Today

The debate over whether CEOs are born or made remains unresolved, but there is one thing they overwhelmingly have in common.

As children, they were paddled, belted, switched or swatted.

Child psychologists wince at such a finding. They warn that spanking slows mental development and retards achievement.

I just wanted to make one more comment about the above...

I think it's a broad generalization.

Like I said, I was spanked but I was not "hit" with I would consider what a hit is. I was given a swat, only to the butt. Never smacked in the face nor anywhere else. I excelled in school work and skipped over 7th grade. My parents didn't tell me to skip a grade. I was given the choice by my school and I thought Ohh one less year of school to go to, "I'll take it!" So how can they say that simply spanking can slow mental development and retard achievement?

I don't believe in lashing out at kids, no way. But to say, "You are not listening to me, so now you will have to get a swat on your behind" is not lashing out IMO.

Abuse, which I think is very different, is harmful of course. My grandfather was abused by his father(my great-grandfather), who was an alcoholic, and had a hatchet thrown at him once that left a scar across his elbow. He was always getting hit for no reason. But thank God my grandfather did not become an abuser.

I agree. A spank to the butt is much different than hitting the child. Slapping a child on the face seems to me too dangerous - too easy to really hurt the child, especially if you are angry at the time.

Edited October 11, 2006 by Steven_and_Jinky

[Mirorgate 0]

At the school I worked at, when the kids were bad they had to go to a time out type of chair called "reflection" to reflect on what they did. *rolls eyes* The kids who were always in trouble were always in and out of the chair, and yet always repeating the same things they weren't supposed to do, because their parents at home never disciplined them. The only kids who were sad about going to the time out chair were the kids who were usually well behaved but might have had a bad day. The misbehaved kids would care less.

Yeah. Time-out works sometimes in some situations, but parents have to be active and really look at the underlying issue. For one, kids have a lot of energy and need to expend it. If they are spending a lot of time in front of the TV or playing video games, they're going to get restless. Sometimes kids will act out because that is the only time they will get your attention. I don't think kids are inherently bad or bratty - they just need parents who are actively involved in their lives and there to give them boundaries and guidance.

I'd feel bad for some of the kids who would be at the school from 7am until 6pm, because both parents worked long hours. I know these days, it usually takes 2 incomes to run a housee, but some of these kids had little to no time with their parents during the day. It'd be bedtime for them after eating dinner and that was the end of the day. It was sad. And many times, they would act out and get in trouble. So we would try to keep them active and having fun in the after school program.

But everything we tried would get reversed when the child was back with their parents, if the parents did not follow through. Many children would act pretty good around us teachers, and as soon as their parents walked in the door, they'd go crazy and do everything they aren't supposed to, because they knew mom and dad wouldn't do anything about it. Like what happens on Supernanny, etc, they know the nanny means business but without the parents following through, as soon as the nanny leaves it reverses back.

It is disheartening. Parents should be required to take parenting classes before the birth of their first child. Parenting has got to be the most underrated and most difficult job there is, and it often goes unrewarded other than the satisfaction in loving your children.

Del Jones, USA Today

The debate over whether CEOs are born or made remains unresolved, but there is one thing they overwhelmingly have in common.

As children, they were paddled, belted, switched or swatted.

Child psychologists wince at such a finding. They warn that spanking slows mental development and retards achievement.

I just wanted to make one more comment about the above...

I think it's a broad generalization.

Like I said, I was spanked but I was not "hit" with I would consider what a hit is. I was given a swat, only to the butt. Never smacked in the face nor anywhere else. I excelled in school work and skipped over 7th grade. My parents didn't tell me to skip a grade. I was given the choice by my school and I thought Ohh one less year of school to go to, "I'll take it!" So how can they say that simply spanking can slow mental development and retard achievement?

I don't believe in lashing out at kids, no way. But to say, "You are not listening to me, so now you will have to get a swat on your behind" is not lashing out IMO.

Abuse, which I think is very different, is harmful of course. My grandfather was abused by his father(my great-grandfather), who was an alcoholic, and had a hatchet thrown at him once that left a scar across his elbow. He was always getting hit for no reason. But thank God my grandfather did not become an abuser.

I agree. A spank to the butt is much different than hitting the child. Slapping a child on the face seems to me too dangerous - too easy to really hurt the child, especially if you are angry at the time.

Total agreement here. I was spanked when young, and once or twice smacked in the head when an early teen. spanking I can see doing as a parent, but as someone posted before, wont know for certain as not there yet. the glutes are large muscle n passing for a reason. anywhere else though I would consider abuse. and never ever spank in anger.... to many things to go wrong at that point.

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

I support spanking.

Daniel

:energetic:

[Mirorgate 0]

I support spanking.

Daniel

:energetic:

"Smack it, slap it, rub it down..."

but we're talking children here Daniel-san.... not the wifey

[AnaAndDaniel 0]

I support spanking.

Daniel

:energetic:

"Smack it, slap it, rub it down..."

but we're talking children here Daniel-san.... not the wifey

oh. me bad.

Daniel

:energetic:

[rclouse 0]

I spank her until she says the safeword.

What?

[almaty 19]

I support spanking.

Daniel

:energetic:

me too... ...oh, you mean for children in regards to discipline ..oh...nevermind...

[Garfield fan 0]

Another spanking/swatting supporter here !

[Heracles 417]

That is why kids are brats these days. Parents try to reason with them.. They are a #### child. Their brain does not understand reasoning...

It will be interesting to see how many old school people actually commit crimes, who were disciplined correctly. I knew if I ever thought of stealing or breaking the law I would end up in a hospital, when I was younger.. Ain't no more big momas around to straighten kids up...

[mawilson 2,133]

Child psychologists ... warn that spanking slows mental development and retards achievement.

Am I the only one who fails to see the connection between physical punishment and mental development?

[I'm Gone 60]

Child psychologists ... warn that spanking slows mental development and retards achievement.

Am I the only one who fails to see the connection between physical punishment and mental development?

Because it's BS. Before the psychobabble 60's hippies took over children were displined by spanking and kids were better educated and caused less problems than the wild animals parents are raising today with their timeout chairs.