Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    So we should discipline the gay out of our children? :erm:
    Maybe
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *pitseleh*)
    No, you really haven't. You might want to look up the definition of 'refute'. All you appear to have done is to make a blanket statement based on nothing.
    I have. Read.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Enforcement just isn't gonna happen tho is it?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think smacking works and isn't a good idea, but I don't think the Government has the right to tell people how to parent.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheMindGarage)
    I don't think smacking works and isn't a good idea, but I don't think the Government has the right to tell people how to parent.
    "I don't think children have the right not to be hit"
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    "I don't think children have the right not to be hit"
    I see your point, and I personally oppose smacking, but I think the Government should leave the people alone as much as possible.

    Of course, if it gets to anything more than a light smack (deliberately trying to cause harm), those parents better be locked up. Trouble is that it'd be difficult to prosecute (could you trust a small child's evidence?) and you wouldn't know where to draw the line.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheMindGarage)
    I see your point, and I personally oppose smacking, but I think the Government should leave the people alone as much as possible.

    Of course, if it gets to anything more than a light smack (deliberately trying to cause harm), those parents better be locked up. Trouble is that it'd be difficult to prosecute (could you trust a small child's evidence?) and you wouldn't know where to draw the line.
    But as lib has already pointed out there are similar crimes that are hard to enforce, such as sexual assault. I doesn't mean that you decriminalise it.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by itsfantanoo)
    I have. Read.
    Haha, stamping your feet doesn't make it any more true. Neither does being supercilious and disproportionately defensive in response to a straightforward question.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
    But as lib has already pointed out there are similar crimes that are hard to enforce, such as sexual assault. I doesn't mean that you decriminalise it.
    Of course not. I just think the Government spends too much time in general getting into people's personal lives rather than dealing with the stuff that individuals can't deal with.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AngelStarfire)
    treat with cruelty or violence, especially regularly or repeatedly.
    The key word there *regularly or repeatedly*
    See, I would have thought a sensible person would realise that the key words are cruelty & violence. If the key word is regularly, is it now ok for me to leave a handprint on my son and make them cry, as long as I only do it say, once a year?

    Here's a tip: The answer is of course not.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Why on earth do perfectly intelligent people who would absolutely hate to be hit themselves (and would react violently in many cases if they were) nonetheless think that it's OK for very large people to physically hurt very small, defenceless people?

    We are no longer living in medieval times and do not need to use violence to create a false order in a family. There are better ways.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by VinnicombeDmv)
    See, I would have thought a sensible person would realise that the key words are cruelty & violence. If the key word is regularly, is it now ok for me to leave a handprint on my son and make them cry, as long as I only do it say, once a year?

    Here's a tip: The answer is of course not.
    Why do you think when parents discipline their child there ALWAYS has to be a mark? It's possible not to hit that hard that'll there'll actually be a mark left behind. You may call it cruelty but in my eyes it's doing the child a favour for the future. Just making this clear this can or can not work with all children, it just depends.
    Btw Violence means:
    behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
    The intention is not to do any of these things just to deter their child from doing the wrong things. I do admit there can be other ways to go about things but it works with some children. Plus no it's not okay to leave a handprint on your son(that's different from the discipline I'm talking about). You make them cry then oh well, it's possible for a child to cry when parents don't do what they want to do. Also what do you mean by "once a year" I'm saying that when a child does something really wrong(If it's something little I wouldn't advise it too much) then it's okay to punish them because letting it off (or even grounding) in my opinion will let the child think it's okay to do bad stuff since they can't take their parents seriously and show respect. That's all I gotta say for now.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I think Scotland's morals are in the right place.

    As someone who had parents who were extremely pro-physical punishment for the most minor issues, I don't agree with it. I can see the effects it's had on me as an adult now, and my brother too. Those effects are very, very long standing. I've been made to limp to school before, and more often than not I've been pushed (as a child) to having the honestly held belief that I wanted to kill my father.

    I will say that I've developed a much, much harder personality now as a result however and dominance in terms of presence in the family has shifted from my father to me. Not because I'm some kind of physically violent guy, as I'm not in any way at all (because I have an overwhelming desire to never be my dad), but simply because I've grown to learn to not take s*** quietly or submissively.


    I suppose as a psychology graduate (and student), from my academic side, I've also learnt of the detrimental effects of poor attachment with parents. It's no secret that physical abuse isn't conducive to a healthy parent-child relationship.
    Thankfully for the parent, the majority of their neural development has been and gone. For that child though, that experience, or experiences, can have a long-standing domino effect which can fall to a multitude of ways, including antisocial behaviour. But despite the research and experience out there, I would presume no parent is going to bite their pride and say "Yep. I was a big factor in contributing to this", which only puts more pressure on the kid who could then seek groups/peers who accept their behaviour and end up fuelling the fire.

    Naturally, my view is biased against it. That doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to realise that. There's my two cents.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AngelStarfire)
    Btw Violence means:
    behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
    The intention is not to do any of these things just to deter their child from doing the wrong things
    "Son, I'm going to smack you. I don't intend to hurt you, but I'm going to do something that I know will hurt you and by definition is me being violent."

    (Original post by AngelStarfire)
    because letting it off (or even grounding) in my opinion will let the child think it's okay to do bad stuff since they can't take their parents seriously and show respect. That's all I gotta say for now.
    So taking away their toys or freedom makes them think they got away with it? I'm not against punishing, I fully acknowledge that kids need to be punished often just because of the way children behave, but that punishment doesn;t need to be an open fist.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AngelStarfire)
    Why do you think when parents discipline their child there ALWAYS has to be a mark? It's possible not to hit that hard that'll there'll actually be a mark left behind. You may call it cruelty but in my eyes it's doing the child a favour for the future. Just making this clear this can or can not work with all children, it just depends.
    Btw Violence means:
    behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.
    The intention is not to do any of these things just to deter their child from doing the wrong things. I do admit there can be other ways to go about things but it works with some children. Plus no it's not okay to leave a handprint on your son(that's different from the discipline I'm talking about). You make them cry then oh well, it's possible for a child to cry when parents don't do what they want to do. Also what do you mean by "once a year" I'm saying that when a child does something really wrong(If it's something little I wouldn't advise it too much) then it's okay to punish them because letting it off (or even grounding) in my opinion will let the child think it's okay to do bad stuff since they can't take their parents seriously and show respect. That's all I gotta say for now.
    What about children who may have a valid, justifiable view that is more rational than the parents? What can the kid do to get some respect from the parent at that point? Smack the parent and hope they accept their view just like the parents do?

    I do see you Googled the definition of 'Violence'. I'll agree with it,
    Here's the definition of 'Bullying' "use superior strength or influence to intimidate (someone), typically to force them to do something."

    That's all I gotta say, for now.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by VinnicombeDmv)
    So taking away their toys or freedom makes them think they got away with it? I'm not against punishing, I fully acknowledge that kids need to be punished often just because of the way children behave, but that punishment doesn;t need to be an open fist.
    Nah I'm thinking about when they're around 11yrs and they don't take their parents' punishments seriously. And I agree not an open fist. Just maybe a smack on the cheek or the bum.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sykeology)
    What about children who may have a valid, justifiable view that is more rational than the parents? What can the kid do to get some respect from the parent at that point? Smack the parent and hope they accept their view just like the parents do?

    I do see you Googled the definition of 'Violence'. I'll agree with it,
    Here's the definition of 'Bullying' "use superior strength or influence to intimidate (someone), typically to force them to do something."

    That's all I gotta say, for now.
    First off really? Mimicking me? Anyways yea you do have a point some children can handle things differently. Sure you used bullying but if it benefits them in the future not to do wrong and know what's wrong then why is it that much a problem? But besides that I see where you are coming from 😃
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by VinnicombeDmv)
    I don't call people abusive just for disagreeing with me; I call them abusive for thinking smacking a child is OK.

    Go on, tell me when EXACTLY is it okay to lay your adult hands on a child, rather than trying to make them understand what they did was wrong in a reasonable manner. Go on, tell me when it's OK to hurt a child as an adult.
    Do you know which parents hit?The ones that have also received that abuse and normalise it.It is their way of defence and excuse for doing it.


    Initially, children who are hit will often do what they are told, fearing the blows they could receive. But this is also their first experience of cowardice. Often, they will start up again the next chance they get: first experience of hypocrisy. In the end, they may take pleasure in defying their parents: first experience of provocation. Cowardice, hypocrisy, provocation: is this really what parents want to teach their children?


    This is what American writer Jordan Riak argues in his examination of corporal punishment: "Spanked children don't regard their bodies as being their own personal property. Spanking trains them to accept the idea that adults have absolute authority over their bodies, including the right to inflict pain. And being hit on the buttocks teaches them that even their sexual areas are subject to the will of adults. The child who submits to a spanking on Monday is not likely to say 'No' to a molester on Tuesday. People who sexually molest or exploit children know this. They stalk potential victims among children who have been taught to 'obey or else' because such children are the easiest targets." Although Jordan Riak gives no proof of this hypothesis, it rings true.

    More here for whoever wants to read !
    http://www.nospank.net/qadv1-3.htm
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by VinnicombeDmv)
    So taking away their toys or freedom makes them think they got away with it? I'm not against punishing, I fully acknowledge that kids need to be punished often just because of the way children behave, but that punishment doesn;t need to be an open fist.
    For your previous quote yea you have a point. I gotta agree with you there.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *pitseleh*)
    Haha, stamping your feet doesn't make it any more true. Neither does being supercilious and disproportionately defensive in response to a straightforward question.
    Reminder: You still haven't refuted my statement about it being discipline as opposed to behaviour. Also, I need evidence.

    Provide these two things and we can continue. Or you can delude yourself into thinking you're right.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,436

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
Do you want your parents to be with you when you collect your A-level results?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.