Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Raindance)
    Speaking from a male perspective: by the time you reach 15, parents can't hit you in anger as they know you'll square up to them. There's definitely an age where smacking should not be used by parents. When you're mature enough, disappointed looks and occasional shouting will hurt far more than a few red marks.
    I've never been hit and don't think violence is the answer to disciplining children. I think for some parents, smacking has less to do with discipline, and more to do with them venting their own anger and frustration.
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by Nikki J S)
    I've never been hit and don't think violence is the answer to disciplining children. I think for some parents, smacking has less to do with discipline, and more to do with them venting their own anger and frustration.
    But it isn't necessarily violence is it? It's a fine line, but there's a difference between smacking someone in the face, or a quick slap on the bottom. The former is obviously unacceptable, but I don't see how the latter is wrong. Have your parents never shouted at you? If not, you were either exceptionally well behaved (in which case there's no need for slapping in the first place) or you had your parents twisted round your little finger.

    I know from experience that when my dad, for example, needs to vent frustration, he walks out the door and goes for a walk. I know I'd do the same. I've never been hit out of anger or frustration, just wanred to keep in line. As a result, I think I'd do the same. But obviously we're all different people, and it's down to the parents prerogative as to whether they'd hit their child. I think actual physical abuse is a completely different matter. Though it's difficult to tell, or combat for that matter. I'd like to think that a decent parent wouldn't do it, but we all know of cases where it happens. It's difficult.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lessthanthree)
    That's really not always the case. For some parents, fair enough, but for others..sometimes there's literally nothing left to do to deter a kid from doing something they know full well they'e not supposed to do.
    I can't imagine a situation where it would be needed - can you give me an example.

    MB
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lessthanthree)
    That's really not always the case. For some parents, fair enough, but for others..sometimes there's literally nothing left to do to deter a kid from doing something they know full well they'e not supposed to do.
    I did say for some parents, not all. Although I know lots of my friends were never smacked either, and my own belief is that there is always an alternative method to violence.
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by musicboy)
    I can't imagine a situation where it would be needed - can you give me an example.

    MB
    Hyperactive child, crawling up the walls, not listening to a word that's being said - and blatantly disrespecting the parent.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Raindance)
    Hyperactive child, crawling up the walls, not listening to a word that's being said - and blatantly disrespecting the parent.
    kids don't act like thaat for no reason. Also, do you really think that smacking a kid will help you gain it's respect? More like resntment methinks.

    MB
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Raindance)
    But it isn't necessarily violence is it? It's a fine line, but there's a difference between smacking someone in the face, or a quick slap on the bottom.
    Smacking isn't violence?? If you gave an adult a slap you would be guilty of common assault, why is it different to do that to children? In fact, to me it's worse, because children are helpless and vulnerable, and have no way of stopping it!

    You ask any psychologist, or read any book on parenting, and I bet not a single one would advocate smacking in any circumstance!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Raindance)
    Hyperactive child, crawling up the walls, not listening to a word that's being said - and blatantly disrespecting the parent.
    So is the smacking for crawling up the walls, not listening, or for disrespecting?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by musicboy)
    kids don't act like thaat for no reason.

    MB
    Perhaps a very samll minority do, especially if they are genuinely hyperactive. However, if they are hyperactive, smacking them for being so, will not make that go away. So it does make you wonder what the purpose of the smacking is?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    The not listening. Next time, it will know to listen.
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by musicboy)
    kids don't act like thaat for no reason. Also, do you really think that smacking a kid will help you gain it's respect? More like resntment methinks.

    MB
    Do you think doing nothing at all and letting it run rings around you will help you gain it's respect? I'm not suggesting that you have no experience with children, but I have a 5-year old brother, and I used to work in an adventure playground. You can tell the ones who are discipliend to the ones who aren't First of all, they play together, and don't break down crying when someone knock them over. Second, they're not nasty or siteful to other children. Obviously, children are not generic and they react & interact in different ways. Basically, not all children aren innocent, and unless they're given rules - whilst knowing the consequences - they'll keep pushing the boundary. Similarly, if they're rewarded for good behaviour, and praised for it, they'll be more encouraged to behave. I'm not really advocating smacking, but I think it's down to the parent to decide.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lessthanthree)
    Plenty.

    A child who is intelligent enough to know exactly what pissed you off can do it repeatedly. We haven't really got to the bottom of why he does it - he gets enough attention, he doesn't want for things and he's not about to get his own way all the time. Sometimes the only thing that;ll stopping hitting our buttons is for mum or dad to tell him if he does that again, he'll get a smacked bottom. It generally deters, but when it doesn't - you've got to follow through with a threat otherwise you're thought of as a pushover who doesn't mean anything they say.
    I disagree. There are sanctions you could impose on a child without smacking them.

    (Original post by lessthanthree)
    Children are really, really different from one another, and a method of discipline that might have worked for one child, or indeed their siblings will not necessarily wash with all kids
    Agreed.

    (Original post by lessthanthree)
    And it's not really proper for a three year old to consistently challenge every decision their parent makes for them. It's all well and good asking why? once in a while, but every minute of every day is so incredibly wearing. Sometimes kids should take things for given and understand that no, sometimes parents *don't* have to give reasons - they're in charge.

    In my opinion, challenging authority constantly does not bode very well in a society where you're likely to get kicked out of school and miss out on education if you question every single thing or rule imposed upon you. Sometimes you can just take things as a given - I mean, fair enough, there are things and issues that need questioning, but not everything
    yes, it is proper. It is the method they use to get to know how the world works (Socrates still lives on!?). I constantly challenged authority if I disagreed with it. I still do and I was never chucked out of school because I knew how to challenge it intelligently through my learning experiences outside of school. I'm not talking about rebellion but more children making up there own minds about issues. There's a very interesting book on this stuff called why children fail by John Holt. It's slightly americanised and 1960s but it's a good read.

    MB
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Inverurie Jones)
    The not listening. Next time, it will know to listen.
    I still think there are far better ways to make a child listen. I'm not saying that smacking doesn't work;just that there are alternatives that don't involve violence, which isn't a good lesson to teach children in the first place.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Raindance)
    and unless they're given rules - whilst knowing the consequences - they'll keep pushing the boundary. Similarly, if they're rewarded for good behaviour, and praised for it, they'll be more encouraged to behave.
    I think you've summed up the purpose of discipline rather well there. It's about behaviours having consequences attached to them, and that doesn't have to mean violence!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lessthanthree)
    yeah, there are sanctions you can impose. What about when they're all exhausted ;_;

    I know its hard for people not in the situation to get to grips with.
    I don't think the other sanctions can ever run out.

    MB
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Try having an unruley child to look after for a while.
    Not all children have the intelligence to do things nicely. Not all children will listen to their parents. No matter what you do.
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by Nikki J S)
    I think you've summed up the purpose of discipline rather well there. It's about behaviours having consequences attached to them, and that doesn't have to mean violence!
    It's definitely a two way thing. It'd be hypocritical if you rewarded a child for being good, if you didn't discipline them for misbehaving. That's the way it's always been for me. This doesn't mean toys & money - compared to most kids I was materialistically deprived - but at least it's made me work hard for what I do own, and I don't just ask 'mummy and daddy' for a new bike! I also wouldn't play them off against each other! Ultimately, it's about affection shown. That way, when a parent is obviously disappointed with you - it means a lot more, and you'll know not to do it.

    I agree with you, smacking (which in my opinion doen't equate to violence) isn't always the answer. But there are instances where it is necessary, where just telling them not to do it won't suffice. Another good point, which I think lessthanthree commented on it before, is that a warning should be given before the punishment - and this warning does deter children from doing it again. Similarly, the threat should be carried out. If the child blatantly disrespects the warning in the first place, it's fairly obvious that telling them not to do it again is not going to work.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Luize)
    Try having an unruley child to look after for a while.
    Not all children have the intelligence to do things nicely. Not all children will listen to their parents. No matter what you do.

    I think if children aren't intelligent that's their parents fault. Children who don't understand how to follow rules and behave properly, haven't been taught it by their parents.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lessthanthree)
    does that mean every child who's born and is a bit slow can blame it on their upbringing?
    I don't think you can be born 'a bit slow' as you put it, with the exception of people who have medical conditions which affect learning and general intelligence, and of course learning difficulties. But by and large I think you can teach anyone anything and that if all people were nurtured in the optimum way, they could all achieve very highly.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by puppy)
    I think if children aren't intelligent that's their parents fault. Children who don't understand how to follow rules and behave properly, haven't been taught it by their parents.
    Intelligence is partly down to genetics as well as the upbringing. There are many many things which can mean that both parents won't be around during the upbringing of a child that is of no fault of either parent.
    There could be a serious family incident, a job promotion meaning one parents moving away.(family comes before a job IMO but a job is needed for money and a family will need money). etc

    I do agree to an extent that the parents need to install respectable morals from a young age but this is not the only factor involved.
 
 
 
Poll
Brexit: Given the chance now, would you vote leave or remain?

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.