It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by forestlady
I'm not saying at all "don't teach your kid there are consequences", I'm saying there are better ways to do it.
America is way too spank-happy - why do you think we have the highest rate of violent crime in the developed world?
Originally posted by closettrekkie
I personally think there's a big difference between spanking and hitting and abuse. A tap on the leg or diaper is just going to get their attention, it's not abusive.
I have also observed that most of the bratty children I've seen that do hit and bite people are the ones who's parents tried to reason with them. The ones who were spanked as children didn't grow up to hit others. Again, I'm speaking of spanking and not hitting. There is a difference.
by Forestlady
Well, I do have to say that I think hitting a kid especially under 3 is child abuse. Why on earth would we want to hit any child? All that does is perpetuate violence. Reasoning with them is much better and if they're too young to understand, you tell them "no" until they get the message.
Originally posted by MCory1
I agree with Spider, nextguyinline, et al who said a good spanking is a necessary and effective disciplinary measure sometimes. Like others, I was spanked when I was being raised, and it was times when I needed it--you don't set your sister's room on fire and get a time out.
It's been a while, but I really couldn't say it was ever harsh beatings--always "attention grabbers," that made you know when you did something wrong, and I'll be damned if I would've understood my parents' attempts to explain why some things are good and some were bad when I was three. Twenty years later I still don't understand half the time, but oh well...
I always considered myself lucky too; I had friends in middle and high school whose parents not only still physically disciplined them, but used foreign objects to do it. (And FWIW, those friends would always admit that they deserved it too, normally with a sheepish grin before proudly displaying their bruise and saying "but man, was it worth it....."). I don't agree in the slightest that a hair brush should be used as a disciplinary tool, but at the same time it'll catch someone's attention. (Same with a shoe, wooden spoon, remote control, etc.--mind you, these were kids who could've easily taken out their parents in an "honest" fight.)
It'll be interesting to see how this bill and the spanking-in-schools bill that shots linked to fare against each other...
Originally posted by forestlady
I'm curuious as to what you think the difference is - can you explain? It seems like it's all the same to me and that it would be to the kid as well, being hit is being hit. Personally, the adults I've met who were well-adjusted weren't spanked as kids. There are lots of other ways to deal with a fussy child - time-outs, giving them a choice and well, hell, let them throw a tantrum and not get anything out of it so they will learn what's effective and what's not.
Originally posted by snafu7700
IOW, as we become more and more liberal-minded as a country in our methods of punishing children, our crime rates and prison populations go up. but of course, that's just a coincidence i guess.
[edit on 19-1-2007 by snafu7700]
Originally posted by iori_komei
Any kind of hurting anyonme, unless they consent is wrong, and
should be a criminal act on the infringement of the childs rights.
Originally posted by LogansRun
On a separate note, you want to know why we have rising crime? I suggest you study up on the destruction of our educational system. Leave the politics out of this thread, umm kay??
Originally posted by MCory1
And where do you draw the line at "any kind of hurting"? Because it could very easily be argued that you're hurting a child's feelings by telling them "No", or putting them in time out, or all sorts of other, less "evil" punishments. Psychological abuse is--IMO at least--much more damaging in the long run than physical abuse.