|
salvete
(づ ̄ ³ ̄)...
☆☆
|
|

06-22-2016, 04:35 PM
Is spanking a form of child abuse?
Should parents be allowed to physically discipline their children?
|
|
|
|
|
Inzanebraned
(^._.^)ノ
|
|

06-25-2016, 08:32 AM
A severe slap on the rump to really put a point across should not be considered child abuse.
Hitting a child repeatedly or hitting then on any other area on their body would definitely constitute child abuse.
|
|
|
|
|
The Wandering Poet
Captain Oblivious
☆☆☆ Penpal
|
|

06-26-2016, 04:00 PM
Yes and No.
While some forms, such as taking your anger out on them with repeated hits with hand or a hard object is abuse yes. It hurts and they've already gotten the point long after the first hit.
However hitting a hand before the burn themselves, a swat on the bum to show discipline, yeah that is needed. Counting down to 1 is the stupidest parenting technique ever and ever since that whole don't spank your kids thing, I've seen it everywhere. They just screw around until around 2. Life isn't that kind, and kids need to be prepared for that.
Likely much of the frowned on parenting methods are what caused this whole "safe space" crap.
Additionally. Pain is universal. If your child can not speak and does not understand words, a swift swat on the bottom, which has some padding, so it's not dangerous to do, would allow for the child to feel pain or at least discomfort, and associate that bad behavior with it. I have applied similar methods to pets, a slight flick or the nose or a swat on the bottom. They understand it completely, and often times the behavior stops very quickly.
Last edited by The Wandering Poet; 06-26-2016 at 04:03 PM..
|
|
|
|
|
Symphony of the Night
(◎_◎;)
☆
|
|

07-19-2016, 05:50 PM
Hmm that makes sense *nods* I will keep that in mind when I have kids in the future
|
|
|
|
|
Hocus Pocus
|
|

07-23-2016, 02:33 AM
I think some children need to be spanked, but not all. I turned out well and I remember being spanked once by my grandfather wrongfully I might add for something my cousin did. My parents never spanked me however though they did threaten a couple of times if my memory serves correctly.
Just from seeing all of the bratty children today I believe parents should be allowed to spank a child, but of course not hitting just a slap on the butt.
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Wrong
Challenge your paradigm
☆☆
|
|

08-01-2016, 05:27 PM
One time my brother and I misbehaved and received a strapping with a belt by our father. I was the first to be swatted and so my brother had time to find a magazine and place it in his pants to pad against the swats. My brother put on a convincing act and that was the end of the punishment.
I didn't know this at the time, obviously, or I would have spoke up immediately. It's only been in recent years that my brother confessed to doing this.
|
|
|
|
|
Symphony of the Night
(◎_◎;)
☆
|
|

08-06-2016, 08:40 PM
Hocus Pocus, sorry to hear that you were wrongfully spanked for something your cousin did
Mr. Wrong, what did you and your brother do that received the spanking
|
|
|
|
|
TheEmpressofEvil
(っ◕‿◕)&...
☆☆☆
|
|

08-09-2016, 05:30 AM
I was spanked all of three times in my life and now that I can look back at those moments, it makes total and complete sense that I was. I think I will raise my children with spanking. I've met with so much flack for that because people around me know that my husband and I will be adopting and they know that that means that in all our questions with social workers, we'll be lying on that part and saying "no, we won't spank ever." But, some of the people that have gone off on me the most are the biggest people that express other forms of abuse that I feel are much more damaging (verbal abuse, being generally so wound up they can't form strong connections with their kids). I don't look back on my childhood and remember abuse. I remember well-rounded parents that did what they had to to keep us breathing and force us to know what was right and wrong. I grew up in a house with the word "no" and the death glare that forced you to cut the shit and behave and all of my siblings and myself came out really well. At this point I have some friends banned from my own house because they have kids that aren't well behaved and we've been told, in our own home, to practice "out of sight, out of mind" instead of having a child understand no in a strong sense.
I have always been one of those people that doesn't see a right way and a wrong way. I don't know if my way will be right, but I don't feel like it's wrong either. I think that how I intend to handle discipline in my own home is no one's business but mine and my husband's. I also feel like the spanking that we'll do is going to be a far cry from abuse. There's no going to be belts, or welts, or any of that crazy stuff here.
|
|
|
|
|
2Femme
⊙ω⊙
|
|

08-09-2016, 01:23 PM
Hitting your child is abuse, plain and simple.
You're using the power you have over them to physically harm them - and if you're 'not doing it enough to hurt them', the act and threat is still a form of emotional abuse.
If a boss spanked a co-worker it would be considered assault. Why does this suddenly change when it involves a parent and a child? Honestly the only time you should be physically touching your child against their will if it's for their immediate safety - grabbing them before they wander onto the road, stopping them from touching a hot stove; and these instances should always be followed with an explanation (and if they're too young to comprehend an explanation - they're probably too young to understand why they're being spanked in the first place).
Children still have rights to bodily autonomy, and teaching them that is very important. Even when it comes down to forcing them to hug and kiss relatives when they don't want to... it just blurs the line of consent.
Srrsly.
|
|
|
|
|
The Wandering Poet
Captain Oblivious
☆☆☆ Penpal
|
|

08-09-2016, 04:14 PM
2femme, there is a flaw with that though. If spanking is being done properly, no harm comes to the child. When a person is spanked regardless of if it hurts or not, it feels more like you're being shocked from touching metal. It's very unpleasant but in no way is it harmful. I've met a lot of these "no spank" children. They're for the most part, brats. They get away with so much because they know they can get away with minimal punishment.
Spanking a co-worker is assault because you did not give birth to your coworker. The baby is your job to train and teach how to be a decent human being.
So how would you discipline your child? You've essentially declared parenting as a whole, child abuse. But here's the thing, as a parent you are responsible for preparing them for the real world. The real world doesn't care about your safe zones, your triggers, or your entitlements. Once you step foot into the real world if you aren't emotionally prepared for the stress because of your "stress free parenting" method, you will fail.
Real life has no safe zones. To deny a child the proper mental preparations for that I would say is more abusive than teaching them to properly behave.
|
|
|
|
|
2Femme
⊙ω⊙
|
|

08-09-2016, 10:57 PM
Preparing a child for the real world includes teaching boundaries and limitations... Not to mention that in the real world if someone hits you - regardless if it hurts or not - it's still assault. The idea that because you birthed the child (what about adopted parents? Legal guardians? How does this logic apply to them?) somehow gives you a right to hit them is, frankly, barbaric.
There are plenty of ways to punish a child without laying a hand on them. The argument 'I've met someone in group x therefor all group x is like this person' is a logical fallacy. It makes a lot less sense then 'no one has the right to lay a hand on someone else, ever'.
And frankly teaching children proper coping, how to speak up for themselves when they're abused, and recognizing non-violent forms of abuse is more important than holding onto the ideal that parents have a right to spank their children.
Like... children are human beings, treat them with respect and they will learn. You don't learn respect by having it beat into you... Which - is actually backed by research.
|
|
|
|
|
The Wandering Poet
Captain Oblivious
☆☆☆ Penpal
|
|

08-10-2016, 01:04 AM
It is a parents right in how they raise their children until it can potentially put the child at risk. Spanking does not put a child at risk. It has its place at time.
So what do you do if your no touching discipline fails? What is your last resort? If the kid is cussing and screaming and throwing things what will you do? They won't obey, they won't listen, because they know you can't touch them.
By your concept I am a barbaric abusive partner while married (now divorced) I slapped my wife for throwing a temper tantrum, hitting me screaming at me, throwing things. Yet by your logic my action makes me barbaric for using discipline. But yknow what? She snapped out of it, realized her behavior, and we were able to talk like adults. We don't do that, we slap people who act like that. Same concept, same result.
Also it's not a concept of "I've met one person". It's more every single parent, hundreds of parents I have seen growing up, counting and other such methods were not effective. As a child I even found them stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
2Femme
⊙ω⊙
|
|

08-10-2016, 10:49 PM
My concept said that thinking someone has the right to someone's body because you hold guardianship over them is barbaric - and again, a parent can raise a child how they like - but the childs right to their own body is more important, and the parents right does/should NOT extend to 'the right' to hit their child... Last I checked actually, right to bodily autonomy is a right everyone has.... what right does spanking fall under??
What do you do if corporal punishment fails? There are countless methods of punishment. (And, according to the article I shared, yes... there are risks associated with spanking, if not immediate then otherwise).
And there is countless parenting techniques that do not involve spanking. This Link has some, and offers links to other resources regarding spank-free parenting.
As to you and your wife... The situation is irrelevant. 1) Because she is an adult and is fully developed and capable 2) The power dynamic is still vastly different 3) Regardless of if you did it or not, you had no /right/ to do it, and it was still wrong - even if it gave you the desired effects.
Last edited by 2Femme; 08-19-2016 at 11:53 PM..
|
|
|
|
|
The Wandering Poet
Captain Oblivious
☆☆☆ Penpal
|
|

08-13-2016, 04:32 AM
Your research link seems very difficult to follow.
By their logic I should be a highly aggressive person, I have no issues with IQ tests, and I have no drug or alcohol problems. In fact, I have no problems linked to spanking. When I was spanked I would stop the behavior.
Yes, it's not the only method of punishment, but it shouldn't be. As I've said many times, it has it's time and place.
If a parent were to discipline exclusively by spanking yes that's excessive, or if a parent is to spank many times out of anger, that too is excessive. But to discipline with a single swat to the bottom as is the proper method, I see no reason it would be abuse.
Actually in a quick search it actually says parents have the right to raise their children as they see fit unless it puts the child in danger. A swat to the bottom for being bad is not a valid reason to call CPS, therefor it does not qualify for abuse. Using a belt, a hard object, or excessively hitting the child until it hurts, is another story entirely.
Exwife actually. She was highly abusive. Oddly enough, I don't think she was ever spanked as a child, yet she was the aggressive one.
|
|
|
|
|
2Femme
⊙ω⊙
|
|

08-13-2016, 05:03 AM
A few things in list format because it is late and paragraphs are hard:
1) Just because things have been accepted and done in the past does not mean they should continue. For example, school teachers used to be able to punish children by using physical punishment.
2) I am not contesting that parents should maintain their rights to rear their children how they see fit in terms of things like religion, beliefs, etc... - I'm arguing for the idea that the child's right to their own body - to not be physically punished - is greater then that right, and should be honored.
3) Your experience does not negate the results of the research. The study is not saying /every single person who was spanked will have these issues/ it is saying these issues occur more frequently in children who were spanked, to such an extent that we can positively associate it with spanking. The reverse is true for those who were not spanked - they can still experience these issues.
4) Yes - spanking may have it's time and place, and may work for some. But what about those who DO abuse it? Who are excessive? Who do so in anger? I'm willing to bet this occurs more than spanking in caring and loving families. This is yet another reason spanking should be considered abuse, always - because then it would be banned/illegal and it would decrease the rates of abuse and/or open the door for children to be able to report said abuse.
|
|
|
|
|
The Wandering Poet
Captain Oblivious
☆☆☆ Penpal
|
|

08-17-2016, 04:33 PM
The people who do abuse it, are no different than any other abusive individual. Beating a child anywhere is still beating the child, however a swat on the bottom once is not beating a child. But here's the thing. No matter how amazing of a parent you think you are, you will fail at parenting. There is no such thing as the perfect parent, because every single child is different. At some point or another you will screw up something. Besides if we make spanking illegal what next? Maybe we will make even more things illegal after the next step. Heading in the direction of a world where people are fragile and weak because they don't know discipline.
If the concern here is child abuse, even something as small as "Just you wait until your father gets home" can be abusive, and emotionally traumatizing.
You claim you don't mind if people raise their children based on their beliefs, but yet what if their beliefs permit spanking? What would you do then? Is it still abuse?
|
|
|
|
|
Symphony of the Night
(◎_◎;)
☆
|
|

08-19-2016, 01:53 AM
Is it okay if I ask everyone to include sources that they are citing :D I mean, you do not have to of course. But I am very intrigued and would love to read any articles you might have seen on this subject. I appreciate that this topic has been making for a very thorough and respectful conversation.
|
|
|
|
|
TheEmpressofEvil
(っ◕‿◕)&...
☆☆☆
|
|

08-19-2016, 04:15 PM
Even sources can be skewed because they don't always include the full scope of how discipline was handled. Not all parents employ spanking as the first step in discipline. For example, I see it more as a last resort or a Holly hell my kid is going to hurt themselves or someone else if this behavior doesn't stop ASAP. Those sources can also be on a small scale. I've seen my friends post studies involving 48 kids in total. No study is perfect, but very very many are choosy when it comes to the data they choose to collect. There can be a lot of factors left out that can contribute to a child's behavior. What's the home status, how do the parents interact? are they exposed to violent media (video games, explicit tv shows or music) do they have siblings? are they getting enough attention or is that attention being divided too thinly between other things? what is the socioeconomic status of the family? Was spanking the ONLY form of discipline or was it the last resort? These other factors are almost always left out of the picture, and usually on purpose. Instead it's presented as, child spanked yes/no and some arbitrary scale for negative behavior without an explanation of what constitutes negative behavior.
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Wrong
Challenge your paradigm
☆☆
|
|

10-20-2016, 05:23 AM
Quote:
HOW DR. SPOCK DESTROYED AMERICA
Exclusive: Reb Bradley asserts author's child-care book cultivated narcissism in millions
Published: 01/27/2009 at 12:00 AM
In the last 50 years, our nation has taken a moral nosedive. Since 1960, the rate of violent crimes has more than tripled. Every day there are news reports of heinous crimes unheard of in America a generation ago. Children murder their playmates, their teachers and their parents. Teenage mothers abandon their newborn babies in trashcans, and every year students commit carnage on their classmates. Our culture has sunk so low that children are no longer safe with their teachers in school or at church. Scores of men and women are arrested every year for preying on the children under their care. The sexual revolution that started in the ’60s continues with many casualties. Promiscuity has become so rampant that 1 of every 4 teenage girls now has a sexually transmitted infection.
In the last five decades, practices have become so deviant that the number of distinct STDs had risen from five to more than 50; a sudden increase of a thousand percent. Obsession with sexual violence has brought a 318 percent increase in sexual assault. Our nation is in severe moral decline, and the descent is not slowing. The root cause of decline in America is not that difficult to deduce. When a society becomes out of control, it is because its members elevate self-indulgence and lack self-control. It really is that simple. In the last 50 years, human nature has not changed. Selfishness, lust, covetousness and all other passions are in the human heart at birth. It is only a trained proclivity to say NO to our natural drives that keeps our passions in check; self-control is what stops us from stealing, murdering and committing adultery. It is parents who must instill this important quality in each generation. History and common sense teach us that the society in which children are not taught to keep control of their passions is destined to moral disintegration.
In America the reason that baby boomers and their children have grown up with less mastery over their passions than previous generations is because in the late ’40s a new voice of authority on parenting rose to prominence, and parents of the ’50s and ’60s began to raise children differently than before. In 1946, Dr. Benjamin Spock first published his infamous book “Common Sense Book of Baby and Child Care,” which was unlike any that came before it. Instead of stressing the importance of teaching self-denial and respect for authority, Spock discouraged directive training and emphasized accommodating children’s feelings and catering to their preferences. No longer did children learn they could endure Brussels sprouts and suffer through daily chores. Using Spock’s approach, parents began to feed self-indulgence instead of instilling self-control; homes were becoming child-centered.
As parents elevated children’s “freedom of expression” and natural cravings, children became more outspoken, defiant and demanding of gratification. In fact, they came to view gratification as a right. Spock wrote his book in response to a cold, authoritarian philosophy of parenting that had been dominant in America. For years, parents had been told to withhold affection from their children, not to touch them too often, not to respond to their tears. Understanding of children had not been encouraged, and fathers had held a minor role in their nurture and care. These things distressed Spock, and they would have upset me had I been born back then. Children need our tender affection, understanding and respect. However, Spock’s solutions reflected total ignorance of the hedonistic bent of human nature and fostered an over-exalted sense of self-importance in children. Homes became hotbeds for narcissism, entitlement and victim thinking.
In the early ’60s, under Spock’s influence, parents were watching their children become sassy and contentious, and increasing numbers were seeing them become juvenile delinquents and criminals. As the crime rate started to crawl up, SAT scores began to drop. Teenagers began to exercise less moral restraint and revealed an increasing contempt for authority. The free-love hippy movement and student protests were inevitable for children who had been raised to think too highly of themselves. Is it any surprise that Spock himself participated in protests and was arrested in 1968 because of his contempt for governmental authority?
In 1972, Spock’s imbalanced view of child rearing became greatly apparent when he entered the presidential race as the candidate for the socialistic People’s Party. Anyone who embraces socialism is clueless to a key element of proper parenting, personal responsibility. What Spock’s actions reveal about the weaknesses of his philosophies is obvious, but some doubt that Spock’s influence was that pervasive. However, in the first year, his book sold 750,000 copies, and within six years it sold more than 4 million. It has since sold over 50 million and has been translated into more than 40 languages. According to Dr. Spock’s website, it is second in sales only to the Bible. Life magazine certified the depth of his influence, naming Spock among the 100 most important people of the 20th century.
Even Dr. Spock was aware of his negative influence upon parents. In a 1968 interview with the New York Times, Spock admitted that his first edition of “Common Sense Book of Baby and Child Care” contributed to an increase of permissive parenting in America. “Parents began to be afraid to impose on the child in any way,” he said. In his 1957 edition, he tried to remedy that by emphasizing the need for setting standards and asking for respect. Unfortunately, Spock failed to see the deeper problems of his philosophy, so subsequent editions continued to cultivate narcissism. As Spock’s radical parenting ideas grew in popularity, other “experts” jumped on the bandwagon and promoted their own versions of indulgent child rearing.
Since 1946, parenting approaches that foster narcissism and contempt for authority have become the accepted norm in higher education and subsequently, in society. It is a simple matter to trace the dominant hedonism of our culture back to Spock’s influence. And since the parenting we receive in childhood develops the worldview we hold as adults, Spock influenced not only how American’s conduct themselves in society, but how they approach government as well. Interestingly enough, in the 1968 New York Times interview, Spock admitted that he would “be proud if the idealism and militancy of youth today were caused by my book.” Raising children to adulthood with a defiant attitude toward authority was apparently one of his goals.
Spock died in 1998, and my intent is not to malign a man in the grave, it is to rescue America before we expire from moral disintegration. We must, therefore, identify and abandon the polluted well from which we have been drinking. Those interested in repairing the damage done by Spock, both in the family and in society at large, will want to read “Born Liberal Raised Right: How to Rescue America from Moral Decline – One Family at a Time.” It lays out a clear analysis of the problem and a simple plan for recovery. Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/
|
The bible says spare the rod, spoil the child. Thanks to poor parenting, we now live in a nation filled with criminals.
Last edited by Mr. Wrong; 10-20-2016 at 05:53 AM..
Reason: informing Menewshans
|
|
|
|
|
Yamka Jaden
⊙ω⊙
Penpal
|
|

10-21-2016, 09:20 PM
I was spanked as a child, not a lot and it usually a last resort if everything else failed. Should it be used? Yes, but in moderation.
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Wrong
Challenge your paradigm
☆☆
|
|

12-18-2016, 07:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Symphony of the Night
Hocus Pocus, sorry to hear that you were wrongfully spanked for something your cousin did
Mr. Wrong, what did you and your brother do that received the spanking
|
Oh, what didn't we do to receive a spanking. There was the time we set fire to grandma and grandpa's house. Another time we abandoned the family car on railroad tracks. And once when we cut the brake lines to several school buses. Our parents were so unfair.
Actually, I don't specifically recall. But there was an incident where my brother and I were in a room together while I was playing with a board game on the floor. For whatever reason my brother decided it was a good idea to pretend he was Zorro with a pillow and he ended up knocking down the ceiling light fixture which broke on my bare foot causing a large cut that required stitches. Receiving sutures isn't painful because of the numb shots you receive beforehand. The painful part comes from the needles that administer the painkillers. I had a healthy fear of needles well into adulthood.
Three times during my childhood would I receive a scar from my brother. One on the foot from the Zorro incident, one on my left elbow from blocking a cup he threw at me from five feet away at full force. Plastic cup you say? How can a plastic cup cause any damage? Back in the 1960s and '70s Tupperware made a plastic cup that could survive a nuclear war. It was a heavy gauge plastic cup with a bottom that was an inch and half thick. This cup did double duty as a surface to surface missile. There was a joke that lasted into the 1980s about Tupperware. It was: Three things can survive a nuclear war: Rats, roaches, and Tupperware.
Before the elbow scar there was the time when he pushed me into a glass door. I broke one of the panes and it caused a cut on one of my shoulders.
Fortunately, our childhood grumblings didn't linger into adulthood and we get along quite well today. My brother stopped teasing me so much after I chased him with a knife. He should have been on the track team.
Last edited by Mr. Wrong; 12-18-2016 at 07:58 AM..
Reason: brotherly love
|
|
|
|
|
Ava The Vampire
Spooky Action at a Distance
☆☆
|
|

12-18-2016, 07:22 PM
My parents never hit me.
I think I turned out alright.
That isn't to say I've never been spanked, my aunt has spanked me a few times.
But really, my parents did their best to make sure that I understood what I did wrong when I did it so if I did something wrong, instead of hitting me they would take something away that I liked.
I am living proof that you don't have to hit your child to get them to listen to you.
|
|
|
|
|
Mikio
(・ω・)
☆☆
|
|

12-19-2016, 10:40 AM
I think hitting a child is wrong under any circumstances. I was spanked before when I was a kid and I hated it, whenever anyone raised a hand, I would get scared and paranoid even when they didn't plan on doing anything to me. It's wrong full stop. I would never lay a hand on my kids. If you raise them properly and teach them proper boundaries and respect you'd never need to even think about harming them.
|
|
|
|
|
uncledaddy
swamp troll
|
|

12-25-2016, 02:50 PM
i was hit (among other things) when i was growing up, and it didn't do me a lick of good. i did not respect it as a consequence or accept that i "deserved" it; all it did was make me fear and resent the people who hit me. it felt completely irrelevant to the offense i supposedly committed and usually came with no other reasoning than "____ is mad at me and is going to hit me". ...then again, maybe that was because i almost never intentionally or knowingly broke the rules and i was frequently attacked and punished for accidents, things i was accused of but didn't do, or seemingly no reason at all, and what was or wasn't against the rules was completely arbitrary and subject to change without notice. :^)
point being, what you do doesn't matter nearly as much as why and how you do it. if you're hitting your kids because you're mad, you're doing it wrong. if you're hitting your kids to teach them to fear punishment, you're doing it wrong. if you're hitting your kids to hurt them, you're doing it wrong.
spanking is not necessary, and i scoff at people who seem to think it is the only possible form of discipline. but unless the child is too young to know better in the first place or the parent is hitting hard enough to leave marks or do damage, i wouldn't call it abuse.
as to whether or not i would spank my own children, i really don't know. i prefer methods that are more heavy on communication and understanding. the first response will always be to talk and ask why they did what they did, and to explain to them why it shouldn't be done and what can/will happen if they do it again. when the kids show that they understand what's happened, they will have to atone for whatever they've done (apologizing to another child they hit, for example, or returning something they stole, etc). if they did it again after that, some other kind of punishment on top of making up for the offense will probably be put into place. whether or not that involves a spanking would remain to be seen, depending on the situation.
it's not like i'll probably ever be able to have kids anyway, so it's all just a bunch of speculation.
Last edited by uncledaddy; 12-28-2016 at 12:06 AM..
|
|
|
|
|
The Wandering Poet
Captain Oblivious
☆☆☆ Penpal
|
|

12-27-2016, 05:16 PM
Mikio - Raise their hand? You don't need to wind up a pitch for a smack on the bottom. That's excessive.
As for spanking "harming" them. If done properly, the buttocks has a cushioning which will prevent any damage, and unless you're removing the clothing on top, there should also be no pain. Simply a slight discomfort. Thus no harm will actually be done.
However most people use spanking to alleviate anger, as per what they do for most punishments. This is where the excessive force comes from. The parent is unable to control their anger. It has nothing to do with the punishment itself.
Instead of 12 hard swats instead of just 1 light one, maybe they would ground you for 12 days with no toys in an empty room only allowed to come out to eat. Forcing boredom can be just as traumatizing if not moreso for extended periods of time, such as doing so for days at a time.
As a child that has been spanked, and also been grounded in an empty room for days at a time... I say the second one is way more traumatizing.
|
|
|
|
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) |
|
|
|