Pure Parents

Question:

>No parent spanks for the sake of spanking.  That’s just stupid.  The >children that I have >seen (hundreds, thank you, without exaggerating) whose parents have been >permissive have children who are brats, unpleasant to >be around, have few friends,  children run the household treating the >parents like garbage.

A parent who spanks can be just as permissive as a parent who doesn’t. I’m sure  we’ve all seen examples of both.  I thought the issue was more along the lines  of "When a parent disciplines, should they spank or should they use a  non-physical method?"  Not, "Should they discipline and spank  or should they  just let the misbehavior go without any consequences?" Linda

Response:

> Did you ever stop to think about why people are not all alike? IMO, A > significant part of people’s differences can be attributed to how they > are parented and how their early needs are or are not met.  I notice that > spanking parents often put their own needs and desires ahead of the needs > of their children while the typical nonspanking parent puts the needs of > his children at a much higher level in the priorities of things.  Hence, > there are good reasons for why spanking parents have offspring that they > think NEED to be punished  Spanking, IMO, is a convenient parenting > substitute for children’s early emotional needs that went unfulfilled. > The nonfulfillment of early childhood needs results in considerable > divergence in behavior and personality among the population.

This is truly laughable.  Parents who see a need to occasionally spank children for particular extreme misbehaviors ARE CONSIDERING THE NEEDS OF THE CHILD AND HOLD THESE NEEDS AS THE HIGHEST PRIORITIES!  If other techniques are not working the children still must be pointed in the right direction or they end up inconsiderate, selfish, spoiled, small-minded, rebellious teens and adults with absolutely no respect for others.  Your idea that spanking is a substitute for unfulfilled emotional needs in childhood is ludicrous.  On the contrary, those parents who refuse to discipline or earn the respect of their children are the ones trying to fulfill some need of childhood.  Maybe they weren’t allowed to have every Barbie ever made and try to make up for that by giving their child all that’s asked for.  Maybe they were abused and thus go to the extreme practice of not disciplining their children at all.  Maybe they are not concerned with the effects of the child’s behavior for the child himself or for the rest of the population that has to be subjected to the child’s poor behavior – instead they just want to keep the peace and not have the headache and responsibility of actually parenting the child.  They’re just waiting to pawn off their responsibility to daycares, schools, and the rest of the "village" so someone else can be in charge.  

Response:

> >         Do you believe everything you read?  Do you realize that you > can find an *expert* and a study to validate any point you choose to > have.  

Excellent point.  Ask any forensic psychologist (or other specialist for that matter) and they will tell you that the information in most any given *study* can be interpreted in more than one way. > I do not believe everything I read. By the same token, I look at studies, > etc with healthy scepticism, and I believe parts or much or all of what I > read depending on how valid I think it is, given the evidence around it and > a little common sense. And so far, noone has shown us a study that > validates the point that spanking is any better or even as good as other > methods of discipline. In fact, the only studies we have show it is > detrimental to childhood development. Weigh the evidence.

Glad to see that you admit to picking and choosing which evidence is valid.  ("…how valid I THINK IT IS…) That’s like fundamentalists picking and choosing which parts of the bible are to be taken literally (usually only those that support THEIR position while they ignore the others). > Bottom line is- have you taken a good hard look at the > children/teens of today (and ask yourself the question "If I had done > many of the things that happen as everyday occurrences today…what > would MY parents have done?)  We didn’t do these things because we > knew the ramifications of our actions.  Something that is sadly > lacking in parenting today.  I don’t form my opinions based on studies > and percentages (which are usually manipulated) I form them on > observation.

Here’s another observation.  I watched someone close to me SUFFER from an upbringing that often did not include appropriate punishments for unacceptable actions.  Sure he had a super time when he was going through it.  He quite often did exactly what he wanted to knowing full well that the ‘natural’ consequences his parents were depending on would be insignificant and that they would fail to implement any other ramifications.  He stole; used and dealt drugs; dropped out of school at 15; spent 2 years running from the law (which, by the way, also failed….he was never punished for stealing the car even though he was eventually caught).  It has taken him years (literally) to see the consequences of many of his actions.  I believe that if there had been immediate consequences (‘natural’ or not) he would have suffered FAR LESS because he would have stopped many of the things he was doing.   Heidi

Response:

<snip> >  No parent spanks for the sake of spanking.  That’s just stupid.  The > children that I have > seen (hundreds, thank you, without exaggerating) whose parents have been > permissive have children who are brats, unpleasant to > be around, have few friends,  children run the household treating the > parents like garbage.  Those I know who have grown up have had major > obstacles in their teens and difficult young adult hoods once they have > experienced the real world that does punish for bad behavior.

Comparing non-spanking parenting to permissive parenting is like comparing apples and oranges. -Alexis – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Heidi   >                               [snip] > : As far as mentally handicapped adults are concerned, when adults have > the > : "mental age" of children, it is almost invariably because their ability > to > : LEARN is FAR BELOW that of normal children.  A normal child at age four > has > : an ability to learn that will take him to a mental age of ten in about > six > : years.  An adult with a mental age of four won’t get anything like that > far. > : Because of this, spanking a four-year-old and spanking an adult with a > : so-called "mental age" of four are two extremely different > propositions. > : Trying to argue that a "fair" and consistent society would treat them > the > : same is absolutely ludicrous. >       So, by your reasoning, it is also absolutely ludicrous to spank > retarded children.  If we don’t spank retarded adults because they can’t > learn new things very well, it would certainly follow that the > educational benefits of being hit and hurt by one’s caretakers > would also be wasted on retarded children as well. >       Funny thing though, Nathan, in all of the thousands of words you > have posted on this topic, I cannot recall one instance of you arguing > for limiting spanking to children of normal intelligence or above.  Was > this an oversight on your part? > Chris

Response:

Yes, abuse is still abuse and it’s wrong.  Notice that spanking is not considered abuse.  Abuse leaves physical or emotional scars that last a lifetime.  Spanking is sometimes the only HELP in teaching some children. I have worked with victims of different abuses.  None of them involved spanking.  Beatings yes, but not spankings.  EVERY WELL-ADJUSTED adult I know in several countries (Iran, Switzerland, France, Spain, England, Germany, and the USA) had parents who OCCASIONALLY used spanking when nothing else worked. Heidi – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > |> deep moral conviction here on both sides.  This is why we have our own > |> children, so we can raise them according to our own standards.  If you > |> feel spanking is so terribly wrong, try to enact legislation to outlaw > |> it.  In the meantime, can we agree to disagree on this one and move on? > Raise each to our own standards sounds great in theory, but pedophiles for > instance may sexually abuse their children according to THEIR standards > as to those whom physically and verbally abuse their children, abuse is still > abuse and is wrong.

Response:

Have you read anything about physiology?  Comparing children with mentally handicapped adults is like comparing fruit and vegetables.  Comparing children with adults is like apples with oranges.  They are NOT the same! Children are NOT miniature adults.   Their LOGIC is different because of their lack of experience and mis-associations.  They ARE capable of learning.  Children CANNOT be compared to mentally handicapped adults or alzeimers patients because of neural/chemical differences.  This is not to say that people with these "abilities" can’t learn.  Sure they can.  But they have neural/chemical imbalances that PREVENT them from processing information correctly in many circumstances.  And to say that they should be spanked for a physical disability is ridiculous!  This IS NOT the same as a child’s willful disobedience.  But if a child with Down’s PURPOSEFULLY misbehaves of course their should be disciplinary action.  And of course alternative methods would be first choices.  But spanking is still valid if nothing else works. Children WANT to test the limits.  They WANT to find out who’s in charge and what the consequences are. Children NEED to experience immediate consequences for some actions.  If their logic is not developed enough to foresee the future "natural" consequences that are not immediate then they need an "unnatural" consequence.  Some actions cannot be ignored.  No parent spanks for the sake of spanking.  That’s just stupid.  The children that I have seen (hundreds, thank you, without exaggerating) whose parents have been permissive have children who are brats, unpleasant to be around, have few friends,  children run the household treating the parents like garbage.  Those I know who have grown up have had major obstacles in their teens and difficult young adult hoods once they have experienced the real world that does punish for bad behavior. Heidi   – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >                            [snip] > : As far as mentally handicapped adults are concerned, when adults have the > : "mental age" of children, it is almost invariably because their ability to > : LEARN is FAR BELOW that of normal children.  A normal child at age four has > : an ability to learn that will take him to a mental age of ten in about six > : years.  An adult with a mental age of four won’t get anything like that far. > : Because of this, spanking a four-year-old and spanking an adult with a > : so-called "mental age" of four are two extremely different propositions. > : Trying to argue that a "fair" and consistent society would treat them the > : same is absolutely ludicrous. >    So, by your reasoning, it is also absolutely ludicrous to spank > retarded children.  If we don’t spank retarded adults because they can’t > learn new things very well, it would certainly follow that the > educational benefits of being hit and hurt by one’s caretakers > would also be wasted on retarded children as well. >    Funny thing though, Nathan, in all of the thousands of words you > have posted on this topic, I cannot recall one instance of you arguing > for limiting spanking to children of normal intelligence or above.  Was > this an oversight on your part? > Chris

Response: