UKC

Today I had the misfortune to have to smack my child's legs.
He had gone beyond reason and other efforts of disciplining were ineffective.
So, a smack on his legs was delivered , which had the desired effect of changing his attitude. I don't like to smack and was not proud of it.
Unfortunately, I was harangued by a mother with several children in her vehicle, who, despite me being a child smacker, asked one of the children to wind down the window so that she could converse.
' are you ok' she asked. 'Yes thanks' I replied.
'Smacking is now frowned upon, and there are better ways to vent your anger'. She said.
'Ive tried those and you need to mind your own business' I replied.

Although I thank her for her concern, her intervention was most unwelcome.

I'm a good parent I think.
How much is smacking children in public frowned upon nowadays?

In reply to Dave the Rave:

You could always kick the dog to vent your anger, but we are a nation of animal lovers, so best stick to the saucepan lid.

In reply to Yanis Nayu:


Anger wasn't being vented.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

I was joking.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

Frowned upon a lot, of course that does not make it wrong to do so.

For me, one of the strongest memories of my dad is him smacking me, which is not what I would like for my son, so I'm trying to avoid physical correction - will see how I get on.

In reply to Dave the Rave:
I was thrashed as a child, never did me any harm <twitch>

In reply to Dave the Rave:

It isn't the done thing these days.

It isn't illegal unless you leave a mark or bruise. But it is frowned upon.

If you don't like it, why did you feel it was your only option?

In reply to Dave the Rave:
How fair is smacking? Could be another question worth asking.

I was smacked occasionally by one of my parents, it was the parent who didn't smack me who I grew to see as the fairer one, and took more notice off when being told (not) to do something. and I think it may have played a part in me keeping things to myself when it wasn't healthy.

I'm not trying to decide or say what sort of parent you are, but more just be careful about smacking, it may have more of an effect later on than is easy to judge right now...

In reply to Dr.S at work:



It's a grey area isn't it . I remember relatives giving me a clout, but I think that I'm respectful as an adult, and undoubtedly deserved the clout.
I would say that it hasn't harmed me, but someone will say that I'm a child smacker, so I won't.
It wasn't an over the top action, and the child has since apologised .

In reply to Dave the Rave:

Many people are quick to jump on the "Child abuse, battered children" bandwagon at the slightest hint of child discipline.

Children need discipline and if they continue to wilfully misbehave and take no notice of other methods then I believe a smack on the leg is an acceptable method of correcting the child.

The child will think twice before repeating the bad behaviour again.

In reply to marsbar:

A lot of things aren't .

I had used up all of my nice repertoire?

In reply to Dave the Rave:


I'm definitely not judging you by the way.

Did you try getting down to eye level and being stern? It strikes me that sometimes parents can need to step back for a minute and let a child go 'bleargh' before trying again, which isn't always convenient.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

I'm not criticising, I just wondered.

Nor does it have to be "nice" discipline if it isn't a smack.

In reply to mgco3:



Children live for or thrive on their parents' approval, from the parent who didn't smack me, it always enough that they were angry/disapproving .

In reply to Timmd:
No probs.
I did all the 'you won't be having this and you won't be doing that conversation'.
I won't get down to eye level as I find this annoying when other people do it. You are admitting defeat to lose advantage, plus, they may head butt you?

In reply to Dave the Rave:
It's a tough situation. When my son was little & testing the boundaries- I tried everything ! Shouting, talking calmly at his eye level, putting him in time out, star charts. Nothing was working. One day he wound me up so bad I walked out of the kitchen & sat down on the stairs (the time out spot). A few minutes later he asked me why I was sitting there & I told him he had annoyed me a lot so I put myself into time out before I smacked him. Surprisingly, his behaviour & mine changed for the better. We seemed to get along better after that

In reply to marsbar:

I know. I'm just feeling not very 'proper'
Stairs normally works, but he had gone past that unfortunately.

In reply to RockAngel:


Rock on! That is probably the most sensible answer that I will receive

In reply to Dave the Rave:


It's less about admitting defeat, and more about ensuring that they get to register your facial expressions and can't sub/consciously ignore you, or be distracted by something else. Hopefully you'd be able to think of something to let them know how serious it is to head butt you?

I'm only an uncle, but I find it really effective to get down to eye level with my nieces and nephew. Parenting is always challenging, but from memory of being a kid and seeing my siblings being parents, a stark contrast between 'nice parent' and 'annoyed parent' seems quite effective, The parents who tend to grumble vaguely in the background half the time can seem to have more of a problem than the peaceful ones who'll suddenly shout when they really want something not/to be done, at which their kids will do as they're told.

In reply to Dave the Rave:







In reverse order:
- quite a lot. I think a societal norm is shifting, and that always makes the people in the transition period uncomfortable (think of the gap with your parents' attitudes)

- I wouldn't be able to judge on one (self-disclosed) incident. Parenting is a tough game and *all* "good" parents have done things they regretted afterwards. It's frustrating because it's a learning experience that never quite prepares you for what's next.

- She sounds as if she made the lowest-key approach to the issue she could - asking if you were ok. Was her intrusion unwelcome because it made things worse, or just because it's made you feel bad?

Maybe taking child home and putting him/her in the garden/room for a while might have been an alternative?

PS. I smacked my kids a couple of times in similar circumstances, so really do empathise with the "nowhere to go" situation. And, of course, they are absolutely fine. But that doesn't mean it was the right thing to do or that I don't regret not being "better" than I was able to be.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

I understand your frustrations, not sure how old your child is but at times they do drive you to despair. Recently my son has reacted better to the threat of having something taken away. Now you have to choose carefully but at 5 he loves his wooden railway and lego, but if continues to misbehave then he loses something like his box of lego for say two days. You do then have to remove it but it has worked in conjunction with reward charts and similar, you have to make the reward worthwhile and achievable in reasonable period. I also think the secret to this is when you say something you have to follow up with action, so if you say we aren't going somewhere then you have to be careful as that could work against you if the child didn't actually want to go in any case.

As for the smacking bit I think it is frowned upon but find me a parent who hasn't done it or been very close. A single smack on one occasion won't necessarily make you a bad parent but continual use may teach your child that violence is acceptable.

In reply to
I felt bad anyway. To be honest, I admire her. Not for her anti smacking view, but for the fact that she interviewed in a child being led by the hand unhappily.
Maybe ,but ....

In reply to Dave the Rave:

Firstly can I start by saying I totally get how frustrating parenting can be, and how intractable children can be when they feel like it. Yes, smacking is generally frowned upon (ish, not unilaterally) but also study after study after study is showing that smacking has a negative effect. While it may correct in the short term a certain unwanted action, in the long run it has a negative impact on behaviour as well as mental health (statistically significant - that's not to say it impacts every child in this way). I could provide links but I'm not out to guilt trip you. If you'd like to see some then just ask.

I try to think of parenting as modelling the behaviour you want to instill, so actually getting eye to eye with a child is a good way of promoting communication. You wouldn't want a child who tries to get their own way by hitting so it's best not to model it as an option! (Again, I do still sympathise.)

In reply to Alyson:

'study after study after study'

'I could provide links but I'm not out to guilt trip you'

be great to have a look at the data and would imagine Dave, having taken the initiative and posted here, won't be scarred

thanks

In reply to RockAngel:

Brilliant! Best answer by mile. I do use the "you've really upset daddy" line myself, but that goes one better. I have never hit her and I would consider it a serious failure on my part if I did, but I have had to restrain her to keep her safe while she was throwing a tantrum in a public space. That probably didn't look too good!
To the OP, I'm pretty impressed with the woman who spoke to you, she must have known she'd get abuse in return. While I can understand someone losing the plot under pressure, it sounds like you made a reasoned decision that violence was the only solution. Anyone trained in dealing with "challenging" children will tell you that there is always a better way.

In reply to BazVee:

Or leave them feeling more anxious than they'd otherwise be, and having mixed messages about the warmth and security that most parents wish their children to feel enveloped in.

In reply to Dave the Rave: i think the woman was not only brave, but correct. If you are truly honest with yourself do you still believe that you hit your child because it was in their best interest? or because you were upset, and frustrated?

In reply to Timmd:


This too. I was smacked occasionally as a child and it definitely impacted on my levels of trust and my closeness to my parents. I lost some respect for them too. Also, I went into a relationship with a man who would occasionally hit me (while still telling me how much he loved me) and it took me a long time to decide to leave because that model of being hit by someone who loves you was what I grew up with.

In reply to Hooo:
Excuse you. I did not give the woman any abuse.

In reply to Alyson:
I can relate to that, though with me it was just one parent, thankfully the gulf which it created between us was reduced later on through lots of talking, and we became closer again.

I don't think smacking has to happen very often or very many times to have a negative effect.

In reply to Zoro:

If a kid is being utterly obnoxious and there is no other apparent means to keep them in line, a short, sharp smack seems entirely fine to me. Its not being metted out every week but as a means of last resort with no lasting physical impact then what is the issue?

In reply to Alyson:
From the other side, I was smacked at least a dozen times as a kid - probably more. I never equate violence of any type as ideal or normal but would be very skeptical that an occasional last ditch smack on a child equates to future damage. Its not a sustained attack, is a final point in escalation, and in my mind and experience is far less traumatic than a torrent of verbal abuse - something that seems to be entirely within the law and common-place.

A smack, like a telling off, is a million miles from physical or emotion abuse.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

You're human and the fact that you've come on here to discuss it shows you have a conscience too.

It's easy to judge when it's not your kids. It's very easy to be pompous, superior and smug but until you are in that situation.

So far I've not hit my little girl and I hope I never do. But despite the current social norms I'm not about to sit in judgement over another parent.

You often get some interesting views from those of us who grew up when smacking was "normal". Some say that it never did them any harm, some say that they deserved it and some say that they never forgot it.

My dad was very easy with the smacking. It taught me a form of respect - a respect built on fear. It was unnecessary, violent and basically a form of abuse. However, this was more extreme. My dad was not the kind to back up his discipline with any form of attention, mentoring or even love. So it made me determined to be the opposite.

Dave, you don't sound like that kind of person. I would spend some time speaking to your lad and reinforcing positive behaviours as well as pointing out that it's a last resort and that you love him. I wouldn't apologise as you don't want to give your lad the impression that he can push you even further but would focus on the benefits of harmony and good behaviour, then do your damnedest to avoid it in the future.

But don't beat yourself up over it.

M

In reply to Dave the Rave: I had to sit on that step for about half an hour! 1 minute for every year of persons age!
I have used the removing things too. Namely the power cable to the games console until he's cleaned his room after me nagging him for a week. It's amazing how quickly the room got tidied! Although I did catch him head banging in the middle of his room to Metallica instead of cleaning it!
He's 18 now & although he got the occassional clip round the ear, he's turned out ok & I have to either stand on a box or look up at him now to tell him off!
Kids do push the boundaries & what was right when they were 5 is different to what is right when they're 6. You have to learn to adjust those boundaries to suit their growing needs.

In reply to David Martin:

Why do you think it is that some parents never need to smack, or even hint that a smack may be a possibility? What are they doing which 'last ditch smackers' may not be? Just curious really.


I didn't think Alyson was implying smacking is abuse? It's two very different things to say there are studies which show the negative effects of smacking (albeit with the caveat they don't always occur going unspoken, I guess), and saying that smacking is emotional and physical abuse.

I guess how damaging smacking can be would depend on the emotional make up of the person being smacked, and upon the parenting style of the parents...the context in which the smacking takes place and what happens afterwards.

What's undeniable though, is that smacking certainly 'can' leave children being either more violent or more anxious as individuals, which nobody wants to happen, in any children I would have thought.

In reply to Rampikino:

Hmm, I think I disagree. i know that children can be very testing ...to annoying, but why should hitting or smacking be a way to deal with this. i don't agree with teenagers, adults or anyone in fact trying to solve problems by hitting each other. Hence, I can't agree with children being hit for the sake of asserting a parent's role. I would't judge anyone because they lost their temper once, perhaps, if it didn't cause any harm, but frankly I don't see why violence towards children should be an accepted norm. Clouting, hitting or any other violence is no way of dealing with problems in any relationship in my humble opinion.

In reply to Heike:

Seconded.

In reply to David Martin:

The issue is that children don't have the same self awareness which adults have, so won't be aware quite how obnoxious they're being, and are smaller and weaker physically than the adult smacking them who is (more) aware of how pleasant or otherwise they're being with other people.

The issue is also that one can't always tell at the time what impact being smacked may have later on, and depending on the parenting style of the parent, could give the child mixed messaged about how loved they are, and affect their sense of security. Yes, even smacking just occasionally can have that effect.

Anybody who says it *won't* have that effect, has no way of knowing, and has simply decided that it won't.

So there's lot of issue(s) with smacking children, that you don't feel that smacking has negatively affected you, doesn't mean it won't have a detrimental affect on another person if they're smacked as a child

To be honest I think anybody who doesn't think smacking occasionally will do any harm is lacking in a certain amount of imagination, when there's no way of telling until later on. I don't see why anybody would want to take the risk.

In reply to Heike:

Which bit of my post do you disagree with and where did I condone it as your response implies?

My summary was that he should do his damnedest not to do it again but also not to beat himself up about it.

In reply to Timmd:


Because they are the parents of a different child?

People, even very small people, have different personalities, and behave differently.

In reply to Rampikino:
The thing that you are saying "don't beat yourself up about it". It 's a weird turn of phrase when we are talking about hitting children... I don't want to have a huge debate. My opinion is simply that violence is not really an educational option, nor is it for maintaining relationships with anyone else such as women, elderly or vulnerable people. IMHO

This website gives very good advice http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2003/10/18406/28339

In reply to Timmd:


Just play devil's advocate for a moment: equally, we have no way of knowing what effect not smacking a particular child at a particular time might have...

In reply to David Martin: Hi David, i just don't believe its ok for an adult to hit/slap/crack/clip or cuff a child. Adults hit children either because they've lost their temper or they want the child to fear them. Why is it acceptable to hit an obnoxious child, but not an adult? If you were to hit/slap/crack/clip or cuff an adult it would be assault, wether or not there is lasting physical impact. There is an abundance of evidence that hitting children promotes negative feelings, why would you want that for your children?
There are numerous resources that you can use to gain the tools to deal with these circumstances, in a more positive manner. I deplore anybody who thinks its entirely fine to hit their children to read about how it affects your child.
I don't want you to think that i don't understand how hard it can be to be a parent, its really tough at times. I have brought up 2 teenagers and i have 2 six year olds, and a seven year old. It is never entirely fine to measure out violence against children, the phycological impact will be lasting.

In reply to Heike:

Clouting, hitting or any other violence is no way of dealing with problems in any relationship in my humble opinion.

Yes, 'Clouting, hitting and any other violence' is totally unacceptable. However, that isn't what is really being discussed here. What sometimes happens with children, is that they get into a mode which is very difficult to get them out of verbally. Sometimes, a little 'clip around the ear' is enough to snap them out of it and normality is returned.
No one is condoning full on physical/corporal punishment, just a bit of a prod to snap them out of whatever mood they're in.

In reply to David Martin:

and in my mind and experience is far less traumatic than a torrent of verbal abuse - something that seems to be entirely within the law and common-place.


I was smacked regularly, and on the receiving end of a very sharp tongue regularly too. The harsh words were way worse than the hits. I still tread carefully and worry about offending, knowing I could easily get a torrent of abuse. She'd never hit me now though!!

I'm not a parent and am not going to attempt to wade in to the rights and wrongs of smacking, it's none of my business, but everyone should definitely think as much about words as actions.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

Be interesting to know how old the child is? I had a phase when mine was about two and a half to three when I resorted to smacking on a couple of occasions. Can't remember the exact whys or wherefores but it was essentially parent pushed over the edge. Something I find useful if I feel myself getting very wound up is imagine how you would feel about seeing another carer (say nursery worker/grandparent) smacking your kid - you'd go ape and be appalled that someone was using violence against one of the most special people in the world to you. I know the situation is different if it is not a parent but I find taking an external viewpoint can help me to see a situation more objectively and resorting to violence does not seem like a good call when viewed dispassionately.

As for the intervention - that was 'brave'! Again I had a similar thing when mine was play-fighting with his best friend in the park, again at about 3. Mine was a lot less circumspect than yours - "The Woman" (as she has since become) was standing next to us and said to a friend "Now that's just nasty" - I engaged with her and she said essentially "Well if you think that is OK then fine but just keep them away from my kids". The only day so far of my parenting life I have come home and had to have a lie down to gather the strength to carry on. Although unwelcome and badly phrased she did have a point though - he had become increasingly 'punchy' over the week or two before this incident and this prompted me to put in place some very clear boundaries about what happens if he hits someone with a closed fist - he throws in the bin in front of me a toy of my choosing. Punchiness has now disappeared in all but the most extreme circumstances.

I'm looking forward to the "It is OK to use violence to defence yourself?" conversation, now where's my DVD of the Seven Samurai?

As for getting down to eye level - give it a try. I find if I take a knee, force eye contact, and talk quietly but clearly it can have very good results. Your comment about giving them an advantage if you do this makes me think - so much of this behaviour can be (especially if it is male to male) I am big dog, show me respect goddamit! I'm not saying that is right or wrong, and it is how human relationships work on some level, but it is not particularly rational.

Sorry very long post which tells you nothing other than what you already know - parenting is bl**dy hard work and there are no manuals.

In reply to Zoro:

Where do you get your tasers and zip cuffs from now that the silk road is shut down? What's your source?

I keed, I keed...

In reply to Heike:

Very odd of you to latch onto that phrase as some kind of evidence that I condone hitting children. Not only specious but incredibly lazy. Quite preachy too.

If you want my own opinion about it, reread my post - thought I was clear enough, especially the bit about being "determined to be the opposite." If that's not enough let me be really really clear for you as I find it pretty offensive to intimate that I condone hitting children:

Once, my dad came upstairs, annoyed that my brother and I were making a noise after lights out. He lashed out, hitting at us both randomly and viciously. I was so scared that I wet myself on the spot. Then my dad hit me again because I had wet myself. Think I was about 11.

Still think I condone hitting children? If you do now then I'm at a loss.

The reason Dave shouldn't beat himself up about it is also clear to see. He has a conscience and is prepared to listen to views and opinions about his actions. I would be very worried if he had posted in such a way as to be callous, arrogant and viewing it as totally routine. He is nothing like my dad from what I can tell.

I would like to think we can all be so enlightened as to tell other people definitively what they should or shouldn't do, but we aren't so I'm not going to beat Dave up, I will leave that to others who are much more eager to judge.

In reply to FactorXXX: they get into a mode? Its a child not a laptop thats crashed, were talking about children here, if you think hitting children is like flicking a switch to change modes, you should read more about children's development, perhaps then you might have more patience. A clip round the ear is different to other forms of violence? Do you really believe that?

In reply to Dave the Rave:

Make of this what you will. Main point which sticks out for me is that since banning smacking not a single child has died of physical abuse, as opposed to 5 in the previous 4 years (2nd column page 17)

http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/sites/default/files/docs/A_GENERATION_WIT...

And before anyone asks, yes i'm a parent and yes i've smacked and yes i wish i had had the strength not to.....

In reply to Zoro:

Do children not come with a task manager accessed by ctrl+alt+del?

In reply to FactorXXX:
Ok, that's your opinion, I don't agree with that. Just to illustrate my point: Why should it be ok to hit kids to 'get them out of something'. This could then apply to anyone. E.g. "Oh, this person is really being obnoxious parking their car, maybe if I give him a smack round their ear, s/he might understand?" Or,"my wife/husband is really obnoxious in not doing xyz ' a quick clip round the ear might sort them out'." IMHO there is no difference at all, why should smacking be allowed only because the people are underage?

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

That's pretty comprehensive!

In reply to Dave the Rave:


Sorry, you're right about that. I edited my post and the meaning got lost. I meant to say that she was brave because remonstrating with someone who's smacked their child is very likely to result in receiving abuse in return.
However, you did say that you told her to mind her own business. I think it is anyone's business if they see a child being assaulted, and while you wouldn't class this incident as assault, she did and so would many others.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:


The Sweden thing seems to have been comprehensively debunked, this is why when someone says 'study after study' or 'there's so much stuff out there google it', it's just meaningless.

In contrast, Larzelere and Johnson (1999) found no evidence that child abuse had declined after Sweden’s spanking ban and reported some evidence that it had increased, as well as assaults by minors against minors through 1994 (see Figure 1). Durrant did not report these child abuse statistics, although she and Larzelere and Johnson (1999) both reported that Swedish deaths due to child abuse were so low both before and after their spanking ban that a further decrease was nearly impossible.

They also found that assaults by minors on minors increased by a factor of 21 by 2010! So clearly not smacking causes far more violent children than giving them a good birching now and again.

https://www.ncfr.org/sites/default/files/downloads/news/139-11%20Swed%20Tre...

In reply to Dave the Rave:

I think the fact you are asking shows that you care but for a grown adult that is physically superior than any child to hit said child out of frustration/anger is wrong regardless of how hard you hit them. To a child, being physically reprimanded is psychologically damaging and those that say 'it never did me any harm' should ask the question ti themselves - what real difference has that physical reprimand made? If the answer is nothing then the logical conclusion is that hitting a child is pointless and only creates resentment to the punishment. The long term effect of physical hitting punishment is negligible and should not be performed.

In reply to winhill:

Interesting. So what you're really saying is that academic research can't actually prove anything conclusive, it's just a matter of which research you choose to believe.

It's always good to question your beliefs but on this one i'm pretty solid on which research i'll believe.

It's a very simple argument. If hitting children is ok why is it illegal to hit anyone else?

In reply

It's not always, just mostly.
(Not that I disagree with your main thrust)

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

' i'm pretty solid on which research i'll believe'

thats great but why have you chosen one body of research over another
i've just read the 2 papers linked on here and they come to different conclusions
as a layman i'm left with no info - is one paper written by credible individuals or visa versa and have the results of the papers been found to be reproducable/non reproducable

In reply to Dave the Rave:

I strongly believe that any hitting of a child at any time is [a] wrong, [b] counterproductive - because there are better ways of applying discipline or punishment.

By the way I was never hit as a child, even once. And I never hit my own child [who is now grown up], even once.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

I work with adults with learning disabilities and am trained in non-abusive restraints and refocusing methods, however the client group is Autistic adults, and these strategies don't seem to transfer to an 11 year old "teenager". Bearing in mind I've joined the patenting brigade late, having entered a relationship only a year ago with a woman with child, it's been a bit of a crash course.

Tbh, I don't think the suggestion of taking things off a child is any good either, especially as late as 11 because you're in effect teaching them to steal, and I think psychologically removing treasured items can feel a bit like removing bits of "them".

Exclusion and reflection are probably the least abusive measures as long as not done to excess. This must also be balanced with good quality time spent together in the first place.

Infact, quality time together in the first place is probably the key to solving most of the problems from which situations where parents come close or actually smack their child occurs. If you get the quality time sorted first, you have the respect in place to refocus children from their behaviour with stern language and body language. Ofcourse, I wish I could practise what I preach, but I have lost control at times and shouted/clipped child round ear.

We are going through a bit of a re-evaluation of behaviour management atm and was interested to hear views on disciplining from other parents, particularly those who came into the situation later o.

In reply to dr_botnik:

I work with disabled (physical and mental) children as a teacher and having seen how the support staff deal with bad behaviour I can safely say that non-violent punishments work (in a class room environment) a vast majority of the time. There's no reason non-violent punishment shouldn't work in a home setting.

In reply to dr_botnik:

As a step parent I have learnt to let certain things go that I might not if it was my child.

In more general terms I think it is useful if consequences follow a warning so the child has the choice to stop the bad behaviour. If they have been warned that not stopping will result in the removal of their toy or game for a fixed period then the choice is theirs. Its hardly stealing to short term remove something you paid for anyway.

It would be entirely appropriate if they have taken something belonging to a sibling.

If they have caused damage or mess, then clearing up and repairs would be appropriate, along with stopping pocket money to pay for damages.

In reply to dr_botnik:
With an 11 year old physical punishment is really not going to work especially from a step parent.

Rewarding and reinforcing the desired outcome is probably your best bet.

A lot of problems at that age are down to misunderstandings and unclear instructions. Making certain that they understand what you expect and when can help. Always give a couple of warnings before a change of activities. Eg Dinner will be ready in half an hour so don't start a new game. Dinner will be ready in 15 minutes and I need you to come and help me. Dinner will be ready in 10 minutes, please can you wash your hands and help me with laying the table. Kids like to know what to expect and we don't realise that they dont always know what is going on.

In reply to marsbar:

Indeed, it's often all too easy to blame the child for their behaviour when in reality it's the instructions, or lack thereof that's the issue.

In reply to marsbar:

Good points there, and we'll made.

In reply to higherclimbingwales:

Out of curiosity, what are the non abusive techniques you refer to other than removing the child from the environment (temporary exclusion with a reflective period)? Or removing distracting objects such as a kindle/ipad? I really am curious. We do use alot of what marsbar has said about giving multiple clear prompts, and I do agree that giving an 11 year old small tasks "to be helpful" really does work. As do the classic burn off the energy by giving them mentally and physically straining tasks E.G after school activities such as karate/dancing/gymnastics clubs followed by a game of monopoly/chess/connect 4 instead of just sat watching telly.

Any other ideas?

In reply to Timmd:


Because all kids are different? The dynamic between both parents may be different? There could be all kinds of reasons. If parents can instil control and discipline without the need to smack a child then that is great. Equally, a great many kids apparently run wild and some parents may justifiably need to resort to physical punishment.

I worry that the "thou shall not smack" view is a case of some adults trying to dictate their parenting style on others.



But so can all kinds of things. And I very much wonder if a kid who knows it is being an obnoxious sh1t but continues to do so anyway and receives a smack (which may be no more than a hard tap with fingers on an arm) is really emotionally scarred. There is smacking and there is smacking.

In reply to dr_botnik:
It could be that you are doing the right things already but expecting too much. Kids are not machines, sometimes you do everything right and it all kicks off anyway. Sometimes just chillaxing (as the yoof would say!) is the way forward.

Is there a specific problem with behaviour? Is it violence or causing problems at school? If not then just keep doing what you are doing and relax a bit. It is stressful being a new step parent and it is stressful having a new step parent.

Don't forget to build in some quiet time too. Time watching TV isn't always a bad thing, especially if that time is spent with everyone cuddled up on the sofa together. 11 year olds still need hugs, even if it doesn't seem cool.

In reply to David Martin:

My experience suggests that the kids running riot are the kids who get smacked all the time. Maybe you have the cause and effect the wrong way round. There are ways of disciplining that are better than smacking and more effective.

I don't mean the OP here, I mean the parents who have no control over their children, so they hit them.

In reply to Timmd:




But there are all kinds of parenting styles that will be equally damaging. Showering kids with presents, giving them anything they want, never allowing them to walk to school as paedos are lurking in the bushes, might be incredibly damaging. Each to their own in my view. If parents want to turn out little shites then that is largely their prerogative. So long as it doesn't turn in to outright abuse then who am I to dictate?

I'm intrigued as to what the alternatives are. If we are saying that kids aren't necessarily rational and that a reasoned discussion won't work, if little Rupert is throwing a tantrum, poking the cat's eyes out or throwing stones at the neighbours window, what other recourse to make the behaviour stop is there?

To put it bluntly, it sounds like uber-liberal bollocks to me. In Sweden in the late 90s I had never experienced more screaming/tantrum throwing children, something I suspect resulted from the inability to control them. An article popped up recently which reinforced that view.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/sweden/10421246/Swedish-pa...

In reply to marsbar:


Perhaps if kids are getting "smacked all the time" then there is a parenting problem?

The OP seemed to be getting it in the ear for smacking their child on occasion. Does once every 6 months, or once a year between the ages of 3 and 5 really equate to "all the time"?

In reply to Zoro:


Because a child is not rationale, cannot be put in prison and its sole guardian has no other recourse to discipline than talking or physical control.


Fine. My parents gave me lots of negative feelings when I didn't get what I wanted. Tough luck to me - I'm bloody glad they did so. I see no harm in bringing up kids to know that life isn't all about getting what you want, when you want it.


Ok, give me some examples...

In reply to David Martin:

I think as a society we all have to suffer the little brats so we do have a say.

Showering kids with presents and not letting them have any independence isn't good parenting. Its all part of the same issue. Knowing when to say no and mean it, in such a way that the child knows you mean it.

If a toddler is being unreasonable then the simple non violent answer (if telling them no hasn't worked) is to pick them up and stop them from harassing the cat or whatever. ( The cat is likely to inflict its own punishment before it gets to eye poking).

Toddlers are small for a reason. If you don't like what they are doing, ask them, tell them, physically remove them. They will have a tantrum at this point, which is best ignored and then you tell them you didn't like what they did and if they do it again you will act again.

This system falls down because too many people are scared of upsetting the kid, or would rather placate them than listen to the tantrum. At this pont the kid is in charge and knows it.

If you get this bit right when they are small, life will be easier when they are big.

In reply to dr_botnik:

We use physical timers which we set down infront of the child so they can see how long they have to wait. Tactical ignorance is another tactic I've used to limited success - some children like to be chased so they misbehave to get chased. if what they are doing isn't dangerous or destructive then ignoring the behaviour sometimes makes them stop though it can be misconstrued as tacit approval if you're not careful - hence the limited success.

Other than that, distraction, and time out are the best weapons, not our hands though physical restraint does sometimes have to be done but even that can cause them to do it more because some children like being held firmly and is a reinforcing thing to them. I'd argue that slapping a child can be reinforcing too due to the adrenaline release.

In reply to David Martin:
As I said I didn't mean the op.

The occasional smack isn't the end of the world. I didn't give the op grief.

All I am saying is that it can be done without. Nursery workers and teachers and foster parents manage it. They don't have the option.

The idea that its liberal isn't always the case. As a teacher I am not liberal, the kids in my classroom have to do as they are told. Its a basic expectation I manage despite the fact that most of them are showered with presents by their parents and allowed to do as they wish at home. I have to manage that without parental back up, as in most cases they would accuse me of picking on their child if I complained.

If I can manage 30 of them without hitting any of them, then its not impossible.

In reply to David Martin:

Children are quite rational - they can be reasoned with, they mostly understand right from wrong when it is EXPLAINED to them. OK, some chose to abandon rationality in favour of misbehaviour but that doesn't mean all children are irrational. I know many adults that have a significant lack of rationality about them!

In reply to marsbar:

Indeed - give an inch...

In reply to Dave the Rave:

I would condone smacking being used as an absolute last resort and of course only hard enough to sting a bit. I'm not a parent but as a child I recall being smacked about 3 times. I deserved it each time and it prevented the undesirable behaviour. Non-physical telling off/ punishment can be very effective but there might be those very rare times when they're not working and you need that last resort (which from your OP sounds like what happened).

If I saw a child being smacked in public, my concern would be whether there was a genuine need for it, but that is something that a passer by cannot possibly know (hence it being, literally, frowned upon).

In reply to Dave the Rave:

What made my mind up, outside studying behaviourism, which highlighted the downside of aversives versus the far more powerful use of rewards, was a visceral reaction to adults with learning disabilities being hit.

Bottom line is that if 'less understanding', 'duty of care', 'need to control' makes use of physical hitting ok then we should, obviously, ensure adults are also benefiting from being smacked. I find both smacking disabled adults - or any other adults, as abhorrent as it being socially acceptable to smack children, who are far smaller.

I don't find a parent running out of answers and doing the wrong thing abhorrent - I have done plenty of wrong things. But I find it being socially acceptable to hit children as a means of training or control abhorrent.

That's said as a very strict parent who's made oodles of mistakes, none of which I can justify in retrospect, all of which I can forgive myself for.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

As well as instantly stopping misbehaviour, very occasional smacking of children makes the parent feel slightly guilty, and so calm is restored all round.

In reply to John Kelly:



Because i don't believe hitting people, regardless of their age, can be good.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

fair enough, no need for any research then

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

I think it was Harry Enfield who suggested that if smacking kids is OK, then why not old people too - they're just as annoying.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

6 million years of humans struggling to bringing up their kids (give or take 4 million years depending on your point of view)
20 years of parenting to bring each infant to maturity
we're all hard wired to learn from pain (but i get hot aches over and over again)
my three kids started killing each other just before 8am, they will stop at about 8pm, they will resume their vicious battle very early tomorrow - they seem to enjoy and need a lot of rough and tumble
50 years of child centric theories

i'm just confused

In reply to John Kelly:


No no. I'm all for research. As long as it confirms that i'm right.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

I have smacked both of my children in the past because of them going beyond.

I'm not concerned about this because it was an extreme circumstance, and I haven't had to do this to either of them in over two years. I think that if you tell the child that if they don't change their behaviour that a smacking is inevitable then you are OK. It gives the child a chance to adjust.

What I learnt is that smacking is the final sanction. It's never wise to get as far as the final sanction because then you've got nowhere to go. Now, I prefer to use the threat of counting.

If I have to start counting, they know that they have until I reach zero before I start shouting. When I start shouting they start crying. The thing is that they can see increasing levels of terrible that will happen unless they modify their behaviour at that moment, which is the easiest course of action for them.

Sometimes, the question "Are you angry?" can diffuse the situation completely though.

In reply to John Kelly:





I'm not sure this is true - every time I get a hangover I say the same two words "never again" only to repeat it again and again (though admittedly less frequently these days).

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

I agree in part.
It's just that I see smacking a badly behaved kid on the leg as being less harmful in the message it sends out than pummeling someone to unconsciousness in a boxing ring to earn worldwide approbation and a tidy little earner to boot.
And consent has got absolutely nothing to do with my concern.

In reply to Martin Brierley:

..they know that they have until I reach zero before I start shouting. When I start shouting they start crying. The thing is that they can see increasing levels of terrible that will happen unless they modify their behaviour at that moment, which is the easiest course of action for them.

When I read this I pictured people in orange jump suits in Guantanamo Bay!

In reply to higherclimbingwales:


I said that just once in 1977, and meant it. ( I was 18 the day before I said it)

In reply to RockAngel:

I only had to smack my son once and I hated myself for it and vowed never to do it again, hence my need to put myself into time out. I had a look at myself and realised how I was reacting was not good. Once the anger had disappeared I spoke to my son about things and we worked it out together what the next step was. I also had the same swearing rule for me as he had, ie, he could tell me off if he heard me swear as I could tell him off for swearing. He took great delight in pointing out every swear word I uttered and as a consequence, didnt really swear until he reached his teens. I had to employ the 'oi you stop swearing' then.
I always made sure I told him i loved him every night as I tucked him in and reminded him that tomorrow is a shiny new day and the arguments were over and we would wake up happier tomorrow. I didnt dwell on problems and drag things out for him. Kids are much more immediate and need to be told at the time of the problem, rather than a day later or a week later. They will have forgotten the misdemeanor if its not addressed immediately and wont have a clue what youre on about, which just adds to your frustration.
and remember, kids dont come with an instruction book. Yes, there are guides (supernanny was great) but they arent hard and fast rules. You have to adapt the rules to your children and family life. Being a parent is a steep learning curve for the parent!

In reply to Dave the Rave:

You have my uptmost sympathy. I've also had the misfortune of having been 'taken to task', by a do-gooder, when I had to smack a couple of kids in public. I was incredibly annoyed about their intervention, and I don't have children..

In reply to Martin Brierley:


As a child, and still now, I would rather have had the hit than the shout. Pain doesn't last long. Words stick in your conciousness for a long time and can be really damaging.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

I once smacked one of my children. I had threatened and threatened the smack, but the child went too far.
I made a big show of it, a big build up hoping they would relent, but to no avail.
So I delivered the lightest possible smack on the legs, I couldn't back down.




I have never regretted anything so much in all my life. There's not a day goes by that I don't remember and regret it, and feel so shamed.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

Both my parents smacked me numerous times when I was young. I have always loved them and respected them, I don't think it did me any harm. Interestingly I cannot recall why I was smacked though.

Perhaps because both smacked me I wasn't to play them off against each other or had favourites. My parents have always given me masses of freedom from an early age (going off all day with my friends and not checking in) to my adolescence (offering me small amounts of wine when I was 15 at the dinner table) so I have never had cause to miss behave too much. I suspect my early smackings brought me to heal at an early age and the habit just stuck. My brother who is a bit younger is very much the same.

I think so long as it is not in anger and only used when really necessary then smacking is a good tool for behavioural modification.

Sadly, we humans have a habit of abusing everything from food to drink and smacking a child is no doubt the same. Some will just do it 'because' and as a first line of defense not the last.

In reply to Fredt:


Why feel ashamed?

Did it work or not? It seems you had little choice in the matter and if it brought him in to line it will likely benefit him/her in the future as you are likely to give him more freedom to enjoy things if you know s/he won't play up again.

If it was a pleasant thing for you to do then perhaps you can start to feel ashamed. But it doesn't seem that way to me.

In reply to cap'nChino:



The old 'it never did me any harm' arguement.

The fact that you can't remember why you were smacked highlights its efficacy as if it was something worth being smacked for, I think you'd remember.

In reply to higherclimbingwales:

Hmm, I would tend to think the opposite: if it left some psychological scarring chances are we might remember the event that led to it.

I can't remember much from the 35 years ago when I was last smacked.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

I don't have anything substantial to add, but that I was smacked as a kid every now and again. I don't think it really did that much other than give me a dislike for violence. One thing I will always remember however was when my dad would get super angry - and give me a smack. Then somehow, I would find that funny - and start laughing. His response was always "do you think that's funny?!" and to get even more cross, to which I found even more hilarious. It was a hilarious, sore and vicious circle that somehow I still find funny to this day.

In reply to Timmd:

Ironically I then spend the rest of my life with an irrational desire to please people. Physical or mental, punishment/discipline, will leave a mark either way...

In reply to Dave the Rave:

Only a problem if smacking is done routinely. Regular smacking becomes normalised in the child's mind and rapidly becomes ineffectual as a disciplinary action from a parent. I think it is frowned upon if parents smack their children in public routinely for the slightest misdemeanour.

An unexpected smack on the legs as a one-off might have the desired effect of stopping the behaviour, because to your child it has serious associations - especially if it is obvious to him that you love each other. He will want to maintain that bond.

You sound like a good dad, actually, because you feel bad about it. Exactly what should happen in my opinion.

In reply to mackfras:

Yes, I think mental is worse. I also do everything in my power to keep everyone happy and really can't cope with being shouted at. My husband and I really don't argue, because I will back down rather than argue. If he is quiet for any length of time I get worried that he is in a huff with me! Shouting was a big part of my mother's way of bringing us up. She hit us lots too (more than a gentle smack that people here are talking about), but that never bothered me, it was really ineffective. Even now though, I tread carefully around her so as not to get shouted at. I'm not pro or anti smacking, it's everyone's choice, but don't over look the effect of words.

In reply to girlymonkey:


They f*ck you up, your mum and dad.
They may not mean to, but they do.
They fill you with the faults they had
And add some extra, just for you.

But they were f*cked up in their turn
By fools in old-style hats and coats,
Who half the time were soppy-stern
And half at one another’s throats.

Man hands on misery to man.
It deepens like a coastal shelf.
Get out as early as you can,
And don’t have any kids yourself.

In reply to off-duty:

Just because he was a good poet and a miserable git doesn't mean he was always right.

In reply to John Kelly:


http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10567-005-2340-z#page-1

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3200/JRLP.138.3.197-222#.VOUnIy5vV_g

Very quick search. These are two meta-analyses (systematic studies of studies). The first one suggests (I think - I've only read the abstracts) that conditional smacking - I'm assuming "if you do that I will spank you" type punishment - is more effective than other methods of discipline in getting achieving specific behavioural outcomes (26 studies). The second suggests very limited evidence of long term negative consequences of corporal punishment (70 studies).

Does this mean that conditional smacking will work for every parent/child or that it's never damaging? Definitely no. It also doesn't say anything about how smacking affects attitudes towards violence, including state-sanctioned violence. Personally I'm not a fan. But if you want to find reasons not to smack (conditionally) then it doesn't look like you've got the existing literature on your side.

In reply to Mark Torrance:

really interesting read - thanks for those.

In reply to Mark Torrance:

Thanks Mark

In reply to higherclimbingwales:


Tried, tested and on the whole successful would be another way of looking at it.

Like everything in life it's a grey area, for some people and children it is suitable for others its not. Those that do (again with the usual caviates) should not be judged for doing so.

In reply to cap'nChino:

'Tried, tested and on the whole successful would be another way of looking at it.'

Hmm, you could (and people usually do) apply that adage to just about any behaviour that was acceptable in the past and has become unacceptable now.

Something being effective does not equate to ethical.

The ethics of hitting a smaller and weaker individual is (I believe) what has led to it becoming non acceptable.

We also have alternatives such as rewarding positive behavior and alternative sanctions. I would agree verbal abuse is no better and maybe worse than physical abuse but over the years it's struck me that it's those who were also hit that remember highly punitive verbal treatment.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

When ever I've smacked my kids I've always felt shit after but words can be equally as harsh if not more so! I prefer my wife to do the telling off. I hate being the bad cop!

In reply to cap'nChino:




It was not pleasant, I hated the whole episode. I now feel ashamed because at the time, (I was 35 years younger than I am now) I thought it would work, I thought it was acceptable and thought it was what I had to do.

I wish I knew then what I know now.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

I'm 56 I got smacked at home and at school for any wrongdoings it did me no harm and taught me some respect also in my time I never heard of kids killing kids or stabbings and jumping on heads while some unfortunate soul is already unconscious. Nuff said...

In reply to all:
Thank you for your viewpoints.
I'm not usually a child smacker, but on this occasion...
Said child has been remarkably well behaved this week, and in a study of 1, the incident seems to have done the trick.
I hopefully won't be repeating the action any time soon.
As far as the intervener is concerned, I thank her for her concern.
Thank you all for your insights.
Rave on.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

I've smacked both of two of my three children once each, not just for fun either.

Both times I felt really guilty and wished I hadn't done it.

I'm usually very easy going and don't even have to shout for them to realise they are in the wrong.

Smacking kids is wrong it teaches them nothing apart from if you're bigger and stronger you can get your own way with violence.

To hit someone you are supposed to love, how are children supposed to interpret that?

I was hit not lots but enough both at home and school, none of it made me behave any better, I just got hit more!

I know it all sounds a bit wishy washy liberal, but I just can't get past the hitting someone you love send the completely wrong signal to children.

If you wouldn't hit you wife or someone else you know that didn't do what you wanted them to, when you wanted them to do it, why is it OK to do that to children?

My missus and me always keep to what we say though, which isn't always easy and it means you have to pause before metering out punishments. My ex used to come out with all sorts of shit like,"no Xbox for a month" to my son he knew and I knew that by the end of the week he'd be back on it. This is why he grew up to not give a toss what she said but would do thing I told him to because he knew that if I said we weren't going to do something, we wouldn't do it.

In reply to kerny:


Really? There weren't gangs in your day? Razor gangs? Beatings? Rape? Etc

You're either trolling or live in Shangri La.....

In reply to kerny:
PS how can you respect people who hit you?

Would you respect people who hit you now?

In reply to Mark Torrance:


Find me evidence that smacking is GOOD for children, then i'll maybe listen.......

In reply to krikoman:

I know people who love their horses, or other animals, but still have to give them a whack.

Perhaps it is a matter of how well they can communicate or understand what you are saying, particularly with children or animals where an immediate communication is essential otherwise they won't remember what it is about? Maybe that is how some people might justify the controlled smack?

I have two young children, neither of whom have been smacked (yet). I don't intend to if I can help it, but I've already lost my temper with them from a shouty point of view and perhaps being a bit rough with them when trying to get them to go somewhere, where I feel like I have lost control. I regret it, but I'm not going to dwell on the past too much. I just try harder to stay in control of my emotions better the next time.

Which brings me on to the point (there is one!). Some people can come across as very high and mighty about smacking (not anyone in particular on this thread, just in general), but they may have better control of their anger, so it just comes more easily to them. My wife, for example, is very calm, good natured and just can't get very angry...even with me! So not losing control with the children is much easier for her. I have a (much) shorter fuse, get frustrated easily, like things to be "just so" etc., so the chaos children bring is harder for me to deal with (I know, poor me!). My point is (I think), how easily you cope with bringing up children depends almost entirely on your personality and theirs, rather than being some enlightened super-parent who's read all the books etc.

I try not to judge anyone else for that reason. I'm not them. And they're children aren't mine.

I could write soooo much on this topic, but probably best to sum it up with no, it is not alright to physically punish (or threaten with violence) a child or other any loved person of any age, either in public or in private.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:



Never heard of "Razor Gangs" mate that's probably a Scotland thing as for Shangri La that's you're opinion and mine of you is someone living on cloud cuckoo land.

Now back to having an opinion why does that make me a Troll ?? are you one ?

In reply to kerny:

you don't have an opinion, you made generalized assertions based on your personal experience. to paraphrase "in my day these things didn't happen"

so you're omnipresent? you know everyone and everything that ever happened to them?

lets just leave it at that.

I didn't realise that this discussion was about God ... but yeh leave it at that... father Noall Furlong.. sorry (misprint) .

In reply to Father Noel Furlong & kerny:

Now you're both being silly. Stop it before you get a smack.

In reply to gribble:


Sums it up really. End of thread?

In reply to Pekkie:


Not quite!

In reply to krikoman:

Slap!

In reply to krikoman:


Oh yes it is!

In reply to captain paranoia:

Love it....lol

In reply to captain paranoia:

He started it.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:

I don't care who started it; I'm stopping it.

Now, go and have your bath and brush your teeth, there's a good boy, and afterwards we can all watch one episode of Thomas before you go to bed...

In reply to captain paranoia:


No!

In reply to Dave the Rave:
Sorry to revive this but I've just come across this quite interesting article.

http://www.upworthy.com/the-science-of-spanking-what-happens-to-spanked-kid...

In reply to higherclimbingwales:
No need to apologise, it's a thread.
I can't see any links though?
I'm not sure that it would make a difference , I'm now anti smacking

In reply to Dave the Rave:

I can see the link?

In reply to Dave the Rave: .


Good for you, wlecome to the club of guilt ridden fathers trying to create a better world for future generations. Less violence in the world has to be a good thing.

In reply to higherclimbingwales:
I can just see a web page? On a phone though?

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:



Maybe father
Smack free for over a week!

In reply to Dave the Rave:

Yeah, that might be the problem.

In reply to higherclimbingwales:
I saw a bit on meta analysis and unfortunately couldn't critique it further.
I don't want to really though.
Thanks anyway

In reply to Dave the Rave:

Basically, smacking has no long-term pros and a list of cons.

In reply to higherclimbingwales:
I respect your critique of a meta analysis.
Thanks.
I never liked smacking, it seemed abhorrent. Kids can be very testing though, as is the rest of life.

In reply to Dave the Rave:


"Hi my names Dave and i haven't smacked for 7 days"

Group......" Hi Dave"

A chilling vision of the future?

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:


and how does this make you feel, Dave?


"F*cking epic!!!"

In reply to higherclimbingwales:

Here the paper that that article cites:

http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2002-01514-001

"Parental corporal punishment was associated with ...higher levels of immediate compliance and aggression and lower levels of moral internalization and mental health."

It's in a very well-respected journal.

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:
Why is this chilling? I think it's a good effort on my part to have changed my disciplinary technique?
No?

In reply to krikoman:



It makes me feel good?
What's your problem?

In reply to Dave the Rave:


It was an attempt at humour. Have i read your reply incorrectly?


Yes, it is. I was imaginaging where we all gather at 'smackers anonymous meetings' and thought it was a good joke. Maybe not......

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:
I thought it was. Just doing my best at other disciplinary methods
In having fish tonight!

In reply to Dave the Rave:



I haven't got a problem, what you gonna do smack me?

To be serious for a moment though, if you are really trying to change the way you interact will your kids then good on you. Once less kid being smacked is a step in the right direction.

In reply to krikoman:

Have you been reading 50 shades again? Tut tut

Yes it's my new goal. Whether it's right or wrong is inconsequential to me anymore

In reply to Father Noel Furlong:



if you're choosing to believe stuff that's probably where you're going wrong.

Try googling Smacking causes cancer (yeah, it's a thing).

Written by a professor of psychology, in a peer reviewed journal of behavourism, what could go wrong? Psychology is the subject that the phrase Not Even Wrong could have been invented for and Behavourism it's Prodigal Son.

After the newspapers went a bit mad the NHS put up a reasonable (but no means complete) rebuttal on their NHS Choices website. No further research is needed because the methodology is so poor you can debunk it over your cornflakes with just a rudimentary understanding of causality or scientific method.

It makes Jeremy Kyle look like a powerhouse of psychological interventions.


So like I said, when someone says research by the Institute of Studies proves my point, if they can't cite it and use it properly it just shows that they are the type of person who doesn't evaluate their evidence, nothing more.

In reply to winhill:

But then there's the question of ethics. If physical punishment is ethical when the punished is a child then, given similar responsibilities by virtue of disability, surely it would remain ethical. In fact, if physical hitting holds more benefit than the use of solid boundaries and rewards then we should really hurry up to make sure disabled adults benefit from it.

On the other hand, if as a society, we have evolved to a point where it is not acceptable to hit a child or an adult in order to control their behaviour, sure we need to look at comparative effectiveness of alternatives.

What we have in reality is a bizarre double standard, hitting adults to control them is (almost) universally seen as unethical, hitting children splits the pack.

BTW - behaviourism is a huge subject not quite so easily written off in mythical terms.

In reply to Dave the Rave:

Wish I'd smacked my daughter more when she was little, I have to rely on a longer reach to counter her nifty footwork, ducking and general strength to be able to land a decent punch on her now.

In reply to teflonpete:
Just wait until you are old, infirm and reliant on her, and she exacts her revenge