/ Children and corporal punishment...

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Timmd on 03 Dec 2017

Following this being discussed a while ago on here, I did a quick google and found this. I found it quite interesting to read that the more loving a parent is, the more it can make a child anxious if they're hit as well, possibly due to the conflicted messages received.

https://childandfamilyblog.com/hitting-child/

It's written by a research professor, and there's references and original research cited/linked at the bottom, which is nice.


12
girlymonkey - on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

That is interesting. I was hit by my mum a lot as a child and there was never any warmth or affection from her (still to this day I feel a duty to her, but no warmth). Interestingly, I don't think my dad ever hit me and we always were much closer (but it was still never a warm relationship. Our house wasn't a house of hugs and kisses). I am a very laid back person who was never really adversely affected by being hit, so maybe that is why.
The hitting was completely innefective in getting me to behave and I am completely against corporal punishment.
2
Rob Exile Ward on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to girlymonkey:

Hitting people is wrong. Why people think hitting their own children is an exception to this baffles me.

Jack Dee made a point - if you can hit children, why not hit old people? They're a lot more trouble.
5
skog on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> Hitting people is wrong.

It isn't, though, is it?

Hitting people is -undesirable-, but entirely reasonable and justifiable in quite a number of situations.

The real problem with smacking children (assuming the sort of smack which isn't going to cause injury, such as a smack on the bum or the back of the hand), is that it doesn't appear to achieve anything.

> why not hit old people? They're a lot more trouble.

If it was the case that you could help a child improve their behaviour by smacking them (and it appears it probably isn't, for any sort of physical discipline which might be considered reasonable), the answer to this would be that it's nearly impossible to educate an old person to change their behaviour, but not so for a child.
15
Timmd on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to skog:
> It isn't, though, is it?

How can it not be wrong, when the potential is there for psychological harm to the child, and it's not been found to have any benefits?

> Hitting people is -undesirable-, but entirely reasonable and justifiable in quite a number of situations.

> The real problem with smacking children (assuming the sort of smack which isn't going to cause injury, such as a smack on the bum or the back of the hand), is that it doesn't appear to achieve anything.

Personally, I think the real problem is the potential for psychological harm to the child.

> If it was the case that you could help a child improve their behaviour by smacking them (and it appears it probably isn't, for any sort of physical discipline which might be considered reasonable), the answer to this would be that it's nearly impossible to educate an old person to change their behaviour, but not so for a child.

Fear of being hit in somebody with all their faculties but who is physically vulnerable might be an effective way of making them change what they do? It wouldn't be nice, though. :-/
Post edited at 20:26
5
skog on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

> Fear of being hit in somebody with all their faculties but who is physically vulnerable might be an effective way of making them change what they do?

This sounds like it would fall well outside "any sort of physical discipline which might be considered reasonable"!

By the time someone's a teenager, they're going to laugh off any sort of physical discipline which might be administered by anyone who isn't a thug or a sadist.
1
skog on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

> How can it not be wrong, when the potential is there for psychological harm to the child, and it's not been found to have any benefits?

In the most obvious scenario, they won't be a child, and they will be attacking you or someone else. Unless you're a pacifist, I'm sure you can think of plenty of scenarios where hitting people isn't wrong. I think you just misread what I was replying to there, though...
Name Changed 34 - on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

And the lord said
"Suffer the children " ????
6
Timmd on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to skog:
> In the most obvious scenario, they won't be a child, and they will be attacking you or someone else. Unless you're a pacifist, I'm sure you can think of plenty of scenarios where hitting people isn't wrong. I think you just misread what I was replying to there, though...

The link is about the psychological effects on children. There's 1001 instances in adult life where hitting somebody can be reasonable, but that's not what the article in the link is about.

Which is why in my reply to you, I was talking about the potential for harm to children.
Post edited at 20:37
2
bedspring on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

I can never remember hitting my children, I will ask them, however I do think people feel comfortable having clear boundaries. Therefore I do believe a loving parent should be able to smack a child.
To be a parent, do your best, but be prepared to accept blame.
2
Name Changed 34 - on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

On another tack
Quite simply
You can knock the devil in but you won't knock it out
1
Eric9Points - on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

Perhaps from now on, on this thread, people can say whether they are parents or not.

My own view, as a parent, is that while I never had to hit my child I can understand that with other young children a limited and considered amount of corporal punishment may be necessary but should never be administered in anger.

Some children are little turds and not all parents are expert in child psychology.
3
Andy Morley - on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to skog:

> The real problem with smacking children (assuming the sort of smack which isn't going to cause injury, such as a smack on the bum or the back of the hand), is that it doesn't appear to achieve anything.

It's a cost-benefit equation. If you're affluent, well-supported and time-rich you can probably afford to invest more time in your children's upbringing and can probably manage to use persuasion and other methods to control undesirable behaviour, avoiding the need for corporal punishment. If on the other hand you're under pressure, have multiple children and little support, there are times when it can be the only quick, effective method of gaining a wayward child's attention and changing a difficult and maybe in some situations, dangerous mindset to one that may not be better but will at least be different from the one you have been failing to cope with for the last five minutes or whatever.

In both scenarios, it's possible to screw up and in both scenarios its possible to apply your chosen tactics effectively. Good or bad parenting may be linked to the amount of corporal punishment but its only a fairly sketchy relationship.

1
skog on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

> Which is why in my reply to you, I was talking about the potential for harm to children.

Well, that's fine, but I was pointing out that Rob's reason why it's wrong to hit children isn't the right one - it isn't straight out wrong to hit people as he claimed.

I don't think your 'potential to cause psychological damage' is a valid reason to say something's wrong, either, you'd have to weigh that against potential advantages, as for non-physical forms of discipline.

As I said, I think the problem is that any such advantages appear to be small or absent, so it probably doesn't normally achieve anything. (Although individuals, children or otherwise, are different from each other, so it seems possible that this might not always be true.)
Timmd on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Eric9Points:
> Perhaps from now on, on this thread, people can say whether they are parents or not.

While not being a parent, I was smacked by one of mine, and always had a better bond of trust with the one who didn't, and have grown up with anxiety lurking in the background psychologically speaking, and I was only smacked occasionally. I don't think it's only parents who can have a valid point of view on whether children should be smacked or not. That no developmental benefits have been found to be related to smacking, to me suggests that given it's potential to cause harm, no parent should ever consider it as a reasonable thing to do.

> My own view, as a parent, is that while I never had to hit my child I can understand that with other young children a limited and considered amount of corporal punishment may be necessary but should never be administered in anger.

How is the child going to absorb the difference between being smacked in anger and smacked in '.......' (I don't know what one might call the un angry occasion when it involves a kind of violence), while it's always reliant upon it's parents for bonds of love and security, to allow it to grow up to be well adjusted and secure within itself?

> Some children are little turds and not all parents are expert in child psychology.

One might hope that all parents have a degree of self control, though, or might read up a little bit on child psychology in preparation for parenthood, and once they become parents? Both of my brothers bought books on children and babies once they found out they were going to become fathers.
Post edited at 20:57
skog on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Eric9Points:

I'm a parent.

I've smacked one daughter on the bum once, when she bit me and I was taken by surprise. She hasn't bitten me since, right enough.

The other, I've smacked on the back of the hand once, for not listening to warnings about spilling a drink, then going ahead and spilling it.

Both times felt like failures, but then I've found myself to be imperfect at many aspects of parenting; it's a constant battle to do the best I can and sometimes I don't succeed.

I don't think either of my kids are likely to be scarred for life and they certainly aren't afraid of me - but I'd prefer I hadn't smacked either of them, it simply wasn't the best thing to do.
bedspring on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

One of my children had colic. One night at 2 am I heard my wife who is one of the most caring and loving people I have ever met scream with anguish, I came down stairs and took over, what would have happened in a single parent situation I do not know. Thats 22 years ago, but its etched in my memory. Anyone who has not had children cannot comment.
6
Eric9Points - on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

If you're not a parent you have only experienced one side of the situation. Valid experience of course , but not complete.

I remember a friend of mine with 6 children who adored him explaining this to me years ago. You can send the child to their room while you "decide" what to do for example, then explain to them exactly what they have done wrong and why it is bad enough for you to punish them, generally by that time the child will be close to tears and little more than token slap on the bum is enough. No doubt we've all seen the opposite where a parent loses it with a child, screams insults at them and then batters them. That's when a parent loses respect and authority in the eyes of a child.

Not all parents are interested in psychology, not all parents exercise great self control either all of the time or some of the time.
Timmd on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Eric9Points:
> If you're not a parent you have only experienced one side of the situation. Valid experience of course , but not complete.

What's inarguable, is that smacking isn't any way developmentally beneficial. It might, in some cases, be close to harmless (or in some fortunate cases actually harmless), but in others it can contribute either to anxiety or aggression, and to depression in children too. So, while smacking might be 'understandable', it doesn't make it 'justifiable' in the sense of, smacking is a good thing because it achieves XY and Z. It is never a 'good' thing. There are psychology studies which outline how it's a harmful thing, but none which put smacking in a positive light, which show it has benefits to the well being of children.

> I remember a friend of mine with 6 children who adored him explaining this to me years ago. You can send the child to their room while you "decide" what to do for example, then explain to them exactly what they have done wrong and why it is bad enough for you to punish them, generally by that time the child will be close to tears and little more than token slap on the bum is enough. No doubt we've all seen the opposite where a parent loses it with a child, screams insults at them and then batters them. That's when a parent loses respect and authority in the eyes of a child.

I get the sense that you think some kind of smack, if it's just a token one, is okay? I definitely don't agree, mainly because I think being smacked made me anxious, and (almost equally) because one of my parents managed to discipline me just fine by just raising their voice, too. The bond has always been strong enough, and precious enough, that smacking from them was never something which happened, or needed to .

> Not all parents are interested in psychology, not all parents exercise great self control either all of the time or some of the time.

Which is sad for their children...
Post edited at 21:40
4
Bobling - on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to skog:
Good post : )

I have two and smacked the elder one once that I remember, too long a story to go into here but only time that parenting has ever reduced me to tears (of despair not frustration - that happens most mornings trying to get them out the door to school). It's a bloody tough gig.
Post edited at 22:17
charliesdad - on 03 Dec 2017
In reply to Bobling:

I can report that the threat of violence is very effective;

1 "please stop hitting your brother" = zero impact.
2 "stop hitting your brother or I will be cross with you" = zero impact.
3 "if you hit him again, I'll stop the car and thump you" = instant compliance.

In 13 years as a parent, I've never actually had to stop the car...

1
Timmd on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to charliesdad:

Is it healthy?
6
Timmd on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to charliesdad:

Forgot a smiley.
5
summo on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

> Is it healthy?

Parenting, of course not. It's all sleep deprivation and stress, must take years off your life. ;)

nufkin - on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to charliesdad:

> I can report that the threat of violence is very effective

Seems a bit risky, unless you're actually going to follow through, since it leaves you nowhere to go if they push their luck.

Maybe if the threat is so extreme as to be obviously ridiculous it just serves as an indication that things been pushed as far a you're prepared to tolerate
Andy Johnson - on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to Name Changed 34:

> And the lord said "Suffer the children " ????

In the King James Bible, the quote is "Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven." In English as spoken in the 1600s, "suffer" meant something like "allow" or "permit to happen".

So it doesn't mean what you appear to think it means, and is irrelevant to the topic.

(I'm _not_ a Christian, btw)
wintertree - on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to Rob Exile Ward:

> Jack Dee made a point - if you can hit children, why not hit old people? They're a lot more trouble.

Because old people are too heavy to lift into the coal bunker, and too large to fit anyway?

Less flippantly the problems with old and young are very different - old people lack neural plasticity (so hitting them won’t change anything) and young people have incredible neural plasticity (so hitting them risks messing them up for life). I guess the only people it’s safe to hit are younger adults...
Post edited at 11:35
1
stubbed on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

I was smacked as child, not painfully, and I don't remember it being a particularly good or bad thing.
However it would never occur to me or my husband to hit / smack our children. I do find that 'do that again and I'm putting your favourite toy in the bin' is an effective deterrent for most things.

But it did get me thinking: my brother and sister and I would all hit each other as children, and that could be pretty nasty at times. Presumably we copied what had happened to us to some extent.

My children don't hit each other. So maybe there is a link and personally I prefer them not hitting each other.
Trangia on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to Name Changed 34:

> And the lord said

> "Suffer the children " ????

What the hell?? Which lord would that be?
1
RX-78 on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

Parent of 2 children. Anyway corporal punishment might teach them that force is an ok response and then would it lead to acceptance of 'might is right'?. I have more sympathy for parents hitting out in total frustration after other methods have failed (end of their tether, having been there myself once or twice) than for a parent calmly using hitting as a form of discipline.
2
Timmd on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to bedspring:
> One of my children had colic. One night at 2 am I heard my wife who is one of the most caring and loving people I have ever met scream with anguish, I came down stairs and took over, what would have happened in a single parent situation I do not know. Thats 22 years ago, but its etched in my memory. Anyone who has not had children cannot comment.

Comment on what? The harm which smacking can cause, or whether fallible humans might sometimes slip up and smack their child, and are to be forgiven for this?

Anybody who does a brief google on the potential effects, or who has been smacked and feels damaged as a result, can comment on smacking and it being a bad thing. The evidence is there in black and white.

It's understandable that any parent might crack under pressure...
Post edited at 14:55
captain paranoia - on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to Andy Johnson:

> In English as spoken in the 1600s, "suffer" meant something like "allow" or "permit to happen".

Indeed, and not just in an 'if you must' sense, but in a much warmer, loving sense.

Unfortunately, no-one explained that to us in primary school assemblies, and it seemed to me that this Jesus bloke wasn't someone I wanted to have anything to do with...
1
captain paranoia - on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to girlymonkey:

> Our house wasn't a house of hugs and kisses).

I am sorry to hear that. As someone who has always been very physical in my affection, that makes me sad.

Have a hug.
LastBoyScout on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

I was smacked a few time by my Mum - I probably deserved it, it hasn't done me any harm. My Dad would just quietly tell us how naughty we'd been and that was somehow worse, at times.

I've smacked my daughter's hands once, out of sheer frustration and as a last resort, to get her to stop doing something when all else had failed. It didn't work.

These days, generally, a count of 1, 2, 3 is enough to get her to do something - I rarely have to get past 2 any more.

It's bl**dy hard to get kids to do what you want at times - one epic saga that started "come and clean your teeth" and continued in increasing volume and frustation as she ran around doing everything but ended with her stood in front of me and completely innocently asking "Daddy, where's your happy face?"
skog on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

Tim, you should certainly be able to comment.

But when your knowledge is based on Google searches and on personal experience which may not be universally transferrable, would it maybe be better to be less certain of your opinion? Especially where you could be seen to be trying to tell others what to do, when they may have more, and more relevant, experience than you do?

This is an area where people often let emotions get the better of them rather than calmly examining the evidence (which is plentiful, but perhaps not quite as conclusive as you wish to portray, and may well be suggesting something more nuanced, or even quite different, in a decade or two).

Parents who've lightly smacked their kids, who they love and try to do the best for, often react badly to what can look like suggestions that they're "violent", or abusive, or just "doing them harm" and will then tend to disregard any actual valid points made by those who've made them feel attacked.

Similarly, people who've had bad experiences regarding violence can react poorly to what they may perceive as others advocating it, and disregard any reasonable points they may be making.

It's a lot like the abortion debate, really, where it can quickly become "baby-killing murderers" vs. "chauvinistic oppressors of women".
MeMeMe - on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to Eric9Points:

> Perhaps from now on, on this thread, people can say whether they are parents or not.

> My own view, as a parent, is that while I never had to hit my child I can understand that with other young children a limited and considered amount of corporal punishment may be necessary but should never be administered in anger.

Interestingly I can see how it happens 'in the moment' when someone is angry but I've got no tolerance of it as a considered parenting strategy.
I mean you've got some time to think about how best to change your child's behaviour and he best you can come up with is hitting them?

> Some children are little turds and not all parents are expert in child psychology.

I don't think the two things are unrelated. It's scary being let loose on a child with basically no qualifications about how parenting might work but apparently that's the system we've got...
1
girlymonkey - on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to captain paranoia:

Please don't hug me! I don't do hugs!! (I guess your upbringing doesn't leave you too easily!) I like hugs from my husband, but not generally huggy.
ChrisBrooke - on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to LastBoyScout:


> These days, generally, a count of 1, 2, 3 is enough to get her to do something - I rarely have to get past 2 any more.

Same here, and (not intended as a 'one up', but) often I'll say 'ONE' and my 2 y/o daughter comes screaming, tail between legs and ready to clean teeth. I honestly can't imagine smacking her. From a position of how much I love her, and how ineffective/counter-productive I think it would be.

[Opens can of worms] On the other hand I have some sympathy/empathy for those who shake a baby to death. By which I mean, I really don't like new-borns (I have two lovely young children!), and the combination of unbearable tiredness, frustration and anger that they can engender has led me to want the noise to stop, and at 3am the thought of a quick shake to end it can seem tempting. Obviously you don't actually do it, but I can see how you get to that point. Anyway, that's nothing to do with the OP which is about disciplining children who have a bit more of an idea about what they're doing.
MeMeMe - on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to ChrisBrooke:
> [Opens can of worms] On the other hand I have some sympathy/empathy for those who shake a baby to death. By which I mean, I really don't like new-borns (I have two lovely young children!), and the combination of unbearable tiredness, frustration and anger that they can engender has led me to want the noise to stop, and at 3am the thought of a quick shake to end it can seem tempting. Obviously you don't actually do it, but I can see how you get to that point.

I think it's a common thought, so much so that someone told me health visitors mention it to parents so that they don't think themselves as monsters, and yes, obviously most parents don't actually do it...
LastBoyScout on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to ChrisBrooke:

> [Opens can of worms] On the other hand I have some sympathy/empathy for those who shake a baby to death. By which I mean, I really don't like new-borns (I have two lovely young children!), and the combination of unbearable tiredness, frustration and anger that they can engender has led me to want the noise to stop, and at 3am the thought of a quick shake to end it can seem tempting. Obviously you don't actually do it, but I can see how you get to that point. Anyway, that's nothing to do with the OP which is about disciplining children who have a bit more of an idea about what they're doing.

Ditto - our youngest is a terrible sleeper and my wife has been zombified quite a lot through lack of sleep, especially when breastfeeding. I just don't have the equipment to help out with that and she wouldn't take a bottle.

I remember in the run up to having our first, my Mum quietly said something along the lines of "One day, you will wonder what the heck you were thinking when you're cleaning up puke for the n-th time at 3am, you have no idea what she's screaming for or what to do about it, you haven't slept for a week and want to have a good scream yourself. At that point, call me". We were/are lucky to have that sort of support - many don't.
Bobling - on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to LastBoyScout:

My brother is in San Francisco and had a child a few years before we had ours. After we had had the first he was in touch and we did all the well done, isn't it wonderful stuff but then he said something along the lines of "The only advice I would give you is if you get so stressed out you want to hurt them just remove yourself from the situation until you calm down". Sobering stuff.
ChrisBrooke - on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to Bobling:
Yes, it’s a crazy and often infuriating ride. I’ve found it only gets easier as you’re all able to communicate more. I can reason (to a degree) with my nearly three year old. My seven month old on the other hand can be difficult , but MUCH less difficult than a new born. Did I mention I don’t like new borns....?
garycrocker - on 04 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

I was hit a lot at junior school and I genuinely wasn't a particularly naughty child. 40 years later I still occasionally have nightmares about it. So I don't agree with hitting children. I'm a deputy head now and can't believe it was ever allowed in schools.
baron - on 04 Dec 2017
garycrocker - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to baron:

It is shocking. I don't believe any records were kept at my school. We had a teacher who routinely used a plimsole to hit children with and frequently punched boys in the back. I am staggered by the results of the 2008 poll. Any teacher who wishes to be given permission to hit and abuse other people's children should be struck off.
baron - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to garycrocker:

The days of beating one's own children are probably numbered and it's been 30 years since we could beat anyone else's.
I Suspect that most teachers who expressed a wish to reintroduce corporal punishment wouldn't actually use it as a punishment.
timjones - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to Eric9Points:



> Some children are little turds and not all parents are expert in child psychology.

Is the "turdiness" of the child dictated by the parenting?

1
bedspring on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:

I actually think that parents should be able to smack (not beat) a child, and that the child should understand that ultimately the parent could and would smack them, for definite.

I also think that if this system works, a parent should never ever ever have to smack the child. If they do the system has failed, and really smacking is then pointless, as it was not a deterrent in the first place.
Jimbocz - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to Timmd:
I attended a school at 10 years old where the rule was that corporal punishment could be used after permission was gained by calling the parents. The stupidest thing my parents ever did was write a letter to the school giving them blanket permission to paddle me whenever they saw fit, no phone call required. My teacher was an incompetent old lady who could not control her class and she soon settled on the strategy of making a big deal out of paddling me in order to frighten others into behaving better. I was paddled often, not by my teacher because I was turned over to the school sadist who relished the job. She used a thick wooden paddle that would certainly gain you a prison sentence if you used it on children today. Mrs. Fry, who taught at Eastover Elementary in Charlotte , NC, may you burn in hell.
Post edited at 13:50
duchessofmalfi - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to baron:

A whole different world... blimey do you think they got the permission of those identified before they put that on the internet? I can see one case for people going to school in the 1890s but it is quite different to identifying people who are likely still living - this would be a definite "no" these days and I can't believe it wasn't in 2012!
Eric9Points - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to timjones:

>

> Is the "turdiness" of the child dictated by the parenting?

Quite possibly, quite possibly also their genes and quite possibly the environment they are growing up in. Most probably the product of all three.

Do you own dogs? Just wondered if you had to train and discipline dogs differently just because they are different?
scoobydougan - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to bedspring:

Eh?
krikoman - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to Eric9Points:

> Quite possibly, quite possibly also their genes and quite possibly the environment they are growing up in. Most probably the product of all three.

> Do you own dogs? Just wondered if you had to train and discipline dogs differently just because they are different?

Dogs aren't children though are they?
bedspring on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to scoobydougan:

Karl. Read it through, then think about it.
timjones - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to krikoman:

> Dogs aren't children though are they?

There are many similarities between raising children and training dogs ;)


1
Toerag - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to baron:

I think the problem is that teachers don't have the option of throwing the kid's toys in the bin or removing privileges like parents do.
Put CCTV in the classroom to gain evidence to stick in the faces of the parents who think their little Johnny is an angel.

krikoman - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to timjones:

> There are many similarities between raising children and training dogs ;)

There's a massive similarity between the DNA of a banana and a human.

It doesn't make them the same though.
2
timjones - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to krikoman:

We're not talking about DNA, we're talking about
very basic, often non-verbal, communication.

scoobydougan - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to bedspring:

I did I just couldn't work out how the child would understand that it may be smacked if it disobeyed if it was never smacked? Does it involve sinister facial expressions! But seriously the last thing any parent or person in any position of authority should bring to any altercation is violence! After all if you're angry do you want to be hitting your child?
krikoman - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to timjones:
> We're not talking about DNA, we're talking about

> very basic, often non-verbal, communication.

They're still not the same, or even very similar, unless you want to see it that way.
Post edited at 21:33
Bobling - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to Jimbocz:

Thanks for posting Jim, can see this way not easy to write.
Name Changed 34 - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to Andy Johnson:

>

> So it doesn't mean what you appear to think it means, and is irrelevant to the topic.

Andy. Accepting your point about the evolution of spoken English which I was not aware of in this instance,

However.
Regarding relevance to the topic and the meaning of the phrase or part quotation. It is I believe in fact a double entendre and how I meant the little children should suffer or be suffered is not stated.
A, we should suffer the noise and disruption from small children.

B,The children should suffer adults in all requests reasonable or otherwise

Light-hearted banter possibly not relevant in a serious topic ,

> (I'm _not_ a RELIGIOUS btw)
G.
3
Name Changed 34 - on 05 Dec 2017
In reply to Trangia:
> What the hell?? Which lord would that be.
The lord that is not in your hell ,,of course.

Post edited at 22:31
girlymonkey - on 06 Dec 2017
In reply to Eric9Points:

> Do you own dogs? Just wondered if you had to train and discipline dogs differently just because they are different?

I'm Not sure what point you are trying to make? The most effective dog training is force free and reward based. Same principle applies. Yes, it takes longer and more patience, just like raising a child, but long term outcome is less stressed dog which in turn is better behaved dog and easier to work with. (We rehomed a properly manic dog a year ago with anxiety issues etc, this is very much spoken from experience!)
wercat on 06 Dec 2017
In reply to Name Changed 34:

this is a very novel interpretation - I've never ever heard this one before.
Name Changed 34 - on 06 Dec 2017
In reply to wercat:

Emancipate yourself )..)
Pyreneenemec - on 06 Dec 2017
In reply to girlymonkey:

If I had to use just one word to describe my relationship with my -late- father it would be scared. His violence, towards me my brother , sister and my mum was such that today I think he would be given a 10 year prison sentence. On one ocassion,I was 13, he battered me with a golf-club as I supposedly threw something into a neighbours garden. It was probably only the intervention of my older sister that saved me. I can still recollect the suspicious looks from the hospital casualty staff and the threats from my father if I said anything. At that time domestic violence was very much kept hidden and police intervention almost unheard of. I could go on for pages and pages as the various incidents can be clearly felt and remembered.

I have never raised a hand to my daughter.
Jimbocz - on 06 Dec 2017
In reply to Bobling:

> Thanks for posting Jim, can see this way not easy to write.

Thanks. That part of my childhood was not great but overall I consider myself lucky.

Like the post above, others had worse times.
girlymonkey - on 06 Dec 2017
In reply to Pyreneenemec:

I'm so sorry to hear that.

Your daughter is incredibly lucky to have a father that has not followed suit. Well done.
timjones - on 06 Dec 2017
In reply to krikoman:

> They're still not the same, or even very similar, unless you want to see it that way.

Of course dogs and children aren't the same but if you can convey a message with basic body language alone it will work for both dogs and children.
Eric9Points - on 06 Dec 2017
In reply to girlymonkey:

What I am saying is that every puppy is different, just like a baby. If you raised them in the same environment and trained them in exactly the same way , exactly, they would not all turn out the same. As a result owners try different things with different puppies to get the best outcome.

People aren't different except in degree of complexity.
girlymonkey - on 06 Dec 2017
In reply to Eric9Points:

I would largely agree with that, but I would still say that hitting them is never acceptable, just like children. Yes, you need to be inventive in so many different ways with different dogs/ children, but can always be done without force. Some need longer than others to become socially acceptable!! lol

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.