wildthingRV wrote:
The few that are disrespectful wouldn't be magically respectful if we beat them.
why must you always equate a sensible, humane switching or paddling of a child with a "beating" ? is it just a "thing" with you or are you just always trying to strengthen your position by overkill ?
Some kids, it wouldn't matter if I worked them over with a tire iron and 220 volt electric shocks, they are defiant. They also need counseling and productive methods of discipline. Beating them won't help. That's what I mean. Violence begets violence. A swat on the behind to a HS student means nothing. It's ineffective, but other methods are effective.
I'm not an expert in these matters and I'm not sure if I have the background to talk intelligently about it but I'm fairly certain kids aren't born with unruly behavior, unless there is some sort of mental illness that runs in the family. Is this correct? If I'm correct, this lead me to believe kids who act out are doing so because of learned behavior and/or because there are underlying issues causing them to act the way they do.
If it is some sort of mental defect and/or if there are underlying issues, and we don't try to find out the cause of their egregious behavior, then all the whippings one can exact on a child isn't going to help a thing, right? I would argue it would only exacerbate the problems from an already troubled child. I don't think we parents think of the long term ramifications from whipping a child.
Now, if the cause of the problems that resulted in them acting out is learned behavior, then who do we have to blame? In most cases, the parents. Children emulate us, the parents. They often repeat what we say and act the way we act. If the parents don't recognize they are the cause and adjust their behavior, then all the whippings in the world won't correct the behavior.
Whippings can and will instill fear and ultimately, if severe enough, change the child's behavior but at what cost? The psychological harm done, if the whippings are severe enough, will have lasting effects. I don't think of myself as a bad person. I'm not perfect and I've made plenty of mistakes but I've never been a criminal either. But I can tell you now, there aren't many days that go by that I don't think about some of the whippings (beatings) I endured at the hands of my mother, over 40 years ago. The threshold for causing lasting effects varies with each child, right? How do we know when we have crossed the line?
I allowed my teens a little leeway in acting out vs the alternative. BTW, from all reports when they were in school, they were/are pretty respectful to authority figures without whippings/beatings. They may have been a little smart mouth to me at times but I could live with it. Again, respect is also a learned behavior. If you give it, live it and display it, you'll get it.
wildthingRV wrote:
The few that are disrespectful wouldn't be magically respectful if we beat them.
why must you always equate a sensible, humane switching or paddling of a child with a "beating" ? is it just a "thing" with you or are you just always trying to strengthen your position by overkill ?
Some kids, it wouldn't matter if I worked them over with a tire iron and 220 volt electric shocks, they are defiant. They also need counseling and productive methods of discipline. Beating them won't help. That's what I mean. Violence begets violence. A swat on the behind to a HS student means nothing. It's ineffective, but other methods are effective.
Clear enough?
Thats why you teach them discipline at the end of a belt or switch at a young age. I agree a paddling to a HS kid probably wont work on the most hardcore behaviral problem kids.
If a child's behavior has gotten to a point where physical violence is used as a discipline measure, then the parent has failed to some degree. Why is little Johnny acting out so badly in the first place? Because someone hasn't taught the little turd how to behave properly. Perhaps if the parents were doing their job, he wouldn't have become such a punk, and the paddling wouldn't be necessary.
If, on the other hand, the kid is essentially a good kid, but he's being paddled for minor infractions, then that's just sadistic.
Either way, it's useless, and it amounts to parental failure. Just my opinion, anyway. Anyone who was beaten as a kid and has become a productive member of society has done so, not because they were smacked around as a kid, but in spite of that.
It's a lot easier to whack your kid upside his skull than to actually take the time to teach him right from wrong.
starbase_318 wrote:I'm not an expert in these matters and I'm not sure if I have the background to talk intelligently about it but I'm fairly certain kids aren't born with unruly behavior, unless there is some sort of mental illness that runs in the family. Is this correct? If I'm correct, this lead me to believe kids who act out are doing so because of learned behavior and/or because there are underlying issues causing them to act the way they do.
If it is some sort of mental defect and/or if there are underlying issues, and we don't try to find out the cause of their egregious behavior, then all the whippings one can exact on a child isn't going to help a thing, right? I would argue it would only exacerbate the problems from an already troubled child. I don't think we parents think of the long term ramifications from whipping a child.
Now, if the cause of the problems that resulted in them acting out is learned behavior, then who do we have to blame? In most cases, the parents. Children emulate us, the parents. They often repeat what we say and act the way we act. If the parents don't recognize they are the cause and adjust their behavior, then all the whippings in the world won't correct the behavior.
Whippings can and will instill fear and ultimately, if severe enough, change the child's behavior but at what cost? The psychological harm done, if the whippings are severe enough, will have lasting effects. I don't think of myself as a bad person. I'm not perfect and I've made plenty of mistakes but I've never been a criminal either. But I can tell you now, there aren't many days that go by that I don't think about some of the whippings (beatings) I endured at the hands of my mother, over 40 years ago. The threshold for causing lasting effects varies with each child, right? How do we know when we have crossed the line?
I allowed my teens a little leeway in acting out vs the alternative. BTW, from all reports when they were in school, they were/are pretty respectful to authority figures without whippings/beatings. They may have been a little smart mouth to me at times but I could live with it. Again, respect is also a learned behavior. If you give it, live it and display it, you'll get it.
You highlighted a segment of my comments. I've recognized the fact I'm not an authority on the position but I do speak of my personal experiences. Are you saying you have the background to know whippings are successful in changing behavior without long term ramifications?
Belts, switches, extension cords, wooden paddles are instruments I would think are over the top in curbing or correcting behavior YOU find unwarranted. But, that's me. One only needs to read this thread to know there are a myriad of opinions, probably based on your's/their personal experiences.
