Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 4,095
Have you found an issue in their methodologies?
Slapping Your Children
- Thread starter Kosmiche
- Start date
Have you found an issue in their methodologies?
So treat them as one. You wouldn't slap your mate or your wife, so don't slap your child.
Because you really needed to go?
Abuse is abuse. You should report it surely? If it is by definition abuse, then authorities will take the necessary steps.
Or maybe it isn't actual abuse. Maybe. Maybe it is just a form of last resort discipline that is and always has been and most likely always wil be accepted by society when it comes to the learning and development of a child.
I could be wrong though.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 4,095
I absolutely would slap my mate if he was doing something very stupid. I'm not married, but I've been known to throw a few girlfriends over my knee... albeit in a slightly different context.
But my relationship with my mate or hypothetical wife is different to that I would have with my children. The former are my peers, the latter are my charges.
That would be quite difficult as they haven't yet published the "research" in a scientific journal that my Athens account allows me access to. i.e. They haven't published it in a peer reviewed scientific journal!
Stop strawmanning.
If you remove the label of child, the actions you do to discipline are unacceptable to any other form of human being.
Regardless of the overwhelming scientific communities support that smacking has a massive negative effect on a childs development, i guess we should just carry on right?
Are you so weak of a human being that to regain control over a child, you have to beat them?
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 13,052
- Location
- london
I had more violence from my mom and sister than my dad. Me and my dad used to play fight when i was young, often leaving me with serious injuries and in tears as i would also push it too far and my dad would not know his strength but I never considered any of it malicious or abuse.
I got more emotional abuse from my mom and sister than any other type. Both of them were selfish and self centred and not very nice people.
I think that has caused me more problems than the few instances where my dad hit me because i crossed the line.
I think there is a lot of focus on negative consequences of spanking, which may be warranted, i think the emotional abuse is often under appreciated.
I got more emotional abuse from my mom and sister than any other type. Both of them were selfish and self centred and not very nice people.
I think that has caused me more problems than the few instances where my dad hit me because i crossed the line.
I think there is a lot of focus on negative consequences of spanking, which may be warranted, i think the emotional abuse is often under appreciated.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2013
- Posts
- 4,095
Well if the source of your complaint is that it's not peer reviewed, then that is fine. But accusing the study of bias because it was sponsored by a conservative group is flaky.
Mind you, most social "sciences" are hokum anyway.
We clearly have different views on what constitute abuse.
IF a particular child requires more than a stern word or non physical sanctions in order to keep them safe or ensure that they become a decent human being then I, personally, see it as my responsibility to do so.
I take great pride in my daughter and the fact people like her and willingly have her around to play knowing she is polite, well behaved and considerate. That i have had to give her a gentle slap across the back of the legs just that once to ensure that she understood what i or any adult says goes is something i am more than comfortable with.
Interestingly, we no longer get the violent outbursts and attempts to hit and kick, you might argue that we've taught her that violence breeds violence and that in fact just doing as your asked when it's a reasonable request or discussing the issue is far more satisfactory way to resolve things for both parties.
Then why are you sticking with the label of a child? Remove it and report said parents for child abuse.
Smacking has been around since day dot. The vast majority of people turn out alright wouldn't you say? Even those who dont turn out alright, pretty sure some of those probably weren't smacked. I know a few. Infact I know people who are great kids, and were smacked. I know people who are great kids and weren't smacked. I know people who are douches and were smacked. I also know people who are douches and weren't smacked.
Weird isn't it? Almost like we are all different?
On a side note. None of them who were smacked would call their parents child abusers, nor have they ever been arrested for child abuse. In fact, quite a few of them look back on it now and understood why they got smacked, and it was a lesson learnt.
and 'Are you so weak of a human being that to regain control over a child, you have to beat them', really dude? C'mon. 'weak human being'. Lay off the personal insults, it's embarrassing that you resort to that. I don't criticise your parental skills. 'Beat'? Beating and a smack are not the same.
Some of the words you use aren't interchangeable. That might be where the mix up is.
p.s. I am not a parent. I was smacked as a child when i misbehaved and pushed my parents to the last resort. I have nohing against parents who have this approach. I will adopt this approach most likely. People who have never hit their child, fantastic. Mix of good parenting and a passive child. People who have hit their child, sorry to hear, but hopefully it was a learning experience for the pair of you.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 3,308
- Location
- 2
I just had a quick look at her CV on the calvin.edu website and she has plenty of peer-reviewed papers in academic journals.
She looks a bit of an ogress, though.
She looks a bit of an ogress, though.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 4,473
- Location
- South West
I couldn’t imagine what some people have gone through (are going through) with regards physical abuse and I have a few friends that had a physically abusive childhood. These that have children of their own are militant about never smacking their child... I can completely understand why they take that view.
I don't have a problem in giving my child a smack on the back of the leg if the need arises - in 2 1/2 years I've only done this twice, purposefully never in anger (as I wouldn’t want to teach my child that lashing out is right and particularly when angry) but I explained both times why I was doing it. We never use smacking as a threat for punishment, i.e. I’d NEVER say “one more time and you’re getting a smack”. We do 'time in' which I truly dislike but the threat of this works well for us and to be honest I think from a psychological point of view it is more damaging than smacking, in fact the more I think of it the more disturbing I find it.
It’s all too easy to have an opinion when you haven’t been through the situation yourself, I’m not saying “if you don’t have children you can’t have your own view” but that every child is different, household pressures are different and I could go on, this all makes a difference.
How many people who are over 50 (e.g.) have said “bring back the birch” or whatever form of discipline? The point is it did work but it has been abused, by some, to extremes which means it had to be made illegal. Now I’m not saying to bring the birch back but I believe parents have the right to discipline their child to a reasonable level... question is, what is reasonable? There lies the problem.
There IS a clear line between hitting and smacking, one being child abuse, the other a form of discipline, I know some will disagree with that statement but that is my personal view. Trouble is that there are far too many people that have either no common sense or way to temper the smack to only be simply a smack. Again it boils down to “what is reasonable?”
Sadly I wouldn’t openly admit to my friends the fact that I’d be willing to give my child a smack if the need arose, simply because people get on their high horse and it is just not worth the argument. Far worse (apart from downright physical/sexual/psychological abuse) is with parents feeding their children unhealthy meals, sweets, crisps and fizzy drinks all the time - THAT is child abuse in my book.
I was fairly fat when I was younger and although I know I was a fussy eater I do think that although my parents never smacked me, they didn’t give me a particularly healthy diet and it affected me far more than receiving a few smacks for disobeying/disrespecting them (which to be honest would have done me more good at the time than having endless cr@p fed to me!)
I don't have a problem in giving my child a smack on the back of the leg if the need arises - in 2 1/2 years I've only done this twice, purposefully never in anger (as I wouldn’t want to teach my child that lashing out is right and particularly when angry) but I explained both times why I was doing it. We never use smacking as a threat for punishment, i.e. I’d NEVER say “one more time and you’re getting a smack”. We do 'time in' which I truly dislike but the threat of this works well for us and to be honest I think from a psychological point of view it is more damaging than smacking, in fact the more I think of it the more disturbing I find it.
It’s all too easy to have an opinion when you haven’t been through the situation yourself, I’m not saying “if you don’t have children you can’t have your own view” but that every child is different, household pressures are different and I could go on, this all makes a difference.
How many people who are over 50 (e.g.) have said “bring back the birch” or whatever form of discipline? The point is it did work but it has been abused, by some, to extremes which means it had to be made illegal. Now I’m not saying to bring the birch back but I believe parents have the right to discipline their child to a reasonable level... question is, what is reasonable? There lies the problem.
There IS a clear line between hitting and smacking, one being child abuse, the other a form of discipline, I know some will disagree with that statement but that is my personal view. Trouble is that there are far too many people that have either no common sense or way to temper the smack to only be simply a smack. Again it boils down to “what is reasonable?”
Sadly I wouldn’t openly admit to my friends the fact that I’d be willing to give my child a smack if the need arose, simply because people get on their high horse and it is just not worth the argument. Far worse (apart from downright physical/sexual/psychological abuse) is with parents feeding their children unhealthy meals, sweets, crisps and fizzy drinks all the time - THAT is child abuse in my book.
I was fairly fat when I was younger and although I know I was a fussy eater I do think that although my parents never smacked me, they didn’t give me a particularly healthy diet and it affected me far more than receiving a few smacks for disobeying/disrespecting them (which to be honest would have done me more good at the time than having endless cr@p fed to me!)
Last edited:
But knowing all the negative effects, they could have turned out better.
Of course your not going to label your parents are abusers, the negative connotations attached to that phrase would be massive.
Doesn't detract from the fact that smacking is abuse. Thankfully i have 93% scientific support of the negative effects of child abuse (Which one of the categories is normally smacking). So eventually smacking will be less accepted then it currently is, just some of us are ahead of the curve.
But please you continue abusing your child under the guise of discipline, just remember that the more you do, the bigger the long term damage.
I'm out. Enjoy
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 May 2004
- Posts
- 4,488
- Location
- Tall building nearby
The size difference is very pertinent to the event, it's not just the slap however measured, the size difference affects emotion, creates fear and intimidation.
I am not a pacifist by any stretch of the imagination, I love boxing (used to myself when I was younger) and martial arts and would without hesitation use violence in the right context, self defence.
But knowing all the negative effects, they could have turned out better.
Of course your not going to label your parents are abusers, the negative connotations attached to that phrase would be massive.
Doesn't detract from the fact that smacking is abuse. Thankfully i have 93% scientific support of the negative effects of child abuse (Which one of the categories is normally smacking). So eventually smacking will be less accepted then it currently is, just some of us are ahead of the curve.
But please you continue abusing your child under the guise of discipline, just remember that the more you do, the bigger the long term damage.
I'm out. Enjoy
You are not reading, there are people out there who are bad, who were not smacked as children. You saying that because they were not smacked, they are bad instead of extremely bad? A blanket 'not smacking makes children better people'?
Don't let the door hit you on the way out
I will go back to 'abusing' my non existent child. Just highlights how much you do actually read and take in. I can't wait to get older and have serious mental issues because I was smacked a handful of times by my parents, I will let you know how it turns out.
I'm right, you're wrong attitude, with no hope of reason.
Last edited:
Haven't you heard, the state is emerging as the new parent.
Winner.
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2009
- Posts
- 4,473
- Location
- South West
If that is the case then why do a lot of people understand the logic behind that form of discipline that was given to them and even smack their children themselves?
I've just asked my colleagues (7 people, excluding me) if they agree with smacking. One doesn't, 6 do not have a problem with it. All of them were smacked at some point as a child.
Probably because you risk getting reported to child services or the police!
You don’t tend to hear that discipline is improving in schools, in fact it’s getting worse... must be what the parents are feeding them!!?!
Indeed, I noticed that on the first pass that the only one study which said contrary to the rest of the reports was from a Christian school.
The "Spare the rod, spoil the child" aspect was my first assumption.
I'm still waiting for the pro hitting advocates to give me a rational reason why they are willing to utilise physical punitive measures to control behaviour when firstly- a vast majority of the studies display it's actually detrimental overall - coupled with the question as to why they are willing to actively utilise the tool of physical punishment when there is virtually no evidence at all to support it's use.
Why on earth would somebody need concrete 100% certain evidence to stop doing something, but absolutely none to start?. I'd have thought the logical & rational approach would be to use methods best supported by the existing body of evidence which have a combination of the highest chance of they growing up fulfilled & the lowest chance of them developing behavioural problems.
Last edited: