Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I used to be a boy back in the stone age. And I was rebellious. I got swats in school and home. But Im not a violent homicidal loon, because my Dad also knew that not all discipline means spanking and spanking doesnt equal sadistic beatings. Every child, like each parent, is different. And what works for one parent may not have the same result on another's child. If the discipline does not fit the seriousness of the mistake or if it is given in a highly critical way, children will resist. Discipline should in all cases be given with love. "Parents, do not be irritating your children, but go on bringing them up in the discipline and mental-regulating of God."—Ephesians 6:4.
On the other hand, Kids need boundaries. You will set them if you sincerely love them. And it is good for them to feel and learn the undesirable consequences of wrong behavior. For instance, if the child wrongs another person, you insist that he apologize. When he breaks family rules, you may place restrictions on certain privileges in order to emphasize the importance of keeping rules. It is good to administer discipline at the right time. Similarly, many children like I was, will test whether they can escape without punishment after misbehaving. So once you have warned that a spanking or some other form punishment will follow a specific wrongdoing, be sure to follow through.
Like i said to someone else, no matter what I say, you will never believe that spanking can be an effective form of punishment.
I'm not even saying it doesn't work. But even if it does work, I don't think it's the only effective option.
The main reason that I don't spank has nothing to do with whether it "works" or not. It's because it's not the way I want to treat other people, particularly my children. I don't want to be hit, and I don't want to hit others. It's the same reason I don't use CIO sleep training, regardless of whether it "works". I just don't think it's the right way for me to behave, morally.
Also, I was spanked as a child, though infrequently. And yes, I came out "okay". Though in general, I feel that my mother's discipline style was ineffective. Her main go-to punishment was grounding me. I feel that my father's discipline style was much more effective (divorced parents). He did logical consequences.
The people I have spoken to call them logical consequences. The desire is to avoid arbitrary consequences which distract from the lesson at hand.
I think the confusion is between natural consequences and logical consequences. Logical consequences are what parents impose when natural consequences would be too dangerous or take too long to realize. But they are both aspects of the same general parenting philosophy.
No, I'm telling you that you think you are expressing a different concept, but are ultimately just arguing semantics. I tried to prove that in order to elminate the semantical argument, but you will not concede the position that we are all talking about discipline and punishment and it is simply the differences in the methods that are open for debate.
You stubbornly insist that discipline and punishment are separate topics and insist that you practice some third concept that you gleaned from these books without defining what that is. I thought I've laid out a pretty convincing argument that you are wrong in terms of semantics and was hoping to advance the discussion beyond that point, but you just want to throw in the towel.
I'll answer my own question about cleaning up that I posed to you...
I have explained to my kids that it is respectful and expected of people to clean up after themselves. It is important that we express pride in our home and part of that is keeping it clean and neat. It also shows appreciation on their part for the things that people give them by taking care of the toys properly. We have also reinforced the point that cleaning up our toys properly means we don't lose pieces and can find things when we want them.
There. I have now established a clear expectation, I want them to clean up their toys. I have explained to them (obviously in simpler language) what this expectation is and why it is important.
Now we get to the interesting part, what do we do when they fail to meet the expectation. Well, in my house it means that the toys that they failed to clean up are now taken away until they demonstrate compliance with my expectation. This consequence is presented to them upfront and based on my knowing that it is an effective punishment for my children in this situation.
There. I have now punished them for not living up to my expectation. I have engaged in discipline. I don't think you would find anything objectionable to my method and it is pretty much what your books advocate.
Now that we have cleared the semantical air, we get to the issue of spanking. When we have reached the point where they have failed to meet a clearly defined expectation with a stated consequence is spanking an effective form of punishment?
IMO, yes, within the context of certain situations and dependent on the child it can be an effective means of reinforcing positive and progressive discipline.
I think somebodynew and I have many similarities in how we see things. There are probably quite a few differences, too, but I'll share how I see it.
For me, it's not just semantics; I don't manipulate, coerce, or punish. I don't like the idea of "natural consequences" because, as used by most people, the consequences are what would happen if the child doesn't have a loving partner and parent in their life. An example I've given before is leaving a bike outside, and it's about to rain. Someone who practiced natural consequences would say, "Well, I told her to put up her bike and she didn't; it will get rusty (does that happen to bikes any more? ) - a natural consequence!" I would simply put the bike up. Or, go inside and tell said child, "Hey, it's about to rain, you probably want to put your bike up." Just as I would for a treasured friend.
I believe true discipline (though I know the definition about meting punishment) comes from within. It comes from within by living life, making real choices, experiencing consequences in a caring environment where someone is looking out for you, and learning.
With toys left out, I'd make a game out of it, especially for younger kids: "How many red toys can we put in this toy box?" etc. or I'd start cleaning. I'd invite the kids to clean, and they would be free to decline or let me know they could help later. If I am the one that wants a clean home, I'm the one that needs to take responsibility for cleaning it. *Most* kids want an orderly place to explore. *Most* kids like knowing where things are, on a reliable basis. If cleaning is done, just as a matter of course, not as "chores" or something separate from living life, most kids will jump in to help, as they're able. They might go through phases where they don't want to. Again - who wants this space clean? Why?
As the adult, I take responsibility for the state of our home. This means, often, we have a messy house. I'd rather a messy house and all the occupants truly happy than a clean home with disgruntled kids and resentful adults. It's all about maintaining the peace of our home, and loving connection with the kids.
It took me a while to get this! I trusted other parents who dealt with cleaning in this way, and saw the very good relationship they had with their kids. It took owning *everything* I do as a choice.
I hate to leave this here, but I need to go, and this is probably way too long already.
If you're interested, there are some thoughts here:
I think the confusion is between natural consequences and logical consequences. Logical consequences are what parents impose when natural consequences would be too dangerous or take too long to realize. But they are both aspects of the same general parenting philosophy.
Would it be making too fine a point to say deliver rather than impose? When a tantruming kid is removed from a situation, am I imposing? Or simply delivering on what is necessary? The point for me is that the lack or arbitrariness (removal of some completely unrelated toy or spanking or whatever) cannot add a level of feeling unjustly treated. The child understands exactly where the responsibility lay.
For me, it's not just semantics; I don't manipulate, coerce, or punish. I don't like the idea of "natural consequences" because, as used by most people, the consequences are what would happen if the child doesn't have a loving partner and parent in their life. An example I've given before is leaving a bike outside, and it's about to rain. Someone who practiced natural consequences would say, "Well, I told her to put up her bike and she didn't; it will get rusty (does that happen to bikes any more? ) - a natural consequence!" I would simply put the bike up. Or, go inside and tell said child, "Hey, it's about to rain, you probably want to put your bike up." Just as I would for a treasured friend.
With logical consequences, you could say, "If you can't show me that you are responsible enough to take care of your bike on your own, then I am not going to give you the freedom to ride your bike independently until you can do so." With a child who runs out into the road, until they can show me that they can walk safely on the sidewalk, they will have to hold my hand, be carried, or ride in a stroller, etc until such time as I can trust them to walk safely. It's not about punishing the child, it's about not setting them up for failure in a situation they aren't ready for yet. Some may think that is just a different way of wording a punishment (ie taking away privileges), but to me, the difference is that it is logical, not arbitrary. An arbitrary consequence would be a spanking or time out or grounding, which is otherwise unrelated to the issue at hand.
Would it be making too fine a point to say deliver rather than impose? When a tantruming kid is removed from a situation, am I imposing? Or simply delivering on what is necessary? The point for me is that the lack or arbitrariness (removal of some completely unrelated toy or spanking or whatever) cannot add a level of feeling unjustly treated. The child understands exactly where the responsibility lay.
Um, okay. I don't really see the difference, but I think I agree with you.
I think somebodynew and I have many similarities in how we see things. There are probably quite a few differences, too, but I'll share how I see it.
For me, it's not just semantics; I don't manipulate, coerce, or punish. I don't like the idea of "natural consequences" because, as used by most people, the consequences are what would happen if the child doesn't have a loving partner and parent in their life. An example I've given before is leaving a bike outside, and it's about to rain. Someone who practiced natural consequences would say, "Well, I told her to put up her bike and she didn't; it will get rusty (does that happen to bikes any more? ) - a natural consequence!" I would simply put the bike up. Or, go inside and tell said child, "Hey, it's about to rain, you probably want to put your bike up." Just as I would for a treasured friend.
This is quite a good post. While I err on the side of being a hard ass, of course there is room for just plain joy. And you never solicit helpfulness without being helpful yourself from time to time. My fav author talks about the lesson of the pie. Unloading groceries, a child drops the pie. While one might take the tack that she should be held responsible, one can also decide that stuff happens and one can sit on the tail gate and eat the pie while the eating is good.
On the flip side, when my son was complaining that DH ran over his bike, when I looked at him with that DUH look, he knew that perhaps he should have put it where it went. Which was not directly down the driveway from the car.
Quote:
I believe true discipline (though I know the definition about meting punishment) comes from within.
Definitions are a funny thing. Seems that the origin was teach and learn. Jesus' disciples were not punished by him but educated by him.
Quote:
It comes from within by living life, making real choices, experiencing consequences in a caring environment where someone is looking out for you, and learning.
AbsoLUTELY. Why would they want to bust their butt learning these challenging things if they did not know you had their best interest always at your first thought.
Quote:
With toys left out, I'd make a game out of it, especially for younger kids: "How many red toys can we put in this toy box?" etc. or I'd start cleaning. I'd invite the kids to clean, and they would be free to decline or let me know they could help later.
I am there with the making a game of it. I am there with the idea of songs and making it fun. I am less there with the declining part. Yah if i don't feel like it, someone else will do it for me doesn't quite work for me ... much at all!
Quote:
If I am the one that wants a clean home, I'm the one that needs to take responsibility for cleaning it.
Bah. A home needs to be maintained. The standard of cleanliness is open to discussion. But that some cleaning needs to be done is indisputable. That food needs to be prepared is indisputable. And it is an all hands on deck operation.
Behavior modification through fear -- Daniel Wagner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by catdeoh
I want my children to want to always trust and respect their family. I want them to feel that they can always talk to us about what ever is on their minds. I really think that hitting breaks that special bond of trust between parent and child.
I can't agree with you more. I have seen this happen myself between my son and I especially. After being an authoritarian parent for ten years or so, I have learned what it means to actually raise a child and guide their development in a healthy manner; and now peaceful parenting is the type of parenting philosophy I subscribe to.
It has been working, believe it or not. Spanking is only a form of behavior modification through fear.
And btw, I know this thread is quite a few years old by now. What did you decide to do and did it seem to work?
Daniel Wagner.
Last edited by Jaded; 03-30-2014 at 10:19 PM..
Reason: No links for brand new posters
Do you think that it is better to spank your child when they are bad, or teach them right from wrong/ "making better choices".
I have to say that I grew up in a household that had both sides of the spectrum as far as discipline. My father or mother never hit us under the age of 5, but after that if we did something "bad" like fighting with each other sometimes my Dad would hit us with his belt, and he gave us dish washing duty with that if we were really bad. However, if he was in a somewhat of an in between mood he gave us a choice of the belt or a week of dishes. Needless to say, my brother and I always took the licking. I do not think it taught anything except: "Do not let Dad catch you doing something really bad or you are screwed."
My Mom was a little off the wall! She had very bad mood swings. Sometimes she would beat you with whatever was in her hand at the time if you did not answer her quick enough. I have to say that looking back at my childhood the most effective means of trying to lead us on the right path was just sitting down with my Dad and talking it out. It made me feel respected. Every person should feel respected as a human being. I think that when one resorts to hitting their child they ruin the mutual respect of parent/child relationship. However, I do not think that a parent should be their child's "best friend" and let them walk all over them. The respect has to go both ways. In your opinions, please be honest how do you keep a balance of control with your children without hitting.
Even when your kids are older. Is it possible to be able to keep your kids on the right path all the way through adolescence without raising a hand to them?
I want my children to want to always trust and respect their family. I want them to feel that they can always talk to us about what ever is on their minds. I really think that hitting breaks that special bond of trust between parent and child.
Old post and I have not read through the responses - but this is an age old argument.
Weighing in on - you should not have to hit a child to teach them. It is completely counterintuitive to me.
And yes, I am a parent of 2 (11 &15) - great students, respectful, thoughtful - and very, very low key personalities - and, it doesnt take much to get them in line. Merely expressing disappointment with the older one has her in tears and upset and the younger one - a quiet but firm voice does the trick. Of course appropriate consequences and having to work through your choices also.
When they were younger - time out, having quiet time to calm down and get a hold of themselves, drawing a picture and explaining why they were acting out; being a responsible parent and not putting them in a situation where they were unnecessarily tired, uncomfortable, stressed (example - up late at a restaurant); keeping routines and rules that were consistent - were all very effective - while maybe we just got lucky, I do think parents set the tone for the home and how their children behave.
We still have the teen years, so we are keeping our fingers crossed because the next few could get ugly - fast.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) - a natural consequence!" I would simply put the bike up. Or, go inside and tell said child, "Hey, it's about to rain, you probably want to put your bike up." Just as I would for a treasured friend.
Behavior modification through fear -- Daniel Wagner.
