Is it wrong to discipline/frighten other people's children?

[BlueMaiden88]

Sometimes, I am shocked by the level of cruelty, meanness, and outright nasty behavior that even young humans are capable of.  There are occasions where I wish it was still socially acceptable to yell at your neighbor's children or in extreme cases, give them a good slap for their horrible behavior.  Too many of them are ABSOLUTE MONSTERS.

Today, I went to have a prescription filled.  In the waiting area, a little girl kept putting her feet on the seats, kicking people, kicking their chairs.  Her mother left her there while she shopped for some things and waited for her own prescription to be filled.  An old woman asked the child to stop kicking her because it hurt.  The little girl kept kicking her.  The old woman moved.  The kid repeated it, moving to an old man, then a young woman.  Finally, everyone was clumped together like they were scared of a 7 year old.  She got on the seats and put her feet in people's faces.  They just moved.  When she did it to me, I slapped her legs out of my face and told her that she needed to learn to honor her personal space.  She said, "Only my momma can tell me what to do."  I took her by the arm and marched her over to where her mother was inspecting vitamins and told her what the girl had been doing and how she behaved when asked to stop and when forced to stop.  The little girl got yelled at and pinched.
Afterwards....
As I was walking home from Walgreens, I saw familiar neighborhood children playing on the sidewalk. A rare occurrence. Everyone keeps their little angels cooped up in safe, air conditioned rooms away from germs and bugs, and children have developed an affinity for glowing screens for entertainment. So, I was happy to see kids outside playing, throwing clods of dirt at each other. My feelings soon changed when I realized that they were ripping apart a bird's nest and the dirt clods they were throwing were fistfuls of the nesting material.
The pit of my stomach sank when one of the kids started to fling little blue projectiles at the others and they landed on the pavement with a hollow splat. I felt sick when I heard them scream, "EW!! IT'S MOVING!" and stomp a tiny baby bird, nearly ready to hatch, until it was unrecognizable paste.
I rarely involve myself with other people children, but I wouldn't be true to my own morals if I just walked by. I told them to stop being mean to the poor baby birds. They didn't care. I told them that they would get into big trouble for animal cruelty. They didn't care about that either. When I threatened to tell their mothers the next time I saw them on the train, they ran away. One kid was sobbing, knowing that I frequently talked to her mother on the train on my way to work. But, one little, festering turd of a boy was defiant and threw the last of the robin's eggs on the concrete, hard, before he made his exit.
The pitiful baby bird wiggled somewhat, but it wasn't quite ready to hatch and its tiny body was obviously shattered by the impact. I couldn't save it...so I put it in a shady spot, out of the direct sunlight so it could die in peace and hopefully with a little more dignity than its siblings.

Am I wrong for feeling like small children should be taught to be compassionate and that little psychopathic brats should be taken to counseling?  Am I abnormal to feel like discipline and understanding is supposed to be part of a child's education so they understand that there are negative consequences to their actions?

[CuriousEyes]

I don't want to know where you live. That's horrible.

Short version - it's not okay to physically discipline another person's child, especially not a child whose parents you don't really have a personal relationship with. I would have no problem (aside from personal humiliation that it had to come to that) with someone trying to impart a verbal lesson on morality/manners to my child ("that is a living thing that feels pain, and this is cruel." "you need to respect the personal space of other people."), although the chances that a child engaged in that kind of behavior is really going to take a lesson from a non-authority figure to heart are slim to none.

Note here that I'm using "physically discipline" to cover a broad stretch of meanings - slapping, spanking, grabbing, etc. are completely out of bounds (generally even for the parents themselves, but I don't want to get into that). Something like trying to enforce a punishment - ordering a child to sit down or engage in "time-out" is more acceptable, although you might still be crossing a boundary and the same non-authority/lack of obedience issues above will definitely apply.


The best solution, most times, is just going to be to get the parents involved. Unfortunately that's only going to be as effective as any parent's own measure of discipline is going to be - and many are just as likely to bristle at an implied judgement of their parenting as they are to work to resolve your issue.

[Lustful Bride]

If I did any of those things I would have been smacked, had my Tv, games and toys taken away and just made ot sit quietly in my room. If I ever made any noise or tried to act disobedient id be yelled at and made to stand in the corner.

I remember I got into some trouble once that I went an entire week without anything that was fun. *shivers* When yoru mom and dad were both in the service they don't take any back talk, especially when you accidentally say "fuck you" to them.....>_>  I learned my lesson real quick, I can tell you that much.

[Oniya]

These past three years, I've walked little Oni to middle school, and some of the kids there... *shudder*.  I have used the 'Mommy Voice' on kids who thought it was 'fun' to steal the girls' field hockey sticks and swing them like hatchets.  At other students.  Ran one of them in by intercepting the entryway monitors and ratting on him.  Reprimanded one who was talking about 'raping' another boy.  (I'm not even sure the kid knew what he was talking about.  I hope not, anyways.)  Stood in front of this one kid who was enjoying the chaos caused by riding a bike through a crowd of students.  Yep, we're talking full-on 'gym coach who doesn't need a megaphone' voice, despite the fact that some of the eighth-graders were bigger than I was in one measurement or other.

Was I overstepping?  Maybe.  Did I give a flying fuck that I was overstepping?  Not in the slightest.

[CuriousEyes]

These past three years, I've walked little Oni to middle school, and some of the kids there... *shudder*.  I have used the 'Mommy Voice' on kids who thought it was 'fun' to steal the girls' field hockey sticks and swing them like hatchets.  At other students.  Ran one of them in by intercepting the entryway monitors and ratting on him.  Reprimanded one who was talking about 'raping' another boy.  (I'm not even sure the kid knew what he was talking about.  I hope not, anyways.)  Stood in front of this one kid who was enjoying the chaos caused by riding a bike through a crowd of students.  Yep, we're talking full-on 'gym coach who doesn't need a megaphone' voice, despite the fact that some of the eighth-graders were bigger than I was in one measurement or other.

Was I overstepping?  Maybe.  Did I give a flying fuck that I was overstepping?  Not in the slightest.

Ah yeah, this is worth mentioning and slipped me earlier - the "rules" are obviously a bit different in a situation where a child is placing you or others (especially your own child) in immediate physical danger. If a kid's swinging a hockey stick around a crowd, I think you have a bit of an obligation to snatch it out of their hands for the good of all.

After the immediate danger's past, then you start getting into the dangers of if you're really going too far, in my mind.

[Ephiral]

Mom Voice, shouting, scaring (depending on how), and even physically stopping behaviour that is dangerous, harmful, or ruining a space for other people trying to use it? That's fine. Encouraged, even; I'd rather my child have reasons to behave other than "Parents will get angry!". (This does not apply to trying to make a kid not be a kid, though.)

Raise a hand to my child? I will cut you. I won't do that, and you sure as hell don't get to do it for me.

[Thesunmaid]

I for one am lucky..I have a very laid back and fairly sweet sensitive kid. He is kind to animals and he is polite...but I make sure he knows that when I raise my voice its not just in passing and when I tell him to do something he does it. Its the same with my grandsons..They push I push back harder. Their mother used to think we were too harsh on them but she was in the "I don't want my kids to hate me." mind set. I told her congratulations...you don't want your kids to occasionally hate you..then don't have kids.

I am not saying that your kids should out and out be terrified of you...but with my youngest son and my two grandsons..they know when I raise my voice and I glare (I have been told by my oldest son that a few of his friends thought I was scary when I am mad..high praise coming from teenage boys I guess.)its serious.

I used to live with a couple who had a little girl...they did not baby proof the house...there was electrical outlets she could get at...knickknacks and books right where she could reach them and they were constantly screaming at the kid to the point where she would simply ignore it as normal. But when I raised my voice she knew to stop what she was doing.

In all these cases the kids knew me..but I also used to work in a convenience store and there was this total little brat running around and yanking things off shelves.His mother was like"Damien..Damien..mommy said no.."(how fitting of a name huh?)shes at the front cash talking in a normal tone of voice..kids near the back of the store about to smash a jar of pickles on the floor and seeing as I would be the one dealing with pickle smell and have to clean it up..I finally did something.I looked up and and growled"Damien! you put that back on the shelf now! And you get your sorry butt up here and stand beside your mother before I come down there!" Kid looked at me startled and did as he was told and his mother looked at me pissed off and said"He is my son.."I looked at her and said."And yet who did he listen to?" She wanted to complain to the manager but stormed out when i pointed to the manager and owner who was sitting at a the table near by trying not to crack up laughing at what just happened.

I totally agree with you that kids sometimes need a good crack upside the head..and giving them a swat on the ass once in a while will not kill them or scar them for life. I believe fully that your children do not have to fear you at all times..but dammit if they fear me once in a while that's not a bad thing either. My grown son who is 22 has told me that he has actually heard both our voices in the back of his head saying."Do you really think that's a good idea? Should you keep going?" when he is about to do something dumb.


My 9 year old I have spanked him once in his life..and that was a swat on the diapered butt because he was 2 and he was grabbing the cats tail and yanking it...and my cat is a large male..he was not used to small children yet and he was cornered..not a good situation and the kid was about to have his face clawed off. You can't reason with a 2 year old..so yeah swat on the butt...did not hurt him just startled him enough he let go of the cat and it ran off. Since then he knows tone of voice and the glare...now all i have to do is say his name sternly and glare a bit and that's sufficient. But he is still a sweet cuddly nice kid. And all the cats now love him and sleep with him at night and want him to play with them all the time.

But also that kid you are talking about...I would want to punt the kid through a waaaaaaallllllll..and the bristling at being judged..well that will happen...if your child is out of control and a mini asshole by the time they are 6 to 7 years old..perhaps you should be judged on your parenting skills.  its a hard job..but its no excuse for letting your little crotch fruit act like a cretin.

[Oniya]

There was one time when I came across a kid at the school who had found a little brown bat that had been blown from a tree (at least, that's what it looked like - no visible injuries, but not moving too well either.)  Knowing the propensities of 11-12-year-olds, I adopted an 'in control' attitude and hovered there on 'guard' while sending the little Oni back into the school to get one of the science teachers.  You know those CPR training classes where you essentially order a particular someone to call 911?  Like that. 

Poor little thing didn't last the night, but at least it didn't encounter anything like the baby birds upthread.

[Cycle]

Those children.  With the bird's nest.

That is sick.

I don't even...

[Jag]

A little boy at my daughter's school tried to kiss her, she told him no and tried to pull away, he pulled her back. So I went over, yanked him off and told him never to touch my daughter again. His father told me I had no right to yell or touch his child. His child who was grabbing and forcing kisses on my child, but I was not allowed to help her. I told him that the next time I see it happen, I'm going to back hand his kid. I also, after a discussion with the principal about the situation, made sure they all heard me tell my daughter that the next time it happens that she is to back hand him as hard as she can. I also very loudly made it clear that some kids need to learn about personal space and that 'No means No' even as children.

I feel that my actions and the threat of my, and my daughter's, future actions were well justified.

At the grocery store the other day, some kids were being loud an unruly. The mother was trying to wrangle them and doing the best she could. One of them broke a jar. Instead of snapping at the kid, like I kind of wanted to, I asked the mother if she needed some help.

In that situation, I felt my actions were perfectly acceptable and that anything more wouldn't have been.

As a child, I remember my cat having kittens and my parents gave one of them to the family across the street. It was a small town and small trailer park, so pretty much all the families knew each other. I knew their kids well and hung out with them. One day, they were all in a circle and had the kitten in the middle with a big dog that was trying to bite at it. They wouldn't let me through, cause I was going to grab the kitten, so I ran and got my mom. She yanked the kids apart, grabbed the kitten, scared the dog off, and told them all what little monsters they were being and that they better get home and explain themselves to their parents because she was calling them as soon as we got home.

I feel my mother's actions were justified.

I do think there is a line to where other people should and should not step in when it comes to other children.

A lot of it comes down to situation and person judgement and willingness to stand behind your actions.

[Caehlim]

I realize the social difficulties in attempting to get this to stick but in regards to the children with the bird's nest.

Under Illinois law (510 ILCS 70/3.01.) animal cruelty is a class A misdemeanor which does still apply to minors. In terms of them getting counseling the law does say, "In addition to any other penalty provided by law, upon conviction for violating this Section, the court may order the convicted person to undergo a psychological or psychiatric evaluation and to undergo any treatment at the convicted person's expense that the court determines to be appropriate after due consideration of the evidence."

[Inkidu]

I think there's just something wrong with the bird-nest kids. If I found a bird nest I would have picked it up, put it in a box, and taken it to my mom to beg her to let me keep it, and then I would cry non-stop because she wouldn't let me.

[Sho]

The rule I was always raised with, and I think this is probably the best way to go about it, is that unless the child is physically endangering you (waving a hockey stick, threatening you with a paintball gun, etc), you cannot touch them. Effectively, you should never, EVER touch someone else's child.

What you can do instead is to approach their parents and tell them that their child is doing something unacceptable. If the parents refuse to do anything, approach other authority figures who have the right to discipline those children (principals or, if necessary, security guards/police). If no parents are available whatsoever then you can use Mommy Voice to try and get the kids to listen.

Honestly, though, the second you lay your hands on another person's child you get their defenses up so high that you lose most of the ability to reason with them. I've seen this happen before: Child A hits Child B, and Mom B shoves Child A away from her child or hits Child A. Mom A then shows up, realizes her kid has been hit, and promptly refuses to listen to anything else that has been said, or refuses to believe what Mom B is claiming. Effectively, by hitting a child you're sinking to their level. You're usually three times their size; there is always a better way to handle it.

As far as the bird thing...that is absolutely horrible, and would be a situation where Mommy Voice is MORE than justified. Beyond that, I would still tell the children's parents. They need to know so that they can discipline their chidren. While it's not your role to discipline them, I'm sure their parents will want to. That's absolutely horrific. I wouldn't, per Caehlim's post, report them to the police (I know Caehlim didn't say they have to be reported but he provided a code stating that they could be, if so desired) but I would absolutely tell every single one of their parents that I could. Kids do stupid things without fully understanding what they're doing, and I think this is one of those cases where they need to understand why what they did was wrong.

[Caehlim]

I wouldn't, per Caehlim's post, report them to the police (I know Caehlim didn't say they have to be reported but he provided a code stating that they could be, if so desired)

To be honest, I do think that they should be but I didn't suggest it because I don't necessarily want BlueMaiden to be placed in the difficult situation of trying to do that. It's one thing to have the law on your side, but how people are going to react isn't necessarily going to match up with the law.

I do agree with Sho though, the parents should definitely know about it if you have a chance to tell them.

[BlueMaiden88]

One of the kids' mother rides the train with me to work.  We both work a late shift, so we keep each other company and have actually been able to help each other out when a guy started harassing us on the train.  So, I have her number.  I did end up contacting her and telling her what happened, because it was eating me up inside.  Apparently, one of the kids that was involved is the little girl's cousin.  They were supposed to be staying with the grandmother while the parents are at work. 
I HONESTLY don't want anyone's kid to have a criminal record if it can be avoided because that's a blemish on their life, but the parents need to know what they are raising if the kids are doing this sort of thing while they are out of sight.  If I catch them again, I'll file a claim.  For now, I just alerted the local animal cruelty society chapter that someone's been vandalizing bird nests.
I still have no clue who the little boy belongs to, but more than likely, he's obviously someone the kids know and play with on a somewhat regular basis. 

I don't have any children myself, that's why things like this bother me.  I don't have any of my own to properly judge what I would feel comfortable with.  I mainly base my judgements on these situations on how my parents disciplined me.  I'm always hyper aware that I'm going to overstep some boundary one day because more and more, I keep seeing kids doing awful stuff that I and my peers would have never even DREAMED of doing.   I almost wonder if the adults are oblivious to what's happening or if they ignore it out of fear of someone's parents getting in their face.  It's breeding a culture of 'justifiable' bad behavior.  It really bugs me.

When I was little, I went to a school full of nuns... Nuns with RULERS.  So, not only did you get a detention, you got swatted with a ruler and THEN your parents were notified and you got spanked, extra chores, and all your toys taken.   On top of that, if we did anything bad in the neighborhood and our parents weren't watching, the other parents would yell at us, tell our parents and we'd get into double trouble because not only were we caught doing something we shouldn't have, but we embarrassed our families with our bad behavior.   There was a community aspect to discipline.  It seems that these days it's more important for people to see their kid being 'cute' and being allowed to ignore basic rules and empathy.   

I know that other people don't want their kids harmed.  It makes perfect sense because parents are hardwired to protect their kids.  So, I've never hit anyone else's kid.  I have, however, snatched a kid out of traffic before they got hit by a car, used the 'grown up voice' on kids, called the police (it was a case of some really DISTURBING bullying), and yelled at a woman who let her baby carriage roll into a busy intersection because her text conversation was SO much more important than the life of her kid.

Finding myself in these sorts of situations makes me really uncomfortable.  It's like I'm being put on the spot for doing the 'right thing' and even if I do it, I could still end up with an overprotective parent who is raising a little monster in my face because I told their kid they were being a little monster.  I don't know everyone else's definition for 'too far' in regards to their kids.  For some people, too far is slapping their kid.  For others too far is telling their kid to stop beating another kid in the face with a brick.  It's a crap shoot.

[Ephiral]

The rule I was always raised with, and I think this is probably the best way to go about it, is that unless the child is physically endangering you (waving a hockey stick, threatening you with a paintball gun, etc), you cannot touch them. Effectively, you should never, EVER touch someone else's child.

I'd disagree here - I, for one, would intervene as much as needed to stop it if they were presenting an immediate danger to anyone, not just me. Largely because, as a child, I've been in situations where I wished someone would do that for me.

[BlueMaiden88]

@Ephiral: I have too, actually.  That's also why I'm so cynical about all of these anti-bullying campaigns that don't work because they don't enforce the rules and aren't observant enough to recognize when something's happening.

[Lustful Bride]

@Ephiral: I have too, actually.  That's also why I'm so cynical about all of these anti-bullying campaigns that don't work because they don't enforce the rules and aren't observant enough to recognize when something's happening.

Those campaigns are nothing but a joke, when I was younger a few years ago, 5 at the most, so...about 15 to 14 (im 20 now) I was bullied a lot, to the point one boy followed me home and kept making fun of me. I was a chubby girl back then and so I was easy pickings.  :P

And I cant tell you how many times I was told by teachers. "Well maybe they just want to be friends with you? Have you thought about maybe trying to talk to them?"

[Iniquitous]

Let me put it this way...

Hit my child, scream at my child, you are going to deal with me. No one, and I mean no one, has the right to hit or scream at another person's child. Use a 'mom voice' to grab their attention and get them to settle down - sure. Raise your hand or get in their face to scream at them? Hell no.

And grab my child by the arm to drag them to me? You wouldn't like my response. (Not that I'd let my child be unsupervised.)

[Yukina]

Those campaigns are nothing but a joke, when I was younger a few years ago, 5 at the most, so...about 15 to 14 (im 20 now) I was bullied a lot, to the point one boy followed me home and kept making fun of me. I was a chubby girl back then and so I was easy pickings.  :P

And I cant tell you how many times I was told by teachers. "Well maybe they just want to be friends with you? Have you thought about maybe trying to talk to them?"

+1000000000000

Those pitiful rallies always just honestly gave the message of "Congratulations, bullies. You're so effective we have rallies about you. We say we're stopping you, but just keep doing the horrid things you do.".

[Sho]

I'd disagree here - I, for one, would intervene as much as needed to stop it if they were presenting an immediate danger to anyone, not just me. Largely because, as a child, I've been in situations where I wished someone would do that for me.

Just wanted to clarify (because I think I didn't phrase it right earlier)...what I meant was that a parent can step in at any point if a child, their child or not, is causing a physical threat to any person. I don't think any reasonable person would become furious if someone snatched away a hockey stick/knife/bat from a child threatening to hit others. Again, though, I would say that hitting that child would be unacceptable (whereas taking the offending object would be A-Okay). Hitting the child would have to be a last resort to prevent others from being harmed.

[Aethereal]

I'd disagree here - I, for one, would intervene as much as needed to stop it if they were presenting an immediate danger to anyone, not just me.

Ditto. If someone is harming and/or seriously endangering someone - human or other animal, or in some instances even plant - yes, it is right to stop them. Not harm them, not overblow things, but do just enough to stop them. If it means grabbing their arm, then so be it. (I don't condone actually hitting people. Grabbing wrists or taking away (sharp) things when nothing else works, though? Sure.)

Hitting the child would have to be a last resort to prevent others from being harmed.

I can't see a situation where hitting anyone would do any good unless you've a match and it is actual, proper fight, possibly for life.

And grab my child by the arm to drag them to me? You wouldn't like my response.

What *should* someone do if they saw your child doing something that required immediate intervention (as in, there simply isn't time to go and find you, wherever you are) and "mom voice" simply didn't cut it at all?

[consortium11]

Is it also worth deciding what we mean by "child" here.

Most of the discussion seems to be focused on children in around the 5-10 age range. But a 12-14 year is still a child right? Is "Mum" (or "Dad") voice as likely to work on them? Frankly, are you even going to be able to drag and restrain them with anything resembling ease?

[Oniya]

I was talking about middle-schoolers - so, up to 14 at least.  'Mom voice' (or 'Coach voice') will get their attention.  Striding towards them with that 'I am a person of authority' look in your eyes will as well.  I haven't had to try to drag or restrain anyone, but I was prepared to grab hold of the bike that the one kid was charging around on if he hadn't laid off.

[Aethereal]

I generally make distinction between children and teenagers. A 14-year-old holds much more responsibility (including criminal) than 4-6-8 year old.

[Drake Valentine]

Thing is, now and days it is hard to discipline people. Some folks are just 'scared' to discipline their own children. In some places, if a parent whoops their child it is all of a sudden 'child abuse.'

Though it isn't right to really discipline other people's children and questionably so to do such even in a teacher position. Not sure how the rules are now, but I know at one point when I was growing up it was fine, people could call you in and give you a whooping, before sending you back to class. Later, down the line I heard something about written permissions to such and was wondering 'written permissions, what's that? Never had that luxury when I was a kid.' Of course given the option of receiving a whooping or having my parents called to school, I would pick the former.

Personally I strongly believe in discipline, but that should be done by the actual parents. Discipline helps shape individuals of 'right and wrong,'  and keep them in line, instead of giving them the assumption to believe they can do and basically get away with almost anything they may do. You can tell a lot from how children act. Just look at them and then their parents and how they react, if parents are just aloof to their child's actions, well, there is the problem of upbringing there. I seen people that totally ignore their kids, let them run around in stores, throw stuff on the floor, scream and ball at the top of their lungs, act straightly chaotic. I seen others who may talk to their kids when they cut up, but not do anything. Scolding them or saying stuff 'going to put you in timeout.' Timeout? What the hell is a timeout? Back in my day, if I were to act a fool in public place, I would of either been dragged out of the place and got a belting or got a whooping in said public area.

Edit: Actually, one should never discipline another's child unless they have consent of that parent figure; because A) it can be taken and treated as 'assault on a minor,' if said parental of child may choose to use such as charges. Assuming whatever extents one goes to do said punishment that wasn't agreed on.

[consortium11]

I was talking about middle-schoolers - so, up to 14 at least.  'Mom voice' (or 'Coach voice') will get their attention.  Striding towards them with that 'I am a person of authority' look in your eyes will as well.  I haven't had to try to drag or restrain anyone, but I was prepared to grab hold of the bike that the one kid was charging around on if he hadn't laid off.

My thought is that if one was to waste a day by looking through the various "fight at school" style clips on youtube you'll see more than enough examples of children ignoring teachers regardless of tone, the teachers finding it near impossible to restrain them and in some cases outright attacking the teachers themselves. Would we accept that a different approach and level of force may be needed when dealing with a seven year old and a 14 year old?

[Aethereal]

Back in my day, if I were to act a fool in public place, I would of either been dragged out of the place and got a belting or got a whooping in said public area.

Violence begets violence. I'd not have parent(s) today if either of them would either hit me when I was a child. I'll remember some things my mother did as wrong for as long as I live as is.

[Drake Valentine]

My thought is that if one was to waste a day by looking through the various "fight at school" style clips on youtube you'll see more than enough examples of children ignoring teachers regardless of tone, the teachers finding it near impossible to restrain them and in some cases outright attacking the teachers themselves. Would we accept that a different approach and level of force may be needed when dealing with a seven year old and a 14 year old?

I expect teachers now and days can only do so much. I had known a teacher that would lift up two students each in a hand(freaking big ass coach) and everyone would calm down. Dude would just walk towards the circle of a fight and shove people aside and yank the two responsible up like they weighed nothing and this is Highschoolers.

       Violence begets violence. I'd not have parent(s) today if either of them would either hit me when I was a child. I'll remember some things my mother did as wrong for as long as I live as is.

Depends on the violence. Not saying straight out beatings, a belting or good spanking will correct anything over time. I used to be a horrible urchin myself, but eventually begun to calm down around middle/high school. Probably with the lack of discipline I may be a worse character in person or in jail one, who knows.  I standby the belief a firm hand will correct unruly behavior, but that is only for parent and those they are fine in doing such to decide.

[BlueMaiden88]

As I said before, different people have different parameters when it comes to the 'going to far' line.  Some people do not believe wholeheartedly that if you catch their child doing something violent to someone else, you should go ahead and do whatever makes them stop the fastest without killing them.  Some believe that if you say 'snatch' their kid, that you have broken a cardinal rule...even if you snatch said kid from in front of a speeding car.  At which point, I begin to question if they actually value the life of the kid or their own egos.

I don't think you should hit other people's kids, UNLESS the kid is attacking.  I use the definition 'kid' loosely as someone is just under 18.  The second someone tries to hurt someone and they haven't been provoked, I'm sorry, minor or not, I'm going to assume that they are trying to kill someone and react accordingly.  Which is, to do whatever I need to do to make them stop.  If telling them to stop works, fine.  If pushing them away is what it takes to make them stop, fine.  If blocking makes them stop, fine.  If throwing them down and restraining them in a non-lethal hold is required, that's what I'm going to do. 

[consortium11]

I expect teachers now and days can only do so much. I had known a teacher that would lift up two students each in a hand(freaking big ass coach) and everyone would calm down. Dude would just walk towards the circle of a fight and shove people aside and yank the two responsible up like they weighed nothing and this is Highschoolers.

And that's great if the person in question can do that.

But what if they simply don't have the physical strength to toss people aside or hold two 14 year old boys fighting apart? What happens if there's no response to Mom/Dad/Coach voice? What happens if the response to the voice or being grabbed is to start punching back?

I think most people would accept that a seven year old "punching" an adult (and I use the quotation marks because most children's fights don't really involve real punches) is generally more an irritant for the adult then anything and thus striking back is generally going too far. But what if it isn't a seven year old but a strong 14 year old and they really are throwing punches? Are people still meant to not do anything back? Or to think "well, it's someone elses child, I won't hit or discipline them"?

[Aethereal]

Not saying straight out beatings, a belting or good spanking will correct anything over time.

Did it work for you? Who knows; maybe it did, maybe you're just more reasonable now because you're adult and your brain is now fully developed.
        The only thing you'd have gotten from *my* little self would have been the worst I could dish out and a call to the cops and a talk with the appropriate people at school. If someone attacks me, I *will* fight and I *will* remember it indefinitely. This is one part of me that has never changed. I know it wouldn't have worked for me and would have killed any trust or respect I had (and have, since y'know, my father is a good man and even my mother is mostly reasonable) towards my parents. Also, eventually I'd have grown large and strong enough to cause serious harm once they started assaulting me. And yes, "giving a spanking" qualifies as assault. You'd have a charge at your hands if you did it with an employee; there is no justifying it with children, either.
       (Have I ever physically harmed anyone besides the one time I intervened a fight in which the person I was defending could've gotten killed? No. Have I ever felt the desire to physically harm someone? No. It is nigh impossible to even anger me, let alone make me violent. Would I react if someone physically attacks me/others? Sure, as much as it takes to stop them. Would I still be in the same place I'm now if my parents thought assaulting their children is OK? I am not really certain...)

Some believe that if you say 'snatch' their kid, that you have broken a cardinal rule...even if you snatch said kid from in front of a speeding car.  At which point, I begin to question if they actually value the life of the kid or their own egos.

Reminds me of the story a while back where a guy just watched a kid drown in shallow water after calling 911 because he was "afraid of being put on trial for touching the child by the parents"... What a world we live in indeed.

[Bloodied Porcelain]

      Did it work for you? Who knows; maybe it did, maybe you're just more reasonable now because you're adult and your brain is now fully developed.
        The only thing you'd have gotten from *my* little self would have been the worst I could dish out and a call to the cops and a talk with the appropriate people at school. If someone attacks me, I *will* fight and I *will* remember it indefinitely. This is one part of me that has never changed. I know it wouldn't have worked for me and would have killed any trust or respect I had (and have, since y'know, my father is a good man and even my mother is mostly reasonable) towards my parents. Also, eventually I'd have grown large and strong enough to cause serious harm once they started assaulting me. And yes, "giving a spanking" qualifies as assault. You'd have a charge at your hands if you did it with an employee; there is no justifying it with children, either.
       (Have I ever physically harmed anyone besides the one time I intervened a fight in which the person I was defending could've gotten killed? No. Have I ever felt the desire to physically harm someone? No. It is nigh impossible to even anger me, let alone make me violent. Would I react if someone physically attacks me/others? Sure, as much as it takes to stop them. Would I still be in the same place I'm now if my parents thought assaulting their children is OK? I am not really certain...)
       Reminds me of the story a while back where a guy just watched a kid drown in shallow water after calling 911 because he was "afraid of being put on trial for touching the child by the parents"... What a world we live in indeed.

Technically, what qualifies as assault varies state by state. Here in MD, spanking is perfectly legal as long as it's open-palmed. So you can claim it's assault and "talk to the authorities", but in a lot of states, you'll get told the parent is well within their rights to do that.

That being said, my rules are pretty simple. If my son is doing something he shouldn't be, you tell him to stop. Thankfully for me, he's a lot more respectful of other adults than he is of his mother ::) and will usually listen if only because he cares about what people think of him. If he's doing something that is causing harm or has the potential to cause harm to you or ANYONE, by all means take measures to make him stop. Grab/Restrain/Move him if you have to. Hell, pick him up and carry him to me if I'm around (IE if it were happening at the store and I'm an aisle down or something) and I will be HAPPY to take over the physical discipline.

That said... Unless absolutely necessary, I will not tolerate someone hitting or pushing my child. And by necessary, I mean if it's to protect him (he's about to put his fingers or an object in to a light socket, he's about to walk out in to traffic, etc). If he's just being mouthy and you put your hands on him? You'll have me to deal with. And the cops.

I am firmly of the opinion that society needs to get back to the "It takes a village" way of thinking. Not just when it comes to discipline, but life in general. A child will learn so much more if there is a variety of adults influencing their lives as they grow up. They'll be more open minded, more well-rounded, more worldly, and more respectful. When I was a kid you didn't have just two parents. You had a whole neighborhood. And if your folks weren't around to put the fear of God in to you when you fucked up? Someone else would pinch-hit for them. Now we're so afraid of the boogey man and "stranger danger", kids can't walk to and from the park on their own, so the idea of another adult so much as speaking to our kids has the world up in arms.

And then we wonder why when they hit highschool and college they come out as ungrateful, unprepared, irresponsible and unreliable shitheads as young adults/adults.

[Aethereal]

Technically, what qualifies as assault varies state by state. Here in MD, spanking is perfectly legal as long as it's open-palmed. So you can claim it's assault and "talk to the authorities", but in a lot of states, you'll get told the parent is well within their rights to do that.

I am not in the states, luckily... In my mind, things like this basically translate to "parents can abuse and assault their children as much as they please, as long as it isn't sexual and doesn't leave marks". Being hit is being hit is being hit... The psychological response is about the same.

Now we're so afraid of the boogey man and "stranger danger", kids can't walk to and from the park on their own, so the idea of another adult so much as speaking to our kids has the world up in arms.

You can believe me I've thought "Well, there goes my childhood" aplenty...
      Edit: And then there is the even more constant "If you don't start teaching children something early on, then how on Earth do you expect them to know how to do it when they finally hit 16/18/21?"

[Ephiral]

Personally I strongly believe in discipline, but that should be done by the actual parents. Discipline helps shape individuals of 'right and wrong,'  and keep them in line, instead of giving them the assumption to believe they can do and basically get away with almost anything they may do. You can tell a lot from how children act. Just look at them and then their parents and how they react, if parents are just aloof to their child's actions, well, there is the problem of upbringing there. I seen people that totally ignore their kids, let them run around in stores, throw stuff on the floor, scream and ball at the top of their lungs, act straightly chaotic. I seen others who may talk to their kids when they cut up, but not do anything. Scolding them or saying stuff 'going to put you in timeout.' Timeout? What the hell is a timeout? Back in my day, if I were to act a fool in public place, I would of either been dragged out of the place and got a belting or got a whooping in said public area.

So you're saying that hitting your child is literally the only form of discipline, and anybody unwilling to resort to violence is going to put no meaningful limits on their child. That... thanks for that. It's not randomly insulting, condescending, and factually incorrect at all.

[BlueMaiden88]

On the note of different kinds of discipline, I find that a lot of people immediately feel that corporeal punishment is abuse.  However, they forget that other kinds of discipline can just as easily stray into abuse and do worse and more long lasting damage than being hit as a result of being disobedient or ill-mannered. 

My parents used a combination of physical, psychological, and emotional discipline.  Physical discipline is reactive and falls into the categories that are easily definable: hitting, spanking, belting.  Emotional discipline is also reactive involves and uses the removal of something pleasant in response to bad behavior: taking away toys, taking away allowance, denying a child attention when they throw a tantrum to get your attention.  Psychological discipline often involves non-physical, proactive approach: teaching a child what's appropriate by modeling it for them, informing a child when their behavior is inappropriate, shaming the child when it has done something inappropriate, and rewarding good behavior.

What people forget is that emotional and psychological discipline VERY easily slip into abusive territories without leaving a visible mark and without seeming extreme.  A spanking, if the kid's parents are like mine involves telling the kid what they are getting the spanking for and how many times they will be struck for the offense and why.  It's very concrete, requires no thought.  It's simple.  When you stray outside of the parameters you set for spanking and start doing it in anger, beating welts onto the child or bruising them, it breaks a psychological contract and causes psychological damage.
Emotional discipline becomes abusive when its accompanied with name-calling, verbal abuse, destroying the items that should have just been taken away, confining the child, or ignoring the child without ever explaining to them why its being done and not giving them a discernible limit.  It also involves the idea of not disciplining your child until they are embarrassing to YOU.  Then it's a violation of a psychological contract and it tells them that their suffering is your pleasure.
Psychological discipline becomes abusive when the teaching protocol is accompanied with an implied or overt idea that the moment they fall outside of your parameters they become useless, when rewards and affection are only given in response to actions...and when shaming goes to the level that many parents see as trendy today...when the whole world joins in the dialogue about how bad a child the child is.  This kind of discipline creates a negative psychological contract that affects the kid's self-esteem, self-worth, and causes anxiety.  It's also caused kids to kill themselves.

I feel that all three discipline styles should be combined in a way that doesn't ignore the situation or the child's needs at that moment.  It's up to the parent or whoever is there to gauge what that is because not every situation and not every child will respond to the same kind of discipline.  I currently work in health care and I can tell you, that the prescribed, "No.  Stop.  Don't harm others or yourself." doesn't work.  Sometimes the "If you rip out your IV and your catheter, even if it is uncomfortable, you will hurt yourself, bleed, and probably get sepsis of the blood." doesn't work.  Sometimes putting your hands on someone and MAKING them stop is the only way to actually get them to stop. 

[Pumpkin Seeds]

While I do not want to derail the topic, I would like to point out that physical restraint of a patient is a last resort which requires a great deal of communication on the part of the physician and the nursing staff.  Studies have shown that having a family member at the beside to remind the patient and reorientate them is far more effective and beneficial.  Physical violence on a patient results in increased confusion, potential harm to the patient, feelings of persecution and additional behavioral problems during the stay.  So I am not sure if this comparison is really helping the case of physically disciplining a child since all studies point toward physical restraint being an absolute last resort to keep the patient from harming themselves and others.

By the way, restraining a patient or laying your hands on a patient for any other reason than prevention of harm to self or others is illegal. 

[Drake Valentine]

So you're saying that hitting your child is literally the only form of discipline, and anybody unwilling to resort to violence is going to put no meaningful limits on their child. That... thanks for that. It's not randomly insulting, condescending, and factually incorrect at all.

I'm saying corporal punishment should be used when all other matters obviously are not working.

I honestly could care less if you agree or not with my opinions, they are, after all opinions.

The fact of the matter is, there are many controversies surrounding spanking. There have been studies where it has been found both good and bad for children.

On the other hand, there are many arguments that declare that spanking a child will not have any short-term, long-term, or devastating effects on a child. For example, according to Dr. Elizabeth Gershoff, the most obvious, positive, short-term effect of spanking is the advantage of immediate compliance and observance ("A New Look," 2002). In other words, spanking is a quick way for parents to get their children to obey them. Instead of threatening to put them on a "time out" or instead of not punishing them at all, spanking is a direct and fast way for a parent to get his or her disciplinary point across.
        Some might argue that spanking could cause harmful and damaging effects on a child in the long run. Some might argue that children who are spanked can often wind up being unstable and insecure adults. But according to Diana Baumrind, a psychologist from the University of California Berkeley, sporadic or sometimes even regular spankings do not lead to precariousness or instability in a child (Elias, 2001). Her research has shown that the children who did end up with some emotional damage were the children who were punished and spanked frequently and with objects other than just their parents' hands. Her research has also shown that children who were spanked as a form of discipline (that they were not spanked just to be inflicted pain by their parents) tended to develop the same way other children did who were not spanked. Baumrind goes on to add that spankings that are not in a frequent manner will not lead to any negative or long term effects on the child. It has been shown that spankings that occur every once and a while, do not hamper the way a child develops…that neither the child's social or emotional development will be affected (Kicklighter, 2001).
          Many parents who spank their children use it as a disciplinary last resort. On certain occasions, after they spank their children once, they never have to do it again. This is evident in the case of 39-year-old Sara Curtis. Curtis was out to dinner with a date and she had decided to take her three-year-old daughter with her. The child had been acting up throughout the entire meal, but Curtis tried to ignore the child's untamed behavior because she didn't want to have to disciple her daughter in a public restaurant. But then, Curtis realized that something had to be done. So, she took her daughter into the ladies room and hit her on the thigh. The little girl let out a sharp screech, but Curtis was not remorseful at all for having spanked her child. After they returned to the table, her daughter did not act up once and Curtis never had to spank her again (Hampel, 1999). In other words, children will not repeat their bad behavior because they want to avoid being spanked again.
        In other cases, children actually learn a lesson from physically being punished. This was the case for a man named Donald. When Donald was a young boy, he used to love going over to his grandfather's farm during his summer vacation. He used to love spending time with his grandfather and with his friend that he had met there, who was the son of a black man who worked for Donald's grandfather. These two children always had the best time together. They would play, roughhouse, and call each other names. When the wrestling would become too rough, Donald's grandfather would separate the two boys and have them reflect on why fighting was bad. And that is how far the punishment would go. But one day, the grandfather overheard Donald calling his friend a nigger. Without a warning, the grandfather walked over to Donald, hit him hard across the face, and then walked away. The hit seemed to be apparently hard because it made Donald fall to the ground "leaving [him] more shocked than hurt. The message was violent, and it came with no verbal explanation at all […] but Donald got the message his grandfather was trying to send, and it wasn't a message about the acceptability of violence. It was a message about the utter unacceptability of bigotry, and it had a powerful effect" (Lerner, 1998). Donald never said that word again and not once after that, did his grandfather have to hit him.
           In summary, spanking and corporal punishment are two things that have many opponents. But many argue that spanking will and can do more good than harm. According to some researchers, spanking does not cause any negative effects on children. Some researchers even like to say that children are better off if they are spanked because they are disciplined in such a shocking way that they either learn their lesson or behave in a more appropriate manner to avoid being spanked again.

Source - Be warn of purple background and black texting.

[Oniya]

Looks like that might have been someone's homework assignment.  Source.

[Drake Valentine]

Looks like that might have been someone's homework assignment.  Source.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1240279/Children-smacked-young-likely-successful-study-finds.html

http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/family/item/548-new-study-finds-spanking-is-good-for-kids

http://time.com/3387226/spanking-can-be-an-appropriate-form-of-child-discipline/

http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/18/opinion/navarrette-spanking-kids/

[Ephiral]

I'm saying corporal punishment should be used when all other matters obviously are not working.

That's... not actually what you said, though; you were outright dismissive of other methods, directly equated them with doing nothing, and directly equated "discipline" with corporal punishment.

I honestly could care less if you agree or not with my opinions, they are, after all opinions.

You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts. Fact; There are, in fact, other methods of child discipline.

The fact of the matter is, there are many controversies surrounding spanking. There have been studies where it has been found both good and bad for children.

Have there really? The literature overwhelmingly disagrees with you. So does the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Of the links you posted: First one references a 'study' with a small sample size (179 subjects), relying entirely on surveys for data collection, using a very limited definition of 'spanking' that is neither mentioned in the article nor an accurate model of the typical case, and oh yeah it was rejected every time it was submitted for peer review. This is not good science.

Second article... references the same damn study.

The third... cites no actual data, and is from Focus on the Family, which severely damages its credibility in my eyes. The 'expert' who wrote it has literally zero cites I am able to find in the literature on the subject, likely because as far as I can tell he did not study child psychology.

Fourth... is an opinion piece by someone with no relevant credentials, citing nothing.

The evidence does not support your claims in any meaningful sense. We've done real science on this - lots of it - and the most glowing recommendation I've found of spanking is "It doesn't appear to be actively harmful, as long as it's done in a way that severely limits its long-term effectiveness as a punihsment."

[BlueMaiden88]

While I do not want to derail the topic, I would like to point out that physical restraint of a patient is a last resort which requires a great deal of communication on the part of the physician and the nursing staff.  Studies have shown that having a family member at the beside to remind the patient and reorientate them is far more effective and beneficial.  Physical violence on a patient results in increased confusion, potential harm to the patient, feelings of persecution and additional behavioral problems during the stay.  So I am not sure if this comparison is really helping the case of physically disciplining a child since all studies point toward physical restraint being an absolute last resort to keep the patient from harming themselves and others.

By the way, restraining a patient or laying your hands on a patient for any other reason than prevention of harm to self or others is illegal.

I'm well aware of the legal parameters of restraining patients and the benefits of having family members present.  However, typically, the family doesn't stay 24 hours per day while a patient recovers.  The worst patients never even have family visit them and many of them will act out because they feel that being in the hospital entitles them to having family visit, even when they kinfolk don't want to.  It is the staff that handles the situation if the patient becomes unresponsive to redirection and/or harmful to themselves or others.  I only felt that it wasn't necessary to elaborate on exactly how many sheets of paper need to be filled out before you can restrain a patient because the topic is about what level of intervention you can apply to a situation in which other people's children are being destructive or violent. 

I only brought up patients as an example of how talking to someone about the consequences, the notion of 'time out', or the use of a 'serious voice' doesn't even work with presumably rational adults, let alone willful, undisciplined children.  I never stated anything about condoning violence against patients, just that there are times when you have to physically make them stop.  Most times 'reorienting' them involves actually touching them and moving their hands away from what could harm them or others.

[TaintedAndDelish]

You know, when I was a kid, we didn't stomp on bird nests and torch animals out of fear of punishment. We didn't do those things because we understood that they were animals and had feelings. We had basic intelligence and if one of us was enough of a schmuck to attempt something like that, another kid in the group would have spoken up.  From the OP, its sounds like these kids were either mentally deficient or angry and powerless.

On the topic of corporal punishment, I'm not sure swatting one of these kids would make them any smarter, less angry or less in need to seek power and control. My feeling on punishment is you need to select the most appropriate form for punishment for the kid, the parent and the situation at hand. Every kid, parent and situation is different. Trying to make a rule on how to punish that universally applies to everyone does not sound like a good idea to me.

[Aethereal]

For example, according to Dr. Elizabeth Gershoff, the most obvious, positive, short-term effect of spanking is the advantage of immediate compliance and observance ("A New Look," 2002). In other words, spanking is a quick way for parents to get their children to obey them. Instead of threatening to put them on a "time out" or instead of not punishing them at all, spanking is a direct and fast way for a parent to get his or her disciplinary point across.

No, I wouldn't have obeyed because someone assaulted me, my own parents included - I'd have fought back, teeth and nails. You are attacked - you fight or you flee (and for me, the more natural response is fight; flee is something I have to consciously force myself to do). Simple as that.

[Pumpkin Seeds]

The paperwork and steps required to initiate physical action is the point though.  So many steps are required and documented in order to enact physical restraint and action against a patient.  This is a display of how rare we as adults want physical restraint and violence to be used against another adult.  Yet we would advocate quick physical violence against a child.  My mentioning of family members at bedside was not to say they are there but to point out that a familiar figure, discussing and reminding someone acting out is more effective than a physical altercation. 

Nobody is in disagreement that a child hurting themselves or another should be stopped, physically if necessary.  Where your comparison falls apart though is that people are advocating physical reprimand for bad behavior which is something that cannot be done to a patient.  Therefore you are comparing apples and oranges here. 

[Drake Valentine]

That's... not actually what you said, though; you were outright dismissive of other methods, directly equated them with doing nothing, and directly equated "discipline" with corporal punishment.
You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts. Fact; There are, in fact, other methods of child discipline.

Have there really? The literature overwhelmingly disagrees with you. So does the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Of the links you posted: First one references a 'study' with a small sample size (179 subjects), relying entirely on surveys for data collection, using a very limited definition of 'spanking' that is neither mentioned in the article nor an accurate model of the typical case, and oh yeah it was rejected every time it was submitted for peer review. This is not good science.

Second article... references the same damn study.

The third... cites no actual data, and is from Focus on the Family, which severely damages its credibility in my eyes. The 'expert' who wrote it has literally zero cites I am able to find in the literature on the subject, likely because as far as I can tell he did not study child psychology.

Fourth... is an opinion piece by someone with no relevant credentials, citing nothing.

The evidence does not support your claims in any meaningful sense. We've done real science on this - lots of it - and the most glowing recommendation I've found of spanking is "It doesn't appear to be actively harmful, as long as it's done in a way that severely limits its long-term effectiveness as a punihsment."

It is simple to discredit things, although those links you provided are no hard evidence to back any claims of your own.

I am not going to bother bouncing from site to site through the first one.

As for the second one. I will quote this.

Parents who spank their children are more likely to use other unacceptable forms of corporal punishment.

Depends on the parent. The worse I got was a belt and I never had welts.

The more children are spanked, the more anger they report as adults, the more likely they are to spank their own children, the more likely they are to approve of hitting a spouse, and the more marital conflict they experience as adults

Seriously? I have been through plenty of spankings, I have friends who were treated similar growing up. Yes, some of those will spank their children, but as a means to an end when everything else falls on 'deaf' ears. None of them or me approve of domestic violence. I do not see how punishment reflects on martial conflict, unless there is a severe difference of opinion on how to punish said children.

Spanking has been associated with higher rates of physical aggression, more substance abuse, and increased risk of crime and violence22 when used with older children and adolescents.

Yea? Where have these studies been concluded? I have turned out fine as have friends, co-workers, and other people I know. Only individuals that abuse substances is liquor, but no one is perfect. As far as crime and violence goes, only one person I personally know has been to jail once and they never been to it again. Prison teaches a life experience in itself. As does certain forms of punishment in general.


Spanking is merely another means of an end of correcting behavior. How are you going to handle a child when all else fails? Take away their things and they still cut up, put them in time out, forced some other means of end of redeeming themselves on them? What if they still rebel? Is it okay for parents to be complete pacifists towards corporal punishment? Maybe some can pull it off, because they are blessed with kids that may follow through, but what will you do if not? Take em to a doctor and get them 'drugged' up?

Needless to say, discipline all boils down to how you are raised, the ethics you grew up with. Ethics vary with region, I was brought up in the South and taught how to be respectful, such teachings often involved a firm hand which I am thankful as I turned out just fine in my life. Though I do not see any point of further derailing this topic at hand as it is more about spanking or punishing other people's kids. Parents have a right to handle their young-ins in whatever way they want, however I see it bad parenting to just turn a blind eye and never make an ends approach to correcting repetitive rebellious and chaotic behaviors. It is just as insulting to witness such to my upbringing when others ignore and let their children do whatever they want. It teaches those kids in return nothing other than the fact they are free from punishment in general.

[Oniya]

Yea? Where have these studies been concluded?

Since there was a footnote citation on the bit that you quoted, I went back to the article that you quoted it from, and found that the full text of that particular study was available for free:

This link takes you to the abstract.  The PDF file of the actual study is to the right of that.

[Aethereal]

I have turned out fine as have friends, co-workers, and other people I know.

You turned out a decent person despite the abuse. Not everyone will. I have a friend whose body was frequently covered in bruises, who got yelled at and humiliated on a daily basis, et cetera, et cetera when they were a child, but they're a decent person now, too. There are rape victims, kidnap victims and all kinds of victims who are perfectly functional members of society. Y'know, despite all that. And then there are plenty of people who have issues from things like that decades down the road.
       "But *I* don't have any issues from it, from what I can tell," isn't really an argument. I myself may be ridiculously thick-skinned, but I won't go around telling people "bullying is not an issue, because *I* can't bring myself to care is some stranger calls me names".

[Drake Valentine]

Since there was a footnote citation on the bit that you quoted, I went back to the article that you quoted it from, and found that the full text of that particular study was available for free:

This link takes you to the abstract.  The PDF file of the actual study is to the right of that.

Which requires a subscription, something I will not do.  ::)

      You turned out a decent person despite the abuse. Not everyone will. I have a friend whose body was frequently covered in bruises, who got yelled at and humiliated on a daily basis, et cetera, et cetera when they were a child, but they're a decent person now, too. There are rape victims, kidnap victims and all kinds of victims who are perfectly functional members of society. Y'know, despite all that. And then there are plenty of people who have issues from things like that decades down the road.
       "But *I* don't have any issues from it, from what I can tell," isn't really an argument. I myself may be ridiculously thick-skinned, but I won't go around telling people "bullying is not an issue, because *I* can't bring myself to care is some stranger calls me names".

Since when is spanking abuse? If it is rough enough to leave visible marks, perhaps, depending on the extremity of such. If it is to point of breaking skin, then yes, there is probably some domestic violence, child abuse problem going on there.

[Oniya]

Which requires a subscription, something I will not do.  ::)

Funny.  I don't have a subscription, and accessed it just fine.  http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/98/4/834.full.pdf+html

[Aethereal]

      It says "This item requires a subscription" to me, too. Maybe you have some kind of subscription that applies from earlier?

[Drake Valentine]

Funny.  I don't have a subscription, and accessed it just fine.  http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/98/4/834.full.pdf+html

Funny, cause it isn't working for me. Tell me the keyboard key to pageprint/copy page(cause I don't see it on labtop or overlooking it one) and I will screenshot what I get.

Instead I will quote this.

This item requires a subscription.

If you have an individual print subscription to Pediatrics, online access is included.
Full Text (PDF)
How Can Generative Theories of the Effects of Punishment be Tested?

    Cohen

Pediatrics 1996; 98:4 834-836
To view this item, select one of the options below:
* Sign In for Individuals

If you are an individual subscriber or member, please click "Sign In for Individuals" link above.

[consortium11]

No access for me either.

On the general point though, I'm pretty sure that it's uncontroversial to say that spanking and the corporal punishment of children has been regarded as a negative thing by pretty much all the research done on it. It's one of those cases where one has to balance out personal prejudice against the science... and the science should win that. I was spanked as a child. I don't think it did me any harm. But... 1) I don't have a control to compare myself to and while I may think I turned out fine I can't say whether I'd have turned out "better" without spanking and 2) my personal anecdotes or the anecdotes of my friends are of little consequence compared to serious research done by serious people; you can dispute the methodology, you can dispute the conclusions they draw or the arguments they use but you can't simply go "well, I don't think so".

[Oniya]

      It says "This item requires a subscription" to me, too. Maybe you have some kind of subscription that applies from earlier?

Weird - I have never paid any subscription, and the bottoms of all the pages I looked at said 'Downloaded by Guest'

Screenshots of first page.  Includes a bit of the previous article, which does give me the subscription notice

[Ephiral]

It is simple to discredit things, although those links you provided are no hard evidence to back any claims of your own.

I am not going to bother bouncing from site to site through the first one.

So... you didn't read it, therefore it doesn't exist? Is that seriously what you're saying?

As for the second one. I will quote this.

Depends on the parent. The worse I got was a belt and I never had welts.

Other forms of physical punishment, such as striking a child with an object [...] are unacceptable and may be dangerous to the health and well-being of the child. These types of physical punishment should never be used.

You are one of the cases they are talking about.

Seriously? I have been through plenty of spankings, I have friends who were treated similar growing up. Yes, some of those will spank their children, but as a means to an end when everything else falls on 'deaf' ears. None of them or me approve of domestic violence. I do not see how punishment reflects on martial conflict, unless there is a severe difference of opinion on how to punish said children.

Unfortunately, anecdotes make poor data. If only someone had conducted a broad study and found the general trends across the population as a whole! Someone like, say, Dr. Murray A. Strauss.

Yea? Where have these studies been concluded? I have turned out fine as have friends, co-workers, and other people I know. Only individuals that abuse substances is liquor, but no one is perfect. As far as crime and violence goes, only one person I personally know has been to jail once and they never been to it again. Prison teaches a life experience in itself. As does certain forms of punishment in general.

Maybe take a look at the numerous citations on that article? You have been provided with this information. Deliberately wallowing in ignorance to preserve your idea that spanking is generally harmless does nobody, least of all you, any good.

And... well, I'm going to tell you the same thing that made me reconsider this and look into the data: You didn't turn out fine. You think it's okay to hit a child.

Spanking is merely another means of an end of correcting behavior. How are you going to handle a child when all else fails? Take away their things and they still cut up, put them in time out, forced some other means of end of redeeming themselves on them? What if they still rebel? Is it okay for parents to be complete pacifists towards corporal punishment? Maybe some can pull it off, because they are blessed with kids that may follow through, but what will you do if not? Take em to a doctor and get them 'drugged' up?

Please tell me how this logic differs from the logic of people you would consider actual abusers. Also, why is consulting an expert so much worse than, y'know, hitting your child?

Needless to say, discipline all boils down to how you are raised, the ethics you grew up with. Ethics vary with region, I was brought up in the South and taught how to be respectful, such teachings often involved a firm hand which I am thankful as I turned out just fine in my life. Though I do not see any point of further derailing this topic at hand as it is more about spanking or punishing other people's kids. Parents have a right to handle their young-ins in whatever way they want, however I see it bad parenting to just turn a blind eye and never make an ends approach to correcting repetitive rebellious and chaotic behaviors. It is just as insulting to witness such to my upbringing when others ignore and let their children do whatever they want. It teaches those kids in return nothing other than the fact they are free from punishment in general.

Yet again, you are equating corporal punishment with discipline as though it is the only form. If you're going to choose to ignore the data because it might disagree with your worldview, please at least stop insulting those of us who would rather be well-informed?

[Aethereal]

get them 'drugged' up?

I consider using psychoactive chemicals on a(n unwilling) person which aren't absolutely necessary for them to function equal to their ability to function and/or survive just as bad as physical assault. It's an argument of "but you *could* do even worse!" Sure, it could almost always be worse...

[Inkidu]

Yeah, if you read all the literature on how bad corporal punishment is then every child who was ever spanked would probably become a hyper-aggressive serial killer or something, which is hardly true. I often suspect cherry-picking in many of the articles like this. There's too much personal agenda in this kind of social discourse. It can even be seen in this very argument. Lots of soap boxes on the floor. :|

Sometimes the intellectual adult arguments don't work on the willful minds of children. How many ways can one actually get through to a child that their actions can sometimes have physically painful consequences?

In actual relation to the topic--and not this tangent--of whether or not others should discipline other parents' children. Honestly, it's not worth it in this hypersensitive lawsuit-happy world. Chalk it up to terrible parenting on their part.

[BlueMaiden88]

The paperwork and steps required to initiate physical action is the point though.  So many steps are required and documented in order to enact physical restraint and action against a patient.  This is a display of how rare we as adults want physical restraint and violence to be used against another adult.  Yet we would advocate quick physical violence against a child.  My mentioning of family members at bedside was not to say they are there but to point out that a familiar figure, discussing and reminding someone acting out is more effective than a physical altercation. 

Nobody is in disagreement that a child hurting themselves or another should be stopped, physically if necessary.  Where your comparison falls apart though is that people are advocating physical reprimand for bad behavior which is something that cannot be done to a patient.  Therefore you are comparing apples and oranges here.

It does not fall flat.  The physical reprimand for a patient comes in the form of an intravenous injection of sedative OR at times a physical hold that pulls their limbs at just the right angle so that struggling is more painful than being compliant.  Some pain is always involved.  They are lucid.  They know that we've done something to make them compliant and when the sedative wears off, they remember the event and often times, they do not repeat it.  It's more traumatizing to feel that you are not in control of your own body than being physically slapped. 

The paperwork is only to document the event in the case of a legal suite and to deter the nursing staff from just drugging everyone to avoid having to actually interact with patients.  It does not prevent patient abuse by any means.  It pains me to say this, but the staff members who are going to abuse patients will find ways to do it undocumented and often use bullying to keep other staff members from properly reporting it.  That or they will do it in a passive way and not respond to a patient's needs in time to avert a disaster and fill out the paperwork as if they just "didn't know the patient was going to do that".   I've read enough of protocol and dealt with enough horrible incidents that didn't have to happen to realize that much. 

Having the family as a tool to prevent patients from acting out isn't a deterrent either.  At times, especially with a dementia patient, mentioning a family member and how they will become disappointed in their behavior, will stop the behavior for 5 minutes and then, they will get worse, more violent, and even accusatory.  Sometimes patients are relatively able-bodied, RATIONAL, and aware of what you're trying to do and they react by acting out even more because they feel like they need to prove that no one can make them do anything they don't want to do, even if it's the right thing.   Like methods to maintain peace and control, using family members only works SOMETIMES. 

Furthermore, in the rare instances that sedatives and restraints are needed, we don't fill out paperwork and give them the opportunity to maim someone.  We restrain them first, do the paperwork, call the doctor and then the family.  In that order.

[Ephiral]

Yeah, if you read all the literature on how bad corporal punishment is then every child who was ever spanked would probably become a hyper-aggressive serial killer or something, which is hardly true. I often suspect cherry-picking in many of the articles like this. There's too much personal agenda in this kind of social discourse. It can even be seen in this very argument. Lots of soap boxes on the floor. :|

That's odd. The literature I've read speaks in broad terms, of trends and general tendencies, and mentions only heightened aggression as compared to non-spanked children (since, y'know, you just taught your kid that hitting is the way to settle your differences).

Sometimes the intellectual adult arguments don't work on the willful minds of children. How many ways can one actually get through to a child that their actions can sometimes have physically painful consequences?

You don't need some "intellectual adult" argument. In my experience, a Serious Voice explanation that you Mustn't Do That because <Bad Thing> can happen, coupled with taking away privileges, does the trick. At least, when asked to explain in her own words what she did wrong, my three-year-old gets it - and doesn't repeat the behaviour.

[Inkidu]

That's odd. The literature I've read speaks in broad terms, of trends and general tendencies, and mentions only heightened aggression as compared to non-spanked children (since, y'know, you just taught your kid that hitting is the way to settle your differences).
You don't need some "intellectual adult" argument. In my experience, a Serious Voice explanation that you Mustn't Do That because <Bad Thing> can happen, coupled with taking away privileges, does the trick. At least, when asked to explain in her own words what she did wrong, my three-year-old gets it - and doesn't repeat the behaviour.

Oh wait. Broad terms and anecdotes are okay when you're making your argument, but when someone else is making their's its unacceptable. Okay, I get how this works now. Gotcha.

Done.

[Lustful Bride]

I have a question, what about hits that aren't a spank?

Cause when I was bad enough my parents would hit me but it would be just a slap on the shoulder/ legs. :P

They picked that up in Puerto Rico while stationed there.

By slap I mean what's basically just a love tap, its not like I was on the floor or had any permanent marks on me or anything. It was about as hard as when you try to swat a fly on you or shoo away a mosquito.

[Drake Valentine]

So... you didn't read it, therefore it doesn't exist? Is that seriously what you're saying?

Read what? Various links of 'how not okay to hit children?'

You are one of the cases they are talking about.
Unfortunately, anecdotes make poor data. If only someone had conducted a broad study and found the general trends across the population as a whole! Someone like, say, Dr. Murray A. Strauss.
Maybe take a look at the numerous citations on that article? You have been provided with this information. Deliberately wallowing in ignorance to preserve your idea that spanking is generally harmless does nobody, least of all you, any good.

Whose to say how accurately all of that is recorded?  Science is not always right. Do not speak of ignorance when you are parading around in it yourself.

And... well, I'm going to tell you the same thing that made me reconsider this and look into the data: You didn't turn out fine. You think it's okay to hit a child.

No, I am perfectly normal compared to a lot of society today. At least I have a spine to use corporal punishment when all else may obvious fail. If you want to have a black and white outlook on punishment, be my guess. I see things in shades of gray.

Please tell me how this logic differs from the logic of people you would consider actual abusers. Also, why is consulting an expert so much worse than, y'know, hitting your child?

Actual abuses are those that straight out 'beat' their child. Spanking in discipline is not beating. Why do people so shallowly see it as such? Spanking is not abuse. Spanking is an illustration to correct unruly behavior when all else fails for a child to see that something is not right. Spanking is to remind hierarchy of the household. Children should never be granted power to believe that they are fully in control. An expert for what? To apply medication for unruly behavior? That is like saying 'doping' kids is totally fine.

Yet again, you are equating corporal punishment with discipline as though it is the only form. If you're going to choose to ignore the data because it might disagree with your worldview, please at least stop insulting those of us who would rather be well-informed?

Maybe you should stop being such a bigot and read over things. I am equating corporal punishment as a means of an end when all other punishments fail. It is easy to just run away from the problems.

[Bloodied Porcelain]

Now seems like a good time for cute kittens in need of hugs. Everyone hug the kitten!

[BlueMaiden88]

I have a question, what about hits that aren't a spank?

Cause when I was bad enough my parents would hit me but it would be just a slap on the shoulder/ legs. :P

They picked that up in Puerto Rico while stationed there.

By slap I mean what's basically just a love tap, its not like I was on the floor or had any permanent marks on me or anything. It was about as hard as when you try to swat a fly on you or shoo away a mosquito.

Most of the time this was what my mother would do.  It didn't really hurt and if it did, the most you felt was a sting and it was more shocking than anything else.  I don't think that's abuse primarily because it didn't exactly hurt. 

[Lustful Bride]

Now seems like a good time for cute kittens in need of hugs. Everyone hug the kitten!

*hugs*  ;D

Most of the time this was what my mother would do.  It didn't really hurt and if it did, the most you felt was a sting and it was more shocking than anything else.  I don't think that's abuse primarily because it didn't exactly hurt. 

Yeah I thought the same :) I didn't like it at the time but now I see that it was for the best.

[Blythe]

I have a question, what about hits that aren't a spank?

Cause when I was bad enough my parents would hit me but it would be just a slap on the shoulder/ legs. :P

They picked that up in Puerto Rico while stationed there.

By slap I mean what's basically just a love tap, its not like I was on the floor or had any permanent marks on me or anything. It was about as hard as when you try to swat a fly on you or shoo away a mosquito.

This is what my father would do. He never ever spanked without a very good reason; I had to be at the height of misbehavior, possibly at risk of harming myself or others. He would then 'spank' me, but it never left marks and was more of a surprising 'sting' than anything. Once the surprise snapped me out of my misbehavior, though, he'd sit me down to have a rational conversation to explain why he did what he did, why I did something wrong, why I shouldn't do it, and it would be followed by an apology for having to spank me.

[Lustful Bride]

This is what my father would do. He never ever spanked without a very good reason; I had to be at the height of misbehavior, possibly at risk of harming myself or others. He would then 'spank' me, but it never left marks and was more of a surprising 'sting' than anything. Once the surprise snapped me out of my misbehavior, though, he'd sit me down to have a rational conversation to explain why he did what he did, why I did something wrong, why I shouldn't do it, and it would be followed by an apology for having to spank me.

it seems to be  good way to get the best of both worlds in my opinion.  :-)

[Pumpkin Seeds]

I believe at this point we are going to disagree on the view of restraints and I think it’s best if you no longer venture down that road.  Restraints, chemical or otherwise, are never to be used as a reprimand for behavior.  They are not a punishment in any sense of the word.  This is quite clear in any documentation for JCAHO, DHH and pretty much any ethics community I have ever seen.  Simply keeping the restraints in sight of a patient is unethical and can be seen as threatening a patient.  So the comparison of disciplining a child to a patient is a false one.  That really is it in simplicity.  If, as a medical worker, you are disciplining patients with chemical and/or physical restraint with the goal of inflicting pain or trauma on the patient to curb bad behavior then I recommend you cease caring for patients.

At this point I will step away from the conversation since we are sufficiently off track in this side discussion and are now in the realm of patient care.

[Ephiral]

Oh wait. Broad terms and anecdotes are okay when you're making your argument, but when someone else is making their's its unacceptable. Okay, I get how this works now. Gotcha.

Done.

Broad, empirically-supported  terms are perfectly valid whether or not I happen to agree with them. I...may have been overly broad in how I spoke of my anecdote; it was intended as an example of something that can work, not a universal "this will work", and certainly not "this is the only thing that works", which is a huge chunk of my objection with Drake's argument. My apologies for my poor presentation.

Read what? Various links of 'how not okay to hit children?'

You claim there is no evidence - because you actively refused to look at even one of the dozens of evidence-based articles I provided. This is my point. Refusing to look at the evidence doesn't make it not exist.

Whose to say how accurately all of that is recorded?  Science is not always right. Do not speak of ignorance when you are parading around in it yourself.

...okay, just to make sure I've got this right: It sounds like you're saying "Scientists have been in error before, therefore this opinion piece by someone with literally no qualifications is as valid as a broad consensus resulting from numerous peer-reviewed empirical studies." Is this a fair read?

No, I am perfectly normal compared to a lot of society today. At least I have a spine to use corporal punishment when all else may obvious fail. If you want to have a black and white outlook on punishment, be my guess. I see things in shades of gray.

And who says that "a lot of society today" is at optimal levels of aggression? Should we give up on any attempt to better ourselves, because we already meet the perfectly circular benchmark of "as good as we are now"?

Actual abuses are those that straight out 'beat' their child. Spanking in discipline is not beating. Why do people so shallowly see it as such? Spanking is not abuse. Spanking is an illustration to correct unruly behavior when all else fails for a child to see that something is not right. Spanking is to remind hierarchy of the household. Children should never be granted power to believe that they are fully in control. An expert for what? To apply medication for unruly behavior? That is like saying 'doping' kids is totally fine.

Where exactly is the line between 'spanking' and 'beating'? Number of strikes? How hard they are? It's obviously not the use of weapons, as you already okayed that. Emotional state of the parent? Even if you do see a difference, it is at best one of degree, not of kind.

Yet again, you're misrepresenting the opposition because you seem to see corporal punishment as the only form of discipline: Please tell me where I have said children should believe they are fully in control, or that there should not be a clear power relationship between parent and child.

And yes, believe it or not, sometimes medication is the correct route for behavioural issues, because sometimes they are in fact symptomatic of underlying issues. Consulting a professional is certainly a more productive route than continuing to hit your child in these situations.

Maybe you should stop being such a bigot and read over things. I am equating corporal punishment as a means of an end when all other punishments fail. It is easy to just run away from the problems.

It is not bigotry to point out that the research has been done and it does not support your position. It is not bigotry to point out that statements like this:

I seen others who may talk to their kids when they cut up, but not do anything. Scolding them or saying stuff 'going to put you in timeout.' Timeout? What the hell is a timeout?

...are actually explicitly saying that non-corporal punishment is "doing nothing". It is not bigotry to point it out when you present a false dichotomy between corporal punishment and doing nothing at all to rein in children, as though there are no other options. Please check what you actually wrote before you call me names.

[Caehlim]

Yeah, the article cited appears to be locked behind a subscription wall. I can access it, but only by using my university's access to the journal. There's one I want to share, but unfortunately don't think anyone else is going to have access to it. But if you can read it, this seems to be a pretty on topic, recent, peer-reviewed and broad meta-analysis.

E PAOLUCCI & C VIOLATO (2004), "A Meta-Analysis of the Published Research on the Affective, Cognitive, and Behavioral Effects of Corporal Punishment". The Journal of Psychology, 2004, 138 (3), 197–221

This meta-analysis looks at smacks defined as "physically noninjurious and as administered with an opened hand to the extremities or buttocks, with the intention of modifying behavior" and specifically avoids "slapping the face, kicking, arm-twisting, shaking, pinching, ear pulling, jabbing, shoving, choking, beating, or delivery of repeated demoralizing blows."

Using this definition it concludes "The analyses suggested small negative behavioral and emotional effects of corporal punishment and almost no effect of such punishment on cognition." It also states, again using the definition previously supplied, "The results of the present meta-analysis suggest that exposure to corporal punishment does not substantially increase the risk to youth of developing affective, cognitive, or behavioral pathologies."

And that it appears to be effective when:
"1. used less than weekly, as recalled by adults, or fewer than 10 times annually, as recalled by adolescents;
2. used at nonabusive levels of severity by parents who were not physically violent against family members;
3. administered without the use of potentially damaging instruments;
4. used during ages 2 to 6 and possibly between ages 7 and 12;
5. administered privately;
6. used with reasoning, preferably with an intermediate level of child distress; and
7. used primarily as a back-up for less aversive discipline responses."

[Aethereal]

Spanking in discipline is not beating. Why do people so shallowly see it as such? Spanking is not abuse. Spanking is an illustration to correct unruly behavior when all else fails for a child to see that something is not right. Spanking is to remind hierarchy of the household. Children should never be granted power to believe that they are fully in control.

Making physical contact with the intent to cause pain and/or humiliation is abuse. Period.
        It is not OK to beat your SO into submission because you think this is "hierarchically correct", it is not OK to beat your employees into submission, and guess what, it is not OK to beat your children into submission.
        I will tell you, I'd have bit, clawed and fought for my dear life and never trusted the person again if someone had decided to assault my younger self like that, and this is a perfectly normal, since we are animals with basic survival instincts. We either fight, flee, or stay still and hope it goes away if something attacks us. And my personal self tends to lean on "fight" when assaulted.
        And no, not all abuse immediately results in mental issues - the same way other animals don't immediately go crazy and break down as soon as someone tries to eat them. If it was *that* easy to break our minds, humans would have long gone extinct before they even reached modern society. Does "abuse doesn't necessarily result in evident mental damage" make it OK? No.

[Inkidu]

        Making physical contact with the intent to cause pain and/or humiliation is abuse. Period.
        It is not OK to beat your SO into submission because you think this is "hierarchically correct", it is not OK to beat your employees into submission, and guess what, it is not OK to beat your children into submission.
        I will tell you, I'd have bit, clawed and fought for my dear life and never trusted the person again if someone had decided to assault my younger self like that, and this is a perfectly normal, since we are animals with basic survival instincts. We either fight, flee, or stay still and hope it goes away if something attacks us. And my personal self tends to lean on "fight" when assaulted.
        And no, not all abuse immediately results in mental issues - the same way other animals don't immediately go crazy and break down as soon as someone tries to eat them. If it was *that* easy to break our minds, humans would have long gone extinct before they even reached modern society. Does "abuse doesn't necessarily result in evident mental damage" make it OK? No.

I know you probably mean something more profound, but honestly, you're making yourself look bad. You're basically comparing yourself to an unthinking animal. :\

Even animals get the concept of physical punishment used to correct undesired behavior though, so your argument is really starting to fall apart the more you try to make it. Corporal punishment is not a purely human thing. I've seen a broodmare bite the crap out of a yearling because it wouldn't move when she was sick of its attitude. There's oodles of evidence in various canine circles of the same thing.

[Aethereal]

       Animals aren't "unthinking". More advanced animals are quite capable of intelligent thought, and humans, too, are "just" animals. I am an animal, you're an animal, we're all members of the animal kingdom. And if we're "better" than other animals, then perhaps we shouldn't keep our children under control by hoping they'd be too afraid to do it again if we just beat them up. (Mind, many animal species who take care of their young at first also violently chase them off after certain age, and then will have nothing to do with them for the rest of their lives.)
     As a member of the human species more specifically I say as you onto me, I onto you - if you treat me decently, so will I, if you don't, I won't respect you for it or make an effort to help you. If you continue doing it and/or justify mistreating me later on, you'll see repercussions.

[Eranil Morathim]

This is my first time posting here and I'm probably going to regret it.

Bottom line, spanking, done correctly is NOT abuse. Something like say, hitting a kid in the face with a snow shovel is. That may sound like an extreme example but it was one I lived with my stepdad. And that was simply because the sidewalk looked like it hadn't been shoveled because it had snowed more since I had. That is abuse, not spanking, My mother and my grandparents spanked me, and I'm glad they did.

Spanking, when done rationally, is not even close to abuse. It is a last resort for discipline and serves more to assert authority and show the child they have done wrong. My son, at age 6 has been spanked twice in his life by me. Both times were nothing more than a single swat to get his attention. By the logic in these anti spanking studies, he will now grow up with anger and aggression issues and I should pretty much be out of my mind raging.

To me this seems like those of you who are against spanking think it is the only form of discipline those of us for spanking use. That's just not true. As has been stated repeatedly, it is a LAST RESORT. Not to mention it's not as if the child is being outright beaten in public. At home, in private, just enough for said child to know they screwed up.

As for kicking, screaming, etc. First off at around six it likely would have done no good against an adult. In my family it also would have resulted in being made to stand in a corner facing the wall after said spanking. But I suppose that's some kind of humiliation and abuse too.

Ok, I feel myself starting to ramble and rant, so I'm stopping myself here.

[Ephiral]

Spanking, when done rationally, is not even close to abuse. It is a last resort for discipline and serves more to assert authority and show the child they have done wrong. My son, at age 6 has been spanked twice in his life by me. Both times were nothing more than a single swat to get his attention. By the logic in these anti spanking studies, he will now grow up with anger and aggression issues and I should pretty much be out of my mind raging.

Actually, based on what those studies actually say, that is perfectly fine and shouldn't lead to any issues, but it is not a typical case. The typical pattern is much more frequent, leading to it being less effective, leading to escalation.

To me this seems like those of you who are against spanking think it is the only form of discipline those of us for spanking use. That's just not true. As has been stated repeatedly, it is a LAST RESORT. Not to mention it's not as if the child is being outright beaten in public. At home, in private, just enough for said child to know they screwed up.

When the loudest pro-spanking voice in here repeatedly says that not spanking is literally "doing nothing", that's the only conclusion to draw. Further, he's spoken from the beginning of public contexts, so your limitations do not hold.

We decided over 40 years ago that some of the practices condoned in this thread were cruel and inhumane to use on prisoners. Why is it so controversial to suggest, with the backing of pretty much all the credible research, that maybe children deserve as much consideration as felons?

[Aethereal]

My son, at age 6 has been spanked twice in his life by me. Both times were nothing more than a single swat to get his attention.

When I talk of spanking, I'm not speaking of, say, a loose swat in the general direction of the child's hand and telling them "Hey, fingers!" as they are about to put their hand someone they shouldn't, or similar. I am speaking of spanking as deliberate form of punishment that (while it may not leave marks) is supposed to be painful and/or humiliating. The "come here now and stay still so I can hit you" kind - that's what I am referring to when I use the word "spanking," and that is what I would never condone. *That* is abuse, and something I'd have never forgiven, if my parents ever subjected me to it.

(Just so we're on the same page.)

...for said child to know they screwed up.

Either that, or they learn that beating people when they do something they don't like is OK, or they will resent their parents.
         I've sat my mother down - as a 21+ adult - and told her what she did wrong in raising me (mostly in terms of her yelling and/or threatening). If I had a parent or parents that decided beating me was a child was OK, I'd probably done the same - and if they were still convinced that they did right, you'd not exactly hear me describing the individuals who produced me in too kind terms.

As for kicking, screaming, etc. First off at around six it likely would have done no good against an adult.

No. But eventually, that child will grow up.

[Iniquitous]

I am probably going to regret posting here... but!

My parents spanked me - mostly my father, he was the disciplinarian in the family, and when I say spanked I mean the take off the belt, fold it and spank that ass spanking. It was reserved as a last resort to get my attention when every other form of punishment they came up with failed.

I will admit that I was a hellion child. I didn’t listen, I didn’t mind. I tried hard to do what I wanted. Grounding me didn’t work... I didn’t mind being forced to stay in my room. Taking away my toys didn’t work... I far preferred reading. Taking away my non-educational books didn’t work... I read the encyclopedias. Not letting me go on field trips with my class, not letting me go to the amusement park with the rest of the family... none of that worked.

What did work? Well, getting my ass spanked with a belt sure got my attention. And, just as a child learns not to touch the hot burner because “OW! That hurt!”, getting my ass spanked hurt and I rather quickly decided I didn’t want that again. And guess what... I can remember my dad saying “This hurts me more than it does you.”

Now, as an adult, I have spanked. I took a different approach than my father did. I made sure I never spanked while I was angry at whatever was done, I made sure to discuss what was done wrong and why the spanking was necessary. And when it was over, I hugged and wiped tears while making sure it was understood why I spanked.

Have I used other means of punishment? You betcha. Taken away toys? Check. Grounded? Check. Taken away privileges? Check. Made to stand in the corner? Check. Much as it was with my parents, spanking was used to get the attention and make it clear that certain behaviors will not be tolerated.

Guess what... I am a normal, functioning adult and so are the spawn that I spanked.

[Aethereal]

        And if you were my parent, I would not have a mother now. You'd be dead to me for assaulting me, the exact same way as a hypothetical "boyfriend" who assaults me and is then all flowers and candy would be dead to me. Simple as that.

        People are allowed their own opinions; I don't have to approve of them. Admittedly, I only have my own person as a standpoint (as to an extent is the case with everyone), and I couldn't, ever, respect a person who assaulted me and afterwards insisted they were right to do so. I also wouldn't not do something because you might beat me up - I'd just resent you for resorting to violence against me. And if you ever you told me "It is not OK to hit another person", I'd know you're just blatantly lying to my face, without blinking an eye.   

      Granted, I didn't really need to be disciplined, as much as I wasn't really rebellious - if I did something it was quietly in some corner and with no actual ill intent. My misdeeds were hence usually just me trying to construct something and making a mess or using something I shouldn't have as components. Or taking my rubber boots off and walking in the mud with socks, because it was interesting to see the water bubbling up through the fabric, or something along those lines. Also getting up during the night. And the thing that actually worked for me was most often just my father (who, mind, is a calm person and kindness himself) just telling me. Calmly. Quietly. And I didn't do it again, since I felt bad.
      As opposed to my mother who tended to get yell-y and taking-things-away-y... In the end, I very quickly just learned to completely shut out her yelling and started to hide things in various places in the house or even outside. And protecting things she was threatening to take away with my body - and you can believe me, if she actually tried to use force, I'd sooner have let her snap all bones in my body than released the thing willingly. I didn't care for pain as long as I had an agenda, but you can believe me I remembered all the people who ever inflicted it on me, and not in a good way.
      Including one of my kindergarten teachers, a woman who frankly should have never had the job. My mother rightfully went full-out mother dragon upon her afterwards.

[Iniquitous]

I’ll be honest, if I had a child who acted out with kicking, screaming, biting and clawing when punished - either by spanking or removing possessions, that child would have ended up in therapy.

You are certainly allowed to have your opinions - we all have them, but constantly reiterating how you’d have reacted is pointless. You are not going to change anyone’s mind with telling us how bad ass you would have been and how that person would be out of your life.

Simple fact. I was spanked, I grew up to be a well adjusted adult. I’ve never been arrested, never been to jail, and I am not violent towards other people. The spawn I have spanked are well adjusted adults. They’ve never been arrested, never been to jail, and are not violent people.

Whether I, and them, are exceptions to the rule is debatable. My brother was spanked as I was, he is well adjusted and a cop. Oh, yeah. I forgot to mention - my father is a retired cop. So, abuse? No. Not even in the least.

[Aethereal]

I’ll be honest, if I had a child who acted out with kicking, screaming, biting and clawing when punished - either by spanking or removing possessions, that child would have ended up in therapy.

Or perhaps it's a natural human reaction to someone, y'know, specifically assaulting you. Self-defense. You can bet having a child who is perfectly calm and well-behaved once before they eyes of professionals who responds to "My mother hit me," whenever someone asks why they behaved that way isn't exactly going to shed favorable light on said mother...
        I don't know why some people keep insisting that actions which'd land you in jail against adults are suddenly perfectly OK as long as it's your own child you enact those actions on.

       For the record, I've passed all psych evaluations - be it for car license, gun license, work-related or other - I've been subjected to with flying colors and actually being remarked as - also by professionals, not just people I know - as one of the calmest, most stable people they've met. I've never been depressed, had anxiety or any kind of other mental issues. Et cetera, et cetera. Heck, I don't even have a speeding ticket to my name, let alone anything else...

       And cops are people and just as capable of abuse than almost any other (and to some vague recollections, perhaps more than average), so it's not really an indicator in and of itself.

[Jag]

I was spanked once that I can remember. I was six and I left the house without telling my parents. I was gone for hours. A park ranger found me walking down the side of the highway. He picked me up and brought me home. I wasn't running away. I just wanted to go for a walk. My mother spanked me. Hard. Didn't leave a mark, but it hurt. Then we talked about it.

Yes. She spanked me out of fear and anger. It was how she was raised.

But from that day on, I never left the house without telling my parents. Not because I was scared of being spanked, though I didn't want that again, but because I realized the severity of the action. Anything could have happened to me. Could the situation have ended the same if my parents just talked to me instead of spanking me and then talking? Probably. But that's not what happened. What happened was that I was spanked and talked to. It was a snap reaction on my mother's part and she regretted it.

But I never did it again.

While I was a hellion as a teenager, things in my house were different by that time compared to when I was six. My father didn't supervise me. My mother had left us, I did the dishes, I did the laundry, I did my homework (most of the time), I had a job...so my father treated me like an adult from the time I was fourteen till I moved out. I have bad blood with my father, but never because of the way he punished me or my brothers.

Unlike me, my brothers were hellions of the lazy kind. They never helped out. They back talked. They treated me and my father like shit.

They were spanked. Often. My father wasn't the talking type. He screamed and spanked. My brothers are very much the opposite of each other. One is very well adjusted, has a good job, a good apartment, nice things, and takes care of himself. The other, well...he's a lazy bum. He's living in my grandmother's basement and leaching off of her. He did that to my father for a long time, then he got kicked out. Moved in with my mother, did the same thing, got kicked out. Now he's with grandma and we're waiting to see how long it lasts.

Could my lazy bum of a brother been affected by the spanking? Maybe. He acts just like our father.

All I can think of is that it boils down to the fact that different people react differently to various types of punishment. My daughter, you take away her Leonardo doll and she straightens right up. To her, that doll being taken away is like being spanked. I see the same look on her face when I take it that I saw on my brothers. Punishment ends there for her. Take that doll and she gets it. She bit another kid once. Granted, it was self defense, but she never did it again once I took that doll and sat her down for a talk.

My cousin, we'll call him L, my aunt took away all his toys, his TV, grounded him, set him in corners, and had talks with him. Those things worked temporarily, but he always went back to doing exactly the same things he had before. It left no lasting effect on him. He didn't learn his lesson. He didn't correct his behavior. My aunt refused to try any other forms of punishment. She sent him to therapy, put him on medications, did everything the doctors told her. Now he's in jail. He robbed a gas station at gun point five years ago.

Maybe if he'd been spanked, he might have learned a lesson or two. But who knows for sure. It might have made him worse. It might not. What it might have done doesn't matter, because it wasn't done. What was done doesn't always matter, because it's done and you can't take it back.

I'm not saying all children should be spanked, because that's not necessary. But if all options have been exhausted, then what do you do next? Do you just let it continue? Do you just let them keep going and thinking it's okay when talking doesn't work?

My opinion is to start with talking. Start with taking away a favorite toy or book or show and talk to them. Time outs. More talking. Have them talk to someone else. Sometimes kids respond better to someone else...but there comes a point when you have to think "What else can I do?"

Child kicks you. You talk to them and explain why it's bad and hurts. Child kicks you again. You take away a toy/book/show/whatever and talk to them again. Child kicks you again. Time out and grounding and more talking. Child kicks you again. Grounding, talk to a doctor, talk to a professional, talk to friends. Child kicks you again. What do you do?

Again, all my opinion based on how I was raised and what I've seen. I've never raised a hand to my child, because I've never needed to and I hope I never do. I do believe spanking is an option. A last one, but still one. I have no reason to justify my beliefs to anyone.

[Aethereal]

            Personally I'm fully confident that if nothing else works, beating won't help, either. At best, it does pretty much nothing, on average, it generates fear, distrust and resentment, at worst, it just teaches the child that "don't hit others" is a big fat lie not even you yourself abide to. 
            Will I realistically be able to do about parents who don't agree? On individual level not really (I may say what I think, agreeing or disagreeing is one's own decision, and whether my personal opinion of you is a notch lower as the result probably hardly matters to a stranger), though I will advocate and support making violence-as-"punishment" an offense that is recognizable by law, if it isn't already (in that specific region).

[Inkidu]

Ah see, I get it, you refuse to even humor anything remotely suggesting that spanking is anything but a life or death situation. Goodness help any friend who gave a friendly dig in the arm, but maybe that's just a guy thing. :|

[Blythe]

I think one of the important things to take into account here is that people have very different views on exactly what constitutes a 'spank.' The definition I use is:

spank1
/spæŋk/
verb
1.
(transitive) to slap or smack with the open hand, esp on the buttocks

For me, spanking is not abusive, but it must conform to the following criteria to avoid being abusive:
* Must be open-handed, should not be done with an implement. Too much potential for leaving marks or causing harm with implements. Should ideally only need to be done once.
* Should not be done publicly. Discipline of this nature should never be public if it can be avoided, otherwise it can turn into humiliation rather than discipline.
* Must include, in some manner, dialogue with the child to explain rationally why the spanking is happening, preferably beforehand when possible. The goal is discipline, not pain or needless punishment.
* Must not leave markings, bruisings, etc.
* Must not be used at the first resort, nor should it be used particularly often. Ideally, spanking is a last resort after other options fail.
* Never on someone else's children. In the case of discipline that requires this sort of corrective measure, it should not come from a stranger.

There are a lot of parents who often cross the line with spanking and turn it into abuse as a way to try to control their child rather than educate, rather than explore other disciplinary methods, but I don't think that spanking, with the above caveats, is abuse.

Edit: Not trying to knock on anyone's opinions with this particular post. This is just my own opinion. >_>

[Jag]

            Personally I'm fully confident that if nothing else works, beating won't help, either.

Then what do you do? Take my kicking example. Do you just suffer years of bruised shins? Do you hope they grow out of it on their own? What happens if they kick someone else, another kid, who doesn't decide to take it?

I would never jump to spanking or yelling first. It's the last option...but it's an option. I also don't threaten to spank. I hate it when parents threaten to spank and count down.

Parents get exhausted, frustrated, and feel like failures when the things they try don't work. Parents are human. Parents do things wrong. Parents make mistakes.

As I said, my mother spanked me once and she regretted it. She was scared for my life. She was scared that I might have run away for some reason. She was hysterical. She hit me. She felt like a monster. I cried and it hurt. Was it the best reaction she could have had? No. But it was the one that happened. I don't fault her for that.

I hate to make references to television, but I loved watching Roseanne growing up. It reminded me a lot of my family in the first few seasons. A family scraping by on very little and making it work. I related to Roseanne's family more than I did the Bundy's or the Cleaver's.

Roseanne reminded me a lot of my mother. Especially in an episode that DJ steals a car. He was a kid and he did something really stupid. Roseanne was terrified over what could have happened to her child and horrified over what he'd done. She spanked him. She regretted it. Her character history says her father was a screamer and a spanker. She said she never wanted to spank...but she did. Yes, it was a scripted show, but it was real. Those things happen. Parents freak out and it happens.

I think what matters is what happens after the spanking. Roseanne, like my mother, came to me and talked to me. She told me about how scared she was for me, how much it hurt her to do what she did, and how she hoped I understood. I did.

My father never spanked me. But he did my brothers. They resented him. While one turned out fine and the other not so much, maybe it wasn't the spanking that caused it. Maybe it was the fact that he never apologized, that he never talked, that he never told them how much it hurt him to do it. Maybe it didn't hurt him to do it. Maybe he was just able to ignore that hurt and just do it.

Whatever the reason...parents are not without flaws. Spankings happen for a variety of reasons.

And you know what? I don't think "don't hit others" is a big fat lie. I still believe in talking it out first, but I have no problem throwing a fist.

I'm not a perfect human. I have depression. I have gender issues. I've been told I'm a sociopath (what a load of BS). I've been told I have no heart. But I've also been told I'm the most caring individual. That I'm a lovely human. That I'm incitement and intelligent. No two people ever see anyone the same way.

Just because I am willing to use my fist (though not on a child), doesn't make me any worse a human than anyone else. Just because I'd be willing to spank if I run out of options or if I fail as a human doesn't make me any worse a human than anyone else.

I should be judged on the reasons for my actions and my actions after that. Not by someone who sees me do something without knowing why. I'm willing to kill for my child. I'm willing to die for my child. If I spank my child, those that know me know that means I reached the end of options and I mean to exhaust that last one before accepting failure. Those who don't know me...well, they are free to see me as a heartless monster.

But whatever. Everyone has an opinion and no one is exactly right. Views can change as we age. I was silly enough to tell myself that I would never tell my child No. Because all I ever heard growing up was No. It's laughable to think that now.

I'm imperfect. So were my parents. So is everyone.

[Aethereal]

Goodness help any friend who gave a friendly dig in the arm, but maybe that's just a guy thing. :|

It was also not with the specific intent of causing you physical pain and/or humiliation in the hopes that you might be too afraid to do something like that again. See above for the kind of spanking I'm referring to.

       FYI, I do controlled combat as an adult and often play-wrestled as a kid. Yes, it meant that occasionally there was a guy half bigger than I sitting on my back. But it was fun, no one was in actual pain or miserable, and all that. Entirely different thing.

[Eranil Morathim]

IO, Jagerin, and Sherlock, I agree with all of you 100%.

Is spanking the first option for punishment? No but it is the last. Is it abuse? Not when done like we have all said.

As I said before, I have been spanked, and I have been abused, I know the difference firsthand. A big one being that abuse is done with malice while spanking is not. An abuser has no care for their victim, save perhaps for not killing them so they can abuse them again later. (That was my experience anyway. Felt that way at least.) Spanking on the other hand is not done with malice, and as was said, is harder and more painful for the parent to do than it is to recieve. That may sound cliched but it is true.

Now, would I ever spank a child other than my own? Not a chance. I grew up in a small town where everybody knew everybody. So us kids were disciplined by whichever adult happened to catch us. But none of us were ever spanked by anyone but our parents, or in my case my grandparents too. That was just a line simply because it is a last resort.

Now obviously I have issues with my stepdad for the abuse. But my mom and I are very close, and were my granparents still alive, I know I would be extremely close with them too. As I said before, I'm glad I was spanked. It may have sucked at the time but it helped make me who I am today. In fact I still on occasion here my grandparents asking if what I'm doing is a good idea.

In short, spanking and abuse are worlds apart. Spanking is a last option, abuse is never an option.

[alextaylor]

Frightening isn't the only option! Talk to them!

I always treat children, no matter how young, as intelligent, sentient individuals. They're capable of logic. In the bird situation, make them feel guilty. Make them empathize with the baby birds. It's possible that they'll yell back at you for bringing it up nicely, but that's a natural response to feeling deeply guilty.

Many people don't realize that when a child acts bad, bratty, naughty, or even cruel, there is some underlying reason. They could feel deeply hurt or neglected. If there's a lot of anger or hate, it usually comes from the household. Sometimes they're ashamed of something.

In cases like that, it doesn't help to spank or yell at them. It might be better just to be a friend.

[Caela]

Staying well away from the spanking discussion and simply answering the OP.

If my child is misbehaving and I don't see it for some reason I would hope that another adult would bring her to me, tell me what she did, and let me handle it in the way that I feel is most appropriate for my child. That being said, there are some exceptions. If she is doing something that is going to result in serious harm to herself, or is actively hurting someone else, then I feel it is entirely appropriate for another adult startle or yell at her before coming to get me in order to stop the dangerous behaviour. Someone else actually laying hands on my child to punish however (getting ahold of her arm to bring her to me is one thing) had best expect those hands to be separated from their body!

[vin26m]

Those bird killing kids are on the road to being serial killers.

I haven't read this thread, but recording and reporting bad behavior is always an option.

Also, there's nothing stopping you from yelling at a kid.  I've done a lot of stupid stuff growing up.  I'm surprised I'm still alive.  I had a GT Performer, a BMX bike used for doing tricks.  I used to ride as fast as I can, then stand on the platforms just under the seat and put my hands out to the sides so it felt like I was flying.  No helmet or other protection.  One time, I did this right into the path of an incoming car.  The car stopped, but I was real close to being a bloody stain on their windshield.  The driver was enraged.  He pulled over and yelled at me from inside his car while his wife tried to calm him down.  I just rode off, but the effect my actions had him along with the potentially disastrous consequences stuck with me, and I stopped doing such risky tricks.

[Far eyes]

Take this as coming from somebody both a bit older and not coming from "the west' growing up i did not get physically punished very often. I can remember once getting slapped and once getting spanked with a belt. I was not a very difficult child as far as acting out goes as an adult looking back i would say i deserved both instances.

I don't think much physical discipline is really needed, what is necessary is establishing that your word goes. To meany parents today want to be there children friend, they don't need another friend they will get plenty. They need you to do your job and be there parent. To that end the threat of and use of physical punishment as a last exclamation mark is useful, but it should be the dot at the end of the line.

As for the kids with the bird nest, children can be cruel and the next wave of psychopaths also need to get born they don't just spring out of the ground fully grown.     

[Iniquitous]

I have a friend that had her son in 2003. She came from a home that never used corporal punishment, her husband came from a home that had no discipline at all. I will never forget the first visit after two years of living too far away to visit.

Her son was a monster. He kicked her, he hit her, he bit her, he pulled her hair, he called her names. She would try to take his toys away as punishment, he’d abuse her till she gave them back. She would try to put him in time out, he would refuse to sit there and she’d have to sit on the floor and physically restrain him - this would earn her kicks, slaps, bites that drew blood and bruised her. And bedtime? It was a two and a half hour ordeal to get him to go to bed - time that she would be further abused for trying to make him stay in his bed.

Her husband would yell at him. He’d yell right back at his dad. There was no control of the child. Matter of fact,  he ruled the house hold. And my friend was of the mind that you can use reason and logic with a child. No. You cannot. Definitely not her child.

I watched for a week as this child held the whole house hostage. Watched my friend sit and cry cause she just couldn’t understand why her child treated her so badly and why she was failing so miserably. When she finally asked me what she should do, I gave one answer.

“Whoop his ass. Show him who is the boss. And keep whooping his ass till he gets it.”

She took my advice and it only took six months for him to realize she was not going to back down. Every time he hit her, she spanked him. Every time he bit her, she spanked him. Every time he threw a fit or refused to do as he was told, she spanked him.

When he finally understood that she was the boss, not him, she relaxed and returned to using other forms of punishment. She doesn’t have to spank him often now - usually as a reminder of who is the boss when he gets lippy with her.

I agree with Far Eyes, a child needs to know who is in control. If the child does not know who is in control. or believes they are in control, you are going to have a monster on your hands.