Did Corporal Punishment Save This School?

[Flea]

What an interesting thread. I see so many parallels between this and the dog training discussion in the SD forum.

When is it okay to apply a leash pop or a prong collar? When do you escalate to the alpha roll or simply a blow while you shout BAD!!! How "stubborn" does a dog have to be, and what exactly do they learn from it? And are they learning the desired behavior, or simply avoiding a particular behavior out of fear?

The advantage of having this conversation about humans is that one can explore the motivations behind the offending behavior ... sort of ... before choosing a corrective course of action. In theory. Therapy wouldn't be such a billion-dollar enterprise if people truly understood their actions. And you'll never get a coherent answer out of a 3yo as to why he hit Mommy. I applaud the principal's efforts to find out whether the kid has a serious issue before applying the cane, but what kid is going to have that level of insight? Especially if it's a question of child abuse at which point the principal is reducing "school" to the level of "home" as a place of fear and danger, defeating the whole purpose.

I'm not a parent so I won't weigh in on this - I really have no idea. But as a trainer I would never strike a dog, and I've given a number of professional trainers bad recommendations for doing so.

 

[Makalakumu]

I teach my students and my children that violence is a last resort, only to be used when you have no other options. I've never had to strike my kids because I've never gotten to the point when it would be necessary. I think if I spanked my children for general discipline it would make me out to be a hypocrite later. Even if I used it very judiciously like the principle (and like my father) I still don't want them to associate pain and violence with compliance and justice. There are other ways of meting out consequences for bad behavior and it works just fine for my family.

That said, I probably would not allow my children to go to this school. I would find a private school or home school. I am NOT opposed to parents resorting to the strap or schools resorting to the strap as long as there are other options for parents to choose from. In an ideal world, a parent should be able to shop around and compare discipline systems (among other things) and be able to choose schools based on their criteria.

We don't have that system now, instead we have a massive compulsory scheme that forces almost everyone into it's doors regardless of their individual needs. In this set-up, I do not support the use of the strap because it WILL be used as a tool for conformity. It always has been used in that way and is exactly akin to smashing square kids in round holes.

 

[seasoned]

In a nut shell, yes. Kids want direction, they crave it. Life is made up of choices and consequences. Love them and praise them when they deserve it, sit them down and talk to them when needed, and as a last resort, a stinger on the butt. Now, what you have done, is given them cause to think about their actions, in a meaningful way. Rules should be in place, and fairness always evident in all situations involving reprimanding inappropriate behavior. We on this forum know what it took to get us here. As we look back on life we, for the most part, know when we were treated fairly or out right abused while growing up. Hitting for the sake of hitting is wrong, and consistency should always be in place. Once I knew that my mom or dad meant business, it made my growing up years a whole lot easier.

 

[Sukerkin]

Shesulsa put it more explicitly than I did :tup:.

When it comes to discipline at home then it most certainly should be as she expressed it.

Also, whilst I can understand parents not wanting to deligate physical authority to another over their kids, I am afraid that I must respectfully disagree with the concept. In my day, if you got into trouble at school and were disciplined, you got it worse when you got home.

If the teachers do not have the proper sanctions for the full spectrum of control and punishment then order cannot be maintained and you end up with the situation we have now.

 

[teekin]

I've snipped out an awful lot of the quoted post because I pretty much agree with most of it.

However, I thought this part needed amplification. Meting out a violent response to an infraction without explaining why and how to avoid similar in the future is meaningless discipline.

That is not what I, for one, was talking about. Nor was I suggesting that physical punishment is the first 'port of call' for those attempting to ensure disciplined behaviour.

The whole purpose of discipline is to enforce the idea that actions not within the accepted rules of 'society' have unpleasant consequences. The best, simplest and most meaningful of these consequences is pain and/or humilation.

If a child is amenable to reason and is naturally inclined to cooperate with the social rules then physical discipline will hardly ever (if ever) be necessary.

Corporal punishment needs to exist for those that do not fall into that readily socialised group.

No, Big S. I think you put it best.
Lori