Texas schools revive paddling

[blindsage]

So then WHAT do you suggest they do?? Talking does not work..No bad children?? Thank you Father Flanagan..There are a lot of kids out of control and the parents dont do **** about it because they refuse to believe that their child would act up..I have personally seen a child out of control and the Mothers attempt to start a corrective dialog ignored..The same child was taken to the mens room where the Father and applied a swift hand across their backside and the disruptive behavior ceased..

Children's behavior doesn't exist in a vacuum. It the child is significantly acting up there's one of two causes, poor parenting skills and examples by the parents, or a significant emotional/behavioral/chemical imbalance problem with the child. Neither of which is resolved by hitting the child. Sure their are plenty of anecdotes of children behaving poorly, getting hit and acting 'right'. That doesn't make it the correct action. The correct action is for the parents to learn better PARENTING SKILLS in order to curb the behavior in constructive ways. Yes, this is a long term investment for the parents. What your talking about is a poor band-aid applied to an immediate issue, what I'm talking about is the reality of the long term situation. The answer to poor parenting skills is not violence against children.

 

[blindsage]

That is a rare gift you have..a young disruptive child was visiting our dojang as his sister was training despite his Father sitting next to him and telling him that Master Steve and I were in charge and must be listened to and my own version of "we don't do those things here" said in my best cop voice I was ignored.. The parents threats to take away every privledge he had and was ignored.My Father would have taken me outside and gave me a good swat..They just kept attempting to talk him out of acting up..I pity his teachers..

So the only response you can think of to obviously poor parenting skills is to strike the child? Nothing else? That to me is not an example of a child that needs to be hit, but an example of parents who need education in child rearing.

 

[Drac]

That to me is not an example of a child that needs to be hit, but an example of parents who need education in child rearing.

My parents were not poor parents and their skills produced 3 boys that did them proud.However their came a time when all the talking, yelling, and threating did NO GOOD and a swift hand across the butt drove home the point there were trying to make.. I can see that debating this point further would be counter-productive, you have your beliefs and I have mine.

 

[dancingalone]

Seems to me that those against CP always assume a child is rational and can be reasoned with. Not true in my opinion. Children, especially those in the toddler range, are little masses of chemicals and enzymes. SOME are stable and can understand better the requirements to be a member of their family and society. Others may need some physical encouragement to learn until they develop more physically, emotionally, and mentally.

There's no universal solution for every child. Maybe some of you only have experience with the first group of children. In my case, I needed a swat from time to time, and surely there are other children just like me.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

Seems to me that those against CP always assume a child is rational and can be reasoned with. Not true in my opinion. Children, especially those in the toddler range, are little masses of chemicals and enzymes. SOME are stable and can understand better the requirements to be a member of their family and society. Others may need some physical encouragement to learn until they develop more physically, emotionally, and mentally.

There's no universal solution for every child. Maybe some of you only have experience with the first group of children. In my case, I needed a swat from time to time, and surely there are other children just like me.

You're probably right; different kids certainly respond better and worse to differing parenting styles. However, I'll go out on a limb and say that those of us who are against CP have more of an issue with the "spare the rod, spoil the child" idea; i.e. anyone who doesn't use a paddle or a swat on the butt is raising a spoiled, lazy brat. Me, I don't see any reason to resort to a physical reprimand when taking away privileges or forced yardwork could teach the same lessons.

The other aspect of the whole CP-in-schools issue is the in-schools part. If there are parents who want to rely on CP to reprimand their children, I wont want to be in the room when it happens, but ok. However, a teacher in the public school system using it? That I have a problem with.

 

[blindsage]

Seems to me that those against CP always assume a child is rational and can be reasoned with. Not true in my opinion. Children, especially those in the toddler range, are little masses of chemicals and enzymes. SOME are stable and can understand better the requirements to be a member of their family and society. Others may need some physical encouragement to learn until they develop more physically, emotionally, and mentally.

There's no universal solution for every child. Maybe some of you only have experience with the first group of children. In my case, I needed a swat from time to time, and surely there are other children just like me.

The issue isn't rationalizing vs. a physical solution. The issue is behavior. If you want to understand behavior then you have to learn about behavior. Assuming that those who are against CP are just relegated to using rationalizing completely misses the point. Hitting a child is a stop gap method for a lack of understanding of where behavior comes from, how it works, and how to alter it in a healthy constructive manner. No, child needs to be hit. A lot of parents don't understand child behavior and psychology and resort to hitting because of it's apparent, immediate effect. Patience is required to understand and raise children, striking a child is the overt evidence of a lack of proper patience on the part of a parent. In ANY other aspect of life, striking someone because they aren't behaving the way we like is completely and utterly unnacceptable, so how do we justify striking the most vulnerable people in our society who have a difficult time knowing what behavior is correct through no fault of their own?

 

[dancingalone]

The issue isn't rationalizing vs. a physical solution. The issue is behavior. If you want to understand behavior then you have to learn about behavior. Assuming that those who are against CP are just relegated to using rationalizing completely misses the point. Hitting a child is a stop gap method for a lack of understanding of where behavior comes from, how it works, and how to alter it in a healthy constructive manner. No, child needs to be hit. A lot of parents don't understand child behavior and psychology and resort to hitting because of it's apparent, immediate effect. Patience is required to understand and raise children, striking a child is the overt evidence of a lack of proper patience on the part of a parent. In ANY other aspect of life, striking someone because they aren't behaving the way we like is completely and utterly unnacceptable, so how do we justify striking the most vulnerable people in our society who have a difficult time knowing what behavior is correct through no fault of their own?

I think you are in danger of over-intellectualizing parenting. Behavioral 'science' is a relatively new field and even experts in the area admit it's still far from being a hard, quantitative field of inquiry.

I believe there was good parenting before psychology became a major at every university out there. And yes a few judiciously applied swats here and there to your childen doesn't preclude one from being a good parent.

 

[blindsage]

I think you are in danger of over-intellectualizing parenting. Behavioral 'science' is a relatively new field and even experts in the area admit it's still far from being a hard, quantitative field of inquiry.

I believe there was good parenting before psychology became a major at every university out there. And yes a few judiciously applied swats here and there to your childen doesn't preclude one from being a good parent.

The same rationale used to be used by men in 'disciplining' their wives.

 

[dancingalone]

The same rationale used to be used by men in 'disciplining' their wives.

Bad example. Wives are adults and free-willed, whatever their socio-economic reality. Children by definition aren't competent to make their own choices and must rely on a custodial parent to make arrangements for them.

Anyway, I totally reject the idea that one can always talk one's children into behaving and doing the right thing. With some children, perhaps that's possible. Others are more unruly, and I don't discount a biological reason for perhaps being the difference.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

Bad example. Wives are adults and free-willed, whatever their socio-economic reality. Children by definition aren't competent to make their own choices and must rely on a custodial parent to make arrangements for them.

I think blindsage's point was that, back then, women were regarded in the same manner you're regarding children: unable to make their own choices and dependent on a custodian (i.e. husband). Not saying it's innaccurate about kids, but he was addressing the rationale, not the truth of the matter.

Anyway, I totally reject the idea that one can always talk one's children into behaving and doing the right thing. With some children, perhaps that's possible. Others are more unruly, and I don't discount a biological reason for perhaps being the difference.

You're kind of arguing with a made-up person here. I can't recall anyone in this discussion saying that one can always talk children (especially young ones) into proper behavior. As I said previously, there's a spectrum of parental responses between corporal punishment on one end and rational discussion with a 4-year-old on the other.

 

[dancingalone]

but he was addressing the rationale,

I don't think so. He made a completely bad analogy by trying to tie wife-beating into the subject of CP for children. It's about as relevant pointing out that any rationalization for slavery and slave-beating is bad.

You're kind of arguing with a made-up person here. I can't recall anyone in this discussion saying that one can always talk children (especially young ones) into proper behavior.

No? Just read blindsage's post above yours. He seems to be stating that striking your children is always unjustifiable, which would seem to indicate that there's always another more peaceable option like talking.

"Hitting a child is a stop gap method for a lack of understanding of where behavior comes from, how it works, and how to alter it in a healthy constructive manner."

"No, child needs to be hit. "

"A lot of parents don't understand child behavior and psychology and resort to hitting because of it's apparent, immediate effect."

"Patience is required to understand and raise children, striking a child is the overt evidence of a lack of proper patience on the part of a parent. "

"In ANY other aspect of life, striking someone because they aren't behaving the way we like is completely and utterly unnacceptable, so how do we justify striking the most vulnerable people in our society who have a difficult time knowing what behavior is correct through no fault of their own?"

 

[RandomPhantom700]

No? Just read blindsage's post above yours. He seems to be stating that striking your children is always unjustifiable, which would seem to indicate that there's always another more peaceable option like talking.

Once again, there's a spectrum of responses. The exclusion of corporal punishment (i.e. "striking your children is always unjustifiable") doesn't necessarily only leave talking to them like an adult. There's extra chores, removal of privileges, time out somewhere other than their bedroom, soap in the mouth, yelling, forcing an apology. I'm not necessarily advocating using any of the above, and I recognize that some of them will only be so effective with children of different ages, but there's a lot more available besides CP or a sit-down chat. You seem to think that excluding CP means only leaving open discussion.

Regardless, as far as use of CP in schools is concerned, I see a few problems with it. First and foremost is, I've met some public school teachers in my day whom I wouldn't trust with talking to my child after class, let alone administering corporal punishment. Second, the teacher's role in disciplining a child really should be maintaining order in the classroom, not really dolling out justice, and I don't think CP is the only viable way of doing this.

More generally, CP a) doesn't teach the kid why their behavior's wrong, it just teaches them not to get caught, and b) it can potentially teach them a number of other not-so-nice lessons, such as "violence is an acceptable solution" or "don't trust mommy and daddy", or even "resent and hate authority figures". These problems are especially propounded, I believe, in a classroom setting.

Like I said, there's other ways of achieving the same goals without risking the other not-so-nice lessons being learned. That's why I object to corporal punishment in general, and particularly in a school setting.

 

[blindsage]

Bad example. Wives are adults and free-willed, whatever their socio-economic reality. Children by definition aren't competent to make their own choices and must rely on a custodial parent to make arrangements for them.

It's only a bad example to you because you think striking a child is an appropriate response to a given set of behaviors.

Anyway, I totally reject the idea that one can always talk one's children into behaving and doing the right thing. With some children, perhaps that's possible. Others are more unruly, and I don't discount a biological reason for perhaps being the difference.

As Random has pointed out I have nowhere stated that talking a child into behaving is the only alternative. You have interpreted that. As I said before it's not a dichotomy between talking it out and hitting the child. There are a LOT more dynamics and options available than just those.

 

[dancingalone]

I'm not necessarily advocating using any of the above, and I recognize that some of them will only be so effective with children of different ages, but there's a lot more available besides CP or a sit-down chat. You seem to think that excluding CP means only leaving open discussion.

Let's stick to the punishments for small children since CP is primarily (I hope) meant for them.

"time out somewhere other than their bedroom, soap in the mouth, yelling, forcing an apology"

All of these are aggressive actions in of themselves and they rely on the implicit threat of parental authority as the punitive measure. If you're a big fan of child behavior psychology some even argue that the act of yelling is violence towards your child.

Regardless, as far as use of CP in schools is concerned, I see a few problems with it. First and foremost is, I've met some public school teachers in my day whom I wouldn't trust with talking to my child after class, let alone administering corporal punishment. Second, the teacher's role in disciplining a child really should be maintaining order in the classroom, not really dolling out justice, and I don't think CP is the only viable way of doing this.

More generally, CP a) doesn't teach the kid why their behavior's wrong, it just teaches them not to get caught, and b) it can potentially teach them a number of other not-so-nice lessons, such as "violence is an acceptable solution" or "don't trust mommy and daddy", or even "resent and hate authority figures". These problems are especially propounded, I believe, in a classroom setting.

Like I said, there's other ways of achieving the same goals without risking the other not-so-nice lessons being learned. That's why I object to corporal punishment in general, and particularly in a school setting.

These are better arguments against CP in my opinion. It's not like I think CP should be universally applied in all situations. Use it thoughtfully without anger. Use it wisely and judiciously and explain to the child why they are getting a swat. CP is a tool. Like any other tool it has its limits. I'm inclined to think it works best with small children.

 

[dancingalone]

It's only a bad example to you because you think striking a child is an appropriate response to a given set of behaviors.

Yeah, this seems to be turning into a neener, neener type discussion, so I'll bow out unless someone has something new to add.

 

[Darksoul]

2 cents.

-My own experience: my father never really hit my brothers or myself, at least not that I recall. Maybe when we were really small. I just understood that I was not to make my father angry. How I knew that, I have no idea. When I got older, my father turned to lecturing me. And how I hated to be lectured for 2 hours or so. Shudder. I turned out alright.

-Now, how about instead of CP, we use PD. As in Physical Discipline. Beyond gym class. If a teacher catches a student doing something wrong, discipline them with exercise. Pushups on the spot. And for every infraction, keep increasing the numbers. Jumping jacks, sit-ups/crunches. Right in the hallway, right in front of other students.

-Thoughts?

Andrew

 

[Blade96]

That is a rare gift you have..a young disruptive child was visiting our dojang as his sister was training despite his Father sitting next to him and telling him that Master Steve and I were in charge and must be listened to and my own version of "we don't do those things here" said in my best cop voice I was ignored.. The parents threats to take away every privledge he had and was ignored.My Father would have taken me outside and gave me a good swat..They just kept attempting to talk him out of acting up..I pity his teachers..



Most of the ones CP's including me were caught red handed and the old paddle was applied to the backside, never anywhere else and never with a hand..

So the only response you can think of to obviously poor parenting skills is to strike the child? Nothing else? That to me is not an example of a child that needs to be hit, but an example of parents who need education in child rearing.

Yeah, this seems to be turning into a neener, neener type discussion, so I'll bow out unless someone has something new to add.

I have something new. I'll bring up the example of the small child in the dojo (sorry dojang but i am a karateka) and the example of the small child in the doctor's office waiting that I saw many times. I think even then there are better alternatives to cp. the child in these situations is acting up because children can't sit and be quiet for that long, especially small children. I've seen children act up while waiting for the doctor because they had nothing to occupy them with. And I've seen children play quite happily with something that occupied them and they were fine. The answer to that is give them a book to read or a toy to play with instead of cp. They need stimulation and something to pass the time with and not cp. I have also seen parents bring children up to their office at university and they expected their very small ones to sit and be quiet while the parent worked. WTF! The parents didnt bring anything for them to do ffs.

 

[5-0 Kenpo]

Funny how some people here complain that spanking children teaches them to solve their problems with violence, but if a teacher spanks their children, for ostensibly disciplinary and not abusive purposes, they would solve that problem with violence.

Kinda contradictory, don't ya think....???

 

[RandomPhantom700]

Funny how some people here complain that spanking children teaches them to solve their problems with violence, but if a teacher spanks their children, for ostensibly disciplinary and not abusive purposes, they would solve that problem with violence.

Kinda contradictory, don't ya think....???

Wait, what? Want to run that one by me again?

 

[dancingalone]

I have something new. I'll bring up the example of the small child in the dojo (sorry dojang but i am a karateka) and the example of the small child in the doctor's office waiting that I saw many times. I think even then there are better alternatives to cp. the child in these situations is acting up because children can't sit and be quiet for that long, especially small children. I've seen children act up while waiting for the doctor because they had nothing to occupy them with. And I've seen children play quite happily with something that occupied them and they were fine. The answer to that is give them a book to read or a toy to play with instead of cp. They need stimulation and something to pass the time with and not cp. I have also seen parents bring children up to their office at university and they expected their very small ones to sit and be quiet while the parent worked. WTF! The parents didnt bring anything for them to do ffs.

Blade, that might be an example of where CP would be inappropriate.

Here's an example where I think it was the right punishment. I swatted my four year old son a little while ago. We have a gas range at home and he's very interested in fire right now. He's been told time and time again that fire is dangerous and that he's not allowed to touch the range at all until he is older and can understand the usages of fire better. I caught him on a chair turning one of the burners on while I was letting the dog out the backyard. My son got a hard swat on the bottom, a verbal reprimand, and he was sent to timeout for 2 minutes.

Appropriate correction? I think so. He is 4. CP is very much a valuable tool at this age.