|
On October 18 2014 22:21 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2014 22:13 fronkschnonk wrote:
@micronesia
You acutally answered your question by yourself. If the non-violent discipline methods don't work, you will have to live with it as a parent. The rest of your post seems pretty reasonable, but this was the part I said I can't simply agree with. This is essentially a 'hands off' approach to parenting you take up if your initial punishments (take away toys etc) don't work. This seems to be an extremely backwards lesson for the child... that resisting your discipline gets them what they want. Perhaps if I saw this in action I would understand what you mean better, and it wouldn't be as unreasonable of a suggestions as it currently seems.
I think what he meant was that you don't give in to the kid, you just start ignoring its behavior.
If your kid wants ice cream for dinner and you refuse then it throws a tantrum and you just put it in its room/playpen and ignore it. No kid wants to get ignored.
My sister works at a place for kids whose parents can't handle them and they never use physical force at all. She says that it works a lot better to just explain to the kid why its behavior was wrong.
|
I'm mostly lurking here on the forums, but I cannot really resist saying something to this topic, since it adresses mostly the same arguments while leaving others out.
On October 18 2014 22:21 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2014 22:13 fronkschnonk wrote:
@micronesia
You acutally answered your question by yourself. If the non-violent discipline methods don't work, you will have to live with it as a parent. The rest of your post seems pretty reasonable, but this was the part I said I can't simply agree with. This is essentially a 'hands off' approach to parenting you take up if your initial punishments (take away toys etc) don't work. This seems to be an extremely backwards lesson for the child... that resisting your discipline gets them what they want. Perhaps if I saw this in action I would understand what you mean better, and it wouldn't be as unreasonable of a suggestions as it currently seems.
The only reason why this answer seems unreasonable to you is because the scenario is inherently flawed. If I understood you correctly the scenario is: "All non-spanking methods are not successful, what can I do except resorting to spanking? "
The problem about this is that you can move the goalposts with this argument at will, because you can reformulate in "All this methods X have not worked, what can I do except method Y." Insert here "non-spanking methods and spanking (with hands)" for method X and "using a hairbrush for physical punishment" for method Y. Or you could move "using a hairbrush" to method X and insert "using a cane" for method Y (and so on for harder punishments).
There is no 'complete' method for parenting, you can always have the hypothetical scenario that your child will resist all methods you tried up until a point, that does not mean that using a harder method is justified. If they behave that way and are that stubborn about an issue that they resist consistent non-violent methods then there is most likely a reason for it. Younger children will not resist something on principle (by which I mean 'principle' and not just a stubborn phase) and if older ones do that then they are smart enough that you can just ask them why.
Apart from the consequential point of view there is the issue which is inherent to corporal punishment of any form. There are two components to it: The physical pain or for the least harshest version a shock on the one side and an overpowering part on the other (humilation can be a third part for older children). The overpowering part takes either the form of using your authority to force your child to submit to physical punishment on their own or putting them into position yourself (mostly smaller children). It puts them into a completely helpless position (either by not being able to leave physically or just being held their by parental authoriy) and leaving them exposed, which is an absolutely terrible feeling.
The only situation where such measures are justified is when you defend yourself or others, but for some reason there is this cultural exception for children, who are the ones who rely the most on the people who have the right to do it (in some counties at least). Children are people first and foremost and have essential rights. Not being exposed to physical pain and such helpless positions is one of them. Arguments that they 'turn out right' are completely irrelevant for that, children count as people themselves, not just when they are adults.
|
Yeah, my statement was a bit unclear.
I don't want to say, that you should do nothing. You should keep on doing the stuff you are doing already. The disciplinary methods still will limitate the child and show your disapproval. Your other parenting methods will still show the child your understanding of wrong and right and that it is loved and it also have to justify it's own behaviour (this depends on the age). And if the child still wants to do whatever it is, you don't want it to, you perhaps can't change that in the short run but you can stop it from doing it.
This is the (certainly stressful) situation you have to live with - not with the child doing bad stuff.
In the end it depends on the concrete situation. I strongly belief that a child that is in rage-mode and about to smash bottles in a supermarket will get the point, if you take it by it's hands and carry it away, telling it that you're disappointed and that one doesn't smash other peoples stuff. At least it won't get the point more likely by spanking it.
The point is not, that the child doesn't do it, but the child is aware of it being a wrong thing to do and therefore doesn't want to do it anymore.
|
On October 18 2014 22:21 micronesia wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2014 22:13 fronkschnonk wrote:
@micronesia
You acutally answered your question by yourself. If the non-violent discipline methods don't work, you will have to live with it as a parent. The rest of your post seems pretty reasonable, but this was the part I said I can't simply agree with. This is essentially a 'hands off' approach to parenting you take up if your initial punishments (take away toys etc) don't work. This seems to be an extremely backwards lesson for the child... that resisting your discipline gets them what they want. Perhaps if I saw this in action I would understand what you mean better, and it wouldn't be as unreasonable of a suggestions as it currently seems.
Kids resisting their parents isn't necessarily a bad thing. They are supposed to develop a personality and find shit out on their own, they're supposed to become real people. A good junk of people, mainly the adults that were kids during the "68 generation" or shortly after have been raised completely anti-authoritarian without any rules at all. That's not a fringe phenomenon and actually still quite popular today. If you resort to any kind of "big punishment" regularly you're probably already a parent at the more conservative spectrum here.
I know this is anecdotal but what I always noticed is how American exchange students when they come to study here tend to get completely shit faced and completely overdo it. It actually takes them a few weeks/months to adjust because additionally to the conservative upbringing most seem to have no idea how to handle the fact that they can buy alcohol legally. The whole culture just seems completely unhealthy to me.
|
United States24629 Posts
On October 19 2014 00:40 Nyxisto wrote:
I know this is anecdotal but what I always noticed is how American exchange students when they come to study here tend to get completely shit faced and completely overdo it. It actually takes them a few weeks/months to adjust because additionally to the conservative upbringing most seem to have no idea how to handle the fact that they can buy alcohol legally. The whole culture just seems completely unhealthy to me.
I see the same thing with Americans that go to school locally (in the USA). They leave their parents' home, go live on their own at school, and completely overdo it.
This was not me; I am probably atypical in that regard (although far from unique). That might give me a different perspective than you would expect coming from an American.
|
I think that most of today's retarded modern "culture" such as Jersey Shore has a lot to do with not enough spanking and generally awfull parenting.
|
Spanked open hand as well as occasionally with a belt. Pretty sure my mom used a ladle once too, but out of desperation because I had reached the point where spanking induced laughter, not pain/fear.
|
yeah i was, i think my parents regret it because i dont forgive that kind of abuse.
|
On October 18 2014 23:38 prplhz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2014 22:21 micronesia wrote:On October 18 2014 22:13 fronkschnonk wrote:
@micronesia
You acutally answered your question by yourself. If the non-violent discipline methods don't work, you will have to live with it as a parent. The rest of your post seems pretty reasonable, but this was the part I said I can't simply agree with. This is essentially a 'hands off' approach to parenting you take up if your initial punishments (take away toys etc) don't work. This seems to be an extremely backwards lesson for the child... that resisting your discipline gets them what they want. Perhaps if I saw this in action I would understand what you mean better, and it wouldn't be as unreasonable of a suggestions as it currently seems. I think what he meant was that you don't give in to the kid, you just start ignoring its behavior. If your kid wants ice cream for dinner and you refuse then it throws a tantrum and you just put it in its room/playpen and ignore it. No kid wants to get ignored. My sister works at a place for kids whose parents can't handle them and they never use physical force at all. She says that it works a lot better to just explain to the kid why its behavior was wrong.
I feel like when people say that "it works a lot better to just explain to the kid why its behavior was wrong," they have in their mind that parents who spank just spank for everything. And, maybe some do, but that's ridiculous.
1) Just because I employ spanking, does not mean I do it all the time... for everything... whenever I feel like it.
2) You said your sister never uses physical force at all. How could she possibly know if that works better? She's only tried one side.
3) Most of the people arguing in here don't even have children.
4) I notice a lot of people making the assumption that children are always rational. I find that so silly, especially because most people that argue on TL talk about how dumb adults are. Children are rational and adults are irrational? Ok.
4a) Next time you find yourself at a daycare or a cousin's house and a 2 yr old boy runs up and kicks you in the shin because he knows you will react to it and he wants to play, just explain to him that it actually hurts and you want him to stop. Sometimes, that will work. The smart ones, however, know that because you brought it up, you actually noticed them. Goal achieved. Repeat kicking. So, I guess you're right, they are rational.
Sometimes I feel like some of you guys don't even have younger siblings, or remember when you were a child, or whatever. I mean, are we talking 4 month olds? You don't spank 4 month olds. That's abuse. Are we talking 15 yr olds? If you're still spanking at 15, sounds like you've lost the battle. I don't think spanking into the teenage years does anything. It just doesn't. Their reasoning is developed enough at that point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
