EPTBeating Kids? - Page 15
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
| ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28892 Posts
 | ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
 | ||
micronesia
United States24799 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + | ||
|
Ancestral
United States3230 Posts
On December 25 2008 05:29 Mora wrote: thanks for this. i was not aware of the distinctions. edit - now that i think about it, if you know the specifics of operant conditioning, then perhaps you have an opinion on the matter? care to share it? Sorry, I haven't time to read the rest of the thread since I am about to eat Christmas (eve) dinner with my family, but here's my brief opinion, based on my basic understanding Spanking is usually not very effective conditioning because it often doesn't happen immediately after the transgression, so the child doesn't make a strong enough association with the transgression and the punishment. Also, acts like spanking and similar ones are usually performed when the parent is angry. Although according to some parenting books, it's ok to spank kids "when you're not angry," it's even worse for conditioning if you wait to cool down. Obviously, a spank on the butt doesn't cause lasting physical damage, but there are better forms. A firm "loud" voice informing children of wrongdoing, telling them what will happen if they repeat is better. The second time of course, you can invoke the previous incident ("this time you can't stay up late and watch the Simpsons") The main problem with spanking is that it is indeed usually done angrily, and raging and angry parents is an irresponsible example for children. I think any rational parent should be able to stay calm and devise more effective methods of punishment, and if there are problems so severe that spanking is considered justified, a professional should probably be called in. Not this part is all speculation, but I think that, barring different cultural views where spanking is the norm, frequent spanking is probably the result of parents who had kids and are insufficiently prepared to deal with transgressions (haven't spent enough time considering it) and don't know what to do and feel their child's behavior is deteriorating dangerously. I will not deny that sometimes kids do things that are just bad, but that doesn't mean the parents can too. My $0.02. One of my professors did a research essay on spanking, and it was then cited in an article in some news journal. I'll try to come up with both if this thread is still active in a few days. Edit: In case my implication was not clear, anything that actually physically hurts a child is right out, aside from being illegal. | ||
|
Hippopotamus
1914 Posts
Spanking is usually not very effective conditioning because it often doesn't happen immediately after the transgression, so the child doesn't make a strong enough association with the transgression and the punishment. So you just get done reading about operant conditioning, and then you say that? | ||
|
EmeraldSparks
United States1451 Posts
Also, the sheer amount of douchebaggery in this thread astounds me. On December 24 2008 20:34 Liquid`Drone wrote: the most common arguement "for" spanking children is: "well I was spanked and I turned out just fine" anyone who uses this arguement however, did not turn out fine : for fucks sake, they are advocating hitting their own children. "People who disagree with me are fucked up." Thanks. On December 24 2008 22:31 ManBearPig wrote: I'm amazed at how people won't change their obviously wrong opinions on spanking children, even when studies have been CITED (this does not happen often in discussions on the internet). It just shows how futile arguing on the internet can be. At least in a conversation you can establish a non-dominant way of 'investigating the issue together', so it's not a competition and minds can be swayed. On the internet, it always seems to be about winning. Child spankers: bow before science and admit your defeat. links links links can't do shit without links On December 24 2008 20:27 BlackStar wrote: Statistics are clear. Causation is not correlation. Really, you must be very stupid to even try to make this argument. He's demonstrating the failure of a mechanism to turn kids fucked up, and generally countering the people who say dumb shit like "if you beat your kids they will either be spineless or resentful." Take a look in the mirror. On December 25 2008 04:16 Mora wrote: perhaps if you weren't beaten as a child you'd be better to handle your temper with others' misbehavior. if your responses aren't a clear indication that abuse of children doesn't perpetuate abuse (in your case verbal), then nothing is. Seriously? What the fuck? "Your responses in this thread mean that your parents were terrible people for spanking you and indicate that you are fucked up and likely to abuse your children." On December 25 2008 06:43 BlackStar wrote: Yeah but the debate has ended long long ago. At least among educated people. That's something, isn't it? "People who don't agree with me are retarded." On December 25 2008 09:03 Frits wrote: Title: CHILD, MATERNAL, AND FAMILY CHARACTERISTICS ASSOCIATED WITH SPANKING Author(s): GILESSIMS J, STRAUS MA, SUGARMAN DB Source: FAMILY RELATIONS Volume: 44 Issue: 2 Pages: 170-176 Published: APR 1995 Times Cited: 65 This a great article that sums up the whole thing incredibly well. From the first page: The quoted studies are are peer reviewed and showed significant statistical differences between spanked and not spanked. I would like to know how these studies separate causation and correlation. Maybe shitty parents are more likely to beat their children; has this possibility been accounted for? | ||
|
micronesia
United States24799 Posts
| ||
|
Sawajiri
Austria417 Posts
Different parenting techniques work for different kids. That is why siblings can be so very different from one another. My brother and I are the complete opposite of one another personality-wise and had completely different attitudes and personalities even as toddlers. We were both raised very liberally without ever getting spanked. While he's a manner guy and the technique obviously worked for him, I think a personality such as mine could have profited from a stricter upbringing. So I think parenting is a highly individual thing and that there is no "one-size-fits-all". | ||
|
Frits
11782 Posts
| ||
|
Frits
11782 Posts
On December 25 2008 11:06 Sawajiri wrote: I always think these threads are just so pointless. Different parenting techniques work for different kids. That is why siblings can be so very different from one another. My brother and I are the complete opposite of one another personality-wise and had completely different attitudes and personalities even as toddlers. We were both raised very liberally without ever getting spanked. While he's a manner guy and the technique obviously worked for him, I think a personality such as mine could have profited from a stricter upbringing. So I think parenting is a highly individual thing and that there is no "one-size-fits-all". "could have" please stop with the bullshit personal anecdotes guys they are meaningless | ||
|
EmeraldSparks
United States1451 Posts
also, stats only show "generally kids who are beaten do worse" maybe there are kids/parents for whom beating is useful and kids for whom it is not, with more kids for whom it is not if one is to propose a mechanism for turning kids violent then anecdotal evidence demonstrating failure of said mechanism helps detract from the proposition that beating kids is always bad | ||
|
ilj.psa
Peru3081 Posts
On December 25 2008 08:29 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: blackstar your posts make me frown and shake my head | ||
|
SerpentFlame
418 Posts
On December 25 2008 08:42 Frits wrote: Have you ever seen an antisocial person say, "boy, I wish I wasn't so antisocial"? Yes I have. In fact, it's actually pretty common? If you're referring to those antisocial by choice, it's because they had a choice, which is fundamentally different than the point at hand here (kids don't choose to be spanked). If you're referring to those who are born with some physical deformity or some mental disability that socially handicaps people, then you can ask them if they wished they didn't have them, most of them will say yes. The studies you linked to are about frustration and anger (pscyhological damage) as a child, and as an adult, they'll definitely know that it's present. Right now your argument states that "People who grow up didn't know what's good for them when they were kids", which is kindof ridiculous. Keep in mind that when you reference statistics, many of those who have been spanked are also those who have been abused in some other form that is more severe than spanking, hence the resulting frustration and anger as an adult or whatever. Not to say that your statistics are invalid, but simply saying that you should take them with a grain of salt. Additionally, many spanking households do so out of parental frustration, as opposed to responsible attitudes. Responsible parents make up a far greater proportion of those who do not spank, hence throwing into question whether spanking is the cause for such behavior, or whether it's simply an indication of parental irresponsibility due to a variety of societal factors. Furthermore, the Straus study deals with the intensity and prevelance of spanking, but bases its claims critically on the categories of spanked and nonspanked in various groups of age (<-- not to say that it doesn't deal with chronicity and recurrence, but the conclusion that Straus issues regarding spanking merely looks at the amalgamation of "spanked" into one cateogry). The data given in the study, however, indicates that the negative results that had significant were those that had a high spanking intensity and high spanking prevalence in age groups of 0-4 years of age. The other results in his study with far more moderate spanking show little significant data, and with a lower chronicity of spanking, the data is largely inconclusive. Putting this all into historical context, conservative spankless parenting never took off until the latter half of the century. In America, spanking has been on the decline (from 94 percent in 1960 to 55 percent in 1998 (Welsh 1998), and yet, rates of social aggression and crime rates are increasing in recent years. This at least, indicates that the effects of moderate spanking are relatively inconsequential (obviously, the same cannot be said of excessive physical discipline) In my view, it boils down to spanking as not being bad, but being done at the wrong times. Traditional spanking doesn't look beyond the surface and into the heart of matters, and therefore is sometimes used in the wrong situation. However, I've been unable to find very much information on the subject matter in research databases (a total of three articles on JSTOR( all of which critically originate from Straus), which critically focuses on Western texts as opposed to those of Southeast Asia or the Middle East). If anyone has a reliable article supporting spanking, posting it would be appreciated | ||
|
Ki_Do
Korea (South)981 Posts
On December 24 2008 10:14 Eskii wrote: Physical discipline is an entirely fine way to deal with your kids. | ||
|
strongwind
United States862 Posts
I think parents should utilize some form of discipline within good judgement. It becomes such a pain for teachers to have to do it all themselves. As in this case, the more time a teacher has to deal with raising children, the less time he/she has to actually teach them. edit: oh, and not to mention it drives teachers crazy ^^ | ||
|
29 fps
United States5725 Posts
On December 25 2008 11:16 Frits wrote: "could have" please stop with the bullshit personal anecdotes guys they are meaningless how are they meaningless? there isnt one way to raise kids, otherwise we'd all be a lot more similar. if you're trying to be "scientific" about this, those studies are probably based off of people's lives, aka personal anecdotes. | ||
|
Frits
11782 Posts
On December 25 2008 11:46 29 fps wrote: how are they meaningless? there isnt one way to raise kids, otherwise we'd all be a lot more similar. if you're trying to be "scientific" about this, those studies are probably based off of people's lives, aka personal anecdotes. yes 100 anecdotes with similarities = possible to draw meaningful conclusion 1 anecdote = meaningless | ||
|
29 fps
United States5725 Posts
| ||
|
Mora
Canada5235 Posts
On December 25 2008 10:40 EmeraldSparks wrote: Seriously? What the fuck? "Your responses in this thread mean that your parents were terrible people for spanking you and indicate that you are fucked up and likely to abuse your children." Did you read the whole thread or just skim over parts that you were convicted to retort on? If you had read the rest of my posts in addition to the one you quoted from me you might have been able to figure out that that post was made in jest. perhaps it was just a failing on my part to be funny, but i will reiterate: read the rest of my posts and try responding to those, as they are the ones with actual content. Infact, after re-reading your post, it seems you took more than just my statement out of context. Are you going out of your way to start arguements? I would advocate trying to read someone else's words with the intention of seeing it from their point of view before trying to burn them. If you do not do this, you run the risk of taking things out of context which is bad for discussion. | ||
| ||
