fcarmody@udenva.UUCP (Prince Caspian) (02/24/86)
People, I can see this discussion could get out of hand real fast.
That is why I wanted to keep it in my mailbox. This is a controversial
topic at best, at worst it could start a conflagration. I can also see
that I need to do some clarifying as to what *I* (as the person starting
this discussion, I believe I have some license here) mean by a spanking.
I have seen parents (and more importantly children) for whom it works,
and this is what they have in common, as far as I can tell.
1) Spanking is *completely* reserved for instances involving
A) direct defiance. This is either outright refusal of the
child to obey an order, angry compliance, or post-tell-me-three-times
resistance. (What happens after the third warning or reminder).
B) Situations involving clear and present danger to the child's health
or life. (In young ones, the electic cord/chemical/hot stove scene, in
older kids, a spanking might be appropriate for stealing, etc.)
2) The decision to spank has been made *well before* the parent gets
angry. (This most often means that the parent has set up a standard
in his head: "If he crosses this line, it is time to spank." This *can*
be done if the first guideline serves as the standard.)
3) The spanking is private, an encounter between parent and child.
there is no attempt at humiliation, or angry scolding. There is
no condemnation of the child anywhere in the parent's body language
or attitude. Calmly, and firmly, the parent asks the child what
the spanking is for. With the answer, the spanking begins.
4) This is the tricky part for some people. Spanking is with a neutral
object (not the hand, not a belt) suitable for the purpose. I know of
one family where each time a spanking would be necessary, the child
and his mother would go outside, and the lecture would start as they
walked through the yard, looking for a switch or stick to be
used in the spanking. In the end, the boy had to choose for himself,
based, I am told, on his own conscience. This seems like positive
reinforcement of the lesson.
5) contact is as close as possible during the encounter (This favors
over-the knee.) The spanking stops when healthy, releasing tears
have begun, or some other sign at the parent's good judgement.
(Tears should not be forced, but after they start, if at all,
they should be certifiably genuine. A parent in tune with his child's
responses will know the difference between cathartic tears and an act.)
6) When tears start (or after spanking ends, if repentance is sure
without tears) the child is picked up for a *big*, warm hug, and
*held* until crying stops. (Some children don't want that. Don't
force it, but *don't* *walk* *away*.) Loving whispers help,
things like "there, there" and so on. Encourage the child
to "cry it out." Then, still cozy, discuss things for a bit.
Let the situation resolve itself for both.
7) The spanking *ends* the issue, *even if it has to be repeated later*.
Never bring up previous dirty laundry.
That is what *I* mean by spanking. I don't mean it works all the time,
even in the rare cases where these steps are followed exactly.
Let me ask you the question I was really trying to get at in the
first place : Do parents try to follow through that way? Do they succeed?
If the dynamics are different from the "angry" spanking, the "I mean it"
spanking, or abuse, then how so? If spanking hasn't worked for you,
chances are at least one of the things I have mentioned is absent.
IF AND ONLY IF it *has* worked for you, I want to know if it
was because of these things. If you have tried it this way,
to no effect, then tell me why you think it failed. The responses I
recieved so far all express arguments which I am *well acquainted with*
and *do not need to hear again*, although I do express thanks to
the people who have submitted them. Sorry folks. I believe in
spanking, at least this sort. That will not change, and I will
not be responsable for flames arising from it. But *am I an isolated case*?
Does it *work* when it is *loving*, and why? Can we change things so that
"the rod" doesn't have such a bad name? How? WHERE DO YOU DRAW THE LINE?
Sorry about the length. I am prepared to accept flames, and responses
of other sorts, BUT ONLY IF THEY ARE MAILED, *NOT POSTED*.
If you want to carry the ball over the net among yourselves, that's ok,
BUT DON'T FLAME ME if a conflagration starts. I was as careful as I
knew how to be on this one.
In His Name,
Caspian
******************************************************************************
no dour face on the part of the parent.
--
- Prince Caspian of Narnia, AKA Francis X. Carmody
Electronic Adress (UUcp only:{hplabs,seismo}!hao!udenva!fcarmody}
OR: {boulder,cires,denelcor,cisden}!udenva!fcarmody
The above opinions are my own, noone else in the known galaxy should be held responsable, except in the rare cases where they coincide with the opinions of Almighty God... In the above case, any disagreement with said opinions should be refferred directly to Him....
:wbecker@rochester.UUCP (Tim Becker) (02/25/86)
I agree with much of what Caspian said he means by spanking and would like
to elaborate based on my experience with our 4 year old son.
First, I must tell my son what the limits are and what the consequences
of his crossing those limits are. My son is fairly strong willed and
active - he doesn't play quietly doing everythings he's told. So,
parental intervention is frequently necessary (ie. discipline). For
example, suppose he's throwing his toys around in the play room. I
object telling him he could hit his baby sister and possibly break the
toys or window in the room. He continues. At this point, I tell him
what will happen if he chooses to continue. "If you throw any more
toys, I'll spank you". If a parent doesn't outline the limit and the
consequence, children may see discipline as capricous and hence unfair
-- the discipline depends on daddy's mood not really on their actions.
I believe this principle is valid independent of the discipline used
(spanking, grounding, ...). If he continues to throw his toys, I must
follow through on the promised consequence. Not doing so, communicates
a capricousness as well.
More specific to spanking, I don't spank him in front of his friends or
even his little sister -- I want to avoid any possibility of
humiliation. We have a chair in the living room that we use by taking
him to the living room, spanking him, and sitting him on the chair. I
usually set a kitchen timer at this point (2-4 minutes) and tell him to
think about what happened and that I'll be back when the timer rings.
The reason for the timer is that our son doesn't normally cry tears of
remorse. He'll often be angry or act casual (kind of ignoring my
discipline). The timer forces him to stop playing and gives him a
chance to consider what happened. When the timer rings, I sit face to
face and eye level with him and we talk about what happened. I make
sure he understands why I disciplined him. If he needs to say he's
sorry to someone (for hitting his sister, say), I ask him to do it. I
don't force this -- we sit and talk about it until he's ready. I don't
really like the idea of dragging the child by the hand to the injured
child and saying gruffly, "Now you say you're sorry"! I'm looking to
instill a genuine sensitivity to other people -- forcing it doesn't do
that. We usually hug and I tell him he's forgiven. Small children need
physical reassurance of our feelings -- words may not convey the same
message as a hug. At this point, I want to convey that all is well,
I'm not holding a grudge, and that I love and accept him fully.
Sorry for the long description. Caspian asked for personal experiences,
so here's mine.
Happy parenting!
Tim Becker.
..!{seismo,allegra,decvax}!rochester!beckerfine@nmtvax.UUCP (Andrew J Fine) (02/25/86)
In article <> fcarmody@udenva.UUCP (Prince Caspian) writes: > >1) Spanking is *completely* reserved for instances involving > A) direct defiance. This is either outright refusal of the >child to obey an order, angry compliance, or post-tell-me-three-times >resistance. (What happens after the third warning or reminder). "Angry compliance" should *never* be equated with direct defiance. If a child obeys, a child should be entitled to his/her own thoughts on the matter. In fact, for a child to obey of his/her own free will in spite of a strong disagreement is a sign of great respect for the parent. It may even indicate to the parent that something the parent is ordering is seriously wrong according to the child. If not the case, the best way to handle angry compliance is with open, frank, serious discussion *after* the child obeys. An example from my own past. I hardly ever had to invoke it, but our family rules allowed for this sort of thing. In private, an order one seriously disagreed with could be acknowledged by "Yes, Sir!", or "Yes, Ma'am" and then executed immediately. The child would then have the right to explain why that signal was invoked, in front of the entire family. A child could not exactly pull this thing in public, in which case the signal was to nod silently and execute. Some people may disagree, but I think spanking is appropriate for lies. >4) This is the tricky part for some people. Spanking is with a neutral >object (not the hand, not a belt) suitable for the purpose. I know of >one family where each time a spanking would be necessary, the child >and his mother would go outside, and the lecture would start as they >walked through the yard, looking for a switch or stick to be >used in the spanking. In the end, the boy had to choose for himself, >based, I am told, on his own conscience. This seems like positive >reinforcement of the lesson. I disagree. Always by the hand, on bare buttocks. Use of an object creates distance between the parent or child, and is also an invitation for abuse or actual physical damage. >-- > >- Prince Caspian of Narnia, AKA Francis X. Carmody >Electronic Adress (UUcp only:{hplabs,seismo}!hao!udenva!fcarmody} >OR: {boulder,cires,denelcor,cisden}!udenva!fcarmody >The above opinions are my own, noone else in the known galaxy should be held responsable, except in the rare cases where they coincide with the opinions of Almighty God... In the above case, any disagreement with said opinions should be refferred
hedden@atux01.UUCP (D. Hedden) (02/27/86)
In article <15576@rochester.UUCP>, becker@rochester.UUCP (Tim Becker) writes: > I agree with much of what Caspian said he means by spanking and would like > ... > First, I must tell my son what the limits are and what the consequences > of his crossing those limits are. ... > ... I > object telling him he could hit his baby sister and ... > ... He continues. At this point, I tell him > what will happen if he chooses to continue. "If you throw any more > toys, I'll spank you". If a parent doesn't outline the limit and the > consequence, children may see discipline as capricous and hence unfair > ... > I believe this principle is valid independent of the discipline used > (spanking, grounding, ...). If he continues to throw his toys, I must > follow through on the promised consequence. Not doing so, communicates > a capricousness as well. I heartily agree with the above, but it implies (perhaps even states) an additional point. A parent must be careful not to ever threaten a punishment that they are not fully prepared to carry out. In a moment of frustration saying "If you do that again I'll knock your head off!" is obviously an action you would never intend to carry out, but the child doesn't know that. A less extreme example is saying to a 3 or 4 year old in a car, miles from home "If you don't stop that I'll make you get out of the car and walk home". The child may not have any way of knowing that there is no way you could follow through, and will see your failure to do so as capriciousness or lack of resolve. Even though my wife and I both started out saying we would not use spanking as a disciplinary measure, the failure of all other forms to achieve results has forced us to this "last resort" with both our children. But we are very selective in what spanking is an appropriate punishment for. Specifically, we will never spank for the child having hit someone. That seems hypocritical since spanking IS hitting. > ... He'll often be angry ... (at having been spanked) Another small side point. Children are often angry at parents for spanking and for other punishments, but they don't understand the difference between being angry with someone and hating them; and the know they love their parents, so the anger confuses them, and they feel they can't express it, so it gets internalized -- that's bad. We have tried to be careful to let our children know that it is OK to be angry at us, and that it is OK to express that anger in ways that are socially acceptable (not hitting or screaming, etc). This also gives us a chance to let them know that just because we are angry with them we haven't stopped loving them. > ... We usually hug and I tell him he's forgiven. Small children need > physical reassurance of our feelings -- words may not convey the same > message as a hug. ... VERY IMPORTANT!! > Sorry for the long description. Caspian asked for personal experiences, > so here's mine. And I am also sorry for my long-windedness. "The moving hand writes ..." Don