Nothing can replace a good beating
-
Black Cat wrote: Should the parents have the right to beat their children? Beat... ok... what eactly do you mean by beat... Because over here to beat someone is to quite literally "kick the living shit" out of them... I hope you mean a tap on the hand or a small slap. I don't have children so I'd prefer not to comemnt. All I know is that my parent very very rarley "slapped" any of us but when they did it normally worked. :omg: Regards, Brian Dela :-)
-
Should the parents have the right to beat their children? My answer is Yes if the following are true: 1. It is used only when the child did something very bad and would not listen to reasoning. 2. It is not physically harming the child (no extreme pain, internal injuries, or scars). I know I am going to be beaten up for writing this, but just can't help it. ;P
Beating sounds too cruel for me. But if it's not used too often and as a last resort a slap has it's irreplaceable pedagogic effect :). And the child must know for what it's punished. Pavel Sonork 100.15206
-
I think that's the point of ultimate success: Make it rare enough so children are surprised what happens next - yet make them wonder if you#d go further....
Auch den Schatten will ich lieben weil ich manchmal lieber frier' Rosenstolz [sighist]
From what I hear lately, all I have to do is threaten to give a whoopin' like some of his freinds get. I don't even have to lift a finger. :)
-
I am sorry, I just do not see an end to it. Kid gets a good amck for doing something. Kid stars to fear his parrents. Kid fears parrents the one of two things happen: 1) They learn to fear all adults. This is bad because it ends up givinig them a problem with authority latter in life. I have seen this happen with some close freinds of mine. The end up in situations where they need to assert themselves but don't because they are afriad. 2) The learn to fear thier parrents, and with fear can come eventual hate. This is no way to run a family. I have a 12 year old right now that has been stretching his wings for the last 2 years. I can say that out of all the things he has done, I have never once been provoked to hitting him. Not when he was a child, and not now. My right to discipline ends at the end of my hand. How would I like it if my wife walked up to me and slapped me for ofgetting to take out the garbage. Now, are thier things that WOULD provoke me to clobber him? Yes. If he ever took a swing at me I would lay him out. I deserve the same respect I gave him, he breaks the rule, he get's it right back. If he ever tried to hit my wife, he's toast. he's my son and I love him but I will not tollerate hitting a woman. If you have a problem with hiim liking making the little one cry, then please get some outside advice before you raise hand to your child.
Ray Cassick wrote: Kid gets a good amck for doing something. Kid stars to fear his parrents It just doesn't work like that; not at all. The only way a kid will fear a parent (or anything else for that matter) is if they either cause physical pain or they believe them to, and if the kid thinks that about a smack then god help them they need a good firm smack on the back of the legs. The important factor to remember is that there is love involved in a kid-parent/s relationship and the love will always allow for punishment - the only exceptions are: a) there is no love, in which case the child should be fostered, or b) there is abuse. Even moderate abuse (and I class abuse as anytihng other than a couple of smacks on areas such as arms and legs) does not stress the relationship, it is only those few parents that use discipline as an excuse to beat up their children that cause real problems - and they have serious socioplacement disorders. If a real physocoligical problem develops that is not related to either of the two points mentioned above then it is the child that has a physocoligical problem, not the parents abusing them, and it is simply not possible to sidestep around everything in life on the off chance it may negatively affect a minority. Ray Cassick wrote: I can say that out of all the things he has done, I have never once been provoked to hitting him If you had have been "provoked" into hitting him (even if only a smack) then that would ahve been child abuse. Plain and simple. Smacking a child when as an aide should never be done out of anger.
David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk
Pro wrestling is entertainment for the unentertained unentertainable.
-
David Wulff wrote: having been smacked up till around twelve myself Nah, this one is too easy! ;P David Wulff wrote: Too many kids nowadays are growing up with no respect for discipline Ditto. Jeremy Falcon Imputek "In fact it is quite simple, men and women both only want one thing - what they can't have!" - phykell
Whoops - that was a rather embarrasing slip up! :-O *ahem*
David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk
Pro wrestling is entertainment for the unentertained unentertainable.
-
No. No beating! Are you aware about the damage you inflict on this childs psyche? Grab an arm and stare them in the eyes instead. That usually works up to an age of 10. By that time, the child has developed a fully working conscience, thus the "disappointed look" will work. Violence will do nothing but breed violence. Woe to you, Oh Earth and Sea,for the Devil sends the beast with wrath, because he knows the time is short... Let him who hath understanding reckon the number of the beast for it is a human number, it's number is Six hundred and sixty six
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Are you aware about the damage you inflict on this childs psyche? I don't believe a light smacking (since the word "beating" means somethign different to a lot of people) will inflict any damage. Children are a lot tougher than you think, physical punishment itself is a lesson they will learn sooner or later in life. Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Grab an arm and stare them in the eyes instead. That usually works up to an age of 10. By that time, the child has developed a fully working conscience, thus the "disappointed look" will work. If you choose to raise your kids in a "soft" method, then be my guest. I just don't think the "soft" method works for all kids. Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Violence will do nothing but breed violence. Looks like you need to have a good talk with Bush, Sharon, and Arafat. Hope they will listen.
-
Do you have kids? Sometimes it takes a nice wack in the pants to get them to understand what the word "No" means.
Jason Henderson
start page
articles
"If you are going through hell, keep going." - Sir Winston Churchill -
I agree, First a parent must gain a child's love and respect, And then when the parent appears upset at a child's actions, this is sufficient punnishment. When my kids have been naughty, they often ask me to smack them, which I refuse to do. This seems to hurt them more though. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
You are the intrepid one, always willing to leap into the fray! A serious character flaw, I might add, but entertaining. Said by Roger Wright about me.
Colin^Davies wrote: I agree, First a parent must gain a child's love and respect, And then when the parent appears upset at a child's actions, this is sufficient punnishment. When my kids have been naughty, they often ask me to smack them, which I refuse to do. This seems to hurt them more though. On the other hand, "tough" love works better on some kids.
-
Should the parents have the right to beat their children? My answer is Yes if the following are true: 1. It is used only when the child did something very bad and would not listen to reasoning. 2. It is not physically harming the child (no extreme pain, internal injuries, or scars). I know I am going to be beaten up for writing this, but just can't help it. ;P
This is the problem - society seems unable to distinguish between a smack and a 'beating'. No parent should be allowed to beat their child, any who do should share a cell with a big man named Bubba. All parents should be allowed to physcially discipline their child in a controlled manner if that is what works for that child. Christian Hey, at least Logo had, at it's inception, a mechanical turtle. VB has always lacked even that... - Shog9 04-09-2002 During last 10 years, with invention of VB and similar programming environments, every ill-educated moron became able to develop software. - Alex E. - 12-Sept-2002
-
Should the parents have the right to beat their children? My answer is Yes if the following are true: 1. It is used only when the child did something very bad and would not listen to reasoning. 2. It is not physically harming the child (no extreme pain, internal injuries, or scars). I know I am going to be beaten up for writing this, but just can't help it. ;P
No, I don't think they should be allowed to do so. If they need to resort to violence to get a message across then that is because the parent isn't smart enough to understand how to do so. The argument for inflicting pain on children is commonly based on something along the lines of well I don't know how else to get through to him/her because I've tried everything else. Well, there you have it. The parent has just admitted to not knowing enough. When you're stuck in that case, go seek a professional family psychologist or someone that well understands child psychology for ideas of how to deal with the problem. There's always many alternative ways of dealing with a problem, one just has to seek them out. Saying that beating is the only way is a cop-out and laziness on the part of the parent to do any research and/or to seek help from professionals.
-
Should the parents have the right to beat their children? My answer is Yes if the following are true: 1. It is used only when the child did something very bad and would not listen to reasoning. 2. It is not physically harming the child (no extreme pain, internal injuries, or scars). I know I am going to be beaten up for writing this, but just can't help it. ;P
Verbal abuse can be as bad. I once saw a mom berate her 5 year old for dropping his ball and then chasing after it when it rolled into the street. She yelled something like "what do you want to do, get yourself killed???" in a screaming voice. First off, a child isn't going to understand the cause and effect relationship here. Secondly, a child has no concept of death. Thirdly, and MOST IMPORTANTLY: IT IS THE PARENT'S RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CHILD DOES NOT GET HIM/HERSELF IN TROUBLE. In all cases that I have witnessed (and I've seen a lot working around school children), as was the case when I was young, that it should be the parents that get abeating, not their children (in my case, I got walloped because I wandered over to my next door neighbor because my parents left me alone for a few hours one night, no babysitter, while they went to a faculty party--I was about 4). Therefore, I totally disagree that a child EVER deserves a good beating. This is certainly true for young children which are in the care of their parents, and as for older children, you're wasting your time at that point. Counseling or some other constructive lesson would work a lot better. Marc
-
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Are you aware about the damage you inflict on this childs psyche? I don't believe a light smacking (since the word "beating" means somethign different to a lot of people) will inflict any damage. Children are a lot tougher than you think, physical punishment itself is a lesson they will learn sooner or later in life. Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Grab an arm and stare them in the eyes instead. That usually works up to an age of 10. By that time, the child has developed a fully working conscience, thus the "disappointed look" will work. If you choose to raise your kids in a "soft" method, then be my guest. I just don't think the "soft" method works for all kids. Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Violence will do nothing but breed violence. Looks like you need to have a good talk with Bush, Sharon, and Arafat. Hope they will listen.
Black Cat wrote: Looks like you need to have a good talk with Bush, Sharon, and Arafat. Hope they will listen. I wish! Woe to you, Oh Earth and Sea,for the Devil sends the beast with wrath, because he knows the time is short... Let him who hath understanding reckon the number of the beast for it is a human number, it's number is Six hundred and sixty six