ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
Grayling defending smacking(1000 Posts)
Never did him any harm apparently. The tory party are such a bunch of tossers. Whatever next?
DD was being supremely foul one day when she was about 9 and I slapped her once. She howled in hurt and outrage. For ages she kept carrying on about how I had never done that before.
Except that I had done it before, maybe 2 or 3 occasions when she was age 4-6. She had completely forgotten. So much for traumatised for life by a single incident.
ps: but agree Grayling is a plonker. He's not related to AC Grayling is he? That would boggle my mind.
In that case then Grayling wont mind if a few of us smacked HIM right across the face then.
WTF is someone appointed as Justice Secretary doing saying smacking is an acceptable way to 'send a message'? Really, really irresponsible.
And I also remember the day when I came home from work and DS exploded in rage that he had got a bad mark because I had gone back to work. It was actually because he had not done his homework properly and I had sat with him, trying to encourage him for 40 minutes earlier in the week. Yes, I slapped him and yes, I still think he deserved that. He has been a demanding and difficult boy who has needed firm boundaries. Without the funds to send him to a hothouse for very clever boys that has meant he has been intellectually and physically challenged, I have no doubt whatsoever that he would have got in with the wrong crown and could be a budding great train robber. His father is convinced he will end up working for MI5.
The research suggests objectively that physical punishment works if it's hard enough. Taps and non-marking slaps objectively don't count.
The reason Grayling shouldn't say it is that he is in government, whose official policy for twenty if not thirty years has been an evidence-based "smacking is bad".
Did he say it at a private party or something? No? Then he cocked up.
What research says that? How would research like that even be conducted currently?
Let's teach DC that if people don't do what you want then you hit them, what a lovely lesson to learn.
My labour voting parents believed in smacking, I vote Tory and don't.
I really don't get this issue....obviously smacking is wrong. That's why we teach our kids not to hit each other.
Equally obviously it is unnecessary. Every nursery worker up and down the country can keep at least 3 maybe more under 5s safe and within the rules of the nursery without hitting them. Every teacher can control groups of 30 plus without resorting to hitting.
If you genuinely can't work out your own method for discipline without violence then why not go ask a professional for some tips?
Interesting Horatia, which research is this, do you have any links?
I'd be interested as well, in the definition of the word "works" in this context. I presume it means that the child stops the behaviour that made the parent decide to hit the child? I'd also be interested in what age it "works" at.
I suppose it's very much about what you want for your child. In some cases, I'm sure hitting them regularly would achieve something you wanted so it would work, but I think lots of people don't necessarily want to achieve the thing hitting children might work for anyway, IYSWIM.
Hitting children in Victorian times worked because people wanted their DC's to be polite and respectful to adults and to go up chimneys in some cases. Persuading them to do that, would be much easier if you hit them really hard. Wanting your child to take responsibility for their own actions, is a very different sort of goal and might require a different thing to make it "work".
It is hard though, there are a lot of times that a child may be stopped doing something but having a privilege taken away, or a favourite toy, or not be aloud to do something.
So how do you then teach that child to stand up for themself when a child at school uses the same tactic? We are having this very problem right now, in that a child tells DD she won't be her friend or won't do something with her, if DD doesn't do what the child wants.
Read first part if thread but DD in the bath and wants to come out so am rushing.
star you've got to recognise surely that fiddling etc etc is what toddlers do. Sorry to patronise, but they are curious and want to learn. It's not about being naughty, it's about toddlers.
If you don't want them to fiddle, put it out of reach. Don't leave it there setting them up for a smack. Our living room is deliberately quite sparse for this reason. As long as it isn't dangerous, then you can distract them orshow them how to handle things safely.
^ So much for traumatised for life by a single incident^
That's not really a good argument for smacking. There are things you shouldn't do to a child regardless of whether they'll remember.
I personally don't smack and don't believe it's ever productive...I actually fell out with my Mum last week about this very thing after she smacked my 2yr old dd on the hand (as she keeps hitting her big brother !) Spoke to Mum, explained how I felt strongly about this and she apologised only to comment a few days later that DD "needed a skelp on the ar*e" as she was throwing a tantrum. I saw red at that point and spoke to her in a way that I have never done in my life before....was effin' and blinding and ended up telling her to f**k off if she didn't like my parenting style.
I can understand in certain circumstances why people would choose to smack (going to touch a fire or run out onto the road for example) and you're wanting a short, sharp shock but in most cases I don't see what it teaches a child. In life they will have to deal with people that are being cheeky, obnoxious, rude, argumentative and completely unreasonable - much like your average 3yr old ! - without resorting to hitting them. I think it's about teaching them about actions and consequences.
Everytime I see that bullish face of his I feel like slapping it.
Never have hit my dd, and never will, absoulately crap and cruel, don't care what anyone says.
I actually used to smack DD (7) occasionally when she really crossed the line but came up against some fierce criticism here on MN. I wouldn't back down at the time of the thread but afterwards I had a long think about it and haven't smacked since, that was about a year ago. I realised the smacking was more about me losing control than punishing DD.
That's it in a nutshell *Flick".
I am very against. If yo believe hitting or smacking children teaches them something it can only be that the big hit the strong to get their way. If you believe that you also surely have to believe it would be fine for a husband to do the same to a wife. Why should the weakest be the only ones adults are authorised to use physical violence against?
In the UK the higher yours IQ and social class the less likely you will smack children.
It is also illegal in the UK if it leaves a mark and I hope children who are smacked will upload the footage to youtube to shame their parents.
I've smacked all of my dc and I vote Labour. I agree with other posters - mumsnet gets utterly crazy when smacking is mentioned.
For once I find myself in total agreement with Xenia.
I agree - it's relative Xenia. But I'd rather a parent smacked a child to teach a boundary or two than allowed the child to lose all respect for boundaries, a la what happend in Pimlico a day or two ago.
And are you saying that school teachers two generations ago didn't have high IQs?
I was smacked quite regularly as a child, by a caring parent who was doing her best to raise polite, well-behaved children.
Far from not doing me any harm I believe that it has contributed to my fear of authority and terror of doing anything wrong that severely hinders me in any form of career progression.
Thing is - you really don't need to smack.
Frankly - they get 'consequences' for bad behaviours naturally without you needing to stoop to hitting - so long as you police the boundaries of what is acceptable.
I am so much bigger than my DC that I can implement 'stop STOP' without hitting. I've sat behind a tatrumming kid restraining their arms
to stop them taking a chunk out me or themselves . No means no - and eventually that makes sense.
This thread is not accepting new messages.
Please login first.