to wonder how many people on here use physical discipline ..

[havinhoops1974]

compared to past generations??

I was thinking you hear so may of the older generation talking openly about using physical discipline on their kids compared to now where I almost hear people whispering it, but at the same time giving the old 'it doesnt do them any harm'

personallyn I dont advocate it , should always be a last resort, however I wont cricify someone who has slapped wrists etc at their wits end.

What are the views of MN???

anger

spookshowangellovesit not wishing to split hairs... but I agree it is possible for people to use smacking without losing their temper. I might not agree with it, but I agree that not all smacking is rage or weak parenting, it's just another tool that some people use and other people don't.

However, I think in some cases (my parents for example) it was the thin end of the wedge and it was down to weak parenting. Which meant that ultimately, we were shut in cupboards, held up in front of the living room window with our pants down having our bare bottoms smacked "to let everyone see just how naughty" we were, had our hair pulled as we were yanked upstairs and were spanked with wooden spoons. And I don't think that can be considered part of any 'parenting technique'!

When I got to a certain age, I was a teenager, I thought "fuck this" and every time I got a slap, I slapped back twice as hard as I was slapped.

That's just horrendous, brattish behaviour. When I was a child/teenager if one thing remained at the front of my mind it was that I should never, under any circumstances, hit my mam. She's my mam for heaven's sake! If I was doing something that warranted a slap, I pretty much deserved it, she was the adult, I was the child and it was not my place to return the 'punishment'.

Frankly, if, as a teenager, my child hit me, the next thump they'd feel would be the door on their arse.

not to dismiss what you went through as a child but that is quite obviously child abuse and not what i am discussing as a parenting style and can not be put in the same bracket or should not for the purposes of the discussion.

I suppose Tanif it depends on whether the behaviour did deserve a slap or not.

And when it gets to the point that a child/teenager has lost all respect for their parents, then the parent does have to accept some responsibility for that.

It sounds as though you respected your mum so that even if she did slap you, you felt it was justified, deserved and knew that your mum still loved you.

That's not everyone's experience.

spookshowangellovesit - no I do agree with you there. I don't think everyone should jump on the bandwagon of child abuse either. It diminishes the experiences of some and criminalises the behaviour of others unfairly.

Like I said, I do think physical discipline can have a place in parenting and think it is unreasonable when people shout abuse/weak parenting when that isn't necessarily the case.

In a nutshell, I agree with you!

I love the way some justify their own level of violence against children by comparing it to the excesses of others who no doubt justify themselves in a similar fashion.

The thing is, nobody ever been able to explain to me exactly why you would want to smack a child, and what good it does.

Smacking in anger indicates a loss of control, which is understandable, but obviously unacceptable.

Smacking in cold blood - thinking about and deciding to hit a small child is obviously wrong.

So when is it OK to hit?

I don't think it's necessarily abuse but if it worked I would like to see some kind of correlation between the use of smacking and well behaved children and tbh I have never seen that.

Ime, both here and abroad, well behaved children most often seem to belong to families with a calm, firm, authoritative (not authoritarian) approach, who engage with their children and are interested in them, but not afraid to be the ones in charge. Most such families I have known do not seem to see the need to slap, certainly not after the child has got to junior school age.

Badly behaved children often belong to families which turn a blind eye one minute and scream and slap the next.

i find it interesting that people find it understandable to slap a child in anger and therefore be out of control of yourself and your ability to judge your actions but a measured punishment given after a warning is the most heinous thing in the world.
seems an odd turn around in standards.

It's interesting that the justications for smacking children are the same as those used for smacking wives before it was outlawed.

There are many reasons why I would never, ever physically discipline a child. But without listing my moral objections to it, it simply does not work. People will argue that it worked for them but what they've taught their child is to behave in order to avoid physical punishment, not to make a choice to do the right thing for its own sake. It's a bit like saying crying it out works. Well yes the child might stop asking for you in the night but it's not necessarily because you've taught them how to have good, safe, happy sleep but instead they've given up trying to communicate with you.

I do like these threads. They contain several tropes. Seeker's already noted the running in the road and sockets thing which is always brought up (teach your child how to behave appropriately, if they're too young, move them out of the way or move temptation out of the way). I also note the 'I know a child who is so out of control they need a smack'. If a child is that unhappy they're physically violent then either they need assessing or there are about 87,693 other avenues to challenging difficult behaviour.

I haven't seen 'I know a family who are always going on about smacking being abuse but their child walks all over them, they need a smack' yet. Same as above, it's not smack your child or don't discipline/teach at all. People who are vehemently anti-smacking (I count myself in this group) aren't a homegenous mass. You can engage with your child in other ways.

My children trust me to raise them, to guide them and to teach them. I would never, ever lay a finger on another human being. I pride myself on the fact that I would never resort to physical violence towards a single person. I will not compromise my own standards under the pretence of it being educational. I will not teach my child that I'm a person who can mete out physical pain against anybody, certainly not somebody in my care who I am obliged to instruct in the right choices in life. I won't show my children that hurting another person can ever be the right choice. And hecate makes a good point too which I've never thought of. I would only ever physically harm in self defence and even then I'd endeavour not to. I won't teach my child that it's okay for anybody to hurt them and they have to meekly take it. They're better than that. They deserve better.

its also the odd belief that smacking is the only form of punishment available in the arsenal of parenting tactics that makes me shake my head and sigh.

Well, smacking doesn't work at all does it?

If you were smacked as a child, think 'didn't do me any harm', and then carry on smacking your own child, what has worked is the perpetuation that using violence on small children who cannot retaliate is somehow acceptable.

It isn't acceptable. If you hit an adult you would be liable to be prosecuted. Why is it acceptable to hit a small child, just because your parenting is at fault.

I have not hit my dd - she was no angel child and was as trying as a 4-5-6 year old as anyone else's child. I would never hit her - violence is not the answer. I am not a perfect mother - I am a shouter and all round stroppy git - but dd knows I have never hit her, and never would.

Those of you talking about teenagers - dd is 15 now and I would hope that if I had some kind of personality change and hit her now, she would have the self assurance to call the police. Because it is assault in my book.

I grew up being thrashed - I vowed from a young age that I would never, ever hit anyone when I was an adult. It is wrong. It is pretty black and white in my book.

Oh I also like the obligatory 'I smack my children. I was smacked and it never did me any harm'. Yes it did. It taught you that it's okay to smack.

X-posts with Gerrof.

Exactly, spooks. It's like you've got a choice between smacking and total laissez-faire. I think smacking is a lazy option for people who don't want to think.

IMO the people that start with only smacking a hand are at the top of a slippery slope. What will you do when smacking a hand doesnt work?

Tanif you sound delightful, but your argument is flawed. You smack a child so they smack you back, then you smack them again for smacking you, but harder. You have taught them that behaviour.

"i find it interesting that people find it understandable to slap a child in anger and therefore be out of control of yourself and your ability to judge your actions but a measured punishment given after a warning is the most heinous thing in the world.
seems an odd turn around in standards."

If that is directed at me, I said that I could understand why someone might lose control and smack in the heat of the moment. This nearly happened a couple of times to me when mine were little. Understand- but not excuse. Understand, but not think acceptable.

Hitting another human being as "a measured punishment", however, is completely unacceptable. And unnecessary. If you've given warnings and can work out a measured punishment, then you have time and head space to think of so thing else.

Disclaimer - for me this is purely academic as I don't have DCs yet and have no idea about the strains and difficulties.

But, on two separate occassions I witnessed parents giving their children a smack, one on the hand, one of the bottom. DCs similar ages and in both circumstances the child hit the parent back and the parent said "you mustn't hit people". My thought was - surely that's incredibly confusing for the child (toddlery age). On the one hand you're telling them that it's wrong to hit, but enforcing it by ... um, hitting them. That can't be right.

cory i think you have misunderstood my post.

Why are people shocked that someone who is hit hit backs? I think to a child it makes sense.

Excellent posts show, seeker, cory and wildfell

I can understand the post above who slapped her toddler's wrist because he was reaching for a hot pan (presumably to slap his arm out of the way).

That kind of thing is instinctive - however what is telling is that th mner cried as much as the toddler and has never hit him since.

I don't know how people can deliberately inflict pain on their babies. How can they look at them when they are crying in pain, knowing that they have caused that? I know I am being emotive, but I simply cannot understand it. I am a great big tall woman - how on earth could I justify using my force in order to be violent to a child less than half my size?

I am looking forward to the day in 20, 30, 40 years time when smacking children is considered as disgusting and illegal as other forms of domestic violence.

Smacking is still considered acceptable because it's something a lot of us grew up with and so regard as normal.

If you remove the word and look at the definition:

strike (someone or something), typically with the palm of the hand and as a punishment (Oxford English)

slap loudly and smartly, especially with the hand (Chambers)

It was considered widely acceptable for a husband to 'strike' or 'slap' his wife 'loudly and smartly' 'with the palm of the hand' if he felt her behaviour was unreasonable. It's now considered unacceptable.

Inflicting the equivalent physical pain as punishment would seem shocking if we weren't accustomed to it. If I were to say that child X kept misbehaving so I pulled their hair it would (rightly) be considered to be abusive. But it could cause exactly the same pain as a smack.