to ask if you smack your children?

[toofattorun]

I am not talking beating! Just a smack on the hand or bum when they are being very rude or naughty.

I have never smacked DC. I have never felt the need to. BUT I would smack a child if I caught them trying to grab something dangerous/run out into the road/seriously hurt another child. Not as a means of punishment, just that I can imagine grabbing them and smacking as a means of shocking them into stopping whatever dangerous activity they were embarking on.

I have seen parents be very smug about not smacking who send children to their rooms, sit them on naughty steps for far longer than necessary, remove treats and outings for unrelated offences etc.

I don't think smacking can be viewed as the measure of 'good' or 'bad' parenting. There is plenty of bad parenting that doesn't involve physical violence.

However most parents I know don't smack and make every effort to make sure the punishment fits the crime. Maybe they have learnt from past mistakes, maybe they have read the right books, maybe their children don't push them to their limits?

This is very interesting. I originally asked the question to find out if it was just me who had smacked their children or if others do it and actually admit to it.

I say "admit to it", not because I think people who smack are terrible and should be ashamed, but because of the pressure to say the "right thing" or what people want to hear.

I love my kids more than anything in this world and I know I am a good mother but I have smacked my kids to discipline them.

My mind is telling me it is wrong to smack but when your child is being extremely naughty it's difficult.

I realise as I am writing this it sound so wrong. I was smashed about as a child and I don't want to go down the same route with my children (smacks not smashing).

"I would smack my child on the hand if they were reaching for a hot drink/touching the cooker etc, especially if they had already been told not to touch."

See, I wouldn't smack a child for those reasons ever. If there's time to smack them then there's time to prevent them from touching whatever it is. Then, depending on age I'd either accept I was daft not to have prevented a mobile baby with no understanding of heat from being near a hot oven and take steps for it not to happen again until they are old enough to understand more, or I'd get down with them and show them what I mean by hot, letting them put their hand near and feel with me there to prevent actual touching etc.

I just don't think teaching not to do something risky because you'll get a smack, leads to the same development of judgement for children as learning about the reasons for not doing things and how they should evaluate risk so I don't think it makes sense in the longer term even if it stops the behaviour quickly.

Tried "naughty step" although never actually called it that but didn't like it. I gave DD time to calm down by having her leave the room, or me leaving the room. I never held a door shut or anything like that.

I have no problems with discplining in public either.

IMO there is no difference between hitting and smacking. It's just a name.

Eldest has had smack on the back of his hand occasionally it is not the method that works the best in every situation but sometimes it has worked. I have found with DS1 the best way to get him to do what I want is positive reinforcement - so when he screeches I tell him he has a beautiful speaking voice and I much prefer listening to that.

DS2 is too young to smack although I can see already that he will be a challenge to my parenting ability.

Nope. Never have and never will. Violence (whether it's smacking or hitting - interested in the difference...) is never the answer. I would never smack an adult so why the hell would it be acceptable to smack a child.

My parents used to smack me & my older brother & sister. I haven't smacked DD but thats up until now. She is only 5 so I can't say I never would cause I don't know what happens in the future when it comes to DD misbehaving.

I don't do it as a matter of course, but have done so on 2 occasions - once when DD bit me, and another time when she ran out into a busy road having just been told very clearly by me not to move from the pavement.

I think it was more shock/reflex than anything else and I'm not especially proud of my actions but she's never done either of those things again.

I haven't read the whole thread

But - I have never smacked any of my DC and never would - any more than I would smack/hit my DH - or anybody else for that matter.

It still me that some people don't find it a horrible thing to do. If I'm out somewhere and I even hear a parent threaten their child with a smack I can't help being judgey.

It amazes me the judgmentalism on smacking which is never applied to what I would term "non parenting". To me, this is far worse. I am talking about parents who have a completely laissez faire attitude to their children and seemingly don't care how their children behave. A parent's job is to endure their children grow up into happy, confident, well adjusted adults who can live within the real world, which includes adapting to both stressful and boring situations without recourse to rude behaviour. It is easy being matey with children and not taking any hard parenting decisions, but it is not being a good parent.

There are so many enfants rois these days who rule the roost at home and school without consideration for other children and adults. And their parents probably still believe smugly that they are doing a great job.

I am not saying you need to smack, far from it. However I do think there is this absurd MN consensus that people who smack are doing terrible harm but, on the other hand, all children are absolutely angelic and there is no such thing as naughtiness. Children need to live in your world, not vice versa. And, if this means challenging them not to misbehave in a boring situation for them, so be it. I really don't understand why we have elevated children into saints and turn them into devils a few years later if they have not learned the lessons that nobody has bothered to teach them.

Thank heaven for some common sense larrygrylls

Amazing how so many of us manage it then Laz, eh?

Or are you saying we are all liars?

I have once smacked DS's hand, as he had undone DD's seatbelt for the 4th time in the fast lane of the motorway as we were rushing to BIL wedding rehersal! DH had already pulled over once to put the seat belt back on, endangering us all.

I am not proud of it, but he did stop undoing the seatbelt.

I can't imagine I will smack again.

Ok so I'm going to be totally honest about what I think, so will don my flameproof knickers.

Genuinely - I really don't understand the 'reflex' argument. Where does that reflex come from? That's not particularly a question aimed at you, Dum, just at that general reasoning (which I've heard/read a few times now).

IMO there is no 'reflex' or 'automatic' response of hitting anybody. If there was, does that mean we could use it as an excuse when an adult hits another adult?

God there doesn't seem much choice according to this thread:

• Smack
• Psychological Warfare (poss cold)
• Let child run wild until middle class rioter

The smackers are desperate to justigy themselves - otherwise they will have to feel BAD.

They do so by saying the only alternative is hippy dippy lentil parenting which creates monsters.

You'll notice they refuse to acknowledge that most of us manage without hitting OR creating monsters.

Because it's a weeny bit inconvenient.

If it helps I've had a similar reflex reaction to one or two particularly errant (ex)boyfriends in the long distant past, in spite of them being grown ups!

Not making myself sound good here am I? I was very young and blame my mother for letting me watch Dynasty and Dallas as child!

I can see where you're coming from, flump, but for me personally, that was the only way I could describe it in a couple of fairly extreme situations. I wouldn't consider it something to use as a regular method of discipline, but I've never say never if another extreme circumstance arose (although DD is nearly 8 now and I think it highly unlikely it will).

Crikey Dum I admire your honestly, at least

IMO smacking is the easy option when it comes to parenting.

I don't feel smug that I don't hit my DD. It's just a fact. She is 10y and I don't hit her, never have done and never will do.

And no - she is not a brat who is allowed to rule the roost. Not smacking does not mean not discipling.

And anyone who thinks that smacking a child will not lead to a child with poor behaviour is very naive ime. I have worked with children in schools from 4y to 18y, plus with young offenders and adults within prison education. Smacking a child does not lead to perfect behaviour anymore than non smacking parenting leads to a brat.

A reflex? I would think that needed help

I am not sure on the whole reflex/shock reasoning. If I take a class of 30 children out and about and one tries to run off and go near the road, despite being told beforehand, would I be okay to hit them out of shock or as a reflex? Surely if it is an automatic reflex then it should be fine, yes?

flump - it was my first boyfriend at 17/18 who split up with me because 'we need our space before going to uni' and I then found out he had someone else on the go - I was being a typical melodramatic teenager - I'm sure many of us have been there.

The other situation was less straightforward and not something I particularly want to get into on t'internet.

So does it also follow that an adult who isn't smacked when they behave badly will just get worse? Maybe next time I'm being a bit stroppy DH should give me a slap?

Dum xposted with you - was not responding to your last post.