To be more than annoyed when people inform me my children need a good smack?

[Slightlyneuroricnat]

It really winds me up.
Not so much the oldies who say " in our day I would have a got a whack for that " but people that can see I'm already having a tough time dealing with 2 toddlers, my eldest daughter is going through a phase ( I bloody hope ) of hitting everyone including me and we always have the same conversation, I don't hit you and you must not hit mummy, you've hurt me and now we are going home.
So we had this yesterday in a park and a lady informed me that I was " wishy washy " and what she actually needed was a good smack herself.
Am I being unreasonable to think she is an ignorant fool or am I some kind of martyr as I don't believe in hitting children?

don't you find that a bit weird? Controlled enough to deliberate where you hit a child

Not really, it's the same part that makes the decision to put a family pet down, or to split up with a long term partner. It's the reasoning part. I'd rather it was like that than the more "emotional" side, which is less controlled.

My kids are grown up so I shall never be in a situation where I'll need to smack a child again (I think it's only parent that should do it, not grandparents) unless it's trying to rob me!!

That is precisely why it disturbs me. Someone who can stop and think, hmmmm, I am going to hit my child. Shall I use an implement? Maybe not, might get arrested. Shall I hit him in the face? Maybe not, might leave a bruise and I will get some awkward questions at school.

Someone who deliberately and calmly decides where and how hard they are going to hit a child is in my view a disturbed and disturbing person and I wouldn't want them any where near my child.

Yes, Spero. I can understand a thump in anger (not condone, but comprehend) but the idea of calmly choosing to smack my children is beyond my imagination.

Spero

Plus, I will do it when we get home so don't humiliate them and also because Ai know they've got such developed cognition that they'll be able to assciate the punishment with the crime.

But it's OK because I'm only threatening to hit them and might not actually do it - but they won't know that so I'll keep them fearful in the interitm

But they won't be fearful becasue it doesn't hurt because it's only a smack

And they'll be able to distinguish my acceptable violence fromtheir unacceptable violence because they are so cognitively sophisticated.

Irrational, illogical, controlling nonsense

Ipad fingers. You get the idea.

Better still, I'll smack them for acting in a way that could have been avoided if I (the adult ) had thought about avoiding the hunger, tiredness or excitement that led to the tantrum or bad behaviour.

And I'll smack them for having emotions they can't yet articulate and control.

Hahahahaha.

Hark at you lot!! Amateur Psychologists galore - "sinister" motives everywhere!!

Your views and opinions mean absolutely nothing to me - you know why?

We've raised 2 fantastic, well adjusted & lovely children who are now fantastic, well adjusted adults who aren't violent psychopaths or mentally scarred by the odd smack!

I also work with children & have managed not to kill, maim or batter any of them over the years!

So, I shall leave you lot to your amateur "psycho hunt" & go off secure in the knowledge that the way I raised my children was impeccable & had fantastic results for all of us.

I thank you....

Enjoy your wine Grinch.

Impeccable. Blimey.

Well done major Grinch. Impeccable child raising skills eh?

Maybe you might want to lower the bar just a teeny bit on that particular boast as I am not convinced that this can ever be a realistic claim.

Certainly not one I will accept without confirmation from the children.

AskBasil, all of your your examples are questions of morality, bar the punching one. Young children face few moral dilemmas comparable with the ones you've described because they have no responsibilities.
I'm bigger than lots of people. I don't punch them in the face because I've never felt the inclination. I've probably never felt the inclination because I'm not a violent person. Despite my years of brutalisation at the hands of my mother, I'm probably not a violent person because I was brought up loved and secure by a loving kind person which taught me empathy and kindness in turn. Had I of been of been beaten (not smacked) continually (not very occasionally) by a parent who emotionally abused me and showed me little warmth and affection I would probably be more inclined. Bigger picture.

Random, yes toddlers are capable of understanding cause and effect but they do not always have the emotional restraint not to let that understanding overrule their emotionally driven instincts, hence they do things like hit their mums. They haven't yet mastered self control. That is one of the many things that doesn't develop until later and separates (hopefully) most adults from children. I didn't suggest the race. I have no problem with my kids running down a stretch of pavement that I am familiar with and has no driveways or roads with me. From that brief snapshot of two minutes of my child's life you have ascertained that she doesn't think I'm fun or fair, love her or want to keep her safe? She disagrees and tells me very often that she thinks I am lovely, wonderful and the best mummy in the whole world (and no that's not under threat of violence). She already knew that roads are dangerous but still wanted to race across two. See previous point on self control.

Spero, I don't randomly lash out at a thrashing child. I hold their hand to smack it without room for error. No I don't find exercising self control 'weird'. Please also see point on self control.

Random you previously stated that you think smacking is akin to paedophilea. You now say that you were smacked as a child but you wouldn't call it abusive for the time. So you don't really hold a deep conviction that smacking is absolutely morally wrong then do you? Given you think that how wrong it is depends on the fashions of the day.

Gold unless there is an absolute and infallible world leading authority on dealing with tantruming two year olds and you are that person you are simply and clearly in no way whatsoever qualified to tell anybody what is 'absolutely the best way' to do anything. 'Absolutely the best way' to deal with all two year olds, for heavens sake, and people are calling me arrogant .

"That is precisely why it disturbs me. Someone who can stop and think, hmmmm, I am going to hit my child. Shall I use an implement? Maybe not, might get arrested. Shall I hit him in the face? Maybe not, might leave a bruise and I will get some awkward questions at school"

Those are really thoughts you think can be attributed to anyone who will occasionally smack their child on the hand Spero? I find it incredibly disturbing that you can even come up with this mental scenario. Implements????

I don't think major would want you anywhere near her children to receive you confirmation either.

Times change. With knowledge and advancement we can modify our behaviour and learn from mistakes of the past. I got smacked which was normal 40 years ago, my mother got the belt which was normal 65 years ago, these things are not normal today because most people know better now.

Simple, clear and very specific instructions are absolutely the best way to communicate with a wound up two year old.

I don't claim to be a world authority on dealing with tantruming toddlers however I have studied communication and language in toddlers and pre-schoolers and feel fairly sure of my ground on the fact that simple and clear is the key to communicating with them when they are wound up

Do please then explain the reasoning process by which you opt for smack on the hand.

Presumably you have had to at some stage discount the use of an implement or a smack to the head or face?

Or is the smack on the hand simply done without any conscious thought because the hand is nearest?

And if so, what's to stop you missing the hand?

Anyone who calmly and deliberately decides where and how hard they will hit a child is not fit to parent. In my view.

You didn't say you thought it was normal then, you said it wasn't abuse then. Occasional smacking can't not of been abuse then but is abuse now if it is a moral absolute, regardless of its normality.

Put a different way random, I think slavery is morally absolutely wrong. I think it's morally absolutely wrong now and equally morally absolutely wrong 300 years ago when it was widely practiced and deemed the social norm. How we generally view it today has no bearing on how wrong it actually was then.

Thos well thought out disciplinary tool actually doesn't involve the kind of conscious reasoning Spero describes?

So is it well thought out, or not?

^^ that was to fefifo

I opt for a smack on the hand because it is easily accessible, does not involve the removal of clothes and would be one of the least painful places to be smacked. Just because I believe that smacking is effective (and not emotionally damaging) doesn't mean I relish doing it. Like lots of things I do as a parent with my child's best interests at heart I actually don't enjoy doing it.

Why on earth do you think I would of discounted the use of an implement or a smack to the face? I'm not looking to deliver the most pain that I can and get away with it. I'm looking to deliver the least pain that I can whilst making it effective. If you've never considered beating your child with implements or smacking their heads and faces you've considered those things just as many times as me.

Do you have some sort of physical problem? I really can't understand how you think it even possible to miss the hand if I'm holding it.

My (occasionally smacked) children would think your 'not fit to parent' views bloody ridiculous, well perhaps without the bloody.

Oh God ther is no talking to you. Pain is not necessary at all.

And it is would have, not would of.

Having read all of the thread so far with a great deal of interest, I can see there are points on both sides. I think the smackers don't see it as psychologically damaging because it isn't something they remembering fearing themselves - it really is on the same level as time out/withdrawal if privileges. I knew someone as a kid who would opt for a smack over being told off because it was quicker and bothered him less (which actually says to me that it wasn't as effective, but still).

I was smacked as a kid and it terrified me. In hindsight it was seldom that painful but it was petrifying and humiliating and the threat, even if unspoken, hung over me all the time . My mum congratulates herself on my upbringing as I was a difficult, secretive child who would lie to them about my misdeeds, and she only smacked me instead of using a belt like her parents did. I was probably smacked about once per month as a bigger kid but more when I was a toddler.

In my case physical abuse (aka smacking) was emotional abuse. It is for most since it is the fear if it happening again that the parent wants to remain at the forefront if the child's mind at all times, to prevent future misdeeds.

And I don't see what's so hard about letting them run slightly ahead (so they feel they are winning) until you get to a dangerous bit, then catching them at the road and ending the race in a fun way, with a tickle/congratulations on being really speedy or similar. If they fight, you just say "not on the road, it's dangerous", carry them across and start again on the other side. We do this most days and my child is non-verbal, 2 and desperately wants independence!

So what is the evidential basis for your assertion that the smack to the hand delivers the least amount of pain yet still makes it effective?

Have you experimented with various implements on different parts of the body? Have you asked your child to grade the different types of pain you inflict? Have you measures the correlation between pain inflicted and cessation of undesirable behaviour?

Do share.

fefifo man give up. You'll always get a hiding on these threads if you're a pro smacker. Let people go back to faffing with a pat on the head and you parent how you want.

Gamer

I agree, but the alternative to smacking isn't fafing and pats on the head. Plenty of us manage it

Smack away smackers, it's not illegal - yet.

Just don't give me this bollocks that it's part of a carefully thought out disciplinary programme that after all,never did you any harm.

You do it because you have run out of ideas/patience.