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?

Gold

Oh yes, me too. But it's a good one. I'm all for a mixture of methods. Actually the book is not really about discipline, it is about understanding how children communicate and learn through play, and how we can enter into that. It helped me when I was a bit stuck with my then-3 year old and feeling negative. Helped remind me that his resistance wasn't personal, it was learning.

So don't discount

I'm not a lax parent

Fair comment.

I promise to open and read some of it if I come across a copy

Yes, sometimes being 'playful' doesn't work or isn't appropriate. But that doesn't mean it can't be in your tool kit of responses. You can still be firm when it counts, without resorting to violence.

Fefifo, don't be disingenuous. You weren't just 'stating a fact' when you said
Your own daughter was in nursery at seven months old so I know you may not be able to appreciate this concept, but for my daughters being forcibly told that they may not remain in my presence at that age, given they are used to being in my presence pretty much twenty four seven would hurt them, emotionally, a lot more than a smack

This is the tedious and oft repeated assertion by some that a mother who uses day care can't really 'love' her children because otherwise she would understand they just can't bear to be out of her presence.

If you can't make your arguments without resorting to this kind of comment, don't you think that is saying something not very positive about your arguments?

I would be interested if you could show me where I have alleged that you are a paedophile or a psychopath etc, etc.

What I say is simply that I find the idea that someone would deliberately and calmly smack a child, deeply disturbing. You appeared to be saying that you didn't actually do this, you baked a cake instead. So you don't need to take my views to heart as they can't be describing your parenting?

Yes, sometimes being 'playful' doesn't work or isn't appropriate. But that doesn't mean it can't be in your tool kit of responses. You can still be firm when it counts, without resorting to violence.

You're right, it is firmly in there .

I was thinking more about alternatives to smacking which will be strategies that naturally tend to be among those you use when you need to be firm and clear about boundaries.

I do understand the frustrations of some who smack because I have also seen plenty of the really feeble responses to awful behaviour - like one child biting or whacking another. Hearing the parent say 'please don't do that! gentle hands!' in pathetic pleading voice causes all sorts of RAGE to well up within me.

But I don't see why a firm 'no' and removal from the situation, with some other sort of sanction if child old enough to understand it - no sweets, no TV etc - can't be agreed by all as a much more effective and less abusive response than a smack or threat of smack later.

Crikey, are we all still playing pigeon chess with Fefifo?

Just thought I'd pop back to answer the claim that I compared her to an abusive care home worker. Not so.

Fefifo, I asked you why an adult hitting a small child was accepted, but an adult hitting an equally vulnerable, confused elderly person was not. You replied that hitting an elderly person "don't learn 'em nuffink" (sorry, I paraphrase) whereas I pointed out that it is the victim's fear that gives the abusers away in the end, so this is simply not true, and they do, in fact, know who's going to hurt them.

I'm rather pleased you made the connection to elder abuse and younger abuse all by yourself, even recognising the link between what these abusers do and your 'calm' (cold, calculating) smacking when you get away from prying eyes. It's the first step in admitting you're wrong. Like your Mother has. Listen to her, she's talking sense.

You never answered my question about hitting disabled children did you? I'll pose it again.

What's the difference between hitting a disabled child with a mental age of three and an actual tiny three year old?

Fefifo, some of your responses have been antagonistic.
May I even dare suggest that you are being sensitive? I think you are. If you truly believe your parenting techniques are correct and the consequences of your parenting will only be positive ones, you have no need to get over emotional.
But pardon me, sensitive people are emotionally fragile and prone to hysteria. I'm assuming you're being hysterical because you are only focusing on addressing questions raised by other posters that you feel you have a justifying answer to, and within your answer are rude and derogatory remarks.
We clearly come from different planets.
On my planet I don't believe a child should accept that any degree of physical pain caused intentionally by another human being is acceptable.
You do, and I find it really bizarre and very sad. I whole heatedly pray that your dc never experience any of the feelings expressed by many of the posters here that have been smacked themselves as children.
I also hope that you never belittle your dc's emotional hurt and pain because you think they are weak and hysterical.

Thank you newt, now that I am aware that you don't like the use of that word I shall desist immediately and tell all my friends. Any others you would rather I avoid?

I shall nunquam, at length (newt look away now)

1. yes

2. I feel that if it deters them from doing something that may be more painful then the means justifies the end. I find it to be very effective with my children despite not doing it very forcefully and only occasionally. I reserve it for behaviours that I'm disinclined to let peter out or see how it goes by giving them a sticker.

3. No and they don't.

4. no and they don't.

5. I don't mark a date in my calendar but I'd say probably around two and a half. Too young for me would be any time before they are able to hold a conversation. The sort of age where they are able to understand consequences but cannot modify their emotions to fit.

6. Too old for me would be any time after they begin applying their reason above their emotions. For my eldest this has been around five.

7. I am not responsible for the actions of other parents. To me, basic common sense would dictate that walloping your child about the head or using implements does not fall under the same umbrella as smacking, although I gather from here that many don't share this common sense approach.

8. If I think that an occasional light smack is an effective method of parenting then it would follow that I wouldn't want to see that banned wouldn't it? There are many, many reasons I think it's a very bad idea. I would say that the current law is majorly flawed and could be tightened, but a complete ban? No. What would be the penalty for parents like me? A custodial sentence? My children wouldn't thank you. A fine? All our spare cash goes on them so again they wouldn't thank you. Removing them from a loving home? They would hate you. I think that the biggest flaw is very few people that want a complete ban actually want anything to happen to parents like me so what's the point? Spero (I think) upthread said it would be like when not having car seats and drink driving were made illegal and serve mainly in the form of guiding the populace. Well, that's bollocks. Those things were made illegal because they have both shown to be fatal many times over. The consequences of what smacking, as it stands in the current law we have, are precisely a tiny bit of pain and then bugger all for lots of children by their own accounts and emotional trauma at worst for others. Neither comes close to death, does it? I don't think you should legislate against something that causes a little pain and a remote possibility of emotional trauma. Completely unlike not using car seats and drink driving which are both routinely followed up by the police and in the case of the latter prosecuted, there would be absolutely no deterrent to the parents that give light smacks were it never applied. If the government wants to give guidance they can publish a booklet.

For anyone that wants this blanket ban to actually be enforced I just don't see how that would be feasible. The police are over stretched and social services at breaking point as we are constantly being told. It would be bad for victims of crime in general if the police were compelled to investigate every report of a child being lightly smacked and catastrophic for children who are currently really being neglected or abused were social services to go that way too. There is also the question again of what consequences there could be for the parents that wouldn't directly negatively affect their children.

9. No, I would not accept anyone other than me or DH physically disciplining our children.

If it were not justifiable I wouldn't be able to justify it, at length, in the way I just did. I would just repeat over and over again that it's because I'm right and you're wrong because you're weird.

Sleep! You're awake!!

Oh no maybe not, I'm just checking back intermittently didn't see the time of your last post.

What would be the penalty for parents like me? A custodial sentence?

Would you still do it if it were illegal?

Beck's, we can't say 'hysteria'. Newt doesn't agree with it.

Over sensitive? . Like I said, I'm still on the thread because I find the notions I'm coming across on it positively ridiculous to the point of being diverting. Were I to take any of this nonsense about 'sinister' and 'disturbed' to heart I'd be sat in the corner crying, not posting happily away. I've nothing better to do (insomniac) aren't you here for the same reason?

I'm focusing on addressing the first question I see when I reopen the page and thank you for the prayers for my children.

Sleep, my children don't fear me, what makes you think they do?

I don't smack my children in front of anyone because I don't want to humiliate them. I wouldn't smack them in a room with friends who also smack/have no problem with it. I would tell them that if they don't stop they will be smacked when they get home in a crowded park or busy road full of strangers. Again, why all the talk of hiding from 'prying eyes'?

Do you see a difference between a disabled child with a mental age of three and an actual three year old?

Poppin, you've answered not one but two questions with a question. It's an excellent question and I'd be happy to answer it if you would be so kind as to answer mine first.

Anyone who has the threat of being hit hanging over them lives in fear. You ignore everyone who says smacking damaged them, I suspect because you don't want to admit to what you've potentially done to the child you claim to love.

Do I see a difference between a disabled child with a mental age of three and an actual three year old you ask Fefifo?

Yes, one's bigger.

I wouldn't hit either of them.

How about you?

Going to bed now though so, to be continued...

Random, my children do not live with the threat of being hit hanging over them. My children would not be as happy and well adjusted as they are if they did. The threat of being hit never hangs over them for anything more than a minute. They do not fear me. If they feared me they would not reserve all of their bad behaviour for me and DH (who doesn't smack) as most children who are secure do. 'Being hit' is a very, very small feature of their lives.

I ignore everyone that says it has damaged them because I was hit and it did not damage me. Do you not trust your own experiences over anyone else's? The internet is actually the only place I have ever heard anyone say that their good, loving parents damaged them by hitting them and I know plenty of my friends over the years were smacked. I have never, ever feared my mum. She loves me more than anyone else on earth, how could I fear her? From my own experiences, I just cannot comprehend how someone could fear a very loving parent who occasionally hit them. I just don't see how there could have been nothing else going on there but an occasional smack for damaged to be the result.

I suspect I put up with it for so long because I was brought up in a house where violence was used on our "loved ones" and I though if I went to my parents for help they wouldn't see the problem as they have hit me too so why is it wrong when someone else did it? If they thought I deserve to be hit then maybe I do, and maybe that's what everyone would think

I'm very sorry you went through so much with your ex but what you describe is so very disconnected with my own experience of my mother. The very only reason I would question going to my mother if a man were to abuse me is that I would be very worried about the consequences because I know that she would try to castigate him.

A random man once called me a 'bitch' on the way home from school and when I got home told her. All five foot one of her marched through the door to find him and she continued looking for at least an hour. I've no idea whether she was intending to shout at him (would probably have ended badly) or hit him (would probably have ended worse). But it is this example as one of many others I could give that instilled in me that I don't deserve to take any crap from anyone. It also stands out way more in my mind than any time she hit me.

"I would tell them that if they don't stop they would get smacked when they got home."

"The threat if being hit never hangs over them for more than a minute."

You've contradicted yourself Fefifo. Or you don't go far from home?

You still haven't addressed my points about why it isn't acceptable to be smacked by another adult who is in a senior role at work etc. Please feel free to check the post it's on.

The reason I feel the need to keep coming back to this, is to try and show you that there is a potential risk that your dc may come to harbour feelings that aren't good, and it could be avoided.
Nobody can predict exactly how it will effect anyone in the future.
Especially nowadays, it is becoming more prevalent in schools to teach children any form of hitting in any situation from anyone is unacceptable and that adults to know this.
When they learn this, they may want to ask you a few questions and start challenging you. Will you berate them for that, tell them they are emotionally weak and being hysterical?

Possibly they won't say a thing to you, they might be worried if you do.

Lots of people who have been smacked (me included) as children still love and respect our parents, undoubtably. But that's not to say that it doesn't still smart when you look back.

From personal experience it made me a bit secretive as a child for fear of getting a smack. The humiliation doesn't stop just because there is only you and a parent in the room.
As a teenager and young adult, upon learning some of my peers didn't get smacked and they turned out well, I felt enormous resentment and jealousy of them.

Does that resonate with any of you other posters, just out of curiosity?

I wasn't beaten, I had a smack on the hand or on the bottom, just to be clear.

Any you're right Fefifo, fines, custodial sentencing, removal of children isn't the way forward should a total ban be put in place. Education and parenting classes to show alternatives are.

I don't smack my children in front of anyone because I don't want to humiliate them

So do you carry out ANY forms of discipline in public? Wouldn't ANY form of public disclipine be 'humiliating' to a child?

Isn't your refusal to slap in public because deep down, you do accept it is qualitatively different from using a firm voice or imposing another sanction such as time out/removal of treat?

Because you know if you slap in public that someone might call the police?

Thanks for replying fefifo

Regarding this point

^7) I am not responsible for the actions of other parents. To me, basic common sense would dictate that walloping your child about the head or using implements does not fall under the same umbrella as smacking, although I gather from here that many don't share this common sense approach.

8. If I think that an occasional light smack is an effective method of parenting then it would follow that I wouldn't want to see that banned wouldn't it? There are many, many reasons I think it's a very bad idea. I would say that the current law is majorly flawed and could be tightened, but a complete ban? No. What would be the penalty for parents like me? A custodial sentence? My children wouldn't thank you. A fine? All our spare cash goes on them so again they wouldn't thank you. Removing them from a loving home? They would hate you. I think that the biggest flaw is very few people that want a complete ban actually want anything to happen to parents like me so what's the point? Spero (I think) upthread said it would be like when not having car seats and drink driving were made illegal and serve mainly in the form of guiding the populace. Well, that's bollocks. Those things were made illegal because they have both shown to be fatal many times over. The consequences of what smacking, as it stands in the current law we have, are precisely a tiny bit of pain and then bugger all for lots of children by their own accounts and emotional trauma at worst for others. Neither comes close to death, does it? I don't think you should legislate against something that causes a little pain and a remote possibility of emotional trauma.^

You are again applying your standards to other people. There is smacking which is not using implements or a smack on the head. I assure you, there is smacking which causes a lot of pain and a great possibility of emotional trauma, yet it still falls within 'allowed smacking'.

Take what I am saying as fact if you can. Some children will be in a lot of pain, and some will be emotionally traumatised. Is this ok?

I would hasten to add, you speak very blasély (is this a word?) of "emotional trauma at worst", but this is a very bad worst, and may not manifest itself well into adulthood.

When smacking has such a wide spectrum of negative effects, is it not best to have a blanket ban? Could you stop if it were made illegal? I would suggest any parent who couldn't has a problem, and would deserve to have legal punishment in whatever form that took. I would imagine SS involvement.

Does anyone know how it works in Scotland where I believe it is illegal?

Just found this www.barnardos.org.uk/help_at_hand_final_report.pdf

Very insightful and interesting.

Have just mentioned it on another thread too.

Clicky link please

I'm having a brain fart and I can't work out how to do it on my phone, annoying.

However, put into Google Barnados Help At Hand survey evaluation and it will come up. Sorry.

www.barnardos.org.uk/help_at_hand_final_report.pdf

Much obliged.