Smacking! At what age do people thinking it's appropriate

[AlanasMum]

I was at coffee morning the other day and my 15m dd was playing up a little. Another mum commented and said wow I bet she gets a lot of smacks. I must have looked a bit shocked as it hadn't occured to me to smack dd before.

I've always been on the fence on this subject and figured I'd cross that bridge when I came to it. Which appears to be coming quicker than I anticipated.

exactly what soapbox said - exactly.

however - whenever someone says smacking - suddenly is child beating - oliver twist stylee.

In defence of Matildax, what is being illustrated by this thread is that there are different styles of parenting. No one technique is perfect - and no one child is the same, nor is a parent.

I feel no reason to apologise for the fact that I did ( and would still, in the same, age related, circumstances) choose to use smacking in certain circumstances.

I am comfortable with what I chose to - it worked for my ds and me - I'm not even sure he will remember - but he may well remember the time-outs and how much they distressed him (he had another one last night, which really upset him). I wouldn't use it now that he is 6 - the "tap" that I used 4 years ago would no longer serve to shock and I wouldn't want to escalate to anything more powerful, and, more importantly, I can now reason with him.

I am sure I have hurt him more by holding his hand really strongly in a shop when he is trying to run away.

That is a good analogy of why relationships with children is different and you cannot use direct analogies with what is deemed to be abuse between adults: if I were to force and adult to go soemewhere he/she didn't want to go, that would be deemed abduction or even assualt - whereas as a parent, no-one would bat an eyelid at someone dragging a reluctant child into, say, a shoe shop - or past a sweetie shop!

soapbox, i applaud you and the other mumsnetters who like you have never smacked their child, however i have never hit out in anger,only to regret it later, or used smacking as a means of disipline, i have on occasion, after exhausting all other measures,used a smack, though never hard to explain to my dc of the consequences of their immediate actions. it is out of love and to ensure the long term safety of my children, i am amazed to see how this has caused so much controversy.

matildax and Prettybird, having been involved on these smacking threads before I feel qualified ( a bit) to tell you that no amount of explaining or reasoning on your parts will make one jot of a difference not now not ever to the views or reactions of the anti smackers. Save your breath and energy for something more productive and less frustrating.

What is the point of a tap that doesn't hurt? Are you trying to make the point that "I could hit you and hurt you but I'm not doing it right now"

I have a question for those of you who smack your children (not those who have done it in blind anger btw)

If you had an agreement with your boss/DH/anyone not to do something. And oyu did it - how many times would you have to do it in defiance of their instructions before they were allowed to hit you?

Secondly, what do you think your children learn from being hit when they do things you don't like?

I am using the word hit deliberatly, because a tap (is tapping a keyboard and to me that woudl be a way of getting attention, like you tap a friend on the shoulder).

Hitting is "to deal a blow or stroke to something" from dictionary

I did say it was normally a "parp" subject for me!

I just decided (eventually) to post to show that there are some parents who do choose to use smacking within a specific context. If we always keep silent, then the anti-any-smacking-whatsoever-so-matter-how-defineders will assume that theirs is the only opinion that exists and that no educated, well meaning parent could have a different point of view.

It's a bit like the other thread about 85% of kiwis being against the proposed anti-smakcinh law, even though the majoirty are against smacking.

I'd far rather that laws were properly enforced regarding genuine child abuse. And I'd have no issue whatsoever with additional parenting classes/support demonstrating the preferabel alternatives to smacking.

I am also a "trendy pinko liberal" (and proud of it! ), I do object to this sledgehammer approach - the implication that smackers are all bad.

Others argue this better than I do but all we can answer this with is if the smackers aren't carefly they'll break the law and a jolly good thing too. You don't need a firm smack to teach children anything and if you think so you're wrong. If you're doing taps that don't hurt then that's faintly ludicrous - how could that work at all?

Sunnyjim - I have already answered that question: if my boss had asked me not to do something, he can reason with me as to why he doesn't want me to do it - and does then have the sanction of disciplinary action if I did repeatedly continue to do something I had been told not to.

As soon as I could reason with my ds, I stopped. And it was probably at about the same age that the value of the "tap" (I call it a smack) to shock would have stopped as well. (BTW, when I did in on myslef last night, it did sting - for less than second - and left no mark - and I am as fair skinned as they come).

VVq's post seems one of the more realistically human experiences on here so far (not read all), based on everyday reality rather than just the theory or extreme examples.

I agree smacking is wrong and there are much better ways, more effectrive and justifiable, to discilpline a child.

I stated before having children that I would never smack them.

I admit despite these beliefs that I have smacked DS 1 on about 3 occasions. These were occasions when his behaviour had been accumatively challenging and I felt like I'd tried everything (although I'm sure when analysed I hadn't)and in my rage smacked him, pretty firmly on the bottom.

Afterwards I did feel bad, did apologise and used more effective strategies.

It was a failure on my part, and will remain an unpleasnt memory for the both of us.

I however will not regard myself as ,abusive, or ,bullying, because overall I am a loving caring balanced parent, who does not make this an frequnet part of family life.

I think i probaly have resorted to this in rage, despite my views against it, as I was smacked occasionally as a child, so it is within my 'parenting schema' somehwre.

I'm expalineing not justifying. It was /is wrong.

I am sometimes wrong, I try to be better.

Also these 3 occasions happened in the space of about 18mths when Ds was about 3. Since then I have found that the talking/reasoning/reward/sanction type strategies can be used more effectvely.and I hope I never fail in this way again.

I do think some are too quick to use really damaging labels such as bully and abusive, when the overall relationship and family life may well be neither.

sunnyjim, it was not a case of not doing something i didnt like, it was out of concern for their safety,the two are by no means related. i stand by my convictions. until a child is of an age when they can be reasoned with, and are able to use rational thought,i feel i am justified to use any means that enables them to see the consequences of their actions.It was to shock not to hurt.please refrain from posting unless you have the facts right, thankyou.

DoodleDoo

Keeo posting...you can do it without being unprovoked, you know, on some uncontenscious food thread, for e.g!

'provoked' I mean. duh.

I was shocked when a friend came to stay with me and she "tapped" her 9 mth old ds for reaching out to get a book which she didn't want him to have. She sees no problem with smacking but was defensive saying the infamous "well it didn't do me any harm" line.
She thought I was far too soft with my ds and let him get away with murder.
It is different parenting styles and I disagreed with hers. it looked like a tap to me but its relative isn't it? I wasn't on the receiving end of it...
I was smacked a lot as a child and felt it DID do me harm.

Sunnyjim - I didn't answer the second part of your question: ds learnt not to do whatever it was he was doing, as a result of the shock that he got. It may be that he had got hysterical and could no longer listen to me and wasn't "hearing" me telling him to stop. I honestly can't now remember the circumstances.

I know that Bloss, who used to argue for smacking in the sort of tightly defined circcumstances that I have outlined gave a good example once, where she was ensconced in a loving threesome on the couch with her dd and her ds. her younger ds was doing something (pushing her dd away) that was spoiling the moment. When, after a number of requests, he continued to do it, she smacked him once - and he stopped. Alternatives such as "timeout", long winded reasioning, were not option in the circumstances as it would have spoiled the moment for her dd as well. As it was, they were able to immediately continue with the enjoyable activity. She argues it much more elquontely then me here - I hope she doesn't mind me bringing her name up.

My mum would smack me in anger quite a lot when I was younger.I am not talking about taps on hands etc.these were full blows and I hated her for this, this has affected me. I speak to her but do not have mother/daughter relationship. that has been all her doing.

kittywaitsfor, i agree with you fully, however i am not frustrated just amazed and shocked that certain individuals are unable to see the difference between premeditated abuse of a child through smacking or whatever,and concern for a childs safety at a young age.

I do remember other smacking threads where, with many of the same contributors, there was a general concession that there is a huge difference beween a smack and child abuse, which of course there is.

smacking in anger is wrong

of course it is!

"young children on the whole have no concept of danger"

Not in my experience. DS has never been near the fire when it is on, from a very young age he seemed to sense it was to be avoided. When we walk by the river he has always known to take care around the edge (of course I tell him to take even more care but that's just standard parental neurosis). I guess these are "natural" threats, the iron etc. is a bit different I suppose.

j3, your story is awful,your mother obviously had major problems and took them out on you.In that instance smacking is terribly wrong and should not and cannot be justified ever. a huge hug is sent to you

I agree: smacking in anger is wrong and I was always careful never to do so.

vimfuego i did say "on the whole." Some children are more "worldly wise" than others. however i appreciate your point of view