Grayling defending smacking

[seventiesgirl]

Never did him any harm apparently. The tory party are such a bunch of tossers. Whatever next?

Perfectstorm, I am not trying to justify smacking. You are clearly not reading my posts. I just don't think it is quite the crime or abuse you think it is in all cases. You choose to ignore any possibility that you can not agree with smacking without viewing it as abuse. Not sure why.

Amazingmum - you can tell the difference easily because a child that is challenging authority will watch you like a hawk to see your reaction. They are checking if they are allowed or not and how far they can push boundaries and that is when you really have to show them where those boundaries are.

Exactly.

When you ask a child not to touch a glass vase. You ask politely, 'please don't touch that, it might break and you could get hurt'

Request and justification for the request.

ooh just one last point to make - there's a massive difference between a child disobeying deliberately, or just being clumsy or forgetful or silly.

Like like like like like like like like like!

The times I most vividly remember being smacked were NOT when I was disobeying deliberately.

Either I didn't know they were wrong (how was I to know that man was blind, and that he stopped suddenly when I wasn't expecting it, causing me to bump into him, and be smacked for it?).

And when my brother played up, and I got punished because parents believed him and not me. This happened more than once.

Also my primary school had a policy of "woe betide any pupil who does something without being told".

These and other things made me grow up with a huge fear of doing anything spontaneously, so risk-averse that was was very held back in life.

So my point is: not so much smacking per se, but if used carelessly (like any punishment) can be very damaging.

perfet yes, as a parent it is my job to steer them away from wrong and poin them to the right. you can call it forcing, I have no problem with iot.

if they don't want to sit in a carseat with a seatbelt on at the age of 15 months I can preach to them about the highway code and how they might die if they fly out of the car through the windscreen etc till I'm blue in the face - but will they understand it?
no, they will wriggle and scream because I force my will upon them. which is also my job as a parent because I know better what's good for them.

they are not in the position to make decisions for themselves when they are born and they need to gradually gain control and independence - and also learn hoe to deal with these - not have it handed over to they challenge you and you are too weak to parent.

and for the last time parental authority is a category in itself and can not be compared to any other type of relationship. fact

perfectstorm - we are obviously a nation of abusers as far as you are concerned. Every parent MUST be an abuser because according to your logic, taken to it's natural limit, all discipline is abuse. I don't give a time-out to another adult but I do to my child therefore, clearly I am guilty of false inprisonment; I don't tell other adults to behave even if they are although I do tell my children how to behave - clearly this must be verbal abuse. The list is endless.

Your logic does not work and does not fit. I can see your flawed logic. Most mumsnetters probably also see your flawed logic although they are to afraid / civilised to be subjected to your verbal assaults (which is not actually a logical extreme I mentioned above, but is actually verbal assault).

Anyway, my two year old has just started screaming so I am just off the change his nappy and tell him not to scream - or in your view I am off to inflict battery and verbally assault him.

Physical punishment is wrong. It does not teach - it just adds fear and power dynamics to a relationship. It also works better for the smacker than the smackee - in that you get rid of negative emotions and the smackee stops the behaviour that annoyed you BUT the smackee has not learned how to deal with their feelings that led to the bad behaviour, or why their behaviour was deemed "wrong" - they will learn not to do it in front of you again. That is not the same.

Roald Dahl writes very eloquently on the subject of societally approved of physical punishment in his autobiographies "Boy" and "Going Solo".
He was not made a prefect due to his refusal to beat the first year boys when he was at Repton.

Read "Boy" and then decide to hit your kids - I don't think so.

letsgomaths "The times I most vividly remember being smacked were NOT when I was disobeying deliberately."

therefore whoever smacked you got it wrong and smacked out of frustration or anger- and I view that as abuse/violence too. and it broke your trust and effected you mentally/psychologically and broke your spirit.

people make mistake and children even more so and they need to know that in order to learn and grow they are allowed to make mistakes and should feel safe to do so.
so if they spill the milk or wet the bed or step on your toes or forget their homework or whatever, you'll get annoyed or cross, but smacking in these circumstances is pointless, because there's no guarantee they won't do it again.

but a kid laughing in your face and doing the exact opposite of what he was told to or not to do is not a mistake!
it is a deliberate and very carefully calculated act of disobedience designed to test and challenge and has to be met accordingly by and equally deliberate and carefully calculated discipline.

and that kind of punishment will not break his spirit, only his will

I don't know stacks about law, but the law distinguishes between accidental or deliberate crimes and the punishments are much harsher for the latter.

do ponder about that

What is the point of smacking a two year old that runs into the road?

It's not as though smacking will make the child road safe.

I can understand the emotion behind smacking a child in that instance, and would certainly not say that the parent was guilty of child abuse.

However, the only way to keep a child safe next to a road is holding hands/supervision/restraint until they have the brain development to be taught how to cross a road.

Young children learn by copying and through repetition. Slow and boring. Smacking them so they can reason about what they did wrong is no more effective than having a lengthy conversation with them. Young children are safe on the pavement when you enforce over and over again that you do not move unless they hold hands/the buggy/walk next to you etc. etc. etc. ad nauseum. And then one day they see their friend on the other side of the road and attempt to run across and because you are right next to them and are watching them like a hawk you pull them back. And you continue to insist that they hold hands/walk next to you etc. etc. until one day they are old enough to reliably know not to run out into the traffic.

You can add a bit of smacking if you want, but it won't make the process any faster.

Why would you want to teach a child that their will can be broken by somebody bigger and stronger hitting them?

Why would you want to teach a child that their will can be broken by somebody in authority applying psychological pressure to them?

Amazingmum

I think we have completely different view of what parenthood is about. I don't see my job as breaking my children's will. i see my job as helping them to grow up into decent people who feel at ease with themselves, know how to act in social situations and act on their own reasoning, conscience, compassion and curiosity. On the way there I want them to be safe and happy, clean, warm, well fed and rested and stimulated to learn. At the same time I don't want to drive myself nuts.

This doesn't mean not saying no, or anything goes. It means having boundaries and consequences (including sometimes emotional consequences) but its not aimed at "breaking their will".

It is really sad to read this thread. I cannot understand smacking. My mum did it. Nothing terrible. I do not think of it. But even as a child I could not understand why she would do it. I have never been able to hit another human being, including first and foremost my younger brother.

I try not to enter these discussions because I believe I am wired differently than people who smack and no possible understanding will come out of the conversation. Smacking someone just because you can do it and you are bigger than them. Of course by the time they reach their teens and can hit back people stop it. And they are the people you love the most and over whom you have the greatest amount of power. It totally escapes me. You can make a child do virtually anything you want to, without using any corporal punishment on them.

Going the extra mile and using force when you are in such a superior position to start with is something that I totally fail to understand.

miggsie kids know perfectly well when they are doing something wrong, especially when they have been warned before hand!

and as they grow older they have ideas about what is allowed and what's not. I always tell them that if it is a new thing and they are no sure, they should imagine whether I or DH would approve or not, that should be a good general guide for now.

but they definitely know what is wrong and what is not!

my older kids and friends (6 boys in total) did something really naughty at the weekend (it was funny, but it was very wrong) and when I found out the next day I asked my children one question :
" - Boys, while you were doing what you were doing did you
a, think nothing of it/thought it was ok
b, weren't sure if it was ok, but you decided it was ok
c, thought it was not ok, but you decided to do it anyway?"

I did not shout as I was actually quite shocked at what they did. (not going to tell, don't ask)

the answer: sheepish looks, embarrassed giggles, sighs and collective sorry mummy, followed by my oldest bursting into tears because he realized just how bad it was and as he's the oldest he also got everyone else into trouble

he was so sorry and clearly regretting his actions, so I decided that him feeling very bad about the situations was enough punishment, worse than anything I could have done.
he was sobbing as I cuddled him, at which point the others started saying sorry to him for encouraging him in the first place.

it was lovely and powerful and a real bonding moment, and they were massively relieved that they were forgiven. and I did not have to raise my voice once.

my DS2 even decided to not open his beloved MOTD magazine (arriving today) till Thursday, he thought that would be an appropriate punishment for himself.

I was astonished! he knew very well he did something wrong, and actually wanted to "suffer" for it, so that the guilt would be redeemed by it as forgiveness just wasn't enough.

it was his way of saying, fine , I'll make it right, I'll pay for it, because then I can move on.

so yes, kids know very well what is expected of them if the expectations and rules are explained and predictable

amazingmumof6, not sure about the point of your post. But even without smacking it terrifies me: "massively relieved that they were forgiven"; wanting to 'suffer' to redeem guilt...

Camaleon,

I sometimes think a lot of anti smackers on this thread did not have a normal childhood. For me Amazingmum's posts make perfect sense.

Do you not have any memory or identification with her children's emotions. I remember living in a happy home and wanting to please my parents (my mother in particular). Not because the consequence would be a smack but because I wanted her to be happy and when she was happy we had a lovely exciting time. I also remember times when my brother (or a friend) and I would decide to be REALLY naughty. The excitement was coupled by a huge feeling of guilt BECAUSE I had been well taught a sense of right and wrong. I remember knowing that there would be a price to pay and feeling better after it was paid and relationships and life were back to normal. Again this was not because the price (smack or whatever) was scary. It was because I wanted to know that there was a fair adult guiding me and setting boundaries.

Did you not care whether your parents forgave you for your behaviour? Did you never do anything you felt guilty about?

If you identify with nothing in Amazingmum's post above, it makes me think that you did not have a childhood where you had a clear sense of right and wrong. Or, alternatively, that you never chose a wrong/naughty course of action, which would be suspiciously abnormal. Otherwise, why wouldn't you feel guilty or want to be forgiven?

himalaya if the will or urge is wrong or damaging or harmful it has to be eliminated. nip it in the bud I say.

you can only achieve self-control by first applying rules and control externally and by reinforcing the rules with rewards and punishment over and over again until the desirable behaviour becomes a habit and will internalize.
there are other factors too, but this is the basic "formula"
and the reverse is also true, sadly

it's very basic psychology

My mum and dad smacked me. My dad also hit my mum. Later on I hit my sister (when I was still school age, never later) and a couple of times I really hurt her. I've never smacked my kids and they've never hit anyone. They wouldn't dream of it.

larry I think we should run some sort of help clinic for people who just don't get it...

I think that a number of posters had really sad childhoods where there was little excitement and new experiences and their main contact with their parents was through some form of discipline, maybe casual physical violence. I can understand why they just cannot see how a child could be happy and still be smacked as discipline. I think that is because they cannot visualise the fun and laughter in a happy household where consequences are measured and children are encouraged to experiment within boundaries and, when the boundaries are crossed, they are firmly but kindly enforced.

I know of one parent (wife of a friend) who virtually ignores her children other than to smack them when they interrupt her day. That, to me, is terribly wrong. However, to say the smacking is the problem would be to mistake the symptom for the disease.

All your posts clearly show you love and enjoy your (many!) children and know them well as individuals. That, to me, is the recipe for being a good parent. The method of discipline is pretty much irrelevant after that.

Amazingmum

Can I ask if your childbearing philosophy has a religious foundation - either now or from your own upbringing?

The idea that children are naturally bad, with wills that have to be broken, and all the talk of guilt, suffering and redemption seems like a religious view of the world.

I just don't recognise it in my own family. My children can be lazy, distracted, greedy, mean to each other, selfish etc... at times. But they grow through stages of maturity and self control without having to have things "nipped in the bud". Usually when they do something "bad" it because they are concentrated more on their own immediate wants than others feelings, safety, expectations -- not because they are actively trying to be disobedient to test artbitrary rules.

I want them to think about not doing things for reasons not because it is "against the rules" and when they are too young to think it through themselves I keep things out of reach/nudge them into unthinking compliance and routine.

letsgobtw the "ponder about" comment was not aimed at you, sorry if it looks like that!

I did not say they were naturally bad

Smacking is always wrong. My brothers and sisters have never forgiven my mother for it and we are all in our 40s. you can try and justify it until you are blue in the face with all your fingers in plug sockets and he ran into the road arguments but in reality you are teaching your children that bigger people can control you with physical violence and that is never right.

I have asked the same question repeatedly on these threads and never had an answer. What could a child possibly do that is so bad that you feel the need to strike them? and I am assuming it worked and you never had to repeat it.