Grayling defending smacking

[seventiesgirl]

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

The point about verbal abuse is irrelevant, of course you shouldn't verbally abuse, but a shout of 'hey, don't do that!' is not verbal abuse.

If you are saying the things SGB suggests OR hitting, you've lost control. But a raised voice alone does not equal verbal abuse.

Hitting is hitting and it is wrong. The fact that verbal abuse is also wrong doesn't make hitting kids less wrong.

I guess I have no patience with prolonged resentment, winging, sulking and being "vile" all afternoon. I like to just get on.

I don't think I could physically have got DD2 into the car in her PJs, certainly not without levels of force that I wouldn't want to use.

She is the most socially aware child I have ever met, she would have been mortally embarrassed from about 2.

Star You know what, I deal with my children by teaching them the behaviour I want and helping them not to behave in ways that are dangerous or harm or upset other people.

My children wouldn't get to 334 times of doing something I didn't want them to because I would look at why they were behaving that way and sort it. So, to take your sofa example;

• maybe they're climbing because it's a normal way for them to practise and develop their gross motor skills...so if I don't want them to climb on the sofa, I'll need to find something that they can climb.

• maybe they're climbing because it gets my attention (334 times of being told no, is 334 lots of attention and if there's no positive attention available, they'll go for being told off or smacked rather than get no attention)...so I'll up the amount of time I spend with them playing and having fun (which will take up the same amount of my time, as telling them off 334 times anyway)

• maybe they're climbing because they have energy to burn...we'll go for a run round the park

• maybe they're bored (which if they're not allowed to explore, they're likely to be)...so I need to distract them with interesting activities.

So, what I'm trying to say is...I choose to teach my child how to behave my showing them (which I won't be if I smack them...in fact I'll be doing the complete opposite of modelling wanted behaviour), telling them and helping hem to do what they want, and giving them lots of positive attention when they're behaving well. This works because you both enjoy the time you spend together, and there's not a lot of normal, age expected behaviour naughtiness.

Or I could make use of my adult reasoning, planning and logical thinking skills...by telling them off 334 times, before losing my temper and whacking them.

ffs can we for once NOT have the "any parent who says they haven't is a liar"

No, they aren't. Mine are 10 and 8 and I have never laid a finger on either of them. And oddly enough, unlike ALL children of smackers, they haven't spent their childhood falling over each other to run in front of buses/stick their hands in the toaster either

And "didn't do me any harm". Bit it did. You think it's OK to solve your problems by hitting people. But only people who are much smaller than you.

Hmmm I was a teacher with very good discipline believe me it is different in a school situation as you have peer pressure and children will often listen to a stern teacher more than a parent.

I don't smack to discipline bar the pinching incident which was totally the right thing to do however I will be honest and say to be frank I look back at my controlled smacks as a child and compare them to how dp and I discipline dd (who is exactly the same as me)and I think there is a whole lot more stress involved, I'm also not convinced it is better.

I think a lot of parents don't smack but don't know what to do instead so do nothing which is very damaging imvho. At some point you can't turn a blind anymore and I think if you leave it too late to acknowledge and confront bad behaviour you're stuffed.

But polkadot - the parents you describe are not failing because they don't smack. They are failing (according to you) because they do nothing! The two are not linked.

And clearly going by behaviour in schools there are a lot of parents who don't know what to do,tolerate shite behaviour and do nothing.

Doing nothing is shite,lazy parenting too imvho.

Interested to hear the 100% fail safe discipline measures others use. I suspect if anybody could come up with one they'd make a fortune.

Parenting classes are what is needed and lots off them for all classes as some of the mc parenting I've seen is the worst of the lot.

'I guess I have no patience' yep, it sounds like it.

An embarassed 2 year old?! Wow you must have worked hard at teaching her to be humiliated via smacking.

There's no resentment if you remove something immediately. DS snatches a toy? Toy gets taken. In your case, I'd hit ds and let him still play with the toy.

It's not about removing something every time - only when it's relevant.

People have said that smacking made them feel humiliated. That's what you've done to your daughters. Made them feel small and powerless. You call it socially aware? No, you have made them learn that mummy is right simply because they'll get smacked otherwise.

Nice.

No wonder you get flamed star.

Smackers often do show themselves up on these threads with comments like that one. They lack imagination to the point where they assume that discipline in a non-hitting family must mean "a vacuum where smacking ought to be".

Sad, depressing, but thankfully on the way out. Most of you smackers are already breaking the law and the rest of you are on borrowed time. Children are the only people in our society who can legally be hit (apart from boxers) and it won't be the case for much longer. Better get your names down for some basic parenting classes...

They are linked.I was raised in the 70s when smacking was common and behaviour better.Smacking has been removed and nothing has been put in it's place.

Parents don't know what to do.

don't think I could physically have got DD2 into the car in her PJs, certainly not without levels of force that I wouldn't want to use

You did use force. You smacked.

No - smacking has "been removed" because it is wrong!
When you say nothing has been put in its place - what do you mean? I'm intrigued. Are you suggesting smacking was the answer to all society's ills? Unruly teens - what, there were none of these in the 70s? Really?

My ds is 3 and I have never smacked him.

My parents smacked me regularly as a child. I can remember one occasion when I had scraped "I hate my sister" with a pin on a wooden desk in my bedroom. My dad came into the room with his slipper behind his back and said he had seen it and knew I ad written it because I was the only one who could write. I am the eldest child. He whacked me so hard on my thigh with his slipper that I couldn't go to school the next day because I had a massive bruise and had PE so the teacher would have seen.

My mum used to wear those wedge heeled shoes that were back in fashion a few years ago, I can remember being hit by the heels of those too many times.

The last time my mum hit me I was 17, she found my oral contraceptive pill in my bag. I had gone to family planning and got sorted before having sex, I thought I was being responsible.... When my mum found out she went APESHIT, saying I wouldn't need it unless I had had sex. When I said I did need it she slapped me and called me a slut!!!

I wish I had been able to talk to her and ask her advice before having to take myself to the clinic on my own.

I'm sure she would be mortified if she ever read this as she thinks that she is a perfect parent.

I don't want my son to have memories like this

Grabbing and dragging aren't preferable either.

They are linked.I was raised in the 70s when smacking was common and behaviour better

Evidence please.

It isn't smacking or nothing though There are lots of other ways to discipline your children. Ballstoit wrote an excellent post just a few posts earlier with some ideas. Parenting classes might help parents to see that there are other ways to teach your children the appropriate way to behave. But it is certainly not smacking or nothing.

Sorry x posted with loads of you. That took ages to type.

No I am not a liar, I really have not smacked my ds

For every child that was smacked and has grown to say "it didn't do me any harm", I have heard a tale along the lines of "it harmed me, because..."

Many parents do know what to do. If you don't, polkadot, ask them or go n a course.

C&p'd from the NSPCC website:

"Parents may believe there are occasions when only a smack will work. For example, your child is very disobedient; your toddler runs into the road; or one of your children bites a playmate. It can be tempting to think a smack sorts out these incidents quickly, but it does nothing to teach your child about how you want them to behave.

Instead, it:

gives a bad example of how to handle strong emotions
may lead your child to hit or bully others
may encourage your child to lie, or hide feelings, to avoid smacking
can make defiant behaviour worse, so discipline gets even harder
leads to a resentful and angry child, damaging family relationships if it goes on for a long time."

No Cat I'm suggesting parents are confused,frustrated and bewildered.I know because I've had them sat in front of me saying that.Yes smacking children isn't preferable however doing nothing is worse behaviour wise. As a society we removed smacking and haven't taught parents what to do in it's place so they try 101 things often with zero consistency,stress and frustration. Some do nothing preferring to believe their little darlings are perfect because it's easier.

I read this somewhere:

When an adult hits an adult it is called assault
When a child hits an adult it is called defiance
When an adult hits a child it is called discipline

Hitting is hitting is hitting - it is wrong, always, to physically, emotional, verbally or otherwise abuse someone else - particular those who are vulnerable and depend on you.

If you honestly cannot think of any other way of parenting your child than assaulting them, then you owe it to them and yourself to seek help, advice and support.

If physical punishments worked, then why is it not ok for your boss to hit you? Or for your child to be hit by their teacher? It is not ok, because it is not ok.

I have never, ever, and will never, ever hit my children. I was smacked, hard, as a child. I remember the pain, hurt and complete bewilderment/feeling of injustice. I work in child protection now and see, hear and read the most awful things about physical punishments - I think it is very hard for there to be a line of what is "acceptable" and what isn't - much better to say none, end of.

it's the ones who maintain that it did them no harm who manifest the most damage tbh. Their moral compass is all fucked up. They think it's fine to hit people smaller and weaker than themselves in order to force compliance.

People who know it did them harm tend to have done a bit more work on their personal development and have cottoned on that it might be an idea not to hit their own children.