I'm astonished that so many people are in favour of...

[emkana]

... smacking

But those who smack say that it is to makes the child 'obay' surley 'obaying' is a continued thing, not switched on and off (which would require more smacks)

where as for a child to respect their parents, that will only be switched off if the parent does something to loose that respect.

(if I smacked my children I would loose their respect)

genuinely interested too greeny, bit worried because I don't intend to offend anyone, it is a tricky subject though.

so you would say then that all the parents on here who have said they were smacked as children were probably horible, agressive children, or very shy, sorry but I don't believe that could be the case. Considering that smacking was far more common place 20 years ago than it is today, and yet the previous generation were far more respectful of our elders than children are today. I don't believe that necessarily has to do with the fact that smacking isn't as common as it is today, I think that there are a lot of other factors which also come into play which are a matter for a different thread perhaps, but i do think that lack of discipline certainly does play a part, be it smacking or otherwise.

I think that the issue here is about what works for you, and whether you think that it's right, as a matter of interest, those who don't smack, and as a rule I would count myself amongst those, although I am not specifically opposed to smacking but generally have found that there are more effectie ways to discipline my ds, but let's say that next week there's an artacle in some magazine saying that, for example, time-out is harmful to children because it makes them feel rejected (as stated in previous post), and that it should be banned immediately. Would you stop doing it? can you honestly say that if a certain method of discipline works for you and someone told you not to do it you would listen and stop? I imagine that there would be a huge post on here saying that we lived in the nanny state and that at least your method was better than smacking.

I think there are moderates here. But those who feel strongly tend to see anyone who differs from them at all as being an extremist.

Well, it is interesting, because even on this thread some of the stereotypes have broken down. I, for example, am a fairly traditional mother in a lot of ways - I like good manners, which to me isn't the same as fear-driven obsequiousness - I insist on please and thank you, and excuse me, and pardon me, and not interrupting when adults are talking because it's rude, etc etc. I like traditional family meals at the table and I insist on children helping to tidy up and having small responsibilities within the home. I suspect that kittywits and I are not poles apart in many respects. And yet I could no more raise my hand to a child than stamp on a kitten or poke an old man in the eye. I just couldn't - and I don't think it conflicts with the values above - we all show one another respect and courtesy, we all help with the day to day running of the home, and there is no hitting or bawling or general violent aggressive behaviour allowed, from anyone. There is a division somewhere between the smackers and the non-smackers which I am not understanding. I know from MN - and from common sense, really - that these are not all psychotic witches like my mother, nor are they cold Victorian monoliths who don't love their children and desire power at any price. So there MUST be common ground - we MUST be able to understand one anothers' views more clearly, even if we never reconcile them to our own....does any of that make sense?

I just feel that by flinging the old stereotypes at one another over and over again - "Well, you're obviously a hippy drippy patchouli-draped wet weekend"..."Yes, but you're a cold-hearted vicious unfeeling monster"....it's not helping, is it? And it's obviously not accurate either, on either side.

Sorry, I ramble, I am not well and I have spent far to much time on MN this week

wannabe that is not really an argument.

The questions are:

1. does smacking work as an effective form of discipline.

1. Should an adults/human rights to use their physical advantage/force over their children count for more than a child's right to not have force used against them?

smacking is only one option. Will the pro-smackers ever acknowledge that there is another way? if yes then why smack?

No, Wannabe, that is exactly what I am NOT saying - I am trying to say that the stereotypes we have of one another can't be accurate and aren't helpful - I think you've misread my post .

Don't agree with smacking at all...what kind of a message does it send to a small child?...not a good one thats for sure! I was never smacked as a kid, and I haven't turned into anything bad.
Some questions for those that think it is ok to smack....
If your child smacked another child, would you think that was ok?
If your dh/dp smacked you, would you think that was ok?
And if your child smacked you back...what do you do?
Smacking your child tells them its fine to lash out in anger, its fine to take that anger out on other people and the bigger you are the harder you can smack!
There are a hundred and one more important things to teach a child surely!

agree greeny.

Haven't read all the other posts yet Greeny but I have to say I totally agree with you. We do all have some common ground I think. Things are very hard to discuss on the computer. Threads like this always make me think of how I behave towards my children and quite of often I DO moderate my way of doing things because of discussions I have had.T
hat was a good post though, well done

Thanks . It actually crossed my mind yesterday on the thread about Sunday lunch - I think we - parents generally, not just me and you - sometimes have wildly inaccurate views of one another because we disagree on something fundamental, especially something like smacking, because it seems to go straight to the heart of one's identity as a parent. I think breastfeeding is another example, which is why those threads rage for days as well.

agree lucybug.

if the pro-smackers smack because, as someone said, the child is not able to understand needing their coat on when it's cold, then what makes you beleive that they are able to understand why you are smacking them?

'mummy is smacking me because she loves me and I will get cold, so she knows best and I will not copy that smack from her and next time I will put my coat on when I don't want to.

It makes no sense to me at all.

Greeny - stereotypes are interesting things. I think mine have been challenged so much since I've been using parenting message boards that I hardly have them any more - no sooner have you read a post on one board and decided that Fartypantsbrownfeather is a hippy-dippy liberal lentil-weaver, then you read another on another board that seems to indicate that he/she is a scary disciplinarian with a neat line in aggressive putdowns. It's very odd and quite disconcerting - and probably very healthy! In rl you get to meet people first and probably don't find out their opinions on a diverse range of subjects for a while.

Ah...thats where I'm coming from green....I agree completely

tryagain,my ds2 (age 3) wakes me up at 5.30 am every day.i always put him back to bed,firmly telling him that its still dark out therefore it is still night so he should go back to sleep!!

TYP,i am just trying to imagine how a child who has been brought up to question authority every time they are told/asked to do something is going to survive in school?
children have to do as the teachers tell them without queation when they are at school,so why should it be any different at home?

I'm away now' cos I am going to go to a mandolin concert and have to put all the brood to bed on my own , got to do baths first. It all takes an age. Have a good evening's debate and I hope you keep it clean

exactly poppet.....how can you expect a small child...who can't make sense of the world at the best of times...rationalise a smack?

I think that obviously for some smacking does work or they wouldn?t do it. But I do think that if there is a form of discipline that works for your child then there is no reason to smack. As I have said before, I am not opposed to smacking but I see no reason to do it as there are other methods of discipline that work for us, and I also think that in a lot of instances smacking is counter productive, i.e. to smack a child for smacking another child gives out totally the wrong message.

I think though that this is such an imotive subject that it?s something that will get peoples? backs up because by challenging the way you raise your child is, in a way, challenging your parenting abilities. I think that one of the reasons these debates get so heated is because people are very forthright in their views, and the extreme non-smackers, (some not all) as good as accuse the smackers of being child abusers and that can only get their backs up and so the debate rages out of control.

agree, greeny + kitty

would be good to have a thread with a list of say 10 contentious topics and everyone could rate where they stood on them. Might be very interesting.

That is a good idea Filly . I am starting to suspect that a good 50% of the anger that is generated on these threads comes from the assumptions people feel are being made about them, rather than disagreement about the topic in hand.

It would filly, you could complie it ?

Am about the mandolin concert - dh plays the mandolin, it is a beautiful instrument.

or compile it even!

a smack is still a smack though.... If you were smacked it would make you feel cross, belittled, sore! If someone smacked me I would damned well want to smack them back! If someone took me aside and made me calm down for ten minutes without a smack I would be far happier! does a child not have the right to feel the same?

Aren't they just. This is the 'fretful federation of mandolins' great name.
Right really must get off this and bath the kids