what are the reasons for NO smacking?

[hermykne]

I AM CURIOUS to know, folling the other thread, as my dd is so bold at the moment nothing gets thru to her, even putting her in a time out room for 2/3mins, shes 3. she will keep on screaming and then hit something or push something over.
can last 40mins and no matter how you go over the matter with her when shes calm, she doesnt seem to learn anything,
and i suppose smacking will not make her understand either...
but what does smacking create or instill in behavourial patterns in yours opinions?

Violence begets violence, using violence gives the impression that violence is an acceptable solution to things - a way to deal w/your emotions, settle conflict, etc.

Not something I want DD to find acceptable.

parp notes to herself not to even post a comment on this thread**

I feel that it shows them that lashing out in a violent manner is the way to handle things/situations that you don't agree with.
For instance, if I smacked my child and they then got into trouble at school for hitting a child in the playground, how could I reprimand them? It doesn't make sense to me. This isn't to say I haven't smacked - I don't want to and the situations where I have is when I have "lost it" a bit and felt awful afterwards. It simply doesn't work with my kids - missing a treat or being removed from a social situation is far more of a punishment to them.

My children are first told firmly and then they are given a second chance this time more firmly with the the threat that if they do not do what I am asking then they will receive a smack on the leg and if they still don't respond to what I say to them then I carry it out, just a swift smack on the legs, thats all I do but believe me for my kids it does work. They do cry and have a little sulk but then they realise they have done wrong and the matter is resolved. Sometimes its the only way and I do believe this.

I think maybe its because I was brought up this way that I do this with my children. DP refuses to smack as he was never smacked but he doesn't disagree with my form of punishment and I don't disagree with his. His voice is scary enough anyway!!!!

kids learn by mimicing others around them so if they see that when you get angry, annoyed, frustrated, you hit or smack, then that is what they will learn to do to. It seems a bit ludicrous to me to say to a child 'dont hit' while hitting them - what is that teaching them!?

There was an advert (for the NSPCC) recently on the radio that went along the lines of the dad saying "We'll go out for lunch, then to the zoo, then we'll come home and I'm going to smack you" - smacking is the last resort of a parent who has lost it, IMO.

Hitting someone smaller than you, to make them do what you want them to? No thanks.

Message withdrawn

I've opinions, but can't debate sadly Ds is waking up.

It gives mixed messages - you aren't allowed to hit people because it's wrong, but I can hit you.

I wouldn't hit anyone my own size to make them do something, so why would I hit a child less than half my size?

My mother was very free with her fists when we were growing up and I know that hitting me served no purpose at all apart from to knock every inch of self-confidence out of me, and I prefer not to inflict that on a child that I love.

Agree re the mixed messages thing - have seen women in supermarkets hitting their children and saying "Don't hit your brother!" - wtf?!

Plus, if I hit my dh, who is 6'2", it's domestic violence ... I can't quite see why it's then OK to hit someone who's less than 4' tall!

What I consider wrong is the other day we were waiting to go into nursery and a little boy (3) called Thomas was waiting with his Gran and the rest of us to go in, his Gran kept telling him to stay by her side and he got giddy as he saw the other children going in from the other side and ran to the door and opened it and went in. His Gran rushed in and belted him around the head and he started to cry, everyone just looked at her in shock including the teachers!!!

i disagree with it for all of the reasons below (violence begets violence, not something i want my child to think is acceptable, not a solution to problem) but don't for a minute think that i'm so saintly that i'd never do it (haven't yet ds is 2 years old and v v frustrating at times)...i do think that it is lazy parenting, it is not that effective, there are always better solutions, if the child is in a dangerous situation then restraint is necessary but smacking isn't. i don't want my child to do or not do things because he is scared i'll smack him, nor do i want him to learn through fear and distress.

bottom line, you wouldn't do it to an adult (i hope) so why on earth is it justifiable to use it on a small defenseless child.

we're all human and sometimes we parent in ways that we don't approve of, but i definitely don't think it's something you can justify.

wigwam, cross posted.

I just feels very wrong, with regard to my daughter.
I did smack my ds on the hand when he a toddler 2-3 yrs for things like road crossing violations and playing with dangerous things like plugs and sockets.
Have never smacked him since and think now I am older and wiser I could have used a different method had I known
I was smacked as a child and do not feel to aggrieved about it, but its not for me now.

I think when parents hit their child it instills fear, i personally wouldnt want them to 1) be afraid of me or 2) think its ok to use a form of intimidation to lead the way.

I think some times parents hit out of frustration and their own anger, so what does that teach the child? "mummy's pissed off today?"

I'm not against the odd smack on the bottom or even the fear (diff to the fear of an actual smack!)of a smack to keep kids in line, but I do intend to not smack at all. (fingers crossed)

For me personally my mum did smack us, I wasnt bothered at all, I didnt like it but we took it, moved on and if the situ called for us to risk getting another whooping then so be it. Eventually she begun taking away our priviliges istead and my god, did we feel that, 100 times more than an arse whooping!

I think where problems arise is when children are beaten as opposed to given a smack. Beatings are defo not the way forward.

oh she can't stop herself.

I think people seem to lump a controlled, and prewarned, along with explanation afterwards, smack along with full on child abuse with paretns lashing out for no reason.

My children (well DS2 is still too young) NEVER get a smack without being pre-warned, and a little while later we sit down and talk about it.

Both my parents smacked me as a child.

My dad - because didn't know how else to discipline me - he never explained why or anything - and I grew up resenting him for many years.

My mum would also warn me (ahd my brother), warn us a 2nd time, and if we did it a 3rd time we'd get a smack. Later she'd sit down with us and explain why we got one (with her we generally already knew why we'd got one) and we'd have a cuddle. I've always had, a fantastic relationship with her.

IMO Children are.......well they're children. Adults are......adults. We don't "discipline" adults in the same way we do to children - you wouldn't tell someone that was misbehaving to sit on the naughty step, you wouldn't threaten to take away a toy, you wouldn't ground them.....and yes - you wouldn't smack them too (well most wouldn't).

I firmly believe that one of the main reasons we have such a problem with "yob" culture in this country, and general ill manners is because discipline has become very wishywashy, we have to treat children exactly the same as we'd treat an adult or we're doing them a great injustice etc etc.

I'm not saying that people HAVE to smack (DS1 only gets smacks once in a blue moon these days), but in general we try to treat them more like adults than children - and we're now paying for it when with the younger generations.

And on that note I'm off to toddler group

how the hell can 2 warnings (often after the naughty step has alreeady been used) and sitting down with them afterwards to explain and make sure they understand "why" be lazy parenting????

Reasons against smacking

it escalates
rarely effective..child remembers the smack but not why they did wrong
it is very difficult to say mum can smack because she knows she will only use it in certain circumstances and it will be a light tap and dad may have different ideas as might aunty, grandma, big sister etc
children who are smacked lose self esteem and so do their parents
children who are smacked become inured to the effect and their behaviour deteriroates..they often feel they they will get a smack anyway however they behave
it teaches a lack of respect between parents and children is acceptable when it isn't
physical pain inflicted between adults is not acceptable and it is not acceptable between adult and child either
smacking encourages the idea that violence is acceptable

I don't like the idea of teaching my children that it's acceptable to hurt someone who doesn't do what you want them to do. Also, it makes me very uneasy that a big adult is allowed to hit a small child, if it happened outside the home it would be classed as bullying or even assault. having said that, I'm nowhere near perfect. Like sandyballs there have been times when I've been tired and p'd off and lost it with them and smacked their legs or hands, it's not something I'm very happy to have done though.

In response to what chrimbocrazy said about how you were disciplined yourself - I was 'slippered' as a child and I still remember the pain and humiliation. I can't say it made me behave better as I don't recall planning to do things that would result in my Dad getting the slipper out, but it has meant that I've resolved never to degrade my children like that. We get along fine with time outs, losing priviledges etc.

Children have to learn there are boundaries, but IMO violence isn't the way to teach them that.

No, you wouldn't take away a toy from an adult, but you would eg take away their driving licence if they "misbehave" on the roads, or their freedom (like a naughty step, perhaps?) if they break the law (society's boundaries).

What we don't do in this country is give punishments that use violence.

All too often a parent who doesn't want to smack, does, and it's usually an end-of-the-tether situation. But both child and parent may well be at the ends of their tethers, and if you react with a smack, then you stop any chance of resolving the problem. If you are committed to not reacting on the spur of the moment, then by making a conscious decision not to smack you give both of yourselves a chance to find out what is actually going on and whether there is an easier way out.

For example - a child who always ignores 'No'. Instead of using smacking as a last resort, try avoiding saying 'No' in the first place. A child will often appear to misbehave because they don't necessarily know what it is the parent expects - they may truely not understand what the parent wants of them when they are told not to do something. On the other hand, if they are told what to do, it's easier for them to co-operate, especially if they know that they will be rewarded (even if only by a happy smile and a cuddle).

My thoughs exactly QoQ!!!! Totally and utterly agree with what you say.

The way you say your Mum was is exactly the same as I am with my children.

I think everyone knows their own children best and what would work with them.

I was smacked as a child and have no bad memories but have not had to go down that route yet as mine are only 3 and 15 months. Hope not to as I think there are far better forms of discipline.

However if they run out into the road or something equalling shocking, then I think a smart smack on the leg would speak volumes about whether or not to do it again, rather than reasoning.

Deja vu-oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Parp.

I think smacking is stupid and lazy