Are there any absoute rights and wrongs in parenting?

[seeker]

Apart from bottom line safety issues?

I have been thinking about this because I consider myself by nature a relativist, and the mumsnet consensus is to end most discussions with something like "each to their own".

But I was on a thread recently when I felt very strongly that someone's viewpoint was just wrong. Not a different point of view, but wrong. And I said so - expecting to be flamed - but somewhat to my chagrin I was reminded of my insignificance by being ignored!

So, are there any parenting issues that people feel are absolutely right or wrong - or is everything except basic safety things like car seats and smoking over babies heads and not leaving your valium open in the cot a matter of opinion?

Smacking a child is wrong imo. It is cruel and it only teaches them that it is ok to strike out violently. If you get to the point of smacking, or even shouting, then you have lost the argument/point you were trying to make and therefore is futile.

I have never smacked or raised my voice to my children. What's the point? Of course there are times when I feel myself getting wound up, but I have to remeber that I am the adult and that it is up to me to show them how to behave/react in certain situations.

Tbh when I see children being smacked, especially in the street it makes my blood boil.

Good, Tnhanks TFN. So will all those who said it wasn't tru that the lower your social class the more likely you smack your children now retract that? I don't care what class people are - none of them should ever do it.

"We present data on corporal punishment (CP) by a nationally representative sample of 991 American parents interviewed in 1995. Six types of CP were examined: slaps on the hand or leg, spanking on the buttocks, pinching, shaking, hitting on the buttocks with a belt or paddle, and slapping in the face. The overall prevalence rate (the percentage of parents using any of these types of CP during the previous year) was 35% for infants and reached a peak of 94% at ages 3 and 4. Despite rapid decline after age 5, just over half of American parents hit children at age 12, a third at age 14, and 13% at age 17. Analysis of chronicity found that parents who hit teenage children did so an average of about six times during the year. Severity, as measured by hitting the child with a belt or paddle, was greatest for children age 5?12 (28% of such children). CP was more prevalent among African American and low socioeconomic status parents, in the South, for boys, and by mothers. The pervasiveness of CP reported in this article, and the harmful side effects of CP shown by recent longitudinal research, indicates a need for psychology and sociology textbooks to reverse the current tendency to almost ignore CP and instead treat it as a major aspect of the socialization experience of American children; and for developmental psychologists to be cognizant of the likelihood that parents are using CP far more often than even advocates of CP recommend, and to inform parents about the risks involved."

I guess the better class of person just gets their nanny to smack them instead.

no xenia i wont retract anything. like i said at least twice middle class abuse is really difficult to spot, and in fact a lot goes unnoticed, so therfore will not be monitored, or recorded.
your such a smart alec, who can never back down on anything, or admit to what you said was based on your own prejudices. your 1958 google reference just highlights my point further. i am not suggesting you are wrong, i just think you are not very knowledgeable in this field, and your sweeping generalizations are quite frankly idiotic. I am most shocked at your quote earlier on in this thread when you said that go into any council estate and you will see blatant evidence of child abuse/cruelty, but go on to any street with university educated parents and that percentage of abuse/cruelty plummetts.(sp) my answer to you is that is complete bollox, nobody knows what happens behind closed doors, and the person with the higher intelligence that you keep banging on about,will be better able to cover up any wrong doings, and less likely to be suspected of anything in the first place. so the cycle continues without question.

Message withdrawn

Danae - there is, however, a very strong correlation between analytical ability and good impulse control because the two skills are developed in the pre-frontal cortex...

Message withdrawn

Sure, I agree.

But are you in danger of equating "posh" with "educated"? Not the same thing...

Message withdrawn

Nope .

Analytical thought processes require huge forward planning abilities, which are the same abilities that regulate impulse control (deferred gratification).

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

Message withdrawn

i think was just plain 'wrong' this morning. i blew up at dp over something then let that carry over into the way i spoke to poor dd, who's not even very well at the moment. I just spoke to her quite stroppily even though she didn't deserve it in the least. i feel terrible about it now. if i have issues with anyone else i have to make sure it doesn't spill over into the way I relate to dd.

Oh don't be so PC. The workingn class thump around the ear of the child in the super market queue - we've all seen it. Clever educated parents don't do that. I am not saying posh parents never abuse children - that would be ridiculous but they use more educated means of dealing with their children on the whole. It's self evident never mind the studies we've found including the recent one someone else found.

By the way sending small children away to school at 6 is obviously pretty bad for them too but few parents send children away these days. It is not the case that upper class parents are cold and bad at psychology. The old fashioned stiff upper lip thing is just something that happened in the past and probably in most classes.

The question of the extent to which people should express emotion to be happy is fascinating. Children need to learn to some extent to control their temper and behaviour and even tears and all of us know some idiot women who cry at work so some control is needed but if you're really overly emotionally buttoned up that's not good either.

haven't read the whole post, but are you joking? clever educated parents don't smack their children?

or just not in the supermarket queue?

am with desiderata on this one.

by danae......
" Then a well-trained brain can step in and rationalize away what just happened. Which is very dangerous IMO and IME."
very well said, and my sentiments entirely. the "brighter" the individual, the better the excuses, both to themselves,and to others.

Danae - I do actually believe there is a way to think yourself into better parenting (more patience, better impulse control etc).

It's what cognitive behavioural therapy, and all kinds of other therapeutic techniques, are all about.

However, the very best person when chronically over-tired, badly nourished, stressed etc can lose it. Better to make sure your life is well-regulated (ie lots and lots of forward planning) so you don't get so overwhelmed or wound down that you get to breaking point.

Message withdrawn

I mean that most women do themselves a disservice if they cry at work and learning that impulse control which I think anna is also talking about is a good skill and we can try to teach our children that too. But if we're smacking their bottom saying that will teach you not to thump your brother....

The thinking ahead is a good point too. What are the challenges I will face today with the children. What are the flash points. How can I remove those in advance etc.

Danae, disciplining an irksome child is hardly the kind of 'strong' situation which would override all your cognitoie functioing. Being attacked by a preditor yes, discipling an child, no. You are in no mortal danger from the child

Depends what they are crying for surely Xenia?

I was also at a seminar the other day by a psychologist/anthroplogist who said that very successful people in corporate circles score very low on empathy scales - on average again. The study was mostly about men, but the same would bve the case for women, of which there are even less v successful in the coprporate world.

I wonder if Pitchounette isd on to something; maybe it is your perspective.

Absolute rights for me:

1. Keep kid alive
2. Let it learn stuff

Absolute wrongs:

a) Kill or maim kid
b) Keep kid in box

That about covers it.

so you can't have clever educated working class people then? what century are you living in?

just skimmed through a bit of this so sorry if repeating. I cannot believe the poster who said the lower social classes were more likely to smack their children!

I know it is banned now, but I remember my brothers who went to public school being caned on a regular basis for misbehaving with a proper flicky cane thing and in prep school they got a whacking with a size 13 rubber plimsoll! Parents backed the school fully and felt the punishment if given was deserved, so no sympathies from home.

Times have changed greatly and my parents wouldnt dream of smacking their GC's and in fact are real softies who spoil them rotten, but I also remember all of us being smacked if we had lied to our parents.

I dont believe in it, and couldnt do it, but just wanted to say there is absolutely no substance to her comment about the deprived areas or whatever it was she said being more likely to use this punishment. Complete tosh!