Smacking your child in public

Occidental

Zulu wrote:

Poor parenting leads to children being smacked.

There is no reason to hit a child - ever.

Poor parenting also leads to little bastards who think they can walk on water, or anyone else who happens to be in their way.

I have a six year old girl and we get on most of time. We have our ups and downs, strops, huffs etc, but we work things out without any slapping. Maybe this makes me the fabled good parent, but personally I just think I've been bloody lucky, so far.

To me a good parent is one who raises their kids to have manners and to be fair and kind to others. This can be quite a challenge when half their mates have been trained to make themselves No1 in all things with an attitude to match. The occasional slap is the least of my worries. The parents who’ve absolved themselves from any responsibility for their child’s upbringing are the ones who need a look at.

the_syco

dabhal wrote:

What country exactly are you in? People in Ireland in the vast majority hit thier kids, I see it every day and it makes my blood boil.

If I smacked you, you could hit back. If a child hit you, you'd better run, as you can't hit back. And when there's 10 of them, all about 13 or 14 each, theres not a damn thing you can do about it.

Except kick the sh|t out of them.

=-=

So yeah, kids should be taught to respect other people.

jbkenn

shellspeare wrote:

It has been reported that a Manchester father has been separated from his family for 6months due to smacking his 3year old son in public after he ran out into the road.
He has now been allowed back into the family home due to pleading guilty.

Some years back I was driving through a junction in a urban area when I spotted a family on the traffic island with a boisterous child of about 3 or 4. As I drew abreast of them the child ran from his father, and hit the wing of the car (the sound of the smack will stay with me forever), I braked immediately and went over a bump in the road, I stopped, convinced I had run over the child, and got out of the car in a shocked state. The child was screaming, and a passerby assured me he had simply hit the wing of the car. A passing patrol car stopped and took the child and his parents to a local hospital, leaving a Garda with me at the scene, as the patrol car drove around the block to take the child to hospital the driver put on the sirens and I was sure the child must have taken a turn for the worst. The Garda with me called his colleague on the radio, who told him he just turned on the sirens to distract the child and stop him crying.

As it was a road traffic accident the Gardai had to investigate, and take measurements of the scene, and statements from witnesses, in case there might be a sudden case of "compensationitis" from the family (the Garda's words, not mine) and call them the following day to see if the matter would be taken any further. The witnesses and family confirm what had happened was not my fault, but, it was a worrying 24 hours for me.

I feel for the father in this case, as a parent myself, do you smack the child or have him killed? which is the lesser of two evils?.

Political Correctness gone mad

jbkenn

cajun_tiger

well i'm a mammy of a 4 yr old and she is more stuborn than me, she's so inteligent. so much so that if she doesnt want to listen to what i'm saying she won't. i've been so angry that i screamed at her for 20 minutes after darting across a busy road, never would i raise my hand.. as a child my father did and it went from a tap on the back of the legs to a slap an the tush to a smack on the back of my head which turned into 5 stiches. now he hit my daughter once. and i totally lost the rag at him and threatened to hit him if it ever happened again, he was so taken back that he sat down and started to talk but just babbled for 5 minutes then nothing for the rest of the night.

cajun_tiger

Gilgamesh wrote:

I don't want to sounds racist or anything, but my opinion in this matter changed when I moved to Ireland, personally I think a lot of the kids here, would be completely different if they would have been clouted every now and then, when they did something wrong.
this country proves, that just shouting at a kid or telling it off, doesn't have the same impact (doesn't bring the same respect) towrds their authority as getting smacked does.
I don't mean, beating the living day lights of of the child, but it is a fact that humans learn faster where their boudaries are, when they are hurt or receive a result they don't like.

The smack should be the last resort, and should only be used when really required.

How to you expect children to learn, what is right or wrong?
you can't reason with kids, especially young ones

but for years children where hit and beaten and abused in this counrty we've learned from our mistakes

pete

shellspeare wrote:

It has been reported that a Manchester father has been separated from his family for 6months due to smacking his 3year old son in public after he ran out into the road.
He has now been allowed back into the family home due to pleading guilty.

Is it me or is something seriously wrong with this? Eye witnesses claim the father warned the child three times but the toddler was determined to run off. He escaped from his dads hand and ran out into the road where a car had to swerve to avoid the child. The father then slapped the back of the childs hand, and a policeman witnessed it and arrested him, i mean come on!

Never let the facts get in the way of a good story, eh?

Chief Superintendent Alan Cooper, of Greater Manchester police, said he was confident the force used on the child merited the punishment.

He said: "I personally have copies of witness statements which claim the level of force which was used was over and above what is necessary to discipline a child.

"Another witness describes the child being hit so hard he left the ground and slid across the pavement. I am satisfied that the officer acted appropriately."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4080293.stm

Magnolia_Fan

I work weekends in a shop and I can safely say that one of the few perks to the job is the endless child beatings that I get to see....its so funny when they run...Hell I make their ice cream cones lob sided on purpose so they drop them and get beat! mwuhahhahahahah

Magnolia_Fan

Note: I was joking my cones are always perfect just like Kelly Brooks

luckat

Only stupid people have to hit each other. (And that includes children.)

Intelligent people don't bring their children into dangerous situations.

Gurgle

luckat wrote:

Only stupid people have to hit each other. (And that includes children.)
Intelligent people don't bring their children into dangerous situations.

Exactly, when walking along/across a road with a child, you should have a death-grip on their wrist. If they decide not to co-operate, you carry them.

You can't expect a child under 5 to have common sense when it comes to road safety.

MrPudding

Gurgle wrote:

Exactly, when walking along/across a road with a child, you should have a death-grip on their wrist. If they decide not to co-operate, you carry them.

You can't expect a child under 5 to have common sense when it comes to road safety.

So it OK to hurt and possibly bruise them with a "death grip" but you can't give them a smack which is more symbolic than painful?

Have you never had to smack your child Gurgle? What age are you children?

MrP

bonkey

Gurgle wrote:

Exactly, when walking along/across a road with a child, you should have a death-grip on their wrist. If they decide not to co-operate, you carry them.

And if they scream and wriggle and do all in their power to get out of your grip/carrying hold? If they pull your hair and slap your face while you carry them in order to be let down? If they get so distressed they literally get convulsions?

And before you decide that only kids raised with bad parenting would behave in such a manner bear in mind that if :

You can't expect a child under 5 to have common sense when it comes to road safety.

...then you also can't expect them to know what is and is not acceptable behaviour when dealing with their parents/guardians. So simply seeing another child do it might give them sufficient impetus to misbehave.

luckat wrote:

Only stupid people have to hit each other

Tell me...if an adult attacks you without provocation...how stupid are you (as another adult) for defending yourself?

The point - lest it be lost on some - is that luckat's line of reasoning is a convenient oversimplification of reality.

jc

Gurgle

MrPudding wrote:

So it OK to hurt and possibly bruise them with a "death grip" but you can't give them a smack which is more symbolic than painful?

Death grip meaning holding your hand rigid enough that they can't squeeze their hand out. Not neccessarily cutting off circulation.

MrPudding wrote:

Have you never had to smack your child Gurgle? What age are you children?

No, I don't think theres any such thing as having to smack a child. IMHO, smacking usually occurs when the parent loses his/her temper. Its not really about teaching the child, its just venting frustation.

On the other hand, a light tip on the back of the hand, just enough to get their attention is probably much more effective than smacking. That way they know they're being rebuked. If you smack them they're not learning anything because their are distracted by pain.

Two boys, older is 5, younger is 21 months.

The 5 year old is very well behaved, we've been extremely lucky with him. He has also had road safety drilled into him since he learned to walk but its still only within the last year that I would trust him to walk along the footpath more than arms-length away.

The baby thinks the funniest thing in the world is to sprint off in a random direction with no warning except the squeals of laughter. We live in a quiet cul-de-sac but I still make a point of catching him before he gets to the road.

Basically, I try to teach them to think of the road as though it were actually on fire.

climaxer

Gurgle I agree with you that smacking is usually the parents frustration/losing their temper. I don't agree with smacking but do believe there is a big difference to a light tap but still don't do it. I have never smacked my son. My daughter I gave a light tap too on a rare occasion but hated myself for it. She was around 2 and kept pushing her little 11mth old cousin who was starting to walk and kept doing it - obviously jealous of the attention he was getting. The small tap didn't work either and I just asked her would she mind her little cousin and praised her for being a great big girl and she didn't do it again. I use the ignore when naughty and praise when good method and it works a treat.

Also kids whom are smacked aren't necesserily going to turn out to be well behaved. I know kids who are smacked and they are still brats. My kids are well behaved most of the time and my eldest who's 11.5 is grounded or gets no pocket money or has to go to bed early if she misbehaves. She was a handful as a toddler and can still be sometimes and my son who's the total opposite to her is so placid and easy going and quite shy until he's used to you and rarely plays up. Its amazing how different their personalities are really.

I'm always saying that parenting is soooo hard and it can be so draining at times when they suck every ounce of patience out of you and I would give most parents the benefit of the doubt. I also think a parent who smacks in public is probably less likely to beat a child. I hate parents who give their kids that look in public and you know they are going to get a severe beating when they get home.

MrPudding

Ah. I think there may be some confusione here as to what I consider a smack to be. For me it is purely symbolic and is not to cause pain. It is simply to focus attention. Mostly it is a tap on the nappy.

I have a 6 year old girl who is very well behave and can be reasoned with. There is also a little fella of almost 2. He can sometimes be "difficult" and requires attention focusing.

MrP

Gurgle

bonkey wrote:

And if they scream and wriggle and do all in their power to get out of your grip/carrying hold? If they pull your hair and slap your face while you carry them in order to be let down? If they get so distressed they literally get convulsions?

I had all of that ocassionally during the terrible twos.

Luckily I'm considerably bigger and stronger than a two year old, so I could restrain him without hurting him. Along with pulling hair and slapping, they have nails like little razors and they can really do damage. You can't hold that against them though, at that age the world revolves around them and they have no real concept of hurting someone else.

bonkey wrote:

then you also can't expect them to know what is and is not acceptable behaviour when dealing with their parents/guardians. So simply seeing another child do it might give them sufficient impetus to misbehave.

Any child is going to chance his arm with all kinds of disobedience, thats how they learn what they can get away with and what you're serious about. In a dangerous situation you can't give them the opportunity.

Do you think smacking is a useful parenting tool are are you just playing devils advocate as usual ?

Sleepy

Honestly one of the best bits of parenting I ever heard with regard to children biting/scratching etc. was one of my friends mother's who when the conversation came up said that my mate had only ever bitten her once and learned never to do it again: she bit him back! I think that's a great way of educating a child to respect others and the consequences of their actions "Do unto others..." if you will.

And before the PC brigade jump on me for condoning this "canabalistic" behaviour, I'm sure she just gave him a light nip, not ripped flesh from his bones!

Gurgle

Sleepy wrote:

Honestly one of the best bits of parenting I ever heard with regard to children biting/scratching etc. was one of my friends mother's who when the conversation came up said that my mate had only ever bitten her once and learned never to do it again: she bit him back! I think that's a great way of educating a child to respect others and the consequences of their actions "Do unto others..." if you will.

lol
And those cutsie little toothies are bloody sharp.

bonkey

Gurgle wrote:

Luckily I'm considerably bigger and stronger than a two year old

Fair enough. Is every parent big enough and strong enough to manage a two-year old? A three-year old? (and so on)?

Gurgle wrote:

Do you think smacking is a useful parenting tool are are you just playing devils advocate as usual ?

A bit of both really

I think there are situations where it can be a useful tool....but I think I already more or less admitted as much. I already pointed out in this thread that the difficulty arises at where one can draw the line in law. In reality, you'd need to take everything on a case by case basis to determine if - in this case - what was done was unacceptable, which just isn't possible. I'd also point you back to where I did say I'd prefer laws to be too strict than too lax - that children be offered too much protection rather than too little.

My major objection is to the over-simplified comments like luckat's. However, I also have an objection to anyone taking a stance that smacks of "because it worked with me / my kids / people I know, its what should be done and what our standards should be based on".

I'm not saying that this is what you're doing, but rather pointing out that anecdotal evidence based on a handful of cases which themselves effectively highlight how all kids are different is not a basis for legislation nor for standards-setting.

You could queue up hundreds of people who will give evidence as to how they were raised without slaps, or how they never slappe d their kids, and how it all worked out fine. In response, I'd say it was equally possible to queue up hundreds of people who could admit that they drove while drunk without harming anyone, and ask if that evidence of a happy outcome in a number of situations means that this this is the right thing to do?

(Note to those prone to over-reaction...I'm not saying that not slapping your children is wrong. I'm saying that a good outcome in a non-representative sample doesn't mean that something is the right & only way that things should be donr.)

So...in return I'd ask you whether or not you believe that yoru way is the right way for everyone, or if you're more just pointing out that a lack of physical discipline isn't necessarily a bad thing either.

jc

Gurgle

bonkey wrote:

So...in return I'd ask you whether or not you believe that yoru way is the right way for everyone, or if you're more just pointing out that a lack of physical discipline isn't necessarily a bad thing either.
jc

bonkey wrote:

A bit of both really

I don't think under any circumstances a child should be 'taught a lesson' with a beating but there isn't anything wrong with a little tap to focus their attention on the fact that your not impressed.

Consistancy is probably the most important factor in teaching a child dicipline.

If you let a two year old run around on the road when its quiet but go ballistic when they try to run out when its busy, they get mixed messages. To them the presence or absence of cars isn't terribly important.

Likewise with any misbehaviour, if you give them sweets to shut them up one time and a smack the next, they will have to try that particular form of misbehaviour a few more times before they know what to expect.

bonkey

Gurgle wrote:

I don't think under any circumstances a child should be 'taught a lesson' with a beating but there isn't anything wrong with a little tap to focus their attention on the fact that your not impressed.

And so, other than that we may agree on what constitutes "a tap", we're more or less in agreement.


jc

RainyDay

Slapping is a great way of teaching children that;

a) Violence is the way to solve your problems
b) It is OK to hit someone, provided that you are much bigger than them and you have (in your mind) a good reason.

MrPudding

RainyDay wrote:

Slapping is a great way of teaching children that;

a) Violence is the way to solve your problems
b) It is OK to hit someone, provided that you are much bigger than them and you have (in your mind) a good reason.

I got battered when I was a kid. I was a very naughty boy. It did not teach me either of the 2 points above. Does that make me a stupid child or an intelligent child?

MrP

Gurgle

MrPudding wrote:

I was a very naughty boy.

Case in point: inferiority complex

MrPudding

What are you talking about?

MrP

RainyDay

MrPudding wrote:

I got battered when I was a kid. I was a very naughty boy.
MrP

Thanks for proving that violence does not fix behavioural problems.

CathyMoran

Was one of the kids whose mother hit her - find it morally wrong to do so. How can it be OK to hit a child and not an adult? While I agree that the law was too extreme with the case being mentioned a strict hitting ban needs to be in place to avoid abuse in the future. Too many generations have been emotionally and physically traumatised by physical violence - is time for it to stop.

MrPudding

RainyDay wrote:

Thanks for proving that violence does not fix behavioural problems.

What exactly do you mean by this? I don't know you but you seem to think you know me.

MrP

RainyDay

All I know about you is what you've posted above.

Hobbes

I think the slap for almost running out in front of a car is fine. Teaches the child that if they do it again they get a slap, well most likely they will get splattered across the road but a slap is more likely a better deterrent.

Eskimos have an intresting way of teaching their children. They tell them once not to do something, then don't say it again. Then after the kid has say ripped a huge hole in its hand from playing with spears or having its tongue stuck to the wall it learns not to do it again and listen.

A slap on the hand is nothing. If you don't draw the line for the child they will keep on going. Most times simple punishment will handle it (to the room, not playing with toys, ignoring them until they behave).