Discipline or abuse

Just to be clear here, I was meaning a short sharp smack that a parent would normally never apply. I am not talking about first resort. I am talking about when the parent is really tested and pushed to a limit. I never intended it to be implied as a hard wallop that could cause injury, or serious injury. I am anti smacking of children, but I wouldn't hang a parent for an odd smack here and there, done out of pure fright or after being really pushed to their limits. First resort smacking bugs me, and thought out and intentional/deliberate smacking or striking bugs me more. As in retrieval of instrument and the ritualistic delivery of a physical punishment.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

So what you are saying is that it is ok (excusable) to lash out if you are stressed/tested/pushed to your limit? I am not sure if I am picking you up correctly

Lash out? I am simply saying that I am anti smacking as a first resort. I understand sometimes a parent smacks, or "lashes" out if you want to describe it as such, because they have been really pushed to a limit (last resort), or a major fright causes them to react with a short and sharp smack, an extremely rare occurrence for them. Not some wallop that could really hurt a child. Not some sort of systematic and frequent smacking.

Pawwed Rig wrote: »

. They would give the punishment in a measured way.

And I find this to be very disturbing. In a perfect world I would love no child to be smacked. I am willing to accept that at times, a parent will resort to a smack. This I can live with and I can understand. No parent can say that they will never do it. You can't know this for a fact. The smacking of a child as a first resort, or the casual smacking whenever the child does something to bother a parent, really annoys me. But this ritualistic and systematic inflicting of pain through the smacking/striking of children is for me inexcusable.

BTW, not all the time is a parent smacking out of anger. Last resort smacking, short and sharp, and not at all heavy, can be done without being angry, and can be done in "some sort" of measured way. Not just swinging from the rafters in a rage.

In relation to the thread title: Corporal punishment, or the systematic and deliberate and ritualistic smacking/striking of children is something I cannot ever agree with.

Maguined wrote: »

Already lost what?

whatever the point was you were trying to make, unless your only point was that you are physically capable of beating someone up who is weaker than you.

if you can't make a point without resorting to physical violence, you didn't have a point to begin with.

Maguined wrote: »

Please tell me how either my upbringing was a failure due to my parents discipline or how my life would be improved from what it currently is if my parents had chosen not to physically discipline me?

for a start I imagine you'd be a lot less needlessly argumentative and overly defensive of people physically abusing their children.

walshb wrote: »

For those who advocate or support or don't see much harm in corporal punishment, can I ask at what age do they feel does it become appropriate for a child to be beaten/punished/struck with a belt or spoon?

When the child is old enough to be able to speak and express their own will sufficiently. My parents would talk to me first, they would try and reason with me. If I refused to be reasonable I would receive several warnings about how unreasonable I was being before they would use the wooden spoon on me.

There would be no point is physically disciplining a child too young to be verbally reasoned with. Similarly the age at which my parents stopped physically disciplining me was when I was old enough to realise disregarding my parents consistently was not reasonable so I think I was maybe 7 or 8 when it stopped. By that age I had learned to listen to my parents when they tried to rationally and reasonably instruct me so I no longer rebelled against them enough that they felt they needed to discipline me.

vibe666 wrote: »

for a start I imagine you'd be a lot less needlessly argumentative and overly defensive of people physically abusing their children.

This is a discussion thread. You gave your opinion and I gave mine.

I am perfectly capable of attacking your arguments without attacking you personally despite by your definition my parents physically abusing me growing up so I would appreciate the same from you.

So do you have a more reasonable answer? If by your definition my parents physically abused me growing up yet I feel I am an ordinary reasonable member of society how would my upbringing be better if my parents never physically disciplined me?

Maguined wrote: »

This is a discussion thread. You gave your opinion and I gave mine.

I am perfectly capable of attacking your arguments without attacking you personally despite by your definition my parents physically abusing me growing up so I would appreciate the same from you.

So do you have a more reasonable answer? If by your definition my parents physically abused me growing up yet I feel I am an ordinary reasonable member of society how would my upbringing be better if my parents never physically disciplined me?

the question was asked, i simply responded to the request.

pretty much every study done on the subject shows that physically abused children are more likely to become more aggressive adults who in turn are more likely to have any number of related metal issues as a result.

I'm sorry to be the one to break it to you, but by your own admission you were hit with a wooden spoon and by ANY reasonable definition of abuse, as a direct result of that you were physically abused whether you believe it or not.

physical abuse is physical abuse, full stop. laying your hands (or even worse a weapon) on someone with the express intention of administering physical pain or discomfort on that person = physical abuse, just because it's being done to a child under the guise of discipline doesn't change that simple fact.

to put it another way, if another adult could take you to court for any given form of physical abuse towards them, then doing the same thing to a child is also physical abuse, not discipline.

marcmc5 wrote: »

You clearly don't see the distinction between corporal punishment and assault and believe me there is a world of difference. Granted some parents have in the past overstepped that line but the majority of them don't and should not be vilified for using corporal punishment

Ok, remove the word assault.

What wrong could a young child do to justify them being beaten/struck/hit with a wooden spoon, or some other instrument? That's what baffles me. Are grown adults that incapable of non physical discipline of a young child? That they feel that physical discipline is the only measure when all else fails? I'd love to know what all else is? Is it a case of the child not doing what they were told on 2-3 occasions?

As to some parents overstepping the mark as regards the administering of corporal punishment, I assume you mean a really heavy or bad beating? A beating is a beating. Even the "less" severe will still be quite painful I'd imagine? They are hitting the child to inflict pain. Otherwise they wouldn't waste the thought and effort to do it. A poster here said they'd have a sore behind for a couple of hours. That's not some pat on the backside they got.

Imagine going too hard or heavy on a 4/5 year old when administering corporal punishment? That's quite sick when you think of it.

But, imagine not going too hard. But still causing a 4/5 year old a lot of discomfort, and pain. Still a sickening thought in my opinion.

vibe666 wrote: »

the question was asked, i simply responded to the request.

You answered in an abusive way that violates the rules of the forum hence the moderator posting the warning. You could of responsed in an objective manner but you chose not to.

vibe666 wrote: »

pretty much every study done on the subject shows that physically abused children are more likely to become more aggressive adults who in turn are more likely to have any number of related metal issues as a result.

Can you provide any such study? Because you do not distinguish between physical discipline and physical abuse I have to admit I am wary if I can trust any studies you claim regard "abuse".

vibe666 wrote: »

I'm sorry to be the one to break it to you, but by your own admission you were hit with a wooden spoon and by ANY reasonable definition of abuse, as a direct result of that you were physically abused whether you believe it or not.

physical abuse is physical abuse, full stop. laying your hands (or even worse a weapon) on someone with the express intention of administering physical pain or discomfort on that person = physical abuse, just because it's being done to a child under the guise of discipline doesn't change that simple fact.

I have to disagree, I believe plenty of reasonable people are capable of distinguishing between physical discipline and physical abuse. To be honest the fact you cannot I find a bit disgusting as you are insulting the experiences of victims of genuine abuse.

Other posters have already contributed to this thread to give examples of the abuse they received. Parents beating their children with full force causing broken bones and permanent injury not to mention the pyschological trauma of such abuse yet to you this is the same abuse my parents gave me because they used restrained hits from a wooden spoon to my behind never causing any permanent injury or psychological damage.

I have sympathy for those who were abused growing up, I do not consider myself one of these people. I was very lucky to have the parents I had growing up and have never once felt abused in my life by them.

vibe666 wrote: »

to put it another way, if another adult could take you to court for any given form of physical abuse towards them, then doing the same thing to a child is also physical abuse, not discipline.

The comparison is not valid because of the nature of the parent child relationship. If your argument is true then how do you explain bedtimes? If another adult came into my home and I told that person they had to stay in the bedroom until the morning this would not be legal. An adult has their own free will and if I tried to restrict their movement and force them to stay it is holding them against their will however a parent is allowed do this to their own child. A parent is allowed reasonably restrict their child to their rooms. Also if I threw out another adults possessions as I did not think it was a good influence on them that adult can bring me to court for destroying their property while a parent can do this to their children. The parent/child relationship makes your arugment on this particular point flawed.

Maguined wrote: »

The intention is to teach the child, the physical pain is just the medium. Just as if you try and reason with a child the intention is to teach them but the medium is verbal.

A sore a behind for two hours does not worry me at all. What is the long term negative effect a sore behind can achieve? Kids hurt themselves playing GAA all the time, I have never met a single GAA player than has not endured an injury more severe than my sore behind growing up. Are you worried about the hundreds of thousands of children playing GAA each week?

You assume, when I was 4 years old my mother would of been in her mid thirties, she would of been in her physical prime and could easily of hurt me very severely but she obviously had to conciously restrain her power each and every time I was disciplined since I never injured beyond said sore behind for two hours.

Your trying to compare the intentional inflicting of pain on your child (for doing something that bothers you, or is "wrong") with sports injuries is weak, and not all that relevant.

Armelodie wrote: »

Generally when this topic comes up and someone says that they were hit by parents and possibly hit their own children I think of being a teacher (in loco parentis!)... If they say it never did them any harm I ask Is it ok for a teacher to hit your kids? No it aint, its assault on a minor.

Corporal Punishment is an out of date word for backward societies. We've moved on, we don't punish a child's body to teach their mind. If that was the case I'd just save myself the bother and have all the kids in my classes fitted with electric shock neck collars to 'teach them'...

If I lost a finger and said it taught me to switch the lawnmower off before cleaning... would I advocate free finger amputations being given out with every lawnmower bought...
In the general scheme of things, the loss of a finger 'never did me any long term harm' ... so therefore is it a valuable method of teaching/learning.

Don't hit, find another way, other parents can do it, why can't you.

The parent/child relationship is not the same as a teacher/child relationship. The law already differentiates between corporal punishment at home and in school. In Ireland corporal punishment is not allowed in school but is allowed at home. There are many things a parent is allowed to do that a teacher is not.

Also we have not moved on as it is still legal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporal_punishment_in_the_home

Losing a finger is a permanent injury that does cause you harm, you no longer have the use of your finger. A parent cutting off a childs finger would not be considered moderate punishment but actual abuse. A sore behind for two hours leaves no permanent injury.

walshb wrote: »

Sports do require a certain consent.

I know plenty of kids forced to go to sports because their parents believe it will educate them in having a healthy lifestyle. The parents do not want their children to become too sedentary and so force the children to go to sports. The children are forced to engage in sports they do not want to do and can incur injuries, do you worry about these injuries when the children have not given consent? Or do you believe a parent could not force a child to participate in a sport without the childs permission?