See ths is wierd to me. You see spanking as a form of communication. I see spanking as a form of punishment.
If i were to hold a match until it burns my fingers, should i receive a spanking to prevent me from burning myself?
Which is pretty much exactly the point i’ve been going circles around. I’d like to see some concrete data that shows spanking vs. non-violence.
Of course one of the biggest issues with or without spanking is the child’s relationship with his parents. If this relationship is, from the very beginning, distant, unloving, and confrontational, then the child will quickly learn to associate his parents with punishments and restrictions, and will therefore act in a negative manner. So you beat the brat (because he deserved it) and the cycle continues.
I remember getting hit a lot as a child. I only remember why one time, because the event was so out of proportion to what I was doing. The rest of the times I remember the punishment, and the resentment and anger towards my parents, not not why they did it.
Grandma sitting me down to tell me why she was so disappointed in me, though? I remember what I did to earn those talks. Burning matches, stealing cookies, watching tv channels I knew were off-limits. And I didn’t do them again. Well, not at grandma’s house.
I got spanked as a kid. I got smacked on the head. Ocassionally I got a real beating for an excessive transgression.
I have a 21 year old son. He got spanked as a kid. He got the occasional smack on the head. As he got older he used to like to tell me, “If you hit me, I’ll call the cops. They’ll put you in jail!” I’d tell him, “Okay, you do that. And by the time they get here I’ll beat you silly.”
It was a joke. We still kid about it today. The thing is, the occasional corporal punishment doesn’t make a serial killer. Or a messed up kid. But I have seen the result of spoiling a child. Those are the kids that are screaming and throwing a fit. They are the ones that have a parent begging their kids to, “Be quiet or you’ll get a TIME OUT.”
Screw that. Smack the kid and get on with your life.
I’ve never spanked my kids (6 & 9), and they’re really well-behaved, but I sometimes wonder about the cause and effect–are they just naturally well-behaved kids, and would I be so anti-spanking if I’d ended up with different kids?
My wife and I had a rough time in the last few years of her life, and I was really stressed out for a some of it–I wonder, what if we’d had some of the kids that I see in my sons’ school (some of them are just crazy), would I have gone over the edge. It’s a sobering thought–it’s a lot easier to judge other people’s parenting than it is to have their kids.
Stupid people breed stupid kids and bad parenting makes bad kids.
I’m certainly no expert in Swedish birth rates :)
That said, while my gut feeling is that policies tending to shift control/responsibility/authority for children more to the government than the family will likely reduce birth rate a bit in the long term, I think that the two policies you’re discussing don’t quite fit that framework.
The one policy (a paid year off after birth), is basically a big bribe to have babies. Unless there’s more to it than what you’ve described, that doesn’t seem to shift authority over the child away from the parents, and in fact creates a strong economic incentive (at the margin) to have a kid, or, to have more than you might otherwise have had. It makes sense that this would tend to boost birthrate, all other things equal.
The second (high enrollment in government daycare) is a bit harder to predict for. I guess it would tend to depend on the nature and the economics of the situation. If it amounts to nearly free daycare that is otherwise roughly comparable to private daycare, then it is yet another economic incentive for those parents who would prefer to continue to work. If it is a bit more patriarchal (give us your kids because we know best), then that might be a much more ambiguous signal for some prospective parents, I would think.
Overall, I think Western society has been too captured by images of consumerism that, for many/most couples, are only sustainable by dual incomes. This reduces the incentive to have children, and, I think is not a positive trend for the children themselves, on the whole.
Tonight I was watching a bit of a 1995 movie about Patsy Cline, and one scene showed her and her husband (with baby) moving into a new house circa 1961. She’s hit the big-time as a singer, moving into a house that is extravagant by her standards, but would appear to be a mid-sized one story to most Americans today. She gushes about it having a dishwasher and a stove built right into the wall. It seems quaint that this could be the source of such wonder, and a standard of apparent luxury for a singer at the height of her career.
And then you see stuff like this - designer clothes for 1 year olds - $34.95 T-Shirts* for an 18 month old that will likely be dripping ketchup on it the first day…
*Scroll through it a bit…
My parents spanked me and my siblings when we were little. They even had a big wooden paddle that my dad carved solely for that purpose. The spankings weren’t frequent - 3-5 times a year per kid, tops - and I don’t think it had any negative effect on us while growing up. Certainly, none of us ever had “disruptive and violent behavior problems”. Regarding your example, my initial take would be that people with such problems were likely more prone to being spanked due to their extremely volatile behavior. I wouldn’t have guessed that spankings were the cause of it, and in fact would say that no open mind would’ve come to your conclusion, given what you’d said.
Looking back, I think occasional spankings were an effective punishment, and certainly more effective than a guilt-trip-ridden “talking to” would’ve been. When I received a speech in lieu of “actual” punishment, I let those meaningless words bounce right off me (I never once felt bad about anything I did) and felt like I’d gotten away with something. Maybe some kids would respond to that sort of treatment, but I can guarantee that I’d never be one of them. Nothing ever affected me other than spankings or a loss of privilege. Spankings were also an effective way of teaching me my boundaries, especially the difference between a “soft” boundary (“please don’t do that”) and a “hard” boundary (“You WILL NOT do that”).
This is all giving me a lot to think about, as my son’s only 2. He’s at the cusp of causing real trouble.
I notice that our nanny would show him to hit things when he bumped into them. I don’t know if she ever hit him, but from that, she taught him to hit things. And if we scream and throw things and hit him, he learns to scream and throw things and hit others.
I wish my wife understood this.
I should have presented that as a “on the other hand”-policy. And I certainly don’t see it as a bribe. You get 80% of your previous salary during that time, and I see that as reasonable, maybe actually a bit low, as having a child is worth as much to society as you working a year, I’d say.
The second (high enrollment in government daycare) is a bit harder to predict for. I guess it would tend to depend on the nature and the economics of the situation. If it amounts to nearly free daycare that is otherwise roughly comparable to private daycare, then it is yet another economic incentive for those parents who would prefer to continue to work. If it is a bit more patriarchal (give us your kids because we know best), then that might be a much more ambiguous signal for some prospective parents, I would think.
Well, it is 8 hours a day or so when you don’t see your child for a large part of its youth. And it’s not so much that you’re expected to leave it to the warm embrace of the state, it’s that you’re expected to work, that drives the enrollment in daycare.
As for interfering with parents’ right over a child, I have no problem with the government cheerfully infringing upon it.
Kids don’t need to learn that stuff–they figure it out just fine on their own.
No, of course not. I’m not even sure I’d assent to the statement “spanking is a form of communication.” I see spanking as an absolute last resort to protect the current or future welfare of a child, and one that’s probably wholly unnecessary, but may be warranted in some very specific circumstance. Hell, it’s arguably disingenuous to say I have a stance at all since, as I noted earlier, I have no children of my own. It’s just a philosophy that certain parents I’ve known well and respected have held to, and I don’t think even they ever “spanked” any of their four children in the traditional sense. Lightly swatted their bottom maybe, and I think that’s all that’s ever necessary anyway.
I’m also not talking about shit like “trying to touch a hot stove” or “trying to put their finger in an electric socket around the house.” In the latter example you’re just a shitty parent for not providing a safe home environment for your child anyway. But consider the following scenario: you’re driving down the highway at 50 mph, and your 3-6 year old throws a tantrum, unbuckles their child safety seat, and attempts to open the door of the car. I’ve personally witnessed something very close to that. Now that’s a scenario where I think spanking may be appropriate, because it’s a behavior that seriously endangers the life of the child, but obviously the child doesn’t realize that, so you need to make it clear it will not be tolerated under any circumstances. But I’m still unwilling to endorse spanking as a remedy, even in such a specific scenario. There may be better ways to deal with it, depending on the child and the relationship between parent and child and other factors. And again, even if spanking were the right thing to do, that doesn’t mean you have to hurt the child, a light swatting is more than sufficient. Your only goal is to prevent the behavior in the future, since it’s an especially reckless one that could kill the child if they attempt to repeat it.
That enough nuance for ya? ;)
If there is a kid going bonkers in a public place like a restaurant,mall,or movie,it always seems to be the parent who talks to the kid for 30 minutes who can’t get him/her to shut up.The parent who plants one on the ass seems to get a quicker reaction.
Then again we get the parent who completely ignores what is going on,assuming everyone else has to put up with their precious brat who is clearly the center of the bloody universe…
“I find waving the gun around gets the message across.”
Or we get the parents who never find themselves in that situation.
In my years of being a nanny, I have had 12 charges and with one exception, I’ve never, ever had to deal with a public tantrum that lasted more than five minutes. It has never taken a smack on the ass to get them to straighten up. On the rare ocassions when they act out, all I’ve had to do is acknowledge the fact that they’re being assholes, redirect them away from assholiness, and reward them when they stop being assholes. The majority of the time, my four year old charge will even apologize to me and whoever else he was pissing off, without prompting.
Public tantrum’s aren’t a good thing. I leave. I’ll take my kid out and sit in the car and wait for my wife or we’ll just go. If you throw a fit, you lose privileges. The first being your right to be wherever we are, the second being your right to not be in trouble at home.
We only do that when we see it’s you trying to enjoy your dinner or the plane ride, Lloyd. I say to my son, “Quick! It’s Lloyd, make as much noise as you can!” My son says, “Buwahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!”
This works every time.
I learned all I need to know about parenting from the television show, 24.
STOP CRYING RIGHT NOW OR MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WILL DIE!
This one works only a couple of times though. You have to follow up or the kids won’t believe you anymore. :P