• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Parents: Punishing Kids [W:361]

is it ever allowable for a Parent to punish their child with force?

  • Yes

    Votes: 43 68.3%
  • No

    Votes: 12 19.0%
  • Other (explain)

    Votes: 8 12.7%

  • Total voters
    63
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

We can say what we want about corporal punishment. I got spanked as a kid. I never interpreted it to mean that the ones I love are the ones I should fear. I interpreted it as if I choose to do things that I know will result in my being spanked, don't get caught.

And honestly, the belt shouldn't really start till they are, what, 8 or 9? I can't really recall, but...I only remember getting the belt when I was a bit older, not a toddler. Bu to try to hide your child from violence forever will simply result in a RUDE awakening when they are teenagers.


Humans are violent. And EVENTUALLY, one way or another, that fact WILL be driven home to your children.

An adult who hits a child is nothing more than a coward.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

Even toddlers hear the authority of the male voice. They know.



I currently have my niece and her two sons (8 and 4) living in my home temporarily. Mostly I leave them to her when they misbehave. She has noted, with what appears to be a mix of gratitude and frustration, that they obey me more readily and quickly than they do her. :)


(Not to disparage her in any way, she's done good work with them and they're pretty good boys overall. Boys in particular, though, seem to respond to male authority more readily for some reason. Of course they've known me since they were born, so we have an already-established relationship.)
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

First, Bold part: Think you meant Consistent. And being consistent is a must in anything, not just child rearing.

Also you're making several assumptions for those that spank their children. 1st assumption: That those that spank their child only do so when angry. That is actually false. Might be true for some yes. But it is not always the case. I spank my children. I'm never angry when I do. In fact I purposely avoid doing so when I am angry. Second false assumption is that those that spank their children ONLY use spanking and no other means of punishment. Third assumption is that those that spank their children never warn or explain consequences before spanking their child. My children know full well what their punishments are for any given thing that they do wrong and WHY they are to be punished should they break a rule. Be it sitting in a corner to being grounded in their room to spanking and all the other options in between.


Thank you and well said.


There seems to be an assumption on the part of those who disparage it, that parents who spank are wild animals who do so only in out of control anger, and who never use other methods or talk with their child.

Nothing could be further from the truth of course.

Like most parents, I reserved spanking as more of a last resort, or a response to certain specific and serious misbehaviors which had to be corrected emphatically and immediately (safety issues, and open defiance, mainly). I ALWAYS explained carefully what the child had done and why it was a "spanking offense". I used other common methods as well, and let the corrective method fit the infraction.

So do most good parents I know who use spanking.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

First, Bold part: Think you meant Consistent. And being consistent is a must in anything, not just child rearing.

Also you're making several assumptions for those that spank their children. 1st assumption: That those that spank their child only do so when angry. That is actually false. Might be true for some yes. But it is not always the case. I spank my children. I'm never angry when I do. In fact I purposely avoid doing so when I am angry. Second false assumption is that those that spank their children ONLY use spanking and no other means of punishment. Third assumption is that those that spank their children never warn or explain consequences before spanking their child. My children know full well what their punishments are for any given thing that they do wrong and WHY they are to be punished should they break a rule. Be it sitting in a corner to being grounded in their room to spanking and all the other options in between.

You are absolutely right, in Dutch "Consequent" means consistent.

And I am not assuming things. Nine times out of ten the parents will be very calm when beating their child but I have seen myself that parents get angry and frustrated and smack a child.

I do not think or assume that spanking is the only punishment because that would be a very very bad way of parenting, but I am of the opinion that beating is never an appropriate form of punishing your child.

And you can justify it and I am not demonizing you for spanking, but I am of the opinion that dr. Phil and countless other experts are right and that corporal punishment is only a short term solution to a problem.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

You are absolutely right, in Dutch "Consequent" means consistent.

And I am not assuming things. Nine times out of ten the parents will be very calm when beating their child but I have seen myself that parents get angry and frustrated and smack a child.

I do not think or assume that spanking is the only punishment because that would be a very very bad way of parenting, but I am of the opinion that beating is never an appropriate form of punishing your child.

And you can justify it and I am not demonizing you for spanking, but I am of the opinion that dr. Phil and countless other experts are right and that corporal punishment is only a short term solution to a problem.

Everybody here agrees with you.

Nobody here is talking about beating children.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

Actually it is absolutely true...and your analogy involving video games is completely baseless. You may not believe that your Dad smacking you taught you that lesson, but it is clear that it did.

Clear how?
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

An adult who hits a child is nothing more than a coward.

That's a real nice opinion you got there.


You may as well give up. You're not going to change my mind about spanking. We've been doing it for, oh, a couple thousand years now. It's worked so far.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

That's a real nice opinion you got there.


You may as well give up. You're not going to change my mind about spanking. We've been doing it for, oh, a couple thousand years now. It's worked so far.

It doesn't change the facts. Sorry.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

That's a real nice opinion you got there.


You may as well give up. You're not going to change my mind about spanking. We've been doing it for, oh, a couple thousand years now. It's worked so far.

My son was never struck by anyone as a child. He grew up just fine.
Anyone who hits a child, for any reason, ought to get one right back in the face from someone much bigger and stronger than they are. Damn cowards. Hitting children is inexcusable.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

My son was never struck by anyone as a child. He grew up just fine.
Anyone who hits a child, for any reason, ought to get one right back in the face from someone much bigger and stronger than they are. Damn cowards. Hitting children is inexcusable.



Define hit. If you're including spanking, then your opinion is full of ****.


Lots of war heroes spanked their children; my father the WW2 vet being one. He was afraid on exactly not one damn thing.

Lots of men who've proven their courage also spank children. I've BEEN hit in the face by people much bigger and stronger than me and came right back on. And yes, I advocate spanking as a useful tool in parenting under certain circumstances.


Your narrow nonfactual viewpoint simply ignores reality.


Once I was in a shopping mall; my toddler was having a meltdown and totally nonresponsive to verbal instruction. I gave him a couple swats on the butt to break the tantrum and get him to refocus. A passing man stopped and stared and appeared about to say something... I said "If you want to be next, by all means, open that mouth."


He shut it and walked on.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

Define hit. If you're including spanking, then your opinion is full of ****.


Lots of war heroes spanked their children; my father the WW2 vet being one. He was afraid on exactly not one damn thing.

Lots of men who've proven their courage also spank children. I've BEEN hit in the face by people much bigger and stronger than me and came right back on. And yes, I advocate spanking as a useful tool in parenting under certain circumstances.


Your narrow nonfactual viewpoint simply ignores reality.


Once I was in a shopping mall; my toddler was having a meltdown and totally nonresponsive to verbal instruction. I gave him a couple swats on the butt to break the tantrum and get him to refocus. A passing man stopped and stared and appeared about to say something... I said "If you want to be next, by all means, open that mouth."


He shut it and walked on.

I don't give a damn how your war hero justified it- I've never hit a child and I'd be ashamed if I ever felt the urge to. I have hit a man who was hitting a child, and hit another man who used to hit his child. I find the idea that an adult should get away with beating a child contemptible. Who but a bully uses physical force against someone much smaller and weaker? Is a child's reaction to being spanked somehow less important than, say, your reaction to being beaten with your arms held?
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

Whatever. Too many nonparents throwing in hypothetical opinions. My father used to beat me excessively, my son got spankings as a young child and no long has to to be disciplined to that extent. Dad went too far and I was very stubborn. I agree that the threat of harsh punishment may be needed depending on the temperament of the child. The result is more important than the limitation of the action, especially by armchair quarterbacks. This is absolutely evident in current foriegn policy. The subject determines the method, not the other way around. Too many miss that tripping over their public image rather than adressing the problem.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

That's a real nice opinion you got there.


You may as well give up. You're not going to change my mind about spanking. We've been doing it for, oh, a couple thousand years now. It's worked so far.

I'm pretty sure that is an appeal to tradition.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

I don't give a damn how your war hero justified it- I've never hit a child and I'd be ashamed if I ever felt the urge to. I have hit a man who was hitting a child, and hit another man who used to hit his child. I find the idea that an adult should get away with beating a child contemptible. Who but a bully uses physical force against someone much smaller and weaker? Is a child's reaction to being spanked somehow less important than, say, your reaction to being beaten with your arms held?


Again, you appear to be conflating spanking as equivalent to being violently beaten about the head and ears with fists and boots, when the two are not remotely the same. This is a common reaction among those who have no clue what they are talking about in this debate. You're confusing (either unreasoningly or deliberately) the image of angry out-of-control violence with the use of controlled spanking as a disciplinary tool in some cases.

And slinging the word "coward" around from the safe anonymity of the Internet is a pretty contemptible habit...
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

Again, you appear to be conflating spanking as equivalent to being violently beaten about the head and ears with fists and boots, when the two are not remotely the same. This is a common reaction among those who have no clue what they are talking about in this debate. You're confusing (either unreasoningly or deliberately) the image of angry out-of-control violence with the use of controlled spanking as a disciplinary tool in some cases.

And slinging the word "coward" around from the safe anonymity of the Internet is a pretty contemptible habit...

Violence is violence. The amount of violence doesn't just somehow make it not violence. Stop trying to justify violence. To say this is bad and this is good because of the amount of violence is absurd on it's face.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

Violence is violence. The amount of violence doesn't just somehow make it not violence. Stop trying to justify violence. To say this is bad and this is good because of the amount of violence is absurd on it's face.


Absolutism about things which have a broad range of expression, is an unrealistic viewpoint.... and one of the chief problems with libertarianism.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

Absolutism about things which have a broad range of expression, is an unrealistic viewpoint.... and one of the chief problems with libertarianism.

Mounting your argument on arbitrary lines in the sand is ridiculous. If you are against violence done towards children than you are against violence done towards children. This whole nonsense where people try to separate abuse into spankings and beatings is nothing but empty rationalization by abusers.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

First I have to say that my daughter is only 7 months old now, so I don't have first hand experience (pun intended) with punishing her yet, but naturally, it's a topic I've been considering for a while, put a lot of thought in and did quite some reading on.

In general, my opinion is that physical violence against a child is generally a bad thing and should be avoided if possible. That said, I don't think mild physical punishment is necessarily a big deal or even abuse, as long as the context is right. Most likely, mild spanking is easily understood by a child, as long as it comes together with communication and explanation, and the child realizes well it has done wrong. While on the other side, even very mild spanking that hardly ever hurts but just shocks the child, may be very traumatizing when the child doesn't understand the reason and is left alone with this shock.

But as a matter of principle, I'm rather comfortable with a zero tolerance policy towards spanking, because it's a slippery slope and the line to abuse is very thin. Basically all parents who abuse their kids start with "just spanking", and basically of them think "I'm just spanking a little". Also, I don't think spanking should ever become a habit for a parent, or even worse, serve as a means to vent the own frustration. Spanking out of that motivation, rather than a means that focuses on the learning effect in the child, is *always* bad and there is no excuse, IMO.

It's also a huge misunderstanding, IMO, that discipline requires physical violence, and absence of spanking equals lack of discipline. I've seen enough examples of very disciplined children who have never been spanked, and on the contrary, kids who have often been spanked and then act even wilder, at least when dealing with other people than their spanking parent, out of spite and to pass on their frustration. There are other and better means of creating discipline than spanking, and I'm pretty sure they work well with most children.

ALso, there is the danger that children learn the wrong lesson from spanking (especially spanking that is not accompaigned with sufficient communication): That it's okay to use physical violence against those who are weaker to get your will. The worst schoolyard bullies I met in my life were all children who were excessively spanked by their parents. They had to regain their sense of strength and self-confidence by scoring victories over weaker children.

When it comes to the different theories I read about, it seems that the according literature sees three main branches of education styles: The authoritarian education, the anti-authoritarian and the democratic education.

Physical punishment is usually a sign of authoritarian education; the parent is a tyrant, a dictator who has to be obeyed as a matter of principle, it must never be questioned and the child has no or few voice in the decisions the parent(s) make. Even worse than disobedience is questioning the parent's authority, and this alone is punished. This style of education breeds authoritarian and either passive or violent characters, and it is associated with many personality disorders in adult life.

The extreme opposite is anti-authoritarian education: The child is supposed to develop entirely naturally and is given no limits or rules. Problems naturally arise when such kids start violating the needs and limits of other people. Problems also arise regarding discipline and social behavior.

Often lauded is a democratic education style, which looks like a sane middle way: The child is given a well defined, broad leeway inside which it may realm independently, but the limits that do exist must be strictly enforced. Rules all agree on are a matter of negotiation between parent and child, while of course the parents maintain the last word, but not without first listening to the concerns and opinions of the child, and proposing compromises when possible. It is vital to teach the child empathy, and to respect the needs and limits of other people, in exchange for other family members respecting the needs and limits of the child.

Perhaps more important than the question whether mild spanking is okay, is the question about the appropriate style of education. When spanking takes places, either deliberately or "accidentally" out of an extreme situation, the context is probably more important than the spanking itself.


So far my idealistic ideas today. But hey, ask me again in 3 years or so. ;)
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

First I have to say that my daughter is only 7 months old now, so I don't have first hand experience (pun intended) with punishing her yet, but naturally, it's a topic I've been considering for a while, put a lot of thought in and did quite some reading on.

In general, my opinion is that physical violence against a child is generally a bad thing and should be avoided if possible. That said, I don't think mild physical punishment is necessarily a big deal or even abuse, as long as the context is right. Most likely, mild spanking is easily understood by a child, as long as it comes together with communication and explanation, and the child realizes well it has done wrong. While on the other side, even very mild spanking that hardly ever hurts but just shocks the child, may be very traumatizing when the child doesn't understand the reason and is left alone with this shock.

But as a matter of principle, I'm rather comfortable with a zero tolerance policy towards spanking, because it's a slippery slope and the line to abuse is very thin. Basically all parents who abuse their kids start with "just spanking", and basically of them think "I'm just spanking a little". Also, I don't think spanking should ever become a habit for a parent, or even worse, serve as a means to vent the own frustration. Spanking out of that motivation, rather than a means that focuses on the learning effect in the child, is *always* bad and there is no excuse, IMO.

It's also a huge misunderstanding, IMO, that discipline requires physical violence, and absence of spanking equals lack of discipline. I've seen enough examples of very disciplined children who have never been spanked, and on the contrary, kids who have often been spanked and then act even wilder, at least when dealing with other people than their spanking parent, out of spite and to pass on their frustration. There are other and better means of creating discipline than spanking, and I'm pretty sure they work well with most children.

ALso, there is the danger that children learn the wrong lesson from spanking (especially spanking that is not accompaigned with sufficient communication): That it's okay to use physical violence against those who are weaker to get your will. The worst schoolyard bullies I met in my life were all children who were excessively spanked by their parents. They had to regain their sense of strength and self-confidence by scoring victories over weaker children.

When it comes to the different theories I read about, it seems that the according literature sees three main branches of education styles: The authoritarian education, the anti-authoritarian and the democratic education.

Physical punishment is usually a sign of authoritarian education; the parent is a tyrant, a dictator who has to be obeyed as a matter of principle, it must never be questioned and the child has no or few voice in the decisions the parent(s) make. Even worse than disobedience is questioning the parent's authority, and this alone is punished. This style of education breeds authoritarian and either passive or violent characters, and it is associated with many personality disorders in adult life.

The extreme opposite is anti-authoritarian education: The child is supposed to develop entirely naturally and is given no limits or rules. Problems naturally arise when such kids start violating the needs and limits of other people. Problems also arise regarding discipline and social behavior.

Often lauded is a democratic education style, which looks like a sane middle way: The child is given a well defined, broad leeway inside which it may realm independently, but the limits that do exist must be strictly enforced. Rules all agree on are a matter of negotiation between parent and child, while of course the parents maintain the last word, but not without first listening to the concerns and opinions of the child, and proposing compromises when possible. It is vital to teach the child empathy, and to respect the needs and limits of other people, in exchange for other family members respecting the needs and limits of the child.

Perhaps more important than the question whether mild spanking is okay, is the question about the appropriate style of education. When spanking takes places, either deliberately or "accidentally" out of an extreme situation, the context is probably more important than the spanking itself.


So far my idealistic ideas today. But hey, ask me again in 3 years or so. ;)



Part of the problem when this issue comes up (as it so often does) is the focus becomes myopic on the spank/no spank.... when that question is really just a small small part of the whole discipline equation.

Proper child discipline exists as part of a proper relationship between parent and child. There has to be lots of love to establish that relationship, and children spell love T-I-M-E. :)

Clear communication in both directions is a must at all times.

As much as possible, rules that may result in punishment need to be spelled out ahead of time, and the punishments need to fit the offense; and vitally important the child must be made to understand what they did wrong.

Good discipline is one branch of good parenting and is a complex subject.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

Again, you appear to be conflating spanking as equivalent to being violently beaten about the head and ears with fists and boots, when the two are not remotely the same. This is a common reaction among those who have no clue what they are talking about in this debate. You're confusing (either unreasoningly or deliberately) the image of angry out-of-control violence with the use of controlled spanking as a disciplinary tool in some cases.

And slinging the word "coward" around from the safe anonymity of the Internet is a pretty contemptible habit...

Of course I know what I'm talking about. I've raised a son, and was raised by folks with the whole other opinion on the subject.
'Controlled spanking'? Is that how you think the child perceives it? Why is the child's reaction to being overpowered, helpless to defend theirself, somehow not as important as an adult's reaction in the same situation?
And I don't make a habit of using the word 'coward', and I don't rely on the 'safe anonymity of the internet'. You've mistaken me for a whole other body.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

Of course I know what I'm talking about. I've raised a son, and was raised by folks with the whole other opinion on the subject.
'Controlled spanking'? Is that how you think the child perceives it? Why is the child's reaction to being overpowered, helpless to defend theirself, somehow not as important as an adult's reaction in the same situation?
And I don't make a habit of using the word 'coward', and I don't rely on the 'safe anonymity of the internet'. You've mistaken me for a whole other body.

I swear some people think children are a different species. Why do they think children would be better off from being abused by their parents? Do they think adults are better off when they get abused by fellow adults? The logic behind some peoples arguments is so ****ing warped.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

I swear some people think children are a different species. Why do they think children would be better off from being abused by their parents? Do they think adults are better off when they get abused by fellow adults? The logic behind some peoples arguments is so ****ing warped.

I imagine they would resist corporal punishment for bad behaviour. Too bad their children are unable to resist.
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

I swear some people think children are a different species. Why do they think children would be better off from being abused by their parents? Do they think adults are better off when they get abused by fellow adults? The logic behind some peoples arguments is so ****ing warped.
What's warped in my opinion is those who view a spanking as abuse.

Let's see little Johnny is playing close to the stove and wanting to reach up to the hot pot that is boiling away. Daddy says "No No Johnny "hot" you will get hurt". And takes the child away from the stove. Johnny goes back around the stove and Daddy once again says "No No Johnny "hot" you can't play around the stove. The phone rings Dad answers the phone and in a couple of seconds the child manages to topple the boiling pot onto him. Now which pain do you think is worse. The third degree burns the boiling substance in the pot caused or the smack on the bottom to teach and instill in the child not to get around the stove?
 
Re: Parents: Punishing Kids

What's warped in my opinion is those who view a spanking as abuse.

Let's see little Johnny is playing close to the stove and wanting to reach up to the hot pot that is boiling away. Daddy says "No No Johnny "hot" you will get hurt". And takes the child away from the stove. Johnny goes back around the stove and Daddy once again says "No No Johnny "hot" you can't play around the stove. The phone rings Dad answers the phone and in a couple of seconds the child manages to topple the boiling pot onto him. Now which pain do you think is worse. The third degree burns the boiling substance in the pot caused or the smack on the bottom to teach and instill in the child not to get around the stove?

If the boy insists on touching it I say go ahead and let him. I once had a kid that insisted on touching the stove, so after a few times explaining to him the situation I just let him touch it. Afterwords he knew I was right about the stove and didn't dare touch it again.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom