http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070119/lf ... 0119202053

So NPR was talking about this today and I was thinking a bit about it. I know there are a handful of parents on here (most of whom have young young kids), but I was wondering what the general consensus was. Is it as easy as a cut and dry, "you spank your kids you're breaking the law" or is it something that should be left alone in terms of civil actions?

I think, speaking COMPLETELY theoretically as I don't have any kids of my own (at least that I know about), I feel that there are times where a spank is valid and useful. However, it seems that if parents took the time to learn about growth and development of the child in terms of their psychological maturation (i.e., conditioning, rewards vs. consequences, positive reinforcement, etc)then we could avoid the whole issue of spanking. That is obviously an ideal. The woman leading the push for misdemeanors is stating that she's trying to put a stop to the people that basically physically abuse their children. She said she is not trying to go after the 'soccer moms and dads". However, isn't there already pretty strict legislation against child abuse? After hearing Leiber discuss her reasoning and clarify her point, the legislation she is promoting just seemed to make less and less sense.

Thoughts? Experiences?

I got my ass whipped on a regular basis and i am a better person for it. When I got too big for them to whip me and make it count, they lectured me. I'd rather have been beaten.

As a teacher, I wish parents would just be somewhat involved in their children's lives, and be consistent in their rules and discipline.

We're fortunate that our son responds well to verbal correction and times out. We've never had to raise a hand to him.

My childhood, OTOH, I earned a few good thrashings.

They seem to think that "hit," "beat," and "smack around" are synonymous with "spank"

Which is bullshit.

I don't spank my kids, primarily because they have awesome temperments and have never needed spanking, but my dad and mom sure as spit spanked my brothers and me. And by spank I mean on the butt with an open hand as a form of discipline, not as a form of lashing out.

How you spank is crucial. Why you spank. Not THAT you spank.

There's a massive difference between spanking and smacking around.

In order not to offend God, my parents made sure that not one inch of the rod was spared.

Now let's see how many homo jokes we get out of that one.

I'll beat my kids till blood comes out the ears.

Heh. Yeah, "spare the rod, spoil the child" has historically been one of the most misinterpreted Biblical passages. It actually refers to a shepherd's crook and is about guiding, not about a stick. Shepherds use the crook to snag lambs back to the flock who are wandering off into trouble. They don't hit them with the crooks.

I agree with this completely. It brings up a related point to the "why" of spankings. It seems that oftentimes parents resort to spanking because they are overwhelmed by whatever is going on in their lives coupled with basic parenting and rearing of their child(ren). As a parent, even when things are chaotic, ideally you remain in control. When parents spank because they're overwhelmed it is a manifestation of a loss of control and in many ways is the child controlling them. Dangerous situation for child-rearing, so I'm told.

Though dad and mom also lost control sometimes.

Okay, a lot. We kids were a bunch of overwhelming shitwheels.

im so hardcore i beat your kids

The Phils covered it.

there is no reason to ever hit your children. ever.
it's humiliating and makes them afraid of you which accomplishes nothing.
it may make you feel like you're "in control" or "showed them a thing or two" but it serves no real purpose.

I think I got spanked once, at a pretty early age, and it convinced me once and for all that they were serious. After that, it was entirely unnecessary. Mom had only to LOOK at us.

I've spanked each of my kids a handful of times, always with a belt. Each time I was without anger and in control. I explained to them why they were receiving the whipping in a calm way and what I expected in the future. They cried a lot, it upset me, but it was always necessary in my view as their parent. I'll do it again if they need it.

and they may "need it" again because it doesn't solve the problem in the first place.

i just don't get it.

Maybe you need it to be beaten into you?

Keep in mind, I have no children of my own and have absolutely no practical experience. The following are still just my thoughts, not set in stone beliefs.

I agree with what you're saying. And, looking back on my childhood, which I think I had a pretty good one, I can remember a few times I got spanked between the ages of maybe 6-10 by my mother. By that time I was already a pretty big fella and the spankings were more of a last resort reminding me that I was not actually in charge. They were never "painful".

My dad hit me with a belt one time and that is all it took. I remember subconsciously respecting his authority more. It was not a rage beating or anything like that. It was also a last resort because essentially I was not doing what I was told, was being a huge pain in the ass, and my dad gave me ample warnings with threats of what would come. He left it in my control to stop my behavior or experience the final consequence. He hit me twice with the belt from what I can remember and I feel that in some ways I am better for it. Although, one could argue that 17 years later I still remember it pretty vividly is a good example that it may have done more harm on an emotional level than it did to really curb any type of behavior. I can honestly say, though, that I have never from that point on, been afraid of my father. I think it is a bit different with boys as well. It's hard for me to imagine a time when it would be necessary to hit a young girl with a belt as punishment, but that could just be because I am sexist prick.

I do see your arguments here though. The example that is given for spankings typically revolves around some kid darting out into the street and almost getting killed by traffic and the parent snags them spanks them and then hugs them grateful that they're still alive.

I don't think spanking is a cut and dry all or nothing kind of issue, but I do think it is not something that should be used as a quick fix or even in the first few options on the list of disciplinary actions.

I don't recall ever getting spanked or anything as a kid. Mouthful of soap once for telling my parents to f off but that's all I remember.

Then again, my sisters and I were good kids with no cause to punish us.


If I had a kid who was a terror or a brat, I don't know. I'd like to think I'd be able to find a way to exert control without physical force, but I can't say for sure.

it's a cut and dry issue for me.

the example of darting out in the street is a perfect example. i totally get it that a parent would lose it beause you're so freaked out that your kid could have just died. i'm not saying these types of instances don't occur.

what i am saying is spanking as a regular form of discipline is a waste of time and leads to nothing productive.

i hit my daughte once. she was 2 and kept poking me in the eye while i was trying to fall asleep. i slapped her hand and felt like shit. never hit her again and i've never hit my son.

my kids are 14 and 17, well adjusted, respectful of each other and those around them. did they receive punishments? you betcha. did we have arguments? of course. and somehow we've managed to stay a very close family even though i'm seperated from their mother.

kidds look up to their parents. using words to settle an argument or disagreement is a much better example to set than hitting. if i hit my son, whay can't my son hit my daughter?

eh, i'm done.

got nothin' to say to that. You can be my mom any day.

my mom spanked me a couple times but it was more comical than anything. i was bigger than her at around age 9

What ayah said... except I don't have kids yet.

What shiv said… except I don't have kids yet.