HOME | DD

Description
...teach the child.

It has always been my longest belief that parents who use spanking or corporal punishment as a method to teach their children lessons are not only lazy, but incredibly inept in communication skills.

It wasn't so long ago that it was socially acceptable for a man to hit his wife, or his woman, because she was not considered to be his equal and therefor it was okay, as long as she deserved it, of course.

So now people still have it in their heads that striking a child is also still an acceptable thing to do. Because somehow the context of the action changes according to age and relation to the person performing said action.

For example:

If an adult were hit another adult with an open hand across the face, not out of self defense or any such reason, this would be considered assault.

However, if an adult were to hit a child, their child, with an open hand across the face, this is considered discipline.

Am I the only one who finds this double standard rather odd if not disturbing? Using corporal punishment doesn't teach anything, it only conditions out of fear and fear makes for a poor teaching tool. You cannot communicate a lesson with a fist. The only message being sent is "if you do this again, I will hit you more". Again, explain how this is a valid lesson?

Yes, you may argue that "well, my parents spanked me and I'm okay" and that's great, good for you. Would you like a medal? It's not an excuse, especially since a lot will grow up to accept this form of behavior as okay and they too will also use corporal punishment as a form of pseudo discipline.

How easy it must be to just hit your child and be done with it. You won't have to teach him/her anything, you won't have to communicate or be involved any more than you need to be. Why would you want to spend time teaching them anything when hitting is so much quicker and to the point. Hitting your child is not a consequence to their actions, it's your reaction to a situation you're not comfortable or capable of dealing with.

Do you know how many parents use the term discipline in order to justify and sometimes even mask child abuse?

Where do you draw the line at what is and what is not assault or abuse?

Also, don't you find it funny how teachers don't need to use corporal punishment in order to teach your kids during class? They seem to learn their lessons just fine through communication and actual interaction between student and teacher. They seem to be quite capable of absorbing information just fine without the fear of being assaulted.

I once was given the excuse that if they didn't hit their kids, they'd probably be out doing drugs, having sex, stealing, beating people up, etc etc and I had to wonder, what will they do once their children turn 18? They'd have spent the last 18 years having taught absolutely nothing. Also, on the subject of when your kids turn 18, since when has it even been acceptable for police to beat anyone they arrest without provocation? The police won't spank your kids for you once they're out on their own, so I fail to see how they've been taught anything of the real world or of real consequences to their actions.

If an adult commits a crime they're arrested and must face consequences according to the crime committed. They're not spanked or beaten, they have many of their rights and freedoms taken away, must face jail or prison time, pay fines, etc.

So it stands to reason that if your child does something wrong, you give them a consequence that is appropriate to their age and whatever wrong they committed. But most importantly, you have to communicate and actually teach them, or else they'll never learn. These are real consequences that if they committed crimes when they're much older, they'd face much of the same punishments, only much harsher.

Don't be a lazy parent. The moment you've struck your child(ren) out of anger you've failed as a parent to protect them from the very thing the law protects you from.

Your kids aren't Pavlov's Dogs, stop treating them like they are.

Description
...teach the child.

It has always been my longest belief that parents who use spanking or corporal punishment as a method to teach their children lessons are not only lazy, but incredibly inept in communication skills.

It wasn't so long ago that it was socially acceptable for a man to hit his wife, or his woman, because she was not considered to be his equal and therefor it was okay, as long as she deserved it, of course.

So now people still have it in their heads that striking a child is also still an acceptable thing to do. Because somehow the context of the action changes according to age and relation to the person performing said action.

For example:

If an adult were hit another adult with an open hand across the face, not out of self defense or any such reason, this would be considered assault.

However, if an adult were to hit a child, their child, with an open hand across the face, this is considered discipline.

Am I the only one who finds this double standard rather odd if not disturbing? Using corporal punishment doesn't teach anything, it only conditions out of fear and fear makes for a poor teaching tool. You cannot communicate a lesson with a fist. The only message being sent is "if you do this again, I will hit you more". Again, explain how this is a valid lesson?

Yes, you may argue that "well, my parents spanked me and I'm okay" and that's great, good for you. Would you like a medal? It's not an excuse, especially since a lot will grow up to accept this form of behavior as okay and they too will also use corporal punishment as a form of pseudo discipline.

How easy it must be to just hit your child and be done with it. You won't have to teach him/her anything, you won't have to communicate or be involved any more than you need to be. Why would you want to spend time teaching them anything when hitting is so much quicker and to the point. Hitting your child is not a consequence to their actions, it's your reaction to a situation you're not comfortable or capable of dealing with.

Do you know how many parents use the term discipline in order to justify and sometimes even mask child abuse?

Where do you draw the line at what is and what is not assault or abuse?

Also, don't you find it funny how teachers don't need to use corporal punishment in order to teach your kids during class? They seem to learn their lessons just fine through communication and actual interaction between student and teacher. They seem to be quite capable of absorbing information just fine without the fear of being assaulted.

I once was given the excuse that if they didn't hit their kids, they'd probably be out doing drugs, having sex, stealing, beating people up, etc etc and I had to wonder, what will they do once their children turn 18? They'd have spent the last 18 years having taught absolutely nothing. Also, on the subject of when your kids turn 18, since when has it even been acceptable for police to beat anyone they arrest without provocation? The police won't spank your kids for you once they're out on their own, so I fail to see how they've been taught anything of the real world or of real consequences to their actions.

If an adult commits a crime they're arrested and must face consequences according to the crime committed. They're not spanked or beaten, they have many of their rights and freedoms taken away, must face jail or prison time, pay fines, etc.

So it stands to reason that if your child does something wrong, you give them a consequence that is appropriate to their age and whatever wrong they committed. But most importantly, you have to communicate and actually teach them, or else they'll never learn. These are real consequences that if they committed crimes when they're much older, they'd face much of the same punishments, only much harsher.

Don't be a lazy parent. The moment you've struck your child(ren) out of anger you've failed as a parent to protect them from the very thing the law protects you from.

Your kids aren't Pavlov's Dogs, stop treating them like they are.