O
otjm
Guest
I dislike the term “smacking” a child. It seems to be loaded with a greater amount of emotion than a term such as spanking, or physical punishment.
We have a long list of people around who go by the mantra that if you ever use physical punishment of a child, you are teaching them to use force. I have yet to see either a sociological or psychological study that was well designed that could show that moderate physical punishment, used as an occasional part of discipline, did so.
Children do learn to use force when that is all they see modeled in a family, and when that is all that is used on them. And that doesn’t take a PhD to figuer out, either.
Striking a child hard enough to leave a mark - a bruise - is almost always considered to be evidence of child abuse. Striking a child with an instrument - a belt, a stick, a wooden spoon, etc. is much more likely to leave a bruise than an open hand. and if we are really honest, we use them becasue we can cause more pain. Point made.
Striking a child while angry is a very very short road to child abuse. And from what I have observed, most of the time children receive physical punishment when the parent is “hot”. That should be enough said. Note: I did not say that ever striking a child while hot is child abuse. I said it is a very very short road.
But if discipline means teaching (and that is the root word), you need to stop and ask yourself exactly what you are teaching when you strike a child.
You may be teaching that for certain acts, there are very unpleasant consequences. With that I do not have a particular problem, assuming that is not the only way you can teach, and it is proportional.
If you cannot stop and say what you are really trying to teach, or if when you stop you find what you are teaching is that mommy or daddy is really angry, then you are not disciplining the child, you are acting out your anger on someone who cannot defend themselves.
A good portion of the whole problem is that parents don’t start early enough to teach a child what the word “no” means (and you don’t have to spank them to get it across).
Another portion of the problem is dealing with a child who has attention deficit disorder, particularly if they have a hyperactive overlay, or if the child has other attention issues. It takes a huge amount of patience, and not a little bit of wisdom to be able to teach - discipline - a child properly. Too often physical punishment is used because patience was long gone, or because the parent didn’t know or wouldn’t use other parenting proceedures (like time out). and a third (somewhat related to patience) issue is the parent not stepping in and doing something - like time out - until whatever has been going on has gone nuclear. Tell them once and then intervene. Why tell them twice, or three times, or four… you have just taught them they don’t have to obey until you scream, or jerk, or hit. And you taught them. Often, you taught them very well; and then you wonder why they don’t mind.
It is because you taught them they didn’t have to.
I have no problem with telling a child why the rule is the rule. We can do that some other time, like at the dinner table. The point of discipline is that when the rule is invoked, whatever is violating the rule stops. I don’t “reason” with the child. I tell them to stop or the consequence will happen (once) and then if it doesn’t stop, the consequence happens. It is truly amazing how quickly they connect the dots.
It is also truly amazing how many times, if you follow that pattern consistently, you will be told how well your child behaves.
Never threaten. Promise. There is a vast difference.
Never beg. Ever. You are in charge. Act like it. Never say that if xyz doesn’t stop that you will do thus and so, unless you are ready and willing to immediately do thus and so. And if xyz continues, then do thus and so. Right then. No second chance.
And if thus and so is an over-reaction, then don’t say that is what will happen.
We have a long list of people around who go by the mantra that if you ever use physical punishment of a child, you are teaching them to use force. I have yet to see either a sociological or psychological study that was well designed that could show that moderate physical punishment, used as an occasional part of discipline, did so.
Children do learn to use force when that is all they see modeled in a family, and when that is all that is used on them. And that doesn’t take a PhD to figuer out, either.
Striking a child hard enough to leave a mark - a bruise - is almost always considered to be evidence of child abuse. Striking a child with an instrument - a belt, a stick, a wooden spoon, etc. is much more likely to leave a bruise than an open hand. and if we are really honest, we use them becasue we can cause more pain. Point made.
Striking a child while angry is a very very short road to child abuse. And from what I have observed, most of the time children receive physical punishment when the parent is “hot”. That should be enough said. Note: I did not say that ever striking a child while hot is child abuse. I said it is a very very short road.
But if discipline means teaching (and that is the root word), you need to stop and ask yourself exactly what you are teaching when you strike a child.
You may be teaching that for certain acts, there are very unpleasant consequences. With that I do not have a particular problem, assuming that is not the only way you can teach, and it is proportional.
If you cannot stop and say what you are really trying to teach, or if when you stop you find what you are teaching is that mommy or daddy is really angry, then you are not disciplining the child, you are acting out your anger on someone who cannot defend themselves.
A good portion of the whole problem is that parents don’t start early enough to teach a child what the word “no” means (and you don’t have to spank them to get it across).
Another portion of the problem is dealing with a child who has attention deficit disorder, particularly if they have a hyperactive overlay, or if the child has other attention issues. It takes a huge amount of patience, and not a little bit of wisdom to be able to teach - discipline - a child properly. Too often physical punishment is used because patience was long gone, or because the parent didn’t know or wouldn’t use other parenting proceedures (like time out). and a third (somewhat related to patience) issue is the parent not stepping in and doing something - like time out - until whatever has been going on has gone nuclear. Tell them once and then intervene. Why tell them twice, or three times, or four… you have just taught them they don’t have to obey until you scream, or jerk, or hit. And you taught them. Often, you taught them very well; and then you wonder why they don’t mind.
It is because you taught them they didn’t have to.
I have no problem with telling a child why the rule is the rule. We can do that some other time, like at the dinner table. The point of discipline is that when the rule is invoked, whatever is violating the rule stops. I don’t “reason” with the child. I tell them to stop or the consequence will happen (once) and then if it doesn’t stop, the consequence happens. It is truly amazing how quickly they connect the dots.
It is also truly amazing how many times, if you follow that pattern consistently, you will be told how well your child behaves.
Never threaten. Promise. There is a vast difference.
Never beg. Ever. You are in charge. Act like it. Never say that if xyz doesn’t stop that you will do thus and so, unless you are ready and willing to immediately do thus and so. And if xyz continues, then do thus and so. Right then. No second chance.
And if thus and so is an over-reaction, then don’t say that is what will happen.
