How should Parents discipline children

[WestCoastRunner]

Really, you've never experienced a 1-3YO get violent? WoW, good for you!

Unfortunatley for me, I have kids, many nieces and nephews, had a daycare, have a wife in the school system and now have daughters that babysit...and have seen it with nearly every child I've encountered.

So if a 1 to 3 year old gets violent, they deserve violence too. That doesn't make sense. That only reinforces their violent behaviour.

[On Guard for Thee]

Once again, if you can't control a 1-3 year old w/o resorting to violence, something is way way wrong.

[cybercoma]

It's not really your place to tell me when not to and when I should respond to someone. I did report his behaviour and I simply didn't feel it was right to ignore and not draw attention to his antics. If I want to respond to someone's post, that is my perogative.

If you're going to encourage him, then don't complain about his behaviour.

[bush_cheney2004]

Stop the whining and complaining....this member has every privilege to post content as much as any other. None of the insults or personal attacks will make any difference, and frankly are an admission of poor debating skills. "Insensitive" threads and posts about "Blacks", "Jews", "Muslims", "Merkins", "Harper", "Obama", "Bush", and many other persons or groups pass without any such hysterics.

Edited September 20, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[Bryan]

Violence may get their attention, no doubt about that and it may correct behaviour in the short term, but long term, not so much.

Long term too. When people realize that they will get hurt if they step out of line, they eventually stop. Singapore has nearly non-existent minor crimes because the penalty is a severe public beating with a bamboo cane. It works.

It's the same for spankings. You don't even have to actually do it, the kids just have to know that you're not bluffing when you say that you will do it if they don't stop (whatever) right now. If they know that you won't really do it? No, the threat doesn't work.

[bush_cheney2004]

Agreed....empty threats to address unruly behavior only encourages more of the same. I watch parents trying to manage their disobedient children by counting "1........2.......3".......then what ? Others watch to see how this stand off will end, knowing full well that the child will continue to push boundaries and limits to test parental resolve.

[On Guard for Thee]

So threaten then, and then what the hell, beat them too. Yep, the world needs more of that for sure.

[On Guard for Thee]

I suspect people who choose to beat their kids probably had parents who had the same type of developemental failing, which of course can hardly help but get passed on.

[WestCoastRunner]

When children are treated with violence, especially from parents, they begin to lose trust with their parents and grow up not trusting the motives of the many people around them. Spanking also increases aggression and there have been plenty of studies to prove this.

[On Guard for Thee]

I guess one of the problems here is that parents who choose corporal punishment techniques don't actually understand it as violence. Somehow the child is supposed to be able to differentiate their getting hit as somehow different that what they might see on TV. And of course there is the old "this will hurt me more than it will you" crazy idea of justification.

[Bryan]

So threaten then, and then what the hell, beat them too. Yep, the world needs more of that for sure.

Without question, it does need a lot more of it.

[On Guard for Thee]

The only accurate part of your posts on this topic is when you said, "the threat doesn't work". At least not in the way any thinking person would want it too. Why do people need to threaten other people, especially their own little kids?

[Hal 9000]

No one is advocating for "beating children".

[Big Guy]

A child is playing with matches after being "warned" of the dangers. I believe that a swat on the bum tells the child that if you do this then you will get this. I guess the alternative is having a sit down with the child, having a "time out" then talking to the child to reinforce the message and hope the message was received before the place is burned down or the child starts their hair on fire. Meanwhile, one other child is swinging the cat by the tail and a third is finding that the oven is a "neat" hiding place.

I have seen psychology used on the first child of a marriage and half way through the second. The third kid gets swatted and all subsequent children get "applied" psychology.

Finally, the better behaved and the more you can guarantee good behavior the more places you can take them and the more freedom you can allow them. Not trying to convince anyone of anything just sharing experience. Each to his/her own.

[Bryan]

Why do people need to threaten other people, especially their own little kids?

Because we care about them enough to do the right thing, even if it's not fun.

[WestCoastRunner]

Because we care about them enough to do the right thing, even if it's not fun.

[WestCoastRunner]

Of course your opinion goes against more experienced educated psychologists.

[On Guard for Thee]

I suppose I should define "threaten" Being told for instance that you will lose your access to your bike for a week if you go riding without your helmet again could be defined as a threat. Being told you will get a good whacking when your daddy gets home for the same infraction is a horse of a very different color IMO.

[bush_cheney2004]

Some experienced educated psychologists still spank their children.

[Hal 9000]

Of course your opinion goes against more experienced educated psychologists.

You can find a psychologist to say whatever you agree with. You can find all sorts of studies that say the same thing. And, you can find opposing views.

The problem is; a psychologist who believes in spanking knows that to say as such would invite complete hostility from the left.

You guys can't even separate spanking from child beating for crying out loud. This is another form of social engineering

[Bryan]

I suppose I should define "threaten" Being told for instance that you will lose your access to your bike for a week if you go riding without your helmet again could be defined as a threat. Being told you will get a good whacking when your daddy gets home for the same infraction is a horse of a very different color IMO.

Two sides of the same coin. You use what works. Thankfully, many kids will respond to "threats" of the former nature. That's simply not the case for all kids though. Some parents are lucky, and they end up with kids that want to follow the rules and will do basically what they are told most of the time. Others get stuck with unholy terrors that need to be physically corrected occasionally.

[Guest]

I suppose I should define "threaten" Being told for instance that you will lose your access to your bike for a week if you go riding without your helmet again could be defined as a threat. Being told you will get a good whacking when your daddy gets home for the same infraction is a horse of a very different color IMO.

What about being told that you will lose your access to your bike for a week if you go riding without your helmet again and being told you will get a good whacking when your daddy gets home for setting fire to your sister?

[On Guard for Thee]

Ah, she probably had it coming anyways.

[WestCoastRunner]

What about being told that you will lose your access to your bike for a week if you go riding without your helmet again and being told you will get a good whacking when your daddy gets home for setting fire to your sister?

If a child is setting fire to their sister, I would think professional help needs to step in.

[WestCoastRunner]

. Others get stuck with unholy terrors that need to be physically corrected occasionally.

Physically corrected sounds so ominous and quite frankly sounds like child abuse.