now Kathy, you needn't be unsettled, the bill hasnot passed, and is just being considerd to be presented. AND by the way, this is something proposed in a state legislature (CA at the moment), not the US Congress, in case any of us are ummmm confused.
Whether is is insanity from the government or not, I will let others debate.
On your last sentence, I would add: and it is precisely that age group who is most likely to get physically and mentally hurt by it. You are trgiht, children that age are not adept at reason, therefore they are not behaving by using reason. Pain stimulus will not change the underlying cause of their behavior. Under age four a child is probably being disruptive because they are tired, hungry, or wanting attention. tired and hungry have obvious solutions.
Spanking a child that age because they want attention is hardly the attention they should get.
~HAP Children are our legacy to a time we will not see.
You will note, Hap, that I said a well placed swat on the butt, not a beating. I would rather have my 3 year old feel a swat on the behind than a car on his head.
In general I would agree regarding why young children misbehave - tired, hungry, in need of attention. However, there are also times, when WHY they are behaving a certain way is not as important as being sure they are safe. Toddlers and young children do not understand the dangers our world presents. Nor do parents always have a free hand to hold them with.
For instance, I remember when my older son was a toddler. The first word he ever spoke was "hot". I used to tell him "don't touch it's hot" regarding the stove, the tail pipe of a recently turned off car, whatever it was that caught is very very curious mind that was too hot to touch.
One day, his father had just finished cutting the grass, and Aaron walked up to the lawnmower, curious as ever. His dad said, "don't touch it, it is hot." Well Aaron didn't really know what hot meant, and sure enough he touched it and learned the hard way. Second degree burn, painful but not life threatening. However, some things are life threatening and a swat on the butt is a much better consequence in such situations.
I don't understand. When would the swat have been administered in the case of the lawnmower? When they first approached it? after they touched it? while in the garage? Teaching "no" is always good, especially when something is life threatening. I had two distinct Daddy "no"s. the NO! and the no. Each were used when they applied.
If there is a hand free to swat a child in the street, there is a hand free to grasp him before they get there. I don't understand what you are saying Abi.
My daughter was raised with the 'spare the rod, spoil the child' misinterpretation practiced by 'christians'...which is one thing twi had in common with those 'wretched christians' they disdained.
My son was raised nearly 'wild'...no spankings, freedom of choice from a young age, self-determination, etc. We were going for the opposite of twi and our 'church' upbringings.
They turned out nearly exactly the same...making nearly exactly the same choices...having nearly exactly the same world views...etc. Except that my daughter, as a teenager, ran to the 'comfort' of a man 7 years her senior.
Based upon my experience, I cannot say one way or the other concerning to spank or not to spank...because my experience is that spanking or not spanking determined nothing in my children's lives. Unless being spanked by her daddy was part of what led my daughter to seek 'comfort' in the arms of older men...and that's a Dr Phil show...and is now a moot point in her life.
Should the government be this heavily involved in how people raise their children?
now Kathy, you needn't be unsettled, the bill hasnot passed, and is just being considerd to be presented. AND by the way, this is something proposed in a state legislature (CA at the moment), not the US Congress, in case any of us are ummmm confused.
~HAP
Children are our legacy to a time we cannot see.
It's the idea they think it is their right to make decisions like that in the first place.
It would be interesting to see how children as a whole in different generations become problem adults. Like children raised in the 50's versus 90's. I am just going on the world around me, no charts or grafts, but when parents began to take on the philosophy to allow their children to run wild so they could find themselves and place no restrictions on them I can not believe it has not added to some of our adult problems of today. Children need boundaries, it has been proven since we knew what the word meant and it has not gone away. We have not evolved as such a master race that children do not need to know what is acceptable and what is not and we never will.
A pat on the backside or tap on the hand when a small child is deserving of it does not scar them for life. And whether they understand or not it teaches them they will not be able to run wild as adults and not suffer the consequences of it.
When did society give over the ownership of how children should be raised to the children.
This may sound real off track but I do not believe it is. These bills even making it to this point is a move in the direction and making the world revolve around the child rather than the adult teaching the child they are part not the whole.
I love children, and if anyone thinks otherwise, well sorry that you misunderstood.
I doubt anyone thought otherwise Kathy. I certainly did not mean to cast such a view of Abi or anyone else here either, I apologize if I appeared that way. Lest any thinks otherwise, I did not let children run wild to find themselves either. boundaries yes, all I was addressing is how those boundaries be taught.
Ownership is not given over to the child, although ownership for their mistakes needs to be. too many parents cover for junior so long into their adulthood that the child never learns to make a decision. That to me is the fallacy in "do what I say, I am the parent" type child-rearing. To tell a child they do not need to understand why, it is enough that I told you so, inhibits their ability to make cognitive choices.
Whenever someone shouts at me, "Don't tell me what to do with my kid!" I Shout right back, "HEY! That kid is not your's forever - he has to grow up and become his own person and someone elses Dad!"
Some folks forget that "their" kids doesn't refer to "their property."
That being said, I'm no fan of government intervention in how a child is raised - but I can see how this law is being set up as a sort of back door to get parents who are skilled at hiding their abuse. I'm still not for the law - I just like to look at both sides of an issue for a long time.
Ok, I'm a Californian and I've been following this since day one. The proposed law is being written by a childless woman in Silicon Valley. Here in Sacramento, the letter-to-the-editor response has been about 10 to 1 opposed to the law. The responses have been:
1. You're childless and don't have a clue.
2. Spanking might be bad, but it's not the state's responsibility to judge.
3. It can't be enforced.
I should note that the law as proposed would require a parenting class for the first offence, with no other penalty.
Given the public response, I think it's highly unlikely the law will pass. The sideways implication that California is full of kooks and crazy people isn't needed. I've seen equal or greater socialistic tendencies in Oregon, eastern Washington, Michigan and New York.
Whenever someone shouts at me, "Don't tell me what to do with my kid!" I Shout right back, "HEY! That kid is not your's forever - he has to grow up and become his own person and someone elses Dad!"
awesome response, dooj! I might have to start using this.
that said, sometimes I have to say "this is the way it is because I'm the mom". doesn't mean we don't talk about it, acknowledge how much we don't like it and how it will actually (believe it or not) help us be better people and run down the list of what we can learn. my son even got really ....ed today about a heavy law I had to enact, and when I started to acknowledge his anger he said "no mom, I just don't like the change. this isn't comfortable".
and that said, I did swat my little one on the thigh today, just once, for climbing on to the top bunk and jumping on her brother's neck. she broke a rule and wouldn't listen. swat, timeout, hug, talk. she'll probably do it again, but she is... um... there's no good way to describe her except that the evil streak runs deep, and she's very smart. she's also full of love, thank God.
Potato - I tell my kids that there is only one mean mom in the world and they have her! That keeps things funny around here.
I also give my kids a time to reply - they get to be honest - I only ask that they are also respectful. I don't want them in a situation where a boss or spouse is abusive in any way and they find they have no skills to have their say.
Jim, saw it on the news few days ago. The law won't get off the ground unless politicians think they can get some votes from it and rustle it on the news media.
The law proposes to prohibit spanking children under 3 years old. Difficult to enforce? The only way it could be enforced at all is by observers, which means any person could report an incident. In application it's scarey.
I think the criticism of the politician not being a parent is a legitmate one, in that a law like this is potentially so intrusive and subject to abuse of it's own that the perception that this is just another rmeddlesome politician bringing legal intrusion into private life in an area where there's no personal experience is reasonable. I can't help but think - great, another politician looking out for our best interests, meanwhile crack dealers are holding garage sales in her city.
It's a useless gesture, that won't help children who are actual victims of abuse anymore than they are now. Toddlers that display signs of physical abuse can be reported now.
We never "spanked" our children or used spoons, belts, bats, 2X4's or other implements of violence on our kids. We both did do the "swat" move more than once on their butts. But we felt it was necessary to be careful with them. But in all of the classic examples - kids running into the street, grabbing something hot, about to fall, I moved quick and decisively to protect them. All parents do that though.
Excellent points brought up since I last looked in.
And Hap, thanks for your post to me regarding my love for children.
A swat to get the attention of a child on the verge of making a dangerous choice certainly isn't the same as beating some sense into them. I've never subscribed to beating sense into anyone, although twi mentally beat some sense out of me.
I agree it's a back door way of gaining control of our home life (my way of seeing it).
When there is far more evil efforts going unchecked right under these politicians noses.
Experience is a big deal and the lack of it for those making decisions should impact things. I'm glad to see we pay attention when we go to the poles.
My mother rarely physically punished me. Although I remember quite well the times she did. I was acting up quite badly and she made me go out and chose my own switch to be used on my butt. I brought in a willowy thing that stung like heck on my backside. The next time I was given the joy (yeah right) of choosing my instrument of punishment I brought in the biggest log I could carry. My mom never used that form after that, it made her realize the damage it caused me. Did I turn into a rotten child/adult? Well I don't consider myself one. I adore my mother and have told her if I were one tenth the mother as she then I would be thankful.
My son was swatted less than half a dozen times his whole life. He understood words being told to him and acted on them so just didn't need to have his attention gotten in that way. But had he needed it I would have done so, but not with a switch.
All this doesn't teach anything, it just relays some of my thoughts.
The National Committee for the Prevention of Child Abuse just added verbal abuse as an official category of child abuse within the past two years. Only 20 states include it as a category of abuse. California estimates that emotional abuse accounts for only 4 percent of the state's reported abuse cases.
Spanking (not beating), does drive the point home on the little kiddies. I wouldn't spank anyone under 18 months, because even a spanking could hurt them, but from two to four are crucial years where spanking just might be the only way to get some children's attention.
I did not get bitter with my parents growing up. It was usually forgotten quite quickly. Usually by the end of the day. My Dad used a strap. It stung but I was not hurt. After catching me smoking, he made me smoke more until I got sick. I never picked up another smoke until the Army and I hated it then, so quit. I never did drugs. When caught drinking and suffering a hangover the next day, my father took me out to the yard, sick or not, made me rake leaves, I would get sick out there, but he would make me continue until the yard was done. He gave me no aspirin for my headache, and I suffered the consequences almost 24 hours. I never raided his liquor again. I picked up drinking in college later, but dropped it. Today, I don't smoke, don't drink, don't do drugs. I live a normal life.
The treatment by the hands of my Dad did not twist me. Not that I recommend his methods to others, just that was what happened to me.
I doubt anyone thought otherwise Kathy. I certainly did not mean to cast such a view of Abi or anyone else here either, I apologize if I appeared that way. Lest any thinks otherwise, I did not let children run wild to find themselves either. boundaries yes, all I was addressing is how those boundaries be taught.
Ownership is not given over to the child, although ownership for their mistakes needs to be. too many parents cover for junior so long into their adulthood that the child never learns to make a decision. That to me is the fallacy in "do what I say, I am the parent" type child-rearing. To tell a child they do not need to understand why, it is enough that I told you so, inhibits their ability to make cognitive choices.
~HAP
Hap, I wasn't using you as an example on the boundaries or running wild but thank you for your replies.
Also what I was referring to ownership being given over to the child is we already have in place a system that will allow a child to sue their parents, which perhaps was appropriate in some cases but it also reflects allowing the children to make such decisions gives them ownership. A child is not mature enough to make such choices on their own.
Nor should we raise them like the world revolves around them. I was thrilled to have my only son after having been told I would never be able to have children. But in my gratefulness I did not make him the master of the home because I was so thankful to have a child. I see that in homes today where they make the child the most important thing in the family. That isn't healthy for anyone, especially the child.
Those were my thoughts on that one and I could have elaborated I know.
:o :o :o :o Some of us enjoy being spanked...
Satori is enjoying you I hope you know.
But you know he'll be back to reclaim don't ya.
I thought we all might enjoy this store sign I was sent today:
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
4
12
10
5
Popular Days
Jan 25
35
Jan 26
23
Jan 27
13
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 4 posts
ChattyKathy 12 posts
HAPe4me 10 posts
doojable 5 posts
Popular Days
Jan 25 2007
35 posts
Jan 26 2007
23 posts
Jan 27 2007
13 posts
Posted Images
coolchef
i would get a swat on the foot from my dad{gosh i miss that man} when i screwed up
he would always say this is going to hurt me that it is you
and i bet it did
a swat on the foot imo is just a wake up call
beating ? NO but a swat is not a bad thing imo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HAPe4me
now Kathy, you needn't be unsettled, the bill hasnot passed, and is just being considerd to be presented. AND by the way, this is something proposed in a state legislature (CA at the moment), not the US Congress, in case any of us are ummmm confused.
~HAP
Children are our legacy to a time we cannot see.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
You will note, Hap, that I said a well placed swat on the butt, not a beating. I would rather have my 3 year old feel a swat on the behind than a car on his head.
In general I would agree regarding why young children misbehave - tired, hungry, in need of attention. However, there are also times, when WHY they are behaving a certain way is not as important as being sure they are safe. Toddlers and young children do not understand the dangers our world presents. Nor do parents always have a free hand to hold them with.
For instance, I remember when my older son was a toddler. The first word he ever spoke was "hot". I used to tell him "don't touch it's hot" regarding the stove, the tail pipe of a recently turned off car, whatever it was that caught is very very curious mind that was too hot to touch.
One day, his father had just finished cutting the grass, and Aaron walked up to the lawnmower, curious as ever. His dad said, "don't touch it, it is hot." Well Aaron didn't really know what hot meant, and sure enough he touched it and learned the hard way. Second degree burn, painful but not life threatening. However, some things are life threatening and a swat on the butt is a much better consequence in such situations.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HAPe4me
I don't understand. When would the swat have been administered in the case of the lawnmower? When they first approached it? after they touched it? while in the garage? Teaching "no" is always good, especially when something is life threatening. I had two distinct Daddy "no"s. the NO! and the no. Each were used when they applied.
If there is a hand free to swat a child in the street, there is a hand free to grasp him before they get there. I don't understand what you are saying Abi.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CoolWaters
My daughter was raised with the 'spare the rod, spoil the child' misinterpretation practiced by 'christians'...which is one thing twi had in common with those 'wretched christians' they disdained.
My son was raised nearly 'wild'...no spankings, freedom of choice from a young age, self-determination, etc. We were going for the opposite of twi and our 'church' upbringings.
They turned out nearly exactly the same...making nearly exactly the same choices...having nearly exactly the same world views...etc. Except that my daughter, as a teenager, ran to the 'comfort' of a man 7 years her senior.
Based upon my experience, I cannot say one way or the other concerning to spank or not to spank...because my experience is that spanking or not spanking determined nothing in my children's lives. Unless being spanked by her daddy was part of what led my daughter to seek 'comfort' in the arms of older men...and that's a Dr Phil show...and is now a moot point in her life.
Should the government be this heavily involved in how people raise their children?
No.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
It's the idea they think it is their right to make decisions like that in the first place.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
It would be interesting to see how children as a whole in different generations become problem adults. Like children raised in the 50's versus 90's. I am just going on the world around me, no charts or grafts, but when parents began to take on the philosophy to allow their children to run wild so they could find themselves and place no restrictions on them I can not believe it has not added to some of our adult problems of today. Children need boundaries, it has been proven since we knew what the word meant and it has not gone away. We have not evolved as such a master race that children do not need to know what is acceptable and what is not and we never will.
A pat on the backside or tap on the hand when a small child is deserving of it does not scar them for life. And whether they understand or not it teaches them they will not be able to run wild as adults and not suffer the consequences of it.
When did society give over the ownership of how children should be raised to the children.
This may sound real off track but I do not believe it is. These bills even making it to this point is a move in the direction and making the world revolve around the child rather than the adult teaching the child they are part not the whole.
I love children, and if anyone thinks otherwise, well sorry that you misunderstood.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HAPe4me
I doubt anyone thought otherwise Kathy. I certainly did not mean to cast such a view of Abi or anyone else here either, I apologize if I appeared that way. Lest any thinks otherwise, I did not let children run wild to find themselves either. boundaries yes, all I was addressing is how those boundaries be taught.
Ownership is not given over to the child, although ownership for their mistakes needs to be. too many parents cover for junior so long into their adulthood that the child never learns to make a decision. That to me is the fallacy in "do what I say, I am the parent" type child-rearing. To tell a child they do not need to understand why, it is enough that I told you so, inhibits their ability to make cognitive choices.
~HAP
Edited by HAPe4meLink to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Whenever someone shouts at me, "Don't tell me what to do with my kid!" I Shout right back, "HEY! That kid is not your's forever - he has to grow up and become his own person and someone elses Dad!"
Some folks forget that "their" kids doesn't refer to "their property."
That being said, I'm no fan of government intervention in how a child is raised - but I can see how this law is being set up as a sort of back door to get parents who are skilled at hiding their abuse. I'm still not for the law - I just like to look at both sides of an issue for a long time.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim
Ok, I'm a Californian and I've been following this since day one. The proposed law is being written by a childless woman in Silicon Valley. Here in Sacramento, the letter-to-the-editor response has been about 10 to 1 opposed to the law. The responses have been:
1. You're childless and don't have a clue.
2. Spanking might be bad, but it's not the state's responsibility to judge.
3. It can't be enforced.
I should note that the law as proposed would require a parenting class for the first offence, with no other penalty.
Given the public response, I think it's highly unlikely the law will pass. The sideways implication that California is full of kooks and crazy people isn't needed. I've seen equal or greater socialistic tendencies in Oregon, eastern Washington, Michigan and New York.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
:o :o :o :o Some of us enjoy being spanked...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Groucho dear - I think you really meant to post this in "that other thread"
;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
potato
awesome response, dooj! I might have to start using this.
that said, sometimes I have to say "this is the way it is because I'm the mom". doesn't mean we don't talk about it, acknowledge how much we don't like it and how it will actually (believe it or not) help us be better people and run down the list of what we can learn. my son even got really ....ed today about a heavy law I had to enact, and when I started to acknowledge his anger he said "no mom, I just don't like the change. this isn't comfortable".
and that said, I did swat my little one on the thigh today, just once, for climbing on to the top bunk and jumping on her brother's neck. she broke a rule and wouldn't listen. swat, timeout, hug, talk. she'll probably do it again, but she is... um... there's no good way to describe her except that the evil streak runs deep, and she's very smart. she's also full of love, thank God.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Potato - I tell my kids that there is only one mean mom in the world and they have her! That keeps things funny around here.
I also give my kids a time to reply - they get to be honest - I only ask that they are also respectful. I don't want them in a situation where a boss or spouse is abusive in any way and they find they have no skills to have their say.
So my kids do know how to state their case.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
Jim, saw it on the news few days ago. The law won't get off the ground unless politicians think they can get some votes from it and rustle it on the news media.
The law proposes to prohibit spanking children under 3 years old. Difficult to enforce? The only way it could be enforced at all is by observers, which means any person could report an incident. In application it's scarey.
I think the criticism of the politician not being a parent is a legitmate one, in that a law like this is potentially so intrusive and subject to abuse of it's own that the perception that this is just another rmeddlesome politician bringing legal intrusion into private life in an area where there's no personal experience is reasonable. I can't help but think - great, another politician looking out for our best interests, meanwhile crack dealers are holding garage sales in her city.
It's a useless gesture, that won't help children who are actual victims of abuse anymore than they are now. Toddlers that display signs of physical abuse can be reported now.
We never "spanked" our children or used spoons, belts, bats, 2X4's or other implements of violence on our kids. We both did do the "swat" move more than once on their butts. But we felt it was necessary to be careful with them. But in all of the classic examples - kids running into the street, grabbing something hot, about to fall, I moved quick and decisively to protect them. All parents do that though.
Edited by socksLink to comment
Share on other sites
Sushi
For those interested.
HERE!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sushi
This is because verbal and emotional abuse is a LOT more fun, aaaaaand, harder to prove.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Excellent points brought up since I last looked in.
And Hap, thanks for your post to me regarding my love for children.
A swat to get the attention of a child on the verge of making a dangerous choice certainly isn't the same as beating some sense into them. I've never subscribed to beating sense into anyone, although twi mentally beat some sense out of me.
I agree it's a back door way of gaining control of our home life (my way of seeing it).
When there is far more evil efforts going unchecked right under these politicians noses.
Experience is a big deal and the lack of it for those making decisions should impact things. I'm glad to see we pay attention when we go to the poles.
My mother rarely physically punished me. Although I remember quite well the times she did. I was acting up quite badly and she made me go out and chose my own switch to be used on my butt. I brought in a willowy thing that stung like heck on my backside. The next time I was given the joy (yeah right) of choosing my instrument of punishment I brought in the biggest log I could carry. My mom never used that form after that, it made her realize the damage it caused me. Did I turn into a rotten child/adult? Well I don't consider myself one. I adore my mother and have told her if I were one tenth the mother as she then I would be thankful.
My son was swatted less than half a dozen times his whole life. He understood words being told to him and acted on them so just didn't need to have his attention gotten in that way. But had he needed it I would have done so, but not with a switch.
All this doesn't teach anything, it just relays some of my thoughts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
VeganXTC
From here: http://www.moriartydee.com/custody/verbal.html
The National Committee for the Prevention of Child Abuse just added verbal abuse as an official category of child abuse within the past two years. Only 20 states include it as a category of abuse. California estimates that emotional abuse accounts for only 4 percent of the state's reported abuse cases.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eagle
Spanking (not beating), does drive the point home on the little kiddies. I wouldn't spank anyone under 18 months, because even a spanking could hurt them, but from two to four are crucial years where spanking just might be the only way to get some children's attention.
I did not get bitter with my parents growing up. It was usually forgotten quite quickly. Usually by the end of the day. My Dad used a strap. It stung but I was not hurt. After catching me smoking, he made me smoke more until I got sick. I never picked up another smoke until the Army and I hated it then, so quit. I never did drugs. When caught drinking and suffering a hangover the next day, my father took me out to the yard, sick or not, made me rake leaves, I would get sick out there, but he would make me continue until the yard was done. He gave me no aspirin for my headache, and I suffered the consequences almost 24 hours. I never raided his liquor again. I picked up drinking in college later, but dropped it. Today, I don't smoke, don't drink, don't do drugs. I live a normal life.
The treatment by the hands of my Dad did not twist me. Not that I recommend his methods to others, just that was what happened to me.
Eagle
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Eagle,
Are you SURE that's "normal"? :D
(just kidding... but, good for you anyway!)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HAPe4me
I thought we all might enjoy this store sign I was sent today:
HAP
Edited by HAPe4meLink to comment
Share on other sites
Sushi
Must be a popular sign, Hap. I saw that sign at a coffee shop here in Michigan.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Hap, I wasn't using you as an example on the boundaries or running wild but thank you for your replies.
Also what I was referring to ownership being given over to the child is we already have in place a system that will allow a child to sue their parents, which perhaps was appropriate in some cases but it also reflects allowing the children to make such decisions gives them ownership. A child is not mature enough to make such choices on their own.
Nor should we raise them like the world revolves around them. I was thrilled to have my only son after having been told I would never be able to have children. But in my gratefulness I did not make him the master of the home because I was so thankful to have a child. I see that in homes today where they make the child the most important thing in the family. That isn't healthy for anyone, especially the child.
Those were my thoughts on that one and I could have elaborated I know.
Satori is enjoying you I hope you know.
But you know he'll be back to reclaim don't ya.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.