Voices
in
Japan

have your say

What are your views on parents hitting their children as a means of discipline?

56 Comments

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

56 Comments
Login to comment

I do not condone it. However, I believe parents are the best candidate in assessing the effective approach in disciplining their children. After all, they know their children the best. I believe hitting children is an abuse and in extreme cases, very detrimental to the child's psychological growth and development as well as pychosocial growth and development. There are other methods of disciplining children without the physical abuse such as: timeout, an early bedtime, or withholding a favorite toy for a period of time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I have always noted that pain is an extremely effective social modifier. Granted care must be taken to not damage the child as they may still have work to do, so implements like baseball bats are simply not a good idea. I do however agree with nusre13, there are other methods of disciplining children, psychological control can be achieved through fear of what might happen rather than what will happen. Disciplining our children is very important today, without real discipline our children could grow up seriously damaged, if physical pain is the answer in your home you must not shy away from it, in fact learn to share & enjoy it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Corporal punishment is a viable, time-tested form of discipline. It must, of course, be administered with fair warning, full reasoning, and loving support thereafter. It provides children with a "breathing space": The memory of physical pain is often enough to deter children from wayward behaviour, and gives them the opportunity to discover the benefits of good behaviour.

It should always be a last resort as well. Even then, care should be taken to ensure that no permanent physical damage is done to the child.

It's a nice theory, but it works. The only negative memories I have of my parents smacking me is when I felt it was unjustified.

Witholding Toys, early bedtime, timeout etc. also cause a child pain. In this sense the are just as much abuse as a smack on the bottom. In fact, there is just as much potential for misuse of those options, as any social worker who has found a kid locked up in a cupboard all day will attest.

Teaching children positive behaviour requires consequences, and all of these consequences are going to hurt the child. Warning, reasoning and support after the event, however, will eventually turn those consequences into a valuable experience, no matter if they are physical or psychological.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's a nice theory, but it works.

Whoops. My editor was asleep there!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Inflicting pain on kids is not disciplining them. It is bullying them. A good reflection of the intelligence of parents is how they handle their kids. Simple parents have simple solutions - "Whack!" - What do kids learn from being beaten into submission? I have four kids between 1 and 19 years old. None have ever been hit as punishment and are they dis-functional or out of control. Anyone who condones any sort of physical punishment on children needs to read 'Taming Toddlers' by Dr. Green. You will learn more about taming yourself than taming toddlers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

People who hit their kids just show them it's OK to be bullies, that might is right. I would like for those people to be smacked around the head by giant kids.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Demoralizing to hit or be hit. If I can't accept their counterargument over what I want them to do, I threaten withdrawal of pocket money (when they weren't earning); now, withdrawal of food service. ( ^‐^ ) ♪♪ WORKS. Try for yourselves.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That they have no clue how to explain to their kid what is right and wrong and give well thought out examples of what happens if you violate them. Hitting a kid is an "in the moment" reaction to frustration on the parents part.

Saw a sad incident yesterday. Mom, dad and kid waiting in coffee shop for their coffee. Kid up on one of the chairs. Dad tells him to get down, kid ignores him. dad slaps kid in face, grabs his shirt and yanks him down. Kid starts crying really loud. Dad becomes embarassed and tries to pacify kid with sweet talk. Doesn't work. Dad grabs kid and pulls him outside. Mom, throughout the whole encounter, is staring at her cell phone. Kid comes running back in a few minutes later, to get comfort from mom. As soon as kid reaches mom, she turned to go and pick up their drinks, effectively doing her best to ignore the whole situation, while dad waited outside.

This little kid is the future of Japan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't believe violence ever achieves good results.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

hit, whack, smack ... all seem to point toward abuse. Spank, on the other hand, is not necessarily about administering pain, but about control. This is effective for children under five to imprint on children that certain behaviour is not tolerated (i.e. not a substitute for inattentive/lazy parenting in bamboohat's example), in most cases other forms of control should be used.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh no, not this old potato again.

Wot Disillusioned and Deguchisan said.

It's scary that so many so-called adults equate 'discipline' with physical and/or mental violence.

'My Dad used to hit me and it did me no harm, so I discipline my kids by hitting them' - a common argument in favour of violent discipline, and the proponent seems unaware of the fact that his Dad's actions did harm him - -it turned him into a Dad Who Hits His Kids.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think it is important to realize that there is a very fine line between hitting your kids for disciplinary reasons and just hitting them (because you can). Despite having grown up in a household where my grandfather could literally kill you with a stare (this is a chap who put me off the idea of smoking at the age of 5 by organizing for me to see an autopsy), I was brought up to believe that good manners, etc., among children are the result of rigid (non-violent) discipline within the home. I handle my kids in the same way, on a day to day basis, they are taught what is right (acceptable) and what is wrong (unacceptable). As such, I have never had to raise my hands to them. If my kids do act up, however, there is also Plan B. I set the dog on them (5 minutes rough and tumble with our larger dog is enough to tie anybody out).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If my kids do act up, however, there is also Plan B. I set the dog on them

If they act up, they get to play with the dog? You reward acting up?

:-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

My parents never hit me, but they always said it was definitely possible, and I believed it. This is why my friend R says I have no fear. Her mother used to beat her kids terribly and my friend R has a lot of fear, even in adulthood. She has a lot of nervousness and anxiety as well. I think it's from walking on eggshells so much of the time with her mother. What my parents would do is take away my privileges. This especially hurt when I was in high school - no phone, no friends. Also, my dad was Catholic, so having to listen to his long rants full of blame, shame & guilt were a major deterrent to me.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

the decision should soley be from the parents. I believe that anyone prying into other families' affairs destroys the family's dependency on each other. To make a law restricting particular punishments can never be reinforced.

I do remember getting swats on the rear-end by the principal when i was in middle-school. there was no regulations on how to swat. when i got to high school, there was an actual system and protocol. "extend arm out with paddle at 90 degrees, count to 5 and using gravitational pull, touch tush lightly." there was an actual paper on how to swat. it didnt hurt at all, but the embarassment was painful.

I dont think that i would do such punishments when i have children. it is pointless and i personally couldnt live with the guilt what i had done to my child. if my child acts up, i think that would be my fault.

if we turn this around and say that a law was inacted for ALL parents to use corporal punishment (you think only scolding is enough and not use corporal punishment), would you still do what the law requires you to do? no. we are humans and we are not perfect. even prying into other families' affairs isnt perfect either.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I would draw the line at breaking bones. Bruises and some bleeding are effective in teaching a child what not to do (get out of the way of the TV, shut up during the game, etc). But, breaking bones goes a little too far.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think that every parent does it a different way. I was brought up where getting hit was a last resort. I was taught what was right and what was wrong. If I was hit it was because I chose not to follow those simple rules. The punishment always fit the crime. Trust me, I did receive a lecture before I was hit. But it wasn't a punch or kick. It was a spanking. That taught me never to make the same mistake twice or simply not get caught for making that mistake. I knew what was right and what was wrong. I will raise my child the same way. Until someone pays all my bills and takes the responsibility of raising my child then there is no one to tell me that I am wrong in what I am doing. I am not breaking the law so discipline my child is a home issue. Not a society one.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Some posters here seem to feel they don't need violence because they are pretty skilful at administering mental torture.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Notginger: Some posters here seem to feel they don't need violence because they are pretty skilful at administering mental torture.

I have not even read the thread yet, but I have no doubt that is as true as it is morbidly funny!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is an old one, brought back to life. I agree with poster saying a little touch to let them know they were wrong after the verbal warning is ok in my book. Beating your kid till they cry to sleep...not good. Also, as cmeandu stated " Until someone pays all my bills and takes the responsibility of raising my child then there is no one to tell me that I am wrong in what I am doing. I am not breaking the law so discipline my child is a home issue. Not a society one."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm pretty sure I was given a little spank if I misbehaved when I was a toddler. I've never bullied anyone and turned out okay.

Children should never be hit with force to injure.

Pulling earlobes however was quite effective with me.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@moonbeams: Pulling earlobes can cause inner ear damage and hearing loss. Not a good idea. I swat the fatty tissue on the glutus maximus (butt) when warrented does the least damage.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Depends on what you mean by "hitting". If you mean light to moderate spanking or a smack on the hand then I'm for it, provided it is administered appropriately according to the child and the situation, at the parent's discretion. If you mean slapping, punching, or beating with a belt/other object, then a I am dead set against it.

For the record, I was spanked on occasion (thought not much, as I was a good little boy!) and I have turned out just fine; I am about as mild mannered as they come.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Cleo - I think I wrote "set the dog on them" rather than "play with the dog." With an animal big enough to crush you (if he sits on you), 5 minutes rough and tumble with our larger dog is usually more than enough to straighten out the most difficult of children.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tee hee timorborder, did you miss the little smiley in my post?

I wrote "set the dog on them" .... With an animal big enough to crush you (if he sits on you)

Is that a typo for "sit the dog on them"?

It's possible (and most effective) to train a dog without resorting to violence. Why settle for anything less with the kids?
0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am absolutely against it! Beating up your own children is insane. Children should grow up with love and kindness and not violence from their parents which lead to them hating their parents for the rest of their lives.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am absolutely against it! Beating up your own children is insane. Children should grow up with love and kindness and not violence from their parents which lead to them hating their parents for the rest of their lives.

And we all know what children in Japan do to their parents after years of torment...

Be kind to your kids folks. You never know when you'll wake up to a kitchen knife staring you in the face.

S!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

AS i child I got my share of the whip. As a responsible parent, I disapprove of constant hitting, but once in a while, its good to keep things in balance. Of course hitting your own child makes u feel worthless but it needs to be done,more times with boys than with girls.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Depends on how you define this.

A slight slap on the hand for doing something bad or a black eye? There's a line somewhere. "Hit" can be defined many ways.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think hitting as discipline is a hard issue. I know for me, as a child, I would have never needed to be hit. I was (as it was the 70s/80s).

I think parents need to work harder at knowing their child and trying to explain things to them. I think most to all children should be able to be reasoned with so they understand WHY they shouldn't do something. If the proper time has been taken and emotional support given to a child, you should be able to reason with them at a certain age. This may not always be the case. But hitting your child, because they don't listen (because you haven't given them the knowledge, time, love, and emotional support) is pretty terrible and rather immoral.

Some people / personality types seem to need more than just a reasonable explanation however. Regardless, I still think that if those people / kids had someone who tried to understand them, learn about them, spend time with them, those personality traits could be "avoided" or controlled in some way.

Of course, I'm not a parent. So, I'm sure it's easier said than done.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Kids probably don't mind it as it's better than being ignored.

I haven't found it to be necessary yet. I have a really powerful evil eye.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

i've been brought up in the 'spare the rod and spoil the child' environment. of course spanking was always the last resort.... when reasoning and scolding fails.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

it should be done more frequently, especially in japan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

not necessary...I have a great kid...never spanked or hit him once.... hitting a kid is a sign of desperation..parents saying I lost

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am a believer in "Spare the rod, and spoil the child" I know that some parents abuse their children and also their responsibilities, but children need discipline. A smack on the backside never did anyone any harm. If there had been more such discipline of the brats going around today when they were younger, maybe society would not be in the shambles it is in today. I dont like the "parents hitting their chldren" part of the sentence above this thread. It is not a question of "hitting" because that implies violence for violence` sake. The act of discipline by smacking a child on his/her posterior is actually an act of love, to produce in the child a better personality in the future so that he/she will not be a pain in the ass to everyone else for the rest of his/her life.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan still has capital punsihment, just like Japan's master, the United States. Hitting prepares humans for the reality of life. Do something wrong and you will be hurt.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think this "hitting kids turns them into bullies" line of argument is nonsense. From my observations, the bullies are the ones who have never been disciplined.

When I was a kid if I got a slap on the head I didn't think "Oh I've been slapped so that means it's OK for me to go and slap other kids". Children don't think like that. What I thought was: 1. "Ouch" 2. "I've done something wrong". 3. "I'd better not do that again".

I think that happy children start from a base of strict discipline. If the parent decides that a short sharp slap as a last resort is part of that discipline then that is absolutely fine.

People who campaign against hitting kids should be put in charge of an out-of-control class of spoilt brats for a month and then see how they get on. I mean, what would you do if you try your trendy "time out" approach and the kids just laugh in your face?

Of course, I do accept that some kids are as good as gold and never need a slap. That's great and if you have a child like that then you are truly lucky. But I also think this modern love-and-peace approach to child rearing is in some cases creating a bunch of selfish monsters who have difficulty accepting authority and as a result are limiting their choices in life.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The act of discipline by smacking a child on his/her posterior is actually an act of love, to produce in the child a better personality in the future so that he/she will not be a pain in the ass to everyone else for the rest of his/her life.

Well said. Couldn't agree more.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think that happy children start from a base of strict discipline.

So do I. That involves setting down clear boundaries and providing solid incentives for sticking with them. Carrots work a lot better than sticks.

Children don't think like that.

Right. They think, 'Oh, so that's how I get someone smaller than me to do what I want.'

What I thought was: 1. "Ouch" 2. "I've done something wrong". 3. "I'd better not do that again".

Or more likely, 'I'd better not get caught doing that again'. It's like drivers who speed. When they get pulled over and given a ticket, they don't think, 'Right, I've been punished, I'll never speed again'. They think, 'I'd better watch out for speed traps in future.' If punishment worked, there'd be no one driving over the speed limit, no one parking where they shouldn't. Or maybe it would be a good idea for the traffic cops to paddle your bottom then and there, instead of giving you a ticket? And if not, why not, if it's so effective?

I do accept that some kids are as good as gold and never need a slap.

There isn't a Goody-Two-Shoes gene, so it must be that the way kids are brought up has something to do with them being 'good' (never yet met a kid that was 'good as gold', with all the nuances of perfection that suggests. Even kids are human). Give a child love, affection and guidance from the start, and there's no reason for it ever to 'need' a slap. It seems to me it's more the parents who feel the 'need' to dish out the slaps, either out of frustration or as an 'easy' alternative to setting boundaries and providing the incentives to follow them - which, I admit, can be hard work. But no one ever said raising a child was easy.

I mean, what would you do if you try your trendy "time out" approach and the kids just laugh in your face?

By the time you get to that state, discipline has already failed. It starts way, way before a child is old enough to attend any kind of class. And I'm sure I'm not the only parent who would be up in arms at the thought of my child being put in the cars of a slap-happy teacher.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am absolutely against it! Beating up your own children is insane. Children should grow up with love and kindness and not violence from their parents which lead to them hating their parents for the rest of their lives.

And we all know what children in Japan do to their parents after years of torment...

Be kind to your kids folks. You never know when you'll wake up to a kitchen knife staring you in the face.

I am sorry, but that's over the top.So you are for love, against hate? you like peace and you dislike war? Kids who are not disciplined are the ones who become a potential danger. Look at today japanese yound men: a generation of spoiled, angry weaklings, who were never told NO and who actually have absolutely no limit when it's about their little comfort. The fact is that very immature girls are bringing their kids alone because daddy is too busy having fun with his bucho. Those chicks take all the decision concerning the kid (that are usually wrong)and raise their kids as if it were a pet.Every single mother I've met in Japan spoil their kid and are pretty much beeing spat at in the process. I remember one of them saying: when my baby cries, I want to cry too...WTF!!! Resorting to appropriate and proportional violence must be used as an ultima ratio, of course. But, talking about Japan, a lot of "smack" and "spank" would have probably saved several lives, if you catch my drift.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry: I was actually quoting spidey in my four first lines.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Kids who are not disciplined are the ones who become a potential danger.

In don't see anyone saying kids shouldn't be disciplined. The question is whether that discipline should take the form of parents hitting their children.

And the answer is No.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And the answer is No.

Wow, that's one hell of an argument. As I said in my previous post, smacking kids should be done as an ultima ratio, when absolutely everything had been tried. Smacking a kid pretty much means you failed, but it has to be done if the kid's naughtiness is over the top. Japan and its monster parents is definitely the country that prolly spoil their kids the most: look at their young generation of me-me-me who cannot stand any contrariety. I was smacked about once a year by my mom when I was really naughty, and I am all fine today, and I am actually grateful to my mom. We smacked kids for 5000 years, and now we've been stopping giving them a rare but firm warning through smacking them since the past 20 years, we obvously see that just forbiding them to play with their playstation for one afternoon is not enough.

And by the way, I believe that parents who don't want to resort to any kind of physical punishment is somehow making an experience and are challenging themsleves, more than thinking about their kid. A lot of parents are just posers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What are your views on parents hitting their children as a means of discipline?

Well i was hit/slapped when i was younger, and one of my friends parents hit there kids with a wooden sppon accross the back of there legs. I dont get hit anymore cause im 18 "An Adult" now. But i believe its a quick, not thought out punishment for a child. So not a good idea.

I think clear rules and boundaries with good punishment not involving hitting the child will do just as well. If it acually effects the child then it would be a good punishment.. "No TV for the rest of the week" even though they cant miss episodes of some show.. great punishment was used on myself T_T lol, maybe cancel them going to that party they had been looking forward to all week, no computer, no xbox/ps3/wii, are just some examples of punishments not involving hitting a child.

But one thing all parents/guardians should remember when decided a punishment. It MUST fit the crime. like.. say the child had drawn on the walls, dont ground them for a month, give them extra chores and they now cant see any friends after school or on weekends.. that DOESNT fit the crime.. sure it was naughty but that punishment would be over doing it.

My mum does those kinda punishments with my brother and my dad hates it when she does.. cause it doesnt fit the crime and he cant even have a say.

Another thing is, if it is a really bad thing like involving the police discuss the punishment together if you have a husband/wife. That way you'll both be on the same page with the punishment. ;]

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The fact is, hitting kids is often the act of out-of-control parents who have lost it.

Well, in this case I'll have to agree, but this is not note exactly a mean of discipline. Open question:is it possible to smack a kid in cold blood?

Yes, definitely, as long as it is done as the last of the last mean to discipline your kid.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wot PaddySmash said, except -

I know Cleo wouldn't do that much

I have slapped my kids, when they were being little terrors - and I lost it. Only a couple of times, and both times I was at the end of my tether - and in the wrong. I regretted it and was ashamed of myself. Thankfully a couple of slaps doesn't seem to have had any lasting effect on them.

smacking kids should be done as an ultima ratio, when absolutely everything had been tried

Thing is, when everything else has been tried and still the kid is playing up, chances are the parent is at the end of his/her tether and as far from being ultimately rational as it's possible to get. No child should ever be punished just because a parent has lost the plot.

is it possible to smack a kid in cold blood? Yes, definitely, as long as it is done as the last of the last mean to discipline your kid.

I suppose it is possible to smack a kid in cold blood - but definitely not when you're at the end of your tether and flailing around for a 'last means' of disciplining the kid.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Right. They think, 'Oh, so that's how I get someone smaller than me to do what I want.'

I think there is no evidence for this and it's just not true. As I said, bullies are usually the kids who have never been disciplined themselves. I have observed this when I was a child and again as an adult watching kids. I doubt very much whether anyone has observed a child become a bully as a result of strict discipline from parents which involved smacking as a last resort.

If punishment worked, there'd be no one driving over the speed limit, no one parking where they shouldn't. Or maybe it would be a good idea for the traffic cops to paddle your bottom then and there, instead of giving you a ticket? And if not, why not, if it's so effective?

This is just ridiculous. Measured punishment in society is acceptable and necessary. I mean what's your idea to control speeding drivers? Give them a gold star for every day they keep within the speed limit? Perhaps they could proudly stick the stars in a neat line on the rear bumper. It sounds like a great scheme...

Or maybe it would be a good idea for the traffic cops to paddle your bottom then and there, instead of giving you a ticket?

If they're female cops I support this idea strongly.

There isn't a Goody-Two-Shoes gene, so it must be that the way kids are brought up has something to do with them being 'good'

I think you are wrong. I thing some kids are predisposed to be very good, obedient and docile. Other kids are more rowdy. Still others seem to be something akin to Satan's devil spawn. There are all kinds of kids and the happy-clappy "let's have a time out and take deep breaths" approach may work with some kids but others may need a firmer approach. If the parents decide a firm smack as a last resort in some circumstances is necessary I think it is absolutely fine, particularly with rowdier and naughtier kids.

By the time you get to that state, discipline has already failed. It starts way, way before a child is old enough to attend any kind of class.

Maybe you've inadvertently hit the nail on the head. The problem is not parents who use a smack as a last resort, the problem is parents who in no way discipline their kids. That IMHO is a hundred times worse then a slap on the bum.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

parents who cannot control themselves/their anger, should never (be allowed to) raise their hands towards their children. only those who can observe the difference between discipline and abuse can properly judge when and what type of corporal punishment is warranted for a given offence/situation.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am a believer in "Spare the rod, and spoil the child" I know that some parents abuse their children and also their responsibilities, but children need discipline. A smack on the backside never did anyone any harm. If there had been more such discipline of the brats going around today when they were younger, maybe society would not be in the shambles it is in today. I dont like the "parents hitting their chldren" part of the sentence above this thread. It is not a question of "hitting" because that implies violence for violence` sake. The act of discipline by smacking a child on his/her posterior is actually an act of love, to produce in the child a better personality in the future so that he/she will not be a pain in the ass to everyone else for the rest of his/her life

I completely agree with this. Thank you for being a realist ;) There are a lot of 'o-shiris' that need a good smacking in this country, but not Japan alone.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Absolutely not ! Hitting a child means that the parent has lost the argument and their temper.. It's more about the parent letting off steam than giving the child a lesson.

You can discipline your kids without ever hitting them. It just takes more time and attention. As a parent myself, in my experience, the worst-behaved kids are the ones that are shouted at or hit by their parents : never getting a clear explanation for what they did wrong.

People who hit their kids should be ashamed of themselves - it's backward ! It's also been made illegal in 28 countries around the world.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Hitting a child means that the parent has lost the argument and their temper.. It's more about the parent letting off steam than giving the child a lesson."

Why? Why does it mean this? This is getting dogmatic. "Violence is never the answer" dogmatic. What you have written in no way describes my experience growing up. I will freely except that there are many bad partents (or good ones who have temporarily lost it) who fit the bill, but there are plenty of other ones that do not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Measured punishment in society is acceptable and necessary.

Well we certainly accept it, but since it obviously doesn't work (people still drive over the speed limit, and park where they're not supposed to) it hardly seems correct to call it 'necessary'.

I mean what's your idea to control speeding drivers? Give them a gold star for every day they keep within the speed limit? Perhaps they could proudly stick the stars in a neat line on the rear bumper.

Gold stars aren't much of a reward. If cars could be fitted with some kind of device that monitored and recorded the speed at all times and drivers were offered some kind of bonus or reward for, say, every thousand kilometres they drove without going over the limit (eg a discount on road tax, lower insurance premiums etc) you'd find more drivers eager to observe the speed limits even on days when the speed traps weren't in operation.

Maybe you've inadvertently hit the nail on the head. The problem is not parents who use a smack as a last resort, the problem is parents who in no way discipline their kids.

Nuffink inadvertent about it. I repeat, no one is saying kids should not be disciplined, simply that there is no need to discipline a child by hitting it. When smacking is used as a 'last resort' kids quickly learn how far they can go before the parent becomes physical, and will push up to the limit; parent counters by shortening the limit, and after a while the smack becomes the first resort, not the last. It's quick and easy, has some temporary effect and gives the parent the satisfaction of having shown the kid who's boss.

If it's possible to raise children to be upright, moral adults without smacking them (and it is), what kind of parent would choose to smack?

in my experience, the worst-behaved kids are the ones that are shouted at or hit by their parents : never getting a clear explanation for what they did wrong

Yup.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

When smacking is used as a 'last resort' kids quickly learn how far they can go before the parent becomes physical, and will push up to the limit; parent counters by shortening the limit, and after a while the smack becomes the first resort, not the last.

You present this as an inevitable result but of course it's not. It's one possible outcome, and I think a very unlikely one. A much more likely one is that the child learns to be better behaved in general and to respect authority, so that a smack is rarely or never required. That was my experience as a child and I think that will be the result in 99.9% of cases where parents use smacking as part of their strict but fair discipline measures.

If cars could be fitted with some kind of device that monitored and recorded the speed at all times and drivers were offered some kind of bonus or reward for, say, every thousand kilometres they drove without going over the limit (eg a discount on road tax, lower insurance premiums etc) you'd find more drivers eager to observe the speed limits even on days when the speed traps weren't in operation.

This is cloud-cuckoo land, but it's kind of sweet and touching that you think it might work.

Well we certainly accept it (punishment), but since it obviously doesn't work (people still drive over the speed limit, and park where they're not supposed to) it hardly seems correct to call it 'necessary'.

Why stop with speeding? Why not abolish the concept of punishment altogether? Then we could get points for, say, every day we didn't murder someone. And if we did happen to murder someone we would get no points for that particular day...

the worst-behaved kids are the ones that are shouted at or hit by their parents : never getting a clear explanation for what they did wrong.

I think this goes against everyone's experience. The bullies and the nasty kids are the ones who haven't been disciplined properly by their parents.

Not getting a clear explanation is a problem for any discipline method. Most anti-smackers here seem to think it's solely associated with smacking. That's rubbish. As some have already pointed out, non-smacking discipline methods can be considered a kind of mental torture and if there's no explanation of why such a method is being implemented it is equally bad.

When I was a kid and had gotten a clip round the ear, my parents would invariably sit me down later to talk it through. Absolutely fine parenting... strict but fair discipline with the possibility of a smack for severe misdemeanors.

I'm sure the happy-clappy crowd on this forum are doing a good parenting job with their time-outs and withdrawal of privileges etc, but they are wrong to condemn other parents who are doing an equally fine job but who think a smack can be used under certain circumstances as a discipline measure.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Everything needs a stimulus(cause/reason) to give a response(eventuallity) I must say;I agree that smacking kids afew slaps maybe,(NO extremes here)is the only way to raise them upright. When I was a kid,my dad had only two rules;1: I only ask you twice for you to do something - the third time was always a slap. 2:Do all that is required of you and then you can play/do your own stuff. As kids,in the event of getting smacked,the third party will always say such things like;"They are only kids" but as these kids grow up,they tend to lean towards the third party's opinion hence becoming more rebelious to their parents(talking about abuse).S0 merely stopping the kid from watching TV or PS/WII/XBOX is a total waste of time(in my opinion)coz they'll come up with new ways to pass time.BUT,as long as you have the memory of pain,you'll never be tempted to try it again.Take for example an electric shock,with that experience,have you ever again thought of let alone retry picking up a naked electric cable with your bare hands?? PS: Your morals will be judged according to the answer you give to this last question.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It would depend on the offense but in general it is a bad policy.

On the other hand so long as it didn't cross the line to physical assault it is nobody elses business.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It certainly makes the parents feel better.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites