Ban smacking, children's tsar urges
Discussion
ofcorsa said:
But surely you are relying on the memory of that violence to influence future decisions or are you advocating constant reinforcement?
Neither. Situations are temporally specific. A short slap to indicate a wrong behaviour is internalised during development to merely allow a moment of reflection towards a future behaviour. The memory does not exist nor does the threat need to be maintained - if applied properly and timely. Psychological techniques tend to affect all behaviours rather than just temporally specific unthinking actions - anxieties carry over to all actions.
Breadvan72 said:
Controlling children by getting a Doberman to bite them? WTAF?
Johnfm, I agree with what you say about labelling. The pro smackers twist language to maintain that smacking is somehow a use of violence that isn't a use of violence. If a position can only be defended by resort to euphemisms and evasions, that may say something about the position.
Oh well, at least we haven't had "I smack with love" for the last few pages.
I'd smack with love. Smacking with any other emotion at the time of the smack is at best counterproductive. If you can't understand the smack with love then its probably best that you don't smack your children.Johnfm, I agree with what you say about labelling. The pro smackers twist language to maintain that smacking is somehow a use of violence that isn't a use of violence. If a position can only be defended by resort to euphemisms and evasions, that may say something about the position.
Oh well, at least we haven't had "I smack with love" for the last few pages.
Edited by Breadvan72 on Thursday 2nd July 07:20
Actually in our house most discipline gets started with a smack, not always me that's doing it I'd add, and ends up with all three of us wielding plastic swords and cushions like one of those early star trek encounters.
However my boys are 17 and 14, and I'm in my early fifties so they are learning that might is right, and alliance and cooperation is king in any situation. I think if its okay for most governments then its okay for my family. My wife awards points for blows delivered vs style of execution when she hasn't got her hands over her face.
I've given up trying to have a sensible conversation on this thread. Too emotive on both sides, and the wierdos are out in force.
I can tell you however that the non smackers will win the day. I have to go to child protection lectures and child case conferences on a regular basis and the criteria for reporting someone to social services is getting lower every year. Smacking your child in a general practice waiting room will almost certainly get you reported to social services child team, as will shouting at your child, or obviously withholding attention as a form of mental cruelty if you abide by our areas current guidelines.
Patients know this, there are posters all over the waiting room and there is no downside to the local authority cracking down even harder so they will. Its easier for them to do this to make sure if a child gets injured its not their guidelines fault. Social services are inundated with these sort of referrals at the moment.
As a for instance a patient reported to one of our receptionists that a child in the waiting room was making a lot of noise and 'playing mother up', mum told the child 'wait till I get you home'. That was enough for the incident to be reported to us by the patient sitting next to her. After discussion at our practice that was discussed with our local child protection team and their recommendation was to report it to social service safeguarding team.
So this whole conversation is rather after the horse has bolted. I don't think there is a GP in the country that faced with a child reporting smacking wouldn't refer nowadays.
I personally think, that giant brush, as one poster put it, is bonkers, and people like breadvan et al are at the forefront of nanny state which keeps dabbling in things it either doesn't understand, or strives to have control over despite its known obvious failings. We all know of course the statistics of abuse or violence against a child in state care.
However all that said it doesn't change to overriding direction of current society as voted for by its electors. Smacking, or even threatening to smack your child where health professionals are around won't end in a discussion, it'll end in reporting.
Obviously too many of you don't smack with love.
WestyCarl said:
hornetrider said:
For example, don't walk on the dwarf wall as you may fall and bump your head. She's generally pretty good (3 next week), but occasionally she'll be doing things she's previously been told not to do. I don't call this type of behaviour seeking love or approval, I call it pushing boundaries.
and this would deserve a "smack"?With these feet said:
I said in my post my dog might bite. I warn my son because the dogs too old to know any different.
Your dog should know its position in the hierarchy as BELOW your child. If it's doesn't, it's entirely your fault. The dogs not too old, you just haven't trained it properly. You should teach your child not to annoy your dog and the dog not to show aggression to your child. It's not difficult is it? I deplore the culture of reporting people to social services for stern words, but that is a long way from smacking.
Presumably many smackers would deplore the beating of children with straps or sticks, but only a few decades ago such methods were standard. The smackers presumably are content that some indeterminate but lesser amount of force is just the Goldilocks mean. The rest of us think that it is time to confine the move away from force.
Presumably many smackers would deplore the beating of children with straps or sticks, but only a few decades ago such methods were standard. The smackers presumably are content that some indeterminate but lesser amount of force is just the Goldilocks mean. The rest of us think that it is time to confine the move away from force.
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 2nd July 12:27
el stovey said:
Your dog should know its position in the hierarchy as BELOW your child. If it's doesn't, it's entirely your fault. The dogs not too old, you just haven't trained it properly. You should teach your child not to annoy your dog and the dog not to show aggression to your child. It's not difficult is it?
Oh no, the dog knows his place, only it, like a small child, likes to do things it shouldnt if it thinks it can get away with it - like get on the new sofa or sleep on the freshly made bed... As was said earlier though, children will push the limits and regardless of how well trained you think your animal may be,they are animals and when hurt or scared may well turn round and bite. Breadvan72 said:
The rest of us think that it is time to confine the move away from physical force.
EFA.The force being advocated instead being induced anxiety (fear of loss of possessions/privileges/freedoms) .
So how well will the world turn out when smacking/shouting/bribing/removal of freedom (grounding)/removal of possessions (internet is a right you know) are all banned under the concept of being civilised?
I suspect civilisation will become a thing of the past......
Breadvan72 said:
Controlling children by getting a Doberman to bite them? WTAF?
That is not what was said. Twisting words & misrepresention is far below your usual standard.What was said was that the dog chose to discipline them as she would her own puppies; no harm & it worked perfectly.
Jinx said:
Breadvan72 said:
The rest of us think that it is time to confine the move away from physical force.
EFA.The force being advocated instead being induced anxiety (fear of loss of possessions/privileges/freedoms) .
So how well will the world turn out when smacking/shouting/bribing/removal of freedom (grounding)/removal of possessions (internet is a right you know) are all banned under the concept of being civilised?
I suspect civilisation will become a thing of the past......
julian64 said:
As a for instance a patient reported to one of our receptionists that a child in the waiting room was making a lot of noise and 'playing mother up', mum told the child 'wait till I get you home'. That was enough for the incident to be reported to us by the patient sitting next to her. After discussion at our practice that was discussed with our local child protection team and their recommendation was to report it to social service safeguarding team.
1) What happened in the end?2) What should a parent do in that situation? "If you don't behave you won't get sweets later" is just as much mental torture is it not? Or is it now physical abuse because you're threatening to feed them sugar (OMG POISON!) later if they behave? Oh, I get it, "If you are a good boy, I will give you some celery."
The dog now thinks it's okay to bare its teeth at children and to nibble at them. I've had plenty of dogs, lots with incredible mentality and caring nature for kids however, such behaviour from the dog AND children is not acceptable at all and you should've stepped in well before that happened.
I don't smack my child, I don't let the dog do the discipline. The only physical discipline I've needed to do is pick the child up and place them in time out or to stop them from harming themselves.
I don't smack my child, I don't let the dog do the discipline. The only physical discipline I've needed to do is pick the child up and place them in time out or to stop them from harming themselves.
Pan Pan Pan said:
Jinx said:
Breadvan72 said:
The rest of us think that it is time to confine the move away from physical force.
EFA.The force being advocated instead being induced anxiety (fear of loss of possessions/privileges/freedoms) .
So how well will the world turn out when smacking/shouting/bribing/removal of freedom (grounding)/removal of possessions (internet is a right you know) are all banned under the concept of being civilised?
I suspect civilisation will become a thing of the past......
Hugo a Gogo said:
or it could be because those children have learned that a smack is a useful conflict-resolution tool, from their parents love-filled smacks, so apply the same to their teachers
I used to get a hiding when I was young, and I never chinned a teacher. Most of my peers are the same...hornetrider said:
Timmy40 said:
A loved and well cared for child will not need anything more than non physical discipline, like Dogs fundamentally they seek approval and affection from adults.
What a load of twaddle, do you have children yourself? 
Young children push behavioural boundaries all the time. By that I mean doing things they've been implicitly told not to do, time and time again. It is a constant challenge to make them stop doing disallowed behaviour.
Is this seeking approval or affection?! I think not.
Rovinghawk said:
That is not what was said. Twisting words & misrepresention is far below your usual standard.
What was said was that the dog chose to discipline them as she would her own puppies; no harm & it worked perfectly.
Read it again. Some psycho thinks it acceptable for a dog to discipline children. What was said was that the dog chose to discipline them as she would her own puppies; no harm & it worked perfectly.
hornetrider said:
Hugo a Gogo said:
or it could be because those children have learned that a smack is a useful conflict-resolution tool, from their parents love-filled smacks, so apply the same to their teachers
I used to get a hiding when I was young, and I never chinned a teacher. Most of my peers are the same...The idea that the only alternative to smacking is mental torture is laughable. Try using neither. Try not regarding children as antagonists or as animals. My daughter is ten. She is not perfect, and nor am I, but she has never had a tantrum and has never needed to be yelled at, threatened, deprived of privileges, sent to sit on her own, or any of that. We talk to her. She listens. No psychological warfare or hand to hand combat required.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff