Smacking can lower a child's IQ, study reveals

[Hollywood]

DH just emailed me this article, very interesting....





Smacking can lower child's IQ
Likened to post-traumatic stress
Time out the best disciplinary tool
Herald Sun: Cyber boasting risk to kids (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/pedophiles-trawling-social-networking-sites-for-details-posted-by-parents/story-e6frf7l6-1225779298815?from=news.com.au)
SMACKING, long used by parents to discipline naughty children, could cause more than tears.

Research revealed it can also lower a child's IQ, with those smacked up to three times a week having a lower IQ due to psychological stress.

US-based sociologist Professor Murray Straus, who studied the impact of smacking for 40 years, likened the effects of corporal punishment to post-traumatic stress, affecting a child's mental development, The Daily Telegraph reports (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/lifestyle/spanking-long-used-by-parents-to-discipline-naughty-children-can/story-e6frf00i-1225779278575).

He called on governments to outlaw corporal punishment.

After studying 800 toddlers aged between two and four over a four-year period, he found those who were subjected to smacking had an IQ five points lower than that of a child who wasn't physically disciplined.

"The results of this research have major implications for the well-being of children across the globe," he said.

"All parents want smart children. This research shows that avoiding smacking and correcting misbehaviour in other ways can help that."

Children aged five to nine years who were smacked regularly had an IQ 2.8 points lower. Dr Straus said children who constantly faced physical punishment lived in fear and suffered stress, which was associated with poorer academic performance.

While not an advocate of smacking, Sydney psychologist Dr Judith Kennedy said parents who gave an occasional tap on the bottom should not fear damaging their child.

"But a child who is suppressed through physical punishment regularly is going to behave differently," Dr Kennedy said.

Melbourne child psychologist Michael Carr-Gregg said many factors contributed to intelligence and he found it hard to believe that spanking was one, the Herald Sun reports (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/research-shows-kids-suffer-more-than-parents-know/story-e6frf7l6-1225779327104).

Dr Carr-Gregg said hitting children should never be the main disciplinary tool - giving them time out was the best option.

"But while parents should never whack their kids on the head, I don't believe the odd tap on the bum traumatises them," he said.

"I can't come at this politically correct stuff that says that a little smack on the bum makes parents child abusers."

Father of three Con Zoumis said spanking should be used only as a last resort.

"It's not to hurt them, it's just to make them snap out of a tantrum or stubborn behaviour," he said. "And if you threaten to spank someone you have to carry it through."

Link to article (http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,26122566-2,00.html?from=igoogle+gadget+compact+news_rss)

.....sorry in advance to the mods :o

[FullMoon]

I dont agree with this at all. I think maybe if you where not just smacking your kids but laying into them maybe.. Not just for smacking though..

IMO.

[sockstealingpoltergeist]

I have read oodles of studies about smacking and the harm it causes children. Far too much for me to ignore.

I am now a reformed smacker and feel so bad that i smacked DD when she was younger.:o

[PeppaH]

I dont agree with this at all. I think maybe if you where not just smacking your kids but laying into them maybe.. Not just for smacking though..

IMO.

:iagree: What a load of crap.

[Hollywood]

I dont agree with this at all. I think maybe if you where not just smacking your kids but laying into them maybe.. Not just for smacking though..

IMO.

This is from the article:

While not an advocate of smacking, Sydney psychologist Dr Judith Kennedy said parents who gave an occasional tap on the bottom should not fear damaging their child.


Like you say, it's not talking about parents who give the odd tap on the bum :no:

[PeppaH]

This is from the article:


Like you say, it's not talking about parents who give the odd tap on the bum :no:

Well thats good then. But according to ALOT of hubbers, even a tap on the bum/hand once in a while is child abuse and your ruining your child for life. :no:

[Phyllis Stein]

Well thats good then. But according to ALOT of hubbers, even a tap on the bum/hand once in a while is child abuse and your ruining your child for life. :no:

I think hitting/ smacking/ "tapping" any person is a form of abuse, and don't see any reason to exclude children from it. However, I don't personally believe a light smack "ruins" a child for life, they're far more resilient than that.

Intuitively, I totally get where the research is coming from, I'd like to have a look at it in more detail.

To me, smacking is almost always instigated for behaviours that are normal in children, not "naughty" <-- that's just a label adults apply to the behaviour. The whole idea of smacking is to create an inhibition in the child. If smacking )or other punitive punishment) is a regular response to developmentally normal behaviour, it would be understandable if the child became inhibited more broadly, sticking to conservative or 'safe' behaviour for fear of trying something new and being punished. IQ is at least partly built on creativity, lateral thinking and risk taking, all things which could be inhibited by fear, so it makes sense that smacking as a regular form of "discipline" could affect IQ.

[justmum]

I think hitting/ smacking/ "tapping" any person is a form of abuse, and don't see any reason to exclude children from it. However, I don't personally believe a light smack "ruins" a child for life, they're far more resilient than that.

Intuitively, I totally get where the research is coming from, I'd like to have a look at it in more detail.

To me, smacking is almost always instigated for behaviours that are normal in children, not "naughty" <-- that's just a label adults apply to the behaviour. The whole idea of smacking is to create an inhibition in the child. If smacking )or other punitive punishment) is a regular response to developmentally normal behaviour, it would be understandable if the child became inhibited more broadly, sticking to conservative or 'safe' behaviour for fear of trying something new and being punished. IQ is at least partly built on creativity, lateral thinking and risk taking, all things which could be inhibited by fear, so it makes sense that smacking as a regular form of "discipline" could affect IQ.

:valentine: yep

[sockstealingpoltergeist]

I think hitting/ smacking/ "tapping" any person is a form of abuse, and don't see any reason to exclude children from it. However, I don't personally believe a light smack "ruins" a child for life, they're far more resilient than that.

Intuitively, I totally get where the research is coming from, I'd like to have a look at it in more detail.

To me, smacking is almost always instigated for behaviours that are normal in children, not "naughty" <-- that's just a label adults apply to the behaviour. The whole idea of smacking is to create an inhibition in the child. If smacking )or other punitive punishment) is a regular response to developmentally normal behaviour, it would be understandable if the child became inhibited more broadly, sticking to conservative or 'safe' behaviour for fear of trying something new and being punished. IQ is at least partly built on creativity, lateral thinking and risk taking, all things which could be inhibited by fear, so it makes sense that smacking as a regular form of "discipline" could affect IQ.
:yes:

[PeppaH]

I think hitting/ smacking/ "tapping" any person is a form of abuse, and don't see any reason to exclude children from it. However, I don't personally believe a light smack "ruins" a child for life, they're far more resilient than that.



Thats your opinion. Not mine. :no:

[justmum]

Thats your opinion. Not mine. :no:

Peppah she said "I think" at the beginning. That means it IS her opinion.

[BabelFish]

If you `tap' a child, what's that going to do? Pointless, IMO.

So in order to garner a response a smack has to have some form of pain or shock or fear attached. Otherwise why do it? If you do something to your child that causes them pain or fear or shock, on purpose with intent to cause pain or fear or shock, then that is a form of abuse. It's a mild one, perhaps, but it still is. You can have any opinion about it that you like, but it doesn't change what it is.

[PeppaH]

Peppah she said "I think" at the beginning. That means it IS her opinion.

Umm... Was I debating that in any way or form? No. Its just a statement.

[Lastcenturymum]

Well that must explain why the younger generation (teenagers) reckons the older generation 'is dumb and knows nothing' :rolleyes:

[~Temet Nosce~]

Well that must explain why the younger generation (teenagers) reckons the older generation 'is dumb and knows nothing' :rolleyes:
:laughing: yeah... and I bet the people who did this study were hit with the cane at school.. so why on earth would we bother listening to them when they have 5 points lowered IQ :footinmouth:

It doesn't really bother me either way, I don't/won't ever smack dd, but yes.. I think it is a load of hogwash. There are sooo many other variables that could have affected those childrens IQ. And really.. 5 points? Big deal. I would love my child no matter how many bloody IQ points they had.

[CrankyAndTired]

I dont agree with smacking children for any reason - my opinion is definitely coloured by my personal experience as I was beaten/"smacked" as a child in an abusive way.

However I dont believe all parents that smack their children are guilty of child abuse either.

But to my point.. I think we'd need to know more about the study before trusting its assertions.... A correlation does not equal causation.. and if there is simply a correlation between smacking and lower IQ, there may be other intervention factors involved.

For example wealth is also correlated with increased IQ - but the money does not cause the increase in IQ, there are many factors - one being education.

I just think we need to be careful when digesting the results of any study :)

[Phyllis Stein]

But to my point.. I think we'd need to know more about the study before trusting its assertions.... A correlation does not equal causation.. and if there is simply a correlation between smacking and lower IQ, there may be other intervention factors involved.

For example wealth is also correlated with increased IQ - but the money does not cause the increase in IQ, there are many factors - one being education.

I just think we need to be careful when digesting the results of any study :)


:iagree:

My first thought on reading the article was questioning if they controlled for socioeconomic/ education status.

However, my own thoughts on this study come from having read a fair bit of research into the links between authoritarian parenting and conservative behaviour in adulthood; it's not much of a stretch to see the comparison, though the validity of *this* study is still to be discovered.

Peppa, I respect that your opinion on smacking differs to mine. However, I'd encourage you, like all of us, to be open to new information, even (especially) that which might contradict your position, i.e. to keep an open mind. There's something a lot worse than making poor parenting choices when you don't know better, and that's making the same choices when you do know better.

[mum2bubba]

Smacking, abusive? No.

Being hit in the face with a plastic spoon causing a massive black (or purple) eye, abusive? Hell yes. Or getting your head hit with a broom handle repetatively (sp?) YES. :banghead:

Sorry, but I just can't stand these two things being compared. I was abused as a kid (the plastic spoon on the face and broom handle on the head is what happened to me) and I can tell you right now getting a smack every now and then is NOT abuse.

It makes me angry when people say that I am abusive because I smack every now and then.

[BabelFish]

I don't think it's `abuse' either, in the way that we use that term to refer to child abuse these days.

I said it is a `form' of abuse - and, technically, it is.

[sweetseven]

I dont agree with smacking children for any reason - my opinion is definitely coloured by my personal experience as I was beaten/"smacked" as a child in an abusive way.I prefer to reserve smacking for safety issues. That way it as more impact and is more likely to be effective. Also, it is outright dangerous behaviour that needs to be stomped on fast, and is less flexible to weaning them away from it.

By the way, I've used a two-finger, painless, smack on a young child before. These can sometimes be effective, or completely ignored, depending on the individual in question.

[Sheer Bliss]

I dont agree with smacking children for any reason - my opinion is definitely coloured by my personal experience as I was beaten/"smacked" as a child in an abusive way.

However I dont believe all parents that smack their children are guilty of child abuse either.

But to my point.. I think we'd need to know more about the study before trusting its assertions.... A correlation does not equal causation.. and if there is simply a correlation between smacking and lower IQ, there may be other intervention factors involved.

For example wealth is also correlated with increased IQ - but the money does not cause the increase in IQ, there are many factors - one being education.

I just think we need to be careful when digesting the results of any study :)

:iagree:

Socioeconomic factors would play a larger role IMO and my experience too.

I don't agree smacking is the right way to treat a child, but the article and associated research doesn't hold much truth for me

[BabelFish]

Actually (and this stunned me when I found out) that child abuse, domestic abuse, drug and alcohol abuse and sexual abuse are just as prevalent - if not more so - in affluent areas and areas that are not considered on the lower end of the socioeconomic scale. It blew me away. My husband has a degree in sociology and told me that the `poor people have more abuse' myth is just that - a myth, totally and completely. I was really shocked and surprised, and then ashamed, when I found out.

[Phyllis Stein]

Actually (and this stunned me when I found out) that child abuse, domestic abuse, drug and alcohol abuse and sexual abuse are just as prevalent - if not more so - in affluent areas and areas that are not considered on the lower end of the socioeconomic scale. It blew me away. My husband has a degree in sociology and told me that the `poor people have more abuse' myth is just that - a myth, totally and completely. I was really shocked and surprised, and then ashamed, when I found out.

Me neither. Socioeconomic status is correlated with IQ, though. I suspect this is due to a range of social factors - household stress, education and other opportunities that are economically determined. If the study didn't control for socioeconomic status (which they usually would), then it may have caused an artificial elevation in the degree of correlation. It all comes down to how well other factors were controlled for.

I agree entirely with what you're saying, though.

[elleandsam]

I was smacked on the kid, not often, always an open palm on the butt. And only when the behaviour was beyond naughty and either deliberately disobendient or dangerous. After some time in my room my mum or dad would come in and ask me if I knew why I got a smack, why what I did was wrong and they would also say they loved me. Then I could come out of my room and we would usually do something together or I would go play with my sisters. There was nothing abusive about what they did, and it has not harmed my relationship with them or my intelligence.

I believe smacking should only be used in extreme circumstances or when nothing else works. Dh and I agree we will try time outs, removal of toys and privledges and grounding before a spanking, but we don't see anything wrong with a tap on the butt every once and a while.

And that's our parenting choice.

[BabelFish]

I think it's also important to remember this study says `can' lower IQ, not `does' lower it. Which means that in some instances there has been a correlation, but only in some instances.

It's easy to completely dismiss such things with a grain of salt because they don't fit into our particular paradigm, but it's studies like these that lead to societal change as a whole, so they shouldn't be dismissed outright.

[jaq]

I found this on a genetics blog I like today (www.gnxp.com) ... very relevant points!


People who spank are aggressive posted by Razib @ 9/22/2009 11:11:00 PM


A follow up to the previous post. I keep seeing the research from this paper in the press, Spanking detrimental to children, study says:
Berlin and colleagues found that children who were spanked as 1-year-olds tended to behave more aggressively at age 2, and did not perform as well as other children on a test measuring thinking skills at age 3. The study is published in the journal Child Development.

The idea is that spanking has negative consequences, making children less intelligent and more aggressive. But what do you think? My thought was that there are two other reasons of possible interest:

1) The kids being spanked are more incorrigible in general, which results in more frustration on the part of the parents.

2) The parents themselves are less intelligent, lack impulse control and are aggressive.

The above two traits of course could exhibit heritability betwen parent and child. Yes, there are plenty of confounds; acceptability of spanking varies from culture to culture. But I think the hypothesis that this is just a correlation between heritable traits and the behavior in question explains the why the "effects were somewhat small."

This sort of thought process kicks into action with a lot of the developmental psychology I see being reported in the press. But a headline such as "Aggressive impulsive parents more likely to beat their children" is probably less palatable....

Note: I'm against spanking personally in regards to how I'd raise my children. But I assume that my children wouldn't be totally incorrigible because I was not (those who know me personally might consider this a mischaracterization, but I am not including outlier behavior!).

Food for thought, alright ...

[Maybelline]

I was listening to 3AW ..when the host (forgotten which one )..was talking about this study..his thought was the children that had been smacked had a low IQ anyway..hence why the had been smacked ..rather then the smarter children ..not needing to be smacked...
hope that made sense

[naiwen]

Firstly I would like to say I think abuse is a spectrum with rape and murder at one end and severe criticism and 'taps' at the other, clearly we are all more worried about the severe end of the spectrum but that does not mean that very mild acts of abuse that the parent may think are part of normal discipline are not abuse.

And whilst those who rape and murder clearly need to be in prison for life perhaps those that verbally abuse or mildly physically abuse their children simply need guidance about more effective discipline methods.

I do not find the study unbelieveable but my thoughts are that children's IQ's are not inherently lowered by repeated smacking but instead perhaps they simply cope less well with testing due to fear of giving the wrong answers?

[Hollywood]

I was listening to 3AW ..when the host (forgotten which one )..was talking about this study..his thought was the children that had been smacked had a low IQ anyway..hence why the had been smacked ..rather then the smarter children ..not needing to be smacked...
hope that made sense

I get what you're saying :yes:

I think it is such a hard thing to study, because each person is so different. How do they know that a child was going to be 5 I.Q. points higher had they not been smacked? Likewise, the ones with a higher I.Q., would they have had lower one if they had been smacked?
Tricky :detective:

[mum2cat]

I can see the correlation b/w smacking and lower IQ in the situation where it's the only form of discipline used by the carer. IMO when a carer doesn't have the patience, knowledge or inclination to invest time and effort into other forms of more effective behaviour modification strategies, then it's likely that there's also little time and effort being invested into nurturing the
child's intellectual development and hence lower IQ. I maybe wrong in my assumption though. By the way, smacking on the bum is ok when it's a last resort measure and balanced out by other forms of discipline as well such as time out.

[guerin]

Have they done any studies into parents that yell at children? I' m not talking about the occassional snap because they are about to hurt themselves but those parents that yell and belittle their children constantly. The ones that are frightening.

I think that would be very damaging and very frightening. I actually think that would be more frightening thent he parent who in a controlled and calm manner smacks their child after warning them.

[guerin]

Me neither. Socioeconomic status is correlated with IQ, though. I suspect this is due to a range of social factors - household stress, education and other opportunities that are economically determined. If the study didn't control for socioeconomic status (which they usually would), then it may have caused an artificial elevation in the degree of correlation. It all comes down to how well other factors were controlled for.

I agree entirely with what you're saying, though.

IQ is more often then not determined by genetics. So if a person's parents have a high IQ then they are more likely to have higher paying jobs and careers. These higher paying jobs put them into a higher socio-economic class. Since they have high IQs and IQ is very much determined by genetics thus their children will have a higher IQ.

[Fuchsia!]

Smacking, abusive? No.

Being hit in the face with a plastic spoon causing a massive black (or purple) eye, abusive? Hell yes. Or getting your head hit with a broom handle repetatively (sp?) YES. :banghead:

Sorry, but I just can't stand these two things being compared. I was abused as a kid (the plastic spoon on the face and broom handle on the head is what happened to me) and I can tell you right now getting a smack every now and then is NOT abuse.

It makes me angry when people say that I am abusive because I smack every now and then.

I was smacked as a child and i feel i was abused. Please don't down play the feelings of those who have felt they were abused just because it may not have been as bad as yours.

[sandy cheeks]

Jaxcoop I don’t think she was playing down feelings of abuse I think she was just stating her POV as an abused child.
I was never abused but I was smacked, once because I almost broke dad’s nose with a door that I slammed in his face at 10.
A few friends were abused their parents left marks, used objects (kettle cord ends and hair brushes), and beat them.
I do think there's a difference between abuse and a smack I don’t mean to offend anyone but I have seen abuse and received a smack or 2(or a few more) there is a difference quite a large one IMO.

[Fuchsia!]

Well it doesn't come down to how hard someone was smacked or how bad it was, it depends on how the abused child is emotionally.

Its like saying to a rape victim where the rapist only penetrated her once where as someone was penetrated 100 times. You wouldn't say to her "hey you were only penetrated once, thats not abuse, getting penetrated 50 times is"

[mum2bubba]

I was smacked as a child and i feel i was abused. Please don't down play the feelings of those who have felt they were abused just because it may not have been as bad as yours.

Well, my parents smacked me. I didn't think they were abusive. My step mother gave me black eyes, thats abusive. And I know people have gone through alot worse than me. I was just telling part of MY story. I wasn't trying to down play anything or make anyone feel as though they weren't abused or whatever just because my experience was worse or better. I am just telling my story thats all. :rolleyes:

I was emotionally abused too. I know my parents smacked me out of love and were disciplining me (they used other forms of discipline too) whereas my step mother was just abusive for no reason other than that she hated me and I reminded her of my mother (who passed away when I was a kid by the way). My step mother was (still is) mentally unstable. My parents weren't. Times when I have smacked my kids (a tap on the hand I might add) is because I am trying to teach them right from wrong (and I do use other forms of discipline too) I don't do it because I'm abusive. Far from it.

[mum2bubba]

Well it doesn't come down to how hard someone was smacked or how bad it was, it depends on how the abused child is emotionally.


So if I was happy about my step mother abusing me thats not abuse?

[mum2bubba]

Jaxcoop I don’t think she was playing down feelings of abuse I think she was just stating her POV as an abused child.
I was never abused but I was smacked, once because I almost broke dad’s nose with a door that I slammed in his face at 10.
A few friends were abused their parents left marks, used objects (kettle cord ends and hair brushes), and beat them.
I do think there's a difference between abuse and a smack I don’t mean to offend anyone but I have seen abuse and received a smack or 2(or a few more) there is a difference quite a large one IMO.

Thankyou. And I agree, there is a huge difference between an occasional smack and being beated or whatever especially with objects like belts or cords and whatnot. I smack my kids on occasions and it really gets me so angry and hurt when people basically tell me I am abusive because of it. I am NOT abusive.

[Fuchsia!]

Thankyou. And I agree, there is a huge difference between an occasional smack and being beated or whatever especially with objects like belts or cords and whatnot. I smack my kids on occasions and it really gets me so angry and hurt when people basically tell me I am abusive because of it. I am NOT abusive.

this is no difference if the person feels they were abused then they were abused. You may not think its not abuse but you aren't the one copping it.

What will you say to your children if they come back to you in 20yrs saying that they felt they were being abused by you?

[sandy cheeks]

Jaxcoop I think thats a bit harsh how do you know her kids wont thank her.
I know a few kids never and I mean never been smacked,told off had anything taken from them and they are brats their mum wont smack cos it's abuse but will happly let her lovely ds and dd bite, hit or choke any other child it passes.
If you ask me they need a little tap on the bum insted of "oh little jonny dont do that" for the 1000th time in a hour.

(http://www.bubhub.com.au/community/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=74)

[Fuchsia!]

i changed to If instead of when. I didn't mean it to sound harsh, it was a genuine question.

I often wonder what my mother would say to me if i was to ask her.

[sandy cheeks]

Well might sound stange but here is why I want to thank mum and dad for giving me a smack.

For the smack I got when I almost broke dads nose and blood was pooring out. I slamed the door in his face because I was 10 and felt like it.

The time I was 15 and wanted jeans dry I hurled abuse at my mum because she was unable to dry my jeans in the 4hour time frame I had given her so she threw a lavender dish at me thanks for doing that and not letting me get away with being a b!t@h

The time dad bit me I was 4 and had a biting fetish I would bite anyone or anything I had bitten the dog and drew blood then decided to bite my older cousin I again drew blood dad bit me, I never bit again (my dad didn't draw blood)

The time I got a tap on the bum because I was walking out the frount of a department store onto the main road I was 3ish.

I think my parents did the right thing and I dont think what they did was abuse some of the times I was a right little cow.
Funny thing is my brother has never copped a smack (unless from me :devil6:)and I have better school results, manners and can behave around people and wont have public meltdowns strange that.

[mum2bubba]

this is no difference if the person feels they were abused then they were abused. You may not think its not abuse but you aren't the one copping it.

What will you say to your children if they come back to you in 20yrs saying that they felt they were being abused by you?

Well, I hope that never happens but if it does I will apologise to them, I will also explain the difference between abuse and discipline.

[SimplyMum]

Firstly, I don't think smacking (in the 'spirit' of smacking NOT abuse!) is abuse.

I think it turns into abuse when taken too far. I don't think smacking works for every parent and child, but it does for some. I think as a parent, it is our job to work out what method of descipline works for us, our children and our family.

I know I have tried time out- it doesn't work for DS.

I have tried taking certain toys/privlidges away- that also doesn't work.

I have read books (one book I have recently read and while the whole concept didn't work for us- I got allot of use out of it and still use numerous points from the book).

For me, my DS, and my family- reasoning works. Sometimes, I need to go further and give a smack with a follow up talk with DS.

I have found that DS likes to push the boundries- test the limits so to speak, which is fine, kids do it. But when I have ask him to stop what he is doing, warned him and given him ample opportunity to change his behaviour. When he ignores my request than he gets a smack. After that, I find that his behaviour is reasonable/acceptable.

I don't think I am abusing him. I think kids need those boundries- it makes them feel safe and secure. This is the method that has worked for our family in allowing DS to feel safe and secure in his sourroundings and what is expected from him.

I will also not apologise for doing what I thought was right by my DS and my family. I will be sorry that they feel this way but I will not apologise for desciplining them.

[BabelFish]

Well might sound stange but here is why I want to thank mum and dad for giving me a smack.

For the smack I got when I almost broke dads nose and blood was pooring out. I slamed the door in his face because I was 10 and felt like it.

The time I was 15 and wanted jeans dry I hurled abuse at my mum because she was unable to dry my jeans in the 4hour time frame I had given her so she threw a lavender dish at me thanks for doing that and not letting me get away with being a b!t@h

The time dad bit me I was 4 and had a biting fetish I would bite anyone or anything I had bitten the dog and drew blood then decided to bite my older cousin I again drew blood dad bit me, I never bit again (my dad didn't draw blood)

The time I got a tap on the bum because I was walking out the frount of a department store onto the main road I was 3ish.

I think my parents did the right thing and I dont think what they did was abuse some of the times I was a right little cow.
Funny thing is my brother has never copped a smack (unless from me :devil6:)and I have better school results, manners and can behave around people and wont have public meltdowns strange that.
So what you're saying is that it took more than 15 years for their methods to work?

[PeppaH]

Jaxcoop I think thats a bit harsh how do you know her kids wont thank her.
I know a few kids never and I mean never been smacked,told off had anything taken from them and they are brats their mum wont smack cos it's abuse but will happly let her lovely ds and dd bite, hit or choke any other child it passes.
If you ask me they need a little tap on the bum insted of "oh little jonny dont do that" for the 1000th time in a hour.

(http://www.bubhub.com.au/community/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=74)

:laughing: :iagree:

[PeppaH]

I will also not apologise for doing what I thought was right by my DS and my family. I will be sorry that they feel this way but I will not apologise for desciplining them.

:iagree:

[onionskin]

Firstly, I don't think smacking (in the 'spirit' of smacking NOT abuse!) is abuse.

I think it turns into abuse when taken too far. I don't think smacking works for every parent and child, but it does for some. I think as a parent, it is our job to work out what method of descipline works for us, our children and our family.

I know I have tried time out- it doesn't work for DS.

I have tried taking certain toys/privlidges away- that also doesn't work.

I have read books (one book I have recently read and while the whole concept didn't work for us- I got allot of use out of it and still use numerous points from the book).

For me, my DS, and my family- reasoning works. Sometimes, I need to go further and give a smack with a follow up talk with DS.

I have found that DS likes to push the boundries- test the limits so to speak, which is fine, kids do it. But when I have ask him to stop what he is doing, warned him and given him ample opportunity to change his behaviour. When he ignores my request than he gets a smack. After that, I find that his behaviour is reasonable/acceptable.

I don't think I am abusing him. I think kids need those boundries- it makes them feel safe and secure. This is the method that has worked for our family in allowing DS to feel safe and secure in his sourroundings and what is expected from him.

I will also not apologise for doing what I thought was right by my DS and my family. I will be sorry that they feel this way but I will not apologise for desciplining them.

Brilliant post Extraordinary :wave:

As for the OP I will take it with a grain of salt.

[sandy cheeks]

So what you're saying is that it took more than 15 years for their methods to work?

No I was a better behaved child than teen I only had a biting fetish. I wasn't smacked all that often these are the time's I remember iykwim.
How many parents methods work? Lets be honest at some time in our parenting we all feel we have made mistakes or would do things different.

[BabelFish]

Yes of course. But I also remember a few select times that I was smacked and they were horrible. Mum used to lose her temper (and yes with me I did push her to the limit) and lash out. She was an awesome Mum, still is, I'd never criticise her in any way - except for that one. I STILL remember those things and would never do that to my child.

The fact that you still remember the times you were smacked means that they obviously had some psychological effect on you, too. Whether you remember them with equanimity or not.

I'll put it in another way, from my own perspective on smacking (and others don't have to agree).

In my life, aside from my children, there are my partner, my family, my friends, my work colleagues and random strangers that fill up my day to day world. The thought of hitting any one of the people that make up those groups is unacceptable. I still get annoyed by those people sometimes, they do things that could be construed as bad behaviour, bad manners, or irrational or hurtful. And yet I don't hit them. And wouldn't consider it.

Why, then, would I hit my child? I don't hit the other people I love - I don't hit the other people I don't even know, let alone love. And yet it's ok for me to hit my child? Why? Because my child is smaller than me? To `teach' it something? Teaching and learning aren't confined to children's age-group. So why do we find other ways to teach and learn when we're bigger? If we can interact with every, single person around us without hitting, we can do the same with our children.

[IndigoJ]

and teflon causes cancer, so do microwaves, if you swim after a feed you will drown. Pfft IMO its just another thing that we shouldnt do JIC something happens. Lets all live in a cotton wool wrapped world. :) Have a nice day

[guerin]

Well, I hope that never happens but if it does I will apologise to them, I will also explain the difference between abuse and discipline.


What happens if your kids come back in 20 years and tell you they felt you deprived them of their freedom when you gave them time out?

What happens if your kids come back in 20 years and tell you that they are seeing a psychologist because they feel that their possessions will be taken away because you took toys off them?

What happens if your kids come back in 20 years and tell you that they cannot ask for anything or assert themselves because you said NO?

and on and on it could go.

I'm not a believer in smacking as my attitude is what do you do if it doesn't work; do you smack harder? The answer is usually No. So why not do what you would do after the smack in the first place. However the 'what happens if..' questions can be asked for every single thing you do as a parent. And you will be the rarest of parent if you do not get something wrong.