freeflybella

You remind me of a mom who was on the Maury show several years ago about this very topic. She sat up on stage with her nose all taped up, why because her now teeange son (who was in juvie for the taping of show) had punched her in the nose. The Chief of the NYC police stood up and asked her if she had ever spanked her child when he was younger and she replied "no" because violence begats violence.... The Maury Show ?! blink. blink. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

100 jump wonder? I won't take offense at that. But it's like me saying you come off as a sky god - just because you've managed to stay alive for 2000 jumps (over 18 years) doesn't make you an expert. Either way, neither of those analogies apply really. I liked the discussion in the women's forum - not so much over here.

True. But in the end, if you have a bunch of damaged kids either they got that way from spanking or the spankings didn't work. Why is the opposite of spanking inconsistent consequences? Telling a kid to do something or he'll receive consequences and then following through with them does work. Correlation does not equal cause. Your words. The overwhelming majority of studies show that spanking is not an effective form of discipline. You may have been spanked - but you may have turned out fine in spite of being spanked. As have many of the proponents on this thread. What kind of question is this? Close to 900,000 children per year are victims of substantiated abuse (physical, emotional and neglect). 72% at the hands of their parents. Apparently their parents are having a hard time figuring something out. It's painful for the parent, it's ineffective for the child, may cause harm to the child and the parent/child bond...call me crazy! Discipline does NOT equal punishment. Discipline is teaching. The true hard work is putting in the time to be an example of right and wrong, having the patience and attention to provide consistent guidance and consequences and maintaining a loving environment for the child to test boundaries, to explore independence while becoming a responsible and compassionate person. Give me time, I'll google some replies... I actually think that's very very sad. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

Just 3 things and I'll let it rest. Number one, maybe you don't remember just how much testing of boundaries happens at 2 and 3? Number two, I totally agree that as parents we have a wide and varied tool chest when it comes to disciplining (teaching) and raising our children. Finally, I still think you're a non-spanker and can't for the life of me figure out why you're such a staunch proponent. Maybe in your view, it's all about not limiting what other parents might "need" at any given time. But the preponderance of research shows not only that spanking doesn't work well as a disciplinary tool but that in some cases it's harmful and leads to abuse. I'd suspect, although I have no proof to back it up, that most parents who spank limitedly claim it's effectiveness because there are other techniques employed simultaneously. And that those parents who spank regularly and continuously do much more damage to their children and the relationship they have with them than they'll ever know.

is that a serious question It was a facetious question. In your opinion, a good slap might save some of the kids from falling into the juvenile justice system. Why then, aren't you able to employ that method of discipline? edited: I guess a more straightforward question would be, why aren't you and peregrinerose (and other child care workers) not legally allowed to use a very highly endorsed "parenting" tool? Why are parents allowed to slap their kids but people hired to care for kids not? As an Advocate of Occasionally Spanking a child when other methods have failed, I can say without a doubt that a Teacher or social worker doing the same thing would be completely unacceptable. They do not have the same bond and understanding of the child that the parent should have. Also it is NOT their job to raise my Child. It is MY responsibility to raise the child. Plain and simply, It is NOT their Job to be a parent. It IS the job of a Foster parent to act as a parent. And spanking by teachers is LEGAL in 23 states. I just find it odd that a "bond and understanding" is the criteria for allowing spanking. Anyway, good discussion! Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

is that a serious question It was a facetious question. In your opinion, a good slap might save some of the kids from falling into the juvenile justice system. Why then, aren't you able to employ that method of discipline? edited: I guess a more straightforward question would be, why aren't you and peregrinerose (and other child care workers) not legally allowed to use a very highly endorsed "parenting" tool? Why are parents allowed to slap their kids but people hired to care for kids not? Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

Why aren't you allowed to slap the kids you work with? Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

So good that you're learning about attachment disorders. My mother is an adoption social worker and attachment disorder therapist. Presumably one's own child isn't suffering from attachment disorder, but it is possible that connections and attachments with parents can be weakened and strengthened through everyday interactions. There is a school of thought that excessive tantrums in the toddler stage are a result of needing more attention/connection/understanding rather than an expression of defiance. I often find with my son, when he cries and gets angry, that he needs a little space to work it out on his own (with me right nearby of course) and then a LOT of cuddle time. Of course that doesn't mean giving him the gum he insisted on having in the first place. I say no, I mean no, I let him express himself and then show him that I care enough about him to explain why he can't have the gum. But I don't get sucked into his emotions. (Ok, I'm a single mama, sometimes when I'm drained or tired, I do get sucked in. Who is perfect?) It's my job to guide and teach and be an example of how to be a person in the world.

Agreed that the concept of hot cannot generally be taught without experiencing hot. Although neither yourself nor I would burn a kid on purpose! I'm not advocating rationalizing to a 2 year old per se. In other words, I don't really expect them to internalize it yet. But they get the point. They understand the tone and the repeated admonitions. And, if it's imminent danger and or the kid just won't listen, it's the parent's responsibility to clear their reach of danger. In other words, that candle shouldn't have been touchable when you proved that you were intent on touching it! My son turned 3 last week and has never touched a hot stove. He learned hot by accidentally touching a lightbulb a long time ago. Whenever he needs to be reminded about the stove I remind him about the lightbulb. No biggie. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

I like your parenting style, I think. I'm in favor of things like not coming out of the room until it's clean. But I personally think both of your examples for spanking sent mixed messages. One "that you shouldn't hit but when you do I'm going to hit you" and two, "that you can push my buttons and I'll dive right into your drama". You took a dare from your teenager in the heat of an argument. In my opinion (which means nothing at all, really) you could've raised your daughter (and really you actually did) without ever spanking her. Lo and behold! You said it yourself - so far so good!

If a child reaches for a hot stove - you grasp her hand firmly, hug her tight and explain the stove is hot and will hurt her. And you do it again and again until she learns. When you lash out and hit her hand you panic her, instill fear and possibly inhibit natural curiosity and demonstrate your own anger/fear. This is not a great set up for trying to calmly TEACH your child not to touch a stove. edit: It's not about namby pambiness (is that a word) or negotiating or letting your get away with murder. It's about setting rules/limits and being present and consistent in enforcing them. That's how skymama's comment is relevant. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

Just for the record (and confused): discipline = teaching Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

This letter was written by a family to their Pastor after hearing a sermon that included a message endorsing spanking as a means of discipllne. I think it's amazing. Although I'm not Christian, I found it powerful. I also happen to be in the anti-spanking camp. Just thought I'd share a well-thought out and articulate argument. Dear Pastor, We are so grateful for all of the ways that you have helped us to connect in a closer way with God. This of course has had a profound influence on our parenting. Yet, in light of a recent sermon, we would like to present to you an alternative Christian view on disciplining children. Christians, of course, are probably the strongest proponents of spanking in the US. It is, so they say, their God given right---it's what the Bible teaches. That is exactly the point of contention and what we hope to humbly disprove. Let's take the Old Testament. Some (our more literal-interpreting brothers) would say that it covers a period of about 4000-10,000 years; others (our more moderate and liberal brothers), anywhere between 10,000 to millions and millions of years. Irrespective of which view you hold, it has to be astounding that there is not one example of spanking in the whole Old Testament. This is especially impressive when you consider the large percentage of OT books which are more narrative than didactic. We might also add that there is no example of spanking in the New Testament, even though the time period is significantly shorter (around 100 years) and the majority of the books are didactic and not narrative. Now certainly there are some didactic passages in both Testaments that can be construed as being pro-spanking, however, they can be interpreted in a different light with sound exegesis. Strange, isn’t it, for a teaching that is so adamantly held by so many believers that it is not illustrated once in either Testament. But, even if no narrative biblical passage illustrates spanking, if it is plainly and consistently taught in didactic passages, then we must accept it as God ordained. In the Old Testament the only passages that can be construed as being pro-spanking are found in only one book: Proverbs. A good hermeneutical principal is to not build doctrine on poetic passages. The wisdom books are full of symbolism and hyperbole and are often a stumbling block to the more literal interpreting readers. The “rod” in these Proverbs passages that so many see as a license to spank is symbolic. This Hebrew word is often translated as shepherd’s “staff/rod” or king’s “scepter”. So, if we were to be more literal, a closer translation would be bat and not twig! But that is not the author’s intent. This “rod” is a symbol of authority and guidance, like a shepherd guiding his sheep or a king governing his people. This is why the Psalmist could joyfully exclaim: “thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me” (Psalm 23:4). We do not wish to pass over this lightly, because these verses are the foundation of the Christian pro-spanking argument. However, to avoid repetition, we ask that you read the following links www.gracefulparenting.blogspot.com and www.aolff.org for a detailed analysis of these passages. It is somewhat puzzling that the people who insist that spanking is Old Testament mandated claim the passages from a poetic book, yet dismiss clear instructions from a didactic passage in the Torah to stone rebellious children (Deut. 21:18-21). Why the inconsistency? You claim that one passage is obviously morally wrong. We submit that both are morally wrong, especially in light of the culmination of God’s progressive revelation---Jesus Christ, who taught us, among other things, that unless we “become like little children” we can never enter the kingdom of heaven (Mt. 18:3. See also Mt. 19:14). Implication: children are more in tune with God than adults. Which raises the question: should the unrighteous be punishing the righteous? While the Old Testament is of great value, we recognize that no longer being under the Law changes how we apply some of the OT Scriptures to our daily lives. So even if spanking is Old Testament taught that doesn’t mean it is New Testament endorsed. Throughout the New Testament the one passage used to support spanking is Hebrews 12:4-6. Going back to the original language there, however, also changes the meaning to the importance of discipline and authority in shaping a child, not physical punishment. God certainly disciplines us but He doesn’t physically hit us when he does. Read the text. Proper exegesis shows that the pro-spanking people simply choose to read into this passage the very point they need to prove. So, if there are no passages in either Testament that truly encourage spanking, then we must evaluate discipline according to other principles that the Bible teaches clearly. Jesus teaches us that we have two goals: to love God with all that we are, and to treat others the way we would like to be treated. Nowhere does He imply that His words do not apply to how we treat children. In fact, His interactions with children showed a special effort to value them and their feelings. He also tells us that whatever we do to the least of these we are doing to Him. Can you honestly say that you would want someone to hit you? I can't. I can say truthfully that I would want loving correction and instruction if I were doing something wrong, but being hit/spanked/popped/smacked would not be a part of it. Jesus’ example was that the one in authority had an even greater responsibility to act in love than the one under authority. We are to demonstrate the Fruit of the Spirit. Yet how is hitting a child compatible with the peace, patience, kindness and gentleness in which we are called to walk? The Bible is very specific about how we should deal with sin in others: We are taught that in correcting those who disobey to do so gently (Gal. 6:1). Parents are specifically cautioned to not cause their children to lose heart (Eph. 6:4). Having the people you love most in the world deliberately hurt you is pretty disheartening, regardless of any lofty motives they may claim. The Bible is clear that parents have a responsibility to discipline their children. But discipline and spanking are not the same thing. Discipline is about making disciples, or teaching. It is difficult for children to focus on a life-lesson, though, if they are distracted by the anger, hurt, fear, humiliation and resentment that result from being hit. As career teachers, our professional education classes and our years of experience with students of many ages have convinced us that the research is correct in showing that people learn more effectively through positive reinforcement than from punishment (negative reinforcement). You have seen this in the family of (name removed), whose children are delightful to be around. They do not spank, but instead practice gentle discipline. Another important point is that most of us are able to learn best from example--that is why Paul wrote to be imitators of him as beloved children. Kids are expert mimics. Too many children in our nation are learning that the way to respond to an offense is to hurt the offender. “Turning the other cheek” is not supposed to mean baring a child’s bottom. We recognize that in other relationships of authority (employer/employee, police officer/civilian, pastor/church member, husband/wife) that physical punishment is inappropriate, even when correction is needed. Children are even more vulnerable—surely we can find better ways to correct them, as well. When Christians teach spanking, the majority has several cute euphemisms to describe it and a list of guidelines as to how, when, and with what. There is absolutely no Biblical basis for any of them—they are essentially cultural. Whether you call it spanking, popping, smacking or hitting, they all mean to strike a child in order to produce pain and fear. Why do we feel the need to create so many guidelines: spank only on the bottom or legs, only X number of times, only with your hand/a switch/a paddle/PVC pipe (Michael and Debi Pearl, some of the most popular writers on spanking in Christian circles, advocate plastic plumbing pipe!). Is spanking on the bottom any better than the Waorani practice of slapping their children in the face with stinging nettles? Why, if neither results in permanent injury? If God didn’t impose a limit on the number of times we strike a child, who is to say that 9 times is worse than 2? While not spanking in anger is at least more likely to avoid a total loss of control and avert serious physical injury, watching the person you love and trust more than any other calmly and deliberately choose to hurt you is a chilling experience. I would submit that the reason behind the euphemisms and rules that Christians create is that our conscience is condemning us. We are aware on some level that hurting those who are smaller and weaker goes against the nature of Christ, and feel a need to justify and minimize what we are actually doing. Another issue with spanking is that as the child grows, the spankings must get harder and longer in order to produce the same level of pain and fear. When do they eventually start to cross the line into abuse? Of course, most parents stop spanking once the child begins to approach them in size and maturity. We agree that then it is more appropriate to use the Biblical admonition, “Come now, let us reason together…”. If the child is old enough to reason, spanking is unnecessary. If the child is too young to reason, then the child is too young to effectively understand what the parents are trying to teach, and the spanking is both cruel and pointless. The false dichotomy that always pops up is that if parents don’t spank, they are not disciplining their children. That suggests that parents are relying on spanking as their main or only form of discipline. Permissive, lazy parenting is neglect. The responsibility given to parents is a great, even fearsome one. By choosing not to spank, we have gained deeper insight into our children’s hearts. It has challenged us to deal with anger and pride, and earnestly seek God’s wisdom, patience and love. Proactive parenting is more “work” than spanking, but already the rewards have been great. There are so many alternative ways to discipline that result in harmony and renewed connection between the parent and child. Teaching a child to do right is much more effective than executing judgment for doing wrong. When we as parents obey our directive to treat others as we want to be treated, it causes us to get behind the eyes of the child and deal with the root of the problem rather than just suppressing an outward behavior. It is amazing to see a cycle of irritability and frustration break when the parent chooses to discipline by restoring relationship. Many parents assume a time-out is the default choice if parents don’t spank. However, often what children need is more time WITH the parents to reconnect, reassure and restore. Without turning an already lengthy letter into a book, if you are interested in other approaches, we would be happy to explain how we handle specific situations or direct you to sources that we have found beneficial. The plan behind redemption is clear. God wants to reconnect with us. All of the history of the Law shows that merely punishing sin doesn't change the heart. What changes the hearts of our children is relationship. Obedience grows out of love and trust rather than a self-centered desire to avoid punishment. If children obey simply out of fear of being spanked, their motivation isn’t righteous, but only self-centered. As a child of God, my choice for obedience isn't based on a fear of punishment. It isn't a get-out-of-hell-free card for me. It is because I love Him and have learned to trust Him. My children are learning to obey for the same reasons. If my children do wrong and repent, for me to go ahead and hit them seems very inconsistent with the way that God has forgiven my mistakes. I have a responsibility to show the same grace toward my kids that I have received. It is God's kindness that leads us to repentance, not His wrath. We have chosen to look at this from a Christian perspective, but we find it interesting that the research is overwhelmingly against spanking. The American Academy of Pediatrics, like many other professional organizations involving children and health, has issued a statement against corporal punishment on the grounds that it is not nearly as effective as positive reinforcement and that it can be harmful physically and emotionally. In fact, there are some indications that spanking is associated with increased delinquent and antisocial behavior, increased risk of child abuse and spousal abuse, increased risk of child and adult aggression, decreased child mental health and decreased adult mental health. Consider this in the light of Jesus’ warning against causing little ones to stumble. Sometimes it is difficult to discern what the Bible teaches on specific issues. You have often used the illustration of God playing hide and seek in order to encourage us to dig deeper and seek Him with all of our hearts. On the topic of spanking, He has given us glimpses of His heart--the parable of the unmerciful servant (Mt. 18:21-35), I John 4, James 2:13. None of these suggest ignoring or excusing sin, but they all teach us to be humble and loving as we show others, regardless of their age, a better way. In closing, we chose to write this to you because of our respect for you. We know that you are someone who has the courage to look beyond the easy, superficial answers and the integrity to hold convictions that may not be popular. Believe us, in Christian circles not spanking is tantamount to heresy, but it is a very worthy cause. We humbly suggest that spanking is just another religiously transmitted disease. We love you and your family and are grateful that God has placed us under your spiritual leadership. May God bless you and your family. {names deleted} The following list includes just some of the organizations that have issued a statement against spanking in the home: * American Academy of Pediatrics * American Humane Association * American Orthopsychiatric Association * Association for Childhood Education International * California Medical Association * Early Childhood Association of Florida * Family Service of Milwaukee * International Child Art Foundation * National Association of Social Workers * National Foster Parent Association * Parents Anonymous * Society for Adolescent Medicine * United Methodist Church * Wisconsin Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention Board Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

"Typically, each child would be given a separate hearing, but given the number of cases, it's likely the judge will have the state, the children's attorneys and the parents' attorneys make consolidated presentations, at least initially, said Harper Estes, president-elect of the state bar. "You can't go one-by-one," Estes said." Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

Best answer so far. By far. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

Also, I thought it was just a fashion interpretation of the fact that inmates couldn't wear belts... why would a bunch of rappers pick up on a statement about soliciting gay sex? Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

Sorry. My post was not a reply directed to you. Good response, though. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

Worth repeating. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

From his speech here in Philly: While Obama rejected what Wright said, he also embraced the man who inspired his Christian faith, officiated at his wedding, baptized his daughters and has been his spiritual guide for nearly 20 years. "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community," Obama said, speaking in front of eight American flags. "I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother — a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe." Obama said he knew Wright to occasionally be a fierce critic of U.S. policy and that the pastor sometimes made controversially remarks in church that he disagreed with, but he said he never heard Wright talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms. The comments that have become a source of debate recently "were not only wrong but divisive" and have raised questions among voters, he said. "I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and YouTube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, there is no doubt that I would react in much the same way," he said. "But the truth is, that isn't all that I know of the man." It really isn't a black and white issue. Pardon the pun. But he certainly doesn't seem to be LYING. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

woo hoo! Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

Actually, I'm glad to know Pam Anderson, Andre 3000, Russell Simmons, Joaquin Phoenix and Moby are vegan and PETA supporters. And I'd also like to know who gives money to causes that I don't support. I am interested in how celebrities spend money as relates to politics and world affairs. It does influence whether I choose to support them. edited: if an entertainer is outspoken enough to interrupt a concert and assert political affiliations, It might ruin the show for me (if I didn't agree) but I certainly could assume by it that they are giving money/lending their name to that cause. I'd actually rather know not to spend my money on them in the future. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

Brilliant! I only wish "Give him ****" wasn't in the clip title...would've been a nice surprise ending. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

It's been a long time since I had a boyfriend on Valentine's Day and I have no idea what to do. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

Agave is also a great sweetener to replace syrup and honey. Rice milk is fine, it's a little nutritionally weak though. Have you tried almond milk? I make my own nut milks with my vita-mix. Just soak some nuts overnight. strain, put in the vita-mix and add water. mix. Got milk! Really? It's that easy? Soak raw almonds overnight and blend with water? I'm going to try it. Do you sweeten it? My son likes it unsweetened but I prefer it with vanilla added, too. Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi

We're huge fans of kombucha. My 2 year old would drink it day and night if I let him! Action expresses priority. - Mahatma Ghandi