Is it okay for parents to hit their children?

[Silver]

Discipline is a good idea unless you take it too far.
I don't believe telling the child over and over what's right/wrong will do the trick if the child isn't listening to you.
Your patience can only run so far.

At the same time, don't beat the fuck out of your child to the point where he/she almost dies.

Everything has to have a balance.

 

[ivbaseball10]

Discipline is a good idea unless you take it too far.
I don't believe telling the child over and over what's right/wrong will do the trick if the child isn't listening to you.
Your patience can only run so far.

At the same time, don't beat the fuck out of your child to the point where he/she almost dies.

Everything has to have a balance.

THIS. I 100% believe in disciplining children, it teaches them right from wrong and honestly, builds up common sense in them. I was disciplined as a child. When I did something bad, I got smacked for it. Occasionally I may do it again but after the 2nd time (usually only took me one time) I would think "oh hey, when I do this, I get punished.. I shouldn't do this". Now on the other hand, when you see the news articles where a 2 year old was beaten to death.. That's just fucking pathetic. There is no excuse for that amount of abuse.

 

[Logic]

However, I was raised this way and had massive amounts of respect for my parents / still do?

Right, cause you respecting (doubt this part) someone who hit you when you were a small child totali validates the beating of small children, kudos my friend. Are there parents who are more lazy than yours were, sure ofce, but that does not make your parents not lazy when it comes to explaining stuff to children.

Not all soldiers develope PTSD but having experienced war makes the odds a fair bit higher. Not all children have undeveloped social and negotiation skills, but being hit as a child (instead of having things explained with words) do make the odds higher. Logical conclusion would be to not send men to war and not to hit children. You turning out "great" (although being pro hitting children is not great in my books, more like a bit fked up in the head) does not justify hitting children.

 

[SmokeHut]

Right, cause you respecting (doubt this part) someone who hit you when you were a small child totali validates the beating of small children, kudos my friend. Are there parents who are more lazy than yours were, sure ofce, but that does not make your parents not lazy when it comes to explaining stuff to children.

Not all soldiers develope PTSD but having experienced war makes the odds a fair bit higher. Not all children have undeveloped social and negotiation skills, but being hit as a child (instead of having things explained with words) do make the odds higher. Logical conclusion would be to not send men to war and not to hit children. You turning out "great" (although being pro hitting children is not great in my books, more like a bit fked up in the head) does not justify hitting children.

You're taking it out of context from my point of view. The furthest I've gone is a tap on the hand. If you consider that a fair comparison for warfare then continue your conversation on your own.

I was merely pointing out that you claimed the spanking of children will not gain respect in the long-run. However, me my sister just about everyone who grew up with me was spanked for bad things and they've turned out to be great members of society who have much respect for their elders.

Edit: still shaking my head at the PTSD comment.

Soldier witnesses his buddys blown to bits, throws a grenade in a room and kills an entire family. ( the mental stress to deal with ) is a comparison to spanking. What on earth.

 

[Logic]

You're taking it out of context from my point of view. The furthest I've gone is a tap on the hand. If you consider that a fair comparison for warfare then continue your conversation on your own.

I was merely pointing out that you claimed the spanking of children will not gain respect in the long-run. However, me my sister just about everyone who grew up with me was spanked for bad things and they've turned out to be great members of society who have much respect for their elders.

Edit: still shaking my head at the PTSD comment.

Soldier witnesses his buddys blown to bits, throws a grenade in a room and kills an entire family. ( the mental stress to deal with ) is a comparison to spanking. What on earth.

The point was that actions have consequences. Lets eliminate the cause and we won't have to deal with the consequences.

I just don's see how hitting someone can be beneficial. The mind of a child is like a sponge and it will adabt and normalize everything in order to survive (like being hit, which your mind has clearly normalized, but that does not make it right). A child who is taught that violence gets you stuff or makes people act the way you want will likely resort to using violence on his peers, instead of peaceful negotiation.

Just makes no sense that hitting people is looked down on and we tell people to leave violent partners but when it comes to children(the most dependent people out there) we say "good job, smack some common sense into him". If you used this logic on a man beating his wife cause she brought her a warm beer after being told numerous times to not do that then you instantly see the problem. We should not hit other people, especially the ones who are the most dependent and the weakest.

 

[SmokeHut]

The point was that actions have consequences. Lets eliminate the cause and we won't have to deal with the consequences.

I just don's see how hitting someone can be beneficial. The mind of a child is like a sponge and it will adabt and normalize everything in order to survive (like being hit, which your mind has clearly normalized, but that does not make it right). A child who is taught that violence gets you stuff or makes people act the way you want will likely resort to using violence on his peers, instead of peaceful negotiation.

Just makes no sense that hitting people is looked down on and we tell people to leave violent partners but when it comes to children(the most dependent people out there) we say "good job, smack some common sense into him". If you used this logic on a man beating his wife cause she brought her a warm beer after being told numerous times to not do that then you instantly see the problem. We should not hit other people, especially the ones who are the most dependent and the weakest.

The problem with that comparison is if the "wife" received a tap on the hand for bringing home the warm beer, it would have little effect. Where'as to a child a tap on the hand is not something their used to, and in that particular action they committed was worse in the scale of things.

If I was sat talking to a lady who was pouring her heart out about her abusive boyfriend who taps her on the hand when she does wrong, I'd not take her seriously. Same in the contrary, if she was complaining about serious abuse I'd take seriously, same with a child.

Where you cannot see my standpoint on why it's effective, I cannot see your standpoint on long-term effects. As, like I've said before, myself and most of my peers as well as every generation above me received physical discipline, if the physical side of it is controlled then it does not serve any long-term complications.

Tapping a child on the hand or rear, is not equal to throwing a child down the stairs and kicking them unconscious.

 

[Logic]

The problem with that comparison is if the "wife" received a tap on the hand for bringing home the warm beer, it would have little effect. Where'as to a child a tap on the hand is not something their used to, and in that particular action they committed was worse in the scale of things.

If I was sat talking to a lady who was pouring her heart out about her abusive boyfriend who taps her on the hand when she does wrong, I'd not take her seriously. Same in the contrary, if she was complaining about serious abuse I'd take seriously, same with a child.

Where you cannot see my standpoint on why it's effective, I cannot see your standpoint on long-term effects. As, like I've said before, myself and most of my peers as well as every generation above me received physical discipline, if the physical side of it is controlled then it does not serve any long-term complications.

Tapping a child on the hand or rear, is not equal to throwing a child down the stairs and kicking them unconscious.

I think you are talking about a really small % of people. In most cases the violence quickly escaletes from tapping the hand into more serious abuse. If the problem was "tapping the hand" then I'd agree with you that this isn't a huge problem, but unfortunatelly that's not the case. I'm talking about the shit I see and hear on the street, the yelling at children, the shaking of children etc. Hitting children is the less time consuming way (easy mode) of parenting and it does real harm to the children. There are multiple studies out there about the negative aspects and I'd suggest reading some of them.

 

[Order]

There is a big difference between abuse and discipline. Spanking is a disciplinary act. Most children, who don't get spanked by their parents, end up being wastemen. Everyone I know, who is 1-2 generations older than me, were spanked - why? So they would be disciplined to do the right thing, to not stray off. If a parent does not spank their child, they do not truly love their child. I was spanked, and I'm glad I was - I am currently 16, quite young. You can see the decrease of moral behavior in our society today. There is a high suicide rate, high murder rate, and an iniquitous, sinful and murderous act which our society condones, it is Abortion.

 

[SmokeHut]

I think you are talking about a really small % of people. In most cases the violence quickly escaletes from tapping the hand into more serious abuse. If the problem was "tapping the hand" then I'd agree with you that this isn't a huge problem, but unfortunatelly that's not the case. I'm talking about the shit I see and hear on the street, the yelling at children, the shaking of children etc. Hitting children is the less time consuming way (easy mode) of parenting and it does real harm to the children. There are multiple studies out there about the negative aspects and I'd suggest reading some of them.

Well its more down to individual control. Opposed to the discipline itself, would you consider a spanking serious abuse? If controlled?

I completely see your point where anything above that, shaking etc is ridiculous and the children should be taken to safety from that person. However, our arguments are not including the parents in control opposed to the parents out of control.

I can see why it happens, I've been in situations where I'm absolutely fucked (tired) and you can't get a child to settle. It's one of the most infuriating things I've probably experienced. However, remaining in control is the only way to deal with situations like that.

There is a big difference between abuse and discipline. Spanking is a disciplinary act. Most children, who don't get spanked by their parents, end up being wastemen. Everyone I know, who is 1-2 generations older than me, were spanked - why? So they would be disciplined to do the right thing, to not stray off. If a parent does not spank their child, they do not truly love their child. I was spanked, and I'm glad I was - I am currently 16, quite young. You can see the decrease of moral behavior in our society today. There is a high suicide rate, high murder rate, and an iniquitous, sinful and murderous act which our society condones, it is Abortion.

I completely agree.

 

[ilovegold69]

There is a big difference between abuse and discipline. Spanking is a disciplinary act. Most children, who don't get spanked by their parents, end up being wastemen. Everyone I know, who is 1-2 generations older than me, were spanked - why? So they would be disciplined to do the right thing, to not stray off.

Irrelevant "Everyone I know who..." go away

If a parent does not spank their child, they do not truly love their child.

no

I was spanked, and I'm glad I was - I am currently 16, quite young.

ok

You can see the decrease of moral behavior in our society today. There is a high suicide rate, high murder rate, and an iniquitous, sinful and murderous act which our society condones, it is Abortion.

Suicide and abortion are not immoral. Abortion has risen (because it has thankfully become more socially acceptable), murder has not risen, and suicide is another conversation entirely.

Please read this:

Church is far beyond the limit of unorganized religion.

If you want to believe in X just please don't try to impose the morals you derive from X on me or anyone else. This includes but is not limited to the following: drugs, abortion, gay marriage, religious shit on official government anything(money flags etc.). I don't care if 95% of your state is protestant, a poster of jesus in a classroom anywhere is wrong. If you pull your child out of class because they are being taught evolution you are doing your children a disservice and fuck you. If you don't vaccinate your children fuck you. If you hit your children fuck you (I don't care if you were hit as a child and you turned out fine).

I also do not care if you choose to be catholic and don't want your tax money to fund abortion programs for teenage girls, if you can't vote without removing your religious bias please don't vote at all.

This should be a global rule for everyone everywhere at all times on all laws and in the manner which you treat other human beings forever.

 

[Order]

Irrelevant "Everyone I know who..." go away



no



ok



Suicide and abortion are not immoral. Abortion has risen (because it has thankfully become more socially acceptable), murder has not risen, and suicide is another conversation entirely.

Please read this:

I read it, I thought it was downright and utter bullsh*t. Have you watched those planned parenthood videos? Of them taking out a 5 and a half month of baby from their mother's womb? That's disturbing, you're one sick son of a bitch if you are happy if that is socially accepted.

You're also saying murder is is moral? Abortion is murder.

Also, you said: "Church is far beyond the limit of unorganized religion.

If you want to believe in X just please don't try to impose the morals you derive from X on me or anyone else. This includes but is not limited to the following: drugs, abortion, gay marriage, religious shit on official government anything(money flags etc.). I don't care if 95% of your state is protestant, a poster of jesus in a classroom anywhere is wrong. If you pull your child out of class because they are being taught evolution you are doing your children a disservice and fuck you. If you don't vaccinate your children fuck you. If you hit your children fuck you (I don't care if you were hit as a child and you turned out fine).

I also do not care if you choose to be catholic and don't want your tax money to fund abortion programs for teenage girls, if you can't vote without removing your religious bias please don't vote at all.

This should be a global rule for everyone everywhere at all times on all laws and in the manner which you treat other human beings forever."

It has been proven that some vaccines cause autism, and other behaviors in children. Maybe your mother let the doctors inject every vaccine in you, I would not at all be surprised, you sick son of a bitch. Please do not say, "fuck you" to me, I am not in anyway homosexual. Everyone has the right to vote, ... if everything happened by random chance, then why can't I do what I want? There is no morality. Nothing is 'true' ... I don't even know why I'm arguing with someone who condones murder, anyway cheers.

 

[Order]

The one who made this thread is hilarious. He opens up a discussing, and gets a brain tumor when some of us don't agree with his thought process. You're preaching to the choir mate. You have a fucked up definition of what love is. To be feared, in a sense of reverence is to be respected. I don't believe that anyone has a right to punch, or wham their child, or throw shit at their child. A simple paddle on the bottom is indeed needed. Your child must be weary of going against rules. There are such things as consequences. Without spanking your child, you are not teaching them that lesson. I do not, in any case - believe that you shall hit your child 'til he bleeds, or gets badly injured, or injured at all.

 

[yz8]

No, children that get hit by their parents end up having no confidence because they were thought at a young age that if you do something wrong = punishment. This reward system will affect them when they are growing up and kill their confidence, NO to parents hitting children.

 

[StormMaster]

I know that when I was a kid, my dad used to hit me with a stick when I tried to cheat and rip out pages of my homework packets to not do them(i thought i was really clever), but he never told me what was wrong with what I did, he just beat me so I grew to resent him alot, now I sorta get why he did it but still, parents should try to instill moral codes into their kids first by explaining why its wrong to do certain things, then if they dont listen, discipline them, some kids just dont really understand why certain things are wrong yet at that young age.

 

[NekoMoon]

I believe hitting should be done, but at a balance like a 3 strike rule, once twice use words. Assume strike one is telling them off, two grounding them, three could be a "tap on the hand". Issue is if the balance isn't held properly, it will cause resentment, at the same time see what works best with your child, some can't learn by words, some need a beat, some just a simple punishment. Hell enlist a reward system like school for example, get a certain grade and i'll reward you with let's say an Ipad. Going on a punishment itself will not help as a child they are only "losing" on the current term, but you know it is a long term process they do not understand that. Use violence as a last resort.

 

[Logic]

The one who made this thread is hilarious. He opens up a discussing, and gets a brain tumor when some of us don't agree with his thought process. You're preaching to the choir mate. You have a fucked up definition of what love is. To be feared, in a sense of reverence is to be respected. I don't believe that anyone has a right to punch, or wham their child, or throw shit at their child. A simple paddle on the bottom is indeed needed. Your child must be weary of going against rules. There are such things as consequences. Without spanking your child, you are not teaching them that lesson. I do not, in any case - believe that you shall hit your child 'til he bleeds, or gets badly injured, or injured at all.

Teaching that actions have consequences can be done without violence, hitting your child is not a must, it's an easy way out.


Here is a good video about this whole topic, also read the comments about people and their real life experiences with their children after they stopped spanking.

[YOUTUBE]watch?v=sQ3hHZkryjA[/YOUTUBE]

I believe hitting should be done, but at a balance like a 3 strike rule, once twice use words. Assume strike one is telling them off, two grounding them, three could be a "tap on the hand". Issue is if the balance isn't held properly, it will cause resentment, at the same time see what works best with your child, some can't learn by words, some need a beat, some just a simple punishment. Hell enlist a reward system like school for example, get a certain grade and i'll reward you with let's say an Ipad. Going on a punishment itself will not help as a child they are only "losing" on the current term, but you know it is a long term process they do not understand that. Use violence as a last resort.

If your child is about to burn his hand on a stove then ofcs you are going to grab his hand and you are not going to talk him out of not touching the stove. After you have grabbed his hand then you can explain what will happen if you touch hot objects. In situations like that "force" must be used, but there is no need for it in situations that can be resolved differently, like drawing on the walls. There is always a non-violent way, using violence is an easy way out, that has bad consequences.

 

[CompileTime]

This is how I'd like to raise my future children...

I believe there are only some very limited situations in which hitting your child is the correct response.
If your child is challenging your authority and they do not respond to other means of correction, then you may have to employ some form of physical punishment.

In most situations however, I believe it would be most appropriate to find some way to show them the consequences of their actions. Rather than taking an antagonistic stance, where you two are on opposite sides, show your child that you're just looking out for them.

If they still decide to do what they were doing originally, let them. Then let them deal with the consequences of their actions. (This should only be allowed in cases where the damage they will incur is short term.)

 

[Tyler]

I read it, I thought it was downright and utter bullsh*t. Have you watched those planned parenthood videos? Of them taking out a 5 and a half month of baby from their mother's womb?

A fetus is considered a part of a woman's body, therefore it is not a human being. Or "baby"

You're also saying murder is is moral? Abortion is murder.

So...If I have a tumor in my brain and it gets taken out, its murder?

It has been proven that some vaccines cause autism,

I actually had plans to reply to your whole post, but as soon as I read this I have made an educated decision that your not worth the strokes of my keyboard.




Alot of the people supporting this stems from "Well I got hit as a child, so therfore its okay"

Which is not okay.

 

[ilovegold69]

The one who made this thread is hilarious. He opens up a discussing, and gets a brain tumor when some of us don't agree with his thought process. You're preaching to the choir mate. You have a fucked up definition of what love is. To be feared, in a sense of reverence is to be respected. I don't believe that anyone has a right to punch, or wham their child, or throw shit at their child. A simple paddle on the bottom is indeed needed. Your child must be weary of going against rules. There are such things as consequences. Without spanking your child, you are not teaching them that lesson. I do not, in any case - believe that you shall hit your child 'til he bleeds, or gets badly injured, or injured at all.

You're just making ass backward declarations about your faith. You haven't produced anything worth effort to rebut. Everything you have said has already been said better and I have doubts that anything you will say is going to be intellectual. I hope you're a troll.

 

[Duff]

I was hit as a child, and i've grew up to respect others and respect my parents. I was never hit till I bled, nor was I hit until I had terrible marks. I was more of a caution to stop what I was doing and to do the right thing. It worked, and it's something I will do to my children if they miss-behave.