Canada: Man decapitated on bus

Yet you conveniently ignore the decline in all categories since 1992. <SNIP>

Are you suggesting that a slight decline is evidence that hippies haven't f**ked s**t up? Oh, and I lay a lot of the blame at Benjamin Spock's doorstep.

Look at the numbers again and try to spin them all you can, they are still MUCH higher.

Of course, we don't need statistics to know that beating a child is an ineffective way to raise a kid.

That's a typical limp wristed attitude. 'Of course...'. What a pathetic statement, right up there with other hollow assertions like 'As we all know..' and 'It's common knowledge..' when you fail to back up said statement with any facts.

For sure raising a child has to be dependent on the child, there is not one solution for all kids. There has to be a balanced attitude, carrot/stick, if you will. It's not about beating a child to a pulp, it's about fair and rational discipline.

This has transitioned way off my original point which was about people being more socially responsible. The plane going into a field in Somerset County was the highest level that we may see in our lifetime and it gives me hope, this was a low point. From my perspective.





Isn't this fun?

Of course, we don't need statistics to know that beating a child is an ineffective way to raise a kid.

On this point, I will engage.

First, the word beating needs to be defined. If you're talking about some kind of strike to a child that can inflict bodily harm, cause bruises, bone bruises, break skin, or even break bones, then yes beating is entirely unnecessary, ineffective, and flat out wrong.

But if you're talking about a spanking - an open hand on the rear end or other soft tissue causing a stinging sensation - then that can be extremely effective and is not scarring. IF DONE PROPERLY.

First, when children are in the 1-3 year old range, they do not yet understand consequences. Their brains are also not yet developed enough to understand reason. You can't sit them down and say "Johnny, I do not want you to pull the dog's tail because it hurts the dog." He won't understand, the toddler brain is not capable of putting himself in another's shoes. A spanking creates a connection, a neural pathway, in the child's brain. Pull the dog's tail = pain on my hiney from a spank. That neural pathway is created that there is a negative consequence for doing that. This is how children come to understand consequences.

Consequences can be taught using other methods, though. Time out is extremely effective. Child pulls the dog's tail, you pick them up immediately and put them in the corner, or on a time-out chair, or wherever. You stand there and you don't allow them to get up. Usually they don't like being confined, and they don't like you being upset with them, so stern looks and a harsh tone of voice are also a must. You don't want to let timeout last too long or they forget what they were there for. You allow them to get up after about a minute, come over to you and make them apologize for pulling the dog's tail.

I use timeout on my 2-year old all the time. It's what I go to first. But she has a habit of just getting up in the middle of it. I put her back and yell at her and all that stuff. But if she keeps doing it, I go to the spank on the hiney. It's the last line of defense, and it always gets through to her.

Now, spanking must be done properly. If you look scary to the child when you're administering it, or if you do it rashly out of anger or frustration, you can inadvertently teach the child that it's ok to express anger or frustration by hitting. You must be completely calm, you must tell them it's coming, and even if they don't understand you must tell them why you're doing it. A calm demeanor also helps assure the child that you are not some scary monster.

Spanking runs the risk of teaching a child that it's OK to hit. But as long as you're not teaching that it's OK to hit out of anger, then the benefits of spanking (teaching consequences) outweigh the negatives. The negatives are minimized when a child never sees you come with a knee jerk reaction.

Sorry to preach on parenting, I recognize it can be very annoying to hear someone tell you how to raise your kids. So let me just disclaim that this is just my opinion and what seems to work well in my house. Each kid is different, some need a firmer approach and some need more encouragement.

I will add that spanking teenagers is completely inappropriate. By this point their brains are developed to understand consequences.

With a 2 year old, you can ask them why they pulled the dog's tail, and they'll say "I don't know." That's because they really didn't understand that it was wrong.

With teenagers, they understand the rules and they understand consequences. They just make an economic decision. I'm going to stay out past curfew tonight because sneaking into the Pearl Jam concert is worth taking a risk that I'll get punished. They figure there's a chance I could get away with it, and if I get caught then a consequence is coming (assuming you instilled that in them when they were younger). You just have to make the consequence of said action not worthwhile, and reduce the chances that they'll get away with it. In other words, the punishment has to suck more than the Pearl Jam concert was fun. You have to tailor the punishment to the child, hit them where it hurts. If they're social, ground them. If they play video games, take it away. Whatever. But spanking is ineffective. They just get pissed off and resent you (and may even fight back) and withdraw from you.

Spanking is intended to create the link between action and consequence. Once that link has been established though, you have to go to other means or the child will withdraw.

Wowy.. ... that was just too much to read, so I didn't bother.

S10 very good post! I agree full heartly with you. Redskin Rat's world of even your neighbors beating/spanking your children is just simply crazy, IMO. If my neighbor or even my best friend hit/spanked my child there would be some words exchanged.

I think with spanking like you said it is the last line of defense. Sometimes parents use spanking to relieve their own angry/fustration with the child, THIS IS WRONG. It is a fine line and their has been times where I have had to clam myself and decide which is the best course of action for my son.

In the end parenting is a very hard job and a personally one at that. Everyone has their own way of doing it. You will have a hard time coming up with Excel Spreadsheets/ Charts on what parenting skill is the best.

This reminds me of when Jsarno said he "beat" his dogs. Oh, the uproar!

Wowy.. ... that was just too much to read, so I didn't bother.


Might have learned something.

Anything over a paragraph does get awfully confusing. :doh:

Spanking is intended to create the link between action and consequence. Once that link has been established though, you have to go to other means or the child will withdraw.

Excellent point, I didn't find it at all hard to read your post.

Excellent point, I didn't find it at all hard to read your post.


Ok with that said don't you agree that is something you would want to decide for your child? Not your neighbor.

I apologize if I offended you in these thread. I just finally read through all the post. I was simply just trying to pull your chain. Plus, you are 47 and I am 35 we are not worlds apart in age.

Excellent point, I didn't find it at all hard to read your post.

It's not hard to read... it just feels like a waste of time.. becuase it's off topic.