fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3215 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3215 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

[Disney's Descendants]

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04. [SPOILERS for Undertale]

__________________________________________________

05. [SPOILERS for Ancillary Mercy]

__________________________________________________

06. [SPOILERS for Great British Bake Off, series 6]

__________________________________________________

07. [SPOILERS for Defiance]

__________________________________________________

08. [SPOILERS for shepherd's crown]

__________________________________________________

09. [WARNING for abuse]

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #459.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

What's the best way to punish a child? Is spanking ever okay?

Spanking is fine, but abuse is not okay. There is a difference, despite how many people say otherwise. I was both spanked and beaten/abused as a child, and I knew then the difference. Reasoning with a young child doesn't work. Toddlers don't have the mental capacity to understand why they can or can't do things. That's why kids are so freaking spoiled now.

As far as the best way to punish a child, taking away toys/phones/games/assorted privileges is still a winner in my book.

Agreed 100%.

Spanking is 100% never, NEVER okay.

1. It is a "quick and easy" punishment, generally done in a moment of anger
2. It models that violence is an appropriate reaction to solving problems
3. It indicates parents who aren't very good at maintaining control or keeping their cool with kids

No leading psychological organization recommends spanking as a punishment. In fact, just the opposite. According to many, many studies, spanking not only is an ineffective punishments, kids who are spanked are more likely to continue negative behaviors. Furthermore there is, unsurprisingly, a link between parents who spank being more likely to abuse further.

Hitting kids is never okay.

The best punishment? CHORES. Punish bad behavior by forcing the kid to contribute positively to the household. Make up for mistakes by cleaning, cooking, mowing the lawn, whatever.

So then they associate chores with punishment and never do any housework as adults?

Sorry, the studies don't match up with your guess. Chores should not only be punishment, but a regular thing that kids have to do. Weekly chores. Cleaning up after meals. Etc. It's one of those things you don't have to like, but you have to do, and it's regularly found to be the best way to "punish" kids.

Making kids do chores as a punishment would only make them resent doing chores at all. Make them fix something they broke, but not if it's unrelated. Taking away privileges/toys is a better option.

I don't think spanking is on the same level as hitting. Hitting is something without warning, in the heat of a situation. Spanking is usually not as immediate. After age 5 or so, I was even able to argue my case if I thought spanking was unwarranted (and for the record, I've never been beaten or abused). It sometimes worked, it sometimes didn't.

Kids don't have to like doing chores. But they do have to do them. Like eating vegetables or going to bed at a reasonable time. It's best to teach kids to suck it up and do it if it's good for you.

Personal anecdotes really are unimportant when the research goes 100% against spanking. And it is literally hitting your kid, so I'm not sure why you are dividing here.

Well said.

My oldest is only two so not a huge amount of experience with discipline yet, but I do have to do it constantly. Sometimes it is REALLY HARD for me not to get angry and want to be forceful. Instead, I work on trying to collaborate with him and try to avoid escalating the situation. Sounds hippy but it works most of the time. The more cross I get and the more I tell him off, the more defiant and unwilling he gets, whereas if I pick my battles, consider compromise, try to explain why something is a bad idea, and offer alternatives, he's much better behaved. I know if I hit him, our covenant would be broken and he'd act the hell up out of anger himself, for a long time. I punish with time outs, making him apologise, and trying to mend the consequences of his actions.

My parents hit me. It was bad.

I don't think any kind of physical punishments are ok.

I think children should first of all be warned and told what consequences they will face if they do something they shouldn't do, and that those consequences should be about loss of privileges, like no TV after dinner, no/less of an allowance and so on. Then the children should face those consequences if they don't heed warnings. It's important that the parent actually follows through.

Maybe timeouts as well? I have no experience with that, but it seems to work on those nanny shows. As long as it won't last for hours and hours I don't really see a problem with it.

Spanking, first and for most, should *never* be a go-to punishment. I was spanked exactly once as a child, and only one swat, and I've *never* underestimated the dangers of live electrical wires again. I honestly don't think anything else would have kept me out of the breaker box and away from live wires as well as that did. It underscored *exactly* how terrified my Dad was, and he cuddled me close and wouldn't let go for a good while after.

As for saying it's bad? In general, yes. Absolutely. Especially as any corporal punishment is ripe for abuse, especially since it *is* usually done in the heat of the moment.

However, complete bans on physical chastisement seem shortsighted to me. Something like smacking a child's hand away is innapropriate if they're reaching for candy, but not so much if they're reaching for a hot pot lid. Mom actually used to smack her own hand to tell us not to do something, with the loud sound getting our attention and the look on her face saying the rest, especially with the association we had.

Time outs can be effective, but it depends on the child. Also, on the adult. We used to get sent to our rooms until Mom wasn't mad at us anymore, because if she let us out after a half hour she was more likely to get mad at us again, which was frustrating for all of us. I don't think this current 'one minute per year' is very effective, though.

I think the most effective thing is to make the consequence fit the crime. Hitting means you're not old enough to play with other children and are sent to your room. Not doing chores means you haven't earned your allowance, so you can't have it. Not eating dinner means it comes out of the fridge when you *are* hungry, and no desert or snacks until it's gone. Making a toothpaste mural or drawing on the walls means losing the whole afternoon to cleaning up the mess.

Consistency is the key, though. Always, ALWAYS follow through, and don't make wild threats that you have no intention of carrying out.

Also, consider severity. Not unloading the dishwasher < taking your sibling's toy without permission < hitting, so punishing all three the same is ridiculous.

[ SECRET POST #3215 ]

Re: Ask an opinion question

Re: Ask an opinion question

Re: Ask an opinion question

Re: Ask an opinion question

Re: Ask an opinion question

Re: Ask an opinion question

Re: Ask an opinion question

Re: Ask an opinion question

Re: Ask an opinion question

Re: Ask an opinion question

Re: Ask an opinion question