Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )










Reply to this topicStart new topicStart Poll

> Discipline Vs Child Abuse, Where should society draw the line.
Swanny 
Posted: 30-Sep-2005, 04:01 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 1,108
Joined: 08-Jun-2003
ZodiacBirch

Realm: Two Rivers, Alaska

male





Rather than muddy up a thread in which plenty of mud is slung about, I thought I'd start a new one, as it brings up an interesting question.

On that other thread SCShamrock wrote
QUOTE
what about laws prohibiting parents from physically disciplining their children?


Historically (and it's been within living memory for many of us), parents were legally free to do whatever they wished to "punish" their children. In fact, child abuse laws evolved from animal welfare laws of the very late nineteenth and early 20th centuries. They were originally enacted for very good reasons, many children were brutally beaten by their parents each and every day. We ain't talking about a swat on the butt here, folks.

So, the question I am posing is this. Where do you think society should draw the line between discipline and abuse?

Swanny



--------------------
user posted image "You can't run with the big dogs if you still pee like a puppy".

Stardancer Historical Freight Dogs, Two Rivers, Alaska.

"Aut pax, aut bellum" (Clan Gunn)
PMEmail Poster               
Top
CelticCoalition 
Posted: 30-Sep-2005, 09:09 AM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Ireland
Posts: 561
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
ZodiacReed


male





This is an interesting question.

Personally, and I suppose this might be seen as taking away the rights and freedoms of parents to discipline their children how they see fit, but I would apply the same rules that govern assault. I don't believe that we should be allowed to do to our children what we aren't allowed to do to a stranger.

For instance, when I was working as a video rental clerk, a man came in the store one night, walked up to me, and slapped me across the face because he believed I had muttered obscenities towards him under my breath the last time he was in the store. Whether I had done such a thing or not (I had not by the way) hhe had no right to hit me and I would have been able to press charges had the police been able to catch the guy.

now imagine this. Your boss calls you into his office because he caught you doing something against company policy. He bends you over a chair and takes a paddle and starts wailing away on your rear end instead of reprimanding you and writing you up. Would people agree too this policy?

People can say that parents have a right to punish their kids however they want. However, because children really don't have anyone other than the government to step in and protect them from physical assualt, I suppose the government is the only one to turn to.

For anyone whho is for spanking or hitting or other methods to discipline children, I suppose I would ask why is it ok to do this to our children, but not to adults?


--------------------
user posted imageuser posted imageuser posted image
May those who love us love us
And those who don't love us
May God turn their hearts,
And if He doesn't turn their hearts,
May He turn their ankles,
So we'll know them by their limping.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
sniper 
Posted: 30-Sep-2005, 12:26 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Knight of the Round Table
*******

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 165
Joined: 10-Aug-2005
ZodiacOak

Realm: Augusta,Ga

male





QUOTE (CelticCoalition @ 30-Sep-2005, 11:09 AM)
This is an interesting question. 
 
Personally, and I suppose this might be seen as taking away the rights and freedoms of parents to discipline their children how they see fit, but I would apply the same rules that govern assault.  I don't believe that we should be allowed to do to our children what we aren't allowed to do to a stranger.

This is a fundamental point were we will divide. This is also why publicly funded education should not be forced upon people with different ideologies.

The question begs an answer and I can offer one up. The reason we should be allowed to do to our children what we can not do to strangers is because we are charged with raising children, who know nothing of the world, to become responsible, respectful citizens in a polite, civilized society. I grown person does not need a spanking to correct his/her behavior while an obstinate child may not respond to anything less than a swat across the butt.

Child abuse is easily identified and overly exaggerated by many that think along the lines CC has just expressed.

Anecdotal example: I was making a delivery to a restaurant fifteen years ago and was in the parking lot of a strip mall. A large lady (over400lbs), a normal size 16 to18 y.o. and a toddler, about two, were walking to their car. The child was throwing a hissy fit about whatever children throw such fits about, probably not getting a toy or some brightly colored "can't live without" item in one of the stores. The large lady, who was negro, was yelling, as many of her ethnicity do, very abrasively, using horribly foul language at the child. The woman opened the driver's side door of the car and got out a leather belt. She walked around the car to where the other two were and started slapping the toddler indiscriminately with massive force. She had no concern where her licks were hitting the child and the child was responding by screaming in agony. The child was too young to even defend himself by putting his hands over his face or curling in the fetal position. Of course she only got off four strikes before I interrupted her assault in defense of the child. I regret to this day not having called the law on her but she was very clear as she drove off without possession of her belt that she was in the wrong and should consider going to DSS for help in learning how to deal with raising a child.

QUOTE (CelticCoalition @ 30-Sep-2005, 11:09 AM)
..........he had no right to hit me and I would have been able to press charges had the police been able to catch the guy.

With the proper training, the coroner could have carried him away and you taken his estate through court.


--------------------
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Militia
1.Civilians trained as soldiers but not part of the regular army

2.The entire body of physically fit civilians eligible by law for military service
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Swanny 
Posted: 30-Sep-2005, 04:05 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 1,108
Joined: 08-Jun-2003
ZodiacBirch

Realm: Two Rivers, Alaska

male





QUOTE
Child abuse is easily identified and overly exaggerated by many that think along the lines CC has just expressed.


I've asked where should society draw the line - you say child abuse is easily identified, yet many highly trained observers, including law enforcement officer, paramedics, physicians (even pediatricians) FREQUENTLY miss some relatively common and to my mind relatively blatant signs of physical abuse. I'm not even discussing neglect or emotional abuse yet. So, if highly trained professional observers find it difficult to identify child abuse, how can you claim it is easily identified?

And please, to tell me what sort of abuse is "overly axaggerated by many that think alont the lines CC has expressed". That is most likely to result in the answer of question at hand "Where you think society should draw the line?"

In some American sub-cultures the anecdote you described is considered routine physical discipline of an obstinate child.

'nother question - since you brought up the "obstinate child". Why is it that when a kid is screaming and kicking and throwing a hissy-fit do parents feel a need to hit the kid, which is guaranteed to make the kid scream louder, kick harder, and now try to deal with fear in addition to whatever other frustration started the whole cycle. That just doesn't strike me as a calm, logical approach to healthy parenting. We no longer do that sort of things to dogs, so why do we feel compelled to do so to our children?

Swanny
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Shadows 
Posted: 30-Sep-2005, 04:38 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline





Reader of souls, vision seeker, TROLL
Group Icon

Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4,789
Joined: 20-Jun-2003
ZodiacHolly

Realm: The frontier of Penn's Woods

male





I have my own opinion on this and it is just that my opinion:

If it don't leave marks do it!

I was raised under the switch, ruler, wooden spoon, what ever was at hand, sure it left me bitter, but I learned real quick not to make the same mistakes again ( or at least not get caught ).

I have raised 6 kids and have at one time or another spanked them all when it was deserved, but it only took one or two times and they learned.

Each situation is different and each child needs different degrees of punishment. I do not agree with out and out beatings, but a parent must have some form of control over what they dish out.

I think society should just stay out of it until it is proven that some form of obvious harm is coming to the child.


--------------------
I support the separation of church and hate!

IMAGINATION - the freest and largest nation in the world!


One can not profess to be of "GOD" and show intolerence and prejudice towards the beliefs of others.

Am fear nach gleidh na h–airm san t–sith, cha bhi iad aige ’n am a’ chogaidh.
He that keeps not his arms in time of peace will have none in time of war.

"We're all in this together , in the parking lot between faith and fear" ... O.C.M.S.

“Beasts feed; man eats; only the man of intellect knows how to eat well.”

"Without food we are nothing, without history we are lost." - SHADOWS


Is iomadh duine laghach a mhill an Creideamh.
Religion has spoiled many a good man.

The clan MacEwen
PMEmail Poster My Photo Album               
Top
Swanny 
Posted: 30-Sep-2005, 06:15 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 1,108
Joined: 08-Jun-2003
ZodiacBirch

Realm: Two Rivers, Alaska

male





Well Shadows, stun guns don't leave marks, rubber hoses are popular in some circles for similar reasons. How about merely confining the child in a dog crate for say, a week or two or for a really serious infraction such as bed wetting, a month or so? That doesn't leave physical marks, but the emotional damage can be extremely severe.

These are just a handful of cases I've responded to during my career, and not the most ugly. I rarely share the truly horrible things with others, mostly because I don't care to revisit the memories.

Swanny
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Aaediwen 
Posted: 30-Sep-2005, 08:13 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 3,069
Joined: 09-Oct-2003
ZodiacHolly

Realm: Kentucky

male





QUOTE (Swanny @ 30-Sep-2005, 07:15 PM)
That doesn't leave physical marks, but the emotional damage can be extremely severe.


He didn't say "So long as it doesn't leave physical marks" Psycological and emotional damage can still qualify under Shadows' criteria.

I too recieved many spankings as a kid. I still believe in it as such a dicipline.

Every case is different, and there are limits. I'll admit that the line is blurry. I'd say Shadows has a good starting point on where it is, but we shouldn't put the slider all the way one way or all the way the other, as is happening all too often in lawmaking these days. Calling any time a parent might have cause to strike their child 'child abuse' is putting the slider way too extreme. By the same token, I agree we shouldn't allow the kind of thing where you have to start making excuses for it.


--------------------
Poet and seeker of knowledge



PMEmail Poster My Photo Album               
Top
Ceciliastar1 
Posted: 30-Sep-2005, 08:23 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 828
Joined: 09-Jun-2004
ZodiacAlder

Realm: Ohio.

female





Very interesting points. I do not think the the phrase "parents should be allowed to do what ever they want when it comes to disciplining children" or something to that effect. I believe that there is a line between discipline and abuse. A simple spanking (with hand, not a belt or brush) is a good form of discipline. It was used on me and all my siblings and it never got to the point where it was abuse. It was what my mother used when there was no other way to get the point across that we had done something bad.

I do not believe that the gov. should step in and stop if all together. This is a very tricky question. The gov. NEEDS to step in for the children who are being abused. But at the same time what is the step from disciplining and abuse.... I need to discuss this with my inner self before I continue...I'm confusing myself...hehe


--------------------
There's a dear little plant that grows in our Isle
Twas St . Patrick himself, sure, that set it;
And the sun of his labour with pleasure did smile,
And with dew from his eye often wet it.
It grows through the bog, through the brake, through the
Mireland, and they call it the dear little shamrock of Ireland.
PMEmail Poster My Photo Album               View My Space Profile.
Top
CelticCoalition 
Posted: 30-Sep-2005, 09:18 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
Group Icon

Group: Ireland
Posts: 561
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
ZodiacReed


male





Well, I don't believe that physical punishment is necessary to raise children. In fact, I believe it is wrong and less effective than other methods.

However, it isn't for me or the government to say when a child isn't being harmed. I think the line should be drawn at spanking that leaves lasting bruises, welts, or cuts. This, and anything worse I would consider abuse the government should be involvved with.

Things like caging a child, locking a child in a closet, or similar practices I would consider abuse necessitating government involvment.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
Ceciliastar1 
Posted: 30-Sep-2005, 09:32 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 828
Joined: 09-Jun-2004
ZodiacAlder

Realm: Ohio.

female





QUOTE (CelticCoalition @ 30-Sep-2005, 10:18 PM)
Well, I don't believe that physical punishment is necessary to raise children.  In fact, I believe it is wrong and less effective than other methods.

However, it isn't for me or the government to say when a child isn't being harmed.  I think the line should be drawn at spanking that leaves lasting bruises, welts, or cuts.  This, and anything worse I would consider abuse the government should be involvved with.

Things like caging a child, locking a child in a closet, or similar practices I would consider abuse necessitating government involvment.

Omigosh. A swat by the bare hand is enough...

Anything beyond that is just wrong. I cannot believe that people would think it is ok to smack a kid so hard he bruises, let a lone cut... It makes me sick to think about it.

Locking a kid in cages is also wrong. You want to punish your child for being bad? Don't let him have dessert that night. Take away his video games or whatever. I don't understand people who do this. They're children, they are not that hard to handle.......
PMEmail Poster My Photo Album               View My Space Profile.
Top
Shadows 
Posted: 03-Oct-2005, 04:35 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline





Reader of souls, vision seeker, TROLL
Group Icon

Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 4,789
Joined: 20-Jun-2003
ZodiacHolly

Realm: The frontier of Penn's Woods

male





QUOTE (Swanny @ 30-Sep-2005, 08:15 PM)
Well Shadows, stun guns don't leave marks, rubber hoses are popular in some circles for similar reasons. How about merely confining the child in a dog crate for say, a week or two or for a really serious infraction such as bed wetting, a month or so? That doesn't leave physical marks, but the emotional damage can be extremely severe.

These are just a handful of cases I've responded to during my career, and not the most ugly. I rarely share the truly horrible things with others, mostly because I don't care to revisit the memories.

Swanny

Sorry to be so long in replying to you Swanny!

You know me and I you, we both know much of what each has been through and we shared some of the same type experiences.

When I said leave no marks I meant no physical nor mental...


When my kids would act up and a simple spanking would not suffice I would grasp them by the shoulders from behind and using the instep side of my foot give then a swift kick in the arse... they would fly out like a party favor... and it worked!

I only used this method on the kids when they were older, all I had to do when they were young was raise my voice.
PMEmail Poster My Photo Album               
Top
stoirmeil 
Posted: 05-Oct-2005, 04:52 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 3,581
Joined: 07-Nov-2004
ZodiacBirch

Realm: New York







Huh. I just had a talk a few days ago, about reporting abuse, with a teenager who thought the tots she was sitting for were being abused. Usually, the scenario is that the teen sitter is doing the abusing. This 14 year old was a mess of shame and guilt and fear about calling DSS -- which she HAD done, after seeing weeks of what she could not understand any other way than as marks of physical abuse -- not only that the toddlers' parents would get down on her, but her own parents as well. What the hell we supposed to do with that?

Parenting styles come down generations, directly (you "parent" more or less the way you were parented) or inversely (you hated the way you were parented, so you resolve to change the style and do virtually the opposite). Either way, it's attributable to what came before, unless you do some serious reflecting about alternatives outside your inherited polarized choices. People rarely do that. When someone says "My dad hit me, and I'm OK," it's very often an act of self-deception. You may not be a quaking mess, true, but on a sliding scale of excellent to competent to good-enough to crappy parenting, you're not likely to be as high up as you might otherwise, if you inherited corporal punishing techniques and you use them as a matter of course.

First of all, did you ever stop and think why so many hitters hit with other things, instead of the hand? Because it bloody well hurts your hand as well as the child's butt (or arm, leg, face. . . ). And that is your index right there that it is a bad idea. Plain operant conditioning tells you that punishment is meant for only one thing: to decrease the likelihood that the problem behaviour will recur. It does not teach right behaviour, it does not teach higher principles of right and wrong, and it does not establish parental dominance, although people think they are getting all that into the child with corporal punishment. As Shadows pointed out -- it teaches "Don't do this while the old man sees." And that's all it teaches. I never saw a kid that didn't size up "Don't do as I do, do as I say" as a crock of crap. They get good at hiding it from you, but that is not the same as a lesson learned.

It usually stays in the family and doesn't get out to public notice until things get really bad because of the rights parents supposedly have, privacy as well as the sovereign responsibility of rearing, but also because the child usually colludes to keep the secret. First -- he's convinced he's bad and he deserves it, and he's ashamed for anyone to find that out. Then, it's terrifying to contemplate that his protector and provider is incompetent, is even dangerous, because the parent is all he has and there seems to be no solution other than desertion or abandonment. And so he puts the knowlege away deep and dissociates himself from it. In his mind, he splits his most immediate model for being human and ditches a big piece of it it, to save himself. Those are the "scars" that cripple the personality development, not the mere memory of physical pain.

It is immensely complicated and hard to do anything effective about it as a social problem, because even removing a child from a deadly situation means ripping apart the attachment system. Have you ever seen a toddler clinging desperately to the legs of someone who is beating the tar out of him? I have. That's his protector and provider. That recognition is built right into the brain. It is a hideous double bind -- your protector is assaulting you. But there's no practical escape. Without him, the child will die, even though it looks to the child like he's going to kill him right here and now.

Now -- I have another story. Kind of an analogue to sniper's anecdote, but this incident was all very educated and upscale. The mother did every bit as much damage, maybe more, yet it's well within "normal" range -- that is, not recognised as abuse. No corporal anything. In fact, I wondered about the presence of corporal love, like hugs, in the relationship, that is how non-physical it all was.

I was standing at a bus stop in midtown with a number of other people. A very well dressed professonal woman, looked maybe like an executive or attorney, who was waiting with us was haranguing her kid relentlessly at the top of her voice for this crime: he had apparently somehow tripped the switch on the escalator at a big bookstore and caused it to stop. The store manager claimed so, at any rate. She was not scolding in the usual way -- she was coldly trying to get him to admit the truth and belaboring him with the evidence. The boy was denying it vigorously. He was about seven. He was crying so hard he was about to vomit, he was red as a beet, and he was doubled up in a cringe, protecting his midsection and genital area, in a corner of the bus shelter.

I doubt he had any fear at all of being struck -- his protective stance is instinctive in a mortal attack, and that is very clearly how he was experiencing the sheer verbal assault. It was equally clear that she had no clue of this, and that it would hardly move her if she did. She was vivisecting him in cross-examination of the facts, and that was it. She was also shaming him to death in public. I think he might have preferred a beating, if anybody asked him. As far as I was concerned, the "truth" was so minor an issue as to have disappeared completely: the real issue was that no matter what he said he could not win. A truly hideous double bind.

So I took her "belt" away too. I got her attention and drew it off the kid for a minute so he could breathe and not puke, and said "Nice-looking boy. Was he born here?" This weirded her out so much that she stopped cold and stared at me, like I'd flipped her "off" switch, before she answered "Of course he was, what do you mean?" I said "So, he's a citizen?" All the while smiling and not showing any disapproval, even though I longed to belt her into next week. She frowned deeply and said "Of course he is." And I said "Well, I thought American citizens didn't have to give evidence against themselves." Playing seriously dumb, as you might think. But if I had just said "Lady, give the kid a break already," it would have accomplished nothing. As it was, the clueless creature got the point, but then she dragged him back into the store saying "Well let's talk to that man again." Evidently it was worth missing a bus for.

Did I think she was unfit? damn straight I did. Would any court? I doubt it. Is that kid "marked"? I don't think he has a chance in hell of uncomplicated, normal adjustment, if that is the nature of their relationship. And everything in the way he was holding himself and pleading tells me it is their habitual way of relating -- life or death perfectionism and shaming. If it had been atypical for them, he would have been indignant or outraged at her lack of faith in him, not weeping hopelessly. Shame is incredibly potent and has to be used extremely lightly, usually during toilet training. There is special wiring for it in the brain, so we did evolve to utilize it. But hard, continued shame used on an older child is the emotional equivalent of whacking him across the face hard enough to loosen his teeth.

So -- the dividing line possibly should not even be between physical and emotional abuse. (I don't mention sexual abuse here because the issues are a great deal more complicated and confusing to the child and sometimes the adult, and that needs separate consideration.) The biggest thing that needs a lot more clarification is the rights of children, and we are still in the stone age on that score. The whole deal of privacy, first, and the sovereign right and responsibility of the parent to rear the child as he or she sees fit are so sacred as personal liberties in this society that people are far more likely to feel uncomfortable or even traumatized just attempting to intervene.

Personally, I come down where Swanny and CC are, with this addition -- if you cannot manage disciplining a normal child without hitting him, what skills are you lacking, and what are you doing about acquiring them? If you do have other skills and you prefer to hit anyway -- well, what's up with you?
PMEmail Poster               
Top
SCShamrock 
Posted: 05-Oct-2005, 07:07 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 1,180
Joined: 22-May-2004
ZodiacVine

Realm: Gamecock Country

male





QUOTE (stoirmeil @ 05-Oct-2005, 05:52 PM)
Shame is incredibly potent and has to be used extremely lightly, usually during toilet training.


-- if you cannot manage disciplining a normal child without hitting him, what skills are you lacking, and what are you doing about acquiring them? If you do have other skills and you prefer to hit anyway -- well, what's up with you?

First Lynn, let me be the first to say that, after raising kids, "shaming" a child during potty training is the absolute wrong way to go about that. The way to get positive results in that area is through positive reinforcement and encouragement. To do otherwise is to beg for a variety of stigmas and complexes that are completely undesirable.

Secondly, corporal punishment, when administered correctly, is a very effective tool. However, it requires careful consideration as to when it is appropriate to use and to what degree. Most children will respond to it, and after some time of use the threat or fear of it will often be enough for the child. I could beat my youngest with a tire iron and he would still be obstinate. But my oldest son rarely needs spankings anymore, and often just the threat of one is enough to get his attention. I know when I was young I responded to it, and in so many instances felt that I had been treated quite leniently after a spanking, considering the offense. What got dad's ire up? Lying, disrespect, talking back. For these offenses I would get a major "word of prayer." But if I was caught showing disrespect to my mother, look out!!

Now one might ask if I became bitter over this. I would answer yes, while I was at home, under the authority of my parents, sure. But after I grew up, I realized how effective those lessons were. I won't say that I think the methods used to teach me were always on point, but I can't say that they weren't either because to this day I still have great appreciation for honesty and respect, and the value of hard work. It did no lasting emotional damage to me. My only living parent can attest to the fact that there is a closeness that hasn't suffered in the least.

Lastly, I do have an opinion of the parent that will never spank an unruly child. Those formative years in a child's life when the kid gets those little hand slaps and the sharp "don't touch" by their parents is what sets the stage for physical discipline. Do parents that do not believe in spanking also not believe in the hand slap too? I can guess yes in many instances when seeing a child in public that is a total monster, in other words, the tail wagging the dog. The point is, kids reach a point where they learn to adapt or otherwise become immune to "talking" methods or grounding. They will often ignore the talks, and find ways to occupy their mind (usually destructive or negative) during grounding periods. But when a parent withholds even the mildest physical punishment, most children see that as weakness, and being kids will often capitalize on that by overwhelming the wussy parent by being a total pain on every conceivable front.


--------------------
The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. ~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, 1859

Education: that which reveals to the wise, and conceals from the stupid, the vast limits of their knowledge.
~Mark Twain
PMEmail Poster               
Top
stoirmeil 
Posted: 05-Oct-2005, 07:49 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 3,581
Joined: 07-Nov-2004
ZodiacBirch

Realm: New York







QUOTE (SCShamrock @ 05-Oct-2005, 08:07 PM)

First Lynn, let me be the first to say that, after raising kids, "shaming" a child during potty training is the absolute wrong way to go about that.

Well, you won't be the first to say that, because inept use of shame does exactly what you are describing, and many have pointed it out. I have no problem with that. Interesting that you should dive on that detail, in the middle of that great long post of mine, in which there was so much that you might have agreed with as a humane person. I think you're combing for something to disagree with, and that's discouraging.

What I mean by "shame" in toilet training is probably not what you are thinking of, in any case. It's part of a much bigger socializing construct, and actually it is used to reinforce the encouragement, to give it balance and motivation. Since you're done with your kids, I don't know how much it interests you, but I'll send you references if you like. smile.gif But the actual brain wiring and neurochemistry for shame develops right at the same time as the impulse to learn continence, and seems to be correlated with it as a developmental milestone. It is the last major emotion to develop. It's more related to the idea that approval is what a child strives for as a natural maturation drive, and that the social expectations to be met when the child is capable of meeting them are part of the process. Shame does not mean the addition of criticism or ridiculing in the process. It means that the absolutely unconditional approval an infant receives now has to be modified and subtly used to let the child know that poopy pants are no longer acceptable.

I categorically disagree with the idea that a child naturally believes that a parent who will not hit him is a weakling. You are painting a picture in which the only thing that gets through to a child is painful physical contact, and a child who has never been spanked or hand slapped is necessarily a spoiled monster. This is not true. There are far more badly modulated kids all over the place that regularly get the bejeezus licked out of them. (You mention yourself that your younger boy would not capitulate to a beating with a tire iron, though God forbid you should do that, and I don't believe for a minute that you would. smile.gif Is he incorrigible? Or would something other than physical pain impress him more, perhaps?) It is just not a valid correlation. However, if you have a whole community or society in which both children and parents observe the way the dynamics are managed, and most kids are getting physical discipline, you are going to have to be stronger in your non-corporal techniques. But it can be done and it should be done. In fact, it gains even more respect from a child, when he does not have to deal with the contradiction that you are doing to him what you don't want him to do, even to another child, much less to you yourself. It's revealing to me, your idea that even a little kid senses that the one who won't hit him is vulnerable to being defied, or taken advantage of: a "wuss". It is not so, unless the child learns it from the family and the community as a value. There are whole cultures in which the man who loses it and strikes anyone is the weak one, the one whose manhood is not under his own control.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
SCShamrock 
Posted: 05-Oct-2005, 08:41 PM
Quote Post

Member is Offline



Celtic Guardian
********

Group: Celtic Nation
Posts: 1,180
Joined: 22-May-2004
ZodiacVine

Realm: Gamecock Country

male





QUOTE (stoirmeil @ 05-Oct-2005, 08:49 PM)
I think you're combing for something to disagree with, and that's discouraging.

Don't be discouraged. I don't like arguing with you half as much as you might think, nor do I think half of what you say is worth more than half as much argument as it reigns in.
PMEmail Poster               
Top
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Reply to this topic Quick ReplyStart new topicStart Poll


 








© Celtic Radio Network
Celtic Radio is a TorontoCast radio station that is based in Canada.
TorontoCast provides music license coverage through SOCAN.
All rights and trademarks reserved. Read our Privacy Policy.








[Home] [Top]