02 Dec 11
Originally posted by karoly aczelIts Friday evening here in Tobago .. going out for a few drinks with my wife .. and yes I preach the Bible to anyone in the bar willing to listen.
I more or less agree with your appraisal.
I just wanted to know what "modern educational psychologists " are you talking about, and more importantly what methods are you refering to that you dont want your kids to be taught?
Will discuss later.
02 Dec 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAgreed.
But having the pain administered by an adult whom hopefully they look up to is
barbaric,
nope cant say i ever thought of my mother as barbaric and half the time i felt
the punishment was deserved!
Especially in the case of young children running onto a road. They need to be quickly taught that they should never attempt to do that, ever, as children dont undrestand traffic laws, and usually they are easily concealed behind other cars so they can easily surprise a driver.
It is only if the corporal punishment is continued when it is failing as it should only be needed once or twice.
Any good parent will talk often with their children and tell them the rules and why they are there.
But they will need to back it up physically quite often at first so that the child knows next time daddy says "please dont put the fork into the power socket or he will come and drag you away", he means it.
This means much picking up a child and placing them away from the danger. a lot of getting up and down, but if you back up your words with actions then later in the childs life you need only say things as they know that daddy or mummy will come and drag you away, so the threat will suffice and hence you dont have to keep getting up and down all day 🙂
02 Dec 11
9 edits
Originally posted by wolfgang59Reasoning with children using appropriate language is very effective - I'm not sure at what age it becomes effective but it is surprisingly young and does work for all school children.
Reasoning with children using appropriate language is very effective - I'm not sure at what age it becomes effective but it is surprisingly young and does work for all school children.
A "naughty step" or "naughty chair" does work but I would only use this as a last resort - i would actually blame myself for not having dealt with the behaviour better o ...[text shortened]... y look up to is barbaric! It builds animosity and resentment as well as condoning violence.
I'd be interested in some more details on this one. For example, suppose I'm a three year old,
no prizes given for the obvious ad-hominem here
and for reasons that can be known by none other than myself I decide that appropriate "pay-back" for slightly older brother taking my favourite toy car (without intended malice) is to throw another of my toys at his face as hard as I can. Neither the parent nor older brother know I intend to do this. Now suppose I'm a rubbish shot and miss older brother by so wide a margin that the action doesn't even register with him (and so I don't suffer any reprisals from him, nor do I get to see him bawl his eyes out - which if I can empathise at this age, might make me think again next time). In what way can the parent reason with me?
They could probably ask me how I'd like it if a toy was thrown in *my* face, and I might be able to decide that I wouldn't, if I'm smart then I might even reason that to some extent *he* wouldn't like it - but this doesn't necessarily mean I'll apply the same transitivity when deciding if it's good or bad (for me) that older brother gets a toy in his face next time. I.e. do I even care what he would or wouldn't like in the future until I clearly see him not liking something!??
The parents could perhaps firmly tell me that throwing toys at older brother (or people in general) is naughty, but then what can I make of this (as a 3 yr old) - I probably only have a vague notion of "naughtyness" in that it's a collection of things I remember my parents don't want me to do. But perhaps my inclination to do it anyway is greater than my inclination to just comply at this time.
But anyway... I would be interested in hearing more from you on this one.
A "naughty step" or "naughty chair" does work but I would only use this as a last resort - i would actually blame myself for not having dealt with the behaviour better on prior occassions.
At this point I don't have a great deal to say on this option - maybe later
Short sharp shock? IT JUST DOESNT WORK. I agree we are conditioned not to do anything that is painful (I believe in letting children explore their environment and getting cuts and bruises to discover what is and is not safe). But having the pain administered by an adult whom hopefully they look up to is barbaric! It builds animosity and resentment as well as condoning violence.
Unsurprisingly I disagree, firstly having been administered a "good hiding" myself when I was a "little bast**d" I can testify to the fact that the things which incurred the greatest wrath are the things I did only once (and feared doing again) so it certainly worked. As I got older, though still equipped at some point with knowledge that certain X shouldn't be done *only* because I'll get a hiding, I managed to discover (perhaps indirectly) for myself or through others that X is is bad for more compelling reasons - and presumably this lead to them trying to reason with me more often - and as I grow even older I no longer need to fear the punishment because I have absolutely no desire to do X in the first place. There are many elements missing here, but used as a short-lived preventative step I say it's a good strategy. I certainly don't think any less of my parents for this.
Secondly I readily concede that it's a primitive (or barbaric) activity - but I also gave my rationale for why this isn't necessarily a bad thing.
03 Dec 11
Originally posted by Agerg1. My experience is with 5-12 yr olds in the classroom and I have dealt with violence as you describe. We could discuss in detail what I would do then you would say but what if the response was X and I would say in that case of X I would try strategy B et cetera, et cetera.
[b]Reasoning with children using appropriate language is very effective - I'm not sure at what age it becomes effective but it is surprisingly young and does work for all school children.
I'd be interested in some more details on this one. For example, suppose I'm a three year old,[hidden]no prizes given for the obvious ad-hominem here[/hidden]and for rea ...[text shortened]... gave my rationale for why this isn't necessarily a bad thing.[/b]
All I can say is that it works for me. I would be interested in the experiences of anyone else on site who works with children.
I would also be interested in finding out how the 3 yr old learned to throw a toy at his brother. Violence is not inherent in children - they learn it - by seeing it and being on the receiving end of it.
2. ...
3. The old argument "it didnt do me any harm" just doesn't hold water.
Firstly how do you or I know that it did you no harm? Who knows how you would have turned out without a "good hiding" from you loving parents?
Secondly even if it does work what right has anyone got to inflict pain on another human being? Why should children not have basic human rights?
Thirdly - and I know I am sounding like a busted record here - children imitate, its how they learn - when your loving parents give you a good hiding you lean one of two lessons a) they are not loving parents OR b) that this is what is acceptable in a loving relationship
03 Dec 11
Originally posted by wolfgang59Ok will do.
I was surprised and disappointed by the support for caning/spanking on this forum.
IF YOU CAN STAY ON TOPIC please contribute your opinion and rationale.
.
Subject: Corporal Punishment of Children
Food for thought: Shouldn't the punishment of children be left up to higher ranking, presumably more responsible officers?
03 Dec 11
I believe that the severity of the action 'has' to be taken into consideration with regard to punishment, and the age of the child. There is no single slate.
Some actions of younger children simply need to be ignored, as ignored behaviour goes away - again depending upon the behaviour. Of course, actions such as theft cannot be ignored, that doesn't apply to this class of behaviour I mention to ignore.
Severe actions need to be dealt with in appropriate manners.
Fighting in elementary school has to involve parents being called to the school, and not just the school itself dealing with the matter. It isn't up to the school to dish out corporal punishment on any child, that is a parental matter. The child can be excluded from fun activities, in order to think about their actions.
My main point being that both the severity of the child's action, and the situation in which it is committed, need to be assessed before any response to it is administered.
03 Dec 11
Originally posted by wolfgang591. Its both, depending on the age of the kid. A significant failure of modern society is focusing on pleasure and entertainment, rather than more productive pursuits. As a child, I remember after dinner, tv was switched off and there was 2 or 3 hours of quiet time in which everyone did homework or studied or read the Bible. When I had my own family I did the same. Im guessing that rarely happens in modern families.
1. Originally you said "[b]make them read" not read to them or teach!
2. Perhaps there is a god, perhaps the bible is the word of god. my question is still
Why teach them the bible.
3. How? I have seen only the opposite.[/b]
2. Are you saying that because you are an atheist I should not teach my kids that there is a God?
3. What you have seen is not the sum total of all the truth pertaining to punishment. Consider the possibility that you still have a lot to learn.
03 Dec 11
Originally posted by Rajk999I think you are missing a few significant points here Raj.
1. Its both, depending on the age of the kid. A significant failure of modern society is focusing on pleasure and entertainment, rather than more productive pursuits. As a child, I remember after dinner, tv was switched off and there was 2 or 3 hours of quiet time in which everyone did homework or studied or read the Bible. When I had my own family I did the ...[text shortened]... the truth pertaining to punishment. Consider the possibility that you still have a lot to learn.
If you refer to my post above yours, then you will infer that age, action and deliverance is, of course, a must in the epitomy of lashing out as an adult, mentor or what may be.
I'm sure wolfgang would not disagree, in that modern society is self-satisfied in self-pleasure and entertainment. However, I don't think your pin-point assertion of families not switching off tv etc prevails.
Most families with young children, or even teenage children, have homework time and no tv time. This is of referring to the educated masses which you abundantly dismiss. Whether you teach your children during these periods of time, or let them read the bible or wahtever is at your own discretion. To say it doesn't occur is quite blind.
Consider the truth that everyday, as a parent, you are always learning, and in the future will regret some of your own decisions. 😉
-m.
03 Dec 11
Originally posted by mikelomOk point taken.
I think you are missing a few significant points here Raj.
If you refer to my post above yours, then you will infer that age, action and deliverance is, of course, a must in the epitomy of lashing out as an adult, mentor or what may be.
I'm sure wolfgang would not disagree, in that modern society is self-satisfied in self-pleasure and entertainment. Ho ...[text shortened]... you are always learning, and in the future will regret some of your own decisions. 😉
-m.
My days as a parent of young kids is probably over and yes I have certainly made mistakes.