Playing with fire

I have had the misfortune of meeting many little brats who run circles round their parents, because their form of discipline is asking a 4 year old to behave and having no sanctions, or even a 'stern mode' for when they are completely ignored.

I do not know whether to laugh or cry when I see a mother or father trying to reason in a very grown up manner with 4 year old screaming Jocasta.

Whatever happened to "I said NO, and I mean it, so enough of that!" to deter tantrums?

I still like the oft heard "I'll give you something to cry about in a minute!"from no-nonsense parents of yore.

Of course that manner of speaking to a child has been out-lawed.

No. Stop twisting my words. I did not say that at all.

What do you do with troublesome children then maryeliza54? If you do not ever smack, remove toys or discipline at all. I presume you disapprove of shouting too in case they are traumatised. Do you have a magic wand you wave to produce angelic children?

It's interesting to see how violence is on the increase as smacking children is on the decrease. Discipline is necessary.

Oh do if an adult behaves in an unacceptable way to me, I should just hit him to show that actions have consequences? Ridiculous

Here we go again- deprivation or threats the only alternative. FFS.

maryeliza54 no it doesn't. It sends the message that unacceptable behaviour has consequences.

Attacking someone smaller than you is wrong and most intelligent people know the difference.

EllanVannin I said the parents, but in some cases it's also their peers. If you are bringing a child up in an area where they are surrounded by illegal behaviour, which in many cases pays dividends, where fights and violence are the way things are usually settled it's very difficult to keep your child on track.

Why can’t people get their head around the idea that the alternative to smacking is NOT NOT NOT throwing away toys, threatening the withdrawal of love or treats? ??. I never did any of thst and neither does my dd

I too am an empty headed idiot. As the mother of 3 boys under 5 if I hadn't disciplined them firmly they would've had untold accidents.

Those grans who think any form of physical punishment is wrong are probably the same ones who complain when they are in a restaurant that undisciplined children are running amok and ruining their meal.

Good parents know the different between a smack on the legs or bottom as a reprimand and abusing a child.

Because I did occasionally smack mine they knew I would take no nonsense so I rarely had to. Consequently a look or a stern voice would usually do the trick if they were misbehaving.

And to those who say that smacking creates abusers; my DS does not smack my GDs. He is fairly strict about good manners or if they fight. Usually by grabbing them by the arm and walking them to a seat for a talking to. But they are more gentle than my 3 boys and don't often fight or attempt dare devil stunts.

In my view, it would do more harm than good to ban smacking entirely. And I completely agree with Deeda that it quickly shows the behaviour was wrong without torturing the child and possibly causing psychological damage. Twisting tiny minds with confusing psychological games of deprivation or threats to send them away is more damaging.

We are never going to get agreement about punishment. To smack or not to smack, that is the question. In many countries the belt is the punishment of choice for unruly children, Here a light quick smack is now a crime wothy of capital punishment. As an empty headed idiot I did smack my children but it was rare as I was lucky enough to have reasonably well-behaved children.
My daughter married a man who occasionally smacked their only child and now she is 23 she does not hold it against him, They have a loving relationship. I think that is the point: if a light smack is given for misbehaviour, but not threats of losing parental love, or toys being thrown away, or longed for treats with-held. this makes a child feel miserable and unhappy. They understand a quick smack followed up by mum or dad saying "I just had to smack you because of what you did, but I still love you."

When an adult hits a child, it’s not even the pain that is the issue, it’s the message it sends. It’s ok if you’re bigger and stronger to physically attack someone smaller and weaker.

I went to my first school in Scotland. There, if we were naughty, we got the ‘strop’, a leather strap cut into ribbons at one end -a miniature cat o’ nine tails. This was used on the palm of the hand and did it sting!! If we were caught licking the hand on the way to the front of the class (rumour had it that it reduced the pain) we were given an extra one. I don’t think it had any lasting effect on me but, if I imagine putting a four or five year old through that now, I am horrified. The teacher was a previously retired lady who had been called back because of a shortage of teachers due to WWII. I suspect that her methods were old-fashioned even then.

My thoughts too, when Scotland were holding their independence vote, I thought that they were very lucky to have that opportunity. I would love the opportunity of voting for the North of England to be independent from those London centrist politicians who don't appear to even know we exist.

There is absolutely no evidence at all that young people today who behave badly wherever reasoned with in their upbringing - almost certainly the reverse. They were probably never taught to think about their reactions and behaviour and learned that shouting, screaming, threatening and hitting out were the ways to behave. Bringing up children properly never ever ever needs to involve physical punishment - you are not allowed to physically punish adults with impunity so why children?

" Learned behaviour " from who and why, Trisher ?

I join the list of the empty headed idiots too !
The idea of being "reasoned with" that seems prevalent at the moment makes me wonder if it has any bearing on the horrendous way that some teenagers behave now. Do you reckon that the killers of so many teens that are being stabbed to death ( and worse, one lad from nearby was then attacked with a hammer that his assailant went home to fetch) could be "reasoned with"??

What is right about hitting (that is what it is, do not dress it up as smacking) a vunerable human being.

My father often had the belt at school.
His crime?
He was deaf and could not hear the teacher.

The fact that their parents in many cases behave in exactly the same manner EllanVannin. It's learned behaviour.

I'd previously asked what makes children and young adults obnoxious with no respect for the law.
Nothing to do with " residential schools ".

This "Oh I was smacked and it never did me any harm" attitude is puzzling. The point is did it do any good? And the evidence is that physical punishment never has improved most children's behaviour. Those children who were mostly good and only needed one smack would have been good anyway and those children who needed to be regularly smacked regarded it as something of a status symbol and went on mis-behaving.
If parents are having trouble dealing with their children they need coping strategies not the right to smack.

It isn't either smacking or ridiculous emotional threats. Hopefully its about parents remaining patient, calm and setting clear limits on their children's behaviour. Most parents manage this well.
The children who are described as 'ferrel' or find themselves excluded from main stream so vulnerable to all kinds of horrors are most likely to be children who have experienced physical and emotional abuse.
The reason some people didn't realise many children have emotional, developmental or behavioural problems until relatively recently, is because those children were shunted off to residential schools at a very early age. There were also day 'special schools' which were closed down along with the residential schools.
Many children sent off to residential schools were children whose needs were being neglected at home. Boys particularly were often described as 'running wild' and in need of the discipline at the residential schools. Those children are now parents themselves and no surprise they're struggling.

Well I managed perfectly well with no smacking ( as does dd) and without the utter stupidity of taking away toys, treats, iPods etc. You can’t justify smacking by saying other punishments are worse when they aren’t needed either.

I smacked my children occasionally when they were little, and they've both grown up to be lovely, kind, generous, adults. And they never needed to be smacked after four-years old.

Now, parents are told not to smack, so they try other things like banning ipods, taking toys away, not allowing treats, etc. These punishments last for days, whereas a quick smack is over and done with, and forgotten.

Animals 'smack' their young. (Years ago, a bitch we had, regularly 'cuffed' her puppies when they got over-exuberant.) And have you ever watched bears with their cubs? They clout them all the time! So I think it's a natural, parental, reaction to naughtiness, imminent danger, etc.

My daughter and her husband vowed that they would never smack their daughter. She is now five. All the taking away of toys, etc. hasn't worked. She is naughty and quite rude to them at times. In desperation, they have had to resort to smacking. Bit late, in my opinion, but we shall see.

Elreldyslexia wasn't recognised until fairly recently ,my OH recently went to the funeral of an old friend whose best friend was Jackie Stewart the racing driver,he's dyslexic he was told he was dumb,stupid thick etc etc .Was never given any assistance and wasn't diagnosed as dyslexic until he was well into adulthood .Sure he's done very well in life but if his dad hadn't had the local garage he might have been left to flounder as there wasn't anyone who wanted a young man with his educational problems .
Jackie said at the funeral that if it hadn't been for his friend ( the deceased) giving him assistance with everyday things he couldn't do he wouldn't have got anywhere in racing or anywhere else . Thank goodness times have changed and we dont belt kids for needing help.

Re DB - absolutely. He was not allowed to take O levels and was told to train as a piano tuner. All the system. saw was his blindness and that’s again part of the whole change in how disability is now conceptualised through the social model of disability rather than the physical ( or mental) disability itself. I think we sometimes forget how far we’ve come and it’s a pity that scarce resources are threatening the educational opportunities again of children with SEN. Parents have to fight incredibly hard for help now

When you think about it what David blunkett personally achieved was incredibly.