I don't even get how that is relevant.

I would have never have done that as a child, never. Why? Because my parents were actually decent, and I wasn't totally maladjusted. If your child is shit, you are shit. And you'll just have to live with that, OR get angry at child/self and attack them.

EDIT: I'm reminded of Larkin's poem, 'This Be The Verse': http://www.artofeurope.com/larkin/lar2.htm

Dude thats bullshit. You can try and try as you wish to be a good parent but some kids are just little shit tards.

Incorrect, children are not born shit-tards, they are grown to be shit-tards.

Do you think Hitler was evil from birth?

And don't call me dude, you yuppie.

Hey I see what you're saying, but there's more to the issue then bad parenting. Parents don't teach their son to smack his younger sister. He picks that up at school or whatever. We're talking about ways to dicipline kids when they do go wrong. Not how to prevent them going wrong.

And I'll call you dude whenever I feel like it, dude.

I was normally a good child, agreeably that was due to good parenting. However it was good parenting because I was smacked when I did wrong, and I picked up on it well. When you are young and you havent done something before you have no concept of wether it is right or wrong, You learn that by wether the consequences of your actions turn out to be good or bad.

And he's right, he can call you dude whenever he likes and you cant do much about it. His custom title gives away that he is more inportant then you in Alcars eyes.

Sigh. Your line of argument goes NOWHERE.

Okay, so the issue we're now dealing with is what to do when kids DO go bad, which they all do at some point. Well, we don't hit them for one, which is the basest, easiest and worst reply to such behaviour. And the way to actually teach your son to hit his sister is by hitting him, so well done there, bozo. Children are far harder to reason with than adults, this is true, that's why the less intelligent, more impulsive and quick to temper parents hit their children rather than try alternative stratagems.

So, here you say, but what if the child simply will not respond to any amount of alternative ways to tackle misbehaviour? Okay, lets hit them. They cry and they stop. Job done. But, oh wait, 5 minutes later, they're acting up again! What to do, what to do, cos smacking is meant to me this final resort, right? The one thing to get them to quit it. Shit, shit, what to do, what to do.

Oh, I know, lets murder them.

In my life, I have found smacking to be of limited use and doesn't actually TEACH the child anything about their behaviour, there's no responsibility, just the consequence, which is short lived, and even if it weren't, children do not think long-term. When you were doing those naughty things when you were a child, were you constantly fretting about being caught and getting seen to (oo-er)? Were you fuck as like. Of course, I'm sure you knew you were doing wrong, but you did it anyway.

Need to smack = Bad parenting.

Oh my god, you mean I can't actually control his mind over this "internet" thing?! Anyway, you are incorrect in your assumption that rank means you have more rights (beyond the VIP Lounge). And you're also incorrect that Alcar considers him more important, since Alcar and I were once lovers for a brief period, where he would soothe my insecurities by whispering sweet-nothings into my ear before sucking my cock.

I'm still not hearing any alternatives from you that actualy work, btw.

Smacking can be one of the best diciplinary methods when done RIGHT. By all means, OFCOURSE you first TELL the kid he's doing wrong. You make it very clear to him that what he's doing is bad. Any normal kid will by that time stop what he/she is doing. But if the kid is just gonna go on while understanding that what he's doing is wrong, then he's doing it on purpose and that deserves a punishment, thats life. It's also how life is going to be when he's gonna grow up so you might as well teach him now.

There's action = reaction. Kid purposfully not listening and the kid gets a punishment. Thats how a kid should be raised, plain and simple. The form of punishment used is up to the parents. If you wanna take away their gameboy or take away his toys then go right ahead if you think that works. And if that works then hey, thats great. But if it doesn't, then smacking (not beating the crap out off) should do the trick just fine.

And MF, any kid above 6 can perfectly think by itself that if he knowingly does something bad he will get in trouble for it. Any kid that can't do that is retarded.

Urgh, this is such a non-topic, it's unbelievable. I have not listed any alternatives because I am not a parent, and can barely remember what methods were used on me as a child. Well, I suppose I could use all of Supernanny's Top Tips, but such stealing would seem a tad disingenuous. Although, on that show, they seemed to work wonders, if the parents followed them through correctly and behaved in a certain way.

Okay, thought of an instance. I'm about 7. Out for a meal, think it was in Wales, nice country, starting to get fidgety, like kids do. Before that escalated any further, my dad took me to a nearby playground between courses to allow me to let off steam, came back perfectly calm. Now, I'm sure most parents would have simply told the child to stop it, which would doubtful work, and, yeah, you'd probably end up giving them a smack.

My god, this is all SO utterly basic. And don't give me all this 'that's life!' bollocks. They're children. Why not show them porn tapes for tips? I mean, they gotta know someday, yeah? Fuck off. You're idiotic. If you have a child who does NOT respond to simply psychological tricks then that's YOUR fault, that's life! Deal with your mistakes. And that means you have an unruly child. That's because you were a crap parent. Now you have made this almighty cock-up, the only way to tackle misdemeanours is to hit them? Sad outlook, but you only have yourself to blame.

Anyway, it's hardly surprising that ANYONE on this forum would disagree with smacking children. The height of politics for you lot is that George Bush is stupid, the height of culture is that America is shit and computer games are cool. Humanity is crap! Children are little twats! It's all teenage, teeny-bop faux-intellectual, sound-bite discussion where you all show us how cool and engaging you really are.

If you can, as an adult, strike a child and still hold your head high - and if you CAN'T, then you shouldn't do it - then I pity you as a human being.

Hypocrite QFT.

Hey, I personaly would throw a kid into a wall just for existing. But for the purpose of the discussion I'm pretending to actualy be a human being, okay?

The entire smacking debate has only been around for the last generation of people. It's worked on everyone else! Ask your parents, did their parents ever smack them? Yes they did, it was a normal thing to do when you did something wrong. If you did something wrong then your dad would come out and smack you on the butt. Soft at first, harder if you keep going. And it's not cruel if it WORKS. Ask any guy over 40. You'd grab a pencil and draw on the wall ONCE! ONCE! After that your dad would come out and give you such an earfull that you wouldn't even think of doing it again. It's effective, and if smacking your kids would create evil people then we would be far beyond WWXIII by now.

Raising a kid gives you, as a parent, the responsibility to TEACH the child whats right and wrong. Thats your moral and lawfull obligation when you have a kid. You're not going to teach the kid anything by 'tricking it'. It's not going to learn to be quiet in a restaurant if dad takes him out to the playground before every meal. A kid needs to learn from their mistakes, thats what raising a child is all about. Think about it, go back and check all those things your learned not to do because it gets you in trouble. Touching a hot iron is bad... you do that once and never again. Walking against the edge of a table is bad, you do that once and then you're more carefull. Using permanent marker on your dad's TV is bad, you do that once and then you and your sore ass will know never to do that again.

I have my good share of nieces and nephews to know what is good and what is bad parenting. My brother's kids are great, my sisters kids are absolute hell. My sister and her boyfriend use verbal punishment, doesn't work for shit. I was at my nephews birthday party last saturday and the kids there were told not to splash in the pool to much. Sisters kid was splashing all over everyone and for some reason they thought that telling him over and over and over and over and over and over again was a good idea. Didn't work. Later on, my brothers kid splashed to much too so my brother steps up to him, kneels down to him, tells him normaly not to splash to much and then goes off again. Kids being kids in large numbers, the splashing continues 5 minutes later so he goes back there, raises his voice and tells him one last time that he needs to stop splashing. The kid didn't splash for the remainder of the night because he knew he'd get buttwhipped if his dad had to come back for a third time. The other kid happily splashed away and for the remainder of the night his parents told him: Don't splash, don't splash... don't splash. And at one point, after about the 50th time they told him, I could just see him ignoring his parents all together. They're not gonna do anything anyway so why the hell would he stop.

Children are not as stupid as you think, I know I was perfectly aware of what I was doing at the age of 7. I was also aware of the things I did wrong and what the results would be for me so I tried to avoid doing something wrong on purpose. And if I did do something wrong on purpose, then I knew what to expect and before my dad even stood all the way up from his chair I was already in my room hoping he wouldn't come up and already genuinly regreting what I did. Yes it's a fear based tactic but it does work, works a lot better then constantly telling a kid "not to do that..." Especialy since it's something that, if done right, you only have to establish once. Once the kid knows the routine for doing something bad, he will avoid it at all possible costs. My brothers kid is a perfect example. You smack em once for the first time and when done right you won't have any problems with them untill they reach puberty.

MF, you have no idea, so please just shut yer trap.

Havoc? Your on track, keep going, buds.

Havoc is, in my opinion, absolutely right. I'm not a parent (I'm 15 fer Odd's sake), but I know my parents smacked me if I did anything bad when I was young (especially my father). Nowadays I'm just nice enough to not to anything bad on purpose, seeing as the laws in my country say that a parent who smacks their kids is the same as an abusive, drunken husband beating his wife with a bag of bricks (which is just WTF to me). And because my father smacked me when I was very young, I sorta have this thing where I just instictively fear him when he's angry. Which I actually find very depressing, but still. It worked.

I've kinda goit the same thing, but I am being more stand up to my father, they don't have to right to intimidate you unnecessarily.

Okay, I'm only quoting this bit, cos the rest I haven't read.

Now, the first paragraph is obviously a sly piece of satire on your part in response to my description of the sheer idiocy you and basically everyone else (i.e. everyone who isn't me on this thread) displays. Or maybe it's just you being incredibly stupid. Yeah, actually, yes, it's probably the latter.

Now, the second part. I don't see your point, and that's no fault of my own, that's because you don't actually have one, you sham-fuck. They used to do a whole heap of stupid crap 'Back in the Day', sooo... what's your point? That it didn't harm them, so lets keep going? Stupid, stupid, stupid. As a child I was sexually abused. Now, this fact doesn't bother me all that much at all and has not shaped me in any particular fashion. So... lets bugger teh kids, yeah? Whatever. You and your debate are vapid and hollow. Shame on you, you miserable piece of cancer.

And finally:

Lets all clap Kastere for this wonderful example of his all-pervading-fucking-horribleness.

Yea using a completely retarded situation to prove mine wrong is the way to go dude. That will win you tons of debates in the future... And read my post next time you want to reply, it helps.

This has been the most assinine reading experience of my life. I intend to hit you.

Ugh, I won't even start the whole "I didn't fucking know" debate about your sexual harassment as a kid, but Havoc has a point, you know all of those Horrible, bratty kids that all just Scream and Yell that can get away with anything because their parents are stupid shitheads that can't learn to grab an arm, or raise their voice? imagine if ALL of children were raised like that. One generation of Shrieking monsters that become Doctors, and Lawyers, and Poignant Internet Satirists?

You can't. You can't picture it, because order is kept with some sort of Corporal punishment.
I am not saying that being hit in the face with a Motor Cycle helmet is justified as consequence for eating one cookie too many. But christ, kids need to learn that being hit hurts, and that if you hit someone else, it will hurt them, and though they may apply this in a way thats the exact opposite of the message I am trying to send, it also gives us a brief understanding on why hurting is wrong, I.E.: if you don't like it, don't do it.

Not smacking a child for commiting a crime or doing something irresponsible is stupid, because the message must be layed out that doing it will get you knee deep in shit.

Havoc is still right, Mutual Friend hasn't a clue.

My daughter is quite capable of understanding boundaries without being beaten and that's because I care enough about her to teach her.

So you prefer to instill terror and blind obedience in a child over encouraging reason and self-respect?

EDIT: Kastere, Havoc, and anyone else that encourages corporal punishment is a fucking idiot.

ALright, but if she has done something wrong, would you raise your voice to her? not screaming match worthy, but just to get the message across? I guess that being a total dick about hitting kids doesn't really help what I am trying to say, but basically, this is my point.

A situation in which the child is doing something (And they are over the age of 8, anything below that is repulsive.) that is causing harm to something or someone, and after you've-

1. Told them to stop.
2. Told them to stop louder than the first time.
3. Threatened to count to three.
4. Counted to three.
5. Told them to go to their room.
6. Threatened to remove privileges.
7. Called your spouse/partner for support. (This is depending on if you are married/live with your partner or if your partner can administer some sort of authority that dwarfs yours.)
8. Had your partner do steps 4,5, and 6.

After all of this your child continues to cause a ruckus, you pick them up (gently) and send them to their room.
While in their room your child begins to thrash and break things, you tell them, to stop but they wont, so you enter their room.
They enter tantrum status.
You grab them by the shoulders, but they won't stop, somehow they manage to escape your grasp and leave their room for further pursuits.

You have managed to catch them, have returned to their room, and tell them that the next time they do that, they will be SEVERELY consequensed.

They do it again, so you spank them. Once.
You tell them that it isn't right that you should have to do that because of their behavior.
This single act of discipline removes much grief and hardship to be had after they realise they can hurt others through their actions.

There.
Theres my point.
It works.
It worked on me, at least.

EDIT: And no, used, intimidation is innaprpriate and I think it is wrong, and any parent that believes it works should take a look on what it did for them.
And beating kids is wrong, in so, SO many ways.

Oh ffs people is it still not clear. We're not saying this should be a universal thing, no-one is encouraging beating the crap out of your kid. HOWEVER, that does NOT mean that it can't be used as one of many ways to dicipline your child.

Children CAN be little fucktardbratsthings. Not always, but SOME of them are. And wether that is because there's a retarded kid at the daycare, it's got ADHD, it watches to much TV or because you jammed your foot up its ass, some kids are just downright fucking anoying. Some kids are just so anoying I'd have no problem introducing them to the front of a speeding train. HECK my own nephew, the kid splashing the water, I could hang him out to dry on a flagpole on top of the Empire State Building and wait for the crows to pick him apart.
Some kids just are anoying, thats a fact of life. OANST if you have been blessed with a quiet little girl that gives you no trouble at all, then good on ya, you're in luck. But just the same she could have been a screaming little brat driving you absolutely insane (not insulting your doughter here, ofcourse). There are people who do have screaming little brats and methods that might work on one kid do not always work on the other. Saying that all kids are universaly the same is the most stupid randomly idiotic and retarded thing I have ever heard. Some kids are worse then others, thats a fact.

Hitting should always be a last resort, always under any circumstance, but any responsible parent should be able to see it when normal punishment isn't working anymore.

Conclusion: Some kids need it, period. And if you think any kid can be punished with only your voice then please come meet my nephew.

Then again, instead of "1", you could, say, explain to them exactly why you don't want them to do what they are doing and what happens when they do, and, if possible, suggest an alternative in which to occupy themselves.

It's the difference between spending you life telling/yelling at a teenager to turn down his music, and buying him headphones for his birthday.

Goddamit Mark, stop being so feakishly smart.

I don't agree with that example. In my book a kid, no matter what age, living under my roof has to abide by my rules. If I tell him to turn the music down then he better do it because if I have to tell him a third time his radio will be thrown out the window. If he wants to enjoy loud music then let him come up with the idea of headphones himself.

When the subject of volume starts a parent/teenager blood feud, it is up to the parent to think straight, because the teenager sure as hell won't be. Besides, it kills two birds with one stone: the music problem and the birthday gift problem. Cheaper than a Cadillac, at any rate.

Teenagers rebel against authority: it's what they do, and nothing can change that. You can either present yourself as an even more imposing target or work the problem out like adults. Respect breeds respect, if you have brought up your child like that.

So, to boil everything down here, and I have automatically skipped posts by Kastere and Havoc, of course, they've yet to show any intelligence, doubt they've started now:

Good, caring parenting = No need for a slap.

Wow. At least that's one less debate middle-aged, middle class ma'ams across the land have to worry about.

Trolly Mc'Snoob.

Both sides make good points, especially Bullet. I think it depends on the child.

Only Bullet seems to be talking about teenagers, which is a whole other kettle of fish and separate from the debate.

Though he's making decent points.

He always does, he's so logical he could explain a fish at the bottom of the sea bursting into flames.

DO NOT quote me on that.

And he'd probably put it into the context of some massive hypothesis of FACT on how we're all eventually to die.

Hopefully said death explanation is relative to America's got talent

It is a well researched threat to mankind: inflammable hatchet fish. You have been warned.

But is warning enough?
Anderson Cooper says no.

I could watch that ALL DAY

Agreed....

I did, and now its not funny.
Because then this started to pop in and out of my mind.

*sigh*
This isn't Picture Wars. Keep it on topic, gents.

Child abuse and physical discipline are two very different things.

I'm not up for McCanning kids if they've been bad, but a mild tap on the hand/legs/bum and then an explanation as to why they recieved that would do.

Also, i haven't read the whole topic, but i'm sure somewhere somebody has mentioned it "teaches kids that you solve problems with violence"

In which case you'd probably have to make sure they know that you're an a authority figure, and authority figures have the 'right' to hurt if needs be.

Oh yes.

O-ho yes.

That is both epic win and epic failure.

Well done, you have destroyed the universe.

+ 10 points