WOF: That sort of thing may be even earlier in development, if really possible, this sort of thing will be built up over time. However, I clearly recall being 5 years old and perfectly capable of conscious thought and abiding to morals. Maybe the overall reasons are lack of discipline, combined with the way society works these days meaning children almost
rarely actually get to meet their parents, and parents not knowing what they're doing these days.
The best way to train animals tends to be rewarding them for good things more than disciplining for bad things, though you can't forgo the latter entirely. Maybe children aren't shown enough positive attention, the ones doing bad things in school often tend to disrupt the class and get more attention.
Everyone says the occasional beating (and this is hardly a daily occurrence or anything either) makes kids violent, and it doesn't. Maybe old discipline methods in schools should be returned. I have seen kids in school not caring about being tits in class because they have nothing to truly fear from the teacher as they can't do s*it to them, and this then results in children being able to physically and verbally abuse others and get no real punishment for it, and teachers aren't allowed to step in and break it up. They just have to watch them get pummeled. Being suspended is almost like an ASBO in a sense of not really being a punishment, and when they're given detentions, they just don't go. No one's forcing them to. Basically they're being taught it'd okay to attack other people physically etc., because no one is allowed to do anything to them. Why are the younger children virtually
allowed to physically attack other people?
If it was daily with a belt or somethnig, then maybe it's a bit excessive, but a small tap, smack, whatever in the appropriate situation does no harm. My parent's (well, my dad) were in school at the time of canes and other teacher abuse, but they're not the ones trying to murder people. It's the younger generation of today whom the law and the parents, teachers (due to the law mostly) have been far too soft on. I mostly was good myself, and did get smacked, oh, maybe once or twice, but I haven't gone murdering people, and I am capable of thinking for myself to realise that hurting other people is wrong. The law acts as if children are 100% influenced by their parents, and that they can't think for themselves, which we all know is bull
shit.
Occasional physical discipline is good. Too little or none isn't helping, but neither is it excessively. There needs to be balance.
Kids these days are actually complete a
ssholes though, maybe it's the useless underaged parents generation. The majority of Year 9 and 10's now are complete little s
hits (I'm in year 11), and certainly when I was in those years, none one in the years above or below were such nasty morons. Also the observation of younger children than that, swearing unnecessarily and misbehaving. None of the sort happened to me or anyone I knew at those ages. A Year 8 group coming up to our school managed to get into a fight with each other when they were here, too. I mean, jeez.
:
|
Parents should be able to whack their kid over the head when they feel tis needed. If I were the parents of some of these kids these days, I'd throw them of a fucking building and they still wouldn't learn!
If my kid offends someone on purpose, whack to the head.
If my kid puts up a big mouth to me or anyone else, whack to the head.
If my kid even thinks of hurting someone or something, serious whack to the head.
|
QFT.
I thought hitting was still allowed? At least in the UK, force is allowed except for if it causes bruising, which even then is quite pathetic. Parents aren't going to want to seriously harm their own child, and I can't even remember what made this idea come up in the first place. Children should be able to take the same damage they cause to others. And eye for an eye...
Also recently on the news, a family with a child already was denied an adoption because they occasionally hit their own child, despite being recommended by a childcarer, and the fact their current child is perfectly happy and healthy. She stated that she only maybe got hit "One or twice a year". That's a lame reason to deny a willing adoption. Their excuse was that the children they put up for adoption
may have come from violent families and that the beating may mentally scar them with memories. Yeah. Right. Once or twice a year is going to do cause them to be a murder/rapist/suicide or whatever. If the child can't take on hit a year without heart attacking or whatever, then they shouldn't be up for adoption since the trauma of that will be far too great. I mean, come on.
The current law on childcaring f
ucking PHAILS, however.
Kids these days!!!
" The banishment of a good smack, which would make sure the kid's would never do their misdeed again because they're scared of getting hit, is the biggest legal mistake in history. Look how kid's behave now.
