Should children recieve more discipline?

There is only one lesson i think is 100 necessary to teach a kid... Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. As long as the kid fully, and i mean fully understands that concept. he/she should be a great person. (its not likely for anyone to understand that but just think if we all did)

« Last edited by charly961 on Jul 2nd 2010 »

Look where the generation that was beat has taken us. Continuous violence, constant wars. Physical punishment teaches kids its acceptable, and I'm sorry to burst your bubble but if it was we wouldn't have police...




Also, how is it 'civilians' get thrown in jail for killing, but Soldiers get payed to do the same thing with a bigger gun?
Not saying they (soldiers) are in anyway in the wrong, its just our world has so many hypocritical aspects

« Last edited by charly961 on Jul 2nd 2010 »

Please don't double post. Just edit the first post to say everything you need to say.

charly961 said:

Look where the generation that was beat has taken us. Continuous violence, constant wars. Physical punishment teaches kids its acceptable, and I'm sorry to burst your bubble but if it was we wouldn't have police...




Also, how is it 'civilians' get thrown in jail for killing, but Soldiers get payed to do the same thing with a bigger gun?
Not saying they (soldiers) are in anyway in the wrong, its just our world has so many hypocritical aspects

'There is only one lesson i think is 100 necessary to teach a kid... Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. As long as the kid fully, and i mean fully understands that concept. he/she should be a great person. (its not likely for anyone to understand that but just think if we all did) '

I understand where you are coming from, the idea is good in theory but in practice..I don't know. What a child believes is acceptable is massively influenced by the environment they grow up in. For example if a child is knocked around at home, even if the child didn't like it, they may view it as acceptable when they grow up. However it might well be a mute point, parents who raise kids like that are unlikely to be teaching them 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you' in the first place anyway.

I feel that your second paragragh of your 2nd post is for a different debate.

« Last edited by super craig on Jul 2nd 2010 »

Do unto others as you would have then do unto you. The idea is wonderful but alot of kids find it fun to bully others. And i doubt its because of a lack of friends.

If a child was to be puched around alot then when they grow up they may do it because they learned, even though it hurt them and they didn't like it, it is acceptable. Or in some cases they will hate the idea entirely. But it is a 50/50 chance.

Those who are punished more, may act out in a form of defiance to this and doing more would either break them or just fuel the fire.

Those who aren't may act out for other reasons entirely.

If children should recieve more discipline, then where do we draw the line?
If one kid acts out and punches another should they be punished in a more severe way?
If one kid who is mentally retarded (medical term) punches another should they be punished in a more severe way?
That is kinda hard to choose. Both had learned it was wrong. But how should you discipline both? Egual or Unequal?

There is also, what is the difference between severe discipline and physical assualt?
In some cases it is apparent but others it isn't.
Apparent Example? "A child named 'it'" was a book written on this.

If a parent hits a child it will do one of two things it will make the kid fear there parents or it will make the kid hate his parents wich could lead to serious things in the furture unstable temper,fear of some things maybe even make a serial killer

That doesn't really seem a logical progression to me. Yes, it could have those effects but in the times when spanking was common were there huge numbers of serial killers roaming the world?

I believe there are better ways to discipline a child but to say that spanking will invariably lead to either the child fearing their parents or the child becoming a serial killer is a little extreme...

i was raised with good dicipline, and i believe that i am a better person for it. i have good morals and beliefs, i know how to treat others and i help anyone who asks for it. i know others who have parents that just let them run around and do what they want.... and generally those are the people that get in trouble a lot. i have a friend who is 15 and his mother lets him smoke, both cigarettes and marajuana, and i am pretty sure he drinks as well. now i have met his mother once and she looks like a crack head herself. so the point i am trying to make here is that some people are diciplined and some arent... but we all knew that already.. what i do believe is that everybody should be diciplined on the same level. now the fact that we dont that dicipline equality gives someone more to look for when in the dating society, but that is a different topic. so on that note i also think that people are fine the way we are. we cant all be good people, there would be less variety in the types of people.

The problem is no matter how you discipline a child you can`t say for certain how they will end up. Some children are abused their whole lives and hate it so much that they help others to make sure they don`t go through that. Another child with the same experiences may end up as a messed up criminal. I know of many people who were raised by religious family only to become resentful toward religion. I know a classmate who mocks his parents belief that Obama is a terrorist. It simply has to do with how the child ends up thinking.

Well it is different for everyone. You can't come up with a definant answer. Every child will go through different experiences with different personalities. Two kids could have the exact same personalities and both abused. And end up differently due to tons of things. how they grew up, neighborhood, family, and other important stuff. Were they poor or rich? Never had to worry about things like food, clothes, school, living needs.

I think they should get different punishments in school. Today the amount of detentions a student has is like a trophy. People don't care about getting one. it might ruin a plan but it isn't big enough to do anything.

It's not schools. It's the bloody parents.

If a child is raised with boundaries, and consistency with punishments, & taught to respect those worthy of respect, then that will translate over into their lives when their older, at school & in work.

Time-outs, using a method taught on the T.V show "The Supernanny" works brilliantly. The goes for more extreme punishments of taking toys & such away from children. Especially out of their room & leaving them only a dresser/chest of drawers and a bed. Giving back items when the child behaives, and taking them away again when they're naughty.

Some people may say the same thing for the more violent alternative, although I've personally never met someone that doesn't grow up resentful & spiteful at being abused as a child, and I speak from personal experience about growing up resentful & spiteful.

Oh yes not going in to the the whole violent kids thing but kids today are just bratty and need to stop begin treated like angels parents learn to control your kids or it will just get even worse.

Well, might as well give the debate forum a go.
*Slowly scoots into the firing line with a blindfold on.*

It all really depends on the individual child, does it not? You obviously don't want to severely punish a good child for making a small mistake, while at the same time, you don't want to give a very 'bad' child a slap on the wrist, calling it a day. It's moreover punishing the child to such a point where they won't overstep the boundary that has been placed before them.

Yes, I do believe in the saying 'Don't spare the rod and spoil the children'. If a child is going down the wrong path, the parent/guardian/overseer of said child needs to put their foot down and point them in another direction, one way or the other (Note that that doesn't mean a bloody beating like my parents did with me).

I've only skimmed over this topic, but darkraiarceus911 seems to be a prime example of the good child. He/She knows the boundary, reason why he/she hasn't been punished all that much. ...I think I'll just stop here, don't want to ramble on.

sphynxx said:

It's not schools. It's the bloody parents.

If a child is raised with boundaries, and consistency with punishments, & taught to respect those worthy of respect, then that will translate over into their lives when their older, at school & in work.

Time-outs, using a method taught on the T.V show "The Supernanny" works brilliantly. The goes for more extreme punishments of taking toys & such away from children. Especially out of their room & leaving them only a dresser/chest of drawers and a bed. Giving back items when the child behaives, and taking them away again when they're naughty.

Some people may say the same thing for the more violent alternative, although I've personally never met someone that doesn't grow up resentful & spiteful at being abused as a child, and I speak from personal experience about growing up resentful & spiteful.

Schools play an important part in raising a child but I agree there sometimes appears to be this idea that its totally the school's responsiblity and the parents don't need to do anything, obviously your only at school 6 odd hours a day, the rest of the time its up to the parents.

Going down the more 'aggressive' route may sort out the problems better in the short term but as you've mentioned all it leads to is resent further down the line. If you truely want to get the best out of someone you don't stand over them and berate them 24/7, you need a balance. It would be interesting to see how many of those that punish bad behaviour by smacking etc deal with rewarding good behaviour. No evidence to back this up but I've got a feeling that those families that hit their kids for the smallest punishment are unlikely to be big on giving rewards out in the reverse situation.

There was a show on a while back which to took 2 professionals on child control or whatever you call it , one from the ultra strict and the other from a more 'caring' outlook at gave them problem children to sort out. I'm afraid I didn't catch it but I'll have a look to see if I can find anything. I mention this because if anyone can find information on TV shows its you

Forgoten_Scars said:

Well, might as well give the debate forum a go.
*Slowly scoots into the firing line with a blindfold on.*

It all really depends on the individual child, does it not? You obviously don't want to severely punish a good child for making a small mistake, while at the same time, you don't want to give a very 'bad' child a slap on the wrist, calling it a day. It's moreover punishing the child to such a point where they won't overstep the boundary that has been placed before them.

Yes, I do believe in the saying 'Don't spare the rod and spoil the children'. If a child is going down the wrong path, the parent/guardian/overseer of said child needs to put their foot down and point them in another direction, one way or the other (Note that that doesn't mean a bloody beating like my parents did with me).

I've only skimmed over this topic, but darkraiarceus911 seems to be a prime example of the good child. He/She knows the boundary, reason why he/she hasn't been punished all that much. ...I think I'll just stop here, don't want to ramble on.

*cocks gun* xD

I agree with what you're saying.

Except in saying that it depends on the child - I would say it depends on the parents & their ability to reinforce routine and boundaries.

We tended to get a little sidetracked on physical punishment vs nonphysical punishment lol Which I just realised xD

But for the text in red - Thats the issue here. People believe that discipline equats to either "you're being naughty stop it" or smacking/other physical means of deterance, when it really isn't.

I dont believe in physical punishment at all. My father beat me whenever I did anything wrong, and all it ever did was make me think "I can't do anything because I'm going to get hit" not "oh thats bad, hes hitting me because I shouldn't do that".

Ever see the show Supernanny with Jo Frost? Simple steps. Setting strict routines. Enforcing those routines & using a consequence & rewards systems are proven & effective means of controlling even the most unruly child. There really is no need for physical violence. If parents were to step up their game & use these methods, their children wouldn't be needing more discipline.

After all, 9 times out of 10 it isn't a childs fault they act a certain way. It's the parents, who have more than likely been too lazy/inconsistent.

Craig said:

There was a show on a while back which to took 2 professionals on child control or whatever you call it , one from the ultra strict and the other from a more 'caring' outlook at gave them problem children to sort out. I'm afraid I didn't catch it but I'll have a look to see if I can find anything. I mention this because if anyone can find information on TV shows its you

Might need more info to go on to be able to find it. Partial name? Names of the "professionals? Air date & production company?

But as for the part of your post I left out - I have to say, speaking from personal experience, parents that are constantly negative towarsd their children will almost NEVER praise a child or reward positive behaivour. It's usually seen as a repreeve (spellin? Minds gone blank) from the negative.

*Pulls a Johnny Knoxville and puts a lit cigarette in mouth, waiting to get run over by a bull... or bullet in this case.*

Sphynxx, as far as what you're saying, it's good. If you can find a nonviolent alternative to all the punishment, it's good; More power to you. Problem is, with families these days, you can't really keep up all those routines. Punishment for wrong doings is a fall back that most people take.

Never seen the movie, but from the nanny part in it, I'm guessing that it was a person that was ALWAYS there to take care of the kids. Keep an eye on them, you know? Parents in real life have jobs and other things to do, meaning they can't be around their kids all the time. Something comes up as far as the kid doing wrong, it generally results in a punishment to some degree, which I do believe should take place. Keep all the discipline going.

Lets be honest, the whole point of raising a kid is to prepare them for the future, right? All the punishment is to make sure they do right when they're grown. A spanking is pretty light compared to what happens when you grow up. You screw up with a cop when you're older, you're going to get sodomized with a nightstick.

^I'm well aware of the responsiblities & commitments parents have, but that doesn't excuse them for getting lazy & treating each incident of bad behaviour as an isolated incident.

Which is what violent methods do. They don't treat & resolve the cause of the behaviour & the mind set that goes behind it. It's a temporary solution.

Routines, time outs, reward & consequence programs establish a mindset within children that is universal and most importantly, consistent with punishments.

Say a child of 6 years old throws his toys around. A smack isn't likely to solve that behaviour, it's only going to be a temporary solution. If you take the childs toys away, 1) he cannot throw them anymore & 2) if you explain calmy, get down to their level (which is a technique taught on the Supernanny TV show) and say to them "throwing your toys is wrong, so I'm going to take them away from you, you're going into time out. You will get them back if you can show me you can behaive." a child is more likely going to realise the error of said behaviour & less inclinded to repeat it.

Once a child is established within that kind of routine of reward & consequence, instances of negative behaviour decrease, as they know the more they act out, the less toys, rewards & praise they'll get.

After all, the thing children strive the most for, is parental acceptance & love. If a child is misbehaving & is only ever shown negative emotions, without any praise or love at all, smacking a child will never work.

This is something I've seen over the years through watching my mother look after my neices & nephews, cousins etc. As well as on various parenting T.V shows.

Derek said:

Lets be honest, the whole point of raising a kid is to prepare them for the future, right? All the punishment is to make sure they do right when they're grown. A spanking is pretty light compared to what happens when you grow up. You screw up with a cop when you're older, you're going to get sodomized with a nightstick.

Perhaps that's what happens where you live, but in most places that is a very rare occurance. My neice, who is 4 &a half, used to get smacked by her father until I stepped in & tore him a new one. Now, she's perfectly behaived & is following, thanks to myself, my mother & her mother, the consequence & rewards system I explained above.

She saw a man get beaten up outside a pub, and because of the fact she was "puunished" by getting smacked, she thought the guy had been naughty & asked me why the Police were arresting the two men (she's very, very intelligent) & I said because hitting another person is illegal & naughty. So she asked me why her father wasn't arrested because he hit her (never hard, but still). Which emphasises my point that violence against children should be treated the same way as violence against an adult is - Criminally.

« Last edited by sphynxx on Oct 31st 2010 »

...I'm going to take a wild guess and assume you mean a smack to the face when you say smack all those times. You just don't do that. You put them on a bed, remove the pants, and lay a nice firm hand to their backside. Doesn't really hurt as much as a smack to the face, but it gets the point across.

That guy over thurr said:

After all, the thing children strive the most for, is parental acceptance & love

That, right there. It's true in most cases. By punishing, the parents are in some way showing love, though the child might not see it at the time. If they didn't love, they probably wouldn't care that the kid messed up. What would be the first thing to go through your head after a spanking? If I had to guess for the majority of people, it would be a wanting to have the love back. Strive to do better, while at the same time, keeping something you also said in mind.

Again, that guy over thurr said:

My father beat me whenever I did anything wrong, and all it ever did was make me think "I can't do anything because I'm going to get hit" not "oh thats bad, hes hitting me because I shouldn't do that".

While, as I've already said, I don't believe in a beating, I do believe in punishment enough to get the point across. Don't do wrong is the bottom line. True, a fear that you're going to get hit isn't the best way, but it does make you think about your actions before you do anything, right? Less likely to be a royal screw up.

Oh, how I do wish your system worked in all cases. How I wish all families could work with rewards and such. Would make things better, but there would probably still be a need for mild physical punishment in there somewhere. Sorry if this isn't making much sense. Really tired right now.

Derek said:

...I'm going to take a wild guess and assume you mean a smack to the face when you say smack all those times. You just don't do that. You put them on a bed, remove the pants, and lay a nice firm hand to their backside. Doesn't really hurt as much as a smack to the face, but it gets the point across.

Forgive me, but "remove the pants and lay a nice firm hand to their backside" simply doesn't right lol.

& I was referring to smacks on the wrist/hand as well as the backside. I've never, once in my years of caring for the younger children in my family seen a positive outcome for physical violence as a form of punishment.

Derek... again =D said:

By punishing, the parents are in some way showing love, though the child might not see it at the time. If they didn't love, they probably wouldn't care that the kid messed up. What would be the first thing to go through your head after a spanking? If I had to guess for the majority of people, it would be a wanting to have the love back. Strive to do better, while at the same time, keeping something you also said in mind.

I can't see it that way. If a parent truly loved their child & wanted to administer effective punishment - They wouldnt resort to violence. There are other methods which convey their love for their child in a much, much clearer way.

Whenever I was punished, I didn't think "I want my father to love me & stop hitting me" it was "my father doesn't love me & I can't do anything right" It was never a strive to do better. It was a strive to do nothing to get me hit.

Every single time I've ever seen an adult, whether this be in public, or family or friends use physical violence as a form of punishment, it comes out of frustration. There would be no frustration if a parent actually did their jobs.

As I said, I understand commitments that parents can have, but the method I use is not time consuming. It's just as quick as smacking a child, but the flow on effects last much longer. Sure, it may be tough for the first few times, but once the routine is set, it lasts.

The entire debate boils down to one thing when you really think about it - Sheer laziness on the parents part. Children don't need more discipline. Parents do lol

« Last edited by sphynxx on Oct 31st 2010 »