Corporal Punishment

[Royal Frankia]

I've lived through parents not being able to fully discipline a child and seen the consequences. I've dealt with social workers who've tried to plan the lives of everyone else while ignoring an abusive child that can legit throw their parents up against the wall or break their wrists.

I would say the scientific community might be wrong on this as it was wrong on gender or eugenics. Also, there is the lack of observing societies in which said discipline takes place or how much was say prevented

Slapping your child's hand to stop them from touching a redhot burner isn't abuse, it's neglect by the parent if they allow their child to burn the everliving crap out of their hand.

[Royal Frankia]

Inflicting physical pain on people in an effort to correct their behaviour doesn't sound like a useful course of action.

It's cheaper than prisons or paying for more police.

[Ifreann]

Inflicting physical pain on people in an effort to correct their behaviour doesn't sound like a useful course of action.

It's cheaper than prisons or paying for more police.

I'm fine with investing in not hurting people.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

Inflicting physical pain on people in an effort to correct their behaviour doesn't sound like a useful course of action.

Key mistake being "correct". Using the example of a hot stovetop, the lesson "don't put you hand near the stovetop" teaches nothing at all about all the correct ways to use a stove. It's at best a temporary lesson, but it will stick with the child long after the parent has forgotten all about it.

Pain as a deterrent to specific actions, does of course work. Actually touching a hot stove-top (when daddy's not looking) will cause substantial and lasting pain. The child will avoid that in future, but only because their memory will retain the exact thing they did and the exact consequence. A small pain of punishment only confuses that: they didn't actually do the thing so it doesn't imprint well, they're led to wonder why the thing is "naughty" ... and the pain being moderate they're quite likely to try it again to find out. Hopefully more carefully ...

[Royal Frankia]

It's cheaper than prisons or paying for more police.

I'm fine with investing in not hurting people.

But then more resources are requsiitoned by force from society.

[Daarwyrth]

I've lived through parents not being able to fully discipline a child and seen the consequences. I've dealt with social workers who've tried to plan the lives of everyone else while ignoring an abusive child that can legit throw their parents up against the wall or break their wrists.

I would say the scientific community might be wrong on this as it was wrong on gender or eugenics. Also, there is the lack of observing societies in which said discipline takes place or how much was say prevented

Slapping your child's hand to stop them from touching a redhot burner isn't abuse, it's neglect by the parent if they allow their child to burn the everliving crap out of their hand.

It seems you keep forgetting most people have a voice, brain and reason. You can literally explain and teach a child, without violence, that they cannot touch a burning stove. You literally can prevent a child from doing that by using your voice, brain and reason. It requires a level of maturity on the parent's part.

You're continuing to wreck your own credibility and the credibility of your "arguments".

[Kilobugya]

Also, there is the lack of observing societies in which said discipline takes place or how much was say prevented

Well, nordic societies have a very strong "no hitting children" policy, and they tend to also rank very well on not having to resort much to prison and punishments for adults. Even more evidence your way just doesn't work.

Slapping your child's hand to stop them from touching a redhot burner isn't abuse, it's neglect by the parent if they allow their child to burn the everliving crap out of their hand.

That's a false dichotomy. It's not like either you slap the hand, or you let the child burn. You can grab (without hurting him) the child's wrist or arm or even the whole child and prevent him from burning himself, then explain to him why he shouldn't do that, in a way appropriate for the child's age and personality. Slapping the child's hand might prevent the child from getting burned this one time, but it'll not prevent the child from being burned the next time he gets close to something redhot, quite the opposite, he'll quickly look around, see you're not here to slap him, and do it even more.

[Royal Frankia]

Also, there is the lack of observing societies in which said discipline takes place or how much was say prevented

Well, nordic societies have a very strong "no hitting children" policy, and they tend to also rank very well on not having to resort much to prison and punishments for adults. Even more evidence your way.

Slapping your child's hand to stop them from touching a redhot burner isn't abuse, it's neglect by the parent if they allow their child to burn the everliving crap out of their hand.

That's a false dichotomy. It's not like either you slap the hand, or you let the child burn. You can grab (without hurting him) the child's wrist or harm or even the whole child and prevent him from burning himself, then explain to him why he shouldn't do that, in a way appropriate for the child's age and personality. Slapping the child's hand might prevent the child from getting burned this one time, but it'll not prevent the child from being burned the next time he gets close to something redhot, quite the opposite, he'll quickly look around, see you're not here to slap him, and do it even more.

Nordic societies have a strong welfare tradition which reduces the need for prisons.

In that situation, letting your child burn themselves is neglect by the parent.

Issue is that patients are not there all the time due to the need for them to work themselves to death to raise a child. The lack of a parent in the lives of a child can lead to depression and other things down the line that add up for society.

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

I've lived through parents not being able to fully discipline a child and seen the consequences. I've dealt with social workers who've tried to plan the lives of everyone else while ignoring an abusive child that can legit throw their parents up against the wall or break their wrists.

I would say the scientific community might be wrong on this as it was wrong on gender or eugenics. Also, there is the lack of observing societies in which said discipline takes place or how much was say prevented

Slapping your child's hand to stop them from touching a redhot burner isn't abuse, it's neglect by the parent if they allow their child to burn the everliving crap out of their hand.

It's neglect by the parent not to take the time to teach the lesson properly. "Don't touch the stove" is hardly setting the child up well, to learn to cook later, and perhaps become a great chef.

Parents who can't properly discipline their child with humane methods, need training.

Parents who can't properly discipline their child even using violence, have a bad tendency to escalate the violence until they get a result ... typically submissive crying rather than actual obedience ... and if even that doesn't work, they've been known to kill their child.

At least trying their best with non-violent methods, seeking instruction in that if necessary, leaves open the option to use pain as punishment, as a last resort. And being wary of escalation (having hopefully learned SOMETHING from their failure with humane punishments) they'd be less likely to graduate to criminal abuse.

[Royal Frankia]

I've lived through parents not being able to fully discipline a child and seen the consequences. I've dealt with social workers who've tried to plan the lives of everyone else while ignoring an abusive child that can legit throw their parents up against the wall or break their wrists.

I would say the scientific community might be wrong on this as it was wrong on gender or eugenics. Also, there is the lack of observing societies in which said discipline takes place or how much was say prevented

Slapping your child's hand to stop them from touching a redhot burner isn't abuse, it's neglect by the parent if they allow their child to burn the everliving crap out of their hand.

It seems you keep forgetting most people have a voice, brain and reason. You can literally explain and teach a child, without violence, that they cannot touch a burning stove. You literally can prevent a child from doing that by using your voice, brain and reason. It requires a level of maturity on the parent's part.

You're continuing to wreck your own credibility and the credibility of your "arguments".

You forget that a toddler is not the at the same mental stage as a 15 year old. What I have an issue with is calling preventive action by a parent abuse, which in turn has consequences for everyone else in that household.

[Daarwyrth]

Issue is that patients are not there all the time due to the need for them to work themselves to death to raise a child. The lack of a parent in the lives of a child can lead to depression and other things down the line that add up for society.

Then the parent needs to consider whether they have the time, ability an financial means to put a child on this planet. The child doesn't ask to be born, but the parents demand that it is.

It seems you keep forgetting most people have a voice, brain and reason. You can literally explain and teach a child, without violence, that they cannot touch a burning stove. You literally can prevent a child from doing that by using your voice, brain and reason. It requires a level of maturity on the parent's part.

You're continuing to wreck your own credibility and the credibility of your "arguments".

You forget that a toddler is not the at the same mental stage as a 15 year old. What I have an issue with is calling preventive action by a parent abuse, which in turn has consequences for everyone else in that household.

A parent that cannot explain to a child - 5 years old or 15 - what is right or wrong without violence is a failed parent. You can teach discipline without violence, I am living proof of that.

[Kilobugya]

Nordic societies have a strong welfare tradition which reduces the need for prisons.

Sure, and it's one more reason to have welfare states But still does prove you wrong.

In that situation, letting your child burn themselves is neglect by the parent.

But no one is arguing for letting the child burn themselves. We are arguing for preventing it without voluntarily inflicting pain.

And if by grabbing the child's wrist to prevent him from burning itself, in the heat of action, you did it too strongly and did inflict pain, that's understandable, no one is perfect. That's different from voluntarily inflicting pain. But then you should apologize to the child for hurting him, AND yet explain why you did it, that sure you should have been gentler, but that you were scared for his well-being and overreacted. So you'll teach the child that it's good to apologize when you do harm people or overreact, that you do care for him a lot, and about the danger of burning himself.

[The New California Republic]

Inflicting physical pain on people in an effort to correct their behaviour doesn't sound like a useful course of action.

It's cheaper than prisons or paying for more police.

If the cost of saving some money is to bring back the spectacle of the scaffold, then the price is far too high.

[Zul-ar]

Alright, I particularly disliked your series of posts so now I'm going to waste a ridiculous amount of my time breaking down this argument.

Correction is required for the youth, particularly if they get into the habit of disrespecting their elders/authorities.

Correction does not have to be violent or abusive. There are superior, alternative punishment options.

A paddling at age 9 is preferable and cheaper than say the cost of housing that 18 year old in prison.

A paddling at age nine will increase the likeliness of housing that eighteen year old in prison. As shown in this study,

In the models adjusted for sociodemographic variables, harsh physical punishment was associated with an increased likelihood of most lifetime mental disorders, including major depression, dysthymia, mania, any mood disorder, specific phobia, any anxiety disorder, and any alcohol and drug abuse or dependence

In other words, corporal punishment can lead to issues with mental health/addiction, which can contribute to likeliness for delinquency & lawbreaking, and will generally mean a lower quality of life for the child.

You have to realize that when parents are working themselves to death just to have kids they can't watch everything their kids do.

If a parent does not have the resources to properly raise a child, they should find someone with the resources to do so. Send the kid to a special boarding school or camp with professionals who can take care of them. There are plenty of apps that allow parents to track their kid's phones, observe their texts, see their search history, etc. We live in a modern age where there are many options for supervision.

Heck, what happens when their brat at 18 is disrespectful in court and gets slapped with contempt of court?

There are other ways to teach a child to speak respectfully than to resort to physical violence.

What you're calling for is more intervention later when that child is an adult than say shaping that child before that child reaches adulthood.

No. Nobody is saying not to discipline your child, we're saying that there are alternative punishments that do not leave lasting mental scars on your children, and work better than abuse.

Correction is needed, would you consider slapping a child's hand before it touches a hot burner to be abuse?

False equivalency. Taking a quick action to prevent a child who is in immediate danger from getting hurt =/= beating your child for disobedience, causing future mental health issues

The child, in the event of being punished in such fashion, learns that there are consequences for their behavior.

What they learn is that they will get hit if they disobey in your presence. They will stop disobeying in your presence, out of fear for you, and then continue to disobey in secret when they believe they will not be caught. You will permanently damage their trust and they will hide things from you. They will never learn why what they did was wrong. They will have to deal with mental health issues for the rest of their lives.

If they cannot understand at that stage, they can feel. Depriving children of discipline is as abusive as depriving them of food or water knowing the long-term consequences.

Discipline does not have to be violence. Consequences do not have to be pain. Discipline does not have to be violence. Consequences do not have to be pain. Discipline does not have to be violence. Consequences do not have to be pain. Discipline does not have to be violence. How many times should I repeat this before you understand?

What happens when the brat at 18 takes a swing at a cop?

They will not do that if they have been properly raised, which can be done without violence.

Heck, are you willing to throw parents in jail for doing what they ought to do by disciplining their child if they act out?

I would prefer not to reach those extremes, but if they parent crosses the line then yes. They will lose custody of their child and face jail time.

Correction, in this sense, does not promote violence.

"Johnny, don't hit your sister. In order to teach you why you should never use violence, I will beat the shit out of you. This will be effective in teaching you a lesson."

It teaches that there are consequences for their actions, which is vital for the future of the child.

Discipline does not have to be violence. Consequences do not have to be pain.

[Ifreann]

I'm fine with investing in not hurting people.

But then more resources are requsiitoned by force from society.

The fuck does requisitioning resources from society by force mean?

[A-Series-Of-Tubes]

I've lived through parents not being able to fully discipline a child and seen the consequences. I've dealt with social workers who've tried to plan the lives of everyone else while ignoring an abusive child that can legit throw their parents up against the wall or break their wrists.

I would say the scientific community might be wrong on this as it was wrong on gender or eugenics. Also, there is the lack of observing societies in which said discipline takes place or how much was say prevented

Slapping your child's hand to stop them from touching a redhot burner isn't abuse, it's neglect by the parent if they allow their child to burn the everliving crap out of their hand.

It seems you keep forgetting most people have a voice, brain and reason. You can literally explain and teach a child, without violence, that they cannot touch a burning stove. You literally can prevent a child from doing that by using your voice, brain and reason. It requires a level of maturity on the parent's part.

You're continuing to wreck your own credibility and the credibility of your "arguments".

Yeah, typing too fast to think things through. I've done that, when set upon by multiple posters. I'll be out after this.

I've never had kids, but my impression is that "don't touch hot things" is a necessary lesson before they can even talk much. It can be taught by "guided experience" better than verbal explanation. The kid may know the words "hot" and "very" but not be able to put them together and get "too hot". If they're used to "nice hot baths" and "hot soup" then "very" escalates only as far as touching it before getting in, not don't touch it at all because it will fuck you up instantly.

I'll say again that a wood fire is a better introduction to "too hot to touch" because allowed to move cautiously towards it the child will feel discomfort and then pain, well before actually touching it and getting a burst of conductive heat. Perhaps it also triggers instincts of caution too. Be good, y'all!

[Kilobugya]

You forget that a toddler is not the at the same mental stage as a 15 year old.

Sure, I won't explain to a toddler about thermodynamics and black body radiation, like I would to a 15 years old. But I would gently grab the toddler's wrist, and say to him a clear "NO" and then something like "This is very hot, it burns. It hurts a lot. Ouch ouch ouch. Like <whatever character in a book/... the child likes and got burned or wounded>. Be careful, ok ?" (adjusting for the exact age and personality of the child).

What I have an issue with is calling preventive action by a parent abuse

No one calls "preventive action" abuse. No more than we call vaccinating a child abuse because the needle stings. We call voluntarily inflicting pain abuse. You can prevent the child from hurting himself without inflicting pain. You're the adult. And if you fail, react to strongly and inflict pain unwillingly, well, apologize and try to do better next time.

[Kilobugya]

The fuck does requisitioning resources from society by force mean?

I assume he means taxes.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

But then more resources are requisitioned by force from society.

The fuck does requisitioning resources from society by force mean?

it's when commie countries like norway and the entirety of europe steal your toothbrush in order to prevent crime instead of just hitting kids like a normal and well-adjusted person would.

[Wink Wonk We Like Stonks]

and the whole "slap your kids hand or let them burn themself" scenario is dumb. just don't let small children near the stove. additionally, if the child's hand is above the burner about to touch it, and you slap the hand, where the fuck do you think it's going to go? straight into the burner.

[The New California Republic]

But then more resources are requsiitoned by force from society.

The fuck does requisitioning resources from society by force mean?

Sounds like a euphemism that a bank robber would use, moments before entering the bank and telling everyone to get the fuck down on the floor and shouting at the tellers to step the fuck back from the counter.

[Daarwyrth]

The fuck does requisitioning resources from society by force mean?

I assume he means taxes.

Oh no! God forbid taxes are used to actually help people and create a society wherein everyone can thrive together, instead of the rich getting everything they need while the poor suffer! /S

[Kilobugya]

Oh no! God forbid taxes are used to actually help people and create a society wherein everyone can thrive together, instead of the rich getting everything they need while the poor suffer! /S

Yeah pretty horrible, indeed ! Much better to torture children !

[Agarntrop]

Suprised to hear that it's still going strong in Colorado...

[Zul-ar]

I've lived through parents not being able to fully discipline a child and seen the consequences.

Myself as well. The woman I knew was lazy and old-fashioned. When her daughter misbehaved, she'd hit her. Her daughter got used to it and would misbehave when her mother wasn't looking. When she didn't get her way with other kids, she'd follow her mother's example and hit them. Her mother never properly explained to her why what she did was wrong, so she never felt the need to stop. Her mother blamed the daughter's personality problems on her inherent qualities, instead of addressing her own failed parenting. Her child is out of control now and never listens to her.

I've dealt with social workers who've tried to plan the lives of everyone else while ignoring an abusive child that can legit throw their parents up against the wall or break their wrists.

If their kid got to that point, then they were doing something wrong all along. How is continuing to hit them solving the problem? Put the kid in a special facility for out of control kids or something. Also, we're obviously not talking about using violence in self-defense here, we're talking about punishment.

I would say the scientific community might be wrong on this as it was wrong on gender or eugenics.

There's no evidence to support that claim.

Also, there is the lack of observing societies in which said discipline takes place or how much was say prevented

No idea what you mean here

Slapping your child's hand to stop them from touching a redhot burner isn't abuse, it's neglect by the parent if they allow their child to burn the everliving crap out of their hand.

No, it isn't abuse to make a sudden action in order to stop the child, who is in immediate danger to hurt themselves. That's not the only way though. You restrain the child, pulling their hand away from the burner. You tell them they cannot touch it because it will hurt them.

You then take preventative measures to prevent the child from touching the burner in the future, like putting up a child gate in the kitchen or making sure not to leave the stove alone while the child is wandering. If you see the child attempting to disobey the no-burner rule, you reiterate what you've said previously and administer a non-violent punishment.