Cyclone Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 Why is your method of punishment better than a spank and why don't you treat child the same as adults. You must have been in a shop and seen adults touching stuff, why would you let them touch but forcibly prevent a child from touching? If you accept that it's okay for adults to touch then why are seeking to find a way to teach children not to? And why are you struggling so hard to do that without using violence? If you are responsible for the child, then simply leave the shop with them, that's consequence enough for them not doing as they were told. ---------- Post added 03-01-2014 at 14:32 ---------- I think that micro-managing what a parent can and cannot do has some serious negative effects on society as a whole. A parent is responsible for the safety and well-being of children but also has to take responsibility for the actions of their own children. If you tell a parent what they can and cannot do down to the last detail, you can no longer expect the parent to be responsible. I may be wrong but the current beliefs to not appear to be successful. It's a reasonable position to take, but the law makes it illegal for you to hit me, why does a child deserve less protection? This isn't really about interfering in parenting, it's about applying the same standards to interaction with children that we apply to interaction with everyone else. IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 Smacking is a very mild form of chastisement. Hitting and beating are more severe forms of violence as understood by most people and can never be tolerated. Children and adults cannot be compared in this situation as the adult is past the learning stage where the argument regarding smacking is discussed. I don't think anyone is recommending smacking but appreciate that in the real world children are sometimes given a mild smack and to make this illegal would see many responsible parents being prosecuted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 What makes it impossible to compare children and adults, they're all people aren't they? And I'm pretty sure that adults can be taught things in a negative way, in much the same way children or animals can. Maybe they have a higher pain threshold though, so they'd have to be smacked harder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 What makes it impossible to compare children and adults, they're all people aren't they? And I'm pretty sure that adults can be taught things in a negative way, in much the same way children or animals can. Maybe they have a higher pain threshold though, so they'd have to be smacked harder. The difference is about dangers and responsible behaviour which an adult is expected to be aware of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daneha Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 And when it doesn't work you hit them harder and more frequently I guess. Whatever turns you on. Then you guess wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 Then you guess wrong. Go on then clever lad. If you hit the kid and the kid continues to do what you don't want it to, what then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daneha Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 It's a reasonable position to take, but the law makes it illegal for you to hit me, Its also illegal for me to take away something that belongs to you, or force you to go to your room. And smacking a child for being naughty is different to me punching you. The two things are entirely different and shouldn't be confused. ---------- Post added 03-01-2014 at 15:25 ---------- If you accept that it's okay for adults to touch then why are seeking to find a way to teach children not to? And why are you struggling so hard to do that without using violence? If you are responsible for the child, then simply leave the shop with them, that's consequence enough for them not doing as they were told. Its much better to teach them not to touch than have to walk out of every shop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 And smacking a child for being naughty is different to me punching you. The two things are entirely different and shouldn't be confused. No they aren't. They both involve an application of force intended to cause pain. In that respect they're entirely the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daneha Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 Go on then clever lad. If you hit the kid and the kid continues to do what you don't want it to, what then? It never happened, but if it had, I would have used some of the mental abuse that you preferred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 3, 2014 Share Posted January 3, 2014 Its also illegal for me to take away something that belongs to you, or force you to go to your room. And smacking a child for being naughty is different to me punching you. The two things are entirely different and shouldn't be confused. They are pretty much identical. You impose your will by physical violence. Its much better to teach them not to touch than have to walk out of every shop. What do you mean teach? Do you mean hit them so that they obey you? Or some other method of teaching you haven't yet explained? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.