Agreed on the balance, absolutely.

To respond to your earlier comment, I didn't get "spanked". To me as child? That always carried a creepy sexual undertone and the idea made me highly uncomfortable. No one hit my butt! People today are SO against hitting in the face because (and I've actually heard people say this) "the face is your identity! to hit a child's face is to HIT THEIR IDENTITY!!!!" Um. Where else are you going to hit them, if not their butt? The hand if they grab something or touch something they shouldn't. But, hitting on the butt was not something that happened in my house. It was just how discipline functioned in my house. My mother was extremely loving and nurturing, encouraging of my talents and of me forming my own opinions. I credit her primarily for building my sense of self worth and giving me the tools needed to defend my rights to being treated well and given fair opportunities in life. She is an incredible woman and was an incredible mother. less

If you don't have kids, how do you think you'd discipline them?

I was raised by my grandparents, if I disrespected them, did something I knew I wasn't supposed to do, or otherwise needed to be disciplined I got spanked. So many people I talk to are like religiously against spanking a child.

How do you disciple? [private voting] less

Just out of curiosity, Why are some referring to spanking as "hitting/beating or HARMING" a child? Heck, I remember back in the day when folks would use wooden paddles and "a switch" lol. Tell ya what though, you didn't have kids walkin' into schools with guns, blowing folks up and murdering their peers back then! Im of a younger generation, but I can definitely see a difference between the way things are now, versus what I have heard from back then. I agree some things were taken to extremes and were not right, but back then, kids had a respectful fear of their parents and consequences. Now a days, its a slap on the wrist and "Don't do it again sweetie" and the parents are surprised when it happens again? Shocking. less

Owl, you said I didn't vote because frankly, even though I have worked extensively with kids, it's impossible to say what I'd do if I had my own. We all think we know just how we'd do it, but any parent will tell you that parenthood surprised the shit out of them at every turn.

I cannot agree more strongly. Parenting is a full time profession.

On an other note (and not related to what Owl said) When I use the word "lazy" I mean, "not doing all you could to prevent the behavior and then doing the easiest thing possible (usually hitting) long after the kid fucked up." It's easy to HIT (and let's call it what it is, "spanking" not only sounds like a snack and has a cute ring to it, but it has sexual connotations. At any rate not a single psychological research study has shown that hitting contributes to better behaved children, better outcomes or better parenting. Not even one. The only proven result is that kids figure out ways to NOT GET CAUGHT.

However, I NEVER said parent who hit are all "unloving or irresponsible." Please don't put words in my mouth.

As I said, so many parents manage to properly raise children with NO hitting. And when you actually have kids, you know they all have different personalities. If ONE set of parents can do a good job without hitting ALL can.

As for the word "lazy" parenting is a full time activity. For instance, if hte kids you are babysitting get into trouble "before you get up" why were you sleeping while they were awake? That isn't parenting with all you have. If you take care of kids, you are there and present at all times. I have NEVER been asleep when small children were awake an up and around. EVER. Why? Because they get into things, then it's somehow OK to HIT them because YOU (not you, Owl) were sleeping when you should have been up and caring for the children? YOU then caused the reason you felt required hitting.

Babysitting is far from actually raising children. I did child care and babysitting for years before I had my own kids. It was two completely different things.

Anything one think can be accomplished by hitting a child can be accomplished (albeit with a little more work on the part of the parent) without hitting and with some forethought.

As for, "But, there is a difference between hitting and beating." Where IS that line? NOBODY who believes in hitting kids can tell me. Except to say, "What I do is hitting, what some other people do is beating." NOT an answer. If everyone has a different line that delineates the difference between hitting and beating, then the line is useless. Not long ago, a boy was found, dead, buried under poured concrete in his parent's trailer yard. Their excuse? They were "spanking" him..... and he died. To THEM, what killed a child was nothing more than a spanking. Although most people would disagree that what they did was wrong and NOT a "spanking" WHERE IS THE LINE? Nobody who is pro-hitting seems to be able to tell me.

Plus, and I hate to pull rank, I'm debating with people who don't have their own kids. Nope, baby sitting, even if it's overnight doesn't count. DOING IT full time and all the time counts.

If one parent can do it without hitting ALL can. Plus, you can't know from baby sitting, you won't know until/if you have your own. That's all I have to say. less

One more thing; please read this article. It has references and good reasons why hitting is counter productive. One of the things that made me think about this article, is that the fact that kids who are hit often engage in "revenge fantasies." I remember now, having these as a child, when I had been hit. I totally forgot about it. These fantasies are almost Universal, if you don't remember them, and you are protecting a parent who hit, then the damage is buried deep inside. This article sanely, humanely and scientifically explains why hitting is not the best way to discipline children

Article on why hitting is counterproductive less

Please stop trying to tell us we're all damaged goods if we were hit, P'Gell. Stop speaking for my experience. I was hit. I'm sorry you had a bad experience as a child, but I did not. Plain and simple, hitting was not a traumatic experience for me. I love my parents, and I deeply appreciate and respect their parenting, and I wouldn't have had it any other way. Seriously. I'm not "burying" things and stop presuming to know what my most inner thoughts are. It is singularly arrogant and not conducive to a productive dialogue. You can defend your style of parenting without fucking insulting every single other parent that does it differently. less

Not perfect but based on a large body of research and science and long term outcomes. It isn't really "my opinion" or "I think this way." What I have said is based on much research into Child Development and long term outcomes. It is not just "my opinion." My opinions were largely based on what has been proven to be true for the majority of children.

Also, I'm not really taking this, any of these things being said, as a personal assault. Why are you? Why do you feel the need to protect your parent's decisions to hit (when you have no children of your own in which to practice child rearing skills, thus no reason to protect yourself?) so personally?

Please read the article I posted. It explains a lot. Most parents who hurt are not intentionally hurting their kids (although if one were to HIT an other adult, what other purpose would one have but to HURT?) but there are repercussions from hitting children. Some are overt and many are deeply ingrained.

Basically, the point is, if what one does to a child would land you in jail if you perpetrated the same actions against an adult then it makes sense NOT to perpetrate these actions against a child. How could that be wrong? less

The "science" of human behavior is hardly as objective as the hard sciences; it is culturally informed, subject to human bias, and highly mutable. "Studies" of human behavior, by definition, cannot be conclusive by the definitions of scientific method and inquiry because there are far too many variables that cannot be accounted for. I know that you know that, so I'm not even going to belabor that point. Science with a capital 'S' doesn't impress me much in this regard, especially because "science" said a mere forty years ago that homosexuals suffered from a curable mental disease. A few decades ago, science said that women that couldn't have orgasms from intercourse were also mentally diseased. Give a bunch of scientists that believe in hitting some grant money, and they'll find a different result. A study can and will find whatever you want it to when so many variables cannot be controlled purely and fully.

As for why I'm taking this personally, I'm truly astounded that you cannot understand why I am. Surely, even if you don't agree with physical discipline, you can understand why voicing your grievances in the manner that you do can be hurtful. Additionally, how does the fact that I do not have children inhibit me in any way from speaking to the efficacy of my parents' techniques with me? What experience could I possibly speak better to? Parents can only speak to how they THINK their discipline has affected their children; I am actually TELLING YOU how my parents' discipline has affected me. I am just as entitled to speak passionately about that as you are about your experience raising children. Both of us are speaking from personal experience, not from conjecture. I am certainly not espousing hitting as a universally effective practice. I am only saying that it does work in some families, and it worked in mine.

I read the article. I remain unconvinced that I have suffered deep, repressed trauma as a result of my parents style of discipline. Of course, that is the handy thing about Invisible Repressed Trauma, right? You can assure me that it does exist, and that it does justify your stance, even if it actually cannot be pointed to definitively. Unfortunately, the burden of proof of such "deeply engrained" repercussions rest rhetorically with you.

Finally, if people are actually doings bids for aggravated assault if they slap someone's face, I'm pretty sure our penal system is make horrible use of its already bloated funding. less

We'll have to agree to disagree like adults. I have a Bachelor's in Psychology and that and my nurses training taught me a lot about human behavior, and even though new things are found in this science, I still can't believe that all things found in physiological studies are simply "soft" and have no bearings on real life. They do.

Of course, science changes, but you are talking about things Freud said, not things based on real research. It is unfortunate that Freud was followed, without research to back up his thoughts for so many years.

I know hitting is damaging. My mother was a hitter. I'm not defending her. I don't see the reason to defend those who harm children. So, if you feel the need to defend those who hit children who can't defend themselves, we'll have to agree to disagree.

I also feel that assault is a serious crime and very often is NOT "a horrible use of bloated funding." Sorry I feel that way.

Okay? I'm done. I've said all I need to say. less

She evidently thought what she was taught didn't apply to her, or didn't feel the desire to apply what she learned, if she hit Of all people, SHE should know the damage hitting does. But... it's easier than... other methods.

Shit, I'm done talking about this. less