Negative reinforcement

[Professur]

Y'know, I could sit and listen to the BS being spewed here, but I'm not gonna. Instead, I'm gonna hold Parenting 101.

Rule number one. The parent must have control. Without control, the child will never grow up.

Rule number two. No two kids respond the same to stimulii. Some kids need a spanking to drive home a rule, the same as some kids study easily, and some kids don't. And it's often for the same reasons. Kids with difficulty studying will often wind up getting more spankings, because the lessons (both types) get forgotten.

Rule number three. Anyone who tries to make up rules as to how someone else's kids are brought up should be the first one to the gallows.

Rule number four. Some transgressions require a physical solution. Some never do. Beating up kids at school for their lunch money ... physical. Bringing home bad marks ... never.

Rule number five. A spanking is never to be left uncomforted. A hug, and a reminder that you love the child is a must. Discussion of why the spanking was necessary too, lest the child not understand that avoiding spankings is within his/her control.

Rule number six. The one I feel is most important. You cannot punish the bad without rewarding the good. This is where today's busy parents fuck it up all the time. They punish, punish, punish, and then ignore the good, in the name of the punishment. Wrongo. Ignore the punishment to reward the good, and it'll stick the good deeper in their minds.

And lastly, Rule number seven. Spend time with your kids. Don't expect a daycare worker, or teacher to bring up your kids for you. You won't like the results.

 

[flavio]

Parenting 101?

Lets jump ahead to the more advanced classes.....

It's normal for every child to misbehave now and then. When children test parents' limits, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that parents should use methods other than spanking to discipline their children.

Spanking has negative consequences and is no more effective than other forms of discipline. In fact, there's often a gray area between when spanking ends and child abuse begins.

American Academy of Pediatrics

Research shows that effective parents raise well-adjusted children who are more self-reliant, self-controlled, and positively curious than children raised by parents who are punitive, overly strict (authoritarian), or permissive. Effective parents operate on the belief that both the child and the parent have certain rights and that the needs of both are important. Effective parents don't need to use physical force to discipline the child, but are more likely to set clear rules and explain why these rules are important. Effective parents reason with their children and consider the youngsters' points of views even though they may not agree with them.

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry

 

[Professur]

I see a lot of "american" in there, Flav. Americans aren't exactly world renound for their child rearing skills. And personally, I'd rather chop my dick off than heed anything said by a psychiatrist.

 

[Professur]

Effective parents don't need to use physical force to discipline the child, but are more likely to set clear rules and explain why these rules are important. Effective parents reason with their children and consider the youngsters' points of views even though they may not agree with them.

Thanks. That brought a smile to my face. Despite the fact that it's the dumbest piece of shit I've ever heard. Reason with kids. That's comedy.

As for considering the youngsters' point of view, that's true. You can't fix what's broke until you understand what's broke, can you? But understanding and fixing aren't the same thing. And we are discussing fixing.

Don't get me wrong. I don't like hitting my kids. I'd much rather not ever have to hit them. But sometimes you have to, if only to get their attention.

 

[Professur]

Research shows that effective parents raise well-adjusted children who are more self-reliant, self-controlled, and positively curious than children raised by parents who are punitive, overly strict (authoritarian), or permissive. Effective parents operate on the belief that both the child and the parent have certain rights and that the needs of both are important. Effective parents don't need to use physical force to discipline the child, but are more likely to set clear rules and explain why these rules are important. Effective parents reason with their children and consider the youngsters' points of views even though they may not agree with them.

Reread this one more time, just to be sure I'd not missed anything relevant, and a thought occured to me. Notice how they repeat the phrase "effective parents"? Effective parents. That seems awfully subjective, doesn't it? Who decided what's effective? I've seen medical treatments that left the patient in much worse shape than he was in before the treatment, but the treatment was still called effective. Were George Washington's parents not effective? They raised a rebellious trouble maker, didn't they? How about John Lennon's parents? Or Martin Luther King's? What is well adjusted? Self reliant? Self controlled? There's a good description of Hitler. He knew exactly what he wanted in life and made a damn good grab for it. Very effective.

 

[flavio]

I see a lot of "american" in there, Flav. Americans aren't exactly world renound for their child rearing skills. And personally, I'd rather chop my dick off than heed anything said by a psychiatrist.

Canadian Psychiatric Association

We discourage the use of corporal punishment in the care, control or treatment of children. Alternate methods of treatment, behavioural and physical control are available and usually render corporal punishment unnecessary.

http://www.cpa-apc.org/publications/position_papers/corporal.asp


Here's a good one for you....

Joint Statement on Physical Punishment of Children and Youth
Executive Summary​

Background
The Joint Statement on Physical Punishment of Children and Youth was developed by a national partnership of organizations concerned with the well-being of children and their families. It has been formally endorsed by many Canadian organizations and individuals involved in a broad range of issues related to children and youth.

Purpose and audience
Based on extensive research evidence, the statement provides an overview of the developmental outcomes associated with the use of physical punishment on children and youth. Scenarios depicting disciplinary situations ground the document in the realities well known to parents and caregivers. The statement will also be of interest to professionals, policy and program planners, many members of the public, and children and youth themselves. Resources are identified for those interested in learning more about effective discipline and parenting.

Highlights of findings
The research evidence now available permits us to move beyond the debate about whether physical punishment is harmful to children and youth or is even effective as discipline.
Few parents believe that physical punishment is effective, most believe it is unnecessary and harmful, and a majority think the most common outcome is parental guilt or regret.

There is strong evidence that physical punishment places children at risk for physical injury, poorer mental health, impaired relationships with parents, weaker internalization of moral values, antisocial behaviour, poorer adult adjustment, and tolerance of violence in adulthood.

There is no clear evidence of any benefit from the use of physical punishment on children.

Parents are more likely to use physical punishment if they approve of it, experienced it themselves as children, feel anger in response to their children's behaviour, are subject to depression, or are burdened by particular forms of stress.

Conclusion and implications

On the basis of the clear and compelling evidence—that the physical punishment of children and youth plays no useful role in their upbringing and poses only risks to their development—parents should be strongly encouraged to develop alternative and positive approaches to discipline. The implications of this evidence and this goal are examined in relation to Canadian law, human rights and actions taken by other countries.

Recommendations
Recommendations for action in Canada include:
1. delivery of public awareness messages to inform all Canadians that physical punishment is harmful to children's development and is ineffective as discipline;
2. development of universal parenting education
3. provision of the same protection of children from physical assault as is given to Canadian adults and to children in a growing number of countries.
Responsibility for action lies within the jurisdiction of national, provincial/territorial and local levels of government, the mandates of organizations, and the expertise of professionals who serve children and youth. The statement as a whole may be considered an urge to action by parents and caregivers—within and beyond their families.

Canadian Child Care Federation

http://www.cccf-fcsge.ca/pressroom/JointStatementonPhysicalPunishmentofChildrenandYouth.htm

Now I realize that you would like to dismiss the giant mountain of evidence from Canada as well, but you really have to be determined to hit your kids in light of all the facts and studies.

It may be that once you have already been hitting your kids for some length of time it's hard to accept that it's not good for them.

 

[flavio]

! Thanks. That brought a smile to my face. Despite the fact that it's the dumbest piece of shit I've ever heard. Reason with kids. That's comedy.

As for considering the youngsters' point of view, that's true. You can't fix what's broke until you understand what's broke, can you? But understanding and fixing aren't the same thing. And we are discussing fixing.

Don't get me wrong. I don't like hitting my kids. I'd much rather not ever have to hit them. But sometimes you have to, if only to get their attention.

The fact that you find it laughable to reason with a child and can't imagine them having anything but a "broke" point of view if they don't agree with you shows a quite a lack of respect maybe even contempt.

 

[outside looking in]

I'm sorry flav, you can keep posting source after source, and it will still be the most ridiculous shit I've ever read. Of course, these are probably the same people that are trying to take "derogatory" references out of history books as well.

It isn't the negative punishment that has "mental side effects" and causes "psychological damage," but rather the lack of positive reinforcement. In all that horse shit you've posted, I didn't once see mentioned the obvious reality that, on average, parents who use corporal punishment will be less likely to use positive reinforcement as well. Those studies aren't even isolating the variable they purport to study.

An amusing, if educational, misapplication of group statistics.


"effective parents don't need..." Bullshit. Effective parents are the ones that can identify what disciplinary measures are required for their children, and as a result raise loving, well adjusted children. Period.

 

[flavio]

I'm sorry flav, you can keep posting source after source, and it will still be the most ridiculous shit I've ever read.

I believe that many people are so determined to hit their kids that there is no amount of scientific evidence that will stop them. At one point there was overwhelming evidence that the earth was round but many still insisted it was flat.

Like I said as well, once you've started hitting your kids it's probably much harder think objectively about it. It would threaten your self-image as a parent to think that all that hitting was actually bad.

Of course, these are probably the same people that are trying to take "derogatory" references out of history books as well.

If that makes you feel better, but these are psychologists/psychiatrists and I don't see what they would have to do with history books.

It isn't the negative punishment that has "mental side effects"

Any studies to back that up? ...or is that just what you would like to believe?

In all that horse shit you've posted, I didn't once see mentioned the obvious reality that, on average, parents who use corporal punishment will be less likely to use positive reinforcement as well. Those studies aren't even isolating the variable they purport to study.

Are you sure about that?

"effective parents don't need..." Bullshit. Effective parents are the ones that can identify what disciplinary measures are required for their children, and as a result raise loving, well adjusted children. Period.

Every child is different to a certain extent but all children share similar characteristics. The idea here is to learn from the wealth of knowledge that is available on the subject. Just the same as with anything else you're trying to be good at.

I really don't understand the determination to hit children in the face of a mountain of evidence that there are better ways. It's like the people that don't believe that second-hand smoke is bad for kids. Whether you believe it or not, why not just keep it away from them to be safe?

 

[Gonz]

where do you get that information?

Just looking at numbers. There wasn't a specific story or anything. Just random stories & it occured to me the other night (what I wrote). Just conversation topic.

I have spanked my kid 3 times in 9 years. They were not much more than a smack on the ass when he was being exceptionally defiant.

American Psychological Association

Aren't these the same fucked up doctors who are trying to get pedophilia removed from the "psych book of bad behaviors"? I think it is.

 

[PT]

I believe that many people are so determined to hit their kids that there is no amount of scientific evidence that will stop them.

Yep, that's it. In fact, after reading this, I brought all six of them down for a whippin just to make myself feel better.

 

[flavio]

When a child misbehaves, don't react. Ignore.

That is definitely NOT what professionals recommend. More like this....

In fact, there are many other parenting "tools" that work better and have less potential negative impact on kids than physical punishment. A few of them are:

Be very clear about your expectations of behavior. Set limits and enforce them. No spanking does not mean no discipline.

Limit the number of rules, based on what's really important, then monitor children's behavior and when the rules are broken, impose consequence immediately.

Reinforce children's good behavior. "Catch them being good."

Be as consistent as possible about your expectations and consequences.

Children, Youth, and Family Consortium
http://www.cyfc.umn.edu/publications/newsreleases/1-16-02nr.html


I'd also like to say that I don't think all NR (the original topic) is bad, but this quickly turned into a physical punishment conversation.

 

[ris]

Since PR has replaced NR, there have been more violent incidences with the under 30 crowd than any time in history. Columbine & similar incidents didn't occur. Mass killings in our cities was nowhere near the epidemic is has become. Rape, homicide & assaults are all up with the teen set.


Coincidence? I think not. You?

gonz, where do you get that information? it is a logical consequence, at least in the way i see it, but i'm interested on what that information is based

i'm not sure there is a direct connection beyond the cultural that violence in general in some countries is on the rise. there are several european countries that have banned smacking outright and i don't see a phenomenal increase in violence in them.

the claim is we see rates of violence on the increase in our youth and those under their 30's. as a subjective thing perhaps we do but it cannot be denied that the group is the largest it has ever been and we now have more news saturation than ever before - the transgressions of 20 years ago that got little press are now plastered across the networks.

 

[Gonz]

the transgressions of 20 years ago that got little press are now plastered across the networks.

In general, I fully agree. The presss has taken things to a new level of stupidity. However, Columbine type atrocities are strictly 21st century.

 

[chcr]

http://www.nospank.net/nytimes2.htm
http://people.biola.edu/faculty/paulp/debate.html

There have been 13 published studies and 3 unpublished studies capable of isolating the effects of parental spanking on child outcomes. Most of them (12 of 16) have found beneficial child outcomes of spanking under some important circumstances. Such beneficial outcomes are mostly limited to the use of nonabusive spanking to back up milder disciplinary tactics with 2- to 6-year-old children by loving, sober parents who are in control of their anger.

http://www.homeschooloasis.com/art_no_longer_antispanking_by_shannon.htm

I used to be Mrs. Anti-Spanking. If I saw anyone spanking their children in public, I would just feel horrible. And rightly so, because what I saw was wrong. These children had done something wrong, and the parents in ANGER, would haul off and hit them. Other than misaligning their spine, and killing the child’s spirit there is absolutely nothing of value being accomplished. This is CHILD ABUSE and I am ashamed to admit to having done this.
I had only spanked a few times in our children’s 4 1/2 years, and it was in anger. Their disrespectful talk, not obeying until the “10th time”, and poor countenance needed to change, but how? I learned that I DID NOT have to spank in anger (a complete revelation!) I could actually have rules, that when not followed through on the FIRST time, would warrant discipline. By disciplining the FIRST time, you’re TOTALLY calm and there is absolutely NO anger. We could sit down and talk about what happened, why they were about to get a spanking, and pray for a changing of their heart.
This is NOT child abuse. I love my children so much, that I will not follow the world’s ways of the so-called “rights of the child.” It’s so vogue not to spank, it makes me sick! I no longer have to go around walking on eggshells, praying that my children will “be good.” I can say no without having to, talk it out for 10 minutes. Without having to cancel everybody's plans because one person messed up. I don’t have to go through whiny, 15-minute tantrums, while I look on with a “you know it’s this stage” look.

Look around flav, you can find just as many "pro" as "anti." Until you have your own, you don't have a frame of reference. Prof hit the nail right on the head though, no two children are alike (that's what individual means) and what works for one may or may not work for another.

 

[flavio]

Look around flav, you can find just as many "pro" as "anti." Until you have your own, you don't have a frame of reference. Prof hit the nail right on the head though, no two children are alike (that's what individual means) and what works for one may or may not work for another.

Sure you found the opinion of "Shannon Schermerhorn, a homeschooling mom". Pretty scientific.

Now the other two links actually refer to the same guys opinion if you didn't notice and it's hardly a stellar endorsement for more spankings and even warns against it for children over 6.

This hardly compares to the evidence I presented against.

Yes, each child is different but we know that smoking and hitting is bad for most of them.

 

[PT]

No, we don't know that. You think that it is bad for them, Some of us think that it is a necessary part of raising children. Odd how it's the ones with children that are not against it.

 

[Gonz]

Odd how it's the ones with children that are not against it.

 

[Professur]

You might wanna dismiss that homeschooler as unscientific, but she does nail the point directly. There's a manifest difference between spanking a child and beating one in anger. Yelling while spanking is the first sign of the latter. A calm single shot to the buttocks is not the same thing. And, to be perfectly clear, my daughter would much rather take a spanking than some other punishments I could dish out. Given the choice, she takes a spanking every time, since it's over and done with quick.

 

[flavio]

Odd that all the doctors and psychologists / psychiatrists are against it. But those people don't have kids.