The problem is that your nephew's parents didn't do the hard work up front. My 5 year old is well behaved and well adjusted, why? Because we did the hard worked up front and continue to do the hard work. Moreover, hitting a young child does not instill courage, conviction or positively shapes a child's character. You are probably right I couldn't deal with your nephew nor would I want to. I bet that if his parents had worked with him like we did and do with our son, he would be as well behaved and adjusted as my son. Clearly, the fact that my son, who has never been spanked, would not cause a stranger fall into a sobbing heap is positive proof that spanking is not an effective means of raising a well behaved child.
Why is it that proponents of spanking feel threatened by those of us who reject it as a form of discipline? Could it be that you feel guilty? And why is that? Maybe because you know that it is morally and ethically wrong.View Thread
Not hard to separate at all. I didn't and don't equate the two. I didn't say it was beating. I did say hitting. Spanking and beating are both hitting. In fact, I noted no matter how gentle or well meaning, it had no place in discipline especially for children under 2. I said it doesn't teach self-control, it teaches fear. I suspect your DH's defiance came from the fact that he was spanked and not respected. As oppose to some Spanking, IMHO, amounts to weakness and lack of personal self-control. And in there lies the rub, if you don't have personal self-control how can you teach it to your child(ren)?View Thread
Discipline doesn't equal to punishment. Discipline is about personal self-control. It starts from day one. Very young children have no personal self-control. They are not being defiant or malicious or disrespectful. They are doing what comes natural. Our jobs as parents is to teach them self-control. This beings with redirecting, redirecting, redirecting until you are blue in the face and then redirecting some more. The idea of hitting a child less than 2 years, no matter how gentle or seemingly well meaning, is plain wrong. Hitting is punishment and retribution. It teaches nothing about self-control. As another poster noted, it merely teaches fear. As a child gets older, you give them choices and you allow them to make good and bad choices. Of course with bad choices there are negative consequences. For young children, it can be a timeout, making them sit for a certain amount of time. I have heard from many that this does not work. It does not work because those parents don't follow through. I can remember a 3 minute time out taking more than 30 minutes. Because my son would get up before the 3 minutes were up. I used a kitchen timer so he knew exactly when the time was up. We started over and over and over, just like redirecting. The purpose of this is not punishment but teaching personal self-control and to underscore that we meant what we said. It goes for all kinds of activities. The other thing we did and still do, is we give our son fair clear warning and stick with it. So now when we say x,y,z is going to happen, it does and he doesn't question it. Right now we are dealing with him giving us an attitude for when we don't do what he wants. Well the consequence for that is often sitting until he is contrite and to take away some sort of privilege. He also never gets anything through demanding, yelling or pitching a fit. That was the rule from the get go. Basically, if you clearly outline things and are consistent a lot of behavior issues go away without raising a hand. We also make a point to treat him with respect and thank him for ultimately making the right choice even though there may have been negative consequences along the way. Like violence begets violence, respect begets respect.View Thread
Ultimately, it falls on the parents. Teachers and the school have the responsibility to remove the bully from the school environment for the safety of the other students but the parents must address the issue. I do believe that if the parents fail to address the behavior, they should be held legally accountable.
I think the real question is what consitutes bullying? I think a lot of normal, albeit cruel, behavior is being labled as bullying. Yes, it sucks to be teased, I have been there but life isn't all sunshine and roses. I think there has become a tendency to over protect children from harshness. This is a real disservice because once they go off on their own, they are unable to deal with it at time when they have to figure out how to navigate the world on their own. I'm not saying let your kid get beat up or tolerate mean girls but sometimes children need to figure some of this out on their own with some minimal adult oversight.View Thread
I am curious to know if there are any studies on who is more likely to take anti-depressants: women who stay at home or women who work outside the home. My anecdotal experience is women that stay at home, which sort of fits hand and glove to the original premise of the study. Assuming there is any validity to this, I wonder how that cuts is it women who take anti-depressants are more likely to stay at home because of their mental health issues or is it because they stay-at-home. Again my anecdotal experience says the former rather than the latter but it is hard to erase the 50s and 60s image of women at home popping valium and its ilk.View Thread
For me most definitely, I work mostly for my insanity. I need something more than staying at home to feel fulfilled. I am fortunate in that I can practise my profession part-time and be there for my son. I am sure that there are plenty of SAHMs that feel completely fulfilled by being at home. As I'm sure there are prefectly stressed out and miserable working moms and SAHMs. The thing I know is a happy mom means a happy home and happy children.View Thread
From what I understand, this was a last ditch effort by the state. The mother argued in court that other's were sneaking food to her child so it was out of her control and that she bought him a bike and tried to get him to excerise but he wouldn't do it. Remember we are talking about an 8 year old. The judge found that this was a case of medical neglect. No one took this lightly. An 8 year old weighing 200 pounds is neglect, medical reasons have been ruled out. 8 years olds don't get that overweight without an adult/adults allowing him to get there. Clearly, the adult(s) in his world is/are not doing what they are suppose to do to protect him. IMHO, this is nothing short of obscene.View Thread
There is no right or wrong answer here. Through out history men have and have not been circumcised. This isn't some major health decision that requires interference by the medical community to protect the health of the child. Nor are all that do circumcisions are doctors. There was no detailed medical discussion with us and our doctor about the pros and cons of circumcision. Why? Because it in itself isn't a medical issue. Males function quite well with or without that piece of foreskin. We had our son circumcised at birth. Why? Because his father is.View Thread