Quote:
Originally Posted by Molecules
edit: this is a shambolic mess of a post, but i'm hoping you'll pick it apart so i can respond  |
I agree, but I'll try and do my best
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molecules
i've been following this and i don't really want to get too much more involved but I had to comment, after all you know where i stand vaguely - but tore surely on some level this whole thread concept is intuitive on your part?
As those of us who were smacked draw on our personal experience to assert that measured 'positive discipline' is not harmful in the long term (a grand generalization to be sure); surely yourself (and i'm guessing Marijan) are taking the 'well I wasn't physically punished and I turned out fine, so any form of corporal discipline is unnecessary and cruel' stance?
|
I have referred to personal experiences, but I can say right now it's not what I really wanted. When I did it, it was only to try and make points at the same level as others as most posters in this thread have been speaking from personal experience and seem to put more credibility in it than I think I do personally.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molecules
I know you have good intentions and are interested in the wider effect of this ingrained method of child-rearing, but doesn't the sheer majority (even in these comparatively 'lax' and conscientious times) in the poll make you think that maybe this kind of scolding is natural in society? Welly maybe not natural (we like to think of ourselves as reasoned, evolved beings after all) but not so abhorrent and inexcusable?
|
Violence is part of human nature and also the natures of many other animals. However, I don't think the goal of a society should be to live as natural as possible. For example, for males - rape can be a very good strategy for reproduction. After all, the cost of having a child that way for the male is very little if the mother is the one bringing it up and we see these strategies and counter strategies in many species of animals. There's no reason to think it can't be viable for humans, but we still don't want it in our societies.
In society, we give up freedoms for the greater good. Maybe some of those freedoms are freedoms to do things that may come natural to some of us. It's a social contract - I agree to give up my right to hit my children if everyone else does the same. However, even if hitting is natural, I think it's by far most natural for those who were hit themselves. As stated and supported before, the behaviour is inherited through practice.
I think a better goal for society would be to increase the happiness of it's members and I think a ban on corporal punishment would help further that goal. The reasons are numerous and you've undoubtedly read many of them already. A rough general idea could go like this : violence leads to unhappiness and more violence. I think when you introduce spanking, that in turn may generate even more spankers (also found scientific support for this). Such a positive feedback doesn't necessarily concern itself with wether the spanking is on the whole positive or negative, so it can spread a negative trend in society.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molecules
I think maybe you are playing down the personal experience part a bit too much, because this is important for gauging that line between discipline and abuse, which I won't even try to deny is a huge problem (although just how endemic it is I don't know, where are the figures and how reliable are they?), nobody here is claiming to having been abused.
|
I recognise that the majority won't have any problems with this and that even if there are problems, they can be hard to spot judging from only one's own experiences. Noone knows how things could have been like in a separate reality where people upheld a ban for example.
However, I think small differences in simple things like how we communicate with eachother will eventually become a big impact even if they seem trivial on the individual scale. Also, I'm not just interested in majority who have no problems .. I'm also interested in the minority and if they are represented here, I'm guessing many of then wouldn't want to "come out" with their stories of how they were abused in this thread .. I expect them to be a minority and also further underrepresented in addition to that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molecules
On the face of it illegalizing corporal punishment outright is an assured way of reducing *reported* child abuse. But isn't it also a gross violation into people's domestic lives, their privacy?
|
No because the number 1 goal of such a law is not to invade homes and punish smacking parents. The article which evaluated the effects of the ban in Sweden posted 3 goals where the number 1 I believe was to change how people view violence against children. Number 2 was to make abuse more "visible" and abuse is by definition not the same as corporal punishment, but in a society without such punishment, abuse stands out more easily.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molecules
My family could be very argumentative at times (okay, often) but this was only in teenhood when the hormones were really flying. Was it suppressed rage from growing up with the threat of physical violence?
|
I can only speculate that if my father had smacked me when I was a teenager, I might've smacked back. They didn't give me much to rebel against and I think that smacking would've put fuel on my fire and distanced us further.
Don't take this as an argument against anything by the way and feel free to forget it. It's only me wondering out loud and sharing some thoughts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Molecules
I don't know your (tore and Marijan's) family circumstances growing up, but I can tell you that living in close quarters with several siblings with two working parents is probably more likely to lead to a dysfunctional family unit - when kids are bored they do stupid things and they need attention as much as they need their own space, stress levels can go through the roof for parents and a smack can be the most effective way for kids to differentiate.
These kind of working/lower-middle class living conditions are obviously really common and on a practical level I would be interested to hear what alternative methods you might advocate under these circumstances?
Or indeed how well these legislations have gone down in Sweden? Are Sweden and Norway not comparatively wealthy countries with historically liberal attitudes? (I'm not against this)
|
This is harder for me to reply to because I have no experience as a parent. Again, I have to speculate, but like you (I think) I believe that raising kids without corporal punishment will be harder than with it. Possibly, it requires more work on behalf of the parents - at least until the kids understand the negative consequences and know when they apply (f.ex when the kids stop testing the limits).
A popular alternative to corporal punishment is timeout which is supposed to be very effective (the child is put in a timeout zone and has to stay there for f.ex the same amount of minutes as their age). A potential drawback is that the kids will probably have to "test out" this system before it works properly and that initial period will probably drive parents temporarily mad. Also, a focus on rewards for good behaviour (positive reinforcement) rather than punishment for bad (negative reinforcement) is supposedly very effective.
If you remove corporal punishment, you are essentially removing that tool from the parenting toolbox. I agree that this can make it harder for many parents, especially those who have relatively few tools. Maybe one should make parenting courses more easily accessible/cheaper/etc alongside a law like this.
As for the ban's success in Sweden, I posted the abstract of an article describing the effects of the law on the first page. The law has been in place since 1979 and society have since progressed in every area the law was supposed to improve it in, so the conclusion is that it was successful.
I think it would be successful for Norway as well