If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
"Chris" wrote in message ... In alt.parenting.spanking Nathan A. Barclay wrote: : But by and large, the system works. And throwing it out before we're : positive that we have something that will work better in the real world, : with real parents and real children, would be foolish. Once again, Nathan, you appear to be talking about win/win cooperative nonpunitive discipline as if it were some sort of new untested concept rather than a set of approaches to dealing with conflict in the parent/child relationship developed decades ago and used successfully in Chris, this is anecdotal evidence. If I argued that there are thousands of parents who spank and get good results, you would correctly counter that just because there are thousands of parents who spank and get good results, that most definitely does not mean that all parents who spank get good results. So why should I accept the same kind of reasoning from you regarding non-punitive techniques? As I keep saying, how well strictly non-punitive techniques work depends on children's willingness to cooperate. The fact that there are some children, or even a lot of children who are sufficiently willing to cooperate for purely non-punitive techniques to be considered "successful" in no way implies that there aren't other children for whom eliminating parents' authority to punish would be a disaster. (And that's doubly true - actually, a lot more than just doubly true - if a lot of parents forced to use exclusively non-punitive techniques wouldn't put nearly the effort into them that parents who are highly committed to making non-punitive techniques work do.) Further, what evidence do you have regarding whether those "thousands of families" rely entirely on non-punitive techniques? What evidence do you have that the parents in those families never punish, and never even raise the possibility that they might punish if they feel like they have to? And even if you can find thousands of families where you can be sure that even the possibility of punishment never comes up, do those reflect the vast majority of families who are trying to use exclusively non-punitive techniques, or do a large percentage of parents who would like to use exclusively non-punitive techniques find that they need at least the possibility of using punishment as leverage? Keep in mind that knowing that their parents could punish if they feel the need gives children a bit more incentive to make non-punitive techniques work than they would have otherwise. I'm not trying to say that non-punitive techniques aren't useful. They are. I'm just challenging your unsupported assertions about how reliably they work. |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
"Chris" wrote in message ... In alt.parenting.spanking Nathan A. Barclay wrote: : But by and large, the system works. And throwing it out before we're : positive that we have something that will work better in the real world, : with real parents and real children, would be foolish. Once again, Nathan, you appear to be talking about win/win cooperative nonpunitive discipline as if it were some sort of new untested concept rather than a set of approaches to dealing with conflict in the parent/child relationship developed decades ago and used successfully in Chris, this is anecdotal evidence. If I argued that there are thousands of parents who spank and get good results, you would correctly counter ----------------------- The fact is that there ARE NO SUCH RESULTS! You will SAY that they "had good results", when by your criteria spanking IS ONLY result that concerns you, and NOT what the child will do in the future, or whether he is emotionally crippled, and why? BECAUSE BOTH I AND CHRIS WEEKS KNOW THAT *YOU* are emotionally crippled TOO and COULDN'T POSSIBLY NOTICE SUCH A THING, BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO PROPER REFERENT!!!! As I keep saying, how well strictly non-punitive techniques work depends on children's willingness to cooperate. ---------------------- That's an entirely nonsensial circularity! *IF* they WERE cooperative, then NO such punishment even *COULD* BE necessary, and *IF* they are NOT, then it cannot have the desired effect!! If you're truthfully willing to stand on such nonsense, then it proves NOT ONLY that you're an uneducated IDIOT, BUT ALSO INSANE!! Further, what evidence do you have regarding whether those "thousands of families" rely entirely on non-punitive techniques? ---------------------------- They may not, no evidence is needed, we all KNOW what WE do when we are assaulted and coerced, and kids are NOT shown by ANY reseearch to be AT ALL different from every other ADULT human being!! I'm not trying to say that non-punitive techniques aren't useful. They are. I'm just challenging your unsupported assertions about how reliably they work. ----------------------- They work, because that is the well-known treatment of one another that has resulted in all great and good friendships DOWN THRU HISTORY! While abuse and attempt at coercion ONLY causes revenge formation, assault, murder, and warfare! Are you so ****ing stupid that you will not admit that if someone pushes you that you won't turn around and smack the **** out of them, or if they are bigger that you will not BOTH: Lose ALL respect for them, and plan longterm REVENGE UPON THEM!! Between the obvious success of friendships based on equality and respect wthout coercion, and the total failures caused by assault and coercion, what makes you imagine IN YOUR WILDEST DREAMS that you have a SINGLE PHILOSOPHICAL LEG TO STAND ON???????????? Steve |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
"Chris" wrote in message ... : In alt.parenting.spanking Nathan A. Barclay wrote: [snip] : But by and large, the system works. I beg to differ. Punishment is the most heavily overrated child discipline technique. I posted an article by Gordon the other day about workshops he has led, inviting participants to list the ways they reacted to punitive authoritarian control as children. Virtually none of the reactions were desirable. I agree that its heavily overrated. That does not, however, imply that there aren't situations where it is necessary or beneficial. Which of the reactions listed did you engage in as a child, Nathan? Note that I don't ask if you engaged in some of them because I know you did - we all did. This seems a bit personal. There are limits to how much of my life and history I want to post publicly, especially with archives like Google to preserve the information (and it could get preserved in a reply even if I'd flag it to prevent archiving of my own message). I'll scratch the surface of the issue a bit, but I don't want to go into detail. My most serious ongoing negative reaction was when I was in elementary school, and had to do with being forced to go to school when I thought it was boring and tedious. That gives me an excellent reason to support educational choice. But I don't view not requiring children to go to school at all, or giving children carte blanche to choose "schools" where they can play all day without learning much, as a viable solution. Some children may be responsible enough to make good choices about their education without outside limitations on what choices they can make, but I wouldn't trust myself at that age to do so. I'll also admit to having circumvented the rules about bedtime quite a bit by reading in bed through the light of my open door - and hiding my book if my father's chair creaked indicating he might be getting up. The very few times I was caught, I wasn't punished, but I was always afraid that I might be (and I wouldn't have regarded it as unfair or unreasonable if I was). So I have no illusions that punishment is anywhere near reliable when kids expect not to get caught. Knowing that parents consider a behavior serious enough to be worth punishing over might make enough difference in the child's thinking to have an impact on the child's behavior - or it might not. As for the rest, I exhibited some of those behaviors, but aside maybe from frequent arguments over chores (in which, looking back, I was generally being unreasonable), they were neither frequent nor particularly serious. Then again, my parents weren't all that punitive in their basic outlook. They were willing to threaten, and to punish if necessary, when discussion and persuasion didn't work, but punitive techniques weren't their first preference. By and large, a system with this many side effects, and with some such side effects on the list manifesting themselves in every child raised under it, doesn't "work" very well at all. I think I'm looking at the glass as three quarters full and you're focusing on the one quarter that's still empty. Yes, the system has problems, but most children grow up to be productive citizens who generally respect each other's rights and legitimate interests. And those who don't are kept in check enough that most people feel reasonably safe. That gives us an awful lot to lose if we make a radical change and it fails. Keep in mind that parents who use purely non-punitive techniques (to the extent that parents who never resort to even indirect threats of punishment exist at all) are ones who choose that kind of technique voluntarily, and who choose to invest the time and effort to make them work. Keep in mind that at present, parents who try to use non-punitive techniques and don't succeed can resort to threats and, if necessary, punishment as a back-up. The jump from that to taking away parents' authority to punish at all for anything short of criminal behavior would be an enormous one and, I contend, an extremely dangerous one. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
"Chris" wrote: Which of the reactions listed did you engage in as a child, Nathan? Note that I don't ask if you engaged in some of them because I know you did - we all did. My most serious ongoing negative reaction was when I was in elementary school, and had to do with being forced to go to school when I thought it was boring and tedious. That gives me an excellent reason to support educational choice. But I don't view not requiring children to go to school at all, or giving children carte blanche to choose "schools" where they can play all day without learning much, as a viable solution. Some children may be responsible enough to make good choices about their education without outside limitations on what choices they can make, but I wouldn't trust myself at that age to do so. ------------------------- You simply don't know yourself well enough to grasp the principle of boredom. Without being coerced, once that stops, a child sooner or later leaves behind his block to creativity caused by the revenge formation due to abuse, and he starts being curiously interested in learning things again, usually quite intently! He need only be offered something interesting without being forced to engage in it and he will be a fan for life! This was proven at numerous "free schools" including the famous Summerhill run by A.S. Neill. Kids, who when they came decided to play for as much as several YEARS, to get rid of their revenge formation for their previous abuse, all had caught up and even surpassed their classmates in other schools upon testing only a year or so after finally becoming ultimately bored and deciding to come to some classes again!! And they became extremely creative people with interesting inventive careers indeed, numerous among them getting higher degrees with honors. I'll also admit to having circumvented the rules about bedtime quite a bit by reading in bed through the light of my open door - and hiding my book if my father's chair creaked indicating he might be getting up. The very few times I was caught, I wasn't punished, but I was always afraid that I might be (and I wouldn't have regarded it as unfair or unreasonable if I was). -------------- Of course you would, and why lie to us and yourself about this now?? You obviously felt it immensely unfair or else you wouldn't have been reading then!!!! God you're repressed!!! Our kids read or slept or listened to music or TV or computer just exactly as they LIKED, and came and went as they liked, and they thereby learned their OWN INTERNAL self-regulation for THEIR OWN purposes, and didn't have to undergo ANY shock of first freedom when they moved from our home to their first place of their own! They already KNEW all that! Did they abide our wishes that they call? Not always, but when we cried once before them they always called us thereafter (they told us they didn't realize how much we worried) and they to always called us to tell us they were safely someplace for the night. If you're hitting your kids just because you can't dare show them your emotion then you're a REAL SICKEE!! So I have no illusions that punishment is anywhere near reliable when kids expect not to get caught. Knowing that parents consider a behavior serious enough to be worth punishing over might make enough difference in the child's thinking to have an impact on the child's behavior - or it might not. -------------------------------- Ridiculous, punishment is NOT at ALL useful or effective when the activity is THE CHILD'S HUMAN RIGHT!!!!!!! As for the rest, I exhibited some of those behaviors, but aside maybe from frequent arguments over chores (in which, looking back, I was generally being unreasonable), they were neither frequent nor particularly serious. Then again, my parents weren't all that punitive in their basic outlook. They were willing to threaten, and to punish if necessary, when discussion and persuasion didn't work, but punitive techniques weren't their first preference. ---------------- Which you have to thank for your small remaining creativity. By and large, a system with this many side effects, and with some such side effects on the list manifesting themselves in every child raised under it, doesn't "work" very well at all. I think I'm looking at the glass as three quarters full and you're focusing on the one quarter that's still empty. Yes, the system has problems, but most children grow up to be productive citizens who generally respect each other's rights and legitimate interests. And those who don't are kept in check enough that most people feel reasonably safe. ------------------------- YOU need a course in psychology, and statistical info on depression!!! That gives us an awful lot to lose if we make a radical change and it fails. ------------------------- That's like believing that since you keep hitting your head on the cabinet door that taking it off the hinges or wearing a hat might somehow do something terrible!! It's idiotic!! Keep in mind that parents who use purely non-punitive techniques (to the extent that parents who never resort to even indirect threats of punishment exist at all) are ones who choose that kind of technique voluntarily, and who choose to invest the time and effort to make them work. Keep in mind that at present, parents who try to use non-punitive techniques and don't succeed can resort to threats and, if necessary, punishment as a back-up. The jump from that to taking away parents' authority to punish at all for anything short of criminal behavior would be an enormous one and, I contend, an extremely dangerous one. ------------------ What a deluded asshole you are! None of the above are beneficial AT ALL, and ALL are extremely HARMFUL AND ABUSIVE! You're quite insane, deranged, and damaged!! My kids were raised that way, with their rights respected, never coerced, never threatened or forced, and they are both very happy and open people, and both are degreed computer professionals. Steve |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, R. Steve Walz wrote: But I do believe and have proof that my mouth is FULL OF ****! Steve You are right! :-) Doan |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... Nathan A. Barclay wrote: Our kids read or slept or listened to music or TV or computer just exactly as they LIKED, and came and went as they liked, and they thereby learned their OWN INTERNAL self-regulation for THEIR OWN purposes, and didn't have to undergo ANY shock of first freedom when they moved from our home to their first place of their own! I find it curious that someone who claims to have such strong respect for his children's rights and desires would adopt as arrogant, disrespectful, and insulting a tone as you do toward other adults. How would you expect your children to react to the kind of tone you are using here on this newsgroup? What would your children think if they told you they felt one way about something, and you tried to insist that they could not possibly feel that way and must feel some other way entirely? And why would you expect such a tone to be any more successful with adults than it would be with your children? |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
Simple answer - Steve is a "never-spanked" kid! :-) Doan On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, Nathan A. Barclay wrote: "R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... Nathan A. Barclay wrote: Our kids read or slept or listened to music or TV or computer just exactly as they LIKED, and came and went as they liked, and they thereby learned their OWN INTERNAL self-regulation for THEIR OWN purposes, and didn't have to undergo ANY shock of first freedom when they moved from our home to their first place of their own! I find it curious that someone who claims to have such strong respect for his children's rights and desires would adopt as arrogant, disrespectful, and insulting a tone as you do toward other adults. How would you expect your children to react to the kind of tone you are using here on this newsgroup? What would your children think if they told you they felt one way about something, and you tried to insist that they could not possibly feel that way and must feel some other way entirely? And why would you expect such a tone to be any more successful with adults than it would be with your children? |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
On 9 Jun 2004, Kane wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 13:23:03 -0700, Doan wrote: On 9 Jun 2004, Chris wrote: In alt.parenting.spanking Nathan A. Barclay wrote: : But by and large, the system works. And throwing it out before we're : positive that we have something that will work better in the real world, : with real parents and real children, would be foolish. Once again, Nathan, you appear to be talking about win/win cooperative nonpunitive discipline as if it were some sort of new untested concept rather than a set of approaches to dealing with conflict in the parent/child relationship developed decades ago and used successfully in thousands of families. Ah! I just love the logic. :-) Isn't this the same argument that you don't like about spanking? Afterall, spanking has been used for thousands of years and BILLIONS of families. Sorry. Not the same logic at all. And no, that's not the argument he used either. You overlooked the word "successfully." That's the key. Your definition? ;-) If all you have is a hammer ever problem looks like a nail. And if you have a hammer when the problem is a nail? :-) Some parents have learned about other ways to solve problems than using a hammer. And most parents learned when to use a hammer. :-) And in fact, we now drive nails, or make fastenings with many more things than hammers and nails. And banned hammers? ;-) We've even learned how to line up molecules so materials will bond to each other without "spanking" them. So Home Depot no longer sell hammers and nails??? :-) In other words. Parents are improving. I hope so! Are you against improving? nope. Are you? :-) Improvement can save a lot of cat's-asses in good wood, avoid a lot of smashed fingers, and reduce production of a lot of, dare I say it? Injured children. And which cultures made more improvements, non-spanking ones? Doan Not hitting, and doing other things instead seems to be too hard for some. Probably they should think about getting a pet rock. Or stop listen to the "experts". :-) Doan Kane |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
"Doan" wrote in message ... Simple answer - Steve is a "never-spanked" kid! :-) Why in the world would you think that? To me, his attitude looks a whole lot more like what I would expect from someone who was punished as a child, resented it, and can't imagine anyone else resenting it any less (or at least much less) than he does. Further, I think there are a lot of children who have very good reason to resent the way their parents use their authority. There are parents who make their kids wait on them. There are parents who frequently answer the question "Why?" with "Because I said so," or, "Because I'm bigger than you." There are parents who mostly ignore their kids when they aren't scolding or punishing them, who view their children more as an inconvenience than as a treasure. Even under the best of conditions, the use of parental authority can easily generate a certain amount of resentment. If the relationship between the parents and the children is strong, and if the children trust and respect their parents, bits of occasional resentment can generally be swallowed up by the overall strength of the relationship. Even if the children disagree with their parents, the children know their parents love them and are trying to do what's best for them. But if parents give their children little reason to love, or trust, or respect them, how much can punishment accomplish in that kind of vacuum of positive influence? It is the positive elements of the parent-child relationship - the example parents set, and the respect and trust they earn, and their ability to persuade with reason - that have by far the strongest influence on children's behavior. When those elements aren't there, or are weak, the very most that punishment can accomplish is to hold negative behavior partially in check. And even while it does that, it also generates resentment that can fan the flames for future misbehavior. As I've told Chris and the others on his side of the issue, I view punishment - including spanking - as something that can be useful at times when positive efforts fail or when there isn't time to make them work properly. But the idea that if a child behaves badly on a frequent basis, the blame should automatically be fixed on not enough spanking is absurd. Most of the time, there is a much deeper problem that spanking could not possibly put more than a band-aid on. Nathan |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
How Children REALLY React To Control
"Nathan A. Barclay" wrote in message ... Most of the time, there is a much deeper problem that spanking could not possibly put more than a band-aid on. By the way, before anyone makes too much of this statement, you might consider how many band-aids are sold each year. More seriously, I do think I need to clarify this a bit. There are a lot of situations where additional spanking or other punishment would help reduce behavior problems - and especially behavior problems in the presence of adults or that adults are likely to learn about. And in some cases, the possibility of punishment genuinely needs to be an ongoing part of a solution, at least until a child's self-discipline is ready to take over. But when there are major problems contributing to children's wanting to misbehave, and society places the blame on a lack of punishment, we never even notice the underlying problems much less try to find ways to address them that will reduce children's desire to misbehave. We focus on suppressing the misbehavior that is a symptom of the deeper problem, and completely ignore the underlying disease. And because we focus only on the symptom, we keep applying band-aid after band-aid while the wound itself does not heal. That distraction from other issues that need to be addressed is what makes the knee-jerk, "He must not have been spanked," or, "He must not have been spanked enough," attitude so very dangerous. Nathan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Chemically beating children: Pinellas Poisoners Heilman and Talley | Todd Gastaldo | Pregnancy | 0 | July 4th 04 11:26 PM |
misc.kids FAQ on Breastfeeding Past the First Year | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | January 16th 04 10:15 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | Spanking | 12 | December 10th 03 03:30 AM |
| Ray attempts Biblical justification: was U.N. rules Canada should ban spanking | Kane | Spanking | 105 | November 30th 03 06:48 AM |
So much for the claims about Sweden | Kane | Spanking | 10 | November 5th 03 07:31 AM |