Tricky-Ricky Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 I suppose its based on some excuse for a physiologists theory :badidea:that if kids never receive any kind of physical punishment, they will grow up to be passive, and not go around smoking crack, beating people up for money and fun, and stabbing and shooting! But what they seem to forget, is that we all live in a world that does this for a pastime:rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbourner Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 When my mate first joined the police he was in a junior school and saw some commotion in a nearby class, he went in and a 9 year old boy was threatening the teacher with a cardboard tube! My mate went in and took the tube off him, didn't get hit, told him to respect his teachers or something, the kid spat at him!!! He said that's technically assault and if he doesn't calm down he'd arrest him, the kid calmly said he couldn't arrest him cos he's under 16 and doesn't have criminal liability!!! Where'd he learn that from! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Wilson Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Hopefully it'll never happen. If it does go on the statute books some nutter will beat seven bells out of a kid, when they threaten to tell the Social Services (the majority of whom are an idle lot of ineffectual *ankers, IMHO and experience, just as an aside ) mummy's new boyfriend has given them a smack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbourner Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 A couple we know, her half brother threatened that when he didn't want to do what his mum was asking, he actually phoned the police and said she'd hit him!!!!! Little bastard!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Supernanny for prime minister. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Superfanny for prime minister. The woman is a genius. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveK Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Supernanny for prime minister. The woman is a genius. And the new punishment for speeding would simply be "sit in the naughty corner". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaveriK Posted October 8, 2008 Author Share Posted October 8, 2008 BY Hogmaw Have you tried "No Alannah, you'll hurt yourself", "Alannah stop that, it's dangerous" and "Alannah get that out of your mouth or you'll do yourself an injury" Kids don't like being ordered about for no reason Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marbleapple Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Smacked bottom for you then Is that a promise!? Our smashing government are voting to relieve you of this option. LONDON (Reuters) - A cross-party group of MPs will try on Wednesday to bring in a ban preventing parents from smacking their children, according to a campaign group The government remains opposed to an outright ban Enough said. Scare mongering by initial poster imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 And the new punishment for speeding would simply be "sit in the naughty corner". Have you seen the 'behavior modification' that women gets with a naughty corner?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaveriK Posted October 8, 2008 Author Share Posted October 8, 2008 By Marbleapple Scare mongering by initial poster imo. Yes, scare mongering, i am trying to bring everyone down to their knee's with this info Or just perhaps i was amazed that a law like this could ever be considered. Your an idiot imo! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Fight! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Yes, scare mongering, i am trying to put everyone over my knee with this... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaveriK Posted October 8, 2008 Author Share Posted October 8, 2008 I have buns, dont tempt me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tannhauser Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 I suppose its based on some excuse for a physiologists theory :badidea:that if kids never receive any kind of physical punishment, they will grow up to be passive, and not go around smoking crack, beating people up for money and fun, and stabbing and shooting! But what they seem to forget, is that we all live in a world that does this for a pastime:rolleyes: I think you mean a psychologist. A physiologist would be unlikely to be intereted in smacking, unless he was looking at the impact of stressors on physiological systems. That aside, I doubt that psychology has had much input into the debate, other than to justify opinions based on ethical argument. You could use psychological theories to make the case in either direction. Kids learn by largely by observation and by operant conditioning (trial and error). You could argue that if a child has an aggressive parent that is always lashing out in order to achieve control, then the kid will conclude that this is an appropriate way to behave. Or you could argue that behaviour that is punished with physical pain tends to be dropped from the behavioural repertoire. My background is in Psychology and I'm strongly in favour of smacking. In fact, I might order myself this T shirt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lbm Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 I think you mean a psychologist. A physiologist would be unlikely to be intereted in smacking, unless he was looking at the impact of stressors on physiological systems. That aside, I doubt that psychology has had much input into the debate, other than to justify opinions based on ethical argument. You could use psychological theories to make the case in either direction. Kids learn by largely by observation and by operant conditioning (trial and error). You could argue that if a child has an aggressive parent that is always lashing out in order to achieve control, then the kid will conclude that this is an appropriate way to behave. Or you could argue that behaviour that is punished with physical pain tends to be dropped from the behavioural repertoire. My background is in Psychology and I'm strongly in favour of smacking. In fact, I might order myself this T shirt. The T-shirt seems a tempting buy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbourner Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 How about this one? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieP Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 How about kicking them? is that banned? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbonut Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 The T-shirt seems a tempting buy Group buy??? Joking aside though (although the issue is laughable in itself) they've been threatening to do this for years. The suggestion pops up now and again and eventually subsides to be resurrected another day. I'm not a parent but an occasional clip around the ear taught me respect for my parents and contributed to learning a strong sense of right and wrong. Sadly, some kids don't respond to the strongest reprimands. But policing people in their own homes is not the answer. If you love your child you will do the best to bring it up well and if that includes a slap around the legs when necessary then it is your choice, surely. Is it just me or is it from around the time corporal punishment at school was stopped that kids seemed to start getting out of hand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axle Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Supernanny for prime minister. Seen her programme a couple of times (due to wife) and must be said i cannot see her model working for all children. Perhaps the majority, but not vast at that. They obviously dont air the ones which have gone astray and taken a life up of alcohol and drugs due to reminiscing in the 'naughty corner'. Just to add, i personally believe a little bit of firm discipline is no bad thing. Again its not for all children, and can damage the confidence of some imo. Its all about judgement, but some people's aren't very good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Wilson Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 How about kicking them? is that banned? Nah, nearly as much fun as driving sideways Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tannhauser Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Human rights are earned by showing respect, NOT given! These days there aren't many human beings out there that deserve rights, but it seems those that show no respect for others have more human rights. I'm not going to comment too much on this thread, because I have some (apparently) old-school values including corporal punishement and the like. Hell I had it at school, and it taught me 1 of 2 things a) Don't do X, or b) Don't get caught doing x. Out of interest, there was a survey in one of the broadsheets last week (Guardian or Torygraph maybe) of 5,000 teachers. About 22% were in favour of corporal punichment. Re: human rights. If you're thinking that human rights need to be earned then - with respect - you've misunderstood the concept as it's articulated in the 1948 UDHR. As the name implies, the idea of a 'human right' is that there are certain things that you are entitled to simply because you are a human being -it's not contingent at all on what sort of human being, or what you've done. You can't lose your human rights, either. We could debate about whether such an idea is desirable, practical and so on. But to say, for example, "human rights have to be earned" or "they should have their human rights taken away" is a contradiction in terms. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 I'm strongly in favour of smacking. I just thought I'd paraphrase you in case the Daily Mail are watching I think we probably need to define a 'smack' - this is the real debate. A clip around the head? a black eye? in traction? how far is acceptable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 They obviously dont air the ones which have gone astray and taken a life up of alcohol and drugs due to reminiscing in the 'naughty corner'. No, she's a nanny, they tend to look after younger children. I think the point is, with the right discipline as a child hopefully that can be taken forward to teenage years. Although personally speaking that didn't happen with me. I fell into the wrong crowd, which I'm sure speaks for a lot of people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Out of interest, there was a survey in one of the broadsheets last week (Guardian or Torygraph maybe) of 5,000 teachers. About 22% were in favour of corporal punichment. That's not surprising, most of them were probably either drunk or fueled on prozac. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.