Do you think there is a DIFFERENCE in hitting your child or spanking your child?

Question

yes or no. and why. please.

Answer 1

As most already stated; spanking is used to teach a lesson. Spanking is my last resort, when other forms of discipline have failed. Spanking is on the bottom (Although, I did smack my son's hand when he was younger to keep him from hurting himself on stove, outlets, etc.) Spankings do not leave marks. Spankings are done with respect to the child and the situation; and a reason should be given to the child who received them.

Hitting is disrespectful. Hitting is something people do out of anger or without just cause. Hitting usually leaves marks. Hitting only teaches one lesson: be afraid of me. People who hit children do not bother to explain themselves to the child unless they are worried they are gonna get in trouble if the child tells someone about it.

Answer 2

There is a big difference. I am 16 years old and I admit that hitting is the way to go. My mom started off spanking me when I lived with her. I did bad things. When I started living with my dad, I acted way better because he actually hit me. I do not disagree with hitting and think it is for the best. When you get a spanking, you act like it is bad, and when your away from your parents you laugh about it. Hit them and don't let them take advantage of you. The police will not do anything to you. Trust me I have called the police on my dad and they will not do a thing but preach to the child. Good luck and let me know what happens.

Josh

Answer 3

I think there is a definate difference. Discipline actually comes from the Greek word for teaching. I think the intention of the parent in spanking is usually to teach the child not to do a certain behaviour. Hitting crosses the line into taking out ones anger on another.
I don't really think either one can be justified. There has to be ways to correct behavior without hitting.

Answer 4

Yes. Spanking is a punishment that is not done out of anger but out of discipline. I.E. I would rather spank them than have them keep running out into the streets where the consequences can be far worse. Or turn into a liar or a thief.

Hitting is done out of anger. Kids shouldnt be hit just because we are angry. Plus "hitting" leaves the impression that the parent is out of control and just hauled off and knocked the kid a good one.

Answer 5

I agree with Bean62960... There are sometimes that spanking/smacking is the best resource to educate a child. However, you must measure yourself, and never do it just because you are angry. But hitting... well, that's another story.

Answer 6

Yes, spanking is done with the intention of correcting a negative behavior that may cause the child damage. (ie, running out into the street) Hitting holds a negative connotation to me because it's done mindlessly, with no disciplinary objective. Many times it's done out of anger or frustration.

Answer 7

spanking is on the bum and at an adjusted pressure so that they dont like it, but its not violent. i wus spanked and i think it was a gud disciplinary tool. its not the onlee way to raise kids tho, and there may be better methods.
one important thing to remember tho is not to just hit the kid as hard as he made u mad. spanking is not meant to punish for the crime, but to teach them not to do it again.

Answer 8

yes there is a difference in the power of the hit

Answer 9

nope because in the end you're just hitting you're child...i guess 'spanking' and 'hitting' are just different ways of saying it.

Answer 10

Yes. Level of anger and selfishness, and motive.

BUT, according to them, there IS no difference! Hence the reason why I utilize alternative disciplinary tactics.