R&S Parents: Do you agree with the whole "spare the rod, spoil the child," thing?

Question

Or do "time-outs" make more sense?

Answer 1

I've never raised a hand to any of my three children, and trust me when I say that as a single mom that was most difficult to do.

When the kids were little I never let them out of my sight for a moment. They were kept from putting a key in an outlet or touching a hot stove because I literally gave up every aspect of my life to be right there beside them.

It was hard, exhausting work, but it was better than smacking kids who are too young to understand why they were being struck in the first place. On the few occasions when I wasn't right there, my shriek at what they were about to do was bloodcurdling enough to stop them in their tracks.

Striking a child is a poor punishment, used mainly by, in my opinion, lazy parents. Discipline should be about learning from your mistakes, or better yet, knowing through teaching/learning not to do wrong in the first place. All spankings teach is that your parents are bigger than you and can hurt you-not much different from a schoolyard bully.

My preferred method of discipline was to take away privileges and require that they be earned back. This hit them where it hurt and they thought twice about repeated offense.

I don't agree with "time-outs" unless the children are very young. After about age three or four , most children are beginning to understand that their actions have consequences. They don't yet remember this, but the ability to grasp it is there.

Answer 2

Even one of our neighborhoods cops told us there is a big difference between child abuse and a well deserved smack on the butt Highlander.I think a lot of what is wrong today is because the parents" spare the rod" and spoil the child.That is why this generation is labeled "The gimme " generation.Time outs never worked for very long.They outgrow it.And the wooden spoon still stings at whatever age they are.I'm not saying beat them with it .But a well deserved smack on the bottom still stops you and makes you think.Even God has to smack our fingers once in a while to make us listen.

Answer 3

I was taught by a wise man that people misuse that quote. He claims that "the rod" is supposed to be symbolic of the shepard's crook often associated with Jesus. If viewed in that context, this quote is not about corporal punishment at all, but rather about the need to raise one's child in faith...which seems more in keeping with the message that Christians are supposed to accept.

Now, I'm an atheist and don't agree with that particular nugget of "wisdom" either. However, I think it makes more sense than "if you don't hit your kids they'll be brats." I only think that physical punishment like spanking is acceptable if the child is doing something that is putting themselves or others in immediate physical danger--so if they're reaching toward a hot stove, smacking their hand gently is a good way of getting their attention. Any other time, physical punishment is the absolute least effective method of discipline.

Answer 4

The rod of discipline folks, NOT an actual stick lol.

Just like Supernanny says, have rules and stick to them. Children want, need and crave a steady home where there are indeed certain rules that must be obeyed ... no ball throwing in the house, put your shoes somewhere other than the living room, make your bed.

If you don't have a good backbone of rules, the child will be spoiled. Don't we all agree on that? Jeesh, don't make more out of it than it is.

Answer 5

I think one need to get their attention no matter what but, only to a point. Also we need to be careful this day and age because there are so many children who have ADHD and the rod does not get their attention so a person would just beat a kid for nothing (there really is no excuse for beating at all but...) If a child works well with time out then go ahead but, some may need a swat on the butt.

Answer 6

Genetics seem to play a part too, nature and nurture. We "spared the rod" and our children stack up well against those of our peer group. No worse, maybe a little better.

An example I like to use is the attitude (as recent as the 70's) that it was ok to give your wife a little smack. Only when she deserved it of course. Out of your love for her.

Answer 7

Believe it or not, but the oldest child got 2 spankings and the youngest saw both and that is all the spankings that I ever had to do. They were polite. They showed respect. They didn't get into trouble. I had many long talks with them about doing what was right but I never again had to spank. For my two only a few spankings was all it took. The main thing to me is to let them know that you mean business and you do not tolerate a rebellious child.

Answer 8

Spare the rod. Don't spoil the child!! Use time-out and grounding.

Answer 9

For all my parenting knowledge and psychology education, in addition to countless hours rearing other people's children & dolling out parenting advice, I have found biblical mandates for child-rearing to be the most effective.

God tells us plainly not to drive our children to wrath, so why would we purposely "beat" them for no reason, or be such staunch disciplinarians that we drive them from our love & that of God in the future?

Spanking a child, especially young ones that can't yet verbally reason, is an immediate and moderately painful deterrent for the activity or behavior a parents wants to end. That's it. Parents don't get to slap them around or lock them in a closet. A smacked hand or swatted leg is usually enough. Some children respond better to sitting by themselves for a short time. Depends on the child's will power or level of defiance.

As they become older and better able to be verbally reasoned with, spankings become less necessary. Once they can connect their bad behavior with, say, hurt feelings (snatching a toy from another child, etc), parents need to start working on the child's own conscious, or heart. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is the very first thing children should learn.

As a parent, you want a child that will obey immediately (or as close to immediate as possible), mainly for their protection, but also for the sake of your grey hairs.

The sooner you let them know what the expectations are, and are prepared to enforce them, you're well on your way to having a happy child, well-suited for society (and for Christians, more accepting of the Father they can't yet see).

Discipline is supposed to be meeted out in love - you love your child & want them to learn right from wrong so they can avoid trouble in the future & to learn to become obedient to authority. Doesn't sound like child abuse to me.

Answer 10

I for one absolutely agree.
My kids are and were well behaved and polite. The absolute worst brats were, inevitably, raised by people too cowardly to use physical discipline when it was required and appropriate.

Just read Sun's brainless post just above mine. That sort of mindless prattle is just what I meant. Anyone who cannot tell the difference between disciplining a child for slamming his sister's fingers in a car door and punching a child in the face for spilling grape juice, shouldn't be allowed to raise a child.