Should we reintroduce the cane in schools? (1 Viewer)

[Darnie]

THE SCIENCE SAYS THAT SMACKING DOES NOT INSTILL ANY OF THIS


why are you arguing with the science for fuck sake

not according to NZ medical journal

meh, its three years old and described in a newspaper article, but it has some validity.

I had a smack used as my only punishment up to about the age of 8, and i'd say i'd still have decent morals, and i am not in any way agressive. Neither are my brother or sister.

article

 

[David Spade]

Very good argument there bro

you were smacked until you were 8 and you have morals





do you see why you're an idiot though?

 

[Darnie]

did you even read the article?

I dont see how using a smack to a 4 year old, who won't see reason if you try and explain it to them, is the wrong thing to do. It means the kid attributes something naughty with less desirable outcome, therefore is not convinced to do it.

 

[David Spade]

no i did not read the article
i havent read anything anyone has said because i do not care about this at all im just making sweeping generalisations and strawmen and shit cos im bored

oh wait thats what you're all doing

 

[John McCain]

.

.

I don't understand how a young child can be developed enough to recognize the cause and effect of smacking, but not of other punishments.

I don't think the emotional impact of isolating them for a time out, in combination with you raising your voice and using aggressive body language, is that distant and abstract from the cause. If they are too young to draw this basic, virtually immediate connection, then are they old enough to be making the connection between physical violence and it's cause, and learn to change behaviour from the experience?

In an institution where all children are by law required to attend school we are taking away the parents choice in how to handle their child's behaviour. Should we really be handing over disciplinary choices for our our children to the state? I don't think it is morally right to strip parents of the right to chose and act against something they personally do not condone.

Is it really productive to teach children behaviours that give the message to use physical violence as a means to control another persons actions when in the real world this does not apply? I think we should be teaching them to behave as functional full grown adults without using physical punishment as a deterrent.

It should be about whether the action is just or unjust, not about parental choice. If the action is ever unjustified for the state to apply it, why should parents have that right?

We allow the state to apply discipline in the playground in numerous other instances, try telling your school that they are not allowed to isolate your child from his peers when he is disobedient etc.. Parents have never been allowed to demand exceptions from a schools disciplinary policy.

Also you don't have to send your children to a state school, home schooling is legal for all years in NSW.

Physical violence is used as a means to control behaviour in the real world all the time, I think the implicit threat of physical violence governs a lot of human interaction, people would treat each other very differently if they didn't anticipate the possibility of physical consequences for their actions, and their own ability to inflict and control a situation physically. Situations come to blows between adults all the time. A physical response to another adult is completely justified in many situations.

 

[John McCain]

So then you are arguing that the state holds ownership of the child rather than the parent?

I guess you're right. Let's hand over all of our choices to the great big nanny state we all love and call home. No need to choose a career. The government says your an electrician. No need to decide what's for dinner tonight. The government will give us our daily rations.

If the state can't administer discipline to children, why do we grant it the right over our beings to regulate adult behaviour via the police and the judiciary?

 

[ashie0]

are you saying that there is no learning of morals, right and wrong, and no learning of what is safe and isn't, when a parent uses a smack as discipline?

By resorting to smacking your children you are entrenching in them the notion that violence is acceptable behavior. Hardly a logical method discipline.

 

[Omie Jay]

Hitting is only gonna aggravate them more.

School kids should know when they're doing something wrong, and caning isn't needed to re-inforce punishments/lessons that need to be learnt.

 

[John McCain]

Hitting is only gonna aggravate them more.

School kids should know when they're doing something wrong, and caning isn't needed to re-inforce punishments/lessons that need to be learnt.

Why is this different to when it is used by parents, which you endorsed?

 

[Ayatollah]

By resorting to smacking your children you are entrenching the notion that violence is acceptable behavior. Hardly a logical method discipline.

Incorret,
Your actually 'entrenching' the notion that bad behaviour will not be tolerated. Young children do not have the mental capacity to realise 'time out' or 'no tv' is a punishment for their rudeness (or whatever it was they where doing). Numerous studies show the only way to 'condition' children is to immeadiately strike the child after their missdemeanor, this infliction is actually proccessed by their brain, and they associate their bad behaviour with the punishment.

The relationship between a parent and a child is god given, and no one has the right to impose there liberal ideology on the way we raise our children, countless peer reviewd papers show that children raised by the rod are more odentient and responsive to their parents demands, they are also more likely to be involved in community/church service programs.

Perhaps you wish to raise your children through the Xbox, where games like 'call of duty' rewards them for sadistic mass murder of 'arabs', compelling them to fufill this disgusting 'duty'.
I say to you, no, I will not have this in my household, children are shaped by their parents, and the parents have a responsibility to instill proper values and manners, 'smacking' does not seriously harm children, the long term benifits are well documented and I myself was 'raised by the rod' and I have never commited a criminal offence, nor been in a fight.

You raise you children how you like, but dont you dare tell me what to do.

 

[John McCain]

Numerous studies show the only way to 'condition' children is to immeadiately strike the child after their missdemeanor

No studies exist that show this.

Post one.

 

[Iron]

You should forgive those who you feel abused u as a child m8. Let the h8 go

 

[Omie Jay]

Why is this different to when it is used by parents, which you endorsed?

because school kids are old enough to know right from wrong, so dont need a smack to reinforce it.

Young kids dont know, so if they disobey a parent (more than 3 times i reckon), a smack is in order to reinforce the fact that the parent should be obeyed.
As the child gets older, they learn that what the parent is asking for isnt bad, or must be done, or whatever.

A mother isnt gonna smack her 19 yr old son because he wont listen to her. Thats because the 19 year old should be old enough to know that what the mother is asking of him should be done, whereas a 6 year old is still in the process of learning.

As kids/adolescents/teenagers get older and begin to mature, their responsibilites increase.
If a 12 year old gets asked to put out the clothes by his mother, he might say "no fuck off" or "i dont wanna" (or something like that), because kids can be like that at that age.
If a 19 year old gets asked to do the same thing, he would know that his mum gets shoulder problems, so he'll gladly do it no questions asked.
(actual example, from my household, guess who the 19 yr old is )

Maturity plays a big role, as does the child's experience of life.
A child is still in the middle of the learning process, so lessons need to be taught to ensure they dont become a freak when they get older.
A teenager should know basic stuff like this, so if they disobey/dont do homework/whatever, they will suffer the consequences, and it will ultimately be their own downfall. Something as simple as not doing homework COULD eventually result in the student not knowing the content, and not passing the grade, and staying in school longer, maybe not even making it out of school, then problems getting a job afterwards, ALL BECAUSE they didnt apply themself at school.

School kids shouldnt be doing their homework because they fear the cane.
They should be doing it so they get a proper education.

edit: wow, i only just noticed how off-topic i went, haha.

 

[John McCain]

because school kids are old enough to know right from wrong, so dont need a smack to reinforce it.

Young kids dont know, so if they disobey a parent (more than 3 times i reckon), a smack is in order to reinforce the fact that the parent should be obeyed.
As the child gets older, they learn that what the parent is asking for isnt bad, or must be done, or whatever.

A mother isnt gonna smack her 19 yr old son because he wont listen to her. Thats because the 19 year old should be old enough to know that what the mother is asking of him should be done, whereas a 6 year old is still in the process of learning.

You've contradicted yourself.

You said school age kids know right from wrong. You later said a 6 year old is still in the process of learning.

A 6 year old is of school age.

 

[Omie Jay]

by school age i mean high school and maybe upper primary as well (year 5 and 6)
(i should've specified, my bad)

 

[John McCain]

Okay, so the use of the cane on school children younger than that should be acceptable?

 

[Omie Jay]

No.

When, in my rant, i was talking about young children being smacked, i believe only parents have that right, and that no one else has any right to strike someone else's child.

 

[John McCain]

Why do parents have any more right to hit the child than anyone else?

 

[TommySix]

I was smacked as a child using something like a cane by my dad, I love him to bits but there is resentment and no it didn't work in disciplining me at all. In fact, I developed a habit of fighting him with a similar object if I knew the 'cane' was coming

 

[57o1i]

If a certain punishment is to the benefit of the child, it shouldn't matter who is applying it.

Disagree. By that logic a child belongs to the whole of society rather than to a family unit. I think punishments like grounding and time out are effective as well, but it's not like I would allow my neighbours or my friend's mother or my bus driver to weigh in.

So in short, that's a massive generalisation that you've used there to back up your argument.