Parents who think spanking is ok as a last resort have a clear differnce in their minds between what constitutes child abuse, or violent abuse, and what constitutes a disciplinary smack. (A disciplinary smack is very very light, and is done once, or three slow measured times at the outset, on the bottom, or hand, with the flat of your own palm.)
The idea is that hopefully you will never actually have to hit your child. It is also incredibly important never to hit your child when you are angry or stressed out youself, becuase your judgement is suspect, and your physical coordination is impaired, so it's likely that you will smack too hard. The third thing is to have read up on or otherwise learned as many parenting techniques as possible before you have the kid.
If you've had to smack your child more than about 4 or 5 times in its life, then it may be time to learn some more about parenting techniques.
The idea, when a child is preverbal, is to physically keep them out of harm's way, and mischief, or harming other children/people, by physically removing them from the situation, and distracting them. In some cases... especially when they are getting the hang of "good" and "naughty" behaviour, a short sharp loud "NO!" is useful, as are expressions, stances or gestures to let them know the action is dissapproved of.
As soon as a child is verbal, it's time to start teaching rules, and to tell them there are punishments that go with some of the rule breaking. The smaller the child, the more simple you put things. OF COURSE you want techniques like the ones in 3,2,1, Magic, and Parenting with Love and Logic, in your ********
The thing is, that some children, or some situations, just aren't covered by these other techniques.
The whole reason that parents have to use systems of rewards and punishments in the first place, is that children start out with no logic, and no comprehension of all the consequences in the world, that happen for each action in the world. They are learning all the time THROUGH action and consequence, but they have to go through all the simple, obvious, immediate ones first, before they get to a really good understanding of the complex, abstract, long delayed and far-away consequences.
A lot of children won't ever need a spank, because all the other techniques work with them. That's great, and it's ideal, but it's also a really lucky outcome. There are some children, who will do something serious, and just won't learn not to do it, without having been spanked once in their lives.
That's because all their own urges that they are feeling inside right now are drowning out any very distant and hazy notions of why it might not be a good idea. This is when it's not the consequence of the action itself is not enough to stop the child, but the fact that Mummy and Daddy say "No", and if I do it anyway I'm going to get punished has to be enough to stop the child. For some children, with some urges, it's only the idea of getting a smack that will stop them.
For some children, the idea of lighter punishments aren't enough to overcome some immediate urges. (And I'm talking about things where the parents aren't in the same place, or have their hands full and can't intervene in any action the child does.) If a child does something serious, and has been told it's against the rules, then it's time to apply the pre-detrmined punishment. If the child does that serious thing again, it's time to give the punishment AND to tell the child that next time it does it, it's getting a smack. If the rule is flouted a third time, it's time for a smack.
In the case for a toddler, a really light smack might be appropriate immediately after any really dangerous activity. The child is learning through actions and consequences right? Well it's too dangerous for the kid to learn first hand the consequence of sticking a hand in a fire, or boiling water. If a "No!" or a dominant pose and a wagging finger won't keep a child away from a fire, or a road, then I think a light smack on the hand (that stings for a few moments) is a really good stand-in consequence for a burnt hand, or getting run over.
And no, it's not possible to totally child-proof a life, so that such stand-in smacks are completely unnecessary for all children in all situations.
If a child is still physically fighting (after all the talks, logic, and punishment tactics) there is one of two things happening. Either the idea of other people's pain is obviously still too abstract and far away. Or the child is getting in situations when it is feeling really hurt, and wants to inflict pain back, in retaliation, or to educate the other person how they fell inside.
In the second case, you need to teach the child better problem solving skills. In the first case, this is where a judicious application of "this is how it feels" can work wonders. Tell the child: the next time you bite someone, I'm going to bite you in the same place, to show you what it feels like. (push someone, pinch someone, slap someone etc. Obviously if the child has done something really dangerous, modify what you do to them.) If it does happen again, then calmly and clinically do exactly what they did, making sure your pressure is light. "See? That's what it feels like." In almost every case, that lesson will never have to be repeated.
For a little toddler who has a bad habit of lunging, biting deeply and hanging on, one immediate light bite on the forearm can stop that habit dead. You have engaged in direct, intimate communication with the child. They instantly make the connection between their own mouth's actions and your mouth's actions. I'm not saying that you should do this every ar any time your toddler hits or kicks. But doing it just the once is often a really effective lesson, and seems to work especially effectively with biting.
Of course, you want to teach your child the difference between real violent behaviour, and play fights, which are still an important bonding physical activity, especially amongst family and males.
Edited, Mar 22nd 2007 9:42am by Aripyanfar
