I thought we might discuss the pros and cons of different ways to discipline your kids.

Having read the following article, my parents would have been jailed in Australia as I used to cop my Dads "Sam Brown" (A thick black military style belt) on my bare butt and I was made to eat soap so often I grew to like the taste.

My children would also be removed from me and I would be punished if in Aust. as my wife and I do use a smack on the leg or butt as a form of discipline and control.

WHat are your thoughts?

DOCS takes children from grandparents 'over bum smack'

By Caroline Overington

September 24, 2008 07:28am

FOUR children were removed from their grandparents' care and put into separate foster homes, allegedly because the grandmother smacked one of them on the bottom after the child tried to climb into a drain.

The children had lived on and off with their grandparents for six years while their mother battled drug addiction. The children were removed in December by the NSW Department of Community Services (DOCS) and have been living in foster homes, separated from each other.

Details of the case are included in a submission to the Wood inquiry into child welfare, kept secret by inquiry staff but obtained by The Australian.

The inquiry is investigating the system of child welfare in NSW, but intends to keep secret 90 per cent of the submissions it receives.

The Australian has been publishing some of the secret submissions with the permission of the authors.

A woman who is close to the grandparent case, who cannot be named because it would identify the children, said the four siblings, had been "in and out" of their grandparents' home for years.

"Those grandparents loved those kids," she said.

"They were really nice people. They weren't hitting the kids willy-nilly.

"What happened was, the children had been with their mum and it had gone badly wrong again.

"They were put with the grandparents and the idea was to try to make it more permanent."

Such permanent placements are often resisted by parents, because it means they lose not only their children but the Centrelink and other benefits associated with being full-time carers.

The woman said the grandmother "saw the littlest one heading down a drain pipe and grabbed him with one hand and smacked him.

"It was shock. It was sudden, like a moment of frustration, or fright, a startled reflex."

Soon after the incident, DOCS case workers visited the children at school to interview them, as part of the process of making the placement with the grandparents permanent.

"They said to the little one: do your grandparents ever hit you, or smack you? And of course he said: 'Yes, she smacked me last week.'

"He was just telling the truth and it spiralled from there."

The children were immediately removed from the grandparents' home "and because they couldn't find emergency carers to take all four of them, they were split up.

"Never mind the grandparents for a minute. It's very traumatic for small children. It's like they are being punished."

The grandparents appealed to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal and the case is now under review.

"The problem is, it takes time," the woman said. "The children were removed before Christmas, so it's been nine months, and nine months is a long time in anybody's life, and a long time in a child's life."

The trouble with using physical punishment on kids is it becomes an easy option.

It also makes them sneaky and untruthful, which is a natural reaction to avoid pain.

I'm not totally opposed to it, and have certainly done it and received it myself, I just think in many cases the child may not have deliberately set out to do the wrong thing and talking it through can show there was only an honest mistake.

I found that deprivation of privileges works a lot better, but is a lot harder work to enforce than a sudden bad tempered smack.

I agree with the bad tempered smack part, smacking should never be done in the heat of the moment. The bible says two things that always stick in my mind, not that I am of any religous persuasion.

Spare the rod and spoil the child.

and not remembering the exact words used the other proverb used it states something along the lines of if needing to use the rod on a child, go out to a tree and find the smoothest branch, then whittle it down to a usable length and size. Then if you still need to use the rod go ahead.

Smacking should always be used with dialogue.

"He who spareth the rod hateth his son: but he that loveth him correcteth him betimes" (Proverbs 13:24) and "Withhold not correction from a child: for if thou strike him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and deliver his soul from hel_l." (Proverbs 23:13-14)

There's lots of other good stuff in Proverbs as well, most of it equally irrelevant to living in the 21st century.

Here's a goody.

The lips of an adulteress drip with honey, and her mouth is smoother than oil; But in the end she is as bitter as wormwood, as sharp as a two-edged sword.

-- Proverbs 5:3-4

Welfare/Social working must be the most thankless line of work ever created. The "my right to strike my child" crowd are also the first to howl in outrage when a kid is returned to a formerly abusive family and ends up in a dumpster.

I can hardly blame Social workers for "over reacting" to complaints of abuse, it's a natural procedure in an age when so many kids are killed or tortured by their own parents. Rarely a day goes buy when the local tabloid doesn't loving described the trial and conviction of some drug or alcohol addled parent who finally hit the child too hard or once too often.

And God help the local social welfare department if they had had complaints of the abuse and not taken the child into care... OR, even worse, had the child in care and returned it after Mummy promised to be good and kick the druggy boyfriend out.

I was only ever spanked by my parents once in my life, never smacked, hit or anything else. (and dad came and apologized later on )

My mother was a kind, patient and gentle woman who rarely even raised her voice. What she did do were time outs, stand in the corner, go to your room etc. And then, once we'd calmed down, she would come and talk to us about what had happened, what was wrong about it, what it meant and what changes needed to be made.

Usually by the time she was done, I was crying, very upset that I had hurt my mother and disappointed her so. Not that she ever pulled a guilt trip on me, but that I felt I had let her down.

We were punished, don't get me wrong, but we also knew the rules and they were set out from a very early age. My sisters have done the same with their kids and both have raised children who understand the value of good manners and polite behavior.

The problem with the dialogue approach in this case is that the child was getting into a potentially dangerous situation to which the grandparent felt, rightly or wrongly, called for an instant reprimand. Whether the smack was the correct reprimand is open to question but being gently coaxed out of the drain and then subjected to a discussion on the dangers of entering confined spaces only runs the danger of awakening the child's curiosity. "Why aren't I allowed down that dark, cosy tunnel? I bet there's hidden treasure down there". What would social services have had to say if she'd followed the dialogue route and three days later the kid drowned down the drain? You have to accept that with the best will in the world you will not be able to watch kids every waking second of every day to make sure they don't get into bother. So sometimes the reprimand has to be short, sharp and lasting in the child's memory, the difficult part is selecting the occasions to which that response is appropriate but who ever said parenthood would be easy.

I'm in tuky's camp.

Old man with the thick belt, mother grabbing your ear - but then again apparently I was a terror of a child and probably deserved every hiding I received.

In high school corporol punishment was an everday occurence. Funny thing was that our meglomaniacal school principal was a weak, geriatric old fart. His cane left marks, but after a while it didn't really hurt that much. We, being the miscievous, un-disciplaned teenagers that our group was, decided to try and give the guy a heart attack. After every stroke, we would scream out "oh fuc_k that hurt" in between sniggers of laughter. The guy started working up a frenzy, three strokes would turn into twenty, and then he would hobble over to his table and practically overdose on whole heaps of pills.

Hitting kids - not really in favour of that on a regular basis, however, there are definate times when a child needs to be physically punished. IMO these times should be only used very sparingly & when the parent wants to express the consequences to really serious mis-behavior where reasoning with the child has failed to get an adequate response.

On top of that, really naughty boys, like myself, really do need a good whipping from time to time to set us straight!

Good post soundman. I never got a smack I didn't deserve! Actually only once when my mother got the detail wrong and I forgave her for that.

I didn't realize tuky was asking for our thoughts specifically on this case but was under the impression that he was asking about what we thought of giving kids a smack in general.

In this case, no, my mother still would not have hit me. She would have yelled at me, grabbed my arm and pulled me away. But, then I was not an out of control child. The children in this case clearly have had major parental issues with, it appears, both parents being absent on the parenting front and the only normal discipline being the grandparents.

Kids need rules, stability and clear boundaries. Kids who live in a constant state of change (ie from incompetent mother to caring grandparents and back again) will be confused and frankly, very difficult to discipline. So, was the smack necessary? Perhaps. Was the reaction from child services extreme? Yes, and in removing these kids from the only stable home they have ever know are certainly doing those children no favors.

Bring back Caning, the Slipper and the Birch, i say. Kids nowadays are a bunch of namby pamby's who don't know the meaning of respect and go round beating up old grannies.

Now, before the PC brigade jump on me, although there is a bit of tongue in cheek, in the above comment. It can't be just coincidence that young one's today don't respect elders like they did when i was a young un.

It is no coincidence that the cowards stopped beating me as soon as I was big enough to fight back.

Bring back Caning, the Slipper and the Birch, i say. Kids nowadays are a bunch of namby pamby's who don't know the meaning of respect and go round beating up old grannies.

Now, before the PC brigade jump on me, although there is a bit of tongue in cheek, in the above comment. It can't be just coincidence that young one's today don't respect elders like they did when i was a young un.

There's a hel_l of a lot of elders that don't deserve too much respect either. In many Western societies the family unit is disintegrating rapidly. A lot of kids have a "father of the month" club and Mum spends the day shoving her Supporting Mother's Benefit into the poker machines.

The kids are virtually feral as soon as they can fend for themselves and many join a gang as a substitute family. Very quickly they find out that stealing and bashing weaker people and having sex with anyone is FUN.

That's a black post sceadugenga.

There's a hel_l of a lot of elders that don't deserve too much respect either.

Maybe so but neither do they deserve to be beat up by young thugs.

The kids are virtually feral as soon as they can fend for themselves and many join a gang as a substitute family. Very quickly they find out that stealing and bashing weaker people and having sex with anyone is FUN.

Many of these elders who may not deserve respect fought in wars to keep the freedom for these hooligans and hence allow them to have their "fun"

I'm not trying to justify what they do Mr B, I'm just pointing out a few possible reasons for their behaviour.

Tigger, my black posts are usually before 8am, don't read anything I post after 8pm at night either.

Tigger, my black posts are usually before 8am, don't read anything I post after 8pm at night either.

I'll try to do that!

I'm not trying to justify what they do Mr B, I'm just pointing out a few possible reasons for their behaviour.

Yeah i know buddy

I do not know which journey is best, but what I do know and the route I will follow is no smacking, no cane, no restorative justice of the corporal kind will be meted out, I will follow my own path and this follows very closely to the sbk mindset related above.

I am extraordinarily inexperienced, but I guess that is the journey, I just hope we get it right.

Good Luck

Moss

Lived on the Isle of Man for a short time as a callow youth. One " Glasgow" fortnight ( factory holiday for the working man ) a ship load of Orangemen from Scotland arrived at the same time as the ferry from Eire. Two sides of neds faced off on the docks and holy war was about to commence. A single Manx copper got between the two sides of angry young men, banged the floor with his tip-staff and explained to the combatants that the IOM still had " the birtch " and any trouble from them and they would feel it's power. Silence from both sides, who then slowly walked off the pier with the sound of " have a nice holiday " from the PC ringing in their ears.

Gentle words I fear, would have led to bloodshed and the copper in the harbour. The thugs, no more than boys, scared shitless and kept in line, never mind their deep hatred by the thought of the birch. It was never used on them that day, and in fact rarely used on the Island, but the knowledge it was there worked wonders.

I didn't realize tuky was asking for our thoughts specifically on this case but was under the impression that he was asking about what we thought of giving kids a smack in general.

He did but I was trying to use the case in point to illustrate how an instantaneous response may be more appropriate than say a lecture maybe some time later. Sending the kid to bed early may satisfy your "no violence" principles but it useless if the kid is lying up there thinking "what did I do wrong?".

IMO there are certain occasions when a single slap followed by an explanation of why the punishment was meted out is more effective at preventing a recurrence. These occasions would be limited to times when the kid's action puts them in harms way and not for minor transgressions like drawing pictures of the dog on the newly decorated lounge walls.

I couldn't think of a better reason for getting a slap than drawing on the newly decorated lounge walls.

Especially if you'd spent the weekend doing it your self.

Lived on the Isle of Man for a short time as a callow youth. One " Glasgow" fortnight ( factory holiday for the working man ) a ship load of Orangemen from Scotland arrived at the same time as the ferry from Eire ??????. Two sides of neds faced off on the docks and holy war was about to commence.

Paddy Reilly

Although I fear young Paddy has had a jar or two

Good Luck

Moss

I've been watching this thread develop.

Would you like my opinion? you're going to get it anyway.

Chastisement or punishment should always be lacking in two things.

1. Anger.

2. Self satisfaction.

Be it a 'go to your room' a cut off of privileges, or a smart rap on the back of the legs.

Moss, kids are control freaks, once they get the upper hand, you are doomed...... by all means promise never to smack your child, but don't make it a binding agreement.

My little girl knows that if she misbehaves too much then she will get a slap, fortunately just knowing is usually enough and rarely do I have to raise my hand. Unfortunately though, being as mischevious as she is she likes to see how far she can push my wife and I, and so sometimes she needs a reminder of where the line is drawn.

I definitely agree with this:

Chastisement or punishment should always be lacking in two things.

1. Anger.

2. Self satisfaction.

Whenever my girl gets a slap then it is deliberate, which maybe sound but but in deliberate I mean controlled.

on the other end of the scale it drives me nuts when parents give their kids whatever they want just because they throw a tantrum for it, my little girl has learned that no means no, and so it makes such things so much easier for all concerned, especially her.

There were four of us kids, raised by our Dad, his first wife, and after Mom died, a stepmother. We grew up among children of managers, lawyers, doctors, school teachers, etc. - gentlemen, they were. I never heard a classmate tell a story about getting a beating at home. There were no schoolyard fights, either. My classmates are now retiring as judges, professors, executives, accountants, etc., like our fathers did.

How your folks raised you may have been a crying shame or a crime, even back then. I dated a woman when we were both 42. Every weekend as a child and teenager, her parents beat her and her brother nearly senseless on their weekend drunken binges. Her family was run out of town for child beating, in the 1950's.

If you cannot control your own emotions around children, you do not deserve to be a parent. I raised all six of my kids, often singlehandedly, and always stopped spanking them around the age of four, because by then, we could reason with them.

Parents prepare children to be adults. If you want hooligans, beat the shit out of them, and they learn how to beat the shit out of adults.

Sorry, but I feel real strongly about this. I am no saint, but I am no child beater. Nor do my kids beat their kids now. In fact, my son in Ireland is married to a social worker who is in Child Protective Services. Yesterday was the International Day of Nonviolence. Teach your children well. It is much more difficult to discipline kindly and gracefully, but you can do it.

I grew up in a working class saw milling town. Most of the kids I went to school with got a "hiding" when they misbehaved.

I never saw any marks on them and invariably it was a case of "you wait until your father gets home from work" so the father wouldn't have been drunk.

Drinking in rural Australia in the '50s was almost invariably a social thing, football club and RSL (veterans associations). There were pubs but they closed at 6pm.

My father liked a drink, without being a drunk, but I can count the times he hit me on one hand, and never when he was drinking.

But then I was a very good kid.

Can I for one second just pick on this one point.

I raised all six of my kids, often singlehandedly, and always stopped spanking them around the age of four, because by then, we could reason with them.

Moss, make a note of that and report back in a few years.

Good luck.

Can I for one second just pick on this one point.

I raised all six of my kids, often singlehandedly, and always stopped spanking them around the age of four, because by then, we could reason with them.

Moss, make a note of that and report back in a few years.

Good luck.

It was just a guess, from 24 years ago. But when the preschoolers understood what punishment was (for doing something wrong), they understood non-corporal punishment.

I apologize if my post sounded classist. Poor folks know better than rich folks, often. But we understood from examples around us that respectable grown-ups used their minds rather than their fists. Except for leaders of entire countries.

Or people that want to be the next governor of Bangkok.

I'm in favour of smacking young kids and rationalise it thus:

The human body experiences pain as a warning system to the mind that something should be avoided. Pain exists from birth because it takes a number of years to develop the cognitive ability to recognise what should be avoided. Pain is the body's instinctive defence mechanism.

Therefore, until a child can be reasoned with a smack which causes pain (obviously not too much because we love our children) is the most effective way of teaching a child what it should and should not do.

Once cognitive reasoning is developed then psychology can be effective in controlling behaviour. But when that fails a smack is required.