From: tigger@satyr.Sylvan.COM (Grace Sylvan)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: 20/20 SPANKING COMPLAINT
Date: 6 Nov 92 09:22:24 GMT
	<1992Nov5.091927.10979@sequent.com>
	<1992Nov5.165042.24174@cs.brown.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Sylvan Associates

In article <1992Nov5.165042.24174@cs.brown.edu> mhn@cs.brown.edu (Marian H. Nodine) writes:

   > ... We brought her upstairs, and she refused to
   >change.  She was saying "NO! NO! NO!" and refusing to do anything.  We
   >then sat her down so she could calm down, then asked if she was going
   >to change her clothes, or disobey us.  When she still refused to change
   >her clothes, we spanked her.  When she clamed down again, we encouraged
   >>her to confess (yes, we are a Christian household) that she had disobeyed,
   ...

   Anna was spanked because she was refusing to follow through on an
   agreed-upon logical consequence of her wetting her pants.  In our
   house, there are rules (discussed and well-known) and consequences
   (usually logical).  We set the rules, with feedback from our kids
   at the time.  Once the rule is in place, we, as parents, enforce it.
   If my child refuses to take the agreed-upon consequence, then she
   is disobeying, and she gets the consequence of disobeying.

Okay, here is the non spanking alternative. You would simply have
(somewhat brusquely) changed her. She probably wouldn't have liked it,
and no spanking or confession would have been necessary. Next time,
children being the independent creatures they are, she'd probably do
it herself.

   > Even more often, these discussions have 
   > pointedly demonstrated to me how many rules are made for ensuring parental
   > convenience - and not much else.

   How was the above example related to parental convenience?  I'm not
   sure I understand your point?

Convenience. Because it is still a quick solution to "if you don't
obey me". Ok, so you put a level before that - first there is the
simple, agreed upon, logical consequence. But if, for some reason, the
child is unwilling to do the consequence, they get hit. You don't work
with them any further.

Kayvan and I make sure to follow through, which might mean physically
guiding a young child, on what the logical consequence is. We stop
there. If Katherine needs to mop up a spill, and she refuses, we get a
rag, put it in her hand, and guide her through it. We've rarely had to
do that now that she's three. She might keep complaining that she
doesn't want her shoes on when we're going out, but we persist in our
request until she either comes over and does it herself or lets us put
them on her. She might still be complaining about it.

I don't give her a chance to control me, by giving her the option
of having me hit her, even if, for some reason, she might feel
deserving of it. (Since we don't hit or call a person OR her actions
bad, there'd be no reason for her to think she should be punished in
our household.)

The words are HONOR your Mother and Father, I believe, not obey them
every moment.
-- 

Tigger (Grace Sylvan)                Mom of Katherine Yelena, 8/8/89,
tigger@satyr.sylvan.com              Corey 1/31/91; we loved him so,
                                     Robin Gregory born 2/28/92

 "It seems to me that our large goal is to find the ways to help our
 children become humane and strong."
 
              - Dr Haim Ginott quoted by Adele Faber & Elaine Mazlish