From: dsc@gemini.tmc.edu (Doug S. Caprette Bldg. 28 W191 x3892)
Subject: Re: Plain Talk About Spanking (long)
Organization: NASA GSFC CDP VLBI
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 00:25:34 GMT


Perhaps some of your statements were rhetorical.  I have treated them as 
literal, since everything I wrote was intended to be literal.

In article <1689AC87D.M18611@MBVM.Mitre.Org> M18611@MBVM.Mitre.Org (Kathy Wilk) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.230645.29990@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov>
>dsc@gemini.tmc.edu (Doug S. Caprette Bldg. 28 W191 x3892) writes:
(Regarding the anecdote about a child's hand being slapped..)
>>
>>
>>Of course not!  The purpose of the punishment was not to make him less
>>cranky and tired, as you well know.  Did he hit your daughter again?
>>If not, I daresay that he knew what he had done wrong.  Was slapping his
>>hand appropriate?  I don't know.  But I have seen cranky and tired children
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^      
>>that if spoken to sincerely or scolded, immediately retaliate by repeating
>>the offense.  (In this case it would mean hitting your daughter again).
>>Perhaps this parent had learned from experience that this was how her child
  ^^^^^^^
>>would respond.
>>
> 
>  This is truly giving the parent a lot of credit where I don't think it is
>due. 

No.  It is truly speculation as indicated by what was written above!  Crimony,
I didn't witness this, I only heard about it from you.

>       The child did not hit again not because he necessarily knew it was
>wrong but because he knew HE would get hit again.  This is the likeliest
>reason for the punishment 'working'.  If a child is cranky or tired, the
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
      Yes, I agree.
>wait is long, and he is acting up, let's throw in another alternative -
>that the parent get the child out of that environment and give him a rest
>or something to eat, or some comfort because the child does not have the
>tolerance that an adult does for waiting in line.  Or is the point that
>slapping the child is the way the parent teaches the child to like waiting
                                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>in line? (Get real, please)
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Are you seriously suggesting that parents should give up doing anything that
the child finds booring, or tiresome?  Or, perhaps they should get a sitter
and leave the child at home every time they leave the house?  Are you ad-
vocating that parents should teach children to enjoy unpleasent activities,
(e.g. teach them to be masochists) rather than teaching them to put up with
them without taking it out on others?

Just who needs to 'get real' here?

>
>  The parent may have learned from experience that for her child, the least
>work for her and the most gratifying action for her (because she was tired
>and cranky, too) was to smack.
>

Quite possibly so.  That is precisely one reason why I said I didn't know if
slapping his hand was the right thing to do.   However, it was not until I was 
much older that I realized that parents sometimes reacted this way too.  When I
was four, I regarded adults as some sort of superbeings with infinite wisdom.
I doubt if her son concluded that his hand was slapped because his mother was 
tired and cranky.  If, however, he only got spanked when his mother was ir-
ritable, then he would be getting a confusing message.  Under those circum-
stances a child is not being punished, he/she is being abused. 

> 
>>
>>>                                  The child cried for about 15 mins after
>>>the slap. the whole time he was crying the mother was saying how
>>>sorry she was that she had "HAD to hit him."

By the way, to whom?  The child or to the people around them.

>>
>>I agree that this kind of behaviour, (the profuse appologizing) is confusing
>>to the child.
>>
> 
>  You seem to be saying that smacking a tired and cranky child is THE solu-
>tion (not the best solution, for either the short or the long run) for that
>mother.
> 

Please (seriously) tell me why you think this (smacking is THE solution) is
my conclusion.  There seems to be a very serious block to our communication.  
Perhaps email?  I find this last statement very puzzling.

I wrote that the profuse appologizing was confusing to the child.  This
relates back to your original supposition, which I challenged, to the
effect that being spanked, was not a logical consequence for a child's
action.  Punishing a child for hitting another child, by spanking, and
telling the child "You (meaning the child) are not allowed to hit" teaches
the child that they (the child) will be punished by the authority (parent)
if they (the child) hits someone.  This is a perfectly logical lesson with
clear application later in life.  If they (the now grown up child) does
something forbidden to them by the authority (the government) like run-
ning a red light, then the authority (the government) will punish them.
Regardless of whether or not they are tired and cranky when they run the red 
light.  It is not illogical.  This does not mean that there are no logical
alternative ways to teach such a lesson.

The profuse apologising is confusing because it indicates to the child that
the punishment was somehow inappropriate, indicating that the child did not
do anything wrong.  The child may conclude that it was arbitrary, and *NOT*
the consequence of their action. 
 
>>>                                                   Maybe when he hit my
>>>daughter the child also felt that he "HAD" to hit?
>>>
>>
>>As a child, I had no problem whatsoever with learning to distinguish be-
>>tween hitting without provocation, fighting back, and being punished by the
>>time I was four.
>>
>>I am not suggesting that it would be impossible for a child raised without
>>corporal punishment to learn these distinctions.  Just that corporal punish-
>>ment does not, by itself, present such a confusion either.  Many children
>>have pain inflicted on them because of the mood their parents are in, rather
>>than as a consequence for their misbehaviour.  This is not punishment, this
>>is abuse.  This is what confuses and harms the child.   Pain, physical or
>>behaviour is clearly harmful, and is just as clearly not punishment.
>>
>>I am astounded, that in the 50 or so posts that I've read so far, no one has
>>suggested this.
> 
>  Abuse is often inflicted by parents who are trying to 'teach a lesson'.

I contend that statements made (by the abusive parents) to this effect are an
excuse.  I don't believe them.  I advise you to question the truthfulness of
what they are saying as well.  But, please question it in your mind, and not
to their face.  Abusive parents often respond to criticism, even when it is
done in a kind and sincere manner, by mistreating the child further.  (Per-
sonal observation)

>They don't have to be in a bad mood.  The most horrendous abuse that I read
>about is not done in anger - it is the kind of punishment in which the parent
>uses physical force and then explains away the punishment in the most rational
>of arguments.

And it is also being done by very sick people.  Likely as children they 
were neglected when good, and abused for immagined misbehaviours, and never
rewarded or punished at all, in the conventional sense of the word.  One such 
abusive individual I met (spousal abuse) was nearly killed by his father for
eating ice cream.  His father's reaction was not a logical consequence of 
his action.  It was not punishment, it was abuse.

By the way, just so we can be clear, do you consider all corporeal punish-
ment (punishment by inflicting pain) to be abuse by definition?  Do you
consider all punishment to be abuse by definition?
>  What is pathetic is the repetetive way that parents will administer slaps
>or whacks, or even pinches, for truly trivial thing...

 
>                                                ...   and yes, I do think
>they should apologize that they have so little control over themselves,
>angry or not.

I do not mean to suggest that apologising to children is inherently wrong.
Nor would it be wrong to apologize for loosing control.  But it is clearly
wrong to apologise for punishing a child, if the punishment was appropriate
within the context of the moral system being taught the child.  That is con-
fusing.
--
dsc@gemini.gsfc.nasa.gov  
 |  Regards,         |   Hughes STX                |    Code 926.9 GSFC        |
 |  Doug Caprette    |   Lanham, Maryland          |    Greenbelt, MD  20771   |
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am not a number. I am a free man." -- # 6
Newsgroups: misc.kids