I was listening to a radio program this morning about bringing back caning at school.
Apparentley over 40% of parents want it back.
I've been caned and hit by teachers a few times went to a tough schipperschool in Dordrecht.School for seafaring children.
|
No.
Physical restraint when required, absolutely ( and perhaps more of it than we currently get ), but its just gratuitous violence to hit them.
|
|
No. Violence breeds more violence, and you can't tell children it's wrong to hit each other, then hit them yourself when they transgress. It's widely accepted by those who study such things that children who are hit (let's avoid euphemisms like 'caned' or 'spanked') at home are more likely to commit acts of violence themselves; if children are hit at school as well, that can only make the problem worse.
|
I shall never forget being made to stand at the front during morning assembly at school when I was 9 for giving someone a knuckle sandwich, that hurt me more than all the slippers, canes n' rulers etc,
So no - there are other ways to punish a child.
|
|
A clip aback "o" lug - saves a thousand arguments!
|
I agree it never did me any good being hit.You lose respect for the adult and it won't return.
Best thing for children get them involved in sport its participating not always the winning or losing.
|
I say lash the parents.
I can make a cat o' nine tails if required. :)
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 16 Sep 11 at 13:32
|
Readin some history books about the old sailing Dutch navy ships.
If a crew member got into a scrape.They where pinned to the mainmast with a knive.And had to free himself.Or Kiel Hauled full width pulled under the ship to the other side.
Men where men.>;)Michiel De Ruiter from Vlissingen.Good schipper looked after his crew.
Went up the Thames or was it Maarten Tromp? another good schipper and had a battle with the Brits.;)
|
|
40% of parents want it back so that implies that 60% don't. If they want caning done they should do it themselves. A bit of ritual humiliation might work. A fluorescent tabard saying "I didn't do my homework", to be worn at school for 2 days or that sort of thing.
|
I was caned once at school, and rapped over the knuckles with a ruler on more than one occasion.
At the risk of sounding like all your parents, it never did me any harm.
But I'm not sure it did me any good, or had the desired impact.
My answer would be yes, but like the police use of firearms, only as a last resort.
|
>> it never did me any harm.
Me neither. Taught me what was right and what was wrong. If I did wrong then I knew I'd get a slap.
Too many namby pamby do gooders these days for my liking telling people what they can and can't do to discipline their children. There is a huge difference between child abuse and child discipline, IMHO.
|
Never caned but slippered on a few occasions for offences such as forgotten sports kit and larking about. Like Iffy I doubt it harmed me but neither did it make me any better at remembering rugger boots. The cane was reserved for very serious offences and was only adminstered to a couple of lads in my time at Grammar School. Neither fulfilled the promise they must have shown at 11+ as one ended up on a production line, the other as a squaddie.
At primary school we had a bad tempered teacher who was too keen to hand out slaps on the legs. I think in the end a parent complained and she was advised as to her conduct.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Fri 16 Sep 11 at 13:49
|
>>
>> My answer would be yes, but like the police use of firearms, only as a
>> last resort.
>>
+1
|
Come on Meldrew, you know that would soon be worn as a badge of pride:)
Pat
|
I didn't get caned at school, but sailed close enough sometimes, managed to end up in a Masters detention often enough which meant travelling to school on a Saturday in full uniform including cap and writing an essay or similar for the full 1 or 2 hour period, in the end i learned which is what it's all about.
Knowing the cane was a final option then expulsion without appeal moderated my idiotic teenage high spirits.
The one or two that did get caned were not hailed as heroes but rather tolerated by the other boys and avoided, maybe the way the school discipline system worked was geared for that, whatever the thought behind it worked.
The school should have the choice, codes of conduct and discipline clearly explained in it's rules.
Those who think children should be subject to formal non bullying discipline and that school is a place of learning can send their children to a school that practices corporal punishment, those who object can send their children elsewhere...we know which will be the better schools overall and i don't just mean by results tables.
Not as it will happen things are not bad enough yet, never thought schools would have full time coppers in my lifetime, that's what happens when you allow ever more PC idiots to run a country.
|
|
Possibly but it is up to the school to ensure that it is seen as a stigma and object of scorn and derision
|
just a glance at this thread shows the way that folk think about discipline.
Respect for authority and respect for peoples rights and property have gone the way of the Dodo - it no longer exists.
A few of you may argue that physical punishment isn't the answer, but its funny that this social breakdown started with the "latch-key" kids (when parents were both out working) and kids never had discipline at home because there was never anyone there to enforce it. Luckily, the schools and teachers were able to provide a bit of "tempered" discipline and demanded a degree of respect along with it. When this last bastion was removed, the "rot" set in and has continued , worsening all the time, until we are at the present situation. Well. its too late now!
we will have to live with what we`ve created, I cant see anything improving, just looking and listening at the 4.5,and 6 year olds running feral in the streets, and even in the school playgrounds tells me 5 minutes on "the naughty step" followed by forgiveness and an ice-cream just don't cut it!
|
>> just a glance at this thread shows the way that folk think about discipline.
>> Respect for authority and respect for peoples rights and property have gone the way of
>> the Dodo - it no longer exists.
If you mean we think its barbaric to strike children with bits of wood, you are quite right. As far as teaching respect goes, all it teaches is that violence is accepted.
I got caned, as it happened more than one it clearly didnt do me any good.
|
>>I got caned, as it happened more than one it clearly didnt do me any good. <<
you know right from wrong, and no-matter how much of a "wind-up" merchant you are, ;-)
you will probably be well respected by your peers at home and at work, so yes! i would say it has done you some good! ;-)
|
Z got caned, he isn't a career criminal and has only mild sociopathic tendencies (sorry Z - hope you know it's kindly meant) therefore caning did him some good? Come on, Devonite! How on earth do you come to that conclusion?
Can't stop. I wasn't hit at school, or at home, which must mean I'm late for robbing my third old lady of the day.
|
Sure, but only if it is used as the standard consequence for everybody, rather than just small children that can't defend themselves.
Caught doing 40 in a 30 zone? Pants down and two whacks on the bottom with the policeman's belt in front of the other motorists...that'll teach 'em.
|
>> Caught doing 40 in a 30 zone? Pants down and two whacks on the bottom
>> with the policeman's belt in front of the other motorists...that'll teach 'em.
>>
Thats all part of the problem caused by the PC brigade, courts which are ineffective at punishing people.
The farmer in the traveller thread had the right idea.
|
AC must be itching to do his social commentary bit on this one.
|
To add to my above post, you didn't want to get expelled from this school so moderated your behaviour...carrot and stick, it works it's the only thing that does work.
We had our own army and air force cadet contingents, our own armoury and rifle range, great fun and adventure with camps and outside trips, learning to strip rebuild and fire Lee Enfields, Brens and the like, down to the army ranges for instruction and SLR range days with heavier weapons, and lots of drill practice and excercises., one memorable day one of the old boys then an army officer came down to the school cadet building with a grenade launcher, fired dummy grenades over the playing fields, brilliant.
Proper boys own stuff, wouldn't have missed it for the world, but our Masters in most cases were ex military and nearly all natural leaders who commanded respect without ever a moment of hostility, you wanted to respect them.
Ice cold outside swimming pool though...brr.
Something like the above would do some of the feral youngsters a world of good, give them something to want to be part of, and a good grounding for adult life where carrot and stick makes the world turn.
|
Hitting kids simply doesnt make them do what they are told. It has a temporary effect but they soon forget unless the violence is bad enough to leave mental scars, but nobody normal would advocate that.
The issue is one of respect for authority and the rules. Kids these days seem to think they can do what they like and when. This comes from the parents allowing it and training these kids to behave in a certain way through a poor example.
Unfortunately there are a fair chunk of parents out there who dont have the stones to throw away this ridiculous notion of being their childs friend and actually raise them to cope effectively with the world, a cornerstone of which is to respect the rules and the enforcement of those rules, which requires committed and consistant discipline.
It is essential to enforce compliance, with physical persuasion if required.
We have enough knowledge about human behaviour these days to realise what non-violent punishments do work, the problem is that currently as a society we arent brave enough to apply the punishments with the vigor required. Too soft by half.
|
carrot and stick, it works.
What did they do to you with the carrot, GB?
|
>> What did they do to you with the carrot
>>
Fed us and very good dinners too.
Reminds me, must book a luncheon at SchoolDinners.
|
>> Hitting kids simply doesnt make them do what they are told. It has a temporary
>> effect but they soon forget unless the violence is bad enough to leave mental scars,
>> but nobody normal would advocate that.
In a word, cobblers.
IF (big if) you are having to use controlled violence against your sprogs on the incredibly odd occasion, because they have seriously transgresed, the implied threat next time will be sufficient to get them back in line.
Think not of violence, think the humiliation of a resounding smack in front of parents and siblings.
|
And the lesson it teaches the child?
My parent/teacher is a high-status individual.
When he wants to assert his status, he hits me.
I am a low-status individual but would like higher status.
Hitting people is a sign of high status.
Next time someone challenges my status, I will hit them.
|
|
I must have been caned or slapped with a ruler accross the hand 20 or 30 times when I was at grammar school. Mostly it never got entered in the book. The only thing it ought me was that if I were ever to get my hand on that sadistic little PE teacher I would even now happily kill him even though he would now be in his eighties.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Fri 16 Sep 11 at 17:49
|
>> I must have been caned or slapped with a ruler accross the hand 20 or
>> 30 times when I was at grammar school.
The clever bit is not to get caught.
|
|
Caught for what - Most of the beatings by this particular teacher were dished out at random.
|
I appreciate your reasoning WdeB, but looking back over the last 100 years at the behaviour of children and young adults, doesn't bear out your theory, does it?
Pat
|
|
Doesn't it, Pat? Perhaps you'd better set out your evidence before you invite me to accept it.
|
I think WillDeB is over-analysing the question.
Or he's taken out a subscription to The Guardian.
|
I don't think a teacher hitting me would have done any good. My step dad knocked me out once (sounds worse than it was), pretty much the only proper violence i experienced. All i did was plot how to stab him (thankfully i didn't try it!)
Every child's different so i doubt a lazy one size fits all solution is the answer anywhere.
For me, it was to tell me i wouldn't achieve something (only used 3 times in my life). Without fail i smashed all expectations. Just sheer bloodymindedness i guess but it did the job.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 17 Sep 11 at 00:36
|
Why do I need evidence to support my opinion?
That is counter productive in a discussion forum WdeB.
I am not in court.
It acts in just the same way as the pedants waiting to pounce on someone who may not be absolutely 100% grammatically correct.
I can make a legible post and that's good enough for me.
Right, here goes.
I was at school 60 years ago and I lived in fear of being disciplined so I behaved myself.
I was a teenager 38 year ago and although I sowed my wild oats, I knew right from wrong and toed the line.
My Dad died when I was 11 years old but although my Mother was then a single parent she still taught me to be considerate, tolerant and to respect others.
I looked after her until she died when I was in my 30's and respected both her and everything I had resented in the past when I couldn't do all the things my friends could do.
Show me children today who fear the discipline of school?
Show me teenagers who know right from wrong? (I know there are some but it is a small minority)
Show me children or teenagers who fear discipline...they don't, they know their rights.
For the record, I don't believe caning should be brought back in school but I do believe parents should be free to administer a smack when it's deserved.
I feel so sorry for teachers who have to obey the 'no contact' rule yet leave themselves wide open to be accused of anything by the pupils.
The world isn't a better place because of lack of discipline as we knew it.
Today is proof of that.
Pat
Last edited by: pda on Fri 16 Sep 11 at 18:29
|
>> It acts in just the same way as the pedants waiting to pounce on someone
>> who may not be absolutely 100% grammatically correct.
>>
I am glad that none of them are brave enough to harass our resident Dutch speaker. They must realise the wrath that would be brought down on them.
|
>> And the lesson it teaches the child?
>>
>> My parent/teacher is a high-status individual.
>>
>> When he wants to assert his status, he hits me.
>>
>> I am a low-status individual but would like higher status.
>>
>> Hitting people is a sign of high status.
>>
>> Next time someone challenges my status, I will hit them.
>>
>>
>>
Rubbish...
I never thought like that...and I had the cane twice at school (both times deserved, although once a bit iffy...didn't do it again though).
The above is an adults interpretation of a child's outlook..when most children haven't thought that far.
|
Rubbish...
I never thought like that..
You miss the point, WP. It's not about what you consciously think; it operates at the level of our animal heritage - think of the social mechanisms of baboons or chimpanzees. There, a high-status individual gets to be that way by fighting, and stays that way by physically deterring or repelling any challenges. The violent animals get all the privileges, while the ones they pick on live a life of stress and relative lack of success.
Nearly all the DNA that governs that behaviour in other primates is still present in us, and for much of our history we've not actually behaved that differently from them. Real discipline is to allow the higher, intellectual, 'human' values to overcome our animal tendencies; hitting children - or anyone else - is merely a step back towards the caves and the forests.
|
So how do you directly relate your theory to the decline in moral standards we've seen over the past 100 years?
Pat
Last edited by: pda on Sat 17 Sep 11 at 08:21
|
I don't think I need to, Pat. At least not before you've demonstrated
1. that 'moral standards' have declined in the last 100 years. (For example, does failure to persecute people for being black or homosexual count as a decline? I don't think so.)
2. that removal of corporal punishment from British schools (which has happened only in the last 30 years) has somehow caused this decline. And please don't mistake correlation for causation.
|
I'll take that as 'I can't explain that' then, shall I?:)
Pat
|
|
No. You won't - or can't - substantiate your assertion of 'moral decline', so you've given me nothing to explain.
|
...No. You won't - or can't - substantiate your assertion of 'moral decline', so you've given me nothing to explain...
There has been a steep decline in the standards of behaviour of children since when I grew up in the 1970s.
That's a matter of fact.
Whether the withdrawal of corporal punishment from schools has anything to do with it is a separate question.
|
There has been a steep decline in the standards of behaviour of children since when I grew up in the 1970s. That's a matter of fact
Really, Iffy? You and I are about the same age. I'm not aware that behaviour in my children's primary schools (they've been to two, one in the Midlands and one here in the South) is significantly different from what I remember in mine at the same stage.
If we're going to argue about the causes of 'moral decline', either from Pat's supposed Edwardian golden age (when, let's remember, she wouldn't have been allowed to vote) or Iffy's and my '70s childhoods, let's have some real facts. I don't mean anecdotes, I mean evidence that society as a whole - and not some bottom stratum that is far more economically dislocated now than it was a generation ago - really has declined.
Once we have that, we can argue over whether the 'decline' was caused by slack parenting, soft schooling, the end of National Service, the nanny state or the alignment of the moons of Saturn.
But even if we get there, the means-to-an-end argument doesn't wash. For adults to hit children is wrong.
|
>> If we're going to argue about the causes of 'moral decline', either from Pat's supposed
>> Edwardian golden age (when, let's remember, she wouldn't have been allowed to vote) or Iffy's
>> and my '70s childhoods, let's have some real facts. I don't mean anecdotes, I mean
>> evidence that society as a whole - and not some bottom stratum that is far
>> more economically dislocated now than it was a generation ago - really has declined.
>>
>> Once we have that, we can argue over whether the 'decline' was caused by slack
>> parenting, soft schooling, the end of National Service, the nanny state or the alignment of
>> the moons of Saturn.
If you're looking for a rational, structured debate, with multi-step fact gathering and analysis...you've come to the wrong place
Not aimed at anybody on this thread, just a general observation about this forum, and probably every other single forum on the internet.
You'll probably be far more successful in making bold claims, refusing to alter your view, belittling any attempt at rational debate, and then calling anybody who persists a troll...it's a street fight, not a think tank :)
|
The perceived decline in moral standards was noted by the Victorians and they too were complaining about the exact same problems and said it was wishy washy liberalism that was at the route of it.
There is only one sensible way to behave to others, its how you wish to be treated yourself. Youth of today complains about the way they are treated when many are rude and obnoxious.
Adults tolerate bad behaviour all the time and often do nothing. Its because they haven't grown up either. You can't discipline a child when you are an overgrown brat yourself. Bratty kids have bratty parents.
It's definitely worse as several incidents which didn't occur during my young years have become common place in previously crime free areas - thefts from sheds and private gardens, continual arson of fences, trespass, more criminal damage to property. There's clearly a growing underclass that has no respect for other people's property and is jealous so seeks to destroy what others have worked for because they can't face the responsibility of being a feckless waster with only themselves to blame. You get out what you put in. If you put in nothing you don't get the opportunities and fester on the dole or poorly paid work. You don't have a right to anything beyond the basics. If you want more, you work for it and offer something people value.
|
>> You get out what you put in.
I agree with a lot of what you says TB, and would certainly agree that the more you put in the more you get.
However, I think there is an important point that there is not a direct correlation between the amount of effort and the amount of gain.
There are lots of factors that make a big difference.
Of course, the reality is that there is no point bleating on about the disadvantages that you may have or the advantages that others may have, but the reality is also that people do and they get angry about the gap between what they have and what others have.
It may be that if you took the people with the advantages, and put them in the shoes of the disadvantaged, that they would be similarly angry.
The more important thing, I think, is being happy with what you have, rather than trying to get as much as you can, but then society seeks to put great emphasis on achievement, which usually means material wealth and success.
The problem is that there will always be haves and have-nots, even if everybody put in the same amount of effort - so until such a time when people can be happy, and respected, as have-nots, there will be issues...will probably take at least another million years :)
|
But calling them feclless wasters is not the answer.Its surprising once you try to talk to people and see things from their point of few how situations can change.
Returning back from holiday this year on the airplane it was a couple in their mid fifties who behaved in a selfish way.I remember one of the lads in the London riots mentioned that he went for a job smartley dressed and politeley spoken still didn't get anywhere.Forgive me I know that is no excuse for a riot but somewhere along the line it is a problem and the politicians won't addres this.If we are creating a underclass all of us will pay the price.
|
For adults to hit
>> children is wrong.
>>
In your opinion.
|
>> For adults to hit children is wrong.
>> >>
>> In your opinion.
>>
There is a huge difference between hitting a child and injuring them, and giving a hand smack, to reinforce the difference between right and wrong.
One thing I hate, is when people say 'that child is to young to understand right and wrong'
IMHO a child is never to young for the teaching to begin.
As soon as they become mobile, risks start stacking up - hot surfaces, 'out of bounds areas' etc. The child needs to be taught what/where is acceptable.
A changed tone of voice, with a firm 'NO!' is a good way to start, the child quickly becomes aware that the adult isn't happy with their actions.
As the child ages, then a light smack on the hand will reinforce the message. The 1st smacks need not hurt at all, the shock factor should pass the message on.
Part of the teaching, is to back up the 'wrong' learning, with the 'good'.
This is done with verbal 'good boy/girl' and hugs etc, when the child reacts as they should.
This may sound like the way we would train a dog, and i suppose in a way it is, but are we saying a human baby is stupider than a puppy?
|
You are not wrong Swiss Tony, but there is a difference between a protective slap and a caning. A great example would be slapping a hand away from a child about to put it on a hot fire after you told it several times not to, but they persisted.
However, how can there be a physical punishment for getting an essay wrong or for being controversial? For putting a rivet in the wrong place, for being black! I have witnessed all of these!
It is not "human rights" not to get a caning, it is fundamental justice, caning is often arbitrary punishment of one to prove a point. It serves no real purpose and if discipline was enforced by more reliable means then caning would not be required.
Where does a caning become violent physical abuse? When a metal rod is used? When a teacher has specifically named their implement? When a leg it broken or a hand cannot be closed properly for a week.
Some of the teachers in my school, which was a modern, supposedly forward looking comprehensive should have been locked up for the punishments that they gave. If they did what they did in their own home to their children it is likely that the children would have been taken way and the parent locked up, so why is it OK to do it in schools?
|
>> Some of the teachers in my school, which was a modern, supposedly forward looking comprehensive
>> should have been locked up for the punishments that they gave. If they did what
>> they did in their own home to their children it is likely that the children
>> would have been taken way and the parent locked up, so why is it OK
>> to do it in schools?
I agree with every part of this post...but....still think schools should be able to mete out corporal punishment....IF THE CIRCUMSTANCES WARRANTED IT.
In my mind the answer...as always...is a sensible middle of the road approach.
It will never be right to beat hell out of a child for not doing some homework...but there are circumstances where a ruler across the palm of the hand...in front of the class..would be appropriate...e.g. extreme bad behaviour/assault of another pupil etc.
We have let the pendulum swing too much the other way...our teachers have no real sanctions left...and as for proof about the state of our schools, how about the under cover documentary done by the supply teacher..the one that they then tried (or maybe achieved, can't remember) to have her struck off for.
|
>> We have let the pendulum swing too much the other way...our teachers have no real
>> sanctions left...and as for proof about the state of our schools, how about the under
>> cover documentary done by the supply teacher..the one that they then tried (or maybe achieved,
>> can't remember) to have her struck off for.
Finland is often considered to have the best school system in the world, and yet corporal punishment is illegal both in schools and in the home.
On that basis it would seem that good schools can exist, without the threat of violence.
|
>>>>>>>We have let the pendulum swing too much the other way...our teachers have no real sanctions left...and as for proof about the state of our schools, how about the under cover documentary done by the supply teacher..the one that they then tried (or maybe achieved, can't remember) to have her struck off for.
True.
Part of it is the parents' fault. As I have said before. My kids know how to behave and are liked by their teachers at school We probably pay the price at home. ;-)
Some parents think the sun shines out of their kids' proverbial and won't even let them take detention or storm in to school demanding the return for their confiscated mobiles etc.
Of course when parents act like prats at home, kids will act as prats when they get the chance. Monkey see, monkey do!
Schools should be allowed to discipline without interference from parents and the need for caning would probably only be needed in the most exceptional cases.
|
>> You are not wrong Swiss Tony, but there is a difference between a protective slap
>> and a caning. A great example would be slapping a hand away from a child
>> about to put it on a hot fire after you told it several times not
>> to, but they persisted.
Letting them get burnt when they have completely ignored their parent would be a far more worthwhile lesson as they will have learnt a) fires are hot and burn b) parents are trying to be helpful when telling me things c) listen to advice from adults d) painful consequences occur after ignoring advice.
You don't have to hit. You can restrain and move them away.
At some point children have to learn consequences and get hurt after ignoring parents. They learn very fast they should listen to those older and wise than themselves. If you completely prevent them from ever coming to any harm then they end up having far less sense when they're older. A little injury is a good learning tool.
If you have to resort to hitting a child you have so lost the argument and they know it.
|
There a lot of people our there for whom beating children brings some sort of perverted pleasure. To allow these people a route to fulfilling their perversion is a dangerous path to go down.
The teacher I referred to in an earlier post left the school suddenly after some sort of rumoured incident led to a complaint by some of the parents.
|
>> There a lot of people our there for whom beating children brings some sort of
>> perverted pleasure. To allow these people a route to fulfilling their perversion is a dangerous
>> path to go down.
Ah...I get it.
To prevent the extremists from getting away with things they shouldn't be....everyone else is banned as well...it's easier than actually dealing with the problem.
Same old story then.
|
I'm not sure why dealing with the problem of discipline in our schools revolves around whether we allow teachers to inflict physical pain on our children. There are plenty of ways to punish children without hitting them. As someone who was subject to what at least would be described as physical bullying by a teacher I certainly would not want to sanction it.
I know a number of teachers and none that I know want to go own this route. A good teacher in a well run school should be able to maintain discipline in a class without resort to violence. If violence is needed to restore order things have gone way way to far.
Smacking your own children is slightly different and I must admit to doing it once or twice more in frustration than anything else but the feeling of guilt took a long time to go away
|
A good teacher in a well run school should be able to
>> maintain discipline in a class without resort to violence. If violence is needed to restore
>> order things have gone way way to far.
You are absolutely correct, things have gone way too far.
For 15 years, I was a uniformed police sergeant. A fair part of my time was spent as the Custody Officer.
I lost count of the times some kid came in (and over time the ages started getting younger) and started peforming..spitting at me, having to be manhandled and held down to be searched, thoroughly and utterly obnoxious...yet 'knew their rights'.
Two hours in the cell would tend to start to make a difference on the first timers. If you took them out and they peformed again..back in for another 2 hours.
You could see the reality dawning on their faces. This was a the first time in many, many years that ANYONE had truly stood up to them.
What hope have teachers got, with someone like that?...and whilst that little 'richard cranium' is performing in the class room, none of the other kids are learning anything. Yet if his punishment was to be a visit to the head and the cane, there's half a chance he might toe the line enougn for everyone to at least get by...otherwise we might as well give up.
Using persuasion techniques is too late for someone like that...far too late.
Last edited by: Westpig on Sat 17 Sep 11 at 17:17
|
>> As the child ages, then a light smack on the hand will reinforce the message.
Children need consequences, but consequence doesn't need to be violence.
A big problem is that "non-violent" consequences can take up a lot of time for the parent. Alternatively violent consequences can easily be dished out, and not take up a lot of the parent's time.
The need to resort to violence comes from either a lack of knowledge of alternatives, or from laziness. If the parent, who knows the alternatives, is too lazy to apply them, then the fault lies with the parent, not the child.
|
>> >> As the child ages, then a light smack on the hand will reinforce the
>> message.
>>
>> Children need consequences, but consequence doesn't need to be violence.
>> The need to resort to violence comes from either a lack of knowledge of alternatives,
>> or from laziness. If the parent, who knows the alternatives, is too lazy to apply
>> them, then the fault lies with the parent, not the child.
>>
If the training is done from an early enough age of child, AND the child learns from it (the tone of voice) then I agree, the need to smack never should arise.
I take exception to a light smack being called violence - violence is excess, and needless, attacking of another person.
Zippy I think understands pretty much what I mean.
As a kid, I was brought up as per my model, and I knew were the line was... my old man only had to resort to smacking my once in my memory, and;
1/ it was deserved.
2/ the shock of it happening hurt more than the actual smack.
I attempted to bring my own children up using the same system.
All seemed ok until the marriage broke up.
When I left home the eldest 2 started to run riot - so much so that my ex-wife gave up on them.
I took them under my wing, and I am glad to say, they are now turning into decent adults, and that was without the need from any slaps from me!
I just gave them rules they had to abide by, or face the music, something their mother wouldn't reinforce.
|
>> There has been a steep decline in the standards of behaviour of children since when
>> I grew up in the 1970s.
>>
>> That's a matter of fact.
It is certainly an oft repeated claim, whether there is any proof that it is a fact, I don't know.
Memory can be a very unreliable source.
|
>>
>> Caught doing 40 in a 30 zone? Pants down and two whacks on the bottom
>> with the policeman's belt in front of the other motorists...that'll teach 'em.
>>
Some people would pay good money for that.
|
RR...trust you to lower the tone of this thread:)
Pat
|
|
It can get lower Pat..>:)
|
>> RR...trust you to lower the tone of this thread:)
>>
>> Pat
>>
I'm just holding the fort till BBD gets back.
|
I would just like you to know that I am perfectly capable of doing that too:)
I'm being very restrained!
Pat
|
>> >> Caught doing 40 in a 30 zone? Pants down and two whacks on the
>> bottom
>> >> with the policeman's belt in front of the other motorists...that'll teach 'em.
>> >>
>> Some people would pay good money for that.
Yeah, that's a problem.
Iffy would probably be permanently driving around at 60! ;)
|
Thats funny.>:)
You cannot beat a bit of spanking.
|
>> Thats funny.>:)
>>
>> You cannot beat a bit of spanking.
>>
Tourist in the city, the one who lost his lady
On purpose...if you asked me,
he had to find a reason,
to cover up the treason?
|
Aye you might be right but have they got any evidence against him.?
To cover up his treason.(Een rotzak denk ik Ian.
|
Dutchie, I thought you would have recognised lyrics from the greatest Dutch band ever?
No, not the Dolly Dots.
I still laugh about the sticker in the bayswater phone boothe, circa 1987 - NAUGHTY BOYS GET BOTTOM MARKS!
|
Sorry Ian my mind was somewhere else nothing changes,.:)
I have a look on the net.I remember father Abraham.
|
I was caned at least twice (at different schools).
Once for shying a crown cork bottle top at a car (the car driver complained to the school & I was found hiding in the changing room!) I WAS very young tho', having not long passed the then, Common Entrance, exam, so 9 or ten, I guess: it was a public school, so very infra dig!
The second time was at the (boarding) grammar school I attended later. I was playing a wind-up gramophone in the common room, which was adjacent to the Head's house. It was pop of the day, (Frankie Laine or Les Paul, probably) which the Head abhorred. In he came to tell me to turn it off and I looked at him!
Six of the best for dumb insolence!
|
The funny thing about the whole caning issue is that what would easily prevent it ever happening is the Human Rights issue, which I think one will find, is part and parcel of the EU and all it stands for.
I dont think the International Busybody organisations who think the Dale Farm residents human rights are under threat will think caning children to be any less of crime against humanity.
So, you cant have it both ways, much as some of you like to play both sides, your infact arguing against the very political monster you so adore.
Its funny if nothing else. Tee hee.
|
I was caned at school. I was in a fight. I was attacked by someone trying to steal my calculator. My parents saved up and brought it for £10, which then was a lot of money.
I consider I was caned unfairly. So where is my recourse to put things right?
There was also another teacher at school who was a vicious racist. Being white, I didn't receive his attentions but several children were beaten by this thug. He used dirty tricks such as using blocks and rods of metal from the metal work shop. When complaints were made, nothing was done until he broke some kids leg.
Then there is the discussion as to what the cane should be used for. Is it in retaliation to physical violence or late homework, or being late to school or getting a question wrong, or answering a teacher back, all of which are punishable by the cane at sometime in our history but some I would hope would be more acceptable than others.
Then you get cases where a teacher just picks on someone. Just as an example to others. How can that be fair? Imagine shopping on a weekend and a police officer failed to arrest an individual for shoplifting so beat the next person he saw with is truncheon. Again, I have witnessed totally innocent people get the cane, just because they were nearest the teacher when they walked in to a noisy classroom.
One of the most ridiculous caning that I witnessed was when a fellow pupil received a significantly harsh caning by our bigoted RE teacher for denying in a very well reasoned essay that conception was an act of God, based on what the Biology teacher had told us in a previous lesson! He could not close his hand properly all week and the teacher looked rabid whilst he meted out his punishment.
Canning is not the right answer. If punishment is needed take away the internet. It certainly makes my son behave better when his internet access is denied for a day or so!
Last edited by: zippy on Sat 17 Sep 11 at 02:24
|
>>He could not close his hand properly all week and the teacher looked rabid whilst he meted out his punishment<<
No dark sarcasm in the classroom – hey teacher, leave them kids alone.
|
I've had a comfortably numb bum more-than a few times, if I knew I was in for 'the high jump'
I'd wear my Levi's under my school trousers :)
|
Have you morphed into AC FoR?
Pat
|
Afraid not.
If anyone is going to be caned, id far rather they started in prisons, plenty of them deserve a good pasting.
|
I got 'the whacks' many, many times when I was incarcerated in the sort of grammar school that was pathetic enough to think it was a public school for young gentleman - mainly because I was an obnoxious little sod in those days and not accepting authority was the biggest crime of all.
Each of my teachers - with a few honourable exceptions - had their own variety of weapon and style of corporal punishment: one form teacher of mine had a proprietary cricket bat-shaped object with 'Heat for the Seat' printed on it. Our gym teacher, a hero of the Danish resistance, insisted that all boys' brains were in the seat of their pants and had a stick called 'the memory tickler'. Another teacher (in every other sense a gentle man, who in retirement became a non-stipendiary priest in the Church of England) had a weapon known as 'the board of education'. A geography teacher used bend boys over and take a flying kick at their backsides. I kid you not. There was great hilarity once when he missed and his shoe flew off and broke a window.
I wasn't physically or mentally injured by this sort of treatment and I don't hold grudges against the perpetrators - I once met the then-retired gym teacher in a pub and he bought me a pint! The only teacher I ever wanted to settle scores with was the one who chose to use mental cruelty rather than the physical variety. Imagine my horror when many years later I went with my son to the same school, by then a sixth form college, to find the same man was 'admissions tutor'.
Anyway, to answer the question: no.
|
|
Reminds me of some of the pure sadists I came across in schools - a Geography teacher who frothed at the mouth when assaulting mis-behaving kids in his class - an objectionable oaf. At least the French teacher was liberal and only used his language skills to batter us.
|
|
The headmaster of my prep school knew how to add to the tension! If one misbehaved in class one was sent outside to stand in the corridor; if found there by him one was taken to his study for a beating and if he didn't one was off and free! 10 minutes felt like a year!
|
It seems to me that a few folk are confusing "hitting" a child with a "disciplinary smack".
Smacking a child at almost every instance of a "Wrong-doing" is Wrong! that is just amoral and a form of child-abuse, but... a "disciplinary smack" delivered at the right time and in the "right" circumstances, can be a valuable tool, and can enforce a lesson that otherwise would otherwise not be learn t, due to the "shock" aspect.
Every day, I hear a Mother verbally arguing at the top of her voice with her 7year old daughter(madam!) who thinks she knows best, and yes the Language from both is obscene! All this could have been avoided with a quick "clip -o-back of the Lug" at the r4ight time, when the back-answering started,! in fact when they are "at it" in the street outside the Hovel I feel like going out and giving them both one!
|
And at what age does a "clip round the back of the head" become assault?
And when, as the thread title says, does beating a child with a stick become an acceptable part of a "clip round the back of the head"?
Last edited by: Zero on Sat 17 Sep 11 at 14:43
|
>> And at what age does a "clip round the back of the head" become assault?
>>
>> And when, as the thread title says, does beating a child with a stick become
>> an acceptable part of a "clip round the back of the head"?
>>
It doesn't.
There is a line between a corrective slap, and a beating - and its not a thin line either.
|
|
I think that if you let the youngsters know who is boss from as soon as they understand, set the rules and keep to them, discipline is non confrontational, natural and certainly non violent. I can't remember ever raising my voice to the grandbrats, except to stop a squabble between them. All that needs is an "oi, pack it in".
|
|
Grandparents is different Old Navy I adored my grandfather and grandmother.Grandpa used to take me to his allotment planting potato's and differnt veg.My opoe (grandma use to spoil me with kindness.Unfortenately the old man was away at sea for months and bringing up three children wasn't easy for my mother.
|
Thinking back to when I was at school, it was the old-school teachers who were loved the most by students.
Out deputy head was the most fab character. Short of stature, but charisma by the bucketload, a bellowing voice and he had the ability to make all students, bad boys or prefect, feel like he owned them and there was only one choice and that was the one he presented you with.
He always wore the black gown and his idea of finding out the culprit for a crime was to line every single possible student who was near there at the time up an individually interrogate them with menace and purpose - always got his man to.
Utterly nice guy if you were decent though an having met him years later, he said its not what you say its how you say it, no backing down, go in hard and they know who is boss.
He went on to be a successful head at another school which came as no suprise. those that followed were light-weights and it was a poorer place for it.
|
|
I agree Dutchie, but remember your grandkids are brought up by your kids. Our family rules are similar across the generations. That does not mean that the youngsters (of either generation) have not been "grounded" by their parents on rare occasions. :)
Last edited by: Old Navy on Sat 17 Sep 11 at 16:16
|
I don't think many teachers would want to see it back. Mrs B says her biggest problem is low level disruption of the sort that's very difficult to nail on a particular child.
What she would like is more support onthe odd ocasion she's had to restrian kids. A science lab is not the place for horseplay.
|
|
Low level disruption is an issue of attitude and respect. Unfortunatly by the time kids hit puberty, the horse has long since bolted and society is lumbered with the result.
|
|
Some kids might be bored with the subject or have a low attention span.Difficult for teachers.never a easy job in my opnion.
|
I wasn't around yesterday and finally caught up with this thread at 4am today.
My instant reaction was to sit upon my fingers once more.
Four hours later they have pins and needles so I have to post.
What a lot of pot 'calling the kettle black' we have here.
So many on here never miss a chance to have a pop at the Daily Mail/ The Sun or even any passing journalist for 'sensationalist' reporting.
Yet here we see those of us that advocate a little gentle smacking by parents to discipline their own children, turned into evil child beaters worthy of ABH at the very least.
Devonite and a couple of others have tried to point this out, but as with the sensible crew who normally point out the error of the DM's ways, have been largely ignored.
Shame on you...how can you practice what you condemn in the media?
Pat
Last edited by: pda on Sun 18 Sep 11 at 09:04
|
This post was about being caned at school, not "gentle smacking by parents". Hitting a child with a wooden stick is an accurate description of being caned, and hitting a child across the hand with a ruler, both of which were once common in our schools.
|
The defining line between the two quickly got ignored though, just as in the DM on a regular basis.
Pat
|
>> So many on here never miss a chance to have a pop at the Daily
>> Mail/ The Sun or even any passing journalist for 'sensationalist' reporting.
>>
>> Yet here we see those of us that advocate a little gentle smacking by parents
>> to discipline their own children, turned into evil child beaters worthy of ABH at the
>> very least.
>>
>> Devonite and a couple of others have tried to point this out, but as with
>> the sensible crew who normally point out the error of the DM's ways, have been
>> largely ignored.
>>
>> Shame on you...how can you practice what you condemn in the media?
Very well put.
It's a common tactic if someone disagrees with another's point..to in effect ridicule it, by going to the extreme end of that subject matter...and tar them with the extreme point of view....thus thoroughly ignoring any reasonable arguement in the middle.
This can happen even if the arguement is glaringly obviously middle of the road...and/or the person has tried to explain this.
It happens quite often on here. Irritating, but is spurs me on even more, to get the reasonable side of the message across and not let the debate stiflers get their way. I don't expect everyone to agree with me, but neither do I expect them to twist my words into what they are not.
I should imagine it puts some/many posters off though.
|
>> It's a common tactic if someone disagrees with another's point..to in effect ridicule it, by
>> going to the extreme end of that subject matter...and tar them with the extreme point
>> of view....thus thoroughly ignoring any reasonable arguement in the middle.
To be honest, I don't think that people have been suggesting that you are all cruel child beaters.
Rather they have been saying that hitting children is not needed and is not acceptable, any more than giving an adult a "little slap" is.
It seems to be that the people who do condone hitting children are then claiming that they are being portrayed as cruel child beaters, in an attempt to make those on the other side seem unreasonable.
|
>>
>> Rather they have been saying that hitting children is not needed and is not acceptable,
>> any more than giving an adult a "little slap" is.
There are plenty of times when giving an adult 'a little slap' could be justified.
E.g....drunk paws your missus as you're walking down the High Street after a meal out and grabs her backside..or...you catch a burglar in your house at 4am
|
>> >> Rather they have been saying that hitting children is not needed and is not
>> acceptable,
>> >> any more than giving an adult a "little slap" is.
>>
>> There are plenty of times when giving an adult 'a little slap' could be justified.
>>
>> E.g....drunk paws your missus as you're walking down the High Street after a meal out
>> and grabs her backside..or...you catch a burglar in your house at 4am
Ridiculous. You've taken two theoretical incidents, one where you are trying to prevent sexual violence and one when faced with a very threatening situation in your home.
In both examples, you might be justified in using a very high level of violence.
How do they possibly compare to a disruptive child?
Outside of dealing with actual or threatened violence, when would you consider it acceptable to hit an adult, even just with a little slap?
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Sun 18 Sep 11 at 13:15
|
>>
>> Ridiculous. >>
>> How do they possibly compare to a disruptive child?
They don't and were never intended to, but what they do show is your statement was too narrow.. i.e.never acceptable to slap an adult.
>>
>> Outside of dealing with actual or threatened violence, when would you consider it acceptable to
>> hit an adult, even just with a little slap?
When an actor is involved in making a film with the other party's consent? Dispatching a wasp off your mate's leg?....
|
>> >> Outside of dealing with actual or threatened violence, when would you consider it acceptable
>> to
>> >> hit an adult, even just with a little slap?
>>
>> When an actor is involved in making a film with the other party's consent? Dispatching
>> a wasp off your mate's leg?....
Are you just trying to be silly?
You know fully well that I meant without consent and with the intention of causing hurt.
I'll take the fact that you haven't been able to come up with a single sensible example to suggest that you know full well that slapping adults isn't acceptable. It isn't for children either.
|
>>
>> Are you just trying to be silly?
No, not at all, but I was trying to point out how your statement was..again..too narrow.
>>
>> You know fully well that I meant without consent and with the intention of causing
>> hurt.
Yes, I did.
>>
>> I'll take the fact that you haven't been able to come up with a single
>> sensible example to suggest that you know full well that slapping adults isn't acceptable. It
>> isn't for children either.
>>
Physical behaviour towards adults can be acceptable e.g. shooting someone in law enforcement situations or restraining a mental health patient. Within the parameters you've set, then 'no' I cannot think of a reason why you'd slap an adult..but there again you are beyond teaching a junior what is right and wrong and you are not dealing with someone with a yet to be fully formed mind. Legislators must think that's right, as a parent can still lawfully chastise their child with a slap...a teacher now, cannot.
|
>> Within the parameters you've set, then 'no' I cannot think
>> of a reason why you'd slap an adult..but there again you are beyond teaching a
>> junior what is right and wrong and you are not dealing with someone with a
>> yet to be fully formed mind. Legislators must think that's right, as a parent can
>> still lawfully chastise their child with a slap...a teacher now, cannot.
There are plenty of reasons why you might slap an adult (within the parameters I've mentioned), but that doesn't make them acceptable.
There are likewise reasons that you would slap a child, but that doesn't make them acceptable.
I'd suggest that if parents that smacked there kids now, had some kind of training, they could be given skills that would remove the need for physical violence (same with teachers).
It does seem that legislators in the UK think that it's right, but legislators in many other countries don't.
Assuming that our legislators don't hold some kind of special moral authority in the world, what they think doesn't decide whether something is actually right, just whether you can be convicted for doing it in this country.
|
>> There are likewise reasons that you would slap a child, but that doesn't make them
>> acceptable.
>>
>> I'd suggest that if parents that smacked there kids now, had some kind of training,
>> they could be given skills that would remove the need for physical violence (same with
>> teachers).
>>
Are you saying that all the parents in the world that have used mild physical correction to chastise their children to keep them on the straight and narrow are all wrong?.. and they all need more training?
|
>> Are you saying that all the parents in the world that have used mild physical
>> correction to chastise their children to keep them on the straight and narrow are all
>> wrong?.. and they all need more training?
I suppose that you could put it that way. There are ways to manage behaviour without hitting, and many people don't have those skills. Is that so surprising? Are you assuming that they are innate?
There is a wealth of knowledge on child behaviour, and the vast majority of parents will never have looked at it. Rather they will have gone on instinct and copying their parents, or other parents they have seen.
Just because your parents did it, doesn't make it right (unless they were world renowned experts in child behaviour, perhaps).
|
>>
>> I suppose that you could put it that way.
You might be right....on the other hand you might be wrong.
|
How many people are there who are just are not capable of being parents.?And how many men who get these females in the pudding club and dissapear without showing a ounce of responsibility
Our Daughter has a teacher friend who had to deal with kids from drug addict parents what change do they have.?
|
Interesting article here:
www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-14927898
The armchair experts here who are so sure that caning is needed, that behaviour was better in the past and that teachers need corporal punishment to keep order, might be interested in these couple of snippets:
But the National Union of Teachers said parents may have got the "erroneous impression" from government statements that the classroom was a place of "rowdy and disrespectful behaviour".
It said teachers needed consistent support from management, along with appropriate sanctions and rewards, "not the right to hit children".
and
The NASUWT teachers' union said there was a "mythology" around corporal punishment.
In the 1950s and 1960s, vandalism and assaults against teachers were "common features of life" in many schools, and evidence suggested behaviour had improved since the practice was banned, it said.
Last edited by: SteelSpark on Sun 18 Sep 11 at 17:36
|
Assaults against teachers in the 1950s and 1960s common features of life?
I really, really don't think so.
|
>> Assaults against teachers in the 1950s and 1960s common features of life?
>> I really, really don't think so.
Well a large teacher's union says different. I doubt that they are just guessing or making it up.
Do you have any evidence, or is it just your opinion against theirs?
|
Only speaking from personal experience, SteelSpark.
Went to school in the sixties and there was certainly no evidence of it then. Teachers were respected by pupils and if you got in trouble at school and your parents got to hear of it you'd be for the high jump.
Not like nowadays when "parents" storm down to the school ranting that sweet little Johnny is an angel and it's the school/teachers to blame.
So, yes, they are making it up.
ADHD didn't exist then either.
|
Neither were many food additives and preservatives in the 60s
Diet may be a factor - parents have long claimed that food additives can aggravate hyperactive behaviour and research by the Food Standards Agency and Southampton University has shown that certain mixtures of artificial food colours, alongside sodium benzoate - a preservative used in ice cream and confectionary - are linked to increases in hyperactivity. Quote from BBC website
www.bbc.co.uk/health/physical_health/conditions/attention2.shtml
Last edited by: Meldrew on Sun 18 Sep 11 at 18:17
|
>> Only speaking from personal experience, SteelSpark.
>> Went to school in the sixties and there was certainly no evidence of it then.
Ah, I see. Well, to be fair to them, they do say "in many schools".
That's the problem with individual experiences, of course. Not only do people often mis-remember what it was really like, they were also only exposed to a small slice of the whole picture.
|
Oh, I remember SS.
Scarred for life... :-)
|
>> Oh, I remember SS.
>> Scarred for life... :-)
Ouch :)
My school days were in the post-caning days, so my scars are just psychological!
|
There was violence in classrooms in the sixties.Our Tech school in Rotterdam.Remember a teacher hitting this lad hard across his face.It stunned most of us I made a comment to the teacher that he would only do that once to me.Never got me high marks with him.,:)
A mate of mine smacked a teacher back he got kicked out of the school.Violence begets violence.Broadley I agree with you Steel Spark.I have given my lads a tap once in a while.Always regretted it straightaway.
My wife had and still has the patients of a saint never raised a hand to the kids and very rarely rased her voice.All three adore and respect her.
|
Should caning be brought back at school? - Stuu
