Total Members Voted: 78
IMHO, Actually, negative reinforcement will only prevent your child from doing that behavior in front of the parents but will increase their desire to do it away from the parents.
A hitting parent and one that gives a potch once in a blue moon are two different things.
can we first determine at what age (one who does hit their kids) starts at. my kids to young. OP please put a - i am not sure yet.
I must say that this generation (the first one with an anti discipline attitude) is producing the greatest products.#sarcasm
Speaking to a 'hitting parent', think about the last time you spanked your child. Think about the mood you were in. If you had just received a huge salary bonus or raise, and had been in a terrific mood, do you think you'd have still hit your child?Probably not. That means that the spanking can be attributed to your mood rather than the child's behavior.Just something to think about.
YOU hit them at birth?
and that can all be attributed to not hitting!?
I was referring to preventing the child from running in the street in the future. As to whether hitting is the most effective way to accomplish this was not my point ( although I was assuming it is). My point was that although hitting (or other quick fixes) may be the most effective way to get quick results it is almost never warranted because parenting is not just about getting children to behave. It's a life long process and trading quick results for long term ones is short sighted.That being said there are situations where we need the quick result, like when child is running in the street, And must trade in the long term results for short term gains.
I think the next thread should be "Does Your Kid Hit You"?
It's not about the title, Rather about the OP.... I know he is the OP without opening the thread.
One of the great fallacies: that our generation is worse than all the ones before it. Time for a looong history lesson.
The above quote is thoroughly self contradictory. I'm at a loss. You clarified for me that the topic you are discussing is preventing child from running into the street in the future. Not stopping them from running while they are running. Ok. Your stance on this topic is that hitting is appropriate. Then you say that a child running into the street is a situation where we need a quick result and that's why hitting is warranted. Huh? Why is a quick result necessary, unless you are in fact referring to stopping a child who is in the act of running into the street? You said so clearly that you are referring to preventing future running...
Poll