Parents Judgement In Discipline Their Own Children example essay topic

1 CORPORAL PUNISHMENT We live in a society where we let our children do whatever they want. We spoil them them rotten, and they live in the most prosperous country in the world. And how do we punish them when they do something wrong? We give them a time out.

Oh yeah that's really going to hurt them and prove to them they are not the princess and kings they think they are. In today's world the timeout system is not going to cut it, we need to let the parents decide whats the best way to discipline their child. As a child my parents used corporal punishment as a mean of discipline. At the time I felt it was unfair but looking back at it, it was good for me in the long run. I made me realize what was right and wrong, provided boundaries, gave me discipline and respect to my elders. My brothers as well are better people because my parents used corporal punishment.

They would not respect any type of punishment unless it was a spanking. Now every time I go to the store I see these kids running around, grabbing everything at stores, throwing tantrums, you name it they do it. The worst part is watching how the parents respond; some start counting others put them on a time out. It's ridiculous; if the children respected the punishment the parents would give them then they would not do those things in public domains. When I say we should spank our kids I am not saying just go and hit your kids. Spanking should not be over used but done in times where it is appropriate.

If your child responds better to other forms of discipline then they should use that form instead. Spanking is one of those last resort options. Some children respond better to other forms, so if you can discipline your child by another means other than spanking than by all means do so. People are always misinformed on what spanking is, they think you just pull down their pants and whale away. It is just a mild slap on the butt ox region. Many critics of corporal punishment make un logical arguments against it.

"Spanking children is not only tantamount to child abuse but also fosters a more aggressive society at large by teaching children that violence is an acceptable way to settle problem". (Samuelson) This point is one many from his side use over and over. I am just wondering if he lives in the same country as I do. Most people would agree that a higher percentage of parents today don! |t spank than say 30 years ago. "Many child-development experts cite studies linking corporal punishment to higher rates of adolescent delinquency, adult depression and even lover intelligence among children". (Samuelson) So kids that are spanked are less intelligent that those who are given time outs.

These two things are in no way linked together as a cause and affect problem. How could you prove that, you can! |t prove something like this. But yet many people use it but not on the spanking issue. The part about children disrespecting adults is the key in this quote. How could a kid who does whatever he wants at home have respect to adults outside his home.

They would do the same thing everywhere because they know they will get away with it. A time out will make a kid think twice before doing something bad, and by emphasizing that point they will grow up knowing what's good and bad. And spanking is the only way some kids will learn. Both sides of the debate want to be associated with being morally right, and you cannot be more morally right than have the bible on your side. "Do not withhold discipline from your children; if you beat them with a rod, they will not die. If you beat them with the rod, you will save their lives from hell".

This passage is in the bible; know how can you be morally wrong in this country if you Have the bible on your side. It says that the parents have the right to spank their kids as a form of discipline. No one will argue that the bible is morally wrong or will they, especially since most things that we consider if they are morally right or not are defined by the religious part of us. Spanking among younger children for whom reasoning is less effective can instill a sense of right and wrong. "Spanking a toddler who touches the stove, for example, can send a clear and morablemessage about the physical dangers of the youngster's actions. A lengthy, rational explanation about why stoves are dangerous, by contrast, would likely be incomprehensible to a child and therefore ineffective".

(Chiu sano) Its true sometimes a simple slap to the butt compared to along speech is better. The kid will know right away not to do it again. You will not be hurting the kid, its just a little slap to let him know don! |t do it again. There is also a misconception that corporal punishment is inhuman while verbal discipline isn! |t and there fore corporal punishment is dangerous. Any type of punishment if taken to the extreme can be dangerous as well; a verbal scolding is as painful as a physical one.

People see it as in humane because they perceive the parents doing it out of rage. But a proper spanking is the exact opposite, you just hit the child calmly to say yeah you did something wrong but it's for you own good. Many parents feel it is the school systems fault their disciplinary tactics are being looked at as a bad thing. The problem is the schools are becoming far too liberal. Many moral values that are taught at home are contradicted at school. One of them is corporal punishment; I am not saying the teachers should spank their kids.

They should not teach the kids that it is morally wrong if a kid gets spanked at home. And that is happening all over the country. This practice is probably contributing thought that by spanking your kids you are doing wrong. The schools should not tell the parents how to parent. The Supreme Court ruled the 14th amendment specifically the part that say no person shall be deprived of liberty. Well liberty the courts ruled also gave the parents the right to establish a home and bring up children the way his own conscious feels fit.

So if the parent feels the child would be better served being spanked than they could spank. As long as the child is not abused, this means bleeding, bruising... Case closed the constitution says we can use corporal punishment so I think that's good enough for me. Especially since the United States citizens live by the constitution. A major concern of parent's rights opponents is that parents could abuse their children 4 legally under measures that allow parents the right to the discipline of their children.

"Thomas Birch, the legislative counsel for the National Child Abuse Coalition, expressed concern in January 1996 that the language of most state parental rights amendments could tie the hands of child protection agencies by making it more difficult to investigate abuse, even when a child complains". (Apple borne). But proponents of parents of parents rights say that those fears are unfounded. They cite cases in which social workers have removed children from their parent's homes merely because parents spanked children or because children did not agree with their parents house rules. Parents rights measures are carefully worded, they say to ensure that no true case of child abuse will be tolerated.

Parents judgement in discipline their own children should be respected. If you as a parent can discipline without spanking all the power to you. But the fact is not all kids are like that, many need spankings to grow up and have respect for others. No one is saying its good to spank, its a necessity. I dont want to be the guy in the store who cant control his kid. I just feel that the parents should be given more lee way on how to raise their own kids.

They shouldnt have to fear that by spanking social services might take away their kid. Spanking if done right is harmless and there is no disciplinary device before it. In my opinion if its in the bible i do not see anything wrong with it.