His mother did not act immediately beside telling him over and over to stop doing something, until she eventually yelled at him.
It's unfortunate the mother didn't handle the situation more effectively. Things would've gone better had she acted to positively direct her child from the outset.
Parents (not directing this particularly at your friend) often don't respond and interact with their children, whether out of distraction or disinterest or laziness or what have you, and then when the child's done everything possible to get their attention, they finally get negative attention when the parent blows up. Oftentimes children are just plain tired or hungry or discombobulated in some way because they're
children - so often the little ones just want to be picked up and hugged, not told to "Shut your mouth or I"ll slap it shut" or "When your father gets home, you're going to get what you got coming so you better be scared...." both of which I've heard said to little kids sitting miserably in shopping carts at the grocery store way too late at night.
I was abused as a child and I was also lovingly disciplined. I definitely know the difference, and the usage of a paddle or other wooden object is not something I consider abuse.
I'm on record here as disagreeing with your view on paddles and other wooden objects.
I have a friend who used to post on TOL who considers using the hand to spank wrong, because hands are for embracing your children; so he uses a paddle to spank.
Disassociation. Of the parent, not the child. He's not helping the child disassociate the paddle from his "embracing" hands. More likely distancing himself from the vague guilt which may accompany the hitting of his precious children with a wooden implement.
Now, in the usage of paddles, etc. it is never necessary to give more than two or three whacks, IMHO. And as I illustrated above in my response to Nori one should always discuss with the child before and after the spanking as to why the spanking is taking place, which no only includes the action on the part of the child that warranted discipline, but also the fact that you love them and are disciplining them because you love them and you want them to learn right from wrong and to grow up to be a well mannered adult. Also it is unnecessary to strike hard enough to leave a bruise or a welt, IMHO, but it is worthless if you leave no mark.
It is entirely possible to raise well-mannered adults without striking them as children.
And your line I bolded?
That's the mentality I just cannot fathom. At all.
And if you think it's worthless to leave no mark, you've negated completely the argument that spanking isn't abusive as long as you
don't leave a mark. In your estimation then, all those who spank
gently aren't accomplishing a thing...except showing their kids that the best way to show displeasure is to hit someone.
I am personally opposed to the usage of belts, but I do not stand against those who do if they are not abusive.
But a belt has to leave a mark, right? Yet you said without a mark it's worthless. So either it's abusive...or it's worthless. You can't have it both ways.
And that "I am personally opposed..." line sounds awfully familiar somehow...:think:
