Drugging Kids for a Break

[Kim]

One thing I don't think people who argue in favor of spanking ever seem to take into account is that spanking can lead to more extreme violent physical abuse. Parents try spanking but it doesn't work, or they just find themselves at their wits end, and they'll probably beat them harder. There's definitely room for an "I'm not hitting them hard enough" mentality to develop, and, failing that, people who are able to control themselves well enough that they just don't hit their kids period are much less likely to become especially abusive.

Plus, I kinda think that the whole "spanking your kids isn't abuse" argument kinda falls apart when the whole reason you spank them, as opposed to just plain hitting them on the face or whatever, is so that other people won't be able to see you've been beating your children.

[bluestarultor]

Originally Posted by NonCon

Plus, I kinda think that the whole "spanking your kids isn't abuse" argument kinda falls apart when the whole reason you spank them, as opposed to just plain hitting them on the face or whatever, is so that other people won't be able to see you've been beating your children.

Wha? Just, huh? Where'd this one come from?

Seriously, by that logic, why not just be punching them in the gut or smacking their back? I've never in my life heard this reasoning. There are much better reasons the ass is used:

1. It's protected. The butt has a ton of padding, so the force is redistributed a lot, which actually makes it safer than hitting them pretty much anywhere else.
2. There's nothing essential there. All that padding is far away from vital organs and fragile bones.
3. It has a broad surface area. Not only does this help with accessibility, but again, it means redistributing all the force.

If it were just about not having the damage visible, there are plenty of better places to cause damage that are covered up. The ass is last on the list of places you can actually cause real physical harm to.

[Kim]

Originally Posted by bluestarultor

Wha? Just, huh? Where'd this one come from?

Seriously, by that logic, why not just be punching them in the gut or smacking their back? I've never in my life heard this reasoning. There are much better reasons the ass is used:

1. It's protected. The butt has a ton of padding, so the force is redistributed a lot, which actually makes it safer than hitting them pretty much anywhere else.
2. There's nothing essential there. All that padding is far away from vital organs and fragile bones.
3. It has a broad surface area. Not only does this help with accessibility, but again, it means redistributing all the force.

If it were just about not having the damage visible, there are plenty of better places to cause damage that are covered up. The ass is last on the list of places you can actually cause real physical harm to.

I'm a call shenanigans on this cuz

A. I'm pretty sure the back has more surface area than the ass.

B. Ass is actually the part of the body other people will be seeing the least of. After all, hitting them on the back or limbs would be exposed the minute they went swimming.

C. The amount of force necessary to cause permanent physical trauma by hitting them on the back is past the whole "Well, spanking them that hard isn't good" imaginary line spanking defenders like to draw.

[Yrcrazypa]

The back is also the spot where most of the spine tends to be in humans, I hear. It tends to be a very important part of the body, and you are more likely to damage it if you hit them there, as opposed to on the butt. Some parents may spank their children on the butt because it is least likely to be seen, but it is also, like blues said, the place you are least likely to cause lasting physical harm. Aside from straight up kicking their ass, obviously.

[Kim]

Originally Posted by Yrcrazypa

The back is also the spot where most of the spine tends to be in humans, I hear. It tends to be a very important part of the body, and you are more likely to damage it if you hit them there, as opposed to on the butt. Some parents may spank their children on the butt because it is least likely to be seen, but it is also, like blues said, the place you are least likely to cause lasting physical harm. Aside from straight up kicking their ass, obviously.

Originally Posted by NonCon

C. The amount of force necessary to cause permanent physical trauma by hitting them on the back is past the whole "Well, spanking them that hard isn't good" imaginary line spanking defenders like to draw.

.

[bluestarultor]

Depending on the area of the back, you do have the kidneys to worry about. They're pretty much the only vital organ not fully protected by the ribcage minus the liver, and if you take a hit to them, well, enjoy your technicolor pee.

Aside from that, no, you're not doing much damage to the back using reasonable force. On a different note, though, the back is generally seen, in Western society, at least, as a comfort area. Your kid feels like shit, a back rub helps calm them down. When you want to tell them they did good, it's a pat on the back. Basically, you don't want to be mixing associations.

[Funka Genocide]

I think the proper method of raising children is to explain everything in ridiculous detail ad nauseum, then work on a sort of point for point basis with rewards for positive behavior.

If your child still can't figure shit out after like the 15th time you've explained something to them, fuck it. Just ignore them until they're old enough to leave. You tried. (Guess you need to feed them or something, but make sure you keep them segregated from your expensive stuff. Hire a nanny if you've got the cheddar.)

[Azisien]

Honestly I don't see what the big deal is with beating kids. I deal with kids everyday at my job and I've observed most of them are self-centered assholes with high pitched voices. If that doesn't deserve a solid beating, or drugging, on a biweekly basis then man I don't know what else would.

[Terex4]

I tend to duck out when a topic gets overly scientific in an area where science doesn't really apply.

When I punish my children, I don't size them up and think to myself "now where can I bash this kid in order to cause the least amount of pain. Now this spot has a larger surface area but I might snap a bone, hmmm...the skull is nice and thick but I might hit his eye, he needs his legs to walk....the ass! Its perfect!."

I could argue that we hit the ass for symbolic reasons. Kid's being an ass so I hit him in the ass, take that Shakespeare!.

Fact of the matter is, those who advocate spanking, are advocating spanking. Spanking is the act of applying your hand (or an object) against an ass. Its safe, it causes enough pain to get the point across, and it doesn't hurt your hand when you do it.

Its not for constant use, the use of objects is typically reserved as only being acceptable for the elderly, and dammit its the American Way.

Are there people who abuse this method, yes. But to compare it to beating the everlasting piss out of your kid is extreme.

I don't want to sound arrogant or elitist, but really, you can't really judge how to raise a child until you have one of your own. Not a single person on this earth is prepared to be a parent, not one. I've been doing it for 7 years and I still don't know what the hell to do half the time.

You can seek advice from "experts" but think about it. How well can they really be doing. Their family is a walking case study. How well would you turn out if your childhood was a research project?
I can guarantee that while your parents are a useful source of guidance, they still haven't figured you out after over 20 years of trying to raise you.

My stance on dosing kids has little to do with statistics and studies. My nephew died from this behavior, and I've always been a firm believer that drugs are created for a purpose and should only be used for that purpose as directed.

These parents whine that they need a break. I signed my kids up for a summer program that keeps them out of the house from 10am-4pm and I still don't get a break because none of the neighborhood kids have figured out they aren't friggin here! When they're in school, I have a million things I have to do with that time before they get home since I'm the only driver in my household. My break comes when they go to bed since they're all finally old enough to sleep all night and nightmares are rare. Once every few months I finally crack and send them off for a weekend.

On a side note, if any of you get married, have children, and your wife stays home full time. Appreciate it. I'm a full time Dad and I don't do half the shit a traditional stay home Mom does and I'm exhausted. I used to do a lot less and got a paycheck. Now my job is never ending and I get paid in cigarettes (seriously).

[Professor Smarmiarty]

I think the only conclusion that we can draw from this is that kids should be raisedin communes by appropriately trainedpeople with adaquate who won't need to resort to violence/spannking.