Kid needs a good spanking.

He remind anyone else of Jack Perry, aka. youdiejoejunior? (In appearance, not behavior, of course.)

*comedy

>> ^lucky760:
Kid needs a good spanking.


My thoughts exactly.

jerk!!

Rofl!

boot to the head

But spanking is becoming more and more illegal and unacceptable. Seems like society likes brats like this. I know a couple that doesn't even want to use the word "No" because it imposes "barriers". How sad.

Fucking parents.

Parents indeed. They did not seem to be giving in, although, they did let him go a bit to far.

I have gone from loving children to hating them as I see how the majority turn out.

As far as spanking landing you in trouble, I would offer a child 10 minutes of gaming for every spank he asked for, let us see how much they really want it.

I'm pretty sure spanking would have no affect on his tantrums, it would only make the parents feel better because they 'did something about it'. As long as he doesn't get any traction from them, he'll grow out of them.

Parenting is difficult, humbling, and most of all requires patience. You have to accept that a kid isn't a finished person, and no amount of discipline will make them a reasonable adult. And if you somehow manage to mold your kid into something that acts like an adult (e.g. child stars), congratulations, you've created an abnormal and neurotic child who makes your life easier.

I would contend that this was an example of good parenting. They obviously set a limit on the kid and were sticking to it.

The "tantrum" was hardly that. Hell, the whole exchange was only two minutes...

I still use spanking as a form of discipline but for extreme conditions such as disobedience or rebellion (which this kid demonstrates when he hits his dad). My discipline consists of verbal warnings, timeouts, sending a child to their room (not to play), taking privileges away, and finally spanking. Children need rules and boundaries. They also need to know that there is consequences if they break the rules. The consequences should also fit the "crime". Again, disobedience and rebellion are the extreme conditions. I do not spank for accidents like breaking a dish/glass, but do lecture them when they do so.

I think there is a proper way to spank a child but most parents utilize an improper method. My method is:
1) they should first know that spanking is a consequence to certain behavior.
2) Only spank in a private area... I use the bathroom. It gives me time to cool off myself if I am upset. Never spank your child if you are upset.
3) Once in the bathroom I talk to my children and ask why they are getting a spanking. I then tell them how many spankings they will be getting. Typically it's 1-2 slaps to their bottoms depending on the severity.
4) I hit only on the bottom and I don't use any instruments. It hurts me too. I hit hard enough to give them a sting and draw a tear. The goal is to teach them consequences not hurt them. Basically, I am talking to their brain through their rear end.
5) If they are upset afterward then sometimes I will give an additional spanking. They need to know that their choice to disobey/rebel is why they received a spanking.
6) I talk once again to them. And remind them of the rules.

That's it. I think that it has worked in my home. I got this method from a book called, "Dare to Discipline". If you review the comments on the book half are good and half are bad. I suppose it is the divide between people who favor spanking and others who do not. Some people say that spanking leaves psychological scars. I think if you do it the right way and be consistent then this does not happen. My kids are not oppressed. They are very loving and outgoing. As they get older they mature and spanking has also become infrequent.

Hay look the kid probably wanted to play the ps3 simply because most other things in life are shit , its obviously going to be hard for a kid to understand why its bad to play something that's enjoyable and actually not that bad, say a kid wanted to play pano all day long ore do math ore scince parents wud be like ohh yahh thats well good.

i don't know with this situation ( and i know looking after kids is a bitch ) but if the kid had other options maby go out with parents do something enjoyable fly model airplanes go to a science museum then he probably wudnet be so pissed because he would have other alternatives in his mind.

just from personal exsperance parents would be like don't play on pc yet there was fuck all alse to do that would be mentally stimulating enough to engage me other than make things out of lego but in the end that is pritty mutch the same as making things on a pc only its more limited.

also i have no respect for these people owning a ps3 pah surly any normal family would own a 360 + maby a wii , but then again thay are Norwegian and norway is a nice place with so manny good looking woman , i bet the kid was an acident,

WRT spankings, I think more importantly than giving him a spanking during that tantrum is that his parents should have spanked him for the first few years of his life.

It's a very well supported theory I have that those initial formative years are the ones that determine their obedience for the rest of their lives. I know several parents of fully grown kids who only spanked them until they were maybe 5-7 and were never spoiled rotten whining tantrum-throwing little shits the rest of their childhood.

On the other hand I also know lots of parents who never spanked their children and instead just coddled them and begged/pleaded with them not to cry and pout, and those punk kids did nothing but whine and kick and scream and grew into whiny attention starved buffalops.

I think the parents in this video belong to the latter group of folks. (I myself have one parent from each of the groups [divorced] and acted accordingly with each growing up; I never disobeyed my father and always challenged my mother.)

Spankings are a copout for lazy parents. This was far better, and was an example of the type of level-headedness required to deal with misbehaving children, rather than teaching them that the way to deal with people who are pissing you off by engaging in violence.

For sure, effective parenting. The child will soon learn the futility of his childish ways

(also pwnt)

Thanks to his parents, this kid is going to grow up to be the next 12 inch spike wearing banshee vocalist fronting a band of zombie vikings raised from the dead wreaking deathly noisy havoc amongst all the blood-stained cave dwellers in the bog.

spare the rod spoil the child

I wanna see Dick Cheney do this at his treason trial.

"I still use spanking as a form of discipline but for extreme conditions such as disobedience or rebellion (which this kid demonstrates when he hits his dad)."

So maximillion, to teach a kid that it's wrong to hit someone else, you hit them? I see...

Props to the parent for staying calm. Although that could have been due to the camera.

I would be a good parent, if only because I'm passive aggressive.

I'd take away his Playstation, and if he continued to whine about it, I'd take everything out of his room when he was at school. When he came home, he'd see nothing in his room but four walls and a floor.

>> ^lucky760:
On the other hand I also know lots of parents who never spanked their children and instead just coddled them and begged/pleaded with them not to cry and pout, and those punk kids did nothing but whine and kick and scream and grew into whiny attention starved buffalops.

Why do the only two options have to be spanking or coddling? It is entirely possible to set borders for your child in a stern manner without resorting to spanking. No matter how you explain the spanking to the child, it is still physical abuse in my opinion. Children are not big on complex explanations, and will likely not understand it if you tried. Instead they only know the fear of being spanked. I don't believe for a second that spanking is in any way constructive.

hear hear!

Eh, I think it's questionable parenting because

1) the father was giving the kid attention when he was acting badly, which can encourage the bad behavior.
2) the father wasn't explaining why he took the PS3 away, which makes it just seem cruel from the kid's point of view.

But the father did a good job staying cool and holding his ground, at least.

>> ^robbersdog49:
So maximillion, to teach a kid that it's wrong to hit someone else, you hit them? I see...


Basically, yes. My spankings are not violent. Read on. And yes it has worked for my kids.

If you read my entire post you will understand better. This kid's problem is not in the fact that he hit his dad per se but rather that he is being rebellious. Kids need to respect authority figures such as parents. If they don't learn this lesson early on then they are going to be disrespectful later on. Read lcuky760's post as an example.

I posted at length about my spanking method because I want people to understand that there is a difference between a proper spanking and child abuse. I know some parents go off and hit a kid immediately when they misbehave. This is child abuse in my opinion. My spanking discipline is a consistent process that takes minutes to execute because I am talking to my children most of the time. The actually spanking part is only a small portion of the time. My voice is calm and loving, but I am firm about the rules and the consequences. My kids do not view spankings as a violence.

Most of time I only have to threaten to spank and they immediately obey. It's the idea of the consequences that causes them to correct their behavior. That's the idea. Again, Lucky760 confirms this.

BTW, "spare the rod, spoil the child". It's the rod of discipline, not a physical rod for whipping. I never would use an instrument to hit my children.

i foresee more addiction problems.

I believe this is the first Westy comment I've ever upvoted.

haha, re-watching this I still love the father's nonchalant reply, "you can't behave like this?"

"My spankings are not violent."

Could you please explain what violence is, because I'm pretty certain you've got a completely different definition of violence to most people. I suspect you mean it's not violent because it's me doing it.

I used to think there was no alternative to spanking until I saw Dr Tanya Byron on the House of Tiny Tearaways here in the UK. She had more control over the kids in the house than I would have ever thought possible. These were bad kids, like the one above. She was involved with them for only a few days and you could already see the difference by the end.

She controlled bad, naughty, young kids and did it far more effectively than I've ever seen it done before and all without ever lifting a finger.

Violence against your kids isn't necessary. It's your natural reaction, but when you see what really can be done and how much more effective it is, you realise how bad and unnecessary hitting children is.

If it sounds like I'm calling you a bad parent then yes, I suppose I am. I'm not saying it's your fault, the techniques she uses would need to be learned, they aren't your natural reaction. No-one ever gets taught these things and you wouldn't know about them if you were taught them. However, just because you don't know of a better way of doing things doesn't mean there isn't one.

You don't need to hit kids. Hitting a kid as punishment for them hitting you is just as fucked up as it sounds.

There's a big difference between respect and fear.

i dunno, max. the more eloborate, detailed and planned your spanking sessions are, the more sadistic they sound to me.
we have two kids here, unspanked, and they are now one perfectly average teenager and one quite normal 7 year old.
i think you can be perfectly capable of communicating with your children withouth resorting to violence... and if theres one thing i think "works", it is being able to communicate with the kids.. as in they understand you, and you understand them.
and i am betting you were spanked as a kid as well.

>> ^lavoll:
i dunno, max. the more eloborate, detailed and planned your spanking sessions are, the more sadistic they sound to me.


Good job in exaggerating. I write that the majority of the time spent in the bathroom is used for communication and you call me sadistic. I can spend up to 5 minutes sometimes talking to my children. The actual spanking takes 10 seconds. Apparently my method is poor because I try to instill negative consequences to a child's action. Taking them to the bathroom removes them from the situation and focuses their attention on their bad behavior.

Per the definition of violence:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/violence

My goal in spanking is not to injure or abuse. If you do that then you are hitting too hard or improperly. I deliver a sting that is used to send a message of consequence. It is not abusive.

No, I was not spanked as a child and neither was my wife. My kids respect me, love me, play games cheerfully, randomly come up to hug and say they love me. They are active loving kids that constantly bare a smile. They fear the consequences to bad behavior. That is the goal.

Perhaps you would prefer a different example... we have friends that don't spank. They are also caught up in a new form of child rearing where they do not use the word, "no"; they don't want to be negative with their children. As a result both of their children rule their parents.

Well, what do you expect when you call your kid Loke?

>> ^maximillian:
Perhaps you would prefer a different example... we have friends that don't spank. They are also caught up in a new form of child rearing where they do not use the word, "no"; they don't want to be negative with their children. As a result both of their children rule their parents.


I'll repeat myself: Why only consider these two options? You speak as if the only alternative to spanking is to give in to your children totally so as not to be "negative", whatever that means. There are many middle grounds between the two where you are firm with your children and are able to set clear borders that they understand and respect. My point is that it is better to encourage good behaviour than to punish bad. You say yourself that your children fear the consequences of bad behaviour, and fear is never a good way to influence people, kids or adults.

Don't get me wrong, I believe you when you say you have a tender and loving family, I really do. I just think you could have achieved the same with just the love and without the spanking. There is of course a huge difference between violent child abuse and what you are doing, but you have still crossed my moral line in this matter.

With regards to the video, I believe there are also things happening outside the camera that we have to take into consideration. I think it is clear from the dialogue that the father had already explained to the boy why he was banned from playing PS3. But the filming was unnecessary, and only encourages more of the same behaviour, since the kid feels he is getting attention that way.

Not a single post on how weird it is that the parents are videotaping this kid's meltdown? That is what I find most disturbing about this clip. There is something fundamentally wrong that this kid is not talking to his father, he is talking to his father with a camera in front of his face.

Creeps me out.

I was just thinking that. Its as if the parents knew a funny meltdown was going to happen, so they whipped out the camera. Unless its for some 'constructive parenting techniques' class, its just another example of kids raising kids.

Hammer plus head = no drama.

I second what bareboards said, the fact that this is being taped is wrong.

Mx, thinking about what you said, what do you think of this. Please see this as a serious and honest question:

If there was a way of achieving exactly what you achieve by spanking, but without you hitting your children, would you think it a better method than spanking?

I'm sorry but I really won't accept any description of spanking other than hitting your kids. As far as I'm concerned when you hit someone it's a violent act.

if you don't see it as violence, I think the definition of domestic violence fits pretty well:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/domestic%20violence

>> ^rychan:
Eh, I think it's questionable parenting because
1) the father was giving the kid attention when he was acting badly, which can encourage the bad behavior.
2) the father wasn't explaining why he took the PS3 away, which makes it just seem cruel from the kid's point of view.
But the father did a good job staying cool and holding his ground, at least.


1) It would have been far more effective to tell the kid "No, end of discussion." and then to hold to that, don't allow it to be brought up and if the kid continued, ignore him.

2)The kid obviously knew why it had been taken away. He admits that "I was bad," but then goes on to counter with "it doesn't matter" which tells me that he knew very well why he was "banned".

I'm not even going to read the comments here, there'll be a huge debate on what makes good parenting and discipline etc. The main point is brought up in the post above mine/rychan ones.

There's no point debating smacking etc. when this just demonstrates what you don't do... which is pay attention to a tantrum.

End of story, ignore it, if they bring it to you put them in their room or somewhere else... but don't engage... it may take a while, but they give up through lack of interest and lack of any effect from their outbursts. It works with our kids... the more you engage on the tantrum the longer and worse it gets, the more you ignore it and carry on with other things, the quicker it stops.

^spoco2's comment cuts to the core of the whole issue. Applause.

^I agree.

And you sure as heck don't videotape it. Talk about wrong message.

EVERYONE TALKING ABOUT SPANKING IS MISSING THE POINT

I'm surprised he didn't threaten his son by saying, "if you act this way I'm going to post it on the internet so the entire world can laugh at you, like we laughed at the stoned kid after the dentist last week."

Oh man, parenting is in theory SO MUCH easier thanks to Youtube.

a child is only different from an adult in that it is physically and mentally underdeveloped.

human rights says the law should ensure the lives of people against the violence of others. legal guardianship says that a parent should ensure the life of a child by providing the food, shelter, and clothing it cannot provide for itself--it says nothing about forcing it to conform to your will, or molding it in your mind's image.

you can justify the ends (obedience), which make your life easier, but how can you justify the means (violence)?

If you have a gun you can shoot your kid in the foot not only dose it shut them up , but it feels so good.

Maybe they were videotaping the tantrum so they could show it to him once he calmed down and let him see how bad his behavior was. High-tech parenting. Why they put it on YouTube I don't know, but it's a good source of amusement.

not funny

Seriously, the majority of you need to get over yourselves in this thread. Jesus, kids have tantrums, they explode, they become momentarily demonic and they make you hate them a lot of the time. That hardly means they are lacking discipline.

Consistency is always the key with kids no matter which way you spin it. Consistently remaining calm in the face of a willful child will work out in the end, even if it does take years. You don't bring kids up to try and make them into perfect kids (idealistic and pure luck), you are bringing them up to be balanced adults, and that is always going to be a challenge and never as clear cut as just "belt them and shut them up". I'm suprised that so many of you have this Victorian mentality in this day and age

This exchange would not have happened in my house growing up. I walked on eggshells around my father. My memory of childhood is basically trying not to piss off my dad so that he wouldn't abuse my mom (didn't help he would rage consantly no matter what), and trying to endure my mom who had been mentally and emotionally twisted by my dad.

I don't know if I'll spank my (notional) kids. I don't think "spare rod, spoil child", but neither do I think that a couple of simple, not-too-hard, bare-handed spanks is going to cause psychic harm. I do think that I could parent effectively without spanking, however.

Also I know I wouldn't follow my parents' suit. For two unusually pacifistic people they were pretty gung-ho on spanking (me, at least; I can't recall if my older sibs used to get it). I can't remember most of my offenses punished by spanking (seeing as I was 2-3 y.o.), but I do remember that for a lot of them I was in disbelief that I was getting it for having done something which seemed minor to me.

Apart from the frequency of it, they were also overly severe; my mom (unwittingly, I think) used the heel of her hand, i.e., bone, which struck hard enough to occasionally leave bruises. If she was really vexed it'd be "wait 'til your father gets home", which I knew meant that in a few hours I'd get the belt. That's taking it too far IMO and is substantially further than I'd go.

Yup... I don't want kids.

I don't want kids to the point where I'm too scared to date lately. Well, too scared to have sex. Sex is where babies come from!

i want to start out by saying that i have spanked children and i was also spanked as a child...spanking is really strange to me, in that it's something that you do to your child that if anyone else did - they'd be arrested for battery. no where else in society is the hitting/spanking of someone deemed an acceptable way to teach someone a lesson. imagine you did something wrong at work and your boss used some physical means that involved striking you - even if it was in the privacy of their office - how would that work for you? would you learn from it? if so, what? would you work harder to make the boss proud after that?

to me, spanking is what people/parents (self included) resort to when they can't figure out what else to do. it HAS to be the last resort, doesn't it? if not it would be prett odd parenting to just skip right on over the other methods and go directly to the child-striking, wouldn't it? maybe you were in a hurry or you just couldn't figure out what to say to the kid...? kids can be frustrating and annoying and loud and they don't listen - but to strike them just seems wrong to me. again, i have spanked before and there are times in the store when a kid is throwing a fit and i'll think..."boy, the mom/dad oughta give that kid a good whack," but you've gotta stop and ask yourself is the spanking REALLY to teach THEM some kind of lesson (and if so, what?)or, could it possilby be because YOU are fed up with it and you don't want to hear it anymore and they've been bugging you all day and they won't stop crying no matter what you do and it would be quite satisfying to give that screaming little beast a little whomp on the butt?

in closing, i'd like to say that being spanked made me mad and it made me mean. that feeling of someone bigger and stronger than i was being able to do that and there was not a thing i could do - it's a terrible feeling and it didn't teach me anything....and i'm talking regular spankings - not beatings. secondly, the last time i spanked a child...afterwards i thought long and hard about the power play and dynamics and was it REALLY me wanting to 'teach' them or was it more like me being so frustrated that i just 'went there' and did the gut reaction thing. i have never learned a thing - not one single solitary thing from being hit, spanked or physically punished...other than that children are powerless against adults and that's not the way i ever want to make any child feel.

Good parents. Bad technology.

Soccer balls, checkers, slot cars, skipping ropes, bicycles, etc. don't induce this sort of extreme behavior. It's only the new technology with its demands on players to reach that next level that induces this sort of compulsion and obsession in both adults and children.

Unfortunately, our children are far more susceptible to its controlling influence than their parents who grew up without it and know it for what it is, a force that saps individual will.

I don't think spanking the kid is any sort of solution but the parents' solution of removing and controlling the technology is absolutely the correct solution by re-asserting control in the hands of people and not the software.

I love technology in many ways. But I abhor the market-driven, consumerist energies that are buried within much of its recreational derivatives. In the same way supermarkets and shopping malls are designed to control every waking second a consumer is within their grasp, these products are designed to entrap and control to create that artificially inseminated "need" and "demand" of our consumer economy.

Don't spank. Moderate the child's access to this influence for his own good. The tantrums will be well worth it in the long run.

imho.