Have to agree with Cheese on this one.
I am a father, I am the primary caregiver for my daughter. I get frustrated at times, even angry very rarely. However I could not ever physically hurt her on purpose. The very thought makes me shiver. She is well behaved, and I'd like to think her mother and I did a good job instilling right and wrong in her. I think a raised voice works very well to curb potentially dangerous behaviour; especially because it has been used so infrequently. That and I rarely have her out of sight, especially around roads or dogs. She is 3 and a half, and she will soon have a brother. Will having two change my mind? I doubt it. Perhaps I will be more frustrated at times, perhaps a suituation will arise where a spanking might be appropriate for some, a necessary deterent to poor behavior. I really don't think so. If I resort to using violence on my child I would see it as a failure in me. I see no real difference between spanking and beating, I really don't. Why try to rationalize a level of violence? If the spanking doesn't really hurt the child, then why bother? If it does, then that is beating. It is a very blurry line that people are trying to draw between beating and spanking, and I am happy that I will never put myself in that situation. Yes, I am saying "never" with confidence. Call me elitist too, I don't care. Every parenting experience is unique, and I am very happy that mine has been wonderful. I honestly think my experience would be sullied if I ever hurt my children.
I was spanked as a child. Didn't like it much. Dad used belt, mom wooden spoon. Went to a strict school in England where they had the strap and salt, nasty business. Very effective deterent, useful show of power, dominance, and control. However for me, that's not what parenting is about.
I am by no means a New Age do gooder pacifist, I have a feeling at some future moment Locke is going to get a group of Canuck fans angry enough that I will find pressing my fist into their faces repeatedly and at speed, necessary.
|