Expert to Moms: Spanking Does Not Make Children Obedient
Approximately 70-90% of parents use spanking as a disciplinary tactic, says Dr. Holden, Professor of Psychology at Southern Methodist University. This is especially concerning, says Holden, because he’s convinced that any form of hitting a child, whether it be slapping or spanking, is wrong.
“Does this actually make kids more obedient?” asks Anderson.
“It doesn’t,” says Holden, who has studied the effects of spanking for years. “It’s undermining. One-hundred-fifty years ago in this country, husbands were hitting wives when the wives were disobedient,” says Holden. “We now think that's shocking, and we'd never allow that anymore. I'd like to suggest that us hitting kids is the same thing. We're assaulting children. They have a right not to be hit.”
Comments
Wow, the Anderson Cooper media types will do anything they can to distort effective, non-abusive discipline. The problem is that once they reframe the debate on their terms, they've already lumped the responsible parents with the ones that have beat their children to death. The Anderson Cooper audience laps it up in their naivety. And with that, you've loaded the deck against your guests & they're never able to share what good disciplining their children has brought upon them.
The producer's opinions were made before ever bringing in guests. This show, among many others from the left, are & never will be credible sources of information. Just propaganda & sub-par entertainment!!!
Spanking is the tool of a lazy parent. It has been proven unnecessary by the 32 countries that outlaw it. For those who claim it didn't harm their children, I dare you to check out what your children wrote about spanking on the experienceproject. The emotional damage they didn't dare tell you about they certainly wrote about anonymously on the internet. Get educated people. This archaic practice needs to end.
Spanking and child abuse are two completely different things. To assume they are the same is akin to saying that negative reinforcement by depriving a child of his/her favorite toy is the same as stealing from the child.
I can say this about spanking. I rarely spank my children, and after they reached an age where I could reason with them, spankings became even more rare. My children are not maladjusted humans. They do not have low self-esteem. They are not violent. They are not cowards. The relationship my wife and I have with our kids is about as solid as it can be. Our children are not intimidated by us. They generally have good manners, and are working hard in school.
Spanking should never be the first form of discipline used, and the less it is used, the more effective it becomes. It is/was often the "idea" of getting spanked that works better than the spanking itself. It is a solid tool for parents to use--- if it is used sparingly. Used all the time--- it is not effective. Just like yelling---- if done all the time, it not as effective as when it is only done once in a while.
When the child needs/deserves a spanking--- you give it. When the child needs/deserves a hug---- you give it.
The argument about spanking a child being like beating your wife--- seriously? Really? Apples and oranges--- completely. My wife is my equal, my partner, my peer. My children are not my social peers and will never be. They will always be my children--- even when they are 60 and I am 80. It is not a power-thing. It is an experience and learning thing. As a parent, my job will only be done when I am gone. Of course, as our children gain their own experience and wisdom, they will look to us less for guidance--- we hope!
Re: Spanking children
I raised two adopted boys. I got one at birth and the other was three years old. My husband spanked the 3-year old - it was more like phisical abuse because the skin was always bruised. He turned out to be a drunk as an adult and started beating his wife.
My younger son is totally different. He is an accountant now and does not drink. He is a well adjusted adult. You may be wondering If I had any influence on my older son. Well,he kept running to the abuser for acception and love. So. it is a vicious cycle when you hit children.
Hassina
I was raised by divorced parents, one of whom spanked me. The other beat me. There is a HUGE significant difference between the two. Swatting a child on the behind to let them know you mean business and that their behavior is not acceptable, after you have exhausted other means, is not psychologically damaging to that child. It is also not the same as smacking a child across the face or wailing on them with a belt because you didn't like something they said, which IS psychologically damaging. People need to learn the difference between teaching their children how to behave (they don't come out knowing, by the way, and being their buddy and letting them act however they want does NOT change that) and being abusive. There IS a difference which I have experienced firsthand.
While I do believe that children need correction I also believe that it can be provided without the use of your hands. It can be provided by time-out, or removal of toys or, privileges. Here I am at 1:54am responding to a post that is nearly 6 months old because this is a subject that makes me mad. I have taken care of children from the ages of infancy to 14 and I have only hit one once. This happened more than 15 years ago and the fact that I did it still has an effect on me. I hate to think that I did it and that when I did it I had no idea what kind of effect it still has on me today. It is dead wrong to hit our children or for us to make them fear us. There is NEVER a reason to strike your child. They have the RIGHT TO NOT BE HIT. When we were in school we were taught to keep our hands to ourselves and if we want to teach our children this we need to lead by example. They talk about giving consequences to mimic real life. Take away a privilege, toy, playtime, or whatever but do not lay a hand on your children.
My mother is also under the same mistaken impression of the bible that Rick is. First: No, the bible teaches us to discipline or "Teach" our children right from wrong it does not tell us to hit our kids. The bible is FIGURATIVE not LITERAL in its teachings. None of the verses that Rick pointed out actually say to hit or as he put it "Whoop" your child. They don't even read that way and can't even be taken to mean that. It does say to teach our children and we can do this without violence. By the way it also says "Violence begets Violence" and striking your children is violence. The "Rod" that is mentioned in these verses means or symbolizes teaching as is "discipline" When we spank young children we teach them that if they want someone to do as they want all they have to do i*****. Spanked children are more likely to become violent, do worse in school, and, are more likely to be bullies.
Spanking your children teaches them that this is acceptable punishment for their young ones when they have them. They pass violence onto their young ones. We need to break this cycle of violence because yes children who are spanked or hit as children are more likely to engage in domestic abuse. We need to teach our young ones that hitting is wrong so let's start with ourselves and decide not to spank anymore.
When you spank your kids it not only effects them physically it also effects them emotionally and for a very long time. I have cousins in their 40's and 50's who were spanked and they joke about it because it bothered them that much. Most people do it not out of love but rather out of anger. They do not take time to cool off nor do they explain they just hit leaving the kid wondering why. When they have finished they are still mad and show no love whatsoever to that child.
As far as how young is too young if I were to say I would say you do not spank anywhere before 3 because at these early ages you can reason with a child and they will understand they do not understand why you would hit them if they hit their sibling. Their thought process is "If I can't hit my brother, why can Mommy hit me?" or "Ok mommy hit me because I did something she didn't like so if little brother or sister does something I don't like I can hit them." Kids are not that difficult to analyze at that age. So if reasoning with young children works why can't we do it with older ones as well.
When we reason with them we tell them what they did wrong because they may not realize they did wrong at all. After this we tell them why what they did was wrong. We then tell why we don't want them to do what it was they did. It might have been dangerous or unsafe. Explaining this to them is our responsibility and YES you have to explain this to your child. You are in complete control of what they watch, the toys they own, the games they play, the food they eat, etc. so when it comes to punishment TAKE SOMETHING AWAY. Do not use your hands for violent purposes because it is WRONG.
One thing to always remember is that for any type of non-spanking punishment to work you need patience. If you have put your child in time-out and they won't stay there keep putting them bac*****il they do. Don't give up show them that you are the adult, and that they are the child, and that you will win.
"Show me a man that will strike his child and I will show you a man who has run out of ideas." I don't know who said this quote but it is quite famous and I follow it. There is always a better way to do things.
Another thing I want to point out is that there is a difference between discipline and punishment. As more than one person has stated discipline means to teach. Punishment=consequences.
My sister was spanked a whole lot more than I was and as a teen she got into a lot more trouble than I did. It did not teach her anything. She to this day has never learned what it was she was supposed to learn. She got into fights and laid her hands on her ex boyfriends son. Of course he was no better he laid his hands on her. Spanking her taught her nothing. I was rarely spanked and really can't remember the last time it happened. I am completely non-violent, friendly, and have the patience of Job when I take care of kids. There is no limit to which I can be pushed nor do I get angry with them when I am babysitting. Because I am the way I am most kids listen to me. I give them love, I give them space and I let them be themselves which most parents don't do. I let them play and I observe them. I play with them as well. I love the sounds of children's laughter and hate the sound of their crying. Laughter is happy crying is not. We need to let our children be children and not make them be little adults. Let them have fun when you take them out. If you take them to the store make a game of it. Let them find what it is you are looking for. Get them involved!
Big thing here HAVE PATIENCE! If you feel like you are about to explode LEAVE THE ROOM and after you have cooled down you will be in control of your faculties and can better take control of the situation.
Another thing DO NOT FOLLOW IN YOUR PARENTS FOOTSTEPS when it comes to teaching and punishing your child. They did what they were taught but you do not have to do as you were taught by them.
NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO HIT A CHILD!
When it does come down to punishment we can show them consequences in other ways.
TIME OUT: this is good for when your child is acting up he or she just needs to be away from the action for a little while.
NAUGHTY CHAIR/STAIR/RUG: Good for younger children between 2 and maybe 7. First give them a warning then if they do not heed it take them away from the group and place them in a designated place. Set a time that they must stay for example one minute for each year they are old. If they get up before the time is up. PUT THEM BACK and restart the timer. Keep doing this until they learn that they cannot play until they do as you ask. While they are serving their time do not talk to them or pay attention to them no matter what they do. When they have sat there the required time re-include them into the group and give hugs and kisses.
LOSS OF SOMETHING: Good for 8 and up. Since you as parents have complete control over your children you simply take something away for a set length of time. Don't take away just any old toy or game because then it won't work. Take away something that they play with all the time. If they like a certain game and play it all the time. TAKE IT AWAY. You can even do this with younger kids too. You can also teach them to help others in this way by donating what it is you have taken to the local Goodwill or other used store that may be close.
AN UNPLEASANT CHORE: Tell them that they must do a certain chore as punishment. This works well on younger children because they don't want to do chores they want to have fun but until that chore gets done they don't get to play. Maybe the chore is to do dishes. There are a handful of kids that like to do dishes but if they are required to it becomes unpleasant. For older kids it could be cleaning the kitchen top to bottom. The cool thing something positive is getting done and they are still being punished. Praise them when they have finished.
These are what I like to call Constructive punishments because they are doing something that builds them up for the future and teaches them a life skill. Not only this but a chore around the house gets done and its still a punishment, huh 4 good things in one. Could you ask for anything more? This is the way a child should be taught. The other side is:
Destructive Punishment: Physical Punishment of any kind. Spanking, hitting, swatting, etc. When we use these types of punishments it demeans the child and makes us little more than animals. Usually this is preceded by yelling and threats. This causes fear and can have negative effects such as low self esteem , temper issues, violence, acting out, emotional breakdowns, lack of empathy toward others, Domestic abuse in later life, and eventual child abuse toward their own. As our children age we have to do more to have the same effect much like a person who's body has learned to tolerate painkillers so they need more to achieve the same effect. It can escalate and yes lead to the abuse of your own child.
Before you decide to spank think about what I have written here. Remember I am no parent but I have babysat kids for a lot longer than some people have been parents. I may not be on the inside, I am on the outside looking in and someone who is in this position can better see what is right and what is wrong than someone who is actually on the inside because the person the inside has only one view, THEIR OWN. Lastly but not least, BURN PEARLS BOOK. Use constructive punishment the kind that builds your child up not negative punishment, all it does it tears your children down. Respect your kids, have patience and above all, don't hit, Be creative, it leads to a happier healthier, more well-rounded child. So in short as adults we need to heed what we learned in school. DON'T HIT!
in school
Before spanking parents should ask themselves a few questions.
What message are they conveying to their child if they were to spank? What does the actual spanking interaction produce? Why spanking is not a long-term solution? There are many alternatives to spanking-some parents choose the easy way out.
Lucia
http://disciplineandchildren.com
Hogwash! Basic common sense tells anyone that spanking works! I am a school teacher and no matter what psychologists ATTEMPT to convince those that are blinded by the letters following their names, the children that are spanked, (not beaten), are the most mannerly, and best behaved in the school. Most psychologists and psychological studies do not differentiate between spanking and abuse, so their statistics are meaningless. There is no greater study than life itself. Spanking started to be criticized and outlawed about 40 years ago. So, needless to say, crime and the severity of crime is much worse than it has been in years past. The elimination of spanking does not establish, at an early age, the respect for authority and the fear of doing wrong. In our nation and EVERY nation that has reduced or eliminated spanking as a discipline, violence has increased. Ask ANY teacher especially those that have taught over the last 30 years, and ask them if student behavior has improved or gotten worse. The overwhelming answer is that, it has gotten worse. What value is the word of "an expert" when reality proves him wrong. The answer: WORTHLESS!!!
Children need limits, they need to learn consequences to their actions. Build, break, build is a primary and instinctive method in all humans and animals. (While Pearl, is wrong, very wrong and I believe he should be spanked with that tube he had in his hand.) You have shown one extreme or the other to make your point, but what about showing wonderful children that benefit from proper discipline that not only shows consequence to actions but love and understanding allowing them to grow up to be amazing people instead of spoiled brats that get pregnant, end up doing drugs, an in juvenile hall for committing crimes. There is a careful balance, it's not cut and dry, but there has to be one. Example: My three year old twins have been fighting since they were in my womb, I watched them do it on the little monitor since their hands were formed. They fought each-other for food for space and basically for fun by the time they were actually born, they developed this behavior. They had their own space after they were born and the fighting was not an issue until they started being able to reach for toys and often the same one. I would interact with them both distract them and give them different toys, one each or play games with them, and at that stage it worked, until the next time they reached for the same toy. Rinse & repeat on those actions until they could crawl and walk and punch, bite, scream and basically be normal two year olds. They crawled into a laundry basket and it was adorable until they started pushing garbing and tugging, hitting and screaming violently. I was in shock seeing this behavior and instinctively grabbed them out of the basket and told them no, lightly swatted their butts over their diapers and separated them for a minute. Their reaction was pure shock, not fear but shock. I got their attention told them to be nice and love each other and share or they would get a spank again. Our older 3 year old (yes I have 3, 3 year old boys) who is 9 months older and a lot more mature then the twins came in and was upset that I had spanked his brothers. He can understand at this age what happened and why after our discussion he told me "mommy I don't want to be spanked I am going to be a good boy" he then hugged me and kissed me and went about his business playing with cars on the bed while I folded laundry and the twins played with board books. The difference is build, break, build...building love and respect and your children knowing you love them so much that no matter what they do that love won't go away. Breaking their attention from bad behaviors, especially when they are hurting a sibling or another child by swatting their butt lightly, NEVER IN ANGER (if you are mad or frustrated-WALK AWAY and come back when you are clam and rational) then Build an understanding of the action that was wrong and let them again know you love them and that they are good boys but what they did was not nice or loving to their brother. Build, Break, Build works for me in the manor I described. It has worked for their eldest brother who is going to be 15 in March. He is an amazing young man, respectful, insightful, opinionated, gentle and caring. He is not afraid of me, but he does have an understanding there are consequences to his actions, he developed this when he was 3 and 4, just like his brothers are doing now. He donates to great causes on his own, he thinks of others constantly, so does his 3 year brother and the twins are starting to. Proper discipline with spanking, NOT ABUSE, is the way to go for our family. We have compliments every time we go out in public because of how well our children behave, how well the communicate and how amazing they are, every time we go out. We are re invited to places because our children as such a pleasure and they can't believe it when they ask if they are always this good and I answer honestly, "no, they can't always be good". When I go shopping I take all three little ones and they behave like little citizens and are very helpful, while I look around and they do to and ask what is wrong with the other kids and toddlers screaming and throwing tantrums all around us, it's mortifying to us all and I know I am thinking holy cow that kid needs a spank, then the parent gives in with the candy or toy to "shut them up" and we all just look at each other and raise our eyebrows knowing that is not the answer and go about our way. I can guarantee my children are going to be amazing people (they already are) because I love them enough to show them right from wrong from the start.
This is some crap. The parents there are not saying they beat their kids all of the time and that is the only form of punishment...my goodness! Spanking a child is right and biblical. Proverbs 19:18, 13:24, & 23:13 all talk about whooping your child. It isn't abuse or disrespect. People are giving kids too darn much leeway when they don't spank them. Parent child relationships aren't democracies/social equalities. Kids are subject to their parents.
I watched the show Friday and had some comments about spanking. There are three primary methods of conditioning. The first is operant conditioning (including reinforcement and punishment - developed by B. F. Skinner), the second is classical conditioning (developed by Ivan Pavlov), and the third is observational conditioning (developed by Albert Bandura). Classical conditioning is typically not very effective when used on humans (very effective on other species within the kingdom animalia, however).
We'll focus on reinforcement and punishment first. Both are broken into two subcategories: positive and negative. Positive reinforcement is when a response is followed by the addition of a reinforcing stimulus (ex: after receiving good grades on his/her report card, the child is given a new video game). Negative reinforcement is when a response is followed by the subtraction of an aversive stimulus (ex: after a child's grades have improved, the child's television privileges are reinstated). Think of positive as adding something good, and negative as subtracting something bad. Positive punishment is when a response is followed by the addition of an aversive stimulus (ex: spanking the child for bad grades). Negative punishment is when a response is followed by the subtraction of a reinforcing stimulus (ex: taking away television privileges for bad grades). Think of positive as adding something bad and negative as subtracting something good. Here's primarily where they differ: reinforcement is used to increase the likelihood that a behavior will be repeated; punishment is used to decrease the likelihood that a behavior will be repeated. The greater the consistency and shortness of delay of reinforcement/punishment, the greater the level of conditioning. Notice "consistency and shortness of delay" is mentioned - severity is not.
The only subcategory to be concerned with is positive punishment. Studies show that positive punishment works best in the beginning because it instills fear (the child is fearful of the pain associated with spanking); however, positive punishment tactics decrease in effectiveness over time. This is partly because the fear usually turns into anger and even hatred. Reinforcement techniques are more sustainable. Let me give you a real life application: governing a child is not much different than governing a country. Look at governments governed by "love." The majority of them throughout history were very successful for a very long time. Now look at the governments governed by "fear." The majority of them were very successful at first, but eventually the citizens revolted (in fact this is how our country came into existence). By spanking your child, you will see desirable and immediate results, but years down the road you will begin to reap what you sow because the child will most likely become more aggressive and antisocial (studies by Elizabeth Gershoff and many others have found there to be a positive correlation between level of spanking as children and level o****gression and antisocial behavior as adolescence/young adults - positive correlation is not a good thing in this instance), and they will be more likely to depart from you. Most parents who spank their children have a hard time seeing this because the side effects don't arise until years down the road. Think about this: if a pellet is presented as soon as a mouse hits a button, then the mouse will begin to associated the button with food. However, if the pellet is presented a day after the mouse hits the button, then the mouse will not come to associate the button with food. The same concept applies to spanking because the side effects arise so long after the spanking and not immediately. One area where reinforcement and punishment contradict is in the area of love and fear. It's hard to love something that you fear. For example, is it possible for you to love a spider if you suffer from arachnophobia? This may be extreme but the point still holds true. This contradiction often leads to the child being confused about their responsibilities. I'll give you a real life example. My mother always conditioned me via reinforcement and negative punishment techniques; my father always conditioned me via positive punishment techniques. Today I am very close with my mother; however, today I don't know wither my father is dead or alive. My father would get me every other weekend (after their divorce) and I recall spending most of the weekend with a headache and nausea because I was so stressed. I was constantly worried if I would do something that would elicit a spanking. This level of stress has detrimental effects on the child as well. In the end, I came to fear my father more than love him.
Now let me venture observational conditioning. When you act, your child sees this and comes to believe it's acceptable behavior. I'm sure all parents at some point have found their child imitating them. Children's brains are primed for imitation. This is how they learn language. No one teaches them to speak, they jus*****ch their parents do it, and they imitate. The same think applies to spanking. When a child sees his parent spanking them, they come to think it is acceptable to hit others. You may say "But my child knows the difference between me spanking them and them hitting someone else." This assumption is not true, however. Here is an example: when a child asks for the first time "What is that?" and you say "It's a dog." Then when the child sees a cat, they may say "Look, a dog!" This is because they know what a dog is, but when they see another four legged furry animal they think it to also be a dog. The same concept applies to spanking. They are unable to reason why there is a difference between you hitting them, and them hitting a kid at school. As a parent, you must understand your child's very limited cognitive ability. Children can understand concrete questions and answers such as "What color is this chair?" - the answer may be "Brown." They cannot understand abstract questions and answers like "What is respect and what does it mean to live respectfully?" Some adult philosophers are still contemplating this question, so how do you expect a child to fully understand it?
Many studies have been conducted on the effects of positive punishment as a conditioning method on children. Some have tried to better understand the child's mind. This is important because if I ask you "What does it mean to be a three year old?" You cannot answer this question objectively. Here is why: though you were once a three year old, you remember nothing from those years. Here's an analogy: let's say you get really drunk at a party one night and a friend teaches you to play poker because you never knew how. The next day, you cannot recall the previous night due to your level of intoxication. My question then is "Do you know how to play poker?" If the knowledge is predicated on the experience, then yes; but if the knowledge is predicated on the memory, then no. What's important to understand is that knowledge is dependent on both the experience and the retention of the experience (memory). So just because you were a three year old once, doesn't mean you know what it means to be a three year old now because you have the experience but not the memory. You can of course imagine what it is like for you to be a three year old, but that's not the question at hand. The question at hand is: what is it for a three year old to be a three year old - a question you cannot answer objectively. So while you may think that your child is learning respect by your methods of positive punishment, I assure you they are not (I explain why in the next paragraph). You may say that your parents spanked you and you turned out ok, but this is more of the exception than the norm. Also you may not actually be as ok as you think. Self-identity is often inaccurate because it is difficult for us to evaluate ourselves objectively.
Now that this metaphysical conundrum has been resolved, I continue with my discussion of the psychology experiments on the effects of spanking children. When a child misbehaves and is spanked, the psychologist would ask the child privately about their thoughts and feelings of the spanking. I assure you not one answered "I now know what it means to be respectful." Common answered included "Mommy doesn't like me anymore" and "I did a bad thing." While the later may be a positive revelation, the former certainly is not. These experiments hold true because it is a three year old commenting on the experience of a three year old, and not an adult commenting on the experience of a three year old. If you decide to try this at home, you must get someone else to question the child and they must not lead the child by saying things such as "Do you feel sad?" but instead leave the questions open for personal expression such as "How do you feel?" In this way, demand characteristics can be eliminated and the integrity of the scientific method upheld. If you don't believe that children have a different and unknowable perspective than adults, let me give you this example: infants in the sensorimotor stage of cognitive development do not posses a quality known as object permanence. If a nine month old is playing with a ball and it rolls under the couch (out of view), they do not go looking for it because they do not understand that it continues to exist even though it cannot be sensed. This is also why infants find "peek-a-boo" so entertaining. The fact that the ball no longer exists may seem absurd to you, but to the child it appears as a necessary truth.
If we accept the premise that hitting someone is not respectable, then isn't if awfully hypocritical of parents how spank to expect respect when they themselves are exhibiting such disrespect? That's no different than a parent telling a child "Do not cuss" only for the parent to then cuss like a sailor. It is best if reinforcement techniques are used from birth. Once the damage of positive punishment has been done, it can be difficult for reinforcement techniques to be effective (but not impossible). Here are some tactics to effectively change a child's behavior without side effects:
*Reinforce an incompatible behavior. For instance, if you're trying to decrease a child's whining, respond to their requests only when they talk in a normal tone of voice.
*Stop reinforcing problem behavior. For instance, if your child is whining and you give in, this simply reinforces whining.
*Reinforce the non-occurrence of problem behavior. For instance, if you're trying to reduce bickering between your children, set an appropriate time limit, and then provide positive reinforcement if they have not bickered during that time interval.
*Remove the opportunity to obtain. For instance, time-out. The time-out begins as soon as the child begins to exhibit undesirable behavior, and ends as soon as the behavior is under control.
*Use induction - a discipline technique that combines parental control with explaining why a behavior is prohibited. Induction enhances the child's ability to reason. This includes:
**The reason for prohibition of behavior (the why behind the what)
**The consequences associated with the behavior.
**The effect of the child's behavior on others and/or themselves.
*Role model
*Use positive and negative reinforcement techniques as primary techniques and negative punishment only if needed, but never positive punishment (spanking).
It's important to not discipline the child upon the debut of a problem behavior because children learn through trial and error. For instance, a child doesn't come out of the womb already knowing how to walk - they learn this through trial and error. Just the same, a child doesn't come out of the womb with a full understanding of ethics. So how can you punish a child if he didn't know the act was wrong? The first time an offense occurs, simply use induction. By disciplining them on the very first occurrence, it deters them from trying got learn via trial and error in the future. Of course, second offenses are grounds for discipline. It's also important to understand that learning takes place over time. Parents often get impatient and resort to positive punishment so they can see immediate results, but the long term benefits outweigh the short term. It's also important to pick your battles because a parent who is too controlling will stifle the child which can lead to lack of trust, autonomy, initiative, attachment, and self-esteem. The primary focus of discipline should always be to effectively condition the child, not to satisfy the parent's ego by exhorting control over an inferior being (this happens more than you'd think). The mark of a superior disciplinary is to implement effective discipline without ever letting the child forget they love them.
There are three primary parenting styles. The first is authoritarian (my father's style) - when the parents are demanding and unresponsive toward their child's needs and desires. This is the worst parenting style and can often end with children becoming moody, irritable, unhappy, fearful, and withdrawn. The second is permissive - where the parents are extremely tolerant and not demanding. They can either be indulgent, where they are more responsive to their child's needs or desires, or indifferent, where they are less responsive to their child's needs or desires. Permissive parenting often leads to immature and impulsive children. The third is authoritative (my mother's style) - where parents set clear standards for their child's behavior and are also responsive to their child's needs and desires. This is the best parenting style and children often end up cheerful, socially competent, energetic, and friendly. Here are some important aspects of a parent:
*Let your child know you love them.
*Listen to your child.
*Work with your child as much as possible as opposed to against them.
*Understand your child's age related cognitive abilities and limitations.
*Don't expect perfection.
There is much more to be said about this issue, but I will end here seeing as all the basics have been covered. Please excuse the lack of flow to this comment; I'm scribbling this comment between my classes.