Why do some people support harsh punishment for kids?

I was browsing the Social Studies forum on the Snopes messageboard and discovered a number of news stories about parents who disciplined their children in very unusual (and IMO harsh) ways. Such as that Ohio woman who posted a humiliating photo of her daughter on Facebook for commenting on her (the mother's) driving to her friends. What I found very unusual about these sorts of stories was all the comments supporting the parents who did these sorts of things.

It made me think of this old song about flogging: Old Time Cat O'Nine But then, that song was written by someone who grew up in the 20s. Why does everyone think this happens? It's really weird that there are apparently some people in the 21st century who share this attitude. And apparently not all of them are older people. (It just seemed to me from what I read that there were heaps of people who had this same attitude: "Bring back the cat-o'nine-tails/ the stocks/corporal punishment in school and that'll keep kids in line.") BTW, this thread is not about political debates over spanking or the rightness of some discipline methods, so try not to derail it into that.

edited 14th Sep '12 10:01:13 AM by BestOf

Because its Old School and traditional?

It wouldn't have been passed down through the years if it wasn't effective.

Great... binding feet was old school... and effective (for the culture of the time, from a certain point of view and with a lot of cultural expectations of successful femininity). Didn't make it either ethical or a good idea in the longer term or for individual's health. Or right.

edited 14th Sep '12 11:20:38 AM by DrunkGirlfriend

So in other words the reason is Appeal to Tradition?

Eh? I wasn't aware that foot-binding was a discipline method... <slightly confused>

Also, old school styles of education sometimes only seemed to work... as they were the only things used for ages.

That was kind of my point. I going for "tradition for tradition's sake tends to pass along bad as well as good things".

These comments could be representing a Vocal Minority. For instance, I personally wouldn't seek out a story about a mother humiliating her daughter on Facebook. If I stumbled on such a story, I'd probably think "Christ" and move on. I know that's anecdotal, and I'm not saying that's the reason. Just offering a possible explanation.

edited 14th Sep '12 1:21:01 PM by AnEditor

Are you kidding me? Punishment is there because of mistakes. The harsh punishments are there because you have to give them at the right time, to make sure people grow up right. Just check out what Russell Peters has to say about beating kids.

I'm not telling you to support the harshness, but instead I'm telling you to start effectively punish your kids when conditions are met.

Honestly, harsh punishments could probably be very effective as a means of discipline, if only the people who gave them were any good at it. Punishing inconsistently or arbitrarily (ie: sometimes forgive them, sometimes give large punishments for small offenses, etc), will just teach the kids that they have no control over their lives and that what they do doesn't matter. Or that what they can get away with depends on their parent's mood. Which obviously isn't very helpful to anyone.

...you could probably ask dog trainers for good advice on the subject.

edited 14th Sep '12 4:07:08 PM by Clarste

Honestly though, I'm curious why stuff like this◊ counts as harsh punishment.

OP: ... Then again, you have people responding to the article without reading it, or completely forgetting what school was like.

The thing is, if I ever have kids I'm not going to be doing what the parents in the news stories say. (Well, I hope not.) And that's why I'm never having kids. (And I've heard the "you''ll change your mind" stuff over and over again)

edited 14th Sep '12 4:31:43 PM by MorwenEdhelwen

But I thought that was absolutely true?

@Clarste: I'd tend to agree. Harsh punishments can work, but only when they are fairly and justly applied...and a thorough explanation to the person being punished as to why what is happening to them is necessary.

Without those two things, you end up with a situation like the one you described. At that point, the person being punished does not grow stronger...they grow weaker.

There's three kinds of people as I see it; those who went through a harsh but fair system of justice, learned better and think the system works, those who went through an unfair system and are convinced that its just legitimized abuse and those cowardly slackers who can't deal with anything that hurts.

Since there are more of the last two than the first one, that's why harsh punishment is going out of favor. Jury's out on whether this is a good thing or not.

edited 14th Sep '12 6:23:08 PM by drunkscriblerian

I went through a pretty unfair system (if you were honestly having problems, you'd be more likely to be set cleaning drains for detention, rather than being asked what was actually wrong). However, I can see the sense in having some discipline in schools and the home. As long as it's fair.

And, warning signs are given a way to be be picked up. Like, for instance, multiple detentions and/or an overly passive-aggressive mindset in a pupil (complete with odd bruising) sounding alarm-bells, rather than being dismissed as "problem kid... here, have another half-term's worth of sanding desks or a caning to get you out of your lazy mind-set".

PS — That possible abuse case wasn't me... but another person in my class. Who wound up in detention about as often as I did, with my undiagnosed problem.

edited 14th Sep '12 7:21:49 PM by Euodiachloris

@Euo: Agreed in that any system of justice needs to differentiate between those with legitimate problems holding them back and those that are just not trying hard enough/need a bit more discipline. How that balance needs to be struck is a thorny, three-dimensional problem.

depends on the "harsh" you mean. Something that really hurt someone physically or emotionally is bad, simple as that. but thing like grounding them a kid for a while, taking their computer, ect. are effective generally. And, personally, I'm not against a crack on the mouth once in a while for back talk, ect.. That's basically how I was raised and with hindsight, it worked pretty well.

would you have minded if your parents made you carry a sign?

@Joe: good point. the definition of "harsh" has kind of undergone a change in the last few decades.

Example: I was part of what is probably the last generation of kids to go through school-sanctioned corporal punishment in America. I remember the days when it was okay for the teacher to summon you to the head of the class and smack your wrist with a ruler when you acted out of line.

My recollection; it wasn't really that painful, but it was humiliating. And the humiliation was worse than the pain.

I'm of two minds on corporal punishment, really. On the one hand, it works great for some people. On the other hand it breeds a sense of victimization in some few who go through it. I'll be honest in that I'm not sure what the difference is.

edited 14th Sep '12 7:33:57 PM by drunkscriblerian

@Morwen: Er, yes? That's the entire point of punishment?

The funny thing about this is, "Harsh Punishment" styles and less harsh styles probably both work.

Historically, we have exampls like the Spartans who treated their kids in ways that would not be legal in most places in the world today.

In comparison to a Spartan childhood, most other kids had it easy.

The end result though, is still what worked for whatever culture that used these styles. If it didn't, the culture would have collapsed from the dysfunctional kids that were the next generation.

Its probably a testament to the adaptability of the human animal/culture that it can function with varrying styles/conditions.

Well, the thing is when I told my mum about this she was shocked.

Well the thing is that a mom posting an embarassing photo of her daughter on Facebook as punishment for her daughter criticizing her driving to her friends reeks of revenge, not punishment.

A kid holding a sign that says he's sorry for throwing snowballs at cars seems like an actual punishment because throwing snowballs at cars can be dangerous.

And also, forcing your kid to announce something that they actually did is different to just a random humiliation, in my opinion. I mean - presumably that kid did throw snowballs at cars. If he/she is ashamed to have people know that then they shouldn't have done it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Spartans kill the babies they deemed unfit?

edited 14th Sep '12 7:52:05 PM by DeviantBraeburn