"Parenting Without Punishing"

Chris · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 106

http://www.nopunish.net/PWP.pdf
http://www.nopunish.net/pwp-ch1.htm

Archived from group: alt>parenting>spanking

Doan · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1571

On 15 Jun 2004, Chris wrote:

> http://www.nopunish.net/PWP.pdf
> http://www.nopunish.net/pwp-ch1.htm
>
>
Great! Then let's ban ALL forms of punishment. Come on, Chris. Why
don't you and Kane0 go down to the local juvenile hall and proclaim
loudy in a Reaganish way: "...tear down this wall"? Smile

Doan

Nathan A. Barclay · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 175

The way I view it, there are two key issues that need to be considered in
regard to the views expressed by this article (and in regard to Steve's
somewhat similar views):

1) How consistently do purely non-punitive approaches work? The fact that
some parents have marvelous success without needing to use punishment and
write articles about their success in no way implies that all parents who
use those methods would have similar success - and especially does not imply
that parents forced into using such methods without being truly committed to
them the way the author was would have similar success. What the article
provides in regard to evidence in success is purely anecdotal in nature.
Frankly, I view it as hypocritical for Chris to resoundingly vilify
anecdotal evidence when used by people who support spanking (as he certainly
did in past times when I was active on alt.parenting.spanking) yet accept
anecdotal evidence in support of non-punitive parenting methods essentially
without question.

I would not be surprised if the methods the author used would have a high
success rate for parents who consistently put in the time and energy to make
them work. But we don't really know how high, and unless the success rate
is one hundred percent, that still leaves the question of what to do in
cases where they fail. Further, the question of what about parents who
don't invest a similar amount of time and energy remains.

2) How much should society demand from parents? There are limits to how
much freedom children can be given without giving children the power to take
away their parents' freedom. With young children, parents cannot go
somewhere and leave the children at home. With children of any age, it is
usually impractical if not outright impossible for parents to come home from
a place they go with their children without bringing their children home
with them (although sometimes it's practical for the kids to get a ride with
someone else). And there are things that it is dangerous for children to do
without a parent there to supervise.

If parents WANT to give up the amount of freedom they have to in order never
to coerce their children, that is one thing. I admire parents who are
willing to go so far out of their way to put their children's interests
ahead of their own. But in my view, trying to FORCE parents to give up the
amount of freedom that they would have to in order to avoid ever coercing
their children is another matter entirely.

In regard to what is fair, keep in mind that adults do not generally have
the power to coerce other adults merely by refusing to cooperate. An adult
cannot say with his actions, "I'm not going, so you can't go either," or,
"I'm staying, so you have to stay too." An adult can't say, "I'm going to
do this, so you have to supervise me." But because of the special
responsibility that parents have toward their children, children can say
those things to their parents merely by choosing not to cooperate.

Unlike Steve, I view life as an opportunity, not a burden. And I don't
think that parents' having the power to choose when to put their own desires
first and when to put their children's first in regard to such issues is an
unreasonable price for children to pay for that opportunity. That certainly
does not mean that I view it as appropriate for parents to order their
children around without even trying to ask nicely, nor does it mean that I
have any respect for parents who almost always put their own interests ahead
of their children's. But I'm not going to condemn people as bad parents
just because they decide to put their own desires' ahead of their children's
at times - even if it means that they sometimes have to coerce their
children rather than allowing their children to coerce them.

Nathan

"Doan" wrote in message@skat.usc.edu...
>
>
> On 15 Jun 2004, Chris wrote:
>
> > http://www.nopunish.net/PWP.pdf
> > http://www.nopunish.net/pwp-ch1.htm
> >
> >
> Great! Then let's ban ALL forms of punishment. Come on, Chris. Why
> don't you and Kane0 go down to the local juvenile hall and proclaim
> loudy in a Reaganish way: "...tear down this wall"? Smile

>
> Doan
>
>

dragonlady · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 2193

In article ,
"R. Steve Walz" wrote:

> Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
> >
> > The way I view it, there are two key issues that need to be considered in
> > regard to the views expressed by this article (and in regard to Steve's
> > somewhat similar views):
> >
> > 1) How consistently do purely non-punitive approaches work?
> --------------
> For NON-criminal rebellious acts, they do NOT work, they will NEVER
> work! You will ALWAYS do NOTHING but create hatred and vengeance
> with them!!
>
>

Steve, you've got to calm down and read more carefully.

Do you REALLY want to say that non-punitive approaches never work --
that the only thing that works is punishment?
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care

R. Steve Walz · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1906

dragonlady wrote:
>
> In article ,
> "R. Steve Walz" wrote:
>
> > Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
> > >
> > > The way I view it, there are two key issues that need to be considered in
> > > regard to the views expressed by this article (and in regard to Steve's
> > > somewhat similar views):
> > >
> > > 1) How consistently do purely non-punitive approaches work?
> > --------------
> > For NON-criminal rebellious acts, they do NOT work, they will NEVER
> > work! You will ALWAYS do NOTHING but create hatred and vengeance
> > with them!!
> >
> >
>
> Steve, you've got to calm down and read more carefully.
>
> Do you REALLY want to say that non-punitive approaches never work --
> that the only thing that works is punishment?
----------------------
Ooops! Reverse that!
Steve ;->

Ironfist5687 · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 13

>Steve, you've got to calm down and read more carefully.
>
>Do you REALLY want to say that non-punitive approaches never work --
>that the only thing that works is punishment?

Please just put the nazi on filter and ignore him. He will go away.

Kurt

Doan · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1571

On 16 Jun 2004, Kane wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Doan"
> Newsgroups: alt.parenting.spanking,alt.parenting.solutions,misc.kids,alt.activism.children
> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 3:18 PM
> Subject: Re: "Parenting Without Punishing"
>
>
> >
> > I wouldn't this far.
>
>
> Parent without using punishment? We know. You don't have the capacity.
> Many have it and use it. Some got it the hard way, but thinking and
> learning.
>
So where are they? How have their children faired? Did they grow up to
be a Mother Theresa? A Ted Turner? Or do they grow up to be like you
and Steve ? Wink

Doan

Nathan A. Barclay · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 175

"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message@armory.com...
> Nathan A. Barclay wrote:

> > I have very little idea of how reliably purely non-punitive parenting
> > techniques really work, and while people like Chris, Steve, and the
> > article's author would LIKE to believe that such techniques would
> > always work, they do not seem to be able to provide any solid
> > evidence.
> -------------------
> Just because we're WHOLLY UN-interested in the idiotic "cite-wars"
> that happen, when neurotic religiously-tortured morally-offended
> Right-wingnuts try to deluge this thread with their phony X-spurt
> website cut-n-pasties in response to our voluminous peer-reviewed
> journals that anyone CAN read if they want to,

Steve, I find it insulting that you simply assume I would do that sort of
thing. I know the difference between opinion and evidence, and I have no
interest in quoting opinions as if they were evidence. Doing so would only
hurt my credibility, which I place a high value on.

> does NOT support
> YOUR moronic accusation that "they do not seem to be able to provide
> any solid evidence." In fact the reverse is true, by factors of ten
> to one or MORE!! Go ask all the child development authorities you
> want, and write down their opinions, and then let those stand as
> a vote for which is the Truth, if you're stupid enough to need that!

Scientific truth is not determined by majority vote. It is determined by
the proper use of scientific methodologies and ONLY by the proper use of
scientific methodologies. If scientists express opinions that go beyond
what the methodologies they use can support, those opinions are merely
PERSONAL opinions, not science.

In the past, Chris suggested a few studies for me to read. However, from
what I recall, those studies were always in terms of whether or not childen
were spanked (or, in some cases, whether or not they were spanked within a
prticular timeframe). As best I recall, none of them separated out a group
in which no punishment of any kind was used, or in which punishment was used
only in regard to situations in which the children's behavior would be a
crime for adults. Therefore, the results of those studies provide no
scientific basis for evaluating the results parents get from using purely
non-punitive techniques.

If you are aware of any studies that looked specifically at parents who
never punished at all, or who never punished except when the children's
behavior would be considered a crime in adults, or some such, I would
probably find it interesting to look at. (Although in order to constitute
legitimate science, the study would also have to deal with the issue of
parents who started off using purely non-punitive techniques, did not like
their results, and started punishing at least occasionally. Showing that
parents who like a technique's results well enough to stick with it tend to
have good results is great for showing that it can work, but does not give a
clear indication of how reliably it works.) If you do not have such
evidence, then you can say only that the opinions of some number of
scientists support your views, not that science supports them.

If you refuse to provide any such evidence, I must make at least a tentative
assumption that you do not have any. Certainly, I will not accept claims
that you have valid scientific evidence as legitimate if you refuse to
present the evidence or indicate what it is.

> > My own view is that parents should try to make non-punitive techniques
work
> > as much as they reasonably can, because to whatever extent they do work,
> > they help children think like adults who do what is right because it is
> > right instead of like children who do what is right only because they
are
> > afraid of getting in trouble if they don't. At worst, the number of
> > situations where the parents will feel a need to punish is likely to be
a
> > lot smaller than if they relied primarily on punishment to correct their
> > children's behavior. And at best, they might always be able to get
their
> > children to behave well enough that the parents can live with their
> > children's occasional imperfections without feeling a need to resort to
> > punishment.
> --------------
> anyone can see that you tried to excuse some amount of punishment:

Good. Then I made myself reasonably clear.

Doan · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1571

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004, toto wrote:

> On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:43:12 -0500, "Donna Metler"
> wrote:
>
> >You see, "teaching without punishing" has been pushed down the throats of
> >the educational system for more than a decade (I've been teaching that
> >long).
>
> No, actually, what has been pushed is *not* teaching without
> punishing, though teaching without corporal punishment has been
> pushed in 27 states for more than a decade.
>
> Using different punishments like detentions and bad grades is still
> punitive. And what has been pushed is using material rewards like
> stickers and bribes which is the other side of the control coin. It
> works just as poorly.
>
Actually, they are pushing the "no-punishment" agenda. They are calling
it "consequences" now. Smile

Doan

toto · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 2581

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:43:12 -0500, "Donna Metler"
wrote:

>You see, "teaching without punishing" has been pushed down the throats of
>the educational system for more than a decade (I've been teaching that
>long).

No, actually, what has been pushed is *not* teaching without
punishing, though teaching without corporal punishment has been
pushed in 27 states for more than a decade.

Using different punishments like detentions and bad grades is still
punitive. And what has been pushed is using material rewards like
stickers and bribes which is the other side of the control coin. It
works just as poorly.

--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

Doan · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 1571

On 17 Jun 2004, Chris wrote:

> In alt.parenting.spanking Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
> : "R. Steve Walz" wrote:
>
> :> All you're doing is trying to make any "success" look FUZZY as to
> :> cause, so that you can retain your favorite little sick compulsion!
>
> : What I am trying to do is draw a distinction between evidence that meets
> : scientific criteria and evidence that does not.
>
> This brings us right back to our aborted, unfinished debate of 2001,
> Nathan; aborted because you disappeared and days later said you "didn't
> have time" to debate about the scientific studies on spanking.
>
> You did your best to discredit the available evidence linking spanking
> to a wide variety of negative long term effects on children. When you
> disappeared was after I invited you to now produce evidence of equal rigor
> in support of your own position, adding that I would of course expect your
> evidence to meet all of the same standards you had recently demanded of
> evidence cited by me.
>
> Three years later, I ask you again: where is your scientific evidence
> of measurable long term benefit to children from spanking? If you have
> none, please signify by ignoring this question, or perhaps by vanishing
> again.
>
> Chris
>
LOL! The burden of proof is on you, Chris! Where is your scientific
evidence of measureable long term benefit from non-cp alternatives?
Nathan was trying to discuss the Straus & Mouradian (1998) just a
couple of days ago. I DID NOT SEE any response from you!

Doan

Donna Metler · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 231

"toto" wrote in message@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 09:43:12 -0500, "Donna Metler"
> wrote:
>
> >You see, "teaching without punishing" has been pushed down the throats of
> >the educational system for more than a decade (I've been teaching that
> >long).
>
> No, actually, what has been pushed is *not* teaching without
> punishing, though teaching without corporal punishment has been
> pushed in 27 states for more than a decade.
>
> Using different punishments like detentions and bad grades is still
> punitive. And what has been pushed is using material rewards like
> stickers and bribes which is the other side of the control coin. It
> works just as poorly.
>
Detention isn't allowed in my school-too many parents don't want it. IN
general, just about everything which could be deemed "punitive" has been
disallowed. A teacher in my school was given a formal reprimand just for
requiring that students clean up a mess that they had made-because it was
"humiliating" for the students.

And teachers are told not to use rewards because it "ruins intrinsic
motivation".

>
>
> --
> Dorothy
>
> There is no sound, no cry in all the world
> that can be heard unless someone listens ..
>
> The Outer Limits

Chris · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 106

In alt.parenting.spanking Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
: "R. Steve Walz" wrote:

:> All you're doing is trying to make any "success" look FUZZY as to
:> cause, so that you can retain your favorite little sick compulsion!

: What I am trying to do is draw a distinction between evidence that meets
: scientific criteria and evidence that does not.

This brings us right back to our aborted, unfinished debate of 2001,
Nathan; aborted because you disappeared and days later said you "didn't
have time" to debate about the scientific studies on spanking.

You did your best to discredit the available evidence linking spanking
to a wide variety of negative long term effects on children. When you
disappeared was after I invited you to now produce evidence of equal rigor
in support of your own position, adding that I would of course expect your
evidence to meet all of the same standards you had recently demanded of
evidence cited by me.

Three years later, I ask you again: where is your scientific evidence
of measurable long term benefit to children from spanking? If you have
none, please signify by ignoring this question, or perhaps by vanishing
again.

Chris

toto · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 2581

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 15:36:58 -0500, "Donna Metler"
wrote:

>Detention isn't allowed in my school-too many parents don't want it. IN
>general, just about everything which could be deemed "punitive" has been
>disallowed. A teacher in my school was given a formal reprimand just for
>requiring that students clean up a mess that they had made-because it was
>"humiliating" for the students.
>
>And teachers are told not to use rewards because it "ruins intrinsic
>motivation".
>
That's quite unusual.

Is there a plan in place to encourage self-discipline in the students?
You have to have a school wide plan that encourages kids if you want
to eliminate behaviorist techniques.

--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

toto · Joined: 15 Aug 2007 Posts: 2581

On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 15:36:58 -0500, "Donna Metler"
wrote:

>And teachers are told not to use rewards because it "ruins intrinsic
>motivation".

So there are no grades then? No report cards?

--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits