Philosophy Now Forum

The Voice of Time wrote:Well that's a matter of opinion x)

It's not unusual for women in Norway to get back to work quite early, but I'm not sure how early. I just know that it's been quite a big political cause of my political party, and Trondheim the municipality I live in now has gone through with it: that all children aged 1 should be able to attend kindergarten. Presumably so that the women can work, since the mothers don't go to kindergarten WITH their child.

But that can be a difference in either local or national cultures.

No, it's not. Someone has to look after a baby 24/7, whether it's the mother or some random stranger in a day-care centre. By 'work' I presume you mean worke elsewhere, away from their baby.

Yes. So they go to work while somebody takes care of the child in kindergarten.

The Voice of Time wrote:Yes. So they go to work while somebody takes care of the child in kindergarten.

Right, because being a mother isn't work at all. It's just doing nothing.

cladking wrote:Most children rarely need punishment. Starting at a very young age they need to learn the meaning of the word "no" and this will involve an unpleasant rap and saying "no" firmly. It is absolutely critical that you never rescind a punishment or allow the behavior to continue early in this training. Once a child knows "no" then simply saying the word is usually sufficient. When they get about two or three years old they'll probably ask you not to rap or spank them any more. Just make a bargain that you never will again providing they accept another punishment. In my opinion this new punishment should just bwe sufficient to get their attention and get them to modify their behavior, ie- a short time out or being sent to their room.

My experience is limited to some naturally good kids and some will, no doubt, need a firmer hand or additional correction. The biggest thing is to not relent so don't punish unless you're willing to follow through. They must learn that no always means no and that it's never "cute" to misbehave. This doesn't mean they have to be "whupped" each time they misbehave but that they must change their behavior when you say no. Kids learn from example so try to set a good example and try to let them do anything they want within the boundaries you set.

This works in my experience.

Cladking;

All good advice, but I would add one thing to it, and that is atonement. When a child does something bad enough to warrant physical punishment, many children need a way to come back to neutral. Whether it is forgiveness, after they understand the wrongness of their activity, or if it is making amends, such as paying for the neighbor's shattered window, some children need help dealing with the aftermath of their mistakes. I found that the older my children got, the more likely they would need help putting their mistakes behind them.

Gee

Gee wrote:
All good advice, but I would add one thing to it, and that is atonement. When a child does something bad enough to warrant physical punishment, many children need a way to come back to neutral. Whether it is forgiveness, after they understand the wrongness of their activity, or if it is making amends, such as paying for the neighbor's shattered window, some children need help dealing with the aftermath of their mistakes. I found that the older my children got, the more likely they would need help putting their mistakes behind them.

As a kid gets older their mistakes tend to get bigger. This is why setting boundaries is so important; it helps reduce the frequency and severity of mistakes.

I have noticed that some children raised this way have a difficult time dealing with their mistakes and shortcomings. Perhaps if your advice had been implemented this might have mitigated this problem. Perhaps dumping so much responsibility on the child would work even better if you notice when they are having difficulty dealing with their mistakes and you take more time to reassure them that no one is perfect.

It is possible, probably, to give kids too much freedom and responsibility. Even if they can shoulder it they are still children. Everyone needs to fit not only in the world but in society as well.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:I've never heard of anyone slapping a baby on the cheek to wake it or get it to feed.

I am going to assume, because of your above statement, that you either have never nursed a baby, or that you were extremely lucky. And it is more like tapping or patting than it is slapping, although sometimes it becomes necessary to get a little more aggressive.

Babies, just like people, come with an assortment of personalities. Sometimes you will get a baby that will nurse until s/he is full and then fall asleep. But sometimes you will get a baby that will nurse for 30 seconds, then fall asleep. In ten minutes it will again want to nurse for 30 seconds and fall back asleep. This type of baby is referred to as a lazy nurser and will be happy to use mom like she is a pacifier for 24/7.

Problems arise with this type of nursing baby because the nipples never get a break so they get tender very quickly. It is also a little difficult for mom to wash clothes, cook food for herself, and take a bath with baby permanently attached -- and this is assuming that she does not have other children to care for.

The nursing societies and all the best books recommend tapping or patting the baby's mouth or cheek to stimulate the nursing reflex, but to be very frank, I have seen babies that can be turned upside down and held by their feet without waking. You can't shake them, "shaken baby syndrome", you can't frighten them by yelling, you can't smack them, and I don't recommend letting them cry until they are hungry enough to eat. Sometimes tickling their feet works to wake them up. Babies like this try the patience of their mothers, but it is imperative that you get the nursing sessions at least two hours apart, gradually stretching it to four hours apart.

In the US, there is an abundance of ignorance regarding a nursing mother, so there is very little support for nursing mothers -- not like the old days.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:I've also never heard of a baby starving to death because it was left alone to sleep and wake up in its own time.

The fact that you have never heard of it does not prohibit it from happening. One of the tests for a newborn before it is released from the hospital is a test of the suckling reflex to see if it is normal.

Are you saying that you have never heard of SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome)? A co-worker of my mother's, who was also a nurse, was sitting in a rocking chair rocking her baby when the infant quit breathing. Although she was a nurse, she could not get the baby to breath again. The infant died and the cause of death was SIDS.

On the other hand, a friend of mine's mother relates this story. My friend was a newborn in the hospital nursery when she quit breathing. A very experienced nurse saw it happen, picked up the infant by the arm and shoulder, flipped the infant over and slammed it back down on the bed. The shock caused the baby to take a breath and scream -- saving it's life. Maybe the nurse in the rocking chair should have smacked her baby -- hard -- as soon as the baby quit breathing. Talk about your child abuse!

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:I also wouldn't be so sure a four month old doesn't know what you are saying. They are extremely clever little creatures.

Maybe so, but a four month old does not even know that it is no longer part of it's mother. It will not discover that it is a separate being until around 6 to 9 months old.

Gee

'Never nursed a baby'. Have you? I assume you mean 'breast-fed'. I also don't see what any of those 'techniques' you describe have to do with 'disciplining' a child.

Well that's been an interesting read. I've learnt that the man against smacking a nappy clad bum is not against pinching a baby on the lip. Like all humans, lips contain a significant number of nerve endings. Can't help but wonder what the psych effects of that particular discipline would have on the infant when it comes to using hand to mouth exploration? I also wonder at what pressure one should apply to the pinch in order to effect the desired effect? Given those nerve endings and the delicate nature of an infants the skin... it can't be very much pressure at all as blood would rise quickly to the 'disciplined' area. And how can he know that the child is making the correct connection between the need to end the undesirable behavior and the lip 'pinched' which isn't a pinch really but a pressure squeeze to the lip.

I also note that this same man who spoke eloquently on nature of respect has no probs telling other forum members that they, their understanding or their comments are stupid? Is this an example of his push to be respected perchance? Is this how he would speak to his children... name calling?

It raises the question of whether adults should speak to children in the same way as they speak to themselves. Certainly if they did... I suspect that there would be a lot less dissin' going on in these forums.

Something that hasn't been considered is that of those who have been raised with a spanking hand, belt, whip etc. and whether they are psych disturbed by it. Note: this is not about whether children abused have psych effects... we know the answer is yes... no this is about corporeal punishment metered out in a controlled way that does not engage anger.

I didn't suffer for it.

I've never heard of a parent hitting their child when they aren't angry. To me, hitting a child in a cold and calculated way, without any anger, is just plain creepy. I don't believe in smacking at all, but I do realise that a parent might lash out in anger and frustration if they don't have the skills to control it.

Gee wrote:.. it is imperative that you get the nursing sessions at least two hours apart, gradually stretching it to four hours apart.

So you haven't breast-fed then, or was it 50 years ago? That is such an old-fashioned idea.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

Gee wrote:.. it is imperative that you get the nursing sessions at least two hours apart, gradually stretching it to four hours apart.

So you haven't breast-fed then, or was it 50 years ago? That is such an old-fashioned idea.

Last I heard, it's the preferred method in the medical community. Here's a link: http://www.m.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/nursing-basics

PhilX

Philosophy Explorer wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:

Gee wrote:.. it is imperative that you get the nursing sessions at least two hours apart, gradually stretching it to four hours apart.

So you haven't breast-fed then, or was it 50 years ago? That is such an old-fashioned idea.

Last I heard, it's the preferred method in the medical community. Here's a link: http://www.m.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/nursing-basics

PhilX

I wasn't saying breasfeeding is an old-fashioned idea. I was referring to the set time span between feeds. Of course it's best to breast-feed. We are mammals.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:I've never heard of a parent hitting their child when they aren't angry. To me, hitting a child in a cold and calculated way, without any anger, is just plain creepy. I don't believe in smacking at all, but I do realise that a parent might lash out in anger and frustration if they don't have the skills to control it.

Not creepy at all. An example for you. I did a cruel thing to my older brother when I was young. I rallied our street friends and had him ticked until he peed himself. He ran inside crying and told Mum.

Dad came outside and summoned me in. Both Mum and Dad was furious and told me as much. Should have seen the anger on their faces... pure rage. How dare I denigrate and humiliate my brother like that! They then told me that I was going to get the strap for that.. the strap being an old leather belt they used as punishment... and that I was to go to my room and await that punishment.

About 5 mins latter, after she had calmed down, my Mum came in with her poker face masking her emotions (I learnt later that she loathed strapping us kids hence the poker face as pity has no place within discipline) and told me to put my hand out and and then received three straps on the palm of my hand.

I never humiliated or denigrated my brother again. I was 7 and he was 10.

In the course of my parents learning how and why I rallied the troops to tickle my brother... with the intent of humiliating him as I knew his inclination to pee himself when ticked... I learnt from my parents that the kids did my bidding because of my natural inclination to take the lead and that my use of my leadership skills was an abuse of that power... not only because of what my brother suffered, but because I had used otherwise good children to do bad things.

I deserved that discipline and it achieved the desired goal without any negative psych impacts.

To reiterate... there was nothing creep about it. It was discipline pure and simple.

My parents rarely used the strap btw except for exceptionally bad behavior.

Sappho de Miranda wrote:

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:I've never heard of a parent hitting their child when they aren't angry. To me, hitting a child in a cold and calculated way, without any anger, is just plain creepy. I don't believe in smacking at all, but I do realise that a parent might lash out in anger and frustration if they don't have the skills to control it.

Not creepy at all. An example for you. I did a cruel thing to my older brother when I was young. I rallied our street friends and had him ticked until he peed himself. He ran inside crying and told Mum.

Dad came outside and summoned me in. Both Mum and Dad was furious and told me as much. Should have seen the anger on their faces... pure rage. How dare I denigrate and humiliate my brother like that! They then told me that I was going to get the strap for that.. the strap being an old leather belt they used as punishment... and that I was to go to my room and await that punishment.

About 5 mins latter, after she had calmed down, my Mum came in with her poker face masking her emotions (I learnt later that she loathed strapping us kids hence the poker face as pity has no place within discipline) and told me to put my hand out and and then received three straps on the palm of my hand.

I never humiliated or denigrated my brother again. I was 7 and he was 10.

In the course of my parents learning how and why I rallied the troops to tickle my brother... with the intent of humiliating him as I knew his inclination to pee himself when ticked... I learnt from my parents that the kids did my bidding because of my natural inclination to take the lead and that my use of my leadership skills was an abuse of that power... not only because of what my brother suffered, but because I had used otherwise good children to do bad things.

I deserved that discipline and it achieved the desired goal without any negative psych impacts.

To reiterate... there was nothing creep about it. It was discipline pure and simple.

My parents rarely used the strap btw except for exceptionally bad behavior.

It does sound like you deserved it. But for every child who deserves it there are many who don't, which is probably why it's been out-lawed here. Lot's of adults deserve a good walloping, but it's just not allowed.

Veg,

You have a short-term memory. Here's exactly what you said:

"That is such an old-fashioned idea."

Care to rephrase?

PhilX