.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Bully Pulpit

The term "bully pulpit" stems from President Theodore Roosevelt's reference to the White House as a "bully pulpit," meaning a terrific platform from which to persuasively advocate an agenda. Roosevelt often used the word "bully" as an adjective meaning superb/wonderful. The Bully Pulpit features news, reasoned discourse, opinion and some humor.

Tuesday, November 14, 2006

RE: N.C. court approves child spanking

I'm certainly not a “child expert,” so I'd never give another parent my opinion on how they should discipline their child (and, if they begged me, I’d share only with great reluctance); if there's one thing parents generally don't appreciate, it's unsolicited advice on how to raise their kids.

But since I am a parent, in the spirit of "sharing" here on the ol' BP, I feel comfortable saying that there are many ways to discipline a child responsibly, effectively, and - yes - lovingly. And sure, corporal punishment can be administered within that realm. As a child, I remember getting only a few "real" spankings, and those I received served as a constant reminder of why I should avoid future ones. I never remember the spankings being especially painful; they mostly just hurt my pride and my feelings and, in the build-up to the "moment," I used my little kid brain to think pretty hard about what it was that I did to deserve a spanking. And, as a result, the measure of discipline worked as intended.

If a child can be effectively disciplined without being hit, then I would imagine that most reasonable parents would prefer to do so. Reasonable people do not value physical force over mental force.

Further, if you must constantly spank your child... well, it isn't really working, is it? Not only are they not learning to behave from the threat of being hit, but they may even be tolerating the experience simply for the attention. And that can open a whole 'nother can of dysfunction.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home