Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 446 posts

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#71

Post by Mz »

Choice increases the likelihood of compliance. And choice isn't important, it's the appearance of choice.

Oh, ha ha ha. Maybe for some kids, but not for most high IQ kids. They tend to not fall for that, recognize they are being gamed and "what's good for the goose (parent) is good for the gander (offspring)." So let the games begin! Because they will take that and run with it.

That sort of manipulative crap isn't even good parenting. It's a nice trick sometimes, but it is often badly misused by parents who have no real intentions of doing right by their kids and are just trying to figure out what's most convenient for the parent.

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#72

Post by Klinky »

jessriedel wrote: post #57
bmy78 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "tricking", unless you're letting your toddler dictate whether you should leave the house. Toddlers don't have a choice over that; instead, you're giving the toddler a choice appropriate to their level. That helps build their cognitive abilities and takes the focus away from whether they want to leave the house (a choice they shouldn't make), to whether they want the sweater or coat (a choice reasonable for…

You're using a cognitive advantage to distract them from expressing displeasure about something they reasonably don't like. Just because the toddler doesn't have a say over whether you're leaving the house doesn't mean you're not tricking him. If two people are dating, the boyfriend is well within his rights to unilaterally break off the relationship. But if he broached the issue with his girlfriend by saying "Would…

Are you suggesting 4-year-old children are emotionally mature enough to properly express their displeasure with something in a productive manner? Maybe some are, but others are very hair triggered with their emotions and interpret not getting their way as if they were being murdered. Perhaps working around these fatal emotion exceptions is better than running into them every day, at least until the child's brain has had time for a few major revisions.

In your second paragraph, are you suggesting there is no such thing as an amicable breakup? One where exes can still be friends? The "I don't have romantic feelings for you, but would like to remain friends" tactic is quite popular. Obviously the recipient of that message will interpret it in a variety of ways depending on their investment in the relationship. If the person has a negative reaction to it, they likely wouldn't have responded any better to "I am leaving you, goodbye" either.

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#74

Post by tent »

SiVal wrote: post #65
theli0nheart wrote: post #38

> Punishment might make you feel better, but it won’t change the kid’s behavior. Instead, he advocates for a radical technique in which parents positively reinforce the behavior they do want to see until the negative behavior eventually goes away. We adopted a puppy a little more than a year ago and this was the exact advice we were given for how to train her. Puppies and little kids are remarkably similar, and the k…

Punishment might make you feel better, but it won’t change the kid’s behavior. This claim (from the article) is nonsense. I've changed the behavior of my kids countless times with punishment. I realize that the attitude I am supposed to take is that when someone with Ivy League credentials espouses a currently fashionable theory that my own observations contradict, I am supposed to believe the theory and not my own l…

I think the idea isn't so much that punishment doesn't get results, but rather that those results come with side effects. Usually, this is some harboured anger, or avoidance of the parent.

Yes, punishment gets changes behavior, but it's not always a 100% positive change.

It should have been phrased better in the article.

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#75

Post by llukas »

SiVal wrote: post #65
theli0nheart wrote: post #38

> Punishment might make you feel better, but it won’t change the kid’s behavior. Instead, he advocates for a radical technique in which parents positively reinforce the behavior they do want to see until the negative behavior eventually goes away. We adopted a puppy a little more than a year ago and this was the exact advice we were given for how to train her. Puppies and little kids are remarkably similar, and the k…

Punishment might make you feel better, but it won’t change the kid’s behavior. This claim (from the article) is nonsense. I've changed the behavior of my kids countless times with punishment. I realize that the attitude I am supposed to take is that when someone with Ivy League credentials espouses a currently fashionable theory that my own observations contradict, I am supposed to believe the theory and not my own l…

Punishment always changes behavior only when you're looking/enforcing. You'll never know if you police kid enough.

Is that your goal?

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#76

Post by jessriedel »

mhluongo wrote: post #63
jessriedel wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're using a cognitive advantage to distract them from expressing displeasure about something they reasonably don't like. Just because the toddler doesn't have a say over whether you're leaving the house doesn't mean you're not tricking him. If two people are dating, the boyfriend is well within his rights to unilaterally break off the relationship. But if he broached the issue with his girlfriend by saying "Would…

It's clearly not a fair comparison. At some point you need to introduce an age of determination or at least a grade to have a reasonable conversation about the ethics of parenting. Parents are required to do all sorts of things in their kids' best interest that wouldn't otherwise be reasonable / appropriate.

The point of the example was not that it was a perfect analogy, it was merely to rebut the idea that a parent's prerogative to choose destination doesn't mean there's no transgression.

I already addressed the child's-interest defense in another comment. Yes, there are of course cases where parents transgressions may be justified (and required) in order to help the child, but we shouldn't pretend there is no transgression, in particular because we should always try to secure the good outcome for the child without the transgression.

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#77

Post by jessriedel »

Klinky wrote: post #72
jessriedel wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're using a cognitive advantage to distract them from expressing displeasure about something they reasonably don't like. Just because the toddler doesn't have a say over whether you're leaving the house doesn't mean you're not tricking him. If two people are dating, the boyfriend is well within his rights to unilaterally break off the relationship. But if he broached the issue with his girlfriend by saying "Would…

Are you suggesting 4-year-old children are emotionally mature enough to properly express their displeasure with something in a productive manner? Maybe some are, but others are very hair triggered with their emotions and interpret not getting their way as if they were being murdered. Perhaps working around these fatal emotion exceptions is better than running into them every day, at least until the child's brain has…

> Perhaps working around these fatal emotion exceptions is better than running into them every day, at least until the child's brain has had time for a few major revisions.

Perhaps. Parenting is complicated. But we shouldn't pretend it's not a trick, and that we aren't doing something the child may rightfully resent.

> In your second paragraph, are you suggesting...

No.

> If the person has a negative reaction to it, they likely wouldn't have responded any better to "I am leaving you, goodbye" either.

The point of being honest is not necessarily because it secures the best response.

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#78

Post by icebraining »

codingdave wrote: post #49
icebraining wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"According to the Department of Education, over 166,000 students in public schools were physically punished during the 2011–2012 school year." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_corporal_punishment_in_...

While that is a large number, it is less than a half of a percent of the entire student body of the USA. As I said, it happens. But isn't the norm. Also, If you are going to cherry pick quotes, try the last 3 paragraphs of the Overview section, which talk about how it is not widely accepted, and the efforts to outlaw it. Or, just this one: "Most urban public school systems, even in states where it is permitted, have…

I'm not cherry-picking, I'm highlighting, but leaving the link so that people can judge for themselves.

I mostly made the reply because your post implied that it was something that a few rogue teachers did (as it inevitably happens in any country), especially to people not used to a decentralized schooling system.

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#79

Post by andrewfromx »

WWLink wrote: post #69
andrewfromx wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

haha exactly. I love when really smart people write articles about dealing with children and then you discover they are non-parents themselves. Or, they are work-a-aholics and never interact with their own kids 24/7 like full time parents do.

I get the impression most of the people on this site are workaholics.

sure, musk has 5 kids! how much time does he get with them vs. work I wonder.

Re: No Spanking, No Time-Out, No Problems

#80

Post by wyager »

dang wrote: post #55

(Edit: I'm detaching this from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13101402 and marking it off-topic. That example wasn't a clear enough one to make the point about, because the commenter wasn't being snarky or doing anything particularly wrong. Maybe next time it comes up more clearly I'll try again.) I know it's nitpicky, but please don't use quotation marks when you're not actually quoting someone, and especially…

How else are you supposed to indicate that you're rephrasing something someone else said? It's generally pretty clear when something is an actual quote, and putting the quote in italics makes it very clear that it was not actually said.
Post reply on HN