The recent study to have caused a stir is the Corporal Punishment for Children issue; should kids be 'smacked' when they transgress?
This issue is as muddy as hell but most proponents in the 'non-smacking' camp seem to think that by denying the child something they like to do is the answer. If 'smacking' (as opposed to outright beating) is considered physical abuse then isn't denying the child the opportunity to do something they like emotional abuse (emotional blackmail)? Why is that considered BETTER than smacking? Because it isn't visible?
I don't claim to know what the answer is, but there is little chance of children's behaviour improving when adults behaviour is so poor. All that lying, cheating, backstabbing corruption, etc that is condoned at ALL levels of society and indeed encouraged (think of Reality TV where the best 'backstabber' wins a million dollars; think the political arena where the best 'talker' [regardless of their REAL ideals] is promoted to the higher political ranks). These are the examples we set for children. WAKE-UP people, your children are largely shaped by society and it's doings.
Think about that the next time you hurry through dinner or rush home so you don't miss any of 'Survivor' or 'Big-Brother'. Are your children seeing your eagerness to watch this incredibly bad behaviour? And it's being rewarded with fame and money.
No comments:
Post a Comment