rsjg80 Posted January 12, 2008 Author Share Posted January 12, 2008 thats bollocks Tony I use the naughty step method with Amy and even at 18 months she understand some basic principles, like she can not touch the TV, go near the fire etc. and not once have I had to hit or touch her she knows when she has done wrong because once I threaten her with the step (in the right otne of voice) she stops and if she has to go there, she screams which means I have won I would never hit my own child Ianrobo, I am not a parent and I ask purely out of interest; but when Amy is 9-10 or so and point blank refuses to go to this naughty step (although not allowed to use the word naughty in schools anymore - no joke!!) what do you do then? I'm not being facetious I am genuinely interested in what your next step would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsjg80 Posted January 12, 2008 Author Share Posted January 12, 2008 your last sentence is key rs they have everything and want more they should only get rewarded for good behaviour and it seems like you now get rewarded for bad behviour by parents who don;t want the hassle True. But furthermore the few good children see that crime pays in effect. That is the lesson that is taught. It will be the naughty ones who are rewarded for even mediocre behaviour in an attempt to appease them - whilst the good children are ignored for superior behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 teh step is for young ones, once the basic discplines are there then at 9/10 it will be much easier to 'control' them teh basic step of any child's education is in the first three years, thats where the foundations are laid you see too many parents now give into a childs demands just because hey are having a temoer tantrum we leave amy alone and guess what ? three minutes later she is creeping around us but never gets what she wanted, which is usually chocolate !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsjg80 Posted January 12, 2008 Author Share Posted January 12, 2008 teh step is for young ones, once the basic discplines are there then at 9/10 it will be much easier to 'control' them teh basic step of any child's education is in the first three years, thats where the foundations are laid you see too many parents now give into a childs demands just because hey are having a temoer tantrum we leave amy alone and guess what ? three minutes later she is creeping around us but never gets what she wanted, which is usually chocolate !!! Yes, I agree fully. No-one can disagree with that. So does that mean the damage on the 90/95% of the children I teach is now irreversible as they clearly do not have such like minded parents? And they will continue the pattern. If parents (or at least a majority) were like you and Tony life would be easy. Naturally I can not divulge details of schools, names etc and speak from a safe anonymity of a forum but this is what ALL teachers think away from parents evenings and public comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 Heck we will make mistakes and taht is obvious but how inflicting violence (no matter how mild it is ) is the answer completely baffles me the early years as a teacher you know are vital and it is a pattern that is spread down remember parents control children not the other way round but a lot of parents want the easy life .. it makes me laugh when you hear peopel call for the cane and such like, if it has reached that stage it is too late and the ones that got hit are now the parents raising their kids in such a so called bad way .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 although not allowed to use the word naughty in schools anymore - no joke!!) I asked Harvey once in jest when i picked him up from school "were you a good boy at school today or were you naughty" and the teacher informed me "we don't use that word around here" .. I assume she meant naughty ,maybe she was referring to the word good ?? :-) guess i was a bit harsh on the old naughty step school of thought ..like I say i prefer talking to my children ... thing with parenting is i guess it's horses for courses ..I wont read any magazines or watch any program telling me how to raise a child ,my wife and I will do it our way based on the moral standards that we were both brought up with..( you have to take into account that posts i make on VT are deliberatly intended to be near the knuckle at times before you starting getting concerned and calling childline :-) ... i'm very proud of Harvey and the way he behaves , people come up to us in Waitrose and say how good he is and what a well behaved boy he is ...long may it continue .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zen Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 I would never hit my own child i'm talking a clip ..you make it sound like I'm saying belt the living crap out of them your also talking about a girl , and 18mths old , i'm talking about a boy that is a teenager jack the lad in years to come ...big difference naughty step though ..sorry but that has to be the gayest thing i've ever heard in parenting .. i talk to my 3 year old and explain right and wrong ... beleive it or not they do understand ...and they will continue to understand, even when they become teenagers. No need to bring physical punishment into it at all. I do agree about the "naughty step" though. That's just daft. As you say, talk to them, be firm and make it clear beyond any doubt what's right and wrong. But leave the smacks and ear clips out of it, it sends out the wrong signals and teaches that it's ok to solve a disagreement with the use of physical means. I absolutely agree that weak parenting is part of the problem, I agree with nick about TVs and PSs in kids' rooms and how spoilt materialism among kids is a problem for discipline, and I also believe we need to do more in terms of after school centres, youth centres etc to keep them off the streets. I would like to add, though, that I don't think kids are as bad as some people (and media) like to think. But Ian's point earlier about the worst kids getting worse, is a good one I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 the step though is about understanding that there is a reaction to any action check out how amy reacts after three warnings to it .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsjg80 Posted January 12, 2008 Author Share Posted January 12, 2008 This might sound like me hating my job but it isn't that. I don't care about planning, I don't care about mindless paperwork for the sake or paperwork, meetings for the sake of meetings and silly colleagues - that's all jobs!! I care because I'm one of those deluded teachers who actually thought you could make a difference and I'm just beginning to realise it's FAR too late. And I see it everyday naturally but my point is its reflection on our society. God, I'm 27 and generally happy go lucky and I sound like a right moany git tonight! Ah well, it's the weekend and the one saving grace - The Season Ticket in my wallet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 You sound like you care mate and if in your teaching you can persuade one kid to turn his/her life around you have succedded see I have often believed that at 14 it is obvious which kids should be allowed to leave to do a vocational course, and the problem is that sometimes we force them to do subjects that have no apitude in, that is daft from my own (hated) experience at school I did woodwork, metalwork, English lit, art, Chemistry, biology hated them all and not got a single thing out of them, however I loved history and geography so why could I not do more of them ? why the occupation so much on 5 GCSE's some kids just can not do it but have talents in other areas which are never exploited and they get left out for example if a bad kid hates lessons but is good at say music why not let him concentrate on that, or sport etc. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zen Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 the step though is about understanding that there is a reaction to any action check out how amy reacts after three warnings to it .... I think taking away a privilege is far more effective, imo. The "naughty step" just seems to me as if it would lose it's effect after a while. Teaching kids that they actually have to earn their priviliges through behaving well is what it's about. I personally believe that any sort of additional punishment, beyond taking away a privilege, won't really do any good when raising a child. My mum is a primary school teacher, and a bloody good one at that, and she raised me using this philosophy and applies the same approach when she teaches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsjg80 Posted January 12, 2008 Author Share Posted January 12, 2008 The problem is now they don't want to do ANYTHING!! Admittedly my knowledge of older children is a bit more limited but of the ones I do teach they have no interest in anything, even old favourites like sport. PSPs and DSs is all they care about. I like to think I'll make a difference for even a few - but what a country/ world they'll live in?..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 But leave the smacks and ear clips out of it, it sends out the wrong signals and teaches that it's ok to solve a disagreement with the use of physical means. I disagree .. when I was a teenager my mum would be soft with us , my dad firm ...but fair , a clip when it was warrented , nothing more ..which one do you think my brother and i reacted better to when it came to matters of getting into trouble at school my mum with her ..don't do it again or my dad with a clip around the ear and the impied threat that more was to come if you did it again it's hard to put a view point on something like this across without it looking unfavourably bad on me ... but as always on VT , I'll always give an honest answer rather than the right answer .... People here don't really know me as a person so it's hard for you all to judge how I turned out as a result of what i believe was a very good pbringing given to me by my parents .. if you read my comments that i would "clip" my child in years to come you may pickup up an opinion of me that probabaly doesn't do me justice ..where as if you were a close friend you would understand the context of who i am and how I am ... and know that a clip is not something i would give out for the sake of it not sure if i'm making sense now .... ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianrobo1 Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 oh I will do the priveldge thing but that is only when she gets some at around 4/5 I woudl imagine it is the same principle, the step is about taking them out of the situation and withdrawing something for a while Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsjg80 Posted January 12, 2008 Author Share Posted January 12, 2008 the step though is about understanding that there is a reaction to any action check out how amy reacts after three warnings to it .... I think taking away a privilege is far more effective, imo. The "naughty step" just seems to me as if it would lose it's effect after a while. Teaching kids that they actually have to earn their priviliges through behaving well is what it's about. I personally believe that any sort of additional punishment, beyond taking away a privilege, won't really do any good when raising a child. My mum is a primary school teacher, and a bloody good one at that, and she raised me using this philosophy and applies the same approach when she teaches. What privilege does she take away? I'd like to know!! Nothing works in all the schools I've been at; breaks, sports, golden time, none of it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gringo Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 I agree with tony on this one. A smack at the appropriate time didn't hurt anyone. By legislating for the abusive parents it removed the tools that the decent parents had. However, as indicated in my previous link, the problem runs a bit deeper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsjg80 Posted January 12, 2008 Author Share Posted January 12, 2008 But leave the smacks and ear clips out of it, it sends out the wrong signals and teaches that it's ok to solve a disagreement with the use of physical means. I disagree .. when I was a teenager my mum would be soft with us , my dad firm ...but fair , a clip when it was warrented , nothing more ..which one do you think my brother and i reacted better to when it came to matters of getting into trouble at school my mum with her ..don't do it again or my dad with a clip around the ear and the impied threat that more was to come if you did it again it's hard to put a view point on something like this across without it looking unfavourably bad on me ... but as always on VT , I'll always give an honest answer rather than the right answer .... People here don't really know me as a person so it's hard for you all to judge how I turned out as a result of what i believe was a very good pbringing given to me by my parents .. if you read my comments that i would "clip" my child in years to come you may pickup up an opinion of me that probabaly doesn't do me justice ..where as if you were a close friend you would understand the context of who i am and how I am ... and know that a clip is not something i would give out for the sake of it not sure if i'm making sense now .... ?? Making perfect sense Tony. As someone mentioned earlier 'Horses for courses'. I do not deem any parent a bad parent for a light clip around the ear if it's warranted in the same way I don't accuse parents of being bad parents if they avoid physical punishment of all kinds. I like you will say what I mean on here without fear of being PC!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Zen Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 I disagree .. when I was a teenager my mum would be soft with us , my dad firm ...but fair , a clip when it was warrented , nothing more ..which one do you think my brother and i reacted better to when it came to matters of getting into trouble at school my mum with her ..don't do it again or my dad with a clip around the ear and the impied threat that more was to come if you did it again it's hard to put a view point on something like this across without it looking unfavourably bad on me ... but as always on VT , I'll always give an honest answer rather than the right answer .... People here don't really know me as a person so it's hard for you all to judge how I turned out as a result of what i believe was a very good pbringing given to me by my parents .. if you read my comments that i would "clip" my child in years to come you may pickup up an opinion of me that probabaly doesn't do me justice ..where as if you were a close friend you would understand the context of who i am and how I am ... and know that a clip is not something i would give out for the sake of it not sure if i'm making sense now .... ?? Look, I'm not advocating "soft" parenting here. Quite on the contrary, I believe a parent should be very firm with their child as I said in my earlier post. I certainly am very firm when I deal with kids and teenagers (something I've done as a job in a local school, and still do through coaching youth football). What I am saying is that I don't believe in physical punishment. I believe you when you say being smacked by your father didn't do you any harm, and I have no reason to believe you're not a good person and I'm sure your parents did a great job. However, I believe smacking is both unnecessary (there are better and smarter ways), too easy, and it doesn't really teach what's right it only scares you off doing what's wrong (see the difference?). And for some (maybe even most) kids, being smacked sends out a signal that it's okay to solve a problem with physical means. I'm sure you are, and will continue to be, a great father Tony, but I hope you'll reconsider your views on smacking and clips. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nrogers Posted January 12, 2008 Share Posted January 12, 2008 I also am of the belief that a healthy and fit child will behave alot better... I have lots of nieces and nephews, and if they want a treat, i.e. sweets, etc, they have to run around the house several times and do some star jumps, no treats without excercise, we as a family, state no TV unless they have walked at least 5000 steps, and then they only get an hour, if they want more they have to walk another 5000 steps. These kids are well balenced and well behaved, they will also get a clip as a last resort... I think the 2 can work in unison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsjg80 Posted January 12, 2008 Author Share Posted January 12, 2008 Right it's up to all you parents now then - you lot spread the good parenting message and make my life easier! Remember I don't have sweets, telly, money, games to hold back so it's all in your hands! And on that, goodnight - but I'll be checking back on this thread tomorrow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts