I think ledef left a comment of one of my hubs about how when most of us were children, our parents gave us the belt when we misbehaved, today spanking your kids for misbehaving is called "inhumane"...
By contrast, it is considered "humane" to pump your kids full of drugs to get them under control, unnaturally altering them and eventually leading them down the path of habitual drug use to "deal" with their emotions all the while they have never learned to deal with them on their own.
Now how or why is this? Are parents and teachers and doctors etc.. trying to take the easy way out? I know children are children and will do as children do, we did our kids do but our parents would be damned if we got the easy way out.
My personal belief is that I will not pump my kid up full of drugs just to get her under control.
Some argue that it is child abuse to not give your kids these drugs when it could help them right now.
Other argue that physical discipline is child abuse.. a swat on the bum.
What do you think?
If it makes you feel any better, sooner or later they will do the same to you.
I guess, it all depends on how you are as a parent, how your children will act, so if a parent is one who is strict with no tolerance and the child has no other means to cope and rebels because of such said circumstance then by all means take away his suffering (though more then likely. But if on the other hand it is a simple child that defies his parents for the fun of it, then he needs a good whipping on the rump, to set him straight.
I don't agree to just giving kids medication just because.
I do agree to spanking on the behind, regardless of what anyone says.
I had a customer tell me one time, that her daughter told her she was calling child services on her, and her mother looked her dead in the eyes and said well you may right after I give you a good whipping, because I won't ever see you again, because they will put you in foster care, and who knows what.
I have noticed this and I think it is all about money, and desperate parents. I don't think that these parents are purposely drugging their children. I think a lot of these parents are naive and don't question their doctors. Pharmaceutical companies get tons of money to drug children. The thing that gets me is that it is speed that they are given. Ritalyn is speed.
*shutter* speed? Oy... Possibly, parents are afraid of being told they are abusing or neglecting their children if they don't give them the drugs.
Psychiatrists are telling parents that their children have a "disease" called ADHD. The medications that they prescribe actually do calm their children down, but at what cost. I had a boss who's son was on Ritalyn for years. He got old enough to realize that it was making him high and he stopped taking it on his own. His mother was actually mad at him for refusing to take his meds. She said she couldn't "handle" him without them. It makes one wonder if the medication is for the children, or the parents.
I didn't have either But I am not a parent, so until I'm in those shoes...
Because politics is involved when determining whether or not it is ethical to give your children drugs, or decide what is considered child abuse and what is not considered child abuse.
If I thought it would be better there then I would have put it there.
Did you just come to troll? Or would you actually like to contribute something other then .....?
Spanking is a lost art. My Mom used to use a hair brush and then as we got bigger than her a shoe on us. We learned. Sort of. Well what she intended us to. As the the drugs see my hub posted a couple days ago.
At least one case I know of that the drug properly perscribed worked the way it is advertised, but not they way many want to use it.
Well I just read it and a couple things stand out, which is the basis for the discussion in the first place.
1. The boy was already very smart, had no cognitive troubles whatsoever. He was a social kid and very good about giving instruction and understanding how things worked.
2. The teachers decided that because Ritche like to talk and be social that he had a problem and their problem with him resulted in giving him drugs.
3. As he got a little bit older, he became frustrated... seems not so much because he couldn't do the work assigned to him but because the drugs he had been taking made him less motivated or less inspired to do the work assigned to him. Plus it didn't help that he was labeled and pretty much outcast and also demoted to special ed on accounts of him not being intrigued and from being neglected by the teachers.
4. Eventually this turned into frustration because instead of giving him things that were mentally stimulating and supporting his social development without drugs, they did the opposite.
5. As stated in the OP, eventually he chose that more drugs was the answer.
Do you see the correlation?
-your a very good writer btw-
One point you may have missed (our I wasn't clear) Ritchie was not on any "therapy" in his younger years. He only began taking the Adderrall substitue a year or so ago. His parents absolutely refused to give in to the teachers and Guidance Counselors.
Thank you for the compliment, High praise from a "Hubber" of your stauture. Fantastic Pic too!
children are being overdosed by big pharma. parents take the easy way out. doctors, dependent upon the kickbacks from big pharma, while anxiously awaiting the next visit by big pharma's pretty little sales rep in her tiny black dress, generously help the parents along the path of easy.
in a society of sensationalism, the concept of discipline has been muddied by the term "abuse."
it's easy for today's child to scream abuse, not fully aware of where their undisciplined behavior is leading them.
without discipline there is no respect. without respect there is no love. too many children today are the alphas in their parents' homes.
I notice that almost every post you make contains the words "big pharma" somewhere in it.
Maybe there is a problem with "big pharma".
i've noticed that every post you make brings nothing to any of the discussions.
I agree mostly. I am having issue with this at the moment myself and most of this was from the muddied association with what is abuse and what is discipline. In which case my own kid has taken the alpha role and I am putting my foot down to change this but I wont do drugs.
There is nothing wrong with her.
The other part is the I think that the "farms" are breeding children to come back for more. I don't know if it is intentional but it is what is happening.
Creating addictions at a young age which results in more voluntary drug use when they get older.
Children learn respect when they're treated with respect (and live with examples of people who respect others). They also tend to respect a parent who can be in charge without resorting to hitting. One of the problems with raising kids hitting them is that they never learn it is possible to teach a child right from wrong without hitting them. They grow up and think it's "either no teaching them or hitting them".
As someone raised by parents who didn't hit, and as someone who had three noticeably well behaved, nice, little kids; I've seen that nice, well behaved, children who respect themselves and others can be raised without anyone ever hitting anyone. The added benefit is that they are now three adults who know that too.
It is now known that hitting children is not the most effective way to parent, and although it may seem to work for the minute it isn't, in the long run, the best or most effective thing. It's also known that one thing bullies tend to have in common is that they live with violence (and being hit is violent) in the home.
So often you'll see online things like, "My child bites; how can I stop him?" and "My child hits other children; how can I stop him?" When my kids were little I'd make it clear, "If you're angry or upset we can talk about it, but we aren't having any hurting people in our house." How can parents teach children not to hurt others when the parents, themselves, think it's ok (and even advisable) to hurt people who are smaller than they are?!! (And I'm not talking about abusive violence - just the "regular" kind of violence that so many people seem to think is so necessary.) Kids may forgive their parents because they grow up to know their parents didn't know any better, or else they grow up thinking that's the only way to have children who behave well. Neither of those is the ideal outcome.
I agree to most of your comment, but there is the rare child, that is down right to curious for there own good, and there are those children, that no amount of respect or loving firmness, with words teaches them. But a good swat on the behind leaves them with an impression, that there actions won't be tolerated, so that these "wild childs" grow to know they can not walk all over people and get what they want.
None of my children suffered with anything that required behaviour controlling (or modifying?) drugs.
However, a friend of mine has a son that suffers from aspergers. Saying he's a handful is an understatement. From the off, he was presribed Ritalin. She wouldn't use it. She's always managed his behaviour herself.
Her biggest prooblem was the schools. I remember the rows she had (with educational staff/ boards) because she wouldn't dose him up before school.
On the other hand, I have another friend that daily fills her child with drugs - and it's arguable as to whether he really needs them.
I know the child, I know how he's raised. I'm not 100% convinced that the he needs drugs quite as much as his parents need to practice good parenting.
spare the rod, spoil the child...I think parents have gotten lazy when it comes to discipline. There is a distinct difference between discipline and abuse. If my child is misbehaving or is disrespectful and has been talked to about correcting his behavior, if he continues he will be disciplined. That is the consequence for his behavior and I make that clear in the warning. The main difference between the two is that discipline is based on rational thinking and never dealt in anger or an altered state such as when you have been drinking. My son is now 11 and has a total of about 3-4 spankings his whole life. He looses privelages first and a spanking is always a last resort, but he knows it will come if he continues to make bad choices. I always make it clear through calm conversation why he is being punished so that next time he can make better choices.
As for the drug issue, my sister thought my neice was a little hyper as a young child. My sister requested she be put on ritalin. She spent weekends with my husband and I and her mom would always send her with her meds, but we never gave them to her. We were firm with her so that she understood she had to behave or she would face consequences. She always behaved well for us. She has a completely different attitude with us as opposed to her mother because she knows what she can and can not get away with at our house.
I think in some cases meds may be needed, but I think in most cases it is over diagnosed and those children need clear boundaries set for them and parents that are willing to stick to them.
I don't think it's drugs or physical discipline, though. You don't need either.
I think drugs (of any kind) are a last resort. They can be wonderful and life-saving, but everything has side-effects.
I was never punished physically as a child, but in other ways. And as a parent, I've never smacked either.
I agree. I don't think that it is a choice between spanking or drugging. I believe that Sandra just used the double standard as an example to get a conversation going. It is true that drugs can be more dangerous than the occasional spanking. It is ironic that drugs are more acceptable than spankings.
No ,it is an attempt at controlling the masses. Its like giving candy to a baby, then taking it away. They want the control. When you look like the good guy, don't we all want to trust. But then you get a little closer, and you smell the stench. Bam it's to late they got yea with addiction to addictive prescription drugs.
Actually it's both. The irony is that giving children drugs is more acceptable then the occasional spanking AND it is also ironic that when you give children drugs at an early age, they grow up with drug addictions... something that we are constantly trying to overcome AND by doing so, all control is being taken away from the parents and the children making the drug problem a political factor in why drug addiction and broken families are more common now then ever before.
Drug companies need naive parents to keep the drugs on the market by creating new problems. Now that is irony.
This is so sad and yet so true. I lived in Miami for six years when I had kids in elementary, middle and high school. I had heard about the "pill moms" in elementary, but didn't believe it until I was at the school one day and saw a line of children march into the office to take their prozac. I was shocked!!! I then found out that my son was a "buddy" to one of the "prozac" kids. In other words, he had to accompany this kid to the office to get his meds every day.
Remarkable isn't it? I think parents need to man up and be parents. Shute, I have a hard time with my own kid but the last thing I would consider doing (though in my dreams it sounds so nice, lol) is dose them up with drugs. *shaking my head*
In defense of the parents, they either have there own demons to conquer knowingly or not. So I won't go down that road so fast.
But the parents need to deal with themselves not change their kids to suit their disabilities. To me that is child abuse.
Exactly! good point. though some don't know they have a problem. look at some of the people here that think, their just peachy they way they are.
I agree with Sandra. The keyword in what you said is "their own demons" -- not their kids' demons. For the amount of kids I saw on Prozac from well-off families? Nuh uh. Not buying it. While there may be some cases like you describe who are just ignorant, what I saw was wealthy families just being lazy and self-absorbed.
Yea but how can they see, if they can't even see themselves?
Some of these parents just might be on drugs themselves. I guess it might fall into that old cleche' about what is good for the goose is good for the gander.
I'm not saying that what you are describing doesn't happen. I'm saying that in my experience, that isn't the case. It's just wealthy, self-absorbed people that never should have had kids that do it so that they can continue to be self-absorbed.
Anti-depressants for kids???
Tis lazy or ignorant parenting ,thats my opinion. And I say ignorant because often some parents really think their child is out of control because of some genetic disposal -yea it is 'their genes'
I worked with special needs kids for 10 yrs, mostly 3-6yrs old.
Many (not all)ADS Attention deficent syndrome kids were fine with behavioral manangement ( that thing we called boundaries and rules when we were kids)...and honestly many parents ,yea the big people were the ones who were hyperactive!!
I would watch them collect their little darlings and even befoe they walked out the gate ,it was the PARENTS who would be yelling ,screaming , an acting irrationally. So I say ignorant ,because sadly some adults think its normal to pop a pill at the slightest hint of perceieved stress. They never learned to cope, and drag their kids to the nearest Doctor who will promptly sign them up for the meds.
My parents had 9 kids all up,so smacks n cuddles all had their place...
Did we grow up to be violent -No
Did we learn early how to keep out of trouble -Yes (well most of us did , the boys always like to challenge the physical realms ,but that do, if guided seemed to have positive spin-offs in the end..showing itself in sporting achievements etc.
Interestingly though New Zealand 3 yrs ago ,introduced the "No Smacking Bill" basically its intention was good ( to send the message to child abusers ,a zero tolerance ) and to be fair the bill did not enforce a total ban on smacking ,but the grey areas such as 'reasonable force' became confusing for everyone( including Police ,Child Care Protectors etc)
This last month has seen that same bill up for reveiw to correct the flaws.
I do think child abuse is disgusting and would never hesitate to help any child who was being hurt ,but its not normal adjusted people that need these laws ,is it?
Its the ones who never had the right discipline/training all those years ago.
Hi, new hubber here go easy on me
one point to consider in this discussion:
Societal pressure on parents to have "perfect" children in public is extreme. How many times have you been anoyed by a screaming child throwing a fit in public (or been embarrased by your own kid going nuts in public). Many peple will even make comments either to other people around them or directly to the parent about what they are doing wrong. This pressure is present in schools as well and parents many times will feel obligated to give in to it. Societis current answer for behavior problems is the kid must have hyperactivity dissorder and should be turned into a ritalin zombie so the rest of us can be comfortable around him.
I believe that to a certian degree mental or personality disorders like add, anxiety, and depression are real. They are difficult to difinitively diagnose, and it is dificult to know when treatment is necesary to aid normal developement in children. Many adults grow up with undiagnosed add and do notice problems later on in life regarding inabilities to reach thier full potential in thier careers, shooling, or even family lives. It is a sad realization to come upon as an adult that your parents could have done something but did not know what or how, it can feel like you were neglected or overlooked even if it isn't true. Maybe this is where the people are coming from that say it is abusive not to treat children.
I don't think that treament equals dosing children with drugs. It is better to do as other posters have said and give children boundries and guidelines, and also teach them coping skills to help them with thier particular hurdles. They can decide as informed adults if they wish to take medication or not.
The only drugs I will give my children is tylenol, cold medicine, and the occasional round of atibiotics, I even use those only when absolutely nesecary. I will however give them a swift swat on the bum if I catch them digging around in the medicine cabinet.
by JP Carlos5 years ago
There are many disciplining styles and tactics that are available to parents. But what is the line that separates acceptable and detestable?
by crystaleyes4 years ago
If your child does something wrong like hit you because you have not given in to his tantrum, what would you do? I have sometimes given a smack on his back for misbehavior.. is it fine or am i being a bad parent?
by romper205 years ago
I don't have pre teen children, but I say spank away.
by Daniel Carter5 years ago
Here's the link. Rather shocking, since Jesus supposedly is the "Prince of Peace." However, it seems to be consistent with the general temperature and climate of the religion forums...
by greeneyesH19827 years ago
I bring this up because some people think that the united states is trying to ban this altogether and think that it will result in more crime from children being allowed to get away with more.... what are your thoughts...
by Grace Marguerite Williams3 years ago
Many traditional and fundamentalist religious parents raise their children to what is tantamount to abuse. Such children are brainwashed into thinking that the only legitimate and acceptable construct is the religious...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.