YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED
Q: My husband and I have very different views on discipline. I believe in giving our two-year-old a smack when he’s naughty, and my husband is really against smacking. As you can imagine, this leads to quite a heated debate. I don’t understand why he’s so against smacking or how to resolve this. Do you have any advice on this?
A:
Clinical psychologist Steven Kaplan answers: Presumably the debate is not about whether or not discipline is required at all. Rather, it is about what form that discipline should take. If you take that as your starting point, the problem is simple enough.
The traditional argument in favour of corporal punishment is that it is convenient, and that, “It never did me any harm.” The truth is that it is very convenient for the parent but generally ineffective as a consequence, because it easily becomes the standard parental response for any behaviour deemed inappropriate. Consequently, children either become terrified of the parent, or, more commonly, perceive a smack on the bum or hand as fair trade for being rude, disobedient, having a tantrum, stealing, lying or any other misdemeanour. If the aim is to teach your son self-restraint, smacking is generally pointless because consequences should have meaning specific to the misdeed.
Parents who vehemently oppose smacking normally do so either because they were never on the receiving end and find the notion barbaric or, more commonly, because they were extensively on the receiving end and remember it very clearly. It is, after all, quite a trick to justify the perpetration of violence toward a loved one without coming across as abusive. Having said that, a verbal debate with a two-year-old about the inappropriateness of his behaviour is like trying to nail jelly to the ceiling!
Both of you have a point. Punishment for toddlers should be tangible for the child and conceptual for the parent. So, the conversation between you and your husband should be about the long-term goals of discipline. Hitting only works in the very, very short term. And sometimes that is okay if your aim is to administer a short sharp shock. I stress though that this is only effective in very extreme circumstances, but still limited. The aim of discipline is generally to extinguish bad behaviour and encourage healthy behaviour. Would you make much of a point with your husband if part of your argument was to punch him in the face?
I suggest that the two of you establish a hierarchy of rules for your child where you determine a consistent response for specific behaviours. Debate is pointless with a two-year-old who throws tantrums, just as hitting is pointless with a two-yearold who bites other children.
Punishments must be unanimous and consistent, or they just breed fear and mistrust. Your child will take far more notice if both of you respond in the same way to the same naughtiness; and in the same different way to different naughtiness.