You would hit your mom?

if I was physically abused and she was talking about how she enjoyed it I would.

I would hit my mom if she went batshit crazy and was trying to kill me. otherwise, it's not right.

how can we assume that? because she said so? she also said it made her feel better. that doesn't sound like she gave much of a **** about the OP at all; rather that she was frustrated and crappy all the time and took it out on her kid. and where did this idea come from that if you don't beat your kid they're going to be running around doing delinquency? If they were already doing it, they probably sure as hell won't stop. and if they weren't before, an overbearing or abusive parent might just push them into it

"an overbearing and abusive parent might just push them into it" *Facepalm* When people miss the whole point and just hear what they want to hear -_- Enforcing discipline and being abusive are not synonymous - get it through your thick skull. In simple terms, discipline = good, abuse = bad. Not the same thing.

I'm confused about this line of reasoning, does disciplining never become abuse then? If my child forgets to say thank you or something and I give them a savage beating, since in my mind that is disciplining them, is that not abuse?

#26 My parents spanked me when I was a kid. It did not improve my behaviour, it did not 'make me respond', it did not make me respect them more. The only thing it achieved is making me scared and lose trust in them. To me, anyone who needs to get physical to get their point across, be it to a kid or an adult, is a failure.

15 & 26, OP's mom clearly said it did NOT change his behavior. Therefore to continue using a disciplinary strategy that was ineffective in its intent, but instead gives the mother satisfaction, is abusive. If something does not produce its intended result (in this case changing behavior) why would you continue to do it? Also, 26, it would actually encourage negative behavior (especially if the child was not adequately and effectively constantly rewarded for good behavior). That's Psych 101. If the only way a child is receiving attention is through negative behavior, then that child will continue that negative behavior because *any* attention is better than no attention. If good behavior is recognized and rewarded, then it is more likely good behavior will be displayed. Like Pavlov's dogs, children are trained (implicitly or explicitly) about what behavior will get attention.

You realize that right in the FML it says "It didn't change your behavior, but it did make me feel better," right? Did you just completely skip over that part?

I just completed a criminology uni course regarding this. Parents that use the excuse that they are teaching a child a lesson by using excessive and unnecessary discipline (it does not change the adverse result if it's emotional, physical etc) will not in any case help the child. It will only cause physical and emotional trauma, cause the child to act out, high rates of antisocial behaviour and depression are overly common in children who experience oppressive amounts of discipline. Teaching a child wrong from right is very different than the threat of physical or emotional pain. I would know, my Christian mother who beat me, broke my fingers and kicked me while I was near passed out from pain on the ground excused it by saying she was teaching me a lesson just like every other parent who won't admit they need a therapist and instead take their frustrations out on their children. I wanted to kill myself when I was thirteen years old due to the fact that my mother "wanted to change my behaviour". If you think that's a good excuse, then I feel terrible for the emotional state of your future children. Yes, discipline is necessary, however excessive and oppressive discipline is NOT okay. You wouldn't strike your girlfriend for doing the wrong thing, you would show her that her actions were wrong in a respectful manner. Children deserve to be respected too.

Exactly, 84. I've worked with too many abused children to think spanking is ever justified. And I've heard way too many abusive parents use the same rationale as some of the posters here.

I was beaten as a child and I can say it stopped me from doing all of the stupid things I was doing. There's a difference between disciplining your child and Child Abuse. Physically disciplining your child doesn't mean you're abusing them. I wasn't being beaten with excessive force yet I was always taught a lesson. I was also rewarded whenever I did something good/right. So I am not against physically disciplining your child but Child Abuse is absolutely wrong.

More most likely. OP never said what was done to deserve the whooping. The butt hurt generation immed cries abuse and disownement. I had got whooped a few times and they were enthusiastic ones but I deserved it and I made me a fine law abiding citizen. Most kids do stuff to piss their parents off on purpose at some point or another. Doesn't say he was hospitalized.

Nope, you're advocating beating children. You are NOT well adjusted. I wasn't beaten as a kid and I turned out better. Ask the people in jail for violent offenses and you'll find, more often than not, they were beaten as kids, too.

there is a difference between beating and spanking. I was and I'm very well adjusted. who are you to judge? there are plenty others who were spanked and turned out just fine as well.

Who am I to judge? Someone who knows better, that's who.

You should NEVER, under any circumstances, ever beat ANYONE, let alone your own child.