Turd Ferguson said:
I think I will be more the type to threaten spanking but almost never do it.
There is nothing worse than doing this. Why on earth would you threaten a punishment but then "almost never follow through". This is more confusing than anything else. The child will not understand the concept of discipline.
The key to proper discipline is not necessarily the type of punishment use, rather consistency.
I do agree with some of the points you made, especially the part about it becoming too easy and perhaps the punishment not always fitting the crime.
Discipline is about consistency and guidance. Sometimes a negative reinforcement is necessary. IMHO
Spanking should always be performed in a calm and controlled and private fashion. Send the child to his/her room so that you can have a chance to cool down. Enter the room, have a talk so that the child understands exactly what it is that they have done to warrant the spanking. One shot across the behind with a belt should be more than enough to get the point across.
One should always try other means of negative reinforcement first ie - the revocation of a privilige. Warn the child, "If you do this, then that will certainly occur" then always, always, always follow through. Another good reason to send a child to their room: so you can calm down and think about an acceptable punishment as it is difficult to think clearly when you are upset.
There is an expression in my language:
"It is better that you should cry now, than I should cry later."
Call me old fashioned, but this idea just seems to make sense to me.
However, as the child becomes older and can reason more and more a parent can no longer rely on spanking. Then one must clearly think a lot in order to even make 1/2 an attempt at proper parenting. Lots of mistakes to be made along the way... After all, it is the child that makes the parent - not the other way around.
And no, you don't have to have children in order to figure this stuff out.
Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
