Open hand. On the buttocks. That's pretty much the line. A mild smack in the mouth may be acceptable in some cases, but that's iffy.

Its a difficult question, I would define Discipline as a beneificial action for the child, while abuse is a detrimental action. If giving an Openhanded smack to the backside of a youth will teach them an important moral lesson, but it also teaches violence and gives rise to a new criminal, then the innocent smack is then Abuse. Personally, I recieved a few whacks for Misbehaviour (harmless open handed slap to legs etc) and I am all the better for it. To answer your question, we might need to wait 60 years to see what my life ends up like, to see whether my punishment was Abuse or Discipline.

Abuse=broken bones, cigarette burns, black eyes Discipline=a sore red butt.

I think it really has to do more with the attitude - and attitude will govern actions. A parent trying to discipline a child out of love, concern, and yes - anger - will not be likely to beat a child 'full sore'. This is a bad example, but - assault. The concept of 'reasonable' rules with this - would a reasonable person in the same situation do the same thing? Even with variations in attitudes and habits, that principle can still hold. Is what we do reasonable? There was a news story a while back about where a father got in trouble for smacking his daughter in public. Trouble is he pulled her pants down to smack her on her bare backside. The smack itself may have been reasonable, but I don't agree with the pants-down bit, especially not in public. It's about discipline, not humiliation. Abuse to me is more attitude. Failing to control anger, or trying to 'punish' or 'hurt' the child for upsetting you would class as abuse to me. Then there arises the issue of control. Just how much control should we have over our kids? I ask this question in all seriousness, looking at it from several points of view: 1. Our children often do not have the ability to make the right decisions in certain situations. Logically speaking, that is part of the reason we have the age of adulthood - you would expect that a person of adult age has enough maturity and wisdom to make their own choices. Until then, they really are under the responsibility of their parents. Their parents are not just providers or caregivers, but guides and consciences as well, as the child develops their own. 2. On the flip side of that, however, a child is still a person with a personality and free will. We only learn from observation and experience. So, often we have to experience something ourselves in order to learn it. How much latitude do we give our kids to make mistakes? How much do we let them learn the 'hard way'? Stifling a child to prevent them from doing wrong things can in a way be abusing them, as it may exert an unrealistic level of control over their lives and rob them of enjoyment in living. Then again, not enough control may result in a child who endangers themselves or hits a 'too hard' lesson that they cannot handle. Do you really want to let your child stick a knife in the power socket so they can find out 'the hard way' that electricity kills? 3. Discipline. I haven't seen anything that says discipline is an innate behaviour - we have a tendency to be undisciplined when left to ourselves. True, some people are naturally disciplined and organised, but the majority of us tend to slide towards the lowest common denominator - laziness and selfishness. Discipline is really about choosing against our negative desires or bad habits. 4. Self Discipline - is about disciplining ourselves. We will never learn how to discipline ourselves unless somebody shows us. My children will only learn self-discipline from my own self-discipline, and how I discipline them. It is also an attempt to teach them 'right from wrong'. So control is a big factor in this. How much control do we take, or how much freedom do we give? I believe that a parent who loves their child and has their best interests at heart is not likely to perform abusive behaviour on their kids. Abuse really tends to come in more through ignorance or selfishness. So when I deal with my children in regards to discipline, I often find myself asking "Is this the best way to deal with it?" I've gone over the top once or twice, but the thing is I realised it afterwards and made efforts to ensure it doesn't happen again.

At how much force is used and why you did it. If you leave a mark on the backside from and open hand swat that lasts less then an hour you're fine. If you leave a welt or a bruise you crossed the line. If you use an object like a spoon, belt, or anything else you've crossed a line. If you do it to stop a child from hurting themselves or others, because their destroying property, or for out right definace you're good. If you do it beacuse they spilled their juice you crossed the line. You have to stop and think right before you do it and make sure that the why you're doing it is to teach a lesson and not to get out your anger and frustration. You also need to talk to the child after and explain to them why they got the swat. If not you've defeated the purpose. Abuse teaches violence while discipline does not. And a lack of discipline is just as dangerous because with out kids don't learn how to deal with real consiquences for real actions.

error

well.. my personal opinion, is the only time any type of physical punishment should be used, or you should truly yell at your child, is when whatever they are doing is going to hurt them. (like if they are going to stick their finger in an outlet) because otherwise, basically all you are doing is teaching them that its alright to hit people and scream, or that they should completely fear you. Also, if you scream at your kids all the time, for little reason, this is no better than physical abuse. Abuse, in my opinion is when something is more detrimental then beneficial.

Some people think corporal punishment is always inappropriate. I think it can be appropriate if used sparingly and with caution. Here are some possible guidelines... What is the motivation for discipline? The primary motivation should be for the betterment of the child. Discipline is NOT be for the convenience of the parent. For example the parent shouldn't spank the kid because he/she (parent) is too lazy to use a more appropriate punishment that takes more work to put into place. Never punish for an accident. Don't spank the kid for spilling his milk when he didn't mean to. Corporal punishment should never leave a bruise or mark. Corporal punishment should be rare. If the parent uses it all the time, or for trivial reasons, it loses its effectiveness. There is a certain age window when corporal punishment is most appropriate. Age 3 to 10 is a possible range. It doesn't do any good to spank a baby, because he/she doesn't understand what's going on. And pre-teens are getting too old. There are other punishments that can be more appropriate and effective for pre-teens (grounding, loss of privilege, etc). Corporal punishment should never be done in a way that embarrasses the child. It should be done in private in a manner that is respectful to the personhood of the child. Fathers disciplining their daughters should take special precaution here. Never spank when angry. The parent must take time to evaluate the situation and think through what punishment is most appropriate. Punishment needs to be at the “right” time so the child associates the punishment with the bad behavior. It should be fairly close to the time of the event. For example you wouldn’t punish a three year old for something they did a week ago. Their sense of time has not developed to the point where they can still associate the punishment with the act. In most cases parents are the only ones who should spank. Teachers and relatives should not be using it. In cases of blended families it should be done by the parent, not the step-parent.

Let me understand this. If there is a doubt about or a blurring of the line between abuse and discipline then somebody is not looking at the situation. You love children. You shower them with love and affection and hugs and holding and touching...all in a loving manner. Kids NEVER make mistakes. Adults make mistakes when they feil to understand why kids do what they do. So strive to understand the child and if the parent has trouble, then take some parening classes and seek therapy. There is no need to get physically violent with a child. Ever. Now, if you see a child about to put his/her hand in the fire, firmly restrain. But restrain doesn't mean smacking on the butt or slapping on the mouth or anything like that.

as long as its only a passing mark then its not child abuse.

I think if you spank with something besides your hand or it is not done on the butt or if you hit them or than once or twice.

If you hit more than once or twice, and you do it waaaay too often.

1) if you spank them enough to leave a lasting mark 2) if you spank them for every little thing. 3) if you spank them with anything besides the flat of your hand 4) if spanking becomes 'hitting' on anything besides the butt.

When it's done out of anger. When it's hard enough to leave a mark. When it's done by someone other than a parent.

maybe when the intent switches from disciplinary to aggressive??

When you want to spank, and it will make you feel better to do it. When you are angry, frustrated, upset or the like. When you are not feeling love and sadness at having to do it. Regardless of whether it hurts the kid or not, anything fitting those motivations in the spank-er is abusive to the spank-ee.

When your kid starts to have bruises

Whenever you leave any type of lasting mark on the child or when it is done out of spite and not for discipline. Spanking is only discipline when teaching follows.

when spanking turns into abuse. you have to love them no matter what. if they accept the spanking with out having to be held down and putting up a fuss, and just take it than they know they deserved it. hopefully they will learn from that.

When the spanking leaves marks.

hand prints are left and bruises

When it's done unplanned. A parent should never spank a child when the parent is angry. The parent needs a moment to cool down. Then decide whether the child needs a spanking. The whole motive should be to improve the child.

Do you know who Alvaro Mutis is?

When spanking with more than a bare hand... When spanking more than two swats... When your HAND hurts... When you spank when you are mad - Many times you will overdo it... Chill out, first, then spank for punishment, as described above. When using ANY utensils - wooden spoon, yard stick, switch, curtain rod, belt, strop, etc. When their butt, back, or legs show WELTS, cuts, or any blood... ONLY reddened butt-cheeks should EVER be allowed. When the kid ends up in the hospital, of course.

When it is out of anger , and for your own grdification and when it is done with exsesive force

When you do it.

My answer is that if a child is injured by spanking, then it's abusive. A spanking should hurt, but it should not injur the child in any way.