Drug Problem!

[genoveva]

HE ASKED ME A RHETORICAL QUESTION, "WHY DIDN'T WE HAVE A DRUG PROBLEM WHEN YOU AND I WERE GROWING UP?"

I just don't understand this statement/question.

This is stupid because mankind has always been on drugs.

Yes. Alcohol, which is a drug, has been a source of problem for years. And, think of all the prescription drugs that people get hooked on and abuse and/or cause other problems for the user.

[kilted exile]

this has turned into a discussion about discipline but I want to change course a bit. In the original post it said this:

HE ASKED ME A RHETORICAL QUESTION, "WHY DIDN'T WE HAVE A DRUG PROBLEM WHEN YOU AND I WERE GROWING UP?"

I just don't understand this statement/question.

This is stupid because mankind has always been on drugs. Granted, this meth lab business has me completely baffled because I don't know why anyone would want to mix up and heat a bunch of household chemicals and sudafed and then inject/snort/ingest. I just don't get it.

And I think I got this in an email before from one of my all-american co-workers who likes to send these types of emails around. She sends prayer chains, petitions to Congress about how we're losing our country (I won't say anymore here), and those good luck friendship emails with sick little pictures of kittens and rainbows that flash and if I don't send it on to 10 people I will have five years of bad luck.

I agree here & do wonder exactly what period of time Wizard is referrring to. I am thinking it is nostalgia. Everyone likes to think that when they were growing up young people did what they were told etc. I dont know if anyone is familiar with a book by Alan Bestic in 1961, it is called "Turn Me On Man" and is about how terrible the drug situation is regarding people of 16-25 was then. These are the people who grew up in the '50s which so many like to think of as crime free & devoid of social problems - probably brought up in the manner Wiz would like to see take place now.....

[Granny5]

Meth is such a serious problem where I am from. It effects all ages and all classes (for lack of a better word) of people. I have a well educated family member who grew up in a very upper middle class home who became addicted to meth. This family member was early 40's in age and lost home, family, teeth, and both mental and physical health. It's very inexpensive and it's very easy to get. Folks from the lowest income bracket to the highest are addicted. It's just heartbreaking to see someone you've known for years, gone to church with, worked with become involved in this awful drug. And it pretty easy to tell after a while. Extreamly thin and their teeth start to rot out and very jittery. I have heard from seminars I have had to attend that it only takes one or two uses to become addicted.

[Lioness_Heart]

thank way back to the horse and wagon days, everyone spanked there kids and you never heard of rape, or mmurder, everyone was kinda and respectufull...

1900's early, kids respected parents, and crime was still realy low..kids got spanked

2000's kids dont get spanked anymore becaue everyone wants to scream abuse,,,crime is up, kids yell at parntes and hav eno respect for themselfs or others.

notice something, when you take spanking out of the equation and the ability to dicipline out of the picture...crime goes up..

Could I just say that this statement seems a little naive. There have been problems in all periods of history. I don't see how you can say that 'everyone was kinda and respectufull...' in 'the horse and wagon days', unless you've been there yourself. And there definately were rapes and murders in those days (I'm talking with a knowlege of English history anyway). In the 19th century, loads of kids were abused, even killed, and no-one cared. And there was still crime: a lot of murders in English cities, problems with Opium dens etc.

Yes, we do now have a problem with crime, but correlation does not show cause and effect: you cannot say that it is because there is less corporal punishment. There have been lots of other changes in our society that could account for that. Parenting probably is the key, but there are lots of other ways to foster love and respect within a family unit, and by extension into the world beyond, than by violence.

[rabid reader]

Could I just say that this statement seems a little naive. There have been problems in all periods of history. I don't see how you can say that 'everyone was kinda and respectufull...' in 'the horse and wagon days', unless you've been there yourself. And there definately were rapes and murders in those days (I'm talking with a knowlege of English history anyway). In the 19th century, loads of kids were abused, even killed, and no-one cared. And there was still crime: a lot of murders in English cities, problems with Opium dens etc.

Yes, we do now have a problem with crime, but correlation does not show cause and effect: you cannot say that it is because there is less corporal punishment. There have been lots of other changes in our society that could account for that. Parenting probably is the key, but there are lots of other ways to foster love and respect within a family unit, and by extension into the world beyond, than by violence.

Its funny because crime rates have been on a vast decline since the 50s, there is little crime problem, just violence feed news corporations

[Niamh]

Could I just say that this statement seems a little naive. There have been problems in all periods of history. I don't see how you can say that 'everyone was kinda and respectufull...' in 'the horse and wagon days', unless you've been there yourself. And there definately were rapes and murders in those days (I'm talking with a knowlege of English history anyway). In the 19th century, loads of kids were abused, even killed, and no-one cared. And there was still crime: a lot of murders in English cities, problems with Opium dens etc.

Yes, we do now have a problem with crime, but correlation does not show cause and effect: you cannot say that it is because there is less corporal punishment. There have been lots of other changes in our society that could account for that. Parenting probably is the key, but there are lots of other ways to foster love and respect within a family unit, and by extension into the world beyond, than by violence.

Okay so i said that my Encyclopedia post was to be my only one... but i had to come and agree here. Crime rates in the past were just as bad as today. The best example of murders from the past is the Jack the Ripper case. Also note that child labour was a thing of the past in many of the "westernised" countries such as america, britain, france etc. Children as young as five were sent to work in factories, many were never to return home alive after a days work, whether they were killed on the job or nabbed by criminals. As Lioness said, opium dens were around so Drugs where also a thing of the past.
Child abuse by Parents also existed in the past where to some extent angered parent buried the children alive in chimneys.(thats true) Just cause spanking was around back then and and accepted doesnt mean life was better.

now thats me done.

[stephofthenight]

"If our culture encouraged us to be citizens rather than consumers then these kinds of issues wouldn't arise with such dreary frequency. Responsibility for one's actions within a society framework is something that can be taught and integrated into behavioural norms.
Alexis, Wales

Let's look at a role model of justice in this country. How can you expect kids to respect the law when they see corruption in high places! Of course kids are out of control-they have no infrastructure in which to work - everything is ok as long as you don't get caught! The fault lies with weak government who listen but do not act - leaving our streets a haven for muggers etc.
Adrian, UK

I'm not surprised at the way some kids are today. Go to any shopping centre and you'll see kids causing trouble, while the parents watch, or just can't be bothered.
Keith Jones, UK

Yes and why? Because they are not scared and let's face it, they have nothing to be scared of. Here in Australia, a guy was charged by police for speeding whilst driving his wife to hospital and yet youths who repeatedly steal and wreck cars get a slap on the wrist. Arab countries have it right - whip them - they'll behave for the rest of their lives.
John, Australia

I used to be a vulnerable teenager and have done some crazy things in my past. I was locked up on several occasions for arson. I am not asking for your forgiveness. What I want to make clear is that teenagers are very impressionable and follow trends to look so called "cool"! Maybe we should have legal ways of punishing young offenders instead of letting them back on the streets to create more crime."

-you can find the rest of the artical @ BBC news.com

i completly agree

[Shurtugal]

i'm sorry to say that i am lost on the topic, at thought we were having a debation wether spanking was right or wrong. i plead right.

[Bakiryu]

You mentioned yourself about how productive it is and Bakiryu also that when she was first hit by her teacher, from that time she started to respect every teacher. If it was so good for you, then why did your parents feel the need to spank you again for the second time? It doesn't appear like you were spanked once or twice only.

Yeah and when others would do something annoying, he would start smacking them too?

I don't think it's very necessary to answer this. I don't have to be spanked or un-spanked to express my disapproval of this method for bringing up a child.

Usually children behave because they fear punishment. Which leads to them behaving as they grow holder.

A comparison would be in the bible when god "The father" punished those who didn't believe in him. Didn't they behave then?

(I'm only using this as an example)

[genoveva]

Usually children behave because they fear punishment. Which leads to them behaving as they grow holder.

What kind of life is it to live out of fear? Why should children be made to fear when there is so much joy and happiness to be had out of life?

Children don't necessarily behave as they grow older because they have been punished. Many will be very anti-authoritarian.

Another good book on why punishments are bad is:

Alfie Kohn's
Punished by Rewards: The Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, A's, Praise, and Other Bribes

His new book also addresses why punishments are bad:

Unconditional Parenting: Moving from Rewards and Punishments to Love and Reason

[Pensive]

Usually children behave because they fear punishment. Which leads to them behaving as they grow holder.

So when parents would be away, there would be no fear of punishment and they wouldn't behave. Children shouldn't be taught to behave with the help of imposing fear. They should have a basic understanding of why they should behave.

A comparison would be in the bible when god "The father" punished those who didn't believe in him. Didn't they behave then?

(I'm only using this as an example)

Well if we have brought religion in between, then I would like to mention most of the Prophets are reported have treated children kindly. Prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H) was always affectionate towards children, if they used abuses on him, he would hear them out and would always teach them with the power of love. He is never reported to have been even a little harsh towards children.

I think same is the case with other religious personalities like Buddha, Isa, etc.

[Redzeppelin]

Perhaps it would be better to replace the word "fear" with "respect." Spanking a child is not equal to "hitting" them. A "spanking" is a particular way of "hitting" a child, in a particular part of the body (a rather absorbant part) for a particular reason. Done in the wrong way, for the wrong reason, with the wrong attitude, they can be abusive. Done correctly, they can do what other forms of discipline cannot accomplish - at least not with every child. Very often, parents who are screaming at their 15-year old kids who are defying them directly is a consequence of the parent's refusal to spank the child and establish the chain of command - that "time outs" and rational discussions didn't really impress upon the child the need to respect parents; kids who aren't made aware of who is in control become very unstable because their world has no clear control in it. It's an issue of respect, not fear.

[Granny5]

Perhaps it would be better to replace the word "fear" with "respect." Spanking a child is not equal to "hitting" them. A "spanking" is a particular way of "hitting" a child, in a particular part of the body (a rather absorbant part) for a particular reason. Done in the wrong way, for the wrong reason, with the wrong attitude, they can be abusive. Done correctly, they can do what other forms of discipline cannot accomplish - at least not with every child. Very often, parents who are screaming at their 15-year old kids who are defying them directly is a consequence of the parent's refusal to spank the child and establish the chain of command - that "time outs" and rational discussions didn't really impress upon the child the need to respect parents; kids who aren't made aware of who is in control become very unstable because their world has no clear control in it. It's an issue of respect, not fear.

Red, you are so right. In the past, I worked in law enforcement and my husband works for the juvenile court system. It is a very common thing now to see a parent argue/debate with a young teen. There is a time and place for such discussions between parent and child, but the police department after the child has been arrested isn't one of them. After over 20 years in his line of work, my husband says he can tell very quickly which children have received parenting and displine and which ones haven't. The ones who haven't he will see over and over again.

[bibliophile190]

Okay, here's my two cents worth. I was spanked a few times when I was younger. It was for things like lying and jumping on the bed when I'd been told not to several times. My parents had told me not to several times, and when I didn't stop or I mouthed off to them, they would swat me on the bottom. It never came near to abuse. I love my parents very much, I don't live in fear, I hold no grudges, and I definetly stopped doing it. And I'm not predisposed to violence because of it. Of course it's abuse if someone smacks you into a wall, but the pro-spankers on this board are simply advocating (from what I've gathered, correct me if I'm wrong) a butt-swat. It's okay that you disagree with this method, it's up to you how you discipline your children, but it's not okay to imply that the people who do spank are abusive, or morally defficient.