Losing my libertarianism: parenting edition

[Pointedstick]

My wife and I spanked our son for the first time yesterday.

We didn't want to go here. We really didn't, for a lot of reasons. The cultures that we come from say you don't hit your kids. Our libertarian leanings say that it makes no sense to hit a child you're teaching not to hit others; you're demonstrating that hitting is okay if you're in stronger or in a position of power. And it also just seemed distasteful to us.

Well, all of that ideology hit a wall. Our son is a very strong-willed child, which is probably a good thing overall. He's smart too. And he found our weakness: there's a limit on how far we're willing to go with punishment. So over the past few months, he's been ramping up how much violence he expresses, hitting more and more. Sending him to his room didn't work because he'd trash it. Time-outs would barely work because he'd just leave the time-out-chair, so we'd have to hold him in it, and he would kick and heatbutt, and at that point, we were basically out of options. It got to the point where he threw a heavy wooden toy at my wife's head yesterday and we realized that it was getting completely out of control. He could easily have injured her very badly.

I finally realized that, despite our desire to teach him that hitting is wrong, what we were actually succeeding in teaching him is that hitting is basically consequence-free: when you're willing to hit, but your adversary isn't, you win. That's the opposite of what I want him to learn!

So we spanked him the next time he hit. Nothing emotional, just a few quick slaps on the butt, followed by hugs and cuddles. After two times, he got the message and spontaneously stopped his tantrum. Today he hasn't hit at all. He's been an angel. It feels miraculous after months of escalating violence.



Ideologically, I realize that this is basically a rejection of both liberal and libertarian orthodoxy in favor of a conservative one: that people in a position of power can hit you if they feel they have a good reason to, which is a sentiment that is anathema to the former two viewpoints. But you know what? It's true. Despite all the ideology, both liberals and libertarians live in a world where those with authority over you may indeed hit you if they feel they feel like they have a good reason. Libertarians hate it and liberals are in denial about it, but it's simply the world we live in.

I also realized that this is why conservatives focus on authority so much: that authority be just rather than arbitrary is like the central theme of their ideology. This may sound silly, but think about the show Walker: Texas Ranger (which I unashamedly admit enjoying for the lulz); I think that never has there been a truer and more consistent exemplification of the pure conservative viewpoint expressed in media. And you know who a lot of the villains are? They're not whiny liberals. They're not haughty ivory-tower intellectuals. They're not foreign terrorists. An enormous number of them are middle-aged white males who are abusing their positions of power. Crooked CEO, corrupt police chief, trucking company foreman who traffics drugs, you name it. This trope is so common.

This is a good lesson, I think. Don't try to teach people to dismantle or deny hierarchical power. It will exist. It always has, and it always will. Rather, teach people to use their power justly, compassionately, appropriately, and sparingly. It's a lesson that I realize I feel much more comfortable teaching my son than the lesson that power is bad, power corrupts, power should be distrusted and denied and avoided.

[Libertarian666]

That is not a violation of libertarianism, because libertarianism is for adults.

That does not mean that you are free morally to use violence against children. It means that children don't have the same rights as adults, because sometimes an adult has to use force on a child to prevent a worse outcome, e.g., to keep a kid from running into traffic. I think your example is another case like that.

[Cortopassi]

Glad I have girls...

My parents hit me at times, and I certainly know I deserved it.  My dad is not a very vocal guy, and unfortunately, when he showed emotion when I was younger, it was usually because I did something that required punishment.

But I don't recall ever getting the hugs, and do you understand why we/I did that talk afterward.  So while I have a decent relationship with him, we are not close.

I would say as long as you are following up with with the, hey we don't hate you, we just did this because of x/y/z and you all walk away good with that, that spanking is fine.  Seems it was a fine line for me and I ended up scared of him for a lot of my childhood.  The events were probably so transitory for him, it never bothered him to worry about what he was doing, but I have vivid memories of some of those events, and sadly, fewer good memories.

Been a crappy day.  This didn't help...

[dualstow]

Have you seen the Delta toilet ad in which the kid flushes all manner of things down the toilet, including a stuffed animal? I can't believe what that lil' bastard got away with. In real life, I did that when I was a tot. Flushed my family's toothbrushes down the toilet, among other things. I guess I was fascinated at the time.

My dad grabbed me and thrust my head in the bowl and flushed it while yelling at me. I have no conscious memory of it, but I shudder even during retellings. I recently joked w/ my dad whether or not it's too late to call social services.

So we spanked him the next time he hit. Nothing emotional, just a few quick slaps on the butt, followed by hugs and cuddles. After two times, he got the message and spontaneously stopped his tantrum. Today he hasn't hit at all. He's been an angel. It feels miraculous after months of escalating violence.

As a husband in a willfully childless relationship, I'm probably not entitled to comment. But I would say it appears that the end justifies the means. I was spanked, but never beaten, and I think it probably was for the best.

[Benko]

Dogma of whatever source not infrequently fails when the rubber hits the road.

Good for you that you found something appropriate i.e. something which actually works, and were open minded enough to try it.

[screwtape]

I spanked all my kids when they were growing up. They now tell me I didn't do it enough.

This kind of ties in with the other thread by the liberal teacher talking about the coddled children he has to deal with. Life has a lot of hard lessons for everybody, including a sentence of capital punishment that we all live under. A spanking isn't a big deal in the grand scheme of things as far as I'm concerned.

[MediumTex]

In a bind, pragmatism usually trumps ideology.

[MachineGhost]

I think you're being overdramatic.  You're losing your naive liberalism, not libertarianism.  Post-modern libertarians are pragmatic.  Whatever gets the job done so long as you're not exploiting others for your own profit.  There's very few situations in which you can use violence that isn't for your own profit.

[Reub]

So is it alright to spank ISIS if they act up?

[MachineGhost]

So is it alright to spank ISIS if they act up?

Do you think that would get the message through their thick skulls or would they gleefully and painfully behead you in retaliation for annoying them like a gnat?

[Xan]

So is it alright to spank ISIS if they act up?

Do you think that would get the message through their thick skulls or would they gleefully and painfully behead you in retaliation for annoying them like a gnat?

You ever try beheading a gnat?  Brother, it ain't easy.

[Kbg]

I don't think it is or isn't spanking. Every child is different. The issue is who is in control and parents should be the ones in control. The kids certainly know who is and isn't. Of course as the kids begin to turn into adults one has to let loose the reins increasingly until you fully let go. This process normally works much better if the parents started out in charge.

[Stewardship]

Ideologically, I realize that this is basically a rejection of both liberal and libertarian orthodoxy in favor of a conservative one: that people in a position of power can hit you if they feel they have a good reason to, which is a sentiment that is anathema to the former two viewpoints.

But even within this definition of "libertarian orthodoxy" (which I don't accept) wouldn't this case you described fall entirely under self-defense?

In a bind, pragmatism usually trumps ideology.

Speaking of ideology,

Proverbs 13:24 - Whoever spares the rod hates their children, but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them.
Proverbs 23:13 - Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you punish them with the rod, they will not die.

[MediumTex]

In my experience with three children, and two boys in particular, I have found the key is to create a credible threat of violence without having to actually resort to violence.

It's kind of the same thing that I'm sure police officers try to do when dealing with the public.  For example, even if I am having the friendliest conversation ever with a police officer, I never doubt for a moment that if I started acting crazy the police officer wouldn't hesitate to use force against me...but if I act right everything is super cool.