Sauce for Sass? Peppers and parenting

[Tiassa]

Source: Washington Post
Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52899-2004Aug9.html
Title: "Feeling the Heat"
Date: August 10, 2004

The latest parenting disciplinary controversy to arise seems to be the practice of "hot saucing" a child, or forcing a child to endure pepper sauce on the tongue.

"Hot saucing," or "hot tongue," has roots in Southern culture, according to some advocates of the controversial disciplinary method, but it has spread throughout the country. Nobody keeps track of how many parents do it, but most experts contacted for this story, including pediatricians, psychologists and child welfare professionals, were familiar with it.

The use of hot sauce has been advocated in a popular book, in a magazine for Christian women and on Internet sites. Web-based discussions on parenting carry intense, often emotional exchanges on the topic.

But parents aren't the only ones asking "to sauce or not to sauce?" Several state governments have gotten involved in the debate. In Michigan in 2002, a child care center was sanctioned for using hot sauce to discipline a child. The mother of the 18-month-old boy reportedly gave the child care workers permission to use the sauce to help dissuade her son from biting other children.

Virginia's child protective services agency lists hot saucing among disciplinary tactics it calls "bizarre behaviors." The list includes such methods as forcing a child to kneel on sharp gravel, and locking him in a closet.

Source: Washington Post

The article includes input from saucing parents, including one who is so proud of her behavior that she would not be interviewed for the story by her real name. Parents who engage in the practice say nothing else has worked.

Crosen, who learned about the technique from a friend who carries packets of hot sauce in her purse to correct her own children's misbehavior, said she administers the sauce only "after many warnings, and for extreme circumstances," like when her son called his 3-year-old sister a "crybaby." She said she uses it about four times per year.

Source: Washington Post

The "experts," of course (pediatricians, psychologists, &c), recommend against the practice. Crosen, who would only be interviewed for the story by her maiden name, said "Walk a mile in my shoes first. What I'm doing is minor compared to what kids used to get 40 or 50 years ago . . . Everyone has to do what works for them, within reason."

The courageous testimonies continue:

A mother of two children who relocated to Chevy Chase after a series of moves from Louisiana said the use of hot sauce on children who misbehave is widespread there. She used hot tongue once on her 5-year-old, for biting, and still believes in the practice. But she now says she wouldn't do it "because we can communicate more clearly."

The woman, who insisted on not being identified for this story because she didn't want to be publicly associated with the controversial practice, said that use of hot sauce instills fear and confirms the physical mastery of a parent, which she believes are negative outcomes. But "I need some discipline for egregious acts," she said.

The use of sauce is a last resort, a "worst-case scenario," she said, and should remain so. "As parents, we're all trying to do the best by our children. Hugs go a long way. Kids need lots of love and affection."

She has passed on the advice about hot sauce to friends in her child's play group. Like other parents who use hot sauce, she believes that "hot tongue is more of a threat than actual method" of applying discipline.

Source: Washington Post

Not all of the advocates try to hide their identity, though. Amanda DeLorme, who recommended the practice to a group called DC Urban Moms, notes that saucing, "works like a charm." DeLorme says she was at a point where she would try anything to correct her 2 1/2 year-old son's mouth, and tried saucing:

"He is better behaved as a result," DeLorme said. "He'll say, 'Please don't give me hot tongue, Mommy,' and [the threat] interrupts his behavior. We'll talk about it, hug and make up. That's what usually happens."

In those rare instances when the threat is not enough, DeLorme pries his mouth open and puts one drop of sauce on her son's tongue. "I don't feel like I am physically hurting him," said DeLorme, who described herself as "opposed to spanking and physical violence."

Like some other parents who use hot sauce, Crosen believes it is an appropriate punishment for "defiant talk. . . . I use it when the mouth is the offending party. He needs to learn to control what's coming out of his mouth. If it's his tongue that gets him in trouble, it's his tongue that gets punished."

As a Christian, she believes that "children need to respect and obey [parents] or they won't learn to respect and obey God. God won't hot sauce you, but you need to learn consequences."

Source: Washington Post

Lisa Whelchel, author of Creative Correction: Extraordinary Ideas for Everyday Disciplane (Focus on Family/Tyndale), notes that, "A correction has to hurt just a little," and explains that parents must draw a line and when the child crosses that line, there should be pain.

Comment:

I can't imagine resorting to this tactic on my daughter. What sets me so dubiously about it is the focus on pain and punishment. One anonymous practitioner noted that the use of hot sauce instills fear and confirms the physical mastery of the parent. Personally, I doubt that method of discipline inasmuch as it seems to define right and wrong in terms of what does or does not earn retribution from an authority figure.

We can start with McIlhenny Co., of Avery Island, Louisiana. The owners of the name "Tabasco" condemn the practice of saucing children. Company President Paul McIlhenny has described the practice as "strange and scary," and called it "abusive."

Or we might look to the so-called experts: Family therapist Carleton Kendrick says parents who use the technique are ill-informed, and points to various health hazards including tissue damage and choking hazards. Evangelical Christian author Tim Kimmel (Grace-Based Parenting, from W Publishing Group), admits he has heard of the efficacy of saucing, but notes:

"Just because something works, that doesn't mean it's a good idea . . . .

. . . . Fear can be very effective as a discipline technique, but it's overkill. You haven't corrected the problem, and it means nothing in terms of building character. Our job as parents is to build character, not to adjust behavior."

Source: Washington Post

Part of the question is the safety of the method itself:

Capsaicin, the substance that makes peppers hot, inflames membranes in the eyes, nose and mouth. While many adults find this feeling pleasurable, capsaicin can cause negative reactions even in the third of the adult population that has no tolerance for ingesting it, according to Joel Gregory, publisher of Chile Pepper magazine.

There are additional risks for children. Giorgio Kulp, a pediatrician in Montgomery County, said that the risk of swelling as well as the possibility of unknown allergies make the use of hot sauce on children dangerous.

"Every child's reaction, physically, is different," he said, adding that a parent who hears that hot sauce works safely on one child should be wary of using it on another child.

Source: Washington Post

Author Whelchel, whose fame also includes a stint as a Mouseketeer and her tenure as Blair on TV's The Facts of Life, exemplifies unintentionally the problems of such discipline:

For example, she suggests hiding something a child has failed to put away, to teach the lesson that things left out may disappear. She suggests telling a child who refuses to hold your hand while crossing a street, "I can either hold your hand or hold your hair."

In addition, Whelchel offers the following: "For lying or other offenses of the tongue, I 'spank' my kids' tongues. I put a tiny drop of hot sauce on the end of my finger and dab it onto my child's tongue. It stings for a while, but it abates. (It's the memory that lingers!)" . . . .

. . . . "If there's a mom who shakes the bottle on the kid's tongue, that mom probably does deserve to have someone poking into her business," Whelchel said. "But I think most moms are caring and intuitive. You can't throw out a bunch of good stuff because of the exceptions."

"Creative Correction" provides long lists of scriptural passages that, in Whelchel's view, justify a variety of disciplinary practices.

For example, she quotes the Book of Proverbs -- "The mouth of the righteous brings forth wisdom, but a perverse tongue will be cut out" -- and follows with this suggestion: "A short pinch by a clothespin on the tongue can discourage foul language."

Source: Washington Post

Much of the argument seems to be taking place among Christians; I'm not yet sure whether that notion is significant in and of itself.

The questions that arise are fairly straightforward:

• Is fear of punishment the best, only, or proper reason to behave?
• How many of these folks checked with their doctors before dosing their kids with pepper?
• Will the same process work equally on my child as it did on Joe's?
• What is the result of proper behavior? The child's benefit or the parent's peace of mind?

"She told us the devil was dancing on our tongue, and she put a drop of Tabasco on it to drive him away," said McGowen, who grew up in Philadelphia . . . "All I had to do was see the bottle. Even if [my mother] was just using it for cooking or adding it to a recipe, it put fear in me."

McGowen will not pass her saucing experience down to her son.

"I don't need to resort to chemical warfare . . . ."

Source: Washington Post

Which brings us back 'round to a central question that troubles me: One of the parents in the article used the sauce on her 2 1/2 year-old child for "defiant talk," in order to teach that "children need to respect and obey [parents] or they won't learn to respect and obey God."

Now, as many aspersions as I might cast on the bit about God, I'm much more intrigued by the notion of her 2 1/2 year-old's defiant talk.

I get to experience that phase next year. I'm actually rather quite excited, but that's beside the point. Rather, I would like to know where the 2 1/2 year-old learned such defiant talk as to warrant what another mother calls "chemical warfare"? After all, before I get around to undertaking disciplinary measures, I hope to have some understanding of the nature of my child's defiant talk. If she's merely imitating her mother and myself, what use is hot sauce? In addition to establishing my physical mastery, I would be reminding my daughter to not imitate her parents, at the stake of pain.

I expect my daughter's defiant talk to derive in some tangible manner from the conduct of her mother and myself. Before I go about scorching her tongue, I ought to consider what comes off my own.

Of course, if she takes after her mother I might be obliged to skip straight past hot sauce to electroshock therapy.

So ... whaddaya think?

• Who's been sauced?
• Who sauces their kids?
• What wisdom might such folks have to offer this discussion?

Take "grabbing," for instance. In one of the most remarkable turns I've witnessed, my partner dropped her harsh rebuke and instead played "peek-a-boo" with my daughter after she snatched momma's glasses. "Where's Emma Grace?" asked mother curiously, peering around the room. Emma tried to place the glasses back on momma's nose and then applauded: "There's Emma!"

I thought it was cute at the time, but she doesn't insist on swiping our eyeglasses anymore. No spanking, no wrenching, no yelling.

We--or at least I, as my partner is unpredictable in such cases--will continue our policy of nonviolence. In fact, I insist upon it. As such, this practice of peppering one's children seems rather ... mistaken.
____________________

• Buckholtz, Alison. "Feeling the Heat." Washington Post, August 10, 2004; page HE01. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A52899-2004Aug9.html

 

[§outh§tar]

Wow, all I have to say is Westerners have long scorned alien practices and this is nothing new to the list.

Certainly, what I used to get when I was a youth is nothing compared to this soft treatment. I wonder what all the foolishness is about. Since when did parents start taking their children to see psychologists?

A merciless beating does wonders.

Spare the rod and spoil the child


If Americans, blinded by what they believe to be best for everyone, decide what has worked for generations before there even was an America is of no use, they had better keep it to themselves. Not everyone is into that sensitivity crap.

 

[Dreamwalker]

I think that the method described above is... well, yes, it is scary. I would never condition my children in such a way. Especially considering the risks involved. Why should I instill fear into my offspring? I do not see a reason for that. It would limit children.

Alas, I have to admit that I have never heard of that disciplinary methods, but I can imagine that the children may react in ways that are not pleasing to the parents. If similar treatment would be applied to me, I suppose that I would come to hate my parents over the time. And I would have a definite reason for it. Anyway, this would result in future problems. There are many ways to treat a young kid, to raise him up as a sensible and reasonable person, but with this kind of treatment, I do not think that a normal person would be the result.

And on the topic of general physical punishment for children, I do not doubt it´s efficiency to control the children through fear, but fear is not a good base for a relationship and for a developing personality.

 

[Tiassa]

And Westerners have long embraced barbarism.

Wow, all I have to say is Westerners have long scorned alien practices and this is nothing new to the list.

Among the most scorned "alien"-seeming practices is the notion that one should set an example for their children.

Remember that what took place in the past leads to what takes place today. Beating children doesn't make the child into a bad person, and it doesn't necessarily mean the parent is a bad person, but when we look at the inflexible, two-dimensional, F.o.S. aspects of our communities in the West, the pattern is easy enough to see.

The simplistic echoes of outmoded familial disciplinary methods are heard in all aspects of life.

We'll do the litany later. It can get very long, depending on how detailed one wishes it to be.

 

[§outh§tar]

"Outmoded"? Isn't this the word on the tongue of everyone who considers themselves to be 'modern'. You people of today sicken me, no respect for the elders of old.

More self righteousness in here, I hear..


Since when did setting an example for a child register as the tried and true method for raising the young.

People these days are so soft and then they beat their breasts 14 years later when they recieve a notice of vandalism. I wonder what your statement says to good parents who turned out bad fruit because they didn't want to maim little Sammy when his demons plagued him.

Surely setting an example is a way, but the way?


-----
The Publisher of Harris’s book offers this comment:

“How much credit do parents deserve when their children turn out well? How much blame when they turn out badly? This electrifying book explodes some of our deepest beliefs about children and parents and gives us something radically [an appropriate term!] new to put in their place. With eloquence and wit, Judith Harris explains why parents have little power to determine the sort of people their children become. It is what children experience outside the home, in the company of their peers, that matters most. Parents don’t socialize children: children socialize children.”
----

More foolish excuses for shamefully weak parents.

Patients have a great responsibility to fashing the character of their offspring, not FEAR their offspring.

----
Points to consider.

1) This does not mean children cannot deviate from the good way of instruction.
2) Peer pressure can undo a lifetime of instruction

 

[Dreamwalker]

People today are so soft?

Well, that may be. But I do not see a situation in that I would beat a child.

If a child disobeys me, I would ask why, I suppose that there would be a reasonable course of action without using violence.

Another occurence:
If my child would hit another one, well, just too bad, my heart is bleeding...

But of course, if the little asshole would use force against me, or others, unjustified, I would retaliate likewise.

But I would not beat or punish my child for saying things that I do not want to hear, like it was mentioned in the articles. Nor would I carve fear into my child just for my own convenience (meaning (absolute) control).

Children should find their own limits.

 

[spidergoat]

Oh, my God, that's so wrong. Only an idiot would resort to chemicals to teach their children, not to mention the possibility of hot-sauce related psychosis. I mean, would you ever look at spicy foods the same way again? Negative reinforcement has limited effectiveness... maybe before kids can speak, a slap on the wrist to keep them away from the stove or something is ok, but that's about it.

 

[robtex]

I was having a causual conversation with a physical therapist the other day and he told me he would not beat his little boy. I asked why not and he says why would you (or anyone) teach your child to fear you? Saucing is along the same lines--teaching fear instead of mutual respect for those you live with.

Christanity embracing this activty makes sense. The Christian Bible is based on fear. Follow God and accept Jesus Christ as your savior or burn in hell. Repent or be punished for wicked sins.

God in the Christian Bible regually killed those whom didn't live up to his standards and maybe Christian mothers justify torturing their childern as a better alternative than seeming them grow up to be hellions and being damned to hell for their life choices.

Really though can their be morliaty instilled when the motivating factor is fear ?

 

[spidergoat]

Good point, I guess when faced with the prospect of eternal fire, a little torture with organic acid seems minor.

 

[§outh§tar]

@ robtex

Your statement is illogical. Certainly, if such was the case then all Christians would have to do is kill their children to ensure their salvation.


God is not mocked, whatever a man sows so shall he reap.

Christanity embracing this activty makes sense.

Your generalization exposes your bias.

 

[robtex]

Southstar,

"God is not mocked, whatever a man sows so shall he reap" --what are u babbling about?

Do you mean Christanity being based on fear? I am confused as to which statement you think is illogical. If it the Christanity being based on fear read some of passages I posted from the Bible (source Biblegateway.com).

exodus 34:7
maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation
exodus 20:5

You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,

leviticus 18:25
Even the land was defiled; so I punished it for its sin, and the land vomited out its inhabitants.

leviticus 26:18
'If after all this you will not listen to me, I will punish you for your sins seven times over

numbers 14:18
'The LORD is slow to anger, abounding in love and forgiving sin and rebellion. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.'

Deuteronomy 5:9

You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,

Ezra 7:26

Whoever does not obey the law of your God and the law of the king must surely be punished by death, banishment, confiscation of property, or imprisonment
Matthew 5:22
But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother[ 5:22 Some manuscripts brother without cause] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca,[ 5:22 An Aramaic term of contempt] ' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.

Matthew 23:23
You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?

Matthew 9:45

And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell
Matthew 9:47
And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell
Peter 2:4

For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell,[ 2:4 Greek Tartarus] putting them into gloomy dungeons[ 2:4 Some manuscripts into chains of darkness] to be held for judgment



Off the beaten path but you used the word illogical. Are you implying within that sentence that Christanity is based on logic?

Last part Christianty dictates the only way through salvation is though Christ. (not death)....not accepting Christ is a sentence from God and Jesus to Hell. That is what I mean by worship through fear.

 

[§outh§tar]

Ummm... did you really have to post it that many times? :bugeye:

 

[Naomi]

Assume, then, that Christianity and the major Abrahamic religions are based on fear.

What makes an assumption that the hot-sauce discipline method came from them? What makes an assumption that any sort of swift-punishment-based discipline came from the Abrahamic religions?

Seeing how common it is in most of the world, not to mention how nearly all Oriental countries use physical punishment as discipline, one can only assume it is religion-neutral.

Christians, don't give yourselves too much credit. Though I won't deny that it isn't out of your character.

 

[§outh§tar]

African countries use physical punishment as discipline as well.

What then robtex? Shall we say that these are also adhering to the Bible?

Your scapegoat has eluded you.

Last part Christianty dictates the only way through salvation is though Christ. (not death)....not accepting Christ is a sentence from God and Jesus to Hell. That is what I mean by worship through fear.

I'm afraid your statement is partly incorrect. One does not worship through fear.

Matthew 13:44
"The kingdom of heaven is like treasure hidden in a field. When a man found it, he hid it again, and then in his joy went and sold all he had and bought that field.

Luke 19:37
When he came near the place where the road goes down the Mount of Olives, the whole crowd of disciples began joyfully to praise God in loud voices for all the miracles they had seen:

Luke 24:52
Then they worshiped him and returned to Jerusalem with great joy.

John 15:11
I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete.

Acts 2:28
You have made known to me the paths of life; you will fill me with joy in your presence

Romans 14:17
For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit,

Romans 15:13
May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in him, so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit.


I do believe the texts speak for themselves. The keyword is obviously joy and NOT fear.

 

[§outh§tar]

Christians, don't give yourselves too much credit. Though I won't deny that it isn't out of your character.

Leave it to a disbeliever to take credit from Whom credit is due.


The keyword is 'responsibility', not 'credit'

 

[Tiassa]

Mod Hat - (Cleanup on Aisle 42)

did you really have to post it that many times?

Got it ... or so y'all may have noticed. Sorry for the delay on this post. I got sidetracked in the kitchen.

No worries. I think I see what happened.

Should that be the case, it's worth mentioning that I've made it my habit to re-launch the topic in a new window if the browser times out, in order to see where it dropped. Often, the post goes through, but the rest of the cycle back to the topic is where the problem is.

 

[Naomi]

Leave it to a disbeliever to take credit from Whom credit is due.


The keyword is 'responsibility', not 'credit'

Ouch.

 

[Arditezza]

With my parents, it was Joy dishwashing soap. If we swore, we'd get a glob of it on our tongue and if it was a particularly bad slew of words, Da would break out the scrubbrush as well. My brother swore once at dinner, and it was enough to make me never swear in front of my parents even now. My sister also did it once, but she didn't get the scrubbrush. He would threaten it after that to the both of them, and they would apologize. Needless to say, none of us children are foul-mouthed or uncouth in any way.

We never got sauced, but I have a girlfriend who has done that to her son a few times. She and her ex have joint custody, and when her son goes over to his fathers for a few days, he always comes back swearing. The first few times, he got sauced and now he doesn't do it anymore. My problem is that he still swears like a pig outside her sight (It's so bad I won't let him play with my son unsupervised) so it really hasn't done any good except teach him that he can't swear around his mother. While that works for her, it does not work for the rest of the world who has to deal with him when she is not around. I don't know what the right answer for her is, and I don't give others advice on how to raise their children so we just deal with it in our own way.

I don't believe that communication alone solves the problem of child discipline, and I don't believe that time-outs do much good either. I'm a consequential parenting type. If my son draws on the wall, he gets a bucket and a sponge and he cleans it up. If he doesn't put his laundry in the hamper, he goes to school as the "stinky kid". If he doesn't put his toys away when he is asked, all toys he failed to put away get locked in a trunk for a week. When he doesn't do his homework, he has to do it that night, plus three more assignments I give him and he has to complete them before dinner or his dinner gets cold until he's done. On a small scale I teach him adult lessons. If you leave things out in the open, they are likely to get stolen. If you go to work stinky, your coworkers will not be happy about it, and if you slack at work, you will have to stay late until it's all done. He doesn't swear, as I'm not the swearing type and by my reaction to my girlfriends child he understands that swearing is offensive. He's polite and helpful to others, and he's a good kid. I have swatted him on the tooshie a few times when he was younger, but I always felt worse than he did so I stopped.

But, it also depends on the child. My second child is unruly, loud, and a bit aggressive. I am having trouble figuring out what works best for him. He's 3 now, so I can expect tantrums and such but I can't figure out which way is best for him.

I would, however never sauce my child. I don't think that's right for some reason.