@ Osok
I agree wholeheartedly with you. My boys are both 10 now and had I not have laid a hand on them at any time they would probably be entirely uncontrollable. As it is they know when they've gone too far and now fortunately I can reason with them (most of the time).
I believe that being able to reason with a child and explain why they shouldn't do something is always the best way. However, small boys (in my experience) don't always have the concentration span or the ability to reason as an adult would.
Rather than giving them a guilt trip or sitting them out on the Naughty Step for hours at a time, often a quick sharp smack on the backside was enough to shock them out of their dangerous behaviour. It also impressed upon them that when I said 'No', I meant No.

As far as hitting a two year old is concerned - no that's not appropriate. Perhaps when you have an uncontrollable five or six year old on your hands you may think differently.

Back before I had mine and I was teaching six year olds I remember being shocked and appalled when a particularly badly behaved boy told me his father sent him to his bedroom or smacked him when he was naughty. I'd never do that, I thought then. Once I'd got my own badly behaved boys I changed my mind.

And children are naturally badly behaved. It's a human trait - we like to push boundaries and see just what we can get away with. My sons are not fed on e-numbers, they do not have televisions in their bedroom, they both play rugby, go mountain biking and climbing - these are not spoilt, over-weight, under-achieving chavs who never go to bed at night and whose parents spend their days in a haze of alcohol and weed.
They do however have a reckless, adventuring streak, constantly try my patience and all in all are the modern day equivalent of Just William. In other words, normal boys.
( chickenlady b3ta's very own Elizabeth Taylor, Mon 5 May 2008, 21:05, Reply)