Oooo... wind blows.....
Wahhh...big santa (fountain)
Wahhh... bees in flower...
find mummy/ find daddyThese are just some of the things that Reese says... many more...can't remember....
G6PD Deficiency is a hereditary abnormality in the activity of an erythrocyte (red blood cell) enzyme. This enzyme, glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G-6-PD), is essential for assuring a normal life span for red blood cells, and for oxidizing processes. This enzyme deficiency may provoke the sudden destruction of red blood cells and lead to hemolytic anemia with jaundice following the intake of fava beans, certain legumes and various drugs
The defect is sex-linked, transmitted from mother (usually a healthy carrier) to son (or daughter, who would be a healthy carrier too. This is due to the fact that the structure of G-6-PD is carried on the X chromosome: As stated by Ernest Beutler, M.D., "in females, only one of the two X chromosomes in each cell is active; consequently, female heterozygotes for G-6-PD deficiency have two populations of red cells; deficient cells and normal cells."
The deficit is most prevalent in Africa (affecting up to 20% of the population), but is common also around the Mediterranean (4% - 30%) and Southeast Asia. Please note that there are more than 400 genetic variants of the deficiency. You can determine whether you are G-6-PD deficient by a simple blood test. To determine your variant, you must test yourself at specialized genetic labs.
With G-6-PD deficiency you can have a perfectly normal life, provided you avoid certain drugs and foodstuffs. It is therefore of great importance to learn whether you or your baby suffer from the deficiency, so that you can watch your diet and drug intake, and warn your physician or pediatrician.
A) If the father is unaffected (healthy) and the mother is a carrier (no clinical symptoms):
B) If the father is G6PD deficient and the mother is unaffected:
C) If the father is G6PD deficient and the mother is a carrier:
D) If the father is unaffected and the mother is G6PD deficient:
How would you call fava beans in other languages?English: Fava beans, broad beans;
Spanking demonstrates that it's all right for people to hit people, and especially for big people to hit little people, and stronger people to hit weaker people. Children learn that when you have a problem you solve it with a good swat. A child whose behavior is controlled by spanking is likely to carry on this mode of interaction into other relationships with siblings and peers, and eventually a spouse and offspring.
But, you say, "I don't spank my child that often or that hard. Most of the time I show him lots of love and gentleness. An occasional swat on the bottom won't bother him." This rationalization holds true for some children, but other children remember spanking messages more than nurturing ones. You may have a hug-hit ratio of 100:1 in your home, but you run the risk of your child remembering and being influenced more by the one hit than the 100 hugs, especially if that hit was delivered in anger or unjustly, which happens all too often.
Physical punishment shows that it's all right to vent your anger or right a wrong by hitting other people. This is why the parent's attitude during the spanking leaves as great an impression as the swat itself. How to control one's angry impulses (swat control) is one of the things you are trying to teach your children. Spanking sabotages this teaching. Spanking guidelines usually give the warning to never spank in anger. If this guideline were to be faithfully observed 99 percent of spanking wouldn't occur, because once the parent has calmed down he or she can come up with a more appropriate method of correction.
VERBAL AND EMOTIONAL "HITTING"
Even a guilt-relieving hug from a parent after a spank doesn't remove the sting. The child is likely to feel the hit, inside and out, long after the hug. Most children put in this situation will hug to ask for mercy. "If I hug him, daddy will stop hitting me." When spanking is repeated over and over, one message is driven home to the child, "You are weak and defenseless."
Joan, a loving mother, sincerely believed that spanking was a parental right and obligation needed to turn out an obedient child. She felt spanking was "for the child's own good." After several months of spank-controlled discipline, her toddler became withdrawn. She would notice him playing alone in the corner, not interested in playmates, and avoiding eye contact with her. He had lost his previous sparkle. Outwardly he was a "good boy." Inwardly, Spencer thought he was a bad boy. He didn't feel right and he didn't act right. Spanking made him feel smaller and weaker, overpowered by people bigger than him.
Spanking also devalues the role of a parent. Being an authority figure means you are trusted and respected, but not feared. Lasting authority cannot be based on fear. Parents or other caregivers who repeatedly use spanking to control children enter into a lose-lose situation. Not only does the child lose respect for the parent, but the parents also lose out because they develop a spanking mindset and have fewer alternatives to spanking. The parent has fewer preplanned, experience-tested strategies to divert potential behavior, so the child misbehaves more, which calls for more spanking. This child is not being taught to develop inner control.
Hitting devalues the parent-child relationship. Corporal punishment puts a distance between the spanker and the spankee. This distance is especially troubling in home situations where the parent-child relationship may already be strained, such as single-parent homes or blended families. While some children are forgivingly resilient and bounce back without a negative impression on mind or body, for others it's hard to love the hand that hits them.
The Cycle of Misbehavior
Misbehavior Worse behavior Spanking Decreased self-esteem, anger
One of the goals of disciplinary action is to stop the misbehavior immediately, and spanking may do that. It is more important to create the conviction within the child that he doesn't want to repeat the misbehavior (i.e, internal rather than external control). One of the reasons for the ineffectiveness of spanking in creating internal controls is that during and immediately after the spanking, the child is so preoccupied with the perceived injustice of the physical punishment (or maybe the degree of it he's getting) that he "forgets" the reason for which he was spanked. Sitting down with him and talking after the spanking to be sure he's aware of what he did can be done just as well (if not better) without the spanking part. Alternatives to spanking can be much more thought-and-conscience-provoking for a child, but they may take more time and energy from the parent. This brings up a main reason why some parents lean toward spanking—it's easier.
Rod verses - what they really mean. The following are the biblical verses which have caused the greatest confusion:
"Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline will drive it far from him." (Prov. 22:15)
"He who spares the rod hates his son, but he who loves him is careful to discipline him." (Prov. 13:24)
"Do not withhold discipline from a child; if you punish him with the rod, he will not die. Punish him with the rod and save his soul from death." (Prov. 23:13-14)
"The rod of correction imparts wisdom, but a child left to itself disgraces his mother." (Prov. 29:15)
At first glance these verses may sound pro-spanking. But you might consider a different interpretation of these teachings. "Rod" (shebet) means different things in different parts of the Bible. The Hebrew dictionary gives this word various meanings: a stick (for punishment, writing, fighting, ruling, walking, etc.). While the rod could be used for hitting, it was more frequently used for guiding wandering sheep. Shepherds didn't use the rod to beat their sheep - and children are certainly more valuable than sheep. As shepherd-author Philip Keller teaches so well in A Shepherd Looks At Psalm 23, the shepherd's rod was used to fight off prey and the staff was used to gently guide sheep along the right path. ("Your rod and your staff, they comfort me." – Psalm 23:4).
Jewish families we've interviewed, who carefully follow dietary and lifestyle guidelines in the Scripture, do not practice "rod correction" with their children because they do not follow that interpretation of the text.
The book of Proverbs is one of poetry. It is logical that the writer would have used a well-known tool to form an image of authority. We believe that this is the point that God makes about the rod in the Bible – parents take charge of your children. When you re-read the "rod verses," use the concept of parental authority when you come to the word "rod," ratherthan the concept of beating or spanking. It rings true in every instance.
While Christians and Jews believe that the Old Testament is the inspired word of God, it is also a historical text that has been interpreted in many ways over the centuries, sometimes incorrectly in order to support the beliefs of the times. These "rod" verses have been burdened with interpretations about corporal punishment that support human ideas. Other parts of the Bible, especially the New Testament, suggest that respect, authority, and tenderness should be the prevailing attitudes toward children among people of faith.
In the New Testament, Christ modified the traditional eye-for-an-eye system of justice with His turn-the-other-cheek approach. Christ preached gentleness, love, and understanding, and seemed against any harsh use of the rod, as stated by Paul in 1 Cor. 4:21: "Shall I come to you with the whip (rod), or in love and with a gentle spirit?" Paul went on to teach fathers about the importance of not provoking anger in their children (which is what spanking usually does): "Fathers, do not exasperate your children" (Eph. 6:4), and "Fathers, do not embitter your children, or they will be discouraged" (Col. 3:21).
In our opinion, nowhere in the Bible does it say you must spank your child to be a godly parent.
SPARE THE ROD!There are parents who should not spank and children who should not be spanked. Are there factors in your history, your temperament, or your relationship with your child that put you at risk for abusing your child? Are there characteristics in your child that make spanking unwise?
If the answer to any of these queries is yes, you would be wise to develop a no-spanking mindset in your home and do your best to come up with noncorporal alternatives. If you find you are unable to do this on your own, talk with someone who can help you.
In our experience, and that of many who have thoroughly researched corporal punishment, children whose behaviors are spank-controlled throughout infancy and childhood may appear outwardly compliant, but inside they are seething with anger. They feel that their personhood has been violated, and they detach themselves from a world they perceive has been unfair to them. They find it difficult to trust, becoming insensitive to a world that has been insensitive to them.
Parents who examine their feelings after spanking often realize that all they have accomplished is to relieve themselves of anger. This impulsive release of anger often becomes addicting—perpetuating a cycle of ineffective discipline. We have found that the best way to prevent ourselves from acting on the impulse to spank is to instill in ourselves two convictions: 1. That we will not spank our children. 2. That we will discipline them. Since we have decided that spanking is not an option, we must seek out better alternatives.
9.ABUSIVE HITTING HAS BAD LONG-TERM EFFECTS
The evidence against spanking is overwhelming. Hundreds of studies all come to the same conclusions:
1. The more physical punishment a child receives, the more aggressive he or she will become.
2. The more children are spanked, the more likely they will be abusive toward their own children.
3. Spanking plants seeds for later violent behavior.4.Spanking doesn't work.
In my house, my father had a belt hanging on a hook in the kitchen. It was a visible reminder to be good or to be put over his knee. We were all afraid of that belt.
One day, my father couldn’t find the belt. Eventually it was found in the trash can — my little sister, then age six, had decided the garbage would be a better place for it. She was due for a spanking and was trying to avoid it. Once discovered, she knew her spanking would be worse than ever.
When my father put her over his knee, he noticed that her little rear end had been replaced by a large lumpy surface — wadded-up towels in her underpants. Boy, did he get angry! He pulled out the towels, pulled down her pants and proceeded to hit her. I can still remember the welts on her bottom after her bare skin was hit with that belt. I remember thinking, “Yuck!”
As a mother with four children of my own, the memory brings tears to my eyes. The odd thing about this story is that both my sister and I remember the spanking, but neither of us can recall what the behavior was that caused it. We know that our father must have been trying to teach a lesson. The lesson, however, has been lost. The memory of the spanking is all that remains.
A legacy of punishment
Our parents punished us the same way in which they were punished. And their parents punished them the same way that they themselves were punished as children. After all, we learn what we live. We tend to parent the way we were parented.
Somewhere along the line, parents need to stop the pattern. They need to evaluate their child-rearing methods, especially checking for those destructive practices that they may be following simply out of habit. Parents need to research the current data, analyze their current parenting results and continually look for better answers.
I have four children. They are respectful, responsible, well behaved and just plain great kids. I don’t believe in spanking and have used only positive, loving discipline with them. Parents often ask me whether they should spank their children or not. When looking at the issue of spanking, I urge them to consider the following.
Spanking does nothing to teach a child to develop inner discipline. A child’s focus is on the spanking itself, not on a review of the behavior that led to it. After a spanking, a child does not sit in his room and think, “Gee, I sure goofed. But I really learned something. Next time I’ll behave.” Instead a child is typically thinking, “It’s not fair! She doesn’t understand! I hate her.”
Spanking is seen as punishment for a crime or payment for a debt. In other words, once paid, they have a clean slate. Spanking gets in the way of allowing a child to develop a conscience. The guilt that follows misbehavior is a prime motivator for change. Spanking takes away the guilt, because the crime has been paid for.
Spanking makes the parent feel better. When we get angry, we move into the “fight or flight” mode. Our adrenaline increases, and we have a primitive need to strike out. Hitting releases this negative energy and helps us feel better. But even a minor spanking can escalate into major abuse. Parents have reported that during the heat of the moment, it’s hard to stop hitting, and some say that they don’t even realize how hard they’ve hit until they see the bruise.
Parents who spank sometimes come to rely upon spanking as their primary source of discipline. If you give yourself permission to spank, it becomes a quick fix for all kinds of problems. It blocks off the effective use of other more productive skills.
Spanking gets in the way of a healthy parent-child relationship. Children look up to their parents as protectors, teachers and guides. When a parent breaks that pattern by hitting a child, the relationship suffers.
Spanking is not an effective form of discipline. Hitting a child typically stops a behavior at that point because of shock, fear or pain. But most children turn around and repeat the same behavior – sometimes even the same day! Parents who spank often find themselves spanking a child many times a day – so if spanking “works,” why is this so?
Spanking does teach a lesson. The lesson is: “When you don’t know what else to do, hit!” or “When you’re bigger, you can hit,” or “When you’re really angry, you can get your way by hitting.” It’s common knowledge that children who are frequently hit are more likely to accept the use of violence and are more likely to hit other children. It only makes sense, because after all, children learn what they live. Children who are spanked often have more resentment and anger and lower self-esteem.
What if your child is in danger?
Even with these points in mind, I’ve read several articles that address the issue of spanking where the writer says it’s okay to spank if the child is in danger – for instance, if a toddler is running into the street or reaching out to touch a hot burner on the stove. They suggest that at these times, a few pops on the rear end are okay.
I must admit this naïve mindset baffles me. Why in the world would we want to teach our children about safety by hurting them? Does your ski instructor jab you with his ski pole to teach you not to jump off the chair lift?
A parent who believes that spanking is the only effective way to teach a young child about safety issues is not giving the child enough credit. Children – even little ones – can indeed learn about safety through our teaching them. As a matter of fact, through teaching they will learn much more, as they can absorb the reason for the rule and, over time, learn to make good decisions on their own.
I watched two friends one summer teach their toddlers not to run in the street. Mom A give her toddler a swat on the rear every time he went into the street. Mom B picked up her toddler, looked him in the eye and said, “NO street! Dangerous. Stay by Mommy.” By the end of the summer, both children learned to stay out of the street. Which child understood why? And which child has better communication with his mother?
Positive, respectful, consistent discipline is the real key to raising well-behaved children.