Frum People Don't Kiss or Hug Their Spouses...

... or at least that's what one couple wants their nearly teenage daughter to believe.

A very interesting and sad thread appeared on Imamother this past week in which the topic was discussed.  In the thread, a woman says that her very sheltered 12 year old daughter accidentally saw her neighbors making out on the couch.  The couple had apparently left their blinds open and hence the daughter was able to see them kissing and hugging.  Being very sheltered, she probably never saw anyone kiss beyond a quick peck on the cheek and was disgusted that her neighbors -- otherwise fine Jews (from my reading of the post) -- were "acting like chilonim."  As the poster puts it:

Obviously I'll never know just how much she saw but she was in total shock that this couple were "behaving like chilonim" and she was nauseous over the whole thing. Needless to say, my dd is very sheltered and could not imagine that anyone Charedi would do something so disgusting! 

The poster's first instinct was to tell the kid the truth -- that married couples do engage in such behavior but that it is meant to be private and that the couple should not have been doing such when others can see them.  And so she told her daughter.  Her daughter's reaction:

She was not happy with that answer and of course, started to ask me about her father and myself.  I didn't give her a straight answer but I did let her know that it's normal and natural.

So far, so good.  Kid sees something that was meant to be private.  Being a pre-teen and never having been exposed to this, she's kind of grossed out - a perfectly natural, normal reaction (given her upbringing).  Mother tells the child that it's normal and natural for couples to behave this way and that she'll learn more about it as she gets older.  

But the story doesn't end there.  When the woman's husband hears about the story, his reaction is different.  In her words:

When DH found this out he was not a happy camper. He would rather have her think that the neighbors are pervs or something. Oy.

And sure enough, he does just this.  In a later post, the woman recounts what happened the next day:

She ran to tell my dh about it this morning before I woke up. He told her that it's ossur and not done and that the neighbors are not beseder and that the only reason I said that it is done is because I didn't want to say bad things about the neighbors and that I didn't know what to say. She asked me if that's true and I said yes.

and

My husband says that the mere fact that she got such a shock from what she saw is enough of a reason to make sure she gets back on track and the only way to get her back to her equilibrium is to let her think that it's wrong. He says it's allowed by halacha to lie about this. I said that she'll eventually know I'm a liar and he said that the important thing here is not if I'm a liar or not - it's her state of mind.

The thread goes on for seven pages in total and in those seven pages, EVERY single woman who expressed an opinion on the matter all agreed that the initial response was the correct one and that her husband's approach was wrong.  These responses come from just about all segments of Orthodox Judaism as represented on Imamother -- Chareidi, Chassidic, Litvish, Modern Orthodox, etc.  Yet, in the end, she continues to stand by her husband's decision.

So, what's the end result here?

1.  Over the next few years, one or both of the following is going to happen to this poor girl:

     a.  She will internalize the message her father gave her, come to view physical intimacy with loathing and disgust and possibly even suffer from self-hate when her own hormones kick in and she begins to have desires for physical intimacy.  Oh, and heaven help her kallah teacher and future husband.


     b.  She will find out from her friends that her parents lied to her and that they cannot be trusted to provide her with serious mature answers to the important questions in life.

2.   The father, by telling his daughter that "it's ossur and not done and that the neighbors are not beseder" has, in effect, told her that the neighbors are disgusting perverts.  Granted, they should have closed the window blinds, but from the mother's description, it doesn't sound like we're dealing with serial exhibitionists here - it was a mistake, pure and simple.  But the father chose to paint them as deviants rather than have the courage to face the truth with his daughter.

3.  By telling his daughter that her mother lied, she, in effect, helped to undermine her credibility.  By "confirming" the "lie" (which, mind you, was in fact the truth), she has put herself in a position (vis-a-vis her daughter) from which she has no credible resolution.  IMHO, undermining a spouse's authority with anyone (and *especially* with her children) is one of the worst things you can do in a marriage. 

I don't want to address the fact that this couple has obviously never shown affection for each other in front of their kids.  If that's the way they want to run their marriage, that's their business.  It's not how Eeees and I run ours.  Our kids see us hug and kiss.  They can visibly see the affection that we have for each other -- whether we're in physical contact or not.  Eeees and I believe that it's healthy for children to see these things (and yes, they did go through their "ewwww" phase -- but they got over it) and to see that hugging, kissing and physical intimacy (within limits, of course) are perfectly normal and healthy in a married relationship. 

I can understand a parent wanting to keep their child sheltered.  It's a perfectly natural parental reaction.  Yes, some parents tend to overdo it, but at the core of a parent is the desire to protect his or her child.  Unfortunately, however, children cannot be sheltered forever.  At some point, they will have to be told about subjects that you might not want brought up -- and sometimes they'll come up sooner than you like.

We had this issue with one of our children.  Eeees and I were forced to give him information about intimacy sooner than we would have liked.  No, s/he didn't walk in on us or anything like that -- but s/he became aware of some information on his/her own and we, as parents, had to put that information in the proper context.  We could have lied to the kid and we could have buried our heads in the sand -- but that would have been the wrong thing to do.  The child would have grown up and internalized the wrong message about intimacy -- and that would have required far more extensive "fixing" later on and a total loss of trust in us as parents. So, we chose the responsible choice -- giving the child the information s/he needed and putting it in the proper context.

Children are naturally curious about the world.  They will constantly ask questions, and they will sometimes see or hear things that you would rather they not know about.  But a child also needs to know that they can come to their parents for accurate information when they see something that so shakes the foundation of their world.  That doesn't mean that you *have* to answer every question -- sometimes a subject should be avoided or pushed off -- but a child needs to understand that a parent won't lie to them.  As one poster in the thread beautifully put it, you can't be mechanech with sheker - period.

Perhaps our method isn't for everyone -- but I can say this:  if my kids had accidentally spied a married couple making out, they might have been a bit grossed out -- but they also would have realized that it's a natural part of the relationship.  Furthermore, they would know that they can talk to us about it and receive honest and truthful answers.  Eeees and I don't lie to our kids, nor do we EVER make the other parent out to be a liar.

The Wolf

Hat tip:  Pesky Settler and OnionSoupMix

Questioning The Educational Paradigm In Chinuch

As many of you know, I have three children -- Walter, George and Wilma. Walter is finishing up his junior year in high school and will be starting his senior year in the fall.

Walter is a highly intelligent teen. He analyzes situations, asks penetrating questions and is fully capable of thinking matters through on his own. He has the uncanny ability to tell when people are giving him sincere answers to his questions and when people are just "blowing smoke" at him to shut him up.

However, for all that, he is still a teenager, with the maturity of a teenager. Like many teens, he does not always understand the long-range implications of things. He does not always see how life experience gives his parents and elders an advantage* in life with regard to the grander picture. And he does not always understand why he needs to study things that aren't immediately relevant to his life.

One particular area of angst for him is Gemara. Walter is a "cut to the chase" kind of person. If you can give him a good reason for something, he can understand it and accept it (even if he doesn't particularly agree with it). He can understand, for example, the need to learn halacha, since it's relevant to him in that it informs him of the laws that govern his life as a Jew. But Gemara, on the other hand, doesn't interest him all that much. At this point in his life, it doesn't really matter all that much to him how Rava and Abaye argue out what the final law is going to be. Just tell him what the final answer is and leave it at that. The fact that the Gemara is in a foreign language written and paginated in a format that makes it very difficult for beginners to master doesn't help matters.

Truth to tell, I can understand his frustration because I felt the same way at his age. At his age, I too often complained that the Gemara wasn't organized more like the Shulchan Aruch, with chapters and law numbers that are very easy to find and tell you, in a very practical and final way, what the halacha is. I, too, was confounded by the language, the arcane rules (what's a binyan av again?) and the maddening lack of any indication on the page when a new topic begins or picks up on a topic that was dropped from the discussion three pages ago. The fact that not one of the rabbeim in my high school made any effort to engage me in Gemara didn't help matters**.

Of course, I'm much older now. I like to think that I'm a bit wiser as well. I have a better appreciation for Gemara than I did when I was sixteen and seventeen. But that's probably of little comfort to Walter at this stage of his life. In addition, I have to wonder how many other kids there are out there like Walter (and myself when I was that age) who wouldn't mind learning halacha but just aren't all that gung-ho about Gemara. I would guess (based on purely anecdotal evidence from other kids Walter's age) that the answer is quite a few.

In most Yeshivos, Gemara is taught beginning in the fifth grade, when a boy is about ten years old. By sixth grade, it is the major Judaic course of study, with students spending hours per day on the topic. This is usually done without any sort of "Introduction to Talmud" mini-course where the structure and methodology of the Gemara is explained. Usually it's taught by simply "jumping right in" to the first line.

Sometimes I wonder (and, admittedly I have no way to prove this) if things would be better if the system were changed. The Mishna in Avos gives us guidelines about when to introduce new topics in chinuch. The Mishna there says that at age five children should begin learning to read Tanach, at ten learn Mishna and at fifteen learn Gemara. The point that's being made, I believe, is that children should not be rushed into topics ahead of time. Perhaps we should have our kids spend five years learning Tanach primarily before advancing to Mishna. Perhaps it wouldn't hurt to spend five years learning Mishna before jumping in Gemara. There are probably several advantages to this approach:

• Our kids would probably have a better understanding of Tanach. Heck, they might even finish most of it in the five years.
• Our kids would have a better understanding of Mishna.
• When our kids finally do advance on to Gemara, they will be a bit older, wiser and more intellectually and emotionally capable of handling Gemara.

Of course, if a student is showing exceptional ability and is able to handle more advanced forms of study (for his age) he should be encouraged to do so. But that's not everyone. Not every 10 year old is an illuy (genius). The vast majority would stick to the 5-10-15 model (which is roughly equivalent in the United States to first, sixth and tenth grades).

But that's not quite what's happening. Nowadays, our boys start learning Chumash in first grade (some schools even start in preschool!). By third grade they're starting Mishna. They start Gemara during the fifth grade and, from the sixth grade onward, spend upwards of 60% of the Limudei Kodesh (Judaic Studies) portion of the day on it. The result is that kids come away with a substandard knowledge of Chumash and Mishna.

Other topics barely make it to the radar screen at all. Halacha is often taught on an ad-hoc basis. Navi is barely taught and, when it is, it is often limited to the early "historical" books -- Joshua and Samuel. Kings is barely taught. I have yet to hear of a right-wing yeshiva high school that teaches any of the true "prophetical" books -- Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel or the Twelve "Minor" Prophets. I'd be willing to bet dollars to donuts that outside of their Bar Mitzvah Haftorah or following the weekly haftorah in shul (do teens do that?), well over 90% of yeshiva high school graduates have never even cracked open a copy of Isaiah or an Ezekiel. Jewish Philosiphy? Forget about it. History? Maybe in some more left-leaning schools, but certainly not amongst the yeshivish. Hebrew language? Puh-leeeeez.

To be honest, I wonder if we're doing our sons a disservice with the existing educational model. They may (not will -- may) come away from high school knowing a fair amount of Gemara and Rishonim, but how much Judaism do they know? Does your average high schooler understand who Isaiah was and what he was prophesying about? They all know that Elijah was a great prophet, but do they understand why? Do they know anything about him other than the fact that he's still alive and something about a confrontation on Mt. Carmel?

Or, an even better question -- does the average high schooler even come away knowing how to learn Gemara well?

I'm curious why we have abandoned the educational paradigm as outlined in the Mishna. I've heard people say that it's a matter of "one-upmanship" among the schools to be "more frum" by starting Gemara earlier than the other schools. I'm not convinced that that's entirely true. Were it completely true, I'm sure we'd be hearing of yeshivos that claim to be teaching*** Gemara in the third grade. But if that's not the reason, there must be another -- and I'm very curious as to why those who put great stock in the words of Chazal chose to abandon their model of chinuch.

The Wolf


* Although, of course, by no means does that make us *always* right -- just more likely to be so.

** That's not to say it's all their fault, of course. A good share of the blame does lie with me -- but they have their share as well.

*** But not actually teaching, of course, since your average eight year old is not really capable of learning Gemara.

Rejected!

For a long time, I've felt that there is a significant problem to the way that Orthodox Judaism is practiced today. That problem is that we worry far too much about what other people will think rather than what actually counts.

The point was driven home to me yesterday as I was reading a post written by a father who was trying to get his son with Down's Syndrome into kindergarten in a school in Jerusalem.

The father met with the principal of the school. All seemed to go well and the parents were invited back for a subsequent meeting with the rebbe and an administrator. Discussions centered around how to integrate the child (and his "shadow") into the classroom. The child is a high-functioning child and the teacher seemed confident that he could successfully teach the young child.

Alas, it all fell apart when someone higher up put the kibosh on his enrollment. Was it because they were afraid the child wouldn't be able to fit in? Was it because they were afraid for his safety or the safety of the other kids?

No -- it was because they were afraid of the yeshiva's reputation. They were afraid of what people would think of the yeshiva if they saw a child with Down's in the classroom.

This is just so wrong on so many levels, that I just don't know where to begin. But let's start with the question raised -- what would people think?

I don't know about any of you, but I can only wonder at who would be so small-minded as to think any less of a yeshiva that would include a Down's Syndrome child (assuming, of course, that the child can truly fit into the class*). I thought we moved beyond the times when kids with disabilities were locked away and hidden from view and were considered embarrassments. I thought that we in the Orthodox Jewish world have finally come to realize that even children with disabilities such as Down's can be given a Torah education (up to his or her own capabilities, of course). We have developed programs to help and educate children with disabilities and to allow them to mainstream whenever possible. It's really a shame to see that there are still some people in the frum community who would see it as an embarrassment to be associated with a school that has a child with Down's.

Of course, there's also the idea that school has a mission -- to teach. I would think that if a school could successfully teach (and mainstream) a child with Down's it would be a major coup for the school. I would think that the school would look at this as an opportunity to prove that a Torah education is accessible to all and that they are so good, that they could even help mainstream a child with Down's. But the school chose to discard this opportunity as well.

I can't help but wonder what will be next. Will schools start giving IQ tests** and not accepting those who don't score over 115 for fear of being labeled as a "school for dummies?" Will they start turning away kids with wheelchairs or missing fingers for fear of developing a reputation for taking in "different kids?" Or are our schools to become places where only "perfect" kids are able to attend?

I know it's little consolation to them, but I think that perhaps the parents of this child with Down's were lucky to dodge a bullet. I'm not so sure that I'd want to enroll my kids in a school where the value system is reputation before things that are really important.

The Wolf




* The father, in fact, made the point that if his son couldn't fit in, he'd withdraw him from the school, but that didn't seem to make a difference.

** To be distinguished from an achievement or skill test which, IMHO, is perfectly acceptable.

These Are "Tough Questions??"

Yeshiva World News has a recording of some questions that were raised at the recent Torah U'Mesorah convention. About a thousand rabbeim, principals and others involved in Torah education got to ask the Roshei Yeshiva questions. What were the burning issues that were discussed? What were the "tough questions" (as indicated by the YWN headline) that were asked?

• Does a Rebbe taking his class out for a day (such as to play ball on Lag B'Omer) consitute Bittul Torah?
• Should the "Chinuch Roundtable" columns in the Yated be discontinued?
• Should a child who has poor reading skills be allowed to be a Chazzan in school?

Now, I don't want to denigrate the questions. The questions asked are certainly valid questions and should be asked. However, I would think that if you have the opportunity to have such esteemed Roshei Yeshiva as Rav Avrohom Chaim Levine Shlita (Rosh Yeshiva Telsh Chicago), Rav Shmuel Kaminetzky Shlita (Rosh Yeshiva Philadelphia), Novaminsker Rebbe Shlita (Rosh Yeshiva Novaminsk) and Rav Aron Feldman Shlita (Rosh Yeshiva Ner Yisroel Baltimore) on hand, you could find far tougher and more important questions to ask. Here are two far tougher questions that I (who, aside from being a parent, is not involved in chinuch) could think of off the top of my head:

• I suspect that a child in my class may be being abused either at home or by another teacher in the yeshiva. What's the appropriate course of action to take?
• Under what conditions should I be allowed to ask the menahel to remove a disruptive child from my class? What options do I have to exhaust first before taking that step?

So, what was it? Were the rabbeim afraid to ask really tough questions? Or were they afraid that the Roshei Yeshiva would be offended by tough questions? Why would you ask such softball (but legitmate) questions when you have all these distinguished Roshei Yeshiva on hand?

The Wolf

P.S. There's still time to enter the contest to win a signed print of one of my photos. Click here.

Destroying A Young Person's Respect For Their Parents

For the last few weeks, Rebbetzin Jungreis' column in The Jewish Press has focused on the shidduch problem of "working boys" being viewed as "second class citizens" in the shidduch market*.

This week, she had letters from two young women - one who was looking for a "working boy" and one who was looking for a "learning boy" (while being respectful to workers). However, both girls had one thing in common -- their working fathers were put down to their faces.

The first girl writes (emphasis mine):

Once, my principal accused me of doing some inappropriate things that I would never dream of doing. When I told her that I was raised differently and that my Yiddishkeit meant too much to me to ever participate in the activities she accused me of, she said that she would expect such behavior from me because I was "not a good girl" as I unfortunately "come from a working family." Even more hurtful was when I was told to "not lower myself to my father's level" by marrying a working guy even if he would devote time to Torah.

The second girl had a similar experience when applying for seminary:

I was not prepared for the hurt that was inflicted upon me. The person who interviewed me questioned me about my parents' professions and their heavy work schedules, and then went on to make some very unkind, critical remarks which I prefer not to repeat because, a) it's too hurtful and b) it would be disrespectful to my parents. I left the interview shattered and broke down in tears. I later found out that I was not the only one who had been reduced to tears – other girls were equally mistreated and put to shame.

What the hell is going on here? It's one thing to extol a learning lifestyle, but it's quite another thing to bash a young person's father in front of their face! We're not talking about men who are murderers, tax cheats, rapists or other social and/or criminal misanthropes. We're talking about fine, upstanding human beings who daven every day, go to work each day, probably set aside times to learn Torah, are shomrei Torah U'Mitzvos and obviously feel that their daughters' Torah education is worth the huge monetary investment that they make in it. And what do they get for their money? The administration teaches their kids that they are "on a lower level" and that the home is obviously not a good home. They feel that such people are open game for ridicule and harassment -- and not just behind their backs but to their kids' faces!

I'm also left to wonder about these teachers/administrators who make these remarks. How could these people possibly be allowed to be in chinuch? How can a teacher possibly teach the mitzvah of honoring your parents at one moment and at in the next belittle a child's parent to their face? How do we allow people who obviously have no idea what the mitzvah of lashon hara means to teach our children the halachos of that very mitzvah? How can any school (public, private, parochial... it doesn't matter) allow any teacher to have contact with kids when they destroy the most important things in the lives of those kids -- namely their parents? How dare they! Just who the hell do they think they are?!

I, apparently, wasn't aware of the famous "working father" exception to the mitzvah of kibbud av. I certainly didn't know of the well-known halacha that one is only not allowed to say lashon hara about kollel families. Silly me... I didn't realize that intentionally harming the psyche of a young person was permitted when the target of the attack doesn't spend eight hours in the beis midrash every day. I must have been out working the day they taught those halachos.

If this is the case, I don't know how any working family can send their kids to such a school. It would serve the schools right to have every working family pull out of the school (after all, why send your daughter to a school where she's going to be taught to view you with scorn and disrespect). Let's see the school try to financially survive without the very people that they are harming.

The Wolf

* Yes, I used the term market. That's what it's become, IMHO.

The Right School For The Right Kid

The school year is finally over for the kids. The last tests have been taken, the books have been turned in and the awards (where applicable) have been given out.

Walter's first year of high school was a mixed bag. He had some trouble adjusting and I think he went through a bit of culture shock. He was used to an enviornment where, because of his intelligence, he could slide by without much effort. Now, however, he found himself in a school where the environment is more challenging. I can't say that Eeees and I are 100% happy with the way the school year went, but we're also pretty sure that this school was probably the best available choice for him and we think that things will be better for him there next year.

People often ask me if we're happy with the choice of school, and, for the most part, we are. Yes, there are certain things that we wish would change about the school (and about Walter himself), but we know that we can't have *everything* we want. Yet, when people ask us about George, they're surprised to find out that we are leaning against sending him there, despite being generally happy with it for Walter. When the time comes to choose a high school for George, we will certainly consider Walter's school. However, early indications are that he probably won't be going there.

The simple fact is that Walter and George are two very different kids with *very* different personalities and temperaments (in fact, sometimes so different that I find it hard to believe that they grew up in the same household). Just because Walter can survive and (we hope, thrive) in a particular environment, that doesn't mean that it is the right one for George. He needs a place that is right for his needs. What's good for Walter is not necessarily what's good for George.

It always amazes me, however, how some people completely ignore the child in the process of picking a school. People sometimes pick a school out of laziness (e.g. "Well, we have one kid here, so let's send all of them here"), competition ("we've got to be able to say that we send our kids to the *best* yeshiva") or even sillier reasons. I know of one parent who didn't want to consider a school because she thought it would reflect poorly on her family when it came time for shidduchim. The educational policies of the place weren't important, whether it was the right fit for her kid's educational level and temperament wasn't important. What was important was that her daughters might not get shidduchim later in life if they or a sibling attended this school. It apparently never entered her mind that sending her kids to the wrong school for them could send them off the derech, which would prove to be a far greater "shidduch stain" than a choice of elementary or high school.*

Parents owe it to their kids to send them to the right school *for them.* It doesn't have to be the right school for the parents -- they aren't the ones attending. It doesn't have to be the right school for the neighbors -- they can send their kids to whatever school they want to. It doesn't have to be the right school for some as-yet-unmet in-laws -- hopefully they'll judge your kid on the basis of his or her character and not what elementary/high school they went to (and, if they judge on that basis, maybe you don't want to marry them anyway). You have to find the school that is the right one for that kid. No one else -- not the parents, not the grandparents, not the neighbors -- not even siblings -- matter. Find the best school for *that* kid. The risk of doing anything else is just too great.

The Wolf


* I'm not suggesting that she actually did send her kid to the wrong school. She just refused to even consider a specific school as a possibly correct choice because of how it would look.

Was This Yeshiva's Money Well Spent? What About The Student's Time?

CrownHeights.info is reporting that Rabbi Leibel Kaplan, Rosh Yeshiva of Tomchei Tmimim Lubavitch Montreal gave monetary prizes to students to learned Gemara ba'al peh (by heart). The biggest prize went to Yehoshua Heshel Mishulovin, who was awarded a check for $4,000 for learning the entire tractate Bava Basra by heart, with Rashi and Tosfos.

Now, let me state up front that this is an impressive feat. Bava Basra has 175 pages. Just doing the Gemara by heart is very impressive. When you add the Rashi and Tosfos on top of it, it's almost superhuman.

The extraordinary magnitude of the feat aside, I have to ask the questions -- was the Yeshiva's money well spent? Was the student's time well spent?

I'm sure that the act of memorization must have taken him months. I'm sure he put a tremendous amount of effort into it. And I'm also sure that by memorizing it, he has become extremely well versed in the text of the Gemara, the Rashi and the Tosfos. But could his time have been spent better? Was it necessary for him to learn it by heart? Or could his time have been better put to use by learning it extremely well and moving on to another tractate and learning that very well too? Is there a point at which the extra effort of learning it by heart causes diminishing returns in the extra understanding of it that he gets from an extra review? I'm not a chinuch expert, but my guess would be that his time would have been better served by studying for a comprehensive test on the entire tractate (with Rashi and Tosfos) and then moving on to conquer another tractate.

The second question is whether or not the Yeshiva's money was well spent in this effort. I agree that yeshivos should encourage extra learning and if monetary prizes are a part of that strategy, then so be it. But you have to realize that when you devote $4000 to a prize to one student (no matter how impressive the accomplishment was) then you are advertising that you have "money to burn." $4,000 could probably be better spent in a way that would allow more student to learn Torah rather than awarding it to a one student who performs an impressive feat.

The Wolf

Wow! Now There's A Rebbi Who Needs To Retire!

As many of you know, I am often critical of the Yated and some of the articles/letters that are found in it. However, there is one part of the Yated that I am actually starting to enjoy reading -- The Chinuch Roundtable. Each week, The Chinuch Roundtable features a question from a parent or teacher about chinuch and the proper approach, followed by responses from about six to ten professional mechanchim. While I have to admit up front that (aside from my experience as a parent) I have no background in chinuch, I usually find myself in agreement with the roundtable participants.

This week's letter (I'm sorry, I don't have it with me, so I can't quote it verbatim) is from a parent of a child (the letter doesn't specify the age) who sometimes causes trouble in class. The rebbi decided to punish the child (I think we can generally agree that a disruptive child does need to be disciplined) by having him write lines -- 1500 times! When the child failed to turn in the assignment, he upped the ante -- he told the child that he had to write "I will be more responsible" 5000 times!! Five. Thousand. Times.

To their credit, each and every participant in the round table criticized the practice of having children write lines as a form of discipline -- even if it it's only fifty lines, let alone the absurd number of lines that the rebbi gave the student.

That being said, I'm really surprised that there are teachers who are so out of touch that they think that any child (even a teenager) can really complete such a task. One participant of the roundtable actually remarked that the task was not a punishment, but a sentence. I can't even begin to fathom the enormity of the task that this rebbi laid before the child. 5000 times! Aside from it being a waste of two hundred pieces of paper, it also does nothing to improve the child's attitude or disposition. All an assignment like this can do is breed anger and resentment for the rebbi, the school, and possibly yiddishkeit in general.

We all know that there are good teachers out there and bad teachers -- my kids have had their share of both -- but they've never had anyone who proposed such a mindless, pointless, demeaning task as punishment. I think that this is clearly a rebbi who needs to leave chinuch and go on to something else. He clearly has no idea on how to relate to children.

Do any of you have any stories about bad punishments that you or your kids received? Or how about creative punishments that were especially good and helped you to change your ways?

The Wolf