Spanking kids? Your thoughts?

My parents spanked me. I love my parents. And I like them. They love me. I think I turned out OK.

I have heard from them that they followed the rule "No spanking when you (the parent) is angry."

 

My parents hit me as a kid, mostly because they got angry/frustrated at my tantrums; always in the heat of the moment and with their hand. It was clearly ever so effective ... because they had to keep it up for nine years (and I'm normally quite good at taking hints).
Maybe it's not lazy per se, but in a way I do think hitting is an 'easy option'; short sharp punishment rendered, the kid quits misbehaving, everyone gets on with their lives. It fixes the symptoms without necessarily getting to the root cause of the problem.

Anyway we now have a puppy. Having done the necessary research we learnt about strategies to discipline him without hitting [well rendered yell, time outs, rewarding postive behaviour etc], and he is very content well behaved dog. So I figure hey if you can raise another sentient being, with as limited a grasp of human communication as we do regarding his own psyche, then surely it'd work for your own species.

That said few days ago he didn't want to be restrained [whilst I adjust his harness] so nipped me; and in the heat of the moment I swatted him. Shocked the hell out of all of us. That was sure as not how I want to turn into my mother.

I just cannot see any decent justification behind hitting from an objective/philosophical perspective. Though as with most things my main reasoning comes from a subjective perspective; my parents haven't hit for years but when they get angry yes I am scared, and no I don't respect them.
Oh yeah and my brother and I used to wallop each other too, which was of course never condoned, but with hindsight it was inevitable. That was the earliest and longest running example we'd been set for how to deal with frustrating behaviour in others (same cast and all). With that so ingrained maybe it wasn't such a suprise that the dog also entered such an equation.

I've forgiven my parents, because well it's healthier that way. They honestly didn't know better and were trying to do the right thing, which is something.
It seems niave to say I will never ever hit a child (never figure I'd swat the dog either), but I am damn well not going to aspire to it. Yeah maybe I did turn out OK, but I'm hoping for better than OK next time around. Only good I can see coming of that was to know my own limits and strive even harder to find a better way.

 

I think I turned out okay too, having been spanked for just about everything as a kid. I think that how our parents may have disciplined us is a completely different story though... spanking was THE thing to do when your kids misbehaved 20, 30, or more years ago. I don't think that our parents spanked us because they didn't love us, it's just the way parenting was handled back then. And there weren't dozens of doctors & psychologists speaking up about the negative impact it can have either. Were our parents wrong? Well, maybe. But can we blame them for it? I really don't think so. That would be like blaming doctors 100 years ago for using leeches & urine to heal people. They were doing there honest level-best, given the knowledge they had at the time.

But NOW there ARE studies out to show that some of the things our parents may have done could have been harmful. We now know that aerosols can be harmful to the environment. We've changed them. We have learned that asbestos is a BAD thing to use as a building material. So we don't use it anymore. Why does spanking have to be any different? Yeah, our parents spanked us. Yeah, we turned out okay. But now we know that it might not be the best way to go about disciplining a child. Maybe it's time for a change.

One thing that really bothers me is when people say that violence & spanking is a learned behavior. "I spank because I was spanked..." To me that infers something I don't want to accept. It says to me that people are either unable or unwilling to change something they have been brought up with. Baloney. I was spanked. I don't spank. I did when my son was a baby, but I've since learned that there are other ways to get through to him that are far more effective. I'm not gonna lie, it is WORLDS harder to discipline without spanking, but I think it's worth the extra effort. To say that people can't change dooms us all to forever repeat the mistakes of the past. I don't want to live in a world that cannot change. And I doubt anyone else here does either.
love,
mom

 

I want my kids to turn out better than "OK" or "Just fine." I want better results that that.

Kids who grow up in war zones often turn out "Fine." There were children who were at Auchvitz or lived in the Jewish-Polish Ghettos, with no food during WWII who claim to have turned out "OK." There are children in Beruit or Basrah or Iraq who will most likely be "Fine." That, by no one's estimation means that children should be exposed to atrocities, because some think they are "OK."

Fairy, I need to apologise. I was too rough on you. I shouldn't have called you on the carpet, if that is what it seemed like. I just KNOW you are a GOOD mama, and I wanted to point out some inconsistancies, Still, I should have been more gentle. Please, please forgive me.

 

Here is only a SMALL sampling of the well done studies and articles on WHY Hitting is so dangerous to the growth and health of children. I am sure some will say “You can make research say whatever you like.” That is the response of anti-intellectuals, anti-investigationals, kneejerk reactionaries and simply lazy people who cannot abide being proven WRONG and those who are too illiterate to LEARN from their mistakes and the body of works which only prove what intuitive parents have known for ages. ​

There is MUCH more work In this field. Open ANY 101 Psychology or Child Development book and you can see that Corporal Punishment is simply not good for children, does not accomplish the long term goals good parents want in their children and can cause terrible psychological ham.​

The most common response from those who were damaged by PHYSICAL abuse is to say, “Well, it happened to me, and I’m fine.” Children, even adult children, always protect their abusers. ​

References and Resources​

Durrant, Joan E. (2000). “Trends in Youth Crime and Well-Being Since the Abolition of Corporal Punishment in Sweden”, Youth and Society. Youth and Society, Volume 31, 437-455.

Gershoff, Elizabeth (2002) “Corporal Punishment by Parents and Associated Child Behaviors and Experiences: A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review”, Psychological Bulletin 2002. Vol. 128, No. 4 539-579. American Psychological Association.

Greven, Philip. (1992). Spare the Rod: The religious roots of punishment and the psychological impact of physical abuse. Vintage Books.

Miller, Alice. (1990) For your own good: Hidden cruelty in child-rearing and roots of violence. Farrar, Straus & Giroux, LLC.

Straus, M.A., Sugarman, D.B., & Giles-Sims (1997). “Corporal punishment by parents and subsequent antisocial behavior in children”. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, 155, 761-767.

Straus, M.A., & Gelles, R.J. (Eds.). (1990) “Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptions to violence in 8,145 families”. New Brunswick, NJ: Transactions.

Straus, M.A. (1994). Beating the devil out of them: Corporal punishment in American families. San Francisco, CA: New Lexington Press.

Strassberg, Z., Dodge, K.A., Pettit, G.S., & Bates, J.E. (1994). “Spanking in families and subsequent aggressive behavior toward peers by kindergarten students”. Development and Psychopathology, 6, 445-461.

Wolfe, D.A. (1987). Child abuse: Implications for child development and psychopathology . Newbury Park, CA: Sage

(There are HUNDREDS more studies, if one wants more, they are avaiable just about anywhere.)

Author: Nadine Block, Director of the Center for Effective Discipline and co-chair of EPOCH-USA July 2005.





The first is from the American Psychological Association, there are hundreds, if not thousands more studies in this field. andcrs2 and Haid, if THIS and all the references I gave you aren’t enough, I don''t know what to tell you. I have studied Psychology and Child Development since the early 1980s, so I have plenty of data and knowlege on this. BUT, one does not need a Master's Degree to know that hitting is simply wrong and simply does not work. MOST good parents realize after a time. (andcrs2, Silly me. I forgot. How many children have you raised?)

IS CORPORAL PUNISHMENT AN EFFECTIVE MEANS OF DISCIPLINE?
Corporal Punishment Leads to More Immediate Compliant Behavior in Children, But is also Associated with Physical Abuse.

Should Parents be Counseled For or Against Spanking?

WASHINGTON -- Corporal punishment remains a widely used discipline technique in many American families, but it has also been a subject of controversy within the child development and psychological communities. In a large-scale meta-analysis of 88 studies, psychologist Elizabeth Thompson Gershoff, PhD, of the National Center for Children in Poverty at Columbia University, looked at both positive and negative behaviors in children that were associated with corporal punishment. Her research and commentaries on her work are published in the July issue of Psychological Bulletin, published by the American Psychological Association.

While conducting the meta-analysis, which included 62 years of collected data, Gershoff looked for associations between parental use of corporal punishment and 11 child behaviors and experiences, including several in childhood (immediate compliance, moral internalization, quality of relationship with parent, and physical abuse from that parent), three in both childhood and adulthood (mental health, aggression, and criminal or antisocial behavior) and one in adulthood alone (abuse of own children or spouse).

Gershoff found "strong associations" between corporal punishment and all eleven child behaviors and experiences. Ten of the associations were negative such as with increased child aggression and antisocial behavior. The single desirable association was between corporal punishment and increased immediate compliance on the part of the child. (So, I guess if you want to raise an unquestioning, terrorized child who will IMMEDIATELY "OBEY" you whenever you look at them, go ahead. THAT is, ONLY a "termporary" association. It says nothing of FUTURE ability to behave or to learn self control. It is nothing more than the reflex of a dog kicked too many times, who gets out of the Master's Way, out of terror. I want a better life and future for my children. MS)

The two largest effect sizes (strongest associations) were immediate compliance by the child and physical abuse of the child by the parent. Gershoff believes that these two strongest associations model the complexity of the debate around corporal punishment.

"That these two disparate constructs should show the strongest links to corporal punishment underlines the controversy over this practice. There is general consensus that corporal punishment is effective in getting children to comply immediately while at the same time there is caution from child abuse researchers that corporal punishment by its nature can escalate into physical maltreatment," Gershoff writes.

"The act of corporal punishment itself is different across parents - parents vary in how frequently they use it, how forcefully they administer it, how emotionally aroused they are when they do it, and whether they combine it with other techniques. Each of these qualities of corporal punishment can determine which child-mediated processes are activated, and, in turn, which outcomes may be realized," Gershoff concludes.

The meta-analysis also demonstrates that the frequency and severity of the corporal punishment matters. The more often or more harshly a child was hit, the more likely they are to be aggressive or to have mental health problems. (This does not mean, however, that children only hit, occasionally or "lightly" are spared these problem as well.)

Gershoff also summarizes a large body of literature on parenting that suggests why corporal punishment may actually cause negative outcomes for children.

• For one, corporal punishment on its own does not teach children right from wrong.
• Secondly, although it makes children afraid to disobey when parents are present, when parents are not present to administer the punishment those same children will misbehave.

In commentary published along with the Gershoff study, George W. Holden, PhD, of the University of Texas at Austin, writes that Gershoff's findings "reflect the growing body of evidence indicating that corporal punishment does no good and may even cause harm." Holden submits that the psychological community should not be advocating spanking as a discipline tool for parents.

Baumrind et al. suggest that those parents whose emotional make-up may cause them to cross the line between appropriate corporal punishment and physical abuse should be counseled not to use corporal punishment as a technique to discipline their children. But, that other parents could use mild to moderate corporal punishment effectively. "The fact that some parents punish excessively and unwisely is not an argument, however, for counseling all parents not to punish at all."

In her reply to Baumrind et al., Gershoff states that excessive corporal punishment is more likely to be underreported than overreported and that the possibility of negative effects on children caution against the use of corporal punishment. (In other words, parent who HIT usually LIE about how often and how vicious the Hitting was. So a parent saying "I don't do it too hard or too often." cannot be taken as the truth in many situations. MS)

"Until researchers, clinicians, and parents can definitively demonstrate the presence of positive effects of corporal punishment, including effectiveness in halting future misbehavior, not just the absence of negative effects, we as psychologists can not responsibly recommend its use," Gershoff writes.

# # #​

The American Psychological Association (APA), in Washington, DC, is the largest scientific and professional organization representing psychology in the United States and is the world's largest association of psychologists. APA's membership includes more than 155,000 researchers, educators, clinicians, consultants and students. Through its divisions in 53 subfields of psychology and affiliations with 60 state, territorial and Canadian provincial associations, APA works to advance psychology as a science, as a profession and as a means of promoting human welfare.

 

Spanking: Facts and Fiction

Corporal punishment:
Synonymous with “physical punishment.”." It means the intentional infliction of pain on the body (of a child, a child. I might add. MS) for purposes of punishment or controlling behavior. It includes slapping, spanking, hitting with objects, pinching, shaking, and forcing to stand for long periods of time.



In the United States, spanking as punishment has shown a long-term decline. In the 1950's, ninety-nine percent of parents supported the use of corporal punishment of children. In recent years that number has fallen. Surveys generally report about fifty percent of parents supporting its use. Studies show that a majority of parents who use corporal punishment feel badly about it and don't think it works to improve behavior.

Parents who support spanking often use one of the following arguments and excuses::

• Spanking is an effective way to manage behavior.
• I got hit when I was a kid and I turned out OK.
• If we don’t spank children, they’ll grow up rotten.
• The bible says, “Spare the rod and spoil the child”

Look at the facts:

Spanking argument #1 - “Spanking is an effective way to manage behavior”

Hitting a small child will usually stop misbehavior. However, other ways of discipline such as verbal correction, reasoning, and time-out work as well and do not have the potential for harm that hitting does. Hitting children may actually increase misbehavior. One large study showed that the more parents spanked children for antisocial behavior, the more the antisocial behavior increased (Straus, Sugarman, & Giles-Sims, 1997). The more children are hit, the more likely they are to hit others including peers and siblings and, as adults, they are more likely to hit their spouses (Straus and Gelles, 1990; Wolfe, 1987). Hitting children teaches them that it is acceptable to hit others who are smaller and weaker. “I'm going to hit you because you hit your sister” is a hypocrisy not lost on children.

Spanking argument #2 - “I got hit when I was a kid and I turned out OK”

Being spanked is an emotional event. Adults often remember with crystal clarity times they were paddled or spanked as children. Many adults look back on corporal punishment in childhood with great anger and sadness. Sometimes people say, “I was spanked as a child, and I deserved it”. It is hard for us to believe that people who loved us would intentionally hurt us. We feel the need to excuse that hurt. Studies show that even a few instances of being hit as children are associated with more depressive symptoms as adults (Strauss, 1994, Strassberg, Dodge, Pettit & Bates, 1994).

A landmark meta-analysis of 88 corporal punishment research studies of over six decades showed that corporal punishment of children was associated with negative outcomes including

• increased delinquent antisocial behavior,
• increased risk of child abuse and spousal abuse,
• increased risk of child aggression
• adult aggression,
• decreased child mental health
• decreased adult mental health (Gershoff, 2002). While most of us who were spanked “turned out OK”, it is likely that not being spanked would have helped us turn out to be healthier.

Spanking Argument #3 - “If we don't spank children, they'll grow up rotten”

Children in seventeen countries (2005) are growing up without being hit in homes, in daycare or in schools. Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Austria, Finland and other countries that have banned corporal punishment of children in general have low rates of interpersonal violence compared to the United States.

Critics predicted that Swedish youth would grow up more unruly after parents stopped spanking because of the l979 corporal punishment ban. Dr. Joan Durrant who studied effects of the ban for l5 years reported that this did not happen. Her studies indicate youth did not become more unruly, under socialized or self-destructive following the ban. In fact, she said most measures demonstrated a substantial improvement in youth well-being (Durrant, 2000).

Professor Adrienne Haeuser who studied these educational laws in Europe in 1981 and 1991 said “Children are receiving more discipline since the law in Sweden passed. Parents think twice and tend to rely more on verbal conflict resolution to manage their children”. Discipline is important. Discipline means “to teach”. We need more discipline of children such as explaining and reasoning, establishing rules and consequences, praising good behavior in children and being good models for or children. Such methods develop a child's conscience and self-control. Children who experience teaching discipline are less likely to misbehave and more likely to become self-disciplined adults.

Spanking Argument #4 - “The bible says 'Spare the rod and spoil the child' and I must obey God”

Spanking is deeply rooted in the history and culture of the United States. The bible is often used to support, even perhaps to require, that parents use corporal punishment on children. Many clergy today are speaking out against that interpretation of scripture. The Reverend Dr. Thomas E. Sagendorf, retired Methodist Minister, says the following “I can find no sanction in the teaching of Jesus or the witness of the New Testament to encourage the practice of corporal punishment at home, school or anywhere else. A number of popular voices take a different view, often quoting Old Testament scriptures to prove their point. Those who subscribe to this argument misunderstand and misuse scripture. A similar method of selective reading could just as well be used to justify slavery, suppression of women, polygamy, incest and infanticide”. At its General Conference in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania in April and May, 2004, the United Methodist Church passed two resolutions against corporal punishment in homes, schools and child-care. The UnitedMethodistChurch is the second largest Protestant denomination in the United States.

Conclusion​

Look at the facts. Accumulated research supports the ineffectiveness and harm of corporal punishment. Children who are spanked most are more likely to be aggressive and hit others. Children hit for antisocial behaviors are more likely to increase those misbehaviors. Hitting children teaches acceptance of violence. While most of us who were spanked as children grow up to be healthy adults, spanking caused anxiety, contributed to feelings of helplessness and humiliation, and often provoked anger and a desire for revenge, feelings which have usually been repressed in adulthood but may lead to depression, adult violence, and hitting our own children. Effective discipline exists. It does not involve hitting and humiliating children.

Spanking is counterproductive and dangerous​

Why are spankings, slaps, and even apparently harmless blows like pats on the hand dangerous for a baby?

1. They teach it (the baby) violence
2. They destroy the infallible certainty of being loved that the baby needs
3. They cause anxiety; the expectancy of the next break
4. They convey a lie: they pretend to be educational, but parents actually use them to vent their anger; when they strike, it’s because, as children, they were struck themselves
5. They provoke anger and a desire for revenge, which remain repressed only to be expressed much later (Your children are going to pick out YOUR nursing home. Do you want the "desire for revenge" to be sublimated until the time until YOU are helpless, unable to defend yourself, and NEED your child to care about you? If so, you may want to think that the vast majority of "Elder Abuse" is perpertrated against people who abused their children, in fact almost all Elder Abuse is. Either by the child, himself, or by Nursing Home workers who were abused, and may use your parent as a Whipping Boy for the abuse they themselves suffered when they were young and helpless. THINK. MS.)
6. They program the child to accept illogical arguments (I’m hurting you for your own good) that stay stored up in their body
7. They destroy sensitivity and compassion for others and for oneself, and hence limit the capacity to gain insight

What long-term lessons does the baby retain from spankings and other blows? The baby learns:

1. That a child does not deserve respect
2. That good can be learned through punishment (which is usually wrong, since punishment merely teaches the children to want to punish on their own turn)
3. That suffering mustn’t be felt, it must be ignored (which is dangerous to the immune system)
4. That violence is a manifestation of love (fostering perversion)
5. That denial of feeling is healthy (but the body pays the price of this error, often much later)

How is repressed anger very often vented? In childhood and adolescence:

1. By making fun of the weak
2. By hitting classmates
3. By annoying the teachers
4. By watching tv and playing video games to experience forbidden and stored up feelings of rage and anger, and by identifying with violent heroes. (Children who have never been beaten are less interested in cruel films, and, as adults, will not produce horror shows).

In adulthood:

1. By perpetuating spanking, as an apparently educational and effective means, often heartily recommended to others, whereas in actual fact, one’s own suffering is being avenged on the next generation
2. By refusing to understand the connections between previously experienced violence and the violence actively repeated today. The ignorance of society is thereby perpetuated (as a small number of people on this thread are illustrating.....MS)
3. By entering professions which demand violence (Guess what percentage of Cops and Prison Guards were struck as kids......?")
4. By being gullible to politicians who designate scapegoats for the violence that has been stored up and which can finally be vented with impunity: “impure” races, ethnic “cleansing”, ostracized social minorities (I'd love to see a study of Bush supporters and relations to being struck as children, and have not rejected this type of Punishment. From MY personal experience, this would be HIGH. MS)
5. (Because of obedience to violence as a child), by readiness to obey any authority which recalls the authority of the parents, as the Germans obeyed Hitler, the Russians Stalin, the Serbs Milosivic.

Conversely, some become aware of the repression and universal denial of childhood pain, realizing how violence is transmitted from parents to children, and stop hitting children regardless of age. This can be done (many have succeeded) as soon as one has understood that the causes of the “educational” violence are hidden in the repressed history of the parents.

Alice Miller, June 99, author of the book Paths of Life (Pantheon 1998) and eight other books on childhood.

(MS speaking now.) I would have to write volumes to properly take this issue on. The problem with many people who ask for "proof" that their are wrong, is that they refuse to look at, read or accept the PROOF when it is presented to them.

Do your own homework. There are NO reputable studies, psychologists, books or parents who can show how or why harming a child benefits them. And beleive ME, they have been looking for well over a CENTURY. It hitting and other forms of Corporal Punishment was "fine" and it "worked" and it was not harmful, these prohitting people would be shouting it from the rooftops. Instead they rely on Anecdote and misintpretation, and tell us things even they know are NOT true, (See Ezzo, Dobson, the Pearls (who say it is "fine" to allow a father who rapes his daughters to stay in the home, as "A child needs a father." and are "Champions" in the ProHitting arena. They, and their fellows, have nothing to stand on, and people like Ezzo have children who won't even speak to them. WHO is the expert, when the "experts" who endorse hitting don't even have relationships with their children, as these were destroyed by ther imhumane treatment of these children? MS) my comments are in red.

 

I agree, of course, most parents who hit love their children. Most men who beat their wives love them, too. As you and I agree, love alone, doesn't make a behavior right.

As for most parents doing it this way, not all did. My father and mother used to have flaming rows about it. Although my mother HATED her own father, she didn't see a problem with hitting, even though she hated him for doing it to her. My father, however, was not only not hit as a child (and he was born in 1937, and his siblings were born in 1925 and the early 1940s, and none of them were hit,, either. Some parents, even then, did their own thinking.) My dad didn't beleive in hitting when I was a child (I beleive he may have struck me once, because he thought I lied about something (I hadn't, and he felt like shit later) but, as a rule, my mother only hit me when he wasn't around. I rememeber two occasions where he stopped her. Once he took a hairbrush away from her and on an other he took a shoe out of her hand, and actuallly had to physically restrain her from harming me. Her father had damaged her so badly, she was completely out of control, YET to this day, she claims that "I turned out fine." (OMG, what shit.) and that I, too, "turned out fine" and I've had my issues, as well, many, I know, due to the simmering violence in my home growing up, which to this day, my mother denies was there.)