Spanking, when done correctly, is good for kids

Great Debates
1

A couple days ago in the car, I heard a radio call-in in show discussing a recent study pointing to the benefits of spanking children for disciplinary purposes. Unfortunately I missed the details of the study, but most callers were in generally in favour, with the usual caveats.

This morning, again in the car, I heard about this “study” in which 20 CEOs were asked if they were spanked as children - each one who answered said Yes. Neither the CEOs nor the “study” make any claims of causation.

Has the spanking debate recently reemerged? For me the question is academic as my kids are all beyond the spanking years. But I do maintain that spanking, when done correctly, is good for kids.

This was my practice as a parent: Before any disciplinary action was a discussion, so I can learn what really happened, with particular attention to motive and what level of understanding-that-was-wrong. When I decided a spanking would be administered, I would first say, “I’m going to give you a spanking now.” After giving a moment for that to sink in, over the knee, apply a swat or two to the bottom. Then hugs and “I love you” immediately afterwards.

The main purpose is to associate consequences to the misbehaviour. After the fact finding discussion, often a lecture on why that was bad is sufficient. Some times, though, the actual consequences may be too abstract or indirect for one so very young - spanking is a good substitute. A secondary purpose is to ensure the severity of the misbehaviour is communicated. It’s easy for children to ignore or forget the lecutre. It’s not so easy to forget an accute, focussed event of a spanking. “Message delivered, message received.”

A useful side-effect (although not a reason by itself) is it fosters a healthy fear. If the kids misbehave in a restaurant, just a certain look is sufficient to communicate, “keep it up and you know the consequences.” Contrast this with (I’m sure you’ve seen it too) the kid in the supermarket in full tantrum mode demanding that cereal, whose parent appears impotent to stop the tantrum.

By “done correctly” I mean, only after careful considering all parental tools - never in anger, flat handed swat once or twice to the clothed bottom, for the “short sharp shock” effect more than for the pain, with the purpose of reinforcing the idea of negative consequences more than merely “punishment,” immediately followed by lavish reminders of our love and acceptance of the person.

What of the studies? I must confess ignorance, but it seems there are a number of studies that come down on both sides. Which studies are performed by a group without an agenda, and what do these ones say? Does anyone know of the study I heard about on the radio? In those studies that say there is harm, how have they factored out other causes to the harm they measured? Do these studies consider different spanking techniques in assessing the harm done?

Now, I understand condoning spanking in society has its dangers, and it’s easy to see how a prima facie case can be made that hitting is bad. True, not every parent will follow a reasonable approach. Unlike merely yelling and screaming, incorrect spanking can lead to physical injury. Some argue it is best for everyone if no one uses spanking and thus we avoid the risk. I disagree for two reasons: 1) society has never condoned child abuse, and yet it exists. What changes if we make spanking-done-properly a taboo? 2) It can be argued that the decline in spanking has at least proximate nexus (if not causal) to the decrease in respect children have for authority.

Be it resolved: Spanking, when done correctly, is good for kids. Skillful and loving parents who properly use this disciplinary tool should not face societal condemnation, and certainly not legal procedings nor state intervention.

2

Spanking is wasted on kids! It should be reserved for people old enough to appreciate it! :wink:

3

One person’s spanking is another person’s beating and therein lies the problem. I do not think anyone should even inflict pain on another human being for any reason. I had a few “spankings” when I was a kid and I remember them well. What I do not recall is what the heck I did to deserve them. They succeeded in making me fear my parents so if that was the result they wanted, it worked.

As far as a “hug” after? I don’t understand how that negates the fact that you choose to cause your child physical pain rather than taking the time to parent by communicating your displeasure and making consequences for bad behavior.

“I was spanked and I turned out okay” is just a silly argument. My son was never spanked and he turned out pretty darn good too. Just entered college, great head on his shoulders and respectful and kind.

I am sorry but I disagree over hitting a child for any reason.

4

Spanking can never hurt as much as verbal humiliation. That can be construed as either a pro-spanking argument or an anti-spanking argument, I guess.

5

Well, but, like Murray Strauss said in the article, these CEOs are all around 50-60 years old, and most kids were spanked at the time period the CEOs were growing up. And, if his comments are correct, most are spanked now, for that matter, if 90% of toddlers are spanked at least once.

It seems to me, in my humble, childless opinion, that the “Spank or not?” question doesn’t really have any answer. More important than whether a parent spanks or not is whether they have reasonable, fair rules, are consistant in applying those rules, and their kids know that their parents love and care about them. It seems to me that if you can pull that off as a parent, your kids will be ok.

6

I prety much come down on the “no spanking at any time, for any reason” side. However, if it is administered in the way you describe, consistently and reasonably, then it’s probably not so bad. I think there are always better alternatives, but consistency has been shown time and again to be a major factor in child development. Consistent spankings are probably better than unpredictable hugs.

7

It’s hard to know what study you might be thinking of. A number of studies link physical punishment to later aggression or antisocial behavior, whereas others fail to demonstrate that link. More recent evidence suggests that links between physical punishment and poor outcomes may be mediated by ethnicity and other parenting factors.

A metaanalysis (a technique by which the results of many studies can be aggregated) by Larzelere & Kuhn (2005) suggests that the development of positive qualities is not linked to the use of physical punishment, whereas negative qualities are associated with a history of physical punishment under some circumstances, particularly when physical punishment is particularly harsh or is the primary method of discipline used by the parent. However, they found that circumscribed use of physical punishment may be associated with compliance and reduced antisocial behavior from children at levels about the same as the use of some other parenting strategies.

8

The thing is that the word “spanking” implies a wide range of actions, some of which are harmless and some of which are harmful. You have to define the term.

If a kid reaches for a hot stove element and you slap his hand away with a sharp “No!” is that “spanking”?

I think Captain Amazing is likely right. If you love your kids and set fair and consistent rules, whether or not they get the odd swat on the ass is probably irrelevant. Planned beatings, however (go up to your room and I’ll come up in a few minutes to spank you) is starting to go too far.

9

So spanking makes you into a CEO ?! :eek: Horrifying ! !

The only message I ever got was “They are bigger and stronger than me, fear them”. I was spanked occasionally as a child, and like Foxy40 I couldn’t tell you why. Personally, I regard spanking as a kind of bullying.

I doubt that has anything to do with spanking. More likely, it’s because the parent gives in and buys the cereal, thereby showing the kid that tantrums work ( and setting him on the road to becoming a political lobbyist :smiley: ).

More seriously, I recall ( but can’t find a link ) to a study showing that most American parents do give into their children’s tantrums, whines, begging, etc; IMHO this is why so many kinds do that sort of thing, not because of a lack of spanking. You’d think more Americans had the guts to stand up to a six year old without resorting to violence.

There’s a study claiming that spanking causes short term obedience, but long term
aggression and “anti-social behavior”. Link

Fear is not respect.

Personally, I regard spanking as wrong. In some cases, where young children are behaving in an outright dangerous way ( poking things into light sockets, running into the street, etc ) I can see it as a necessary evil; otherwise, I disapprove of it.

10

The hugs purpose is definitely not to negate the pain. It is to reassure the child that it is the only behaviour that is unacceptiable. Its intended message is, “What you did was wrong, yes, but I still love you and what your actions did not change that.”

It is a silly argument, but so too (as in the article I linked to) is the argument, “go ahead and smoke because only 2/3 of smokers didn’t get cancer.”

Another (if not silly at least specious) argument is, “We have laws that prevent hitting everyone except children.” Not only is that not true (self-defence, for example) it is also irrelevant. We have laws that prohibit possessing all controlled drugs except those prescribed by a doctor. The exception is by design.

11

I do tend to be verbose, so my definition is buried.

It is this disciplinary technique I offer for debate as good (not merely “not harmful”).

12

My grandmother was a fucking* expert* at this. She never had to raise her voice or even say anything mean. I don’t know how she did it. All she had to do was look at me and say in a grave tone of voice, “I am so dissapointed in you,” and I would dissolve into a flood of tears. I would have rather she had beaten me.

It’s always struck me as a hypocrisy. Hitting people is wrong, we tell kids. Unless, of course, you’re a parent.

13

If you wish to teach that violence is a good form of communication and violence is a way to acheive a good end. then swing away. Hitting diminishes the hitter and hurts the psysche of the one hit. There are better forms of communication with the ones you are supposed to love and protect.

14

That, I think, is where the real harm lies. It’s not only painful for the child, but humiliating.

15

I guess when you boil it down, I am advocating violence as a means of communication. In the context of a loving parent’s discipline, this needs to be taught (although, obviously, that’s not the point of the spanking at the time).

It depends on the context. Boxers do not necessarily feel diminished. Done properly, spanked children do not either.

Where there are better forms, those are the better option, no doubt. Sometimes the details of what needs to be communicated are not within a 4-year old’s grasp. And yet, something must be done to get the point across, if nothing else, “when you do this, bad stuff happens.” Grounding, standing in the corner, fingerwaiving-raised voices can do this too - and should be used where appropriate (I note in passing each of these risks diminishing the child and/or damaging psyche too).

16

There’s a limit to how far that logic goes, though. The plain fact is that parents exert physical control over their children we would consider unacceptable in any other circumstance. If I were to physically force you against your will into my car and drive you somewhere, that’s kidnapping, a very serious crime. If my kid refuses to leave the Chuck-E-Cheese and I pick her up and cart her off to the car, you wouldn’t bat an eye, but I’m doing the same thing.

Children do understand that their parents have a degree of control over children that is not the same as how people are supposed to act towards each other in other circumstances.

17

So is “time-out”, right? Isn’t the occasional knockdown to the ego kind of essential to growing up? People need humiliation and a whole host of negative experiences to grow.

Now then, there can be issues of overdoing anything … but surely kids should not completely sheltered from negativity while growing up. I realize I’m going off on a tangent, but I’m looking down the top of a slippery slope here.

18

In the adult world, the state has a monopoly on violence, and while the last resort, must employ it at times (handcuffs, batons, even guns). In the home, the parent has the monopoly on violence, and children have no problem in making the distinction. I would be very surprised for a child to reason, “Daddy hit me, so I am allowed to hit Billy in anger.”

There is the argument that spanking a child may result in an adult who uses violence as a solution inappropriately. Some may contend that violence is never appropriate. If true, then of course spanking is de facto inappropriate. If we agree that violence in some circumstances (however restrictive) is appropriate, then this argument warrants discussion. If studies show that those spanked demonstrate higher incidence of using violence inappropriately, then I would be convinced that spanking is bad - its short-term gain is not worth such long-term cost.

19

This study (though it has its critics) seems to suggest just that:

Here is another study:

This article about a Canadian study suggests that children who are spanked are twice as likely to develop drug and alcohol problems as well as issued like depression.

20

There are better ways to change children’s behaviour.
Certainly after any punishment it’s good to reassert your love, but the problem with using spanking is that you are showing you have the power to strike without retaliation.

Perhaps the child should hug the parent after spanking to say “What you did was wrong, yes, but I still love you and what your actions did not change that.”

The meaningful statement is that smokers get far more fatal diseases, not that cancer kills more than half of smokers. :rolleyes:

As for the original statement that:

‘20 CEOs were asked if they were spanked as children - each one who answered said Yes. Neither the CEOs nor the “study” make any claims of causation.’

  • this is also silly.

You don’t start with financially successful people, find one thing they have in common and claim anything meaningful.

How many of the CEO’s were men? Does this show that women are useless at running business?
How many of the CEO’s were white? Does that show anything?
How many of the CEO’s had drive, suitable educational qualifications and business experience? Might that be obviously more relevant than whether they got spanked as a child?

Let’s take a bunch of criminals and ask them if they were spanked. Would that show a correlation between spanking and future crime?

More seriously, let’s take child abusers and ask them if they were spanked as a child. Guess what that proves.

Are you desperate for backing arguments?
We do have laws that prevent violence, especially bullying. It is strange to me that hitting your own child is an exception in some countries.
‘In 1979, Sweden passed a law prohibiting all corporal punishment by parents. This was hailed as a crucial step in the effort to reduce child abuse (Deley, 1988; Feshbach, 1980; Ziegert, 1983). Several countries have passed similar laws since then (Norway, Denmark, Finland, Austria, and Cyprus), and organizations have formed to advocate against parental corporal punishment throughout the world (e.g., End Physical Punishment of Children [EPOCH]’

The reasons for drug controls are based on which drugs were discovered first, not on some reliable medical basis. Do you really think that tobacco would be legalised if it were discovered today?
Marijuana has medical benefits in pain control. if Raleigh had discovered that instead, it would be legal today.

Oh, you compare fully-trained athletes being paid (with a referee supervising them) to a grown-up spanking a child? :smack:
Children adapt to all sorts of households. They can love alcoholic parents. They can love parents who abandon them. It doesn’t make the behaviour right.
(I’m not saying spanking is in the same category, but that your argument is specious.)

Well you’re certainly honest!
The problem is that some parents take the violence too far, that school children use bullying and that some adults use domestic violence or street crime to get what they want.
Is this communication?