Spanking, when done correctly, is good for kids

Great Debates
121

Wow. So totally misunderstood I have not often been.

  1. The word ‘coercing’ means ‘deliberately attempting to influene the behavior of’. Carrot, stick, whichever, it’s all coersion. “Not coercing” = “totally hands off, back turned, no deliberate influence whatsoever” = “not parenting”.

It was a bad word to use, and I didn’t bring it into the discussion; amusingly enough, the statement of mine you found such horror in was my attempt to undescore how poor a word it was.

  1. At first I was going to apologise for using the word “crime”; I wanted to finish my post this year and simply didn’t want to bother coming up with some longer, more gentle way of communicating my notions. But no, I won’t apologise. If you violate a formally established set of rules, then you are, by definition, ‘committing a crime’. This is different than ‘being randomly naughty’ in that, you are aware that the action you performed was wrong, and that there will be a consequence.

If you don’t like the word “crime” (perhaps feeling that it, for unknown reasons, may only apply to the societal governmental legal system), feel free to substitute in any synonym that makes you feel more comfortable.

  1. You clearly have no idea what I’m talking about with regard to spanking.

The only spanking I will even tenuously approve of is spanking that meets the following criteria. When I speak of spanking in this thread, this is what I’m talking about and nothing else:

  1. The act of spanking is done in consequence for a specific action that the child has been [previously informed of as being punished by a spanking. Those facets are so important to my definition, in fact, that I’ll give each their own number:

  2. The spanking is a consequence, not a random action on the part of the parent.

  3. The spanking is in response to a specific action, and the child knows it.

  4. The child was informed in advance of the “crime” that the consequence would be spanking.

I’m not certain that the other “advocates” of spanking in this thread include 4 in their own definition of the word as discussed here. But I do.

  1. The act of spanking itself is done on the rear with the pants still on. There are a specified number of swats, intended to cause a great deal of discomfort, and no damage. The kid is supposed to remember this.

Now, if you think I’m defending anything beyond this limited definition of the word “spanking”, then you’re wrong. I am not advocating beating the crap out of your kids; I am not advocating taking a switch to them; I’m not advocating taking out your frustrations on them.

Also, spanking is not the only tool in your arsenal. It is the biggest tool in your arsenal. I was dealing with a two-year-old kid. I do not believe in taking a child’s possessions away from them (that’s theft), and we didn’t have a TV or other ‘babysitter devices’ to ban the kid from. The remaining options for punishement seemed to be a) spanking, b) sending the kid to her room, c) withholding food, and d) telling the kid we hated them in one of various ways (yelling, ignoring, etcetera).

We didn’t like d. C was reserved for if the kid refused to eat the food served (we didn’t get her something else to eat.) For most other infractions, naturally, we sent the kid to her room for various pre-specified amounts of time. But running into the street is not the same as throwing a toy. To reinforce that there are some things you just do not do, we needed a bigger stick. Thus: spanking. (As defined above.)

As I said in a previous post, I spanked this kid exactly twice, and both times you could tell clearly from the manner she committed the infractions (in plain sight right in front of us, smirking) that she was testing our authority. So, I reminded her what the consequence was, she persisted, I carried out the punishment. Screaming. Carrying on. Oh, she must be dying. We consoled her afterward and reminded her of the “crime”-consequence connection, and then carried on with life.

After those two times, she never committed a spankable infraction again. There was no sign of her doing it again in the future, either. (I was only in a supervisory position over her for two years, so I can’t be certain.) She did get sent to her room every so often, but that’s to be expected; that punishment was intended to educate her as to what is considered good behavior more than to suppress the act, so it’s to be expected that it was imperfect at suppressing the act. (There was a point at which she decided to punish us by refusing to come out of her room; we of course let her do that. We made sure she knew she could come out, of course.)

Based on my experience in the matter, I am convinced that spanking (by my definition) can be entirely effective in achieving it’s ends: curbing potentially dangerous or strongly inadviseable behavior. Also, the child did not seem harmed, stunted, fearful or stifled by it, in any long-term sense (long-term meaning, once she got over crying after the spanking). So I’m convinced that using it, carefully, as a tool is not necessary harmful and can be beneficial.

Oh, and by the way, we didn’t just make rules and then not supervise the kids. The use of spanking does not imply that you ignore or otherwise fail to supervise the kid. (To imply as much, now, that would be an excluded middle.)

Oh, and chasm? Your notions on parenting seem laughably naive, if you’re talking about applying these techniques to extremely young children. Seven or eight year olds, sure, you can negotiate with them to a fairly large degree, from what I can tell. Two year olds? Yeah right. You only negotiate with them when you’re okay with all of the options they might choose. Elsewise lies madness.

122

Read this a few times. Seriously. Read it through.

Think about the very clear message delivered over and over to a child. " I love you, therefore I beat you. "

I can think of nothing more nauseating.

Not once, not even in a slight or mild way, have I ever raised a hand up to strike my children. They’re 16 and almost 15. Good kids, respectful and kind and aware of the feelings of others.

There’s no slippery slope at all. You use your hand to strike a child, then tell them you love them ? Then you get to reap the benefits- which may or may not emerge for decades.

Excellent. :rolleyes:

Cartooniverse

123

Spanking if done correctly!But theres the rub !Just HOW many parents actually do take the time and trouble to wrap barbed wire around a baseball bat before the spanking begins ?Its typical that modern parents "talk"good parenting but when theres a little effort involved then the kids can go hang!

124

One idea that appeared in this thread I hadn’t considered: the distinction between morality and the effects of spanking. A number of posts criticize spanking becaues violence* is in their opinion morally unacceptible. I take it that, even if its risks were negligent and its effectiveness were demonstratable, these people would still be against spanking. In a similar vein, I suppose some people would be opposed to, say, prostitution regardless of whether society is measurably improved if it were properly instituted.** We’ll have to agree to disagree with the idea of “essential” morality.

Another point in the arguement against spanking is “It sends mixed messages. How can a child reconcile being hit with being loved?” But isn’t 78%*** of all communication ambiguous? One time when we were having hot dogs, I introduced NatureBoy to the idea of putting cheese and bacon in the bun. He declined (not a big cheese fan). When I was a kid we called these “whistle dogs” (not sure why). When I said that name, he replied under his breath, “I’m not a wuss.” I heard it and corrected the miscommunication and all was well. But imagine I did not hear his comment and he persisted for a while in the belief I thought he was a wuss for not trying something new. Is he doomed to live the rest of his life with this belief? No, of course not because the sum of all interactions will allow him to be exposed to the truth. Even if spanking sends a mixed message, the sum total of all interactions in our relationship will indicate which message is correct.

NatureBoy and I love to play wrestle. Sometimes accidents happen and one of us hurts the other. No mixed messages, no conflict with the idea of love. Some may say, “How can you compare play fighting to a 20ft giant beating you?” The only point I’m trying to make is: in the right context painful physical contact between parent and child does not cause psychological damage. If it is so when play fighting, a skillful parent can ensure it’s so when disciplining.

I finally sat down with a view to reading Lissa’s links. Unfortuantely, the first is a dead link, the third is a newspaper article with a link to the actual study and that link is dead. The second studied only children under 2 and only mothers who did the spanking. For our family the spanking years were 2-5(ish). I am defer, however, by Hentor’s summary of the current state of the literature: Spanking as described is likely harmless, provides some short term positives, but in the face of other techniques is not whole-heartedly recommended.

To sum up my take on everything so far: If your moral code says all hitting is always wrong, spanking is not for you. If you believe that a child is entitled to a contrary opinion to an older/wiser parent and thus it’s wrong for a parent to enforce a child’s behaviour - well, good luck with that. The literature seems to rate spanking anywhere from harmless to risky at varying levels (more on this point in my next post). No one has mentioned a study where spanking predicts superior children by any measure. So I’m pursuaded that, given the risks and given the alternatives, I probably would have spanked less or not at all if I were to do it over again. I still maintain spanking has its place in a parent’s toolkit. But perhaps it is right that we as a society move away from it.

  • The term violence as applied to spanking has rightly come under criticism in this thread. I use it here to characterize the opinion of those opposed for this reason. Outside this usage, violence is not accurate at it lends to images of anger and/or injury that it not part of spanking done rightly.

** Please say, “Look, he’s comparing spanking to prostitution.” I merely point out that some people hold some practices to be immoral without considering whether society is harmed or improved by those activities.

*** I’ve read that 64.2% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

125

The only critique I have of your criteria (and it’s minor) is the “forewarned” requirement. The prerequisite need not be an explicit, “do this again and you’ll get a spanking.” Extreme example for illustrative purposes only: Imagine a kid, after having been told colouring on the wall is wrong. Is grounded for colouring on the wall, then after five repeat offences is spanked. Later, the child colours all over daddy’s work papers. If I was convinced it wasn’t an honest mistake, I wouldn’t buy the distinction “But daddy, you said not to colour on the wall and I didn’t!” and consider it a repeat offence.

Requiring an explicit forewarning removes cases where the child clearly ought to have known this brand new behaviour was wrong, or cases where it is important to quickly introduce the severity of consequence, “Don’t EVER do this again!”

126

I don’t know why you think you can learn parenting from a sitcom. :confused:

My response was to a poster (Shizaru) who gave anecdotal evidence about the ‘good old days’ when everyone on his street got hit with branches. I merely pointed out my own anecdotal evidence about how my school used violence agianst pupils.

127

To chasm: There is a place for negotiated settlements with a disagreeing child. I agree that such negotiation is more work and an impatient parent is tempted to use the parental power differential to “win.” I’ll even agree that this happens too often. I’ll even admit, on occassion, I did so too.

However, don’t take the opposite extreme that therefore negotiation is always the only way to go. In order to establish healthy habits, a parent must sometimes unsure the child behaves in this way - enforcing the parental will to the direct contrary of the child’s.

Here’s another dumb analogy: When teaching the piano, you don’t negotiate on how a scale should be played. My role as a teacher is to show you the right way to do it, and your role as a student is to do what I say. Now there are mean piano teachers who use a ruler to enforce the right way, and others who are more nurturing. But what’s right is not up for negotiation. How much more so with the complex nature of life?

I believe I see where you’re coming from, and I would rather more parents-to-be come from that general direction of respect for children as developing people and not objects. I would love to compare notes with you once you have a three or four year old to see in what ways you develop your intended practices.

128

In the OP I assert

We’ve focussed so far on the first part, “spanking is good.” What about the second part, “society should butt out”?

If we stipulate that spanking, while not necessarily harmful and likewise not necessarily effective - how should we as a society handle those parents who wish to spank their children?

Of course, we should intervene in cases of abuse. The problems are: what intervention? what is abuse? and how do we know when it’s happening?

I’ll start with my current belief: Society is going too far in its condemnation of spanking, and its attempts to solve the problem of abuse. The cure is worse than the disease when measured from a high level view of society as a whole. There is no doubt when CAS* steps in and removes a child from a battered child from the clutches of an abusive parent that for that child it’s wonderful. But for each case of this, how many innocent parents come under suspicion, surveillance, or even legal entanglements?

I’m sure each of us has a story from a friend of a friend, or closer tie: My most recent was a couple weeks ago I learned that a friend of mine had a serious brush with CAS. She had given her young son a rare swat-style spanking. The child, nonchalantly to all reports, tells his friends about it. A teacher overhears. Later, when my friend went, as usual, to pick him up from school, instead this teacher gives her a card, “You need to call this number if you wish to see your child again.” If I recall, it took the remainder of the weekend to get her son home, followed by x months of “supervision” and “visitation.”

From innocent parents undergoing this to children who shout back to a parent, “Oh yeah? I’ll just call that 800-number!” Is the cost worth it?

Finally, the CAS building in our city is one of the finest, nicely styled buildings in its neighbourhood - lotsa money. Recently those running the CAS had made a case for budget increases citing increasing case-load. Is it a far stretch to say that the CAS is interested in building a bigger case-load and may be thus unfairly follow through on obviously marginal cases? Is it in the CAS’s interest to call all spanking something worthy of their attention? And not just spanking?

Even while typing the above, in the back of my mind are the counter-arguments: Parents should have a healthy fear of crossing the line and its consequences. What other methods of detection are there than trained professionals keeping their eyes open (teachers, doctors, etc.)? Maybe it is a small price to pay.

Aside from state sponsored interventions as above, what of the general attitude of society? I hate the fact that if I let my daughter of 8 (when she was that age) ride her bike to the end of the street out of my direct sight that some people consider that a dereliction of duty. So I’m predisposed to consider society’s opinion to be overreacting to overblown risks. It is from this stance that I believe when I say I spanked my kids, society’s >gasp< is to be ignored.

But, as I conceded a few posts ago, there are risks to spanking - not if everyone does it right, but the fact that if condonded many will not do it right. When done wrong the effects are very real - and the extreme end is abuse. From a simple probability times severity risk assessment, maybe spanking should be taboo, even if it means legitimate, skill spanking goes with it.

Enough from me… what say you?

  • In our jurisdiction CAS, the Children’s Aid Society, is responsible for child protection activities.
129

I’m not sure if we have the same incidence of child abuse here in the Philippines as it is there in the U.S. so I really can’t say if allowing spanking does increase the incidence of “legitimate child abuse”. However, whenever we see clips of children being so disrespectful to their parents in the US, we really thank God that spanking is allowed here. The tantrums, the disrespect, the lack of discipline…I’m really not sure it’s worth it.

130

Well, I should have been more clear…not everyone got branches. Some kids got belts.

Please don’t think that every kid and myself included, back then got our asses beat for every little thing. But when we did get a spanking we sure as hell knew not to do whatever we did again. Whether or not you agree with spanking, I think that children need to learn that actions have consequences. (Anti spanking folks will now accuse me of me being a totalitarian tyrant, I suppose). In the end I think the decision is up to the parents. Whatever their choices are, they should strive to raise the child with a sense of morality and right and wrong.

131

I disagree that that’s the message being delivered here. ISTM that what Nature’s Call is clearly saying is “The fact that I occasionally spank you doesn’t mean I don’t love you”. (And conflating spanking with beating is disingenuous, IMHO.)

Parents often follow up various kinds of disciplinary actions, from scoldings to spankings to time-outs, with demonstrations of affection to soothe and reassure the child. Unless you’re willing to interpret all of those as meaning “I love you, therefore I abuse you”, I don’t think you need to get all nauseated about any of them.

132

Not disingenuous in any way. However, we are allowed to respectfully disagree here. I disagree with you.

Using your hands or some device held in the hands to strike a child, then gathering them up into your arms and saying, " But you know I do love you " delivers the message that results in lots of battered adults, and lots of kids who are struck because their parents were struck ( then loved, then struck, then loved, then struck, then loved ).

The desperate need to defend this cycle is not surprising- who would hit their kid and then NOT want to defend the action ?

133

I forgot to plug this in, sorry for the double-post.

This nice overview on statistics regarding spanking shows me to be in the minority overall. That doesn’t change how I feel, but does surprise me- just how many people hit their children.

134

Perhaps you should learn sarcasm from a sitcom as well. :wink:

135

Thanks for clarifying. Between that and Hentor’s links and having a few days to digest this thread, I’m a little more understanding of your position.

I still think that spanking is wrong wrong wrong under any circumstance, but I do see the major distinction between a quick swat for shock value and repeated hard swats to cause pain. I’m ever so slightly more OK with the former.

The real problem I have with spanking is when it’s used so extensively that the child has to dissociate to escape from the pain and humiliation. There’s evidence that that’s where the real damage starts to occur. Once again, I don’t think anyone here will disagree. I think a potential problem is that a good number of parents might not know when they’ve crossed this line, however. Of course, many will, but I get the feeling that many who think they know are the ones who are the greatest danger. If you’re afraid that you often cross that line, you probably never do.

Maybe. :wink:

136

That’s quite the extreme example; a cleverer kid would claim they failed to draw a distinction between their drawing paper and daddy’s work papers. It’s a much easier sell.

Anyway, you spank your way; I spank mine. Though, I might have done things differently in a different situation. I came into a situation where I suspected the mother might not establish a consistent diciplinary system on her own accord. (That is, the scenario “mom gets tired and frustrated, tells the kid to do something, the kid does not immidiately comply, the mom promptly spanks the kid” seemed well within the realm of possibility.) The particular portion of my ‘legal system’ which you mention was in large part put into place to restrict the parent (by which I mean ‘her’; I’m perfect of course), forcing them to curb their desires to lash out out of frustration. The fact that it finalizes the job of associating the crime with the punishment, not “mommy’s mad so I get punished” is just icing on the cake.

It was indeed a little tough dealing with the cases where the kid sets fire to the house and you can’t spank them 'cause it didn’t occure to you that they’d do it. Generally, after hastily making sure nobody declared that there would be an immidiate spanking (I didn’t like the idea of telling the kid we’d do something and then not doing it, and I didn’t like flatly reversing mom either: therefore, the spanking would have had to happen) we simply stressed how unhappy we were about the situation and that if she ever did that again, there would definitely be a spanking. Now, go to your room! (We were a little looser with using the room.) Fortunately the kid didn’t put us in that situation too often.

Is it going to hurt my case to point out that i swatted several times (five, I think), and the goal was for it to hurt (though not damage)? For me it wasn’t a mild tool used on occasion; it was a WMD used twice sortly after the rules were established, and then (as it turned out) never again.

To summarize my position: I’m highly suspicious of spanking in general; there is a fine line between an organized discipline system and just beating the kid because they cross you on a bad day. Ergo my rigid rules about when to do it. However, when used with great care it’s an effective tool in the kit, and from what I could see, the kit I was using (including the spankings) seemed to work pretty darned well. The kid was obedient without seeming too stifled; she definitely had personality and spirit, even though she knew and respected the limits of the rules. At the age of two-through-four-ish, mind you.

(I only tried it on one kid, and didn’t see the long term effects, though, so what do I know? Maybe she was just a naturally good kid. I’m relating my limited experience; ymmv.)

137

I have a philosophical objection to spanking. I don’t think it is right and good for adults to hit children. And yet, when I looked into the research, it seemed that no one could show very much effect either way, as long as they were talking about controlled, open-hand-to-butt swatting on occasion, not beatings. Spanked kids pretty much obeyed their parents, hit other kids, got good grades, had anti-social behavior, and so forth at similar rates to non-spanked kids. There are some studies, cited upthread, showing some long-term bad effects, but IIRC, other studies failed to show the same.

I came to the conclusion that I didn’t need to keep from spanking based on the scientific evidence. But that doesn’t mean I spank. As I said, I have a problem with it.

While I disagree with some of what **chasm ** says, I do agree that some parents try to use spanking as a way to make children police their own behavior before they are developmentally ready. One of the studies cited above discussed kids under 2 getting spanked regularly - that is nuts. At that age, they have almost no ability to control impulses, futurize, or generalize lessons. You have to stay with them - *keep * them out of the street, *pull * them away from the hot stove, supervise them nearly constantly. That is really difficult, draining work, and I understand the impulse to “put the fear of god” into them over the hot stove, so you don’t have to watch and stay nearby all the time, but it just won’t work. By the time they can correlate the spanking with avoiding behavior, and control their impulses, they can start understanding when you *explain * why they shouldn’t do those things and what the consequences (natural or artificial) will be.

Other problems with spanking:

Without other parenting tools, you’re eventually put in the position of saying, “Don’t hit people!” SMACK!

It’s easy to slip into taking out your own emotions in a violent manner. Not much of a problem with timeouts and explaining why they shouldn’t do things.

It conditions the parent too. When your kid does something undesirable, swat them. But little kids do undesirable things for lots of reasons, including being hungry, tired, overstimulated, lonely, or scared, and hitting them in these circumstances is totally counterproductive. With other forms of discipline, inquiry into why the kid is misbehaving is often part of the procedure.

It teaches kids that it’s acceptable for adults to touch them in ways that feel bad, on a private area. I don’t know any statistics on this - this is just my own personal feeling, that you should teach kids autonomy over their bodies and resistance to possible abuse as much as possible.

BTW, my kid is 39 months old, and generally screeches to a halt at the edge of sidewalks and such, and I have never hit her to reinforce this lesson. (I also still stay nearby and offer reminders for her to stop when she is caught up in something and might forget.)

138

I still think you’re overdramatizing this. I was (infrequently and mildly) spanked as a child myself, yet I have never spanked any child, nor would I want to. So I’m skeptical about inferring some kind of pathological “cycle” of spanking, much less the existence of any “desperate need to defend” it.

As Cinnamon said, the evidence suggests that mild, controlled use of spanking really doesn’t have detectable negative effects on children. Spanking opponents may insist that it has to have negative effects, and may use scary rhetoric about “beating” and “violence” to dramatize their point, but scary rhetoric is no substitute for convincing evidence.

139

I agree that any spanking of an under-2 is reprehensible and ignorant, and the parent really needs some educating about behaviorism, attachment and child development.

But from 2 to 4, I don’t think (and this is just my opinion, as a beginning parent) an occasional swat, say 6 times/year, is a bad thing.

Specifically, at 2.5 and 3.5, kids are going through phases of “extreme disequilibrium” as Louise Ames puts it, and are going to push Mom (or whoever their primary caregiver is) absolutely to the wall. Once in a while, not often, but occasionally they need the equivalent of the “nip” you see mama tigers give their young when they are out of control.

I think that how the child responds to a single swat is the answer to whether or not it was a good idea - Mom is learning here, too. When it causes the child to cease their disruptive (sometimes destructive) behavior and move back towards the mother for reassurance, then that says you got it right.

If it escalates the hysteria, leads to a second swat, makes the child cry for more than a minute, or becomes a habit (you need to do it again in the next few days), then it was (or is becoming) the wrong choice and Mom needs to do some research on better options. Or maybe she needs to find some help so that she can get away from the kids and recharge her batteries. Ames’ recommends that 3.5-yr-olds be enrolled in some kind of daycare/nursery school at least 3 afternoons/week, just so Mom can save her sanity.

Yes, it lets off a little bit of steam for mom, but not in proportion to causing pain - pain is not the point. The point is to break the momentum and seize control.

I completely agree that natural consequences is the first discipline choice, followed by loss of privileges or toys, or physically removing them from the problem. Next comes volume (but not full-out screaming, that’s no good either). Then threats - putting them in the corner, if possible, or the threat of a “spanking”. And beyond that is the swat (assuming that you’re calm enough to touch them w/out causing damage – sometimes you just have to leave).

In my opinion, name-calling and the silent treatment are far more damaging than an occasional pop on the behind when the child is being an unruly brat.

The real “discipline” work isn’t a matter of punishments - it’s your relationship to your child, the teaching you do on a daily basis. The point is to empower them to make good choices and learn self-control. The biggest lesson we teach is through our own behavior, so out-of-control swatting isn’t going to help.

Personally I haven’t used swatting for any safety infractions, but that response is so common among my mommy friends and acquaintances that I have to believe there is something valid about their choice.

And any swat is like a “code blue” in a hospital - Mom feels bad about it, too, and needs to think about the circumstances that led up to the crisis, to see what else could be changed in the future. But sometimes the answer is “not a doggone thing”.

140

I think that’s an excellent point – learn as you go, rather than stick to some arbitrary dogma.

But I do think that there can be something misleading about this – regression toward the mean. That is, sometimes children behave badly. Sometimes they behave well. Most of the time, they behave somewhere in the middle. If your child is acting at one of the extremes, wait a little while – that behavior will change, and with no prompting from you.

To restate, if your child is acting extremely well, wait a bit. The child will soon sink back to normal. If your child is acting badly, wait a bit. He will soon rise to normal.

All on his own.

Now imagine spanking the kid when he is bad, and not spanking him when he is good. One can easily conclude that when he is spanked, his behavior improves. And when he is not spanked (or even when he is rewarded) because of good behavior, his behavior deteriorates. The thing is, the spanking may have had absolutely nothing to do with the bahavior. It may be that the child learned nothing. In fact, it’s the parent who is getting conditioned.