Is Spanking Of Children Appropriate?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

Poll question: Is Spanking Of Children Appropriate?

[Vincardog]

1. Do you see any difference between spanking and beating?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. I Wouldn't Hit Somebody Who Was Incapable Of Hitting Me Back...

It's a vanity of mine...

[Vincardog]

7. IS there any difference between a swat on The diapers to get their attention and beating them with a

frying pan?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. They Both Inflict Pain

eom

[Vincardog]

13. I disagree. I did an experiment. I took a child and patted his ass and said nice things.

The baby smiled. I kept patting his ass and said bad baby. The infant began to cry. IT had nothing to do with pain.

[iconoclastic cat]

17. lol, there's no way did you actually did that. nt

[Vincardog]

21. BET me I did to. My youngest brother was the subject. He does not remember it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. You Went From A Swat To A Pat

Certainly you distinguish between the two...

[Vincardog]

24. The force was the same. The baby thought that there was a difference.

[jtrockville]

2. No, it sends the message:

when someone doesn't do as they're supposed to, violence is an appropriate response.

[WindRavenX]

4. Yup

Of course, there were times when I was swatted on my behind...but more of an attention getter than for punishment.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. That Is The Main Reason I Oppose It...

But I would change you reason just a bit, ergo:


"when someone doesn't do what I want them to do, violence is an appropriate response."

[jtrockville]

199. Yes, thanks for clarifying.

[IntravenousDemilo]

29. But it also sends the very valuable life lesson:

when someone doesn't do as he or she is supposed to, violence is an expectable response.

[JDPriestly]

41. Not to children.

A child below the age of 3 does not connect the violence to the child's own act. As for a child over 3, spankings are pointless. A child over 3 can reason and understands punishments other than spankings such as sitting in a corner without toys for a while or not watching TV for a couple of weeks much better than a spanking. The spanking only causes resentment on the part of the child and a wish for revenge.

Don't do anything to your child that you would not want your child to do to you. Cause when your child grows up, sooner or later, what you have done to your child, he or she will do to you. The parent decides on the amount of harmony and positive feeling that will be present in the house.

[Trillo]

166. Exactly right

"when your child grows up, sooner or later, what you have done to your child, he or she will do to you"

Thanks for the memory, bittersweet as it is. It was quite exhilarating to get even with the SOB. He never touched me again.

[Mr. Blonde]

201. My cousin has been in time out his whole life

and still hasn't figured out what he has been punished for. He is 17 now by the way and has been sent to military schools and rehab among other things to correct his problems. Who really cares about being grounded? It is a lame punishment and isn't something that instills enough desire to not have it happen again.

[bluethruandthru]

69. You're right!

I just love when you see a parent wailing on their kids bottom saying "STOP (whack) HITTING (whack) YOUR (whack) BROTHER"!!!

Sending the message that violence is okay...as long as you're bigger than the other person! :crazy:

[Exiled in America]

81. I think so too. Though I was raised with spanking.

[MissB]

98. This. Exactly.

[quinnox]

5. Don't have kids but

I think spanking is fine in moderation. As long as you don't spank them too often or with too much force then I have no problem with it.

[wake.up.america]

9. I have 3 well behaved children. Could be because I don't spank 'em

[youthere]

52. How long before someone says they have 3 well-behaved kids...

and they DID spank? I wonder. I'll bet it won't be long.

[bperci108]

64. TA-DAH!!!

See below.

(You knew it was coming, didn't you?) :P

[youthere]

191. DU never disappoints!

:headbang:

[bperci108]

60. And I've got two very well-behaved children. Could be because I DID spank 'em...

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc, anyone? ;)

[youthere]

190. BWAHAHAHA!!!

I knew it!

[wake.up.america]

202. Ab incunabulis ?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

28. OK

About 90 percent of parents use some form of corporal punishment on toddlers, and about 50 percent continue to use it during the early teen years, despite a growing body of evidence that it does not positively affect a child's behavior and may actually result in increased aggressive or delinquent behaviors. Straus and colleagues examined the relationship between corporal punishment and antisocial behavior in children.



.....


The authors conclude that corporal punishment or spanking is a statistically significant predictor of subsequent antisocial behavior, even in children who may be spanked only once a week. They believe their data show a "dose response" to corporal punishment, starting with young children. The more frequently spanking is used, the longer its negative effects last and the greater the likelihood that it will induce behavior problems. They further suggest that reducing or completely eliminating corporal punishment would be beneficial to society, since antisocial behavior is associated with violence and more serious crimes committed by teenagers and adults.


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3225/is_n4_v57/ai_20383467

[JDPriestly]

46. Thank you.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

58. HITTING MODELS HITTING

There is a classic story about the mother who believed in spanking as a necessary part of discipline until one day she observed her three- year-old daughter hitting her one-year-old son. When confronted, her daughter said, "I'm just playing mommy." This mother never spanked another child.Children love to imitate, especially people whom they love and respect. They perceive that it's okay for them to do whatever you do. Parents, remember, you are bringing up someone else's mother or father, and wife or husband. The same discipline techniques you employ with your children are the ones they are most likely to carry on in their own parenting. The family is a training camp for teaching children how to handle conflicts. Studies show that children from spanking families are more likely to use aggression to handle conflicts when they become adults.

http://www.askdrsears.com/html/6/T062100.asp

[txaslftist]

97. "children who may be spanked ONLY once a week?"

That's way too often. I spanked my oldest daughter once. She told my second daughter how terrible and horrible and awful it was (one open-hand swat on the fanny), so I never had to spank my second daughter at all. I've had to spank my boy maybe three times in his life.

Once a week is a parent who knows no other form of discipline, more often than once a week is probably abusive.

[JDPriestly]

44. You have never had children.

The problem is that parents easily get carried away. A child can really make the parent angry. If the parent has a habit of using physical punishment, it is very easy to use too much.

[DemGa]

10. What gives anyone the right to hit someone?

It's an egregious assault on their humanity. Wrong on many levels, IMO.

[Vincardog]

16. When you have a child throwing a hissy fit and acting out a tantrum; how do you propose getting

their attention?

[DemGa]

19. Acceptance, love, empathy. n/t

[Vincardog]

You keep rewarding misbehavior and see where that gets you. Hint :Paris Hilton.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

30. There's Other Forms Of Punishment Or Negative Sanctions Besides Hitting Someone

For instance if you break a criminal law you don't get a whipping....

[Vincardog]

47. You have never heard of the elevator in the Dallas jail.

[Yukari Yakumo]

33. Agreed. Apparently people have forgotten the old adage "Spare the rod, spoil the child." {nt}

[redqueen]

37. I don't think that parable means what you think it means.

:hi:

[gollygee]

43. Love should not be used as a carrot, and the loss of love shouldn't be used as a stick

I bet Paris Hilton is more the product of parents who were too busy for her than having too much love and empathy.

[JDPriestly]

55. Believe it or not. Spanking does reward misbehavior.

Attention is the reward. It teaches impatience and violence. Don't do it. You can end up in jail, and, if you get carried away and go to far, you can lose your children.

[bluethruandthru]

85. Children usually misbehave for a reason...

either they don't know that they're doing something they shouldn't...in which case spanking won't help. Better to tell and/or show them how you'd like them to behave..and when they do..give them a hug. Or they misbehave in order to get your attention. You can give them positive attention that will make them feel closer to you..or you can smack them or yell at them. Then they'll start to resent and pull away from you because you're no longer someone they can trust. Yes, they may "behave"...but at what cost?
Spanking kids shows failure on the part of the parent.

[MissB]

100. I wouldn't use Paris as the pro-spanking model.

Her life is fucked up beyond belief for reasons beyond spanking/no spanking.

[Vincardog]

188. OK without discipline you end up with George Bush.

[Telly Savalas]

192. There are forms of discipline which don't involve violence.

[DemGa]

40. Empathic communication means understanding

the situation. Implicit in this, for me, is working toward some resolution of the problem. This is meant to clarify my position.

[redqueen]

35. Why do you need their attention? The way to handle it is to NOT give them yours.

That's the reward... attention.

Ignore the tantrum and see what happens.

[bluethruandthru]

65. Or...

grab the child and start kissing their neck and making "raspberries" on them. They start to giggle and the tantrum's over. Works like a charm...especially when they're young.
Humor and laughter is a great way to get kids to cooperate. :)

[redqueen]

66. Oh... lovely!

:hi:

[gollygee]

Tantrums are a normal part of development and don't require punishment

The pediatrician asked at one point if my daughter had tantrums, I said yes and asked why, and she said if a child didn't have tantrums they had to consider if the child had some kind of special needs.

Children outgrow tantrums all on their own.

[JDPriestly]

53. You distract the child with something positive.

You listen to your child in the first place. If the child is under 3 and you need to take something away from the child, give the child something else. Teach the child to substitute positive behavior for negative behavior. Try to develop problems solving skills in your child. When a parent responds in angry emotion, the parent conveys the message that obstacles and difficulty should be met with angry emotion, i.e., temper tantrums. Children naturally respond that way. But, theoretically, part of becoming an adult is learning to respond rationally and to channel physically aggressive behavior into other behavior such as intelligent discussion, listening to others and talking with them.

It is interesting. If your car doesn't behave, you don't bash it with a sledgehammer because you know the car will just behave worse. Why should you bash your child just because the child is not behaving? No. You help the child learn how to work out the problem. If I can't eat the candy now, maybe I will get something I like even better later when we get home. If I can't stay with mommy now, I can play with the children in the pre-school.

Sometimes you just ignore the child's tantrum, smile and reassure the child. If the child is really acting out, you firmly but without violence make the child sit in a corner until the child is tired of acting out and becomes rational.

Don't hit your child. You could end up in court. You could lose custody of your child. Your child could end up in a foster home. Don't think for a minute that it could not happen to you. Please, please don't hit or spank your children.

[scarletwoman]

109. If a child is having "hissy fits" and tantrums, that means the parents have already failed

at proper parenting. To then physically assault the child is just compounding the dysfunction.

Children need attention like they need air and water and food. A child having a screaming fit is a child who has not been attended to properly in the first place.

If a child is having tantrums, it's not THEIR attention that needs getting, it's the PARENTS' attention that has evidently been lacking -- so they resort to the one surefire way of getting parental attention: screaming their little heads off.

I raised two boys without ever spanking, they never threw tantrums, they knew that no matter what I was always willing to listen to them and interact with them with respect and understanding. They have grown up to be responsible, ethical and compassionate adults.

Children freak out for a reason, a good parent is tuned in enough to their needs to make it unnecessary for them to go emotionally over the edge. And please notice I used the word "needs" -- as opposed to "wants". If childrens' real needs are met (like loving attention and attentiveness), "wants" are a barely an issue.

sw

[iverglas]

11. it's an assault

Civilized societies do not permit assaults, as doing so would be a violation of an individual's right to security of the person.

On the other hand, the old maxim de minimis non curat lex can be very useful. Not all assaults are deserving of the full weight of the criminal justice system being brought down on their perpetrators, and the odd bum smack by a frustrated/frightened but otherwise blameless parent, even were spanking outlawed, would not likely lead to a criminal record.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/spanking/
http://www.toronto.ca/health/children/discipline.htm
http://www.canadiancrc.com/SpankOut_Day_April_30th.htm

http://www.cmaj.ca/cgi/content/full/161/7/805
"Interpretation: There appears to be a linear association between the frequency of slapping and spanking during childhood and a lifetime prevalence of anxiety disorder, alcohol abuse or dependence and externalizing problems."

Things that are "wrong" so very often produce negative outcomes, too.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

18. You See... We Agree On Something...

Part of my aversion to spanking is a function of my respect for an individual's autonomy and spanking someone without their permission violates their autonomy... I also don't fancy violence as a method of settling disputes; especially before all other alternatives have been exhausted...




PEACE

BRIAN

[txaslftist]

95. Telling them to go to bed at 8 pm also impinges on their autonomy.

Still gotta do it.

[iverglas]

123. and here we encounter the concept of "justified"

In Canada, we codify it in our constitution:

1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

-- which our courts have now spend much time interpreting and applying. In the US, the courts do essentially the same thing, by making rules about levels of scrutiny and classes of rights and so on.

If freedom of speech could really never be abridged in the US, then there could be no laws against advertising snake oil to cure cancer, or telling lies under oath ... or shouting "fire" in crowded theatres where there is no fire.

If the right to security of the person (which you might have to call the right to privacy in the US) could really never be infringed, there could be no military draft or a whole lot of other things.

If we didn't, by common accord, make exceptions to every rule we have ever made by common accord, for reasons that we believe justify those exceptions, we'd be robots, or extinct by now, or all gone mad from the insoluble conundrums we'd created for ourselves.

Children have rights. Parents are generally entrusted with ensuring that children are able to exercise their rights, and also with ensuring that children follow all our rules. Parents are required to do these things in the children's interests. It is not in a child's interests to be allowed to run amok or beat up other children or eat an entire box of cookies or write on the walls, or whatever the child might get stuck in a corner for.

A parent may interfere in a child's liberty, in the child's interests. A parent may stick a child in the corner for an hour. However, a parent may not lock a child in a closet for a week. The reasons for all this are pretty obvious to anyone looking.

What reason -- justification -- there would be for allowing parents to deliberately assault their children, I don't know.

[scarletwoman]

142. Diplomacy over violence. You *entice* them to bed by making it story time.

A parent who resorts to spanking their child in order to "make" the child go to bed, is a selfish lazy parent who is too concerned with their own personal comfort over making the effort to give their child the loving attention that the child needs in order to thrive and be happy.

[Marrah_G]

198. You would be surprised how many do not

They let the kids stay up until they are tired, let them eat whatever they want, let them do whatever they want and then go out and bitch about what a bunch of spoiled, undisciplined kids we have out there.

People actually bitched at me for insisting my children used good manners and went to bed at the same time every night. I was also bitched at for letting my kids go without dinner if they refused to eat what was made or would not stay sitting at the table.

I went with my own instincts and the advice of a good pediatrician and my kids turned out to be damn good kids.

I'm not my children's friend, they don't need to like me all the time and if they never have the thought "I hate you, you are so unfair" then I am a really crappy parent.

[JDPriestly]

57. You are right. The law in California allows spanking, but it is

narrowly defined. Something beyond that can put you in jail. Parents can easily cross the line. Don't use physical violence of any kind on your children.

[iverglas]

107. that's where it just gets weird, isn't it?

The Criminal Code of Canada says:

43. Every schoolteacher, parent or person standing in the place of a parent is justified in using force by way of correction toward a pupil or child, as the case may be, who is under his care, if the force does not exceed what is reasonable under the circumstances.

and in 2004 the Supreme Court of Canada said, in a challenge to that section as being a violation of the constitutional guarantees of security of the person and equality and against cruel and unusual punishment:

http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/2004/2004scc4.html

First, the person applying the force must have intended it to be for educative or corrective purposes: ... . Accordingly, s. 43 cannot exculpate outbursts of violence against a child motivated by anger or animated by frustration. It admits into its sphere of immunity only sober, reasoned uses of force that address the actual behaviour of the child and are designed to restrain, control or express some symbolic disapproval of his or her behaviour. The purpose of the force must always be the education or discipline of the child: ... .


Second, the child must be capable of benefiting from the correction. This requires the capacity to learn and the possibility of successful correction. Force against children under two cannot be corrective, since on the evidence they are incapable of understanding why they are hit ... . A child may also be incapable of learning from the application of force because of disability or some other contextual factor. In these cases, force will not be “corrective” and will not fall within the sphere of immunity provided by s. 43.

-- and that (the first bit), to me, is just weird and icky. That an assault is excused if it is committed for "educative or corrective purposes". What the hell is a "sober, reasoned use of force"? In all other contexts, we excuse the use of force only if it is necessary to avert some immediate threat. I don't get to walk up to you at the bar and punch you, to teach you the lesson that you shouldn't have stolen my beer last week. But if it works for children, and is not wrong or unwise in the case of children, why should I not get to do that?

In this case, as in the odd other one it's decided recently (Canadians will immediately think of Chaoulli, in which the Court chose to undermine our health care system against all the evidence it had before it that this was what it was doing), our famously clever and politically correct Supreme Court up here just seems to have lost its marbles and disconnected from reality.

[mitchtv]

12. a good swat on the ass for a kid running into the street

might get their attention

[BlooInBloo]

14. Depends too heavily on the specific details of a situation to admit of a general answer.

[iconoclastic cat]

15. Prior to having children, I did think it was okay.

Now, however, I couldn't do it. But that doesn't give me any right to dictate to another parent who does think spanking is okay. As mentioned above, though, there is a big difference between spanking and beating.

[SidDithers]

22. No way, no how, never...nt

Sid

[TahitiNut]

23. Sure. Slaves and chattel are for beating. Children, women, who cares?

:sarcasm:


:puke:

[IntravenousDemilo]

25. When they're bad, certainly. When they're good, ehh, not so much... n/m

[bemildred]

26. Rarely, great restraint is required.

But there are occasions when physical methods are necessary, kids cannot just be allowed to act out. On the other hand spanking as a form of punishment is always mistake. When habitual, it always indicates a failure of the adults in charge. If you are not in control of yourself, you have no business attempting to discipline a child.

It is amazing to me that we have these discussions in an nation that habitually treats juveniles as adults in the criminal legal process.

[gollygee]

56. False dichotomy

"there are occasions when physical methods are necessary, kids cannot just be allowed to act out."

There are more choices than that.

[bemildred]

74. What do you propose to do to stop a child from, say, hitting another child?

Without using any form of physical restraint? Are you supposed to just talk until they get tired?

[gollygee]

79. Take the child home

I don't have any problem picking a kid up and taking him/her home. But I don't hit. Ever.

[bemildred]

89. Good for you.

How is that not "physical restraint"?

[bemildred]

91. I'm sure the kid your kid just punched out really appreciates your moral superiority too.

[gollygee]

111. By the time my kid was big enough to "punch someone out"

she'd learned not to hit through non-violent means.

Even if she punched someone out, I wouldn't spank. There are plenty of ways to actually teach children things. Teaching a child not to hit by hitting doesn't work.

[bemildred]

125. Well that's certainly true.

If you habitually hit your kids they will learn to do that too, some of them at least. On the other hand, if you paddle them once or twice in the course of growing up, nothing much will come of it. And I do think that people that take rigid attitudes about matters of discipline in child raising, whether in being too violent or too passive, make lousy parents.

[gollygee]

128. Another false dichotomy

You can be non-violent and not be passive. There are plenty of ways to get your point across to a child.

[bemildred]

129. You use the term "violent" while accusing me of "false dichotomy"?

When I said "physical restraint"? Do you really want to assert I am advocating violence against children because I suggest that physical restraint is sometimes necessary, after admitting you yourself would cart your kid off against their will in certain situations?

[gollygee]

130. I'm responding to this sentence

"And I do think that people that take rigid attitudes about matters of discipline in child raising, whether in being too violent or too passive, make lousy parents."

Sorry if I misinterpreted. I can see upon re-reading that you could have meant that people could be too violent, or too passive, or could be in between. I'm doing like three things at once here.

[bemildred]

137. That isn't a false dichotomy, it's just a dichotomy.

A presentation of two extremes in a range of possible attitudes. My experience as a parent has been that one has to pay attention and be flexible. I paddled all of them a few times at one point or another, when they were small, to get their attention. And I do mean a few, less than a handful of times, per each. With one of them it was zero. They are all well-behaved and not violent, and they all tell me I was a good parent. In a two cases we negotiated agreements about methods of discipline when they were of age to do that (around 10) and both respected them. For this reason, I disagree with blanket statements about what parents ought and ought not to do, it's a messy business, and most parents are just kids that grew up, and do the best they can. It is not so much that I think spanking is good, it's that I think bashing parents is as unproductive as spanking children, when you make a habit of it.

[bemildred]

134. As a matter of curiosity, when do you think kids become capable of

aggression against other kids? I mean, I admit is it often learned behavior, but it was a problem for several of my kids (other kids aggression) even in pre-school. It wasn't a matter of being old enough, it begins quite early, although when they are younger they can do less damage, so to speak. There also seem to be innate tendencies that differ from child to child, some just are much more physical than others. I always liked to read myself.

[gollygee]

138. Different kids learn at different ages, that's true

when my daughter was younger she was very aggressive. She outgrew it around 3. She was still having trouble and at some point I got her a bell to ring - she was hitting because she didn't know how else to communicate her anger. Once she had the bell if she got angry she would ring that little bell, and it got our attention and let us know she was angry. She stopped hitting when I got her the bell. If her aggressiveness had continued I would have kept looking for non-violent ways to handle it. I know that some kids do hit longer than she did, though, and it might be more challenging to get some kids to stop than others. But I don't see how hitting a child is going to make them less likely to hit.

My nephew, who has just turned 5, was hitting until pretty recently. My brother was a big believer in spanking. I have no idea if that's part of the reason my nephew hit because a lot of young kids hit regardless. Anyway, he got divorced and got full custody, and then started dating a woman who was a child/family counselor and who didn't believe in spanking, and he read he read some books she recommended and stopped spanking my nephew. My nephew stopped hitting within a few months. I'm not saying that would happen with every kid because people are much more complicated than that, but it was a pretty dramatic difference. There were other issues at play, of course, such as his parents getting out of a bad marriage, so I can't chalk it all up to the end of spanking.

[bemildred]

144. Well, I see where you are coming from, anyway.

You are quite right that hitting them is not a good way to teach them not to hit. That business of yours with the bell is very clever. Teaching then to deal with anger is very important, and hitting them is a really bad way to do that too. Things have to be dealt with, and hitting doesn't deal with much of anything.

[Old and In the Way]

27. Qualified yes

I can count the # times I whacked my kids'fannies on one hand. Sometimes, you just need to get their attention. Always have to keep the option open.

[Karenina]

86. I bopped my eldest's butt ONCE.

His little brother was on the top bunk, dangling his arm. I warned him not to take the bait as I told the younger to get down. In a nanosecond, big bro pulled lil bro off the bunk and I caught him 20 cm. before his head hit the floor. Big bro was treated to an ass-warming single swat.

He screamed like a Banshee, "YOU HIT ME!!!" After the ruckus and adrenaline subsided we spent 45 minutes talking.
"You do realize that what you did could have seriously injured or killed your brother, don't you?"
"But, but YOU HIT ME!"
"Yes, I hit you, I'm sorry, I was FREAKED OUT but if I EVER see you endangering someone else's life, I'll do it again."

I never needed to swat either of them again. The L@@K sufficed.

[ronnykmarshall]

31. Only in the smoking section of Olive Garden.

[AlCzervik]

32. While breasfeeding.

:D :hi:

[racaulk]

39. You're bad!

:rofl:

[JDPriestly]

59. Well, maybe there. LOL I am absolutely opposed to

spankings because I know what happens to parents and children when the "spanking" gets out of hand and it does all to often.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

108. Don't make me sic the Universal Flamebait on you! -nt

[redqueen]

34. No.

Far from the best method for training animals... so why would anyone even consider using the method on their own kids?

Sad stuff...

[buddhamama]

112. completely agree

violence as a means to control behavior is never ok.

[gollygee]

36. There is no valid reason other than self defense to hit a person

and no one needs to defend themselves against a young child by hitting.

[JDPriestly]

38. Spanking is not appropriate.

Would you want to be spanked? What you give your child, your child will give back to you. That is absolutely true. Always think about how you would feel if your child did to you what you are doing to your child.

You have a right to respect your child and to be respected in return.

A spanking can too quickly turn into a beating. I have practiced in the courts that decide whether a child is to be placed in a foster home. I have read the case law. A "spanking" can quickly get out of hand. You think it won't happen, but it can happen to otherwise rational people. Don't get started. Don't do it. It can become a horrible habit.

Deal with the underlying issue. If your child is 3 or under, distract the child from the negative conduct with something positive. If your child is 3 or over, make sure the child under stands why he or she is supposed to do x rather than y. If the child is too hysterical to pay attention, make him or her sit still in a corner or some other appropriate place until he or she is calm and you can talk to the child rationally. Ask the child why he or she did the "naughty" thing, and listen to what the child says. Have a real discussion about what the child could have done better.

This works. I did this with my kids, and they are wonderful. (They are both grown.)

[BeHereNow]

48. Agreed- also spanking is the sign that a parent is not in control-

Parents who spank are not in control of their role as parents.
Children thrive when there is security and the sense that
their parents set boundaries with love.
If those boundaries are broken by a child, the response must
be calm, but firm. Consequences must be consistent and
fair, not angry.
Anger only escalates the situation and builds feelings of
resentment in the child. What you want as a parent is respect.
Respect from your child lessens the chance that your
child will do something outside of the boundaries and
knowing the parent respects the child increases a child's
self respect and confidence.
Spanking is a no win form of brutality.

BHN

[bamacrat]

42. Spanking is not beating.

I was spanked, hell I was paddled in school up to the 12th grade. It works for some, a lot of kids whose parents are too afraid to spank turn out to be fucking douche bags, and vice versa. Depends really, the last time I was "spanked" it was by the principal at my high school I was 17.

[Sapere aude]

45. I think spanking teaches that aggression by the more powerful one is the way to get one's way.

The kid doesn't know good from bad or wrong from right. He/she knows that you are bigger and stronger and you can get your way by spanking him/her. The kid does what you want as a reaction to the pain or fear you put in him.

Animals are not kids so don't take this the wrong way but I would not train a horse by hitting him. The response I want from a horse is willingness to do what I ask him to do. The horse accepts me as the leader. I think that same thing is true about humans and humans are animals too.

Kids will soon get to the point where they can make judgments about what is the thing to do and what is not. If they do the right thing out of fear of punishment they haven't evolved much I think.

[derby378]

49. I think George W. Bush could've done with a few more spankings to his rump...

Since the Democratic Party will not discipline him, who will?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

51. Maybe He Was Spanked As A Child And That's Why He Thinks Violence Is An Appropriate Response To

Problems...

[redqueen]

68. He was spanked plenty.

Barbara is a parent who thinks spanking is peachy-keen.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

71. That Explains It...

eom

[obnoxiousdrunk]

50. No need of

spanking when we have Ritalin.

[verse18]

54. Spanking vs. Beating

Spanking=Hitting with an open hand on the seat of the pants without leaving bruises or lasting marks.

Beating=hitting with a fist, belt, cord, switch or other object: hitting with an open hand anywhere other than the seat of the pants: spanking that leaves bruises or permanent marks.

I'm a Social Worker in a pediatric hospital and the team I work on specifically assesses children who have been seriously injured due to abuse and/or neglect. We get plenty of children who are basically assaulted by the adults in their lives causing severe injury and death in some cases. The line between spanking and beatings is so thin and easily crossed.

We will be starting an initiative in our hospital offering stressed out parents other methods of disciplining their misbehaving children besides yelling at, spanking or threatening to spank their children. These other methods include discipline, time out, sticker charts, logical outcomes contracting and house rules.

[JDPriestly]

61. Thank you.

[redqueen]

70. "The line between spanking and beatings is so thin and easily crossed"

Yup.

Hitting is bad. I tell my kids that, and I won't confuse them by pretending that hitting them is a good way to deal with them.

[slackmaster]

62. In Before AJNTSA Guy

[DemocratSinceBirth]

67. Can We Put You Down As Undecided?

eom

[slackmaster]

136. Just spank me

:argh:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

146. Post A Picture And I'll Let You Know If You're My Type

-:)

[bperci108]

76. No shit.

But I still couldn't resist getting involved a little. ;)

Bet it won't be 15 minutes before some of the more egregiously vapid ones here end up reposted over at RimJob's Freeptard FunHouse.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

82. And We Should Censor Ourselves So Some Yahoos Won't Have Anything To Say

eom

[bperci108]

96. No.

But I do get tired of handing the dipshits the club used to beat us Leebruls.

Some of the posts on this thread are mind-blowingly ridiculous.

But some of their award winning insanity ends up here, too.

And I never even mentioned "censorship" nor inferred it. :hi:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

102. Most Of The Posts Here Seem Reasonable

Including posts from advocates and opponents of the process...

Who cares what they think... The most impressive thing about their observations on the "internets" is that simian behavior has evolved to the point of typing....

[porphyrian]

63. Sometimes, but it carries the message that hitting is acceptable if someone does wrong.

If you don't have a problem with the message, you shouldn't have too much of a problem with the punishment.

[Clintonista2]

72. Let's hit our children to teach them not to hit others

Great idea! :sarcasm:

[The Traveler]

73. There is no right answer

I've seen well behaved, well motivated and gentle kids grow up in homes were spanking was practiced, and in homes where it was not. Likewise, evil demon possessed monster kids emerge from either kind of environment. It seems to be important that spankings be delivered calmly, sternly and without anger. There's a difference between administering discipline (physically or otherwise) and venting anger.

My own policy was to reserve spanking for really dangerous stuff ... like sticking forks into wall outlets, rushing out into the street without looking, playing with Dad's oxyacetylene torch and the gas can ... you get the idea.

One phenomena that interests me, though, is the degree of passion such subjects raise ... as if anyone's theory on anything as complex as human behavior is universally applicable to all people and situations.

[gollygee]

77. Your examples are cases where the child needed better supervision

not where the child needed to be spanked.

If dad has a child with access to an oxyacetylene torch and a gas can, that's not the child's fault.

[The Traveler]

90. Ah. I see you devote yourself to continuous monitoring

of 12 year old children. Good for you. Most of us are less perfect human beings. We appreciate your purity and ability to judge us in our failings.

Thank you again for sharing.

[gollygee]

114. You spanked a 12-year-old?

Wow. You couldn't think of anything else to do with someone who can communicate at that level?

[The Traveler]

175. Yep. There was thorough communication

including a review of the physics of volatile materials, why an empty gas can ain't necessarily empty, why there are rules about the use of tools in the shop. I spanked boy about six times in his whole life. That was the last one, as I recall.

Boy is smart, fast moving, and curious as hell. Well, not a boy any more. Graduated from Ga Tech in chemistry and all that. Still smart, fast moving and curious as hell. The experience seems to have left him undamaged.

At some point you will discover that your solutions won't work for everyone in every situation. Until that gets hammered home, you will probably remain a victim of absolutism ... your way is the right way and any other way is either indecent or inferior. In truth, there are a range of parenting techniques that are quite acceptable and that produce good results ... and this pattern holds true when considering a great many other subjects.

I oppose the modern trend towards absolutism and zero tolerance on a regular basis. One might say I am absolutely opposed to absolutism ... doh!

[txaslftist]

104. O jeeze.

Like you can create a perfectly safe world for a 2 year old boy or keep a 2 year old boy from finding something potentially dangerous to do?

maybe in Mr. Rogers' neighborhood.

[gollygee]

115. No but if it isn't a safe environment, that isn't the child's fault

and therefore the child shouldn't be punished.

[Alexander]

75. If you can't discipline a child without getting physical, you don't deserve to be a parent.

[bperci108]

88. ...and THAT has to be the most over-reaching, and patently dumb overgeneralization...

...I've seen posted here yet.

Wait...can someone top it???

Maybe remove children from spanking homes?

No, I've got it...Burning at the stake for spanking!

The Wheel?

The Rack, perhaps?

Good fucking gawd.

:eyes:

[Alexander]

116. When has spanking or hitting a child ever been absolutely necessary?

Not my fault if you feel the need to act like a violent asshole.

[bperci108]

145. Ding! Ding! Ding!

Just when I thought you couldn't top yourself....

You don't know me, or likely anyone else here from Adam, yet you come up with this:

"Not my fault if you feel the need to act like a violent asshole." :silly:


<talking-out-of-ass meter pegged and smoking>

[piedmont]

93. Stupidest post in a thread full of them. nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

94. Maybe He Deserves An Opportunity To Clarify His Remarks

eom

[Alexander]

120. No, I'm just stupid because I don't agree that violence is the only way...

to discipline children. :sarcasm:

I'm glad someone on this thread shows a little sanity.

[bperci108]

149. Has anyone here suggested that spanking is the ONLY way?

Let me answer my own rhetorical question:

NO.

NOBODY has suggested it is the only way, just ONE possible way.


Stop projecting.

[piedmont]

157. Who said anything at all about the only way to discipline children?

Sure as hell wasn't me.

[Alexander]

118. Yes, alternatives to spanking/hitting are just plain stupid.

Please tell me when spanking or hitting a child has ever been necessary.

Sounds like you need to seek some help.

[piedmont]

152. You stated that parents who spank don't deserve their children.

Spanking has not been conclusively proven to cause more harm to children than good. To state that billions of parents have not deserved their children is laughable and meaningless.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

176. "Conclusively"

Nice weasel word...

The lion's share of research on spanking strongly suggests there is a positive correlation between spanking and anti-social behavior...

Google is your friend...


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=spanking+and+anti-social+behavior&btnG=Search

[piedmont]

184. 9 out of the top 10 Google results you linked to referenced ONE flawed study.

That study (Straus 1997) is a JOKE.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

193. And

And you reached that conclusion after conducting a rigorous imvestigation of your own...

[Exiled in America]

78. All things being equal, I am not for physical violence against children.

I was raised in a home where spanking was common. However, I have grown up to believe that as a general rule, I am not in favor of physical forms of punishment for children. I've discovered that there are many alternative approaches to responsible guidance and discipline for kids.

Having said that, I'm not implying that there are no situations, circumstances or particular kids where spanking, done cautiously and responsibly, might be appropriate.

I just know that I wouldn't approve of it as a general rule.

[Labors of Hercules]

80. spanking a child to save them from danger...

is the only time I would consider it appropriate. If they are delibertely ignoring you and doing something dangerous, then you have to physically demand their attention. A pop on the behind is a much better way to do this than grabbing or jerking them toward you.

But it should be precipitated by concern and never anger.

[gollygee]

83. Childproofing and supervision

I would much rather pick a child up and move him/her than spank. One says, "this is not safe, you need to be moved away" and the other one says, "I will control you by hitting."

[Sanctified]

113. Do you have children? n/t

[gollygee]

117. yes. n/t

[Sanctified]

121. And you have never had them run into the street without you being able to grab them... n/t

[gollygee]

124. Yes

I was truly frightened and my daughter was able to sense my fear. I picked her up and brought her back to our yard and I think my fear was a good teaching tool in and of itself.

Edited to add - if you think spanking works to keep a child from running onto the street, would you leave a young child unattended by the street after you spanked him/her for that?

[nini]

133. try doing that when they're inches from doing something that will really hurt them..

.... and you have a split second to get them to stop.

no matter how hard you try things can happen with kids and just rarely immediate action is warranted.

[gollygee]

141. Why on earth would the immediate action be spanking instead of picking them up and moving them?

I don't see how that makes sense. If you spank, they are physically capable of continuing. If you move them, they can't continue.

[nini]

156. an example

my grandma had to smack my nephew's hand that was reaching towards a hot burner - her other hand had a heavy pan in it. She didn't have time to set the pan down, pick him up and move him.

I guess she was an evil grandma and should have done as you say and let him burn himself. She didn't see him coming up behind her and didn't have time to warn him otherwise.

[gollygee]

158. I used one of these

[nini]

181. I'll tell my dead grandma she fucked up

stuff like that wasn't available back then.

Damn, it must be nice living in a perfect black and white world.

[Labors of Hercules]

203. must be nice...

to have the money to buy tons of groovy little screens to protect the kids from all things dangerous.
So, do you ever let them out of their plastic bubble? :eyes:

[Adelante]

84. I was spanked extremely rarely as a child

I mean, maybe twice or three times in my life, and they were situations where I had put myself in danger. They were lessons learned, too.

[Sanctified]

87. I selected yes.

I use spanking on my children as a last resort after talking too and the quiet corner does not work. I probably have to spank my children about once or twice a month not too often but it does happen when they want to test me. I never spank my kids out of anger and I do sit down with them and go over why they were spanked after they are out of punishment.

My parents used to spank my brother, sister and myself on a first offense and I would not have a problem with this since we all turned out extremely well adjusted adults. My wife was somewhat against spanking but then my mom told her some stories and she was like if our children are anything like you and your brother then spanking is ok.

[txaslftist]

92. Because swatting a kid on the butt will get his attention...

... and is better than getting his attention by having him get hit by a car.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

119. And That's The Only Reason Parents Spank Their Children

eom

[Igel]

162. No, but that's quite irrelevant, isn't it?

There are people that drink because they enjoy wine with dinner.

"And that's the only reason people drink alcohol." (with an implied "?")

The desired response being, "Yes, you're right. Since some people do abuse it, we can't allow it to continue, or allow the risk that others might. We must prevent it as a moral evil. We shall have a Constitutional amendment to keep people from abusing a practice--drinking!"

Been there, done that.

Next fallacy, please.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

173. Nice Fallacy Of Your Own

"The desired response being, "Yes, you're right. Since some people do abuse it, we can't allow it to continue, or allow the risk that others might. We must prevent it as a moral evil. We shall have a Constitutional amendment to keep people from abusing a practice--drinking!"



You better wear some cleats or you might fall on that slippery slope ...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

183. And Another Fallacy

The Strawman Fallacy...

Nowhere did I argue that spanking should be prohibited by force of law...

You attacked what you imagined or would have liked for me to have said not what I did say...

You had a twofer...Two logical fallacies in one post...

I Probably could find a couple more lagical fallacies but I'm tired...

[beastieboy]

99. I'd love to see the breakdown demographically.

I bet most of the yes votes are from the south and older people.

[bemildred]

101. Oh good.

:popcorn::popcorn:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

106. The South Does Have A Martial Tradition

J/K

[Sanctified]

110. I voted yes and I am from the NW. n/t

[iverglas]

135. I said no and I'm old

The fact that I'm Canadian is only part of the explanation.

The significant factor is adherence to patriarchal values. And in the US, the young are possibly more wed to those values, as a cohort, than the old.

http://erg.environics.net/media_room/default.asp?aID=456

Nearly 20 years ago, my colleagues at Environics in Toronto and CROP in Montreal began a study of Canadian social values. In our first survey of Canadian values in 1983, we asked Canadians if they strongly or somewhat agreed or disagreed that: "The father of the family must be the master in his own house." ... The "father must be master" question has become legendary at Environics. We love it because it measures a traditional, patriarchal attitude to authority in our most cherished institution: the family.

... we found that where 42 per cent of Americans believed the father should be master in 1992, the number increased to 44 per cent in 1996. We wondered if this was a statistical anomaly. We went back into the field in 2000 to find out if the frontal assault on patriarchal authority by U.S. president Bill Clinton and television icon Homer Simpson would bring U.S. numbers more into line with those in Canada and France.

This time, 48 per cent of Americans said the father of the family must be master in his own home; 51 per cent disagreed and 1 per cent had no opinion. We were stunned.

The details were even more stunning: Forty-three per cent of American women agreed with the statement -- up nine points from 1992. And among baby boomers aged 35 to 44, 48 per cent said dad should be boss, up 12 points over 1992. This was the biggest increase of any age cohort. (Only 15 per cent of younger Canadian boomers take this position -- meaning that the gap between younger Canadian boomers and Americans in this cohort is an astounding 33 points.)

Okay, maybe 35 is "old" ...

But the "South" part just isn't all wrong:

But the United States is regionally divided: New England is least chauvinistic at 29 per cent, followed by the Plains states (36 per cent) and the Midwest (46 per cent). Above the national average are Texarkana (54 per cent) and the Deep South, where 71 per cent believe the gentleman of the house should be master.

[moc]

197. Spanking is inversely related to socioeconomic status.

As income and education go up, prevalence of spanking declines.

[nini]

103. Yes - they should be beaten until they submit

:sarcasm:



I had to spank my kid twice - it was a safety issue and I don't give a damn what anyone says about it. It was only enough to get his attention - nothing more.

Now beating a kid should result in immediate sterilization and a beating of the adult.

[Dora]

105. No. Hitting another person is a violent act. I will not teach my son violence. n/t

[Stuckinthebush]

122. Of course not

The only reason people support corporal punishment is because they need to justify their actions.

Beating children is wrong. I don't care how hard one does it, it sends the message that those with power can inflict pain on those without.

[mudesi]

126. NO. Never. And I'm saddened by the number of yes votes. (nm)

[johnaries]

127. I have seen many who SHOULD have been spanked.

I am appalled by the behavior of many kids today. When I was their age my parents would never have allowed me to behave the way I see many children behave today. Nor would any of my friend's parents have alloed them to act that way.
it depends on the child, some naturally listen better than others. But with some children no other punishment gets through to them. In those cases, spanking is indeed appropriate as long as it is not done out of anger (in which the parent can lose control and the spanking turns into a beating).
I know many of you disagree, but either you had children who listened well, no children at all, or everyone else wishes you would spank your children.

[BearSquirrel2]

143. Chances are ...

Chances are that they are being spanked and it doesn't do any good.

Ask educators about corporal punishment and you'll find out that they only kids who respond to getting swatted are the ones who really didn't need it in the first place. After a while, a "repeat offenders" ability to bend over and take it without grimacing becomes a status of rebellion and a notion of esteem to his classmates. It only feeds the things that are making the kid misbehave.

[goddess40]

151. You're right - they only behave when their parents are present

and free to swat them - kids that are spanked learn external control, kids who aren't learn internal control.

[bperci108]

159. Thanks for probably the best post here.

In a thread that was likely intended as flame-bait anyway, your post shines.

Bravo!

I've been so disgusted by some of the abject stupidity on this thread, (likely posted by childless hand-wringers and nattering know-it-alls) I was ready to just delete it and shake my head.

Again: Bravo. You said it all.

:toast:

:yourock:

[redqueen]

167. how do you know they weren't

christ

[slackmaster]

171. I can think of some parents who should be spanked

Like a couple I know who let their self-centered teenage daughters convince them to buy a much more expensive car than they could really afford.

[Shine]

131. Absolutely NOT!!!

:thumbsdown:

It is never appropriate to hit a child. Ever.

There are many other effective ways of disciplining a child which do not involve spanking. Spanking only ends up teaching the child negative impact of using power over another....not to mention the obvious negative side effects on the kid's lowered self esteem.

[Balbus]

132. I think we should be able to spank other people's kids..

Some punk misfit was riding one of those little motorized roller-scooters in front of my house this morning and I was wishing I could put my foot up his ass.

[BearSquirrel2]

139. No ...

It teaches kids to use violence to solve problems. What exactly does hitting the child solve?

[Midlodemocrat]

140. No. Never. And people who justify it are morans.

[goddess40]

147. it's abuse plain and simple

it teaches might makes right.

I've even heard the moronic argument that the kid can't understand words but can understand the pain is related to whatever they did wrong.

[MasonJar]

148. Spanking should be reserved for things that children do that are dangerous.

If a child runs into the street when he has been instructed not to, then a good, sound spanking may help him remember the next time. This could be a life and death situation!!!!!!

[Karenina]

165. I was at the laundromat

and a 3 year old was running wild and loose, pushing the envelope. She had received CLEAR INSTRUCTIONS about her boundaries. Nevertheless, she insisted on running out of the entrance which faced a major thoroughfare.
Twice, mama grabbed her at the entrance and set the limit. The third time she ushered her back in with pats on the bottom. Little Miss Diva SCREECHED in outrage. I had to put the towel I was folding over my face to stifle my laughter. Mama winked at me. The next time she simply raised her hand and Babykins suddenly found something INSIDE THE FACILITY to occupy her attention. This time I stifled my laughter with my Levis. Mama winked at me again. It reminded me of my childhood.

My parents had a great system. The 5 count.

"Pick up your trash and put it in the bin. ONE."
"Pick up your trash and put it in the bin. TWO."
"Pick up your trash and put it in the bin. THREE."
(By this time the belt was being loosened or the paddle grasped and the "request" was honored)
"Pick up your trash and put it in the bin. FOUR."
I let Dad get to FIVE and RAN... ONCE. Got my hindparts tanned. OUCH!

The day I ran my very observant younger siblings got the message that our parental units meant bidness and testing the envelope rarely got beyond ONE. :rofl:

[mcar]

150. No. Why teach your child that hitting something smaller is OK?

n/t

[Madspirit]

153. NO NO NO NO NO

How on the fucking earth can anyone justify doing to someone who comes up to your knees something that if you did to someone your own size, they could file charges. What a farce. Go take some Psychology 101 or parenting classes if you think it's OK. It's not OK to hit anyone and children are...contrary to popular mythology, people too.

Lee

[Catchawave]

154. A *Pop* on the butt gets their attention, it's when

you don't stop, that's the problem.

[slackmaster]

168. Someone will now demand you to provide an example of a situation where a pop is needed

Then explain why it really is never needed.

(If you walk into the trap.)

;-)

[Madspirit]

155. Abuse!!

To spank a child is a cruel, spiteful, ignoble, mean, disrespectful and dirty act because it is carried out towards a powerless person who is not allowed to defend herself / himself nor to escape from the aggressor and his ignorance. It is also a most destructive act because it damages the brain of the victims who will repeat their whole lives the lies and feeble mindedness of the King Solomon's "Spare the rod, spoil the child." Exactly the opposite is true. The rod spoils the child and leaves lingering effects for a whole life. Solomon learned his lie from his own parents as you learned it from yours, as your children will learn it from you.

Alice Miller

[Norrin Radd]

160. No. A cattle prod is more effective.

:sarcasm:

[Trillo]

161. This poll and its results are very sad.

I don't have children, nor will I, but if I did I would not spank, though certainly at a certain age some sort of humane negative reinforcement might sparingly be needed.

I think the much more important thing than negative reinforcement (punishment of some kind or another) is generous positive reinforcement (reward) when desired behavior is noted. Perhaps that requires self-training, to learn to note when your child is being good with as much awareness, if not more, than when you notice undesired behavior.

[slackmaster]

169. But even "humane" negative reinforcement will hurt the child's self-image

:sarcasm:

[steven88]

163. Spanking is not inherently bad

Bad behavior by a child can have many causes. Each can call for a differnt response by a parent and that is not something every parent learns are knows what the optimal response to each is. I know I haven't. I say optimal response because there can be a number of satisfactory or adequate responses. How do you ever know which is best? That is why there is so much controversy. Sometimes kids are bad because they are just bored. A good response may be to give them something to occupy their time but sometimes is is good to stop the behavior but leave it up to them to find ways to overcome their boredom. Sometimes kids are bad because they do not feel they get enough attention from a parent. In that case punishment does no good and the parent should, if possible, stop what they are doing and give the child their attention. There times when a child does something that is dangerous to their well being. I feel that at that time a single swat to the bottom to reinforce the admonition is appropriate.

[iamthebandfanman]

164. i was spanked growing up

but only for SERIOUS incidents.

never for silly reasons.

cant say that it was harmful to me in the long run.
but who knows? maybe i coulda learned a lesson without it. guess ill never know.

[slackmaster]

170. Same here - but I have to say my mom was young, inexperienced, immature

If I had been born 10 years later she MAY have been able to figure out other ways of getting the lesson through.

One of the biggest problems is that people tend to have children before they are really grown up themselves.

[David Zephyr]

172. No. Never.

We as adults are bigger and supposed to be smarter than little ones who are really at our mercy.

Hitting, spanking, pinching is wrong. I know there are a lot who disagree, but I think it's cruel.

It's wrong. I don't even think that tickling children is appropriate.

If you don't hit, spank, pinch or tickle grown-ups, what makes it OK to do it to others just because they are small? It's wrong.

[marions ghost]

174. It's like the dog whisperer ...

you have to discipline the animal but you don't hit. There are lots of ways to either divert attention or curb bad behavior if the child is too young to be reasoned with. But you don't hit. For all the reasons that have already been listed.

The thing that I have a problem with is parents who see the child acting up badly and instead of showing negativity in a controlled way, they let the child get away with bad behavior because they are opposed to spanking. They don't seem to know other methods so they just give up entirely. (I'm talking about behaviors that really are bad enough to be an issue).

OK--here's a story. What do you parents think of this? My nephew always had a bad tendency to pick on his younger sister. He was a lot bigger and stronger. One of the many things he did to annoy her was to pinch her hard on the arm when she wasn't looking. Typical, right? Well his parents just could not seem to break him of this. They yelled, they punished, they pleaded. (They had never spanked him at any time). This went on for years. No matter how hard she tried to retaliate, the kid sister could never discourage this herself. (of course her pissed-off reaction was part of the game).

OK so then one day the kids were with their aunts and uncles (who had seen the pinching behavior all too often) and it started up in the car. One of the uncles just lost it and reached over and gave that older brother a big hurtful pinch and didn't let go for awhile. He said he wanted to show him how it felt to be the little monkey for a change. The kid never did it again.

SO, was that OK or what?

[LostInAnomie]

177. "Spanking = Beating" is a rhetorical device used to win arguments.

Spanking is a legitimate way for parents to set boundaries for their children. To try to conflate it with abuse is a disingenuous attempt to obfuscate the reasoning of the parents.

Any form of discipline can become abusive if take to an extreme. Spanking is not any more inherently abusive than time outs, grounding, and revocation of privileges. If done appropriately it teaches children it teaches children to respect their parents authority. If done inappropriately it teaches children to abuse authority.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

178. You're Entitled To Your Opinion

I just hope you know the conclusions you have reached are diametrically opposed to the conclusions of most of those that have scientifically researched the subject...


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=spanking+and+anti-social+behavior&btnG=Search

[uppityperson]

179. Define "spanking". eom

[DemocratSinceBirth]

180. Sure

Spanking is the most commonly-used form of corporal punishment, consisting of one or more sharp smacks applied on the buttocks.

[uppityperson]

185. With a hand or other object? Clothed or unclothed?

Bruising? What about smacking a hand with an extension cord when the crawler continually crawls to them and tries to chew on them? What about using a stick to hit legs until the person falls down and can't stand anymore? What about a swat across the clothed buttocks when the 3 yr old bites your inner thigh? By a parent, guardian, teacher, whomever? In anger or not anger? Aimed toward 1 behavior or generally at an attitude?

Lots of variables. I think that it can not be a simplistic answer.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

186. In Any Research You Need To Operationalize Your Terms...

I lifted that definition from wikipedia and it sounded useful...

[uppityperson]

187. It is a good definition, until people start casting absolutes.

Hard to argue "never" "fine" when the terms can be so variable.

[rucky]

182. It doesn't work.

and makes things worse in the long run.

[NNN0LHI]

189. No more than I think someone striking their spouse is appropriate

Neither are appropriate.

Don

[DemocratSinceBirth]

194. From The American Psychological Association

Council voted to adopt the following resolution on corporal punishment:

WHEREAS: The resort to corporal punishment tends to reduce the likelihood of employing more effective, humane, and creative ways of interacting with children;


WHEREAS: it is evident that socially acceptable goals of education, training, and socialization can be achieved without the use of physical violence against children, and that children so raised, grow to moral and competent adulthood;


WHEREAS: Corporal punishment intended to influence "undesirable responses" may create in the child the impression that he or she is an "undesirable person"; and an impression that lowers self-esteem and may have chronic consequences;


WHEREAS: Research has shown that to a considerable extent children learn by imitating the behavior of adults, especially those they are dependent upon; and the use of corporal punishment by adults having authority over children is likely to train children to use physical violence to control behavior rather than rational persuasion, education, and intelligent forms of both positive and negative reinforcement;


WHEREAS: Research has shown that the effective use of punishment in eliminating undesirable behavior requires precision in timing, duration, intensity, and specificity, as well as considerable sophistication in controlling a variety of relevant environmental and cognitive factors, such that punishment administered in institutional settings, without attention to all these factors, is likely to instill hostility, rage, and a sense of powerlessness without reducing the undesirable behavior;


THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the American Psychological Association opposes the use of corporal punishment in schools, juvenile facilities, child care nurseries, and all other institutions, public or private, where children are cared for or educated (Conger, 1975).



http://www.apa.org/pi/cyf/res_punish.html

[DemocratSinceBirth]

195. From The American Academy Of Pediatrics

Parents who spank their children are more likely to use other unacceptable forms of corporal punishment. The more children are spanked, the more anger they report as adults, the more likely they are to spank their own children, the more likely they are to approve of hitting a spouse, and the more marital conflict they experience as adults. Spanking has been associated with higher rates of physical aggression, more substance abuse, and increased risk of crime and violence when used with older children and adolescents.

Because of the negative consequences of spanking and because it has been demonstrated to be no more effective than other approaches for managing undesired behavior in children, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that parents be encouraged and assisted in developing methods other than spanking in response to undesired behavior.

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;101/4/723

[moc]

196. Spanking is lazy parenting. When a parent spanks, it is always about

the parent expressing frustration and attempting to demonstrate power over the child.

Effective discipline can't be about the parent's frustration or about power struggles with the child.

Parenting is tough, believe me, I know. There are have been times when I've been sorely tempted to spank my own children. I understand the frustration, and I can see the allure of spanking as it gets an immediate response. However, as research has demonstrated, spanking may be associated with short term compliance, but it is not associated with long term behavioral change. Furthermore, a reliance on spanking is associated with negative outcomes for children such as higher rates of aggression, internalizing problems, and lower rates of prosocial behavior, to name a few.

[last_texas_dem]

200. No

I believe there are more effective ways of disciplining children.