Physical punishment

Post Reply New Topic

To people who routinely slap their children on the bottom, hand or face, the difference between ok/good violence toward their children and criminal/bad violence toward their children is obvious. But there is a problem: they can't rationally define the edges of those categories.

One person says just the open hand is ok, and only with very light force. Another says a little more force is also good. Yet another says a hairbrush or belt is ok when the moral lesson has to be driven a little harder. Then another says light shaking is ok. Maybe pushing onto the floor or bed. Perhaps a cane... Maybe an actual punch to the mouth is needed to punish particularly egregious misbehavior. Ok as long as no dental damage is done. The line turns out to be fuzzy. Nonexistent, in fact.

Another problem, widely discussed is that the child learns only not to get caught, and that the ability to hurt others makes you "right." This has some pretty bad consequences. Please do read the links I provided for more on this.

A less discussed problem is the effect of the violence on the parents. It makes them more violent. The ones who slap frequently are more likely to also use a hairbrush or belt. The ones who spank early and often and use belts and small hard objects as clubs turn out to increase the odds that they will hit harder.

I read a discussion on this topic that suggested that as much as two thirds of criminal physical child abuse resulted from an unplanned escalation of supposedly ok physical punishment. I will try to find and quote that and related studies here.

There is evidence to suggest that you should not be so confident that your kids will be ok if you spank them. There is also evidence to suggest that you will not be ok if you spank them. No doubt everyone who has posted here is an exception, but there is plenty of reason to exercise very great caution if you find yourself thinking "what my child needs now is pain."

I think this debate has turned personal very quickly. I think it is possible for parents to make mistakes and still be good parents. I want to point that out because, although I made an argument for why physical punishment is not appropriate, I am not trying to pass judgment on people who spank their children.

Honestly, I think it's enough for them to understand that other techniques are as effective or more, and most of them will give up spanking on their own - because they don't like hitting their children, they just think they have to. Sometimes it takes more than text to demonstrate this, and I'm sorry I can't be there to personally show you all these techniques.

Adamantium - I make this point because I think you are approaching this from a purely principled intellectual stance, which is fine, but a lot of other people have very personal stakes in this debate. Some of the points you make, about honor killings for example, are gross exaggerations. You are right that there is a blurry line between spanking and abuse. I'll go one step further and point out that physical punishment can easily lead to a physical struggle, which can result in dangerous accidents. When addressing this issue, though, please remember that the majority of American parents continue to use physical punishment, but do not abuse their children. An exaggerated moral offensive is not going to do anything to change that. At best, it will offend those people and turn them against you. Getting people to argue vigorously against you is a great way to make them more entrenched in their beliefs. Therefore, it is necessary to proceed with caution and care here. Try to remember that most people who spank their children are probably well-meaning (if misguided), and should be treated as people who truly care about their child's well-being. When you compare them to someone who engages in an honor killing, you imply that they view their own interests as primary over their children, which for most parents is just not true. I know parallels can be drawn there, but lets leave those alone as they really don't do anyone any good. Once again, I'm meeting your idealism with some pragmatism here...in this case, it's simply a debate strategy; keep it reasonable and unoffensive, or you'll turn people away rather than convert them.

@Emilemulder

I think for someone living in a culture, where its accepted to give parents the right to "spank" a kid, its simply hard to understand how that feels for people, being used to it being something that is cultural completely something disgusting and even forbidden.

I do understand about your explanations of "normal spanking" not hurting an child so not being a crime ...

Maybe the example about honour killings was a bad one.

Let me mention a better example, one that can be far more related. In some archaic cultures, as a husband you still have the right to beat your woman. Many foreigners thought horrible about that. That caused people, living in that country to explain (Even in public television, there are youtube links about it.) that this is simply misunderstood. So no, these men in these countries are NOT allowed to beat their woman as much as their want, but there are rules to how you shall beat your wife, and when you are allowed to beat your wife, and just as you focused now on that "normal spanking" should cause no real injuries or similar, just the same did that guy in that video.

Is it reasonable for you, that a guy, trying to explain, that there are acutally rules, how to correctly beat your wife, so that your wife dont get injured by getting beaten, does not cause at all, that this whole issues feels any better?

Does it make you feel better, that there are countries, where it is actually allowed to beat your wife, as long as you dont injure her?

It feels simply wrong. And giving rules to something, that feels anyway completely wrong in any way, does not make it better in any way. There should not be rules, for how to do something moderate, that simply feels like a crime to you. I dont care. if that woman get beaten in a way that cares for them not to be injured. That still does not change at all, that they should not get beaten at all and that doing so is wrong, anyway if done with an open slap or an closed fist.

@Schneekugel, in the absence of such rules in this country, it really winds up being a matter of choice. Since it is a matter of choice right now, the most important tool to change things is persuasion. I am in agreement that physical punishment of any kind should not be done. But I recognize that it is legal. I'm not trying to whitewash anything here, just pointing out that given that reality, our best course of action is to meet people with empathy and understanding, and use persuasion from there.

Incidentally, using your example; if I was the lone dissenter in a country where spousal abuse is legal, I would take the same course of action. I would start with reasoned, empathic and respectful discourse, and hopefully build a movement from there. If I immediately insulted people, they would simply turn against me and stop listening.

I understand your moral outrage, and at times I share it. At other times, I only feel sad about the situation as a whole; overwhelmed parents who think they're doing what's best, causing harm to children instead. I truly do feel empathy for both the parents and the children in many such situations, and from that position, I am able to reach out to families and help them change. I'm not trying to argue in favor of spanking at all (see my initial post). I'm simply recommending that if only for tactical reasons, we all try and use some tact.

Emile, this is what I have never understood and what baffles me. I show people holes in their beliefs and I assume it is due to my ignorance. I use the Socratic method. I question this stuff and people become angry. Why do people become angry instead of looking at my question and answers it by acknowledging that there is a flaw in the argument? It's almost like they become more enraged and they stick to their positions like glue? Why do people do this? I have tried to use persuasion and it fails almost every time. What am I doing wrong?

I think the Socratic method is a good choice for persuasion, but it doesn't always work. Everyone has their own beliefs and depending on their motivations, they will either invest the energy to engage you or not. If they do, it's very rare that a discussion just turns so that someone says, "ok you're right." And when that happens, it's usually just to stop the discussion, not really to concede a point. I think the best one can hope for in a debate is for the other person to listen receptively and offer thoughtful counterpoints. After this, just hope that some of your ideas planted a seed, and that over time the person will come around.

A worst case scenario is that a person emotionally shuts down and then builds a mental wall, where they are no longer willing to engage with the ideas. Some people are very quick to do that no matter what the topic, others will do that only when they become very emotionally invested in the topic - which can happen if they feel they're being personally attacked. That's what I was trying to avoid here.

I also think that forums are probably not the best modality for this sort of thing. The Socratic method requires constant back and forth, and forums are more like short essays. The longer we ramble without listening to a response, the more time we each have to convince ourselves that we're right (considering how I ramble, I must be the most right of all!).

I partly agree with you there about her kids not learning respect from a spanking. I am sure they still learned respect from other approaches OOM did. I doubt she literally meant it when she said she tore her kids butts apart. I certainly still learned respect and how to behave from other consequences because my mom didn't spank all the time and use it as her only method. She used words, she gave us time outs, sent us to our room, took away privileges, made us leave places, rewarded us good for good behavior, also let us suffer natural consequences and she also yelled. I remember her saying then she doesn't like it and I thought as an eight year "so don't do it." Now I know it's not so simple. I don't think she spanked her kids all the time or used it as her only approach for discipline. That is a worst assumption to make about someone when they say they spanked their kids and have an exaggerating image.

You said that forums are probably not the best modality for this sort of thing. It is difficult for me to get my point out in real time because a lot of times I can't figure out how to put my thoughts into words. For me, there is an extreme hesitation when I speak in real time. Real time would not work with me because my thoughts become blocked all of the time.

I think part of what makes this an explosive topic is that is is like veganism, (I am not a vegan) which also tends to get emotional even though it is not in the ever dangerous "Mommy/Daddy War" territory or political.

Vegans who do not eat animal products b/c they believe very strongly that it is morally wrong, often make omnivores feel judged b/c they are being told implicitly that what they are doing is wrong. It is therefore hard for vegans and omnivores to talk about veganism b/c often omnivores will automatically become defensive and vegans often will automatically come off as self-righteous and preachy.

Vegans are not going to welcome the opposing viewpoint, either. They view it as morally wrong. Sometimes omnivores will even intentionally serve non-vegan dishes to vegans in secret, on purpose, to make some kind of point. Sometimes people can get nasty about these things.

Spanking is the same way, so I generally try to stay away from the topic in real life. People who are for it are not going to be persuaded. People who are against it will not be persuaded. People who are against it come off preachy and self-righteous. People who are for it can get obnoxious, too.

We do not spank, but my in-laws are very pro-spanking to the point of being spanking evangelists, which to me is very weird. My SIL brags in various anecdotes about having being spanked as a child, and this was way before she became a parent. They like to depict non-spanking parents as "wussy." I try not to discuss this with them b/c I would never persuade them, and they will not persuade me. I try to avoid the topic, and keep my thoughts to myself, but if they are so inclined it turns into a "thing" I don't think anyone, spanker or non, likes to be questioned accusingly about their parenting.

Last edited by ASDMommyASDKid on 05 Feb 2014, 3:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I understand your reasoning. You are correct about my approach and, sadly, I was not able to imagine how this line of thought would put people on the defensive and push them into an entrenched position. This is perhaps a feature of my autism. It also reminds me of my father, who was singularly good at unintentionally alienating people and creating bitter enemies and long feuds. I am sorry if my approach harmed your attempt to explore this issue in a constructive way.

For what it's worth, i think the parents who engage in honor killings don't like what they feel they have to do, but feel compelled by community expectation. It is not that they put their own interests over their children, but rather that they put the interests of their family over the interests of any one of its members. They are also victims of their culture.

I think there is an inescapable problem when the idea of dominance backed by corporal punishment is introduced into the relationship. If the desired submission is shown after the first display of physical dominance or threat of pain, all is seemingly well, but what happens when there is additional defiance? How far does the escalation go? The whole posture of the relationship has to be replaced with something that has no possibility of escalating in that way. It's like choosing to drive a fast car without using a seatbelt. It may work out fine, but why choose that way when there is a better alternative? Still, I suppose I am mostly just talking to myself, now, so I should just exit the conversation.

My apologies if my thoughts on this derailed your pedagogical train of thought. I see the virtue of your approach and methods and the futility of my own crude engagement. Good luck.

Adamantium, I found your posts in this thread fascinating, very well thought and expressed and greatly appreciated you NOT reacting in a personal and emotional manner, especially since I seem to remember you do have children of your own. I don't see any use in the few knee jerk reactions in this thread, I haven't posted precisely because I feel quite strongly on the subject.

It's illegal to spank in my country and considered abuse. I support this law and agree with the studies connecting spanking with psychological and behavioural issues in both children and parents. I raised two children without spanking and while raising children in itself can be quite a challenge, I can't say I found it more challenging because I wasn't allowed to "spank".

I read the first two links and part of the third you posted and apparently we weren't hit enough. That is what the third one said about the more kids are hit the more likely they will be aggressive so I gathered we weren't hit enough.

I am aware that kids who are truly abused tend to grow up to be messed up people and some turn out fine because they're lucky. Some even get in trouble with the law or become abusers themselves or else everyone would be in prison who were abused and all of them would be abusers. My grandfather was hit a lot growing up and he learned to hit when you're mad so he did that to his children including to my mother and then he stopped in the 1970's and started doing silent treatments instead and my mom had to learn to not hit and it was very hard. She had to break that cycle. I bet lot of parents had to who were hit a lot growing up because that was the way kids were raised then, if they did something wrong, you hit them, if they pissed you off, you hit them, every time they talk back, you hit them. That made kids be very afraid of their parents and my mom was afraid too. Today that would be considered abuse if you hit your kids too often and out of anger and frustration. No doubt there are still people out there who do this to their kids. I knew a parent that did this to her son and even my own mother thought it was wrong even though she spanked us and has slapped our mouths before. She did get her kid taken eventually but he had poor hygiene and missed school often so I am sure someone from there called social services. I don't know if emotional abuse had anything to do with it since it's so hard to prove because there is no harm or physical signs. She also pulled him by his hair and ears and did some name calling. The kid seemed all fine with it probably because he is used to it and probably thought it was all normal and he was immune to his mom's screaming because it seemed to have no affect on him simply because he was used to it so he learned to tune it out. But those kids grow up and probably do it to their own kids and the cycle seems to continue in families of abuse because they don't know any different so they think it's normal. My mom knew a parent who was always cursing at her child and saying she will kick his ass and in her defense her mom did it to her and she turned out fine. To her it was all normal. But yet she was shocked when her four year old told an old woman "f**k you" at Safeway when all she said was hi to him and being all friendly and my mom told her kids model after their parents so if she talks that way around him and to him, he will talk that way to other people. This parent never actually hurt her child, she only threatened him and I was shocked anyone would think this is normal parenting because that is now how mine talked to us nor have I seen other parents talk to their kids that way. But like I say, some people don't know any different and they never figure out how they were raised was actually not normal so the cycle continues and that is the reason why kids who are abused grow up to be abusers themselves and it doesn't surprise me when kids still continue having parents in their lives who abused them growing up because they don't know any different or because they did other wonderful things but had bad tempers or did some abusive behaviors but still did other good behaviors so they overlook the abuse. Also how kids were raised then would be considered abuse today so kids still see their parents like my mom still sees hers and talks to them on the phone still.

You are right the child learns to not get caught but they do this with all rules regardless of how they are punished. People call it testing their limits. They like to see what they can get away with so they wait until there is no grown up around to do it. I used to lie to avoid getting caught and it never worked. Even though my mom didn't spank us all the time and didn't use it as her only method, I still was afraid of getting into trouble and getting caught so I always lied by denying it and blaming it on someone else. I also would sneak sweets and candy and snacks because my mom always said no and I was afraid of the word no so I would wait until she was at work for me to sneak it or wait until she was gone. My brothers never did this but I did and she could have put locks on the cupboards but she never did for some reason or buy something to put all the snacks in and put a lock on it. But that was just me. I didn't need to be abused to be afraid of getting into trouble and sneaking around. I just didn't like rules and getting consequences but I didn't have ODD so I never rebelled or fought against it and I followed authority anyway to avoid consequences. I hear lot of kids don't like rules and consequences so of course they will try and sneak and get away with stuff and not get caught. That is what kids do. My son will try and do things too so I have to make sure to check up on him to make sure he isn't getting into trouble and that gets him to follow my rules by not getting into stuff that isn't his because then he ends up making a mess and losing things. He doesn't know when I will come and check on him and I can tell what he has been into just by what has been moved out of place and he knows that.






I have never heard of a law in other countries about men being allowed to hit women if it's done a certain way in certain situations. That sounds like the law we have here about spankings. I knew since childhood you must not hit your kid often or it becomes abuse. You must hit a kid in certain spots, you must not hit when mad, you must not slap your kid a lot or it will teach them to hit, you do not hit them hard, there are certain situations where you can spank. My mom was always telling me the difference when I would get confused about why a mother was in trouble for hitting her kids because she did it to us and she isn't in trouble so why is the mom in trouble in the movie and she would explain the difference to me. It's like how it's not okay to hit a bully or push them but however if they keep bugging you and harassing you and you have told them over and over to leave you alone and you have tried ignoring them, walking away and they still did it, it's okay to get psychical now. It becomes self defense and being provoked. Okay bad example because I am now implying the parent is provoked by their child when they spank and that is not what I am trying to say here.

When you say beat, I assume you mean slap or hit and the woman isn't seriously hurt, it's just a little sting. To me beat means hurting the person and they are in lot of pain and they are injured and have to go to the hospital or they have a black eye or bloody nose, bruises. So to me when people say beat and not mean these things, it's an exaggerated term they are using. It's like how parents say a kid is beating up other kids when all the kid is doing is grabbing other kids and playing rough and the kids are not even hurt and the kid is hitting but he isn't hurting them where they have to go get ice on their skin or get a nurse or call the ambulance or even getting blood or having bruises. I see beat like how I would see in movies how two adults fight like I see in James Bond and action movies or how I see in the youtube videos of parents literally beating their kids. I know people use beat as an exaggerated word like a parent may say they beat their kids with a hammer for fun to mean they are playing with them and are hitting them with one of those inflatable hammers you win at the fair and the kid is having fun and laughing and they like getting hit with it and the parent isn't harming them. I once saw a youtube video of a mother hitting her two year old with that hammer and the person who posted it was calling it abuse and I thought "There is no abuse, it's just a mother playing with her son and she isn't beating him with it." I hope the person meant it as a joke when he said mom abuses her kid in his title. Sometimes people use the word beat as a joke.

I bet everyone would be happy if someone did that and I am not sure if that person would be facing any charges since it's hard to prosecute someone in court when it comes to children and pedophilia or sex abuse. A man in Texas beat his neighbor to death when he caught him molesting his five year old daughter so he beat him and then called 911 when he was not moving and not fighting back and he died on the way to the hospital from head blows. There were no charges filed and everything was dropped. Even the officer who handled the case said he had kids himself and would have done the same as the father. There was another case I heard on here from someone and this happened in the UK I think in England. This man finds out his friend is a pedophile, this pedophile has never harmed a kid before and he was in treatment for his illness because he did not like the way he was so he thought he could trust his long time friend by telling him about his illness. Instead the man freaked out and killed the pedophile to "protect his daughter" and the man was found not guilty even though the pedophile was innocent. This WP member said he read it in a police report.

It's funny, I always find your tone very respectful, and your arguments very logical. It's the choice of metaphors that I think gets some people riled up. ASDMommy has it right; this is a very volatile topic! I appreciate your apology, but it wasn't necessary for me, I wasn't upset at all by you, I was just trying to swing things back in a constructive direction. I certainly don't want this to be just pedagogical either ...that would be so boring! As you can see, I'm a fairly diplomatic person, and am always trying to make peace. I hope my attempts at this and my constructive criticism is more helpful than annoying to you and the other aspies on here.

edit:
Just to follow up on ASDMommy's point - I think this debate can also be seen as a cultural debate, and an example of cultural imperialism. I've noticed this personally when working with African American families, if the issue of physical punishment came up, they would often frame it as a cultural difference between white people and black people. I think the same could be said for southerners, when talking to a northerner, or working class people talking to over-educated intellectuals like myself. When framed this way, it become an issue of cultural pride: one cannot concede physical punishment without also conceding the inferiority of their culture. I think the best argument against this point is that it is not really a cultural issue - people in all cultures engage in physical punishment, although wealthier white families tend to pretend that they do not do it.

LOL, yeah. You're the one who couldn't differentiate between a spanking on the bottom and punching the kid in the jaw, if I remember correctly.

Also, it's not a crime here to spank your kids and they don't get taken from you if you spank them. Even the schools have paddles they use and will spank a child. I don't know what country you live in where it's a crime to spank your own child, but I don't live there.

Huge difference between spanking and abuse. Also, not every child needs to be spanked. My youngest daughter only got spanked about twice in her whole life, while my oldest son was such a handfull that he ended up getting one fairly often.

There might be a huge difference between spanking or brakin someones jaw, but what is the matter about it, if none of both is not necessary at all? You are seeking excuses, with excusing your behavior by saying it was necessary. But if it was necessary, then it was here as well necessary. We have the same kind of kids as you have. Human race kids. There is not much difference. So either it was for both kids necessary, or its for none kids necessary, and if its not necessary at all to spank your kids to execute them, stop trying to excuse your beating of your kid, by lying to yourself that you did it because of it being necessary. When its not necessary, you simply do it, because you want to do it. And I dont see anything healthy at all, about the wish to spank or beat a kid without an reason.