To spank or not to spank (WITH POLL)

Post Reply New Topic

The science says that corporal punishment doesn't work, or even backfires.

Children of spankers are no less likely to commit infractions in the future. In fact, they're often more likely because spanking was used instead of a more effective means.

Spanked children have higher rates of aggressive behavior and depression in adulthood. Doesn't sound like effective parenting to me.


Corporal punishment, maternal warmth, and child adjustment: a longitudinal study in eight countries.

No sh!t it should be illegal. As someone who's been roughed up over report cards & attendance I can't see myself supporting anything like that. Happy to say I've never seen anyone sink to this level in public, I'd probably intervene provided it wouldn't just make things worse. This is the sort of law that can only really be enforced by everyone.

I believe one of the biggest problems with society today is not enough people were hit by their parents. (Self included)

Fear of consequence is a very important lesson. I tend to believe people turned out to be much better people 50-100 years ago than they do today.

I don't think anyone has the right to tell someone how to raise their child.

PS if corporal punishment worked, the place where I live would be a paradise of people doing the right thing...instead it is crazy with abuse towards women, children, animals, the elderly and much more...the majority of people here still believe that beating up their kid or spanking them, as they call it, works...go to a jail and you'll find most people there were spanked...obviously, it doesn't work.

I voted no but to be clear, I am not for spanking, I just don't think we should limit parents ability to discipline their children the way they see fit. I personally would not spank my child but I was spanked growing up and I feel none of these so called ill repercussions that spankings in theory cause. I guess I am neutral on the topic to be honest.

The statistics or crime, charitable giving, and inclusiveness in public events tell exactly the opposite story. The "Fear of consequences" argument is simplistic and doesn't have any relationship with the way people actually develop morality. It's actually terrifying to hear because it tells me you think consequences are the only reason not to do horrible things. What if we're alone and you know you won't get caught?



So fingering your daughter nightly to make sure she's still a virgin is ok? How about leaving you 7 yo on a street corner because you think he's possessed? How about fathering a child with your daughter? Are we going to say these are OK now?

I was gonna say, basically, the exact same thing----'cept for the "self included" part, as I was spanked, and am glad for it!!

Children MUST BE disciplined, and one doesn't have to abuse a child, to discipline it----one doesn't even have to spank a child to discipline it----but, people, once again, IMO, went hog-wild in the opposite direction ("OVER-corrected"), and decided not to discipline, AT ALL, and I feel that's what's wrong with the world, today----too many SPOILED-ROTTEN BRATS!!

As for those who say "I got spanked and it didn't work"----or, "I got spanked, a couple of times, and it didn't do ME, any good"----I feel the reason it didn't work, was because the discipline was inconsistent. When a parent makes a rule and the child doesn't behave, the child needs to be disciplined, EVERY SINGLE TIME (sometimes a child, like me, just forgets). Consistency is EVERYTHING in my book!!

Kids get-away-with MURDER, nowadays (figuratively speaking), and it's got to STOP!! Kids have no manners, no morals, no values, no direction, no discipline (in dealing with others, for instance)----then, they're sent out into the world, where they expect EVERYBODY to kiss their butts, like Mommy and Daddy did----and, I'm really quite SICK of having to deal with them!!

Also, since someone brought-up guns----I was just saying this, the other day----we know about a few of these school shooters' mothers, and Mrs. Lanza and Mrs. Harper, for instance, IMO, CODDLED their kids; for which I'm so incredibly thankful. [/sarcasm]

"Spare the rod, spoil the child!"

I can't agree more.
Growing up in this generation (I'm young ), I've found that waaay too many kids don't know where the limits are.
They have very little self control, and little self discipline.
I have much more than them, that is the main reason why I never misbehaved much. I know better. I understand what consequences my actions can bring. To me, it appears that most kids don't understand that.
Hell, I've seen them destroy stuff for fun. Not broken, old things ... brand new, expensive things.
Apparently they don't get the point (punishment/consequences).

In my mind, the best parent is one who can be compassionate/caring when needed, and strict when the time calls for it.
My Mother didn't even have to say anything to me, she'd just give me a serious look ... I knew right then and there that she meant business! But today's kids will just look at you and laugh!

I think there is a fundamental shift in parenting that has caused the increase in aggression(?) in today's generations.

However, it still doesn't mean that spanking is necessary.


I am SO appalled by what you said!
Since when did anyone say on here that they think it is OK to do that?!
Of course it is TOTALLY NOT OK to do that!


Proof?

So, if someone eats a poisonous plant, and pukes their guts out because of it, you are saying that being afraid of doing that again is not the reason to avoid eating the plant, correct? Then, I'm wondering, what is it?


Hmm ... that's not morally right.
Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do it.

-Ben

This I would agree with, as long as you are not taking it any further than a simple restraint.

As a toddler, I was obsessed with fans. I would just run when I saw one. I would run into the street sometimes, and it was a busy street in front of my house. My mom would pick me up, and hold me. I would head butt her, but she never hit me during those times. She didn't need to. She just held me in a basket restraint until I calmed down. I plan to do that when I have a child.

But hitting them, spanking them, slapping them, whooping them, hair-pulling them, pulling their ears, whatever name you want to call it, is wrong. It crosses the line.

One reason why I think there should be a law is because, as a society, we do not want to injure or traumatize children. Therefore, we need to steer as clear from that possibility as we can.

Hitting other adults isn't outlawed because it traumatizes them. Its illegal because it is just so offensive, disrespectful, and immoral. If we didn't have that law, everyone would be hitting everyone else. We would have anarchy. We see that with many parents here in America.

But yes, there is a difference between restraint and actually hitting or attacking a child a child.

Punishment does not count as raising one's kids. Teaching them does. If a parent fails to teach something, there are plenty of other people with better odds. Case in point, it's not terribly difficult to teach cause & effect without violence. Victorians were better people huh? I guess that's why they only sold the highest quality poison in every pharmacy!

Proof? On any statistic of antisocial activity that's available, it's going down. Whether you think "kids today" are spoiled is up to you, but they're better behaved the their parents and grandparents.



Again. The proof that's available points in the opposite direction.



What was said was that society didn't have a right to interfere with parenting choices. I was providing some real world examples of parenting choices that they'd have to allow if that were the case. My point wasn't that they said that was OK, but that they didn't think through what they were proposing.



Um. I linked to a peer reviewed, longitudinal, eight country study. Corporal punishment doesn't work. Teaching the kids why what they did was wrong does.



Do you really think that's an equivalent analogy? It's not.



Exactly. And spanking only teaches you that Mom/Dad doesn't want you to and will punish you IF they catch you. It doesn't teach you why you shouldn't. Morality is taught with words, not pain.

They also used to have something called 'rough music' (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rough_music), which was apparently a communal sanction against abusive wives or husbands. Not sure if there were equivalent traditions that arose in North America.

I remember this written speech that went on about how today's kids undisciplined spoiled disobedient and disrespectful and how society is going down the tubes. Thing is, it was written something like 3000 years ago.

Methods like time outs and loss of privileges are very effective by the way.

Yep....the lamenting of the lax morals of the younger generation has been going on since cave man days.

You find this well-documented during the Jazz Age, the 60's, the 70's, etc.

Right I mean what about all those rebellious 60's teenagers listening to all that rock and roll garbage, growing their hair long and wearing beads and stuff becoming hippies?! It's unbelievable. It used to be that boys had proper haircuts and dressed like gentlemen! They should have been spanked harder and more often! (Please don't tell my grandfather I wrote that)

Totally irrelevant comment by me, but you just helped me understand a part of a Terry Pratchett book a bit better, so thank you for that