A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » General
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

A great article on spanking



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 28th 04, 12:27 PM
Doan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default A great article on spanking

On Sat, 28 Feb 2004, Doan wrote:

On Sat, 28 Feb 2004, billy f wrote:

http://www.christian-parents.net/Chi...16_Bum_Rap.htm

from......
http://www.nextcity.com/main/town/12bumrap.htm

and this one:

Corporal Punishment in the Culture Wars

Richard W. Cross

With the educational and artistic highlands well occupied in the interminable
culture wars, the tireless warriors of cultural deconstruction have shifted
their attention back to the siege of the family with their critique of
child-rearing practices. Their focus is again on corporal punishment, or
spanking. The revival of the battles over the practice of spanking is pointed
directly at the family, and the family is quite vulnerable here. Child-rearing
practices involving discipline are that part of culture making that is akin to
pulling up the weeds. Not a very pleasant task, sometimes quite difficult,
often easy to botch, and even easier for an onlooker to criticize. But as on
all matters of discipline, these practices cut at the joints in the family by
pointing directly at the relationship between parent and child in the formation
of habits that sustain culture.

Twenty years ago, spanking was a major point of contention, but the legislative
efforts to retrict or prohibit spanking then were only successful in the
schools. The tide has turned. Over the last three years there has been a spurt
of litigation against parents who have spanked their own children and the
European Court of Human Rights is currently litigating a case against a
parent's use of corporal punishment to overturn British law. Legislative
initiatives both nationally, as well as internationally have taken on a
significant momentum. The United Nations Treaty Convention on the Rights of
Children, which has over 125 signatories and may be put before the U.S.Senate,
proscribes the use of spanking. Several European countries already outlaw the
practice, including Austria, Finland, Italy, Norway and Sweden. And some others
have had the matter under review,including Germany.

A group of sociologists who have been highly successful in disseminating
research and popular literature that can only be described as abolitionist, has
begun to use language that envisions protections against spanking as a
fundamental human right. Murray Straus and associates pronounce:

Children are next on the [civil rights] agenda, including the right of a
child to be free from the risk of physical assault by parents. The basis
of this change is not evidence that corporal punishment harms children...
Instead, the change is in moral principles or beliefs.

Of course, in the name of civil rights large segments of our people have
undergone a rather substantial change of moral sensibility about the family.
As a result, it would seem that we have an explosion in illegitimacy,
abandonment, and youth suicide. These rights and their link to domestic
violence are left unnoted by Straus, nor does he specify what other rights
children may have. However, his rhetoric is becoming de regueur in academia
and the professions.

Some notables have been swept along in the rhetorical tide. Benjamin Spock
after 35 years finally came out againstspanking in the late '80s. Amongst more
serious researchers, Penn State psychologist Jay Belsky was recently dismayed
that the courts afford more protection to criminals than children who are
spanked in the schools. He laments that the general plight of children will
worsen as long as parents "rear their offspring in a society in which violence
is rampant, corporal punishment is condoned as a child-rearing technique, and
parenthood itself is construed in terms of ownership."

This line of thinking fails to account for two very basic distinctions. First,
that the justifiable use of coercion with children is directed principally to
the good of the child, because it is intended to be educative. Surely, we
wouldn't describe aparent picking up and carrying a resistant child as
tantamount to kidnapping. But, just as surely, if I forced someone into my car,
as I have done many times to my own children, as a competent adult the person
would rightly feel imposed upon. Second, children are not competent to make
rational judgments about their behavior, because they lack emotional stability,
as well as experience and a fully developed capacity for reasoning. Yet they
are capable of acting and emoting just the same. At those times when affection
or good judgement fail,they do good through fear alone.

Social scientists miss these distinctions because they have neglected the basic
insight-captured by the religious notion of original sin-that man must work at
being good, since by nature we are inclined to take the course of least
resistance. Lacking this fundamental insight, it becomes easy to distort
traditional practices on punishment as a kind of revenge, or constraint as
ownership.

Belsky's allusion to the legal protections of the Constitution raises a further
and more ominous question whether we wish to redefine familial relations in the
same legalistic terms as those that already apply between the state and its
citizens. Are our attempts to secure the welfare of children advanced by
equating the treatment of children who are spanked with the coercive restraints
employed by the state against the criminal? If the law must be structured such
that the government secures the relationship between parent and child, as
Belsky suggests, then we are in a very bleak condition as a society, since
trust is at the base of any social order, and trust begins in the family, not
in government.

Unlike many other battles in the culture wars, it is remarkable that there has
never been anything close to a consensus among research psychologists on the
question of spanking. Although the National Education Association and the
American Psychological Association each passed resolutions condemning the
practice over twenty years ago, behind the scenes the debate over spanking has
persisted.

The disputedquestion is whether psychological research shows that the ordinary
use of spanking is beneficial, benign, or harmful to children under its domain.
The good news on this particular front is that the research evidence, which was
quite mixed twenty years back, is becoming increasingly clear in support of the
practice.

Nevertheless, to date, the public relations advantage remains with the spanking
abolitionists, such as Murray Straus, whose reports saturated the media the
last week of this August. Strauss and his cohort continue to promote the notion
that spanking children for misbehavior is a major cause of violence and mental
illness.

Psychological researchers are likely to play a pivotal role in the debate, if
their research on the corporal punishment of children is ever made widely
known. For over twenty years they suspected that the data simply did not
support the sweeping resolutions of the professional societies and the
persistant publications of Straus' group. First, data were inconsistent,
suggesting spanking was harmful or benign. Second, psychologists knew that
researching spanking in the home was necessary to settle the issue, and that
this kind of research was very complex, time consuming, and far from complete.
The easier research strategies could not resolve the main issues. Third, the
theoretical models that were used to explain how spanking was bad did not
adequately conform to several pertinent theories. Fourth, early on in the more
open debate of the 1960s, researchers knew that the push for political
correctness could easily overwhelm dispassionate scientific discussion. A few
prominent researchers dug in their heels, and James Dobson was the lone
professional who stood firm with his book Dare to Discipline. In spite of all
these doubts, the APA adopted the antispanking resolution in the mid-seventies,
after which the issue moved to the back burner.

Following twenty plus years of simmering, the issue is again coming to a
researcher's boil. In Chicago in February of 1996, the American Academy of
Pediatrics and Albert Einstein College of Medicine sponsored a major
conference on CP. Two months later, Chapel Hill hosted another conference
entitled Research on Discipline: the State of the Art, Deficits, and
Implications. The proceedings of each were published respectively in Pediatrics
(October, 1996) and the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine. (August,
1997) As expected, the Goliath of the abolitionists, sociologist Murray Straus,
made his presence felt. However, two Davids were present, one at each
conference. Each landed serious blows to abolitionist orthodoxy that were
reinforced with extensive commentary by Berkeley researcher Diana Baumrind
(perhaps today's most prominent parenting researcher, who has been looking at
childrearing practices since the 1950s.)

As a result of these conferences and the data which have been accumulating for
several years now, it is no surprise that Straus, as a social scientist who is
supposed to be concerned about the facts, demurs. The basis of this change is
not evidence that corporal punishment harms children. Indeed. At the Chicago
conference,psychologist Robert Larzelere of Boys' Town gave special attention
to the types of research designs and their various problems. He concluded that
a substantial number of the studies that purport to provide strong findings
revealing the harmful effects of spanking, such as Straus', suffer from serious
flaws. The well-designed studies show that spanking did not produce the bad
effects so routinely reported. Also, evidence is mounting that moderate
spanking of younger children is actually beneficial. Baumrind largely
concurred, noting, "A Blanket Injunction Against Disciplinary Use of Spanking
Is not Warranted by the Data." Other conference participants such as Drs.
Friedman and Schonberg were refreshingly candid: "Although we attempted to
achieve neutrality, we must confess, that we had a preconceived notion that
corporal punishment, including spanking, was innately and always bad." (p. 857)

Larzelere and Baumrind seem to be making some headway. At Chapel Hill,
psychologist Marjorie Linder-Gunnoe of Calvin College criticized the dominant
theory in the sociology of violence--the children who experience or witness
spanking, simply desire to imitate it. She showed that the effects ofspanking
are mediated by the meaning that the child attaches to the parent's actions.
This is a way of stating the thoroughly common sense idea that children
interpret parental actions according to their sense of justice. If children
realize they have done something wrong,they can interpret a spanking not as an
undeserved assault as some would have it, but rather as just deserts.

The emerging consensus in this group can be summarized as follows: First and
foremost, the short and long-term effects of spanking are influenced by the
child's perception of its fairness; spanking that conforms to clear rules,
and a reasonable explanation, legitimize the punishment for the child, and do
not encourage the child simply to use violence to settle a score. Second,
timing and vigilance by the parent is important; all punishment, including
spanking, loses effectiveness if it is not administered shortly after the bad
deed. Third, spanking is most effective when it is used in conjunction with
other non-corporal disciplinary measures, and where there is a routine display
of parental affection outside the disciplinary encounter. Fourth, punishments
that include spanking, are especially suited for children between the ages of
two and six years, and it helps the child internalize the parents' values.
Fifth, temperament affects the efficaciousness of various kinds of discipline;
some boys who are temperamentally impulsive may not be socialized without
spanking, whereas temperamentally fearful or anxious children may suffer in
their social development because of it.

Despite the mounting evidence pointing toward the potentially beneficial
effects of spanking under specific circumstances, conference organizers were
reluctant to acknowledge the implications of the major findings. The
"Consensus Statements" in Pediatrics declare that: "There are no data bearing
on the effectiveness of spanking to control misbehavior..." (p.853) The
Archives editors conclude, "...that undesirable discipline includes
inconsistency, noncontingent discipline, harsh punishment,corporal punishment
for infants, and negative parental demeanor." Alas, the editors fail to mention
that none of these points has been under serious debate for more than twenty
years. And in a seeming miff, the Archives editor Dr. DeAngelis avers in the
leading pull quote "I still believe that it is better to spare the child and
spoil the rod."

The issue of spanking will continue to be an uphill battle for the near future,
but at least some reinforcements are becoming available. Compared to so many
encounters with the professions and research communities in the culture wars,
there is a ray of hope on the question of corporal punishment if the word can
get out. Psychological research is providing the ever-mounting technical
evidence on the side of commonsense: too little punishment leads to unruly
children. And this is as it should be, since the balance in family life is
found where the practice of punishment is a part of the larger practice of
love. Although the village cannot make parents love their children, if it
proscribes a natural tool of child-rearing, it may make children very much
harder to love.


Author Note

Richard W.Cross, Ph.D. has taught in graduate psychology training programs at
Eastern Illinois University. He currently teaches psychology at Franciscan
University of Steubenville in Ohio.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
| | Kids should work... Kane General 13 December 10th 03 03:30 AM
Kids should work. LaVonne Carlson General 22 December 7th 03 05:27 AM
| Kids should work... Kane General 1 December 6th 03 09:11 PM
And again he strikes........ Doan strikes ...... again! was Kids should work... Kane General 2 December 6th 03 04:28 AM
Excuse Me???? Researchers admit spanking behavior notrigorously tested Doan General 0 July 10th 03 06:21 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.