Discipline.....

[Trieste]

Good, now that you've edited your posts to actually contain points, I'd like to respond.

A) Jude, that research is funded by a center that specifically researches drug and alcohol abuse. A bit of research into them shows that they tend to work with the underpriviledged and with minorities. I'm not exactly a poster-girl for affirmative action, here, but do I really have to get into the socioeconomic disadvantages of the children of underprivileged (meaning poverty line and lower) parents? No? Good.

My skepticism here comes from the subject matter and the research pool. Underprivileged, poverty-stricken families are going to have a myriad of learning difficulties, which means that this study is more correlation than causation - something I believe you have pointed out yourself in other threads.

B) IQ isn't everything, and it has little to do with the ability to put learned information to good use. We all know the genius who lives in their mom's basement, and so-called nerds aren't exactly known for their social skills. You can be the smartest psychologist in the world and still fail to get a date. So arguing that spanking makes these kids stupider - apparently implying that it's damaging their ability to lead a normal and successful life - is kind of strawman-ey.

So, in short, no. It isn't anything close to justification not to spank your child. It feels to me - and this is personal opinion, I'll freely admit - like scare tactics.

[Darkcide]

You don't seem to understand how scientific studies work so I will explain.

They divided children up into 2 groups, a group that is spanked, and a group that is not.  Then they compared the two groups and found that the group that was spanked was intellectually stunted.

No, studies never account for individual people, they study trends in order to determine loose causality because it's impossible to account for the effect in one person, especially when dealing with a sociological principle.

There are also other studies on the matter that suggest equally bad results.

If you decide to spank your child fully knowing that it's been linked to a decrease in intelligence and dangerous sexual behaviors (look at the bottom of the page where it discusses that) then you've got to have a lot of faith in your parenting style in order to overcome an established link.

Is it possible?  I don't know, I would say probably.  The first study hints that you can counteract damage done by adding in cognitive stimulus (though it states that if you did that without the spanking by itself it would probably have a positive effect so they're just cancelling each other out more than likely).  But I don't see why a responsible parent would risk damaging their kid by spanking them.

Showing examples of unruly youth as "evidence" that some kids need corporal punishment is far from valid.  First of all, there's no statistical data to back up that those kids couldn't be cured by counseling and non-violent methods.  You're merely putting forth a point of view in a non-rigorous way based on anecdotal evidence which is completely without any sort of predictive value.  Secondly, if your kid gets to that point to begin with you've probably already made mistakes.  Which, in my cases, is often the use of physical discipline in excess to begin with.

Anyone who has taken Psych 1000 knows how a scientific study works. Doesn't mean it is the be all to end all. They have studies which state that intelligence is linked to race, yet fail to take into account that race isn't anything but a social construct. Genetically it doesn't exist.

The point? Studies are to be taken with a grain of salt. Especially when you are dealing with human psychology, there are billions of people in the planet. A relatively small test demographic will not be able to speak for them. I don't care how many similar trends arise among the test subjects, there are too many people on this planet with too many different variables.

So the children in group A were spanked and had a decreased intelligence, ok. Again. Did they fully examine the circumstances? Did the spankers have any discourse with the children after spanking them? To what extent were the children spanked? What were they spanked with? Where were they spanked? What about their backgrounds? Socio-economic status? Ethnicity?

You don't see why a responsible parent would spank a child? I have a question for you. Are you yourself a parent? If so, in your eyes what is the single worst thing your child has done? I am curious, and definitely going somewhere with the question.

[kylie]

Spanking alone doesn't hold any risks and it can't be said to on it's own because we don't know the circumstances surrounding the children who develop issues down the road's lives. How much of the parenting is examined before people jump into conclusions? Does the child have the capacity for mental imbalance beforehand? How does the parent spank the child? Are environmental circumstances taken into account? Until they prove that spanking alone holds risks, the studies don't mean crap.

The point was, these studies should be taken with a grain of salt because there are too many factors they don't take into account.

Well in my mind, there is a world of difference between "don't mean crap" and "should be taken with a grain of salt," but I'll shrug onward.  I also have to point out that "we can't know" does not fit well with an assertion that some action categorically "doesn't present any risks."  It's actually an argument about what or just how much those risks might be, and how well they might be managed. 

          Believe it or not, I actually agree with you that there are a lot of variables.  I also do appreciate that one can make those kind of criticisms of scientific studies -- at least up to a point.  I do believe that spanking is a tool, and I assume that some people might be very good at using physical tools.  (I am more reluctant to presume that most people, speaking generally, are well prepared to make that judgment.)  I would allow that while I haven't experienced or seen many examples that satisfy me as "good" spanking of children, by some standards they may be out there too.

          Without denying all that, I also tend to agree with Jude that you're taking a somewhat crass approach to what science there is, even after accounting for its limits.  I could take more time and provide a few links...  If you're going to expect such homework of me, would you kindly show me some studies that satisfy you with evidence that spanking is generally safe or good?  Alternatively, or perhaps in the process, you could also go do some Googling and probably find most or all of the articles I passed on a quick search.

          For another take on it, if say one's agenda were actually to reduce the conversation to simply "it all depends" or in practice, every parent for themselves...  Then in fact, one would not need to claim any scientific justification in order to do that.  Not even the limited kind of justification that only goes so far as to question the methods of studies.   As far as I know, the politics of the day (especially the conservative end of them) do not lend themselves to any ideal, controlled study of comparative discipline in a variety of households.  So, since you framed much of your response to me as rather extreme skepticism about methods:  I believe existing circumstances could make it difficult to "prove" by those criteria if or when spanking might be generally healthy.   

[kylie]

"Politically conservative, evangelical Christians, sometimes Black, often not so high on the income scale." Where is your proof as to this claim, how large was the pool of parents who spank children that the studies drew from, and how many whuppings are actually reported?

Here's one that starts on that.  http://www.time.com/time/health/articl e/0,8599,1926222,00.html   

          I believe it's referrring to this study:  Straus, Murray A. and Mallie J. Paschall. Corporal Punishment by Mothers and Development of Children's Cognitive Ability: A Longitudinal Study of Two Nationally Representative Age Cohorts. Journal of Aggression Maltreatment & Trauma, 2009; 18 (5): 459-483     

In the U.S., Straus and his colleague Mallie Paschall of the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation looked at 1,510 children — 806 kids ages 2 to 4, and 704 ages 5 to 9 — and found that roughly three-quarters had endured some kind of corporal punishment in the previous two weeks, according to interviews with the mothers. Researchers measured the children's IQ initially, then again four years later. Those kids who hadn't been spanked in the initial survey period scored significantly better on intelligence and achievement tests than those who had been hit. Among the 2-to-4-year-olds, the difference in IQ was five points; among the older kids, there was a 2.8-point gap.  That association held after taking into account parental education, income and other environmental factors, says Straus.... [snip]

... The preponderance of evidence points away from corporal punishment, which the European Union and the U.N. have recommended against, but the data suggest that most parents, especially those in the U.S., still spank their kids. On the basis of his international data, collected by surveying more than 17,000 college students in various countries, Straus found that countries with higher GDP tended to be those where corporal punishment was used less often. In the U.S., the tendency to hit also varies with income, along with geography and culture; it's most common among African-American families, Southern families, parents who were spanked as children themselves and those who identify themselves as conservative Christians.

Another summary of the study with a few other details:  http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/0 /090924231749.htm

According to Straus, there are two explanations for the relation of corporal punishment to lower IQ.

First, corporal punishment is extremely stressful and can become a chronic stressor for young children, who typically experience corporal punishment three or more times a week. For many it continues for years. The research found that the stress of corporal punishment shows up as an increase in post-traumatic stress symptoms such as being fearful that terrible things are about to happen and being easily startled. These symptoms are associated with lower IQ.

Second, a higher national level of economic development underlies both fewer parents using corporal punishment and a higher national IQ.

If you are interested in more from Strauss, he has a page here: http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/CP-Empirical.htm         

           I don't really know what to make of IQ scores, myself.  I even think that people have pretty variable responses to stress (even trauma) individually, and to different types of stress -- some more positive than others.  I don't see much in here that makes me feel more positive about spanking as a general prescription, though.

[Darkcide]

          Well in my mind, there is a world of difference between "don't mean crap" and "should be taken with a grain of salt," but I'll shrug onward.  I also have to point out that "we can't know" does not fit well with an assertion that some action categorically "doesn't present any risks."  It's actually an argument about what or just how much those risks might be, and how well they might be managed. 

          Believe it or not, I actually agree with you that there are a lot of variables.  I also do appreciate that one can make those kind of criticisms of scientific studies -- at least up to a point.  I do believe that spanking is a tool, and I assume that some people might be very good at using physical tools.  (I am more reluctant to presume that most people, speaking generally, are well prepared to make that judgment.)  I would allow that while I haven't experienced or seen many examples that satisfy me as "good" spanking of children, by some standards they may be out there too.

          Without denying all that, I also tend to agree with Jude that you're taking a somewhat crass approach to what science there is, even after accounting for its limits.  I could take more time and provide a few links...  If you're going to expect such homework of me, would you kindly show me some studies that satisfy you with evidence that spanking is generally safe or good?  Alternatively, or perhaps in the process, you could also go do some Googling and probably find most or all of the articles I passed on a quick search.

          For another take on it, if say one's agenda were actually to reduce the conversation to simply "it all depends" or in practice, every parent for themselves...  Then in fact, one would not need to claim any scientific justification in order to do that.  Not even the limited kind of justification that only goes so far as to question the methods of studies.   As far as I know, the politics of the day (especially the conservative end of them) do not lend themselves to any ideal, controlled study of comparative discipline in a variety of households.  So, since you framed much of your response to me as rather extreme skepticism about methods:  I believe existing circumstances could make it difficult to "prove" by those criteria if or when spanking might be generally healthy.

Case studies leave far too many variables for me. Which is why I don't entertain them, nor do I use them outside of classes where they're required. Countless reasons as to why.

As for this discussion, you summed it up nicely. "It Depends." There is no golden rule to parenting. For some kids, spanking is a bad idea. For other kids, spanking will not have any ill effects and can be helpful along with decent parenting. It is all reliant on the family, and the child and the given circumstances. It is impossible to prove that spanking is outright harmful or helpful. So it boils down to what you feel is right or wrong. I would never insist that what I feel worked for me, would work for everyone else and tell people how to raise their children.

"The preponderance of evidence points away from corporal punishment, which the European Union and the U.N. have recommended against, but the data suggest that most parents, especially those in the U.S., still spank their kids. On the basis of his international data, collected by surveying more than 17,000 college students in various countries, Straus found that countries with higher GDP tended to be those where corporal punishment was used less often. In the U.S., the tendency to hit also varies with income, along with geography and culture; it's most common among African-American families, Southern families, parents who were spanked as children themselves and those who identify themselves as conservative Christians."

Problem: Ok going off this article. If most parents in the U.S still spank kids why is it that the demographic in questions are singled out?

African Americans in the USA number well under 50 million. So if we were going off of that, there are far more white families where spanking takes place.
Southern Familes? How much of the nation's percentage is in the south?
Conservative Christians? What demonination?

So if most parents spank their children as this article said, where is there room to say where it is most common? Also what constitutes as most parents?

This is why I do not like studies, I am pulling out too many questions as opposed to discussing personal experience which I feel personally holds a lot more weight when the circumstances can fully be looked into. We're not at school, lol. I'd like to hear from your personal experience, I always find that to be infinitely more educational.

What kind of child were you? What about your parents?

[Jude]

The research isn't airtight, and that particular study proves nothing on its own at all.  One study can be an anomaly and you brought up a fair amount of good points Trieste.  As stated, Correlation isn't causation, and it's entirely possible I've overstated the case on how the particular studies done by that one group establish a link between corporal punishment and lowered IQ.  However, all of that aside, check out the wikipedia page where there's a summation of a ton of more sources which agree that it's probably bad.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporal_punishment_in_the_home

Also, whether or not I am a parent is an entirely irrelevant question.  I personally think it's an attempt to draw emotion into the situation in a way that's completely irrelevant; I decline to answer.

The bottom line is, numerous studies suggest that spanking often has detrimental effects on the child, that it isn't very effective, and those in favor of it have yet to show any evidence that proves it's a necessary evil.

EDIT:  There's a reason why people don't rely on personal experience when making factual pronouncements.  Because personal experience is seriously flawed.  It's based on memory which is an imperfect process and confirmation bias is an incredibly powerful source of delusion and distortion of fact.  There are numerous other psychological principles which disrupt the formulation of accurate judgments from your own life.  Science is an attempt at rigorously gathering data so that determinations can be made without human error getting in the way.

[Darkcide]

The research isn't airtight, and that particular study proves nothing on its own at all.  One study can be an anomaly and you brought up a fair amount of good points Trieste.  As stated, Correlation isn't causation, and it's entirely possible I've overstated the case on how the particular studies done by that one group establish a link between corporal punishment and lowered IQ.  However, all of that aside, check out the wikipedia page where there's a summation of a ton of more sources which agree that it's probably bad.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporal_punishment_in_the_home

Also, whether or not I am a parent is an entirely irrelevant question.  I personally think it's an attempt to draw emotion into the situation in a way that's completely irrelevant; I decline to answer.

The bottom line is, numerous studies suggest that spanking often has detrimental effects on the child, that it isn't very effective, and those in favor of it have yet to show any evidence that proves it's a necessary evil.

EDIT:  There's a reason why people don't rely on personal experience when making factual pronounces.  Because personal experience is flawed.  It's based on memory which is an imperfect process and confirmation bias is an incredibly powerful source.  Science is an attempt at rigorously gathering data so that determinations can be made without human error getting in the way.

Emotion? No. Thank you for assuming though. It isn't irrelevant. It is a logical question.

It can have negative effects, who is disputing that? Yet it has been effective on many people and hasn't had side effects on them. So where exactly does that leave us? Is it neccesary? Who knows. Is grounding a child neccesary? Is letting a child discover dangerous things for themselves neccesary? No. None of that is neccesary and it solely depends on the family as to whether it will work or not. Care to find a study that says there is one absolutely right way to raise a child?

Factual pronounces, ok.

Personal experience is flawed, but the studies which fail to mention a countless number of variables and draw from far too limited a pool are what exactly? .

[Oniya]

The thing is, you can take any form of discipline and show how an excessive use of it stunts or damages a child.  Take time-outs.  In excess, you could compare that to the effects of solitary confinement on someone.  Extra chores?  Look at child labor laws.  Yelling at them?  There are studies on how repetitive loud noises can cause a state of constant anxiety.

The fact of the matter is that any discipline method used indiscriminately is going to have ill effects.  At the very least, it will desensitize the child to that form of punishment.  The trick is to use punishment sparingly, and limit corporal punishment to the times when absolutely necessary.

[consortium11]

Instinctively and from my own experience I don't have an issue with spankings... of course using the standard caveats of it being reasonable etc etc. I got my arse tanned a few times and it hasn't seemed to have done any damage to me.

But

That's instinctive and from my own personal experience... and that only applies to me. Science in these type of areas has issues obviously, but there's a glut of science against spanking and corporal punishment. I like to think that if the evidence proves me wrong I accept I'm wrong and on this issue I cautiously submit that the evidence is against me. I don't think it should be a legislative issue (obviously outside of the outrageous cases) but I believe public opinion should be brought to bear on the issue.

[Serephino]

The question of whether or not you are a parent is very relevant.  You can't know what being a parent is like unless you are one.  You can preach about how spanking is bad until you're blue in the face... but unless you've dealt with a small child throwing a temper tantrum.....

Personal experiences are relevant too.  The study was about kids who were spanked.  How many people here were spanked?  I think for the most part we're all reasonably intelligent adults, so if a bunch of us here are fairly intelligent and were spanked... that kind of blows that study right out of the water now doesn't it?  And of course, the question has to be asked, how many of those parents lied for fear of being accused of abusing their children?

I was spanked.  Average IQ is 100-115.  Mine is 147.  My high school GPA was 3.2.  My college GPA was 3.7.  I enjoy watching the History Channel, and Discovery Channel.  I also enjoy reading and writing.  I've written fan fictions and original stories that I've been told are very good, by my editor and some readers. 

Spanking hasn't hurt me any.  My personal experience is evidence against the statistics in that study.  And if I had been selected for that study, my personal experience would have been part of that scientific data.  All of that data was collected by recording information about the kids.  So one would think statistics about other real people would be just as relevant.   

[somdgirl]

I don't have a child old enough to worry about spanking. When my one year old does something wrong I explain his actions and consequences. I am not sure that he always understands me but for now I won't spank him. He knows the stove is hot because he will walk up and say hot but I don't know it he actually understands what hot is. For now I am against spanking but I am not against other people spanking their children so long as it does not cross the line into abuse.

[Jude]

The question of whether or not you are a parent is very relevant.  You can't know what being a parent is like unless you are one.  You can preach about how spanking is bad until you're blue in the face... but unless you've dealt with a small child throwing a temper tantrum.....

So only a parent has dealt with a small child throwing a temper tantrum?  What if I babysit children, I'm in the day care industry, etc.?  There's a number of people who have experience in handling children.  You still don't need experience in handling children to read scientific studies and notice that spanking, on the whole, damages children.

By the way, while we're talking about people in the child care industry and in school... Corporal Punishment is illegal there in most of the United States, yet they still manage to do their job just fine regardless.

Personal experiences are relevant too.  The study was about kids who were spanked.  How many people here were spanked?  I think for the most part we're all reasonably intelligent adults, so if a bunch of us here are fairly intelligent and were spanked... that kind of blows that study right out of the water now doesn't it?  And of course, the question has to be asked, how many of those parents lied for fear of being accused of abusing their children?

Personal experiences offer one data point.  One data point is meaningless considering that there are three hundred million people alone in the United States.

I was spanked.  Average IQ is 100-115.  Mine is 147.  My high school GPA was 3.2.  My college GPA was 3.7.  I enjoy watching the History Channel, and Discovery Channel.  I also enjoy reading and writing.  I've written fan fictions and original stories that I've been told are very good, by my editor and some readers.

Just because you're 'smart' by your own estimation doesn't mean you couldn't have been smarter if you weren't spanked, so there's an error in judgment.  And much of what you listed to testify for your intelligence doesn't actually mean anything, such as the history channel and fan fiction qualifications.

Spanking hasn't hurt me any.

That's quite a far-reaching statement, and you're probably not qualified to make such a judgment.  People often have a hard time assessing their own strengths and weaknesses and it could simply be that the ways in which is has affected you are more complicated than you realize.  I also think it's possible that you're right, but the fact that you state it with such confidence I think betrays your overly simplistic outlook on the situation.

My personal experience is evidence against the statistics in that study.  And if I had been selected for that study, my personal experience would have been part of that scientific data.  All of that data was collected by recording information about the kids.  So one would think statistics about other real people would be just as relevant.

Personal experience is not evidence against a trend, and that's all studies show.

It's fairly obvious that studies on Corporal Punishment show that there is a trend between Corporal Punishment and negative outcomes, but that doesn't mean that corporal punishment will always lead to a negative outcome.  If it seems like I've been saying that, then that's my failure as a communicator.  I'm sure there are people who have been spanked that have not in any way suffered emotional, intellectual, or psychological damage as a result.  Be that as it may, studies show that it has a measurable effect on the populace.

I have a few questions for everyone who seems to support parents spanking their children.  Why do you believe it's acceptable to literally cause your child pain in order to make them comply with your instructions?  Do you really think that causing another person pain as a way of enforcing rules you've established for them to follow is going to foster a good relationship between you and that person?  Knowing that causing someone pain in order to control their actions is a tyrannical, despotic action in every circumstance but the parent/child relationship and in law enforcement situations dealing with criminals/prisoners (and it's often considered inhumane there), what about the parent/child relationship makes it a justifiable action exactly?

I'm sure we can all agree that spanking can cause damage, that doesn't seem to be anything that anyone is disagreeing with.  With that in mind, why do people seem so willing to expose children to a source of potential harm in this instance when in many others they're so fierely protective?  I would assert it's because they have confidence in spanking because it was done to them, so they don't logically consider just what it is that they're actually doing to children to force their will on them.  What reason do you even have to believe that spanking, or any physical form of punishment, is ever necessary to begin with?  If we can agree that it's not necessary, then why take what we have all accepted is a risk with your child?

Again, personal experience is not relevant.  Personal experience discusses one case through the very biased prism of a single human being's memories and perceptions which have been shown to, time and time again, be flawed.  If there is any objective evidence showing that spanking has a purpose, then I'm fully willing to reconsider my opinion on the matter.  But so far I have seen the people claiming that it should be considered acceptable do nothing but tear down the studies that disagree with their opinions while producing zero credible evidence in their defense.

And finally, my parents administered corporal punishment to me.  It was not a damaging experience in my estimation, though I can't be for sure if it didn't have some ramifications that I'm not aware of.  I think I turned out generally okay, however.  I definitely wouldn't fault my parents or consider them abusive for what they did.  But that does not in any way mean that my experience was typical.

Taking your personal experience as support for a general position is like looking at a single dot of an impressionist painting and characterizing it as crap; the dots come together to form a greater picture which truly color the overall action as something to be encouraged or discouraged.  I'm not going to get into whether or not it should be legal or illegal because that involves a whole other slew of issues.  The question here is whether or not parents should be told that spanking is tool that they can administer to their children safely?  And I don't see how anyone can possibly say "yes" to that question in light of the facts.

EDIT:  Here's another resource from a website by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).

Why Spanking Is Not the Best Choice

The American Academy of Pediatrics does not recommend spanking. Although most Americans were spanked as children, we now know that it has several important side effects.

    * Even though spanking may seem to "work" at first, it loses its impact after a while.
    * Because most parents do not want to spank, they are less likely to be consistent.
    * Spanking increases aggression and anger instead of teaching responsibility.
    * Parents may intend to stay calm but often do not, and then regret their actions later.
    * Spanking can lead to physical struggles and even grow to the point of harming the child.

It is true that many adults who were spanked as children may be well-adjusted and caring people today. However, research has shown that, when compared with children who are not spanked, children who are spanked are more likely to become adults who are depressed, use alcohol, have more anger, hit their own children, hit their spouses, and engage in crime and violence. These adult outcomes make sense because spanking teaches a child that causing others pain is OK if you're frustrated or want to maintain control—even with those you love. A child is not likely to see the difference between getting spanked from his parents and hitting a sibling or another child when he doesn't get what he wants.

[Darkcide]

So only a parent has dealt with a small child throwing a temper tantrum?  What if I babysit children, I'm in the day care industry, etc.?  There's a number of people who have experience in handling children.  You still don't need experience in handling children to read scientific studies and notice that spanking, on the whole, damages children.

By the way, while we're talking about people in the child care industry and in school... Corporal Punishment is illegal there in most of the United States, yet they still manage to do their job just fine regardless.
Personal experiences offer one data point.  One data point is meaningless considering that there are three hundred million people alone in the United States.
Just because you're 'smart' by your own estimation doesn't mean you couldn't have been smarter if you weren't spanked, so there's an error in judgment.  And much of what you listed to testify for your intelligence doesn't actually mean anything, such as the history channel and fan fiction qualifications.
That's quite a far-reaching statement, and you're probably not qualified to make such a judgment.  People often have a hard time assessing their own strengths and weaknesses and it could simply be that the ways in which is has affected you are more complicated than you realize.  I also think it's possible that you're right, but the fact that you state it with such confidence I think betrays your overly simplistic outlook on the situation.
Personal experience is not evidence against a trend, and that's all studies show.

It's fairly obvious that studies on Corporal Punishment show that there is a trend between Corporal Punishment and negative outcomes, but that doesn't mean that corporal punishment will always lead to a negative outcome.  If it seems like I've been saying that, then that's my failure as a communicator.  I'm sure there are people who have been spanked that have not in any way suffered emotional, intellectual, or psychological damage as a result.  Be that as it may, studies show that it has a measurable effect on the populace.

I have a few questions for everyone who seems to support parents spanking their children.  Why do you believe it's acceptable to literally cause your child pain in order to make them comply with your instructions?  Do you really think that causing another person pain as a way of enforcing rules you've established for them to follow is going to foster a good relationship between you and that person?  Knowing that causing someone pain in order to control their actions is a tyrannical, despotic action in every circumstance but the parent/child relationship and in law enforcement situations dealing with criminals/prisoners (and it's often considered inhumane there), what about the parent/child relationship makes it a justifiable action exactly?

I'm sure we can all agree that spanking can cause damage, that doesn't seem to be anything that anyone is disagreeing with.  With that in mind, why do people seem so willing to expose children to a source of potential harm in this instance when in many others they're so fierely protective?  I would assert it's because they have confidence in spanking because it was done to them, so they don't logically consider just what it is that they're actually doing to children to force their will on them.  What reason do you even have to believe that spanking, or any physical form of punishment, is ever necessary to begin with?  If we can agree that it's not necessary, then why take what we have all accepted is a risk with your child?

Again, personal experience is not relevant.  Personal experience discusses one case through the very biased prism of a single human being's memories and perceptions which have been shown to, time and time again, be flawed.  If there is any objective evidence showing that spanking has a purpose, then I'm fully willing to reconsider my opinion on the matter.  But so far I have seen the people claiming that it should be considered acceptable do nothing but tear down the studies that disagree with their opinions while producing zero credible evidence in their defense.

And finally, my parents administered corporal punishment to me.  It was not a damaging experience in my estimation, though I can't be for sure if it didn't have some ramifications that I'm not aware of.  I think I turned out generally okay, however.  I definitely wouldn't fault my parents or consider them abusive for what they did.  But that does not in any way mean that my experience was typical.

Taking your personal experience as support for a general position is like looking at a single dot of an impressionist painting and characterizing it as crap; the dots come together to form a greater picture which truly color the overall action as something to be encouraged or discouraged.  I'm not going to get into whether or not it should be legal or illegal because that involves a whole other slew of issues.  The question here is whether or not parents should be told that spanking is tool that they can administer to their children safely?  And I don't see how anyone can possibly say "yes" to that question in light of the facts.

EDIT:  Here's another resource from a website by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).

They do their job just fine?

[Jude]

That's a tangential argument which really would just draw from the rest of my post, so I'll concede that point.  If you'd like to respond to the rest of it however...

[Darkcide]

That's a tangential argument which really would just draw from the rest of my post, so I'll concede that point.  If you'd like to respond to the rest of it however...

What would be the point? I've said, you've said, and several others in the thread have said they've been spanked as kids without any noticeable side effects. But science declares it to be a fact! As opposed to a trend they've discovered. I'm not letting some quacks who I will never meet and who will never meet my children tell me how to raise my children and how to discipline them if need be.

[Jude]

So basically when they're sick you'll take them to the doctor and trust them to cure their ailment through complicated methods, but you don't trust them when they offer you parenting advice?

EDITED FOR POLITENESS AND...

It doesn't make sense to trust science in some instances but not when you don't feel like it, is my point.

[Torch]

The first rule of parenting (one which many of us learn the hard way) is this: Take what works for you, and leave the rest. 

Why do some parents use corporal punishment? Probably for the same reasons parents choose, despite reams of studies and information to the contrary, to use commercial infant formulas instead of breastmilk, even though they know for a fact that breastmilk is the best food for babies. Or for the same reasons parents choose to co-sleep, or use disposables instead of cloth diapers, or to Ferberize their babies, or any number of a thousand other decisions parents have to make.

Parenting is not and never will be an exact science. It is very easy to judge others for their choices, especially when one has not had the benefit of experience, and can only offer cold, bland, scientific study as a basis for their opinion. It's rather insulting, especially to those of us who have been in the parenting trenches since those same folks were still in elementary school.

As parents, we all start out with the best of intentions for our children, vowing never, ever to do this or that or say "Because I said so!", etc. But real life always tends to intervene, and when it does, all the scientific studies and surveys and research get thrown out the window, and a parent is left to grab at whatever works for their family. It happens to every parent...every...single...one.

And for the younger folks in this thread who intend to have children someday, but haven't yet...it will happen to you. Yes...you.

[Oniya]

Very few things that involve human beings are an exact science.  We are (thankfully) more than the sum of our cells, fluids, and chemical reactions.

[Trieste]

We haven't even finished studying all the chemical reactions, or completely mapping the brain. We're a lot better off than we were about 100 years ago, but we're certainly not experts. No matter what someone might call themselves, no one is an expert on the human brain, or human physiology. There are just varying degrees of ignorance.

[Darkcide]

The first rule of parenting (one which many of us learn the hard way) is this: Take what works for you, and leave the rest. 

Why do some parents use corporal punishment? Probably for the same reasons parents choose, despite reams of studies and information to the contrary, to use commercial infant formulas instead of breastmilk, even though they know for a fact that breastmilk is the best food for babies. Or for the same reasons parents choose to co-sleep, or use disposables instead of cloth diapers, or to Ferberize their babies, or any number of a thousand other decisions parents have to make.

Parenting is not and never will be an exact science. It is very easy to judge others for their choices, especially when one has not had the benefit of experience, and can only offer cold, bland, scientific study as a basis for their opinion. It's rather insulting, especially to those of us who have been in the parenting trenches since those same folks were still in elementary school.

As parents, we all start out with the best of intentions for our children, vowing never, ever to do this or that or say "Because I said so!", etc. But real life always tends to intervene, and when it does, all the scientific studies and surveys and research get thrown out the window, and a parent is left to grab at whatever works for their family. It happens to every parent...every...single...one.

And for the younger folks in this thread who intend to have children someday, but haven't yet...it will happen to you. Yes...you.

Thank you so very much.

So basically when they're sick you'll take them to the doctor and trust them to cure their ailment through complicated methods, but you don't trust them when they offer you parenting advice?

EDITED FOR POLITENESS AND...

It doesn't make sense to trust science in some instances but not when you don't feel like it, is my point.

Lmao. My biology and my school of parenting are two totally different things. That would be like trying to use a case study to improve my sex life.

[Trieste]

Whether you mean to or not, you're trolling. Please stop.

Thanks. :)

[Serephino]

I've said many times; it's impossible to know how you will react in a situation until you're in that situation.  I don't have kids yet, but my boyfriend and I do plan to adopt when we're in a better financial situation.  I'm definitely not going into this with rose colored glasses.  I will honestly admit that I don't know how I'm going to handle things.

And someone who babysits or is a child care worker has one advantage that a parent does not.  You keep the kid for a certain period of time, and then you give it back.  Parents can't do that.  There isn't anywhere to give them back to.  You are responsible for that child; period.  All those 'experts' handing out advice don't have to deal with the consequences. 

As for whether or not I could be smarter, speculating on that is just ridiculous.  Maybe I would, maybe I wouldn't, but the point is I haven't been scarred for life.  Neither have you by your own admission.  Those studies claim psychological damage is done.  If me, you, and many others were spanked and yet lead decent, normal lives, then what damage was done? 

Yes, my parents inflicted physical pain on me, but only when I did something bad.  If I was behaving myself I had nothing to fear.  Pain is part of how we as a species learn.  You touch a hot stove and get burned, you don't do it again unless you're complete moron.  People who burned themselves on hot stoves as little kids aren't afraid of stoves.  I get stung on the foot walking barefoot outside; I start wearing shoes. If something hurts, you avoid it. 

[kylie]

If something hurts, you avoid it.

1)  Well the first response has been tossed at me plenty, so it should be quite familiar by now: 
     This seems to assume that we're all imagining comparable situations and actions when we say "spanking." 

2)  That quote also assumes that we can uniformly predict the responses of the children to spanking, per se. 
     I'm simply not convinced that we always get good information from the responses, or that we can necessarily gauge it that well.

3)  Then, assuming we could agree there is some generally non-threatening range for children in most situations... 
     I still don't buy the assumption that people necessarily avoid pain at the level of spankings.  Adults certainly vary on this, particularly when it comes to closer relationships.  Parent-child is also "close" in the sense of being very frequent and familiar, without fussing about where sexuality kicks in.  Adults are more often provided with a language to respond and they are more often allowed to speak on the issue.  Kids are at a much lower status/power level. 

          I can't forget a certain little girl who once lived next door to me, say age 5-7.  I once heard her father smacking her for a good 15 min. or so (I presume it was spanking; it sounded pretty vigorous).  She was giggling and laughing her head off throughout the whole thing.  Her dad was having this conversation with her mom throughout, bewildered about why the child was responding like this.  Somehow I don't expect that, if she remembers whatever came before the spanking, she would necessarily avoid repeating that activity.   

          When presented with way too many variables for the class time, sociologists do love to reduce stuff to "it depends."  However, as that's been used so far here, it's often a discussion stopper.  No matter what the topic, it's generally possible to siphon off everyone's energy into fine-tuned complaints about unknowns -- without saying in the open what we do give credence to.  Unless we talk about the particulars of what might make a good or bad spanking (and we know some spankings are linked to abuse), then we can go round and around.  Personally, I'm still rather concerned with what studies I've glimpsed out there suggesting the evidence tends to raise many complications with spanking.  I don't assume that no one should do it under any circumstances...  I just don't think I would subscribe to most of the assumptions I've heard to advocate/defend doing it.

          We also haven't talked much about socialization.  What happens when children leave the home (or even, invite a friend over).  What if, in fact, a few parents are using reasonably good technique, but then many are doing it neutral to rather badly?  (I'm more likely to believe that's the case, unless I see fewer warnings and more positive indicators from the science.)  If that is so, then the bad cases have effects that ripple outside of the home.  Messages from the confused or negative cases work their way around.  If the child down the street was spanked in a nasty way and that child gives off hints and notices to so many others about what they have learned power relationships must be like...  It becomes another, privatized form of education and ideology circulating in society.   

[Oniya]

          I can't forget a certain little girl who once lived next door to me, say age 5-7.  I once heard her father smacking her for a good 15 min. or so (I presume it was spanking; it sounded pretty vigorous).  She was giggling and laughing her head off throughout the whole thing.  Her dad was having this conversation with her mom throughout, bewildered about why the child was responding like this.  Somehow I don't expect that, if she remembers whatever came before the spanking, she would necessarily avoid repeating that activity.   

Speaking as a parent, if I were to spank a child and get giggling (and 15 minutes sounds excessive to me regardless!), I would immediately chalk that up as a discipline method that didn't work, and use something different for all future punishments.

[Nadir]

*shrugs* so long as it is applied with a clear intention in mind, not just out of anger, and the reasons for it are made clear to the child and the child understands, I don't see a problem with it. So long it isn't overused, too. There has to be rules that you follow, so the kid can keep up and toe the line without second guessing. Pain is, as Trie said, a useful tool. The damage comes from a lack of structure to the punishment. Repeating it too frequently, not giving a reason, doing so in anger, letting the punishment continue for more than five minutes... seriously, they have the message in the first minute. Dragging it out will make them forget the lesson. *rolls eyes*