I was reading an article in Child Magazine this morning that I thought was interesting. According to the article, there is new evidence to suggest that spanking your kids does more harm than good, regardless of the culture in which you live.
Researchers at the Center for Child and Family Policy at Duke University studied 366 mothers and children in China, India, Italy, Kenya, the Philippines and Thailand. They found that even in those countries where spanking is the cultural norm, the kids who are often physically disciplined are more likely to be anxious and aggressive than those who received either less physical punishment or none at all.
"Children imitate their parents," says lead study author Jennifer Lansford, Ph.D. "If their parent uses hitting to deal with a situation, children think it's okay for them to do it, too."
Paradoxically, this effect may be even more pronounced in places like the United States where spanking is no longer considered to be part of the cultural norm of parenting. "If a child knows most of her friends are spanked, it may feel less strange or frightening," says Dr. Lansford. "But if it isn't the norm, she may feel rejected by her parents or imagine she's a bad kid."
17 comments:
Very interesting food for thought...and very true.
I'm surprised you would be reading an article like this, or need to, with Schuyler being pretty much putty in your hands most of the time!
BTW: I am watching Narnia right now, we bought it today, and Schuyler looks a little like Lucy. You may not think so, and I've never seen Schuyler in real life, but I would imagine her to be a little like Lucy....
We don't spank either even though both of us were spanked as children. It doens't work. I will say that I have often threatened to 'pop' his rear end but have never done it and honestly can count on one hand how many times I've ever really threatened it. I know at those times I was probably at my wits end and in looking back, I'm sure there were other things I could have done to re direct him. That is what I typically try to do. Re direct. My oldest son is 6 years old. He is a spit fire. He is all boy and in true form, likes to push the envelope BUT he is also respectful and loving. He's just high energy. I remember how being spanked made me feel (more angry and full of rebellious feelings) and I'm sure because I was as a child, it's likely why those few times when he was really pushing my buttons, I automatically went there. --- There are obvious reasons why it's not a good idea (how can you hit a child when we ask that they not hit anyone else? etc) but beyond those, it isn't respectful and there are surely (and there are) other ways to discipline a child when necessary.
I whole heartedly agree. For what it's worth......
Jenn
That seems like a no-brainer to me - coming from an ultra religious fundamentalist upbringing where corporal punishment at home and at school was the norm.
Coincidentally, now I would never spank a child and I'm an agnostic.
I think there's a huge difference between "I'm not going to do anything at all and let my child grow up feral because I want to be nice" and "I'm not going to use violence to teach my kids". Suggesting otherwise means that the only tools you grant yourself as a parent are fear and intimidation. And hey, they're your kids, burn them with cigarettes if that's your thing. Just don't expect me to admire your parenting skills.
I suspect your definition of "necessary" is wildly different from mine, since I'm having a hard time coming up with a circumstance when it would be "necessary" to beat my daughter.
Perhaps if her clothes were on fire. I'll grant you that one.
I'm wondering about this... my husband and I don't have kids yet, we're practicing with a very clever and hyperactive Boxer dog first. :-) When we got her as a 2 month old a year and a half ago, I read all the dog-raising sites and got a bunch of dog-training books, and had all the info from the "experts" down pat before we even picked her up.
In the dog training world, the experts advocate a "positive only" approach. As in, you never do anything to punish or even say "no" to the dog, you simply praise them for doing good things, and when they're doing something bad, redirect them to good things so you can praise them for that instead. According to the positive-only fellow owners, book authors, and trainers we hired, doing anything else is cruel, old-fashioned, and will damage your relationship with the dog, making them fearful and distrustful of humans for the rest of their lives.
So... we followed all of this by the book for the first 5 or 6 months. And after 5 or 6 months of many-times-daily training sessions, puppy classes, socialization playdates, and hours spent on boxer training forums talking to other owners, we had an adolescent dog that had a 50-word vocabulary, knew every trick in the book, and knew how to solve complex problems on her own. And barked incessantly, overpowered us on walks, and attacked us with teeth and claws whenever we didn't pay enough attention to her.
So. We learned our lesson about "experts". We asked our doggy daycare provider for advice, since she used to be a dog trainer, and she told us to leave a leash on the dog whenever she got into an attacking mood, and give her a hard pop on the leash whenever she lunged at us. We hated doing it, but 4 or 5 "pops" later, she never did it again. When she started on one of her incessant barking sessions, we told her "no barking!" and punished her by spraying some bad-smelling stuff near her. Again, took a couple of repetitions and barking was no longer a problem. When she pulled too hard on the leash, she got a "pop". Now we enjoy taking her outside, and thus take her out more often.
I know some folks on those Boxer forums who would call the SPCA if they saw us doing this leash popping thing. And yet, if we'd continued to follow their advice and redirected, ignored, timed-out, or whatever.... Either she'd have ended up in the pound, or we would have ended up in the hospital. Instead, we have the happiest, gentlest, most loving dog I've ever met.
So that's a lot about my dog. :-) But my husband and I have talked a lot about this and what it means for our child-raising methods in the future. We plan to use spanking as a last-resort punishment for inexcusable crimes, stuff like running out into traffic, intentionally hurting people, anything that will cause serious harm either to the child or to others if we don't immediately bring a stop to it.
I suppose a lot of people will think we're horrible parents. But hey, we'll be used to it by then. :-)
The thing I'm never clear about is the whole "I'll only hit my kid in the case of a life or death situation". Are there really situations out there where the only way to make your point strongly enough is to hit a litte kid?
Personally, I would think that having someone three times your size kick your ass would be distracting from the important point you were trying to make. I'm glad that philosophy doesn't carry over into the adult world.
"Now Fred, this report is very important to the company, so don't screw it up, okay? In fact, pow! Like that? Want some more? Okay, okay, stop crying and get out of my office, you baby..."
1. I crate-trained my dog and it worked out great, but that certainly doesn't mean it would be a good idea for me to put my kids in a cage. Dogs and kids? Not the same.
2. The whole idea of hitting a kid to punish him or her for "hurting someone intentionally" simply doesn't make sense to me. How can you possibly expect a child to benefit from a message of "It's wrong to hurt someone, so now I'm going to hurt you." Violence teaches violence.
3. Yes, generations of children were spanked and maybe some of them came out okay. Generations of people smoked, too, and not all of them died of lung cancer. Being able to point anecdotally to someone who didn't get sick from smoking doesn't negate the evidence that shows it's generally harmful.
I've never spanked my children. I have one that's never even tempted me, and one that has caused me and my husband to carefully consider our position. But in the end, the answer for us is clear. Finding meaningful consequences for bad behavior may be more difficult and time consuming than simply smacking her, but it's the right choice for us.
I don't spank for a couple of personal reasons. First, I have a bad temper that I've worked very hard to manage and I don't even want give myself that opening.
Second, I remember my reaction to being spanked as a kid. My parents spanked rarely and as a last resort. But I always knew that it meant I had won. If I could get through the spanking without giving in then there was no where else they could go. They couldn't and wouldn't hit me harder so they'd have to go back to taking away privileges or grounding or just give up. (And usually, they just gave up.) I already see some of my stubbornness in my little one so I am trying to figure out different, more effective discipline methods.
Who left the troll treats sitting out again? Now everyone's going to want one.
I wasn't spanked---it wasn't even on my hippy mom's roster of possibilities---and when I did visit other people's houses as a kid and saw spankings being administered or hear tales of people getting "the belt" or whatever, I thought it was completely weird, creepy, and unnatural. Especially when it occurs after the child is old enough to talk and reason. I just couldn't believe people actually did this little drama/powertrip. I still get totally weirded out by people who have this whole little ritual going and do this whole talking thing and explain why they're going to do such and such to the kid, engage in some kind of dialogue about it... "come over here Kevin...the reason I'm going to do this is.." etc. etc... I mean, if a kid's old enough to talk about the spanking, then they're old enough to reason about what they've done, and thus too old to get a spanking. Duh!
Call me crazy but I see spanking out of anger and frustration as less weird than the cold, detached 'this hurts you less than it does me' approach (call it 'the lesser of two evils'). Kind of like the difference between a murder in the heat of an argument vs. a premeditated killing. They're both bad but people who plot spankings seem worse. If you can think it through enough to be calm and unemotional about it, surely you can think of some other way to handle it altogether. As Roseanne once said, "They always say not to hit your kids in anger. When the hell else would you ever hit them?"
I don't get the whole thing at all and I'm glad I have no personal experience with it.
Rob-
You are so hillarious and I love the little firestorm/dialogue/debate you have going on here. Especially when you have this to say:
"Now Fred, this report is very important to the company, so don't screw it up, okay? In fact, pow! Like that? Want some more? Okay, okay, stop crying and get out of my office, you baby..."
Rob wrote, "Personally, I would think that having someone three times your size kick your ass would be distracting from the important point you were trying to make."
I hardly think that spanking a child is "kicking his ass." It's fine to use hyperbole for effect, but when you're debating the merits (or not) of something, it only makes you look like a jerk. And before you think otherwise, I don't spank any of my children (I have three).
Spank. Hit. Beat. Abuse. In my mind, they are synonyms. You can disagree with me if you like, but having a different opinion from you doesn't make me a jerk. Calling me a jerk for having that different opinion? Don't be an ass.
Personally, I'd be ashamed of being an apologist for hitting children, whether I actually beat my own kids or not.
I really am going to regret turning anonymous comments back on, aren't I?
I think bottom line, if you use physical anything to teach a child anything, it's wrong. See where I said, "I think" because this is just my opinion. I"m not saying it's fact although in my tiny little mind, it is. Fact that is.
So Rob put this out there for all of us to debate and it really got all of us going. Now if someone could just walk away and actually consider why not using physical force would actually benefit and teach your child something...just consider it. Without proclaiming why it's right, just maybe consider why it might POSSIBLY be wrong.
Jenn
I don't know why
"Spanking = beating child to death "
OR
"Not Spanking = raising feral child".
I remember being spanked exactly once. My brother and I had spent an afternoon of repeatedly being punished for teasing my sister and basically would not stop. Spanking = we stopped. I don't feel traumatized.
I have kids, they are little. I don't spank.
I also don't buy that spanking = teaching kids to hit. Does giving time outs teach kids to give other kids time outs?
My guess is our own upbringing has a lot to do with how we view spanking. If you got beaten... I can see you never wanting to parent that way.
I come from a pretty big family. I have 21 neices and nephews of all ages. Some are devastated by the littlest rebuke. Some are simply stubborn beyond belief. Each case is different and I think there is room for middle ground.
The problem I have with these studies is they view the extremes.
I have NEVER spanked my daughter...no need. When she had time out, she considered her actions. When I raised my voice in frustration to her...she responded. When I explained things to her...she listened. Easy.
My son was a completely different kettle of fish. None of these things worked. And I tried. OH how I tried. Everything - star charts, time out, reasoning, bribery, etc etc.
What did work, was one sharp smack on the bum, and being sent to his room to think. It got his attention, it wasn't abuse, and he certainly didn't want it repeated.
Horses for courses, people. Honestly, children are all different, with different personality profiles and different triggers.
I was smacked unmercifully as a child, and swore I wouldn't smack my children like my parents did - often and for any and every punishment.
My son only received a smack when all else had failed. Most often when he deliberately disobeyed a clearly worded and understood instruction. Like "Don't touch the heater son, it will burn you". Now, he was determined to touch the rotten heater...so do I give up and let him? And allow himself to be burned (child abuse) or smack him when he tries, after I've explained 20 times not to touch it. At least my smack is on the bottom, and controlled, not a potential burn.
It only takes a couple of smacks to get through to this sort of child. It's not like you're smacking on a daily basis. I didn't have to smack my son past about age 4, and only had to a few times.
All I'm saying, is that for some kids...it really works, and does not damage their psyche at all.
My son is now 17, my daughter 13. They are well adjusted, loving children, who respect me, their friends and their elders. They are not violent. They know violence is not the way to resolve adult disputes.
I do not believe that my son would be the considerate and respectful near-adult he is today without those smacks. Really.
I'm ranting. Stopping now.
yeah, it doesn't have to be a vicious beating or anything to seriously mess a kid up. my dad used to spank me occasionally, just one or two swats when he was really frustrated--a few times a year and less frequently as I got older. And I still have an instinctive flinch response if he's walking behind me. If that's how you want your kids to feel about you, hey, go ahead and slap them.
and you know, I was by any measure what they'd call a 'difficult' child. extremely easy to provoke into screaming and impossible to comfort, with some obsessive semi-autistic behaviours thrown in for spice, and a tendency to long loud screaming, physical attacks on my parents, violent tantrums--and being hit or held down was so viciously humiliating and terrifying that the memories still make me sick. Unless the kid is coming at you with a knife or about to jump off a cliff, *you don't* use your size and strength against it. You just don't.
Post a Comment