Becasue there are two sides to every story. I do not endorse this - but I do
uphold the right to opposing views.
To Spank or Not to Spank
By Den A. Trumbull, M.D., and S. DuBose Ravenel, M.D.
Numerous studies support spanking as a legitimate form of discipline.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
You might have seen the news reports. Last summer the American Medical
Association (AMA) issued a press release trumpeting a study by an
anti-spanking "expert" alleging that corporal punishment resulted, not in
better behaved children, but in increased disciplinary problems as children
grew older.
Well, as they say, don't believe everything you read in the papers. The AMA
played up the study by Dr. Murray Straus while ignoring the one published
alongside it in Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine. That second
study, by Dr. Marjorie Gunnoe, concluded, "For most children, claims that
spanking teaches aggression seem unfounded." In fact, of the five research
presentations at the conference at which Straus and Gunnoe delivered their
findings, three found beneficial effects in properly administered spanking.
Numerous other studies support spanking as a legitimate form of discipline.
And even Straus himself admits in his book Beating the Devil Out of Them
(1994) that "the type of evidence used ... cannot definitively prove that
corporal punishment has harmful side effects."
For example, a special conference was convened in 1996 by the American
Academy of Pediatrics. The conference chairpersons, although coming in with
an admitted bias that spanking is inherently wrong, stated that they became
convinced that "spanking in and of itself is not detrimental to a child or
predictive of later problems."
The AMA's choice to publicize only the Straus paper appears almost a
deliberate attempt to give only one side of the story. But that's not
surprising. Opposition to spanking has been growing in elite circles over
the past 15 years. No doubt much of this springs from a sincere concern for
the well-being of children. Child abuse is a reality, and stories of such
abuse are horrifying. But while loving and effective discipline is not harsh
and abusive, neither should it be weak and ineffectual.
There are several arguments commonly leveled against disciplinary spanking.
Ironically, most of these can be used against other forms of discipline. Any
form (time-out, restriction, etc.), when used inappropriately and in anger,
can distort a child's perception of justice and harm his emotional
development. In light of this, let's examine some of the unfounded arguments
promoted by spanking opponents.
Argument No. 1: Physical punishment establishes the moral righteousness of
hitting other people.
Counterpoint: The "spanking teaches hitting" belief has gained in popularity
over the past decade but is not supported by objective evidence. We must
make a distinction between abusive hitting and nonabusive spanking. A
child's ability to tell the difference between the two depends largely upon
the parents' attitude while spanking and their procedure for spanking. There
is no evidence that a mild spank to the buttocks of a disobedient child by a
loving parent teaches the child aggressive behavior.
The critical issue is how spanking (or, in fact, any punishment) is used
more so than whether it is used. Physical abuse by an angry, uncontrolled
parent will leave lasting emotional wounds and cultivate bitterness in a
child. The balanced, prudent use of disciplinary spanking, however, is a
deterrent to aggressive behavior with some children.
Argument No. 2: Since parents often refrain from hitting until their anger
or frustration boils over, the child learns that such emotions justify the
use of physical force.
Counterpoint: A 1995 study published in the journal Pediatrics indicates
that most parents who spank do not spank on impulse, but do so purposefully
with a belief in its effectiveness. Furthermore, the study revealed no
significant correlation between the frequency of spanking and the anger
reported by mothers. Actually, the mothers who reported being angry were not
the same parents who spanked.
Reactive, impulsive hitting after losing control is unquestionably wrong.
Eliminating all physical punishment in the home, however, would not remedy
such explosive scenarios. It could even increase the problem. When effective
spanking is removed from a parent's repertoire, he or she is left with
nagging, begging, belittling and yelling once the primary measures have
failed. By contrast, proper spanking used in conjunction with other
disciplinary means achieves better control of a particularly defiant child,
and moments of exasperation are less likely to occur.
Argument No. 3: Physical punishment is harmful to a child.
Counterpoint: Any disciplinary measure - physical, verbal or emotional -
carried to an extreme can harm a child. Excessive scolding and berating of a
child is emotionally harmful. Excessive use of isolation (time-out) for
unreasonable periods of time can humiliate a child and ruin the measure's
effectiveness.
An appropriately administered spanking of a forewarned, disobedient child,
however, is not harmful when administered in a loving, controlled manner.
Argument No. 4: Spanking is an ineffective solution to misbehavior.
Counterpoint: Though the specific use of appropriate spanking has rarely
been studied, there is evidence of its short-term and long-term
effectiveness. When combined with reasoning, the use of negative
consequences (including spanking) has been shown to decrease the recurrence
of misbehavior with preschool children.
Dr. Diana Baumrind of the Institute for Human Development at the University
of California-Berkeley conducted a decade-long study of families with
children ages 3 to 9. Baumrind found that parents employing a balanced
disciplinary style of firm control (including spanking) and positive
encouragement experienced the most favorable outcome in their children.
Parents taking extreme approaches to discipline (authoritarian types using
excessive punishment with less encouragement or permissive types using
little punishment and no spanking) were less successful.
Argument No. 5: Spanking is never necessary.
Counterpoint: All children need a combination of encouragement and
correction as they are reared to become socially responsible individuals. In
order for correction to deter disobedient behavior, the consequence imposed
upon the child must outweigh the pleasure of the disobedient act. For very
compliant children, milder forms of correction will suffice, and spanking
may never be necessary. For more defiant children who refuse to comply with
or be persuaded by milder consequences, spanking is useful, effective and
appropriate.
* * *
Disciplinary spanking should be evaluated from a factual, objective
perspective. It must be distinguished from abusive, harmful forms of
corporal punishment. Appropriate disciplinary spanking is beneficial and can
play an important role in optimal child development. There is no convincing
evidence that mild spanking is harmful. Indeed, disciplinary spanking is
supported by history, research and a majority of primary care physicians. []
Appendix 1
Parent Guide
Guidelines on disciplinary spanking
If your child is unruly, and you're at wits' end, take a break and consider
these guidelines before you spank your child.
1. Spanking should be used selectively for clear, deliberate misbehavior,
particularly that which arises from a child's persistent defiance of a
parent's instruction. It should be used only when the child receives at
least as much encouragement and praise for good behavior as correction for
problem behavior.
2. Milder forms of discipline, such as verbal correction, time-out and
logical consequences should be used initially, followed by spanking when
noncompliance persists.
3. Only a parent (or in exceptional situations, someone else who has an
intimate relationship of authority with the child) should administer a
spanking.
4. Spanking should not be administered on impulse or when a parent is out of
control. A spanking should always be motivated by love for the purpose of
teaching and correcting, never for revenge.
5. Spanking is inappropriate before 15 months of age and is usually not
necessary until after 18 months. It should be less necessary after 6 years
and rarely, if ever, used after 10 years of age.
6. After 10 months of age, one slap to the hand of a stubborn crawler or
toddler may be necessary to stop serious misbehavior when distraction from
and removal of a forbidden thing have failed. This is particularly the case
when the forbidden object is immovable and dangerous, such as a hot oven
door or an electrical outlet.
7. Spanking should always be a planned action, not a reaction, and should
follow a deliberate procedure.
. The child should be forewarned of the spanking for designated problem
behaviors.
. Spanking should always be administered in private (bedroom or rest room)
to avoid public humiliation.
. One or two spanks should be administered to the buttocks. This is followed
by embracing the child and calmly reviewing the offense and the desired
behavior in an effort to reestablish a warm relationship.
8. Spanking should never cause physical injury.
9. If properly administered spankings are ineffective, other appropriate
disciplinary responses should be tried, or the parent should seek
professional help. Never increase the intensity of spankings.
(These guidelines were developed by Den A. Trumbull, M.D., with input from
psychologists, psychiatrists and pediatricians.)
Appendix 2
Distinguishing Spanking From Abuse
Corporal punishment is defined as bodily punishment of any kind. Since this
definition includes spanking as well as obviously abusive acts such as
kicking, punching, beating, face slapping and even starvation, more specific
definitions must be used to separate appropriate versus inappropriate
corporal punishment.
Child development experts believe spanking should be used mainly as a backup
to primary measures, such as disapproval, redirection, natural and logical
consequences, time-out and restriction of privileges. It is most useful with
toddlers and preschoolers from 18 months to 6 years of age, when reasoning
is less persuasive.
SPANKING PHYSICAL ABUSE
The Act One or two spanks to the buttocks Beating, kicking, punching
The Intent Training: To correct problem behavior Violence: Physical
force intended to injure or abuse
The Attitude Love and concern Anger and malice
The Effects Proper behavior Emotional and physical injury
Also see www.townhall.com/frc/fampol/fp96jpa.html.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Dr. Trumbull is a pediatrician in private practice in Montgomery, Ala. Dr.
Ravenel is a pediatrician in private practice in High Point, N.C., and a
member of Focus on the Family's Physicians Resource Council.
This article appeared in Focus on the Family magazine.
Copyright © 1998 Den A. Trumbull, M.D., and S. DuBose Ravenel, M.D.
All rights reserved.
International copyright secured.
|
