Of children, that is.

This comes up tangentially in various debates, and I figured it might make for interesting conversation.

So - in favor of spanking, opposed as a matter of preference?  Should it be limited/prohibited/required by law, or left to the parents to decide?

Discuss.

If research showed that spanking had positive/negative effects, would you care?

Or are your opinions on the subject not results-oriented, but intent-oriented?

Agreed with all here.

I got spanked a few times when I was a kid, because I screwed up. Its no different than whacking a puppy on the bottom with a rolled up newspaper when he does something stupid.

Children have underdeveloped minds, and often have a problem discerning right from wrong, good from bad. If they don't learn it while their young, they won't ever learn it. What better way to learn the consequences of a severe infraction than getting a few stinging whacks on your bottom?

I'm not saying use it all the time, but there are situations where a good smack on the read end is actually beneficial.

No beatings, and if the spankings don't come to real physical harm, the law should have no say in the matter.

DzXs wrote: im talking about violent and criminal/illegal activity,

Yet criminal activity in this country has steadily been on the decline over the last few decades.  And some of the lowest-crime places in the world are places where spanking is very unusual.  Granted a variety of other factors are likely at play, but your bold claim of increased criminal activity resulting from lack of spanking seems obviously false.

I was raised by parents who spanked, I recall a few but it was the thought of getting spanked that usually was a deterent for me.  I went to school when corporal punishment was allowed, I recieved it a few times as well, I don't believe it was a deterent for me or anyone else at the time.  My son is grown up now, I may have spanked him once, I found that if I explained ahead of time what the punishment would be (grouned or losing whatever privelages), and stuck to it consitantly, he respected it; I think the key is being consistent.

jmac3 wrote: If they can do things at home with little to no punishment then they think it will be fine to do it anywhere.

Does "no spanking" have to mean "no punishment"?  There are plenty of non-spanking disciplinary methods available.  Not spanking does not lead directly to permissive parenting.

Heck, I would hope that spanking is never the ONLY punishment in use.  Any decent parenting strategy must surely be more nuanced than that.

Bunkered wrote: Well it doesn't surprise me that you'd rather have your kid be a sissy.

That's jumping around a bit, don't you think?

I am certainly not raising my kid(s) to be a "sissy".  I encourage and require violent physical activity.  If your goal is to toughen up the kid, I would think a boxing gym would be more appropriate and effective than spanking.

jmac3 wrote: I guess that the key here is to be, quoting someone else in ths thread, "consistent".

That was tallen, I believe, and I agree.

A significant amount of research has been done on punishment in a variety of contexts, including parenting, and among the more consistent conclusions are that consistency/predictability is key to effective punishment.

I am very much of the "tough is good" child-rearing school.  I have been telling my kid to "walk it off" since before he could walk, and one of our earliest games was "crash".

But I don't see spanking as particularly relevant to that.

JohnnyCanuck wrote: I think the key is being consistent.

Bingo.  Follow through with what you say.  My twins aren't even two yet, but they know what they are and are not supposed to do.  Don't stand on the rocking chair.  You get one offense, they you're off it for the rest of the day.  For a period of two weeks I bet I pulled them off that chair 12 times an hour.  It was a painful process, and one that I think many of todays instant gratification parents don't have the discipline for.  But guess what, no one stands on the chair or couch anymore.

Conversley, my neighbor has the 4 year old boy from hell.  We'll be outside talking and the kid will come up to his dad and just crank in the twig and giggleberries.  And dad will say, "if you do that again, we're not going out for ice cream later".  Sure enough, kid does it again. "That's it, no ice cream".  Two hours later I see them pulling back in their driveway licking ice cream cones.  That kid just learned he can get away with anything...

That being said, I have swatted hands a couple of times after repeated warnings not to touch the hot stove top...

TL;DR - I don't think spanking is necessary if you pay attention to your kids in the early years and set thier boundaries - consistently.

Skillet42565 wrote: Benjichang wrote: So? Physical toughness =/= mental toughness. Both are helpful.

And one can lead to the other.

Besides, both lead to respect.  I have little respect for people who cannot distinguish between an injury and an owie.

Rambino wrote: And one can lead to the other. Besides, both lead to respect.  I have little respect for people who cannot distinguish between an injury and an owie.

You find that you and the missus have differing opinions on that? 

FlimFlam wrote: TL;DR - I don't think spanking is necessary if you pay attention to your kids in the early years and set thier boundaries - consistently.

I think this is more or less where I come down.  All too often (certainly not always) I see spanking used as the easy way out.  Other disciplinary methods generally require more time and effort.

Unfortuantely, this means that many bad parents resort to improper spanking, which just makes them worse parents.

FlimFlam wrote: Rambino wrote: And one can lead to the other. Besides, both lead to respect.  I have little respect for people who cannot distinguish between an injury and an owie. You find that you and the missus have differing opinions on that?

:)

There is clearly a gender difference in opinion there, and I will admit that I apply gender-specific standards myself.

That said, the wife does approve in principle of my toughen-him-up plan, although she does think I take it too far on occasion.

Rambino wrote: FlimFlam wrote: Rambino wrote: And one can lead to the other. Besides, both lead to respect.  I have little respect for people who cannot distinguish between an injury and an owie. You find that you and the missus have differing opinions on that?  :) There is clearly a gender difference in opinion there, and I will admit that I apply gender-specific standards myself. That said, the wife does approve in principle of my toughen-him-up plan, although she does think I take it too far on occasion.

Same boat here.  Daddy's girl doesn't cry unless she's hurt.  Mommies girl cries if she fall on her but on the carpet.  Interestingly enough, doesn't act like that when the wife is out

I don't know, I wasn't spanked at all when I was young, but still always kept myself on the straight and narrow.  I am an honor roll student and have a perfectly clean record, school and otherwise.  I'm not a pansy either, granted I'm not the manliest of manly men on this earth, but can take a fair amount of pain and do things which most dads would consider pretty cool - or at least my father thinks so.  Since the beggining, I have played paintball with my dad and rode quads with him, which could be part of it.  I knew that if I didn't do bad or stupid things, I would be able to do these with him.  I laughed when I was first hit with a paintball (which I was 12 and the gun was accidentally shot from about 6 feet away - I laugh remembering this, as my dad was almost shocked that I was just sitting there laughing and not complaining about how he shot me or about how it hurt.  And, it really did, I had a bruise about 5 inches in diameter on my inner thigh the rest of the summer).  I have never thrown a 'tantrum', whenever I had a problem with something, I was able to present it to my parents and find a reasonable alternative or I was convinced their judgement was right.  Because of this, my parents trust me a lot, and I don't do things that I shouldn't because I don't want to break this trust.

I know that my parents never really spoiled me as some of you are explaining.  I think I was completely spoiled, but I knew that when I did recieve things it was under the assumption that I would keep doing well in school and keep myself out of trouble.  I learned the value of things early, as I buy much of my own stuff.  I bought all my paintball guns (first one was around the age of 11 or 12 with my birthday money, and have had 4 since then with other various projects I have been working on) and paid $100 to my dad when he got me a quad, when I was even younger than that.  I learned to respect my parents, my possesions, and other people from the constant insistance of my parents to do things out of generosity and kindness, and also learned early that staying out of trouble allowed me to do things that I liked.

Because of this, I don't know if I could justify spanking my kid.  Granted, if he did something completely unreasonable, spanking while making your purpose perfectly clear to them I think is fine.  Beating, obviously not.  I think if you make your boundries clear and can back it up with something that you stick to, then you shouldn't have a need for spanking.  I know that if my parents took away my paintball gun, quad, computer, or cell phone, it would more than keep me away from doing whatever I did again, but the biggest factor in that is sticking to what you say you're going to do, and not giving in just because your kid is complaining or it makes them happy for you to give it back to them.  If you can make it clear that your word is true and what you said isn't changing, you won't have a situation where spanking is needed.

Man Bites Dog wrote: brihard wrote: Negative reinfoircement most certainly works. I don't think many refute this argument. I think the question is if there are more effective ways, or simply alternate ways equal in effectiveness. I tend to agree with Rambs, that it is effective, but it is the easy way out.

Of equal importance, I would be concerned about unfortunate side effects.  There is an abundance of research showing the effectiveness of punishment as behavior modification, at least in the short term.  There is less useful (IMO) research specifically on spanking (at least that I am familiar with), but there does seem to be some evidence that physical punishment of any kind tends to lead to resentment towards the punisher and fear of the punishment itself, rather than internalization of the underlying rule.

So while spanking can certainly be an effective way to quickly get your kids in line, there may be a risk that you are injuring your personal relationship at the same time.

But mostly, unfortunately, MBD hit it - all too often I see spanking used as the "convenient" punishment, rather than part of an overall good parenting strategy.  And the lure of easy punishment makes it all the more important that we use it with care.

Which leads to my main point/conclusion:  Good parents are good parents, and bad parents are bad parents.  I do not believe that spanking (or not) automatically makes you a good parent or a bad parent, but rather that good parents will take a structured and nuanced approach to parenting, including discipline.  Such a structured and nuanced approach may or may not include spanking, but it will go beyond mere "spare the rod, spoil the child", which is neither structured or nuanced.

I do not/will not spank my children.  My brother, on the other hand, spanks his children, and I while I disagree with that, I do not believe him to be a bad father.  I do, however, believe that he could be an equally good father without spanking.  While I believe that good parents can spank responsibly, I also believe that good parents should not need to resort to spanking, and given the potential side effects I would just as well avoid it.

Bad parents that spank excessively are abhorrent; bad parents that do not discipline at all are useless.  But it is not the spanking or lack thereof that makes them bad parents - that is only the symptom.