Yesterday I was partaking in a debate about spanking/corporal punishment on the parenting site that I frequent. We had a debate on the subject about 3 years ago here at AD, which can be referenced here: To Spank or Not to Spank

It seemed strange to me that on the same day that I was engaged in this spanking debate, there was a short segment about a man who makes paddles for the explicit purpose of spanking and distributes them for free ("buyer" pays only for shipping costs) on my local news station. I was surprised at my local station for calling attention to this man and his "cause", but also frightened that parents might actually take him up on his offer. It made me wonder exactly how prevalent the belief in spanking is today and whether ADers views have changed at all over the past three years.

As a parent and non-spanker, I've always wondered why spanking is still so prevalent today given the potential for escalation into more serious forms of physical punishment/abuse. My degree is in Family Studies and one of the biggest "debate" issues among my classmates was always corporal punishment. I'd hear arguments such as "my parents spanked me and I turned out fine", and the infamous "spare the rod spoil the child" and think how silly that sounded. But it's obviously an issue that many people disagree with me on, considering 90% of American families utilize spanking as a form of discipline.

Before getting into the debate questions at hand, I thought it necessary to offer facts regarding the subject. Keeping in mind that it is nearly impossible to find causality between spanking and compliant or non-compliant behavior (too many variables that cannot be controlled), many past studies have shown a correlation between spanking and negative behaviors (both in childhood and adulthood). Many studies, however, have also shown a correlation between spanking and immediate compliance. This makes it diffcult to say for certain whether or not spanking can be a useful form of discipline.

Many European countries have banned the use of corporal punishment. For the purpose of this debate (and most if not all studies on corporal punishment will use the same or similar definition), corporal punishment can be defined as "the use of physical force with the intention of causing a child to experience pain but not injury for the purposes of correction or control of the child's behavior" (as defined by Dr. Murray A. Strauss). To date, the following countries have banned corporal punishment: Austria, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Latvia, Norway, Romania, Sweden (the first country to do so, in 1979), the Netherlands, and Ukraine.

The American Academy of Pediatrics takes a stand against corporal punishment as well, citing it as ineffective and potentially dangerous.

American Acedemy of Pediatrics' Guidance for Effective Discipline



A massive anaylsis of corporal punishment and its effect on children was undertaken by Elizabeth Thompson Gershoff of Columbia University and published in 2002 in the journal Psychological Bulletin. To date, it is the most comprehensive study of its kind as well as the most generally accepted and respected study. Below are some key points from the 40-page report.

Corporal Punishment by Parents and Associated Child Behavior



The corporal punishment debate is often a polarizing one...those who spank often believe non-spankers are interfering with a parents' right to discipline however they desire, while those who do not spank believe spankers are using ineffective methods of discipline that can be potentially damaging. Many spankers also feel that not spanking is synonymous with a lack of discipline (something many non-spankers will tell you is absolutely untrue). As a non-spanker, I don't feel as if I'm better than spankers because I chose to use a non-physical approach to discipline. I think most parents do what they truly believe is in the best interest of the child, and therein lies the debate.


Questions for debate:

1. Is spanking/corporal punishment a valid form of discipline? Why or why not?

2. Does your own family history (your parents' forms of discipline) play a role in your belief one way or the other?

3. Do you believe that ritualization plays a role in the continued use of spanking in our society (i.e. "My parents did it and I turned out fine")?

4a. If you practice spanking (or plan to if you don't currently have children but will in the future), would you be open to other methods of discipline to completely replace spanking if you believed that they worked? Do you believe that spanking is an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach?

4b. If you are a non-spanker, what forms of discipline do you use and are they effective? Do you believe that spanking is NOT an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach?

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not?

I think it is. While I am not much of a spanker because my children are very well behaved they know I will if it gets to that point. Truth is that I simply remove my children from situations that might lead to the need to spank them. Going nuts in a store or grandmas for instance. Spanking in my house is used to stop dangerous behavior. If you're in the under 4'6" set in my house and you're about to poke your sleeping brother's eye out with a pencil you're going to get spanked. Seriously thinking about dropping a vase down the stairwell? *THWACK!* Generally though, it doesn't come up.
Yes. I never for a second doubted my parents would be the daylights out of me. They never did, but then I never really gave them cause.
No not ritualization but instead the fact that it "works." I am not sold it works as applied by some of the lunatics I've seen in Target but in limited, sane doses it does what it's advertised to do. As such people use it as a tool in their arsenal.
Your children should be aware that it's on the table. Even if you never actually use it.
Well as a confessed spanker (oh man, thats gonna haunt me in Google someday) I still use lots of other forms of discipline. Everything from taking things away to corner sitting. However a much better thing is to focus on the positives your kids are doing so that they actually try NOT to do the wrong things.
No. Absolutely no. No. The US Government shouldn't be doing any such thing. The last thing responsible parents who are doing their best to make their children be respectful, productive members of society needs is a group of people who gave us the US Education System telling them how to be parents. It's none of the Government's business. In the case of ACTUAL abuse - that's a different story. Don't tell me how to raise my kid.

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not?

I don’t have any kids. Like Victoria, I never wanted any. Teaching kids all day was plenty, without coming home to them.

If you will indulge me a bit, I would like to address this thread from a former public school teacher’s perspective.

Corporal punishment is still practiced in some Texas school districts. Fort Worth outlawed it some years ago.

My personal thinking about using it in schools is it doesn’t work. I spent my first three years teaching social studies in Cleburne, Texas - a seen better days railroad town. Instead of homerooms, Cleburne divided its 1200 students into six houses of approximately 200 students each. As a new teacher, I had some problems maintaining classroom disciplining. One of the house masters, a former Air Force Colonel, told me I needed to “bust” them.

The problem with that, was that he was busting the same kids nearly every day. With a few exceptions, I resisted his advice. If it worked, why did the same kids get popped nearly every day?

I think corporal punishment should be discontinued in every public school in the country.

BTW: I’ll let the parents work out the use of corporal punishment at home.

1. Is spanking/corporal punishment a valid form of discipline? Why or why not?

Yes, I believe it's a valid form of discipline. As a grandmother now, I no longer see the value, and I have done "it" both ways. I've cared for my grandchildren many times over the past 11 years, and have never had to spank. Just a look or tone of voice usually does it! I think that a parent spanking in anger sends a negative message that I no longer agree with. Giving a quick swat to a toddler who is about to accomplish a catastrophe sometimes is needed I have to say.
I've had 72 shelter home children and, believe it or not, I never had to spank any of them. As I mentioned above, just a tone or a look was all that was needed.I've always had the feeling that spanking a child was really more for the parent in their fit of anger, than any discipline for the child.

2. Does your own family history (your parents' forms of discipline) play a role in your belief one way or the other?
No, family history does not play a role for me. I received the old-fashioned "whipping", but I have to say that I deserved it each time! It never kept me from repeating the bad behavior though. I wish my parents had been more into communication than they were.

3. Do you believe that ritualization plays a role in the continued use of spanking in our society (i.e. "My parents did it and I turned out fine")?
Perhaps for others, but not for me personally.

4a. If you practice spanking (or plan to if you don't currently have children but will in the future), would you be open to other methods of discipline to completely replace spanking if you believed that they worked? Do you believe that spanking is an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach?
As I said above, I am not much for spanking. Almost any other method practiced in a consistent way with follow-through will work in my opinion.

4b. If you are a non-spanker, what forms of discipline do you use and are they effective? Do you believe that spanking is NOT an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach? For me as a child, spanking did not work; I always felt that it was more of a "release" for my mom and dad, than keeping me from repeating bad acts. I did spank my own kids occasionally, but with my youngest son, spanking was a total failure, so I never even swatted him after the age of three. After seeing both sides now it is my feeling that spanking should NOT be included in discipline.

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not?

DEFINITELY NOT! I shudder to even imagine it!

1. Is spanking/corporal punishment a valid form of discipline? Why or why not?

Parents who use very mild physical discipline on their children are not monsters, and I would not wish to give the impression that I think they are bad parents. However, the initial post gives us plenty of evidence that physical discipline is not necessary, in that it offers no advantage over other methods. There is also evidence that it may have negative effects. Therefore, it's hard to see why one would choose such a method. I have to make allowances for a loss of patience on the part of an exasperated parent, who may lose her temper and swat her child out of sheer frustration with the extraordinarily difficult task of taking care of a youngster. I would forgive her the action; that does not mean that I would approve of it. I might say the same about yelling at a child, or cursing at it, and insulting it. I can fully understand why a busy parent might become angry with a child. This does not mean that I would approve of these actions.

2. Does your own family history (your parents' forms of discipline) play a role in your belief one way or the other?

I was raised by good people, and on very rare occasions I was subjected to physical punishment. I was also, on very rare occasions, subjected to shouts and derision. Such things happen. It would be better if they had not happened. The fact that I can remember them as unpleasant experiences may be evidence of that.

As to whether this experience influences my opinion, I will allow you to judge that.

3. Do you believe that ritualization plays a role in the continued use of spanking in our society (i.e. "My parents did it and I turned out fine")?

Ritualization -- or, to put it more simply, "what everybody does" -- is, I believe, the single most important factor in human behavior. I have observed this phenomenon countless times. People vote for So-and-So because she is popular. People shop at Sprawl*Mart and drink their coffee at Buckstar's because "everybody else does." It is only natural, therefore, to expect that people will use physical discipline because "that is what parents do."

The way to deal with such things, I think, is to work to make subtle changes in the culture so that it is no longer true that "everybody" does it. This has worked well with things like smoking. Years of strong messages about the serious disadvantages of smoking have transformed the American culture. If you watch old American movies, for example, you can't help but notice the truly astonishing amount of smoking which goes on in that black-and-white universe. The famous cigarette-sharing scene between Bette Davis and Paul Henreid in Now, Voyager no longer seems romantic, but disgusting. In a somewhat similar way, if we could promote the message (backed up by the evidence provided in the first post) that physical discipline is not needed, and potentially harmful, it would no longer be true that "everybody" spanks their children, and the incidence of it would drop dramatically.

(Question 4 not applicable.)

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not?

First of all, there should certainly be strict legal penalties for actual abuse and neglect of dependent children. The point at which physical discipline changes from a forgivable mistake into an inexcusable crime is the critical question to ask. New Zealand has recently enacted a new law dealing with this.

Link



The New Zealand law would seem to be a decent model to follow, with very minor incidents being ignored by the authorities.

1. Is spanking/corporal punishment a valid form of discipline? Why or why not?

It is not valid. There is a common thread between non-spanking and spanking parents who have well-behaved children, a common theme to their parenting that I have observed over and over again. That common theme is consistency. Indeed, it seems to me that parents who spank, but do so in a consistent way, usually don't realize that it is the consistency which is the real reason, not the spanking. I have never spanked my children, and they are well behaved, because our methods of discipline are consistent and never based on emotion - especially anger.

I won't cushion my thoughts in niceties. Spanking is either a crutch used by parents who are lazy and narrow-minded, or it is a holdover tool for parents who can't be bothered to grasp the fact that the study of child psychology has made some advancements since their own parents' day.

2. Does your own family history (your parents' forms of discipline) play a role in your belief one way or the other?

Perhaps. My parents spanked me a few times, but not much. Both my sister and myself were well behaved, and I do attribute that in part to the fact that my parents were open-minded enough to realize there were better ways to raise well-disciplined children than spanking them.

3. Do you believe that ritualization plays a role in the continued use of spanking in our society (i.e. "My parents did it and I turned out fine")?

Oh, absolutely. That's probably the single biggest factor. Instead of truly examining the nuances and meanings of discipline and child-rearing, people just do what their parents did. No one stops to think - or wants to think - that even though they "turned out fine," they might have actually turned out better if they had been raised differently.

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not?

Yes. I'm not saying there should be a law about it. But the government's stance should definitely reflect the current understanding of succesful child rearing. Anything the government sponsors related to parenthood should attempt to instill in parents or parents-to-be successful parenting methods that don't include the often detrimental "tool" of spanking.

Here's an example I've seen over and over:

A mother tells her kid to do something. The kid ignores her. She says it again. The kids ignores her. She says it again - she's getting mad now. The kid ignores her. She threatens to spank the kid. The kid behaves. For a few minutes. The process starts all over again. The kid has learned that they can ignore anything but the threat of spanking, and that they can continue to do this over and over. See, what gets a kid to behave is a consistent punishment, applied uniformly - not threatened or alluded to. Defy me once, get a warning. Defy me again and you get a punishment. Period. My kids' allowance is tied to their chores. And I've found the way to get them to do the chores consistently is, I don't nag them, I don't remind them. I check at the end of the day if the chore is done. If it is, they get a checkmark. If not, they don't. Each checkmark is worth a portion of their allowance, and at the end of the week they get whatever portion of their allowance remains. And by the way, they still have to do the chore the next day, but they don't get the checkmark for it - unless there is an extenuating circumstance (out of town or sick).

My conclusion with this topic is a common one I come to with many topics. In this context: spanking can possibly have negative consequences for your children. It is easily possible to raise your children well without spanking. Therefore, why would we need to spank??? I choose the logical answer, not the one based on "tradition."

Questions for debate:

1. Is spanking/corporal punishment a valid form of discipline? Why or why not?
Yes, it is a valid form of discipline. It is because a} it works and b} it impresses upon the child that some behaviors can have physically painful consequences.

2. Does your own family history (your parents' forms of discipline) play a role in your belief one way or the other?
Objectively, I cannot answer that, but I would intuit and say "yes."

3. Do you believe that ritualization plays a role in the continued use of spanking in our society (i.e. "My parents did it and I turned out fine")?
I'm sure it plays a role for some people, just as for some people rebelling for the sake of rebellion against what their parents did is a major factor.

4a. If you practice spanking (or plan to if you don't currently have children but will in the future), would you be open to other methods of discipline to completely replace spanking if you believed that they worked? If I believed that spanking could be completely replaced by alternatives that were more effective, then I would advocate the replacement.

Do you believe that spanking is an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach?
On the societal level, yes. For any specific adult-child dyad, maybe. The variations among both children and adults mean that in some cases spanking won't work, in others its absolutely necessary. I won't venture to foist my uninformed opinions into any particular situations, and reject the notion that others should do so as well.

4b. If you are a non-spanker, what forms of discipline do you use and are they effective? Do you believe that spanking is NOT an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach? n/a

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not? The US and individual states have already taken a stance on corporal punishment, it is allowed. It is allowed because the parents have the responsibility to raise their children, and doing so requires that they also have the authority. New Zealand is comfortable (for now) with further limiting parental authority.

1. Is spanking/corporal punishment a valid form of discipline? Why or why not?
It is a valid form of discipline in one case only - parents who practice corporal punishment should be beaten with nail studded paddles. Other than that, no, it is not valid. A parent who willingly infilct physical paint on a child as punishment is a child abuser. PERIOD. Not only that, but the only effect it has on a child is to teach him how to be a better liar.

2. Does your own family history (your parents' forms of discipline) play a role in your belief one way or the other?
I was never spanked, and was brought up to believe it is wrong, dehumanizing, and lazy parenting.

3. Do you believe that ritualization plays a role in the continued use of spanking in our society (i.e. "My parents did it and I turned out fine")?
Certainly. Appeal to tradition does seem to be everyone's favorite logical falacy. Especially for the segment of our society that is unfamiliar with the experience of living in a house without wheels.

4b. If you are a non-spanker, what forms of discipline do you use and are they effective? Do you believe that spanking is NOT an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach?
Time outs seem to work very well with my son. But only with me, and it is exactly for the reason that Quark brought up. I warn him once, there is no second warning. Doesn't work too well for my wife, as she will warn him about half a billion times before doing something about it. BTW, in my house, "time out" doesn't mean you go to your room that is full of toys, it means you go to my room, which has nothing of interest to a 3 year old.

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not? It should be highly illegal, and punished severely. But, being that we live in a redneck country, that will never happen. Hell, they are still bitter about not being able to wife-beat anymore.

Saying "it works" is pretty vague. I refer you to the studies kmsouthern included in her opening post. And "b" is frankly a bizarre rationale. Touching a stove has painful consequences. Spanking impresses upon the child only that some behaviors will cause their much larger parent to become violent. If our ultimate hold over our children is the threat of violence then we have failed as effective parents; I'm with Looms here.



It can. The evidence is clear. So why aren't you advocating them? If you believe that spanking is effective, why would an alternative have to be more effective for you to embrace it? What if it were just as effective? I'm truly baffled that any parent wouldn't jump at the chance to attempt a nonviolent way to interact with their children.



So it's all relative, eh? Depends on the kid? Doesn't that sound dangerously like the liberal relativity and sensitivity you often rail against here? There are certainly places where sensitivity should be employed; there are issues where relativity ought to be applied. I'm sorry, however, I don't share your view that raising a hand (or a paddle) in violence against children is one of these. It's simply always wrong.

1. Is spanking/corporal punishment a valid form of discipline? Why or why not?

Absolutely valid form of discpline. Discipline, IIRC, literally means "to teach"- and in order to teach, sometimes you have to get thier attention- and, in occasional, moderate amounts, ESPECIALLY regarding safety issues (don't run in the streets) this is perhaps the ONLY way to really get thier attention long enough to teach. I have had to spank my daughter maybe 3 times, perhaps 4? She is six now- and my son, about the same, at the same ages- all of them were for dangerous behaviors, such as running out the front door and into the street etc- or for the boy, immitating another child's behavior of fit throwing. One spanking never did it again.

2. Does your own family history (your parents' forms of discipline) play a role in your belief one way or the other?

Not really- I do know that nearly every spanking I recieved from my bio father and mother prior to 7 I certainly earned, and was needed. Heck, I knew it even then, I was just mad usually because I didn't get away with it.

3. Do you believe that ritualization plays a role in the continued use of spanking in our society (i.e. "My parents did it and I turned out fine")?

Perhaps for some, I have no idea beyond my parents roll prior to thier divorce- after the divorce, I did withstand some pretty horrific abuse, and I understood the difference even then. But I don't really practice it myself accept for very, very unacceptable behavior.

4a. If you practice spanking (or plan to if you don't currently have children but will in the future), would you be open to other methods of discipline to completely replace spanking if you believed that they worked? Do you believe that spanking is an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach?

I don't believe spanking is essential- just another tool in the box.

4b. If you are a non-spanker, what forms of discipline do you use and are they effective? Do you believe that spanking is NOT an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach?

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not?

Absolutely not. One of the most manipulated and often wrong fields in history, and a LONG way from exact, empirical science is psych, and even more fad-ish is child psychology. I have worked in this field for 20 years, and we find out often that this study or that study touted in one instance later comes back to bite us in the butt.

I mean- we horribly over-medicate our children, perhaps this is the REAL alternative to spanking that is being used? I would prefer my child to have a tap on the butt rather than medication to control behavior.

I believe there is some middle ground on this issue, and as usual, the hyperbole from both sides muddies the issue.

There are SO many factors that can contribute to one behavior or another in a developing child, that taking away the "tool" of discipline is simply stupid.

Right now, there is very little consequences for behavior that parents are allowed to "use" in their "toolbox" - that restricting anything other than ACTUAL abuse is asking for trouble.

I have to say, my personal observation is that those that spank too much- thier children have issues normally, and those that bark the loudest against it raise some pretty awful kids themselves- the extremes seem to do the most harm- or, as we say "All the kids admitted here were either spanked too much (abused) or not enough (too permisive).

I have yet to find a single hard core advocate, those that favor making it illegal- that has a child that doesn't NEED to be backhanded, along with the parents.

And we all know about those parents that use it too much- not talking abuse here- just parents that are too willing to start spankin' at the drop of a hat.

To be honest Quark- the ONE field of science were I am IMMEDIATELY skeptical of ANYTHING published in a journal is in psych. Just too easy to manipulate the data or methodology to suit your pre-concieved bias.

I believe that one advantage Europe has over the US is the free time they have for raising children- the more time you spend with your kids, the more likely you are to have a well behaved child. Most behaviors are attention seeking behaviors, and they will seek to get that attention, positive or negative, no matter what.

And the ability to be able to give that attention to your child is pretty lacking in the US.

Let's move away from the "PC" words - I know people don't want to be too PC!

"Spanking" is a way to say "hitting." "Tool," "Discipline," let's call them all what they really are, let's not couch them in rhetorical niceties. Do you think it is OK to hit your children? Oh, it's only OK to hit them on the butt, but not in the stomach, on the back of the hand, but not on the face, on the face, but not on the back of the head...

Sorry, but hitting children is not a "tool" for good parents. It is a tool for those who are unwilling or unable to take the effort to learn how to discipline their children without violence.



Sometimes. There is some truth in what you say. But you're deflecting. It is possible to raise well adjusted, disciplined children without hitting them. End. Of. Point. So why, again, would someone choose to still employ violence against their children? If you are going to call into question these studies then shouldn't you also call into question the "conventional wisdom" of spanking as a "valid" tool for discipline? Look, you and I both face a raging river. I find a way across by throwing a rope to the other side and making a bridge with it. You find a way across by poking someone in the face with a stick until they let you use their boat. We both get to the other side, but is that all that counts? Don't our methods make the real difference between us? And faced with the river again, and with me saying "hey, CR, do it my way, no one gets hurt," would you still go poke the guy in the face again?

Throughout your post you make the common mistake of the spanking advocate. You associate non-spanking with "permissive." You more than once imply that the opposite of a spanking parent is one who lets their kids do whatever they want. That's simply untrue. The spanking parent and the overly permissive parent are both on the wrong side of stern, consistent discipline.

1. Is spanking/corporal punishment a valid form of discipline? Why or why not?

Yes it's a valid parenting technique. Why? Bikerdad already said why, because it works. Corporal punishment can work swimmingly to get compliance when it is used properly. Many critics of corp. punishment like to point to improper usage to discredit the proper usage.

Quarkhead, I read kmsouthern's post and there's absolutely nothing in what she posted that challenges the notion that corporal punishment works. Sure the American Academy of Pediatrics suggests that it is of limited effectiveness, but everything is of limited effectiveness so that statement means nothing. It's not like anybody is going around saying that corporal punishment has unlimited effectiveness.

2. Does your own family history (your parents' forms of discipline) play a role in your belief one way or the other?

Of course it does. I can point to specific instances of my life where a good whooping was both appropriate and effective for correcting my (mis)behavior. It certainly got my attention- probably more than any other punishment they could've done- long enough for my moral and ethical internalization for proper behavior to take place. It wasn't the only tool they had at their disposal, but it was my personal kryptonite. I wasn't a time out kind of kid.

If not for that personal experience, I would not know that it can work so well.

3. Do you believe that ritualization plays a role in the continued use of spanking in our society (i.e. "My parents did it and I turned out fine")?

Sure, that's where most of our behavioral norms come from.

4a. If you practice spanking (or plan to if you don't currently have children but will in the future), would you be open to other methods of discipline to completely replace spanking if you believed that they worked? Do you believe that spanking is an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach?

Sure I would. I'm open to any effective, appropriate parenting technique. Who likes to spank? However, I should add that that is a big "if". There are some circumstances where a good spanking is the probably the best course of action.

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not?

H-E-double hockey sticks no!!. Until they can prove that spanking=abuse they don't have the right to dictate how I raise my kids. It's a crazy notion if you ask me, and I have to say that I am surprised to see Germany on that list of countries banning corporal punishment, especially since they allow abortion. Where's the consistency, you can abort a kid but you just can't spank him? (kidding)

Seriously though, I fee very similarly to cruisingram's comments about psychology. It isn't exactly quantum physics. There aren't any "Laws of Psychology" that I know. It seems to me to be a bit too transient and too subjective to be basing intrusive parenting policy off of it. It just isn't scientific enough.

According to the study that kmsouthern linked to 21% of every 13 kids=2.73 kids out of a thousand that have been physically abused. If something like 90% of kids are spanked, then that says that of those 1000 kids, 900 were spanked and only 2.73 of them were physically abused. That doesn't sound like a serious problem with spanking escalating to abuse to me.

1. Is spanking/corporal punishment a valid form of discipline? Why or why not?

Yes, because it has been proven over time to be effective.

2. Does your own family history (your parents' forms of discipline) play a role in your belief one way or the other?

I'm not sure. My parents spanked, although not that much. One reason for that is that we tended to not repeat the things we were spanked for, thus demonstrating its effectiveness

3. Do you believe that ritualization plays a role in the continued use of spanking in our society (i.e. "My parents did it and I turned out fine")?

Yes, probably to some degree. I don't think it is the sole reason, however.

4a. If you practice spanking (or plan to if you don't currently have children but will in the future), would you be open to other methods of discipline to completely replace spanking if you believed that they worked? Do you believe that spanking is an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach?

I seldom spank my child..it's been almost a couple of years now, and the last two times I've done it only required one swat. The purpose of spanking is not to inflict pain, it is to reinforce and drive home a necessary point. Both of those times I did it it was highly effective, with behaviour modification that lasted for months. Now, would I be open to other methods? Absolutely. But it would be have to be shown to be as effective. Also, in both of these instances multiple other methods had been tried, and had no effect. Is spanking an 'essential' part of a complete disciplinary approach? No, I don't think so. If you can achieve the desired effects without it, then it is unnecessary. But what if you can't? In the previous example, I used the example of a child running across the street. You need to make sure there is an immediate change in behaviour, with strong disincentive to repeat the activity. Most of the alternative methods I have heard discussed aren't going to be as immediate as a spanking. Might such a child stray across the street again, and be hit by a car? If so, was that parent not neglecting their duty by not using the method most likely to affect an immediate change? Perhaps even being criminally negligent, and potentially leading to the death of the child? Lots of 'mights' and 'ifs' there, I know...but that doesn't detract from the point, I think. Spanking has been used as long as it has for one reason..it is effective.

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not?
[/quote] I felt before, and still feel now, that this is a dangerous slippery slope to go down. As I said above, spanking need not be strong or painful to be effective. A little slap on the rear to drive home a point. You might strike your child harder in play, and have him/her laugh about it when it happened. That is the danger I see...how can someone else observing an act judge what is 'excessive'? Further, what would prevent a child from crying wolf, holding his/her parent hostage over the threat of having them reported? Why is there a default assumption that spanking is more damaging to the child than other non-corporal acts, such as telling your child (perhaps repeatedly) you don't love them, for example? I would contend that that would be FAR more damaging than any slap on the rear, yet we don't seem to be outlawing that, do we? Wouldn't that be a lot worse than giving your child a gentle loving tap, misconstrued by a stranger as something it wasn't?

Questions for debate:

1. Is spanking/corporal punishment a valid form of discipline? Why or why not?
No. I do not believe violence is the way to teach anyone anything. I do not believe hitting is a proper way to deal with problems. If a parent is consistent in their discipline, it will be effective. There are other ways to establish boundaries, and I think violating a child's boundary is unnecessary and, in my opinion, unacceptable.

2. Does your own family history (your parents' forms of discipline) play a role in your belief one way or the other?
I was never hit, so possibly. I do find it barbaric and out of synch with what we now know. We know that children learn from a parent's actions. There is evidence that spanking causes shame in children, and I don't think that is what a parent wants to instill in a child.

3. Do you believe that ritualization plays a role in the continued use of spanking in our society (i.e. "My parents did it and I turned out fine")?
Yes. Socialization plays a huge role. If a person finds it acceptable because it was done to them, then they will have a different view as someone that was not hit. I cringe when I see a parent spanking a kid in the grocery store, and I am sure that is due to my experience growing up.

4a. If you practice spanking (or plan to if you don't currently have children but will in the future), would you be open to other methods of discipline to completely replace spanking if you believed that they worked? Do you believe that spanking is an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach?
I will not spank and do not spank my neice or nephew.

4b. If you are a non-spanker, what forms of discipline do you use and are they effective? Do you believe that spanking is NOT an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach?
Time outs have been extremely effective for my niece and nephew. The key is to discipline EVERY TIME, no exceptions. They get ONE warning, then if they do it again- time out. They have a time out mat/ chair in the corner of the den with absolutely no toys etc. I have seen my sis in law leave the house late due to stopping and giving a time out. Both kids are great kids.

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not?
I think hitting anyone should be illegal. We do not allow an adult to hit another adult, why would we allow an adult to hit a much smaller child?

We don't allow adults to restrain other adults either. What do you do if that child just won't sit for his timeout?

We don't allow adults to take things from other adults either. That would be called stealing. What if the child throws his toy at another? Can we take that away?

We don't permit adults to lead other adults (against their will I should add, it might wash in New Orleans during Mardi Gras...) around in crowds with leashes. Can a parent lead a toddler around this way, or is that abusive? Is it better to strap the kid into a stroller while they are kicking and screaming to get out? Or is that abuse too? I mean, no one would strap an adult into a moving chair against his/her will. Should the parent go out only if the child wants to go? What if the four year old doesn't want to, but the two adn a half year old does and the infant needs milk at the store? Should the parent take a vote?

Should carseats be against the law because children often hate them? Anyone who hasn't had to restrain his/her child while buckling the carseat is lucky. It's definitely against the law for an adult to restrain another adult that way.

Is spanking/corporal punishment a valid form of discipline? Why or why not?

It can be, yes. It isn't preferable but there is no cookie cutter answer to child-rearing. It's on an individual case by case basis for what works for each child. Many respond well to other disciplinary measures, which would be preferable.

Rough example: I remember, before I had children, I thought that those leashes that parents led their children around with were a form of child abuse. Since then I have seen many young children who run through crowds away from their parents. It's extremely dangerous, and they also refuse to sit in a stroller and scream whenever they are strapped down that way. When they are forced to hold the parent's hand, they throw themselves on the ground and the parent has to drag them. The parent is left with the choice of either never leaving his/her home (impossible), or employing the leash. It's the best of a bad situation because usually reasoning with a toddler is like reasoning with a drunk. I no longer scoff at leash users as I once did (though I never used them myself). In fact, I think it's a pretty good invention because it allows more freedom of movement for the child than a stroller would (and exercise, too).

Does your own family history (your parents' forms of discipline) play a role in your belief one way or the other?

I doubt it. I was a really good child and was never spanked. I was smacked across the face and thrown into a wall or two. I was held down and had perfume sprayed in my eyes when I was a toddler (still remember that). None of those incidences were related to my behavior in any way. Spanking (within reason) as a disciplinary measure isn't on par with those things.

Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not?

Definitely not. Step in for truly abusive situations only. Disciplinary spankings do not necessarily qualify. It is individual to the situation, just as verbally disciplining your child can qualify as (verbal) abuse under certain situations and not others. Ever scold your child for any reason? Should the authorities step in? For certain, the things a parent might say to his/her child can have vastly more adversely an impact on them than any swat on the bottom.

A friend of mine (from France) got a visit from social workers (in the US) because she told her son's preschool teacher that, when he throws himself on the ground and starts screaming and hits things, she puts him in the garage for a few minutes to calm down. She never spanks, but found that the garage calms him in a couple of minutes. It works, he used to hurt himself and slam his head into walls until she tried this.

.

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not?

No. Absolutely not. It should be allowed on a school-to-school basis, if and only if the parents of that school voice approval.

However, the US should absolutely take measures to set what 'excessive' corporal punishment would mean, and additionally, to assure that any parents who don't want to send their children to a 'spanking' school have access to an alternative.

Personally, I wouldn't put corporal punishment in my retinue of parental management controls, but, hey, I understand. What works for betty don't work for sue.

Let's make this law enforcement analogy a bit more complete. Law enforcement (correctional facility officers, police, etc) is allowed to hit adults; it's called "use of force". The International Association of Chiefs of Police define use of force as "The amount of effort required by police to compel compliance by an unwilling subject." They can use it to "compel compliance", which allows much more latitude than just in life threatening circumstances as you mentioned.

Is it not reasonable to expect that parents have at least as much control over their children as our law enforcement have over adults? I find it troubling that folks consider limiting parental rights while at the same time we have these policy trends toward holding parents criminally liable for the misdeeds of their children.

You will have to highlight for me where it states that hitting an adult is acceptable. I see the use of "force," but that does not mean "hit." The definition also goes on to say that it MUST be necessary. Even between adults and police officers, there was less than 1% of people that were either threatened with force or force was used:


A police officer can't simply hit a suspect because they want a person to do something. There has to be a pressing need, and no other options available.

Mrs P- I am so glad you beat me to the "oh yeah, what if the non-spanking technique DOESN'T work for this PARTICULAR AND INDIVIDUAL child?"- the answer is uusally in all these "spanking is bad" country or here- medication. Give the kid a pill so he will be compliant.

I prefer the tap on the rear of my child to pharmacology, thanks

My boy needed a couple more swats in his 4 years than my daughter did- a couple times for not obeying time out- most were for dangerous behavior- i.-e. running out the front door. He did that once and only once- because the first time he got a spanking. He also has commited a couple variations on that theme- but he never ran out the front door or into the street without permission again.

No way a time out would have been that effective- it just wasn't severe enough to make HIM understand the severity of what he was doing. Until he can really think that going out front door= DANGEROUS, he recognizes going out front door=corporal punishment!

It is a perfectly acceptable form of child behavior mod, if used correctly.

Unless your kid is kinda docile, there is just no negative sanction that has the finality or impact of a swat on the rump for THE CHILD'S extreme behavior.

1. Is spanking/corporal punishment a valid form of discipline? Why or why not?
I personally don't believe it is a valid form of discipline. I believe that it is used because people think it works and because they don't believe other forms of discipline work (often because they equate non-spanking with a complete lack of discipline). I thik the majority of spankers are doing what they think is best for their children, I just happen to think that spanking is not what's best and I think it is unnecessary. For children who are hitting, biting, or hurting themselves or others, there are other ways to use physical restraint that will stop the negative behavior. What is it about a spanking that "teaches" anything. It's much like the Pavlov's dog scenario - sure the child may learn to avoid a certain behavior due to conditioning, but are they learning WHY they should avoid the behavior? The spanking itself does not "teach" any sort of lesson. When parents spank, many times they explain to the child why they are getting a spanking. So how can anyone come to the conclusion "spanking works" when spanking is almost never done without a verbal explanation/lesson attached to it? Maybe it's the verbal explanation/lesson that works and the spanking is just what gets their attention. Because it's impossible to really know one way or the other, I think it just makes sense to NOT spank since there IS proof that spanking CAN and HAS caused harm in some cases.

2. Does your own family history (your parents' forms of discipline) play a role in your belief one way or the other?
In some ways, yes. I was spanked twice - I was a good kid and never disobeyed my mother because I wanted to be a good kid. I wasn't respectful because I was afraid of a spanking or any other form of punishment/discipline. I was a good kid who never got in trouble because my mother taught me from an early age what was expected of me and I understood what it meant to be a good person. My sister was raised exactly the same way (she was spanked I think four times...once was for stealing a pack of collector's cards from a grocery store when she was six) and she and I were always the kids that other parents would compliment when we were out in public..."wow, your children are so well-behaved and have such wonderful manners", etc. It certainly wasn't due to the couple of spankings we got - when I was spanked, I resented my mother for doing so afterward because I did not understand why she would hit me to teach me a lesson. Whenever my sister was spanked (she's four years younger) I would try to intervene and tell my mom that she didn't need a spanking. I knew that I believed spanking was not the answer from the time I was old enough to GET a spanking. I knew that I always understood my mother's rules/expectations when she sat down and explained things, so I felt that spanking was an unfair punishment.

3. Do you believe that ritualization plays a role in the continued use of spanking in our society (i.e. "My parents did it and I turned out fine")?

Definitely. As with any other thing that we eventually realize is "outdated" or "wrong", I think people sontinue to spank because it's what they know. Almost everyone I know what spanked and almost everyone I know continues to spank. Almost every time, the reason these parents give is "my parents spanked me and I turned out fine" - as if that automatically makes it right or okay. I try not to judge others, but I really do feel that spanking is not the right way to discipline. There are MANY other ways to teach children how to behave that do not involve physical punishment. Yes, sometimes it's difficult and sometimes you have to try fifty ways before you find the one that works for you and your child...but there ARE other ways and they DO work. Consistency in whatever you choose is the key. Some kids (like my step-brother) are physically violent (he was abused by his biological mother as an infant/toddler and acted out as a result) and need to be restrained sometimes to keep from harming themselves or others...spanking these kids is usually the WORST thing you can do because it just leads to MORE violence from them (this is the standard belief among the "experts" in the field, as is my own personal belief based on my experience). Some kids are naturally more "easy" to parent due to their temperament - I consider myself lucky in that department because my daughter is one of those "easy" kids. It is still my job to teach her what is expected of her. She's a very well-behaved, loving, respectful kid and I always get compliments on her behavior. No offense, Cruising Ram but I am one of "those that bark the loudest against it" and you couldn't find a person on earth who would say that my daughter is "awful". That's because I am not "permissive" - I do not use physical punishment but my daughter certainly will have a time-out or have privileges taken away if she does not follow directions. She's going in to first grade this year and last year in the second week at her new school, she came home in tears because she lost 5 minutes of recess (14 of the 24 kids in her class had lost recess for not paying attention to the teacher...the one thing my dd has to work on is her focus, which she gets from her mother AND her father ). She was devastated because she was "in trouble". Her teacher never said anything about the loss of recess because she didn't think it was important (dd is after all, five)...Kaia told me when I asked her how her day was. She was horrified that she'd disapponted me (something she absolutely hates...she definitely gets that from me) and we decided that the appropriate punishment was to write (by herself) a letter to her teacher saying that she was sorry and that she would pay attention from now on. She spent about 30 minutes on the letter and never again gotten "in trouble" at school. She understands that there are consequences to her behavior...just not physical ones.

4b. If you are a non-spanker, what forms of discipline do you use and are they effective? Do you believe that spanking is NOT an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach? Time-outs, positive reinforcement, and removing privileges are what we use. If Kaia does something that warrants a time-out (disobeying direct "orders" after two reminders) she will either sit in time-out in a chair or will be sent to her room. Positive reinforcement is a daily occurence and she responds very well to that - I think a big part of discipline is figuring out ways to avoid issues before the arise. Privileges are removed as deemed necessary. We also spend a LOT of time talking to dd and teaching her what we expect of her and what we believe is "good" behavior. All of the above work just fine if they are done with consistency.

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not?

Yes, but I'm not sure about getting involved with legalities. I think some sort of "surgeon general's" type of warning against spanking citing studies/expert opinions would be sufficient at this time.

I'll point this out again - you're setting up a false dichotomy. You've chosen an alternative, and then presented an either-or. Are children over medicated in this country? To be sure, and I'd gladly join you in a rant against it, in another thread. But for you to present medication as the alternative to spanking is disingenious. In your posts here you have basically iterated several extremely generalized options as being the final word. Spank - or be permissive. Spank - or medicate. I'm sorry, but there are more choices out there.

Even a toddler isn't stupid, just naive. A two year old who responds to "nothing but a spanking" as a means of control probably does need medication or some kind of help.

Why anyone would still choose to hit their children, when there are other ways just as good - or better - to raise children, is beyond me. And let's be honest. How many of the "spanking" parents out there have actually tried another approach. And I mean really tried. Hardly any. Most of them just dismiss the idea out of hand. They won't bother with studies because "psychology is so bogus" - which, incidentally, it isn't really.

I'll start it out with perhaps the single most important parenting tip. Never make empty threats - always do what you say you're going to do.

In the very next sentence to the one I quoted it states, "The IACP also identified five components of force: physical, chemical, electronic, impact, and firearm." So you're right, in that particular link they don't explicitly use the word "hit" but I think it's safe to assume that "hitting" would be included under either the "impact" or "physical" force components that they did explicitly state. In any case, they certainly don't say that police officers cannot hit.

I think you're confusing hitting with the use of deadly force. They shouldn't use deadly force without the threat of death, but they can certainly beat/hit/strike you before that point. It all fits into what they call the use of force continuum. Here's an example one from the wikipedia article:

* Verbal command
* Handcuff suspect
* Search suspect
* Use wrist/arm lock
* Use takedown
* Block/punch/kick
* Strike suspect
* Wrestle suspect
* Pepper spray
* Use baton
* Use firearm

I'm not saying that police frequently hit adults. I'm saying that they are allowed to hit adults under a less stringent criteria than the threat of death.


There's a bit more to it than that, but yeah they basically can, ask Rodney King.

********

Now, to tie this back into the topic... the reason that police hitting is relevant is because I think that it is reasonable for parents to have at least the same degree of authority and control over their children as the police do, especially since parents are increasingly becoming criminally liable for their child's misdeeds.

To completely outlaw parents' use of corporal punishment has quite a burden of proof that I'm not seeing anyone satisfy. Simply saying that there are better tools to use in parenting doesn't count. When you factor in that you don't know the parent, child, how the parent spanks the child, and under what circumstances the parent spanks the child, saying that there are better tools counts even less.


The studies you linked to in the beginning do not show a causal link between spanking and harm to the child. They point to "associations with constructs" or something like that but definitely not a causal relationship. If I'm mistaken, then I'd like to see the proof you speak of.

I would turn this around. To allow parents to hit (remember, let's not use PC happy fun terms) their children is what needs a "burden of proof." Because so far the only reason people really have for hitting their kids is tradition, or the old "my parents hit me and I turned out real good, so..." I'm sorry but my conscience tells me that hitting a kid and calling it parenting needs more of a burden of proof than any method that doesn't involve violence.

Don't know the parent? If a parent is unable to conceive of a better way than hitting, they need parenting classes, or advice, or an education, or something. Don't know the child? Again, I say that if there is a child out there who simply cannot be controlled without the use of violence, then there is something quite wrong with that child, and their parents should get them checked out at once. Don't know how they spank? What does that even mean? You either hit a kid or you don't. Sure, hitting them on the butt is "better" than hitting them in the mouth, but it's a matter of degrees, they're not different enough beasts.

Psychology may not be a "hard" science, but we certainly have learned enough to know how conditioning works. If Pavlov could condition dogs with a freaking bell, then I am sure parents could be imaginative enough to find some alternative to hitting their children.

I spoke of the burden of proof that critics of corporal punishment have for the practical considerations. Seeing as to how >90% of American families spank and countless others across the world spank, you are going to need a little more than, "because my conscience says so" if you are going to impress upon those people the evils/obsolescence of child spanking.

Also, you left out the part about it working so swimmingly. That's another reason people do it. The proof is in the pudding as they say. As per the definitions here, spanking isn't violence. The cure for understating corporal punishment with PC friendly terms isn't to overstate it with exaggerated terms like "violence".


Apparently many parents feel as you do, which leaves us with our current ritalin problems.


Beasts, degrees... do you really want to argue over semantics? We live in an analog word, nothing is truly digital, everything is a matter of degrees so what are you saying? You contradict yourself here, anyway. First you imply that there is no meaningful variation within hitting and in the next sentence you admit that some forms are better than others.


Of course it was a freaking dog and not a human being that he conditioned: two "different enough beasts" I might add. Besides that, are you seriously proposing Pavlovian conditioning as a more ethical child-rearing tool than spanking?

************

Again, I reiterate, until someone offers some compelling evidence showing that spanking causes problems in all kids no matter how it's used, or can show how some other tool works better in all situations for all children, spanking isn't going anywhere.

If you don't wish to use "happy PC terms" in the interest of fairness we should go all the way. Timeouts are "imprisonment and shunning", parents also practice forms of bondage, castigation, and chastisement on their wee ones. The horror!



Quark, I understand that this is a very serious issue to you and it always has been. I even agree with about 90 percent of what you have said on this thread (we've argued this one before). But the above is simply not true. Posters have explained clearly reasons why they might spank their children, and most of the incidences involve a direct threat to the child's wellbeing by his own conduct, or the wellbeing of his/her siblings. Running out the front door into the road, throwing a toy metal truck at his sister's head, ect. For some children, a brief and firm physical response works better than 20 timeouts. If the child learns with one spanking not to run out the front door of his home and into traffic, that one spanking is better than having 20 timeout incidences with 20 of the same offenses....because the child might run right smack into a car on the fifth offense and not get to that sixth time-out....you see?

Even kmsouthern's link indicates that spanking works if it is used sparingly...and I don't think anyone here is advocating frequent spankings or spankings for minor offenses.

1. Is spanking/corporal punishment a valid form of discipline? Why or why not?

I’ve resisted participating in this thread for two reasons; one, because I don’t have children and people will discount what I have to say as irrelevant, and two, because it is far too personal. But, what the hey, I’ll put in my $.02. My answer to this is no. Maybe some people have “turned out fine”, but how many don’t?

2. Does your own family history (your parents' forms of discipline) play a role in your belief one way or the other?

I will hold myself up as an example that spanking/hitting does not work. My parents made frequent use of the paddle, conveniently made for us by a neighbor (!). It was big, it was solid, and it hurt like hell. In addition, we had arm yanks, mouths washed out with soap, slaps in the face, and stuff I don’t even remember. My school employed beatings with another intimidating wooden paddle (luckily, I was too terrified to misbehave, so I never suffered the principal’s attentions, but my brother did). As I grew older, the spankings turned into beatings; it took me years not to be head shy if someone raised their hand close to my face, because my mother smacked me in the face so many times. Outwardly, one would think I turned out “fine”, but I am also an insecure, fearful person, who manages to somehow sabotage relationships because I feel undeserving of happiness, deep-seated anger issues, and a horrible sense of self-worth. My brother and I have both suffered chemical dependencies and mental health problems.

I believe that a lot of what leads parents to smack their kids is frustration. Kids are just little people developing their own personalities and testing the limits of their world. To treat them like recalcitrant animals is demeaning. Kmsouthern has the right idea. You teach a child the difference between right and wrong, and let them know the consequences of misbehaving, and apply it consistently. What are parents teaching their kids when they smack them? That violence is an acceptable way to solve problems? Seems to me there’s enough of that mentality in the world.

Interestingly enough, while researching this, I found that “spare the rod, spoil the child” is not from the Bible.


3. Do you believe that ritualization plays a role in the continued use of spanking in our society (i.e. "My parents did it and I turned out fine")?

Definitely. One of the many reasons I did not have children is that I was terrified I would subconsciously do the same things to my children that were done to me, and no child deserves that.

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not?

I don’t know that this could be effectively legislated, and certainly would not be accepted in a puritanical country like the US.

1. Is spanking/corporal punishment a valid form of discipline? Why or why not?

Yes, in moderation, by parents. Why? It works. It has produced hundreds of generations of well-adjusted children and adults.

Also, I won two regional high school science fairs several centuries ago for a survey on the topic. Actually, it was a statistical analysis of the common traits of top students. The first year, I only surveyed the parents of the top students in one school, so I didn't have a control group. The second year, I got permission to survey the parents of every student in the school district. Of more than 60 traits, only three were clearly predictive, all in the parenting category: moderate corporal punishment, breastfeeding, and moms who were homemakers. Wrote a program that could predict class rank percentile within a small margin of error based only on those three factors.

2. Does your own family history (your parents' forms of discipline) play a role in your belief one way or the other?

Probably not much. I wasn't spanked very often, but enough to know the difference between a whooping and violence, and enough to learn the difference between right and wrong.

3. Do you believe that ritualization plays a role in the continued use of spanking in our society (i.e. "My parents did it and I turned out fine")?

Maybe with some folks, but most probably do it because it's been proven effective for a very long time, regardless of whether or not their parents did it.

4a. If you practice spanking (or plan to if you don't currently have children but will in the future), would you be open to other methods of discipline to completely replace spanking if you believed that they worked? Do you believe that spanking is an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach?

There are plenty of forms of discipline that work very well. Spanking is for when nothing else works well enough to effectively to teach the necessary lesson. So, any other suggestions are not likely to completely replace the effectiveness of spanking in rare situations, but I'm certainly open to suggestion.

4b. If you are a non-spanker, what forms of discipline do you use and are they effective? Do you believe that spanking is NOT an essential part of a complete disciplinary approach?

5. Should the United States (or individual states) look into taking a stance on corporal punishment, as the previous countries mentioned have done? Why or why not?

Child abuse is already a crime, so no extra laws are needed, unless they gurantee a school disciplinarian's right to paddle habitual miscreants.

If the government is going to start regulating parenting, then they might as well just take babies from the hospital the day they're born and raise them in concentration camps to be drones-- or outlaw natural childbirth and just manufacture kids from test tubes. That's one "brave new world" I'm glad we'll never experience in America.