I think that you have heard to many stories of bad behavior let me tell you this never did I do any of these things you are talking about I was spanked as a child and I am GLAD I was. I was a perfect kid ask anyone and even though my Dad did spank us he also felt like conversation was a big point in raising his children and I can say that I have a lot less regrets that some of those children who had the good parent bad parent going on I also respect my step Mom (who I claim as my real mother as well even though I have two) for standing by my Dad's form of discipline. I am very happy in my life. I snuck out once 3 months before I turned 18 not really sneaking out but told my parents I was going to one friends house and went to anothers. Never did drugs yuck drank or smoked till I was 18. I respect my parents still to this day and always will and also love them very much. Also my daughter was two once and enjoy it while it lasts. No punt intended. I will also say that you are the reason or I should say people like you are the reason I have no control over my children. If you think a spanking is in order for an unruly spouse I'm all for that but we are talking about a spanking not beating children so I ask you not to put the two together. It is an insult to others and myself. If you steal you go to jail an action that causes a reaction it is very simple really. I will also say I feel for both of you on this and let me tell you if you don't stand together what ever form of discipline that there may be your children will turn out about like those you described in your quote. Sorry to say

I am sorry What I was trying to say was I did not smoke until I was 18. I still don't do the drugs. I have had drinks rarely.

Thank you for that.

I turned out great and I respent and love my parents. Not all people are alike.

I think this has been one of those threads that has helped me see a full perspective on an issue I didn't know much about. Wa-a-a-a-y back when this thread was young, I thought that spanking was necessary. Now, I'm not so sure.

The eloquence of the non-spankers and the conditional spankers has really helped me reconsider this issue. I'm more prone to believing that the decision to spank relies more on the catalyst event itself and the maturity of the child. I am also more inclined to believe it is hardly necessary.

Good debate, everyone.

There really aren't too many right ways or wrong ways to parent. Not disciplining at all and abuse are the wrong ways, but in the middle there are many methods that work just fine for various people. I always find it funny that it's the 'keep your hands off' crowd who are running around saying they've got the only right way and everyone else is wrong, while I have yet to see a spanking advocate tell parents who don't want to spank that they have to.

So long as the kid turns out as a responsible member of society in the end, you've done your job.

I must say I'm thoroughly confused by your post. Especially, how it is that people like [me] are the reason [you] have no control over [your] children. I don't know what that is supposed to mean at all, sorry.

I don't think I've heard too many stories of bad behavior so much as the vast majority of the kids I knew did at least one of the things I mentioned (smoking, drinking, stealing, sneaking out, etc.). Just because they were spanked, doesn't make them want to go run out and smoke...I was simply using that example to say spanking in and of itself does not deter kids from wrong-doings and spanking doesn't always 'work'.

I wasn't trying to say that ALL children who aren't spanked are angels or that ALL children who are spanked are evil...not at all. If you'll look carefully, what I said is My mother didn't use violence as a threat...so obviously spanking is not necessary to get "good behavior" results.. The anecdotal story I gave was only offered to show that spanking isn't always necessary.

And I'm not sure if I made it clear or not, but my husband and I are certainly a united front when it comes to discipline. He believes spanking is okay, but has agreed that since I don't, he will not. There is no differing of opinion in front of our daughter when it comes to punishment. I just wanted to make that absolutely clear because it seems I didn't.

About the connection between hitting a child and hitting a spouse...while you and probably many others don't see the two as related, I do. I see hitting as hitting regardless of who the victim is and regardless of the surrounding situation or reasons for hitting. That's just me and I understand that not everyone shares my views. I am simply saying that I personally don't understand how one (hitting/spanking children) is okay and the other (hitting a spouse or any other person for that matter), which is why I asked the question about why it's considered okay and socially accepted to do one and not the other.

Do I think spanking is wrong? Yes. Would I judge you or anyone else who DOES spank or thinks spanking is okay? No, I sure don't, as it's your right to believe what you want and do what you want since it's not illegal. So long as "abuse" isn't involved, it's none of my business how anyone else decides to parent their children. As a non-spanker I can't tell you how many people have told me how stupid my beliefs are, how my children will grow up to have no respect for adults, how my children will be spoiled (a la 'spare the rod, spoil the child'), etc. People who don't know I am not a spanker have made comments in front of me about how a particular friend's child "needs a whoopin'" or "any good mother would have spanked her child", etc. I've been judged plenty for my beliefs and would never think to do that to anyone else, if only out of respect for our difference in beliefs (and self-respect, as a matter of fact).

That is fine all I was saying is that I feel bad when I have to discipline my child and you make it out like it is child abuse not the deterrent that it is meant to be as in comparing it to spousal abuse so I may of responded harshly to your post. Don't think all of us are monsters or don't love our children because we decide that time out and other forms of discipline are not working. Your two year old I'm sure is a good child so is my three year old she listens and rarely does things she has been told not to but my five year old is abusive and mean to me and others at times. So am I suppose to just let her hit me, tell me that. Please just don't make me out into a monster when I have tried with my oldest. With your quote you compared spousal abuse to swatting a child and I do disagree strongyle with you is all I am saying so yes have your opinion. God Bless.

As the proud parent of two boys I have much to say on the subject of spanking. Physical punishment has never been my choice in terms of disciplining my children, yet quite honestly, there have been times when I have been tempted to spank my youngest one. He is very head-strong, outspoken, opinionated, and bossy, and he's not even three years old yet. I am a firm believer in the concept of discipline, and making sure the child knows that the parent is in charge. But, spanking doesn't look like a very successful option, in my opinion. I give my kids "time-alone" to think about their actions. And when they do something that is not okay, they have to do something positive to make up for their bad behavior. I don't want my kids to feel that causing physical pain on someone else is the best way to teach a lesson. Responsibility for one's actions and behavior is what needs to be addressed, and it can be done so without physically hurting a child.

I was spanked before...numerous times [ I was exactly the greatest kid....eh heh] But the thing was, it wasn't really for emergency situations. More like, bad grades, detentions and once for worrying my parents by running off and forgetting to tell them where I was. By that, my parents made me scared of doing anything bad. So I didn't, once I stopped rebelling against them so much.... The bad thing it did that i notice is to my sister who is older than me and in college. She is afraid to even call home whenever she knows that my parents are unhappy with her. I freak out every time I even think that a teacher is going to call my house to comment on my grades or behavior. But it does work. It makes kids listen but it makes you seem like a god to them and in that way, they distant themselves from you. In the end you make a choice as to which kind of kid you prefer, one who listens or one who is closer to you. You have to take the good with the bad.

While I certainly respect your personal experience and opinions, I have to disagree with the above point. It's not an either or situation. The difference, as I and others have already stated above, is that you can discipline your children WITHOUT spanking them and they will, in turn, respect you and listen to you AND be close to you, too. Of course, just because you discipline without spanking doesn't mean you're kids will think you're the greatest parent on earth...but just because you spank doesn't mean your kids will listen. Some of the most poorly behaved and rebellious kids I've ever known were spanked just like some of the best behaved and least rebellious kids I've ever known were not spanked. Part of the thing with non-spanking is that most of the people I know who are non-spankers don't go around proclaiming to the world that they aren't spankers...some spankers will publicly utter "that kid needs a whuppin" with respect to an "unruly" child in a store or what-have-you. My point is that you can't tell a non-spanker's kids by looking at them or by examining their behavior just like you can't tell a spanked child by looking at them or examining their behavior. It's not an if-then relationship. "If you spank, then your children will behave"...no.

Also, there are non-spankers of all degrees...there are those who use NO discipline and let their kids run wild (FAR from the majority of non-spankers, I can assure you), to those who do everything else under the sun EXCEPT use physical force as a means of discipline...the same goes for spankers...some just do it in "emergency situations" (though I have yet to meet someone like that IRL), and some cross into the realm of abuse (I personally don't see how hitting a child in any way ISN'T abuse, but abuse in the current legal sense of the word is what I'm talking about).

It's simply not some sort of black and white choice resulting in black and white outcomes.

I don’t have any children, but i think you should not teach them lessons via violence, a simple part of it is the fact it probably induces trauma on the child in some form. Maybe if the kid is a repeat play with marbles on the highway, and the parent sees no other alternative. I still think that parenting should be able to raise very healthy children without the use of violence, i don’t know how many people agree with viewing acts of nannies hitting kids, spanking just seems more acceptable to some through some form of social conditioning or brainwashing, then again there is a study that correlates how a person was raised as having an effect on there own child rearing, something like an instinct, though i don’t know how much validity that idea or study holds in reality.

Wow,
This was a pretty good debate. It's always interesting to hear the different opinions on spanking and the different experiences.

My husband and I come from two different ends of the spectrum. I was rarely spanked. He had boards, a belt and as he put's it whatever was handy used on him. Of course that clearly IMO, is abuse, not spanking.

I was not raised however in a non spanking household. My brother was spanked fairly frequently or so I remember.

We have rarely spanked our children. I can usually find more creative ways to discipline them while trying to get them to understand why it's wrong.

One particular incident I wanted to bring up to the one who asked if a spanking had stopped the behavior.

My oldest son who was around 10 at the time had been disciplined and was not allowed to go to the park to play. He said "I'm going." He then ran to the door, opened it and was caught by the back of the shirt halfway out. He did receive a spanking and was told to go to his room. The issue was then later discussed with him after he had time to think about it in his room.

We were in between a state of shock at this behavior as he had not done this type of thing before and a state of complete lack of control over the situation for that instance. We didn't have time to think, to reason with him, anything.

He is 14 now and although he has some periods of defiance over the rules he has never done that again. Although neither of us prefer to spank, I think at that particular moment it was a point of either we lose control or we take action.

An example of other behavior modification for this child. He went through a stage when he was breaking other peoples things. I tried to explain to him how it hurt the other person of whom he was breaking their things. Nothing seemed to work. So I decided to try a different approach. When he did this I would break one of his items. After two times this behavior stopped.

There definitely are different approaches to parenting. I think we all have to use our judgement as to what will work with a particular child. Every child seems to be different and every child has a different level of what will teach them appropriate behavior.

It has been mentioned that parents fail to follow through after repeatedly telling a child there will be consequences. This I 100% agree with. I have seen it, I have done it. It really does reinforce the thought that they can do whatever they wish as it is unlikely there will be any consequences.

I would be interested to know what you all would do if your child was being defiant to the point of leaving the house after you had told him/her he/she could not. I use this scenario because it is the one instance that I have ever felt really was a huge issue.

Let me start off with a thesis: spanking children sends them two messages.
1.) Obviously, their behavior was wrong.
2.) This is a negative consequence, a psychological injury. By this, I mean that the fact that violence is being transferred to them by the person the are most close too sends them a message that they are capable of violence, therefore a certain form of fear is instilled in them.

Now, this is purely my own speculation concerning the topic, I do not claim any of this medically or psychologically proven. In substitution of a spanking, other forms of less psychological punishment (this DOES NOT include standing in a corner) may be more readily applied.

Sincerely,
Locke

So many issues, so little time:

"I think we can all agree that schools should encourage people to be nice to each other, but why is religion a necessary component of this? If a child can't be taught that hitting is wrong without involving Jesus or the 10 Commandments..."

Without a doubt. As a parent places a child accross the lap and begins to spank said child, the parent, with each word and slap, THIS....WILL...TEACH...YOU...NEVER...TO...HIT...YOUR...BROTHER....AGAIN.

I spanked my son once (leading him by the arm along my side) because he did not exit the street where he was playing when I TOLD him to. Wife would have noticed a car coming and would have tried to beat the car to our son and, while still there, would have explained to him that it's not a good idea to....THUMP.

Jesus was not involved. There is a right and wrong - just different perceptions on the delivery of the message. Delivery of the message in schools relies on the perceptions of the teacher. Over the last 25 or so years, teachers have been stripped of the ability to put different delivery mechanisms into place. I got paddled once - only once - thank God my folks never heard about it.

I think one learns "proper" behavior and "moral" behavior [I place them side by side] in the home, school, workplace, etc. It is NOT a religious thing.

NOTE: I moved this post into this thread since it appears it was posted to the wrong thread.

Beating a child is unethical and cruel- but it is also senseless. Disciplining a child requires setting down firm borders and not allowing them to transgress them. A child can be disciplined without the violence. if anything, beating creates anger and promotes negativity. it dares the more difficult children to commit the offense again.
a child who can be disciplined by beating, can also be disciplined without it. the child who cannot be discipline without beating, is more often then not immune to the beatings. they simply dont care.
children usually make morally correct decisions. if the situation and whys and why nots are explained, and a sense of your expectation is conveyed to the child, it would work a lot better than beating. when you explain it to thir reasons they learn not to do what they did, when you beat them they just do it behind your back.
beating may convey fear, but it wont convey reason.

First, I would like to point out that doing any search in Google with the word "spanking" in the search string will yield some rather "unwholesome" websites....

On that note I would like to say that it is critical in this argument to point out that the line between spanking and beating is a rather clear one. Personally I would like to set out the proposition that any hit that leaves a lasting mark is abuse. Multiple hits is abuse. Striking a child out of anger is abuse.
I support the use of spanking in parenting for many reasons:

Spanking is not violent, it is not done out of anger rather it is a part of a well-thought out parenting tactic. It is immediate and communicates a somewhat complex meaning in a simple way.

Children CANNOT sit down and think about the things they have done. Any psychologist will tell you that children can neither think abstractly OR see a situation from another's point of view until they are probably 8-12 years old.
Earlier on they can understand right and wrong, but only as it pertains to them.
Check out Kohlberg's theory of moral development

Most children don't get past the "selfish" stage well into their education. Some don't get there before high school. A child that simply cannot do the moral reasoning to understand how they did "the wrong thing" will never come to a conclusion they have done so during time out. A parent explaining an abstract moral concept to a child that is not ready to grasp it is fruitless.
Sometimes it is better to give a little "correction" to let the child know there is clearly something wrong. Explain it in the simplest of terms and let them stew knowing that there is something they don't quite understand yet.

Oftentimes it is the parent's insecurities with a situation that lead them to try to explain it in detail to the child. Concrete children are more comfortable with concrete answers.

As a consideration, there is not one theory of development that doesn't claim that a child's moral development isn't dependent upon social interaction. So YES, parents do need to explain tough situations to their kids. They do need to expect the children to come to undertsand them. However, there is nothing wrong with setting a precedent for control, dominance (it's not really that bad a thing), and order. If you ask children of disfunctional families what they think they need they will tell you that they need someone to provide order, to tell them what to do!! Of course they need someone to love them also. These two things are NOT diametrically opposed!

As an afterthought, i would like to raise the counter-question:
What is worse, a child fearing the punishment of their parent or a child fearing to dissappoint their parent?

If you look it up in psychology, there are these different concepts known as positive and negative punishment and positive and negative reinforcement. no two children are alike, but I dont think beating is something a child can ever take positively.
Fearing to disappoint a parent is a big pressure on children. I guess theres a fine liine between putting undue pressure on a child and giving them a sense of a mark.
As a child myself, my father never beat me. If I did anything wrong, hed raise the tone of his voice or give me this cold look, I cried and I never did it again. on the other hand my mother occassionally beat me. I got immune to it. I'd smile and what do you know next moment I was doing it again.
i guess talking from my experience, i thing beating never worked.
my father, himself, was beat up a lot as a child. although he never hurt me, he was very violent. hed push and shove my mother during fights and ugly things like that. as a child everytime he was beat up by my grandmother, he ran off, and did the same things again and intentionally *** NOTICE: THIS WORD IS AGAINST THE RULES. FAILURE TO REMOVE IT WILL RESULT IN A STRIKE. *** her off. i feel like the beating had something to do with it.

Seems like an ethical dilemma question...

Assuming the child is a teenager, I think he is too old to be spanked. If he were my child, I'd say, "Go ahead". And let him experience the consequences of leaving the protection of family and home.

As for the question of beating versus spanking, everything done to an extreme can be bad. And it's the same with spanking. Within proper limits, a firm whack on the behind is a valuable tool to parenting. Outside of proper limits, it's wrong. It should never be done while the parent is angry. It should match the severity of the offense. Also, it should be clear what the offense is and not just because Dad is in a rage.

I must confess that I don't have much experience on this issue. I have a seven month old child, who is obviously too young to present me or my wife with this kind of dilemma. We have discussed this issue more times than the Israelis & Palestinians have talked about peace. Yes, moderate use of spanking can be an effective form of discipline. The key word is moderate here. I know couples who use it too frequently, and as a result, are raising kids who you can swat until your arm falls off, and they would just laugh at you. After seeing couples like that-we've decided not to go that route. Yes, other models do work. Call it "time out" or what have you, but they do work. The difference is, these alternative models take much more time and effort than spanking does. Most people don't have the patience to try a method that is more time consuming. I'm not claiming that I will be perfect in this regard, it's just a hunch on my part. I'm sure there are parents out there on both sides of the issue who are currently raising well-adjusted kids. I think you have to pick the model that you believe works with you, as well as your child's mindset.

I look at spanking in the same way the country looks at Nuclear Weapons: it's a good tool for the arsenal, but doesn't have to be trotted out often to be effective.

I found it's most useful in kids under 8 in two circumstances: (1) to get their attention (one quick swat on butt) when they just aren't interested in paying attention to the another chosen punishment (like the timeout that he won't adhere to); (2) as part of a total punishment package for crimes of epic proportions (biting or punching another kid, for example). The whole point is get their attention and let them know who's boss and that their actions will result in immediate retribution. It's how they eventually form a "conscience" and the philosophy of "don't do unto others unless you want Mom/Dad to come down hard on you", which works until they can reason out another philosophy that's equally benign.

Your mileage may vary, of course. Punishment tends to be all about the circumstances, but to out-of-hand rule out a punishment that could be effective doesn't seem like effective parenting.

If it doesn't work, of course, then you move on to find another punishment that's effective in these circumstances. Why stick with something that doesn't work for the kid?