- Home
- Politics
- Entertainment
- Sports
- Health
- Religion
- Society
- Tech
- Money
- People
- Science
- Galleries
Is Spanking an Acceptable Form of Discipline?
You have probably heard the expression, "Spare the rod, spoil the child." Do you agree with it? Perhaps you were spanked as a kid. Was it appropriate? Some people see spanking as an outdated method of punishment or even child abuse, while others view a swat on the bottom as a parent's prerogative. Where do we draw the line when it comes to disciplining our children?
Featured Image:






















Comments
More old data
Again, most of this is old data. Not that it is bad data, because it is not, it is just not new or recent.
Again, as I stated earlier, if so many people have concluded that spanking is such a horrible thing, then why hasn't the Governement or Supreme Court stepped in and done something about all the State Laws that say it is not abuse?
Define old
Before 1990? Before 2000?
Can I?
Can I define old? Old is any information that is not present. Much of the information you posted is from studies done as much as 10, 15, 20, plus years ago. People and circumstances have changed during those times. A study that was done 20 years ago, and its conclusions, have not much relevance on today. Relevant data would be data from the past 5 years.
And more research against corporal punishment
E.A. Stormshak, K.L. Bierman, R.J. McMahon, L.J. Lengua, Department of Applied Behavior and Communication Sciences, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR. "Parenting practices and child disruptive behavior problems in early elementary school." Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, Mar;29(1):17-29. 2000 Found that spanking and physical aggression by parents were associated with elevated rates of all child disruptive behavior problems, especially aggression. Parenting practices contribute to the prediction of oppositional and aggressive behavior problems. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=10693029
M.A. Straus, J.H. Stewart, Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH. "Corporal punishment by American parents: national data on prevalence, chronicity, severity, and duration, in relation to child and family characteristics." Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, June;2(2):55-70 1999 Found children are hit more often, and more severely, than is commonly perceived, or even recommended, by pro-spankers. 35% of infants, and 94% of 3-4 year olds, and over half of 12 year olds experience corporal punishment (slapping, spanking on the buttocks with or without an object, pinching, and shaking).
http://pubpages.unh.edu /~mas2/CP36.pdf
M.A. Straus, V.E. Mouradian, Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH. "Impulsive corporal punishment by mothers and antisocial behavior and impulsiveness of children." Behavioral Science Law, 1998 Summer;16(3):353-74 Found that parental spanking and slapping is associated with increased antisocial behavior and impulsiveness in children. The more corporal punishment experienced by a child, the more likely the child will engage in antisocial behavior and to act impulsively, despite high maternal nurturance. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=9768466
M.A. Straus, D.B. Sugarman, J. Giles-Sims, Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, and Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, TX. "Spanking by parents and subsequent antisocial behavior of children." Pediatric Adolescent Medicine, 1997 Aug;151(8):761-7. Found that children who are spanked are more aggressive 2 years later. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=9265876
or http://pubpages.unh.edu /~mas2/CP64E.htm
M.A. Straus, M. Paschall, Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH. "Corporal punishment by mothers and child's cognitive development: A longitudinal study." Research on a nationally representative sample of 960 children presented at the 14th World Congress of Sociology, Montreal, Canada, Aug.1, 1998. Spanking found to be associated with lowered cognitive development, and lower IQs. http://64.233.161.104/u/unhsites?q=cache:5-Cze3GiP-cJ: www.unh.edu/not-spanking.html +straus+paschall+IQ&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&ie=UTF-8
E.E. Whipple, C.A. Richey, School of Social Work, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI. "Crossing the line from physical discipline to child abuse: how much is too much?" Child Abuse and Neglect, 1997 May;21(5):431-44 Found that "relative exposure" to spanking is positively related to greater risk for child abuse. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=9158904
Question
So, have you purchased the Abstracts from www.ncbi.nlm.gov ? It would be interesting to actually read the White Papers instead of just the summaries of them. However, I am not going to spend $31.95 for them. Also, you might want to check the links because some of them are dead link and do not lead to information. (Not Criticizing you by any means, just letting you know.)
There's a problem with this
I can't legally print the whole study without violating copyright laws, but if I copy and paste some things people may get upset that they can't see the whole thing and accuse me of taking it out of context. It's up to each person to decide if they want to seek access to a full study before deciding if it will satisfy them in the for or against argument.
PubMed abstracts, or summaries, are free. This one is from 2003, for example, which I supposed doesn't meet your definition of too old.
Horm Behav. 2003 Jan;43(1):237-44.Related Articles, Links
The hormonal costs of subtle forms of infant maltreatment.
Bugental DB, Martorell GA, Barraza V.
Department of Psychology, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA. bugental@psych.ucsb.edu
We show here that subtle forms of maltreatment during infancy (below 1 year of age) have potential consequences for the functioning of the child's adrenocortical response system. Infants who received frequent corporal punishment (e.g., spanking ) showed high hormonal reactivity to stress (a repeated separation from mother, combined with the presence of a stranger). In addition, infants who experienced frequent emotional withdrawal by their mothers (either as a result of maternal depression, or mother's strategic use of withdrawal as a control tactic) showed elevated baseline levels of cortisol. It was suggested that there are hormonal "costs" when mothers show response patterns (intentionally or unintentionally) that limit their utility as a means of buffering the child against stress. The hormonal responses shown by infants may alter the functioning of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis in ways that, if continued, may foster risk for immune disorders, sensitization to later stress, cognitive deficits, and social-emotional problems.
I use old and new research to show that the results have been similar over time.
My Question:
My question about all these studies is how they get the information? I am not sure I buy into the fact that people who use corporal punishment as a means of discipline allowed any one to observe them for the periods of time it takes to do these studies. I say that because I know people who have been arrested and accused of abuse for just swatting their kid one time. Then the fear of further problems with the law come along. If it is just a bunch of base line qestions asked individuals, then I wander about the actual truthfulness of the answers and whether or not the questions were baited. These are just thoughts that go through my mind any time I read studies and things.
By the way, in many of these, I find the word "Potential". Potential means that it can cause it but does not necessarily. It is the same as the "Minority" form the article on the one site. Minority means only a few in my book. I really am wandering if their evidence is really inconclusive at best.
I say that because I have read studies that say that children watching tv and playing violent games causes violent tendencies. This I would say is true because it does that to adults.
Good to know
I will update my links list. I haven't looked at that list in over a year, and I didn't filter out the ones that aren't relevent to this particular conersation.
I get free access to these through my husband's university.
If you just want abstracts, doesn't PubMed post those for free? It's usually the full paper you have to purchase.
And even more research against spanking
Gershoff, E. T., National Center for Children in Poverty, Columbia University, New York, NY. "Corporal Punishment by Parents and Associated Child Behaviors and Experiences: A Meta-Analytic and Theoretical Review." Psychological Bulletin, 2002 Jul;128(4), 539-579 Found that corporal punishment of children was related to decreased internalization of moral rules, increased aggression, more antisocial behavior, increased criminality, weakened parent-child relationships, decreased mental health outcomes, increased adult abusive behaviors, and increased risk of being victimized in abusive relationships in adulthood. This study is an analysis of 88 research studies on corporal punishment of children.
http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/?id=PUNISH .PSY
J. L. Sheline, B.J. Skipper, W.E. Broadhead, Department of Community and Family Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. "Risk factors for violent behavior in elementary school boys: have you hugged your child today?" American Journal of Public Health, 1994 April;84(4):661-3 Found that parents of violent boys were more likely than those of matched control students to use spanking for discipline. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=8154575
C.E. Joubert, University of Alabama, Florence, AL. "Antecedents of narcissism and psychological reactance as indicated by college students' retrospective reports of their parents' behaviors." Psychological Report, 1992 Jun;70(3 Pt 2):1111-5 Higher psychological reactance (feeling threatened) scores on the Narcissism Personality Inventory and the Hong Psychological Reactance Scale correlated with more spanking by fathers. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=1496079
C.E. Joubert, University of North Alabama, Florence, AL. "Self-esteem and social desirability in relation to college students' retrospective perceptions of parental fairness and disciplinary practices." Psychological Report, 1991 August;69(1):115-20 College women were found to view their parents as being less fair if they had been spanked by them as children. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=1961778
D. Levinson, Yale University, New Haven, CT. "Physical punishment of children and wife beating in cross-cultural perspective." Child Abuse and Neglect, 1981 5: 193-195 Found that societies in which physical punishment of children is rare or infrequent, the existence of wife beating is also rare.
http://pubpages.unh.edu /~mas2/CP33y-ID33.pdf
D. Yankelovich, DYG, Inc., sponsored by Civitas, Zero to Three, and Brio Corporation. "What Grown-Ups Understand About Child Development: A National Benchmark Survey" written about in the New York Times, October 24, 2000. This national survey of 3,000 adults found that about 60% of parents spank, even though they concede the punishment is ineffective.
http://www.med.umich.edu/1libr/yourchild/devnews.htm
M.T. Teicher, Developmental Biopsychiatry Research Program, McLean Hospital, Belmont, MA. "Wounds that time won't heal: The neurobiology of child abuse." Cerebrum, vol.2, no.4:Fall 2000. Found a higher incidence of abnormal EEG tests (measure of brain waves) in adults who had been hit as children, and impaired brain development. http://www.dana.org/books/press/cerebrum/fall00/index.cfm (scroll down to "Wounds...")
http://www.mclean.harvard.edu/PublicAffairs/20001214_child_abuse.htm
J.F. Geddes, G.H. Vowles, A.K. Hackshaw, C.D. Nickols, I.S. Scott, H.L. Whitwell, Department of Histopathology and Morbid Anatomy, Royal London Hospital, Whitechapel, London, UK. "Neuropathology of inflicted head injury in children: II. Microscopic brain injury in infants." Brain, 200l 124:1299-1306 Found that babies can be injured and killed from even mild shaking or hitting, primarily from damage to the part of the brain that controls breathing. http://brain.oupjournals.org/cgi/content/full/124/7/1299?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&andorexacttitle=and&andorexacttitleabs=and&fulltext=shaking +babies&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1104436255059_1533&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&fdate=5/1/2001&tdate=7/31/2001&journalcode=brain
M.A. Straus, Family Research Laboratory, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH. "Spanking teaches short-term lesson, but long-term violence." Project NoSpank, July 24, 1999. Research of statistics revealed that the US states that permit the most legal corporal punishment of children are the states with the most homicides committed by children. http://nospank.net/straus7.htm
I have more if this doesn't suffice
I can go on and on.
Some problems with some of these
Aside with the fact that many of the links you provide here don't work or require you to pay, many of them have nothing to do with the issue at hand. Some of them have to do with shaken baby syndrone. Which no one would dare deny is a crime. My thoughts on the issue at hand (or argument between you and the other guy) is that you are not even on the same page with each other. You are arguing that spanking causes pain. That is a given. He is arguing that spanking does not cause lasting damage. The legal systems here in America seem to agree with that because they have determined that short term pain inflicted by some form of corporal punishment as a mean of discipline are ok and have thus passed laws stating that. (By the way did you read the statutes I posted).
I think that it would be a worth while study to invest in today to find out just how truly accurate that information is. However, my feelings are that it would be nearly impossible to observe people who use spanking as a form of punishment in their home environment, school, etc. because of the fear that many Americans live under because of the SRS. I think that it would also be a interesting study to observe the lives of those that do not use spanking as a form of punishment. Then it would be interesting to take the data compile it and see what conclusions are made. I would bet that depending upon the Psychologist that performed the study the results would differ. I say that because you can take two people who observe the same thing and get two totally different views of what they observed.
I gave you what you asked for
You may do with it as you please. But "legal" isn't indicative of "right," since it used to be legal to own slaves, hit your wife, or shoot a Mormon on sight (that law in Missouri wasn't repealed formally until the late 1970's).
Legal
Yes, corporal punishment is legal. One thing that you assume is that every one should agree with you as to whether it is right or wrong. I do not agree with you that it is wrong to use spanking as a means of punishment if merrited. That is my view. Since this is an apposing views sight, I am entitled to have my view, without having to be called a bad parent. This sight is not a site of judging, and since you are not a judge, nor are you God, you have no right to sit in judgement over what someone else sees as right or wrong. You have not through all your posting convinced me that spanking is wrong. You have convinced me however, that your religion is as judgemental as I have been taught it is.
That's Pretty Hateful For a Minister
"You have convinced me however, that your religion is as judgemental as I have been taught it is."
I had said my peace and decided to back out until you, a Minister, posted this. I do not speak for my religion. I am me. You generalizing that my religion is judgmental is hypocritical, especially since you have been yelling at me up and down for getting personal and judging you. Shame on you. I am done having this discussion with you.
You started this whole mess
Remember... You are the one that started this whole problem. From the start, my point was to simply get you to say that there are more than one views to spanking and that every one is entitled to their opinion. Yet, you decided to play judge and say that I am a bad parent.
I also am sending a complaint notice to the Administrator of this site. If they ban me, so be it. If they ban you, so be it too.
I don't see it
I don't see the hatefulness in his statement. I do see a statement that should not have been said, but it was not hateful.
What you said though, falls under libelous and under a verbal attack.
I am emailing the Opposing Views team to review this as I think that both of you have taken this way beyond and should be banned from this site based on your conduct here.
This is for views that oppose. It is not a forum for personal attacks, libelous statements, and judging the individuals that are posting. It is a site where people can post their view and this discuss why that see things that way and present evidence to back it up. This discussion does not even follow that. It has turned to personal attacks that I am sure will not be tollerated.
Civility 101
Civility 101 isn't about censorship—it's about creating a place where personal attacks, insults or threats are seen as absolutely unacceptable. Discourse should be civil and useful, and it should always focus on the ideas instead of the groups and individuals behind those ideas.
Accordingly, anyone who participates on Opposing Views will not:
Abuse, threaten or verbally attack an Opposing Views group or user.
Post libelous, irrelevant, obscene or pornographic material.
Send spam to any Opposing Views group or user.
Artificially increase or interfere with any OV rankings.
Impersonate another Opposing Views user.
Sell, trade or exchange profiles, badges or votes.
Infringe on any copyright laws.
Read it, it is there.
As If...
As if you have any room to talk about hateful. What I said was not one bit hateful. What I stated was just facts based on the way you responded and what you said about me. You had no right to say what you said.
What you said
What you said I would not view as hateful, but I would say it was not necessary. It was no more necessary than her saying you were Bad parent.
You are right though, she had no right. I don't think though that you need to keep this going.
Yes, thanks
Yes, thanks for posting it. That is more than others have posted.
But...
But isn't what is right relative to ones point of view?
From my view point, I believe that it is ok to go out and hunt animals for Sport, but from anothers view, it is not, they believe it is legal, but not right. Though the subjects are worlds apart, the principle is the same.
Your view says its wrong to spank a child, someone elses view point says it is not. Two views based on different principles of right and wrong.
Yes
Yes, what is right is relative to ones point of view. I have been taught that drinking is wrong, but yet others believe drinking is ok. So, just as with this, right and wrong are relative to someones views and their biases.
and page 5
UTAH
Force is justified if used for reasonable discipline of a minor by parent/guardian/teacher /person standing in loco parentis. Sec. 76-2-401.[Cr.]
WASHINGTON
Physical discipline is not unlawful if reasonable and moderate and inflicted by parent /teacher/guardian for restraint or correction. Presumed unreasonable if the following are used to correct/ restrain: -- Throwing, kicking, burning, cutting, striking with a closed fist, shaking a child under 3, interfering with breathing, threatening with a deadly weapon, any other act likely to cause and which does cause bodily harm greater than transient pain or minor temporary marks. [Statute says this list is illustrative and not exclusive]. Age, size,condition of child, and location of injury are all factors in determining "reasonable" and "moderate." Sec. 9A.16.100.[Cr.]
WEST VIRGINIA
Physical injury can include that which is the result of excessive corporal punishment. Sec. 49-1-3 [Ci.]
WISCONSIN
Use of force is justified when actor's conduct is reasonable discipline of a child by a person responsible for child's welfare. Reasonable discipline may involve only such force as a reasonable person believes is necessary. Never reasonable to use force intended to cause great bodily harm or death, or which creates an unreasonable risk of great bodily harm or death. Sec. 939.45.[Cr.]
WYOMING
Abuse include excessive or unreasonable corporal punishment. Sec. 14-3-202.[Ci.] A "neglected child" includes one abused by the infliction of physical or mental injury including excessive or unreasonable corporal punishment. Sec. 14-6-201.[Ci.] Same definition as civil abuse definition. Sec. 6-2-503.[Cr.]
Interesting
This is interesting reading. I have been looking for this thanks for posting it.
page 4
NEBRASKA
It is abuse to knowingly, intentionally, or negligently cause or permit a child to be cruelly punished. Sec. 28-710.[Cr.] Parent/guardian/person responsible for care and supervision/person acting at one of the above's request is justified to use force on a minor if for the purpose of safeguarding or promoting the welfare of minor, including prevention or punishment of misconduct, but not designed to cause or known to create a substantial risk of causing death, serious bodily harm, disfigurement, extreme pain, mental distress, or gross degradation. Sec. 28-1413.[Cr.] If the belief that the force is necessary is a reckless or negligent belief, than the above offers no defense to a crime, if the culpability of that crime is proven by showing recklessness or negligence. Justification is not available if person recklessly or negligently injured or created a substantial risk of injury to a person. Sec. 28-1414.[Cr.]
NEVADA
Excessive corporal punishment may cause physical or mental injuries which constitute abuse. Sec. 432B.150.[Ci.] "Injury" to a child occurs when a parent/guardian/custodian inflicts or allows to be inflicted upon a child physical, mental, or emotional injuries sustained as a result of excessive corporal punishment. Sec. 128.013.[Ci.]
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Parent/guardian/person/teacher responsible for general care and welfare of minor may use force against minor when and to the extent that he reasonably believes it necessary to prevent or punish minor's misconduct. No defense available for malicious or reckless use of force that creates risk of death, serious bodily injury, or substantial pain. Sec. 627:6.[Cr.]
NEW JERSEY
Cruelty to a child includes inflicting unnecessarily severe corporal punishment upon a child. Sec. 9:6-1.[Ci.] "Abuse" includes a parent, guardian, or other person with control or custody inflicting excessive corporal punishment (which must be excessive to the point that the child's physical, mental, or emotional condition has been impaired or is in imminent danger of becoming impaired as a result). Sec. 9:6-8.9.[Ci.] Person with responsibility for care, supervision, discipline, or safety of another may use force against them if for the purpose of and to the extent necessary to further the responsibility. Sec. 2C:3-8.[Cr.] Justification is not available if the person recklessly or negligently injures or creates a risk of injury. Sec. 2C: 3-9.[Cr.]
NEW MEXICO
An abused child includes one who has been cruelly punished by a parent/ guardian/ custodian. Sec.32A-1-4(B).[Ci.] Abuse includes knowingly, intentionally, or negligently permitting or causing a child to be cruelly punished. Sec. 30-6-1.[Cr.]
NEW YORK
Neglecting a child includes unreasonably inflicting or allowing the infliction of harm or substantial risk thereof, including excessive corporal punishment. Fam. Ct. Sec. 1012.[Ci.] Parent/guardian/other person with care and supervision of person under 21, can use non-deadly physical force when and to the extent he reasonably believes necessary to maintain discipline or promote welfare of person force performed upon. Penal Sec. 35:10.[Cr.]
NORTH CAROLINA
Abuse includes infliction of a serious physical injury by other than accidental means; creating a substantial risk of such injury by other than accidental means; and using cruel or grossly inappropriate procedures or devices to modify behavior. Juvenile Sec. 7B-101(1). [Ci.]
NORTH DAKOTA
"Harm" includes injuries sustained from excessive corporal punishment. Sec. 50-25.1-02.[Ci.] Parent/guardian/other person responsible for care and supervision of minor/person acting at direction of the above can use reasonable force on a minor for safeguarding or promoting his welfare, including prevention or punishment of his misconduct and maintenance of proper discipline. Force does not have to be "necessary," but cannot create substantial risk of death,
serious bodily injury or disfigurement, or gross degradation. Sec. 12.1-05-05.[Cr.]
OHIO
Not abuse if not prohibited under law prohibiting endangering children. "Endangering children" is administering corporal punishment or other physical discipline, or physically restraining the child in a cruel manner or for a prolonged period if the punishment or discipline is excessive under the circumstances and creates a substantial risk of serious physical harm to the child. Sec. 2151.031.[Ci.] It is a criminal act to administer corporal punishment or other physical discipline, or to physically restrain the child in a cruel manner or for a prolonged period if it is excessive under the circumstances and creates a substantial risk of serious physical harm to the child. It is a criminal act to administer unwarranted disciplinary measures to child if there is a substantial risk that if conduct is continued it will seriously impair the child's health or development. Sec. 2919.22.[Cr.]
page 3
GEORGIA
Physical forms of discipline may be used as long as there is no physical injury to the child. Secs. 19-7-5/ 19-15- 1/49-5-180.[Ci.] Parent or person in loco parentis reasonably disciplining of a minor has a justification for a criminal prosecution based on that conduct. Sec. 16-3-20.[Cr.]
HAWAII
Parent/guardian/person responsible for general care and supervision of minor/person acting at request of above may use force if. -- employed with due regard for age and size of minor and reasonably related to purpose of safeguarding or promoting welfare of minor, including prevention or punishment of minor's conduct, and -- not designed to cause or known to create a risk of causing substantial bodily injury, disfigurement, extreme pain, mental
distress, or neurological damage. Sec. 703-309.[Cr.]
IDAHO
Abuse includes physical cruelty in excess of that required for reasonable disciplinary purposes, inflicted by a parent or other person in whom legal custody is vested. Sec. 16-2002.[Ci.]
ILLINOIS
An "abused child" includes any child whose parent/immediate family member/person responsible for the child's welfare/individual residing in the same house/paramour of child's parent inflicts excessive corporal punishment.
Secs. 325 5/3/ [Ci.]
INDIANA
Law does not limit right of parent/guardian/custodian to use reasonable corporal punishment when disciplining a child. Sec. 31-34-1-15.[Ci.]
IOWA
Child endangerment includes using unreasonable force, torture, or cruelty which results in physical injury, is intended to cause serious injury, or causes substantial mental or emotional harm. Sec. 726.6.[Cr.]
KANSAS
Abuse includes cruel and inhuman corporal punishment. Sec. 21-3609.[Cr.]
KENTUCKY
Parent/guardian/person/teacher with care and supervision of minor can use force if person believes force necessary for welfare of child and force is not designed to cause or known to cause a substantial risk of causing death, serious physical injury, disfigurement, extreme pain, or extreme mental distress. Sec. 503.110.[Cr.]
LOUISIANA
In determining abuse the agency should take into account that an injury may have resulted from what might be considered reasonable discipline for a child's misbehavior. Children's Code Art. 615(A).[Ci.] Parent/tutor/teacher reasonably disciplining a minor has a defense to a criminal prosecution based on that conduct. Sec. 14:18. [Cr.]
MAINE
It is a crime for parent/guardian/other with care and custody of child to cruelly treat a child by extreme punishment. 17A Sec. 554(1)(B-1). [Cr.]
MARYLAND
Law does not prohibit reasonable punishment by parent or stepparent, including reasonable corporal punishment, evaluated in light of the age and condition of child. Sec. 4-501.[Ci.]
MICHIGAN
Parent/guardian/other person permitted by law, parent, or guardian can reasonably discipline a child, including the use of reasonable force. Sec. 750.136b.[Cr.]
MINNESOTA
Parent/legal guardian/caretaker who intentionally uses unreasonable force or cruel discipline that is excessive under the circumstances is guilty of malicious punishment. Sec. 609.377.[Cr.] Parent/legal guardian/teacher/caretaker of child or pupil can use reasonable force to restrain or correct a child or pupil. Sec. 609.379.[Cr.]
MISSISSIPPI
Physical discipline (not to include any form of sexual abuse) performed on a child by a parent, guardian or custodian shall only be deemed to be abuse under this paragraph when a licensed physician has determined that physical injury has occurred. Sec. 97-5-39(2(m)). [Cr.]
MISSOURI
Discipline including spanking , administered in a reasonable manner, is not abuse. Sec. 210.110. [Ci.] Force justified if by parent/guardian/other person with care and supervision of minor if- -- Person believes force necessary to promote welfare of minor, and -- Force used is not designed to cause or believed to create a substantial risk of causing death, serious physical injury, disfigurement, extreme pain, or extreme emotional distress. Sec. 563.061.[Cr.]
MONTANA
"Physical abuse" is defined as "substantial skin bruising, internal bleeding, substantial injury to skin, subdural hematoma, intentional burns, bone fractures, extreme pain, permanent or temporary disfigurement, impairment of
any bodily organ or function, or death if the injury or death is not accidental." Sec. 41-3-102.[Ci.] Parent or authorized agent of parent/guardian/master/teacher is justified to use force if reasonable and necessary to restrain or correct child. Sec. 45-3-107.[Cr.]
page 2
CONNECTICUT
It is abuse if having control and custody of a child under sixteen (16) one cruelly or unlawfully punishes. Sec. 53-20.[Cr.] Parent/guardian/person with care and supervision of a minor (other than a teacher) may use reasonable physical force, when and to the extent that he reasonably believes necessary to maintain discipline or promote welfare of minor. Sec. 53a-18.[Cr.]
DELAWARE
Force is justifiable if reasonable and moderate and by parent/guardian/foster parent/legal custodian/other similar person responsible for care and supervision. Force must be: -- For purpose of safeguarding or promoting welfareof child, including prevention or punishment of misconduct, and -- Intended to benefit child. Reasonable and moderate is determined in light of: size, age, and condition of child, location, strength, and duration of force. Force is not justified if it consists of: -- Throwing child, kicking, burning, cutting, striking with a closed fist, interfering with breathing, use of or threatened use of deadly weapon, prolonged deprivation of sustenance or medication, any act likely to cause or causing physical injury, disfigurement, mental distress, unnecessary degradation or substantial risk of serious physical injury or
death. Criminal Sec. 468.[Cr.]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Abuse includes excessive corporal punishment. Sec. 6-2101.[Ci.] Abuse includes when a parent/guardian/custodian inflicts or fails to make reasonable efforts to prevent the infliction of physical or mental injury, including excessive corporal punishment. Sec. 16-2301.[Ci.]
FLORIDA
"Harm" to a child occurs when the parent or other person responsible for the child's welfare inflicts or allows to be inflicted upon the child physical, mental, or emotional injury. The following factors must be considered in evaluating any injury: prior injuries; location; multiplicity; and type of trauma. Such injury include, but are not limited to willful acts that produce the following specific injuries: sprains, dislocations, or cartilage damage; bone or skull fractures; brain or spinal cord damage; intracranial hemorrhage or injury to other internal organs; asphyxiation, suffocation, or drowning; injury resulting from the use of a deadly weapon; burns or scalding; cuts, lacerations, punctures, or bites; permanent or temporary disfigurement; or permanent or temporary loss or impairment of a body part or function. "Willful" refers to the intent to perform an action, not to achieve a particular result or an intent to cause an injury. Sec. 415.503.[Ci.]
I found this
I found this on the web and thought that you both might find it interesting. These are verified statutes. It will be about 5 posts.
ALABAMA
Parent/guardian/person responsible for care and supervision of a minor/teacher or other person responsible for care and supervision of a minor for a special purpose may use reasonable and appropriate physical force when and to the extent he reasonably believes it necessary and appropriate to maintain discipline or promote welfare of the child. Sec. 13A-3-24. [Cr.]
ALASKA
Force is justified when and to the extent reasonably necessary and appropriate to promote a child's welfare. Parent/guardian/other person with care and supervision of child under 18 may use reasonable and appropriate non-deadly force upon the child. Sec. 11.81.430.[Cr.]
ARIZONA
Parent/guardian may use reasonable and appropriate physical force upon the minor when and to the extent reasonably necessary and appropriate to maintain discipline. Sec. 13-403.[Cr.]
ARKANSAS
Abuse does not include physical discipline of a child if reasonable and moderate and inflicted by a parent or guardian for restraining or correcting a child. Listed as not reasonable or moderate for correcting or restraining: -- Throwing, kicking, burning, biting, cutting, striking with a closed fist, shaking a child under 3, striking or other actions which result in any non-accidental injury to a child less than 18 months, interfering with a child's breathing, threatening a child with a deadly weapon, striking a child on the face, or any other act that is likely to cause bodily harm greater than transient pain or minor temporary marks. [Statute says this is an illustrative and not exclusive list]. Age, size, condition of the child, and the location of the injury and frequency or recurrence of injuries shall be considered in determining "reasonable" or "moderate." Sec. 9-27-303(B).[Ci.] Parent/teacher/guardian/other with care and supervision of a minor may use reasonable and appropriate physical force when and to the extent reasonably necessary to maintain discipline or promote the welfare of the child. Sec. 5-2-605(l).[Cr.] If the belief that the force is necessary is a reckless or negligent belief, than the above offers no defense to a crime if the culpability of that crime is proven by showing recklessness or negligence.
Justification is not available if person recklessly or negligently injured or created a substantial risk of injury to a person. Sec. 5-2-614.[Cr.]
CALIFORNIA
Law not intended to prohibit the use of reasonable methods of parental discipline, or to prescribe a particular method of parenting. Serious physical harm does not include reasonable and age-appropriate spanking to the buttocks where there is no evidence of serious physical injury. Welf. and Inst. Code Sec. 300. [Ci.] Abuse includes unlawful corporal punishment or injury. Penal Code Sec. 11165.6.[Cr.] "Unlawful corporal punishment or injury" is any person willfully inflicting upon a child any cruel or inhuman corporal punishment or injury resulting in a traumatic condition. Penal Code Sec. 11165.4.[Cr.]
COLORADO
Any investigation of child abuse shall take into account the child-rearing practices of the child's culture. Child abuse and neglect does not include acts which can be reasonably construed to be a reasonable exercise of parental discipline. Sec. 19-3-303(l).[Ci.] A continued pattern of conduct which results in cruel punishment or accumulation of injury which results in death or serious bodily injury is child abuse. Sec. 18-6-401.[Cr.] Parent/guardian/ person with care and supervision of minor can use reasonable and appropriate physical force, if it is reasonably necessary and appropriate to maintain or promote welfare of child. Sec. 18-1-703.[Cr.]
Ok
"Someone believing in spanking a child as a means of punishment does not make them dangerous or disconnected." You have said that you do not believe that statement to be entirely correct. Is that not just your opinion? You believe someone is dangerous who uses spanking as a form of punishment. Do you have non-Christian (non-biased) data to back up that claim? If so, by all means, please post it here for all to read. I say non-Christian and non-biased because I am not a Christian and do not believe that using the Bible as a means of defending ones possition on anything accomplishes much. So, neither of you will convince me of anything using that type of data.
You are right, this whole board is personal. However, what I was relating to was the statement that you made about him being a Baptist minister. Maybe, I missed it, but where did he claim to speak for all Christians? I know many people who are Baptist and most if not all of them believe as he does. I have had some interesting debates with them.
I read what he said, I believe he said that his studies, degree's, and experience make him an authority on what the Bible says. I took that means that he is just heavily endoctrinated in his believes and can back up everything he believes based on that. Let me ask you a question: What makes your interpretation of the Bible any better than his? I can answer that: the same thing that makes him think that his his. It is what he has been endoctrinated to believe, and as a result, he believes his interpretation is the only one that is correct, the same as I believe that you do.
I believe that yelling at your children, denying them things that they enjoy, putting them in time out, restricting them to their rooms, grounding them from their friends, grounding them from going places and doing things that they enjoy can all be seen as abusive. I was recently reading in our local paper that a child here called the police and reported his parents because he felt they were abusing him because they used restricting them to their room. The police came and took the children from the home. The paper said that an investigation into the alleged abuse would take weeks and that the children would remain in protective services custody until it could be settled. I read in someone elses post that time outs are and sending them to their room are ok. Are they? From the views of some, that is also abuse.
I do not believe that any one is disagreeing that spanking causes pain. I believe that the argument here is whether or not it is abuse. You believe it is, and he does not. I would say that you both are entitled to your opinion and that until the Supreme Court in America outlaws the use of spanking as a form of punishment, it is going to be used no matter who stands against it.
Right
You think I'm wrong, I think you are wrong. We are having a debate on a debate board. That's how debate boards work. Surprise!
Yep
Yep, this is a debate board. Isn't it fun?
All fun aside, let me say this. I do believe that there is a difference between a spanking and abuse. One does not define the other (ie. spanking does not denote or define abuse). I do know that a spanking can be administered without abusing the recipient. I remember once from junior high school I got swats from the Principle at school for backtalking the teacher. Man, it hurt (my pride more than anything). He did not abuse me like my father did, he just gave me two swats. I did not consider it abuse. However, I do know from experience that spanking can be abuse if it is dealt out wrong in anger.
If you can't tell...
If you can't tell spanking from beating, then you should do neither. Spanking is not abuse and likewise, abuse, by definition, is not spanking.
Spanking serves to make the child more uncomfortable for doing the bad act than the bad act gives him joy. If you can achieve this through other means, then go ahead. If you can't, however, then a whack on the backside may be called for. And in the long run, talking to your child or sending him to his room or a chair and getting the same result is sort of idiotic. And it annoys the child. And the people who think that you can't rear young.
I have been reading Rosemond for years and how he and I can agree so fully on child rearing and so completely disagree on our world view always amazes me. However, I am comfortable in saying that you will never find him justifying any position by citing biblical edicts; he may cite it as his own point of view, but he is far too intellectually honest to rely on the Bible to justify his position.
continued from last post.....
and postive reinforcement DOES not always work. i have been working with children since i was 16. i see alot of spoiled kids who are rude and expect to have what they want when they want it all the time. sometimes i think i good smack in the mouth would set them straight. but they are not my kids and its not my place. there is a line between disceplin and abuse. when i have my own children it will be my choice how to discipline them. and if it means a slap on the butt then its a slap on the butt. but i am aware of the line....and i would never cross it.
if its not abuse
when i was little, let me tell you....if i talked back to my mother, was being rude to her face, snotty, etc...i got the ole backhand. of course when youre a child you get upset and yell at your parents and say things like "its not fair...i hate you etc.." my parents hardly ever spanked us when we were little....but if we deserved it, it was usually the back hand to the mouth or a smack on the ass. that was the extent of it. and it happend rarely. now im 24 yrs old and i nanny for 2 kids. let me tell you, i understand why we got the back hand!!! i do not have bad feeling towards my parents. i think they did one heck of a job raising me and my brother. and i understand fully why they felt sometimes they needed to give us a little smack when we were being brats. and we were little! we used to be brats and ill admit it. i think that if parents ONLY use spanking...or are bruising their child with it, then that could be concidered abuse. ill tell you, TIME OUTS and positive reinforcement...
From a former spankee
to a certain degree yes. I mean only in situations where the child repeatedly disobeys. for serious things like playing with fire, bullying, stealing etc. And only what a child can take no closed fist or switches or beating for over 10 minutes.
Time Out Does Not Work
Spanking is most definitely an acceptable form of punishment. Children do not have the capability of reasoning. After a child is 9 or 10, depending upon their maturity, then reason with them and do not spank any further. DFS (department of family services) invented and advocated "Time Out" and then reversed their decision stating that you were neglecting your children. The fact of the matter is that we had less violence and disrespect back in the day that kids were afraid of getting a butt whooping. I whole heartedly agree with spanking (on the bottom with your hand). I do not agree with smacking your kids around or striking them with foreign objects.
I agree
I would have to agree with you. Time outs are not the way to go. especially if your children enjoy just sitting down and doing nothing. Spanking them is appropriate as long as it is not abusive.
Spanking is harmful to children
Parents are role models for childrens behavior. When we cuss, children learn to curse, when we hit, slap or spank, children learn to hit. Spanking is a violent act. Spanking with belts, paddles or extension cords is clearly child abuse.
It is far better to be a good role model and to talk firmly to your children about what behavior is expected. Use time-outs, denial of TV, outside activities, etc. to make your point.
See www.nospankingzone.org People Opposed to Paddling Students, Houston
um...not
oh yes, speaking firmly does sooo much for the child .take it from a teen who, yes, was spanked as a child, just speaking firmly will do nothing. Ok so you raise your voice, so what. who cares. we'll just ignore you and pretend to be sorry, so we can go right back to doing whatever it was that was wrong . Spanking on the other hand makes a child think twice before doing something he shouldn't.
Is Spanking an Acceptable Form of Discipline?
I thinlk your wrong!!!!!I got plenty of whoopin's with belt's my son did and my uncle's 9 of them and my dad did and a handful of cousin's NONE of my family are law breaker's we all work hard do right for the most part and myself and several other's are or were in the Marines(not perfect but good people)AND WE NEVER SHOT A SCHOOL UP OR CO WORKER"S and we credit our WHOOPIN"S for our being good people and nobody in my family has ever been arrested for child abuse!!!!
Yes
It most definitely helped me as a child. Time-outs, denial of TV etc. etc. did nothing to change my ways. But a good spanking (with or without belt) told me exactly how to behave. Now their is a difference between spanking and slapping, just as there is a difference between spanking and beating. A spanking is good and effective while a beating or slapping is obviously child abuse.
Yes it is
A Spanking set me straght a time or two.Not spanking and letting your child go wild is more like child abuse.
Yes
OOORAH....Leave it to a fellow Marine to say it best....EVERYONE should read this because you said it best......
Define Harmful...
Mr. Dunne,
I am one of seven children the youngest of which is 43 years old. We were all spanked. Examples include (but are not limited to) the following: hands, hot-wheel tracks, piece of oak baseboard, switches and belts.
Your argument indicates there was long term harm done to us but I don't see it. We have the following accomplishments between us, 1 MBA, 4 Bachelor of Science degrees, 6 Associate Degrees, 7 High School diplomas. There are also 22 children in the 6 marriages and 3 of us have been married over 25 years. None of us have been in prison or convicted of a felony. There is no child abuse in any of the families and there are only 2 children of the 22 that have serious issues. Those children were adopted from the County from a mother who used cocaine and alcohol during the pregnancy (Look up Fetal Alcohol Syndrome).
Specifically what harm is done? From my experience spanking works for a time, and properly applied does not harm the child but actually gives them boundaries. Should spanking be used with all children. Absolutely not. Each child is different and some things that work on one do not work on others. Spanking is a last resort punishment that should not be used lightly. Being consistent is what counts. There is also a point where spanking becomes insulting to the child and at that point it loses it's effectiveness. Every child is different and the age where spanking stops is extremely variable.
And don't give me the argument that there are always exceptions. Your statements do not support that.
The Catholic Heretic
thats whats wrong with kids today
a good spanking on the rump is what most kids need. thats why they have no respect for anybody these days.when most of us adults remember when we were young and got out of control we would be turned over on our parents lap and our rump beat into jelly .and we had respect .but over the years people started going to far with it and started being to violent and thats when the line was drawn.but was drawn in a wrong way.now if you look at a kid wrong you will get locked up and thats not right that just gave the kids the run of the roost.and thats whats wrong with them today (giving kids control)i think if a kid gets out of control a parent should turn them over on their lap and give them a old fashion spanking on the rump.and if they go to far with it .send them to prison for a while.not make other parents cut out spankings so their kids can get out of control.
Model Parents "Beat Child's Rump To Jelly"
Hang on everyone,
-forget people with model children who have never raised a hand to them
-forget those who turn around the behavoir of troubled youth without violence
-forget those who have spent years and years studying family life
-and move over Dr. Phil and Supernanny,
We've got some winning advice right here!
Spanking does NOT bring respect
Spanking children does not bring respect for the parent, it brings anger, hatred and fear. It shows that the parent is out of control and is resorting to hitting a small defenseless child. People are not for hitting and children are people too. Discipline should be for teaching, not for punishment. Let the child know what you approve and disapprove of and they will want your approval.
Jimmy Dunne, People Opposed to Paddling Students, Houston 281.584.9707 see www.nospankingzone.org
Funny...I don't hate my parents.
I appreciate them for spanking me when I got out of hand and other punishments weren't working. By the time my sibling came around, they started thinking spanking was bad. Guess who the brat was who still expects everyone to pay for everything, and who the one who went on to be a business-owner who is respectful. Guess which one stopped talking to our parents when they started saying No to expensive objects, and who is the one who was close to our parents until they died.
Taking away a beloved toy can bring anger, hatred, even fear, just as well. Tell me what child is happy to have her favorite doll taken away.
Spanking does NOT bring respect
I think your dead wrong evryone in my family as far as I can remeber has gotten whippings and we are all good folk's never shot a school up or co- workers and we are hard working and god fearing people.It is the lack of punishment that is the problem with kids now aday's so look's to me like your wrong!!!
Spanking isn't meant to bring respect
Not every action a parent takes is meant to engeander respect. I do believe that spanking a child out of anger and frustration is abuse, not discipline .