Submitting To A Spanking? The 13 New Answer

Here’s a topic of discussion that parents, experts, and teachers are talking about – at what age should a child be spanked? Or is hitting a child really an effective form of discipline? There are conflicting opinions and studies on this subject.

Spanking is a disciplinary method of physical punishment used by parents for centuries to instill obedience and discipline. But at what age is it appropriate to hit a child? Read on to learn more about what the experts are saying about spanking.

Does spanking discipline the child?

Let’s clear the air and see what the experts have to say about spanking as a form of discipline. According to a study by the Harvard Graduate School of Education, spanking is not an effective way to discipline a child, whether at home or at school.

Parents spank their children with the desire to teach them a lesson or instill obedience, but the result depends on the frequency of the spanking and the method of delivery. The answer to the question: Spank a child, IT HANKS.

A parent’s decision on whether or not to spank their child is a matter of personal opinion and should be based on what works best for the parent and child. Like any other form of discipline, hitting a child has its pros and cons.

This is why you have landed on this page, so that you can carefully consider at what age a child should be spanked, even if it is an effective parenting method. But there is one thing you need to be aware of when it comes to spanking. Never hit your child for these reasons:

Out of frustration

Fury

To create fear and intimidation

Shame

If you are a parent who wants to discipline their child, remember that there are other ways to teach obedience and compliance than spanking. Which will be discussed further in the following sections.

Related reading: Authoritarian vs. authoritative parenting

What is the appropriate age for spanking?

If you, as a parent, feel that spanking needs to reinforce physical discipline for your child, then at a minimum, you need to know the appropriate age for spanking. Generally, when a child is ready for potty training, they are ready to face and understand the consequences. In other words, they are development-ready.

It makes no sense to hit a child under the age of two, since he does not understand the negative consequences of his bad deeds. Also, hitting babies can physically harm them.

Studies have found that subtle spanking is an effective discipline for children between the ages of two and six. At this age children can understand why they are punished by spanking.

As the child gets older, it is advisable to reduce spanking and resort to other forms of discipline. Disciplining children through spanking is your choice as a parent, but at least consider your child’s age when using this type of discipline.

How to appropriately discipline your child through spanking

For centuries, spanking has been used by parents or grandparents as a form of punishment, regardless of race or social class. Some use their bare hands while others use materials such as a belt, ruler, wooden spoon, spatula, or other tools.

As much as possible, use only two to three open hand strokes and of course minimize the power. Do not use devices such as belts as this can cause physical harm to your child. The general recommendation is to use non-physical discipline for the child’s first offending. If your child repeats the action, that’s the equivalent of two beats.

If you resort to spanking to correct your child’s negative behavior, make sure they understand why that particular behavior is bad. Spanking to discipline your child without explanation has no teaching value. Here are more reminders on how to appropriately discipline your child through spanking.

Consider the appropriate age when spanking a child

When used appropriately, spanking can be a powerful way to discipline negative behaviors, especially in toddlers or young preschoolers. But before you even think about using spanking to enforce punishment, you should consider your child’s age.

As previously mentioned, a child under the age of 2 may not understand the consequences of their actions. Therefore, spanking is not effective as a sign of discipline for children under the age of two. Also, hitting babies can cause them physical harm, which is something to always remember.

What if your child gets older? are you still spanking According to the American Psychological Association, it is recommended that corporal punishment be gradually replaced with other forms of non-physical discipline, such as time off or loss of privilege, as much as possible.

Offer an explanation

Always offer your child an explanation as to why their behavior is bad. Spanking without any explanation, like any other form of punishment in general, is not an effective way to discipline your child.

For example, the child played with the gas stove. If you spank your child, explain to them that playing with a gas stove is dangerous because they could burn themselves and that they shouldn’t play with it again. So your child will understand why they shouldn’t play with a gas stove again.

Limit your spanking

Did you know that a child who gets spanked a lot is more likely to become more aggressive as they get older? In addition, frequent hitting or spanking is associated with mental health problems in adolescence or adulthood.

In fact, there is a limit to the number of spanks. As a general rule, the number of hits given to a child should only equal the number of times the same rule has been broken. For example, it’s the 2nd time you caught your kid playing with the gas stove.

Spank while saying, “This is the first time you’ve played with the stove and this is the second time you’ve played with it again. You should understand that playing with a stove is dangerous, never do it again”. Your discipline should be accompanied by an explanation as this can be a teaching moment for the child.

Never hit or vent out of anger

Parents should never do the following: spank, vent, intimidate, or incite fear in a child out of anger. If you had a bad day at work and your child did something wrong, don’t take it out on them. Being physically aggressive, especially without a declaration or affirmation of love for the child, can be detrimental to their mental health.

Spanks should never be given out of anger, fear, or any other emotion that you feel the urge to vent. Likewise, it should never be used to intimidate the child. When giving a spanking always follow a declaration and affirmation of love for the child.

What experts say about spanking a child

Experts from various academic sources have provided strong evidence that hitting a child has negative effects on a child’s physical and mental health. The same applies if you yell at or embarrass a child.

So what do the experts suggest? Do not resort to corporal punishment when disciplining a child. If possible, try other non-physical forms of disciplining first, such as B. a time-out or the withdrawal of privileges. Use spanking as a last resort to discipline your child.

Experts say spanking may seem helpful in the short term, but is ineffective and harmful in the long run. A child who is often spanked may interpret the use of physical violence as a socially acceptable method of problem solving, to which he ultimately resorts.

The negative effects of corporal punishment

As a parent, you should be aware of the negative consequences of spanking. Physical punishment such as spanking or hitting can produce negative outcomes in a child, such as:

Physical abuse (especially when severely abused): If a parent becomes emotionally carried away while being spanked, they may hit harder and be unaware of it, and this is a risk factor for physical injury. Forced spanking is a form of child abuse and can result in blisters and bruises.

Fear: Spanking teaches a child to be afraid of you, not to respect you, or not to listen to you. Instead of learning from their mistakes, children feel hurt and resentful.

Increased Aggressive Behavior: If a child has grown up in an environment where spanking is used as an acceptable problem-solving method, the child may exhibit aggressive behavior. This means that fighting and hitting will continue to be their way of solving problems.

Distrust: When children are spanked every time they make a mistake, distrust develops between parent and child over time. Maintaining trust between child and parent requires empathetic leadership.

Low Self-Esteem: When a child is spanked for wrongdoing, their self-esteem drops. A child may think, “If I weren’t such a bad kid, I wouldn’t be hit.”

Parent-Child Relationship: Most parents who spank their children have a bad relationship with their growing children. Spanking undermines the bond between parent and child.

Other Effects of Spanking: Antisocial behavior, mental health problems, poor social-emotional development, poor self-regulation, poor cognitive development, poor brain response

What are other ways to discipline your child other than corporal punishment?

Spanking is not the only way to discipline a child. While spanking is the quickest way to correct a child’s behavior, experts say corporal punishment has long-term consequences for children.

Use spanking as a last resort whenever possible when other forms of discipline are not as effective as you think. At the end of the day you will find that the other forms of discipline are more effective than spanking. Here are other ways to discipline your child without raising your hand:

time out

Taking time out like facing the wall is a powerful way to teach a child obedience. Time out means not being able to interact with playmates, play with toys, or be silent for a period of time.

Taking time out teaches a child to calm and regulate their emotions. It gives them time to think and reflect on their behavior. Time commitment also increases with older and younger children.

Teach your child new skills

Instead of scolding or hitting, teach your child new skills that they would most likely cooperate with. Not only are they learning a new skill, they’re efficiently spending their time doing something productive. Learning a new skill can also help build their independence, confidence, and self-esteem.

Remember to teach new skills appropriate to their age and interests. For example, you can teach four-year-old self-care skills like washing hands or dressing. Learning a new skill can contribute to the child’s overall development.

Remove Permissions

Many parents find removing privileges to be a powerful discipline tool. After all, as human beings, we learn our lesson when what we love is taken away from us. Removing privileges like WiFi, TV, or cell phone time are effective ways to teach the consequences of bad behavior.

How long will you remove their privileges? It depends on you. But usually after 1-2 days of removing privileges they can learn their lesson. Grounding is also a form of depriving oneself of the privilege of going out to gamble or hang out with friends.

Let them do chores

Another alternative to physical punishment is to make them do chores. Not only are you teaching your child a lesson, you are also teaching them life skills for working around the house. Let your child do the dishes, clean up after the dog, fix their bed and more.

Of course, you should always consider your child’s safety when doing a specific task and whether it is age appropriate. Don’t want your three-year-old to wash the dishes properly?

Ignore her yelling or yelling

Kids, especially toddlers, who won’t stop screaming, screaming, or throwing tantrums sometimes just want your attention. What can you do? You can try to ignore their behavior. Do not greet your child until they begin to behave, as this will teach them to be polite.

Positive reinforcement for child development

When your child commits a bad deed, punishment comes naturally. But good behavior also deserves a reward called positive reinforcement. For example, they did a great job cleaning their room, they deserve a treat like ice cream. Or verbal praise for the positive behavior is enough.

frequently asked Questions

How Many Spanks Should a Kid Have?

As experts suggest, the number of beatings a child should receive is equal to the number of times the same rule has been broken. However, non-corporal punishment such as a time-out or loss of privilege is suggested for the first offence.

Does spanking make behavior worse?

Multiple research shows that physical punishment, such as spanking or hitting, can worsen a child’s behavior. This also leads to antisocial behavior, increased aggression or psychological problems.

Is Spanking Child Abuse?

If spanking leaves a bruise, scratch, or cut, that is child abuse by definition. Using excessive force while spanking can result in physical abuse.

take that away

So what is the bottom line in all of this? Spanking may or may not produce positive outcomes for your child. The effectiveness of this type of discipline also depends on how you apply punishment.

Just remember to use this type of punishment appropriately and within a limited capacity. As much as possible, resort to other forms of discipline, such as taking away screen time or time off.

As a parent, you should be more patient to implement discipline and obedience to your child. A final note, two years is the appropriate age for caning. Parenting is hard, but being more patient will have a positive impact on both you and your child.

How child abuse affects adult survivors

dr Paul McLaren (MBBS, FRCPsych, MA, BA, MSc), Consultant Psychiatrist and Medical Director at Hayes Grove Priory Hospital, discusses how child abuse can affect people as adults.

Many of the children abused in the Rotherham case are now adults. How does child abuse affect adult life and relationships?

The experiences of child abuse can stay with survivors for a long time. Adults who have buried their history of child abuse may continue to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), eating disorders, substance abuse, depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, anger, guilt, learning disabilities, physical illness, disturbing memories, and dissociation. A particular problem is the challenge of establishing and maintaining relationships between adults. Recent research suggests that the lifelong onset of psychiatric disorders is due to negative childhood experiences in nearly one-third of cases.

Child abuse can negatively impact survivors’ personal development and their ability to regulate their emotions, which can lead to self-destructive and impulsive behaviors such as repeated self-harm or recurrent suicide attempts. Those who have been repeatedly abused over time can experience dissociation and enter trance-like states, often triggered by memories of the abuse where they relive abusive experiences.

What help is there?

Shame is a major obstacle for survivors seeking help. This is often made worse when their requests for help or disclosure of their abuse as children were ignored or denied by family or professionals. It is important to know that effective treatment is available.

Counseling is a useful starting point and can help survivors by providing a safe environment in which to build a trusting therapeutic relationship. It is often the first experience survivors have of being truly understood in a way that others who have not been abused cannot manage. They are heard and believed and experience empathy instead of judgment.

therapy options

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is a rapidly growing and widely recognized treatment that helps people deal with a variety of mental health difficulties. Evaluation of CBT has shown a 50% success rate in treating anxiety and depression — significantly higher than other talking therapies — and studies have also shown that it can be more effective than medication alone at treating such disorders.

CBT is a structured, action-oriented, and problem-solving approach that helps people manage their thoughts, behavior, and mood more effectively. Generally, patients meet with their therapist weekly for a period of around 6-20 sessions that follow a structured process that includes homework completion and behavioral experiments. CBT has been modified to offer specific help to individuals suffering from PTSD. It can help survivors process their traumatic experiences in a way that lessens their impact on the present.

Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) is a psychological treatment designed for those who have problems with emotional control after traumatic experiences. It is very focused on teaching skills to improve self-regulation.

Childhood trauma often leads to reliving painful memories that are difficult to ignore. Eye Movement Desensitization and Re-Processing (EMDR) is a psychological intervention designed to help process painful memories. Sessions are sometimes longer than CBT for PTSD, but treatment can be completed in fewer sessions in some cases. Those more affected by PTSD may benefit from psychiatric treatment with medications, usually antidepressants.

This page was created by Dr. Paul McLaren (MBBS, FRCPsych, MA, BA, MSc), Consultant Psychiatrist at Hayes Grove Priory Hospital

Spanking, or as it’s officially known, “corporal punishment,” has been in the news a lot lately.

On the trail of the presidential campaign was Senator Ted Cruz’s revelation

If my daughter Catherine, who is five years old, says something that she knows is wrong, she gets a spanking.

And recently, following a call by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to ban caning, the Liberal government in Canada has pledged to end parents’ right to physically discipline children. Similarly, in June 2015, the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that the state had the right to deny foster parenting privileges to a couple who practiced corporal punishment and who beat or paddled children. The couple in the case had unsuccessfully argued that physical discipline was an essential aspect of their Christian faith.

According to a recent Washington Post article

America is becoming less supportive of spanking children. But a majority of Americans still support it.

So is it okay to spank a misbehaving child once in a while?

As a personal disclosure, my wife and I have no children, and I try not to be haughty about couples whose children have very difficult behavior problems. But as a psychiatrist, I cannot ignore the overwhelming evidence that corporal punishment, including caning (which is usually defined as hitting a child with the open hand without causing physical injury), takes a serious toll on children’s mental health.

Why Parents Beat Up Children

Michelle Knox, professor of psychiatry at the University of Toledo, in a review of corporal punishment in the United States, noted a striking irony in American attitudes toward corporal punishment.

In the United States, it is against the law to hit prisoners, criminals, or other adults. Ironically, the only people who can still legally be beaten are the most vulnerable members of our society – those we are charged with protecting – children.

Knox, like many mental health professionals, cites a strong correlation between corporal punishment and child abuse, noting that “…spanking is often the first step in the cycle of child abuse.”

What begins as a well-intentioned parent’s desire to discipline a child often ends in parental anger growing and beatings worsening.

It’s not that the parent is inherently “evil” or a “child molester.” Often the parents are stressed to the breaking point and unfamiliar with alternative methods of disciplining — for example, using “time-outs,” removing privilege, and positively reinforcing the child’s appropriate behavior.

Effects of spanking on children

The psychological distress of children subjected to corporal punishment is well documented.

In 2011, the National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners (NAPNA) issued a statement stating that

Corporal punishment (CP) is an important risk factor for children who develop a pattern of impulsive and antisocial behavior… [and] children who frequently experience CP… are more likely to engage in violent behavior in adulthood.

Similarly, in a 2012 statement, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry concluded that

…although corporal punishment can have a high rate of immediate behavior change, it is ineffective over time and is associated with increased aggression and decreased moral internalization of appropriate behavior.

In short, hitting a child may seem helpful in the short term, but is ineffective and likely harmful in the long term. The child who is often spanked learns that physical violence is an acceptable method of problem solving.

Parents vs Researchers

But wait: Aren’t there exceptions to these general statements? Aren’t there times when a light pat on the butt can do a misbehaving child some good — or at least do no appreciable harm?

Many parents believe so, but most specialists would say there is little evidence to support such claims. However, published Dr. Marjorie Gunnoe, a professor of psychology at Calvin College, and her colleague Carrie Lea Mariner conducted a 1997 study that concluded that “for most children, claims that spanking teaches aggression seem unfounded.”

Gunnoe and Mariner argued that the effects of spanking may depend on the “meaning” children attach to it. For example, spanking that is perceived by the child as parental aggression (as opposed to non-aggressive boundary setting) may be associated with subsequent aggressive behavior by the child.

And, of course, some parents have argued that it’s child misbehavior that leads to spanking – not the other way around.

Nonetheless, there is a strong consensus in the psychiatric community that any form of corporal punishment can be harmful.

dr Catherine A. Taylor (of Tulane University) and colleagues concluded in a 2010 review

…even minor forms of corporal punishment, such as B. spanking, increase the risk of increased aggressive behavior in children.

In addition, clinical studies have shown that reducing parental corporal punishment can reduce later aggression in children.

Parents who feel they have no choice but to spank their misbehaving children don’t need finger-wagging from clinicians.

But they need professional support and education aimed at reducing their stress levels and increasing their use of alternatives to physical punishment.

“Beating naughty children increases their risk of developing depression and becoming addicted to illegal drugs, a new study confirms,” ​​Mail Online reports.

The news comes from the results of a US study that included a sample of more than 8,000 California adults.

Researchers asked simple questions about people’s current mental health and whether they had ever been hit as a child or experienced other forms of physical or emotional abuse.

Smacking has been defined as “the use of physical force with intent to cause pain but not injury to a child”.

In general, the researchers found that people who reported being hit as children were more likely to report problems such as symptoms of depression, moderate or heavy drinking, and drug use.

The researchers argued that childhood munching could have the same long-term negative effects as traumatic life events, such as sexual abuse or parental divorce.

But due to the nature of this study, a cause-and-effect relationship has not been proven, no matter how plausible the connection may seem.

That means the study doesn’t provide any clear evidence that clapping has any negative effects on mental health — but there is a link between the two nonetheless.

According to the charity Child Law Advice, current law in the UK is: “It is unlawful for a parent or guardian to hit their child unless it amounts to ‘appropriate punishment’.”

It’s fair to say that while smacking may be legal as “appropriate punishment,” whether any form of corporal punishment is acceptable is a matter of much debate among pediatricians and child development experts.

Where did the story come from?

The study was conducted by researchers from the University of Manitoba, the University of Michigan, the University of Texas and the Centers for Disease Control in the US.

No sources of financial support are given.

It was published in the journal Child Abuse and Neglect and is free to read online.

The Mail’s coverage of the study was accurate, but the headline – “Spanking unaughty children… ‘should be considered as bad as divorce'” – could give the impression that this is a proven fact, when really that’s just opinion the researcher is .

What kind of research was that?

This cross-sectional study of US adults aimed to see if their childhood experiences of smacking were related to their current health.

Much research has examined how adverse childhood experiences may be associated with poor health outcomes.

Adverse experiences can take many forms, from parental separation or the illness of a close family member to mistreatment, neglect, and abuse.

Previous studies have rarely included smacking as a negative experience, although it is still a common form of child discipline in many countries.

Spanking is typically defined as “the use of physical force with intent to cause pain but not injury to a child in order to correct or control the child’s behavior”.

However, the design of this study has several limitations when it comes to investigating whether smacking causes adverse outcomes in adults.

It is difficult to isolate the impact of a single childhood experience as many other factors could be at play.

It’s also possible that many of the people involved in the study suffered from memory distortions because they were asked about childhood events as adults.

For example, adults with an alcohol or drug problem may be more likely to recall times when they were hit as a child than adults who do not have these types of problems.

What did the research entail?

This US study used self-reported data from adults who participated in the CDC-Kaiser Adverse Childhood Experience (ACE) study.

The study included 8,316 adults recruited from attending routine health screenings in California.

They were asked: “Sometimes parents spank their children as a form of discipline. How many times were you beaten up in the first 18 years of your life?”

Hitting was defined as “yes” if the person said they were hit a few times a year, many times a year, weekly, or more.

One or two hits over the course of an entire childhood were defined as not being hit.

Participants were also asked about physical or emotional abuse.

This included asking during adolescence how often a parent or adult is in the household:

pushed, grabbed, pushed, hit you, or threw something at you

Hit you so hard that you left marks or were injured

scolded, insulted, or put you down

acted in a way that made you afraid of physical harm

This was also rated according to frequency.

Researchers then assessed adult mental health, including asking about possible:

Depression – Asking if they had 2 weeks or more when they felt sad, down, depressed, or lost pleasure in things that were usually important to them or that they enjoyed

moderate to heavy drinking throughout life – more than 14 drinks per week for men or 7 for women

Drug use on the street – every report

Suicide – answering “Yes” to “Have you ever tried to commit suicide?”

Researchers looked at the links between smacking and mental health effects in adults.

They considered potential confounders such as age, gender, ethnicity, educational level and marital status.

What were the main findings?

About half of the sample reported being beaten. The researchers noticed certain trends in the data.

For example, women were more likely to report being hit than men, and black participants more than white participants.

People who reported having been hit were more likely to report depression, moderate to heavy drinking, street drug use, or attempted suicide than those who did not report being hit as a child.

Reports of physical or psychological abuse of children were also linked to these findings.

The researchers attempted to adjust their analysis with the spanking for reports of physical or emotional abuse to try to isolate the effect of the spanking alone.

They found that smacking was still independently associated with an increased likelihood of reporting moderate to heavy drinking, street drug use, and suicide attempts, but there was no longer an association with depression symptoms.

How did the researchers interpret the results?

The researchers said: “Spanking is empirically similar to physical and emotional abuse, and including spanking with abuse adds to our understanding of these mental health problems.”

“Spanking should also be viewed as a [adverse childhood experience] and addressed in violence prevention efforts.”

Conclusion

This study found that gossiping in adulthood can be associated with mental health problems, as well as more recognized forms of physical or emotional child abuse.

But it’s very difficult to show a direct link in this type of study and say that munching has adverse health effects.

And a number of limitations must be taken into account:

It is very difficult to determine the effect of a single factor such as B. smacking to isolate. For example, the parents or caregivers might have had alcohol or drug problems that increased both the risk that they would hit the child and the risk that the child would develop these problems himself. Or children with poor impulse control who were more likely to be hit as children are also more likely to have drug or alcohol problems later.

People who were hit as children are likely to have experienced very different degrees of beating in intensity and frequency, ranging from a mild thump to a bruising injury.

Adults were asked to recall childhood experiences. This means that reports of how many times they’ve been hit can be inaccurate. It’s also possible that adults with mental health problems are more likely to recall negative experiences, particularly when trying to identify possible causes.

The study did not link smacking to clear mental health diagnoses. Only a few simple questions were asked and did not properly assess whether the person had a valid diagnosis of depression or alcohol or drug problems.

The sample may not be representative. It is possible that people with highly traumatic childhood experiences were less likely (or possibly more likely) to respond to this questionnaire (which had a 65% response rate). This would have introduced a form of selection bias.

Although the results of this study are only now being reported, the adults were actually surveyed 20 years ago in 1997, so their childhood must have been in the 1970s or earlier. Cultural and environmental differences between children of different generations may mean that learnings or possible effects of hitting cannot be readily extrapolated to children of today.

The study only involved people from one region in the US, so the results may not be representative of other regions.

This means that the results of this study do not provide strong evidence that smacking leads to negative mental health outcomes in adults – but it is impossible to create an ethical study design that could answer this question.

In the UK, smacking is legal as an “appropriate form of punishment”, but the use of undue force is illegal. It seems that what can be construed as “reasonable” seems to be quite a gray area.

The charity Child Law says: “Whether a ‘strike’ is an appropriate punishment depends on the circumstances of each individual case, taking into account factors such as the child’s age and the nature of the slap.”

They say it is not possible to plead a defense of adequate punishment “if you subject your child to severe corporal punishment that amounts to injury, actual bodily harm, aggravated assault or child abuse.”

It was spring when Joshua Watson, a sixth grader at Alvarado Intermediate School in Alvarado, Texas, had to make a troubling decision — whether to accept a five-day suspension at school or be hit three times with a paddle. His offense: He got his 10th demerit point for forgetting to bring pencils to class. Joshua got good grades and didn’t want to fall behind. So, with his parents’ approval, he decided to get paddled.

On the day of paddling, the vice president approached him outside the cafeteria and told him to take off the two extra pants he was wearing before visiting him in the afternoon. Joshua complied and reported to the office to wait his turn. “I was really scared and very nervous,” he recalls. “It was the longest 10 or 15 minutes I’ve ever had.”

Eventually, the Deputy Principal called him into his office and instructed Joshua to bend over a chair. He then raised the wooden paddle over his head and rammed it into the boy’s buttocks. Joshua screamed and asked him to stop. “I said, ‘Please, please don’t hit me again. Give me a two-week suspension from school instead.'” But he was told it was too late to change: If Joshua didn’t bend down again, he would. d add another hit to the punishment. He hit the boy twice more while Joshua cried and begged for mercy.

When Joshua returned to class, his butt was too sore to sit on. At home, he showed his mother the results and she was shocked. “[The bruise] was purple and black and red,” she recalls. “It covered his whole buttocks.” She called child services and took Josh to the emergency room, where the attending doctor had an important question: “Who hit that kid?”

For the next 10 days, Joshua could not lie on his back or side because it hurt too much. After two weeks, he could only ride a bike by sticking a cushion on the seat. The Watsons took daily photos of their son’s buttocks and said even a month later they could still see signs of bruising. But the emotional trauma lasted much longer.

From the first night after his paddling, Joshua started having nightmares where he saw the VP chasing him with a giant paddle or a gun. According to his mother Paula, these nightmares lasted more than a year. “He didn’t sleep through the night for eight months,” she recalls. “He didn’t even sleep in his bed, he slept in ours. In the worst part of the nightmare, he wet his bed in terror. He regressed emotionally by the age of two or three.”

Joshua was too scared to go back to school that spring, so his mother quit her job so she could homeschool him and take him to appointments with a therapist and psychiatrist. The experts diagnosed him with post-traumatic stress disorder and prescribed antidepressants and anti-anxiety medication for the 11-year-old.

Unfortunately, more than ten years after Joshua’s school paddling, such experiences are not all that uncommon. According to federal statistics, about 70,000 children as young as three years old are spanked or hit in public schools every year – some of them repeatedly. That’s a sharp drop from the 1.4 million children who were physically punished in the late ’70s to early ’80s, but the National Parent Teachers Association, the American Psychological Association, and the National Committee to Prevent Child Abuse say the practice should be completely abolished.

School paddling, which is still legal in 19 states, has resulted in broken bones, lacerations, bruises and severe bruising in some cases. The psychological damage can be even worse. Like Joshua Watson, many children who receive physical punishment have recurring nightmares or night terrors, and suffer from flashbacks, bedwetting, anxiety, school phobias, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Some become socially withdrawn and become low-performing loners.

trouble on the home front

While the use of corporal punishment in schools is declining, most parents in the United States still use corporal punishment to discipline their children. This practice is still widely accepted, despite a growing consensus among psychologists and professional organizations that such punishment is both ineffective and potentially traumatizing.

Robert Fathman, a psychologist in Dublin, Ohio, has campaigned against corporal punishment since his daughter was paddled in first grade in 1980. He says that disciplining children, whether at home or at school, can take a long time -term effects. Some children become aggressive, even violent, and studies have linked harsh physical discipline to an increased incidence of criminal and violent behavior in children. The late psychologist and researcher Ralph Welsh, who did extensive research in this area, calls this connection the “belt theory of juvenile delinquency”. In dealing with thousands of young criminals over the years, he says, he has never met a violent offender who has not been beaten or abused by his parents or guardians.

But Fathman says many children also turn their anger inward and become depressed. “When someone hits us with a board, especially when we were kids, it makes us very angry,” he says. “If it’s a kid with a stick, we can try to beat them up, or we can tell parents or friends and get a lot of support. But if it’s a teacher, principal, or parent, who are we going to tell? Don’t go to the authority figure because that’s the person who hits us. Especially if it’s a parent because they are the person who is meant to nurture and comfort us at all costs. So we suppress anger. And when the anger is repressed and internalized, that causes depression.”

Kathy Darbyshire, 42, of Columbus, Ohio, says her parents hit her almost every day growing up — especially her father, who backhanded her when he was angry. She would sneak around the house trying not to make any noise or draw attention to herself. She had constant nightmares and became so anxious that she could hardly sleep; Instead, she lay awake most of the night. At school, she had few friends until high school and daydreamed through her classes. Sometimes she says, “I pulled my hair over my face so I wouldn’t have to look at my teachers and I could just be by myself.”

Her first suicide attempt came at the age of 7 when she tried to stab herself with a butcher knife. In the coming years, she made several more attempts. “I was scared the whole time,” she recalls. “I was lonely and very angry. I had no self esteem. I thought I was nothing. I still don’t think much of myself.”

Life as an adult wasn’t easy either. She married an emotionally abusive man and was in psychiatric care for more than 20 years, being diagnosed with depression. Therapy has helped, she says, but she still lives with an ingrained sense of anxiety. “Even today, if you reach for me too quickly, I’ll flinch and back away,” she says.

There are many people like Darbyshire who attribute their depression to physical punishment from their parents. But such anecdotes are not scientific proof. Murray Straus, a professor of sociology and co-director of the Family Research Laboratory at the University of New Hampshire, decided to look for such evidence. He put together a study that asked 6,000 adults by the age of 13 how often they were hit by their parents and how often they experienced symptoms of depression, such as hopelessness or great sadness. He found that the more often people were hit as young teenagers, the more likely they were to become depressed and contemplate suicide.

“The men who were hit the most as teenagers had a 23 percent higher depression score than those who were never hit,” says Straus. For women, the difference was 18 percent.

Another study, published in the Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, found that parental corporal punishment was the strongest of 11 different factors contributing to depression in teens living in or near public housing. While corporal punishment has declined sharply in public schools, it is still prevalent in American families.

Although many parents see spanking as terrible and caning as essentially harmless, Straus and other psychologists believe that caning is inherently dangerous. Not only does it teach children that “might makes right,” but it causes fear, anger, pain, and resentment that can affect a child’s self-image. He argues that because corporal punishment is so ubiquitous in this country, it is one of the biggest contributors to depression. “We could probably do more to prevent adult depression by stopping the use of spanking than any other single preventive step we could take,” says Straus.

The Watson family has been dealing with the aftermath of Joshua’s traumatic paddling, but it’s been tough on the whole family. In the fall after paddling, Joshua tried to return to school but became so anxious that he had fainting spells and his nightmares intensified. Then, as the one-year anniversary of paddling drew near, things took a scary turn. “He fainted and fell, was out 30 to 45 seconds,” recalls Paula Watson. “Then he’d come to with a jerk and go straight into a flashback of the attack. He would scream, drag himself across the floor to try to get away. And he wouldn’t recognize me.”

One flashback was so intense that his mum tried to drive him to the hospital – but she had to stop and get an ambulance because Joshua was trying to get out of the car and yelled: ‘The assistant principal is going to kill me, that’s what he did a gun.” He was hospitalized for four days and then went to the hospital’s day treatment center for the next three weeks. The family moved to a new school district and Joshua improved with the help of a good therapist and caring teacher. But his progress came at a high cost: the Watsons’ former home was foreclosed when they couldn’t sell it, and their medical expenses totaled approximately $100,000.

And Joshua’s experience paddling at school changed his parents’ views on corporal punishment forever. “We’ve changed our minds 180 degrees,” says Joshua’s father, David. “I never want to put a child in that situation again.”

More resources

The Center for Effective Discipline. http://www.stophitting.com

references

Interview with Joshua Watson, School Paddle Victim, Alvarado, Texas

Interview with David and Paula Watson, Alvarado, Texas

Interview with Kathy Darbyshire, Columbus, Ohio

Interview with Bob Fathman, psychologist and child mental health advocate

Interview with Murray Straus, Professor of Sociology, University of New Hampshire

Child Abuse Review.

American Civil Rights Union. A violent upbringing. Corporal punishment of children in US public schools. http://www.aclu.org/pdfs/humanrights/aviolenteduca…

Ashton V. The relationship between attitudes towards corporal punishment and the perception and reporting of child abuse. Child Abuse Negl;25(3):389-99.

DuRant RH, et al. Exposure to violence and victimization and depression, hopelessness and meaning in life among adolescents living in and around public housing. J Dev Behav Pediatr;(4):233-7

Dietz TL. Disciplining children: characteristics associated with the use of corporal punishment. Child Abuse Negl;4(12):1529-42.

Gordon, Thomas. discipline that works. feather penguin. Mendler A. and Curwin, Richard L. Discipline with Dignity.

Gottman, John, Raising an Emotionally Intelligent Child: The Heart of Parenting. Simon and Schuster.

Hyman, Irwin A. The Case Against Spanking: How to Discipline Your Child Without Spanking: Jossey-Bass. Shure, B. Raising a Thinking Child: Helping your young child resolve everyday conflicts and get along with others. Pocketbooks.

Kesey, Katherine C. Helping Your Child Cope with Stress, Katharine C. Berkeley Publishing Group. Kurcinka. Shabby. Raise your spirited child. 1991: Harpers.

Straus MA, Stewart JH. Corporal Punishment by American Parents: National Data on Prevalence, Chronicity, Severity, and Duration in Relation to Childhood and Family Characteristics. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev;;2(2):55-70.

Straus MA, Cantor GK. Parental corporal punishment of adolescents: a risk factor in the epidemiology of depression, suicide, alcohol abuse, child abuse, and wife beating. Adolescence;29(115):543-61

Welch, Ralph S. Severe Parental Punishment and Aggression: The Link between Corporal Punishment and Delinquecy, Originally published in Corporal Punishment in American Education: Readings in History, Practice and Alternatives, Editors: Irwin A. Hyman and James H. Wise, Temple University Press.

Center for Effective Discipline. United States: Corporal Punishment Statistics by State and Race. http://www.stophitting.org/disatschool/statesBanni…

Center for Effective Discipline. US corporal punishment statistics by state and race. http://www.stophitting.com/disatschool/statesBanni…

Center for Effective Discipline. US organizations against corporal punishment in schools. http://www.stophitting.com/disatschool/usorgs.php

Center for Effective Discipline. Discipline at Home: Spanking Facts and Fiction. http://www.stophitting.com/disathome/factsAndFicti…

Long considered an effective and even necessary means of socializing children, corporal punishment has been shown to be a predictor of a variety of negative developmental outcomes. The level of agreement in the research literature on this topic is unusual in the social sciences. Corporal punishment is associated with increased infant aggression, antisocial behavior, lower intellectual achievement, poorer quality of parent-child relationships, mental health problems (such as depression), and decreased moral internalization. Evidence on whether corporal punishment leads to short-term compliance is mixed, with some studies showing effectiveness in achieving this goal and others not. However, short-term compliance can be achieved just as effectively without physical punishment. Corporal punishment has a negative impact on child outcomes, especially when it is harsh, regardless of culture. When the use of punishment is normative in a culture, the effects are somewhat less negative. The research supports ongoing efforts to help parents adopt more positive parenting practices and eliminate a legal defense for using corporal punishment on children.

Research suggests that corporal punishment as a method of disciplining children is both ineffective and harmful. This paper provides both an overview and specific examples of recent research on corporal punishment related to the following topics: social, cognitive and mental health; moral internalization and consequences for family relationships; and the interactions with culture and ethnicity. First, it is important to clarify some definitions, as much of the impact debate stems from the difficulty in agreeing on definitions.

Research on the impact of corporal punishment on child outcomes provides a compelling case for changing policies on the use of corporal punishment in families. 2 A research team from the Children’s Issues Center recently reviewed research on child leadership and disciplining (Smith et al. 2005). This paper summarizes and updates a section of that report.

Discipline is the guidance of children’s moral, emotional, and physical development that enables children to take responsibility for themselves in old age (Holden 2002, Wissow 2002). It is about teaching children the limits of what is acceptable and what is not, and making them aware of the values ​​and actions that are acceptable in their family and society. Discipline can be positive, for example, praising the child for doing something good or for stopping doing something inappropriate; or discipline can be negative, such as hitting a child when they do something wrong. Positive discipline usually involves helping children understand why certain behaviors are unacceptable and other behaviors are acceptable. Negative discipline focuses on doing what you’re told to avoid doing something uncomfortable.

Corporal or corporal punishment is the use of force to cause pain, but not injury, for the purpose of correction or control (Straus and Stewart 1999). Although researchers attempt to distinguish between corporal punishment and physical abuse, it is very difficult to do so, and there is no general agreement on the dividing line between corporal punishment and physical abuse. What a “safe smack” is cannot be defined. Abusive and non-abusive parents differ primarily in how often and how severely they physically punish their child, and whether that physical punishment is supposedly intended to correct children.

Many studies have demonstrated positive relationships between corporal punishment and various measures of child behavior, but most of these studies have been cross-sectional and correlational in nature. Correlation studies simply show the relationship of two or more variables at a given point in time and are limited in their ability to demonstrate causality. For example, if a link is found between physical punishment and child aggression, physical punishment may lead to child aggression. However, there is an equally plausible argument that the aggressive behavior could be the causal variable leading to parental punishment, i. However, most researchers believe that there is a bi-directional effect, where both variables are both the cause of and the effect of the other. There are now some longitudinal studies that provide evidence of causality, which is discussed below.

There are methodological problems in determining the effects of corporal punishment and other disciplinary methods on children’s behavior. It is not possible to randomly assign children to the “punishment” and “no punishment” groups, making a causal relationship difficult to establish. The other problems are confounding variables (other variables associated with punishment that are difficult to separate), limited outcome measures (e.g., retrospective reports from parents or children), the definition of punishment (and the distinction from physical abuse), and Lack of generalizability due to limited sample populations (e.g. clinical samples or only European samples).

Critics of Gershoff’s review have also said it is inappropriate to include studies of severe corporal punishment. They argue that the negative effects of corporal punishment are only associated with strict penal discipline, which “is recognized by all experts to be detrimental to the child’s welfare and ethically unacceptable” (Baumrind et al. 2002:581). In response, Gershoff (2002b) has argued that the penalties it contains are not derogatory but normative.

Proponents of corporal punishment have dismissed many of these negative findings, in part because of methodological problems in corporal punishment studies (Larzelere 2000, Larzelere and Kuhn 2005). However, Straus (2001) argues that there are now five prospective studies (observing children’s behavior at different times) all showing the long-term negative effects of corporal punishment. In these studies, two and four years later, children who had been spanked had higher rates of misbehavior than children who had experienced little or no physical punishment.

Ten of the eleven meta-analyses indicate that corporal punishment by parents is associated with the following undesirable behaviors and experiences: decreased moral internalization, increased child aggression, increased criminal and antisocial behavior by the child, decreased quality of the parent-child relationship, decreased child mental health, increased risk of physical abuse, increased aggression in adults, increased criminal and antisocial behavior in adults, decreased mental health in adults, and increased risk of abusing one’s child or spouse. Corporal punishment was associated with only one desirable behavior, namely increased prompt compliance. (Gershoff 2002a:544)

Gershoff (2002a) found that corporal punishment was only associated with a desired behavior, and that was prompt compliance. However, study results were conflicting, with two of the five studies showing that corporal punishment was associated with lower compliance. The other three studies were clinical samples of children referred for problematic behavior. Therefore, the generalizability of their findings is questionable, suggesting that corporal punishment may only be effective in disobedient and disruptive children. Gershoff points out that most parents are not only interested in immediate compliance but also want ongoing compliance, and research shows that this does not necessarily happen and that there are other unforeseen long-term consequences of corporal punishment.

Research on the effects of corporal punishment has achieved a consistency rare in the social sciences (Holden 2002, Straus and Stewart 1999). This research shows that there are a variety of negative long-term consequences of using corporal punishment as a method of family discipline. Gershoff (2002a) performed a meta-analysis of 92 corporal punishment studies examining the effect of punishment on 11 outcome variables. Gershoff’s review specifically excluded studies that included abusive or potentially abusive techniques in their definition of corporal punishment.

long-term effects

social behavior

Corporal punishment has been associated with aggression and other antisocial behavior in children (towards peers, siblings, and adults). Physical punishment can legitimize interpersonal violence for children because they tend to internalize the social relationships they experience (Vygotsky 1978). Ironically, when physically punishing children, the behavior parents are most likely trying to prevent is the very behavior they are likely to reinforce. Social learning theory (Bandura 1969) also suggests that corporal punishment allows children to learn aggressive behavior through modeling. If parents try to change their children’s behavior by inflicting pain on them, those children will likely do the same to others if they want to influence other people’s actions.

Gershoff’s (2002a) meta-analysis reviewed 27 studies in childhood and four in adulthood that looked at the association between corporal punishment and aggression. These studies varied in the ages of the children studied (1–16 years), the type of data collected (however, most were parental self-reports), and experimental design (most were cross-sectional). The results of the meta-analysis consistently showed that parental use of corporal punishment was associated with aggressive behavior in the child. Gershoff’s review also includes 13 studies on delinquent and antisocial behavior in childhood and five studies on the same variables in adulthood. With only two exceptions, the studies showed a consistent association between the use of corporal punishment and criminal and antisocial behavior.

Grogan-Kaylor (2004) used data from the most recent wave of data collection (1998) from the United States National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. There were 1,811 children in the sample and their average age was just over 10 years. The children were mostly from low-income families, and about half of them were black. The study examined the relationship between parents’ use of corporal punishment and children’s antisocial behavior using a fixed effects analysis that offers tighter statistical controls than those used in previous research and controls for both observed and unobserved covariates. Children’s antisocial behavior was measured using the Behavior Problems Index, and parental use of corporal punishment using the HOME inventory, which includes questions about spanking.

Whether or not the parents had spanked their child in the previous week was associated with children’s antisocial behavior two years later, regardless of how antisocial the child was previously. The fixed effects model showed that there was a similarly large negative effect for both low and high levels of corporal punishment. There were no effects of gender, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status on this relationship between parental punishment and children’s antisocial behavior. The study concluded that even low and usual levels of spanking were associated with an increase in antisocial behavior. Unlike studies using other statistical methods, this study suggests that the effect of punishment on behavior is not linear and challenges the assumption that only frequent and severe punishment is associated with harmful effects.

cognitive effects

A sociocultural perspective on development suggests that children’s cognitive development emerges from social interactions. Social relationships such as early attachment to significant others, friendships and collaborative learning between peers, and relationships between children and teachers directly and indirectly affect children’s learning and motivation to learn. Using verbal methods of disciplining through explanation and reasoning is likely to provide the child with more cognitive stimulation than using physical punishment without initiation (Straus 2001). Therefore, poorer cognitive outcomes may result when parents who physically punish their children use less inductive disciplining methods such as explanation and reasoning—procedures likely to promote cognitive growth. It may also be that children who fear physical punishment are prevented from exploring their physical and social world and are therefore less likely to expand their cognitive abilities.

Gershoff’s (2002a) meta-analysis does not include any studies linking corporal punishment to cognitive development or academic performance, but our review (Smith 2005) found seven studies linking aspects of children’s cognitive development to family discipline (Cherian 1994, Jester et al 1999, Shumow et al 1998, Smith and Brooks-Gunn 1997, Solomon and Serres 1999, Straus 2001, Straus and Paschall 2003). These seven studies all show an association between strict discipline and poorer academic performance and/or cognitive development across a range of age groups and ethnic groups. One of the seven studies (Smith and Brooks-Gunn 1997) focused on verbal punishment behavior and the other six studies focused on physical punishment.

A longitudinal study of Wisconsin public schools by Shumov et al. (1998) examined the associations between parental discipline, children’s academic achievement, and teacher ratings of behavioral adjustment in schools. The study used a variety of measures, including parental reports (from interviews) of parenting expectations and discipline at two time points (when children were in third and fifth grade), school achievement scores, and teacher ratings. Reported parental harshness was associated with negative teacher reports of children’s adjustment at school and parental reports of behavior problems at home. Parenting strategies were stable over two years, indicating a consistent parenting approach. In both third and fifth grades, parental harshness was associated with children who had poorer developmental outcomes (in terms of school achievement and school adjustment), even after controlling for family income, race, family structure, and parental education maternal unemployment. The authors concluded that parental harshness was associated with poorer cognitive performance (and social adjustment) in the school setting.

quality of parent-child relationships

A concern that arises from attachment theory is that the use of corporal punishment can affect the quality of relationships between children and their parents. Children’s secure attachment is promoted by warm, positive parent-child interactions and negatively associated with harsh punitive interactions. It is well known that attachment has an important impact on a variety of child developmental outcomes and social skills (Coyl et al. 2002). Attachment security is critical to children’s well-being and sense of security within and outside of family boundaries, and is an integral part of conscience development (Laible and Thomson 2000). Gershoff (2002a) reviews 13 studies linking the use of corporal punishment to the quality of parent-child relationships. The studies consistently showed that corporal punishment was positively associated with poorer parent-child relationships.

Coyl et al. (2002) examined factors that influenced children’s attachment security, such as B. stressful events, maternal depression, negative parent-child interactions and corporal punishment. The study included interviews with mothers participating in a Head Start program when their infants were 14 months old and used Q-Sort measures of attachment and two questions about spanking from the HOME inventory. About two-thirds of the children in the sample were insecurely attached, a number about twice what one would expect for the general population. The study also included a measure of negative mother-child interactions.

The majority of mothers in the study (77%) reported not hitting the child in the past week, while 23% reported hitting the child in the past week. In the spanking group, almost half had spanked only once a week, and about one in six had spanked the child at least six times in the past week. Using pathway analysis, the authors showed that there is a direct pathway linking negative interactions and frequency of spanking to insecure attachment to the child, but also that there is an indirect effect of maternal depression on insecure attachment to the child, mediated by negative interactions and frequency of spanking. Maternal depression had the strongest negative effect on attachment security, followed by negative interactions, frequency of spanking, and relationship stress. The study suggests that corporal punishment and negative mother-infant interactions are more likely to occur when mothers are depressed and stressed, and these negative disciplining techniques are detrimental to infant attachment security.

A qualitative study (Russell 1996) of the views of New Zealand parents and parent educators provides an illustrative example of how family discipline can affect parent-child relationships. The study quotes a mother who made a conscious choice never to hit her own children:

My parents were very strict. I assumed everyone was brought up the same. You will do as you are told and you will not question. My mother used the wooden spoon; my father was more in bare hands. There were other things: going to the room, missing something. When you were naughty they almost took it as a personal affront, they just seemed as offended as if you were insulting them. I was generally very good and was often beaten. I’m sure the beating made me do such stupid things without thinking. It made me want to go out there and do the same thing I was beaten for doing again. The message I got from them when they hit me wasn’t “What you are doing is bad, don’t do it again”. The message I got was “We don’t love you”. (Russell 1996: 69)

Mental health

Less visible than externalizing behavior, but just as serious, is the development of internalizing problems such as depression, anxiety, suicidal thoughts, and other mental health problems. Often ignored and left untreated, such problems can have lifelong implications, including affecting the upbringing of the next generation. New Zealand’s high suicide rate (Action for Children and Youth Aotearoa 2003) is already a concern, so this is a particularly worrying effect of the acceptance of punishment in our culture. According to Straus (1999), mental health problems are associated with corporal punishment because they are a result of the suppression of childish anger associated with being hit by adults on whom children depend for love and care.

Gershoff (2002a) reviewed 12 studies of childhood corporal punishment and mental health and eight studies of adult corporal punishment and mental health. Again, there was complete agreement in the findings of these studies that childhood and adult mental health problems were associated with the use of corporal punishment.

Heaven and Goldstein (2001) surveyed 242 Anglo-Australian and Asian-Australian high school students about their parents’ parenting styles and their own depression and self-esteem. Depression was significantly associated with perceptions of parental punishment and love deprivation. In Anglo students, low self-esteem was significantly associated with low levels of inductance and high levels of love withdrawal. Regardless of their ethnicity, students were more depressed if they had experienced a punitive and unloving upbringing. The effect of parental discipline on depression was mediated by low self-esteem in Anglo-American (but not Asian) students. Punitive discipline also had a more negative impact on internalizing behavior in girls than in boys.

moral internalization

Social information processing theory (Grusec and Goodnow 1994) suggests that the most important long-term goal of family discipline is to help children internalize society’s values ​​and attitudes to guide their own behavior. Moral regulation and internalization include sensitivity to wrongdoing and appropriate behavior, as well as the ability to stay away from wrongdoing and correct harm (Kerr et al. 2004). Fostering internal control over behavior is an important goal of family discipline, and most experts consider it far more important than immediate compliance. Many parents want their children to internalize such values, and they fail to realize that the overuse of assertive discipline without induction or explanation can do the opposite of what they want to achieve. That assertive methods are not as effective as inductive disciplining in promoting moral internalization has been shown in many studies.

Gershoff’s report supports the view that the use of corporal punishment tends to make children less likely to internalize parental rules and values. Review of 15 studies in this area showed that all but two of these studies showed an association between the use of corporal punishment and lower levels of moral internalization.

Kochanska et al. (2001) conducted a longitudinal study of the development of self-regulation in children under the age of four. Mothers of normally developing infants participated in laboratory sessions with their children aged 22, 33 and 45 months. Researchers observed and rated how children responded to their mothers’ prompts in the contexts of “do” (maintain boring behavior) and “don’t” (stop pleasant behavior). Committed compliance meant eagerly embracing maternal agendas and following maternal directions in self-directed ways; Situational compliance was essentially cooperative but appeared dependent on sustained maternal control. Internalization was also observed in “do” and “don’t” contexts by examining whether children complied with prompts when the mother moved to another room. The disciplining style of the mothers was also observed.

There were several significant negative correlations between maternal power use and children’s committed compliance, and between maternal power use and children’s independent compliance (when alone). The authors argue that commitment compliance is the first step towards internal control. It represents the conflict between children’s desire to conform and their desire to be autonomous. Power-based disciplining techniques do not support moral internalization.

Interactions with culture and ethnicity

Much research has been done on the relationship between ethnicity, aspects of parenting and the disciplinary environment, and outcomes for children (Marshall 2005). Several authors point out that the effects of harsh disciplining strategies, especially corporal punishment, can vary depending on the social and cultural context (Deater-Deckard and Dodge 1997, Horn et al. 2004, Kelley and Tseng 1992, Simons et al. 2000) .

Deater-Deckard and Dodge (1997) argue that punishment has different meanings for some cultural groups such as African Americans and that parent-child relationships are another important mediating factor. They contend that where corporal punishment is a prevalent and normative mode of disciplining, and where it is used in a controlled manner in the context of a nurturing relationship, it is considered culturally acceptable and a sign of good parenting, and that therefore the effects can be positive . In fact, there are some studies that support this view (Horn et al. 2004). However, there are other disruptive factors associated with ethnicity, such as poverty, low social status and the risk of living in disadvantaged neighborhoods.

In general, the results are inconclusive, with some studies finding ethnic differences in the association between corporal punishment and poor outcomes and others not. However, various researchers agree that moderating effects of ethnicity only occur with normal or moderate corporal punishment. Extremely strict discipline culminating in physical abuse is equally harmful to all children, regardless of their culture. The negative consequences of severe corporal punishment have been repeated across cultures (Marshall 2005).

A recent study tested the hypothesis that in cultures where corporal punishment is normative, the effects are less negative (Lansford et al. 2005). Cultural normativity refers to the extent to which family members within a culture perceive corporal punishment as normal for their culture and the extent to which families actually use it in that culture. The normativity of corporal punishment varied in six countries in the study, from the lowest in Thailand through China, the Philippines and Italy to the highest in Kenya (Lansford et al. 2005), with different collectivist and religious affiliations between these countries. A total of 336 mother-child dyads, mostly from the middle class, were surveyed to assess the relevance of corporal punishment in each culture and to identify perceptions (of mothers and children) of the use of corporal punishment in their families and in other families in theirs culture group. The children’s internalized and externalized behavioral problems were measured using the Achenbach checklist.

Results showed that countries differed in the reported use and normativity of corporal punishment and in its association with child adaptation. Perceived normativity moderated the association between punishment and infantile aggression and anxiety. That is, in cultural groups such as Kenya, where corporal punishment was more common, adjustment problems were less severe. Put another way, in countries where corporal punishment was less common, children experienced more harmful effects of corporal punishment. Nonetheless, children who had experienced corporal punishment, regardless of whether it was perceived as normative, were more aggressive and fearful. The authors concluded:

access denied

Your access to the NCBI website at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov has been suspended due to possible misuse/abuse of your website. This is not an indication of a security issue such as a virus or attack. It could be something as simple as a script running away or learning how to make better use of e-utilities http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK25497/ to work more efficiently so that your work this does not affect the ability of other researchers to also use our website. To restore access and understand how you can better interact with our site to avoid this in the future, ask your system administrator to contact [email protected].