LockeColeMA wrote:
He was a man who, in a fit of anger, hit his young son who didn't realize what he was doing. So when people say "I was spanked/smacked/hit/switched as a child and it never affected me!" my first thought it always "Bullsh*t. You now think it's ok to hit a child." I never want to think that way.
He did it wrong then. I really think that the first problem we have when discussing corporal punishment is that we first need to establish what exactly we're talking about. Lashing out at someone in a fit of anger is not the standard we should be discussing. That's wrong. Period. It's wrong if you do it to an adult in a bar who **** you off, and it's wrong if you do it to your child as a means of "teaching them a lesson". It's just wrong. Unfortunately, that's the standard everyone assume when broadly declaring that spanking is wrong, and no parent should ever do it.
Spanking can be a very effective teaching tool if used properly (and sparingly). Doing it every time a child does something wrong makes it ineffective since it fails to make it clear to the child that there are levels of "doing something wrong" and that punishment can escalate if they fail to stop doing whatever it is they're "doing wrong". Also, it should never ever be done while angry. That just teaches the child that hitting people who make you angry is acceptable. The child isn't learning the cause/effect you want in that case. You want to teach the child the concept of consequences, not anger release.
When my siblings and I were children, spankings were almost always administered by our dad. Of course, usually what we'd done occurred during the day when he wasn't there, so part one of the punishment was knowing we'd earned a spanking and having to wait for it to happen. Then, when dad got home, there would be a discussion about what had happened, with both parents agreeing whether a spanking or some other punishment was deserved (and yeah, the child got to plead his/her case at this point, which rarely worked). Finally, if a spanking was agreed upon, the child would be told to go to their room (or parents room, it varied), and wait. So once again with the dreadful waiting. Finally, after 10 minutes or so (to make sure he was in a completely calm mood and not acting out of anger), dad would enter the room with a belt (yes, a belt!), calmly explain what you'd done wrong, why it was wrong, and why it deserved a spanking. This would take another 5 minutes or so. Then, he would deliver the spanking. Usually, there was a few minutes of follow up after that, mostly consisting of him explaining (again) that he didn't enjoy doing this, but that it was necessary, and that the choice to avoid such punishment was wholly in our hands, etc, etc, etc.
IMO, that's the correct way to do it. No one in my family ever developed violent tendencies as a result. We always understood perfectly why we were being punished in this way, and since it was only applied when we'd not just done something wrong, but had then taken some action to compound it (like lying to cover something up), it provided a very good lesson in honesty and the difference between mistakes and intent. There was nothing arbitrary or inconsistent about the process, so we weren't scared of our parents or anything. But it did provide a means for our parents to discipline us when the normal means (groundings, time outs, etc) fail. And it was an exceptionally rare event, precisely because it was done properly. We learned not to do the things that would lead to a spanking and thus they didn't occur often (I think I was spanked maybe 3 times). It worked. Very very well. Meanwhile, I see children who are veritable hellions while their well meaning parents simply can't contain them because they refuse to engage in any form of corporal punishment. If you're willing to spank your children (and they know it), you'll find that you don't have to often. And you get much better behaved kids. Win win.
At the risk of tossing in a politically relevant point, the same applies to foreign policy. If you show you're willing to use some high level of force, you'll find that no one does anything that requires you to use it. If you go out of your way to tell everyone that you wont use a level of force beyond X, you'll find yourself overwhelmed with enemies acting against you. Speak softy and carry a big stick only works if everyone assumes you'll use it.
Edited, Sep 24th 2014 5:00pm by gbaji