In my previous post on spanking, I cited data and studies as a way to depersonalize the discussion. By looking towards the current body of literature, instead of making personal observations, I could avoid a he-says, she-says argument, which is not a good MO for discussing controversial topics like this one.

The more I read about this subject, the more I saw evidence of back-filling of facts to support an already-arrived-at point of view, e.g.:

For his part, Dr. Murray Straus (of UNH) said that, as in many scientific debates, each side [of the spanking debate] tended to marshal the evidence that supported its view.

I've always kept my personal views on spanking to myself because I figured they'd be dismissed out of hand as "unsupported". That said, they don't come from nowhere, originating from several sources, including:

1. Books on parenting, books on discipline.
2. Observing both my child and how other parents interact with their children.
3. My own instinct, after thinking about this topic for a very long time.

Before I list the flaws of spanking as a disciplinary MO, I'd like to say that I understand why people spank their children. I've seen many an exasperated parent trying to get a fiercely resistant child into a car seat so they're not late for a doctor's apointment or an important meeting. I've seen parents give in to a tantrum-throwing child's demands, simply because the parent didn't have the evergy to outlast said tantrum and teach that demands are not met when requests are made that way. I've seen young kids walk around seemingly without limits: they have iPods, digital cameras, and cell phones ... none of which they paid for. It's as if there's no limit to the sense of entitlement that so many kids have today.

There's nothing easy about child discipline: it's probably the most difficult part of parenting, which is probably why I think about it all of the time.

Spanking provides a "quick fix" for discipline. It appears to work, particularly in the immediate moment. What doesn't work about it is sometimes subtle (as young kids are not able to articulate clearly how spanking affects them) while other things that don't work take years to manifest themselves.

1. I believe that there are degrees of severity of spanking, and that obviously hitting your kid violently will cause irreparable damage to your child. This is mostly undisputed.

2. I believe that, to a child, there is very little difference in the "shades of grey" associated with being hit / spanked / struck. Yes, in the extremes (on one end a relatively gentle tap and on the other end a violent hit), there are perceived differences, but for the most part, if physical means are used - there are several implicit / tacit lessons that are being learned by the child.

   Five Lessons Implicit in Spanking:

   • That physical violence is a proper/valid method for obtaining compliance and/or obedience and/or what you want.

     NOTE: Substitute anything else for "violence" if you don't like that word ... e.g. "persuasion", "coercion", "mechanism", etc.

     E.g.: "that a physical spanking is the proper/valid method... etc"

   • That physical violence is the natural end of negotiation ... it's a tacit admission that either (a) there will be no negotiation or (b) that negotiation has ended and/or (c) that negotiation has failed.

     ... again with the substitutions for the word "violence".

   • That if you're not careful, and you "push too far" in testing limits, there may be more spanking in the future. Said another way, you're teaching the child "be careful as you test limits, as there may be physical consequences as a result of your tests".

   • That people who care about you sometimes physically aggress against you. Said another way: that physical aggression is a mechanism with which people communicate caring.

     NOTE: If you don't like the word "caring", substitute "lessons", or "discipline" or just make no substitution at all.

     E.g.: "...a mechanism with which people communicate."

   • That it is okay for the child to use physical means to obtain what they want & to communicate... this depends a lot on the age of the child and is not a problem for very young children.

 

3. I believe that spanking is "unreasoning". There is no way for a child to reason with a spanking - it's the end of the line / there is no negotiation possible. Spanking is normally the "last resort", after the reasoning has failed. The inherent imbalance in physical size & strength (plus the adults superior intellect) makes this true.

4. I believe that there's often a false assumption on the part of the parents on the part of the intent of the child... that the child is intentionally being bad, as opposed to a child simply acting like a child and testing limits in the way that children naturally do.

   Said another way: it's entirely possible that a certain percentage of spankings are punishing behavior that is perfectly reasonable, normal, and expected.

   A Brief Aside

   It's important to understand that children figure out limits by testing over, and over, and over, the same set of actions, to understand what the *exact* thing is that's causing the limit to be exceeded. The child will sometimes change a very, very subtle part of their approach and try again - to see if that's the change that will allow them to get what they want. To parents, this often looks like the child is doing the same thing over and over - which is why parents get exasperated. As it turns out, this is how young kids actually learn.
    

5. I believe that for children, to be spanked is terrifying (which is why it works so well). I think that most adults forget how much physically bigger they are than their children and how scary it can be that the people who you depend on for [literally] everything use this mechanism.

   Again, this is regardless of the shades of grey in actual physical pressure applied as well as regardless of the intent of the person doing the spanking.

6. I believe that spanking is unfair to a child because a child cannot understand the specific reasoning behind the action. Meaning, they know there's a reason - they're just not clear on what the exact reason is.

   Said another way: the use of spanking as a teaching mechanism places unreasonable burdens on a child in that children do not have a well-developed sense of "self vs other" nor a well-developed sense of "morality vs amorality" / "good vs bad", etc ... it all looks the same to the child - as they are incapable of making any other distinctions... this all depends on the developmental stage of the child at the time of the spanking - it changes over time.

   So whether it's done with love, or with anger, this is a big difference as perceived by the parent but is not able to be perceived by the child.

   I believe that confusion is very, very common in children following a spanking, as is shame.

7. I believe that it's not fair because children do not have the capacity to reason like adults (e.g.: to understand causality), and so lessons we might think they can learn from being spanked at time #1 may not be able to be applied to time #2 ... to a child, it's much closer to:

   "i got spanked when i did A, and i got spanked when i did B ... does that mean I'll get spanked when i do C? i have no idea... i'm not even sure what A & B were about ... "

   Over time, depending on the frequency of spanking, this can (and will) deter the child's natural curiosity ... as the risk of curiosity outweighs the benefits.

8. I believe that parents who spank ultimately undermine their own authoritative abilities.

   Said another way: as parents, and adults, we're supposed to be careful, and thoughtful, and use "skillful means" to teach our children important lessons. When a parent resorts to spanking, it's a tacit admission that they don't have a reasonable plan for the situation - so instead of relying on intellect, the use of physical force is substituted.

9. I believe most people spank because they (a) have never thought about it or (b) that's they way they were raised.

   Most (if not all) parents that I know fall well outside of the range of "parents who haven't thought about it" and also outside of "that's the way we were raised".

   Said another way: just because it's common doesn't make it right.

   It's also only common in America ... it's uncommon in most of Europe, where corporal punishment has been banned in 18 countries in the EU:

   In Europe, by contrast, smacking has nearly vanished from schools (even in Britain and Ireland, where it was rife)

10. I believe that kids are so varied in their dispositions and sensitivities that parents who spank have no idea what the ultimate effect will be. Many kids will be fine, some won't ... you just don't know, particularly for very young kids (as you're not sure what their ultimate disposition will be).

    I believe that girls are more deeply affected by spanking than boys, mostly due to subsequent socialization of boys in which it's strongly reinforced (via movies, TV, video games, and sports) that physical aggression is not only acceptable, it's encouraged.

    For boys, this is like a snowball rolling down a mountain and we end up physically acting out.

    For girls, their subsequent socialization causes them to turn residual negative feelings inward, into feelings of shame, lack of self-esteem, etc.

11. I believe there are non-spanking / non-physical mechanisms that will cause as much, if not more damage, to a child ... so spanking is not unique in this regard.

12. As a parent, I believe that a reasonable goal is to strive to only make mistakes I am unaware of ... and that spanking falls under "A Known Mistake" for me and my family. I know I will make many, many mistakes as a parent... I'd like to avoid areas that I know have known negative consequences.

    I there is a controversy in a particular area (like this one), I am more apt to "sit out" the controversy if i can and wait for more data.

    E.g.: I can't sit out immunizations ... my child's health depends on them, so even though there is a certain degree of controversy there, I can't wait it out.

13. I believe that spanking is a learned behavior... that we as parents aren't naturally inclined to hit our children.

    Said another way: I think we need to be told it's okay to spank a child, and that if we could "un-learn" spanking and then were left to our own devices, it wouldn't even occur to parents to strike their kids.

    As an aside: It's the single biggest mystery to me; that moment when a parent decides to 1st spank their child... how does a parent make their mind up? Do they consciously do this, or is it mostly an unconscious decision?

    As a 2nd aside: The practice of spanking is very, very old. It predates psychology, family systems dynamics, etc. It's only recently begun to be studied using controlled experiments and all of the results are preliminary, but many trends are clear.

14. I believe that spanking only works in the immediate timeframe in which it's used, but that it doesn't work after that.

    Said another way: I believe spanking tends to drive the errant behavior "underground", rather than allow your child to truely understand the basis for wanting to commit said behavior. Understanding it is the 1st step towards stopping it.

Given all of this (and in light of the studies), I believe that the very best argument one could come up with for spanking is the following:

"Despite the risks^[1] associated with spanking (even when it's done with love, and not in anger, and not violently ... e.g.: when it's done "properly"), I will be relying on the "overall parenting experience" to balance out those risks with positive lessons, love, and experiences, such that the ultimate/net result for my child is positive."

In other words, despite this questionable practice with it's unknown risks, everything will be okay because I'm doing a lot of stuff right, and so even if there are risks, well, they're small in comparison to what's good.

For my family, I'm seeking another way^[2][3].