Why is it when we see a parent smack their unruly child in public - despite the fact it’s entirely legal and the child belongs to someone else - we stare, we glare, we want to call child protective services. Is it really any of our business? And, why is it that when you’re doing the disciplining it’s O.K., but if someone else is, you just can’t bear it?
There’s no single parenting issue more loaded, more controversial, than spanking. Even as we approach the second decade of the new millennium the question remains: Is parental corporal punishment an appropriate form of childhood discipline?
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) does not endorse it under any circumstances, saying it’s of limited effectiveness and has the potential for harmful side effects. But there has been no real scientific way to measure spanking’s long-term effects. Pro-spanking and anti-spanking studies aren’t scientific. They can’t be modeled or reproduced by other researchers because there are too many wide-ranging factors that could influence the outcome. Additionally, results are often heavily biased toward the researcher’s personal beliefs.
But the AAP’s latest study, published in April, comes closest to building a solid case against the practice, supporting a direct link between spanking and childhood aggression. Based on a survey of about 2,500 mothers, researchers at Tulane University found that children who are spanked as often as twice a month at age 3 are twice as likely to become aggressive, destructive and mean - essentially bullies - by the time they are 5. For the first time, the study included a control for factors such as the levels of stress, depression and education of mothers, as well as a measure of how aggressive the children were from the start.
For Catherine Taylor, assistant professor at Tulane and lead researcher of the study, it’s enough proof that spanking increases the risk for aggressive behavior in children.
“If you’re trying to improve behavior, [spanking] is counterproductive,” she said in an article that ran in U.S. News & World Report. “This study is not saying that children don’t need discipline. But we really encourage parents to focus on positive, non-physical types of discipline, such as time out, instead of spanking.”
That seems to makes sense. Every child is different, so why take the chance and expose them to hitting when there’s no telling how they may interpret it in the long run?
But let’s not forget the reason we’re all here: discipline. There are still a lot of people who think you can spank and still be a good parent. According the AAP, as many as 90 percent of parents think it’s O.K. to spank young children. (The organization defines spanking as hitting that is done with an open hand and does not cause injury.)
Despite some opposition to parental corporal punishment in the United States and the fact it’s been outlawed in 26 countries around the world, the spanking of children is legal in all 50 states. (Bans have been proposed in Massachusetts and California, but these initiatives were quickly shot down.) Some popular pro-spankers include James Dobson, a psychologist and author of the book The New Dare to Discipline, in which he writes:
“The minor pain that is associated with this deliberate misbehavior tends to inhibit it.... A boy or girl who knows love abounds at home will not resent a well-deserved spanking.”
There’s also developmental pediatrician Lawrence Diller, who speculates that the occasional swat could “make the difference in whether your child will be on Ritalin or not.”
A little more radically, some fear the recent AAP study and others like it could demonize spanking to the point that some parents will avoid any discipline that helps a child know right from wrong. The opinion of this talk-radio blogger out of San Diego was recently picked up in The New York Times’ parenting blog Motherlode. It read:
"Bloody hell! It’s no wonder we’ve got such an entitlement mentality these days. We live in a society where success is punished and bad behavior is rewarded. When corporal punishment was prevalent we didn’t have so many issues with welfare, school violence, and the general, overall degradation of society. We now live in a time when parents buckle to kids acting like animals. When did that become a way of life?!"
These arguments support the idea that knowing there are consequences for bad behavior may not always be counterproductive. I happen to remember the threat of the belt when I was naughty as I child - and every once in a great while I felt the sting of leather against my bare derriere. It certainly seems barbaric by today’s standards (my experience happened in the mid ’70s), but there was no shortage of love, caring and security in my house growing up.
I think that the “snapping of the belt” was a disciplinary barometer that helped me make better decisions down the line. Nonetheless, spanking doesn’t fit into my style of parenting today (however, my daughter hasn’t yet entered the terrible twos. You might want to get back to me in year or two). But whichever way you lean - light spanking or a complete hands-off approach - the AAP has good disciplinary recommendations and calming solutions on its Web site, healthychildren.org, to help you navigate the tricky path of discipline.
Do you use endorse spanking? What works for you as an effective disciplinary tool? Share your thoughts with us.