Child Abuse/Corporal Punishment Discussion

[USS Monitor]

If anything, a lot of kids these days could use more strap rather than less, being the spoiled disrespectful brats who always know their rights and never their duties. Some of the shit you get to see at schools these days would be unthinkable back when I was a kid.

That's not necessarily a result of spanking less. I think it comes from other aspects of the way people raise their kids -- what you say when you talk to them, what activities you encourage them to take part in, what types of things you buy for them and how you respond when they ask for more, etc.

[Europe and Oceania]

So your suggestion is let's spank the crap out of our children so they don't become what You claim are "little of peices of bad mannered shit" so they can get screwed up by their parents abuse and instead become violent and/or are more likely to commit a crime or be incarcerated?

It seems that as time when on we have generally gotten more civilized as society compared to when using those barbaric practices such as
stoning and torture etc. in the Middle Ages. You want to conserve an old uneducated practice that has been proven it doesn't work and can
in fact screw up your children, so if you were in the Middle Ages you would probably be one of those that tried to conserve their barbaric
practices by giving your Anecdotes of why it's better.

Did you actually READ the post following the one you responded to? Or were you too lazy and just jumped to the strawmen?
Anyway, the fact that using mild corporal punishment as a tool part of a wider healthy education (french method) do help to rise better behaved kids than either always giving up to their will or "reasoning" with them when they're clearly too young for that (anglo-saxon method) isn't so much proved by anecdotal evidences then it is by empirical ones. Just look at the countless books wrote by American and British mothers and psychologists stating how astonished they are that "Ho my God! Giving your kid a frame does help him to grow into something else than self-centered shit stain!"

Anecdotes and uh... anecdotes again?

Just look at the countless books wrote by American and British mothers and psychologists stating how astonished they are that "Ho my God! Giving your kid a frame does help him to grow into something else than self-centered shit stain!"

Emphasis added.

Oh look, more anecdotes.

Bottom line is that physical punishment affects everyone differently which is why it shouldn't be done in the first place, again the
whole argument from the Right "My parents spanked me and I turned out fine!" is irrelevant because first of all, many of them
are not "fine" and are in fact unaware of their own dysfunction, secondly, just because getting spanked was "fine" for you doesn't mean it's
fine for everybody else.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/1 ... 31962.html
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/gr ... s-not-work
http://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspx
http://www.cccf-fcsge.ca/wp-content/uploads/RS_82-e.pdf
http://www.naturalchild.org/jan_hunt/tenreasons.html
http://healthland.time.com/2012/02/06/w ... esnt-work/

But no, you're right.

[USS Monitor]

when the article says "tree branch" do they really mean a switch? there is a big difference between a switch and a tree branch.

I hope nobody is spanking their kids or anyone else for that matter with a tree branch!

Or a switch... If you need a tool to hit your kid with, you probably are too enthusiastic about hitting your kid.

You can spank me with a tree branch, though. Ironclads are tough like that.

[USS Monitor]

As someone who has been abused by my sorry excuse for a father, I think I know what is abuse. One quick spank is not abuse, especially if you explain the reason for the spanking and only spank as a matter of last resort.

The existence of worse forms of abuse does not make lesser forms of abuse not abuse. The existence of murder does not make assault not a crime.

There are circumstances where using physical force wouldn't get you prosecuted for assault. Like if you're a police officer or a bouncer and you tackle some unruly person to get them under control.

Depending on WHY someone is spanking their kid, it might fall into the same category. Kids can get pretty unruly.

[Aelex]

Anecdotes and uh... anecdotes again?

U wot m8? How's comparing the Anglo-Saxon parenting system to the French one an "anecdote"? I mean, I've no problems with you desperatly trying to throw fallacies around to hide the fact that you have no real arguments but, c'mon! Be somewhat less obvious about it, at least!

Emphasis added.

Oh look, more anecdotes.

Are you acquainted with the concept of Empirical Evidences? Because in fields such as Sociology that aren't true science, when "Anecdotes" pile up so much that you can't ignore them anymore, it's called an Empirical Proof.

Bottom line is that physical punishment affects everyone differently which is why it shouldn't be done in the first place, again the
whole argument from the Right "My parents spanked me and I turned out fine!" is irrelevant because first of all, many of them
are not "fine" and are in fact unaware of their own dysfunction, secondly, just because getting spanked was "fine" for you doesn't mean it's
fine for everybody else.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/1 ... 31962.html
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/gr ... s-not-work
http://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/spanking.aspx
http://www.cccf-fcsge.ca/wp-content/uploads/RS_82-e.pdf
http://www.naturalchild.org/jan_hunt/tenreasons.html
http://healthland.time.com/2012/02/06/w ... esnt-work/

Yet EMPIRICAL EVIDENCES seems to prove that kids who are from time to time fessés not as a way to educate them on itself but rather as one of multiple differents tools to give them a proper "frame" do are more well-mannered and patient than their counter-parts who are just "reasonned" with and whose tantrums are tolerated.

But no, you're right.

No, no. You are. The helicopter parenting and the "kindergarchy" it created just proved how good for the kid's well-being and education it is to give up to all of his demands and act as if he was the one in position of authority. Surely, we ought all to try to adopt such magnificent and efficient parenting skills as you Anglo-Saxon do!

[Imperium Sidhicum]

If anything, a lot of kids these days could use more strap rather than less, being the spoiled disrespectful brats who always know their rights and never their duties. Some of the shit you get to see at schools these days would be unthinkable back when I was a kid.

That's not necessarily a result of spanking less. I think it comes from other aspects of the way people raise their kids -- what you say when you talk to them, what activities you encourage them to take part in, what types of things you buy for them and how you respond when they ask for more, etc.

I suppose there's truth in that. Parents spent much more time with their kids back in my day, kids spent a lot more time socializing with other kids as well and thus learning proper conduct through interaction with other people. Nowadays that television, internet and smartphones have largely replaced parenting, kids seeing their parents only as they leave in the morning and return late in the eve exhausted, unhappy and in no mood or condition to pay much attention to them, it's little wonder that they model their behaviour after other examples. As their wage-slave parents toil their days away trying to make the ends meet, and the overburdened and underpaid teachers have neither the authority nor the incentive to teach proper conduct to their charges, kids oftentimes instead learn their manners from popular culture that glamorizes shallowness, stupidity, vulgarity and shock value.

So unsurprisingly, kids these days always know their rights but never their duties. Indeed, most don't even have a concept of duty or responsibility instilled in them. Their extensive rights mean that they don't get to face consequences for their words and actions, that sense of impunity making them into spoiled, insolent brats.

---

With that being said, I still think harsher disciplinary measures that were the norm for my generation did play a role in making kids of the time more well-behaved. Spanking or slapping a kid for being disrespectful or doing bad things isn't really about asserting dominance and forcing the child to submit - it's about teaching that bad things have bad consequences, that one can and will be held responsible for what they say or do.

[Salandriagado]

The existence of worse forms of abuse does not make lesser forms of abuse not abuse. The existence of murder does not make assault not a crime.

There are circumstances where using physical force wouldn't get you prosecuted for assault. Like if you're a police officer or a bouncer and you tackle some unruly person to get them under control.

Depending on WHY someone is spanking their kid, it might fall into the same category. Kids can get pretty unruly.

Subduing people by physical force and spanking are extremely different things. If a police officer bent you over his knee and gave you a wack on the arse, he'd be in serious shit.

[Dinake]

There are circumstances where using physical force wouldn't get you prosecuted for assault. Like if you're a police officer or a bouncer and you tackle some unruly person to get them under control.

Depending on WHY someone is spanking their kid, it might fall into the same category. Kids can get pretty unruly.

Subduing people by physical force and spanking are extremely different things. If a police officer bent you over his knee and gave you a wack on the arse, he'd be in serious shit.

Parent's aren't police officers. They're congress, president, judge, jury, sheriff, jailer, treasurer, town preacher, dogcatcher and virtually every other authority combined, plus some other things.
If the government had judicial corporal punishment, that would be just fine.

[Salandriagado]

Subduing people by physical force and spanking are extremely different things. If a police officer bent you over his knee and gave you a wack on the arse, he'd be in serious shit.

Parent's aren't police officers. They're congress, president, judge, jury, sheriff, jailer, treasurer, town preacher, dogcatcher and virtually every other authority combined, plus some other things.
If the government had judicial corporal punishment, that would be just fine.

No it wouldn't, if for no other reason that such punishments don't work. They do absolutely nothing to actually correct the behaviour.

[Imperium Sidhicum]

Parent's aren't police officers. They're congress, president, judge, jury, sheriff, jailer, treasurer, town preacher, dogcatcher and virtually every other authority combined, plus some other things.
If the government had judicial corporal punishment, that would be just fine.

No it wouldn't, if for no other reason that such punishments don't work. They do absolutely nothing to actually correct the behaviour.

They do make offenders afraid to commit crimes from fear of immediate and very painful consequences, do they not?

If so, does it really matter if the behaviour itself is corrected or not? You'll be surprised how many people require nothing short of a good beating to get something through their thick skulls, so as long as that certain message is impressed upon them, I don't see why the exact methods would matter.

[Afer]

It's not the lack of punishment. It is their parents. Come to an Asian school and the students are disciplined with a great work ethic. When I studied in England, people could basically get away with anything. All they had to worry about was detention.

[Dinake]

Parent's aren't police officers. They're congress, president, judge, jury, sheriff, jailer, treasurer, town preacher, dogcatcher and virtually every other authority combined, plus some other things.
If the government had judicial corporal punishment, that would be just fine.

No it wouldn't, if for no other reason that such punishments don't work. They do absolutely nothing to actually correct the behaviour.

Judicial corporal punishment seems to work very well for the countries that retain them.

[PaNTuXIa]

No it wouldn't, if for no other reason that such punishments don't work. They do absolutely nothing to actually correct the behaviour.

Judicial corporal punishment seems to work very well for the countries that retain them.

No they don't. Take a look at Nigeria's crime rate for Lagos, one of their largest cities:
http://www.numbeo.com/crime/city_result ... city=Lagos

[Dushan]

I've got a few Times little, rather symbolic spankings as a Kid. Sometimes I was also put under a Shower (no it wasn't cold) after that to calm the fuck down when I was making riot or whatever.

While in my place Teachers did not spank, they had their way to put me into place, especially the female ones. ; )

Those things did not fail to teach me a some healthly amount of humility and a few other important lessons as they put me into the place where i belonged. Of course I wast exactly always a pleasent expierence. But it is one of the things that made me to what I am and for that I am grateful.

That being said, I've observed among relatives some cases of rather harsh and exaggerated physical punishment towards Kids and it was most certainly bad for their development.

[Imperium Sidhicum]

Judicial corporal punishment seems to work very well for the countries that retain them.

No they don't. Take a look at Nigeria's crime rate for Lagos, one of their largest cities:
http://www.numbeo.com/crime/city_result ... city=Lagos

You forget about poverty, desperation, corrupt and ineffective law enforcement and other things that contribute to that crime rate.

If people were sufficiently prosperous to deem it not worthwhile to be flogged over whatever crime they have in mind, and if they were virtually assured to be caught and flogged if they did it, crime rates would surely drop sharply. Much like a starved dog, a starved man with nothing left to lose has no fear of the whip, especially when there's a good chance to avoid the whip regardlessly. A desperate man will much rather take chances against the law than sit idly and most probably expire of starvation or disease as a law-abiding citizen.

Without these problems to complicate matters, flogging would surely be more effective than imprisonment, not to mention cheaper for the state - administering a few dozen lashes doesn't cost anywhere near as much as housing, feeding and guarding a prisoner for months or years. It doesn't put him in close contact with other criminals to exchange experience with for this duration, and most importantly, still gives the offender a painful lesson to remember.

[Dinake]

No they don't. Take a look at Nigeria's crime rate for Lagos, one of their largest cities:
http://www.numbeo.com/crime/city_result ... city=Lagos

You forget about poverty, desperation, corrupt and ineffective law enforcement and other things that contribute to that crime rate.

If people were sufficiently prosperous to deem it not worthwhile to be flogged over whatever crime they have in mind, and if they were virtually assured to be caught and flogged if they did it, crime rates would surely drop sharply. Much like a starved dog, a starved man with nothing left to lose has no fear of the whip, especially when there's a good chance to avoid the whip regardlessly. A desperate man will much rather take chances against the law than sit idly and most probably expire of starvation or disease as a law-abiding citizen.

Without these problems to complicate matters, flogging would surely be more effective than imprisonment, not to mention cheaper for the state - administering a few dozen lashes doesn't cost anywhere near as much as housing, feeding and guarding a prisoner for months or years. It doesn't put him in close contact with other criminals to exchange experience with for this duration, and most importantly, still gives the offender a painful lesson to remember.

Hence why Singapore is a better example than Nigeria.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

There's a time and place to use corporal punishment towards your child. For instance, swatting their hand instead of letting themselves burn their hands with a stove, or yanking them out when you see them approaching a deep hole. Even spanking them before they cross the street without paying attention to implant that crossing the street without paying attention = hurt. In short, anything that requires a fast, and effective lesson.

However, most of the non-immediate lessons can be procured by giving them a talk. If you use corporal punishment as a staple of discipline you run the risk of elevating said corporal punishment into abuse. So it is an extremely blurry line to use corporal punishment as a staple for a child's discipline.

No, corporal punishment such as spanking is not abusive by default (you can argue it is, but then so would be swatting hands so that the child learns that touching hot stoves = pain, or yanking them from danger), but it is abusive because it can be escalated into being beaten with switches and whatnot, and that's where the abuse is.

[Salandriagado]

No it wouldn't, if for no other reason that such punishments don't work. They do absolutely nothing to actually correct the behaviour.

They do make offenders afraid to commit crimes from fear of immediate and very painful consequences, do they not?

If so, does it really matter if the behaviour itself is corrected or not? You'll be surprised how many people require nothing short of a good beating to get something through their thick skulls, so as long as that certain message is impressed upon them, I don't see why the exact methods would matter.

Doesn't work. Fails for exactly the same reason that the death penalty does: most people commit crimes because they are either desperate or not i control of themselves, and no form of deterrent is effective in those situations. Rehabilitation works. Punitive "justice" doesn't.

[Liriena]

As someone who was subjected to corporal punishment as a child, as a pacifist, and as someone who has paid attention to the word of mental health professionals, I am staunchly opposed to physically assaulting children as a form of "punishment". Using violence against children for "misbehaving" teaches them nothing other than fear and aggression, and if you can't get away with spanking your employees or random strangers for "misbehaving", you don't get to do the same to the most vulnerable amongst us. You don't get to lay a single finger on someone who is far weaker than you, still very much growing and learning.

[Liriena]

I do love how so many claim that people from previous generations who were subjected to corporal punishment "turned out just fine", as if a significant percentage of the American population over the age of 26, for example, did not suffer from mental illness.

[Dinake]

I do love how so many claim that people from previous generations who were subjected to corporal punishment "turned out just fine", as if a significant percentage of the American population over the age of 26, for example, did not suffer from mental illness.

Mental illness simply runs rampant in America. Your point?

[Liriena]

I do love how so many claim that people from previous generations who were subjected to corporal punishment "turned out just fine", as if a significant percentage of the American population over the age of 26, for example, did not suffer from mental illness.

Mental illness simply runs rampant in America. Your point?

While correlation doesn't equal causation, the veracity of saying that generations raised on corporal punishment "turned out just fine" based on your self-perception is dubious at best.

[Dinake]

Mental illness simply runs rampant in America. Your point?

While correlation doesn't equal causation, the veracity of saying that generations raised on corporal punishment "turned out just fine" based on your self-perception is dubious at best.

I would be interested to see if there's even a correlation there. America has shockingly high rates of mental illness across all age groups.
Anyways, previous generations often had better outcomes- which is what they're talking about.

[Liriena]

While correlation doesn't equal causation, the veracity of saying that generations raised on corporal punishment "turned out just fine" based on your self-perception is dubious at best.

I would be interested to see if there's even a correlation there. America has shockingly high rates of mental illness across all age groups.
Anyways, previous generations often had better outcomes- which is what they're talking about.

But did they have better outcomes? And did corporal punishment actually have a positive role in this, rather than a plethora of other factors? Because, going by the evidence presented by the OP, and available elsewhere, corporal punishment doesn't really seem to have any sort of long-term positive effects on its victims.

[Olthar]

Positive reinforcement is far more effective than negative reinforcement. Reward kids for doing good, not punish them for doing bad. If a kid does something bad, sit down with them and explain why it's bad in terms and concepts that they'll understand. It'll help foster empathy rather than aggression.