Customer Reviews

To Spank Or Not To Spank

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(14)

 

 

Did any of these reviewers actually read this book? Or did they just go from page to page, screaming as their carefully cultivated sensibilities were challenged? It appears that they did, since their comments are word for word the same as those used by numerous so-called experts who continually tout their beliefs based on little or no data and would have us believe that their opinions are facts. This book does not advocate spanking. If you do not believe in spanking, then this book will not convince you otherwise. Unlike anti-spanking advocates who do all they can to shove their opinions down everyone's throat, Rosemond is not trying to convince anyone to spank. This book is for people who already believe in spanking or who are undecided. And, strange as it sounds, this book can actually prevent child abuse as Rosemond provides guidelines for administering a spanking so as to make it effective, as well as advice on how to raise a well behaved child using a variety of forms of discipline. He constantly reminds the reader that a spanking should be short (one or two swats at the most), should not be administered with the intention of causing pain, should only be given with a hand and never a foreign object (belt, switch, etc.), should never be given on bare skin, and numerous other restrictions. He even objects to the common practice of slapping a child's hand! Does this sound like a person advocating child abuse? The method advocated here is a quick spanking used to get a child's attention, but Rosemond clearly states that the action of spanking should NOT be the punishment. People who use spanking as a punishment are more likely to cross the line from discipline to abuse. Studies have shown that parents who do not use corporal punishment are more likely to explode at a child and cause real harm. Rosemond probably knows what he's talking about as part of his career involved counseling parents whose children were taken away due to abuse. This book is to help people keep control of their kids from day one, and not lose control of the child(ren) and themselves and possibly do something they will regret later. If you do not spank, don't feel threatened, for Rosemond will not try to convince you to do so. If you do spank, this book is an excellent way to ensure that your child will get the maximum benefit from it, as well as giving numerous other disciplinary methods to ensure a well-behaved child that people like to have around. In short, read the book with an open mind. You might be surprised to find advice that you can take home.

I have to believe that the negative reviews of this book are by people that have an agenda or have not read this book.

Rosemond makes very clear the difference between HITTING and SPANKING. And he states there are other more effect ways to disipline a child.

He further says that a steady diet of spankings are not productive. But that an occasional pop on the rear end is effective in getting the child's attention so that you can communicate your message to the child, and that spanking alone will accomplish nothing.

I believe this book has useful information. Whether you decide to spank or not spank, just make an informed decision. This is just one of many resources I checked before my husband and I made a choice. All parents should make that informed choice, and the parenting team, should be in agreement. I know this got both good and bad reviews. I guess it's just a matter of whether you agree with the author or not. Whether I agree or not doesn't matter, the book still has useful information that should be read by all parents.

Writers always seem to want to bash spanking, even though the research has never proven spanking is bad (90% of parents have spanked!). This book gives very good suggestions and I would recommend it to anyone who wants an unbiased discipline book.

The theme of this book is to point out that there are profound differences in "spanking" when it is done appropriately and what others refer to as "hitting." Unlike some other child psychologists who want to lump everything from spanking to murder into one category, Rosemund reveals the element that is being left out of the discipline equation--common sense. Experts tell parents that if they are intelligent, they don't need spanking to discipline their children--but intelligence also means being able to interject reason into the decision making process. The logic of the anti-spanking movement doesn't wash!

Being a research oriented psychologist that has taken in over 300 out-of-control youth (up to 15 at a time) for treatment in my home 24/7 for over 40 years, it is refreshing to see parents get realistic information about the value and role spanking "can" play in parenting. Since the 1970's when two theoretically fanciful, scientifically unsound parenting philosophies (PET,1970;STEP,1973) condemning parental use of rewards and punishments (including spanking) were championed by so called child rearing experts as the scientifically based new and more effective way to raise children, parents have been misled into believing all unpleasant consequences (including a well controlled spanking) are unnatural, produce trauma and is valueless child abuse. Experiencing painful and unpleasant consequences is an important part of Mother Nature's learning process. Unfortunately, many permissive parents being run over by their children look for ways to justify their failure to properly teach their children. They attack people who advocate the effective dimensions of Mother Nature's parenting approach by spewing out mindless cliches and rhetoric such as: people who advocate disciplining children have repressed physical abuse problems from childhood, physical punishment is child abuse, new non-punitive parenting systems, are the only ones with scientific support. The facts of the matter are: (1) non-punitive parenting systems (like PET, STEP, Jane Nelsen's Positive Discipline)have repeatedly been shown through scientific research to be ineffective (e.g. see Rinn & Markle, 1977; Dembo, Sweitzer & Lauritzen, 1985;Robinson,Robinson,& Dunn, 2003)(2) all the books that have received the scientific research on punishment (e.g. Punishment, by Walters and The Effects of Punishment on Human Behavior by Apsohe & Axelrod) point out punishment reduces misbehavior without all the negative side effects claimed by permissive child rearing professionals, and (3) less than 3% of child rearing professionals have actually reviewed even 25% of the scientific studies on punishment. While the vast majority of so called child rearing professionals condemn parental use of punishment, they base their opinions on anecdotes and testimonials they have heard and read, not what has been proven to work in practical parenting situations. If people would quit naively mouthing unearned positive claims about non punitive talk-it-out parenting and share the proper and effective methods for punishing children, (along with lots of rewards) our future generations will better succeed in life. Thanks, Rosemond, for identifying and advocating a realistic optional spanking approach as one of many parenting alternatives. It is too bad so many babbling sheep try mindless character assasination approaches with temper tantrum overtones to mischaracterize Rosemond's book. Over 70% of the out-of-control, defiant children brought to my treatment home over the past 30 years come from families with parents (including many psychologists) who relied on PET and STEP type parenting philosophies. After carrying out a research project which included interviewing the next door neighbors of over 200 child rearing professionals from Los Angeles to New York who advocate PET, STEP type parenting systems, we found those professionals were either not practicing what they preach, or their children were viewed as typically being unruly and disrespectful. It really is time to cut the rhetoric and the fanciful philosophies. It is time to look at the practical, real world of parenting, and give parents advice that can realistically work which benefits children in the long run.

As a minister, I must say that this book makes a clear distinction between "hitting," "beating," and spanking. Per Proverbs, " in the heart of a child foolishness abides, but the rod of correction draws them far from it." I "believe" that spanking is sometimes "necessary". John's book gives parents an understanding that spanking can immediately stop unfavorable behavior, and does not lead to the murderers that we have in prison, maybe they deserved a "swat"; perhaps if they had received some sort of discipline, we wouldn't have those "menances to society."

I think the author's goal was to tell you that it's OK to spank - but the more I read the more I was glad I've chosen not to spank my children. some of the examples and stories were downright scary - spank a 10-year-old for not wanting to unload the dishwasher? Yikes! If you want to read a book with good/positive/practical discipline ideas that really work try Perfect Parenting by Elizabeth Pantley.

John gives a balanced view on the discipline of children. He pointed out the extremist views of the like of Straus. Very good book to read.

Children under 3 years of age have been repeatedly proven incapable of associating the strike of a parent with the behavior that has displeased the parent. Instead, all they see is that the person they love and trust more than anyone else has just turned dangerous and intentionally hurt them. It's clearly child abuse. If a child is too young to understand the association between the spanking and the action discouraged, it's clear based on simple logic that another method of teaching must be used. This book advocates child abuse in its worst form: bullying those who can not speak up against it or defend themselves, or even understand why it is happening. That isn't "psychobabble," it's common sense.

The legal definitions of assault, which do not penalize those who should be legally entitled to protection by the definition based on age, dependency upon an assaulter, or relationship to an assaulter, state that not only is any intentionally or negligently inflicted bodily harm to be considered criminal assault, but even the threat of it is. If I threaten to hit a neighbor, for example, it's criminal assault. If I threaten to hit a grandparent, for example, it's not only assault but it's socially considered "elder abuse." The same MUST be extended to children. Books like these take us backwards in the progression of human development and understanding, not forward into a more developed and civilized society. Shame on the author!