Customer Discussions > Parenting forum

The Debate on Spanking is Dead

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 80 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jun 25, 2011 1:22:24 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 27, 2011 7:23:09 AM PDT
In public forums on the internet, we can certainly have lively debates over whether Hitler was a hero, or whether or not the holocaust ever occurred. Oh, yes, we could find a debate over whether slavery ever existed in the U.S.. We might even get an argument that the Earth is flat and always has been. And, given what has also yet to become common knowledge, we can still find arguments in favor of hitting young children as a form of punishment.

For example, those who developed through their formative years having adopted as a part of their belief system that adults hit children as an acceptable practice will take on this treatment of children as a belief not dissimilar to the religious beliefs they've adopted during this same stage of development. And, these are beliefs that tend to become deeply ingrained.

Those who happen to overcome and evolve beyond such irrational belief systems seem to be the exception to the rule. Sadly, it would seem that few children are able to avoid early childhood brainwashing to a particular religion or orientation. Typically, our little ones will buy into what we feed them lock stock and barrel.

Herein lies the problem of change in the face of overwhelming evidence. Let's liken this change to telling a grown man that his name is actually Archibald instead of Joe. Lot's of luck. It's going to take awhile, no doubt and repeated efforts are in order.

So, once again, let's try driving home the facts that carry with them the hope of breaking through just a few more of those bigoted obstacles still standing in the way of social progress.

To begin with, I feel it's most important to make it very clearly known to any and all concerned, that the debate on spanking within the scientific and academic communities is dead, and has been for a number of years now. The most substantial indicator of this development is evidenced by the fact that virtually every professional organization in the U.S. and Canada concerned with the care and treatment of children, has taken a public stance against the practice of spanking.

Based on the overwhelming accumulation of research conducted over the past 50+ years linking spanking to a number of risk factors, the professional consensus against this practice has grown to world-wide proportions...even to the extent that Sweden, Finland, Austria, Norway, Croatia, Denmark, Hungary, Israel, Cyprus, Netherlands, Bulgaria, Germany, Latvia, Iceland, Romania, Greece, New Zealand, Venezuela, Spain, Portugal, Chile, Uruguay, and Ukraine have legislated total bans on spanking.... with Italy, South Africa, Scotland, Canada, and Ireland apparently in the process of following suit. It should also be noted that every industrialized country in the world has banned spanking in schools. The evidence is in, and the evidence has found against the practice of spanking in a compellingly conclusive manner.

Just as one might find supportive views toward spanking being promoted (typically) on web sites sponsored by fundamentalist Christian sects, so can one find supportive views promoting Homophobia, Racism, Misogyny, and other 'hate group' propaganda. Because of the fact that the actual agendas of these sites are often deceptively disguised by organizational titles such as, 'Family Council', 'People's Choice', 'Rights and Freedoms', etc., people are forced to exercise a highly judicious discernment of the information being made available on the Internet. Some web surfers have had to learn the hard way that the Internet abounds with persuasive presentations of 'facts and figures' that can prove to represent nothing more than religious, political, or philosophical attempts to spread self-serving misinformation.

Having spent 30+ years examining/evaluating the research on this issue of spanking children, I am able to state with a high degree of confidence that there has never been a peer-reviewed study that has been able to establish the efficacy of spanking as a means of long-term behavior modification; as an effective teaching modality; as an effective punishment; or as a means of instilling self-discipline. Nor have there been published research findings in peer-reviewed professional journals that served to refute previous research. This previous research found spanking to be associated with a risk for undesirable emotional consequences; a risk for physical injury; a risk of counter-productive behavioral outcomes; a risk for the onset of dependence on external controls; and a proclivity toward authority-directed behavior. Moreover, there has never been research data produced finding that spanking carries no risk to the quality of the parent-child relationship (and I should add that conservative editorial reviews of previous research findings do not constitute actual research, as is sometimes claimed to be the case).

Nevertheless, there are some spankers who will find reasons to dismiss, ignore, or discount, the research findings of field conducted experimental studies related to the Social Sciences. Well, it's especially these folks that I'd like to address concerning alarming new research findings, which represent the most severe consequences of physical punishment yet discovered...while doing so in the form of documented scientific proof*.

These revelations have come through studies in brain research having provided CAT SCAN pictures showing an abnormal lack of brain development (within the portion of the brain responsible for emotional functioning) in children who had been subject to spankings as a punitive measure. For the sake of sample homogeneity, the researchers chose subjects for their study that had been categorized as 'abused' children. Common sense tells us that this does not eliminate the possibility of a lesser degree of brain damage occurring to spanked children who are subjected to a lesser degree of non-injurious violence. In other words, it would be ludicrous to assume that a child must first suffer bruises, cuts, or welts (or other injuries), before brain damage can take place as a result of the physical punishments. Rather, it is much more logical to deduce that acts of physical aggression toward young children can disrupt, or prevent, the optimal conditions necessary to facilitate a normal process of healthy brain development.

As far as I'm concerned, this new area of research (apparently not yet freely available on the Internet) represents the most compelling, undeniable reason that's yet been discovered to persuade parents to stop (or never start) striking their children as a punitive measure. And I hope any pro-spankers reading this feel the same way. It's difficult to imagine any parent who would be willing to treat their child in a way that might carry even a remote risk of causing a measure of brain damage to their child.

But, in spite of having said all of that, we actually shouldn't need research to end the practice of striking children any more than we needed research to end the practice of striking wives. As a society, there was no need for research findings to convince us of the harmful effects associated with the practice of wives being physically punished.

Instead, when society reached the point of being no longer willing to grant social tolerance to the tradition of husbands physically disciplining their wives, our decision to do so was based on our having progressed socially into the higher morality of a greater humanity. Perhaps, our next step ahead in forward progress should come by way of reaching a decision to begin recognizing children as also being deserving of those same protections against being struck.

No longer do we see any adult members of our society remaining outside the jurisdiction of the protective laws once enjoyed by only the more privileged and 'deserving' (namely white males who made the laws), regardless of race, gender, religion, ethnic group, or sexual orientation. None of our adult citizens remain legally unprotected from being violated through harassment, threats, defamation, discrimination, or being victimized by violence to any degree or form. So, given our heritage of bestowing a greater humanity upon those of a lower social status by welcoming them as our equals in the eyes of the law (in terms of violent treatment), would it be so out of character for us to also shelter the younger, weaker members of our society by allowing them to join those of us already sharing in the security and comfort of safety that's provided under the umbrella of legal protections from violence?

Bringing our little ones into the fold really doesn't seem all that magnanimous if we keep in mind that we've already been willing to share the shelter of our umbrella of Assault laws with even the most vicious of hardened adult criminals. After all, children are the very last segment of our shared human collective who still remain as fair game for being subjected to acts of physical aggression. We display a strange sense of priorities when we don't allow the prison guard to break-out a paddle and start whacking away on the disobedient buttocks of a sociopathic death-row inmate who kills for the rush it gives him, yet we find helpless, defenseless young children as deserving of such treatment.

Fact is, we define corporal punishments of prison inmates as 'Cruel and Unusual Punishment', 'Guard Brutality', or 'Aggravated Assault'. And, should the physical punishments be repeated as a routine punitive measure, such a treatment of prisoners would fall under the definition of 'Torture'.

Why would a murderous inmate be less subject to physical discipline than a helpless 3-year-old child?

Logically, morally, humanely, and scientifically, the debate on spanking is for those who would object to further social progress.

As we evolve as a society, we have to keep in mind that historically there was a time when it was acceptable to legally own other people; a time when the mentally ill were generally considered to be possessed by evil spirits; a time when men legally shot each other in officiated duels; a time when public hangings were attended as a family outing complete with picnic basket; a time when public floggings were considered acceptable punishment; a time when it was a gentleman's agreement that husbands should not beat their wives with a switch that was 'bigger-round than your thumb' (which later became known as 'the rule of thumb'); and there was a time when there were no laws against parents severely beating their children (killing children was unacceptable, of course, but an occasional accidental maiming as a result of disciplinary measures was tolerated).

Obviously, we no longer permit these punishments. The time has come for us to yet further our level of social sophistication by coming to a general agreement that any degree of physical punishment used against children is as socially unacceptable and repugnant as those past violent behaviors we have chosen to put behind us.

James C. Talbot

Article Source:
Your reply to James C. Talbot's post:
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 25, 2011 8:05:44 AM PDT
Grendel007 says:
And yet amazingly, despite your super evolved intellect and ingenious "new" view and insight into the inner mechanisms of the world that the rest of us ignorant savages don't have (probably because we are stupid enough to believe in God-ha ha what morons) the plain fact is that children are more rebellious and out of control than ever, because they fear NOTHING from adults.
I, as a professional educator, can throw up statistics, quotes, and impressive sounding terms much like you have to prove this point. But I am not debating you. You have already made up your mind that you have risen above the backwardness that surrounds and batters your sparkling wit and intellect. I simply show people that despite your open-minded opinion that "the debate is over" (not so intelligent and advanced a tactic, my friend, all well below your intellectually lofty position), the debate is in fact NOT over.
Now, you might be inclined (as per your genius) to deduce that I am one of those apish neanderthals who batters and mutilates my children by daring to pop them on the butt to get their attention. You are free to assume this, as you have already assumed much in your arrogant treatise above.

If you want to prove a point, do not attempt to make it in the heavy-handed and patronizing manner both of us have written above. No one listens to a jerk who just wants to sound smarter than everyone else.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 25, 2011 1:50:10 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 25, 2011 1:51:24 PM PDT
kiwani says:
"I, as a professional educator" you say John Carlos?

~a PROFESSIONAL educator??? ~ really??
-what level do you profess to be?

Exactly "What" are you objecting to here in regard to the "CONTENT" of this treatise?

-the writing style of the author?
- OR -
-the CONTENT about how physical punishment can/does/will cause brain damage?
- or both??

~Be specific in your communication.

Do you have evidence contradicting that brain damage can not / does not occur as indicated above?
-If so, SHOW it!
Do you object to the logic that LITTLE CHILDREN should be sheltered/guarded from being harmed?
From being PROTECTED??
From being given the same legal protections as all adults are now provided by legal authority??
~Explain yourself (as a "professional", of course). [details/specifics, please -not emotional rants...]


Posted on Jun 25, 2011 8:34:29 PM PDT
Em says:
The ludicrous argument above has seriously motivated me to add to this debate - Firstly likening abused children to children who are brought up in a loving stable home where a spank on the bottom when the situation calls for it is bizarre!! You may as well say that feeding your child an occasional Burger King meal is likely to cause heart disease and obesity because research shows that eating excessive fast food results in those same consequences. Secondly the analogy of a "sociopathic death-row inmate who kills for the rush it gives him" was even more strange - were you suggesting that people who spank their children would beat them like a prison guard beating an inmate or were you suggesting that inmates used to get a spank on their bottoms like a 3 year old but this is now thought to be unacceptable??? I am not strongly for or against an occasional spanking but I am certainly against people lumping child abusers with normal, loving parents - the move to legislate anti-spanking laws has certainly not made a dent in child abuse statistics and those children who suffer real abuse are not benefitting from these laws. For those parents who lack the skills and commitment to parent using only positive discipline - an occasional spanking with a lot of love in between is no more detrimental than the occasional burger king - I am sure. The lack of published research to prove this does not mean it is not so - and as most of the now 40+ generation who grew up in an era where spanking was definitely acceptable seem to have quite adequate brain development - their must be some truth to this. I have to agree with John Carlos - your argument is patronizing, unconvincing and illogical.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 25, 2011 10:35:27 PM PDT
kiwani says:
You say: "Secondly the analogy of a "sociopathic death-row inmate who kills for the rush it gives him" was even more strange - were you suggesting that people who spank their children would beat them like a prison guard beating an inmate or were you suggesting that inmates used to get a spank on their bottoms like a 3 year old but this is now thought to be unacceptable???"
Perhaps, you might consider re-reading the paragraph to better understand its premise, indeed the thesis as a whole?


In reply to an earlier post on Jun 26, 2011 1:37:52 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 26, 2011 2:01:52 PM PDT
Richard says:
John Carlos:
Sarcasm, and bombastic hyperbole. Why should we take you seriously? At least I have to hand it to you that you are flying your religious colors.

You say children are more rebellious and out of control. And the evidence for this is what? Or, let us suppose that your assertion is correct, all you are asserting is an undefined vague correlation, not even backed up with data. Prove the causality. That is the tough part.

The debate is settled among professionals who are best qualified to judge. You are right only if you qualify your assertion that the debate is not over among lay persons. On that we do agree. So the conundrum is how do you get lay people who are unskilled and unqualified in science to abide by people who are more skilled and knowledgeable? People who know exactly nothing about the tools and practice of science are bold enough to challenge facts and data they are not even qualified to evaluate. Whatever happened to Christian charity and humility? When did that change to Christian arrogance?

You do understand that leading humanitarians and international law experts have waded in on the morality and legality of hitting vulnerable children. The practice is now conceived of as a human rights violation. Did you read the United Nations Secretary General's report on the worldwide study of violence against children? A sobering report.

Please share some of your research with us. Lets get down to facts and evidence.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 26, 2011 2:19:48 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 26, 2011 2:33:12 PM PDT
Richard says:
... but I am certainly against people lumping child abusers with normal, loving parents - the move to legislate anti-spanking laws has certainly not made a dent in child abuse statistics and those children who suffer real abuse are not benefitting from these laws.

You are displaying an amazing lack of understanding of the issue. In the first place there has been no implementation of anti-hitting laws. Not that I am aware of. Can you cite your source for this? There has been movement in the schools to ban corporal punishment but at least 20 states still permit children to be assaulted for minor infractions in the schools. The deep south has the highest level of incidents. And this correlates well with conservative Christian populations.

Secondly, the children that wind up injured by parents are heavily represented by what you choose to characterize as coming from loving stable homes. They just happen to be children with parents who have way to much confidence in their self control. The data on this is bullet proof if you care to do the research. So called normal loving parents are heavily represented in the offender database. Contrary to what people assume, child abuse is distributed across all layers of society. The topic is a veritable mine field of myths and old wives tales that bear no relation to the facts on file.

What can I help you understand about this issue?

Posted on Jun 26, 2011 2:29:57 PM PDT
Richard says:
Reposting this:

the imperative To end violence against children

The World Report on Violence against Children is not an individual achievement nor the work of
just one office, but the result of a genuine and lively participatory process, involving Governments,
international entities, civil society and children. Over the last three years I have had the privilege
of learning from the testimony of thousands of adults and children from all regions of the world.
Their commitment to the protection and promotion of children's rights has been the driving force
behind the development of the United Nations Secretary-General's Study on Violence against
Children, and this book which elaborates on the `Study'.

The Study confirms that violence against children happens in all parts of the world. In the course
of the Study process, though, I have witnessed the efforts of many civil society organisations that
strive ceaselessly at local and international levels to ensure the protection of children. We must
be inspired by the strength of those in the field who are confronted with very difficult conditions
on a daily basis and who have extremely creative approaches for reducing children's exposure to
violence and advocating for their rights.

Another promising element of the Study process has been the great interest of Governments all
over the world to address the issue of violence against children. As of September 2006, I had
received a total of 136 responses to the questionnaire I sent to Governments as I prepared my
report. Their responses do not deny the pervasiveness of violence. This recognition of violence,
and the open involvement of Governments, are important steps towards putting into practice the
commitments States made when they ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of
the Child.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 27, 2011 5:32:05 AM PDT
Hot hands says:
Again, so easy to say for some depends on the child entirely. I could raise my voice, and my oldest would be in youngest...I can swat him on the butt, and he'll laugh at me and do whatever he was told NOT to do again, right in front of my face.

That said, I would NEVER use a belt, paddle, wooden spoon, etc...and time outs work VERY well with this child...however, comparing a swat on the butt with beating your child with a rubber like comparing buying a cup of coffee to buying a coffee house....

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 27, 2011 5:34:10 AM PDT
Hot hands says:
...and YES John Carlos...these kids are outta control...I think it's more than just spanking though...turn on the TV, everyone from our political leaders to the nasty girls on shows like "bad girls club" are bending the rules, and succeeding as a result...luckily as a nation we have the highest number of our citizen incerated, so the 'system' can do what parents and society can't...(yes, that was meant as sarcasm)

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 27, 2011 6:52:54 AM PDT
Richard says:
Hot hands, see my most recent post to Spanking should be made illegal. You have a mistaken view of the basic issues.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 27, 2011 7:36:44 AM PDT
Hot Hands, social history tells us that 'kids are out of control' from one generation to the next. 'These kids today' has probably been the lament of parent's from before the time we had indoor plumbing.

You state, "...however, comparing a swat on the butt with beating your child with a rubber like comparing buying a cup of coffee to buying a coffee house.... "

I have another analogy. Comparing a swat on the butt with beating a child is like comparing the administration of just a little poison to a hospital stay.

Granted, the force of your blows in conjunction with the frequency you administer them, will determine the extent of the damage you inflict. But, make no mistake, a degree of damage occurs, regardless of whether you choose to name your acts of violence 'swats', 'taps', or 'hard touches'.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 28, 2011 3:50:59 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 28, 2011 3:59:23 PM PDT
james warren says:
John Carlos,
I notice an attitude in your reply to Mr.Talbot that is becoming as tiresome as it is familiar.
To me it speaks nothing about what James C. Talbot has presented, but it speaks volumes about yourself and your sense of your own self worth.

In short, your sarcastic words and phrases like
*** "super evolved intellect"
*** "ingenious new insight"
*** "the rest of us ignorant savages"
*** "we are stupid enough to believe in God"
*** "you have risen above the backwardess"
*** "arrogant treatise"
*** "intellectually lofty position"
*** "heavy-handed and patronizing"

--ALL of these indicate to me a feeling on your part that you are being told "you're not good enough" or that you are somehow "less than."

Why do so many others like yourself immediately discount anything intellectual, academic or elite regardless of the facts?

Why use degradation and humiliation in a way that indicates to others that your lack of listening and communication skills is some sort of "Badge of Honor"?

I challenge you to teach me the evidence, facts and data that acknowledge the ineffectiveness and real harm that corporal punishment causes. And as an advocate of more effective ways of discipline other than hitting, do so in a convincing way that will not come across as overbearing and patronizing.
If YOU were against hitting others who are smaller than you, how would YOU convey that to others?

Even better, I challenge you to rewrite any portion of Mr. Talbott's post that bothers you and instead use language that refers to actual facts, data and evidence uncovered by research, psychology and personal stories.

Personally, I would like your advice on how to communicate with you and others like you.
I look forward to learning from your response.

Posted on Jun 28, 2011 5:08:37 PM PDT
Richard says:
The anonymity of communication over the Internet encourages people to say things to total strangers they would never think to say in person. Unfortunately, the Amazon forums are not moderated so insults and slurs go on without a check. If someone gets too far out of line they can be reported, but that is a reactive mechanism. People have been tossed from this forum, to be sure.

The guidelines are not effective. "Act as though you were a guest at a dinner table?" Not a big barrier to leap for a bully.

Posted on Jun 30, 2011 2:16:37 AM PDT
Spanking your children should be ILLEGAL. 4916 0 new 8 minutes ago

Doesn't look dead to me.

Our children's children's children will be debating it, I'm sure. Unless robots take over the earth. I can't imagine robots doing much spanking.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 30, 2011 2:56:12 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 30, 2011 3:01:17 AM PDT
james warren says:
Doesn't look dead to me.
Believe me, it is.

The absolute fury that is spewing from all these big people who hit little people tells me quite clearly that it is. Their out-of-proportion tantrums of anger and rage is BECAUSE spanking has reached its dead end. When a car's engine breaks down and quits--the auto still has to finish rolling to a stop. The objections to the nurturance of our children are the last gasps of a marginalized population that is shrinking daily.

My child's children will be shaking their heads in confused disbelief over the strange and sordid history of those parents who used to believe that discipline is instilled by pain.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 30, 2011 3:11:56 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 30, 2011 3:32:02 AM PDT
Well, Stephanie, you may be correct. The serious (public) debate over slavery lasted about a hundred years. And, then it took nearly another hundred years (1964) to prohibit discrimination against blacks. JFK provided the impetus and LBJ followed through with the Civil Rights Act against public opinion. Does that still happen?

Women's sufferage struggled for eighty years to finally win the right for women to vote in elections (1920). Nevertheless, wives were still being legally beaten with switches for another twenty years in most states. Don't that beat all.

Just like any advance in social change, it begins with more evolved voices being heard in opposition to less socially sophisticated ideologies and beliefs.

Those more evolved voices are now being heard with regard to hitting children in the same way as they have been heard in protest against those other prejudicial and discriminatory practices of the past.

I agree that change takes time, and that History is unkind to those who rush it. But, nevertheless, we continue to evolve as a society because positive change is inexorable. Exhibits of our ever increasing level of humanity are an indisputable part of our history.

The practice of striking children as a form of punishment will end it's reign of socially acceptable behavior. In terms of social evolution, this end will come all the sooner with the increasing number of rational and reasonable voices in opposition to spanking continuing to speak out for a more humane treatment of children.

Posted on Jun 30, 2011 11:22:00 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 30, 2011 11:22:34 AM PDT
Hot hands says:
One could argue, however, that slavery is not still goes on...the working conditions in today's factory farms/meat processing...and the low pay, done primarily by illegals is like indentured servitude...Slavery is alive and well in many countries, and as the economy plummets the 'white slave trade' in young women is HUGE right now (in your every major US city), perhaps there really is no end to the harm done by humans to others.

Posted on Jun 30, 2011 11:26:59 AM PDT
Hot hands says:
And I'll stand firm with my 4 kids, I think I've spanked all of them a total of 10 times or less...but again, they all have different temperments, as they are all different oldest, never needed to raise my voice...she's a calm, gentle lady. My youngest is a wild man, who after a swat on the butt, will laugh in your face and do whatever you told him not to again...(so for him, time out, or separation works best).

Would I spank regularly? NO. But to really get the little guy's attention, to save him from potential harm? YES.

Posted on Jun 30, 2011 1:50:26 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jun 30, 2011 1:51:33 PM PDT
Ugh. This argument SHOULD be over. Spanking is ineffective. It's been proven. But neither is it harmful when the family is otherwise happy and well adjusted. Why would someone want to use an ineffective punishment though, and one that teaches that hitting is okay?

And I get SO SICK of the whole "kids are so out of control these days" argument. The one poster who pointed out that every generation of kids is "out of control" is right. Nothing changes. But I, too, am a professional educator and have worked with kids from birth to 17, and kids are not out of control. Some kids are, and some kids always will be. And some of their parents probably spank them to try to keep them "in control." And further, I have kids, who I don't spank, and who are easily the most well behaved kids I know.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 1, 2011 8:33:42 AM PDT
Richard says:
The methods of the priest and the parson have been very curious, their history is very entertaining. In all the ages the Roman Church has owned slaves, bought and sold slaves, authorized and encouraged her children to trade in them. Long after some Christian peoples had freed their slaves the Church still held on to hers. If any could know, to absolute certainty, that all this was right, and according to God's will and desire, surely it was she, since she was God's specially appointed representative in the earth and sole authorized and infallible expounder of his Bible. There were the texts; there was no mistaking their meaning; she was right, she was doing in this thing what the Bible had mapped out for her to do. So unassailable was her position that in all the centuries she had no word to say against human slavery. Yet now at last, in our immediate day, we hear a Pope saying slave trading is wrong, and we see him sending an expedition to Africa to stop it. The texts remain: it is the practice that has changed. Why? Because the world has corrected the Bible. The Church never corrects it; and also never fails to drop in at the tail of the procession - and take the credit of the correction. As she will presently do in this instance.

Mark Twain
Bible Teaching and Religious Practice

We will wait for this to happen regarding violence against children. To be sure, there are religious organizations who are against spanking and we must applaud them. But millions of the faithful still trust their bibles over scientific proof that violence against children harms them, and indeed harms our communities.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 1, 2011 5:19:34 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 1, 2011 5:23:44 PM PDT
james warren says:
Hot hands posted:
"Would I spank regularly? NO. But to really get the little guy's attention, to save him from potential harm? YES."
It is truly tragic that there are still many of us left who believe that the only way to get their child's attention and to "save him from potential harm" is to hit that child.
And there's no longer any excuse for doing so.

I will allow that you have probably not yet availed yourself of alternative methods of parent-child communication.

I have seen plenty of parents who have never learned the first clue about the differences--and the ultimate effects of--between the "Father Knows Best" approach and the "nurturing parent" method.

I have seen a lack of parental skills to teach children problem-solving, mediation and negotiating skills--with all the attendant necessary communication skills.

I think it is truly hard--especially for those who claim to be "Christian"--for parents to stop automatically react the way they themselves were taught: to reach for the nearest "rod" and strike out simply because they THEMSELVES are angry and frustrated.

I get that.

But the information, the research, the real-world stories are out there in plain view for everyone to see.

Therefore, there really IS no excuse for any adult to hit any child (or to hit another adult for that matter!).

Posted on Jul 6, 2011 1:10:53 PM PDT
Random Bimms says:
To say that ANY debate within science is "over" or "dead" shows a profound ignorance of the way science operates.

For example, what if those scientists who study physics had said "The debate is over" once Newton had written his Newtonian physics? If they had said something so foolish, we would never have discovered Einstein's physics.

The truth is, debate is NEVER over in ANY science. NEVER. In fact, the very fact that debates are NEVER over (in science) is precisely what separates science from every other form of knowledge.

Posted on Jul 6, 2011 2:34:04 PM PDT
james warren says:
Is it a fair point to compare physics one on one to social sciences? I really don't know.... I'm just wondering.

But going along with your analogy, Newton's view has not been proven "wrong" has it?
Doesn't quantum mechanics have to be seen in the context of Newtonian physics?
I may be wrong, but I am thinking that there are still scientists today that I have heard of or read of who DO think "the debate is over."
I don't regard all of science or assume all scientists will always be on the same page, at the same point in the continuum.

In reply to an earlier post on Jul 6, 2011 4:15:20 PM PDT
"The truth is, debate is NEVER over in ANY science. NEVER. In fact, the very fact that debates are NEVER over (in science) is precisely what separates science from every other form of knowledge."

The scientific debate on whether the earth is flat is over. The debate on whether the earth revolves around the sun is dead. I could go on and on and on.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in


This discussion

Discussion in:  Parenting forum
Participants:  19
Total posts:  80
Initial post:  Jun 25, 2011
Latest post:  Jul 24, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 4 customers

Search Customer Discussions