PregnancyComments on:
Why Spanking Is a Bad Idea
Here are good reasons why you should never spank your child.
- Add a comment
- (36)
|
| |
Comments on:Why Spanking Is a Bad IdeaHere are good reasons why you should never spank your child.
|
| About Family Education,
part of Family Education Network |
Site Map |
Press Releases|
Help |
Advertise
Tom Johnson Sexual Dangers of Spanking Children “...The buttocks are the locus for the induction of pain in a child. We are familiar with the argument that it is a safe ‘locus’ for spanking. However, the anal region is also the major erotic region at precisely the time the child is likely to be beaten there. Thus it is aptly chosen to achieve the result of deranged sexuality in adulthood...” 1971 (p. 113) David Bakan, Slaughter of the Innocents,1971 (p. 113) “Advocates of corporal punishment in schools should examine very carefully the weight of evidence now available and, particularly in light of the pornographic component, consider whether they can justify the continuation of a system with such a capacity for exciting unhealthy interest.”
British Psychological Society, “Report on Corporal Punishment in Schools” (1980) “But what you would not so readily believe upon my affirmation, was that there are persons who are stimulated to venery by strokes of rods, and worked up into a flame of lust by blows... A strange instance what a power the force of education has in grafting inveterate ill habits on our morals...” Johann Heinrich Meibom, physician, 1629 Unpleasant as this information is, we do our children a great disservice when we fail to acknowledge its truth. Had we not turned a blind eye to the unpleasant phenomena of sexual abuse of children 40-50 years ago, many children would have been spared its devastating consequences.
http://nospank.net/pt2009.htm The Sexual Dangers of Spanking Children
http://www.nospank.net/sexdngrs.htm
Parents do all kinds of things that aren't the best way to handle a situation, without a terribly negative outcome. That doesn't automatically mean that it's a good idea. Stacie's mom sounds like a 'good' spanker, if you can use the term; but frankly, most parents aren't that consistent or controlled. Nor, again, does it mean that there aren't any better ways to discipline. 2) I really, really hate the 'touch the stove and you'll get burned' rationale. You can drive a boat show through the holes in this comparison. The stove is not a human being. It is never going to be angry, or drunk, or upset. It is never going to misjudge distance or force. And most importantly, the child does not love the stove and will never associate violence or pain or indignity with love. We live in a society with out-of-control violence, and I'm not talking about crime and drugs and gangs; I'm talking about husbands hitting wives and kids and girlfriends, and it escalating until someone is maimed or dead. If you hit kids, however you rationalize it, you are teaching them that hitting's okay if you're the bigger one. We are ALL paying the price for it, and it's time to stop. If you can't figure out how to teach your kids right from wrong, or keep them safe without hitting them, you need to swallow your pride and talk to your pediatrician about better ways to discipline.
I don't resent her for it, I don't feel abused. The way she set it up, I am very clear that I was the agent of getting spanked on the few occasions it happened. Maybe 5-8 times in my entire childhood. I was warned; I persisted; I got what I was told was coming. I think this is the difference. I do NOT endorse spanking as a physical outlet to parental anger, an excuse to yank your kids around and hit them because you're frustrated. But I DO endorse a way to teach kids that you will reap the consequences of your actions. If spanking works for that (and all families and kids are different) then I don't have a problem with it. I also don't endorse teachers spanking; studies show that people are more likely to abuse or overpunish kids that are not their own. (This includes step-parents, so some caution is in order there, too.) Anyway, the results of my mom's system: people complimented her that we were well-behaved kids. They wanted to be around us. We got good reviews in school. Teachers liked us. We got good grades. We grew up understanding that we were responsible for holding up our end of the bargain. It worked for us. I'm not saying that it's appropriate to all families or all types of kid personalities. I'm not saying that parents should present themselves as all-powerful, or endorse violence as a solution to anger (again, Mom didn't spank when she was angry; she got very serious and explained why it was happening). But I also have yet to be convinced that it's always a bad idea -- or that outsiders should presume they know what works best for everyone without taking time to understand the dynamics of a particular family. It's complicated, and there are no easy answers. I think that's why it's such a long-standing and potent debate; there isn't a blanket answer that's appropriate for everyone, despite people's strong emotional feelings about it.
Now the teacher must accept that disrespect and insubordination because there is no immediate consequence for the child. The fact that they may drop out of school and live in poverty is too abstract. So the teacher sends them to the office, the office sends them to the counselor, (which is paid for my my tax dollars) and the counselor tells them to be good and go back to class. Nothing accomplished. In the mean time the children without discipline problems are short-changed in what they are being taught because the teachers time and the districts resources are being diverted to take care of kids who wont listen. Corporal punishment, not abuse, can correct a lot of this. I've seen it first hand. If you havent been in your local school and seen it firsthand you really cant appreciate the problem.