Pediatricians: Stop hitting your kids. It doesn't work.

[DarthSkywalker]

They did the research. Now can we stop acting like physically assaulting children is in anyway necessary or something that we should allow? Adverse effects are the far more likely outcome. Also, as logic would dictate with someone who is willing to physically attack a child, the parents who do it, likely have issues they themselves need to work out.

Effective Discipline to Raise Healthy Children

 

[Lily Adler]

You know who disagrees? Peggy Hill:

 

[Aximili86]

Always felt it's best to err on the side of caution with this, yeah.

Like, 99% of parents are going to know the limit, and would never cross it in any damaging way. And I do feel like with a younger kid who's done something putting themselves actually in serious danger, like running into a busy street or jamming a fork in an electrical outlet or something, a stern talking to probably isn't going to be enough in a lot of cases to get the message across. Sometimes it is with some kids, other kids notsomuch. Kind of skeptical on the "it doesn't work, ever, in any circumstances" line. Most of the people railing against it in any way/shape/form are probably the upper-middle-class white types too, even among younger people pretty much everyone of color I know comes from a family where it happened on occasion over the serious stuff, and only to a justifiable pretty-minor degree.

Buuuut then there's that 1% of ****ing scumbags out there, who are going to use the "spanking's socially okay within reason" to just go nuts and actually beat their kids horribly. So yeah, maybe you just sort of stigmatize it generally to be safe, sort of where I come down on it. Sure, it's a blanket reaction and it's blaming people not doing the wrong thing for the people who are doing the wrong thing, so it's not ideal, but maybe it's necessary.

Pretty sure it only happened once with me as a kid, 5-6 or something, my mom with one of those wooden cooking spoons, on the leg, over something pretty serious, messing around with matches or something like that. *Shrugs* Generally speaking I don't think something like that's a problem, a majority of parents are controlled enough rational people to know where the line is. But there are a tiny fraction of people out there just plain not suited to being parents, too, and you don't want to leave wiggle-room for these ***holes to take advantage of the "my kid, my discipline methods!" types to enact their heavy-handed powertrip bull****.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

How many times in the century will we hear this pop up again?

 

[Marvolo]

I was whipped with a hand and a leather belt. It worked on me. I didnt continue doing whatever caused the whipping. It also made it so that just a look from dad and the promise of a whipping could quail me and make me not want to put a toe out of line. In hindsight I'd probably whip younger me too. I could be a brat at times.

I was only slapped a couple times. Once dad slapped me for disrespecting my mom and another time my mom backhanded me for cursing while me and my parents were with a church group. Dad's slap knocked me out of a chair. Mom's slap didnt hurt, but it startled me.

My sister and her boyfriend whips my niece. Tho as far as I know my sister only uses her hand. Not sure what the boyfriend uses. Cant really blame them. My niece is stubborn, she gets it honestly, and talking to her is about as effective as talking to a wall sometimes. And she can be a real brat at times.

 

[Aximili86]

Yeah. I mean, slapping's seeming excessive to me, but I guess if you were older, a teenager and cussing out your mom like that, I can see where it'd happen. I never got a belt like that either, but know plenty of kids my age who did, we're talking 1990s here. They stopped the acting out, and they're all functional normal people now.

I do think there's gotta be a limit, and you want to be ultra-cautious with just saying it's socially-okay in general as there really are some twisted violent ****head parents out there who'll totally take advantage of that and go too far, because they're ***holes. And obviously that type of stuff needs to be come down on hard with a sack full of bricks by child services, throw the book at them.

But at the same time, I don't even know you want to take the pediatrician's theoretical word on it 100% either. Some of these people don't even have kids, or they're just approaching it on this purely-theoretical level and not allowing for the real-life diverging, the "treating your 7 year old like a rationally-functioning human being and giving them the benefit of the doubt in making the right choices, positive reinforcement should work on paper, that's what the child psychologist said, only it's not working and the kid's still kicking the dog or riding his bike in traffic" stuff.

It's just judgement at a certain point. There's gotta be a limit, a line, but I don't know you want to start coming down on regular parents with stellar social records/reputations over an open-handed spank on their grade-schooler for endangering themselves and not listening to verbal reasoning. There's a middle ground.


EDIT: That being said, pretty sure if I ever have kids I wouldn't have the heart to actually do it. But I guess that's not necessarily meaning others shouldn't under the right circumstances and only to a certain degree. Having worked retail for a lot of years, you saw it all the time in stores, kids going absolutely off the rails, breaking stuff, shrieking and screaming when the parents caught them, no amount of words ever going to get through. Always hard to see, a parent coming in and spanking some totally-out-of-control preschooler or whatever in public, but at the same time it's kind of like...who the hell am I to question it? It's an open hand to the ass on some 5 year old who's broken something worth a couple hundred bucks and started throwing some "sit on the floor and refuse to move" tantrum when the parents verbally interceded. That's not causing any physical harm, and I kind of get it. Previous generations (overall, I'm sure there are some numerically-minor exceptions) turned out fine with it, so long as it doesn't go over a certain point of severity, you've gotta figure a certain factor of this is wussy current-gen whining, at least if it's over an open-hand spank and nothing further.

 

[Mandon Knight]

It will be a very 'generational' discussion I suspect, us, older posters will have had parents or guardians that did 'administer' smacks & clouts by way of making a point (even teachers in our day had the 'right' to issue or use this as discipline).

As others are saying, it's hard at the best of times to rationally debate with a small child the rights or wrongs of incorrect behaviour as they're balling their eyes out and stamping their feet, without the use of a smack or threat, which will throw fear into the mix, not hugely wise.

My Mum (she was the one to issue discipline and rules in my house, my Dad rarely got involved, if he did, it was because Mum told him too 'have a word') would not have to touch us, (my brother or I), a look from her would tell us everything we needed to know, it went as far as a squeeze to the elbow for extra meaning, if required but we never needed a smack or anything further.

I'm not a parent nor ever will be, but I can say, I'd never lay a finger on a child by way of demonstrating their bad behaviour, kneeling down at their eye level and calming them, reassuring them and then explaining what they've done is wrong is best, I appreciate during a 'paddy' that's hard, but better that than shaking, shouting and smacking, which will simply create fear, break trust and instil in them that violence is the way to resolve a problem, even at that age.

 

[Teelie]

This means nothing. People have been told this for decades and it has only decreased. I doubt it will ever actually stop and even criminalizing it will just mean people do it where it isn't seen.

 

[Marvolo]

The majority of it is already done where it isnt seen. Even when it was acceptable to whip the **** out of a kid in public most of it was done at home. 99% of all my whippings were at home. The rare times they weren't were in a church bathroom or in another family member's home.

 

[Teelie]

Another thing to think about these days is the distrust of trusted professionals or experts. Just look at how many people ignore climate change or anything that requires effort or a change of behavior.

 

[Aximili86]

Why should they necessarily believe it though? I can see how some experienced parent of say 3 or 4 kids, a couple of whom are problematic and display pretty intensely bad behavior which verbal curbing doesn't effect, who've open-hand spanked the kid and it's worked, would not put much stock in what some labcoat guy operating purely in the abstract says on the matter. Like it or not, there are plenty of kids out there who aren't going to take the calm-level-voice-reverse-psychology-and-rational-reasoning stuff seriously from a parent. So long as it's pretty mildly physical and nothing more, I guess that's not a problem in and of itself. "It doesn't work" is abstract, unless the doctor has personal experience with the circumstances - that's going to be different from kid to kid, household to household.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

There is never a reason to perform physical violence on children and justifying it by any means is wrong. The issue here has always been effort and yes training. The vast majority of parents aren't given the tools to handle children, and it is understandable that the general stresses of raising a child and what older generations teach their kids can lead some people to try and rationalize it. But the idea that you can't do other things to teach a child, especially one with behavioral issues doesn't add up.

Let's consider first the idea that because one's parents did it and it "worked", it means it is an actual way to raise a child. Plenty of kids are abused, that turn out right. But is that because of the abuse, or in spite of it? Does a child being afraid of physical violence from the authority figure they are suppose to love and respect really make sense?

And then think of all the steps between ways of teaching a child without hitting them and hitting them. What are the real chances parents who decide to strike their children actually go through all of those? And if one of those will work, why wouldn't one do that instead of striking their child? What is the benefit of striking a child?

Honestly, this is going to be like a lot of things from 100 years ago that we look at now and can't believe they did it.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Why should they necessarily believe it though? I can see how some experienced parent of say 3 or 4 kids, a couple of whom are problematic and display pretty intensely bad behavior which verbal curbing doesn't effect, who've open-hand spanked the kid and it's worked, would not put much stock in what some labcoat guy operating purely in the abstract says on the matter. Like it or not, there are plenty of kids out there who aren't going to take the calm-level-voice-reverse-psychology-and-rational-reasoning stuff seriously from a parent. So long as it's pretty mildly physical and nothing more, I guess that's not a problem in and of itself. "It doesn't work" is abstract, unless the doctor has personal experience with the circumstances - that's going to be different from kid to kid, household to household.

Based on what? Because you have witnessed such children taught using all other methods over a sustained period to judge this? That you jumped from one method to striking a child suggest not.

 

[X-Woman]

Like it or not, there are plenty of kids out there who aren't going to take the calm-level-voice-reverse-psychology-and-rational-reasoning stuff seriously from a parent.

The calm rationality approach doesn't work on a lot of adults, either, lol.

 

[The Endless]

When I was 16 I was a little ****. Came home one night drunk. Mouthed off to my mum. Dad had a go at me. I squared up to him. He sparked me out.

Never did it again and even now at 30 years old I'd never dare back chat my mum or dad. I've never been in trouble with the police. I've got a good job and a family of my own. All in all I'd say I'm a pretty decent person.

At the end of the day I agree that constant abuse is disgraceful. It's morally wrong but also can cause resentment and fear. But sometimes a kid, especially teenagers don't respond to verbal discipline or grounding or having their phones taken away. Sometimes they do need a clip round the earhole.

I see some of the kids today and they're ****ing feral. Just 2 weeks ago I was driving home from work and a lad about 16/17 decided it'd be funny to throw a rock at my van. Him and his mates didn't even run away when I skidded to a stop and shouted at them. Honestly if that happened to me in my early 20s and I didn't have a family I would've got out and confronted them. But like I say, these days the kids carry tools and are basically animals. Wonder why that is?

Now that is a boy that needs ironing out. His old man would've got it as well for raising such a little c***.

 

[Aximili86]

Starting to pretty much think Darth, you know, hasn't ever met a kid.

Look, your abuse assertion doesn't hold, not when you take the amount of kids that had some form of it over many, many generations and the overwhelming majority turned out okay (fully expecting the incoming 'b-b-but how do you know they're okay?' bull**** response - I know they're okay because the majority of people function and don't dwell on a spank when they were 6). Yes, there's a line. No, a majority of parents don't cross it. The ones that do should have child services right up their asses, kids taken away in the extreme instances of the physical stuff.

That's the exception, not the rule. Like, I could cite probably 10 people in my neighorhood generally same age as me from the neighborhood, who grew up with stricter parents than I (mostly minorities too, black & south-asian), got the leather belt to the arm or butt over stealing a candy bar or cheap toy or whatever. Even relatively small-fry bad behavior like that. That's worse than I ever got, and all of these people turned out fine. This was the early-mid 90s for god's sake, the time gap's negligible.

That doesn't mean I'd ever have the heart to do it myself if I ever have a kid, but again, who the hell am I to say? Maybe parents who do, now, used to be in the same "I wouldn't" situation before they had kids. I don't have that experience to judge, I'm guessing neither do you. There's a common sense factor here: you're not going to spank a kid over something really minor, obviously. But if they're acting out violently on siblings, being cruel to the family dog, riding their ****ing tricycle through traffic and putting themselves in harm's way, maybe "now Johnny, I think you're going to need a time-out. And no dessert for you, mister" isn't going to cut it if he keeps doing it. No matter what Mr Mackey-voiced child psychologist says on the matter.

It shouldn't be a first option, I'd agree there. I'd also assert the vast ****ing majority of parents, now, 20 years ago, in the 1950s alike, whatever, don't and haven't used it as a first option. Theory is nice and all, but it's not necessarily to be taken seriously whent said researchers have no personal experience with the situation. I get where parental pushback would come from in that instance.

Think you've gotta be careful about being too lenient with physical parenting, it should definitely probably carry a mild social stigma with it, even the simple open-hand spank stuff that's obviously not going to do any damage to the kid. That being said, the flipside of it is that your arrogance is amusing as hell. So long as they're not crossing any lines, physically harming the kid or emotionally harming the kid (let's be honest, a spank on the ass from a mom to a 5 year old over something serious isn't emotionally harming the kid, you're whiney as ever), that's their business not mine. Or a guy with a psychology degree.

Endless, I think you're taking it a little far there though. "Animals", "feral"? C'mon. Kids aren't any worse now than they always were, it's just part of growing up, you throw little tantrums as a kid and you act out as a teen. That's life. Only difference now is they're entitled and know nothing's going to happen to them, in the case of the older ones like the teens you cited there. I don't come from a family that did much of the physical discipline stuff, but bet your ass if I was throwing rocks at traffic my dad probably would've made an exception. And he'd be ****in' right.

 

[Greens]

Don't hit your child with a belt, for God's sake. If you give them a little smack on the arm or something if they don't listen, fine, but don't go into it premeditated "I'm gonna whip this kid's ass".

 

[Mandon Knight]

I think the 'boundaries' of discipline have changed, the attitude & behaviour of the children & teens hasn't. They will naturally 'test' whichever adult is depriving them of whatever it is they want to do or want to have by way of physical item or attend event, for example.

The difference nowadays is that a party there to guide & protect outside of the parent/guardian has no parameter in which to 'discipline' the child or teen, teachers have no power, detentions are now against European Law, teachers are bound by rulings in which it's very difficult to structure punishment, Police numbers have been reduced, and so Community Officers are now in place instead with no arrest powers, or power to take in offending youths.

Young people and children sense these facts and know they are beyond reproach a lot of times and so use this and 'play on it', push those boundaries further, and so respect falls, reduces and becomes a vicious process.

Youth Clubs are reduced and social services reduced and so the platforms and natural ways in which young people had access to a central hub where they could receive care, interest and social development have disappeared, in my country, this current government has ripped the heart of social & community services and the layers around, built to, in theory, keep them safe and show them the road to a brighter future.

Yes, not every young person is a criminal in waiting, there are so many positive strands for children & young people to discover and create, but the negativity that is bred through lack of hope & vision means many see the only way of self reference is seeing and watching the 'appeal of crime'.

 

[Dr.]

These scientific studies have been pretty consistent in their conclusions: corporal punishment tends to begat aggression or other issues (like depression, substance abuse, etc.) later in life. Now, one can certainly challenge such studies by pointing out technical flaws: poor methodology, small sample size or selection bias. But an argument from personal anecdote is rather less effective. E.g., “I was spanked regularly and I turned out just fine.” This is a bit like pointing to an 80-year-old who’s a heavy smoker. Or the friend who seems to be able to drive safely while drunk. IOW, the existence of isolated exceptions doesn’t negate the overall statistics or the general recommendations.

 

[Aximili86]

Except not everyone's a smoker. Huge, huge numbers of kids were spanked even if really occasionally as little kids, in generations past. Are we really going to say the psychologically-messed-up of those generations turned out that way due to spanking, when just about all of the people who turn out okay of those generations were spanked too?

We need to distinguish between abusive parents beating their kids , and regular nonviolent parents who've found themselves having to do the over-knee spank thing once in a while on their preschooler. That's a whole different beast entirely.

Also, these same "it doesn't work" kid's doctors were the same guys pushing Ritalin on a whole generation before eventually throwing their hands up in the air with a "whoopsidaisy, sorry kids-being-kids, guess we ****ed up, sorry about the side effects". This broad-painting brush stuff is dangerous.

Basically: beating your kids up is going to psychologically effect them negatively. No ****in' duh, you needed to do an extensive academic study to determine that? That's not the same thing as the parents who read the parenting books and do the time-outs and withholding allowance, but sometimes find their child's acting out up-and-above that and get a couple of light slaps on the butt. Conflating that is insane.

 

[moviedoors]

I've given my daughter a good flick on the arm a couple of times when she kicked my parent's dog. As in a literal flick of the finger. Enough to make her go "ow" and get her immediate attention. But that's it. Twice. And even then, I didn't feel great about it. NO ONE takes an open hand to her.

 

[Hotwire]

Spanking is just lazy parenting. If your kid does something you feel warrants you hitting them and they do that thing again, what do you do? Hit them again but, harder this time? The point it, spanking is pretty much, "The Big Gun," and once you use it, you can't escalate from there. Put some actual thought into how to correct your child's behavior beyond that basic, "Not working, better hit it," approach.

 

[Hotwire]

I've given my daughter a good flick on the arm a couple of times when she kicked my parent's dog. As in a literal flick of the finger. Enough to make her go "ow" and get her immediate attention. But that's it. Twice. And even then, I didn't feel great about it. NO ONE takes an open hand to her.

My daughter hit me once when she was rather young. I didn't hit, flick, smack or retaliate in any way. I gave her the saddest look I could muster and asked her, "Do I hit you?" She said, "No." "So, why did you hit me?" She worked out that it was poor choice on her part, we hugged and she's never done it again.

 

[Marvolo]

Don't hit your child with a belt, for God's sake. If you give them a little smack on the arm or something if they don't listen, fine, but don't go into it premeditated "I'm gonna whip this kid's ass".

My mom tried that one time. Just gave me a slight smack on the ass. I made the mistake of laughing at her and saying it didnt hurt and my dad heard me do that...needless to say I couldnt sit for a little while. I never laughed at mom's discipline tactics again tho.


Grounding never worked on me. Writing lines was tedious but tolerable. I had chores already so giving me chores didnt really work either. I loved to read so taking away tv wasnt much of a punishment. I had severe asthma and bad allergies so using yard work or some manual labor as a punishment was a legitimate health risk. To this day I cant even be around freshly cut grass. If I even smell that **** I start wheezing and sneezing and itching.


They never threw away my stuff or broke any of my stuff. They threatened to occassionally but mom and dad were always tight on cash and worked hard to buy me stuff so I quickly learned that particular threat was just a threat.


All that to say, there was only one punishment and one thing that actually had an impact on me, no pun intended. A whipping and a particular leather belt. When my dad went to get that one belt I knew I'd ****ed up and was about to reap what I'd sown.


QUOTE="Dr., post: 37123237, member: 89213"]These scientific studies have been pretty consistent in their conclusions: corporal punishment tends to begat aggression or other issues (like depression, substance abuse, etc.) later in life. Now, one can certainly challenge such studies by pointing out technical flaws: poor methodology, small sample size or selection bias. But an argument from personal anecdote is rather less effective. E.g., “I was spanked regularly and I turned out just fine.” This is a bit like pointing to an 80-year-old who’s a heavy smoker. Or the friend who seems to be able to drive safely while drunk. IOW, the existence of isolated exceptions doesn’t negate the overall statistics or the general recommendations.[/QUOTE]


But a lot of parents raise their kids based on personal experience and anecdotal homespun "wisdom". Some read a book or two on parenting or what to expect when expecting. And the sensible parents listen to their kid's doctor most of the time. Not to mention a lot of parents take the viewpoint of, "Has this other person had to spend a day with my kid? A week? A month? A year? Had to actually be a parent to my kid? Nope, they haven't so they can **** off and mind their own business." Parents get very touchy about other people telling them how to discipline their kids. They dont feel the need to challenge these studies, because when the **** hits the fan so to speak and Little Johnny is being an unholy stubborn terror it's not the scientists in the trenches with Little Johnny. Its mommy or daddy down there having to deal with that and put a stop to it.

Spanking is just lazy parenting. If your kid does something you feel warrants you hitting them and they do that thing again, what do you do? Hit them again but, harder this time? The point it, spanking is pretty much, "The Big Gun," and once you use it, you can't escalate from there. Put some actual thought into how to correct your child's behavior beyond that basic, "Not working, better hit it," approach.

It doesnt need to escalate. It always hurts and that's consequence enough for most kids. Sure as an adult I'd shrug it off now, and quickly get used to it, because I've experienced much much greater pain, and as an adult I can better keep things in perspective, but as a kid a stinging ass cheek was the height of my tolerance and as far as I wanted to push my father's patience.

 

[Hotwire]

It doesnt need to escalate. It always hurts and that's consequence enough for most kids. Sure as an adult I'd shrug it off now, and quickly get used to it, because I've experienced much much greater pain, and as an adult I can better keep things in perspective, but as a kid a stinging ass cheek was the height of my tolerance and as far as I wanted to push my father's patience.

You missed my point. I was saying, if the spanking does NOT achieve the desired result. The kid keeps doing the same behavior you spanked them for. Then what? Hitting them isn't working so, what's the next move?


Again, spanking is just lazy.