Spare the Rod and Spoil the Child: Not the Best Parenting Advice Anymore - Coursework Example

Spare the Rod and Spoil the Child: Not the Best Parenting Advice Anymore Spanking or striking children as a method to correct bad behaviour has been widely used by parents in many cultures as a primary means of discipline. Lately, though, this disciplinary technique has been the subject of criticism among experts who have adopted a philosophy of positive parenting. Corporal punishment seems a simple and effective way to punish children when they stray from desired actions. Children seem to respond much quicker to physical punishments or even the threat of this than they do verbal corrections. Many parents believe that spanking is an acceptable form of punishment and consider the practice as an indispensable component of child-rearing. Others believe hitting anyone is wrong including and maybe especially, a person’s own child. Physically abusing another adult is a crime and when it involves a child, should be considered reprehensible as well. A civilized society should not permit a child to be abused simply because of some perceived biological right that somehow supercedes all others. Is spanking a positive, healthy and effective way to discipline a child or does this practice teach the child that violence is an accepted way to vent anger? This discussion will examine the argument from studies which advocate spanking as well as those which denounce the practice. According to Larzelere’s (2000) findings, whether children experience negative or positive outcomes due to their upbringing depends on the rate of recurrence of any disciplinary approach. This includes all types and does not single-out corporal punishment. Consequently, it is determined to be excessive recurrences of bad behavior that is the root-cause of negative outcomes such as excessive punishment – children are not bad because they’ve been spanked but are spanked because they’ve been bad. Parents understand that recurring bad behaviour will hamper their child’s chances for a successful life as an adult and feel compelled to diminish poor behavioral patterns with disciplinary techniques they believe to be most effective. Most parents find it necessary to resort to the advice of those older than they regarding how best to handle disciplinary matters, thus acting without the guidance of emerging research and theories regarding what motivates children and how best to redirect their behavior (Hernandez, 2007). “There are many aspects which influence parents in this hard job; for example, the culture in which they live, the economic situation in their society, and the religious environment” (Hernandez, 2007). For many of these groups, parents must either rely upon grandparent support and child-raising techniques or avoid raising their children altogether, leaving them to essentially raise themselves, as the parents must spend a majority of their time simply earning the necessary money to keep these same children fed, housed and clothed. This means children are either raised via archaic methods of punishment and behavior expectations or are raised without any boundaries, structure or cultural values. Without time or energy to research the latest knowledge regarding child behavior, what parents need is quality information regarding methods by which to effectively discipline their children without needing to resort to violence or allowing their children to grow up without appropriate guidance. As it turns out, the most effective punishment techniques are established on the basis of a relationship between the parent and child that is positive and loving. The punishment methods are proactive but measured and administered with competency while being designed to both respect the misbehaving individual and present them with an opportunity to learn from their inappropriate behavior. Many of these concepts are based upon the teachings of Gandhi as they are outlined by R. Rajmohan (2000). According to Rajmohan, Gandhi believed that “Punishment and disciplinary action might make for an outer show of orderliness and progress, but that is all.” Punishment was not seen as an effective means of changing children’s behavior. Instead, it was seen to facilitate the hardening of their emotions, provide them with an outer shell of resistance and bring about little if any change in their fundamental behavior patterns. Although it did bring about speedy conformance to the rules when being observed, spanking typically resulted in no inner growth and a tendency for children to disobey the rules when not being watched. According to Gandhi, physical punishment designed to inflict pain first presented an opportunity for an abuse of power towards children by those who are placed in authority above them, such as their parents or teachers. It instills a sense of humiliation and intimidation in the mind of the child and removes them from the result of their poor behavior rendering the child incapable of learning the consequences their actions held for others. Finally, rather than encouraging children to think of how their actions might hurt other people, corporal punishment forces them to make a choice between the mechanical action of obeying the rules or the equally mechanical reaction of rebelling against them, again discouraging any opportunity for moral reflection or growth and reinforcing the idea that rules can or should be broken whenever one can do so without being caught (Rajmohan, 2000). In contrast to the punishment technique, Gandhi suggested a more positive approach involving reasoning within the child regarding their behavior and thus encouraging self-awareness. Care should be taken toward the rearing of children and the correction of anti-social activities that the child is able to learn something positive from the experience rather than reinforcing conceptions of control through physical force and pain. When acting in response to bad behaviour, parents should apply mild corrective actions such as reasoning, grounding and time-out. “A constructive way of dealing with such errors … is not to punish those who committed them, but to help them acknowledge their mistakes and assist them to correct them in future. This method should be kind and sympathetic so it can help individuals transform themselves rather than make them feel bad about themselves” (Rajmohan, 2000). Spanking, if parents feel it absolutely must be used, is thus most effective when only used to re-enforce these mild corrective actions. Studies have demonstrated that spanking serves to increase the chance that the child will respond to mild corrective tactics. As a consequence, spanking is needed less to control behaviour as the child grows older. “Spanking has consistently beneficial outcomes when it is non-abusive (e.g., two swats to the buttocks with an open hand) and used primarily to back up milder disciplinary tactics with 2- to 6-year-olds by loving parents. . .most detrimental outcomes in causally relevant studies are due to overly frequent use of physical punishment” (Larzelere, 2000: 215). The ‘spanking culture’ includes the majority of U.S. and U.K. households as evidenced by the fact that a majority of parents not only believe corporal punishment is the correct method for the home, they want it to be reintroduced in schools to tackle what they perceive is an increasing problem of classroom disorder. “Fifty-one percent of parents think reintroduction of corporal punishment is the answer to the problem. Among working class parents, 60 percent are in favour, 40 percent among middle class parents” (Carvel, 2000). The strongest supporters for corporal punishment in the United States are the National Association of Secondary School Principals, a large majority of fundamentalist churches and the American Federation of Teachers. As of 1985, 47 percent of the general American population were in favor of corporal punishment in the schools and 60 percent of school officials of various rank were also in favor of more physical disciplinary techniques in schools (“Corporal Punishment”, 2003). For most, it is believed that the threat of corporal punishment by teachers and administrators produces children who are “better controlled, learn appropriate appreciation for authority, develop better social skills, as well as improved moral character and learn to better discipline themselves” (“Corporal Punishment”, 2003). It is believed that a large portion of the population believes this way because it was the way in which they were treated as they were growing up without providing much thought to the effects this treatment had for them personally. Many parents and researchers alike are of the opinion that “parents have to be the parents, you can’t let the children run circles around you, which they will. Kids want to push their limits” (Etheridge, 1997). In addition, there are safety concerns. If a child is repeating unsafe behaviour such as climbing the oven or darting out into the street, parents have to stop the child by any means necessary. If reasoning with the child is not effective or the child is too young to understand either the rationale or the danger, a quick swat on the backside may ultimately serve to save their life. These arguments are repeated in triplicate when the child enters school and there are numerous individuals jockeying against each other for social status within their grade level or institution. The argument holds that teachers must retain control of the classroom and the only way to provide them with this type of control, given the numbers of students they must contend with on a daily basis, is to provide them with the right to spank a child who is misbehaving. “They are of the opinion that if this technique is thus removed, greater disciplinary difficult in our schools and reduced teacher security will result” (Climinillo, 1980). Severe punishment, which is suspected in at least 30 percent of those families employing corporal punishment, is described as hitting which was “intended to or had the potential to or actually did cause physical and/or psychological injury or harm to the child” (Nobes, 1997). In the United States, it was determined through a Gallup Poll that 74 percent of children under the age of 5 had been hit by their parents by 1995 with 90 percent of the responding parents with children under the age of three reported having spanked their children as a means of disciplining them (Wauchope & Straus, 1990). These numbers are supported by a number of other studies in which it has been determined that the great majority of children in America have been subjected to spanking as a form of acceptable discipline. There is a growing movement against corporal punishment in the schools that could eventually trickle down into the households. “Physically punishing children has never been shown to enhance moral character development, increase the students’ respect for teachers or other authority figures in general, intensify the teacher’s control in class or even protect the teacher” (“Corporal Punishment”, 2003). More and more parents are becoming educated regarding the psychological studies that have been conducted determining that “corporal punishment is the least effective method [of discipline]. Punishment reinforces a failure identity. It reinforces rebellion, resistance, revenge and resentment. And, what people who spank children will learn is that it teaches more about you than it does about them that the whole goal is to crush the child. It’s not dignified and it’s not respectful” (Psychology H. Stephen Glenn cited in Ni, 1998). Despite this, the United States remains one of the only countries still in favor of allowing negative physical punishment of this sort to occur in schools and homes without reprisals. The tide does seem to be turning in the United States toward more positive parenting methods as more and more adults are becoming educated regarding the detriments of spanking while also learning positive techniques such as instruction and restitution as a means of helping the child’s moral development. The number of studies regarding the negative aspects of corporal punishment methods is increasing in the U.S. as well, such as research conducted by the University of New Hampshire. According to this study, children that are the product of parents who practiced corporal punishment may suffer negative effects in the long-term. “Based on interviews with the mothers of about 3,000 children, researcher Murray Straus found that corporal punishment is counterproductive, resulting in more antisocial behavior by children in later years” (Etheridge, 1997). Since the effects are long-range, parents may not notice violent behaviour from their children for weeks, months or years later, long after the damage has been done. Some suggest that we go back to the days of systems with a good spanking to correct behaviour. Others insist that this is tantamount to criminal brutality. The majority of parents that spank their children are not abusive by nature. They do so because they are concerned about properly socializing and protecting their offspring, a natural inclination also found in most species of animals. However, these parents often feel bad after physically punishing their child. This indicates that somewhere down deep, they know what they are doing is wrong. Most parents would gladly opt for other forms of corrective measures if they only worked. Positive parenting methods such as those suggested by Gandhi that involve treating a child as if they are actually human beings with the capacity for reasoned thought and the right to be respected can work well for older children, but there is a general perception that the still underdeveloped minds of young children are not capable of grasping the fine nuances of such measures. The evidence has shown that sustained spanking leads to future behavioural problems but an occasional swat to those children under seven years of age used only at last resort complemented with sound judgment and a loving environment is probably the favorable method by which to discipline children. References Carvel, John. (8 January 2000). “Parents Call for Schools to Bring Back the Cane.” The Guardian. London. Climinillo, LM. (1980). “Discipline: The School’s Dilemma.” Adolescence. Vol. 15, pp. 1-12. “Corporal Punishment in Schools.” (2003). Journal of Adolescent Health. Position paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine. Vol. 32, pp. 385-393. Etheridge, Pat. (14 August, 1997). “Study: Spanking Kids Leads to Long-Term Bad Behavior.” Cable News Network. Hernandez, Walter E. (2007). “Parents Need to Teach Their Children How to Behave.” Topics Magazine. Available July 15, 2007 from < http://www.topics-mag.com/edition10/child-raising-el-salvador.htm > Larzelere, Robert E. (2000). “Child Outcomes of Nonabusive and Customary Physical Punishment by Parents: An Updated Literature Review.” Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review. Vol. 3, N. 4, pp. 199-221. Ni, J.K. (1998). “Spanking Denounced as Ineffective, Harmful – Expert at Families Alive [conference] Urges Positive Discipline.” Deseret News. Nobes, Gavin. (1997). “Physical Punishment of Children in Two-Parent Families.” Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry. Vol. 2, N. 2, pp. 271 – 281. SAGE Publications Rajmohan, R. (2000). MK Gandhi Institute for Nonviolence. Available July 15, 2007 from < http://www.gandhiinstitute.org/Library/LibraryItem.cfm?LibraryID=833> Wauchope, BA & Straus, MA. (1990). “Physical Punishment and Physical Abuse of American Children: Incidence Rates by Age, Gender and Occupational Class.” Physical Violence in American Families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. Read More