Corporal Penalty: Flogging of Little Ones - Term Paper Example

SMACKING KIDS- IT IS RIGHT TO PHYSICALLY DISCIPLINE KIDS {Insert university’s name} {Insert instructor’s name} {Insert student’s name} April 13, 2013 SMACKING KIDS- IT IS RIGHT TO PHYSICALLY DISCIPLINE KIDS Introduction Over the past years, the attitude of parents on punishment has drastically changed. Most parents do not agree with the use of physical punishment regularly as a means of instilling desirable behavior in their children. In most countries, physical punishment is illegal in schools and the move to ban this form of punishment even at home is in progress. Nonetheless, most parents insist that they have the right to apply physical punishment to handle certain behavior in children to certain ages. On the hand, it is easy to find some reasons for physical punishment. One of the reasons is that it is challenging for parents to abandon the practice completely. Parents argue that physical punishment is the best way because they too were brought up using the same and in the process they were not injured or harmed. Parents argue and believe that for the sake of their children’s future well being, they have the right to discipline their children in a manner they consider right including the use of corporal punishment. Essentially, physical punishment is not only effective but also quick and it does make sense reasoning with a child screaming in a mall. Consequently, most parents are fair and reasonable and most of them would never consider injuring their children by applying unnecessary physical force (Aucon, Frick & Bodin, 2006). This essay will support the idea that smacking kids is a good way of disciplining and hence it is right to physically discipline kids. The essay is divided into various sections, the introduction, background information, summaries of the opponent argument and then supporting ideas for physical punishment based on the reason given by the opponent. Finally there is a conclusion based on the demand to change the law that restricts the use of physical disciplining. The next section highlights background information on physical punishment. Background information Physical punishment also known as corporal punishment was reported as early as 10th century in the book of proverbs which is majorly attributed to the wise king Solomon. He stated that whoever spare the rod, hate the son but who loves his son corrects him. He further emphasizes that parents should not hold correcting their children, and striking him/her with a rod will not kill. Consequently, physical punishment was there during the classical civilizations and was present in Egypt, Greece and Rome for educational, parental and judicial discipline. States such as Sparta attained reputation for using physical discipline. In the Rome Empire, a citizen could get 40 lashes or strokes applied on shoulders or back. Physical punishment is defined as the intentional act of disciplining by mainly inflicting pain as a retribution for a wrong doing or an offence. The aim of physical discipline is to prevent the wrong doing or offense from repeating itself by associating or instilling fear with the acts that are so undesired (Holden, 2002). Parents administer physical discipline in their children in the form of slapping, spanking, whipping or simply smacking. One possible way of smacking is to have the child lying across the laps of the parents or stomach down with the parent using his/her open hand upon the buttocks of the child. Alternatively, parents can tell the children to lie facing down on a table, bed or bend over. Smacking can be administered upon bare buttocks, undergarments or over the shorts or trousers (Strauss, 1994).  It is RIGHT to physically discipline kids The opposition says that it is not right to smack kids as it has a negative impact on moral internalization. They argue that physical discipline only leads to immediate compliance but not a long term one. They emphasize that parents need to use minimal parental power in promoting discipline in children. However, researchers have pointed out that children who are smacked have proven to be happier and successful in their adult life as compared to their counterparts who have never been hit. Consequently, studies have proven that children who are smacked before they attain the age of six are good performers at school as compared to children who are smacked when they are teenagers. Additionally, children who are smacked are likely to be involved in voluntary work and aims at attaining university education as compared to those who have never been physically disciplined. Hence, in regard to the highlighted argument it is wrong to insist that physical punishment does not promote moral internalization. Moreover, physical discipline does not decrease the motivation of children as highlighted by those against it. This is because parents who use physical punishments in most cases apply motivating strategies with an aim of promoting societal and parental values (Holden, 2002). Hence, it is wrong to say that children who are physically punished have low self control and esteem. Secondly, individuals who are against physical discipline argue that it has negative effect on the quality of the parent-child relationship. They explain that smacking invokes the feeling of fear, anger and anxiety in children, an aspect that they argue that interferes with child-parent relationship as children tend to avoid their parents and lose respect for their parents (Porter, 2008). However, the mentioned is one of the weakest reasons why physical discipline should not be used in children. It is evident that children do not hold grudges against their parents. For instance, a child will still run towards the parent who is punishing him or her and will like to be cuddled with the same immediately after the punishment. The mentioned rules out the argument that physical discipline makes the children to hate and lose respect for their parents. It can be pointed out that other than making them fear their parents, it make them respect them as they regard the parents to be holding some power. Furthermore, physical discipline bring parents closer to their children due to the fact that kids believe their parents are the only people capable of solving the problem or dealing with a situation (Larzelere, 2000). Those against physical discipline may perceive the mentioned as and think that children know nothing but they are wrong. Thirdly, individuals against physical discipline point that it results into physical injury and it is a form of abuse. However, it is essential to point out that physical punishment is not the same as abuse. Physical discipline in most cases does not result into physical injury as parents administered them with an aim of just inflicting pain, correcting the wrong doing and not causing harm to their children. While punishing the children they always do with utmost love having in mind the biblical quote in mind, spare the rod and spoil the child. Additionally, there is a line between physical discipline and abuse (Lytton, 1997). For instance, most people point out that in high school they were smacked all of their lives but they do not regard them as demonic as they have no scars left on their bodies. Consequently, in an opinionated view, those against smacking are not aware of what they are saying if they regard it s a form of child abuse. This is because physical punishment teaches children to respect as well as make them be in a position to differentiate what is right from wrong. This is because; the punishment is usually administered immediately (Larzelere, 2000). Additionally, society and parents should not have the expectation that children can adopt positive behavior by merely talking to them, as there is no punishment in that. However, it is important that physical discipline should be moderated and not totally done away with but simply talking and grounding the children has no propounding effect on the behavior of children. A common scene in today society where parents regard physical discipline as wrong is children throwing fits and screaming. These embarrasses the parents and disturb other people, hence it is not wrong once in a while to apply physical discipline. Yes, it is true that children my view it as a form of torture and an end of the world to them but research have shown that people who were physically disciplined in their childhood, grow up to be responsible adults and thanking their parents for using the rod. Additionally, most of them confess of respecting and loving their parents more. Who in his/her right senses appreciate abuse? Therefore, physical discipline is not an abuse. Conclusion In regard to the fact that physical discipline of children do not result into bodily harm or physical injury, the laws regarding it should be changed. Parents should be allowed to physically discipline their children moderately. This is because from the arguments above, the aim of the parents while administering physical punishment is not to harm the children but to ensure change in behavior. The law should recognize and allow parents to apply force if it does not go beyond the reasonable circumstances. The existing legal standing should further reflect the opinion of the public that in essence children are property of their parents and hence the parents have to raise them in the manner they choose and no parent is willing to harm his/her child. References Aucoin, K.J., Frick, P.J. & Bodin, S.D. (2006). Corporal punishment and child adjustment. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 27(6), 527-541. Holden, G.W. (2002). Perspectives on the effects of corporal punishment: Comment on Gershoff (2002). Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 590-595. Larzelere, R.E. (2000). Child outcomes of non abusive and customary physical punishment by parents: An updated literature review. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 3(4), 199-221. Lytton, H. (1997). Physical punishment is a problem, whether conduct disorder is endogenous or not. Psychological Inquiry, 8(3), 211-214. Porter, L. (2008). ‘Smacking children’, adapted from Young children’s behaviour, (3rded), Sydney: Elsveier. Strauss, M. A. (1994). Beating the devils out of them: Corporal punishment in American families. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/Lexington. Read More

al punishment is defined as the intentional act of disciplining by mainly inflicting pain as a retribution for a wrong doing or an offence. The aim of physical discipline is to prevent the wrong doing or offense from repeating itself by associating or instilling fear with the acts that are so undesired (Holden, 2002). Parents administer physical discipline in their children in the form of slapping, spanking, whipping or simply smacking. One possible way of smacking is to have the child lying across the laps of the parents or stomach down with the parent using his/her open hand upon the buttocks of the child.

Alternatively, parents can tell the children to lie facing down on a table, bed or bend over. Smacking can be administered upon bare buttocks, undergarments or over the shorts or trousers (Strauss, 1994).  It is RIGHT to physically discipline kids The opposition says that it is not right to smack kids as it has a negative impact on moral internalization. They argue that physical discipline only leads to immediate compliance but not a long term one. They emphasize that parents need to use minimal parental power in promoting discipline in children.

However, researchers have pointed out that children who are smacked have proven to be happier and successful in their adult life as compared to their counterparts who have never been hit. Consequently, studies have proven that children who are smacked before they attain the age of six are good performers at school as compared to children who are smacked when they are teenagers. Additionally, children who are smacked are likely to be involved in voluntary work and aims at attaining university education as compared to those who have never been physically disciplined.

Hence, in regard to the highlighted argument it is wrong to insist that physical punishment does not promote moral internalization. Moreover, physical discipline does not decrease the motivation of children as highlighted by those against it. This is because parents who use physical punishments in most cases apply motivating strategies with an aim of promoting societal and parental values (Holden, 2002). Hence, it is wrong to say that children who are physically punished have low self control and esteem.

Secondly, individuals who are against physical discipline argue that it has negative effect on the quality of the parent-child relationship. They explain that smacking invokes the feeling of fear, anger and anxiety in children, an aspect that they argue that interferes with child-parent relationship as children tend to avoid their parents and lose respect for their parents (Porter, 2008). However, the mentioned is one of the weakest reasons why physical discipline should not be used in children.

It is evident that children do not hold grudges against their parents. For instance, a child will still run towards the parent who is punishing him or her and will like to be cuddled with the same immediately after the punishment. The mentioned rules out the argument that physical discipline makes the children to hate and lose respect for their parents. It can be pointed out that other than making them fear their parents, it make them respect them as they regard the parents to be holding some power.

Furthermore, physical discipline bring parents closer to their children due to the fact that kids believe their parents are the only people capable of solving the problem or dealing with a situation (Larzelere, 2000). Those against physical discipline may perceive the mentioned as and think that children know nothing but they are wrong. Thirdly, individuals against physical discipline point that it results into physical injury and it is a form of abuse. However, it is essential to point out that physical punishment is not the same as abuse.

Physical discipline in most cases does not result into physical injury as parents administered them with an aim of just inflicting pain, correcting the wrong doing and not causing harm to their children.

Read More