Risks of harm from spanking confirmed by analysis of 5 decades of research

[Sunstone]

A new meta-study of 50 years of research into the effects of spanking has confirmed that "...spanking was associated with negative outcomes consistently and across all types of studies, including those using the strongest methodologies such as longitudinal or experimental designs."

The study, published in this month's Journal of Family Psychology, looks at five decades of research involving over 160,000 children. The researchers say it is the most complete analysis to date of the outcomes associated with spanking, and more specific to the effects of spanking alone than previous papers, which included other types of physical punishment in their analyses.

"Our analysis focuses on what most Americans would recognize as spanking and not on potentially abusive behaviors," says Elizabeth Gershoff, an associate professor of human development and family sciences at The University of Texas at Austin. "We found that spanking was associated with unintended detrimental outcomes and was not associated with more immediate or long-term compliance, which are parents' intended outcomes when they discipline their children."

[Source]

On top of this, the traditional line that “it never did me any harm” doesn't stand up very well. Adults who were spanked as a child were more likely to suffer mental health problems and to behave in anti-social ways.

A UNICEF report found that in most countries, more than 70 percent of children were spanked in the previous month, so it is obviously not the case that spanking is always disastrous (unless you take a very grim view of the state of humanity). However, the evidence Gershoff compiled suggests that the frequency of spanking is as important as whether it happens at all. The more often a child was spanked, the more likely they were to show negative effects.

The aspect of Gershoff's study that is likely to draw the most disbelief is her comparison with physical abuse. "We as a society think of spanking and physical abuse as distinct behaviors," she said. "Yet our research shows that spanking is linked with the same negative child outcomes as abuse, just to a slightly lesser degree."

[Source]

[An earlier article on Spanking by one of the same authors of the meta-study]

The evidence is mounting that spanking children, while perhaps a good way for parents to vent their frustrations, is both detrimental to the child's mental health and well-being, and is relatively ineffective in getting the child to comply with the parent's wishes or commands. Nevertheless, since our noble species of idiot-savants is smart enough to rationalize any favored behavior, while dumb enough to ignore any science that argues against it, spanking is most likely here for a very long time -- in spite of the facts.

Please discuss.

 

[BSM1]

A swift swat on the backside is simply an attention getter; beating a kid into submission while angry is criminal.

 

[Sunstone]

A swift swat on the backside is simply an attention getter; beating a kid into submission while angry is criminal.

The meta-study carefully singled out spanking (which in the study was pretty much defined as an open-handed slap on the backsides) from other forms of physical abuse and still found that spanking significantly increased a child's chances of having poor mental health, and also did little to get a child to comply with his or her parent's commands.

 

[Quetzal]

I have a question. What dictates "spanking" in terms of the study? I mean, there is a difference, as @BSM1 said, between a nonverbal communication method and a beating.

 

[Quetzal]

I have a question. What dictates "spanking" in terms of the study? I mean, there is a difference, as @BSM1 said, between a nonverbal communication method and a beating.

Ack, nevermind. I think @Sunstone answered it above.

 

[Sunstone]

I have a question. What dictates "spanking" in terms of the study? I mean, there is a difference, as @BSM1 said, between a nonverbal communication method and a beating.

Again, the study carefully singled out spanking -- which was defined in the study as an open-handed slap on the buttocks or extremities -- from other forms of physical abuse. The findings are about spanking, Quetzal, not other forms of physical abuse. And the findings are damning to the commonplace, non-scientific notion that spanking children has few if any negative consequences. Instead, the more spanked someone was a child, the more likely they are to suffer long term negative consequences from it.

 

[Quetzal]

The evidence is mounting that spanking children, while perhaps a good way for parents to vent their frustrations, is both detrimental to the child's mental health and well-being, and is relatively ineffective in getting the child to comply with the parent's wishes or commands. Nevertheless, since our noble species of idiot-savants is smart enough to rationalize any favored behavior, while dumb enough to ignore any science that argues against it, spanking is most likely here for a very long time -- in spite of the facts.

Maybe I need to evolve my understanding of the topic. Perhaps I have spoken/acted incorrectly about it in the past.

 

[Quetzal]

Again, the study carefully singled out spanking -- which was defined in the study as an open-handed slap on the buttocks or extremities -- from other forms of physical abuse. The findings are about spanking, Quetzal, not other forms of physical abuse. And the findings are damning to the commonplace, non-scientific notion that spanking children has few if any negative consequences. Instead, the more spanked someone was a child, the more likely they are to suffer long term negative consequences from it.

Sorry about that, you addressed it just as I hit submit. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[HonestJoe]

A swift swat on the backside is simply an attention getter.

So it’s a valid tool for adults who have responsibility for other adults (managers, lecturers, police officers etc.)?

 

[Sunstone]

Maybe I need to evolve my understanding of the topic. Perhaps I have spoken/acted incorrectly about it in the past.

What the hell? If you dare change your mind about spanking just because a bunch of scientists looked at the consequences of spanking to 160,000 kids, then you will have broken the first golden rule of human nature: "Never change your mind because of the facts". Moreover, it is well known that, if as many as seven people on earth ever change their minds because of the facts within the same twelve month period, the Apocalypse will be summoned! You don't want to destroy the earth, do you?

 

[Quetzal]

What the hell? If you dare change your mind about spanking just because a bunch of scientists looked at the consequences of spanking to 160,000 kids, then you will have broken the first golden rule of human nature: "Never change your mind because of the facts". Moreover, it is well known that, if as many as seven people on earth ever change their minds because of the facts within the same twelve month period, the Apocalypse will be summoned! You don't want to destroy the earth, do you?

No... yes... maybe... DON'T MAKE ME DO STUFF!

All jokes aside, though, I have no problem evolving my opinion (as well intended as it might have been) if people who are smarter than me (doesn't take much) come forward with data to the contrary. It happens.

 

[Rival]

Do they propose more worthwhile punishment methods?

 

[Quetzal]

Do they propose more worthwhile punishment methods?

It is an interesting question, right? In my experience, time outs and loss of privileges can be very effective. But I also know it might not be as effective with other kids. It's a tough nut to crack with a silver bullet.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

A new meta-study of 50 years of research into the effects of spanking has confirmed that "...spanking was associated with negative outcomes consistently and across all types of studies, including those using the strongest methodologies such as longitudinal or experimental designs."



[Source]



[Source]

[An earlier article on Spanking by one of the same authors of the meta-study]

The evidence is mounting that spanking children, while perhaps a good way for parents to vent their frustrations, is both detrimental to the child's mental health and well-being, and is relatively ineffective in getting the child to comply with the parent's wishes or commands. Nevertheless, since our noble species of idiot-savants is smart enough to rationalize any favored behavior, while dumb enough to ignore any science that argues against it, spanking is most likely here for a very long time -- in spite of the facts.

Please discuss.

Parents and children alike in this culture are unfortunately obsessed with the Parenting Religion, in which how raising a child is equated to how one is either valued or how one is moral. We have a tendency to defer to parenting practices with these goals in mind more so than checking with the what science points to.

This also explains anti-vaxxers, crunchy granola parents, helicopter parents, and the like just as much as fierce advocacy of corporal punishment.

 

[Sunstone]

All jokes aside, though, I have no problem evolving my opinion (as well intended as it might have been) if people who are smarter than me (doesn't take much) come forward with data to the contrary. It happens.

In all seriousness, Quetzal, you're attitude is in my experience as admirable as it is rare.

 

[Quetzal]

Parents and children alike in this culture are unfortunately obsessed with the Parenting Religion, in which how raising a child is equated to how one is either valued or how one is moral.

Hmm, to be fair, though, some of this might be warranted? That is, how someone parents their kids can be a reflection of their own personal tendencies as their own entity.

 

[Sunstone]

Do they propose more worthwhile punishment methods?

Apparently, that was outside the scope of the study.

 

[Quetzal]

Apparently, that was outside the scope of the study.

As it should be, it could be its own study all together. One I would be interested in reading, actually.

 

[metis]

I see a vast difference between "spanking" and a "swat", the former of which we didn't do to our children but the latter we did on occasions?

Ever try to have a rational discussion with a one-year old? Children have the remarkable ability to turn off the sound coming from parents' mouths, so talk, talk, and more talk sometimes amounts to no change in behavior.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Hmm, to be fair, though, some of this might be warranted? That is, how someone parents their kids can be a reflection of their own personal tendencies as their own entity.

They can be, but how much is nature and how much is conditioned? Or even more deconstructed, how much is indoctrinated and how much is adopted by the child from spending majority time in the same household/tribe/family?

Parents would love to see their child(ren) presented to the world as evidence that they themselves are moral and responsible people. Yet children are humans just like all the rest of us and grow, evolve, learn, reflect, and **** up over the course of 18 years before this society grants them adulthood. The hard truth is that our kids, once grown, go their own way regardless of what we do or don't do. We can choose to think their choices are reflections of us morally or not, but if we do, that's a path that can spiral out of control very very quickly into the depths of our own ego.