Spanking Kids Leads to More Aggressive Behavior?

[sbeaulieu]

Chris,

This makes sense. Thank you.

~ Shane

[dan2100]

I also don't know enough about motives here to say what is meant by the "power motive" and the "achievement motive" -- and whether this makes much sense. It makes it sound like there is a motive switch inside a person's head -- where one moment she's operating from the power motive, the next she flips to the achievement motive, and the next after that to some other motive.

Although it's off-topic: generally what you say here is what happens, yes. Situations give rise to different motivated perspectives. That's why you'll be focused on work in your office one minute, then your wife surprises you by showing up and you change to a different perspective in the next minute. The issue is when you bring the wrong motive to a situation: for example, your wife calls you and you're still in "work mode," so you act what seems cold and she gets upset.

I don't know. I'll have to think more about this.

Back to on-topic, modeling aggression just helps solidify a child's perspective that interpersonal experience is associated to power motivation rather than intimacy, and so you get aggressive or dominating children when you model aggression in relationships with them.

This seems to make sense and appears no different, in a sense, than saying that children learn by imitating. If their formative experience is that their parents, siblings, etc. deal with everything via aggression, it seems natural that they'll be more likely to be aggressive.

[dan2100]

With the first set of cases, I'm not sure, but let's focus on the second. What do you mean by disrespect here? How does a child disrespect a parent when she or he is really young and doesn't understand reasoning?

And why is this the sort of think that physical violence would do much about? I mean if the kid disrespects you, why would a spanking make her or him respect rather than, say, fear you?

It actually seems to me, too, that the younger the child is, the more damage -- both physically and psychologically -- physical violence can do. Don't you agree?

Of the two words you used, I'd only agree with physical, not violent. First and foremost, a parent must not lose control. The idea is to discipline the child in such a way as to dissuade them from going to down path B when you are trying to get them to go down path A (not vent your frustrations on the child). One way or another fear is unavoidable, whether by raising your voice, lifting your hand, or even the child's perception that you will be disappointed.

To answer your question, Dan, what I mean by disrespect is when a child flat out says no when you say yes or goes out of their way to break rules...a battle of wills renowned as the terrible twos. I've seen too many parents letting their kids walk all over them for fear of rejection or guilt at lifting a finger. The result is a generation of kids and young adults that do not understand cause and effect or consequences of bad decisions. Why? Because their parents did little to nothing to intervene. Proper discipline remedies this.

Let me be very clear. I do not advocate violence against children...it's horrible. If you can get your children to follow your rules without lifting a finger, great! In my experience, it's a delicate balance of the two...leaning heavier on the "talks" than on "hands."

~ Shane

I'm still trying to grasp what you mean by "disrespect" and why this is a bad thing that must be punished with spanking or other physical force. I also see a false dichtonomy here, I think, between parents "letting their kids walk all over them" and what you seem to be advocating.

What, also, do you mean by "proper discipline" and by "discipline" itself here? Regarding bad decisions, in many cases, isn't the problem not lack of coercion, but that often times people are shielded from the consequences of bad decisions? For example, to use something benign, if a child spends his allowance on something now and doesn't save up for something latter, then one way for him to learn the consquence of this decision -- be it bad or good -- is to not pony up more money, but let him remain broke until his next allowance or earning of money. Spanking him or some other form of punishment is likely to not teach him about the cause and effect relationship -- here, between spending now and not having money later -- in my mind.

[Brant Gaede]

Are we not kind of begging the question about using physical means to keep a child from doing harm or being harmed? That would be restraint as opposed to, say, the physical discipline of spanking. Now, within the family unit is it necessarily wrong to spank John for hitting his brother Mike as in the use retaliatory force? Mom or Dad as judge and juror? That's a pretty basic anarchical situation isn't it--unless you're the child?

--Brant

[dan2100]

Are we not kind of begging the question about using physical means to keep a child from doing harm or being harmed? That would be restraint as opposed to, say, the physical discipline of spanking. Now, within the family unit is it necessarily wrong to spank John for hitting his brother Mike as in the use retaliatory force? Mom or Dad as judge and juror? That's a pretty basic anarchical situation isn't it--unless you're the child?

--Brant

I think there's a difference between restraint in some forms here. For instance, stopping a child from running in front of a train is one form of restraint that seems totally legit and I doubt many would question as compatible with good parenting and the child's needs. Locking the same kid in the closet seems to go over the line.

Regarding retaliatory force, the case seems stronger, but I wonder if the punishment must be spanking. If you haul off and hit someone, do and should the cops come over and smack you a few times? Would we live in a better society if they did?

[sbeaulieu]

I'm still trying to grasp what you mean by "disrespect" and why this is a bad thing that must be punished with spanking or other physical force. I also see a false dichtonomy here, I think, between parents "letting their kids walk all over them" and what you seem to be advocating.

What, also, do you mean by "proper discipline" and by "discipline" itself here? Regarding bad decisions, in many cases, isn't the problem not lack of coercion, but that often times people are shielded from the consequences of bad decisions? For example, to use something benign, if a child spends his allowance on something now and doesn't save up for something latter, then one way for him to learn the consquence of this decision -- be it bad or good -- is to not pony up more money, but let him remain broke until his next allowance or earning of money. Spanking him or some other form of punishment is likely to not teach him about the cause and effect relationship -- here, between spending now and not having money later -- in my mind.

Dan,

By disrespect, I mean situations like backtalking and dishing out profanities. I did that once as a child. I received a spanking (and a talk afterwards). I understood. My children know that it's wrong, and don't do it. I've been able to talk those types of situations out. Now that my children are older (13 and 10) I don't use spanking anymore...haven't for years.

Proper discipline is a staged approach, and applied case by case (severity of the issue). These days, it involves taking away privileges (no games, TV, etc.) Spanking doesn't equate into every situation. I've already given a couple examples, mostly at younger ages because language and reasoning are still a barrier. That's a key equation.

To use your example of allowance, I'm in agreeance with you. As you say, I give them allowances and they can spend it as they wish. If they want something beyond what they get each time, they save. If they spend it, they expect me to pay the difference at times (which I don't). To get, they have to earn it by saving. It's a long process but they learn the cause and effect in that way. I also set aside part of their allowance and put it into a savings account for them.

~ Shane

[tjohnson]

Dan,

By disrespect, I mean situations like backtalking and dishing out profanities. I did that once as a child. I received a spanking (and a talk afterwards). I understood. My children know that it's wrong, and don't do it. I've been able to talk those types of situations out. Now that my children are older (13 and 10) I don't use spanking anymore...haven't for years.

Proper discipline is a staged approach, and applied case by case (severity of the issue). These days, it involves taking away privileges (no games, TV, etc.) Spanking doesn't equate into every situation. I've already given a couple examples, mostly at younger ages because language and reasoning are still a barrier. That's a key equation.

To use your example of allowance, I'm in agreeance with you. As you say, I give them allowances and they can spend it as they wish. If they want something beyond what they get each time, they save. If they spend it, they expect me to pay the difference at times (which I don't). To get, they have to earn it by saving. It's a long process but they learn the cause and effect in that way. I also set aside part of their allowance and put it into a savings account for them.

~ Shane

You sound like a very responsible parent. I wish I was as disciplined as you.

[sbeaulieu]

You sound like a very responsible parent. I wish I was as disciplined as you.

GS,

Thank you I tell you, it's like tap dancing with combat boots on a glass floor covered with eggshells. Would I change it? Not a chance ;) I have two amazing kids!

~ Shane

[Christopher]

These days, [discipline] involves taking away privileges (no games, TV, etc.) ~ Shane

This type of discipline is considered one of the most effective and healthy for a child. You are not actually introducing any negative stimuli into the discipline, so there are no explicit negative or damaging effects, but the removal of positive stimuli (e.g. videogames) is a very strong motivator for children to change their behavior.

[dan2100]

These days, [discipline] involves taking away privileges (no games, TV, etc.) ~ Shane

This type of discipline is considered one of the most effective and healthy for a child. You are not actually introducing any negative stimuli into the discipline, so there are no explicit negative or damaging effects, but the removal of positive stimuli (e.g. videogames) is a very strong motivator for children to change their behavior.

Why would that not be the preferred method for dealing with "backtalking and dishing out profanities"? (And should either be a problem in the first place?)

[sbeaulieu]

These days, [discipline] involves taking away privileges (no games, TV, etc.) ~ Shane

This type of discipline is considered one of the most effective and healthy for a child. You are not actually introducing any negative stimuli into the discipline, so there are no explicit negative or damaging effects, but the removal of positive stimuli (e.g. videogames) is a very strong motivator for children to change their behavior.

Why would that not be the preferred method for dealing with "backtalking and dishing out profanities"? (And should either be a problem in the first place?)

I think we can all agree that it is the preferred method. I simply attributed spanking as justified, especially when this approach fails (and again, at a younger age). What would you do, Dan, if the preferred method does not work?

~ Shane

[Brant Gaede]

Are we not kind of begging the question about using physical means to keep a child from doing harm or being harmed? That would be restraint as opposed to, say, the physical discipline of spanking. Now, within the family unit is it necessarily wrong to spank John for hitting his brother Mike as in the use retaliatory force? Mom or Dad as judge and juror? That's a pretty basic anarchical situation isn't it--unless you're the child?

--Brant

I think there's a difference between restraint in some forms here. For instance, stopping a child from running in front of a train is one form of restraint that seems totally legit and I doubt many would question as compatible with good parenting and the child's needs. Locking the same kid in the closet seems to go over the line.

Regarding retaliatory force, the case seems stronger, but I wonder if the punishment must be spanking. If you haul off and hit someone, do and should the cops come over and smack you a few times? Would we live in a better society if they did?

Spanking is the open hand hitting the butt. Smacking would seem to be confined to the face. Hitting is using a fist.

I don't think you'll see the cops come spank, smack or hit the parent. I'm against smacking and hitting the child regardless. I'm still ambivalent about spanking in that I don't think there outta be a law which leaves parental discretion. There's a big difference between a whap on the butt and taking a leather strap to Johnny's bare ass.

Times change things for sure. I think one of the Little House books has a story about how a school teacher regained control of his one-room school by using a long whip on one of the not-so-little SOBs. There's a marvelous story within a story in the movie "How Green Was My Valley" in which an unjust teacher got his comeuppance by a couple of local good-guy toughs. When I was in junior high school 1956-56-57 the assistant principal had the wall behind his desk decorated with a great many paddles, some with holes in them so he could swing them faster. I don't know if he ever actually used them or if he just wanted to scare the shit out of you.

--Brant

no children?--spank away!

Edited April 22, 2010 by Brant Gaede

[dan2100]

These days, [discipline] involves taking away privileges (no games, TV, etc.) ~ Shane

This type of discipline is considered one of the most effective and healthy for a child. You are not actually introducing any negative stimuli into the discipline, so there are no explicit negative or damaging effects, but the removal of positive stimuli (e.g. videogames) is a very strong motivator for children to change their behavior.

Why would that not be the preferred method for dealing with "backtalking and dishing out profanities"? (And should either be a problem in the first place?)

I think we can all agree that it is the preferred method. I simply attributed spanking as justified, especially when this approach fails (and again, at a younger age). What would you do, Dan, if the preferred method does not work?

~ Shane

I'm not sure I would see the same things -- "backtalking and dishing out profanities" -- as you as problems needing to be solved by punishment. However, that avoids the question. What would I do in cases where I thought some form of non-corporal punishment was appropriate, but that punishment didn't work? That's what I think you're getting at. I don't know.

[sbeaulieu]

I'm not sure I would see the same things -- "backtalking and dishing out profanities" -- as you as problems needing to be solved by punishment.

Dan,

Again, even the backtalking and profanities would still be a case by case basis. I'm not at all against my kids speaking their minds. I gain more by employing listening techniques to see from my childrens' perspective. This enables me to adjust my approach, even attitude (as I might be in the wrong on the issue).

However, that avoids the question. What would I do in cases where I thought some form of non-corporal punishment was appropriate, but that punishment didn't work? That's what I think you're getting at. I don't know.

Yes.

~ Shane